Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g5fl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T06:35:37.870Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mary Kingsley — a reassessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2009

Extract

The purpose of this article is to examine the ideas of Mary Kingsley, not merely in abstract, but as the political theory of certain groups active in Late Victorian colonial affairs. A ‘surgical’ approach of this kind is almost certain to reduce concepts which at first sight seem brilliant and original to more mundane proportions, so perhaps at the outset this woman's outstanding achievements should be emphasized. Among contemporaries of her sex few achieved more; at a time when women were struggling to create merely the elementary conditions in which to express themselves, Mary Kingsley overshadowed the male competitors in her chosen field, sometimes in physical and almost always in intellectual achievement.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 This article originally took the form of a paper given before the Seminar on the Recent History of the Commonwealth, at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London, on 26 January 1962.Google Scholar

2 Ashanti (Oxford, 1925), 81.Google Scholar

3 Survey of British Commonwealth Affairs, vol. ii,Google ScholarProblems of Economic Policy, 1918–1939, Part 2 (Oxford, 1942), 330.Google Scholar

4 Survey of British Commonwealth Affairs, vol. II, Problems of Economic Policy, 1918–1939, Part 2 (Oxford, 1942, 1942), Appendix A passim, especially pp. 331–2.Google Scholar

5 e.g. Howard, Cecil, Mary Kingsley (London, 1957), 910.Google Scholar

6 Howard, op. cit. 215, quoting a letter from Mary Kingsley to John Holt.Google Scholar

7 This raises the interesting question of why she proved such a fanatical supporter of their interests, for it is quite clear that self-interest was not involved. There is little concrete evidence to suggest any firm explanation. The reason was probably the simple one that she liked most of the traders personally, developed close personal friendships with Goldie, John Holt, and others, and regarded them as a much-abused and unjustly treated group of likeable and honourable men. It does also appear that she took a personal dislike to many missionaries and Government officials, and felt them to be self-seeking and hypocritical.Google Scholar

8 I have discussed these activities in Sir George Goldie and the Making of Nigeria (London, 1960), 303–6.Google Scholar

9 Travels in West Africa (London, January 1897).Google Scholar

10 London, 1899.

11 See the published correspondence in P.P., LXII (1897), 8480, ‘Papers relative to the Liquor Trade in West Africa’.Google Scholar

12 Chamberlain was anxious to resume direct control of the Company's territories.Google Scholar

13 This had been revealed to them by the Colonial Office to Liverpool Chamber of Commerce, 15 March 1896, in P.P., LXII (1897).Google Scholar

14 October 1897, p. xii. The section referred to is pp. 491–500.Google Scholar

15 Travels (1900 edition), 494.Google Scholar

16 In the chapter ‘Commerce in West Africa’ in West African Studies, 281 ff., where there is considerable discussion of the concept of expanding trade, there is no mention of the liquor trade, or its role in development. Considering the amount of space devoted to the liquor trade in the Travels this is an extraordinary omission.Google Scholar

17 Travels, 493ff. Note also that the only missionaries singled out as exempt from the general condemnation are those like Dennis Kemp, who denied that Gold Coasters were drunkards. Mary Kingsley made no comment on Kemp's additional comment that he nevertheless thought liquor ‘of no benefit to the natives’ except to state that she did ‘not agree’, giving no reasons.Google ScholarIbid 492–3.Google Scholar

18 As usual Hancock, op. cit. 332–3, has the most stimulating comments, and others have followed him. He does not mention her idea of African inferiority, but stresses the ideas derived from this, especially the idea that African societies are worthy of respect and serious study before they are senselessly destroyed by officialdom.Google Scholar

19 Travels, 500.Google Scholar

20 Ibid. 501, see also p. 296.Google Scholar

21 Keane, was Professor of Ethnology at Cambridge. In his Ethnology (Cambridge, 1896), 266, he argued that Africans' ‘inherent mental inferiority’ was caused by ‘premature closing of the cranial sutures’!Google ScholarPubMed

22 Travels, 504.Google Scholar

23 West African Studies, 385–6.Google Scholar

26 Travels, 488–9.Google Scholar

27 13 March 1898, in the John Holt Papers. I am indebted to Mr Cecil Holt, of John Holt and Company (Liverpool) Ltd, for permission to quote from these papers.Google Scholar

28 Travels, 489.Google Scholar

33 i.e. the letters from Mary Kingsley to John Holt wherein she constantly seeks his advice on matters of factual information and describes to him periodically the state of the work; in the letters reproduced in Gwynn, S., Mary Kingsley (London, 1933), in the Colonial and Foreign Office correspondence, and in the letters between the traders preserved in the John Holt Papers.Google Scholar

34 See footnote 8.Google Scholar

35 Mary Kingsley to John Holt, 1 October 1898. Her comments are on the first draft of Chapter XIII which she enclosed.Google Scholar

36 Mary Kingsley to John Holt, 2 July 1898.Google Scholar

37 West African Studies, 345.Google Scholar

41 Kingsley, Mary to Holt, John, 5 September 1899.Google Scholar

42 Kingsley, Mary to Holt, John, 9 November 1899.Google Scholar

43 West African Studies, 309–10.Google Scholar

44 Kingsley, Mary to Holt, John, 5 May 1898.Google Scholar

45 West African Studies, 392ff.Google Scholar

46 Though in a letter to John Holt of 29 April 1898 she described a speech by BadenPowell ‘on railways and all manner of such-like “tommy rot”’.Google Scholar

47 Kingsley, Mary to Holt, John, a February 1898.Google Scholar

48 Kingsley, Mary to Holt, John, 21 June 1898.Google Scholar

49 Kingsley, Mary to HoIt, John, September 1899.Google Scholar

50 West African Studies, 398.Google Scholar

51 Kingsley, Mary to Holt, John, 18 September 1899.Google Scholar