THE ZINBABYE RUINS

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XIX, Issue 17, 23 January 1891, Page 15

THE ZINBABYE RUINS

(Fort Beaufort Advocate)

The ie- iiscovery of the Zinbabye ruins during the Pioneers' marck to Fort Hampdeo and the long detai s published in the English papers of their appearance, has exched the keenest interest in hi-to.ical and archaeological circles. To commercial men the9e ruins simply confirm their hopes t'< at at last, a new, or rather an older Xl Doiado has been reached, a-d is ready for exploration. But to the pchol.ir and tbe antiquarian, the widtst field is open for study and speculation, we have dug up Homer, HtroJotu*, and a good deal of Bible history, aud it now remains whether we may not also dig up in the ruins of Zinbabye, tbe story of the land of Ophir, and tbe building of the Temple of Soloman. Neither the Times 1 correspondent nor the Morning Post attempts to give any clue to the date or style or builders of those mighty wallß they describe. It may be that like ihe round towers of Ireland and the prehistoric remains of Southern Mexico, they remain for ever a puizle to antiquaries, the Bilent but unreadable records of an extinguished race. The oldest account we find of the existence of those ruins is in a work published at Cologne in Latin, in the year 1615, by the Jesuit Fa'her larnc. a Portuguese, in his life ol Gorsalee bilveira, missionary in the Kingdom of Morotopata now Mastooualand, and translated into English some few years ago by the Rev. Dr. Allen, of Kingwilliamstown. Describing the scene of Father Silveira's labours, the writer says.—" The Kingdom abounds in gold, especially in Toroa where even now (1530), the ruins of some old stone edificeß are standing, which for size and magnificence might well be compared with the buildings of the ancient Romacß. Hence, come think that this was the land of Ophir. The next traveller who described the ruins was Carl Mauch, a German scientist in 1871, after a break of 300 years. He fixes the position at " Limbaoe "in lat. 20 south, 31 east, and 4,200 feet above sea level. One group covers the side of a hill and another stands on a bold granite kopje. The walls are bailt of hewn granite blocks about the size of bricks, and put together without mortar. Some walls are 30 feet high, and tapering from ten feet at the base to seven at the top, several long beams of stone, cot eight by three, project from the inner side of the walls as if to carry a balcony. Some of these stones have ornaments cut on them, lozenge shaped figures, separated by zig-zag horizontal lines." The Pioneer conespoLdent adds that ihe walls are circular and concentric with a large open space in the centre, and that tbey found a massive conical tower 10 fcei high, and also noted a zig-zig hne> of ornament along the top of one of the walls. Thet-e particul irs still li aye us quite in the dark as to the buildeis or the bui dings. The ci neentne walla poiiM to a MoLomedan origin, as well as tbe ornamen'. We know the Pcrtugutse f .und a powerful civilised people in tioutti East Afri-a witG unlimited slave labour at their comman'i, which n ey called Monaco or Moors. Whether these southern offshoots of Arab civilisation were the builders of these mighty edifices, already ruined in Father Silveira's time or whethjr they are of sti 1 more ancient origin— Puoemcian or Eg\ ptian— has yet to be investigated. It would be permature now to h zard an opinion.