Native construction of the Great Zimbabwe ?

Jul 2011
579
western Europe
#1
For decades was it posited by explorers and archaeologists that the Great Zimbabwe could never have been achieved by the local indigenous population, but was rather much more likely the work of Arabs, Phoenicians, Indians or even Queen Seba etc.


Recent scientific studies however suggest an autochthonous origin.


Why was current opinion so opposed to the native origin of the Great Zimbabwe ?



Houses of Stone - Great Zimbabwe - Grand Escapades
https://www.exploring-africa.com/en/zimbabwe/great-zimbabwe/history-great-zimbabwe
https://www.livescience.com/58200-great-zimbabwe.html
Great Zimbabwe: An African empire - Afrik-news.com : Africa news, Maghreb news - The african daily newspaper
https://www.africa.com/african-architecture-the-legacy-of-great-zimbabwe/
 
Nov 2016
1,531
Indus Valley, Pakistan
#2
Recent scientific studies however suggest an autochthonous origin.


Why was current opinion so opposed to the native origin of the Great Zimbabwe ?
I don't know what to say. Cry or laugh about it. Cry because those who refuse it could be built by indigenous people are so narrow minded as to deny Black people could have built these. Laugh because so much song and dance about what was built post 11th century. That makes it quite recent in historical terms so I can't see the big deal here.
 

kazeuma

Ad Honorem
Jun 2012
2,366
#3
Who is to say that the Queen of Sheba isn't black? There is no proof of her nationality, race, or if she even existed in the first place.

Personally, I would place the Great Zimbabwe with the locals.
 
Jul 2011
579
western Europe
#4
Who is to say that the Queen of Sheba isn't black? There is no proof of her nationality, race, or if she even existed in the first place.

Personally, I would place the Great Zimbabwe with the locals.
i.e. much further away than the southwestern Arabian peninsula (kingdom of Sheba)
 
Nov 2011
8,771
The Dustbin, formerly, Garden of England
#5
90% of everything you read about the Zimbabwes (the Great one or any of the smaller ones) is a complete lie at worst or a fanciful fabrication at best.
 
Jun 2015
5,499
UK
#7
it's been established for several decades now that it had a native origin. The thing is the history of Africa is only really detailed in the pre-colonial era, especially once Europeans came on the scene and African kingdoms became larger and more complex. Whilst Arabs did trade on the eastern coast for centuries, Zimbabwe is about 1000 or more miles from Zanzibar or any other former Arab trading post. they didn't need to travel that far to get slaves, or procure ivory or other commodities.
 

Shtajerc

Ad Honorem
Jul 2014
6,323
Lower Styria, Slovenia
#8
I never understood what's so amazing about the Great Zimbabwe. A few stone huts with lots of stone walls around it. I don't see why the natives would be overchallenged with that. It looks like one of those round Pictish stone things you find in Scotland with a wall around it.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2015
2,512
USA
#10
I never understood what's so amazing about the Great Zimbabwe. A few stone huts with lots of stone walls around it. I don't see why the natives would be overchallenged with that. It looks like one of those round Pictish stone things you find in Scotland with a wall around it.
They're large, free-standing ashlar stonework walls, with much of the bricks being ornately carved in some parts with designs mirroring those in Indonesia. Zimbabwe is also one, if the largest, out of hundreds of these stone buildings scattered throughout southeastern Africa that were the heart of much larger complexes.

Sure, they're not as elaborate as say, castles or brocs, but it's not so much what they are that's so famous about them. Rather, it's what they represent and show on what life was like in Southern Africa. It used to be common knowledge that everyone more or less lived in mud huts and cattle ranches, but instead we have these stone structures with evidence of trade as far away as Asia.