Ancient and Archaeology permalink
Great Zimbabwe
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by shivfan (U2435266) on Sunday, 7th February 2010
There was an interesting programme on Great Zimbabwe, which was a significant kingdom in the 13th century, that built large monuments out of stone in southern Africa. They mined gold, and a lot of their wealth seems to have been created by the trade in this treasure, through the island-state of Kilwa, off the Swahili coast. Both Great Zimbabwe and Kilwa became wealthy through this trade, and it seems to have last a couple of centuries, until both Great Zimbabwe and Kilwa went into decline....
Apparently, when the British colonised Rhodesia, they couldn't accept that black Africans could've created a significant kingdom such as Great Zimbabwe, and pushed the hypothesis that Phoenicians created this kingdom. That was a theory promoted by the white government of Ian Smith, which continued to deny that black Africans could be responsible for this outstanding civilization.
Fortunately, carbon dating and other archeological finds have shown that Great Zimbabwe was a black African achievement, despite the attempts of older white historians to paint it otherwise....
it is unfortunate that historical monuments can be used for political purposes. -
Message 2
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Sunday, 7th February 2010
Hi shivfan
Your post raises some very difficult issues.
I believe that the great enclosure at Great Zimbabwe is the largest single ancient structure in sub-Saharan Africa. I understand that 'zimbabwe' is the Shona word meaning the venerated house or court of a chief. Traditionally these consisted of stone walled enclosures built on a hill. Many are known of which, of course, the most famous is Great Zimbabwe. An archaeologist who has visited the site told me that the enclosure is constructed of one million granite blocks (15,000 tonnes), which produce a wall 5m thick, 11m high and 255m in circumference. An amazing, and entirely indigenous, achievement. Within the great enclosure there are several other enclosures, house platforms, a central open area, and a solid stone 'conical tower'. The early structures at Great Zimbabwe date from the 13th C, and the city & state are fully developed in the 14th C. At this time Chinese porcelain and Persian glass were being imported from Indian Ocean ports which entirely fits your description of contemporary trading.
Although 20th C professional archaeologists came round to the view that Great Zimbabwe was an indigenous creation I am told that this made no difference to the previous Rhodesian government. As you say during the white colonial era, or the period of UDI under Ian Smith that followed it, it was unacceptable to attribute an African origin to the ruins. After independence the Zanu-PF party, for perfectly understandable reasons, took the site as a great manifestation of African identity. This archaeological site gave its name to a whole country; the ultimate recognition of the 'power of the past'. But this development may also have resulted in its own distortion of scientific evidence. Archaeologists were now expected to turn to oral traditions among local African people, but not excavated evidence, to explore the origins of the ruins.
My personal belief is exactly the same as yours; it is indeed unfortunate that historical monuments can be used for political purposes. But I can also understand that nations and people can devise narratives concerning their pasts that are so powerful as to attain a position that is literally 'beyond objective investigation'. How do we set about interpreting remains that have a vivid reality to a contemporary population? Is it the archaeologists or the modern druids that have a right to visit and interpret Stonehenge? A contemporary population may not even believe that the distinction of past from present is a valid one. The whole concept of 'a past' may be a construct of western European conceptual tradition.
Who indeed has ownership of the past?
TP -
Message 3
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Sunday, 7th February 2010
Hi,
I think we must remember than the use of the monuments of the past in a political way is far from being a modern concept. Long before this or the Nazi appropriation of history, real or mythical, the great constructions were being used to legitimise the authority of ruling elites. Even the reconstructions of Stonehenge could be interpreted in this light.
It's too close to chucking out time to go into this but themes of contestation and multi vocality might make for an interesting discussion.
Regards
Ferval -
Message 4
Posted by shivfan (U2435266) on Monday, 8th February 2010
Interesting thoughts, guys....
In the light of the current problems in Zimbabwe, it's probably understandable that this interesting history should be twisted for political purposes on both sides. However, I would hope that historians from now on would research the history of Great Zimbabwe in order to find the truth, whatever that may be. Hey, I can only hope!
It does remind me of the early histories of the Haitian Revolution. In the first 100 years after Haiti's independence in 1804, European histories chose to concentrate on the barabarisms of Dessalines, ignoring the atrocities of the white planters, and explained the defeats suffered by the French and Spanish by focussing on errors and disease, not giving any credit to the generalship of Toussaint. All this changed with that excellent work by CLR James, 'Black Jacobins', which corrected the balance....
Hopefully, we'll soon see that balance corrected with regards to Great Zimbabwe. -
Message 5
Posted by Nicholas Pawson (U14330962) on Monday, 8th February 2010
I have visted Mapungubwe a couple of tiems but aslo spent more time at Tuli Safari Lodge in the Tuli block in Botswana. This is just north of Mapungubwe (across the Limpopo) and was inhabited earlier than Mapungubwe.
The Tuli block also has a hill, Mamagwe, which was used by the rulers of the ancient kingdom.
We recently found a body that had been buried over 600 years ago there and there are lots of pottery shards around.
Mapungubwe is part of a world heritage site and together with the Tuli block will form part of a TFCA (Transfrontier Conservation Area). However there is currently a company called COAL of Africa that is applying for a mining licence for a Vele colliery. If this licence is granted and open coal mining begins then this could damage the archaeological treasures that lie in the area as well as possibly stop the creation of the TFCA and ruin what is a very beautiful and unspoilt part of Africa and Southern Africa's heritage. -
Message 6
Posted by fascinating (U1944795) on Monday, 8th February 2010
Why do you say that it was an "outstanding civilisation"? We have quite a few substantial walls. There is archaeological evidence that it was a trade centre. Nothing really outstanding that I can see.
-
Message 7
Posted by shivfan (U2435266) on Tuesday, 9th February 2010
Okay, shall we say 'potentially outstanding civilization', then?
When I read this, I can't help wishing I knew more about Great Zimbabwe....
It is 'fascinating', don't you think?
-
Message 8
Posted by fascinating (U1944795) on Tuesday, 9th February 2010
Well, "civilisation" means "living in cities", and apparently they didn't.
-
Message 9
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Wednesday, 10th February 2010
Re: Message 8.
Fascinating,
I have seen already such a discussion on these boards about the same subject. It was rather "acid" in the time. Don't know if you recall it? I, in my innocence, had also contributed to that thread. I remember that lol beeble, as he many times do, tried to bring some logic and historicity in the debate, but I suppose that he is now a bit tired from all those efforts, which don't bring that much to biased contributors, who know and expose only "their" truth.
Warm regards,
Paul. -
Message 10
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Wednesday, 10th February 2010
I saw the programme and was very impressed by what it revealed. I think it is too harsh to say it was not a civilisation. There certainly was more to it than just some large walls.
On the other hand, though, there was one thing that was never mentioned during the programme. If Great Zimbabwe, through the other trading centres that were mentioned, carrying trade goods all the way to and from the coast, was involved in what we would call international trade, why have no traces of any writing been found at any of the trading centres? We are talking 12th - 15th centuries here. Every other civilisation of that time had writing of some sort. Great Zimbabwe seems to be the exception. While a lot of the day to day stuff may well have been recorded on perishable materials, I don't recall a single example being shown of any inscription.
Of course, TV programmes are notorious for not being able to give much detail, but this seems a startling omission. The only conclusion I can come to is that the society was illiterate. This in itself is surprising for people who were allegedly involved in trade with China, India and Portugal to name but three.
Just a thought.
Tony -
Message 11
Posted by fascinating (U1944795) on Thursday, 11th February 2010
What do you mean by "harsh"? I was stating that the strict meaning of the word civilisation means living in cities. If they did not live in cities, they may, for all I know, have had an outstanding culture and society, maybe superior to "civilised" ones.
PaulRyckier - hello, no I do not recall a former debate. What point are you making? -
Message 12
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Thursday, 11th February 2010
Well, "civilisation" means "living in cities", and apparently they didn't.Â
No, it doesn't mean "living in cities" any more than "fascinating" means to cast a spell on someone. -
Message 13
Posted by shivfan (U2435266) on Thursday, 11th February 2010
My understanding of the word 'civilization' is that it means that people lived in a town, which could very well be the collection of huts that surrounded the walled buildings in which the elite of Great Zimbabwe lived....
We think of people as being civilized when they have organised themselves into a stable, efficient group, instead of operating separately or in small tribes. Granted, not a lot is known about Great Zimbabwe, but I'm quite prepared to make the assumption that this particular civilization, being a trading centre, might very well have operated in this way.
It would be interesting to see if archeological research in the future will throw up any further light on this, one way or another.... -
Message 14
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Thursday, 11th February 2010
Re: Message 11.
