Mapela Hill – what is its importance for Zimbabwe Culture?

Introduction

Zimbabwean archaeologists are challenging the existing archaeological orthodoxy that was popularised by archaeologist Thomas Huffman around K2 and Mapungubwe, the site in the Shashe-Limpopo Valley in South Africa. Huffman maintained that the elements that created Zimbabwe Culture including sacred leadership, class distinction, and dry stone prestige walling had their origin at the sites of K2 and Mapungubwe.[1] Their challenge is laid out in the article Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe detailed below.

Zimbabwe Culture as defined in the above article “refers to the practice of constructing dwellings for the élite either inside dry stone-walled enclosures or on top of dry stone-walled terraces, while simultaneously confining commoners to areas outside the walls. Known as dzimbahwe in Shona, this configuration of dry stone walls crystallised an ideology of class distinction and sacred leadership.”[2]

Peter Garlake’s survey and limited excavations in 1966 and 1968 resulted in his conclusion that Mapela Hill, “is considerably smaller than Mapungubwe but contains very much more visible stone building.” However the 2013 and 2015 Chirikure et al. fieldwork and excavations at Mapela Hill revealed much more. Its occupants shared a cultural identity with those at Mapungubwe Hill. The site features extensive revetment stone walls, thick, stratified dhaka floors and abundant imported glass beads—clear evidence of regional state formation and elite power.

Chirikure et al. write, “Mapela had a hilltop occupation, a terrace occupation and a flat area occupation consistent with social hierarchy and class distinction. Working on both cultural and chronological logic, the presence of Zimbabwe pattern dry stone walls at Mapela shows that it was probably far more influential than the chronologically overlapping K2 (which did not have elements of the Zimbabwe culture) On the basis of precedence, Mapungubwe may have copied Mapela which, as we have seen, had a fully-evolved Zimbabwe culture before the Middle Limpopo sites.”[3]

In addition, radiocarbon data proves Mapela Hill was occupied before, during, and after Mapungubwe’s abandonment.

However Chirikure et al. believe that the roots of the Zimbabwe culture originated during the Leopard's Kopje Phase I period, rather than solely at K2 and Mapungubwe. After 900, multiple contemporary, socio-politically complex Shona communities across southern Zambezia engaged in local and long-distance trade, creating a network of cultural features across the landscape and at the same time developing early dry stone-walled palaces such as Malumba, Mapela and Halisupi that led to later grand capitals like Great Zimbabwe and Khami.[4]

Exactly what does the article challenge?

The main points that are made in the article are:

Mapungubwe was not the cradle of Zimbabwe Culture

Led by Thomas Huffman the archaeological orthodoxy has become that Zimbabwe Culture characterised by class distinction, sacred leadership, dhaka floors and dry stone walls had its origin at K2 and Mapungubwe between 1200 – 1220. The Bayesian chronology dates from Mapela show that  the earliest occupation of the excavated terraces are from the 11th century, right at the onset of the K2 period.

Massive prestige stone-walled terraces do not originate at Mapungubwe

Mapela Hill features massive, prestige stone-walled terraces dating 1055 - 1220 nearly 200 years earlier than the construction seen at Mapungubwe that date 1220 - 1290

A ruling class (sacred leadership) emerged earlier at Mapela Hill than Mapungubwe

Archaeological excavations at Mapela revealed elite solid dhaka hut floors associated with K2 pottery and thousands of imported glass beads, and a clear spatial division between the elite who occupied the hilltop and terraces versus the commoners who lived below and around Mapela Hill that existed well before K2 and Mapungubwe.

Mapela’s size was underestimated in the past

Peter Garlake’s research[5] on Mapela Hill suggested it was smaller than Mapungubwe and he concluded that it was the capital of an independent Leopard’s Kopje state. Recent excavations and comprehensive mapping by researchers, such as Chirikure et al. argue that Mapela Hill is significantly larger than Mapungubwe Hill when measuring the physical footprint of the settlements, the amount of labour required and the density of stone walling. Studies estimate that the core area of Mapela Hill—including its heavily terraced slopes and flat areas—is roughly four times the physical size of Mapungubwe Hill with significantly more dense stone walling.[6]

Mapela was part of a wider network of connected sites[7]

The authors argue both Mapela and Mapungubwe were not single capital cities but part of a wider network that stretched across the region and shared a common culture and trade network.

Zimbabwe Culture did not emerge from a single site

The authors believe that the socio-political complexity of Zimbabwe Culture was the result of a growth in the population within the region and an increased connectivity between the inhabitants of south-western Zimbabwe, western Botswana and the Shashe-Limpopo Valley of northern South Africa.

Overall Conclusions regarding Mapela

Chronological data from radiocarbon dating, glass bead typologies, and ceramic sequences demonstrate that Mapela Hill was inhabited continuously between the 11th and 15th centuries. Excavations revealed a clear occupational sequence: Zhizo and K2 groups initially occupied the lower flats, K2 and Transitional K2 groups established the earliest terrace and summit levels, and Mapungubwe populations later utilized the upper zones. This lengthy occupation matches the construction of monumental dry-stone revetment walls that terraced the hillside. The discovery of abundant glass beads highlights Mapela's integration into the Indian Ocean network, while its stratified, thick dhaka floor sequences firmly tie the site to the architectural evolution of the Zimbabwe Culture.

Traditional theory by Roger Summers et al.

In the late 1950’s archaeologist Roger Summers with Keith Robinson and Anthony Whitty, carried out large-scale excavations at Great Zimbabwe. Using stratigraphic evidence, ceramic types, architectural styles and early radiocarbon dating, they believed there were five periods of occupation:

Period I (c. AD 100 – 300)

Architecture: No stone walling was present

Class 1 pottery (Gokomere-style), featuring thick-rimmed, incised earthenware.

This period was the initial settlement of the site by early Iron Age farming communities.

Period II (c. AD 300 – 1085)

Architecture: Settlement was on the Hill Complex and its terraces without dry-stone walling in  simple pole-and-mud (dhaka) huts

Class 2 pottery, showing transitional features

Inhabited by later Iron Age ancestors of the Shona (specifically early Karanga groups) growing millet and sorghum and cattle-rearing.

Period III (c. AD 1085 – 1450)

Architecture: the start of stone walling. Usually P-style walling featuring irregular, uncoursed dry-stone granite blocks. Huts now have substantial, thick clay-plastered dhaka.

Class 3 pottery.

The population now expanding into the Great Enclosure and Valley areas and the start of sacred leadership.

Period IV (c. AD 1450 – 1833)

Architecture: features premium Q-style walling with highly uniform, neatly dressed and coursed dry -stone walling as seen in the outer walls of the Great Enclosure.

Class 4 pottery. Excavations reveal prestige goods, including gold ornaments, Persian/Syrian glass shards and Chinese Ming Dynasty porcelain.

Great Zimbabwe reaches its peak population (estimated up to 18,000 people) with Indian Ocean trade routes conducted via coastal Swahili networks. Toward the end of this period, the political elite shifted north; Great Zimbabwe experiences a steady decline.

Period V (c. AD 1833 – 1900)

Architecture: features R-style with rough walling with poorly fitted, haphazardly piled stone structures on top of older ruins.

Class 5 pottery as found in the 19th century.

Great Zimbabwe now occupied by local Karanga-Shona groups, the Nemanwa and Mugabe dynasties, before European arrival in the 1890’s.

Leopard’s Kopje culture

The Leopard's Kopje culture (CE900–1400) is named after the Leopard's Kopje site two kilometres north-east of Khame[8] and west of Bulawayo. This culture was widely distributed from west-central Zimbabwe to north-eastern Botswana and includes adjacent areas of northern South Africa and includes all three sites at K2, Mapungubwe and Mapela Hill.

However, due to the absence of grand dry-stone walling Mapungubwe was simply considered a less important extension of Great Zimbabwe although archaeologists recognised the ceramics and glass beads were part of the same Zimbabwe Culture.

