Le 2 mai 1923, Sir Frederic LUGARD prenait la parole à Bruxelles, dans la Salle de l'Union Coloniale, en présence de S.M. le Roi Albert. Le cycle de conférences organisé par le Ministre des Colonies de Belgique, M. Louis Franck, pour l'étude des problèmes coloniaux sous l'éclairement des diverses solutions adoptées par les principales nations coloniales, devait nécessairement appeler à cette tribune, pour cette confrontation, l'ancien gouverneur général de la Nigérie, le tenant de l'administration indirecte, qui venait, l'année précédente, de consigner les données de son expérience et d'exposer sa doctrine dans un ouvrage dont le retentissement allait s'étendre à toute l'Afrique et qui deviendrait le bréviaire des administrateurs coloniaux.

Most Cewa believe that certain persons are witches (mfiti, sing, and pl.) who impoverish, harm, or kill their fellow beings by using destructive magic and by performing supernatural feats of various kinds. That they are greatly preoccupied with this belief and its various implications is shown by the frequency with which they attribute death and misfortune to witchcraft, and by their related tendency to take precautions against possible attacks by ‘witches’, e.g. by having their bodies and huts magically protected.

I Propose to examine the Uganda secondary boys' boarding-school, in which I teach, as an institution in culture contact; to consider how far its function must be interpreted in terms of its own dynamism and how far in terms of the parent cultures of the Black and White members of the community. The interpretation I make from data gained chiefly within the school is necessarily incomplete, and a complementary study by a field anthropologist, looking at the school from the point of view of outside society, is desirable. But within the limits of the data available to a schoolmaster I here offer a description and an analysis.

Professor Greenberg, in his series of linguistic studies, writes: ‘From the present series there will emerge a complete genetic reclassification of the languages of Africa. These results are so at variance from the commonly accepted scheme that a brief methodological foreword seems in order.’ This is a clear and frank statement and a great promise. Until now, in spite of several attempts, no satisfactory classification of African languages has existed. Though it may seem natural not to be satisfied with an analysis of individual languages but to aim at a synthesis, to see the whole and its interrelations, there was in many quarters a definite aversion from a holistic approach; it was even said to be more important to stress the differences than to try to find relationships. It is certainly necessary to study each single language in all its peculiarities, but it is wrong to maintain that a comparative investigation should not be undertaken until every African language has been analysed; that would defer the matter ad kalendas graecas. It is not necessary to analyse every Bantu language in order to show the characteristic features of Bantu languages and their relation to other languages. We are grateful to Professor Greenberg for his attempt, which reveals a familiarity with the problem and a sound and extensive knowledge of many African languages. Though not every point he makes is new, yet he indicates new roads and provides food for reflection and discussion.

L'importance de l'initiation chez les peuples africains a été soulignée par tous les auteurs qui ont étudié leur vie sociale et religieuse. Dr. Harley, pour le Libéria, en a fait une description qui reste un de nos meilleurs documents sur la question. Nous nous proposons, dans cet article, d'exposer quelques observations que nous avons pu faire, sur le même sujet, chez les habitants de la région forestière de la Guinée Française, et notamment du cercle de N'Zérékoré, au cours d''un séjour de plusieurs années.

In her review of Seven Tribes of British Centra Africa in Africa, xxii. 1 Mrs. Douglas praises the individual essays but criticizes their appearance in a single volume. We do not consider it appropriate for writers to reply to criticism which is levied on the basis of general knowledge and of the internal evidence of a book—indeed, we would ourselves accept the criticism which Mrs. Douglas, with others, has made that the editors should not have shirked the task of providing a general introduction to add to the significance of joint publication of the seven essays. But we consider it legitimate to protest when Mrs. Douglas's criticism is based on inadequate and inaccurate statements about the internal affairs of the Rhodes-Livingstone Institute, especially as she puts this incorrect information in the form of questions.