In a 1984 book, Claire C.Robertson argued that, before colonialism, age was a more important indicator of status and authority than gender in Ghana and in Africa generally. British colonialism imposed European-style male-dominant notions upon more egalitarian local situations to the detriment of women generally, and gender became a defining characteristic that weakened women's power and authority.
Subsequent research in Kenya convinced Robertson that she had overgeneralized about Africa. Before colonialism, gender was more salient in central Kenya than it was in Ghana, although age was still crucial in determining authority. In contrast with Ghana, where women had traded for hundreds of years and achieved legal majority (not unrelated phenomena), the evidence regarding central Kenya indicated that women were legal minors and were sometimes treated as male property, as were European women at that time. Factors like strong patrilinearity and patrilocality, as well as women's inferior land rights and lesser involvement in trade, made women more dependent on men than was generally the case in Ghana. However, since age apparently remained the overriding principle of social organization in central Kenya, some senior women had much authority. Thus, Robertson revised her hypothesis somewhat, arguing that in determining authority in precolonial Africa age was a primary principle that superseded gender to varying degrees depending on the situation.
The primary purpose of the passage is to
present evidence undermining a certain hypothesis
describe a particular position and its subsequent modification
discuss two contrasting viewpoints regarding a particular issue
describe how a social phenomenon varied by region
evaluate an assumption widely held by scholars