Three chiefs fight over Great Zimbabwe control
Friday, 22 June 2012 16:07
George Maponga Masvingo Bureau
THREE traditional leaders here are reportedly feuding over the control and ownership of the Great Zimbabwe monument. The stone monument, 30km outside Masvingo town, is where the name Zimbabwe is derived. The chiefs all claim that the imposing and historic monument falls within their boundaries.
The monument was
built in the 12th Century during the reign and dominance of the Mutapa Empire. However,
chiefs Nemamwa, Mugabe and Murinye are engaged in a bitter row over ownership of the World Heritage site.
The Mugabe and Murinye chieftainships belong to the
Duma people while
Nemamwa is linked to people of
the Shumba totem.
Some historians however, claim that they belong to the Bonga totem.
Masvingo district administrator Mr James Mazvidza yesterday said the chiefs had reached a deadlock over who has jurisdiction over the ruins.
He said efforts to break the impasse failed dismally, forcing authorities to stop the process.
“There is indeed a deadlock amongst the three chiefs claiming that the monuments fall under their jurisdictions and we had started efforts to deal with the deadlock so as to allow the Masvingo Rural District Council to gazette a resolution determining under whose area the monument falls. We stopped that because new issues emerged and they need to be sorted out first before the exact boundaries of chieftainships in Masvingo district were designated.
“We are however, going to continue with efforts to break the deadlock once the issues have been resolved and no chief can legally claim to be the rightful leader controlling the monument,” said Mr Mazvidza.
National Museums and Monuments director Dr Godfrey Mahachi said the Government was working with all communities around Great Zimbabwe.
The Museums and Monuments of Zimbabwe are the custodians of heritage sites.
Dr Mahachi said Government was not qualified to determine whose area the monuments fell under.
Communities surrounding the ruins belong to all the feuding chiefdoms.
He said they had formed a local management committee with representatives of all the communities around the ruins for harmonious co-operation.
“We know there are contestations over the control of the Great Zimbabwe monuments, but we really do not know the origins of those contestations.
“We are merely there to look after the country’s national heritage resources hence at the Great Zimbabwe monument we are working with the entire immediate communities and we regularly hold meetings where all the three chiefs or their representatives attend.”
He said the committee meets once every month.
“Our objective is just to have a harmonious relationship with the immediate communities around the monument. The responsibility to determine which chief should control the monuments lies with other offices, not ours,” he said.
However, historian Cde Aeneas Chigwedere yesterday said there was none among the three chieftainships who should claim control over the monument.
He said Chief Nemamwa was the first to arrive in the area around the Great Zimbabwe monument which had already been built by people of the Mutapa Empire.
Cde Chigwedere, who is also Mashonaland East Provincial Governor, said the Mugabe clan only arrived at Great Zimbabwe in 1840 and fought the Nemamwa clan to get control of the monument.
“It was the great ancestor of the Nemamwa people called Goronga who by the 13th Century was already at the Great Zimbabwe monument.
“He started performing rituals for members of the Mutapa Empire around that time so we can say before the coming of the white men, Great Zimbabwe was in an area under control of people of the Nemamwa clan that is a fact.
“However, by the time the white men arrived right up to colonisation, the area around Great Zimbabwe was now under Mugabe who had fought and defeated Nemamwa.
“None of the three chieftainships can lay claim to the Great Zimbabwe monuments in terms of ownership because the monuments were built by the Mutapa Empire” he said.
Cde Chigwedere said the Duma people (Murinye and Mugabe) came from Uteve (now Mozambique) around the 1700 and settled further south of the monuments.
He said the Nemamwa clan was already settled around the monuments.
Cde Chigwedere said the Mugabe clan broke away from the Murinye clan and only arrived at Great Zimbabwe in 1840.
The Mugabe clan, he said, fought off the Nemamwa clan from the monument.
“The Mugabe clan arrived at Great Zimbabwe in 1840 and fought the Nemamwa clan whose real totem is Bonga (wild cat).
