Entusiasmo como pathos

Lowenthal (2005: 81), in addition to arguing that heritage is an evolving and dissonant concept, went on to claim that heritage comes from both “nature” and “culture”. Hence heritage can be conceived of as either natural or cultural, and from this school of thought emerged the widely used dichotomies of natural and cultural heritages. Accordingly, we often talk of natural heritage, as denoting natural places such as the lands and seas we inhabit and exploit, the soils, plants and animals that form the world’s ecosystems (UNESCO, 2002; Lowenthal, 2005). Put together this range of naturally occurring resources constitutes natural heritage. On the other hand, we also have cultural heritage, consisting of tangible entities such as shipwrecks, lighthouses, traditional villages, graves and Stone Age artefacts (Dumbrell, 2012). These heritages incorporate cultural perspectives representative of a people’s ways of life.

Cultural heritages which do not exist in material form such as social practices, for example songs, dance, folklores, legends, rituals and ceremonies are what is often referred to as intangible cultural heritage (UNESCO, 1972, 2003 & 2006; Dumbrell, 2012). Hence the view that heritage is cultural or natural is common, but in this study I go beyond this dichotomy and argue that heritage is actually both natural and cultural. In line with this study’s objective of enhancing the agency of heritage education to support the sustainability of heritage resources, I also highlight why it is important to construct heritage as natural and cultural instead of either natural or cultural.

First, it is important to note and acknowledge that cultural heritage, as Munjeri (2004) pointed out, entails a people’s way of life, and their relationship to the natural and the built environment. People’s views and the value they attach to a natural heritage resource like a river is shaped by the ways in which they use or broadly relate to the river. If people use the river as a site for conducting religious ceremonies and rituals, then to these people the same river is arguably both a natural and cultural heritage resource.

Natural and cultural heritage is therefore conceptually and materially interconnected.

Lowenthal (2005: 85) called this interconnection the “nature-culture dualism”. It therefore means that our conception of heritage emerges from our own interaction and relation to the natural environment. Heritage is therefore symbolic of human-nature

interaction (UNESCO, 1972). For instance, the Great Zimbabwe monument represents human action on the environment or is a culmination of the impact of cultural practices on what was just a natural landscape (Munjeri, 2004; Katsamudanga, 2004). One can say the same for the urban built environment with its diverse architectures depicting different cultures.

The interconnected nature of heritage has important implications for both the sustainable management of heritage resources and associated heritage education practices. In emphasising the “nature-culture dualism” of heritage, Lowenthal argued that:

Increasingly the heritages of culture and nature came to be viewed as interconnected, and indeed indivisible. If they are twins, they are Siamese twins, separated only at high risk of demise of both. (2005:85).

Failure to recognise and respect this nature-culture dualism of heritage, which in this study I extend to incorporate a critical realist perspective of “dialectical relation”

explained in detail later in this thesis (see Section 3.2.1) within heritage management and education practices as observed in the region, provides rationale for increasing representation and use of indigenous cultural heritage within contemporary heritage education practices.

Emphasising the importance of recognising the linkages between natural and cultural heritage, Mason further noted that:

Socio-cultural values are at the traditional core of conservation values attached to an object, building, or place because it holds meaning for people or social groups due to its age, beauty, artistry, or association with a significant person or event or (otherwise) contributes to processes of cultural affiliation.

(2002:09).

Hughes (2009:30) challenged the idea of dichotomising natural and cultural heritage in conservation and development practices by pointing out that “cities are not separate from the natural world on which they depend”. Hughes (ibid.) alerted us to the risks of treating culture as divorced from nature by narrating how such conceptions can impact on the sustainability of local resources. Hughes further claimed that treating nature as divorced from culture could have contributed to the abandonment of ancient cities. Examples in southern Africa include the collapse of Mapungubwe and the Great Zimbabwe ruins.

Even though there are many theories on the abandonment of ancient cities like Great

Zimbabwe, it is also well documented, as Garlake (1978) argued, that the descendents of Nyatsimba Mutota, the then king, left Dzimbabwe (Great Zimbabwe) and headed north in search of salt and pasture (Abraham, 1962; McNaughton, 1987; Pikirayi, 2006). Simple logic tempts me to think that management and use of natural heritage resources such as salt, pasture and others of course, which constituted an important part of the social economy of people who once lived at Great Zimbabwe, may have never been thought of in a holistic manner, but it is important here to acknowledge that climatic changes and depletion of these natural resources impacted greatly on the daily lives (culture) of the same people, ultimately forcing them to relocate (Pikirayi, 2003 & 2006; O’Connor &

Kiker, 2004; Collins & Burns, 2007). Salt and grazing pasture were treated as a natural resource but their connection to sustaining the culture of eating salted foods and rearing of livestock could have been erroneously overlooked. Similarly Denbow and Denbow (2002:43) claimed that:

The power of Mapungubwe did not last long. After about 150 years, this chiefdom also collapsed and the surrounding area was abandoned. Given the large number of cattle and other animals kept around Mapungubwe, it is tempting to think that its collapse, like that of Toutswe in Botswana, was caused by overgrazing and drought.

The two cases above illustrate Hughes’ point about the dangers of treating culture as divorced from nature and highlight the need to consider this in heritage education practice.

Drawing on Prats (1997) and Mattozi (2001), and emphasising the interconnectedness nature of heritage, Perez, Lopez & Ferres-Listan (2010: 1320) also pointed out that “the term heritage itself does not distinguish between cultural and natural manifestations”, hence all heritages are natural and cultural. The conception of heritage as intertwined or interconnected and consisting of both natural and cultural dimensions requires that we rethink the manner in which current heritage management and education practices are constituted. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, underlying some of the tensions and conflicts around management of heritage in southern Africa is the failure to perceive heritage as both natural and cultural (also see Chapters Five, Six and Seven). Or, to borrow words from Hughes (2009), our “treating nature as divorced from culture” may partly explain the fragmented and exclusive nature of heritage policies and practices inherent in the region (see Chapter Eight). In the case of Great Zimbabwe, as noted by

Chirikure and Pwiti (2008: 467) “heritage managers and archaeologists understandably became alarmed to discover that the alienation of local indigenous groups was also depriving them of valuable allies in the protection of the site”. Their failure to recognise and respect that to local people Great Zimbabwe is a place of cultural significance and not just an important archaeological site or monument, was probably a grave management error (Manyanga, 2000; Katsamudanga, 2004). Important to highlight too is that emphasis on the natural dimensions of heritage over cultural perspectives is still prevalent within contemporary heritage management practices in post colonial southern Africa (Ndoro & Pwiti, 2001; Ndoro 2005). And so, by and large, unless current heritage management and education practices are also re-oriented to allow for recognition of the dialectical relation between natural and cultural aspects of heritage, they may continue to do little to support the sustainable management of heritage resources in the region (Mason, 2002; UNESCO, 2006 & 2010; see also Chapters Five, Six and Seven).

A close look at the recent conflict over control and ownership of Victoria Falls in Zimbabwe, declared a national monument in 1932, a national park in 1957 and finally a World Heritage site in 1989, between National Parks and Wildlife Authority (NPWA) and the National Museums and Monuments of Zimbabwe (NMMZ) illustrates, other than the evolving nature of heritage, challenges and limitations associated with a false conception of heritage as either cultural or natural instead of both (Guvamombe &

Chitumba, 2010).

Educationally, it is sad to note that current interpretation of Victoria Falls to school groups, as I noted during the contextual profiling of heritage education practices in Zimbabwe (Zazu, 2010), continues to be exclusive of the cultural aspects of the Tonga people who lived and interacted with the falls since time immemorial and well before David Livingstone claimed to have discovered the falls. Tour guides continue to narrowly interpret the falls as a natural wonder historically discovered by David Livingstone (also see Section 6.5.3). The challenge then is how to reconstitute the interpretation of Victoria Falls in a manner that helps learners to construct the falls and other heritage sites or monuments as both natural and cultural. This thesis proposes that such an interpretation needs to work with a broader and more inclusive construct of heritage (see Chapters Eight and Nine). It will also, as Meskell and Masuku-van Damme

(2008) propose, need to be cosmopolitan in orientation so as to accommodate the cultural diversity inherent in the southern Africa region.