Fascinating,
as I am sure that I took part in the thread, I did search in all my (latest) messages on the new messageboards and didn't found the thread. That should then that it was on the old messageboards from before August 2005. I entered the Ö÷²¥´óÐã history messageboards in March 2002 and lol beeble was already there.
It could also be that the link to the discussion of Zimbabwe was a wandering off of another title and was off topic as so many times happens overhere.
Hmm, I think just lol beeble can help us with his famous memory.
If I recall it well it was about Arabic trademen introducing some new aspects in Zimbabwe...?
Warm regards,
Paul. -
Message 15
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Friday, 12th February 2010
I think that debating the nature of civilisation may be a blind alley since the word is clearly used in two senses. It has certainly been employed to indicate 'city dwelling' societies, but today the same word is more commonly describes a society that is literate, governed by laws, and is technologically advanced for its time, artistic and creative. The result is that, to take one example, the Bronze Age Minoan Palace society is unquestionably highly civilised according to the second definition, but not by the first.
There is exactly the same problem with the word 'primitive'. It may be used only to express primacy, that is the 'primitive culture' of New Zealand means only 'the culture of the first people to live in New Zealand'. It would be perfectly understandable however if the Maori people interpreted 'primitive' as meaning exactly the opposite of 'civilised' and very much resented its use, especially by those with very little direct knowledge of their culture.
Every society then has a 'culture' which may be defined as the transmitted behaviour patterns that relate the society to the environment. These include: technology, subsistence, economics, ritual practices, and art. Furthermore it has an 'archaeological culture’, in other words those aspects of its general culture that survive in the archaeological record. This is has been touched on already with Zimbabwe where there is evidence of trade but not of writing. If the inhabitants wrote only on perishable material then their literature and laws would not survive.
The word 'civilisation' in its first sense may be replaced by 'urbanisation'. This is not difficult to recognise; we should expect to find: low status residential accommodation, but also evidence of public buildings and some high status structures. There are commonly storage facilities and attempts to solve water supply problems. Urban settlements are usually demarcated defensively. But we should also ask if a society is simple or complex. This is not without its problems; our society is technologically complex but its kinship relationships are simple. But most complex societies will be socially segmented, have craft specialisation, undertake long distance trade, and show evidence of laws, religion and art.
On this basis Zimbabwe would be a complex, proto-urban society perhaps?
TP -
Message 16
Posted by fascinating (U1944795) on Friday, 12th February 2010
I can agree with all of that. It would be rather po-faced of me to insist that the modern definition of civilisation means living in cities, the use of the word has clearly changed, and urbanisation is better.
I think "primitive" never meant "primary" it really meant "undeveloped". All peoples presumably went through hunter-gatherer stage, then cattle herding, then agriculture etc. Those still at hunter-gatherer stage are still at the first (prime) stage. Certainly the word has been used pejoratively, but that is not within the word itself. Some writers have praised the primitive life as far more healthy and virtuous than so-called civilised (urbanised) life. -
Message 17
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Friday, 19th February 2010
Paul, yes the discussion was on the old boards. I'm struck by the fact that I can't think about it without seeing the orange borders of the old history site but as such cannot recall the signing name off the top of my head. As I recall the issue, spread over several messages, was not so much whether the remains of Great Zimbabwe constituted a civilisation as the other poster was quite prepared to suggest that they do. Where the argument arose was that he was not prepared to believe that the Shona were capable of the construction of the Great Zimbabwe enclosure, a view that was typical of the white residents educated under colonial rule. He thus wanted to prove that the Arabs instigated the construction of the site, largely because the dating evidence had ruled out the Phoenicians.
His last posts on here mentioned that he had to take time off from these boards because he was having problems with his estates in Brazil. This was around the time the Brazilian leftist government were attempting to take land away from absentee landlords and distribute it to landless peasents and indiginous people. Apparently it was getting so white colonials could not exploit the poor and further enrich themselves without some cursed state agency stepping in to restrict their freedoms.
Incidentally you started posting on these boards one month after I did. -
Message 18
Posted by fascinating (U1944795) on Friday, 19th February 2010
We need a History of History Message Boards message board.
-
Message 19
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Friday, 19th February 2010
Oh great, an area where us old hands can say they remember when all this was just machine code.
While arguing we did disappear off into the routes of African metallurgy and as a result covered many of the points raised in the West African programme. If anybody wants to delve into the traditions outlined, the material is based upon the Unesco Iron roads in Africa survey. I found an English translation of a PDF detailing some of its findings online.
-
Message 20
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Friday, 19th February 2010
Re: message 17.
lol,
I knew it, you would be the person to explain it. What a memory.
Yes that orange. The first messages I printed out with a colour printer, but at the end it became purple as some colours in the printer were empty...
And those long threads, which ended in columns at the right of the page. Some Englishman contibuting here and overthere directed me to a French history messageboard: "Histoforums", where it was exactly the same. I mean that of becoming colums at the right side.
OOPS and I said Englishman again. To be political correct I had to say "Brit?" (Briton?) or how do you call an inhabitant of Great Britain? In fact it could as good have been a Canadian or some one of the commonwealth...in any case he (she?) wrote good English (in my opinion) and wrote "colour" and not "color"...
To come back on those "Histoforums" after I had learned to correspond in French it ended a quiet death by in my opinion letting too many freedom to the contributors. Was then invited with my better French to a new messageboard "Tribune Histoire" by the owner of that board and spent some years overthere too learning French history, but I suppose by a "Pétainist" (someone who supports the rehabilitation of Pétain) letting no room for other discussion it is now also nearly deserted. Since more than a year now at Passion Histoire, a messageboard very well controlled for "bad" contributors...I think that that is the concept for a good messageboard, to track those who don't use the history messageboard for what it is designed for.
But of course I am "off topic" (hors sujet) and I am sure I couldn't do that at the Passion Histoire for fear to see my message annihilated...
lol, with esteem for all the messages from you over the years and from which I learned that much to form my historical view of the world...and Britain...
Kind regards,
Paul. -
Message 21
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Friday, 19th February 2010
Paul, it just struck me that the poster was called James.
As I understand it the term used to describe the way the messages moved further and further to the right is nesting. -
Message 22
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Saturday, 20th February 2010
Re: Message 21.
lol,
and now I started to doubt about the "orange". Had a look (you know me) to my colour copies of March 2002 and the heading is green and the text rather brown. But it was the window I copied always of a reply to a contributor: "You are replying to this message:" and the reply: "This is how your message will look:" (all in the same window)
But I think yes, although not sure anymore, that the frames and the left side was orange of the main pages...
"nesting": At first I thought at birds, but in the Collins Completely New Edition of 1991 I found under "nest": "5. Computers" the explanation of what you meant.
Yes James Welsh: I think it was during a "conversation" with Minette that he mentioned that he was living with a nice "indegenous" woman...And I always defending the French against his French-bashing... Was it him starting the thread about the gaschambers with his negationist point of view...? I then did the first research about "negationism" (but in English it is called otherwise if I recall it well?). Also about Hitler's Austrian time with rather sympathetic view towards the Jews and the question when it changed...I recall also a thread from him about homosexuality and if it was nature or nurture... he used such denigrating words as...and now I forgot..."queenies?" , "piffies?"...And the American from Louisiana (forgot now his name too (Morgan?)), started with me about people predestinated for "suicide"...I still remember that one characteristic was to be "Protestant", Roman-Catholics weren't that inclined for suicide...there were again if I recall it well, four inclinations and if combined it was the ultime predestination... he gave the "combination" of the four...
Hmm, that's really as Fascinating asked the "history" of the history messageboard...
Kind regards and with esteem as always,
Paul. -
Message 23
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Sunday, 21st February 2010
Addendum to previous message.
lol,
I said "green" and yes the title was on a green background with the text in yellow: "History Message Board" with a big "O" in the word history. But coincidentally I see now that between July and August 2002 the "system" changed to I suppose an "orange" background with a black word on it "Talk History" and I think it lasted till the change to the new "DNA boards"...
And the guy (I have met his name now again in March 2002), who led me to the French "Histoforums", where he contributed too, was "Jason Scott".
And I think James Welsh was living in Paraguay (I remember it while I had to seek if (Paraguay was written with an "u" the same way as in Dutch). And he said once to me that he had to live there because of his previous sins. He never said if he came from one of the Southern African States.
And or subject is perhaps a bit wandering off topic, but it is also a bit history related, as it is an example of "oral history" as the past can also be constructed with the rememberings of people, who lived during the given history. And perhaps with more rememberings from more contemporaries the flaws in the "story" would be less ?
Warm regards and with esteem,
Paul.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD
Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation
Ö÷²¥´óÐã links
Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.