2021
DOI: 10.1080/0067270x.2021.1882730
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

States, agency, and power on the ‘peripheries’: exploring the archaeology of the Later Iron Age societies in precolonial Mberengwa, CE 1300-1600s

Abstract: In southern Africa, as elsewhere, the tendency of Iron Age (CE 200-1900) researchers has been to focus on the more prominent places on the landscape, especially those believed by pioneering archaeologists to have been centres of big states. Consequently, most research foci were accorded to Mapungubwe, Great Zimbabwe, Khami, Danamombe and many other places considered as centres (mizinda) of expansive territorial states. However, landscapes away from, and in-between these states and their centres are traditiona… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 156 publications
(829 reference statements)
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We also inventoried relevant archaeological finds that were recovered by the previous excavators. This included excavation data from recent fieldwork at Chumnungwa (see [77]), which provided additional insights into the settlement history and technological aspects. Generally, the archaeological data were useful in the reconstruction of the land use behaviors of the Zimbabwe people across the sites and the broader surrounding landscapes.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…We also inventoried relevant archaeological finds that were recovered by the previous excavators. This included excavation data from recent fieldwork at Chumnungwa (see [77]), which provided additional insights into the settlement history and technological aspects. Generally, the archaeological data were useful in the reconstruction of the land use behaviors of the Zimbabwe people across the sites and the broader surrounding landscapes.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally, the archaeological data were useful in the reconstruction of the land use behaviors of the Zimbabwe people across the sites and the broader surrounding landscapes. However, because of the legacy of colonial and postcolonial vandalism that resulted in the partial and complete destruction of some sites by mining corporations, land developers, local villagers, artisanal miners, treasure hunters, and antiquarians who unscientifically dug sections of these places in search of gold and other valuable finds (see [36,38,77,78]) (as well as massive post-depositional processes mainly characterized by soil erosion and the intrusion of modern settlements and crop farming into some of the archaeological landscapes), it was difficult to achieve this. Therefore, recourse was made to Shona anthropology (i.e., [79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89][90]) and history [31,[91][92][93][94][95] to make meaningful inferences that are conversant with the local epistemologies, ontologies, and practices of land use.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations