The View from Bokoni: Re-thinking the process of economic change in pre colonial Southern Africa¶
Peter Delius; Stefan Schirmer (2012). The View from Bokoni: Re-thinking the process of economic change in pre colonial Southern Africa. Wits Economic History Conference (WEHC) paper.
| Type | conference paper |
| Scope | Wider apartheid literature |
| Method | theoretical or conceptual |
| Period studied | 1500–1880 |
| Regions | Mpumalanga escarpment (Bokoni), Pedi Kingdom, southern Africa, East Africa (comparative) |
| Themes | origins segregation, agriculture land, comparative theory, business and state |
| Citation key | delius2012 |
Argument¶
The paper uses the Bokoni terraced settlement (c.1500s-1820s) to argue that existing models of pre-colonial economic change, whether geographical (Austin), institutional (Acemoglu and Robinson), traditionalist (Houghton, Macmillan) or mode-of-production (Hall), are too static, linear or reductionist. It proposes a framework of rational individuals whose choices are structured by environment and path-dependent institutions. Applied to Bokoni, this suggests that a decentralised order with cooperative labour mobilisation (initiation and age sets) and regional specialisation encouraged accumulation and innovation. The rise of competitive, predatory centralised states in the nineteenth century, combined with drought, destroyed it. Political instability is therefore presented as a bigger constraint than enduring autocracy, and centralisation is not equated with economic progress.
Evidence and method¶
Secondary literature on archaeology, anthropology and economic history (Maggs, Widgren, Hall, Austin, North, Peires, Eldredge, Parsons, Herbst, Acemoglu and Robinson), aerial photography and archaeological findings on Bokoni, oral traditions, and early traveller reports. No new primary data. The argument is speculative and conceptual.
Place in the debates¶
- Geography/factor endowments versus institutions as the root of African economic divergence (see Pre-Union colonial economy, the mineral revolution and the South African War). Rejects exclusive reliance on either; argues for environment plus path-dependent, adaptable institutions shaping rational choices.
- Traditional (Houghton/Macmillan) view that redistributive, security-seeking African institutions blocked accumulation (see Pre-Union colonial economy, the mineral revolution and the South African War). Partly accepts the concern with security but finds the model too static and unable to explain a dynamic site like Bokoni.
- Mode-of-production/linear models and the identity-focused Central Cattle Pattern (Hall, Huffman) (see Pre-Union colonial economy, the mineral revolution and the South African War). Criticises both as linear or static and as neglecting economic analysis; argues people adapted identities to economic circumstances.
- Political centralisation and economic development (Acemoglu and Robinson, 'enduring absolutisms'; Omer-Cooper's nation-state view) (see Pre-Union colonial economy, the mineral revolution and the South African War). Argues centralisation can be necessary for order, but Bokoni shows limited decentralisation could foster accumulation, and nineteenth-century competitive centralisation was retrogressive.
Findings¶
-
Bokoni was a very large and long-lived intensive farming complex. (p. 1)
This settlement consisted of terraced fields spanning 150 kilometres along the eastern escarpment; it flourished from around the 1500s until the 1820s, after which it all but disappeared.
-
The authors criticise existing models of pre-colonial development as unable to accommodate Bokoni. (p. 1)
They tend to be too static, too linear and/or too reductionist to accommodate the Bokoni findings.
-
Houghton's model is too rigid, since it saw security-oriented structures as blocking accumulation. (p. 7)
But the main problem with Houghton's model was the extent to which it ascribed an overwhelming influence to these structures
-
Individual accumulation and markets existed in pre-colonial Africa despite redistributive norms. (p. 8)
there is much evidence to suggest that individual accumulation occurred despite the rules that sought to restrict such behaviour.
-
Bokoni's absence of an entrenched ruling stratum may have enabled homestead-level accumulation. (p. 11)
the absence of an entrenched overarching ruling strata at Bokoni may have facilitated accumulation at individual/homestead level
-
Terrace-building labour was plausibly mobilised communally through initiation and age sets. (p. 12)
The process of initiation may well have been an effective way of mobilising labour for major projects at the same time as socialising youth
-
Bokoni's collapse is attributed to drought and predatory states rather than white settlement. (p. 13)
The dramatic changes which left the stone wall settlements and terraces largely empty of population where probably the result of droughts combined with the impact of states
-
Nineteenth-century centralisation replaced a production-oriented order with an extractive one. (p. 13)
It was replaced by a social order built around the logic of extraction and war which militated against the development of decentralised intensive farming
-
Political instability, not persistent autocracy, is proposed as the main constraint on pre-colonial African development. (p. 14)
It may therefore be feasible to argue that political instability was a more important constraint on economic development in Africa than persistent autocratic orders that refused to disappear or change.
-
Following Herbst, African state competition over people and resources encouraged raiding. (p. 15)
Unlike European states that competed over territory, African states strove to control not land but people and resources.
