Votre ressource mondiale sur le patrimoine
EN
ES
FR
Réf.
41852
Type
conference item
Titre
Back to the old school? Revival of traditional management systems in Zimbabwe
Langues
English
Auteurs
Maradze, Juliet
Date
2003
Pages
3 p.
Titre de conférence
14th ICOMOS General Assembly and International Symposium: ‘Place, memory, meaning: preserving intangible values in monuments and sites’
Lieu de conférence
Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe
Date de conférence
27 – 31 oct 2003
Mots-clés
legislation / legal protection / management
Résumé en anglais
Formal heritage systems came as part of a colonialpackage throughout the African continent, with the aim of
preserving monuments and sites that bore witness tohuman civilisation and development. Before colonialism,
different systems were in place to ensure respect andsurvival of cultural sites. These included taboos, myths
and restrictions. The impressive structures we see todayhave survived for hundreds of years, meaning they owe
their existence to some form of management, which iscertainly traditional practices. However, the new system
of heritage management sought to protect only tangibleheritage, and considered modern, scientific techniques
important in conservation. This scenario prevailedthroughout the colonial period, and was even inherited by
heritage institutions after independence. In Zimbabwe,National Museums inherited the colonial system, and did
not incorporate traditional ways of heritage protection,despite the fact that in some areas local leadership was
willing to participate and revive old ways of managingheritage. In communal areas, several factors led to the
erosion of traditional management systems. Legislativepieces pertaining to land ownership saw people moving
to reserves, creating way for commercial farms.
Proclamation of sites as a way of ensuring their protectionmeant they automatically became state land. Thus, people
became divorced from their heritage, as accessing itwould have meant trespassing into private or state land.
This meant that traditional leaders, also the guardians ofheritage, could not enforce traditional systems of heritage
protection. Missionaries also widened the gap betweenlocal people and traditional management systems as they
condemned respect for ancestors, who were consideredthe owners of heritage. Many people became
Christianised and questioned traditional ceremonies andbelief systems. Recently, the government embarked on
land redistribution, which had been spontaneous anduncontrolled, and it is not clear whether the new settlers
will be able to respect the heritage they find in differentareas. In light of these factors this paper seeks to assess
how possible and practical it is to call for, and try torevive, traditional systems in managing Zimbabwean
cultural heritage.
preserving monuments and sites that bore witness tohuman civilisation and development. Before colonialism,
different systems were in place to ensure respect andsurvival of cultural sites. These included taboos, myths
and restrictions. The impressive structures we see todayhave survived for hundreds of years, meaning they owe
their existence to some form of management, which iscertainly traditional practices. However, the new system
of heritage management sought to protect only tangibleheritage, and considered modern, scientific techniques
important in conservation. This scenario prevailedthroughout the colonial period, and was even inherited by
heritage institutions after independence. In Zimbabwe,National Museums inherited the colonial system, and did
not incorporate traditional ways of heritage protection,despite the fact that in some areas local leadership was
willing to participate and revive old ways of managingheritage. In communal areas, several factors led to the
erosion of traditional management systems. Legislativepieces pertaining to land ownership saw people moving
to reserves, creating way for commercial farms.
Proclamation of sites as a way of ensuring their protectionmeant they automatically became state land. Thus, people
became divorced from their heritage, as accessing itwould have meant trespassing into private or state land.
This meant that traditional leaders, also the guardians ofheritage, could not enforce traditional systems of heritage
protection. Missionaries also widened the gap betweenlocal people and traditional management systems as they
condemned respect for ancestors, who were consideredthe owners of heritage. Many people became
Christianised and questioned traditional ceremonies andbelief systems. Recently, the government embarked on
land redistribution, which had been spontaneous anduncontrolled, and it is not clear whether the new settlers
will be able to respect the heritage they find in differentareas. In light of these factors this paper seeks to assess
how possible and practical it is to call for, and try torevive, traditional systems in managing Zimbabwean
cultural heritage.
Document joint
B3-2_-_Maradze.pdfLicence
Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (BY-NC-ND)
ICOMOS International Secretariat - 11 rue du Séminaire de Conflans
94220 Charenton-le-Pont, France
Tel. +33 (0) 1 41 94 17 59
E-mail : secretariat@icomos.org
Pour toute demande presse & média, contacter : communication@icomos.org
