If Bakalanga, Banambya & Vhavenda Aren't Shona, How About Similarities of Language?
It is held by several authorities that the Makalangas were the dominant race in South Central Africa, with vassal kingdoms extending beyond Monomotapa itself from Congo, and Zambesia to the Orange River if not the Cape of Good Hope. Duarte Barbosa (1516) states that “the Moors of Benemotapa say there is much gold in a country very far situated in the direction of the Cape of Good Hope, in another kingdom which is subject to this King of Benemotapa – a very great lord having many kings under his vassalage. His country runs through the desert as far as Mozambique to the Cape of Good Hope.” Johnstone (1603) states that the king of Monomotapa was superior lord to all the kings of the countries extending to the Cape of Good Hope - Richard Nicklin Hall and W. G. Neal 1904. The Ancient Ruins of Rhodesia: Monomotapae Imperium.
Over the last two weeks, we dealt with the issue of Bukalanga (ie is Bakalanga, Banambya and Vhavenda history and identity) in light of the manifold distortions that our national identity has been subjected to. We refuted the claim by some Shona political elites and scholars (and some in the Mthwakazi movement) that Bakalanga, Banambya and Vhavenda are Shona peoples.
This we did by presenting solid evidence from the original sources dating back to one of the first ever documents written on Southern African, the letter of the Portuguese officer Diogo de Alcacova, written on 20th November 1506. We also pointed to oral traditions and archeological and missionary records which show that Bakalanga, Banambya and Vhavenda are a nation, as one writer has put it, 'beyond the memory of man', with their own independent identity, heritage and history. But obviously, one of the most sticking points has always been, if that is the case, then how do we explain the relative language similarities between the Shona Group and Kalanga Group Languages (that is, TjiKalanga, TjiNambya and Tshivenda). This week we shall answer this very important question.
We saw in our previous installments that the settlement of the ancestors of the people now called Shona and those of the Kalanga in the Zimbabwean plateau is separated by at least 1500 years, with the Kalanga having settled the land Africa south of the Zambezi about 100AD, and the 'Shona' about 1700. And yet we find that the two groups have some langauge similarities. How can that be? The answers follow.
It has been rightly stated by that student of Shona history, Charles Bullock, that ChiShona is a conglomeration of various languages comprised of the languages of East Africa (notably Kinyarwanda, Kirundi and Western Swahili [also famous for the non-existence of the letter "L"], Portuguese, TjiKalanga and even isiNdebele. There is certainly an element of truth in that statement. But our major concern in the present context is TjiKalanga, TjiNambya and Tshivenda and their relationship to Shona.
There are basically three ways the language of the Shona peoples has come to be so similar to Kalanga, which is the oldest Bantu language spoken in Zimbabwe for an extended period of time.
First, once the ancestors of the Shona had settled in Zimbabwe, they obviously intermixed and intermarried with the Kalanga who were then inhabiting the whole of the Zimbabwean plateau, though concentrated mostly in the south and south-west of the country where the land was less humid and suitable for cattle grazing and mining. In this way the Karanga language came into being, and for those who know the various Shona dialects and TjiKalanga, they know that Karanga is more a variant of Kalanga than it is of say Zezuru. Not even Aenias Chigwedere himself could supress the evidence, and he wrote:
*********
We have important names bandied about in this country. One of them is certainly KARANGA. The Portuguese make constant references to it in their documents after 1500; one of the names debated by the settler regime for possible assignment to the whole of Mashonaland just before 1930, was KARANGA: we have a whole region today that claims to speak a dialect called CHI-KARANGA; we have yet another region or district that indeed speaks KALANGA today … May I point out that … I make no distinction between KARANGA and KALANGA for indeed, there is no difference between them. The original name was KALANGA. But the Shona language, like every other language, has been evolving and continues to do so. One result of this has been that the letter “L” has been dropped and substituted for “R”. The original name KALANGA inevitably changed to KARANGA. The letter “L” has however been retained in the Plumtree area where the language spoken there is still very close to the original KALANGA language … large numbers of descendants of the original KALANGA people are still in that area to this day (Chigwedere, The Karanga Empire, pp. 6-7).
*********
Of course we know that the "original Kalanga" where the builders of the Zimbabgwe Civilization, the builders of the City-states of Maphungubgwe, Great Zimbabgwe, Khami, etc. They were the builders of three of the four man-made Unesco World Heritage sites in Southern Africa - Maphungubgwe, Great Zimbabgwe, and Khami, the fourth one being the Robben Island Prison!
There are those who argue that TjiKalanga is a variant of Karanga that came about as a result of an intermix between Karanga and Ndebele in the 19th Century, but what they overlook is the fact that TjiKalanga was the state language of the Maphungubgwe, Monomotapa, Togwa and Lozwi Kingdoms, as well as the liturgical language of the then state religion - the Mwali Religion - dating back to at least the 10th century, and still is today! The conclusion that Bakalanga, Banambya and Vhavenda are a hybrid of the Karanga and Ndebele can be only described in one word - FOOLISH.