In fact as Chirikure et al. have shown the Early Iron-Age sites shown on the map below mostly all share the same characteristics including:

·       dry stone wall construction

·       élite occupation of hilltops

·       class distinction

·       participation in long-distance trade

·       rainmaking ceremonies

·       and the construction of solid dhaka floors

Chirikure et al. Mapela and some chronologically overlapping sites with Leopard’s Kopje Phases I and II pottery. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111224.g018

As early as 1965 archaeologist Keith Robinson concluded that low stone walling and stone-walled terraces on raised ground were already established cultural practices during the first-millennium Leopard's Kopje Phase I.[9]

The archaeologists involved in the Mapela study strongly believe that their analysis of glass beads and other artefacts reveals that no single entity monopolised trade during the Early and Late Zimbabwe culture; instead, a network of competing peer polities existed where major centres were tightly linked to smaller surrounding settlements. Because these Shona communities shared cultural values and deep network connections, innovations spread rapidly and were easily copied across sites.[10]

Traditional theory following Thomas Huffman

Huffman writes, “It is believed that the K2−Mapungubwe transitions crystallised class distinction and sacred leadership, thought to be the key elements of the Zimbabwe culture on Mapungubwe Hill long before they emerged anywhere else. From Mapungubwe (CE1220–1290), the Zimbabwe culture was expressed at Great Zimbabwe (CE1300–1450) and eventually Khami (CE1450–1820).”[11]

Huffman however used radiocarbon dating to show that Mapungubwe (CE1220–1290) exhibited the Zimbabwe culture pattern earlier than Great Zimbabwe (CE1300–1450) and considered that it began initially at Mapungubwe.

Because Mapungubwe was thought to be the only Leopard's Kopje site with evidence of class distinction, it was seen as the capital of southern Africa's first state. He states, “The Zimbabwe culture sequence can now be divided into three periods, each named after important capitals: Mapungubwe (AD 1220 to 1290), Great Zimbabwe (AD 1290 to 1450) and Khami (AD 1450 to 1820)”[12]

Mapela Hill was deemed to be simply a provincial centre[13] without further research being carried out after Garlake’s preliminary reconnaissance during the 1968 Rhodesian Schools Exploration Society expedition.

Were K2 and Mapungubwe the originators of Zimbabwe Culture as Huffman proposed?

To establish if the above was true, Chirikure et al. reviewed the archaeology of many of the Leopard's Kopje sites in south-western Zimbabwe. Their main finding was that many sites belonging to the Leopard's Kopje Phase I in that they possessed stone walling, dhaka floors and took part in long-distance trade and that Mapela, Malumba and others demonstrated the characteristics of Zimbabwe Culture in the early second millennium. This culture was widely distributed from west-central Zimbabwe to north-eastern Botswana, and adjacent areas of northern South Africa.

As the article states, “As such, supporters and sceptics demanded the substantiation of the conclusions with the aid of carefully excavated sites. This provided the motivation for this work – it presents the outcome of detailed research carried out at Mapela in the Shashe region of south-western Zimbabwe.”[14]

Why choose Mapela Hill when there are so many other sites in Zimbabwe?

The answer provided in the article was, “Mapela was naturally attractive because it contains substantial terrace walls, abundant local pottery, solid dhaka floors, and glass and shell beads on the surface – attributes which collectively define the Zimbabwe Culture. Geographically, Mapela possesses all the advantages which K2 and Mapungubwe have, and perhaps a lot more. It is situated in rich elephant hunting country close to perennial water sources and is within 20 kilometres of the strategic Gwanda-West-Nicholson gold belt.”[15]

Iron Age sites in southern Africa and the key features associated with socio-political complexity

Adapted from M. House: The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe

Where is Mapela?

Mapela Hill is two kilometres due east of the confluence of the Shashe and Shashani rivers in the south-western Zimbabwe lowveld. As the crow flies, it is approximately two kilometres due north of the Zimbabwe-Botswana border. There are no roads on the Zimbabwean side of the border which explains why so few archaeologists after Garlake visited the site.

Google Earth map of Mapela Hill on Zimbabwe’s south-western border with Botswana

What does Mapela Hill look like physically?