“Nemamwa joined forces with the Charumbira clan to defeat the Mugabe clan that occupied the area,” he said.
Great Zimbabwe is a World Heritage site and its massive curving walls, built from hundreds of thousands of granite blocks fitted together without mortar, remain the largest ancient stone structure in sub-Saharan Africa.
Labels: CHIEFS, GREAT ZIMBABWE, MASVINGO
Read more...
COMMENT - This article is all over the place, and tries to bend over backwards to put as much blame on 'the nationalists' for distorting Zimbambwe's pre-colonial history, as it blames colonialism and racism that would deny African people any achievements at all. Sorry, but that doesn't fly, even for the colonial apologists in the MDC. There is a good article on Zimbabwe by Prof. Manu Ampim:
Great Zimbabwe - A history almost forgotten.
'No pure truth' on Great Zimbabwe: historian
20/09/2011 00:00:00
by Sabelo Gatsheni-Ndlovu
A LEAKED United States embassy cable on a conversation between the United States ambassador to Zimbabwe and his Indian counterpart has re-ignited the debate over the contested history of the Great Zimbabwe.
The Indian envoy, Ashok Venkatesan, said “Zimbabweans don't even know the true origins of the ruins at the Great Zimbabwe, which were here when the Shona entered from East Africa and settled on land that was essentially vacant”.
Researchers have failed to agree on who built the Great Zimbabwe – with some claiming they were the work of Indonesian mariners, others crediting the Kararanga tribesmen and more opinion suggesting they were the work of Kalangas from South Africa.
Writing for New Zimbabwe.com today, historian Professor Sabelo Gatsheni-Ndlovu, currently-based at the University of South Africa, says “pure historical truth does not exist”:
I FIND it intriguing that US embassy cables, released by WikiLeaks, are even touching on this archeo-pre-historic subject that has pre-occupied the minds of archaeologists, historians, imperialists, colonialists and nationalists alike.
To be honest, I think no living historian can be certain about the builders of these fantastic stone structures. Historians have relied on archaeological evidence which is itself not conclusive on the real identity of the builders of these stone structures.
What we have are inferences drawn from archaeological evidence. What has compounded the question of the identity of the stone structures is that it has been caught up in imperial and nationalist historiographical tango.
In the first place, colonial historiography informed by the civilising mission ideology sought to deny the African origins of the stone structures as it denied whether African people had any history in the first place. Imperial historiography wanted to link all beautiful human inventions to those people with white skins.
On the other hand, African nationalist historiography contested the claims of imperial historiography to the extent of degenerating into the crisis of counter-factualisation as a mode of historical writing. This involved writing African history through analogies with European histories. Typical examples being that if there were great empires in Europe there were also empires in Africa. If there was Napoleon in Europe that King Shaka of the Zulu was the Napoleon of Africa etc.
The debates on the identity of the builders and owners of the stone structures became entangled in this imperialist versus nationalist intellectual and academic tango.
When African nationalism triumphed over colonialism, the debate became favourable to the African narrative. When the 'Shona'-dominated Zanu PF triumphed in the liberation struggle, Shona claims of ownership and being originators of these stone structures also triumphed.
Today, the Shona and African version has carried the day. But even within the African-Shona version there are contestations of Karanga versus Rozvi, Kalanga versus Venda versions.
As a post-colonial thinker, I see history as a terrain of contesting regimes of truth, clashing perspectives and representations dependent on one's locus of enunciation and even political, ethnic and racial belonging. Pure historical truth and objectivity does not exist.
Now that Zimbabwe's name is drawn from these stone structures, there is evidence that some historians will buy into the nationalist regime of truth as the only truth. Personally, I am suspicious of all historical versions and I built other versions.
Labels: COLONIALISM, GREAT ZIMBABWE, MDC, RACISM, RHODESIA, WIKILEAKS
Read more...
COMMENT - You would expect even envoys to a country to have better general knowledge. However, once some individuals finish their education, they don't take on new information for the rest of their lives. My guess is he was educated back in the 1970s? An excellent article for the ambassador to peruse, would be Prof. Manu Ampim's review of the history and racist mythology of Great Zimbabwe,
GREAT ZIMBABWE: A History Almost Forgotten.
Indian envoy blasted over Shona slur
19/09/2011 00:00:00
by Staff Reporter
SHONA people are “quiescent and undemanding” like the jacaranda tree because they have no “real traditional cultural roots”, the Indian ambassador to Zimbabwe told his United States counterpart, according to leaked diplomatic cables.
Ambassador Ashok Venkatesan also claimed that Zimbabweans did not know the real origins of the Great Zimbabwe ruins “which were here when the Shona entered from East Africa and settled on land that was essentially vacant”. A prominent Zimbabwean academic has called the Indian envoy’s claims “disrespectful and insulting”.
The United States ambassador to Zimbabwe, Charles Ray, met the Indian envoy on January 13, 2010.
In a dispatch to Washington following their meeting, released online by WikiLeaks, Ray said Venkatesan had told him that India has had a relationship with President Robert Mugabe and Zanu PF that dates to the independence struggle, and Mugabe had a personal relationship with Indira Gandhi.
The Indian government, he said, “takes a neutral stance toward the [Zimbabwe] parties now, however, and there has not been a ministerial-level visit to Harare since 1993. Until the political situation improves, there is not likely to be one”.
Venkatesan said he concentrates his efforts on “keeping Zimbabwe-India business relationships smooth”.
The conversation veered to “Shona cultural identity”.
“Venkatesan described Mugabe and the dominant Shona of Zimbabwe as transplants to this land, like the jacaranda tree, an import from South America that has become pervasive - similar to kudzu and armadillos in the southern United States. They have no real traditional cultural roots,” Ambassador Ray wrote.
“He also said that the people here, like the tree, are extremely quiescent and undemanding. He said he wonders if Mugabe ever gives any consideration to his legacy, and whether or not he gives any consideration to his legacy, and whether or not he wants what is best for the country.
“But, he added, the lack of cultural roots causes some irrational behaviour; with many in Zanu PF saying that they are the bright jewels of the region and should be respected for it – ‘the most beautiful bride at the wedding,’ apparently unaware of how outsiders view them.”
In a comment at the end of the cable, Ray claimed that “there have been some articles claiming that the [Great Zimbabwe] ruins were built by Mugabe's ancestors - with total disregard to the fact that most of the people here know it to be a blatant falsehood”.
Advertisement
Zimbabwean academic, Alex Magaisa, said the claims made by the Indian envoy were “disrespectful and insulting to a whole people and their culture”.
“I’m not sure on what basis he grounds his allegations that these people of Zimbabwe are cultureless. If what is attributed to him is true, then I find his attitude quite condescending and I really do not know what books he has been reading which gave him such weird insights,” Magaisa blasted.
“What is surprising is that Indians and many people of the South have suffered greatly over the course of history from cultural marginalisation often resulting from misinterpretations by passers-by and yet he has the audacity to pass judgment so casually. One must be reminded that those who live in glass houses should be careful before they undress.”
Magaisa was equally baffled by Ambassador Ray’s claims that President Mugabe may be promoting claims that his ancestors built the Great Zimbabwe.
He added: “I have not come across any work claiming that Mugabe’s ancestors built Great Zimbabwe. It’s the first I’m hearing of this though I suspect it may be yet another case of passers-by mistaking the large boulder for the elephant.
“There is a whole clan of Mugabes in Masvingo who have no relation whatsoever to President Mugabe. Someone might have heard that the Mugabes had a hand in the building of the monument and mistakenly concluded that they were referring to President Mugabe.
“More seriously, it also shows an unhealthy pre-occupation with Mugabe that the mere mention of such a common name, however unrelated to President Mugabe, is immediately connected to him.”
Magaisa also failed to see the value of such “idle discourse” to Washington.
“What we see is that among the gems located in the US cables, there is also quite a lot of rubble,” said the law expert and newspaper columnist. “But you would expect more serious and learned commentary than what is contained in this cable. This one reads like a casual conversation that you might expect to overhear among tired revellers at the local watering hole.”
The history of the Great Zimbabwe ruins in Masvingo remains contested. Published research makes varying conclusions – some claim that they were the work of the local Karanga tribe, others say they were built by Kalangas who migrated from South Africa after setting up an almost similar monument known as the Mapungubwe, while a book published three years ago credits Indonesian mariners.
Those who push the Kalanga theory are quick to dismiss the Indonesian involvement. They predicate their explanation on the migration and settlement trends of the tribe, now dominant in the Plumtree and Kezi areas in Zimbabwe and in eastern Botswana.
The theorists argue that the Kalanga people first settled in Mapungubwe, from where they migrated back northwards, and settled in Masvingo, where they built the Great Zimbabwe. They later headed west and set up base just outside Bulawayo where they built another breathtaking stone structure, the Khami ruins.
Labels: COLONIALISM, GREAT ZIMBABWE, WIKILEAKS
Read more...
‘ZTA must promote Great Zimbabwe’
By Dyton Mupawaenda recently in Masvingo
TOURISM operators and other stakeholders in Masvingo voiced their concern to the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority saying that little has been done to promote Great Zimbabwe as the country’s number one historical tourist destination.
The operators registered their dismay last week during the launch of the Sanganai Travel and Tourism Africa Travel Fair road show where many said Masvingo was being denied the respect it deserves.
Masvingo town clerk Mr Adolf Guzha said there was so much historic significance in Masvingo and described the city as home to every Zimbabwean hence the need for recognition and vigorous marketing.
"The City of Masvingo is the ‘emotional home of every Zimbabwean’ and the destination where the country’s name is derived from but the focus has not been in favour of Masvingo but on destinations like the Victoria Falls.
"We want Masvingo to be the number one destination in Zimbabwe and we are proud to say that Great Zimbabwe is the only tourist attraction that is 100 percent owned by Zimbabwe," said Mr Guzha.
He also said that the world needs to know about Great Zimbabwe and urged tourism operators in Masvingo to use the Sanganai Exhibition to profile and properly position Masvingo as a leading destination not only in Zimbabwe but also in the world.
Zimbabwe Council for Tourism board member, Mr Fredrick Kasese welcomed the gesture by ZTA to launch Sanganai in all provinces of the country saying this showed the confidence the authority had in stakeholders in the industry.
Kasese said he was also concerned about mobilising people so that there could be a remodification of the thought process about Zimbabwe.
However, Masvingo tourism stakeholders and other associated players urged ZTA to engage hoteliers in Bulawayo not to make a killing out of them by charging exorbitant accommodation rates during Sanganai Travel and Tourism Africa Travel Fair for them not to experience the same problems like they faced during the Zimbabwe International Trade Fair in April.
In April, cases of high levies on those attending the ZITF were reported and ZTA and the National Incomes and Pricing Commission pounced on those who were charging high rates.
The high rates were reported to have
dampened the attendance of the annual trade fair and tourism operators pleaded with ZTA to engage Bulawayo players over accommodation rates.
Mr Givemore Chidzidzi, ZTA executive director for destination marketing assured the players that there were not going to experience the problems faced by those who attended ZITF.
"We can assure you that there is not going to be that kind of problem we experienced in April when hoteliers were charging exorbitant rates and we have already talked to them.
"Sanganai being a tourism event with many international buyers and exhibitors coming we have made sure that we do not have the same kind of problem," said Mr Chidzidzi.
He also challenged Masvingo to come and support Sanganai by coming in numbers and in full force and exploit the opportunity to market Masvingo as the prime Zimbabwean destination.
Labels: GREAT ZIMBABWE, TOURISM, ZIMBABWE, ZTA
Read more...
