Scrofulous Sogolon 117 material in a constructive manner, as the 1993–96 Vallées du Niger show did. It is interesting to note that the figure we have called “Scrofulous Sogolon” (fig. 1) was exhibited in that show along with one of the few figurative sculptures to have been discovered during scientific excavations by archaeologists Roderick and Susan McIntosh. The commentary that went with it said it would be forever speechless and presented this muteness as an inescapable fatality, since the figure had been ripped out of its archaeological context.129 We do not need an epic that matches historically verifiable or verified events to defend the idea that IND terracottas sometimes represent epic figures, even if these characters can be fictitious. Like many other commentators, we think that few of the events related in the Sunjata Epic actually took place,130 but that does not prevent them from being sung, described over and over for West African audiences, held up as paragons of behavior, and even, as we maintain here, poignantly illustrated. These terracottas are associated with the sensational, marvelous, and magical deeds of history. They recall events that impress people, make them dream, stimulate their memories, evoke ethical models, engender proverbs, and reinforce a feeling of identity, all based on what can be seen as a “success story,” that being the recovery of unjustly confiscated power and the efficacy of occult practices. The terracotta sculpture of the Inland Niger Delta also demonstrates that the acquisition of power relies on unimaginable sacrifice. The suffering it reveals is a metaphor for the price to be paid for dominion. The snakes that are frequently included are a reminder of this: With their uncanny ability to attract and repel, they—along with the sores, pustules, wounds, and the infernal cycle of suffering—symbolize just how much abnegation is required to assume all the contradictions inherent in the process of rulership. At the higher levels of Mande politics, when the chief embodies a fundamentally sacred function, power is a scourge and he who wields it is a pariah. The fifteen works presented in this article have all been CT scanned. This was a logistical challenge, considering how difficult it is to transfer masterpieces from public collections to a hospital, where they were examined under the watchful, fascinated, and sometimes concerned gaze of their curators. The video scans are freely accessible on the website: www.scantix.com/sogolon English translation by Isabel Ollivier. NOTES 1. Foucault 1969: 29. The Archaeology of Knowledge (1972), tr. A. M. Sheridan Smith (New York: Pantheon). 2. Brent 1994; Dembelé & Schmidt & Van der Waals 1993: 228–231; McIntosh & McIntosh 1986a: 1994; McIntosh & Diaby & Togola 1997; Panella 2002, 2013; Sanogo 2010; Schmidt & McIntosh 1996; Van Dyke 2007. 3. McIntosh & McIntosh 1981: 10–22; 1986b; 1988; Vansina 1995. 4. Books on the history of African art always give a few examples but few in-depth articles have focused on them in recent years since Bernard de Grunne’s works (1980, 1987). One of the most recent contributions was published in The World of Tribal Art (the former title of this magazine) in 1999 (Leurquin). In 2002, the Amiens museum held an exhibition on the Mande Empire, which was accompanied by a catalog (see Cissé, Dembele & Bedaux 2002). Bernard de Grunne has just published a new book on the subject (2014). Publication was imminent when we were writing this article and he kindly sent us the content. 5. Bouttiaux 2014: 246–267. 6. McIntosh 1989: 74–75, 80–81. 7. Musonda 1996: 164; Schmide & McIntosh 1996, de l’Estoile 2007: 323–367; McIntosh & Togola & McIntosh 1995: 61–63. FIGS. 41, 42, and 43: CT scans of figures 1, 34, and 39, opaque 3D views with ganglionic masses, abscesses, and scars probably due to scrofula, which is indicated in green. © Dr. Marc Ghysels, Brussels.
T75E_web
To see the actual publication please follow the link above