Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 191

HOW ENVIRONMENTAL IS AFRICAN

TRADITIONAL RELIGION?

Nisbert Taringa

Abstract: This article examines some of the beliefs and practices underlying
traditional African religion’s attitudes to nature with reference to Shona reli-
gion of Zimbabwe. At the theoretical level, assuming a romantic view of
Shona attitudes to nature, it is possible to conclude that Shona traditional
religion is necessarily environmentally friendly. The strong beliefs in ancestral
spirits (midzimu), pan-vitalism, kinship, taboo and totems have the potential
to bear testimony to this. The aim of this article is to critically examine the
extent of the claims that Shona traditional religion is environmentally friendly.
It shows that Shona attitudes to nature are in fact discriminative and ambiva-
lent. I argue that the ecological attitude of traditional African religion is
more based on fear or respect of ancestral spirits than on respect for nature
itself. As a result we need to re-examine Shona attitudes to nature if Shona
traditional religion is to re-emerge as a stronger environmental force in the
global village. After introductory remarks the article gives an overview back-
ground about the Shona focusing on their socio-political organization, world-
view and religion. An examination of Shona attitudes to nature focusing on
the land, animals, and plant life and water bodies follows. After this there
is a reflection on the ethical consequences of Shona attitudes to nature. The
last part considers the limits of the romantic view of Shona attitudes to
nature.

Introduction
African traditional religion, and Shona religion in particular, is gen-
erally regarded to be intrinsically environmental friendly. This attitude
of romanticizing African religion recurs in works that refer to Shona
religion and the environment. The following examples are noteworthy.
First we hear that
. . . Traditional African ecology, like everything else in Shona society, is insepa-
rably linked with traditional religion. Environmental protection is sanctioned by
the creator God and the ancestors of the land.1

Secondly, Ranger says,

1 Marthinus L. Daneel, African Earthkeepers: Wholistic Interfaith Mission, New York: Orbis

Books 2001, 90.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2006 Exchange 35,2

Also available online – www.brill.nl
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 192

192  

African religious ideas were very much ideas about relationships, whether with
other living people, or with spirits of the dead, or with animals, or with cleared
land, or with the bush.2

Thirdly we are also told that totemism (mutupo) among the Shona ‘is
a principle which seeks to create a cosmology that takes the existence of
non-human seriously.’3 Finally, Mvududu states ‘Zimbabwe has long been
known for traditional religious practices, which Schoffeleers (177:5-6)
has characterized as “profoundly ecological” . . .’4
The environmental friendliness implied in these statements is some-
times believed to be steadily weakening because of the coming of
Christianity and western ideas. For example, Mvududu argues that the
sacred control of woodlands is weakening. She draws her conclusions
from the research of Matowanyika. Matowanyika found that 77% of
his sample felt that the introduction of Christianity and western ideas
has been the cause of the breakdown of indigenous attitudes to nature.5
So there is a tendency for Shona religion to imply that the Shona
were actually environmentalists but at some point during the course
of history this environmentalist foundation became obscured.
I believe that such perceptions may be idealistic and romantic and
need to be re-examined. This is especially so if Shona religion is to
re-emerge as a stronger environmental force in the global village.
Contrary to these views, I wish to propose, phenomenologically, that
traditional Shona beliefs and practices do not necessarily support reli-
gious environmentalism, and that the traditional Shona worldview does
not sit comfortably within a worldview assumed in modern environmental
discourses. The question how environmental is Shona traditional religion
has not been critically pressed.6
Tomalin’s observations about Hinduism holds true for Shona religion.
She notes the attitude of romanticizing the past as a recurring theme
in most literature on religion and the environment. According to her
this gives rise to a debate, which assumes that an eco-golden age existed
at some point in the past. The discourse holds that ancient peoples

2 Terrance O. Ranger, ‘African Traditional Religion’, in: Stewart Sutherland et al.

(eds.), The World’s Religions, London: Routledge 1988, 687.

3 Tumani M. Nyanjeka, ‘Shona Women and The Mutupo Principle’ in: Rosemary

R. Ruether, Women Healing Earth: Third World Women on Ecology, Feminism, and Religion,
London: SCM Press 1996, 138.
4 Sara S. Mvududu, ‘Management of Indigenous Woodlands’, Ruether, 151.
5 Mvududu, 151.
6 The idea of this question is borrowed from Ian Harris’ ‘How environmental is

Buddhism?’, Religion 21 (1991), 101-114.

Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 193

      193

had a less harmful impact upon the earth and that their religious
literature sings and praises the natural world. Further the discourse
tends to essentialise the lifestyle and values of contemporary non-
industrial societies, particularly so-called tribal or peasant cultures as
environmentalist.7
When I examine the Shona attitude to nature in this article I assume
that one should consider Tomalin’s critical remarks when dealing with
non-industrial peoples attitudes towards nature. First is the idea that
the environmental friendliness of non-industrial people should not lead
us to assume that it is a result of the people holding environmental
values. Secondly is the idea that while they prescribe behaviour that
had the effect of conserving nature, the motivation behind this may
not necessarily be attributed to environmental values.8 As I will show,
the Shona attitude to nature is ambivalent. It can be interpreted pos-
itively as well as negatively. But first a background about the Shona
is necessary.

Who Are the Shona? 9

The Shona are found in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe is land-locked between
Zambia to the north, Malawi to the northeast, Mozambique to the
east, Botswana to the west and South Africa to the south. Its capital
city is Harare. Zimbabwe has a subtropical climate. Politically Zimbabwe
was a British colony from 1890 to 1980. When Zimbabwe gained inde-
pendence in 1980 it changed its name from Rhodesia to Zimbabwe.
The name of the capital also changed from Salisbury to Harare. The
estimated population is 12,5 million. Approximately 60% of the pop-
ulation lives in the rural areas.
There are two major ethnic groups. These are the Shona and the
Ndebele. The Shona tribe is about 65% of the population, with 20%
Ndebele, and other 15% African minority languages. The official lan-
guage is English, with Shona the largest indigenous language group.
So the Shona form the majority of the indigenous population of
Zimbabwe.

7 Emma Tomalin, ‘The Limitations of Religious Environmentalism For India’,

Worldviews 6 (2002), 13.

8 Tomalin, 15.
9 For an extensive account of who the Shona are and their historical links with

Bantu culture see Michael F.C. Bourdillon, The Shona Peoples, Gweru: Mambo Press,
third revised edition 1987.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 194

194  

The Shona rarely use the term ‘Shona’. They tend to refer them-
selves by the name of the particular Shona-speaking group to which
they belong.10 The term refers to describe a group of dialects. These
dialects are Karanga, Zezuru, Korekore, Manyika, and Ndau. The Karanga
are found in the southwest, with the Ndau and the Manyika to the east;
the Zezuru in the center; and the Korekore in the north.11 So when I
speak of Shona people I mean all those who speak dialects of Shona
in Zimbabwe. When I talk of particular Shona subgroups, for exam-
ple, the Karanga, I mean those who speak Karanga dialect and who live
in a particular district of the Shona linguistic area.

The Socio-Political Background of the Shona

It is important to acquaint readers with the socio-political organization
of the Shona. It has an impact on the Shona peoples’ attitudes to
nature. This also enables readers to understand part of my argument
in this article. The argument is that Shona attitudes to nature are pri-
marily about power and relation with spirits than with ecological issues
in the scientific sense. In their beliefs about well-being the Shona hold
that there is a causal connection between the moral condition of the
community and its physical environment. Among the Shona the real
owner of the land and all on it is the tutelary spirit, Mwari and the
various territorial ancestor spirits. So the environment belongs to
the spirits. It is sacred (kuyera). Land is sanctified by its possession by
the ancestor spirits whose remains are buried in it. So it is the spir-
its who look after their property. Ranger confirms this view. He writes:
. . . The system of the spirit mediums expressed the common African idea of the
increased power of the dead, of their ability to communicate more freely with
the divine, and of their role as protector of the land and the people. The dead
were thought of as forming . . . ‘the tender bridge’ between the living and the
divine.12

These beliefs and the related practices operate in the context of a hier-
archy of three interrelated units. These are village (musha), ward (dunhu)
and chiefdom (nyika).13

10 Hubert Bucher, Spirits and Power: An Analysis of Shona Cosmology, Oxford: Oxford

University Press 1980, 21.

11 Bucher, 21.
12 Terrance O. Ranger, Revolt in Southern Rhodesia 1896-7: A Study in African Resistance,

London: Heinemann 1967, 18.

13 For a detailed description of these units see Marthinus L. Daneel, Old and New in

Shona Independent Churches, Volume 1, The Hague: Mouton and Company 1971, 32-38.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 195

      195

The Village (Musha)

A village community consists of a number of extended families. It is
in most cases a nuclear group of male family heads agnatically related
to the village headman (samusha). The headman represents one of the
senior houses of the chief ’s lineage. There could also be foreigners
(vatorwa). Because of a high percentage of agnatic kin the village com-
munity tends to support the headman’s authority. The headman allo-
cates land to family heads and other adults. He also settles domestic
and other minor disputes. He is also responsible for seeing that tra-
ditional ritual obligations, such as keeping the day of rest in honor of
ancestors (chisi ). His function extends to rain thanksgiving ceremonies
(mutoro) and addressing his ancestors on behalf of the village community.14

The Ward (Dunhu)

The ward consists of a number of villages. Rivers, hilltops and streams
mark ward boundaries. These boundaries are well known. A headman
called sadunhu heads the ward. He is a member of the senior homes
of the chief ’s lineage. His functions are similar to those of the leader
of the village. He also presides over the court (dare) and initiates rain
asking rituals in consultation with the village headman.15

The Chiefdom/Territory (Nyika)

The chiefdom is the widest territorial and political unit. Bourdillon is
right when he notes that the boundaries of chiefdom are clearly defined
by natural features such as hills and rivers well known to its inhabit-
ants.16 For the Shona, like most people in Africa, land has primarily
a value linked to a tribe, its chief and the spirits of their ancestors.
This is why in Shona the chief (mambo) is called ‘owner of the land’
(muridzi we nyika). Nyika is the Shona name commonly used for land.17
This ownership of the land by the chief is a result of his supposed
connections with mythological founder-ancestors of his chiefdom. It is
the ancestors who are believed to have chosen him and gave power
and authority over his subjects.18 So the chief is in his position by

14 Daneel, 32-38.
15 Daneel, 35-37.
16 Bourdillon, Shona Peoples, 103.
17 Bucher, 31.
18 Bucher, 32.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 196

196  

virtue of his relationship with the ancestors, who appointed him and
supports him.
The real owners of the land are however the ancestral spirits of the
dead tribal rulers particularly those of the mythical founder-ancestors
of the chiefdom. The chief is the senior descendant of the ancestral
spirits who founded the chiefdom. He is both a political and a religious
figure. The role of the chief is the same as those of village and ward
headmen differing in the chief ’s greater authority. Traditionally he is
the final court of appeal. He is responsible for propitiating his clan
ancestors. He is at the apex of the tribe’s ritual hierarchy. Overall the
chief is sacred.19 His authority is linked to the land and the spirits that
own it.

The World View of the Shona

It is also important to understand Shona attitude to nature in the con-
text of their traditional worldview. This enables us to understand the
roots of the tendency to romanticize Shona attitudes to nature. The
worldview shows how it is possible to claim that Shona religion is envi-
ronmentally friendly. It shows how Shona ideas are regarded as ‘very
much ideas about relationships, whether with other living people, or
with spirits of the dead, or with animals, or with cleared land, or with
the bush’.20 I use this worldview to argue that such relationships are
primarily relationships with spirits and not necessarily ecological rela-
tionships with nature. The issue is that for the Shona the universe is
morally significant. They believe in immanent justice. Retribution of
peoples’ faults will fall upon people out of the universe, apart from
policemen or parental spanking. Nature cares about peoples’ moral
behaviour. It is a moral agent. The appearance of a particular animal
may indicate that something has gone morally wrong in the community.
The traditional Shona worldview is consistent with the general tra-
ditional African worldview. I agree with John S. Mbiti who argues
that one thing that the Africans have in common is their worldview.21
This worldview is anthropocentric. Everything is seen in terms of its
relation to human beings.22 Mbiti categorizes the African worldview

19 Bourdillon, Where Are the Ancestors: Changing Culture in Zimbabwe, Harare: University

of Zimbabwe Publications 1997, 58-64.

20 Ranger, ‘African Traditional Religion’, 867.
21 John S. Mbiti, African Religions and Philosophy, London: Heinemann 1969, 15-16.
22 Mbiti, 16.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 197

      197

into five parts. These are God, spirits, man,23 animals and non-bio-
logical life.24 In representing Shona worldview I conflate it into three
basic parts. These are the spiritual world, the world of human beings
and the natural world. The reason is that the Shona look out upon
a universe partaking at once of the qualities of man, nature and
God/spirits. Although this scheme is consistent with comparing world-
views with reference to a triangle of these three conceptions — man,
nature, God/spirits — the Shona worldview is one in which the tri-
angle itself is not very apparent. Let us begin by considering the spir-
itual worldview.

The Spiritual Worldview

In this section we examine the Shona spiritual worldview focusing on
Mwari (God) and ancestral, avenging (ngozi ) and alien (shave) spirits.

God/Mwari
First, the spiritual world consists of God (Mwari ).25 The Shona believe
that Mwari created the world and all in it. Mwari is regarded as the
Great Spirit whose voice people used to hear at Matopo hills.26 As the
Great Spirit Mwari is sometimes referred to as mudzimumukuru (great
ancestral spirit). So most Shona people believe that nature is a product
of ancestral spirits, probably with Mwari at the top of the hierarchy.
This belief is found in the Shona myth of creation.
The Shona myth of creation traces the origin of life and existence
of nature to a great pool (dzivaguru). The myth begins with Mwari mak-
ing the first human called Mwedzi (moon). This is at the bottom of
the pool (dziva). Mwari gave Mwedzi a medicine horn (gona). Mwedzi
asked to go out to the dry land. Mwari gave him a wife called Masasi
to accompany him. The two lived in a cave. They gave birth to grass,
bushes and trees. After this Masasi went back to the pool. Mwari gave
Mwedzi another wife called Morongo. Morongo gave birth to all kinds of
animals. Eventually she bore boys and girls. Because the children had

23 I assume that Mbiti uses the term man in a generic sense. So where I use it

instead of human beings I assume its generic sense.

24 Mbiti, 16.
25 There are other several names for God or Mwari. These are; Nyadenga (the great

one of the sky), Musikavanhu (the creator of the people), Divaguru (giver of rain/the great
pool), Mutangakugara (the one who existed in the beginning)
26 For the best account of this see Daneel, The God of the Matopo Hills, The Hague:

Mouton 1969.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 198

198  

grown up Morongo refused to continue sleeping with Mwedzi. She asked

him to sleep with his daughters. As a result he became chief (mambo)
of a great people. Masasi chose to sleep with a snake that she hid
under her bed. One day Mwedzi forced Masasi to sleep with him and
the snake bit him. Mwedzi fell ill and there was drought. The children
consulted a diviner about the persistent drought. They were told to
send the sick chief back to the pool. After this they chose another
man to be their king.27
I will use some aspects of this myth when discussing Shona atti-
tudes to particular aspects of nature. At this point it serves to demonstrate
the possible explanation of the Shona belief in nature as a product of
Mwari and the archetypal ancestors.

Chiefs/Territorial Ancestral Spirits28

Secondly the spiritual world consists of ancestral spirits. Here we have
two categories. These are family ancestral spirits (midzimu) and chiefs/
territorial ancestral spirits (mhondoro). As we have already noted in our
discussion of chiefdom the territorial ancestral spirits are often referred
to as guardians of the land. Because of this they are the ones usually
associated with traditional African ecological religious beliefs.29 The
mhondoro is the spirit of the founder of a clan. The chief is in most
cases the medium of the territorial spirit. The role of these spirits is
to protect the fertility of the land and to control rainfall. The Shona
perform rituals to them to get rid of pests, bless seeds before a new
crop is sown to ensure a successful harvest and to thank and celebrate
successful harvest seasons.30 As we have noted above the mhondoro is
the ultimate owner of nyika. Nyika also refers to the area associated
with the history of the founder of the clan as the first person to settle
in a particular area.

27 For a detailed account of this myth see Bucher, 72.

28 Although the focus of this discussion is on male ancestral spirits we should note
that there are female ancestral spirits. Among the Shona mothers are believed to very
influential as spirits responsible for women’s childbearing capacity. The focus on male
ancestors is a result of the Shona patriarchal system that believes that the most impor-
tant spirit elder is the deceased head of a family, the father or grandfather.
29 See J.M. Schoffeleers, Guardians of the Land: Essays on Central African Territorial Cults,

Gweru: Mambo Press 1979.

30 Bourdillon, Where Are the Ancestors, 73.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 199

      199

Family Ancestral Spirits

The family ancestral spirits are guardians of the extended family. They
are spirits of each family or small extended family lineage. So they
are mostly concerned with the peace and welfare of individual family
units. The belief is that ‘every grown up person is attributed to releasing
an ancestral spirit upon his death, and that this mudzimu is conceptually
linked with the realm of nature.’31 What is important to note is that
mudzimu is associated with frightening experiences such as lightning,
hail, drought, animals harmful to people, livestock and crops and benev-
olent experiences such as rain, forest fruit, the harvest, domesticated
and friendly animals.32
Overall at both territorial and family level it means the human
ancestors possess spiritual power and thus participate in sacred reality.
Even though they inhabit the world of spirits they are still present in
the human community as guardians of the family traditions, providers
of fortune, and punishers of those who break accepted mores. So
like in most African communities, among the Shona the ancestors are
crucially important for the continued welfare of the family and the
community.

Ngozi and Alien Spirits

At the family level there are also other spirits. One type is the angry
spirit. Its Shona name is ngozi. These are usually angry spirits of people
who are murdered. This spirit is the most terrifying among the Shona.
Bourdillon has this to say about the ngozi spirit,
Such a spirit attacks suddenly and very harshly. It usually attacks an individual
through his family causing a succession of death, or death followed by serous ill-
ness in other members of the family.33

Another type is the alien/stranger spirit (shave). These are spirits of

dead people unknown to the Shona community in which they choose
a host/medium. They can also be spirits of animals. The Shona believe
that traditional arts such as singing, dancing, divining, healing and
hunting are a result of an appropriate shave spirit. For example dancing
skills are attributed to the baboon spirit. The shave spirit is also accredited
for the power to bring luck to hunters. This type of spirit does not

31 Bucher, 57.
32 Bucher, 57.
33 Bourdillon, Shona Peoples, 233.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 200

200  

play a direct part in upholding the moral code of Shona society as

does the family ancestral spirits and the territorial ancestral spirits.34

The Human World

The myth of creation above shows that among the Shona the springs
of human life comes from Mwari the supreme spirit/god and the ances-
tors. So the Shona confront their own nature as bearers of power asso-
ciated with spirits. The human world consists of the living, the dead
and those about to be born. There is therefore emphasis on obedience
to hierarchical power, human and spiritual. Authority, old age and the
spiritual are regarded as sacred. Human life is also one with the animals,
the plants, and the rest of the world. The highest good is to live in
harmony with all these sacred forces. In fact the primary concern of
people is with fullness and wholeness in human existence as it is given
from the sacred powers and from the ancestors.
Since the main concern is that of re-establishing contact and com-
munion with the sources of power, the ancestors, there are a number
of sacred practitioners. These are the elders, the chiefs, diviners, heal-
ers, and spirit mediums. These ensure that people recognize their place
in the order of things, in family and community and to live according
to the traditions that promote the welfare of all. This means honouring
the ancestors, consult them about important decisions and observe
important rituals and festivals. As in most African societies, among the
Shona the sacred assumes the form of a special personage. There is
therefore the presence in the midst of the community a figure deeply
imbued with the sacred. Human existence remains under the tutelage
of the sacred. It is observed, regulated and promoted by the sacred.

Belief in Witchcraft
The Shona also hold a strong belief in witchcraft. Very often they
explain disease and misfortune in terms of witchcraft. They believe
that witches use animals, birds and snakes as familiars. Bourdillon
confirms this observation. He writes,
. . . Witches are supposed to keep familiar beasts of the night or of stealth, such
as hyenas, owls, antbears and snakes, which they can ride and send on their
errands: these beasts can be used to bewitch a victim . . .35

34 Bucher, 89-104.
35 Bourdillon, Where Are the Ancestors, 175.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 201

      201

Most Shona people are afraid of killing these animals because of fear
of witchcraft. Others kill them in the belief that witches may not oper-
ate in places where there are no animals to use.

The Natural World

As in most African worldviews among the Shona the natural world
consists of animals, plants and all biological life not classified as ani-
mals and plants. Nature also includes phenomena and objects without
biological life.36 Some of these aspects of the tangible world are believed
to be imbued with the power of the great spirit (mwari ), ancestral spir-
its (midzimu), both family and territorial and are therefore spiritually
connected. So it appears the Shona hold a paradoxical belief. This is
the belief in ancestral spirits as creators and above all things and yet
they are regarded to be within all things. For example the presence
of certain animals, birds or snakes in the homestead may mean some-
thing. When this happens the Shona call this shura. Shura means a brief
strange appearance of some rare animal. This signifies something good
or bad, depending on appearance of a particular animal, to happen
in the not so distant future.37 Usually appearances of snakes signify
death in the family.38 This is why the Shona personify animals.
Animals are mostly personified in the principle of totem-animal
(mutupo). This is a religious idea around which the Shona understand
their relationship to each other and the rest of the world. A clan adopts
a particular animal species as its progenitor or mutupo. For example,
a clan may claim its primogenitor of totem-animal as hippo (mvuu).
Others may claim theirs as fish (hove).39
Among the Shona rocks, bodies of water and mountains are also
personified as living beings. For example before climbing particular
mountains or entering particular forests one must ritually ask its per-
mission. So most aspects of nature are perceived as kin, endowed with
consciousness and the power of ancestral spirits. Trees, animals, insects
and plants are all to be approached with caution and consideration.
This why Nyajeka using data among the Shona, argues ‘life is an
organic web. The living and the dead are united. The spiritual and

36 Mbiti, 16.
37 Personal Interview with chief Kumbirai G. Mukanganwi, August 5, 2004, Harare,
Zimbabwe.
38 Mukanganwi.
39 Nyajeka, 137.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 202

202  

the manifest worlds flow together in a circle’.40 In my analysis I will

go further and argue that while her observations are true, the primary
goal is that of keeping right relations with ancestral spirits than a con-
scious goal to help nature remain in balance. The attitude to which
Shona people confront is one of placation, or appeal or coercion and
enjoyable association. Overall the Shona believe some aspects of nature
to be pervaded by spirits.

