CELEBRATING SAMORA MOISES MACHEL Samora Moisés Machel (29 September 1933 – 19 October 1986), Mozambique’s first president after independence, is being commemorated on the 40th anniversary of his death. He led FRELIMO in the armed struggle against Portuguese colonial rule, becoming its president in 1970 after the assassination of Eduardo Mondlane. On 25 June 1975 he proclaimed Mozambique’s independence and served as head of state until his death. A committed socialist, he nationalised key sectors, expanded education and health services, and gave strong support to liberation movements fighting apartheid in South Africa and white-minority rule in Rhodesia (Zimbabwe). On the night of 19 October 1986, the presidential Tupolev Tu-134A returning from a Front-Line States summit in Zambia crashed into the Lebombo Mountains near Mbuzini, South Africa (close to the Mozambique and Eswatini borders). Machel and 33 others—cabinet members, officials, journalists and crew—died; 10 people survived. An official South African inquiry attributed the crash to pilot error (navigational mistakes and ignoring ground-proximity warnings). Questions about a possible false radio beacon and broader circumstances have persisted for four decades and remain unresolved. On 19–20 October 2026, Mozambique and South Africa held a joint commemorative ceremony at the Samora Machel Monument and Museum in Mbuzini under the theme “Commemorating Lifelong Dedication to the People of Southern Africa: Honouring All Victims of the Mbuzini Tragedy.” Mozambican President Daniel Chapo, South African officials, the Machel family (including Graça Machel), veterans and relatives of the victims attended. The event reaffirmed the historic solidarity between the two countries that Machel helped forge. Machel is remembered as a charismatic, disciplined revolutionary who helped end Portuguese colonialism in Mozambique and contributed to the wider Southern African liberation struggle. His death at 53 cut short a transformative presidency, yet the bonds of friendship and shared history between Mozambique and South Africa endure.

THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF SADC The Southern African Development Community (SADC) originated in the anti-colonial and anti-apartheid struggles of the 1960s–1980s and evolved from a loose coordination body (SADCC) focused on reducing economic dependence on apartheid South Africa into a formal regional integration organisation. Roots in the Frontline States SADC’s political origins lie in the Frontline States (FLS), an informal coalition formed in the mid-to-late 1970s by majority-ruled Southern African countries (primarily Angola, Botswana, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Zambia). These states coordinated support for liberation movements fighting colonialism and white-minority rule in Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Namibia (then South West Africa under South African administration), and apartheid South Africa itself. The FLS provided a political and security framework for solidarity against external domination. From 1977, consultations among these states (and others) intensified. In May 1979, Foreign Ministers of the Frontline States met in Gaborone, Botswana, and called for a meeting of ministers responsible for economic development. That meeting took place in Arusha, Tanzania, in July 1979 and laid the groundwork for a regional economic body. Formation of SADCC (1980) On 1 April 1980, in Lusaka, Zambia, nine majority-ruled states formally established the Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC) by adopting the Lusaka Declaration (“Southern Africa: Towards Economic Liberation”). The founding members were Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland (now Eswatini), Tanzania, Zambia, and the newly independent Zimbabwe. SADCC’s core aims were practical and defensive: >Coordinate development projects to promote collective self-reliance. >Reduce economic dependence on apartheid South Africa (and any single external power). >Focus on priority sectors such as transport and communications, energy, mining, and industrial production—especially rehabilitating and expanding transport corridors that bypassed South African routes. It operated as a relatively loose association under a 1981 Memorandum of Understanding rather than a binding treaty; member states retained primary responsibility for projects. Headquarters were later established in Gaborone, Botswana. Transformation into SADC (1992) By the late 1980s, leaders recognised the need for a stronger legal and institutional framework. At the 1989 Summit in Harare, Zimbabwe, they decided to formalise the organisation through a treaty. Namibia’s independence in 1990 and the unfolding end of apartheid in South Africa created new possibilities for deeper regional cooperation. On 17 August 1992, at a Summit in Windhoek, Namibia, Heads of State and Government signed the SADC Declaration and Treaty. This transformed SADCC into the Southern African Development Community (SADC), giving it legal personality and shifting the emphasis from project coordination and reducing dependence toward broader economic integration, trade liberalisation, and eventual deeper cooperation (including political and security dimensions). Subsequent Expansion and Evolution >Namibia joined around its independence (1990). >South Africa joined in 1994 after the end of apartheid and democratic elections. >Mauritius joined in 1995; >the Democratic Republic of Congo and Seychelles in the late 1990s >(Seychelles later withdrew and rejoined); >Madagascar in 2005; and Comoros in 2017. SADC currently comprises 16 member states. Later milestones included the creation of the Organ on Politics, Defence and Security Cooperation, restructuring of institutions (notably after 1999), adoption of the Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan (RISDP), launch of a Free Trade Area (2008), and strategies on industrialisation and infrastructure. The organisation’s headquarters remain in Gaborone, Botswana.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF COMESA COMESA (Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa) is a regional economic community in Africa. Its origins lie in post-independence efforts toward pan-African solidarity, collective self-reliance, and sub-regional economic integration, supported by the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA/ECA) and aligned with the Organisation of African Unity’s (OAU) Lagos Plan of Action. Early Roots (1960s) In the mid-1960s, amid optimism after independence, the idea of regional economic cooperation gained momentum. In 1965 (often dated around October/November), UNECA convened a ministerial meeting in Lusaka, Zambia, of newly independent Eastern and Southern African states. It recommended creating an Economic Community of Eastern and Central African States and set up an Interim Council of Ministers (with an Interim Economic Committee) to negotiate a treaty and start cooperation programmes. Progress slowed as attention shifted to the East African Community (EAC). Interest revived after the EAC’s collapse in 1977. Preferential Trade Area (PTA) Era (1978–1994) In March 1978, ministers of trade, finance, and planning met in Lusaka and adopted the Lusaka Declaration of Intent and Commitment to establish a Preferential Trade Area for Eastern and Southern Africa. An Intergovernmental Negotiating Team was formed to draft the treaty. On 21 December 1981, Heads of State and Government signed the Treaty establishing the Preferential Trade Area (PTA) for Eastern and Southern Africa in Lusaka. Initial signatories included Comoros, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mauritius, Somalia, Uganda, and Zambia (others joined later). The treaty entered into force on 30 September 1982 after ratification by the required number of states. The PTA aimed to leverage a larger market, shared heritage, and greater social/economic cooperation, with the ultimate goal of creating an economic community. It aligned with the OAU’s Lagos Plan of Action and Final Act of Lagos. Trade liberalisation began in the 1980s (tariff reductions from 1984), and institutions such as a clearing house were established. Transformation into COMESA (1993–1994) Article 29 of the PTA Treaty provided for its succession by a common market (and eventual economic community). On 5 November 1993, the Treaty Establishing the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa was signed in Kampala, Uganda. It was ratified on 8 December 1994 in Lilongwe, Malawi, formally launching COMESA as the successor to the PTA. COMESA was defined as an organisation of free, independent sovereign states cooperating to develop their natural and human resources for the good of their people. Its main focus has been building a large economic and trading unit to overcome barriers faced by individual states, under the strategy of “economic prosperity through regional integration.” It is one of the Regional Economic Communities (RECs) recognised as pillars of the African Economic Community / African Union. Later Milestones Free Trade Area (FTA): Launched on 31 October 2000 by nine members (Djibouti, Egypt, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Sudan, Zambia, Zimbabwe), with progressive elimination of tariffs on originating goods. Additional members joined the FTA in subsequent years. Customs Union efforts followed (launched around 2009), alongside work on non-tariff barriers, infrastructure, trade facilitation, and deeper integration. COMESA has also engaged in the Tripartite Free Trade Area process with the East African Community (EAC) and Southern African Development Community (SADC). Membership has evolved (with some withdrawals and new joiners over time); it currently spans about 21 member states from Tunisia in the north to Eswatini in the south. The secretariat is based in Lusaka, Zambia.

Zimbabweans welcome fellow Africans and never ask for passports to prove their identity. Check from these 2 South Africans.

