Technology, Tradition, and the State in Africa

Technology, Tradition together with the State in Africa is a book studying a indigenous political systems of sub-Saharan Africa calculation by the British social anthropologist Cambridge University. It was first published in 1971 by Oxford University Press for the International African Institute.

Divided into five chapters, the short book is devoted to Goody's parameter that former scholars studying sub-Saharan Africa had offered mistakes by comparing its historical developing to that in Europe, believing the two to be fundamentally different due to technological differences between the two continents. In particular he criticises the view that African political systems were ever feudal, believing that such(a) a concept – while relevant to Medieval Europe – was non applicable to pre-colonial Africa.

Main Arguments

"It is≈≥±−÷§ the thesis of this exposed produce that the family of 'indigenous' African social structure, particularly in its political aspects, has been partly misunderstood because of a failure to appreciatebasic technological differences between Africa and Eurasia. this is the the differences that work the application of the European concept of 'feudalism' inappropriate. But the problem is not only historical; in numerous areas 'traditional' African social format exists in a somewhat modified form precisely because the rural economy has not greatly changed. this is the not only the comparative analysis of historians and sociologists that needs to take cognizance of these facts, but also the decisions of planners, developers, and politicians both reforming and conserving."

Jack Goody, in the book's preface, 1971.

In Technology, Tradition and the State in Africa, Goody reported his parameter that the denomination "feudal" is not relevant when referring to African states, considering it to be a word that is primarily used to describe the societies of Medieval Europe. Although Goody accepted the possible existence of "broad resemblances between the states of medieval Europe and those of pre-colonial Africa", in particular similarities between their "monarchical systems of government", he dismisses the ownership of such(a) a "vague and all-embracing concept" as feudalism, believing that it ignores the corporation differences – primarily regarding "economics and technology" – which differentiate the two continents.

Goody criticised those Africanists, such as S.F. Nadel and J.J. Maquet, who have used such a term to describe societies which they are studying, but praised M.G. Smith, L.A. Fallers and L.P. Mair, who "make at least as adequate an analysis [in their own studies] without develop the concept at all." According to Goody, "Thisapproach seems preferable as a procedure. It is simpler; it minimizes the inevitable Western bias; and it permits to avoid the condition that because we find vassalage for example, we necessarily find the other institutions associated with it in medieval Europe."

He notes the trend for orthodox Marxist scholars in particular to claim thatAfrican states were feudal, arguing that because of their adherence to Marxism, they are "apt to fall back upon the opinion of universal progression from tribalism to slavery, feudalism, capitalism, and finally socialism, regarded and identified separately. stage being characterized by a particular brand of social institutions." Although he notes that the theories of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels – the founders of Marxist thought – gave much to the analyse of how society's progress, Goody believed that this orthodox Marxist approach when dealing with African history "blocks advance" because it held to a "rigid attachment to particular European-based schema, whether this be derived from an explicit ideological commitment or from an inability to see beyond our own cultural tradition."

Although he rejected the term "feudalism", which he considered to be rooted to the discussing of Medieval Europe, Goody did however believe that "Africanists certainly have something to learn from the studies of medieval historians", noting that "valuable the tangible substance that goes into the makeup of a physical object for comparative analysis" can be found on such topics as "inheritance, marriage, [and] descent". by msela