Mapela Hill itself is a prominent granite kopje over 90 metres high and the summit is 0.8km in circumference. It is flat-topped and defined by steep cliffs and multi-tiered ledges These ledges were terraced along the natural contours of the slope from bottom to top to accommodate homesteads and clearly outlined kraals. Remarkably, the entire hill is heavily terraced on every side with retaining walls that reach heights of up to 2.5 metres. On top of these walled terraces are drystone built platforms where houses with solid dhaka foundations were built.[16]

Peter Garlake’s excavations in 1966 and 1968

Garlake in 1968 opened five test trenches at Mapela Hill to obtain an indication of depth of deposit and to collect a representable sample of material culture; all the trenches were excavated to bedrock. He concluded the finds matched Leopard’s Kopje Phase III culture [now known as Leopard’s Kopje Phase II (Huffman 2000)

However, it is clear that Garlake’s survey only covered the summit and therefore only about one-quarter of the site of Mapela and none of Little Mapela[17] thereby underestimating its size and importance and overall significance in relation to Mapungubwe.   

Garlake’s (1968) illustrations of Leopard’s Kopje ceramics excavated at Mapela

Imported beads

During his 1968 excavation, Garlake recovered 386 glass beads from sieved material at Mapela. These beads are crucial for understanding Indian Ocean trade networks and determining the site's regional status. The assemblage is highly uniform and consists of three distinct types:

·       Small oblates

·       Opaque cylinders

·       Transparent oblates (34 in total)

Dhaka floors and stone walls at the summit of Mapela

Mapela features dense stone terracing along its contours, with revetment walls exceeding 1.5 metres (Garlake, 1968) The site lacks free-standing walls, containing only low revetment walls that include a stone-walled Upper Platform and a non-walled Lower Platform to the west. Garlake concludes that while geological differences exist, Mapela’s stonework closely matches the style and function of Mapungubwe, though Mapela features significantly more walling.

Garlake’s map of the summit of Mapela Hill showing the trench excavations

Metals

Many short lengths of corroded wire and a chisel-ended razor or adze with a square tang and curved ends were found during the excavations. Copper and bronze were rare, but small fragments of slag were recovered.

Chronology

Two radiocarbon dates from were recorded from trench B. Level 4 recovered a date of AD 1160 ±95 and level 10 recovered a date of AD 1280 ±95 from which Garlake concluded that the dates showed that the occupation did not extend over any great length of time.

Survey and excavation at Mapela by Chirikure et al.

After National Museums and Monuments of Zimbabwe (NMMZ) granted permits to excavate, the archaeologists spent a week consulting with local communities and their leaders and the archaeologists were given permission to work at Mapela supervised by two elders.

Firstly, foot surveys were carried out from the base of the kopje to the summit of Mapela and to little Mapela and beyond. Then the two sites were mapped and finally, excavations began over 2013 and 2015.

Foot surveys from the flats to the hilltops at Mapela and Little Mapela between May and October 2013[18] revealed dense architectural and agricultural features. Drystone walled terraces stretch from the base to the summit of Mapela Hill, supporting platforms for houses, granaries, and multiple homesteads. The extensive summit features an Upper Platform and a Lower Platform, which connects to collapsed platforms, middens, and visible dhaka floors. Additionally, white vitrified dung is scattered across all terrace levels from the base to the top, providing clear evidence of continuous animal rearing throughout the site.

“Hundreds of ceramic sherds, metals, slags, beads, spindle whorls and dhaka fragments were scattered all over the surface of the site. The ceramics were typical K2 and Mapungubwe sherds containing upward and downward facing triangle motifs on shoulders of jars. The glass beads were mostly Mapungubwe oblates of green, black and blue in colour. The surveys indicated that Mapela Hill was extremely rich in material culture, and suitable excavation areas were targeted for excavation.”[19]

Excavation

After mapping, a decision was made to select areas to excavate. In 2013 excavations targeted the flats, the terrace and the summit on the northern side to understand the sequence of occupation on the various parts of the site. In 2015, excavations extended Garlake’s trenches A and B to understand the stratigraphy and compare it to the terraces and on a collapsed wall on the northern side to establish the relationship between the stone walling and the occupation deposit. In all, eight trenches were excavated over two seasons.

Map source: Chirikure et al: Map of Mapela Hill showing the summit, terraces and surrounding flats: Note the density of stone terraces, which by far outnumber those on Mapungubwe Hill. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111224.g007

Stratigraphic excavations were conducted at three areas: (1) Excavation Area 1 on the flats; (2) Terrace Excavation Trench 1 on a substantial north-facing terrace; and (3) Lower Summit Excavation Trench 1 on the lower summit.

