HomeOld_PostsWere sculptors of Zimbabwe Birds women?

Were sculptors of Zimbabwe Birds women?

Published on

THE notion of who built Great Zimbabwe assumes that the male conceptualised, designed and built it for the purposes of fortification and grandeur.
There are, however, other qualities that can be seen in the architecture that allude to a strong female influence and the idea of protection, maternity and procreation.
Originally, the Zimbabwe Birds stood on towering columns on top of the eastern enclosure of Great Zimbabwe and may have symbolised the original lineage of Zimbabwean regal leaders or emperors.
The original Zimbabwe Birds were carved from soapstone/steatite, in a unique and distinctive style. They were formerly situated virtuously on guard atop the fortress of granite stone-walls and monoliths of the ancient city of Great Zimbabwe.
When Great Zimbabwe was ‘discovered’ by modern civilisation in the late 19th Century, five of the carved birds they found were taken to South Africa by Cecil John Rhodes (1853-1902).
Four of the stone statues were returned to Zimbabwe by the South African government at independence in 1980, while the fifth remains controversially, at Groote Schuur, Rhodes’ former home in Cape Town, South Africa.
Pieces of a sixth bird ended up in the hands of a German missionary who sold it to the Ethnological Museum in Berlin in 1907.
The fragments were taken from Berlin to Leningrad when Russian forces occupied Germany at the end of the Second World War.
They remained there until the end of the Cold War when they were returned to Germany.
In May 2003, the fragments of soapstone sculpture were handed back to President Robert Mugabe by a German museum.
The eighth statue has always remained in Zimbabwe.
Observations of cultural ornithology and the common Shona saying: ‘Zayi regondo’ – the egg of the eagle elicit great sentiments of the over-protectiveness that the female eagle has over its eggs.
The saying is a metaphor for an only child.
It also implies a dear beloved one.
Indigenous studies of the field characteristics and behaviour of the chapungu — bateleur eagle (terathopius ecaudatus), and hungwe — the fish eagle (haliaeetus vocifer), both species of birds depicted on the Zimbabwe insignia, build their nests as large platforms of sticks placed high up on a tree near forests and rocky water bodies.
No doubt, early indigenous people’s observation of nature may have influenced the architecture and sculpture of great Zimbabwe.
In the same breath, given the linkages between human and animal behaviour, the building of nests and the making of shelter belong to the female domain.
From this assumption, the circular buildings may emulate the circular weaving of nests and the female dominance in the supervision of human architecture, such as that seen at Great Zimbabwe.
The question of gender is also illustrated and animated in Great Zimbabwe’s bird sculptures, which sit in repose as a female bird guarding her eggs, a symbol perhaps of the importance of the female gender in protecting and nurturing the dynasty.
Historically from the Victorian Age, archaeology was a male domain which leads to the perception of archaeological finds from a white male-centred perspective.
It should interest us that in most civilisations, one of the first things to be excavated and analysed is the pottery, which we know is a woman’s domain.
Given most of the artefacts excavated and discovered at Great Zimbabwe were made by women, could it be women were involved in the construction of Great Zimbabwe, or at least contributed to the design decisions?
When the people of Zimbabwe address a female by their totem, the adjective ‘ma’ precedes the totem.
For example, maNgwenya, maDube, maMoyo or maSibanda determines the sex of the person being addressed.
By deconstructing the symbology etched on the Zimbabwean Bird, one will observe that the chevrons, according to traditional orature, represent the female reproductive organs.
The circle represents continuity, fertility, regeneration, abundance, protection, completeness and perpetuity of the royal lineage.
It is sculpted on the surface of both panels of the bird, in the form of circular, low relief symbols under the bird.
The eggs are illustrated in the circles on the base of the seventh bird.
Among other artefacts found were the Zimbabwe steatite female figurines which also allude to the female’s importance and participation in the creation of Great Zimbabwe, a fact which most Western archaeologists overlooked.
The dominance of female characteristics of the birds and their posture and the lack of the feather crest typical of the male bateleur eagle attest to the hypothesis that the birds are female.
The fact that the birds are portrayed seated on eggs and not soaring which would imply the male hunt, as portrayed in other Western heraldry, the Zimbabwe Bird on the other hand differs in that it shows a dignified bird sitting upright, symbolically protecting its eggs, the progeny and the nation.
Were the sculptures of the Great Zimbabwe Birds female after all?
Most African archaeologists will have to observe and analyse archaeological findings not only in the mother tongue, but through our mothers’ eyes because ultimately the word MaDzimbahwe implies a female hierarchal structure.
Given that indigenous languages embody the meaning of people, places and spaces, it makes sense therefore, to examine archaeology in the mother tongue.
The armorial bearings of Zimbabwe contain a representation of the stone-carved Zimbabwe Bird.
It is the official national emblem of Zimbabwe, appearing on the National Flag and coat of arms of both Zimbabwe and earlier on in Rhodesia, as well as on banknotes and coins (first on the Rhodesian pound, then the Rhodesian dollar and finally on the Zimbabwean dollar).
It probably represents the amalgam of both the fish eagle and bateleur eagle.
The bird is used by the national sports teams and is part of numerous badges and logos of various Zimbabwean institutions and organisations.
Is it not ironic that our colonisers chose the most important indigenous national symbol for their colony?
Dr Tony Monda holds a PhD. in Art Theory and Philosophy and a DBA (Doctorate in Business Administration) and Post-Colonial Heritage Studies. He is a writer, lecturer, musician, art critic, practising artist and corporate image consultant. He is also a specialist art consultant, post-colonial scholar, Zimbabwean socio-economic analyst and researcher.
For views and comments, email: tonym.monda@gmail.com

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest articles

Kariba Municipality commits to President’s service delivery blueprint

By Kundai Marunya IT is rare to find opposition-controlled urban councils throwing their weight on...

The resurgence of Theileriosis in 2024 

THE issues of global changes, climate change and tick-borne diseases cannot be ignored, given...

Britain haunted by its hostile policy on Zimbabwe

TWO critical lessons drawn from the recent debate on Zimbabwe in the British House...

The contentious issue of race

 By Nthungo YaAfrika AS much as Africans would want to have closure to many of...

More like this

Kariba Municipality commits to President’s service delivery blueprint

By Kundai Marunya IT is rare to find opposition-controlled urban councils throwing their weight on...

The resurgence of Theileriosis in 2024 

THE issues of global changes, climate change and tick-borne diseases cannot be ignored, given...

Britain haunted by its hostile policy on Zimbabwe

TWO critical lessons drawn from the recent debate on Zimbabwe in the British House...

Discover more from Celebrating Being Zimbabwean

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading