During the summer of 1966 this writer had the opportunity to investigate the archival holdings of four European Protestant missionary societies. The purpose of this investigation was to gather information on Protestant missionary influence on the development of the Merina Kingdom of Madagascar. During the course of this research I found that these archival holdings were not only a necessary source for my limited study. The information contained in these depositories was also a valuable source of intelligence on almost every aspect of life and labor in Africa from the eighteenth to the twentieth centuries. Unfortunately, these sources have not been used as extensively as they might be. In part, this is due to the limited scope of much of the missionary correspondence, and the awesome task of extracting what the secular historian would consider relevant from the writings of individuals whose dominant concerns were theological and often polemic.

Another, partial, explanation for the neglect of these sources --if one can use such a strong term -- stems from the general lack of information concerning these holdings and their availability to scholars. Although the most frequent users of the mission archives are missionaries themselves and church historians, the secular scholar is generally welcomed and eagerly aided by the professional staffs of the various institutions noted below. It is the intention of this brief article to indicate the location, facilities, and holdings of those four missionary archives which were used by this writer, and to furnish general information regarding other missionary organizations and depositories useful for the researcher.

This report is the result of discussions and recommendations of the Archaeology Committee of the African Studies Association, which met in Chicago early in April, 1966. African archaeology is at present an international discipline producing close collaboration among scientists from different countries, and the future of archaeological research in the continent can best be viewed as an international exercise in which American palaeo-anthropologists are beginning to play an increasingly important part. These brief notes attempt to synthesize the present position in African prehistoric studies, to show the general direction in which these are being developed, and to indicate immediate priorities in basic research and training.

The 1965 Wenner-Gren Conference on African archaeology and evolutionary studies showed that palaeo-anthropology and the closely associated studies of stratigraphers and palaeontologists are now entering upon a new stage of precision in analysis, dating, and interpretation. It emphasized the absolute necessity for new basic research to be undertaken, organized as a series of team projects.

New discoveries have resulted in revised concepts of the origin and evolution of animal species, vegetation patterns, landscape features, and of man himself and his culture. This more precise knowledge has underlined the need above all to review the revised dating of human and cultural evolution in the light of the geophysical methods that now provide an absolute time scale. This is equally as applicable to archaeologists and ethnohistorians concerned with later prehistoric times as it is to those dealing with the study of early man.

The Research Liaison Committee of the African Studies Association has compiled A Directory of Studies Centers and Research Institutes Abroad engaged in Africa-oriented research. The Directory is available by individual countries or in its entirety by writing to the RLC office.

Professors Igor Kopytoff, Vernon McKay, and Benjamin Rivlin are the 1967 liaison representatives of the Association. Each has visited African universities, research institutes, and government offices during the past few months to collect information on research in progress and on the perspectives and problems of field research in the countries of Africa.

The 1968 liaison representatives have been appointed by the Association's president, William A. Hance. Professors Robert A. Lystad and Robert L. West have joined the RLC and will be traveling to Africa during the summer, 1968.

A request to scholars recently returned or going to Africa. The RLC would welcome the following information: 1. Data on research project, including title of project, discipline or disciplines reflected, financial sponsorship, home institution, academic advisor, institutional affiliation in Africa, date of departure and expected duration of stay in Africa; 2. A brief report on living conditions, actual cost in relation to anticipated cost, field problems, and any other information with would be of assistance to those planning fieldwork in Africa.

Anthropologists in the United States came relatively late to a concern with Africa. It was through the study of American Indians that anthropology developed in this country. This orientation was specified long before the discipline was a recognized academic subject. Thomas Jefferson recommended the study of Indian customs and languages, and through this study a reconstruction of Indian history. Albert Gallatin in the 1830's began to give to this goal the vigor he also gave to public life. Many others, whose reputations are associated with other fields, were “intelligent dabblers” (e.g. Henry Thoreau; cf. Lawrence Willson, “Thoreau: Student of Anthropology,” American Anthropologist, LXI, no. 2 [April 1959]).

The European-derived populations of the United States and of South Africa have comparable situations in that each has in its own back yard, so to speak, a number of “laboratories” for the study of societies and cultures other than their own. Anthropology in each country has developed in relation to these opportunities and challenges, but in South Africa it came at a very much later period.

Americans were, in fact, among the catalysts of the development of anthropological thought in the nineteenth century, but they were scarcely cognizant of Africa. Insofar as African ethnography was developed in the nineteenth century, it was done by Europeans. The commercial, colonial, and missionary interest of European countries helped to direct the attention of anthropologists in those countries toward Africa, but also of course to Asia, Oceania, and elsewhere. In toto, Africa was less cultivated at that period than were other major areas.