One trench and three test pits were excavated on Little Mapela, but the results are not discussed in this article.

Ceramics found at Mapela Hill

Michelle House concludes based on the stratigraphic evidence, that the cultural sequence at Mapela Hill follows a distinct spatial and chronological pattern. The flats record short, successive Zhizo and K2 occupations, with the former defined by comb-stamped and wide-incised ceramics. On the terraces (Areas 1 and 2), the earliest levels contain K2 material, which grades into a Transitional K2 phase before culminating in an intensive Mapungubwe occupation. The summit mirrors this upper sequence, beginning with a Transitional K2 occupation at its base and transitioning to a dominant Mapungubwe phase in the final occupational layers.[20]

Photo credit. M. House: Ceramic objects recovered from Mapela Excavations      

Glass beads

The excavations yielded over 2,000 glass beads in a relatively small excavation confirming Mapela Hill as a major participant in the Indian Ocean trading network. To construct the site's cultural history within the current project scope, a representative sample of this large assemblage was analysed. The beads are highly homogeneous and closely match Garlake’s (1968) regional typologies, consisting primarily of small blue-green, black, yellow, and translucent light blue oblates. However, unlike Garlake's (1968) recovery of translucent K2 cylinders, no cylinder beads were found during this project. The collection fits securely within the K2-Mapungubwe series, with the Mapungubwe beads characterised by black, blue-green, and whitish devitrified oblates.[21]

Credit M. House: Thousands of glass beads recovered from the glass bead cache on the edge of a lower terrace at Mapela Hill

House disputes the hypothesis that elite centres like Mapungubwe and Great Zimbabwe maintained exclusive control over glass bead imports. Historical evidence reveals that traveling middlemen traded beads directly across various villages, casting doubt on the feasibility of state-regulated commerce. This critique is supported by the recovery of thousands of glass beads from non-elite sites like Mapela and Malumba. Ultimately, this widespread access undermines the conceptual reliance on exotic trade as a primary indicator of elite authority.[22]

Faunal Results

Of the total of 104 identifiable bones excavated 59.4% were domesticates and 40.6% were wild species. Cattle were the dominant species with goat / sheep and wild Bovids the most common.[23] The numerous cattle kraals as well as the dominance of cattle in the faunal assemblage suggests that cattle rearing was an important practice at this site. House quotes studies by Manyanga[24] that have shown that in times of drought farming societies in south-western Zimbabwe have typically hunted wild animals.

Stone Walling Analysis and Results

The Zimbabwe Culture spans hundreds of stone-walled sites across southern Africa, including 420 in Zimbabwe, 106 in Botswana, and 27 in South Africa (Van Waarden, 2012)[25] Despite a long research history focused on architectural classification, chronological data remains sparse, with only about 20 of these sites radiocarbon-dated to date (Van Waarden, 2012)[26]

The raw material most commonly used was granite, “probably for its exfoliating properties which makes it more predictable to fracture in a predictable way. Other raw material have been used such as sandstone, schist and calcrete however these fractures are less predictable.”[27] The architectural tradition relies strictly on mortarless dry-stone masonry. Initial construction utilized "P-style" walling, characterized by randomly arranged stones that formed a flat vertical face (Whitty, 1960). This transitioned into "Q-style" masonry, which used stones of uniform thickness laid in distinct courses. Combining these two techniques produced "PQ-style" walls (Van Waarden, 2012). Higher-quality coursing allowed for decorative geometric motifs like chevron and checked patterns, which are indicative of "R-style" masonry.

     Chirikure et al: section of terrace walling at Mapela

Mapela Hill has terraces from the base of the hill all the way to the top of the hill. They are all supported by revetment stone walling, some of which are up to 2.5 meters high. The stone walling is uncoursed with suitable sized rocks used in strategic places on the walls. Garlake (1968: 2) documented the stone work at Mapela stating it is, “probably greater than on any other Iron Age living site, excluding the largest Later Iron Age ruins.”[28]

Chirikure et al. write, “The principle of building élite dwellings on terraces is demonstrated at Mapela during K2 times. In fact, the presence of abundant terraces constructed at different elevations further indicates the principle of ranking and class distinction at Mapela, with those on the lower terraces being of a lower class than those above them.”[29]

