Afro-pessimism (Africa) in the context of "African historiography"

African historiography is a branch of historiography involving the study of the theories, methods, sources, and interpretations used by scholars to construct histories of Africa. Most African societies recorded their history via oral tradition, resulting in a lack of written records documenting events before European colonialism. African historiography has therefore lent itself to contemporary methods of historiographical study, the utilisation of oral sources, and the incorporation of evidence derived from various auxiliary disciplines, differentiating it from other continental areas of historiography due to its multidisciplinary nature.

Oral historians utilised various sources from their communities in crafting socially-consolidated histories which were then passed down through generations, with traditions serving as contemporary documents of messages from the past. Early written history about Africa was largely undertaken by outsiders, each of which had their own biases. Colonial historiography was Eurocentric and propagated racist theories such as the Hamitic hypothesis. African historiography became organised in the mid-20th century, and initially involved the refutation of colonial narratives. Nationalist histories sought to generate patriotism and sustain the multi-ethnic nation states, and African historiography saw a movement towards utilising oral sources in a multidisciplinary approach alongside archaeology and historical linguistics. Following growing pessimism about the fate of the continent, Marxist thought became popular, and contributed to a more critical study of colonialism. From 1981 UNESCO began publishing the General History of Africa, edited by specialists from across the continent. The 1980s saw universities struggle amid economic and political crises, resulting in the migration of many scholars (largely to the United States), and the discipline remains critically underfunded. Historians of Africa in the 21st century focus more on contemporary history than precolonial history, and are less ideological than their predecessors as the discipline has taken on a more pluralist form.