Thursday, January 3, 2013

Questions about Postclassical Sub-Saharan Africa Map

The map did not include a better key, all kingdoms with space and color, and religion because the mapmakers, even though they should avoid bias, want to elicit the same opinion of Africa from their viewers that they themselves have. They only put in what they perceived as important despite the fact that we could find other concepts just as or even more significant. It also seems that they did not want us to think too much about the map because it was so simple. Also, to put in easiest terms, these mapmakers may just have been too lazy to incorporate everything indicated in the text book about the continent.

The map portrays a false depiction of Africa during the time period indicated. As a result, the viewer's understanding of this continent is flawed since key pieces of information regarding this area are omitted. For example, religions of the kingdoms are not incorporated and in fact, some kingdoms are not clearly identified. Africa is portrayed in a way that causes the viewer to believe that Africa was minimal in its importance in comparison to the rest of the world. The mapmakers did not show, frankly, any routes going out of Africa, and in the one instance where they did, the route did not point to a specific continent. Also, the absence of more kingdoms indicates that the mapmakers believed they were less significant and as a result, the viewer feels the same. However, this is not true because based on our additions, the other empires not clearly depicted were extremely important, especially in regards to trade and religion. These empires and cities not included in the key had large amounts of exports, mostly in gold and slaves. Also, they adopted new religions such as Christianity and Islam, which helped to shape Africa. This concept was not indicated on the original map. As a result of these additions, our understanding of Africa changes to a more correct outlook on the region.

No comments:

Post a Comment