The second way the language similarities are explained is in the way the so-called Standard Shona was created. ChiKaranga, being an intermixture of TjiKalanga and the Shona dialects, was incorporated into the new language by the British colonialists. As a result, naturally thousands of Kalanga words, which were now forming the Karanga language, entered into the new language. I have often been amazed by those who say that TjiKalanga is a Shona dialect, and wondered if they have tried to compare TjiKalanga with Zezuru. Whilst Zezuru, and many of the Shona dialects are intelligible to the Kalanga, the Zezuru literally go blank when one speaks to them in TjiKalanga.
Thirdly, TjiKalanga language would have heavily infiltrated the Shona dialects during the one hundred and fifty years that the Lozwi, of whose TjiKalanga was the state language, were the rulers of all tribes then inhabiting the Zimbabwean Tableland. It is very common for the language of the rulers to infiltrate the languages of those upon whom they are ruling. This was an easy process since then no chief could rule without the previous sanction of the Kalanga-Lozwi rulers, and in many cases the chiefs were of Bukalanga stock.
An example could be drawn from our own era in the 20th and 21st centuries. Under the overlordship of Ndebele and Tswana chiefs, we have seen TjiKalanga and TjiNambya driven to the verge of extinction as these chiefs insist on the use of isiNdebele and Setswana in their courts, or their languages inflitrates the languages of those upon whom they are ruling. (Of course the infiltration of what became ChiShona by TjiKalanga was brought to a halt by the British colonialists' handing over of power to the Shona as well as the destruction of Bukalanga power by the Matebele (the Ndebele and Swazi) in the 19th century).
Such is the simple way that the similarities of words between TjiKalanga and ChiShona are explained. Despite the efforts of such groups like Center for Advanced Study of African Society which sought to force Bakalanga, Banambya and Vhavenda into Shonahood, Bukalanga Group Languages (TjiKalanga and Tshivenda) remain totally distinct from Shona Group Languages. This in a sense tells us that the dichotomous division of Zimbabwe into Shona and Ndebele country is false. The two largest divisions are instead Bukalanga and the Shona divided almost 40-60 when one combines the Bukalanga populations of the so-called Matebeleland and the Midlands and Maswingo Provinces, and bearing in mind that the Mashonaland population has been swelled by non-Shonas in the capital, Harare. As was argued in earlier installments, the claim that the Shona are the majority at over 80% of the Zimbabwean population is false, they consistute just between 50% and 60% nothing more! Ndaboka. Ndaa.
Just a few pointers. Firstly there exist several dialect continua in the south eastern african region. A dialect continuum is a region in which a language() exists over a wide region, and due to evolution and seperate cultural developments the language diverges. as such while the language changes from village to village ever so slightly, by the time villages are seperated by 100km the difference becomes so large as to be noticeable, and over 1000km this differences become large such that mutual intellegibility might not exist. ie, intellegibility may exist in one direction or not at all.
ReplyDeleteThe major southeastern african dialect continua are Sotho-Tswana languages, Nguni languages and Shona languages (including Kalanga). There has been independent development of Sotho-tswana languages. The case is the same for Nguni languages. It should therefore not be impossible for this exact scenario to be found among the Shona languages. There is therefore no justification for unsubstantiated claims of language transference if observations can be explained by simpler and much more plausible reasons. So point 1:
1) Are the Kalanga Shona? Yes and No. Yes in the sense that they speak a shona group language, like the Xhosa are Nguni. But No in the same way that Xhosa are not Zulu.
The issue is that Shona is a broad term which can also mean a very narrow category. If shona is synonymous with zezuru, then the kalanga are not shona. If shona is synonymous with standard shona, then again kalanga is not shona. On the other hand if shona is synonymous with the dialect continuum in a broad sense then kalanga indeed are shona.
2) What explains the similarity in language?
The dialect continuum explains this. The reason kalanga is most similar to karanga is because these two dialects also have the closest proximity. A result consistent with a dialect contium. We do not know where the boundary between karanga and kalanga was, before the arrival of the ndebele. My own suspicion is that there was no boundary at all. For someone coming from southeast zimbabwe going southwest, karanga would gradually merge into kalanga without an abrupt border. This is the same with moving further east from karanga to ndau. There is no border. There is just gradual change. Today, there is no contact btwn kalanga and karanga, so all we is the large jump. But it should be noted that as one heads west karanga dialect changes and becomes more like kalanga. therefore in Chivi(Western karanga) and Gutu(Eastern Karanga) one encounters words like
Western(Karanga) Eastern(Karanga)
gwara rwara be ill
vuraya Uraya kill
Zarima rima complete darkness
risa fudza tend livestock
The change towards a more kalanga like diction sounds and grammar is even stronger in Mberengwa.
On the other hand Northern Kalanga(Rozvi)is closer to Shangwe than it is to Karanga. In Nambya the -gwala of kalanga becomes -lwala in the same way that -gwara becomes -rwara.
The Shangwe language itself is intermediate between Rozvi and Korekore.
I like your reference to Emmanuel's political views, I personally know the guy and nothing could be further than the truth. In addition, he has a passionate hatred of SHONA: it doesnt matter he has highlighted that Shona is compilation of many tribes like the Karanga, Zezuru, Manyika etc. His arguments I presume should concentrate on distinguishing between Karanga and Kalanga rather than Shona as a whole as it is evident that the Manyikas have no direct relation/conflict with Kalanga.
Delete3)Venda language. Venda is not a member of the shona group languages. In fact venda is a bit of an isolate, belonging to its own group. It is an interesting language because it show tendencies toward shona languages and sotho-tswana languages, with a strong shona languages vocabulary but a sotho-tswana vocabulary. Linguists have suggested it was a sotho language which went through relexification toward shona. The shona version with a strong impact on Venda is Central Shona( Karanga, Zezuru and Manyika) not Western Shona (Kalanga).
ReplyDelete4) Shona recent arrivals?
I find your claim spurious and not consistent with your own logic. Firstly as you say if Shona are recent arrivals that have intermarried with Bakalanga. Why do you not give them the same consideration you give the Ndebele, whom you say are the same? This hypocrisy aside, I will say that it is impossible to determine wether the kalanga or shona were the monomotapa peoples. portugues records of the time might give names and words in the language, but it will not distinguish shona or kalanga to any satisfaction since the languages are so similar. Portuguese refer to the people as Karanga, but you have argued that it is kalanga they mean. I could argue against you, but is there any evidence?
Portuguese refer to the ruler as being called ixe. 'x' is pronounced 'sh' in portuguese to day but we do not know that this was the case 500 years ago. if we take it as so, then the portuguese refer to these people as calling their ruler 'ishe'. Is this shona or kalanga? kalanga and karanga both accept monosyllabic words whereas northen shona languages do not. These languages always place 'i' to give the word stability. Thus
Karanga northen Shona
bge ibwe stone
nda inda lice
vhu ivhu soil
go igo wasp
mbga mbwa dog
My own analysis is that the language they spoke was a variant of northern shona. But if the word had been 'xe' instead of 'ixe' it could easily be kalanga as well as karanga.
Conclussion
While I think you are doing a good job at making people aware of a lot of falsehoods and mistakes in our country's history, I think your political beliefs are getting in the way of your scholarly objectives. Keep up the good work.
Chandigere, your comment is enlightening and a balanced comment; it is quite intellectually stimulating and a refreshing read. Thanks for your contribution to the argument.
ReplyDeletehttp://ww4.msu.ac.zw/elearning/material/1179224484The%20Changamire%20State%20and%20the%20Rozvi.doc
ReplyDeletein lemba ishe is title for the lemba elder to su vhavenda shona name we don't know it but kalanga we know because our ancestors were kalanga
ReplyDeleteNop .. Our ancestors were not Kalanga .. Lemba is Lemba and they will stay Lemba !!
Deletestop lying vhavenda and kalanga people are a big one family its not about you or how the situation might be in zimbabwe but the truth itself
ReplyDeleteThe Central Shona (Zezurus, Karangas, Korekores and Manyikas) generally claim that the linguistically called Eastern Shona (Ndau, Danda, Barwe e.t.c.) and the Western Shona (Kalanga, Lilima, Nambya e.t.c.) and the isolated Southern Bantu group (VhaVenda) are all Shona people. The majority of the so called Eastern Shonas, Western Shonas and Southern Shonas (Vendas) do no want to be regarded as Shonas; what is the real reason they do not want to be regarded as Shonas when their languages are similar to Central Shona dialects? I think the reason is politics rather than linguistics. Linguistically, it is very clear that Eastern Shona, Central Shona, Souuthern Shona and Western Shona are all part of a dialect continuum and could have been speaking the same language, one thousand five hundred years ago!!! Emmanuel, who said Kalanga is not Shona, also rightly said Karanga and Kalanga are the same but did not tell us that Karanga is closer to Zezuru than to Kalanga!!! If a person from Plumtree and another person from Seke go to Chivi, the person from Seke will not experience any communication barrier speaking to the Western Karangas of Chivi even if he speaks in pure Zezuru while the locals speak pure Karanga whereas I am not even sure if the local people of Chivi and the lady from Plum tree will understand each other if the locals decide to speak Karanga and the lady from Plum tree decides to speak in Kalanga. The most likely languages to be used when a Karanga person speaks to a Kalanga person is English or even Ndebele (if the Karanga person once stayed in Bulawayo). Before the coming of the White people to Zimbabwe, Shona was known as Karanga. The people of Masvingo and parts of the Midlands were not the only people called Karangas. The people now called Zezurus, Korekores, Manyikas and Ndaus were also known as Karangas. That was why the Portuguese traders who visited the Monomotapa Emperor in Dande, Mount Darwin, Mashonaland Central in 1500 wrote that the Monomotapa's people are known as Karangas and their language is called Karanga!!! If the Portuguese had come here 20 years ago they would have written the following way of the same people: The Monomotapa's people are known as Korekores and their language is called Korekore; Korekore is a dialect of Shona!!!
ReplyDelete