Africa, A New Geographic Survey by Alan B. Moutjoy; Clifford EmbletonReview by: James E. DugainAfrica Today, Vol. 14, No. 5, American Policy in Southern Africa (Oct., 1967), p. 35Published by: Indiana University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4184835 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 12:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Indiana University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Africa Today.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.51 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 12:36:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

termines "to give the intelligent reader a map of themes and styles of African writing in the metropolitan languages." For many decades, the physical maps of Africa marked only the costal fringes-the vast unex- plored interior was mysteriously blank. In our present knowledge of the African arts we are similarly ig- norant. No anthology so well explores, what for too many readers are the un- known hinterlands of literature. As a guide Mr. Mphahlele's collection is warmly recommended.

J. Povey

Africa, A New Geographic Survey. By Alan B. Moutjoy and Clifford Embleton. (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1967)

According to the title page "the original edition of this book was pub- lished in 1966 by Hitchinson Educa- tional, London as Africa: A Geograph. ical Study. It has been greatly re- vised and brought up to date by the authors."

Apparently the authors have writ- ten this book with a two-fold purpose in mind: (1) as a college text, and (2) as a reference for African scholars.

It is this- reviewer's opinion that the book is better adapted to the first purpose than the second.

The first three chapters, covering 156 pages are devoted to a general survey of Africa as a whole: the physi- cal basis, historical and political evo- lution, and the human geography. The remainder of the book is organ- ized along regional and national lines: ten chapters for ten regions. Each chapter is followed by what appears to be a rather good list of references and a bibliography of books and ar- ticles from geographic journals and official sources. The student should find these references invaluable as they cover a wide range of subject matter and a time span of about 65 years, from about 1900 to 1967.

The writing style is fairly interest- ing, but I do feel that the authors could have improved the readability of the book by an even more region- al approach. In some cases separate treatment of each country became somewhat tedious. I felt that the first three chapters were done the best even though parts were too technical to suit a non-geographer like myself.

The book impressed me by its fa-

cile handling of technical matter on geology, monphology and climatology, and for the reader who needs infor- mation on the hydrology of the Nile, this book provides an answer.

For social and economic data, how- ever, I would have liked a book with more factual data, presented in tabu- lar and graphic form.

I did find soane glaring errors in the section on Liberia, the country with which this reviewer has some first-hand acquaintance. To find the probable population given as 2 mil- lion when its census reports slightly over 1 million is quite a discrepancy. (Hance reported the 1961 estimate of 1.32 million "may be exaggerat- ed.") Other errors: iron ore has for several years been by far the largest export of Liberia, not rubber, and I don't understand the basis for the statement that "a small rice import (is) necessary to feed plantation and mine laborer." I'm sure any Liberian would emphasize the necessity of in- creasing rice imports, and the con- cern of government officials over this phenomenon.

James E. Dugani

Letter to the Editor

THE BIAFRA SECESSION Sirs:

Have we failed in Nigeria? Judging from the title of his Occasional Paper and from his commentary on the Bi- afra secewsion, Mr. Diamond seems to think so. Theoretically, Mr. Diamond welcomes "the idea of a unified Ni- geria". But it is obvious from his writing that he is not enthusiastic about the idea. For one thing, Nigeria has "lost the potential for integrity in any form thus far devised". For another, Nigeria, after all, is "a col- onially conceived entity". Most ser- ious of all: Not only is Nigeria a sym- bol of the colonial past, it is also, in Mr. Diamond's view, "an enormous brake on West African and Pan Af- rican growth".

Having implicitly written off Ni- geria as a failure, Mr. Diamond saw in the Biafra secession "a symbol of . . . the emerging hope of the African revolution". Apparently he would like to see more "Biafras" along the West African coast: ethnic groups of people "releasing" themselves from the old administrative strait jackets into which they were forced, presum- ably, by the colonial masters. After the ethnic groups should have suc- ceeded in establishing themselves

anew within "natural" boundaries, new alignmnents would emerge to the benefit of all. This is why Biafra, in Mr. Diamond's view, "could well be the first move in a more unified West African thrust toward freedom and economic development".

It is doubtful whether Mr. Dia- mond's thesis would help the African cause. The political situation in most African countries is such that one should be wary to recommend or en- courage secessions. The new nations of Africa are congeries of ethnic groups, in some cases, as in Nigeria, number- ing over sixty. Once the process of secession begins it is not easy to see when it will end. There are usually minorities within an area dominated by a major ethnic group that decide to stay otut of a hitherto existing po- litical arrangement. They too might consider themselves viable entities that ought to be independent. At- tempts at secession would always result in civil wars. We shall per- haps have to wait for centuries before the various ethnic groups establish their "independence" within proper boundaries awd enter into viable "new alignments".

There is yet one more serious ob-

jection to Mr. Diamond's thesis. If the program he implicitly suggested would be followed, the "new align- ments" would probably never emerge. We know already how African coun- tries continue to guard jealously their sovereignties and find it dif- ficult to enter into any meaningful alliances. In the attempt to disman- tle the old "colonial" political set- ups, the continent could be thrown into utter chaos. The prospect is too grim to contemplate of struggling na- tions perpetually in the process of becoming.

Again, it is hard to see how Ni- geria, "as historically constituted" is an obstacle to West African or Afri- can growth. The failure hitherto of African countries to achieve unity cannot be blamed on any one single factor. The obstacles to African unity are many: the jealousy with which the countries are guarding their in- dependence; conflict of personalities among African leaders; and the un- derstandable preoccupation of the in- dividual African countries with the social and economic problems within their borders-to name just three fac- tors. A large political entity like Ni- geria, if weli integrated and econ--

35.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.51 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 12:36:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions