This paper focuses upon the interaction between the Northern Tswana kingdoms, located in present-day Botswana, and evangelizing missionaries. Agents of such highly institutionalized, monotheistic ‘religions’ as Judaism, Christianity and Islam mutually conceive of their faiths as entirely incompatible with others and as defining radically distinct communities. The relationship between such communities involves issues of conflict and coexistence that are basically different from the case of the Tswana. Where ‘religion’ is immanent, institutionally as well as culturally, the interface might not only be characterized by processes of separation, but also by mutual adaptation. Evangelizing missionaries, Christianity and the Tswana interacted on the basis of cultural models that only partially overlapped, a fact that gave rise to some controversy. Coexistence may be attributed to the limited extent to which Tswana ideas about superhuman forces are externalized in public rituals that are perceived as ‘religious’ by missionaries. By extension, notions of ‘faith’ and the sacred-secular divide are questioned as concepts adequate for cross-cultural comparison. Such considerations suggest that the colonized are not necessarily the passive victims of evangelizing missionaries. Yet, amongst the Tswana, Christianity has, at times, contributed significantly to aggravate the tensions and conflicts inherent in Tswana polities. This has led Tswana rulers to tackle various challenges, including the rise of indigenous Christian movements, by incorporating the missionary church in their polities as a kind of ‘state church,’ granting it a monopoly.
Tracing the historical development of the Crimean Tatar diaspora of Turkey, the Balkans and Central Asia, this paper looks first at the migration of this small Muslim ethnie from 1783 to the twentieth century, particularly after the Russian Empire’s victory in the Crimean War and Josef Stalin’s deportation of Muslim communities in the final year of World War II. Conquered, persecuted and scattered, the Crimean Tatars were either assimilated into host societies, as in Turkey, or rejected by them, as in Bulgaria and Romania. Yet, many maintained or rediscovered their Crimean Tatar identity in the twentieth century, especially during their long period of exile in Central Asia when they came to form a true diasporan community. Supported by their co-ethnics in Turkey and the Balkans, many Tatars took the opening that appeared in the final days of the Soviet Union to return to an uncertain future in their homeland. The case of the this little-studied ethnic group has obvious implications for scholars interested in ethnically-based oppression, national and diasporic identity construction and Muslim-Christian relations in the marginal zone between Christianity and Islam.