Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
CHAPTER TWO: THE COCONUT ECONOMY OF MICAÚNE IN THE COLONIAL PERIOD
The chapter has five sections. The first gives a background on the Prazo system of Zambézia before introducing the Prazo Mahindo, which is the focus of the thesis. Section two discusses the development of plantation system in central Mozambique, in particular in Prazo Mahindo. Sections three and four present labour and land legislation and show how they helped to promote the plantation system in central Mozambique. Section five focuses on the establishment and development of the coconut economy of Micaúne.
The overall objective of this chapter is to give historical background and highlight the political and economic development of Mozambique since the 1880s in order to understand Micaúne’s economy. It starts by introducing the Prazo system to show how Portugal’s failure to convert this institution into a modern administrative unit and prove effective occupation rights led to the granting of land to foreign companies and plantation owners, as well as the approving of labour and land policies aimed at facilitating the work of these companies.
By doing so, Portugal transferred its sovereignty to those companies in exchange for a fee and stepping back from administrative management of its territories. This resulted in the appropriation of the local people’s land and their transformation into a reserve of cheap labour. This led to the establishment of a plantation system which relied on cheap labour. One example is the coconut economy of Micaúne which ended only recently.
The long-lasting coconut economy is a result of two interconnected factors. First, colonial capitalism consolidated an existing principle of wealth in people and things through several policies and legislation. Second, local customary law was adapted to the colonial law leading to the coconut economy becoming embedded in society. There was a balance between control of people (labour) by Madal and of things (palm trees and land) by both Madal and local people. The pattern of social reproduction is similar to that of other colonial economies where companies paid low wages in order to keep labour working while households were obliged to carry a large burden.
The Prazos of Zambézia
Before the arrival of the Portuguese, the Arabs were involved in long distance trade in Mozambique’s coastal areas and in the hinterland domain of the Mwenemutapa Empire, but with no intention other than the exchange of cloth and beads for gold and probably ivory. Unlike the Arabs, the Portuguese conquerors of the 16th century and the first half of the next century came with the objectives of occupying the gold and silver mines of the Mwenemutapa, replacing the Arabs through military conquest, and religious assimilation of the African people (Negrão 1995, p. 101 2).
The territorial area on which the “Prazos of the crown” were established became relevant after the treaties signed with Mwenemutapa in 1607 and 1629, which recognised Portuguese Crown ownership of vast areas in exchange for military aid (Negrão 1995, p. 101-2). The Prazos were an institution established in Mozambique in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries by the Portuguese “Crown” along the Zambezi River valley, stretching from Quelimane, on the coast, to Zumbo on the west border with Mashonaland (present-day Zimbabwe). The Prazos comprised land grants for three generations with mandatory or preferential succession in the female line. The Crown retained ownership rights but ceded use rights against payment of a leasing fee in gold after 1633 (Isaacman 1972; Capela 1999; Serra 2000; Rodrigues 2000; 2008).
According to Negrão (1995, p. 103), there were three categories of Prazos according to their geographic location, namely, the Prazos in the Zambezi Delta; those north of the Zambezi River, and finally those in the area of the Mwenemutapa Empire. The first had abundant land but did not represent an immediate interest to the adventurers because they lacked gold and ivory; the second were located in an area administered by the Marave Empire and produced cotton and ivory which were a source of income neglected by the Portuguese; the last were under the Mwenemutapa Empire’s control and produced precious metals, which was the reason for the Portuguese presence in the area.
I am concerned here with the first category because it is where my fieldwork site is located. As mentioned before, the absence of precious metals and ivory made the area unattractive to adventurers despite its abundant land; and the Prazos maintained ownership of African land untouched. The Prazos of the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries were essentially land concessions occupied by a Prazo-holder and his family, African settlers, slaves and animals (Negrão 1995, p. 101-2).
Prazo Mahindo
The earliest mention of the Mahindo (Mayindo) land that I found is from 1630 and it was under the control of Simão de Fegueredo (1633 – 1649). Mahindo land passed under different Prazo-holders up to 1807. For instance, Manuel Fegueredo de Sá (1650-1674), Henrique Faria Leitão (1675-1699), Maria de Guerra (1700-1724), and Manuel de Sousa (1725-1750), while from 1760 – 1808 there was no specific land-holder mentioned although it remained a Prazo (Rodrigues 2002, p. 301; 323-325; 387-8).
The total surface of Prazo Mahindo was 700,000 acres, the equivalent of 280,000 hectares (Capela 1999; Linder 2001). It was an aringa made of brick, with four bastions built to defend it from the ‘natives’ who, by then, were not submissive at all (Corungo n.d). Prazo Mahindo was located on the coast and apparently it was not densely populated. Negrão (2001, p. 181) shows the evolution of the population of Micaúne since the 1890s as follows: about 20,000 people between the 1890s and 1920s; 29,000 between the 1930s and 1950s and 28, 000 between the 1960s and 1970s.
The people occupying the area of Micaúne are identified as Podzo (Isaacman 1975; Rita- Ferreira 1983). During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, they actively participated in the slave trade, capturing and selling other Africans to Portuguese traders (Azevedo 1991). The Podzo cultivated maize, sorghum, millet, sweet potato, rice, beans, cassava and peanuts. Cultivation was women’s responsibility while men were responsible for toppling trees, site preparation, construction of defences and surveillance against animals that might cause loss of crops. Among the Podzo, a right of ownership over land was granted provided that it had some trees, such as palm trees, and some citrus (Zonta 2011, p.77). During the boom in oilseed production in Zambézia from the late 1860s and 1880s, the Podzo were largely responsible for the production of sesame and peanuts (Rita-Ferreira 1983; Zonta 2011).
There seems to be no consensus on the identification of the Podzo as an ethnic group. Isaacman (1975) argues that the Podzo are not an independent ethnic group but rather part of the e-Chuabo ethnic group, while, for Rita-Ferreira (1983), they are one of the peripheral minorities of the ci-Sena. This inconsistency might reflect the confluence of different aspects of both the e-Chuabo and ci – Sena as well as Islam and Christianity in shaping local culture.
The distinction between autochthons, slaves and migrant labour has faded out entirely from local memory. At present, my informants do not characterise themselves as either Podzo or ci-Sena but rather as the Mahindo, meaning those who speak the Mahindo language. Indeed, in current official documents, Mahindo designates the people who inhabit Micaúne.
The end of the distinction between autochthons and newcomers was accelerated by colonial companies’ recruitment of labour from elsewhere which led to people’s self- identification with the place rather than to a specific ethnic group. As pointed out by Zonta (2011; p. 82) “the replacement of the indigenous chiefs by the Prazo-holders at the top of the African political organisation was undertaken without major cracks in the social fabric of peoples of the region, who come to see the new tenants as the heirs or representatives of chiefs. The Prazo-holders began to collect taxes on the production of peasant land, but, as has occurred with the old chiefs, they could never claim any ownership of the land, which continued belonging to the community according to the indigenous law”.
The Prazo-holders, particularly after the 1880s, were granted the right to administer the territories under their jurisdiction, which basically meant the development of agricultural production, trade, and tax collection which should have been channelled to the Portuguese treasury (Negrão 2001, p. 72). Trade was the main activity developed by the Prazos, following the routes and networks established before the arrival of the Portuguese (Bowen 2000; Teixeira 2008). However, the Prazo system did not, in many cases, involve changes in the relations of production of the local people who carried on with subsistence production much as before. According to Negrão (2001), the African population was allowed access to a hectare per hut.
This would change in the 1880s as a result of Portugal’s failure to convert the Prazos into a modern administrative unit and the pressure put on it by other colonial powers, particularly after the Berlin Conference of 1884-5, to prove that it had control over the territories it claimed historical rights to. In the case of Zambézia, Portugal’s presence was limited to what was then Quelimane, occupied in 1870 (Isaacman & Isaacman 1991; Serra 2000), and a small coconut plantation in Micaúne that belonged to the Correia and Carvalho company (Vail & White 1980, p. 107). 15
This led the Portuguese state to introduce land reforms. The first was undertaken in 1871 and was aimed at establishing a land tenure system to promote Portuguese private investment in agriculture through a prudent allocation of land concessions on the Prazos.
As a result, in January 1873, the Mining Company of Zambézia (Companhia de Minas da Zambézia) was granted a Prazo for the exploitation of coal and ironstone in the district of Tete (current Tete Province) (Vail & White 1980). 16 In the same year, João Correia, a nephew of Isidoro Correia, a Zambezian slave trader of long standing, rented the Prazo Mahindo in Micaúne and together with Carlos Nandim Carvalho founded the Correia e Carvalho firm. This started producing bricks, cargo boats, and spirits from its sugar cane plantation and later from the sap of the Africans’ palm trees (Newitt 1973; Vail & White 1980; Negrão 1995; 2001; Capela 1999).
Initially, the company did not use many workers because it had acquired a steam engine. At the same time, it hindered any external attempt to recruit labour from its possessions. As a result, local people continued to use their time as they wished (Negrão 2001, p. 83).
The establishment of the Portuguese colonial state in the 1890s led to the introduction of labour and land laws which gradually ended the autonomy enjoyed by the Africans in the different Prazos. It was during this period that relations of production began to change significantly as all Africans took part in forced labour of various kinds as we will see.
The plantation system
The failure to attract Portuguese-based investors for the Prazos and the need to comply with the deliberations of the Berlin Conference which demanded that colonial powers prove that they de facto occupied certain areas, contributed to the government’s decision to lease two-thirds of the country to foreign companies mainly of British, French, German and Swiss origin (Vail & White 1980; Serra 2000; Bowen 2000).
