 Note from Dr. Bain:
As you read this entry, feel free to react. Is it historically accurate? How do you know? What
evidence does the author have for the statements s/he makes?
Remember we said that all
historical accounts are shaped by the historian that creates the account. Do you see the author's
perspective here? Is the account shaped by experience? Ethnocentrism? How?
If you'd like to respond to the
student-historian, then email me with your response and I'll pass it along. Include the author's
name in the subject of your message and email your note to
Dr. Bain at
bbain@umich.edu |
Having visited Mali, I now
know a lot about the place and it's culture. In my opinion, the government in Mali is the
most influential toward how the people live. The Mansa is held in very high regard. He
is the one who makes the rules and laws for the people. I know that he is respected
because of the way people react to and follow his decisions. The Mansa also controls the
gold supply and the army which is a major part of daily lives. I found some parts of the
government very unusual. The Mansa made all the courtly decisions yet they seemed to
differ with each situation. There were no written laws and sometimes
the Mansa would not depend fully upon the Koran (Quran). This is unusual to me
because in the United States where I am from, we have strict guidelines for the laws.
There was something that
really fascinated me about the city of Timbuktu in particular, the architecture of the
buildings. The structures looked very geometric and had an exotic look to them (the pictures from the web
site).
The tension in Mali was
sometimes due to religion. Ancient African beliefs contrast with the Islamic religion.
This sometimes created conflicts within a society. The Islamic religion was developed
greatly in the city of Timbuktu. Traders who came to the city would teach the people
about the religion. Eventually, people in Mali became Muslim. The difference in
religion caused problems because the Mansa had to be careful not to force one religion
upon anyone. Forcing the religion could result in trading conflicts and rebelling.
Some of the customs of the
people were very interesting. One in particular was that if you sneezed in front of the
Mansa, you would first need to lie face down on the ground so it wasn't noticed.
Another custom was that whenever a soldier won a battle, he would be given gifts from
the Mansa. The gifts were given as an incentive yet in my opinion, winning a battle for
one's country should be considered a duty rather than an unexpected accomplishment.
Although many of the customs were different, I respect them and find them intriguing.
After all, if a Malinke person were to come back with me to the United States, they
would be shocked at what they saw.
Comments on R's account.
Dr. Bain's comment (11/15/97):
R, I think you point out an
interesting point when you remind us that Mali did not have formal, written laws (outside
the Quran). Do you think Mali suffered from this? Could they have used written laws?
Since many (most? I'm not sure) people in Mansa's court could write and read, I wonder
why no formal law code developed? Or maybe it did and we have no record of it? What
do you think?
By the way, your comment
might make a good point of comparison for later study. Do you think we will find formal
written laws in the other places we visit?
R responds (11/17/97):
In my opinion, written laws are crucial for a society when trying to
maintain order. I'm sure that the Mansa made specific decisions that were
not consistent. Maybe he did this because he liked some people better than
others, or maybe he thought the crime was worse, yet I'm guessing that some
people did notice the differences in his decisions. There are many reasons
that people of Mali might not have had written laws. The people might not of
known of this way and were just used to their own custom. Another reason
could be that they didn't want to argue with the Mansa due to the severe
punishment they could get, and therefore didn't suggest their uncertainty
towards his decisions. Basically, I really think that written laws are
helpful when trying to make the right decisions and keep some sort of
consistency, yet other cultures obviously don't agree with me or might have
not even known about written laws.
Dr. B's resonse: (11/17/97):
Yes, R, I am certain you are
correct about the consistency of the Mansa's responses. So, are you suggesting that with written
laws he would be more consistent? Are you arguing that written laws are generally fairer?
What do the rest of you think about this issue?
You also make a good point
regarding why people might not want to have written laws in Mali. This question of written laws
is an interesting one and an important one. We might want to consider other cultures to see
where, when and why people adopted written law codes.
R responds (11/18/97):
Yes, I do think that written laws would have made the mansa's decisions more
fair. Just like our court system. Judges have to abide by certain rules
which apply to everyone. Yet, I know that this is only our way and that other
cultures don't think it is as productive.
Dr. B's resonse: (11/19/97):
R, you are showing care as a
historian when you recognize that all cultures may not think written laws are as productive.
However, let's consider a written law code by itself for a second. Is it automatically fairer? What
if we could have added written laws into a system of government like Mali's. There the Mansa
has almost total power. In such a system, the leader makes the laws, enforces the laws, and then
judges the laws. Would written laws make that system fairer?
Also, I was wondering how a religious book could serve as a written law code? Do you think
that the Quran acted as the Mansa's written law code? Do we have any evidence that the Mansa
used the Quran to guide his action and make it more consistent? So, maybe there were written
laws but we did not see them because we were looking for laws like our own.
|
Rosie Rapoport's