King Lewanika

By Xlibris UK

This book expands into the neglected history of Pan African Cross-Border and African traditional leadership in the Southern African liberation struggle. It pays homage the seven African Kings appointed as Honorary Presidents of Congress, at its founding at Bloemfontein on January 8, 1912. These were Dalindyebo of the Thembus; Montsioa of the Barolong; Lewanika of Barotseland; Letsie II of Lesotho Khama of Mangwato of Botswana; Marclane of Pondoland and Mopei of the Bakgatla. King Lewanika of Barotseland is the subject of the memorial lecture. Nelson Mandela, named his second son, Makgatho Lewanika, in honour of Sefako Mapogo Makgatho, the second President of the ANC and King Lewanika of Barotseland
In his biography of Barotselands sovereign ruler from 1878 to 1916, King Lewanika the First, Gervas Clay writes that:
His life began in exile while his heritage lay under alien rule. He had seen the usurper defeated and annihilated and some of his royal relatives in turn enthroned in triumph and overthrown into despair and death.
He had seen the country he loved torn by internecine wars and had himself barely escaped with his life into further exile. His triumphant return he knew would be without permanency of stability unless he discovered a new way to rule. ... He had learnt a better way, and become popular with his people whom he had led to treaties with the dominant colonial power of the age. He died full of honour, loved and respected by his people...
Leaving the heart of his country reserved to the Barotse by treaty rights and his own family secure on the throne. No African ruler of his time achieved more, and none was more regretted by all who had known him
In SiLozi, the hybrid SeSotho-based national lingua franca commonly shared language of Barotseland the head of the national state, the King, goes by the title Mulena Yo Muhulu meaning Supreme Ruler. In the Siluyana language, which is the language of the founding leadership of Barotseland, the King goes by the title Mbumu-wa-Litunga, or simply Litunga. Following the 1884 outbreak of civil war and after the 1885 triump of being re-instated on the throne, Lubosi was referred to as Mbumu-wa-Litunga, Lewanika la Matunga Mwana Kokoma Milonga! meaning the Supreme Lord of the Land, Unifier of Realms and Great Conqueror!
From the first communications, encounters and treaties, the British Government and its colonial authorities and agents acknowledged Litunga Lewanika as King Lewanika of Barotseland. Words of the last stanza of the Barotse National Anthem say it all:
Imutakwandu Mulena Muhulu/ Oh, our late long serving Great King
Yo lu mu fiwe ki Muhauheli/ Given to us by the grace of God
Ha lu punyuhile, ha lu iketile / That we have survived, that we are at peace.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris UK
• Release date: Feb 15, 2017
• ISBN: 9781524597788

Book preview

KING LEWANIKA I

Akashambatwa

Mbikusita Lewanika

Copyright © 2017 by Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewanika.

Library of Congress Control Number:   2017902213

ISBN:         Hardcover               978-1-5245-9780-1

                   Softcover                 978-1-5245-9779-5

                     eBook                     978-1-5245-9778-8

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted

in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system,

without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models,

and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Rev. date: 04/28/2017

Xlibris

800-056-3182

www.Xlibrispublishing.co.uk

749426

COVER DRAWING

cover.jpg

By Prince Godwin Kaluwe Yeta

The cover drawing of King Lewanika the First is by his great-grandson, Prince Godwin Akabiwa Mando Kaluwe Yeta. His grandfather was Litia, the first-born and first successor of King Lewanika the First. His father was Edmund Kaluwe, one of the sons of this Litia, Litunga (King) Yeta the Third (1916–1945). He was named after one of his paternal grand-uncles, Godwin Akabiwa Mando Mbikusita Lewanika, Litunga (King) Lewanika the Second (1968–1977). We are grateful for his permission for the use of this drawing.

interior%20after%20cover.jpg

King Lewanika I at Bulawayo,

Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) in 1902

COPYRIGHT NOTICES

The following constitutes a continuation of the copyright page:

1. Quotations all used with the permission of the Botswana Society for Benson, Mary, Tshekedi Khama as I Knew Him, in Botswana Notes and Records, Volume 8, Gaborone, Botswana, 1976; Jackson, Ashley, Bad Chiefs and Sub-Tribes: Aspects of Recruitment for the British Army in the Bechuanaland Protectorate, 1841–42, Botswana Notes and Records, Volume 28, 1996, the Botswana Society, Gaborone, Botswana; and Ramsey, Jeff, ‘A Child that Does not Cry in the Cradle: The 1908–1910 Campaign to Keep the Bechuanaland Protectorate out of the Union of South Africa’, Botswana Notes and Records, Volume 27, 1995.

2. Quotation all used with permission from the Director-General of National Museum of Zambia copyright holders for Clay, Gervas, Your Friend, Lewanika: The Life and Times of Lubosi Lewanika Litunga of Barotseland, 1842–1916, Chatto & Windus, London, England, 1968.

3. Quotations all used with the permission of the author for Christie, Callum, Goodbye Colonialism, Farewell Feudalism, Kirkgate Books, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 2016.

4. Quotations all used with permission from Carol Cattley-Hall, the widow and literary executor of the copyright of Hall, Richard, Zambia, Pall Mall Press, London, 1965.

5. Quotation used with permission of the Secretary, Church of Barotseland for Keleke ya Bulozi, Lipina za Keleke ya Bulozi, Hymn Number 222, Printed in Lozi, Morija Printing Press, Morija, Lesotho, Reprint 2000.