Shona Religion
The basic elements of Shona religion are reflected in the above world-
view. First we should note that Shona religion is an ancestral religion.
Despite the general widespread belief in Mwari as a high god, Shona
religious beliefs and practices concentrate on the role of ancestors as
superhuman persons active in bestowing blessing as well as misfortune
to their descendants. Every homestead head is responsible for per-
forming domestic rituals such as thanks giving, healing, rites of pas-
sage, initiation, marriage, death and birth. On a larger social scale
rites of power are performed to reinforce the political order and power
of chiefdom. These are done through rituals of rainmaking, fertility,
or strengthening the power of chiefs. Sacred specialists, particularly
diviners play important roles in Shona religion. They offer their ser-
vices to individuals, homestead heads and chiefs. So consistent with
the social organization we described above there are three basic domains
of power that operate in traditional Shona religion — the homestead,
the chiefdom and the discipline of sacred practitioners.
The Shona worldview implies the African concept of pan-vitalism.
This is the belief that everything in the universe has life. This means
that the world is not lifeless and material.41 For the Shona it is alive.
As we have seen above the Shona affirm that there are spirits in the
trees, forests, rivers, etc. This is consistent with the Shona basic assump-
tions about nature. For them life force permeates the whole universe
and matter and spirit are almost inseparable reality. Behind the nat-
ural things and intimately coexisting with them is the non-material
power. Although they see a distinction between different animals, this

40 Nyajeka, 135-142.
41 For an extensive discussion of the African concept of pan-vitalism see K.C.
Anyanwu ‘The African Worldview and Theory of Knowledge’, in: E.A. Ruch and K.C.
Anyanwu, African Philosophy: An Introduction to Main Philosophical Trends In Contemporary
Africa, Rome: Catholic Book Agency 1981, 87-90.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 203

      203

does not allow them to see things in isolation. We saw in the myth
of origin how the Shona believe all things originated from the same
ancestors. So the ideal is that like most Africans, the Shona are kin
to all creatures, gods, spirits and nature.
All this suggests that at the heart of Shona self-understanding stand
the question of ecology. For example, writing about the Jindwi Shona,
Bishau argues that Shona religious beliefs play a vital role in determining
positive values and attitudes towards nature and should be crucial com-
ponents of any efficacious environmental policy involving Shona com-
munity. Religious taboos and restrictions could take the place of scientific
explanation of environmental degradation . . .42 Theoretically therefore
one has the impression that the Shona are environmentally friendly in
the scientific sense.
In this context the Shona look out upon the cosmos as partaking
at once the qualities of man, nature and spirits. So the primary indis-
tinction of the personal, natural and sacred qualities is the first char-
acteristic to be asserted of the worldview and religion of the Shona.
As a result Shona people under the influence of traditional religion
do not set out to control or master or exploit nature. In Shona world-
view man and nature are bound together by one moral order. The
ultimate sanction for morality resides in sacred authority. This is con-
ceived in a hierarchical pattern of, in descending order, the supreme
god (mwari ), territorial ancestors, family ancestors and community elders.
This moral order is human-centred. Though it has links to the sacred
powers, to the ancestors and to nature, and indirectly leads to respect
and conservation to some aspects of nature, the ultimate goal is that
of serving human well-being only. This is why when a Shona acts
practically towards nature his/her actions may be limited by moral
considerations.
To find out the practical Shona attitudes to nature we will address
ourselves to Shona attitudes to examples of particular aspects of nature.

Shona Attitudes to Nature

Discussing the practical Shona attitudes to nature I deal first with
sacredness of the land. The reason is that land is believed to be the

42 See Tabitha Bishau, ‘Religion and the Natural Environment: An Investigation

into the Role of Jindwi Traditional Beliefs and Practices in Environmental Protection’,
unpublished bachelor of arts dissertation, University of Zimbabwe, Department of
Religious Studies, Classics and Philosophy 1997.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 204

204  

back (musana) of the ancestors on which nature and humanity are car-
ried. I then move to a discussion of attitudes to animals, trees, water
bodies/wetlands forests and mountains. The main focus on each aspect
is to show that despite the belief that people are kin to nature in prac-
tice the attitude is discriminative. Further I also show how attitudes
to a particular aspect may lead to a privileged access to natural
resources. There is a different understanding of nature in terms of its
sacredness. Some aspects are disregarded and treated with the least
fear/care and reverence because, using Eliade’s terminology, they are
not hierophanic in any sense. Those treated as hierophanies or as ends
in themselves suffer the least. This means that Shona attitudes to nature
are ambivalent. Extreme attitudes coincide: ecologically responsible and
ecologically harmful.

The Land
The Shona share with most Africans the belief in land as sacred. It
is ancestral land. Land is sacred because it bears the remains of the
ancestors particularly in the form of graves of the chiefs. Shona reli-
gion is based on the grave. In the central rituals of kumutsa midzimu
(rituals in honour of ancestors) the point of entry is the grave. In other
rituals libations are poured on the ground. In the land is also buried
the umbilical cord of people. It is the abode of the dead. When counting
members of the family the Shona always include varipasi (those who
in underworld). As result land is personified in sayings such as pasi rat-
samwa, pasi panodya (the land is angry, the land can kill). As we have
noted above ancestral spirits and chiefs own the land. At his installation
the chief holds in a clenched fist soil mixed with the body fluids of
the late chief/just soil from his grave.43 Primarily it is the chiefdom
that stands in special relations to the land. It is the land bequeathed
to chief by the ancestors. Land belongs to the living, the unborn and
the dead.
The chief acts as the trustee. He allocates land to people. The land
does not have a marketable value. Land rights are vested in cooper-
ative groups that have overriding right over those of individuals. So
it cannot be sold or transferred to another. The chief also ensures that
people follow certain taboos. For example there is a taboo that for-
bids commoners to eat the flesh of an antbear because it burrows the

43 Bucher, 31.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 205

      205

land. But the antbear is a delicacy of the chief. Another example is

that the chief ’s household reserves the flesh of the side of an elephant
on which it lies when it drops dead for consumption.44 Further the
chief also authorizes through ritual the gathering of wild fruits in forests
regarded as sacred. He also, as we shall see in the discussion below
prohibits the cutting of certain trees and the hunting of certain animals
and the pollution of certain water bodies.45 We need however to note
at the outset that each Shona group/chiefdom has its own restrictions
and taboos towards particular animals, trees or water bodies accord-
ing to its religious belief system and values related to its historical
development.
We can draw a fundamental attitude to land from the above. Land
(nyika) with its natural resources is owned by the ancestral guardians
of the land (varidzi venyika). Attitudes are strong when attached to ances-
tral ownership of land and the belief in sacredness of the land serves
as a common history that unite all generations of the same Shona sub-
group. The Shona believe that if one does not relate to sacred aspects
of nature according to prescribed taboos and restrictions the ancestors
would be angry (kutsamwa) and as result some misfortune, such as
drought and epidemics, might befall the community. So the fundamental
attitude to land is a religious one and is based on fear of mystical
sanction by the ancestors. This underlies all attitudes to other aspects
of nature like animals.
We can also see that there is a discriminative attitude. The land
outside a particular chiefdom may not be sacred for people of another
chiefdom. The chief ’s family may protect even some animals of reli-
gious significance for consumption only. So the chief and his family
may have a privileged access to natural resources.

