African Archaeological Review

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 139–161 | Cite as

The chronology of the Valley Enclosures: implications for the interpretation of Great Zimbabwe

  • D. P. Collett
  • A. E. Vines
  • E. G. Hughes
Article

Abstract

The recent structuralist model of the social organization of space at Great Zimbabwe, proposed by Huffman, is critically examined in the light of new chronological data. Architectural histories of the Western and Central Valley Enclosures (Posselt and Phillips Ruins respectively) are used to show the complex changes that occur through time in the social ‘meaning’ of spatial organization. It is argued that these changes are not adequately accounted for in Huffman's model. The Western Valley Enclosure, dated on the basis of a large piece of blue-on-white Chinese porcelain of the Honghzi period (Ming Dynasty, AD 1488–1505) recovered from a sealed context, was still occupied when most other areas of Great Zimbabwe were abandoned. Huffman's incorporation of these enclosures into a synchronic structuralist interpretation of the site is therefore probably invalid. These new data highlight the importance of chronological control in the development of structural and symbolic interpretations of Great Zimbabwe.

Résumé

Le modèle structuraliste de l'organisation sociale de l'espace à la Grande Zimbabwe proposé récemment par Huffman est examiné de façon critique, en fonction de données chronologiques récentes. Les histories architecturales des enclos des vallées Ouest et du Centre (Posselt et Phillips Ruins) sont utilisées afin de démontrer les changements complexes subit au cours du temps par la dimension sociale de l'organisation de l'espace. Les auteurs proposent que ces changements ne sont pas reflétés de manière convaincante par le modèle de Huffman. L'enclos de la vallée de l'Ouest est daté par la présence d'un fragment de porcelaine chinoise large, bleu sur blanc, appartenant à la période Houghzi (Dinastie de Ming 1488–1505 AD), trouvé dans un contexte scéllé; ceci prouve que le site était encore occupé alors que la plupart des autres quartiers de la Grande Zimbabwe étaient déjá abandonnés. L'incorporation par Huffman de ces enclos dans l'interprétation synchronique structuraliste du site n'est donc probablement pas correcte. Ces données nouvelles mettent en lumière l'importance du control chronologique pour le développement d'interpretations symboliques et structuralistes de la Grande Zimbabwe.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beach, D. N. 1980.The Shona and Zimbabwe, 900–1850. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  2. Bent, J. T. 1892.The Ruined Cities of Mashonaland. London: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
  3. Caton-Thompson, G. 1931.The Zimbabwe Culture. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  4. Chittick, H. N. 1974.Kilwa: an Islamic trading city on the East African coast. Nairobi: British Institute in Eastern Africa.Google Scholar
  5. Garlake, P. S. 1968. The value of imported ceramics in the dating and interpretation of the Rhodesian Iron Age.J.A.H. 9: 13–33.Google Scholar
  6. Garlake, P. S. 1973.Great Zimbabwe. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
  7. Garlake, P. S. 1985.Great Zimbabwe Described and Explained. Harare: Zimbabwe Publishing House.Google Scholar
  8. Hall, R. N. 1905.Great Zimbabwe. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  9. Hall, R. N. and Neal, W. G. 1902.The Ancient Ruins of Rhodesia. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  10. Huffman, T. N. 1981. Snakes and birds: expressive space at Great Zimbabwe.African Studies 40:131–50.Google Scholar
  11. Huffman, T. N. 1982. Archaeology and ethnohistory of the African Iron Age.A.R.A. 11:133–50.Google Scholar
  12. Huffman, T. N. 1984a. Expressive space in the Zimbabwe Culture.Man 19:593–612.Google Scholar
  13. Huffman, T. N. 1984b. Where you are the girls gather to play: the Great Enclosure at Great Zimbabwe. InFrontiers: Southern African Archaeology Today (eds. M. Hallet al.): pp. 252–65. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.Google Scholar
  14. Huffman, T. N. 1985. The Great Enclosure and Domba.Man 20:543–5.Google Scholar
  15. Huffman, T. N. 1986. Iron Age settlement patterns and the origins of class distinction in Southern Africa.Advances in World Archaeology 1:291–337.Google Scholar
  16. Huffman, T. N. 1987.Symbols in Stone: unravelling the mystery of Great Zimbabwe. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.Google Scholar
  17. MacIver, D. R. 1906.Medieval Rhodesia. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  18. Masey, F. E. 1911. Zimbabwe: an architect's notes.Proceedings of the Rhodesia Scientific Association 11:37–56.Google Scholar
  19. Mauch, C. 1969.The Journals of Carl Mauch (ed. E. E. Burke). Salisbury: National Archives of Rhodesia.Google Scholar
  20. Robinson, K. R. 1959.Khami Ruins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Robinson, K. R. 1961a. Excavations on the Acropolis hill.Occasional Papers of the National Museums of Southern Rhodesia 3(23A):159–92.Google Scholar
  22. Robinson, K. R. 1961b. Zimbabwe pottery.Occasional Papers of the National Museums of Southern Rhodesia 3(23A):193–226.Google Scholar
  23. Schofield, J. F. 1926. Zimbabwe: a critical examination of the building methods employed.S.A.J.S. 23:971–86.Google Scholar
  24. Stevens, C. G. 1931. The Zimbabwe Temple.J.R.A.I. 61:181–6.Google Scholar
  25. Summers, R. F. 1961. Excavations in the Great Enclosure.Occasional Papers of the National Museums of Southern Rhodesia 3(23A):236–88.Google Scholar
  26. Summers, R. F. and Whitty, A. 1961. The development of the Great Enclosure.Occasional Papers of the National Museums of Southern Rhodesia 3(23A):306–25.Google Scholar
  27. Theal, G. M. (ed.) 1898–1903.Records of South Eastern Africa. Cape Town: Government of Cape Colony.Google Scholar
  28. Turner, V. 1967.The Forest of Symbols: aspects of Ndenbu ritual. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Walton, J. 1956.African Village. Pretoria: Van Schaik.Google Scholar
  30. Whitty, A. 1961. Architectural style at Zimbabwe.Occasional Papers of the National Museums of Southern Rhodesia 3(23A):289–305.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Cambridge University Press 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. P. Collett
  • A. E. Vines
  • E. G. Hughes

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations