Talk:Great Zimbabwe/Archive 2

Material from article space

The following material was placed in article space. Moved here for discussion and response. WBardwin (talk) 06:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

As requested, here are more references and sources - taken from my article at http://DLMcN.com/anczimb.html ... [David McNaughton]:

1. de Barros, J. - 'Décadas da Asia'; originally composed in Lisbon, 1552. In: 'Records of South-eastern Africa', collected by G. McCall-Theal; Cape Colony Printers, 1900, volume VI, book 10; see page 267. Regarding the name "Symbaoe", it is intriguing that Ptolemy's map of the world labels southeast Africa as "Agisymba": see 'Encyclopaedia Britannica' (9th edition), 1883, volume 15, plate VII. Compare Gayre, R.** - 'The origin of the Zimbabwean civilization'; Galaxie Press, Zimbabwe, 1972, pp. 68-69. He suggests that the original name could have been "Sinbani", after the Sabaean Moon God. Local Bantu later may have applied this designation to the building, thereby creating a new word in their own language denoting "stone palace" or "court". >> The fact that "dzimba" carries that meaning in Shona, is often cited as proof that this particular tribe constructed the ancient civilization. However, it would be instructive to investigate how many other Bantu languages contain this root-word. Certainly, it does not occur in SiNdebele, nor in SeSotho, nor Tswana, nor ChiBemba, nor Swazi. Thus, the root "dzimba" could well be a relatively recent acquisition in Shona - derived from an alien source.

• • Gayre's book is probably obtainable from Used Book Central, or from Past Auctions: Africana, (or possibly from Dan Wyman Books in Springfield, MA, USA).

2. Gayre pp. 222-233 (i.e., Appendix I - written by Edmund Layland). Also see: Popham, J.L. - 'Notes on the N'Natali ruin'; Proceedings of the Rhodesia Scientific Association IV (1904), pp. 67-71, and plate VI; White, F. - 'Observations on recent discoveries at ancient ruins'; Proc. Rhodesia Sci. Assoc. IV (1903), pp. 14-20, and plates I to IV; White, F. - 'Description of Lumene ruins'; Proc. Rhodesia Sci. Assoc. V (1905), pp 5-7, and plates I and II; Hall, R.N. - 'Majiri ruins, Motirikoi (M'telekwe) valley'; Proc. Rhodesia Sci. Assoc. IV (1904), pp. 83-86, and plates XI and XII.

3. e.g. de Barros [my ref. 1], pp. 264-273. Cited in Gayre's above-mentioned work, pp. 209, 215-217. De Barros also mentions an inscription above the door of the temple, written in characters not known to the (well educated) Arab merchants who had seen it. If Parfitt's work [my ref. 15] confirms that there was a connection with south Arabia, then that unknown script was probably Himyaritic. The existence of lettering over the entrance is also mentioned by Damião de Goes [original account in mediaeval Portuguese in McCall-Theal's 'Records ...', volume III, p.55 - translated into English on p.129; see reference in my note 1]. >> Randall-MacIver [my ref. 5; 1971 impression, p.99] tries to explain away that inscription by suggesting that the Moorish merchants were simply looking at the zigzag pattern running round the top of the wall!

4. Hall, R.N. - 'Prehistoric Rhodesia'; Fisher Unwin, London, 1909; Hall, R.N. & Neal, W.G. - 'The ancient ruins of Rhodesia'; Methuen, London, 1902; Bent, J.T. - 'The ruined cities of Mashonaland'; Longmans Green, London, 1896.

5. Randall-MacIver, D. - 'Mediaeval Rhodesia'; MacMillan, London, 1906 (new impression: Frank Cass, 1971); Caton-Thompson, Gertrude - 'The Zimbabwe Culture'; Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1931. Revised and reprinted as 'The Zimbabwe Culture, Ruins and Reactions'; Frank Cass, 1971. Although Miss Caton-Thompson does favour the Bantu theory above the others, she is not dogmatic that it has been proven beyond all doubt. Even in her revised edition, she acknowledges that there are plenty of puzzles and unanswered questions. Beach, D. - 'The Shona and their neighbours'; Blackwell, Oxford, 1994. Professor Beach's argument that this tribe built Great Zimbabwe (pages 86-87) - is that the remains of Shona-style thatched houses are found in and around its enclosure, together with typical Shona pottery. However, these could well have been put there after the MaShona conquered Zimbabwe, i.e., when the original inhabitants of that city had been partly expelled and partly absorbed ... On p.106, Beach admits that he can find no logical reason why Great Zimbabwe went into decline [in his context - he believes it flourished until the Shona stopped occupying it. He claims that they abandoned that site just as the Portuguese were arriving on the coast - which conflicts with de Barros's report (my ref. 1) that in the early 1500s the Bantu living near the temple had absolutely no idea who could have built it - instead saying that it must have been "the work of the devil"]. The collapse of Ancient Zimbabwe is of course easy to explain in terms of a Bantu conquest. Pikirayi, I. - 'Zimbabwe Culture: Origins and Decline of Southern Zambezian States'; AltaMira Press, Maryland, USA, 2001. On pages 23-24, Professor Pikirayi does actually acknowledge (and dismisses) Gayre's work on this topic - but without mentioning the central core of Gayre's thesis, namely the Lemba (who are never referred to anywhere in Pikirayi's book) ... In his pages 90-93, (unlike certain other scholars) Professor Pikirayi accepts that gold was being produced and traded in Zimbabwe around the 7th or 8th century AD ... He admits that he cannot adequately explain the collapse of that ancient civilization (pp. 150-154), nor its emergence (p.121). --- Compare comments by Gayre, pp. 206-207, 218, 214 (including a footnote citing Mutwa - an African writer - to the effect that Zimbabwe was built by "white men who arrived before the Arabs"). --- For a detailed review and analysis of the evidence, see 'The Mystery of the Great Zimbabwe' by Wilfred Mallows; Robert Hale, London, 1985. No particular theory is endorsed, regarding the identity of the builders.

6. The expedition was sponsored by the Egyptian Pharaoh Neku II, and is mentioned by Herodotus of Halicarnassus in his 'Historia', book 4, section 42. The voyagers reported that the midday sun was on their right while they were sailing westwards (which Herodotus refused to believe) - but that would of course be a feature of the southern hemisphere. An indication that Phoenician ships were indeed capable of that feat, is provided by Hanno's exploration round the bulge of West Africa. There is also some evidence that they traded as far away as Cornwall in England.

7. Murdock, G.P. - 'Africa: its peoples and their culture history'; McGraw Hill, New York, 1959, pp. 208 et seq. During and even before the "Dark Ages" in Europe, there was contact (probably with exchange of ideas and technology) between Polynesians, Malays, Malabaris, Hindus, Arabs, and Chinese. Sailing ships and their crews had certainly become quite sophisticated by 1500 (or even 2000) years ago. The Chinese had invented the magnetic compass by 200 AD - see 'Encyclopaedia Britannica' (9th edition), 1877, volume 6, p.226; also see Gayre, pp. 20-21.

8. Peters, C. - 'The Eldorado of the Ancients'; Pearson & Bell, London, 1902, p.316. Also see Hall ('Prehistoric Rhodesia'), p.64.

9. Atmospheric pressure fluctuations as a cause of these wind (as well as weather) changes are discussed in Meteorological Notes Series A nos. 11 and 40 - and Series B no. 50; Ministry of Transport and Power, Zimbabwe. Beyond Cape dos Correntes it can become difficult to sail northwards against the Agulhas current.

10. Gayre p.182 (map).

11. Gayre pp. 49-50, 179-181 and 229 (citing Hall & Neal); Murdock p.211.

12. Certain exotic plants and trees not indigenous to southern Africa (such as jasmine, figs, lemons, and cotton) occur near ruins or mines, suggesting contact with distant countries; see Gayre pp. 52-57, 63; Hall & Neal p.116; Hall pp. 80, 196-197; van Warmelo in my note 23. >> M. Horton alludes to a deliberate policy of keeping secret that southeast African gold-source, citing the Yemeni writer Al-Hamdani of 942 AD; see 'The Swahili corridor' in Scientific American 257 (September 1987), pp. 76-84.

13. Indicopleustes's work 'Topographia Christiana' was translated by J.W. McCrindle as Hakluyt Society publication no. 98, London, 1897; see pp. 52-53 (book II). It is cited by R.A. Dart in 'Foreign Influences of the Zimbabwe and Pre-Zimbabwe Eras'; Nada 32 (1955), pp. 19-30; Native Affairs Dept., Southern Rhodesia. It is also mentioned in Gayre's book on p.41; cf. Murdock, p.206. Masudi's or Maçoudi's account (916 AD) is contained in 'Les Prairies d'Or' [parallel text in Arabic and French], translated by C.B. De Maynard and P. de Courtaille; Société Asiatique, Paris, 1864; see volume 3 (chapter 33), p.6. The early exploration of the SE African coast is discussed by Kathleen M. Kenyon in Appendix V to Gertrude Caton Thompson's book, pp. 264-265 [ref. in my note 5]. Miss Kenyon also mentions Ibn Al Wardy (957 AD), as does Hall [my ref. 4] on pp. 69-72.

14. van Warmelo, N.J. , contributing to Hammond Tooke, W.D. - 'The Bantu-speaking peoples of southern Africa'; Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1974 (originally 1937), p.83; also see van Warmelo's publication in German referenced in my note 18, pp. 281 and 282 (which adds that there were large cities in their original homeland). --- Confirmed by Junod, H.A. - 'The life of a South African tribe', volume I: 'Social life'; MacMillan, London, 1927, p.73. --- In addition, see Gayre's articles mentioned in my note 16. >> Professor Beach [my ref. 5] dismisses the Lemba as "Muslims of the interior" (p.161) - ignoring the fact that the Prophet Muhammed, the 'Quran', Ramadan and Mecca mean absolutely nothing to them. --- And Miss Caton-Thompson [also in my ref. 5] does not discuss the Lemba at all - although they are acknowledged briefly in her Appendix IV (written by H. Stayt) which describes the closely associated BaVenda tribe. --- Professor Pikirayi is yet another writer who completely ignores the Lemba, as too is Dr Peter Mitchell in 'The Archaeology of Southern Africa'; Cambridge University Press, 2002 - (which favours the "Shona" theory for ancient Zimbabwe). Similarly guilty (despite very brief references to Gayre and Parfitt) is Joost Fontein in 'The Silence of Great Zimbabwe - contested Landscapes and the Power of Heritage'; UCL Press, 2006.

15. Parfitt, T. - 'Journey to the vanished city'; St. Martin's Press, New York, 1992 (also published by Phoenix). Discussed in a long article on page 22 of The Times (UK) on 10th March 1999. Also see Thomas, M.G., Parfitt, T. et al. - 'Y Chromosomes Traveling South: The Cohen Modal Haplotype and the Origins of the Lemba - the "Black Jews of Southern Africa"; Amer. J. Human Genetics 66 (2000), pp. 674-686.

16. Gayre's book [my ref. 1] pp. 126-137, 65, 199-204; ... and articles by Gayre: 'The Lembas and Vendas of Vendaland'; The Mankind Quarterly VIII (Edinburgh, 1967), pp. 3-15; 'Some further notes on the Lembas'; The Mankind Quarterly XI (1970), pp. 58-60. --- Those Lemba dietary restrictions are confirmed by van Warmelo - see my notes 21 and 18.

17. van Warmelo [in Hammond Tooke, my ref. 14, p.82]; Gayre pp. 135, 66, 103; --- and Mullan, J.E. - 'The Arab builders of Zimbabwe'; published privately in Rhodesia, 1969, pp. 11-19; (this is cited by Gayre, p.163).

18. Jaques, A.A. - 'Notes on the Lemba Tribe of the Northern Transvaal'; Anthropos XXVI (1931), pp. 245-251; see p.249. --- Dr N.J. van Warmelo gives other examples of Lemba prayers uttered in a completely alien, non-Bantu tongue. Those devotees have absolutely no idea what the words mean - but claim that they are in the language of their forefathers - 'Zur Sprache und Herkunft der Lemba'; Hamburger Beiträge zur Afrika-Kunde Bd. 5 (1966), pp. 273-283; Deutsches Institut für Afrika-Forschung; see pp. 279 and 281. There is of course no record of how, when, or whether the words had earlier been written down: in any event, they must have become mangled with the passage of time.

19. Junod [in my ref. 14] pp. 72-73, 94, --- and van Warmelo, N.J. , contributing to Schapera, I. - 'The Bantu-speaking tribes of southern Africa'; Routledge and Sons, London, 1937, and Maskew Miller, Capetown, 1966, pp. 65-66; also see pp. 153, 257, 276. Described too in van Warmelo's contribution to Hammond Tooke [referenced in my note 14] pp. 81-84 and 115-116. --- Also mentioned by Jaques [my ref. 18] p.247. >> Gayre's book shows a picture of a circumcised phallic object from Great Zimbabwe - see p.143.

20. Gayre pp. 200-201 (including photos).

21. Gayre p.200; Murdock [my ref. 7] p.387; van Warmelo - in Hammond Tooke [my ref. 14] p.81; Junod [my ref. 14] pp. 72-73. --- Also van Warmelo, N.J. - 'The copper miners of Musina and the early history of the Zoutpansberg'; Ethnological Publications VIII (1940), pp. 52-53, 63-67; Dept. of Native Affairs, South Africa. The vernacular account of the MaLemba is given by M.M. Motenda - which, incidentally, confirms the dietary restrictions cited by Gayre [my ref. 16] in a comparison with the Mosaic Code. See too van Warmelo's German essay referenced in my note 18 (pp. 273 and 281) - which also describes the beautiful and distinctive pottery produced by Lemba womenfolk. --- See my note 31 for comments on MaKaranga iron-working skills.

22. Murdock [my ref. 7] p.387 - also confirming the many basic differences between Lembas and other Bantu mentioned by van Warmelo, Gayre and Junod. Ancient Zimbabwean graves were identified by gold jewellery: see Hall & Neal pp. 101-106; Gayre pp. 103-104, 126, 111.

23. Gayre pp. 52, 63-64. --- The Lemba use of cotton in the past is cited by van Warmelo - in Hammond Tooke, my ref. 14, p.81 - and his German article in my ref. 18, p.281.

24. References in my notes 16 (Gayre) and 7 (Murdock). For earlier speculations regarding a Lemba-Zimbabwe link, see Hall & Neal, p.126 - and R. Wessman's 'The BaWenda of the Spelonken'; The African World, London, 1908, pp. 129-132; (English translation of a German publication by the Berlin Missionary Society).

25. Gayre p.56 (photo).

26. Gayre p.233 - Appendix I, by Layland, citing Randall-MacIver.

27. Hall pp. 201-205, Gayre pp. 85-87 (with photo) and 233 (where Layland reports that the ancient terraces extend over 2500 square miles).

   Professor Beach [ref. in my note 5; see pp. 126-129] does not think these sophisticated irrigation channels and terraces were cut by the builders of the Great Zimbabwean temple. He assigns those agricultural features to a completely different civilization, which he calls the "Nyanga Culture" - admitting to not knowing who created it.
   However, because the elaborate stone buildings, the extensive gold mines (and ornamentation), and the terracing are all anomalies in southern Africa - surely it is reasonable to suggest that all three phenomena were derived from the same source?

28. Bent p.288 (mentioned by Gayre, pp. 179-181, with photos).

29. Gayre p.229 (citing Hall & Neal).

30. The first measurements were made by Libby, W.F. - 'Chicago radiocarbon dates III'; Science 116 (1952); see p. 680. A piece of Spirostachys africana (tambootie wood) was found above a drain in the inner wall of the Parallel Passage in the Zimbabwe Elliptical Temple. Three estimates of its date were obtained: 540 AD ± 160 years, 610 AD ± 160 years, and 680 AD ± 260 years. They are cited and discussed by Dart, p.19; by Gayre, pp. 110-111 and 190; and by Murdock, p.210; [full references given in my notes 13, 1 and 7]. However, it is true that in a subsequent analysis those dates were apparently revised to the early 1300s (see David Beach's 'The Shona and Zimbabwe, 900-1850'; Heinemann, 1980, p.324). It does seem bewildering that such a large readjustment can be produced after adopting new carbon-dating parameters and assumptions. >> Like Great Zimbabwe, Mapungubwe was a 'dry-stone' construction containing exotic gold ornaments - i.e., both settlements were evidently part of the same civilization. Mapungubwe's 11th-century C-14 measurements are accepted and cited by supporters of the "Shona" theory, including Professors Beach and Pikirayi.

31. de Barros [refs. in my notes 1 and 3]; Hall pp. 40-47, 35; Gayre pp. 209-211, 216 (footnote). When the Europeans arrived, the local Bantu were not using stone when constructing their dwellings. Furthermore, all mine shafts, irrigation channels and agricultural terraces were in disrepair and overgrown. It is true, admittedly, that the MaKaranga were washing some fluvial gold in Rhodesia, aware that it had commercial value. They were also making iron weapons, but proponents of a non-Bantu origin for Zimbabwe argue that the Karangas could have learned such basic skills from the conquered civilization. According to 'Chambers's Encyclopaedia' (ILSC, London, 1973, volume IX, p.134) Karanga ironsmiths emigrated to Zululand in the 18th century, providing technical expertise for the Zulu empire; i.e. metal-working ability seems to have been confined to just a few Bantu tribes.

32. The Bantu migration was still in process during the 18th century - meeting and confronting the Dutch in the eastern Cape Province, which (like Rhodesia and the Transvaal) was previously inhabited by Cappoids. Of tribes lying south and southwest of Zimbabwe, the BaTswana have lighter-coloured skins, whilst the Nguni languages (such as Zulu, SiNdebele, Xhosa and Swazi) contain certain "click" consonants, indicating absorption of some original Cappoid stock by these four tribes. For a discussion of Hottentot-Bantu mixtures in terms of gammaglobulin in blood, see P.V. Tobias [in Hammond Tooke, my ref. 14, pp. 26-27] - citing Jenkins, Zoutendyk & Steinberg in the Amer. J. Phys. Anthrop. 32, no.2 (1970), pp. 197-218. When encountered by the British in the 19th century, Shona people were agricultural and pastoral, just like other tribes around them. Physically, too, the MaShona resemble tribes living to the north.

33. Bent p.vii, (cited by Gayre, p.84, who also favours the Sabaeans). By about the sixth century AD, the Aksumite Abyssinians had become the dominant power in the Red Sea, having subjugated the Sabaeans - which explains why both Cosmas Indicopleustes and Masudi attributed the southeast African gold trade to Abyssinians. In any event, there had been commercial and cultural links across the Aden Straits for many centuries; the Semitic languages of those two Red Sea countries were very similar. The Falashas of modern-day Ethiopia are the remnant of a Judaistic society there.

34. Pliny the Elder - 'Naturalis Historia', c.70 AD, volume VI, section xxxii. Indeed, Sabaean gold wealth dates right back to the Queen of Sheba (= Saba): see 'The Holy Bible' - 1 Kings, chapter 10. Also see the reference to Al-Hamdani in my note 12.

35. Gayre pp. 20-21, 31; Murdock pp. 204 et seq.

36. Gayre pp. 155, 159; de Barros p.269. It is interesting that the name of the mountain range "Inyanga" in the fertile northeast of the country - means "moon" in some Bantu languages.

37. Described by Doe, D.B. - 'Southern Arabia'; Thames and Hudson, London, 1971. Sirwah temple still has a standing wall containing an inscription; (only fragments remain at Marib). Cf. Gayre p.234.

It is worth emphasising that neither Junod, nor van Warmelo, nor Parfitt, nor Jaques - are seeking to prove any theory on the origin of ancient Zimbabwe. Thus, their descriptions of the MaLemba are completely detached from that controversy. In particular, the first two authors confirm the Lemba role in introducing circumcision to southern Africa, and their tradition of an overseas origin.

Link to 'History Comments' file: correspondence with the Nova website on this topic, (and with the American journal Archaeology): http://DLMcN.com/histcorr.html

Discussion

A brief summary of the general theory outlined in reliable sources could be incorporated into the article as an alternate theory if there is evidence from recent literature of support from archaeologists - otherwise it goes in as an historic theory, no longer supported. However, the material presented makes use mainly of historic documents and a few publications from the 1970s. There is little reference to modern archaeological research - except attempts to dismiss it or complain of lack of reference to the Lemba. The literature cited is thus very selective. The general theory presented appears to be original research that has not been published in a recognised journal (judging by material on the author's website.

Some specific comments:

• 1. dzimba is derived from imba (house, a common bantu word) and dzi- (a prefix denoting large (plural). The three words in the full name dzimba dzihuru dzemabwe (large houses of stone) are commonly-used words with no specific link to Great Zimbabwe outside that context.
• 3. It is bizarre to suggest if certain arab visitors could not identify a script then it must be a specific language. Is there any record of this script that allows modern translation?

5. I do not see the relevance of Caton-Thompson's views some 40 years ago, especially if the implication is she is merely saying some things are not explained.

• 6. Relevance?
• 12. Can be explained by foreign trade as easily as by foreign occupation.
• 18. Discusses foreign influences on the Lemba - but relevance here?
• 27. The Nyanga culture is a well researched archaeological culture, not unknown at all. (see works of Soper, Chirikue etc)
• 30. It is not really surpising that improved dating methods gave different results.
• 31. Ironworking was scarcely unique to the MaKaranga - precolonial ironworkings can be found throughout Zimbabwe - so there is no need to suggest an external source for one ethnic subgrouping.
• 32, 33, 34. Relevance? [ It shows the Sabeans were there and the Bantu were still moving in - How did they start making GZ in the 1100's if they weren't there?]
• 36. Etymology of Nyanga is complex (and note that the I is a colonial mis-pronunciation).

Relevance though? Babakathy (talk) 08:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion for an Alternative Scenario

Shona artefacts and dwellings have indeed been found in and around many of the ancient stone ruins scattered across Zimbabwe.

However, before we can dismiss completely the hypothesis of a Semitic origin for the Ancient Zimbabwean Civilization, we do need to carefully consider whether Shona invaders might have overwhelmed the community who built it, with the newcomers eventually taking over occupation of the stone structures. In this *alternative possible scenario*, a proportion of the original inhabitants would have escaped (probably to the south), while others would have been genetically absorbed into the Shona population – at the same time, passing some of their knowledge and skills to the Shona.

That “alternative scenario” is made more plausible by the existence of a community in the north of South Africa with a particular aptitude for building in stone, and for mining and metalwork. Certainly, in the 19th and early 20th centuries there was evidence that they were more talented in those respects than the surrounding tribes. There are also indications of a Zimbabwean origin for that community.

Certainly, there is no cast-iron proof that the above-mentioned sequence of events actually took place. But has it been established that it definitely did not happen?

The following facts are all supported from sources which are not trying to discuss the origin of Great Zimbabwe. They could well be clues to the earliest roots of the Lemba:

(i) Many members of that community have Semitic-sounding names;

(ii) Lemba priests carry the Cohen Modal Haplotype;

(iii) Lemba dietary practices and taboos have a lot in common with the Mosaic code;

(iv) They were regarded by surrounding tribes as the masters and originators of the art of circumcision, and

(v) They have an oral tradition that their male ancestors came by boat (from a country to the north which boasted large cities) to obtain gold.

It does seem that there are unanswered questions which need to be addressed before we can regard the matter as comprehensively settled.

REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

van Warmelo, N.J. - 'The copper miners of Musina and the early history of the Zoutpansberg'; Ethnological Publications no. VIII (1940), Dept. of Native Affairs, South Africa; see pp. 52-53, 63-67. The vernacular account of the MaLemba is given by M.M. Motenda.

van Warmelo, N.J. - 'Zur Sprache und Herkunft der Lemba'; Hamburger Beiträge zur Afrika-Kunde Bd. 5 (1966), pp. 273-283; Deutsches Institut für Afrika-Forschung; see pp. 273, 279, 281-282.

Murdock, G.P. - Africa: its peoples and their culture history; McGraw Hill, New York, 1959; see pp. 387 and 204 et seq.

Schapera, I. - 'The Bantu-speaking tribes of southern Africa'; Routledge and Sons, London, 1937, and Maskew Miller, Capetown, 1966, see pp. 65-66, 153, 257, 276. [Contribution by N.J. van Warmelo].

Jaques, A.A. - 'Notes on the Lemba Tribe of the Northern Transvaal'; Anthropos vol. XXVI (1931), pp. 245-251; see pp. 247, 249.

Junod, H.A. - 'The life of a South African tribe', vol. I: - 'Social life'; MacMillan, London, 1927; see pp.72-73, 94.

Parfitt, T. - 'Journey to the vanished city'; St. Martin's Press, New York, 1992 (also published by Phoenix). Discussed in a long article on p.22 of The Times (UK) on 10th March 1999.

Thomas, M.G., Parfitt, T. et al - 'Y Chromosomes Traveling South: The Cohen Modal Haplotype and the Origins of the Lemba - the "Black Jews of Southern Africa"; Amer. J. Human Genetics vol. 66 (2000), pp. 674-686.

Gayre, R. - 'The origin of the Zimbabwean civilization'; Galaxie Press, Zimbabwe, 1972.

Gayre, R. - 'The Lembas and Vendas of Vendaland'; The Mankind Quarterly vol. VIII (Edinburgh, 1967), pp. 3-15;

Gayre, R. - 'Some further notes on the Lembas'; The Mankind Quarterly vol. XI (1970), pp. 58-60.

Hammond Tooke, W.D. - 'The Bantu-speaking peoples of southern Africa'; Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1974 (originally 1937); see pp. 81-84 and 115-116. [Contribution by N.J. van Warmelo].

—Preceding unsigned comment added by DLMcN (talk • contribs) 11:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 

Sorry - I forgot to sign! DLMcN (talk) 11:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

The article has not and does not dismiss completely the hypothesis of a Semitic origin - it mentions the Lemba claim and the Jewsih link (which is referenced/cited). However, the fact that none of the above sources are discussing the origins of Great Zimbabwe makes the above argument original research and not appropriate for wikipedia. If an argument such has the above has been advanced in a reliable source then find it, add it to the article where it talks of the Lemba and cite the source. But the above is an original, unpublished synthesis and does not policy requirements for inclusion in the article. Babakathy (talk) 14:11, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Babakathy – Thank you for looking at and commenting on my suggestion.

I have taken you at your word and revised my proposal – as appended below. It is a completely detached, objective, and accurate account of what Gayre, Murdock, Layland and Hall wrote in various published texts. Those authors all discuss the origins of Ancient Zimbabwe.

Other cited references are essential because they corroborate the important facts without taking sides in the dispute. In other words, those secondary sources provide confirmation that the key points cited by Gayre, Hall, etc. are quite correct. [Some people might try and claim that Gayre is not a 'reliable source' in this context].

I have avoided inserting any interpretation of my own. There is, in any event, no need for additional commentary. My name will not appear anywhere on the "Great Zimbabwe" page, nor will there be any link to my article.

Multiple quotation marks for bold and italic text are still there in the proposed new piece below, but the reference numbers will need to be adapted to the WikiPedia editing format.

Following the lead from your present page, I have retained a mention of Parfitt's DNA tests. This is indeed important evidence in the controversy. Thus, can we assume that your reference [32] to his Jurimetrics paper will still remain on your page under that same number?

Obviously, your suggestions will be welcome regarding changes in the content and presentation.

Here is the proposed addition:

A possible Semitic origin

Another tribe which claims responsibility for Great Zimbabwe is the Lemba - a possibility which has been supported in varying degrees by several writers [41][42][43][44][45]. Thus, Gayre suggests that the Shona artefacts which were found in the various ruins, were placed there only after they conquered the country and drove out or absorbed the previous inhabitants [46]; the ones who remained would have passed some of their skills and knowledge to the invaders. To advance their argument, Dr Gayre and Professor Murdock both report that in the early 20th century, neighbouring tribes regarded the South African Lemba as exceptionally skilled metal workers [41][43][47][48][49]; Gayre also mentions that those Lemba had a particular aptitude for mining, smelting and building in stone [46].

Maintaining that those Lemba had originally fled southwards from the Masvingo area, Gayre emphasised that their female ancestry must have contained a large MaKaranga element, judging by the fact that the old Lemba language was a dialect of Karanga [46][47][50].

Recent DNA tests reveal that many Lemba possess marked Semitic features in their Y-chromosomes – i.e., passed through their male ancestral line [51][32]. Particularly startling is the fact that their priests still carry the Cohen Modal Haplotype [52].

Gayre describes the Lemba oral tradition that their male forebears came by boat (from a country to the north which boasted large cities) to obtain gold [46][47][48][50].

Other Lemba Semitic characteristics highlighted by Gayre or Murdock are – first, their dietary laws and customs, which have a lot in common with the Mosaic code [41][43][46][47][48][49][53] – second, the fact that many members of that community have Semitic-sounding names [46][47][50] – and finally, a reputation as the masters and originators of the art of circumcision which the Lemba enjoyed among surrounding tribes [46][48][47][49].

Thus, the discovery of models of male circumcised organs in some of the ancient ruins, is interpreted by Gayre as evidence of a direct link between the Lemba and Ancient Zimbabwe [46]. In addition, Gayre, Layland, Hall and Murdock all regard it as significant that the Lemba buried their dead in an extended rather than a crouched position – i.e., in the same style as in certain Zimbabwean graves, where gold jewellery confirmed their association with the ancient civilization [46][44][43][54].

NOTES AND REFERENCES

41. Gayre, R. - 'The Lembas and Vendas of Vendaland'; The Mankind Quarterly vol. VIII (Edinburgh, 1967), pp. 3-15.

42. Gayre, R. - 'Some further notes on the Lembas'; The Mankind Quarterly vol. XI (1970), pp. 58-60.

43. Murdock, G.P. – 'Africa: its peoples and their culture history'; McGraw Hill, New York, 1959; see pp. 387 and 204 et seq.

44. Hall, R.N. & Neal, W.G. - 'The ancient ruins of Rhodesia'; Methuen, London, 1902; see pp. 95, 101-106, 126.

45. R. Wessman - 'The BaWenda of the Spelonken'; The African World, London, 1908; see pp. 129-132.

46. Gayre, R. - 'The origin of the Zimbabwean civilization'; Galaxie Press, Zimbabwe, 1972.

47. Hammond Tooke, W.D. - 'The Bantu-speaking peoples of southern Africa'; Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1974 (originally 1937); see pp. 81-84 and 115-116. [Contribution by N.J. van Warmelo]. Similar material appears in Schapera, I. - 'The Bantu-speaking tribes of southern Africa'; Routledge and Sons, London, 1937, and Maskew Miller, Capetown, 1966, see pp. 65-66, 153, 257, 276.

48. Junod, H.A. - 'The life of a South African tribe', vol. I: - 'Social life'; MacMillan, London, 1927; see pp.72-73, 94.

49. Jaques, A.A. - 'Notes on the Lemba Tribe of the Northern Transvaal'; Anthropos vol. XXVI (1931), pp. 245-251; see pp. 247, 249.

50. van Warmelo, N.J. - 'Zur Sprache und Herkunft der Lemba'; Hamburger Beiträge zur Afrika-Kunde Bd. 5 (1966), pp. 273-283; Deutsches Institut für Afrika-Forschung; see pp. 273, 279, 281-282.

51. Parfitt, T. - 'Journey to the vanished city'; St. Martin's Press, New York, 1992 (also published by Phoenix). Discussed in a long article on p.22 of The Times (UK) on 10th March 1999.

52. Thomas, M.G., Parfitt, T. et al. - 'Y Chromosomes Traveling South: The Cohen Modal Haplotype and the Origins of the Lemba - the "Black Jews of Southern Africa"; Amer. J. Human Genetics vol. 66 (2000), pp. 674-686.

53. van Warmelo, N.J. - 'The copper miners of Musina and the early history of the Zoutpansberg'; Ethnological Publications no. VIII (1940), Dept. of Native Affairs, South Africa; see pp. 52-53, 63-67.

54. Layland, E. – Appendix I of 'The origin of the Zimbabwean civilization'; Galaxie Press, Zimbabwe, 1972; see p.230.

83.230.207.132 (talk) 10:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Signed by DLMcN 83.230.207.132 (talk) 10:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC) .... DLMcN (talk) 10:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I have inserted an editted version covering claims and evidence on links between the Lemba and Great Zimbabwe in the appropriate section of the article - History of Research. I have ommitted most of the material about the Lemba's origins as they are properly discussed on the Lemba article. Hopefully this also ends the edit war over the long extra section on the Lemba. Babakathy (talk) 18:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Gayre and other racists

If we are going to mention Gayre, and perhaps we should, it should be in a section on racist perspectives. It is not NPOV to ignore Gayre's racism, he's the guy who "In his evidence to the court ...described blacks as being "feckless" and he maintained that scientific evidence showed that blacks "prefer their leisure to the dynamism which the white and yellow races show." Zimbabwe before 1900 By D. N. Beach has a line "A long line of racist works trying to prove otherwise [that is, that GZ wasn't built by blacks], culminating in R Gayre's 'The Origin of the Zimbabwean Civilization'. Garlake doesn't just dismiss Gayre, he used the phrase 'worthless polemic'. In any case, Gayre seems to have credited GZ's original builders as being from the Mediterranean area and Arabia.

Maybe we should quote Parfitt "It is worth noting tnat in relatively recent times white racists found this tradition appealing: the Scottish laird Gayre of Gayre and Nigg was the editor of a racist journal called Mankind Quarterly. In 1967 he wrote a short article in which he stressed the connection of the Lemba with the Great Zimbabwe and in 1972 wrote a book, published in Rhodesia and believed by some to have been commissioned by the Rhodesian Government which claimed that the Lemba had been involved in the Great Zimbabwe construction. He further argued that the Lemba had Jewish cultural and genetic traits and that their 'Armenoid' genes must have been acquired from Judaized Sabeans who, he maintained, had serried in the area thousands of years ago. The book's clear objective was to show that black people had never been capable of of building in stone or of governing themselves. There is nor the slightest evidence that 'Sabeans' or any other Middle Eastern people settled in the area thousands of years ago - and there is every evidence that Great Zimbabwe was built something less than a thousand years ago." Dougweller (talk) 14:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree, though, as I have been stressing in discussions with other editors, whether the Lemba have semitic origins or not is of marginal relevance to this article. I had started trying to find some relevant criticisms of Gayre, beyond Pikirayi. I would strongly support reference to an additional critisim of Gayre beyond what is said by Pikirayi. However, the whole issue of the Lemba and Great Zimbabwe is, at best, a marginal theory so discussion (and criticism) of it in this article should not be extensive per wp:weight. Babakathy (talk) 14:57, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Quoiting Parfitt makes particular sense in this context. Babakathy (talk) 15:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Here's the source: [1]. Dougweller (talk) 15:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. Babakathy (talk) 16:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Comments

It is incorrect to imply that >Because Gayre was a racialist – it follows that his line of reasoning proposing a Semitic origin for Great Zimbabwe, is untenable.<

That^ italicised piece between the arrows > < is a non sequitur; it is flawed logic. Admittedly, we have perhaps not been putting it quite as bluntly and directly as that – but it is always better to avoid ad hominem remarks and criticisms.

Here, it is relevant to focus once again on the fact that many of the key points made by Gayre are supported by observations recorded – long before he wrote his book – by van Warmelo, Junod, and others: i.e., by scholars who were not discussing the origins of Great Zimbabwe. This provides a much fairer judgment than (and it should therefore replace) Garlake’s description of the work as “pure polemic”. Thus, I am inclined to doubt whether Garlake ever read and studied the text properly.

Certainly, I am not maintaining that Gayre’s thesis has been demonstrated conclusively. He does, however, raise questions which are worth looking at. DLMcN (talk) 10:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Van Warmelo and Junod - not really. Gayre's thesis is stated, along with various evidence in support of it. A short criticism section is added (toned down, and shorter than the evidence) noting that this position is not supported by the majority of modern archaeologists. Then we move on to the current position of the research. This is in accordance with the wp:weight policy on minority theories. I have also reordered the section. Babakathy (talk) 07:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

What is the point of 'Dougweller' raising arguments about racism and racists and providing offensive quotes, this should be on another page. I don't follow the reasoning - surely political affiliations have no place here? In the same vein, if we are going to use weasel words like, believed by some to have been commissioned by the Rhodesian Govt. - we can allege others believe not. The core of the unresolved mystery is who did build this edifice? And - while we are on the subject, who designed and constructed 1.5million acres of marvellously designed terraces with cunning water channels and 6 000 enigmatic stone lined (I believe after years of studying them) compost pits in the Nyanga Mountains. Someone also created more than 75 000 ancient abandoned mine workings still visible at the turn of the 19th century. I have personally observed one pit ( and numerous others) at the now modern Alaska Mine from which it has been estimated that no less then 150 000 tonnes of copper ore were removed. This equates to about 15 000 tonnes of copper metal. It was obviously exported - by whom? And while we are on the subject of race dougweller should be reminded that it is not whether blacks or whites built it - but who? (IanKlux) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.152.190.112 (talk) 07:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The claim "believed by some to have been commissioned by the Rhodesian Govt" was made by Peter Garlake not Doug Weller. It might be relevant to quote Garlake, as he is an authority on the subject. However the article mentions Gayre's theories, and then briefly mentions criticism by Garlake and others, which is probably sufficient. Criticism of Gayre's work as being ratially motivated is not unique to Garlake, and has a bearing on his theories - as the (recent) quote from Parfitt shows.

As to Nyanga, um, we're not on the subject, this is an article about Great Zimbabwe - but if you want to learn about the Nyanga terraces and pits, read Soper or here or Summers. Babakathy (talk) 14:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

> Dougweller – I have a question ...

Does Garlake actually discuss (and demolish?) any of the links in Gayre’s reasoning? Which specific portions of Gayre’s thesis does he challenge? If indeed Garlake includes anything of that nature in his papers, then what does he say exactly?

I have read the book by Pikirayi cited under reference [34] on the main GZ page, and know for a fact that he does not actually address any particular item in Gayre’s argument; in other words, Pikirayi’s “dismissal” is extremely brief.

Incidentally, Gayre certainly does cite van Warmelo for support. It is true, however, that (in earlier discussions above) I included a few additional but very relevant references from van Warmelo.

On the main page, I have put in a new suggestion for this sensitive and “controversial” section – trying to stick to important facts. DLMcN (talk) 09:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Garlake does not address Gayre's arguments line by line, but dismisses his work in a discussion on past research. It is relevant that established and recognised archaeologists like Garlake and Pikirayi criticise Gayre - particularly since it appears that few (none?) reliable sources since Gayre come out in his support. Please also do take a look at the policy on minority viewpoints which says "the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each. Now an important qualification: In general, articles should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more widely held views." It is appropriate for the article to discuss the possibility of a Lemba origin etc but not to spend a lot of time on it. Babakathy (talk) 17:49, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Further Revision

24 to 25 Feb 2010

I am astounded at the editing war now under progress in the main article. I am now more than intrigued at the strenuous arguments raised against DLMcN. Wherever weasel words and offensive racist language are (subtly) used, I have learned through long experience that there is an underlying fixity with race. This approach (designed to brand and incite) is always used to defend. It is both unjustified and unscientific and leads to a distorted conceptions. My suspicions are aroused!

So while we are on the subject of this enduring mystery and the million acres of terraces; Prof. Beach ( a noted historian ) said that nations can be self deluding. Reading between his lines I suspected he was inferring that nations can be self deluding (in regard to history) by allowing or even coercing and funding archaeologists to study minutiae and then arrive at so called scientific conclusions which suit the political agenda. Thus to dismiss them to another section seems to me an over reliance on the science of archaeology in relation to the origins of the ancient Zimbabwean civilisation. Because of this mentality a huge slice of human history has simply gone missing. I therefore invite greater contribution from DLMcN on this to the main article - and on the 'suite of 28 Radio carbon dates.'

The main article states. 'The radiocarbon evidence is a suite of 28 measurements, for which all but the first four, from the early days of the use of that method and now viewed as inaccurate, support the twelfth to fifteenth centuries chronology.' This is not my understanding of the matter. I read somewhere that the dates, tested numerous times, were considered anomalous and dismissed on those grounds- they were not inaccurate (a weasel word). If my memory serves me right - they actually claimed that the wood dated at around 600AD found in the lintels above a drain in the main wall must have lain around in the bush or taken from a midden and built into the walls, 800 years later, in the medieval times??

I would also welcome from DLMcN, his thoughts on the (convenient?) subject of the divorcing of the mines and terraces from the main GZ ruin and minority views . I say this because at least one of the main contenders to the ( archaeological) truth, Prof. Thomas Huffman, head of Archaeology at the University of Witwatersrand in South Africa acknowledges that the 1906 Bantu interpretation of the ruins, “- was strenuously rejected by the public, a rejection still found today.” (IanKlux) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.152.190.112 (talk) 07:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

IanKlux, against whom are your "suspicions aroused"? The allegations of racial bias against Gayre are all properly documented - if you feel that there is an "underlying fixity with race" on the part of one of the other authors mentioned in the article, find a source that documents such "fixity" and cite it.

If you have a reliable source to cite on your "understanding" of the radiocarbon dates, then cite it. Inaccurate is not a weasel word when applied to the early application of a scientific technique which has now been improved - especially since its use in the article is citing a statement by a recognised authority saying the dates are inaccurate. The source of the claim is cited.

Finally, this is an article about Great Zimbabwe, not Nyanga or the archaeology of Zimbabwe in general, so the Nyanga terraces, pits etc are off-topic here. Babakathy (talk) 10:19, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

1. It certainly is relevant to mention the terracing and agricultural irrigation-channels during a debate on the stone edifices (including Great Zimbabwe) – because it is by no means unreasonable to suggest that all those phenomena are attributable to the same people, whoever they were. Indeed, that also applies to the ancient gold mines and to the jewellery found in various ruins; i.e., they too could well have been part of that same civilisation. All those manifestations can be described as “anomalies” in sub-equatorial Africa, confined as they were to an area which is only slightly larger than modern-day Zimbabwe.

2. Somebody has edited my last contribution such that it now reads "the Lemba, an ethnic group with a tradition of ancient. this claim is supported by Gayre ..." As it stands now, it is not grammatically correct. I am also puzzled and dismayed that the important reference to DNA evidence of a Lemba-Semitic link has been taken out - can somebody explain why? In addition, my final sentence has been removed; i.e. - "Nevertheless, many of the key points made by Gayre are confirmed by observations recorded – long before he wrote his book – by van Warmelo(31), Junod, and others: i.e., by scholars who were not discussing Great Zimbabwe". I submit that this last sentence (which included reference 31 to Hammond-Tooke) is at least as significant as your citations from Garlake, Pikirayi and even Parfitt - because it is more important to focus on (and if necessary, to criticise) the essence of Gayre's argument, and none of those gentlemen seem to have done that. Surely this "Talk-File" is supposed to be a platform for discussing and resolving differences before inserting or editing text in the main page?

3. Incidentally, you often describe the builders of Great Zimbabwe as 'Africans', but that is not really a good term to use in this discussion. It embraces, for example, the Ancient Egyptians, the Carthaginians, and the Isma'ili Fatimids of North Africa. An even better illustration in this context is provided by the Semitic builders of Axum in ancient Abyssinia – because Gayre, Murdock and R.N. Hall would probably all have been sympathetic (or at least open-minded) to a suggestion that they were responsible for creating the Ancient Zimbabwean Civilisation. Those Abyssinian Semites were certainly 'Africans' in the broader sense. And the Sabaeans (just across the Straits of Aden) were similar to the Axumites in several respects; both seem to have had commercial interests down the East African coast. DLMcN (talk) 10:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

1. For this article mines, terracing and agricultural irrigation-channels - and any other archaeological features - that are part of the Great Zimbabwe National Monument or somehow associated with it are relevant. Howver, to incorporate into the article a discussion on Nyanga archaeology would be plain bizarre - rather like putting a discussion of Chelsea Hospital into the article on St. Paul's Cathedral, even though they had the same architect.

2. I have reverted the unexplained deletion and reworked the paragraph. I have not put van Warmelo in as your reference to him above is on the Lemba's semitic links which are adequately covered by Parfitt in the second sentence.

3. On "Africans" I have editted the text to reflect what people actually wrote, e.g. RM uses "Bantu".Babakathy (talk) 11:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

By the way, it's not compulsory to discuss on the talk page before editting, but it certainly helps where there are disagreements Babakathy (talk) 11:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

(I replied to some of those^ points below >> - particularly regarding the terracing and irrigation channels). DLMcN (talk) 11:10, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Apology to babakathy for weasel talk. To respond more accurately, my 'understanding of the matter' was derived from discussion centred around a wooden support taken from the on the roof of a drain aperture, indicating 590AD – 702 C.E. (Libby Chicago); Mr. Roger Summers (and others dismissed the carbon dating as anomalous.‘) Summers says:

" it is considered possible that builders of the temple used the wood when it was dead having collected it from an earlier Stamped Ware midden. This would explain the date which is somewhat earlier than expected."

Speaking of miners Summers,the only person to have ever conducted a thorough study of the mines and their relationship to the stone buildings said,

"Presumably, therefore, the 'Miners' were exploiting the easily available mineral wealth of Rhodesia for at least 1000 years before any of them felt an urge to seek fresh mines.

Summers said:

" The 'Builders' were apparently quite distinct from the 'Miners', they used different (and much plainer) pottery, they eschewed figurines and they had a different taste in beadwork. Moreover, their pottery appears only on ruin sites and accordingly it has been suggested that they were few in numbers. Their first appearance in the south-east and the fact that they possessed different material culture from the 'Miners' suggests an entirely different origin from the previous people."- Southern Rhodesia Early Iron Age 2000 Years - By R. Summers 1961.

Perhaps the editor DLMcN could build these points into the main paper to provide better balance.

Incidentally regarding Africans and North African Semitic s both Roger Summers and Alice Werner warned of the dangers the use of the word Bantu. This classification which was originally coined by Bleek more than a century ago to define the languages spoken south of 5°. Alice Werner said, "―to refer to the Bantu as the race of Africa is misleading." Myths and Legends of the Bantu, by Alice Werner [1933] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.152.190.112 (talk) 18:00, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

27 to 28 Feb 2010

The beam you speak of, originally dated at 590 AD is the one I mention was redated to 14th century, per Huffman ref.

I've left "Bantu" where the term is used in reference to what some said (Randall MacIver, Caton-Thompson etc). Babakathy (talk) 07:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Added something on early farmers and miners in GtZ area. Babakathy (talk) 08:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The contents of the main page seems to change several times a day. When I looked a few minutes ago, there was almost no mention at all of Gayre.

I would like to suggest that we submit to neutral arbitration the inclusion of the following sentence: Nevertheless, many of the key points made by Gayre are confirmed by observations recorded – long before he wrote his book – by van Warmelo, Junod, and others: i.e., by scholars who were not discussing Great Zimbabwe. This is in order to provide a ‘balance’ - because it is unfair and misleading to highlight “dismissals” of Gayre by Pikirayi and Garlake when they do not actually address (and demolish) the principal components of Gayre’s thesis. Incidentally, in that piece by van Warmelo [via Hammond-Tooke] it is not only the Lembas’ Semitic features which are significant – the author also confirms the fact that surrounding tribes regarded the Lemba as very different from themselves.

With regard to your citation by Parfitt on the main page (with co-author Emanuela Trevisan), it was illuminating to read some of his comments which followed afterwards – particularly: “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”. Babakathy – what would your reaction be to the addition of this last Parfitt-sentence to the main GZ article?

I could not find any details of the “wrong facts” Parfitt was referring to above, but he went on to mention that Ken Mufuka and his colleagues supported the idea of a Venda/Lemba responsibility for GZ. Babakathy, are you in a position to look for and assess that item written by Ken Mufuka?

If there is indeed a mechanism for submitting a Wikipedia dispute to arbitration, then presumably it would be best to choose a person who has never heard about the Great Zimbabwe controversy; i.e. someone who can approach and judge it with a completely fresh mind?

- - - - Gayre argues that the “mines, extensive terracing and agricultural irrigation-channels” were indeed “associated with GZ” – in that they were all part of the same ‘colony’, as he would probably describe it. He claims that the existence of that enormous terraced area in NE Zimbabwe is additional evidence of alien influence, because there is nothing quite like it anywhere else in sub-equatorial Africa.

If there was an obvious link or common feature between Chelsea Hospital and St Paul’s Cathedral which helped confirm the identity of the architect – (assuming that we did not know, and that it was important to find out), then it certainly would be illuminating to briefly cite something along those lines. Thus, in the article on GZ, it is not necessary to have an extended discussion on the Nyanga phenomena. One sentence will suffice, e.g. –

Gayre also maintains that the enormous area of agricultural terracing in the northeast of Zimbabwe, together with the irrigation channels there, were an integral part of the ancient Zimbabwean state. DLMcN (talk) 10:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Parfitt on Gayre - added.

Parfitt on Mafuku - dubious: If my memory serves me correctly, Mafuku starts his book with the sentence "The Shona built Great Zimbabwe - let no-one doubt that". However, I do not have the full book to check, which would be preferable. Of course there are those who consider the Lemba to be a subgroup of the Karanga and thus Shona - in which case no conflict arises between Mafuku and Gayre on that topic!

Gayre on terracing etc: I have (previously) added the generally-accepted account of the farmers and miners who lived in the area before the GtZ were built (See settlement). I do not see the point of referring to Gayre's brief reference to Nyanga archaeology when it is (a) brief, (b) lacking in evidence in Gayre's account and (c) not in accordance with the extensive more recent work on the Nyanga upland culture (Summers, Soper, Pwiti).

On van Warmelo, Junod etc: does Gayre cite them to support his argument? If so, then such reference can be made to him citing them - but if he did not then it is original research to point this out, and thus not appropriate for inclusion per wp:original research - see especially the policy on synthesis.

Finally, please read wp:weight, which is the policy on dealing with minority opinions - we are in danger of having an article weighted more towards the Lemba than the current archaeological consensus. Babakathy (talk) 16:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

And, I have reverted the unexplained deletions. These do not help - whether one agrees or disagrees with the intent: removal of material must be explained at least briefly, preferably in the edit summary. Babakathy (talk) 16:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Ruwitah and the Lemba

I have a few questions regarding the following paper which is cited in Wikipedia's "Great Zimbabwe" text; [today it is in note 48]: Ruwitah, A. (1997). "Lost tribe, lost language? the invention of a false Remba identity". Zimbabwea 5.

1. Does the author discuss Parfitt's analyses of Lemba DNA? - and in particular, the fact that their priests still carry the Cohen Modal Haplotype?
2. Does Ruwitah acknowledge the fact that many Lemba clan-names are recognisably Semitic? ... e.g., Sadiki, Hasane, Hamisi, Haji, Bakeri, Sharifo and Saidi?

If he does indeed mention either of those two items, then does he offer his own explanation for them? - e.g., in order to downplay the apparent Semitic links? ... and if so, what does he say? If, however, Ruwitah’s article does not contain the two above points, then I feel very strongly that this omission should be emphasised in order to qualify that reference. Otherwise, is it possible to summarize the essence of Ruwitah’s argument? Is it just based on linguistic criteria? [i.e., the old Lemba language was indeed a dialect of Karanga] ... or is there more? It would of course be helpful for me to try and get hold of Ruwitah's paper, if possible, to read it first-hand, but this is not all that easy to do from our little village here in rural SE Spain. DLMcN (talk) 10:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

1. It is very unlikely that a paper published in 1997 would discuss a DNA finding published in 2000.
2. The point being made is that although the semitic link has indeed been substantiated it had been opposed (note past tense in the statement) on specific grounds by a specific researcher. It is not necessary, in the case of every paper that is cited on a subject, to state whether or not the author of the paper being cited discussed every piece of evidence raised by another (every other?) researcher. Imagine how tedious this paragraph would be if every time Gayre is mentioned it was necessary to list every point raised by Hall or Randall-MacIver which Gayre might not have mentioned. The point is that there is a reseacher who disagreed, and the grounds of his disagreement (ethnographic) are stated (which in fact is how Parfitt refers to Ruwitah's work in his book). Babakathy (talk) 21:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I have editted the tense on the citation of Ruwitah to make it clear his is an earlier work. Babakathy (talk) 22:20, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Parfitt’s investigations were actually initiated in the 1980s ... and in 1992 he published his 'Journey to the vanished city'. The first genetic studies of the Lemba were then carried out in 1996. However, you are right that a 1997 writer can be forgiven for not being aware of the full extent of Parfitt’s discoveries.

Nevertheless, I am quite baffled as to why, under the circumstances, you consider it desirable to quote Ruwitah’s opinions here – particularly when they have now been contradicted by DNA evidence. Far more relevant and illuminating are the Lembas’ Semitic clan-names cited by van Warmelo in 1937. It therefore seems quite justifiable to insert a very brief mention of these – which I have done. DLMcN (talk) 09:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Then let us leave out Ruwitah's opinions and the rebuttal as the whole issue is very marginal to the Great Zimbabwe article as opposed to the Lemba article. We leave the brief reference (cited) to the DNA analysis confirming it. Babakathy (talk) 13:59, 23 March 2010 (UTC)