Animals
The Shona like many other African people recognize that spirits operate
in the human world through animals, birds and fish. Each Shona sub-
group has its own taboos and restrictions towards particular animals.
Certain animals and birds like mvuu (hippo), hove (fish), mheta (water-
python), garwe (crocodile), hungwe (fish-eagle), mbiti (otter), soko (monkey),
shava (antelope), beta (termites), humba (wild-pig/warthog), nzou (elephant),
shumba (lion), and nyati (buffalo) are considered totems. The animals

44 Bucher, 32.
45 Daneel, African Earthkeepers, 20.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 206

206  

related to aquatic life are associated with the beginning of the Karanga
Shona. As a result the Mwedzi myth of creation we have described
earlier on is often associated with the Karanga. They trace their ori-
gin from dzivaguru (the great pool). So each aquatic species is believed
to be their progenitor (mutupo/totem — animal). Other Shona groups
claim their beginnings in the terrestrial region. For example the Mbire
Shona have a creation myth centred on the great monkey (soko). So
the different clans derive their primogenitors/totem from terrestrial
species.46 The Shona believe that if totemic animals are killed mysterious
diseases and wounds will catch up children.
Further most Shona clan names are the name of the totemic animal.
Members of the clan are forbidden to eat the flesh of the animal. In
some cases there is taboo on some part of the animal. A person may
not be allowed to eat, for example, the heart or trunk of an elephant
or possibly some inedible part. If one breaks the taboo one may lose
his/her teeth or experience some other harm. For example Pongweni
confirms this. He writes:
The totemic animal has a taboo attached to it or to parts of its carcass such that
the totem bearer is forbidden to eat. Infringement of this taboo has certain con-
comitant magical sanctions, such as loss of teeth or leprosy (maperembudzi ).47

This implies that most totemic animals by virtue of taboos attached

to their parts are open to killing. The Shona kill them for special rit-
uals or for using their skin for ceremonial dress for chiefs or when
diviners perform rituals for public interest. Overall, however, the totem,
in some sense, is more than names of animals. Events involving the
animals are signs from ancestral spirits. Totemic animals have mythical
and religious significance.48 This is why they feature in Shona praise
poetry.
The Shona associate other animals that are not totemic animals
such as the owl, tortoise and hyena with bad omen. Killing such ani-
mals is believed to be bad omen because the Shona believe these ani-
mals to be familiars that witches use.49 This leaves other species open
to killing. Sometimes they are killed in large numbers. This is justified
by the belief in hunting alien spirits that we talked about in the section

46 Nyajeka, 137.
47 Alec J.C. Pongweni, Shona, Praise Poetry as Role Negotiation: The Battles of the Clans
and the Sexes, Gweru: Mambo Press 1996, 9.
48 See Bourdillon, Shona Peoples, 24-25.
49 See section on witchcraft beliefs above.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 207

      207

on the spiritual world of the Shona. For example there is a hill forest
called Chinyamademo. This was a place where many wild animals lived.
A good hunter would kill many animals. The name means any one
who went in the hill with an axe would come back with some meat.
The Shona believed that the spirits of the area supplied the meat.50
Looking at totemism as it relates to Shona relations with nature
with a less critical eye than she does when relating it to the status of
women Nyajeka reaches the conclusion that the romantic school sub-
scribes to. Her statement is therefore worth quoting at length. She
argues,
The mutupo (totemism) principle focuses on fostering the primary relationships
between animals and humans, animals and the deity, humans and humans, deity
and humans, nature and humans, the dead and the living. The mutupo princi-
ple attempts to enumerate or approximate the ideal mode of life which assures
a sustainable future of all of existence. An analysis of the fundamental elements
of the mutupo principle reveals that it is a principle which seeks to create a cos-
mology that takes the existence of non-human entities seriously.51

This ideal picture may need to be qualified in the light of the Shona
practical attitudes to nature. We need to be wary of the risks involved
in taking totemism as a rallying point for environmental ethic. We
should not put a blind trust in this principle.
The primary critical position that we must take is to note that every-
thing connected with totemism is puzzling. Extreme opposites coin-
cide: good and evil, accepted and forbidden practices. We have seen
above how the permitted and the prohibited is found in the treatment
of certain totemic animals. Some animal species can be preserved for
generations as a result of totemism while others will not. The situa-
tion is worse for those species that seem to be outside Shona system
of religious values and beliefs. The positive attitude is more on ani-
mals that are identified as positive and vital part of religious life. The
Shona discriminative attitude to nature persists in relation to animals.
We may need a redefinition of animal life’s sacredness, as much as
we need this in other aspects of nature such as plant life. This does
not however mean that I underrate or do not appreciate the com-
munity function that totemism serves with respect to ecology and to
natural conservation.

50 See Claude G. Mararike, Survival Strategies in Rural Zimbabwe, Harare: Mond Books
1999, 46-47.
51 Nyajeka, 137-138.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 208

208  

Trees, Forests, Mountain Forests

The Shona also believe that particular trees, forests and mountain
forests are imbued with spirits. They develop, like in the case of ani-
mals, taboos around the cutting and destruction of certain trees, shrubs
and forests. In this section for examples I rely much on Daneel’s exten-
sive research on the significance and symbolism of trees among the
Karanga Shona and also for some of the trees’ scientific names.

Forests, Mountain Forests

There is strong belief among the Shona in sacred forest/mountain
forests. In most cases these are sacred groves. This is where they have
the burial sites of their chiefs. Daneel’s finding is correct that sometimes
sacred groves encompass large mountain ranges. These places are there-
fore the habitat of ancestral spirits. So all aspects of nature, plants,
and wildlife and water bodies are under the mystical tutelage of ances-
tral spirits and guardian animals (mhondoro). These could be lions,
baboons, leopards and snakes.52 Chiefs, spirit mediums and ward head-
men monitor this guardianship. Access to natural resources in these
forests is a special prerogative of the chiefly house. Access not sanc-
tioned through ritual is dangerous because it may result in death.
For example one of the weekly newspapers in Zimbabwe, The Manica
Post of the week 6-12 August 2004, carried the story of the 19-year-
old Loveness Bhunu who disappeared in the sacred Nzunza Mountains.
She had gone there to look for sweeping brooms. She was with her
8-year-old sister who survived death after falling down a slope. The
story surrounding her disappearance is that she angered the spirits of
the mountains by despising the size of the sweeping brooms. The
villagers in this area believe and are convinced that the spirits of
the mountains were angry and caused the girl’s death.53 Gelfand
who did research among the Korekore Shona confirms this belief. He
writes:
. . . So strong is this feeling among the Shona that one entering a strange area
in a forest, a mountain or a beautiful spot is not allowed to comment on it least
he upsets the ancestral spirits (vadzimu) of the region.54

52Daneel, African Earthkeepers, 90.

53The Manica Post, Mutare, August 6-12, 2004, ‘Misssing Girl Found Dead in Sacred
Mountain’.
54 Michael Gelfand, Shona Religion, Cape Town: Juta 1972, 54.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 209

      209

Such sacred forests are traditionally called rambatemwa. This literally

means ‘woodlands that cannot be cut.’55 The ancestral spirits rest here.
They are passageway and habitat of mhondoro (ancestral spirits in the
form of animals).56 The Shona consider it morally wrong to cut trees
in these places. Firewood and building material is fetched from places
other than these sacred places. So some animals and plant life are
protected in this manner.

Trees
The Shona also have taboos in relation to cutting or destroying cer-
tain trees. There is a belief that all large trees belong to the ancestral
spirits. For example Daneel found this among the Karanga Shona. He
comments, ‘Virtually all large trees (miti mikuru) were protected as they
belonged to the samarombo-ancestors who were believed to dwell in tree
branches.’57 The belief in ancestral spirits living in tree branches is also
implied in death rituals. In the bringing back home the ancestor ritual
some Shona use the branches of certain big trees. They symbolically
drag the branch from the deceased’s grave to the homestead. The
most commonly used branches are those of muhacha/muchakata (Parinari
curatellifolia) and mutuwa (Kirkia acuminate) trees.58
Some trees with religious significance are mubvumira (Kirkia acuminate)
used to ritually mark the establishment of a new homestead, and muzeze
(Peltiforum africanum) whose branches are used for ritual purification after
burial.59 In his research Mukamuri found that the following trees also
have religious significance. Fruit trees such as mushavi and muonde meet-
ing places for rain-asking ritual (mutoro/mukwerere).60
The list of examples could be endless.61 What is important to note
with most sacred trees is that the Shona believe that some trees are
imbued with spirits, particularly ancestral spirits. As a result these trees,
like other sacred aspects of nature, are a vital part of religious life

55 Mvududu, 152.
56 Mvududu, 152.
57 Daneel, African Earthkeepers, 92.
58 See Bucher, 74-83, for details about the bringing back home ritual and the use

of tree branches.
59 Daneel, African Earthkeepers, 93.
60 B.B. Mukamuri, ‘Local Environmental Conservation Strategies: Karanga Religion,

Politics and Environmental Control’, Environment and History, 1 (1995), 308-309.

61 For example Mvududu, 1996, 151, mentions mupanda trees that cannot be used

for firewood because herbalists use them in exorcising avenging spirits; muninu is believed
to cause family disputes if used for firewood.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 210

210  

because they belong to ancestors. They can only be cut with the rit-
ual permission of the chief. If one does not ask for permission it means
one is fighting the ancestors. This invokes the wrath of both the chief
and the ancestors. A chief may ask for a fine. This can be a sacrificial
goat, sheep or cow for conciliatory ritual with the ancestors. So the
cutting of certain trees is prohibited and guarded by ancestral spirits
or certain trees are protected because of their significance in rituals.
Some water bodies are protected in a similar manner.

Water Bodies/Wetlands
Water bodies/wetlands are sacred because they are the abode of ani-
mals associated with spirits. The Shona use the concept kuyera in relation
with this. The closest English translation of kuyera is abstinence. This
means people should approach sacred water bodies carefully and observe
taboos. For example they should not use iron buckets to draw water
from these places. They must use gourds, wooden or clay containers,
which have not been used for cooking. The guardians of wetland are
animals such as the python and njuzu (water spirits). The Shona believe
that these animals keep these waters on behalf of varipasi (underworld).
Wrong doers may be drowned in the pool by these animals.62
Water from such sources is used for ritual purposes. For example
the Shona believe that it has healing powers, can be used by traditional
healers to initiate spirit possession and cooling avenging spirits. Some
water sources are associated with a historical healing spirit medium.63

The Ethical Consequences of Shona Attitudes to Nature

Does the above analysis of Shona attitudes to nature suggest that at
the heart of Shona religion stands the question of environmental con-
servation? Theoretically one can give an affirmative answer and argue
that Shona religion necessarily serve environmental functions. This is
the position of the romantic school. It tends to imply that the Shona
plan to practice such attitudes in the way a religious environmentalist
would do. The problem is that while theoretically the Shona believe
that they are kin to nature in practice their attitudes are ambivalent
and discriminative.

