CULTURE IN TRANSITION IN SOUTH AFRICA
LECTURE 2: TRADITIONAL SETTLEMENT IN SOUTH AFRICA
INTODUCTION
Any discussion about the nature of indigenous settlement in Africa should also take into consideration polygamy, a practice which western, Christian tradition holds to be a state oppressive of women for the benefit of men. The concept of "male sexual domination" in a society where both men and women collaborate freely in economic activities, and where the control of resources and their means of production is protected by a system of checks and cross-checks, enshrined in custom and tradition, is a contradiction which has never been fully challenged.
BRIEF HISTORY OF POLYGAMY IN SOUTHERN AFRICA
One of the preconceptions more popularly held by both academics and lay public alike in regard to southern African rural society is that the indigenous family unit is polygamous in nature. This is only partly true. A broad survey of homestead patterns in the region reveals that whilst a number of polygamous settlements were documented during the course of current research, these were in a distinct minority and that monogamous marriages appeared to be the more general norm. It could of course be argued that this is a recent development brought about by the work of Christian missionaries, but the validity of such a statement should not be left to go unquestioned. For one thing the Christian churches which enjoy the largest following in southern Africa, the so-called Independent Churches, permit their followers to practice polygamy. For another, it was found that although this practice indeed appears to have been more prevalent during the last century than it is today, its presence was not as widespread as various missionaries way have wished us to believe. Lichtenstein wrote of the Xhosa in 1812 that "Most of the Koossas have but one wife; the kings and chiefs of the kraals only have four or five."
This was reinforced by Alberti who stated, also of the Xhosa, that “Those with least resources, must be satisfied with one woman, others have two, and rarely more.”
Contemporary visitors to other parts of the country came to similar conclusions. Livingstone went one step further and in 1857 estimated that approximately 43% of Tswana men practiced polygamy and then only a very small minority of these had more than three wives. By 1946 an official census revealed that this figure had dropped to 11% with only 1.3% having three wives or more.
The practice of polygamy may, in most cases, be explained in terms of a levirate, a social practice, used to ensure the continued status and survival of widows and orphans within an established family structure. While it is true, therefore, that every rural family is potentially polygamous in nature, we need to question whether such polygamy was the result of "male sexuality and lust" or merely the enforcement of social obligations intended to reinforce ties between family or clan groupings. Recently obtained data would seem to show that, currently, 27% of rural households are headed by widowed or single women. If we were to assume that in the 1850s an equivalent number of women could have become widows and were thus absorbed into the monogamous households of family members, thus making them polygamous, then it will be seen that this form of union could have accounted for most of the polygamous marriages recorded by Livingstone among the Tswana. The remaining group, those with three wives or more, were a distinct minority and their polygamy may be explained in terms of group leaders creating political alliances and gaining control of resources for their own communities.
The general trend away from polygamous unions evidenced since 1920 could therefore be explained in two ways. The growth of urbanisation and the establishment of urban-based political structures has brought about a decreased emphasis upon both regional group identity and the power of the traditional and inherited rural leadership. The need for making unions based upon political expediency has thus lessened considerably. The economics of obtaining a bride in the rural areas has also changed substantially over the past five generations, as women, after the 1930s, also began to enter in increasing numbers the ranks of an industrialised and urban proletariat.
Despite such developments, however, when considering the nature of indigenous settlement, the principles of polygamy remain predominant, and although polygamous households today are few and far between, every rural homestead and village is still being planned out as if it could, at some stage, become polygamous.
SOME GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF RURAL SETTLEMENT
The idea of "rural settlement" as a series of huts placed haphazardly over the southern African countryside is plainly mistaken. Not only is the indigenous homestead subject to a number of principles which govern the distribution of its constituent parts but such principles may be interpreted to represent a cognitive and unspoken language which involves not only the social, political, economic, sexual, inheritance and religious values of the people concerned but, in many ways also acts as a mirror to their cosmological beliefs as a whole. As such therefore, it may be concluded that the usage of space within the domestic settlement represents a more reliable guideline to cultural pattern and group identity than other elements, such as dwelling form and decorative motif, which historical research has proved to be open to pragmatic manipulation.
Conceive, if you will, of a society which places, at the core of its settlement, its ancestral spirits or “shades”, whose guidance and wisdom is sought daily in the resolution of family affairs and petty squabbles. They are key to the maintenance of “order”, while on the outer perimeter of the settlement lurk strangers, wild nature, dangerous animals, famine and war; in other words “chaos”. The maintenance of inner order against outer chaos is given over to the men, who are able to communicate with the ancestors, and through them, administer, rule and pass regulations. As a result the inner space of a rural homestead, variously known as an “isibaya” or a “kgoro”, becomes the place of the men where they discuss group affairs, hold beer drinks, administer laws, resolve disputes, and commune with the ancestors. The central area is also associated with burial, the keeping of cattle, the group’s wealth, and the storage of emergency grain rations. Women still at the age of menstruation are generally not admitted to this area, as they are considered to be susceptible to the forces of chaos, especially during their monthly periods.
Nonetheless the task of mediating between inner order and outer chaos falls upon the women, who control the residential space located about the central core. They also see to its maintenance, keep the area immediately beyond clear of surface vegetation, and conduct all farming activity. Thus the real control of the homestead and its daily life lies in the hands of women, although its ownership, symbolically at least, lies with the men. In the constant daily struggle to retain the fine balance between “order” and “chaos”, the two genders are perceived to be equal partners.
The principles or, if we wish, the vocabulary of such a language of settlement are based upon the following factors:
- General architectural form and governing axes.
- Aspect and direction of approach and orientation.
- Hierarchical determination and the relationships existing between husband and wife (or wives), parents and children, family and visitors, domestic unit and community.
- Inheritance patterns.
- The architectural expression of territorial statements, common spaces, work areas and privacy.
- Areas of interaction between the individual family unit and the community as a whole.
- Position of byre and other animal enclosures.
- Position of cooking facilities and attendant work functions.
- Location of burial areas and places of religious significance.
- Other considerations such as seating hierarchies, spatial divisions determined by sex and age etc.
When these values were applied to a wide range of examples, it became evident that the southern African region is currently the home to two major architectural groupings: the Venda, a small minority inhabiting the northern reaches of the Transvaal, and the larger Nguni/Sotho/Tswana family, or virtually the remaining indigenous population of southern Africa.
THE CONCEPTS OF "LEFT” AND “RIGHT"
This is based upon the hierarchical relationship perceived to exist between the "Head" and subsequent wives of a polygamous marriage. The interpretation of which hand is assumed to be ascendant varies from group to group and is the subject of numerous historical anecdotes or myths. Generally speaking it may be said that those groups who hold "right" to be superior to "left" explain this by means of a metaphor which reflects an old rural belief that a warrior wields his spear with his right hand and his shield with his left. The right is therefore assumed to have an ascendance over the left being "active" and "aggressive" whilst the left is "passive" and "defensive".
THE CONCEPTS OF “FRONT” AND “BACK”
A second hierarchical differentiation which may be said to exist in indigenous settlement arises between those domestic units and homesteads closest to the central common, the parental space, and those located on the external perimeter, the residences of married children. Although strictly speaking such a differentiation can best be described as one existing between "centre" and "perimeter", this is only valid for as long as the settlement form remains circular. Once the built environment breaks up into individual homesteads which tend to follow a linear pattern along contour lines, then it will be seen that the traditional centre-perimeter apposition will become translated into one based upon the concept of front and back.
THE ZULU
Traditional Nguni domestic settlement has followed a circular pattern enclosing a central cattle byre surrounded by individual dwelling units. The cattle byre and, in some instances the outside perimeter, were demarcated by a palisade of timber logs. Ideally the homestead was located on a gentle, east-facing slope with the main entrance located at its lowest point. The Great Hut, which was the residence of the family head and his First Wife, was sited on axis with the entrance, at the opposite, or upper, end of the circle. The dwellings of second and subsequent wives were then placed alternatively on either side of the Great Hut, in descending order of importance. The imaginary axis thus created served to divide the extended family unit into Left-Hand and Right-Hand Houses, thus establishing a hierarchy between the House of the First or Great Wife, who bears the future family head, and the Second House, which acts as its support group. The interpretation of which Hand was dominant, the Left or the Right, has tended to vary from group to group. Each wife had her own cooking hut, located to the rear of her residence, but she was also expected to participate in the preparation of her husband’s meal, in the Great wife’s own kitchen. Understandably, this was the area where most family quarrels tended to originate.
The dwellings of the children and of visitors were located in the lower sector of the circle, closest to the entrance. Although the homestead as a whole came under the titular leadership of the patriarchal family head, the various dwelling units fell under the control of individual wives, who also had access to their own granaries and food stores. Supplementary granaries were buried in pits inside in the cattle byre, where they came under the control of the family’s men but, in an emergency, were made available to the group as a whole. The byre was generally acknowledged to be the preserve of adult male activity, but was also associated with religious ritual and burial. Older women were allowed to enter the byre, but only after they had reached a post-menstrual age. Entrance to the byre was gained at its upper end, closest to the Great Hut, and on the same axis as the main entrance to the homestead.
Traditionally Zulu settlement has tended to follow the Nguni model, and although a general decline in the practice of polygamy has made such orderings largely irrelevant, the broad symbolism attached to the main elements of the homestead are still being followed today. Thus the homestead will always face downhill, preferably to the east, the cattle byre will be located before the parent’s dwelling, the cooking area will be found to the rear, the children’s residences will be located closest to the point of entry, and the divisions of gender control in homestead spaces are still being applied. Burial may no longer take place in the byre, but its space remains associated with the men, sacred rites, and communion with the ancestors.
Before 1822 cattle returning to their byre in the late afternoon, would follow a circuitous route and make their entrance into the central space through a gate located at the head of the circle, at a point opposite the Great Hut. However after 1822, and the establishment of the Zulu Kingdom under Shaka, this gate was relocated to the lower end of the circle, away from the Great Hut and closest to the main entrance to the settlement. This created a direct axial approach into the inner cattle area and reinforced the position and status of the Great Hut at the head of the circle. Initially this was a feature of Zulu Royal settlements and regional administrative capitals, but within a generation it appears to have become the standard pattern followed by all domestic homesteads in this region.
Like their smaller domestic counterparts, Zulu Royal towns were circular in form, faced east down a gentle slope, and had a central space given over to cattle and the activities of men. The quarters of the King and his wives were located at the upper end of the circle, while entry was gained at the lower and opposite end. However, this is where all similarity with its domestic counterpart ceased. Apart from the royal family, only some of who resided there on a permanent basis, a Royal capital was a regional administrative center as well as a military barracks, populated entirely by unmarried warriors belonging to one or more of the King’s regiments. Consequently all ordering along the lines of Left Hand and Right Hand became redundant and, except for the Royal enclosure, all gender-based divisions of space fell away. The central space was used by the King as his Court, often involving military parades, national celebrations, legal proceedings, the hearing of petitions, and the reception of foreign dignitaries, and only a small portion, at the upper end, was given over for a small select herd of the King’s cattle. Royal capitals were extensive in size, measuring between 800m and 1600m in diameter, and capable of housing up to 6000 persons.
THE NDEBELE
Historically the larger Ndebele settlement was built in the shape of an open fan, with a large circular space containing the cattle byre and the gathering place for the men being located at its center. The dwelling of the first wife of the senior man was located at the head of the settlement, on axis with the main entry to the central space. Other wives of the senior man were then allocated homes on either side of the first wife, on a left-and-right basis in descending order of status. The homes of his brothers, or other members of his retinue, were located alternatively to the left and right of his abode. Where such men also had polygamous families, their own homes were also structured according to an internal left-and-right arrangement. Married male children were usually allocated dwelling space behind the homestead of their mother, and they too followed a left-and-right ordering. However, by the third generation the demand for space rendered all such pretense for hierarchy nonsensical, and the settlement was either reformed, or it divided into two separate homesteads.
By the 1940s most Ndebele settlements had changed to a linear pattern. The homes of individual family members were still laid out according to their status in a left-and-right hierarchy, but the homestead now followed the land’s lines of contour, an arrangement which made better use of their farming resources. The cattle byre, although still central, was now in a square, and was located opposite the home of the senior member of the family.
A metaphor used by some Ndebele to describe their built habitat likens the spaces of the homestead to the body of a woman. In their terms the front courtyard, generally an area of "clean" activities, is likened to the mapoto or beaded apron worn by married women as part of their wedding finery; the parents' dwelling is the womb for it is here the mother resides and hence it is the origin of the family's fertility, its children and hence its wealth, originate. The rear quarters which house the cooking areas as well as the children are the breasts whence all nourishment originates. This symbolism is reinforced during the wedding celebrations when the men dance through the front courtyard of the bride's family homestead, thereby ritually defiling it to the accompaniment of ribald jokes from their womenfolk.
