Thinking Black

Often invoked as providing the genealogy of the study of religion, British imperial comparative religion entailed a triple mediation in which imperial theorists derived indigenous data through colonial middlemen. Focusing on the circulation of Africana religions in this enterprise, I examine the wor...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Africana religions 2013-01, Vol.1 (1), p.1-27
Main Author: Chidester, David
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Often invoked as providing the genealogy of the study of religion, British imperial comparative religion entailed a triple mediation in which imperial theorists derived indigenous data through colonial middlemen. Focusing on the circulation of Africana religions in this enterprise, I examine the work of three South African scholars—the Zulu philologist uNemo (1865–1953), the Tswana historian S. M. Molema (1891–1965), and the Zulu dramatist and student of anthropology H. I. E. Dhlomo (1903–1956)—who intervened in imperial comparative religion by reversing the flow in knowledge production. While uNemo unsettled F. Max Müller's confidence in quoting colonial experts in South Africa, Molema and Dhlomo turned imperial theorists into informants for advancing their own intellectual projects in the historical and anthropological analysis of African religion in South Africa. For the study of Africana religions, this discussion highlights the dynamics of circulation in producing knowledge about religion and religions.
ISSN:2165-5405
2165-5413
DOI:10.5325/jafrireli.1.1.0001