Essay on Homegoing

Defining and Studying the Modern African Diaspora Author(s): Colin A. Palmer Source: The Journal of Negro History, Vol. 85, No. 1/2 (Winter - Spring, 2000), pp. 27-32 Published by: Association for the Study of African American Life and History Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2649097 Accessed: 19-08-2017 00:39 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide

range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and

facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

http://about.jstor.org/terms

Association for the Study of African American Life and History is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Negro History

This content downloaded from 71.179.21.2 on Sat, 19 Aug 2017 00:39:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

DEFINING AND STUDYING THE MODERN AFRICAN DIASPORA

By

Colin A. Palmer *

The 1999 annual meeting of the American Historical Association will have as its

theme "Diasporas and Migrations in History." This has been welcomed by those

scholars whose scholarly interest and research focus on what has come to be called

the African diaspora. As a field of study, the African diaspora has gathered momen-

tum in recent times and this is reflected in the proliferating conferences, courses,

Ph.D. programs, faculty positions, book prizes, and the number of scholars who define

themselves as specialists. But, as far as I know, no one has really attempted a sys-

tematic and comprehensive definition of the term "African diaspora," although the

concept has been around since the nineteenth century and the term has been used

since the 1960s if not earlier. Does it refer simply to Africans abroad, that is to say

the peoples of African descent who live outside of their ancestral continent? Is Africa

a part of the diaspora? Is the term synonymous with what is now being called the

Black Atlantic?'

The concept of a diaspora is not confined to the peoples of African descent. His-

torians are familiar with the migration of Asians that resulted in the peopling of the

Americas. Sometime between ten and twenty thousand years ago, these Asian peoples

crossed the Bering Strait and settled in North and South America and the Caribbean

islands. The Jewish diaspora, perhaps the most widely studied, also has very ancient

roots, beginning about 5,000 years ago. Starting in the eighth century, Muslim peo-

ples brought their religion and culture to various parts of Asia, Europe, and Africa,

creating communities in the process. European peoples began their penetration of the

African continent in the fifteenth century, a process that in time resulted in their dis-

persal in many other parts of the world. Obviously, these diasporic streams, or move-

ments of specific peoples, were not the same either in their timing, impetus, direction,

or nature.

The study of the African diaspora, as I mentioned at the outset, represents a growth

industry today. But, as I shall suggest, albeit briefly, there is no single diasporic

movement or monolithic diasporic community to be studied. For the limited purposes

of this discussion, I shall identify five major African diasporic streams that occurred at

different times and for different reasons. The first African diaspora was a conse-

quence of the great movement within and outside of Africa that began about 100,000 years ago. This early movement, the contours of which are still quite controversial,

constitutes a necessary starting point for any study of the dispersal and settlement of

African peoples. To study early humankind is, in effect, to study this diaspora. Some

* Colin A. Palmer is a distinguished Professor of History at the City University of New York.

This content downloaded from 71.179.21.2 on Sat, 19 Aug 2017 00:39:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

28 JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY

scholars may argue, with considerable merit, that this early African exodus is so dif-

ferent in character from later movements and settlements that it should not be seen as

constituting a phase of the diasporic process. This issue ought to be a subject for

healthy and vigorous debate among scholars.2

The second major diasporic stream began about 3,000 B.C.E. with the movement of

the Bantu-speaking peoples from what is now roughly the contemporary nations of Ni-

geria and Cameroon to other parts of the continent and to the Indian Ocean. The

third major stream, which I shall characterize loosely as a trading diaspora, involved

the movement of traders, merchants, slaves, soldiers, and others to parts of Europe,

the Middle East, and Asia beginning around the fifth century B.C.E. Its pace was

markedly uneven, and its texture and energy varied. Thus the brisk slave trade con-

ducted by the Muslims to the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern countries starting af-

ter the seventh century was not a new development but its scope and intensity were

certainly unprecedented. This prolonged third diasporic stream resulted in the creation

of communities of various sizes comprised of peoples of African descent in India,

Portugal, Sprain, the Italian city states, and elsewhere in Europe, the Middle East, and

Asia long before Christopher Columbus undertook his voyages across the Atlantic. In

his important study of African peoples in classical antiquity, for example, Frank

Snowden notes that while the "exact number of Ethiopians who entered the Greco-

Roman world as a result of military, diplomatic, and commercial activity is difficult to

determine . . . all the evidence suggests a sizable Ethiopian element, especially in the

population of the Roman world."3 In the parlance of the times the term "Ethiopian"

was a synonym for black Africans. The aforementioned three diasporic streams form

what I shall call the premodern African diaspora.

The fourth major African diasporic stream and the one that is most widely studied

today is associated with the Atlantic trade in African slaves. This trade, which began

in earnest in the fifteenth century, may have delivered as many as 200,000 Africans to

various European societies and eleven to twelve million to the Americas over time.

The fifth major stream began during the nineteenth century after slavery's demise in

the Americas and continues to our own times. It is characterized by the movement of

peoples among, and resettlement in, various societies. These latter two diasporic

streams, along with several substreams, and the communities that emerged constitute

the modem African diaspora. Unlike the premodem diaspora, "racial" oppression and

resistance to it are two of its most salient features.

The five major diasporic streams (or four if the first is excluded) that I have identi-

fied do not constitute the only significant movements of peoples of African descent

within or outside of the African continent. Scholars, depending on their perspectives,

should identify other major streams or substreams such as that resulting from the des-

iccation of the Sahara between 2500 B.C.E. and 2300 B.C.E. or the movement of peo-

ples from East Africa to the Middle East and Asia during the era of the Atlantic slave

trade and after. They should make sure, however, that these streams are not conflated

in terms of their timing, scope, and nature. It should be stressed that it is these

diasporic streams-or movements of specific peoples to several societies-together

with the communities that they constructed that form a diaspora. The construction of

a diaspora, then, is an organic process involving movement from an ancestral land,

settlement in new lands, and sometimes renewed movement and resettlement else-

This content downloaded from 71.179.21.2 on Sat, 19 Aug 2017 00:39:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

MODERN AFRICAN DIASPORA 29

where. The various stages of this process are interrelated, but yet discrete. Thus, to cite one example, the contemporary movement of West Indians to New York or London should be seen as the latest stage in a process that started with a forced mi- gration of specific peoples from the African continent in the sixteenth century, their settlement in the Caribbean, and the later movement of their descendants to the United States, England, and elsewhere.

I should add that while diasporas involve the movement of a particular people to several places at once, or over time, a migration is usually of a more limited scope and duration and is, essentially, the movement of individuals from one point to an- other within a polity or outside of it. The boundaries between the two processes are, to be sure, very elastic since diasporas are the product of several migratory streams. Thus, on the one hand, the contemporary movement of Jamaicans to England could be seen as a migration, but on the other hand it constitutes a part of the diasporic stream that began with the Atlantic slave trade.

Diasporic communities, generally speaking, possess a number of characteristics. Regardless of their location, members of a diaspora share an emotional attachment to their ancestral land, are cognizant of their dispersal and, if conditions warrant, their oppression and alienation in the countries in which they reside. Members of diasporic communities also tend to possess a sense of "racial," ethnic, or religious identity that transcends geographic boundaries, share broad cultural similarities, and sometimes ar- ticulate a desire to return to their original homeland. No diasporic community manifests all of these characteristics or shares with the same intensity an identity with their scattered ancestral kin. In many respects, diasporas are not actual but imaginary and symbolic communities and political constructs; it is we who often call them into being.

It is also useful, in this context, to remind ourselves that the appellation "African" was a misnomer until very recent times. Since, generally speaking, the peoples of Af- rica traditionally embraced an ethnic identification in contradistinction to a trans-eth- nic, regional, or continentally-based one, it is more historically accurate to speak of Yoruba, Akan, or Malinke diasporas for much of the period up to the late nineteenth century or even later. The issue becomes even more complicated when one recog- nizes that individuals also moved from one society to another for a variety of reasons including being captured in war. Since an African or trans-ethnic consciousness did not exist, the people who left their ethnic homeland were, strictly speaking, residing "abroad." Should such intemal movements of specific peoples in Africa be consid- ered parts of a diasporic stream? Can we speak of an African diaspora before the late nineteenth or twentieth century since the subjects of our study did not define them- selves as African but as Yoruba, Wolof, Igbo, or other? Equally important, what dem- ographic, temporal, or other boundaries should be imposed on the concept?