62 Mukamuri, 304-305.
63 Mukamuri, 304-305.
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 211

      211

Shona attitudes to nature show that not all animals, plant life and
water sources are sacred. This means not all aspects of nature play a
pivotal and vital role in their beliefs about salvation. So there is a
different understanding of nature in terms of its sacredness. As a result
some aspects are treated with least care and reverence. We discussed
how this is justified through hunting alien spirits. Regarding totemic
animals the issue is even ambivalent as ecologically responsible and
harmful attitudes coincide. In terms of environmental conservation it
means the least revered species are more prone to destruction than
those Shona believe are imbued with spirits. So this may lead to the
problem of overexploitation and under utilization of natural resources.
In the light of this we can note three attitudes to nature. These are
to maintain, obey and act on it. The first two are related to sacred
aspects of nature. They are primarily based on fear of reprisal from
powerful ancestral spirits. As we mentioned in the discussions above
the attitudes are one of placation appeal and coercion. Sacred aspects
are not indifferent. They are morally significant. They care. They are
involved in conduct. So they constitute a system of moral consequences.
This is why respect is based on fear rather than on environmental
consciousness.
Reverence to some aspects of nature is a religious attitude that devel-
ops around social, political and economic spheres of life. The whole
scheme is tied to expressing loyalty to the chief. We saw how the chief
is respected because of his connection with sovereignty over land (nyika).
He holds land as a trustee of ancestral spirits who are the real own-
ers. The spirits are approached through the chief who works in close
association with spirit mediums. The chief is the one who intercedes
with his ancestors who are linked to the productivity of the land. So
ecologically responsible attitudes are stronger when attached to tradi-
tional social, political and economic organization. We noted how this
results in a privileged access to natural resources by the chief and his
close kin.
The third attitude nature, to act on it, is encouraged by hunting
spirits and magical and divination rituals that use charms and fetishes
of parts of animals. These are not imbued with spirits. So they are
removed from the realm of religious ethics and morality. People do
not have obligations towards these. There is no need for restrains in
dealing with them.
Further if we consider the attitudes to land we can infer a land
ethic consistent with traditional African land ethics. With respect to
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 212

212  

ownership rights it is the social group that is considered as the owner

of the land. This could be a clan, kinship group, or family. To have
the right of ownership means a great responsibility from both the indi-
vidual and the community, because the ultimate owner of the land is
the great ancestral spirit, Mwari. So the Shona believe that ancestors
gave the land to them. Land is therefore a communal property belong-
ing to both the living and the dead. This could hold only at time
when Shona anticipated no change in the future of their communities.

The Limit to Romantic Views of Shona Attitudes to Nature

Those who tend to romanticize Shona attitude to nature argue as if
nothing significant has changed. Something has changed that may not
warrant romanticism. Since colonialism there has been the introduction
of a cash economy and modern ways of farming. Administratively there
are now district councils running parallel with the traditional role of
chiefs and sometimes taking over from the latter some roles in legal
and consultative matters. Where people used to fear ancestral spirits
because they may withhold rain and diminish the productivity of land
now they can have successful harvests by using fertilizers and irrigations.
Many mission churches are providing modern agricultural education
and extension services. As a result Christians tend to more successful
farmers than non-Christians.
So in some cases the chiefs are losing their political importance, so
too do the spirits that have traditionally supported them. Christianity
provides a religion that stretches beyond the limiting boundaries of
kinship group or chiefdom. This does not however mean that the whole
system collapses. Many Shona people still maintain traditional religious
beliefs.64
In modern Zimbabwe where people are now constantly meeting
people from other religious and cultural backgrounds, to hold uncrit-
ically to old and regionalized attitudes to nature is not likely to sat-
isfy global environmental concerns. It may be possible to maintain
traditional attitudes at local level but we need something with a broad
base in order to cope with global environmental problems.

64 For a detailed analysis of religious and cultural changes in Zimbabwe see Bourdillon,

Where Are the Ancestors.

Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 213

      213

Conclusion
The purpose of this article was to engage into a descriptive and critical
analysis of Shona attitudes to nature. The examples of some animals,
plant life and water sources were used to demonstrate the discriminative
Shona attitudes based on a certain understanding of nature as sacred.
A number of conclusions can be drawn from the forgoing discussions,
reiterating the hypothesis that Shona attitudes to nature are discriminative
and ambivalent.
Looking at Shona attitudes from a practical point of view it is pos-
sible to conclude that Shona attitudes to nature are both ecologically
responsible and harmful. Reverence, responsibility and restraint in con-
nection with interaction with sacred aspects of nature are based on
the fear of ancestral spirits. This generates two attitudes to nature, to
obey and to maintain nature. These attitudes are strongly linked to
traditional religious, social, economic and political institutions that chiefs
use to control people. These employ the idioms of taboos, totemism,
kuyera (abstinence) and rambatemwa (sacred groves). On the other hand
an attitude of acting on nature based on belief in alien spirits pro-
pounds the idea that some aspects are disenchanted. They do not have
ethical religious significance.
The article also raised the issues of the resultant of overexploitation
and underutilisation of nature and the privileged access to some nat-
ural resources by the ruling lineage. We also highlighted the tradi-
tional Shona land ethic. Further we raised the issue that something is
changing in the material background in which Shona attitudes to nature
hold strongly.
The question remains how best to proceed with Shona attitudes to
nature. Is it desirable to, in the light of the environmental crisis in
Zimbabwe, proceed within the framework of traditional Shona reli-
gion and institutions or should attempts be made to work within a
framework like the one presupposed in Christian attitudes to nature
that assumes that plants and animals have a dignity and value of their
own as children of God and members, with us, of the divine family?

Nisbert Taisekwa Taringa (b. 1964), Zimbabwe, is a lecturer in

the Department of Religious Studies, Classics and Philosophy of the
University of Zimbabwe in Harare. He teaches Phenomenology of
Religion, World Religions and African Traditional Religions. He has
research interests in the relevance of traditional religions to global issues
such as the environment, gender, human rights and religions, HIV
Exchange 35,2_f4_191-214III 3/16/06 11:38 AM Page 214

214  

and Aids and intercultural/inter-religious dialogue/theology. So far he

has published ‘African Metaphors for God: Male or Female? in Scriptura
86/2 (2004), 174-179. His other articles on HIV and AIDS, inter-reli-
gious dialogue and Human rights are under consideration for publi-
cation in relevant journals. His E-mail: nissie25@yahoo.co.uk