1.) schw.weiss - StoneWatch

Whether present-day foragers (hunter-gatherers) are remains (pristine) of prehistoric foragers is a subject of considerable
debate in Anthropology. These foragers have in recent years undergone some significant sociocultural
and socioeconomic changes. For example, in Tanzania, the Sandawe of Kondoa (central Tanzania) have become
more sedentary farmers. They do still speak the click-language, but also they are speaking other languages.
The Hadza (Hadzabe) live in the Eysasi Basin (east of Lake Eysasi), Karutu district, Arusha Region. Half of the
population continues to be full-time foragers/hunter-gatherers and the remaining practice half-time foraging. In
terms of lifeways (culture, language, economy) they still significantly differ from their neighbours (the Bantu and
Cushitic people). In most cases the Hadza speak the click-language (other linguists think that it is different from
Khoisan) when they are communicating to each other. However, if they are communicating to non-Hadza then
they speak other Bantu or Cushitic languages. Current estimation put the Hadza foragers to be between 800 and
1000 people.
The Government of Tanzania provides the Hadza with free food (when it is necessary), education and health services.
There are two or three Non-Government Organisations that support the Hadza. I don’t know if the Sandawe
gets any support, probably this is because they have become more farmers than foragers.
These answers given by Dr. Mabulla are confirmed by the informations I got from Dr. Hessel
Visser at the Kuru Development Trust in D’Kar/Ghanzi (Botswana): He assumes the Hadza
with a population of about about 1500 persons and the Sandawe with about 30. to 40.000 persons.
Moreover he defines the language of the Hadza as Khoisanoid (meaning not Khoisan,
but similar to it) and of the Sandawe as (real) Khoisan.
What remains, is the first sentence of Dr. Mabulla’s answer, the “anthropological debate”,
whether the Hadza and Sandawe are remains of prehistoric foragers? From point of view of
rock art one must come to the conclusion that they are the descendants of the early artist. I
would therefore like to let A. R. Willcox present his arguments: 306
The Hadza are a tribe of only about 800 persons living near Lake Eyasi. Physically their resemblance to the southern
Khoisan is not close: they are blacker and more sturdily built so whatever they had of Bushman-like physical
make-up is clearly well mixed with Negro elements. They remain fairly short however, the men averaging
1,60 m and the women just under 1,50 m. Culturally the resemblance is close. As noted above they use the bow
and arrow (although a much longer than the Bushman weapon) and they poison the heads. They also dress similarly
in skins, erect similar roughly built small “beehive” huts or camp in rock shelters, use fire-drills and wood
digging sticks (but without stone weights) and make beads out of ostrich eggshells. ... All this was no doubt typical
of any Later Stone Age modus vivendi.
A similar argumentation we find looking to Benjamin W. Smith’s publication: 307
The Sandawe speak a language which belongs to a different family from the Bantu languages spoken by their
neighbours. This language includes click sounds. The only other African languages to use such sounds are the
Bushmen and related languages found in southern Africa.
I would like to follow both the argumentations out of the reasons these authors mention, but
from the point of view of the rock art of the Kondoa and Singida region too. This rock art
depicts clear similarities to the south African Bushman rock art (as not to say that it is
Bushman rock art). And we now find two groups of Bushman-like people in central Tanzania
speaking a Khoisan language and having the same cultural resemblance like the San. Therefore
I do not understand the anthropological debates mentioned above: Why should this rock art has
been made by Bushman-like people who then disappeared and being “replaced” in more recent
times by other people groups speaking Khoisan and having similar cultural resemblance too,
who are not responsible for the Kondoa and Singida rock art. No, I believe that the Hadza and
306 Willcox, A. R.: The Rock Art of Africa, London & Canberra 1984, page 119.
307 Smith, B. W.: Zambia's Ancient Rock Art, The Paintings of Kasama, Livingstone (Zambia) 1997.
146