SEPTEMBER 12 1890 marked the entrance of the Pioneer Column into what they later termed Rhodesia.
The Union Jack was hoisted.
Whites ‘claimed’ the country was theirs.
The fate of the indigenes was now in their hands.
Advertisements to lure more whites to come to Rhodesia where fertile land was ‘abundant’ for them were awash in newspapers.
This spelt doom for locals.
Agriculture had been the mainstay for their survival.
Given the changes, locals’ lives were disturbed.
They were forcibly removed from their land.
Their way of life changed.
Records show prior to the arrival of whites, blacks were renowned agriculturalists.
It did not take the coming of the whiteman for indigenes to be ‘masters of the land’.
In a paper by Mandivamba Rukuni titled The Evolution of Agricultural Policy (1890-1990) published in the book Zimbabwe’s Agricultural Revolution Revisited, he backs the notion that blacks were active farmers before whites came.
“When the white settlers arrived in 1890, they found traditional agriculture dating back some 2 000 years,” he writes.
“Livestock was a major activity by AD 1000 and native Zimbabweans owned about 500 000 cattle at the time of colonisation.
The traditional economy in the 19th Century had developed beyond agriculture.
Local barter trade thrived in drought years as food became scarce.
Zimbabwe’s traditional agriculture was the centrepiece of a vibrant traditional economy.”
Rukuni writes, blacks grew various crops which made up part of their diet which was also complimented by game and wild fruits.
Said Rukuni: “Prior to the arrival of the white settlers, both the Shona and Ndebele grew a wide variety of crops; finger millet, bulrush millet, sorghum, maize, groundnuts, potatoes, rice, sweet potatoes, cowpeas, pumpkins, squash, cucumber, tomatoes, marrow, melons, yams, cassava, cane, pineapple, lemons, paw-paws and others.
Millets were the staple food.
The land use system and crops produced by smallholders was quite similar for the whole country.
A system of land rotation was used to maintain soil fertility.”
Of interest to note is that locals were also producers of what are now referred to as cash crops such as tobacco and cotton.
“The Shangwe people of present day Gokwe District in the western part of Zimbabwe were renowned tobacco growers in pre-colonial days,” writes Rukuni.
“After colonisation, the Shangwe tobacco industry grew from 1903 to the early 1920s.”
However, it was the growing of small grains that played a pivotal role in promoting food security during the pre-colonial era.
Professor Sheunesu Mpepereki told The Patriot maize was not a main crop before the arrival of whites, but it was the growing of small grains that was popular.
“People grew crops such as millet, pumpkins, watermelons, Sesamum indicum (runinga), mashamba/ mafere, sweet cane (magunde/ipwa), bottle gourd (mapudzi/ makavhu) and okra,” he said.
“Millets, that is finger and pearl, sorghum and rapoko were the main sources of energy.
“Other nutrients were derived from game, vegetables such as muboora (pumkin leaves), mutsine (black jack) and mumowa.”
Given the high nutritional value in millets, Prof Mpepereki said locals were not prone to malnutrition.
“These crops which blacks grew promoted healthy eating and there were no cases of malnutrition,” he said.
“Malnutrition is a colonial construct caused by the disruption of way of living of blacks by whites.
“After being forcibly moved from their land and the prioritising of maize as a cash crop by the settlers, production of small grains tumbled.”
Studies have shown small grains are drought-resistant and are not prone to attacks from pests and diseases during production and after harvesting.
This meant even if local communities were hit by droughts, they were not heavily affected.
Small grains thrive in marginal environments with low rainfalls; low nutrients and mineral salts can be relatively low or even in sandy soils.
This meant production of small grains did not strain soils and the environment.
Soils remained fertile for long.
As such, small grains were easy to produce and store after harvesting.
Hence, pre-colonial communities were never affected by droughts.
Prof Mpepereki said pre-colonial communities relied on small grains for food security hence they never went hungry.
“There were never cases of small grains zvichipfukutwa (being affected by weavils) which meant they could be stored for years in some cases for up to 10 years,” he said.
“Small grains have no spaces in which stalk-borers can maneoeuvre hence they are not attacked as opposed to maize which made maize a not preferred grain.”
Apart from promoting food security and nutrition, small grains were a significant crop used in rituals conducted by local communities.
Rituals promoted unity in societies and helped Africans identify with one another.
With agriculture being a source of livelihood for indigenes, the agricultural calendar was punctuated by rituals
After harvesting, societies under the guidance of chiefs and village elders held mapira echando to thank God for good harvests.
To prepare the summer cropping season, societies engaged in what have been termed rain-asking ceremonies (bira remvura/mukwerera), as part of preparations.
Communities also participated in nhimbe where they helped each other to weed and harvest in the fields .
These activities required the brewing of traditional beer small grains.
Also during and after funerals, there was kurova guva and kupira midzimu, where traditional beer was required.
For rain-asking ceremonies, rukweza was used to brew beer.
For other rituals such as kupira midzimu, doro rateteguru was brewed using mhunga with rukweza used for doro rasekuru.
As such, it was important for these small grains to be produced in abundance.
Prof Mpepereki noted that it was the duty of women to prepare small grains though it was labour intensive.
“Women had to wake up in the morning to prepare grains that were to be used to prepare meals,” he said.
“Older women participated actively in the brewing of traditional beer used in traditioal ceremonies.”
In a paper by Daniel Weiner titled Land and Agricultural Development, he notes production of small grains contributed to social cohesion.
“The preparation of small grains, that is pounding and grinding, was done by young women under the guidance of older women,” he writes.
“The small grains were used to prepare meals and brewing beer which was also done by women.
“Women of older generations used these gatherings for preparing small grains to teach young women their roles and duties (as) wives.
“Songs sung during the(se) preparation(s) were not only for entertainment but were educative and informative.”
Weiner notes that participating in nhimbe instilled a sense of ownership and unity.
“After partaking in joint field activities, locals enjoyed traditional beer brewed using locally produced grain and they used these platforms to share ideas, teach younger generations rules guiding their societies,” he writes.
“By working together in the fields, it meant cases of theft were not common as people were aware crops were shared commodities.”
With whites invading land, it meant the performing of rituals was disturbed.
The promotion of maize as a cash crop resulted in the decline of small grains.
Weiner writes that around 1950, grinding mills were introduced.
This ‘noble’ development meant people no longer had to grind and pound maize the traditional way.
However, this had negative effects on the production of small grains.
Prof Mpepereki said following the introduction of grinding mills, maize became a popular crop.
“There were no grinding mills to process small grains and it should be noted the way to process small grains was difficult,” he said.
“Having realised that with the grinding mill it was easy to process maize, people switched to the production of maize with little attention now being paid to small grains.”
The moving away from producing small grains had effects on societies and the environment.
“The growing of maize on a large scale, which is prone to pests and diseases, meant people had to apply fertilisers and chemicals to protect the crop,” said Prof Mpepereki.
“With small grain production diminishing for rituals, it meant people had to improvise using either maize meal to brew beer and of late buying commercially sold beer and this reduces the value and importance of rituals.”
Prof Mpepereki said our diet was also affected.
“We saw the emergence of diseases that never existed before and this is because the nutritional value that was provided through small grains was no longer readily available,” he said.
“Today, many are not aware of the nutritional value of foods prepared using small grains, with those who eat it mostly doing so after being diagnosed of non-communicable diseases, yet this should not be the case.”
Over the years, the country has had to battle with effects of climate change-induced drought.
Prof Mpepereki said if small grain production is promoted, effects of droughts would not be so acutely felt.
“Small grain production is climate-change-smart,” he said.
“Necessity is the mother of invention, so innovative ways should be put in place to revive and promote small grain production.”
Prof Mpepereki concurs with Rukuni on the need for innovative ways to improve not only small grain production but the agriculture sector as a whole when he says:
“The paradox of Africa is that (it) has moved from a position of food self-sufficiency in the early 1960s to a hungry, malnourished, impoverished and disillusioned continent.
Given that 70 percent of Africa’s people are dependent on agriculture for employment and economy, one cannot ignore the fact that the future destiny of the continent lies in the political economy of agriculture.
Africans are now agreed more than ever on the need for home-grown solutions to local problems.
Borrowing ideas from other parts of the world has not succeeded mainly because intelligent borrowing of ideas has to be rooted in self respect.
Africa is in desperate need of revitalising its food and agricultural sector and of facing up to the long-term nature of its food crisis.”