Clearly, a major problem that scholars of the modern African diaspora confront is how to make a case for the contours and nature of their subject, and this may not be very easy, as the preceding observations suggest. The difficulty notwithstanding, I hope to initiate a scholarly debate by attempting a definition of the modern African diaspora since it is the one that is receiving the most attention. This diaspora pos- sesses some of the characteristics that I mentioned but as the following tentative defi- nition implies, it has its unique features.

This content downloaded from 71.179.21.2 on Sat, 19 Aug 2017 00:39:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

30 JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY

The modern African diaspora, at its core, consists of the millions of peoples of African descent liv-

ing in various societies who are united by a past based significantly but not exclusively upon "ra-

cial" oppression and the struggles against it and who, despite the cultural variations and political and

other divisions among them, share an emotional bond with one another and with their ancestral con-

tinent and who also, regardless of their location face broadly similar problems in constructing and re-

alizing themselves.4

This definition rejects any notion of a sustained desire to emigrate to Africa by those

of its peoples who currently live outside that continent's boundaries, although groups

such as the Rastafarians sometimes articulate such a desire. The desire to return to

Africa, to be sure, was articulated by many of the enslaved who were removed from that continent and thousands of free African Americans left for Liberia during the nineteenth century. Men such as Henry Highland Garnet, Henry McNeal Turner, Mar-

cus Garvey and others actively embraced emigration to Africa at various times but the appeal of the continent as a place to re-establish roots seemed to have waned over time.

Methodologically speaking, the study of the modern African diaspora should, in my opinion, begin with the study of Africa. The African continent-the ancestral home- land-must be central to any informed analysis and understanding of the dispersal of

its peoples. Not only must the programs that are designed promote an understanding

of the history and nature of the variegated African cultures, but it must be recognized that the peoples who left Africa and their ethnic group, coerced or otherwise, brought their cultures, ideas, and worldviews with them as well. Africa, in all of its cultural richness and diversity, remained very much alive in the receiving societies as the vari-

ous ethnic groups created new cultures and recreated their old ways as circumstances allowed. Consequently, the study of the modern African diaspora, particularly the as- pect of it that is associated with the Atlantic slave trade, cannot be justifiably sepa-

rated from the study of the home continent.

Scholars must be careful not to homogenize the experiences of the diverse peoples of the modern diaspora. There are obviously certain commonalities, but there are fun- damental differences born of the societal context, the times, the political, economic, and "racial" circumstances, and so on. North American scholars in particular must avoid the temptation to impose paradigms that reflect their own experiences upon

other areas of the diaspora. I am, in effect, suggesting that we ask different kinds of questions that will more accurately inform our understanding of the peoples of a dias-

pora who are simultaneously similar and yet different. Scholars of the modern dias- pora must also make a methodological distinction between studying the trajectory of a people and the trajectory of the nation state in which they reside. In many cases, in-

cluding the United States, England, and Canada, the history of marginalized blacks who occupy a minority status is not coterminous with the history of the nation state. The history of black America is certainly not a carbon copy of that of the larger pol-

ity. In the case of those societies where peoples of African descent constitute the ma-

jority or exercise political and other forms of power, the issues are more complex. The scholar not only has to examine how a people realized themselves over time in

specific contexts but how they began the task of constructing nation states as well.

Obviously, the history and experiences of peoples of African descent in such societies as Jamaica, Haiti, and Barbados where they comprise the overwhelming majority can-

This content downloaded from 71.179.21.2 on Sat, 19 Aug 2017 00:39:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

MODERN AFRICAN DIASPORA 31

not be conflated with those of their counterparts in England, Germany, Canada, or

Mexico where they forn a distinct minority. The differences are too vast. In socie-

ties such as Brazil and Cuba where the peoples of African descent may be in the ma-

jority but do not exercise political power commensurate with their number, the ques-

tions that are asked must be appropriate to their circumstances. Finally, we must be

careful not to paint a static and ahistorical picture of what was and is a very dynamic

set of processes at work, everywhere.