The state retained control of the remaining areas, which included south of the Save River (Inhambane, Gaza and Maputo Provinces). This was already integrated into a service economy exporting labour to the South African mines and the complex transport system linking South African railways and ports to the Port of Maputo (Bowen 2000).
In this context, two main chartered companies were created, namely, the Mozambique Company and the Nyassa17 or Niassa Company. The first was founded in February 1888 and occupied Manica and Sofala Provinces in an area of approximately one hundred and forty thousand square kilometres. This company had Portuguese, British and French investors and its headquarters were in Lisbon with branches in London and Paris. The second was established in September 1891 and occupied Niassa and Cabo Delgado Provinces in an area of approximately two hundred thousand square kilometres (Vail 1976; Vail & White 1980; Negrão 1995).
These chartered companies were granted powers to: organise a police force to ensure the pacification of the territories under their jurisdiction; facilitate colonisation through the construction of infrastructure (especially roads); create and develop small industries, e.g. cotton and sugar; engage in trading agricultural surpluses and rural business; and ensure the transit of goods to neighbouring countries (mainly South Africa and Rhodesia). In exchange, the companies earned the right to collect taxes (mussoco and hut tax); negotiate through sub-concessions the exploitation of land for agriculture and mining; exploit marine wealth; exercise exclusivity in the recruitment of labour (including forced labour); and issue currency and postage stamps in the territories under their administration (Duffy 1959; Wuyts 1980; Cabaço 2007).
The Portuguese government granted leasing rights to the Zambézia Company, which was founded in 1892 as a merger of the Society of the Founders of the General Company of Zambézia, established in 1880, and the Central Africa and Zoutpansberg Exploration Company (Vail & White 1980, p. 114). A decree of 24 September 1892 gave the Zambézia Company the right of administration for 10 years of the Crown Prazos situated north of the Zambezi River and west of the Luenha and Mazoi Rivers in an area of one hundred thousand square kilometres. Most of this company’s territory remained in the hands of different investors even after Mozambique’s independence in 1975 (Great Britain 1920). Unlike the two chartered companies, the Zambézia Company had no chartered rights and most of its shares were bought by South African, English, German, French and Monacan investors. It had two main offices, one in Lisbon and another in Paris (Vail & White 1980; Negrão 1995).
Declaration
Acknowledgements
Abstract
List of figures
List of tables
List of abbreviations and acronyms
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Introduction
1.2. Research questions
1.3. Objectives
1.4. Theoretical framework
1.5. Relevance of the study
1.6. Contribution of the thesis
1.7. Research methods
1.8. Data analysis
1.9. Organisation of this study
CHAPTER TWO: THE COCONUT ECONOMY OF MICAÚNE IN THE COLONIAL PERIOD
2.1. The Prazos of Zambézia
2.1.1. Prazo Mahindo
2.2. The plantation system
2.3. The exploitation of African labour
2.4. Land legislation
2.5. The origin and expansion of the Micaúne coconut economy
CHAPTER THREE: THE COCONUT ECONOMY IN POST-COLONIAL MOZAMBIQUE
3.1. The socialist era
3.1.1. Uneven privatisations
3.2. The neoliberal era
3.2.1. The liberal Land Law (19/97) and the bet for large land concessions
CHAPTER FOUR: THE COLLAPSE OF THE COCONUT ECONOMY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
4.1. The catastrophic CLYD
4.2. Witchcraft-associated Killings: An internal frontier?
CHAPTER FIVE: LIVELIHOOD DISCOURSES AND MULTIPLE LAND CLAIMS
5.1. Changing livelihoods through plans and projects
5.2. Multiple land claims
CHAPTER SIX: CHANGING LIVELIHOODS
6.1. Household profiles
6.1.1. Very Poor (VP) and Poor (P) Households
6.1.1.1. Subsistence farming
6.1.1.2. Fishing
6.1.2 Middle households
6.1.2.1. Subsistence farming
6.2.2.2. Fishing
6.2.2.3. Petty Trade
6.1.3. Better-off households
6.1.3.1. Business
6.1.3.2. Cash Crops
6.1.3.3. Formal Employment
6.1.3. 4. State stipends
CHAPTER SEVEN: LOCAL POLITICS AT THE FRONTIER
7.1 From geography to poor infrastructure
7.2. State events as a site of interaction
7.3. The legacy of the armed conflict
7.4 Community authorities and local development
CHAPTER EIGHT: CHANGING MEANINGS ATTRIBUTED TO LAND
8.1. Land as a commodity
8.2. Land as a source of identity
8.3. Land as a reserve of wealth
CHAPTER NINE: CONCLUSIONS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