Keith Robinson demonstrated that the Leopard's Kopje communities occupying most of south-western Zimbabwe were building prestige stone-walled terraces from around CE900 onwards.[30] (i.e. during K2 times)

Van Waarden explains why revetment terraces are widespread across most Mapungubwe-period sites, but rare at Mapungubwe. While the "elite" walling at Great Zimbabwe served as a physical and visual barrier separating elites from commoners, Mapungubwe, Mapela, and the 41 hilltop sites in the Tati cluster feature revetment stone walling primarily to maximise habitable space on steep slopes. Mapungubwe lacks extensive terracing because it is a flat-topped sandstone hill with sheer cliffs dropping straight to the plains. Consequently, terrace building was unnecessary: the summit already provided ample flat space for housing and the vertical cliffs made terracing structurally impractical.[31]

Map of Mapungubwe (CE1220–1290) (after Huffman, 2007): Note the limited number of walls and small size when compared with Mapela. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111224.g017

According to Huffman, the primary function of prestige walling in the Zimbabwe Culture is to create a protective barrier around a sacred leader, elevating and shielding them from view. Huffman identifies Mapungubwe as the site of the earliest stone walling within this tradition.

At Mapela Hill, this structural concept is evident in the configuration of the summit. House notes that a five-foot-high, 120-foot-long stone revetment wall runs across the hill, creating an isolated Upper Platform that naturally restricts access and remains entirely hidden from the base of the hill.[32]

Consequently, while Mapela Hill features only a limited amount of coursed walling, the architecture demonstrates a deliberate effort to restrict access to the summit and visually isolate the elite space.

Metal Analysis and Results

Metallurgical recoveries were concentrated at Little Mapela Hill, with Mapela yielding only minimal fragments and small items. They mostly consist of small iron and copper coils alongside a few excavated spearheads. Iron slag was found at specific areas of the site, but the combined presence of finished metal objects and smelted slag shows that metalworking was carried out at both sites.[33]

Photo credit. M. House: Metal objects recovered from Mapela excavations

Chirikure et al state, “While bronze and other copper-based objects were recovered at Mapela, so far no gold objects have been recovered. Given that Mapela is just less than 20 kilometres away from the Gwanda-West-Nicholson gold belt, it is only a matter of time before gold is found.”[34]

Dhaka floors, spindle whorls and clay pipes

A succession of dhaka floors was recorded at Mapela Hill showing that the site dates to the beginning of the Zimbabwe Culture period as this style of flooring is specific to this period. Spindle whorls were recovered from the surface of Mapela Hill indicating cotton production at this site.[35]

Photo credit. M. House: remains of dhaka walls recovered from Mapela excavations

Garlake’s (1968) excavations on the Upper Platform revealed a distinct, thick dhaka floor that contrasted sharply with structures found across the rest of the site. Adjacent to this floor was a dhaka kerb, a feature typical of elite housing within the Zimbabwe Culture. The subsequent excavations conducted for this study identified multiple layers of this thick dhaka flooring—locally known as "Zimbabwe cement." When considered alongside the monumental stone wall bounding the Upper Platform, these architectural elements suggest that this area served as an elite function. These finds at Mapela disprove any suggestion that they first appeared at Mapungubwe Hill before anywhere else.[36]

Rainmaking

Rainmaking played a major role in the Early Iron-Age, evolving from a ritual practiced on remote hillsides by rainmakers to a tool for political power. Archaeological evidence of this ritual include steep hills, rock tanks, cupules and evidence of heavy burning, all of which were found at the Mapela site.

Cupules located on the eastern edge of the north facing cliff at Mapela. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111224.g015

Cupules - small, circular, man-made depressions pecked or hammered into rock faces are deeply connected to ancient rainmaking and rain-control rituals. Rather than being decorative or utilitarian (such as grinding hollows), cupules served as a dynamic "rain vocabulary" shared and developed between indigenous San hunter-gatherers and early farmers.