Historians and other scholars should also adopt with the utmost caution the term

"Black Atlantic" (recently popularized by Paul Gilroy) as a synonym for the modem

African diaspora. Not only does this appellation exclude societies such as those in the

Indian Ocean that are not a part of the Atlantic basin, but there are fundamental dif-

ferences in the historical experiences of the peoples of the North Atlantic and the

South Atlantic and within these zones as well. If the appellation Black Atlantic is to be adopted, scholars must resist any tendency to homogenize and conflate the histories of these variegated peoples whose memories are still haunted by an ocean that is asso- ciated with the travail of their ancestors. Not too long ago, some scholars used the

term "Plantation America" to characterize the peoples of African descent in the

Americas, in contrast to those who were called Euro-Americans and Indo-Americans.

Unlike the Caucasians and the Indians, blacks as people were rendered invisible by

this terminology and defined according to a particular economic arrangement. Al-

though the adjective "Black" suggests that the people are included in the "Black At- lantic" construct, I am still concerned that the term lends itself to some of the same

kinds of criticisms that were leveled at the use of "Plantation America." In addition, if a general nomenclature is needed for the peoples of African descent living in the

Atlantic basin, it should emerge from their complex and unique internal experiences, their sinews and deep structures. Seen in this light, the Atlantic Ocean is of question-

able value as the signifier of a people's trajectory and the core of their history.

Similarly, if a "Black Atlantic" exists, is there an oppositional "White Atlantic"

and if so what are its animating features? The term "Africology" that is now being

embraced by some to mean the study of the peoples of African descent also suggests

a kind of "racial" or ethnic essentialism that should be questioned. Obviously, the temptation to reify "race" or ethnicity as the impetus for a people's motions in a dias-

pora as opposed to deeper and more universal structural forces should be avoided.5

The point that I should like to emphasize is that new fields require new methodolo- gies and it is unacceptable for scholars to see the modern African diaspora as a replica of other diasporas or as black American, black British, or Caribbean history writ large. The field must embrace disciplinary and interdisciplinary orientations and must, per-

force, be comparative in its methodological dimensions. Scholars, arguably, cannot and should not define themselves as diaspora specialists if their area of expertise is

confined to one society, or worse, to one small corner of that society. More than any-

thing else, we need at this stage new and provocative questions that seek to illuminate the processes at work among the peoples of African descent who are still continuing to construct themselves and command their destinies. African diaspora studies, as we shape this developing field, must be subjected to the same kind of methodological

rigor as any other area of knowledge, free from romantic condescension, essentialism, and distracting fads. For a start, let us see if we can arrive at a broad agreement on

This content downloaded from 71.179.21.2 on Sat, 19 Aug 2017 00:39:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

32 JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY

the meaning of the modem African diaspora and then we can embrace and promote

our diverse interpretive stances.

NOTES

' I should like to thank the following persons who commented on an earlier draft of this manuscript and

helped me to improve it: Michael Gomez, James Sweet, Delia Mellis, Patrick Manning, Samuel K. Roberts,

Jr., Risa L. Goluboff, Madeleine Lopez, Anthony Marsh, Sandra Green, Regine I. Herberlein, and Joseph

Miller.

2 For a discussion of the African origins issue, see Christopher Stringer and Robin McKie, African Exo-

dus: The Origins of Modern Humaniity (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1996).

3 Frank M. Snowden, Jr., Blacks in Antiquity: Ethiopianis in the Gieco-Ronian World (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1970), p. 184. See also St. Clair Drake Black Folk Here and There, 2 volumes

(Los Angeles: Center for Afro-American Studies, 1987, 1990).

4 This definition owes a great deal to the efforts of my graduate students at the Graduate School of the

City University of New York, who enrolled in my Spring 1997 course "Social Movements in the African

Diaspora During the Twentieth Century."

This point was originally raised by Samuel Roberts, Jr., a graduate student at Princeton.

This content downloaded from 71.179.21.2 on Sat, 19 Aug 2017 00:39:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms