CONSIDERACIÓN IMPORTANTE ACERCA DE LA INSTALACIÓN

Introduction

There is hardly a way to talk about farming and knowledge in Mupfurudzi without reference to issues of magic, religion and witchcraft. Indeed, these issues had a way of cropping up in conversations with various informants whether they were specifically brought up or not. People would deny or acknowledge the existence of magic depending on the social context in which a particular question on magic was asked. However, no one in the sample denied the existence of witchcraft and all respondents claimed to belong to one religion or the other, Christianity or African Religion.

Letts (1991: 305, 306) regards magical beliefs, religious beliefs, and superstition as illogical, inconsistent and evidentially unfounded. For him the only legitimate questions that can be asked of these beliefs are why people hold them, where and when they originated, how they are transmitted and what functions they serve. For positivists like Letts, there is a real world out there in which people need to act objectively and scientifically to achieve results. To them, believing in witchcraft or magic is just like believing in Father Christmas and the tooth fairy. In this view, to be effective, local farmers should react to the dictates of the objective world and their magical and religious beliefs are considered as being out of touch with the ‘real’ world out there. Magical, witchcraft, and religious beliefs are regarded as retrogressive and as an obstacle to change. For Bourdillon (1989: 29) the term ‘magic’ can also be used to denote circumstances where ‘people con- fuse the logic of communication with the logic of material efficacy’. His argument is that this kind of confusion sometimes occurs and that it is convenient to classify such confusion as magic.

Accusations of witchcraft have been linked to jealousy (Fisiy and Geschiere 1996: 197; Daneel 1971: 68; Dolan 2002: 669; Ciekawy and Geschiere 1998: 5), and for Evans-Pritchard (1937: 404): ‘The sickness is

the sorcery and proof of it’.46 _{This denies the possibility of regarding people}

who believe in witchcraft as rational people who consider evidence before witchcraft is attributed to be the cause of anything. Instead the witchcraft accuser is condemned to a perpetual state of jealousy and confusion in which he fails to recognise the all-too-obvious link between disease and bacteria and other contaminating agencies out there in the ‘real’ world.

Although I do not deny that some witchcraft accusations are a result of jealousy, in most cases people consider the evidence before them before accusations are made. Some witchcraft accusations are dismissed by villagers (both rich and poor) for their lack of evidence. Although Niehaus et al. (2001: 116) recognise that often evidence is needed to ascertain whether witchcraft has occurred, he trivialises this evidence when he claims that sometimes evidence can be circumstantial. Thus, if his view on circumstan- tial evidence is taken to its logical conclusion, evidence that is normally permissible for those who believe in witchcraft is not substantive, is not able to link the witch to the witchcraft act, and indeed does not even prove that witchcraft has occurred at all. Where the witches confess, the confession is tied to political power games. Similarly, the poor are seen as using the confessions or threats of witchcraft to gain power within their households (see Dolan 2002: 667, on how women in a district in Kenya used threats of witchcraft against their husbands to gain access to resources within house- holds). Niehaus et al.(2001: 9) regard witchcraft as a ‘weapon of the weak’, which they use to gain access to resources owned by the rich within their communities or families.

Elsewhere witchcraft beliefs and accusations have been linked to conflict and stressful situations. ‘In our extremely stressed society, traditional witch- craft beliefs provide apparent relief. At times of economic repression, suspi- cions of witchcraft abound as do the consequent witch hunts’ (Bourdillon 1993: 119; see also Dolan 2002: 663 on the link between witchcraft and friction within communities). Although these observations are relevant, there is a need to go beyond these economic and social tension approaches to witchcraft. This is so because as mentioned above, people consider different kinds of evidence before a person is accused of witchcraft, in spite of his or her wealth or lack of it.

46 _{However, it should be noted that Evans-Pritchard (1937) tried to show that}

witchcraft beliefs are rational and based on experience although he also was interested in explaining why the Azande people believed in these false beliefs. For instance in explaining why the Azande believed in magic in spite of contradictory evidence and beliefs, Evans-Pritchard (ibid.: 475) wrote: ‘Magic is very largely employed against mystical powers, witchcraft and sorcery. Since its actions transcend experience it cannot be easily contradicted by experience ... contradictions between the beliefs are not noticed by the Azande, because beliefs are not all present at the same time but function in different situations. They are therefore not brought into opposition’.

Structural approaches that emphasise economic explanations and the accompanying jealousy to some extent fail to analyse magic and witchcraft beliefs from the point of view of the people who believe in them, or who believe that they are witchcraft practitioners. This is so because these people’s beliefs and their confessions are dismissed a priori as due to delusions caused by confusion and a critical failure to deal adequately with ‘objective’ facts in an ‘objective’ world; as an ineffectual attempt to deal with modernity; or simply as an indicator of the stress levels within a society. It will become apparent in this chapter, that instead of adopting structural explanations, witchcraft beliefs are better understood by adopting situational and multi-meaning explanations which are highly aware of the dynamics and differential interpretations of the significance of witchcraft.