Radiocarbon Dating

Twelve dating samples, nine samples from the Terrace Excavation Area 1 and three from the Lower Summit excavation were submitted for radiocarbon dating to estimate the duration of occupation at the site, the material being mostly carbonised charcoal, burnt sorghum and burnt bone. The results showed that Mapela Hill was occupied from the 11th to the late 14th century and that Little Mapela was a later extension of the site dating from the 14th to the 15th century. The early 11th-century occupation on the terrace and lower summit features K2 pottery, while later periods are associated with Mapungubwe pottery.[37]

What did the fieldwork mapping and excavations reveal at Mapela?

The results showed:

·       Mapela is easily the largest known Leopard's Kopje site in southern Africa

·       The Bayesian chronology, when combined with local pottery and glass bead analysis indicates that Mapela flourished between CE1055 and CE1400

·       That Mapela  pre- and post-dates the generally accepted dates for Mapungubwe (CE1220–1300)

·       That Mapela’s prestige stone walls and evidence of class distinction indicates that the Zimbabwe culture evolved earlier at Mapela than at K2 and Mapungubwe

Photo Chirikure et al: a section of Mapela Hill from the north  (doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111224.g002)

What is Bayesian chronology?

Bayesian chronology is a statistical framework used in archaeology, geology, and paleoenvironmental science to build highly precise and internally consistent timelines by combining scientific dating measurements with independent historical or stratigraphic evidence. Researchers don’t have to rely solely on isolated scientific dates (like radiocarbon results) which often carry broad probability windows due to atmospheric fluctuations. Instead, they constrain those results using what is already known about the physical or historical relationships of the samples.

How was Bayesian chronology applied at the Mapela excavations?

At Mapela Bayesian chronological modelling was used to combine radiocarbon dates with the site's physical layers of occupation (stratigraphy) and material culture sequences. This statistical method narrowed down probability ranges and produced a high-precision timeline for when different phases of the settlement were built and occupied

The Bayesian chronology demonstrated that Mapela's massive stone-walled terraces and elite solid dhaka floors were initially constructed around CE1055–1219.

By tightly sequencing K2 ceramics,[38] transitional phases[39] and material culture[40] in uninterrupted contexts,[41] the model proved that complex stone architecture and class distinctions existed at Mapela nearly 200 years earlier than at Mapungubwe.

Conclusions

Occupied for at least 300 years, Mapela Hill yielded an abundance of excavated material culture indicating a highly productive community. Key archaeological findings reveal distinct aspects of this community:

Labour and Infrastructure: Expansive stone walling points to a substantial, coordinated labour force.

Trade Networks: Large numbers of glass beads demonstrates active integration into the Indian Ocean trade network.

Craft Specialisation: Evidence of metalworking and metal slag confirms craft artisanal skills.

Subsistence: Remaining grain bin foundations confirm the importance of crop agriculture.

While Mapela’s physical size could theoretically accommodate a very large population, actual figures are difficult to reliably estimate although the Chirikure et al. surveys found approximately 20 hut floors that suggest Mapela Hill reliably supported a population of several hundred people.[42]

While Mapungubwe and K2 are conventionally recognized as the earliest states in southern Africa, this study demonstrates that their core architectural features—such as hilltop stone walls and dhaka floors are not unique to them, the archaeological literature reveals numerous similar, undated hilltop settlements across the region. It seems the orthodox framework prioritizing Mapungubwe is flawed because it fails to account for these other barely investigated sites. To establish a more accurate timeline of regional socio-political complexity, future research must prioritize excavations and precise radiocarbon dating at understudied sites across Botswana, South Africa and Zimbabwe.

References

Shadreck Chirikure, Munyaradzi Manyanga, A. Mark Pollard, Foreman Bandama, Godfrey Mahachi, Innocent Pikirayi. Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe. October 31, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111224

P.S. Garlake. Rhodesian Ruins-A Preliminary Assessment of Their Styles and Chronology. The Journal of African History 11, no. 4 (1970): 495–513. http://www.jstor.org/stable/180918

Michelle House. Feb 2016. The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe. https://open.uct.ac.za/server/api/core/bitstreams/25c8fa28-1bf1-4aac-8f17-9fecef9e8970/content

T.N. Huffman. Mapungubwe and the origins of the Zimbabwe Culture. South African Archaeological Society. Goodwin Series, Vol. 8, African Naissance: The Limpopo Valley 1000 Years Ago (Dec. 2000), pp. 14-29

M.H. Schuman & M. Murimbika. Vessels for the Ancestors: Cupules and the annual rain-control cycle in the Shashe-Limpopo Confluence Area. Southern African Field Archaeology 15 & 16: 26 - 34. 2006/2007

Notes

[1] See the two articles An Introduction to the significance of Mapungubwe under Masvingo and

Are there cultural links between Mapungubwe and Great Zimbabwe? both under Masvingo on the website www.zimfieldguide.com

[2] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P1

[3] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P12

[4] This is called the Actor-Network Theory (ANT)

[5] Garlake’s fieldwork and mapping of Mapela Hill was carried out in 1968 during a Rhodesian Schools Exploration Society work and sparked the archaeological debate. However he only mapped the flat summit of the hill and omitted the massive lower stone terraces wrapping around the contours below. As no other archaeologists visited Mapela until the authors of the second survey, it was assumed to be a minor site to Mapungubwe. The second survey in 2013 was a collaborative effort led by Dr Shadreck Chirikure from the University of Cape Town alongside the University of Oslo. Their fieldwork corrected the first survey by successfully mapping the massive lower stone terraces Garlake had missed. Its groundbreaking findings were officially published in October 2014

[6] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P13

[7] Garlake considered there were about 150 Iron-Age ruins in Rhodesia (present-day Zimbabwe) and had personally visited about 83 of them (Rhodesian Ruins-A Preliminary Assessment of Their Styles and Chronology)

[8] See the articles Khame (previously Khami) Ruins, a UNESCO World Heritage Cultural Site and Khami – capital of the Torwa state under Bulawayo on the website www.zimfieldguide.com

[9] Robinson KR (1965) The Leopard’s Kopje culture: A preliminary report on recent work. Arnoldia 25: 1–7.

[10] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P14 - 15

[11] Mapungubwe and the origins of the Zimbabwe culture, P14

[12] Ibid, P14

[13] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P4

[14] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P2

[15] Ibid, P2

[16] The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P4

[17] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P4

[18] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P4

[19] The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P40

[20] For the ceramics analysis see The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P58 - 78

[21] For the beads analysis see The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P79 - 90

[22] The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P129

[23] For the faunal analysis see The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P92 - 104

[24] Manyanga, M., 2001. Choices and constraints: animal resource exploitation in south-eastern Zimbabwe c. AD 900-1500 (Vol. 18). Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University.

[25] Catrien van Waarden. Butua and the End of an Era: The Effect of the Collapse of the Kalanga State on Ordinary Citizens. An Analysis of Behaviour under Stress. March 2012

Azania Archaeological Research in Africa 47(1):133-134

DOI:10.1080/0067270X.2011.647957

[26] For the stone walling analysis see The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P105 - 110

[27] The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P105

[28] Garlake, P. S. 1968. Test excavations at Mapela Hill, near the Shashi River, Rhodesia. Arnoldia. 3 (34): 1- 29.

[29] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P12

[30] Robinson KR (1966) The Leopard’s Kopje culture, its position in the Iron Age of southern Rhodesia. South African Archaeological Bulletin 21: 5–51

[31] Van Waarden, C. 1998. The Later Iron Age. In Ditswa Mmung: the archaeology of Botswana. Lane, R., Reid, A., & Segobye, A (eds). Gaborone, Botswana: Pula Press and Botswana Society

[32] The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P130

[33] For the metal analysis see The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P111 - 112

[34] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P12

[35] For the dhaka floors, spindle whorls and clay pipes analysis see The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P113 - 115

[36] Zimbabwe Culture before Mapungubwe: New Evidence from Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P12

[37] The radio-carbon results table is not shown but can be found in the article The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P56

[38] "K2 ceramics" refers to a specific type of pottery made between 10th – 12th century in the Shashe-Limpopo Valley

[39] Transitional K2" phase, where the lifestyle, technology, and pottery of the K2 people were evolving into what would become Zimbabwe culture

[40] "Material culture": The physical things left behind - glass beads, dhaka floors, dry-stone walled terraces and cattle kraals

[41] "In uninterrupted contexts" means the archaeological site was found perfectly preserved and stratified and had not been dug up, mixed, ploughed over, or disturbed.

[42] The Archaeology of Mapela Hill, South-Western Zimbabwe, P136-8