4
T. O. Beidelman
Anthropos 92.1997
which is smaller and constructed as a continuous
circular ramp with occasional adjoining, level gal
leries. The Guggenheim show is smaller, about 550
objects. Jay Levenson of the Guggenheim asserts
that “it will be essentially the same show” (Vincent
1996: 122), but an exhibit reduced by 34% is
seriously altered. The Guggenheim has published
a smaller, supplementary catalogue showing far
less pieces but including newly shown objects
(and associated discussions) not in the London or
Berlin exhibits and hence not in this catalogue
under review here. Neither the Royal Academy
catalogue nor the Guggenheim supplement accu
rately conveys the actual impression of the exhibits
since the catalogue illustrations are detailed and
large whereas the exhibits were criticized for their
poor display and labelling of many objects (Sie-
ber 1996:70; Ross 1996:6 for London; my own
judgment for New York).
The Catalogue
This sumptuous catalogue contains three brief in
troductions, an essay of Africa’s archaeological re
cord, and seven self-contained sections, each based
on a geographical region of Africa and prefaced
by a coloured map indicating the societies whose
works are shown. Each section opens with one or
more essays by experts in that area who introduce
the cultures and works which follow. All of the
objects in the exhibit (and some not shown) are
attractively illustrated in colour, sometimes with
more than one photograph. Each is accompanied
by terse but often informative remarks by a scholar
along with citation of the provenance of the piece
(where this is known), indication of where it has
previously been exhibited, and a few scholarly
references pertaining to the work or the culture
which produced it. These commentaries involve a
wide range of scholars (126 in all), some more
qualified than others, not just the authors of the
sectional introductions. At the end of the catalogue
there is a huge bibliography, nearly 1400 items.
The three brief introductory essays are by Tom
Phillips (an artist and the organizing curator of the
exhibit), Kwame Anthony Appiah, the African phi
losopher and murder mystery writer who teaches
at Harvard University, and his friend Henry Louis
Gates, Jr., the Black American literary scholar and
critic who also teaches at Harvard. There is also a
brief essay on the African “prehistoric” record by
Peter Garlake, the British archaeologist and histo
rian of Africa. Ironically, none of these authors is
an expert on African art. The most interesting of
these essays is Appiah’s which questions both the
concept of Africa and of art, issues to which I shall
return in the second part of this review article.
The seven cultural-geographic sections to the
catalogue (and exhibit) are: (1) ancient Egypt
(introduced by Edna R. Russmann) and Nubia
(introduced by Lâslo Tordk), (2) eastern Africa
(introduced by John Mack), (3) southern Africa
(introduced by Patricia Davison), (4) central Africa
(introduced by Daniel Biebuyck and Frank Herre-
man), (5) western Africa and the Guinea coast
(introduced by John Picton), (6) the sahel and sa
vannah of western Africa (introduced by René A.
Bravmann), and northern Africa, including Mus
lim and Coptic Egypt (introduced by Timothy A.
Insoll, M. Rachel MacLean, R.J.A. Wilson, Nadia
Erzini, and Rachel Ward).
The catalogue (and exhibit) departs from other
such surveys of African art in two respects. First,
it attempts to give more balanced coverage to
all regions of Africa whereas in previous surveys
eastern and southern Africa receive far less or even
no coverage. Second, it includes ancient Egypt
and Nubia and Muslim/Berber/Carthaginian/Cop
tic northern Africa (Roman and Greek colonial
material is excluded). Even so, those areas of
sub-Saharan Africa which have traditionally dom
inated the study of African art, namely western
and central Africa, continue to dominate here. In
contrast, the Egyptian and north African materials
which have each usually constituted their own
special and celebrated art worlds to scholars and
experts are not here given attention comparable
to the sheer scope and general acknowledgement
of their achievements. Despite their inclusion, this
catalogue (and exhibit) remains mainly a statement
about sub-Saharan African cultures and the reasons
for this, while never fully stated, seem clear and
important, though debatable.
The complex reasons for these combinations
and imbalances are essentially political, and I dis
cuss them in the latter half of this essay where I
consider the catalogue and exhibit as sociological
and cultural events in themselves. At this point,
at my describing the catalogue, I simply indicate
the numbers of artefacts representing each of the
seven cultural-geographic areas. 834 objects are
illustrated: ancient Egypt and Nubia, 103; eastern
Africa including Ethiopia, 91; southern Africa, 94;
central Africa, 141; western Africa and the Guinea
coast, 227; the sahel and savannah of western
Africa, 94; and northern Africa, 94.
Finally, while I do not want to present a lita
ny of minor technical criticisms about errors and
omissions in the text of a catalogue of this size