The witchcraft-modernity thesis that links beliefs and accusations of witchcraft to an attempt to deal with the malcontents of modernity (Geschiere 1997) fails to explain why people who believe in witchcraft at one moment might not believe in it at the next moment, except maybe by simply alluding to jealousy and the need for power and wealth. If witchcraft beliefs are to be understood as an attempt to deal with the ‘malcontents of modernity’, what does it mean in circumstances where the believer in witch- craft does not turn to witchcraft explanations, when in other similar circum- stances s/he does? Does it mean that, in that particular instance when s/he chooses not to resort to witchcraft explanations, the tension between him/her and modernity’s malcontents has been resolved? This then leads to a spurious understanding of modernity and witchcraft whereby if people do not understand or fully appreciate or want to gain control over modern changes, they turn to witchcraft, whereas, when for some reason or other, understanding and enlightenment finally dawn on them they drop witchcraft accusations and beliefs until a next time when, again, they are in tension with another segment of modernity. Such understandings can only be achieved through denying persons the capacity to interpret the evidence available to them, and the right to be able to believe or not to believe, and they only focus on the possibilities afforded by these discourses to gain control over modern changes. This chapter maintains the position that there is a need for ‘anthropologists to avoid either extreme in their analysis of witchcraft: on the one hand of assigning only the ‘traditional’, micro- community social tensions to witch-like powers, or on the other hand of superimposing western academic and popular notions of modernity onto them’ (Rassmussen 2004: 336).

Geschiere (1997) laments what he calls ‘the rise of the occult’ in modern Cameroon and links this to modernity where politicians are seen to amass power through a recourse to the occult, where witchcraft is a ‘language that “signifies” the modern changes: ... it promises unheard of chances to enrich oneself’ (ibid.: 24). However, what he does not appreciate is the fact that

what he perceives to be a rise in the occult might simply reflect an opening up of political space in which these beliefs can be discussed openly by the repealing of the colonial laws that made it illegal to accuse others of witch- craft and seek redress in courts for any loss and pain suffered through the witchcraft perpetrated by others. The same criticism holds for Niehaus et al. (2001) in that, although in South Africa the Witchcraft Suppression Act has not been repealed, the fall of the apartheid regime opened up spaces for people to discuss witchcraft. Hence the apparent rise in witchcraft which Niehaus et al. link to modernity can best be explained as a grassroots response to democratisation, which opened up discussion on matters that had been expunged from public discourse.

In Zimbabwe, to the dismay of the colonial authorities who were intent on ‘improving’ African agriculture, Africans always linked good crop yield to magic, witchcraft and religion instead of to good farming practices (Bolding 2004), and skills such as hunting were, and still are, linked to magic and religion. Thus, in this chapter, I take the view that witchcraft is not a language that signifies modern changes, but rather continuity, with ‘customary’ and deeply embedded sets of beliefs and practices. In African societies wealth, health, and agricultural production, or rather wealth, health, agricultural production, and fertility were inextricably linked to issues of magic, witchcraft, and religion, leading to a rearrangement of witchcraft beliefs and arguments whenever the latter were contested, negotiated, and reworked by people in accordance with their needs. This, in itself, is not problematic as long as the dynamism of witchcraft beliefs is recognised and we do away with attempts to understand witchcraft simply as ‘traditional’ or as ‘modern’.

More often bits and pieces of discursive texts are brought together in innovative ways or in strange combinations in particular situations in order to negotiate or contest certain shifting points of view. Indeed the multiplicity and fragmentation of discourses (and this would include discourses on witchcraft) ... is more often the case than the clash of well defined opposing view points and rationalities’ (Long 2004: 28).

For Geertz (1966: 4, cited in Keesing 1987: 166),

... religion is a system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive and long lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.

A weakness in Geertz’s definition is that he does not leave room for negotiation, contestation and change in his definition of religion. In this chapter, there is a realisation that there is not one religious belief, and that religious beliefs in the area I studied were contested (as indeed they are

contested all over the world). This chapter acknowledges that different people adhering to the same religious faith might not practise and interpret their commitment in the same way. However, regardless of these differences within and across religions (both Shona religion and Christianity47_{), religious}

belief affects conceptions of knowledge and how agriculture is practised. As Havekort et al.(2003: 142) put it,

... religious and philosophical concepts have their place within traditional world views. Cosmovision to a larger extent dictates the way the land, water, plants, and animals are to be used, how decisions are taken, problems are solved, experimentation takes place, and how rural people organise themselves.

However, people do not simply order their practices according to a pre- given order of religiosity, but, as will be demonstrated with respect to chisi, they invent new religious forms and transform the old religion to suit new needs and conditions.

