Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
of the world behind.” It is firmly accepted that the early Egyptians were Africans, and much of the
glory of the advances in modern medicine belongs rightly to Africa.
It has been observed that ancient Egyptian medicine, like all African medicine, has baffled
scholars because of the complete interpenetration of “magicospiritual” and “rational” elements.
There have been some spirited efforts to interpret the African medical practices from a strictly
Western perspective. Anything that does not fit into the limited technological worldview of the West
is dubbed “superstitious.” One of the greatest problems African medicine faces now is the ubiqui-
tous Procrustes complex, in which most people are unable to accept facts without rationalizing and
twisting them to fit predigested theories, prejudices, and beliefs. Procrustes, according to Greek
mythology, was the robber of Polypemon, who stretched or shortened his captives to fit one of his
iron beds. Traditional African medicine is still surviving only because it works, and its adherents
refuse to be swayed by the intimidating logic of those who want African medicine to be “modern-
ized” into oblivion. It has been suggested that African traditional medicine should be separated into
its composite parts, namely, the so-called rational treatment of diseases with herbs and the use of
“magic” and the invocation of spirits, gods, and God in the healing processes. As indicated, it is dif-
ficult to separate the two components, and there is an ever-present danger of overcompartmentaliza-
tion. The use of herbs in combination with the power of the human spirit, assistance from the gods,
and other unseen forces constitutes a fundamental aspect of African ethnomedicine.
The use of the word
ethnomedicine
in describing African medicine does imply some value judg-
ment; this is correct and deliberate since the point has to be emphasized that Western medicine is
not culturally specific, and that modern orthodox medicine is the product of the synthesis or, more
appropriately, the fusion of several ethnomedical systems and developments in science. African
ethnomedicine is also specifically a tribal medical system; this is so because all aspects of African
life, including healing, are based on strong family ties, and no other English word could describe the
power of group interdependence and resilience of human spirit in unison than
tribe
.
It is the belief among most Africans that an herbal prescription from a medicine man could cure
an indicated illness not necessarily because the plant has a demonstrable pharmacological activity
per se, but because there is life-giving potency in every creature that the medicinal plants possess
and also the acquired properties imparted to the plant through invocations, incantations, and rituals.
The majority of Africans today still depend either totally or partially on these healing methods
used by their ancestors. This form of treatment, which is referred to as ethnomedicine, is, some-
times, the only kind of health care available to the rural populations. A people's ethnomedicine
represents the sum of their medical knowledge and practices based on practical experiences and
observations handed down from one generation to another. The healing methods and health prac-
tices of any community are the product of various cultural heritages, which are profoundly influ-
enced by the interplay of a complex of social, economic, and political factors. Like other aspects
of culture, it is dynamic, absorbing new concepts and adapting to the winds of change. The healers
may use medicines from local plants, minerals, or animal substances; prescribe special exercises,
incantations, dances, or music; and use sacrifices and purifying rituals of a religious nature—all to
reflect the beliefs and attitudes of their community about what causes illness and how to prevent it
and about what being healthy really means.
The African traditional healer differs from the contemporary doctor trained in the ways of
Western science in his or her conception of health, the causes of ill health, and the methods of treat-
ment. The Western-trained doctor is generally analytic in methodology, concentrating efforts on
units, while the native healer focuses on the whole human being and recognizes the units as parts
that can never equal the sum—all treatment, therefore, is holistic. Both, however, are concerned
for the improvement of the community health, and they make genuine efforts to cure and prevent
diseases and maintain good health. With such a common objective, it would be desirable to have a
pooling of the resources of both groups to achieve their goal, but what exists presently is, unfortu-
nately, mutual antagonism, distrust, and contempt. It has been argued that there are many areas of
