Cambridge Archaeological Journal Beyond Static
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cambridge Archaeological Journal http://journals.cambridge.org/CAJ Additional services for Cambridge Archaeological Journal: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here Beyond Static Models: An Evaluation of Present Status and Future Prospects for Iron Age Research in Southern Africa Per Ditlef Fredriksen and Shadreck Chirikure Cambridge Archaeological Journal / FirstView Article / May 2015, pp 1 - 18 DOI: 10.1017/S0959774314001115, Published online: 06 May 2015 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0959774314001115 How to cite this article: Per Ditlef Fredriksen and Shadreck Chirikure Beyond Static Models: An Evaluation of Present Status and Future Prospects for Iron Age Research in Southern Africa. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, Available on CJO 2015 doi:10.1017/ S0959774314001115 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAJ, IP address: 84.215.22.142 on 07 May 2015 Beyond Static Models: An Evaluation of Present Status and Future Prospects for Iron Age Research in Southern Africa Per Ditlef Fredriksen & Shadreck Chirikure To what extent do we need structuralist cognitive settlement models such as the Central Cattle Pattern and the Zimbabwe Pattern for future research and understanding of Iron Age social life in southern Africa? How will alternative approaches enable us to progress beyond the present status of knowledge? While the three last decades of debate have un- derpinned key aspects of archaeological inquiry, notably questions of social change, gender dynamics, analytical scale and the use of ethnographic and ethnoarchaeological insights, the sometimes entrenched nature of the debate has in other respects hindered development of new approaches and restrained the range of themes and topics scholars engage with. In this article, we identify the issues of analytical scale and recursiveness as key to the development of future approaches and present an alternative framework through empirically grounded discussion of three central Iron Age themes: ceramics and the microscale, the spatiality of metal production and the temporality of stonewalled architecture. To change analytical scale is to change perspective on 2007; 2008) have resulted in an impressive list of publi- social life. Issues of scale exist at a fundamental level cations. However, critics have pointed out that discus- of archaeological interpretation, influencing our per- sion of the models has restrained the range of themes ception of space and time. These issues are found at and topics with which scholars engage. For example, the core of the debate of the epistemological founda- the focus on spatial organization of settlements, and tion and use of the models for Iron Age settlement how this allows for certain reconstructions of ide- space in southern Africa. The Iron Age spans nearly ology and worldview, has directed attention away two thousand years, from the Early Iron Age (ad 200– from more ‘mundane’ aspects of Iron Age societies, 900), via the Middle Iron Age (ad 900–1300) to the Late such as subsistence strategies, patterns of resource Iron Age (ad 1300–1820), which ended with colonial- procurement, sequence of reconstruction, or reasons ism (Huffman 2007; 2012a). The era is associated with for abandonment (see Bonner et al. 2008, 11–12; Lane the beginning of crop agriculture, metalworking, pot- 2010, 312). tery making and settled life. Since their introduction The key focus in this article is how microscale in the early 1980s, the models known as the Central variation of archaeological data, remains of every- Cattle Pattern (CCP) and the Zimbabwe Pattern (ZP) day or ‘mundane’ aspects, may inform regional or (see below) have been instrumental in broadening our interregional frameworks in novel ways. We argue understanding of the time period. And applications of for recursiveness through mutually informing move- these ethnographically derived cognitive models and ment between analytical scales. Acknowledging the the ‘direct historical approach’ (Huffman 1986; 2001; significance of including context-specific insights in Cambridge Archaeological Journal page 1 of 18 C 2015 McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research doi:10.1017/S0959774314001115 Received 06 Mar 2014; Accepted 17 Nov 2014; Revised 20 Oct 2014 Per Ditlef Fredriksen and Shadreck Chirikure macroscale modelling,1 we have two main aims. The CCP and the ZP: issues of scale and temporality The first part of the paper is devoted to recog- nizing the root causes of the current situation and The introduction of structuralist modelling to under- to comprehend their implications for our under- stand the organization of settlement space (Huffman standing of the Iron Age. In the second part, we 1982) was a decisive turning-point in Iron Age stud- aim to demonstrate how we can use these insights ies. The combined emphasis on ideology and belief to develop alternatives. We do this by presenting systems enabled an approach where behaviour was a set of approaches to societal change, continuity not only integral to human cognition, but also pro- and variability in the archaeological record: to ce- vided understanding of how key ideological prin- ramic production in households, spatial dimensions ciples were inscribed onto settlements and land- of metalworking and the temporality of stonewalled scapes. Aided by radiocarbon dating, the approach architecture. was groundbreaking in allowing a turn from more A core argument is that lack of recursiveness classical culture-historical questions to processually between analytical scales, and thereby also between oriented archaeological analyses of past behavioural empirical, methodological and theoretical levels of in- patterns. As is well known to Iron Age archaeologists, quiry, is a key contributor to the present status for Iron both models are ethnographic constructs. Anthropol- Age research in southern Africa. After more than three ogist Adam Kuper (1980; 1982) had observed what decades of debate, in which the models’ inventor and he called the southern African Bantu Cattle Pattern, main proponent, Thomas Huffman, is prominent, the which described the late nineteenth-century Nguni models remain influential—not least in the sense that settlement organization. Following the direct histori- we will use here; that critics engage with them when cal approach, the application of the model, to be re- proposing alternatives. The partly entrenched nature named the Central Cattle Pattern (CCP), was extended of the debate contributes to the current epistemic stand- back to the Early Iron Age (EIA). still. By this we mean that, while archaeological use The CCP model is principally associated with of the models may produce interesting and nuanced Nguni and Sotho-Tswana speakers, and the set- results, often applying sophisticated field and labo- tlement pattern represents a ‘cultural package’ re- ratory methods, a critical theoretical reading reveals stricted to groups of Eastern Bantu speakers shar- that the epistemic foundation for the models, and ing certain distinct features (see Huffman 2001; particularly the treatment of ethnography by the di- 2012b, 124). A typical organization consists of an rect historical approach, remains largely unchanged. arc of houses around a central cattle corral. Gen- Rooted in structuralism and a belief in archaeology- der is an important structuring principle. Opposi- as-science, the models and their largely ahistorical tions of male/female, pastoralism/agriculture, ances- epistemic foundation, including a retreat from present tors/descendants, rulers/subjects and cool/hot are politics, have been characterized as outmoded, even represented spatially, either concentric or diametric. unethical (Meskell 2005; see also Fredriksen 2011; In this manner, the CCP also makes statements about Pikirayi & Chirikure 2011). rank and status (Huffman 2001; 2008; 2012b). The standstill may be hard to perceive without The Zimbabwe Pattern (ZP) is seen to have devel- a long-term discursive perspective on a time-span oped from the CCP, and may be represented through with significant societal change. We therefore evalu- the same kind of concept, but with a different result. ate the present status against the backdrop of the last Paul Lane (2005, 31) notes that the ZP has no his- three decades of Iron Age research in southern Africa. torical analogue and that all known examples there- In this period, countries such as South Africa, Zim- fore are archaeological. However, Huffman (2011, 38) babwe and Mozambique have seen profound societal has recently pointed out that Venda society presents transformation, while the concurrent wider archaeo- a twenty-first-century version. The main sources of logical discourse has felt the impact of postproces- analogy come from sixteenth-century Portuguese doc- sualism. Recognizing the significance of postcolonial uments and elements of recent Shona and Venda critique of notions that the past may exist indepen- ethnography. The ZP has a more restricted spatial dently of present politics (see e.g. Lane 2011), we seek and temporal distribution than the CCP. And, un- answers to two interlinked questions: to what extent like the CCP, which is associated with both elite and are the CCP and the ZP models needed for devel- commoners, the ZP was restricted to elite settlements, oping future understanding of social life in Iron Age while commoners retained a basic CCP settlement lay- southern Africa? And precisely