THE TSWANA
The Tswana were probably the first indigenous group in southern Africa to achieve settlements of such size that, in modern terms, could be described as being “urban”. Arriving at a time when the average colonial town in the Cape was little larger than 300 to 600 persons, early nineteenth century travelers to the region were astounded to discover the presence of indigenous towns ranging in size from five to sixteen thousand people. Despite their large populations, Tswana towns were by no means permanent, and Dithakong, the Tlhaping capital, is known to have moved three times between 1802 and 1814.
The Tswana town was constituted of a number of extended family clusters, often containing the dwellings of the senior male, his wife or wives, and those of his brothers, together with their children. Unlike the Nguni, whose sons married out of the family, the preferred wife of a Tswana male was his first cousin on the father’s side, and the only time that the family unit was physically divided was when it either became too large and unwieldy to administer, or when competing interests within the family made it desirable. The homesteads of individual families were grouped fan-like about a central space containing the cattle byre and a gathering place for the males. The family cluster was structured according to a hierarchy based upon the relationship perceived to exist between the Left Hand and the Right Hand, where the senior brother in a family was accorded precedence over his siblings, and the senior wife in a polygamous marriage was accorded precedence over subsequent wives.
Each wife was accorded her own dwelling unit, which was surrounded by a system of inter-leading walled courtyards, sometimes referred to by archaeologists as “bilobial”. The front courtyard or “lobe” acted as a space for social interaction for the women of the household, whereas the rear lobe was used as a work space. Additional structures, such as the kitchen, granaries and sleeping facilities for the children also gave off this rear space. During the course of current research a number of cases were recorded where the rear courtyard was subdivided into a complex series of service spaces, such as one might expect in any rural household. Also, in a number of cases, the rear verandah was used for the storage of grain and water, often in large pots buried in the floor.
THE VENDA
The homestead architecture of the Venda can be said to be unique in the context of southern Africa, for while all other groups use a system of hierarchical differentiation based upon the concept of “left and right”, in their case all distinction is made in terms of “front and back”. Often also, the concept of “front” is synonymous with “downhill”, while “back” is used to mean “uphill”. Historical evidence appears to indicate that, originally, Venda settlement followed the circular pattern of their Nguni/Sotho/Tswana neighbours further south, but archaeologists have not yet established when this separation took place.
Such a differentiation becomes evident at the level of the domestic unit, where the dwellings and activity centers of the wife, (or wives in a polygamous union), will be located before and preferably downhill from those of the father and family head. Similarly the homesteads of a man's sons will be placed in front of and downhill from that of the parent. The settlement of a Venda chief or headman will tend to follow the same basic pattern as that applicable to his people, except that the process of ascent to his quarters will be complicated by the introduction of defensive ramparts and narrow access passages, all designed to protect his person in the case of attack. An old Venda proverb states that "to climb a mountain you must follow a zig-zag path", an obvious metaphor for their chiefs and the structure of their society.
Venda settlement is also differentiated from that of their neighbours in southern Africa by the fact that, in a polygamous marriage, the Venda father has a separate dwelling in his own right, with its own courtyards and, in some cases, its own granary. This contrasts sharply with the practice of most other southern African groups where, under similar circumstances, the dwelling of the first wife is recognised to be that of the father. This also means that, with the exception of the Head Wife, no hierarchy of settlement is followed in determining the position of second and subsequent wives, the location of their dwellings being a matter of personal preference and group negotiation.
CONCLUSION
Developments in indigenous architectural culture over the past century need to be read in the wider context of socio-economic and political patterns of the southern African region. They took place at a time when its people saw the loss of their military and political power; the dispossession and occupation of their lands; the placing of whole families into indentured employment on white-owned farms; and the channeling of their men-folk in to a migrant labour system which separated them from their families for years at a time. This began to establish some of the preconditions for the undermining of traditional patrifocal patterns and their replacement with elements of matrifocality. As a result many elements of settlement which we today regard as “traditional”, have been reduced to vestigial traces, barely recognizable from their historical roots.
POSTSCRIPT
This was the second of four lectures on the subject of Culture in Transition in South Africa, delivered to the Faculty of Architecture and Society, Campus Leonardo, at the Politecnico of Milano, Italy, on 16 May 2007, and was entitled Il Sistema Urbanistico dei Popoli Indigeni Sudafricani. It has been reproduced here in both Italian and English for the benefit of Italian-speaking students who attended the course. I am grateful to Prof Santa Nipoti, of Bologna who, not only did the bulk of this translation, but also put forward a number of positive suggestions aimed at making these ideas more comprehensible to an Italian audience.