Talk:Great Zimbabwe/Archive 6

Ken Mufuka

I do not think that treating Mufuka as a normal Zimbabwean archaeologist is quite proper: Garlake has described his work as having grotesque exaggerations and as "yet another example of the racist cult history which Great Zimbabwe has always inspired ... there is no common ground between this nonsense and normal processes of historical research"[1] I have added something on this to the political implication section

It would also be far better to quote Mufuka than Parfitt saying that "Mufuka thinks that"

It's also a bit problematic to refer to "other Zimbabwean archeologists" without any idea who is meant.

Finally, I have removed the first reference to Parfitt talking about Mufuka, as it is a repetition. Babakathy (talk) 15:07, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I think we should try to integrate a bit more of that Kaarsholm paper, it's really quite good. —Cliftonian (talk) 15:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Done. Babakathy (talk) 06:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I've reverted this IP edit after checking that the original text was accurate, but it is only fair to add Mufuka's views on Parfitt's work since the latter is citing the former to support him. Babakathy (talk) 05:35, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

24.215.253.97, Mufuka clearly is not impressed with Parfitt's work per the citation I added - that is clearly relevant when Parfitt is citing Mufuka as supporting him on Lemba/Venda origins. The citation I found reports Mufuka criticising Parfitt (rather insultingly/emotionally as people tend to be on this topic sadly) but doesn't say what he was unimpressed by. You've been commenting in edit summaries that Mufuka's differences w/ Parfitt are on other issues - what issues were they, and do you have a citation for that? If so it would likely be better than the wording and citation that I've put. But it's not constructive to simply remove the text that KM disagrees with TP, since he clearly does. Babakathy (talk) 06:07, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

The reference to KM in full (from AP): Ken Mufuka, a professor of history from Zimbabwe who teaches at Lander University in South Carolina, called Parfitt a "publicity-monger" and "a charlatan" in a newsletter published in Harare does not tell us the area of disagreement. Babakathy (talk) 06:25, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Richard Wade, observatory

Although he was able to get publicity for his idea, I can't find any reliable source supporting it. He's been looking at this for 30 years but doesn't have any relevant qualifications. As of last November he was still working on a Ph.D.[2]. "From Archaeology to Archaeologies: The ‘Other’ Past" Edited by Anna Simandiraki-GrimshawEleni Stefanou BAR International Series 2409 refers to him as "a freelance astronomer of dubious credentials."[3] Dougweller (talk) 11:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC) (signing late)

Unknown masons

According to the 16th century explorer João de Barros, the natives did not know who built Great Zimbabwe. They apparently thought it was the work of the devil. The Lemba's claim that they built the edifices also seems at least as credible as that of the Shona. Furthermore, some of the structures appear to have cultural ties with Pharaonic Egypt, which suggests that the stoneworks are of considerable antiquity. Soupforone (talk) 01:52, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

The Shona are the builders

"Examination of all the existing evidence, gathered from every quarter, still can produce not one single item that is not in accordance with the claim of Bantu origin and medieval date".

"Since the 1950s, there has been consensus among archaeologists as to the African origins of Great Zimbabwe".

"Archaeologists generally agree that the builders probably spoke one of the Shona languages, based upon evidence of pottery, oral traditions and anthropology and were probably descended from the Gokomere culture. The Gokomere culture, an eastern Bantu subgroup".

"More recent archaeological work has been carried out by Peter Garlake, who has produced the comprehensive descriptions of the site, David Beach and Thomas Huffman, who have worked on the chronology and development of Great Zimbabwe and Gilbert Pwiti, who has published extensively on trade links. Today, the most recent consensus appears to attribute the construction of Great Zimbabwe to the Shona people. Some evidence also suggests an early influence from the probably Venda speaking peoples of Mapungubwe".

These are some of the sections from article based on the latest researches that confirms the African origins of Great Zimbabwe. for other theories, they are based on false evidence and all the sources that mentioned were issued in the colonial period which aims to deny the African origins of Great Zimbabwe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgtxxx36 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

That Great Zimbabwe may have had a local origin doesn't automatically mean that it was built by the ancestral Shona. It just as easily could have been constructed by the Lemba's forebears, as has also been hypothesized. In fact, aside from João de Barros' 16th century record -- which indicates that the natives did not know who built the structures; they instead thought it was the work of the devil -- the only precolonial testimonies on the stoneworks that propound a specific identity for the masons assert that they were constructed by the early Lemba [4]:

The construction of Great Zimbabwe is also claimed by the Lemba. This ethnic group of Zimbabwe and South Africa has a tradition of ancient Jewish or South Arabian descent through their male line, which is supported by recent DNA studies, and female ancestry derived from the Karanga subgroup of the Shona. The Lemba claim was also reported by a William Bolts (in 1777, to the Austrian Habsburg authorities), and by an A.A. Anderson (writing about his travels north of the Limpopo River in the 19th century) — both of whom were told that the stone edifices and the gold mines were constructed by a people known as the BaLemba.

Anyway, without any genetic or skeletal evidence, it cannot be indicated with certainty who built the edifices. Soupforone (talk) 17:30, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Nonetheless it appears to be the current mainstream consensus that the Shona built it. Great Zimbabwe By Martin Hall, Rebecca Stefoff, Oxford University Press p.32[5], History of Africa By Kevin Shillington [6], The Archaeology of Southern Africa"" By Peter Mitchell, Cambridge University Press (I can't find a page number for a direct statement, only "One of the saddest legacies of colonial and minority rule was the alienation of southern Africa's people from their past and the denigration or denial of its richness and value, coupled to widespread indifference to the results of archaeological research (Shepherd 1998). Right up until independence, for ex- ample, the Rhodesia Front regime insisted that there was no proof that Great Zimbabwe was the work of ancestral Shona. The continued popularity of such ideas, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, can be gauged from sales of popular books attributing the site to Indian miners or other exotic groups" p.413, which makes it clear)[7], Introduction to the History of African Civilization: Precolonial Africa By C. Magbaily Fyle, University Press of America[8], Native Peoples of the World: An Encylopedia of Groups, Cultures and Contemporary Issues by Steven Danver, Routledge[9] etc. Doug Weller talk 11:15, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

I am aware of the Shona theory and its popularity. However, per WP:WikiVoice, even such widespread opinions should not be stated in Wikipedia's voice. Especially when there are precolonial testimonies that indicate that the stoneworks were actually built by the early Lemba. Soupforone (talk) 15:47, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Just looked at your source for the old anecdotal evidence (which isn't convincing). I'm not at all sure why you brought it here, An unpublished essay/whatever by someone who teaches social work and that doesn't seem mentioned anywhere doesn't cut it and isn't relevant here. Doug Weller talk 19:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

It is asserted in the text that Zimbabwe is the Shona name of the ruins as first recorded in 1531 by Vicente Pegado, which is little different from the old recorded traditions on the Lemba. Also, these precolonial testimonies are actually from Magdel le Roux's The Lemba: A Lost Tribe of Israel in Southern Africa. The link above merely paraphrases her. Le Roux is a noted archaeologist and professor of Old Testament and Ancient Near Eastern Studies at the University of South Africa [10]. Soupforone (talk) 03:17, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

This is all interesting, but basically of historical interest. Ignoring questions of who the Balemba might have been, what mainstream sources actually suggest GZ was built by the Lamba and not the Shona? Doug Weller talk 15:55, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

"Ba" is a prefix in the Bantu languages that means "people". The "Balemba" were thus the Lemba people. With that said, besides those early testimonies on this ancient territory (which are chronologically closer to that period than ours), there are inter alia Le Roux, Parfitt, Mufuka, David B. Goldstein, and the late Roger Summers. Soupforone (talk) 16:06, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Was there any evidence left on who was the builder Tunga Dube (talk) 19:54, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Plenty. Read section 3 of the article. Babakathy (talk) 10:09, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Shona, Lemba & Parfitt

First, about Lemba for your information the Shona are consisted on more then13 ethnic groups and Shona is name given by Europeans to who was living on zimbabwe plateau and The Lemba one from these groups who happened to have some semitic ancestors maybe from trader who visit zimbabwe and for their relationship with Zimbabwe this section tells us everything:

"Tudor Parfitt described Gayre's work as intended to "show that black people had never been capable of building in stone or of governing themselves", although he adds: "The fact that Gayre... got most of his facts wrong, does not in itself vitiate the claims of the Lemba to have been involved in the Great Zimbabwe civilisation.""

Secand, you are here not because you are interested in history or searching for the truth you are here because you are belief that blacks can't build and Great Zimbabwe Invalidate your belief why did you choose the Arabs, Pharaohs (Ptolemaic) and Phoenician but not Venda or Kalanga because they are non-black anyway i will not wast more time on you because i know your agenda here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgtxxx36 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

That is an unfortunate and poor choice of words (please see the policy on personal attacks). It is also absurd since both the Shona and Lemba are largely of Bantu origin; they in fact share maternal roots. Anyway, it appears that you just glanced at the Tudor Parfitt stuff. He is actually one of the chief proponents of the Lemba origin theory for these edifices: "The fact that Gayre... got most of his facts wrong, does not in itself vitiate the claims of the Lemba to have been involved in the Great Zimbabwe civilisation." [Tudor Parfitt] says that Mufuka, among others, supports the hypothesis of construction by the Lemba or the Venda" [11]. Ken Mufuka is a Bantu archaeologist, by the way. Soupforone (talk) 15:47, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Diogo de Alcacova

That Vicente Pegado was the first explorer to identify the Great Zimbabwe edifices is inaccurate. Around 1506, Diogo de Alcacova actually described them to the then King of Portugal as being located within the Ucalanga (Bukalanga) kingdom:

The kingdom, Sir, in which there is the gold that comes to Sofala is called Ucalanga [Bukalanga], and the kingdom is very large, in which there are many large towns, besides many other villages, and Sofala itself is in this kingdom if not the whole land along the sea < And, 21Sir, a man might go from Sofala to a city which is called Zumubany [Zimbabwe] which is large, in which the king always resides, in ten or twelve days, if you travel as in Portugal; < and in the whole kingdom of Ucalanga gold in extracted; and in this way: they dig out the earth and make a kind of tunnel, through which they go under the ground a long stone’s throw, and keep on taking out from the veins with the ground mixed with the gold, and, when collected, they put it in a pot, and cook it much in fire; and after cooking they take it out, and put it to cool, and when cold, the earth remains, and the gold all fine gold < (in Duffy 1964, 149).

According to the Zimbabwean historian Nzimu-Unami Emmanuel, "Ucalanga" refers to Bukalanga. This would be the realm of the Kalanga, who speak a language related to Shona [12]. Soupforone (talk) 18:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Great Zimbabwe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090327114818/http://arts.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/publications/general/Historical/2002/debaets_zimbabwe/zimbabwe.pdf to http://arts.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/publications/general/Historical/2002/debaets_zimbabwe/zimbabwe.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:01, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Gokomere culture - dating

"The Gokomere culture, an eastern Bantu subgroup, existed in the area from around 500 AD and flourished from 200 AD to about 800 AD."

I have no experience in editing Wikipedia AND I am neither an archaeologist nor an anthropologist - but even to a layman this is an obviously nonsensical sentence. Can someone please deal with it?

fkarno@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fkarno (talk • contribs) 02:57, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. Unfortunately I don't have independent corroborating dates, so I have done the obvious and shuffled the existing ones so that they make sense.

Cadar (talk) 02:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Dont throw baby out with Bathwater

The Lemba hypothesis is noticeably absent from this article whilst the Shona theory carries undue weight! I think I know the reason why and its a fairly silly one.

Just because Hitler liked classical doesn't make classical music should be associated with Nazi Germany, and similarly, just because it was used as a political excuse by Rhodesian racists to justify their white supremacist rule does not render false the huge amount of circumstantial evidence towards a Lemba origin of the Great Zimbabwe.

I can think of multiple examples where historical ideas promoted by extremists for political objectives were initially discredited and then later discovered to be true. For instance the Aryan Invasion theory of North Indian ancestral origins and languages, historically attacked as a British colonial mythology to justify both the caste system and British rule over India, is now virtually uncontested amongst modern historians, archaeologists, anthropologists and linguists. Indeed the only people who still even call it "Aryan invasion" are the Hindu nationalists who wish to discredit it. Or claims that the Bantu expansion was exaggerated by the Apartheid South Africa government to justify their rule and delegitimise Black self-determination movements, despite a modern Africa-wide study of the DNA of Ancient and Modern African populations showing that the Bantu expansion, far from being gradual or peaceful, practically obliterated half the continent and near completely eradicated the original East and Central African peoples (and also of course many Bushmen ancestors/relatives)

With this in mind, just because Gayre and others proposed a Lemba origin of the Great Zimbabwe partly because of their nonsense belief that Black Africans were incapable of creating and sustaining their own civilisation, does NOT mean that:

1. A Lemba origin for TGZ is ruled out.

2. The stockpile of circumstantial evidence towards a Lemba connection to TGZ should be caricatured as "fringe" or "unreliable". I have seen numerous references to similarities between the Lemba and TGZ in handcraft removed for being "unreliable" solely because the authors used this evidence in conjunction with aforementioned racist beliefs.

3. The circumstantial and historical evidence towards TGZ NOT being associated with the Shona people should be caricatured as "fringe" or "unreliable" (modern 'consensus' on Shona origins are shaky at best and lie entirely upon Occam's Razor and an unfair rejection of the Lemba theory due to it's association with Rhodesia and Racism)

4. Any support for a Lemba origin is implicit support of Rhodesia, its racist policies, or the racist mythology that Black people cannot run their own civilisations (ironically despite Middleastern paternal descent, the Lemba have been shown to possess overwhelmingly Subsaharan African DNA which would put this racist belief directly at odds with a Lemba origin of TGZ anyway!)

In short, don't throw the baby out with the bath water! Supersizemebby (talk) 04:52, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

@Supersizemebby: thanks, but this is basically the sort of argument that is more appropriate for a forum. Our articles are meant to be based on sources that meet the criteria at WP:VERIFY and WP:RS, weighted according to their significance (see WP:NPOV. What do recent academic sources say? Doug Weller talk 13:47, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Link to slave trade

This article should also mention the fact that this particular kingdom also traded African slaves to the Arabs. Zanzibar and Mombasa have similar origins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.241.94 (talk) 12:00, 23 November 2020 (UTC)