HISTORICAL ETYMOLOGY OF MAPEREMBUDZI/LEPROSY Maperembudzi (also shortened to mapere) is the Shona (particularly Karanga dialect) term for leprosy (Hansen’s disease), used by indigenous people in what is now Zimbabwe since long before colonial times. Historical etymology The word is a compound: mapere + mbudzi. It is commonly glossed as “hyenas and goats.” The Karanga anthropologist Herbert Aschwanden proposed that the name comes from the spotted appearance associated with both animals—hyenas have spotted coats, and certain goats can show similar markings—because skin spots and lesions are a prominent symptom of leprosy. Related African terms support a broader association with skin eruptions or sores (e.g., chipele or pele for rash/scabies in some languages, uhele for skin rash, impele for sores). In Shona usage the full form maperembudzi became the standard designation for the disease. How indigenous people treated those affected Traditional Shona/Karanga approaches combined social isolation, spiritual diagnosis and ritual, and herbal medicine administered by n’anga (traditional healers). Social response: People with advanced or visible leprosy were typically isolated or segregated from the main community, reflecting the fear of contagion and the stigma attached to chronic, disfiguring disease. Complex or persistent illnesses such as leprosy were often interpreted as having spiritual causes (ancestral displeasure, witchcraft, or alien spirits) and therefore required communal or specialist ritual attention in addition to physical care. Spiritual and ritual treatment: Diagnosis might involve spirit mediums, divining, or other traditional methods. Healing could include appeasement rituals directed at ancestors or offending spirits, extraction of supposed disease-causing objects, exorcism, or protective/cleansing rites. Serious chronic conditions were handled as matters affecting both the individual and the wider social-spiritual order. Herbal remedies: Ethnobotanical records from Zimbabwe document several plants used specifically or among other skin conditions for leprosy: Bobgunnia madagascariensis (snake bean; Shona: mucherekese, mukosho): pods used. Dichrostachys cinerea (sickle bush; Shona: mumhangara, mupangara, etc.): leaf powder mixed with porridge and taken orally. Monotes engleri and Monotes glaber (Shona: muaraara, muwara, etc.): fresh leaves rubbed on the body or the body washed with an infusion. Other species (e.g., certain Psidium or related plants in broader skin-ailment lists) appear in traditional pharmacopoeias for leprosy or similar lesions, often prepared as powders, infusions, or pastes applied topically or taken internally. These plant-based treatments formed part of a wider system of herbalism for dermatological problems; efficacy was understood within the local cosmological framework rather than modern biomedical terms. Pre-colonial care therefore rested on isolation plus the combined efforts of healers, family, and ritual specialists. Colonial-era leprosaria (such as Ngomahuru and Mutemwa) later formalized segregation and introduced Western medical approaches, but indigenous naming and traditional management practices long predated them.

HISTORICAL ETYMOLOGY OF NHUTA/CANCER Among the indigenous Shona people of Zimbabwe, “nhuta” (also rendered as a golden mole or mole-like burrowing animal) has long served as both a literal name for the animal and a cultural metaphor for cancer (alongside terms such as gomarara and mhuka). The analogy draws on the animal’s underground tunneling, multiple entrances, and elusive nature: cancer is conceptualized as something that “digs into” or spreads through the body like a mole creating molehills, making it difficult to eradicate and prone to metastasis. Conceptual and Cosmological Framework In traditional Shona understandings of illness, serious or chronic conditions such as cancer were rarely viewed in purely biomedical terms. Disease causation was often linked to spiritual, ancestral, or social factors—displeasure of midzimu (ancestral spirits who “reside in the earth”), witchcraft (uroyi), or imbalances requiring ritual resolution. Cancer could be described as originating “from the earth” (zvabva pasi), a metaphysical attribution rather than a single physical cause. Some accounts link it to witches inserting a small “animal” (likened to the nhuta) into the body that then burrows and consumes flesh from within. Diagnosis traditionally involved the n’anga (traditional medical practitioner), who used methods such as spirit possession, dreams, bone-throwing (hakata), or reading illness narratives and symptoms. The goal was not only to identify the physical manifestation but to uncover the underlying spiritual or social breach. Treatment Practices Historical and ethnographic accounts (including modern documentation of continuing practices) indicate that treatment combined herbal, animal-derived, and ritual elements: Animal portions of the nhuta itself: Healers described hunting the elusive animal, removing its fur with fire, roasting and drying it, then grinding it into powder mixed with plant medicines (roots or leaves). This was applied to wounds or taken internally. The rationale was often sympathetic or based on the animal’s own diet of diverse roots and its ability to store food underground—symbolically addressing the “burrowing” disease and drawing on the concentrated plant substances the animal consumed. Soil from molehills (ivhu renhuta or dhaga renhuta): Used in various contexts, including some childbirth practices and other remedies; it appears in broader ethnomedicinal repertoires linked to the animal’s symbolism. Historical Context and Continuity Pre-colonial Shona societies relied on n’anga as primary healers for physical, mental, and social ailments; they held respected status as custodians of indigenous knowledge. Colonial rule (from the 1890s) and missionary activity actively suppressed traditional healing through laws such as the Witchcraft Suppression Act (1899) and education systems that framed indigenous practices as superstition. Practices were driven underground but persisted, especially in rural areas.

THE BATTLE OF MAUNGWE The Battle of Maungwe (June 1684) was a major engagement between the rising Rozvi forces under Changamire Dombo and a Portuguese-led force (with African auxiliaries and Mutapa allies). It is associated with the Maungwe region (the historic principality/kingdom of the Makoni dynasty) in what is now eastern Zimbabwe, near the present-day Mutasa area in Manicaland Province. Some accounts link the fighting specifically to Mhanda Mountain on the border between modern Mutasa and Makoni districts. Historical Context In the late 17th century, the Mutapa (Monomotapa) state in northern Zimbabwe was weakened by internal succession disputes, civil wars, and increasing Portuguese interference. Portuguese traders and settlers from bases along the Zambezi (Tete, Sena) and coastal areas had gained influence through trade in gold and ivory, supplied arms to rival factions, established feiras (trading posts), and sometimes intervened militarily. This eroded Mutapa authority and created openings for new powers. The Battle Portuguese authorities, viewing Dombo as a threat to their commercial position in the interior gold trade, launched a campaign. Sources describe a force under (or associated with) the Governor of Mozambique, including Portuguese troops, local African militia/auxiliaries, and Mutapa allies, confronting Dombo’s Rozvi in Maungwe around June 1684. The fighting was intense and lasted a full day (some accounts describe a multi-day or protracted engagement). Rozvi warriors, primarily using traditional weapons (bows and arrows, spears, shields, axes), faced Portuguese firearms and limited artillery. Dombo’s forces reportedly broke or routed the Portuguese lines multiple times (accounts vary between four and five), though they themselves suffered significant casualties from gunfire. Both sides camped on or near the battlefield overnight intending to resume. A key tactical or psychological element, recorded in Portuguese-linked accounts and later traditions, involved Rozvi women (accompanying the army) gathering firewood and, on Dombo’s orders, lighting a ring of fires around the Portuguese camp in the middle of the night (around 1 a.m.). The Portuguese and their allies, believing themselves surrounded, fled in panic. At dawn the Rozvi looted the abandoned camp. Dombo did not pursue aggressively, partly because of his own losses and because a Mutapa force (with some Portuguese elements) was simultaneously threatening his position in Butua; he later defeated that force as well. Significance and Aftermath The victory at Maungwe was an important early demonstration of Rozvi military capability against European firearms and helped establish Dombo’s reputation. It contributed to the broader process by which the Rozvi expelled or greatly reduced Portuguese influence on the Zimbabwe Plateau interior in the late 17th century (further actions included attacks on other feiras such as Dambarare in the 1690s). Dombo consolidated power in Butua (with centers such as Danangombe/Dhlo-Dhlo) and extended influence over much of the plateau, creating the dominant Rozvi state that lasted into the early 19th century. Maungwe itself came under Rozvi overlordship (with the Makoni lineage continuing in a subordinate or integrated role in some accounts). The battle is remembered as a landmark in resisting external commercial and military penetration into the interior Shona states.

THE RISE OF THE ROZVI STATE Rozvi comes from the Shona (Karanga/Kalanga) verb kurozva (or related forms), meaning “to plunder,” “to destroy,” or “destroyer.” It originated as a nickname (varozvi = “the destroyers”) for the powerful military followers of Changamire Dombo in the late 17th century, reflecting their reputation as a formidable warrior force. Background: Decline of Mutapa and Portuguese Influence In the early 17th century, the Mutapa or Mwenemutapa) kingdom, a major Shona state in northeastern Zimbabwe and parts of Mozambique, came under heavy Portuguese influence. After internal conflicts, a 1629 treaty effectively made Mutapa a Portuguese vassal. Portuguese prazo-holders (estate holders) and traders gained extensive rights: mineral exploitation, monopolies, extraterritoriality, and the ability to raid and enslave local people with little restraint. This caused economic disruption, social chaos, disease, famine, and resentment among provincial chiefs, who increasingly viewed Mutapa rulers as Portuguese puppets. Rise of Changamire Dombo Changamire Dombo (also known in traditions as Dombolakonachingwango or similar) emerged in the 1670s–1680s in the northeast of the Zimbabwean plateau (around the upper Mazoe/Nyadire rivers, associated with the moyo/heart totem among Karanga/Shona groups). Accounts of his background vary: He was likely a provincial leader, governor, or cattle-keeper under Mutapa ruler Kamharapasu Mukombwe (r. c. 1663–1692/94). Mukombwe rewarded him with land and cattle for military service against rivals or Portuguese-aligned forces. Dombo used this wealth to attract a large following, build a disciplined army of roughly 2,000–4,000 men, and consolidate power. Key Military Steps in State Formation Rebellion and victory over Mutapa/Portuguese forces: Dombo rebelled. In 1684, at the Battle of Maungwe (near the present Mutasa/Makoni border), his forces defeated a combined Mutapa-Portuguese army, seizing more territory from the weakening Mutapa state. Conquest of Butua/Torwa (c. 1683–1690s): Dombo moved southwest, conquering the Torwa state (which had been weakened by civil war and Portuguese involvement). He established control over fertile, cattle-rich, and mineral-bearing lands, setting up capitals that shifted over time (e.g., areas near Tsindi/Marondera, Manyanga, and later Danangombe/Dhlo-Dhlo). Expulsion of the Portuguese: In the early 1690s (notably 1693–1695), at the invitation of a Mutapa claimant (Nyakunembire), Dombo’s forces attacked Portuguese settlements and fairs (including Dambarare and others in the Zambezi valley and eastern areas). They drove the Portuguese off the central plateau, ending their effective interior presence (though limited coastal/trade activity continued). Dombo also expanded into areas like Manyika. These campaigns unified anti-Portuguese sentiment, attracted followers, and allowed Dombo to dominate much of the Zimbabwean plateau. The state peaked under him and successors as a military, cattle-based polity that controlled trade (especially gold and ivory) and collected tribute. Overall, the consensus is that the state crystallized through Dombo’s military success against the backdrop of Mutapa decline and Portuguese overreach in the late 1600s, establishing a new center of power in the southwest that lasted until Nguni/Mfecane invasions in the 1830s.

An admiration of Harare's beauty, the capital city of Zimbabwe told from a visitor's perspective without bias or prejudice.

AFRICAN DRUMMING SIMILARITIES African drumming spans an enormous continent with deep regional, ethnic, and historical variation, yet Sub-Saharan traditions share a coherent rhythmic “system” (as ethnomusicologists such as A. M. Jones and C. K. Ladzekpo have described it). The similarities lie less in identical instruments or exact patterns than in underlying principles of organization, social function, and the way rhythm interlocks with dance, speech, and community life. Shared Rhythmic Foundations Sub-Saharan African music places strong emphasis on rhythm over Western-style melody and harmony. Timelines / key patterns / guide patterns: A repeating “anchor” phrase—frequently played on a double iron bell (gankogui or similar), rattle, or high-pitched drum—organizes the entire texture. The most widespread is the seven-stroke “standard pattern,” which can be felt in both duple and triple interpretations and appears across Yoruba, Ewe, and many other traditions. Ostinato and cyclic structure: Short, repeating patterns interlock; variation and improvisation occur on top of these stable cycles rather than free-form development. Call-and-response: A lead player (or singer) issues a phrase; the ensemble or group answers. This structures both music and social interaction and often cues dancers or section changes. Ensemble Roles and Performance Practice Drumming is almost always collective. Typical roles include: A lead or master drummer who improvises, signals changes (breaks, “échauffements” or accelerations, section shifts), and dialogues with dancers. Supporting drums that lock into specific interlocking parts. Time-keeping instruments (bells, smaller drums, or rattles) that hold the timeline steady. Performance is usually oral and participatory: rhythms are learned by ear and body rather than notation, and the boundary between player, dancer, and audience is porous. Dynamics and intensity rise and fall according to the social or ritual context and the lead player’s cues. Southern Africa: More varied; some groups (e.g., certain Nguni or Venda practices) maintain important drum roles, while others (Maasai, some township styles) use drums less centrally. African drumming is highly diverse in surface detail yet unified by a deep grammar of interlocking cycles, conversational interplay, and embodied social meaning. The “similarities” the question notes are real: they form one of the world’s most sophisticated and enduring approaches to rhythm as a collective, living force.

A LIBERATION HERITAGE: THE 1966 BATTLE OF CHINHOYI The 1966 Battle of Chinhoyi is regarded as liberation heritage in Zimbabwe because it is widely seen as the opening military engagement of the Second Chimurenga/ war of liberation), symbolizing the start of sustained armed resistance against colonial rule after Ian Smith’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) in 1965. On 28 April 1966, a small group of seven ZANLA (Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army) guerrillas—trained in China and infiltrated from Zambia, engaged Rhodesian security forces (primarily British South Africa Police, later supported by military elements including air support) near the town of Sinoia (modern Chinhoyi) in what is now Mashonaland West. The fighters, commonly remembered as the “Chinhoyi Seven” (names variously given as including David Guzuzu, Arthur Maramba, Christopher Chatambudza, Simon Chingozha/Nyandoro/Chimbodza, Godwin/Godfrey Manyerenyere or Dube, Chubby Savanhu, and others depending on accounts), fought for many hours before running out of ammunition and being killed. Key reasons it holds heritage status include: It marked the start of the armed phase of the struggle. It is generally treated as the first significant direct combat between ZANLA cadres and Rhodesian forces after UDI, shifting from earlier sabotage or political activism toward sustained guerrilla warfare that eventually led to independence in 1980. It is commemorated as the beginning of the Second Chimurenga. Symbolic and inspirational value. Despite the loss, news of the fight inspired nationalists (including those in detention, who reportedly celebrated). It demonstrated willingness to confront a militarily superior force and helped galvanize recruitment, resolve, and later tactical shifts toward more effective guerrilla methods. It is linked in popular and official memory to the fulfillment of Mbuya Nehanda’s prophecy (“my bones shall rise again”), as the date is close to the anniversary of her execution. Official recognition and sites of memory. The battle site was developed into the Mashonaland West Provincial Heroes’ Acre (with a museum), the seven were declared national heroes, streets in Chinhoyi have been renamed after them, monuments have been built or upgraded, and the anniversary is associated with Chimurenga Day commemorations. It features in songs (e.g., Bhundu Boys’ “Viva Chinhoyi”), official tributes, and national narratives of sacrifice and the roots of independence. While small in scale and a tactical loss, the battle was a foundational act of resistance that ignited the decisive armed struggle, embodied bravery and sacrifice, and continues to be preserved and commemorated as part of the country’s liberation heritage.

SIGNIFICANCE OF MOMBE YEHUMAI IN ZIMBABWE INDIGENOUS CULTURE Mombe yehumai literally “the cow of motherhood,” is a mandatory live female cow (typically a heifer that has not yet calved, known as tsiru) that a groom presents to his mother-in-law as part of roora (lobola/bridewealth) negotiations in traditional Shona marriage customs in Zimbabwe. It is distinct from other cattle or cash payments in roora and cannot traditionally be substituted with money or other goods—“mombe yehumai inoenda ichitsika” (the mother’s cow must go walking/living). Significance in Shona Practices It serves multiple overlapping social, economic, symbolic, and spiritual roles: >Recognition of motherhood and the bride’s mother: It specifically honours the mother-in-law (amai or ambuya) for the physical and emotional labour of bearing and raising the bride. It acknowledges her “pains in delivering a daughter” and her role in producing a marriageable woman. Unlike other roora elements that may be shared among the bride’s family, this cow belongs solely to the mother, giving her personal ownership, autonomy, and a productive asset (milk, calves, and eventual increase of her herd). >Sealing the marriage and building relationships: It “seals” the matrimonial contract and creates a permanent bond between the groom’s family and the bride’s maternal line. In Shona thought, marriage is about building kinship (kuroora kuvaka ukama), and this cow cements ongoing ties with the mother-in-law and her natal family. It fosters respect from the son-in-law and helps maintain positive relations. >Symbol of fertility, productivity, and prosperity: The heifer represents the bride’s expected fertility and productivity in her new home (bearing children and contributing to the household). It is expected to calve; the first female calf often triggers a thanksgiving ceremony (madiro), after which the original cow may be slaughtered and shared by both families in a ritual meal that invokes blessings from the maternal ancestors. The cow’s growth and offspring symbolise the flourishing of the new family. >Spiritual and ancestral dimensions: Maternal ancestors (vadzimu from the mother’s side) are regarded as particularly powerful in Shona cosmology—they are associated with origins, life, and fertility (“varidzi vemunhu”). Proper handling of mombe yehumai is believed to secure their blessings and protection for the couple and their children. Non-payment or improper handling is traditionally said to invite misfortunes (infertility, marital problems, or generational issues), sometimes requiring later rectification by descendants to restore harmony. The mother is expected to bless the cow upon receipt for the benefit of her daughter’s offspring. >Economic empowerment of women: In a historically male-dominated cattle-owning society, this is one of the few ways women gain personal livestock ownership. It provides milk, calves, and wealth that can support the mother and, by extension, her family. Modern initiatives (e.g., “The Mother’s Cow” dairy projects) have built on this tradition to promote women’s economic agency through improved dairy breeds and management. >It is non-negotiable within traditional roora. Other payments (such as rusambo, mafukidzadumbu for the pregnancy/carrying, or general danga cattle) go to the broader family or father, but mombe yehumai is reserved for the mother. Historical Background The practice is rooted in the deep pastoralist traditions of the Shona peoples. Cattle have long been central to Shona social, economic, and ritual life—used for bridewealth, fines, sacrifices, and as stores of wealth and status. The tradition is linked to the early pastoralist period and the Bantu migrations, and it was already established by the time of the early MaDzimbahwe (Great Zimbabwe) era centuries ago, when cattle herds were crucial to reproduction, dispersion, and growth of livestock across the region.

EPISODE 34. MEMOIRS OF A FREEDOM FIGHTER

THE SACREDNESS OF THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER In indigenous Shona culture of Zimbabwe, November is known as Mbudzi (or Mwedzi waMbudzi / Mwedzi Wembudzi), meaning “the month of the goat.” It is traditionally regarded as a sacred period during which major cultural, spiritual, and social ceremonies are prohibited. This sacredness is rooted in pre-colonial Shona agrarian society, the traditional lunar calendar, ecological observations tied to the onset of the rainy season, and beliefs about ancestral spirits. Traditional Calendar Context The Shona traditionally followed a lunar calendar with approximately 13 months based on moon cycles (a new moon marking the start of a month), rather than the Gregorian solar calendar introduced through colonial and Western influence. Mbudzi as a lunar period does not align perfectly with the modern month of November. It typically begins around mid-to-late October (often linked to the full moon, mwedzi wagara) and ends around mid-November with the appearance of the new moon. After this, ceremonies resume, and December (Zvita, associated with thanksgiving) becomes a time for previously deferred rites. Ecological and Practical Origins: Protection of Goats The name and core practical rationale derive from goats (mbudzi), the primary sacrificial animals in Shona rituals. November coincides with the peak breeding and kidding season for goats (and other herbivores), following the first rains that bring abundant forage and mark a period of natural regeneration for flora and fauna. Spiritual and Ancestral Dimensions Alongside the ecological reason, Shona cosmology holds that ancestral spirits (midzimu) and the spiritual realm rest or become unavailable during Mbudzi. Spirit mediums (masvikiro) and traditional healers (n’anga), who channel ancestral spirits for guidance, healing, and community well-being, cannot perform their usual functions (e.g., kusvikirwa). Instead, they rely on herbal knowledge (mishonga). Explanations vary slightly but converge: the ancestors are said to confer with Musikavanhu (the Creator/God) on matters accumulated during the year, deliberate among themselves, or simply rest (analogous in some accounts to the biblical day of rest). As a result, ceremonies that invoke or require ancestral participation—such as bira (spirit possession ceremonies), kurova guva or kurova makuva (bringing back the spirit of the deceased), traditional marriages, and related rites—are taboo. Performing them is believed to be ineffective or to invite misfortune (e.g., failed marriages, calamities), requiring later cleansing or re-performance. Traditional courts and other spiritual activities also pause. Some accounts describe the ancestors gathering people’s wishes and requests during the year and presenting them during this period, returning afterward (sometimes marked by celebrations with doro beer, dancing, and thanksgiving once the sacred period ends). Historical Continuity and Modern Context These practices originated in pre-colonial Shona society, where life was tightly interwoven with agriculture, livestock, lunar observation, and ancestor veneration. The taboos served both practical sustainability (protecting livestock and focusing labor on field preparation after the rains) and spiritual order. Oral traditions, proverbs, and elders’ knowledge preserved them.

EPISODE 33. MEMOIRS OF A FREEDOM FIGHTER

Study the picture and tell me the country with citizens who have the audacity to steal a door mat from a supertmarket/chainstore and use it as bedside mat in his home?

HOW INDIGENOUS SOCIETIES DEALT WITH SOCIAL MISCREANTS OR DELINQUENTS BEFORE THE INTRODUCTION OF MODERN COURTS Pre-colonial indigenous communities in Zimbabwe (primarily Shona groups and the Ndebele) handled social miscreants and delinquents through customary, community-based systems focused on restorative justice, social harmony, and reconciliation rather than the punitive, individual-focused, or incarceration-based approaches of modern Western-style justice. These systems operated under the philosophy of ubuntu/hunhu (“I am because we are”), viewing crime (mhosva among the Shona) as a disruption affecting the whole community, extended families, and spiritual balance, not just individuals. There were no prisons or formal police forces. Disputes were resolved hierarchically through traditional courts (dare in Shona; idale or similar among the Ndebele), guided by elders, chiefs, and spiritual authorities. The process emphasized truth-seeking, compensation, public accountability, and reintegration where possible. Family court (dare repamusha): Handled minor intra-family or close-kin disputes privately (e.g., parent-child conflicts, minor thefts, in-law issues). Presided over by family heads or aunts/elders. Focused on quick resolution without public involvement. Local/village court (dare remumana): Addressed inter-family matters and smaller offences such as thefts, fights, livestock damaging crops, or minor assaults. Presided over by headmen or village heads. Aimed at restoring harmony and encouraging forgiveness by framing wrongdoing as part of human nature. Chief’s or higher court (dare repamusoro or chief’s dare): Dealt with more serious or unresolved cases. The chief (or sub-chief) presided with advisors selected for wisdom, knowledge of custom, intelligence, and eloquence (often “sages”). The community participated openly. Appeals could escalate to higher paramount or king levels in larger polities. Ndebele systems were similar but more centralized under the king (inkosi), with chiefs (izinduna) and headmen handling local matters; serious cases reached the royal court. Traditional healers (n’anga), diviners, and spirit mediums played key roles across groups by providing evidence through divination or ordeals, identifying spiritual causes (e.g., ancestral displeasure or witchcraft), and guiding compensation or cleansing. Common Approaches by Type of Misconduct Offences were graded by severity and impact on social/spiritual order. Procedures involved reporting the issue, gathering evidence (witnesses, divination), open discussion, judgment, and enforcement by community consensus or authority. Minor offences (petty theft, fights, crop damage, domestic disputes): Compensation in kind (livestock, grain, or goods), public apology, fines paid to the victim’s family or community, or light social sanctions. Emphasis on restitution and reconciliation so the offender could reintegrate. Theft: Treated as serious if habitual or against communal resources. Once-off cases often allowed reform via restitution and social programmes. Habitual or “hereditary” thieves faced harsher measures, including public shaming, banishment, or (in some cases) elimination if seen as irredeemable threats to order. Adultery, assault, or family violations: Compensation (often cattle) to the aggrieved party/family. Public reconciliation rituals (e.g., sharing a goat or fowl) could be required. Among some groups, severe cases risked stronger sanctions. Witchcraft (uroyi): Viewed as a major threat to communal and spiritual balance. Accusations were investigated via diviners and ordeals. Confirmed witches often faced exile/ostracism (the primary sanction in many Shona areas) or execution (more emphasized in Ndebele ideology, though unproven cases were treated more cautiously). Cleansing rituals or spiritual intervention were common. Murder or serious violence: Highly disruptive. Preferred response was compensatory (“blood” restitution)

The Zulus have closed the businesses that employed their own kith and kin. They have also looted from shops owned by their own and left their own destitute over night. Sources of livelihoods were lost,simply because of foreign nationals who owned businesses. Whites own businesses but are left untouched yet black owned businesses are the target. Time will tell when unemployment rises and they will turn on each other and crime rates escalate.