On the other hand, there are other scholars, like Pool (1994) and Jackson (1989), who do not seek to establish the truth or falsity of these beliefs, but rather to study and understand these beliefs in their contexts. Why spoil the fantasy? In this chapter, however, I do not aim to discuss the various functions or dysfunctions of various magical, religious and witchcraft beliefs that people may hold. Neither do I wish to discuss the premises on which these beliefs are held to be true. Denying the importance of these factors, for example in enhancing or lessening agricultural production as scientists do, does not make them any less important in people’s agricultural practices. My aim in this chapter is primarily to discuss how these beliefs impact on knowledge. The importance of magic, witchcraft and religion as part of the local theoretical tradition for identifying facts and genuine phenomena can hardly be overemphasised.

Magic

While much agricultural practice is shaped by economic and technical choices, there are also issues of culture that affect people’s perceptions and behaviour. In this section, I focus on magical beliefs and practices that can affect farming practices, and in particular that can affect the way information about agricultural technology is produced, transmitted and received. I will

47 _{As noted later in the chapter, some independent Christian churches have}

borrowed heavily from African Religion. In spite of this, these churches have managed to maintain their distinction from African Religion, just as they have managed to maintain their independence from mainstream Christian churches such as the Roman Catholic Church, the Methodist Church, the Anglican Church, the Salvation Army, etc.

try to distinguish between religion and magic, but they feed into each other and cannot always be distinguished. Some forms of magic are incorporated into religious practice but not all religious experiences are magical and not all magical experiences are religious in character. For example, some people regard water blessed by Christian priests and prophets as an effective counter against people with bad magic. On the other hand, those who believe in African religion might interpret events such as poor yields as a punishment from the ancestors who have great power over the livelihoods of their descendants. Indeed for me, religious beliefs are magical. My decision to separate magic and religion is based on the fact that most Christian churches regard magic as evil and they ban the use of magical amulets and medicines among their followers. Thus, in the Johanne Masowe and Johanne Marange churches anyone who is seen using these magical amulets or magic horns is regarded as a witch.

These beliefs in religion and magic provide a basis through which people evaluate their own performance as well as the performance of others within the community. For instance, good crop yields might mean a person is using bad magic, or that s/he has protected his/her field with magical charms, or that the ancestors and God are satisfied with his/her conduct, not merely that s/he has great farming knowledge or that s/he manages his things well. For many, the consideration of effort or skill or technology is a secondary issue – and in any case poses the question of how an individual acquires the skill or knowledge or propensity to work. Often magic is supposed to produce good yields at the expense of others: for instance, the magician finds supernatural ways of stealing the crops of others. On the other hand, when good fortune is understood in terms of religion, then it can never be at the expense of others, and sometimes it will be good for the general populace.

The majority of the people in the sample believed in the existence of magic to enhance agricultural skills. However, of all those who believed in the existence of magic, none admitted to having used magic and only two people in 2001 and three in 2002 claimed to have lost their produce to people with magic.

Case 1

In this family, the children were convinced that some people used bad magic (tsvera) to steal from other people’s fields. They were convinced of the existence of the magic because when they would herd cattle during the dry season they often found clay pots filled with water and medicines buried in the middle of particular fields. Why would anyone bury a clay pot filled with muti in their field, if not for the purpose of tsvera?48

48 _{Incidentally some people thought that some people dug medicines into their}

fields to protect them from tsvera. As a result we can never be sure that the clay pots in people’s fields were indeed tsvera or were an attempt to counter tsvera.

The father was convinced that tsvera existed because he had at one time been a victim of it. Someone who pretended to be his friend once came to his field during the evening to ask for snuff. When he left this farmer’s field, this ‘friend’ collected a tin full of soil from his field. On discovering that this was what had been done, he followed the man to his field and found him still with the soil in the tin. He asked him why he had taken some soil from his field to which he answered that he wanted to use the soil to wash his hands in the river, which, as was later pointed out, he had already passed. The respondent was enraged and strongly suspected tsvera. He demanded that the soil in the tin be thrown away. In the end, the field never gave him anything so he had to change fields. The tsvera had already worked. It had made his soil cold. The official reason for moving from that plot was that the field was less than twelve acres. If he had asked the resettlement officer to be moved because the field had some bad magic on it, his request would have been refused. He believed that if there was enough rain, and a farmer had enough fertiliser, failure to get good yields would be a clear indication of tsvera. A prophet could confirm the suspicions if they were correct. The only way to neutralise tsvera was to use holy water.

Case 2

This farmer was a very poor farmer and people thought that he was lazy. He believed in the existence of tsvera. He believed that if you cultivated a large piece of land and applied enough fertiliser then you could expect to get a large yield. If the yield was low this would indicate the workings of tsvera. For him people with tsvera were like witches that operated at night and were able to get in even if you locked your door.

According to the respondent, some people also have magic that can make