Evidence ledger¶
Sources used¶
| Source | Kind | Period | How used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bokoni archaeological research: aerial photographs and stone-walled terrace site surveys (Mpumalanga escarpment) | maps spatial data | 1930s to 2012; settlement c.1500s-1820s | Establishes the extent and scale of the terraced intensive farming settlement and the evidence for decentralised, stratified homesteads. |
| Delius, Maggs and Schoeman, 'Bokoni: Old Structures New Paradigms?' JSAS 58,3 (2012) | secondary literature compilation | c.1500s-1820s | Supplies the underlying archaeological and historical findings on Bokoni on which the paper's theorising rests. |
| Maggs, 'The 2009 FYI Workshop and Excursion' (African Studies 69,2, 2010), comparative East African terrace evidence | secondary literature compilation | 2009-2010 | Source of the inference that terrace building was communal male labour with later family plot demarcation, implying age-set labour mobilisation. |
| Widgren, Islands of Intensive Agriculture in Eastern Africa (2004) | secondary literature compilation | comparative, various | Used to characterise the farming practices and landesque capital of intensive agriculture islands for comparison with Bokoni. |
| Austin (2008), 'Resources, techniques, and strategies south of the Sahara', Economic History Review 61,3 | secondary literature compilation | 1500-2000 | Presented as the factor-endowments geographical approach against which the authors position their institutional framework. |
| Acemoglu and Robinson, 'Why is Africa Poor' (2010), drawing on Mary Douglas's Lele/Bushong comparison | secondary literature compilation | pre-colonial | Illustrates the institutionalist argument that centralised states gave higher agricultural output, which the authors qualify. |
| Houghton and Walton, The Economy of a Native Reserve (1952); Macmillan, Complex South Africa (1930) | secondary literature compilation | 1920s-1950s | Presented as the traditional 'security over innovation' view of African rural institutions that Bokoni challenges. |
| Early travellers' and nineteenth-century reports of witchcraft/hoarding trials and secret grain hoards (via Wilson, 'The Nguni People'; Sansom, 'Traditional Economic Systems') | secondary literature compilation | nineteenth century | Used to show individual accumulation occurred despite redistributive norms. |
| Hall, The Changing Past (archaeological overview of pre-colonial southern Africa) | secondary literature compilation | pre-colonial to 19th century | Source for claims on chiefdom instability, early trade specialisation in salt, iron and copper areas, and mutual aid institutions. |
| Historiography of the Mfecane/difaqane and trade-driven centralisation (Eldredge; Parsons; Mason; Peires; Delius, The Land Belongs to Us) | secondary literature compilation | c.1750-1830 | Supports the account of trade, wealth differentiation and state centralisation leading to violence and the destruction of Bokoni. |
| Killick, recent overview of technology exchange between south-east Africa and the Islamic world | secondary literature compilation | pre-colonial | Used to argue African societies adopted techniques selectively and mined gold and tin in response to external demand. |
| Oral traditions on Bokoni chieftainship (referenced, not itemised) | interviews oral history | pre-colonial/19th century traditions | Alongside archaeology, said to support the existence of a small-scale, fragmented chieftainship at Bokoni. |
Inference¶
Quantification: None.
Conceptual and theoretical synthesis: the authors critique rival models (factor endowments, Acemoglu-Robinson institutionalism, Houghton's traditionalism, mode of production) and build an institutional-economics framework from secondary literature. They apply it speculatively to the Bokoni archaeological findings, reasoning from plausibility and comparison with East African terrace sites.
Key claims¶
| Claim | Basis | Strength |
|---|---|---|
| Bokoni was a large, long-lived terraced intensive farming system (c.1500s-1820s) that undermines static models of African economic institutions. (p. 1) | Archaeological research and aerial photography summarised from Delius, Maggs and Schoeman (2012) and Maggs; no new data presented. | Partial data |
| Bokoni was probably governed by a relatively decentralised political system whose limited centralisation permitted accumulation and innovation. (p. 12) | Oral traditions and archaeological evidence (no distinct capitals or ruling strata), plus comparison with East African decentralised sites. | Partial data |
| Terrace construction was likely organised through communal male labour, possibly via initiation age sets, with family plots marked afterwards. (p. 12) | Maggs's inference from Nyanga/Cherangani comparisons and wall patterns at Bokoni. | Illustrative or anecdotal |
| Bokoni was destroyed in the early nineteenth century by drought combined with predatory centralised states (Ndwandwe, Swazi, Ndebele), not by white settlement. (p. 13) | Interpretation of difaqane historiography (Eldredge, Parsons, Delius) and the observation that white settlement was sparse; no direct data. | Asserted |
| Individual accumulation and markets were widespread in pre-colonial Africa despite redistributive norms, so Houghton and Macmillan's static view is too simplistic. (p. 8) | Anecdotal traveller reports of hoarding trials and secret grain pits, plus Hall on early specialisation and trade. | Illustrative or anecdotal |
| Political instability and competitive centralisation, rather than enduring absolutism, were the main constraint on pre-colonial economic development in Africa. (p. 14) | Argument from Bokoni case plus Herbst, Acemoglu and Robinson and Greif; theoretical rather than tested. | Asserted |
| Bokoni likely functioned within a wider trading system of specialisation, supplying food and acquiring iron and other goods, and may have provided food security to vulnerable areas. (p. 3) | Maggs on iron consumption and comparative East African cases; authors admit the details remain hazy. | Asserted |
The author's caveats¶
The authors stress that understanding of Bokoni is 'in its infancy', that conclusions are speculative ('one plausible speculation', 'to push this speculation to its outer limits'), and that the historical details of the wider system 'remain hazy at best'. They say they cannot give a conclusive answer on labour and capital formation from existing evidence.
Gaps in the evidence¶
The argument needs systematic archaeological dating, settlement mapping and excavation data (population estimates, wall labour inputs, crop and manure evidence, trade goods) to test claims about decentralisation, labour mobilisation and trade integration. Fuller oral-tradition collection, and critical use of early traveller and missionary records, could corroborate the political structure and the causes of collapse. Much of this fieldwork is ongoing and now accumulating, but the paper cites none of it directly.
Replicability: Not applicable.