6. Quotation used with permission of author for Mills, Greg, Why States Recover; Changing Walking Societies into Winning Nations – From Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, Pancador Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2014.

7. Quotations used with permission of authors for Mubita, Malumo, and Chisala, Beatwell S., Zambia and the Barotseland Agreement 1964, Self-Published, Lusaka, 2012.

8. Quotations used with permission of author for Musambachime, Mwewa, One Zambia, One Nation, One Country, Xlibris Publishing Company, UK, 2016.

9. Quotation used with permission of author for Noyoo, Ndangwa, Social Welfare in Zambia: The Search for a Transformative Agenda, Adonis & Abbey Publishers, Inc., London, England, UK, 2013.

10. Quotations used with permission from author for Phiri, Bizeck Jube, A Political History of Zambia: From the Colonial Period to the 3rd Republic, Africa World Press, Inc., Trenton, New Jersey, United States of America, 2006.

11. Quotations used with permission from author for Prins, Gwyn, The Hidden Hippopotamus, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, UK.

12. Quotations used with permission of author for Sardanis, Andrew, Africa Another Side of the Coin: Northern Rhodesia’s Final Years and Zambia’s Nationhood, I. B. Tauris, London, England, UK, 2003, and Sardanis, Andrew, Zambia: The First 50 Years, I. B. Tauris, London, England, UK, 2014.

13. Quotations used with permission of Ms Yaputula Tembo, the daughter and literary executor of the copyright of Tembo, Nephus, The One Party State and Its Future, Kenneth Kaunda Foundation, Lusaka, Zambia, 1990.

14. Quotations used with permission of author for Wina, Sikota, The Night Without a President, Multimedia Publications, Lusaka, Zambia, 1985.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am thankful to Matthew ‘M.K.’ Malefane and his team of comrades, Vuyisile Moedi, Miliki Tati, Teboho Ntsihlele, Vyron Nkosi, Tshepo Kgasoan and Sophamandla Zondi, as well as Freedom Park chief executive Jane Mufamadi and her officers, Khorombi Matibe and Pamela, for their assistance and cooperation in kicking off the project leading up to the publication of this book. I am indebted to the library resources generously availed by my friend David Moir of Likaka, Sesheke, Barotseland, and initial proofreading assistance by Kabasia Mwikisa, Monde Sifuniso and Ndangwa Nooyo as well as assistance from library staff and other personnel at the National Assembly of Zambia by Chama Mfula, Honester Tembo, and Muswa Muhau. The oral history and family creed shared with, and gained from, my late parents and siblings – Litunga Lewanika II, Mooyo Imwambo Namaya Namakau Ng’umbi, Mwanang’ono Kufekisa, Sifuniso, Litia Malikana, Mbikusita Wamundila, Mwananyanda Kaluwe and Lubinda Mwangela-wa-Naluya – is source for much of my contribution.

Nothing would have come of the idea of this book without my brother Sekufele’s and my sister Mbololwa’s preparedness to come to my rescue by sharing the financial burden, my brother Kusiyo for generously sharing notes, and the rest of my living siblings, Inonge, Mbuywana, and Mwendaendi, for supporting me in every other way. Furthermore, it is appropriate and pleasing that the book cover drawing of King Lewanika the First is by Prince Godwin Akabiwa Mando Kaluwe Yeta. This is because it shows that the family and national chain remains unbroken from generation to generation. There is nothing more critically important than the ancestral calling to keep the family and national spirit and public service alive and on the case! Of course, those who assisted, as above, are not responsible for the ideas and views in this book.

The book is a contribution to an ongoing dialogue for positively engaging and addressing differences, conflicts, and contradictions arising in the wake of the legacy of King Lewanika the First of Barotseland with gratitude also due to Ndangwa Noyoo, Sitwala Imenda, Mutungulu Wanga, John Lilemba, Muleta Kalaluka, Saleya Kwalombota, and Sibeta Mundia. Neither the editor nor the contributors necessarily share or agree with what other contributors have written, but we all believe in the intellectual and political freedom of expression and self-expression, and we are each expressing our own personal opinions. However, as the editor, I am responsible for this book’s shortcomings, overall content, presentation, and publication.

CONTENTS

Prologue

Ndangwa Noyoo (Phd) University Of Johannesburg

Introduction

King Lewanika In Southern African Liberation

Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika African Lineki Courier,

Mukola Memorial Trust

Chapter One

Indigenous African Nationalism Over Changing Times:

Bastion Of Resistance

Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika

African Lineki Courier, Mukola Memorial Trust

Chapter Two

Indigenous African Nationalism Over Changing Times:

Survival And Sovereignty

Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika

African Lineki Courier, Mukola Memorial Trust

Chapter Three

Indigenous African Nationalism Over Changing Times:

Action Has Spoken Louder

Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika

African Lineki Courier, Mukola Memorial Trust

Chapter Four

Barotseland: Evolution Of A Nation State

Michael Mutungulu Wanga

Chapter Five

The Origins Of Barotseland – North-Western Rhodesia

And North-Eastern Rhodesia

Saleya Kwalombota, Barotse Post

Chapter Six

Lewanika: A Great African King Ahead Of His Times

Ndangwa Noyoo (Phd) University Of Johannesburg

Chapter Seven

Which Way Barotseland? Inheritance, Experience, Reaction,

And Road Map

Sitwala Namwinji Imenda

Senior Professor, University Of Zululand

Chapter Eight

Political Prisoners And Human Rights Violations

Linyungandambo

Chapter Nine

One Media On Self-Determination Of Barotseland

Sibetta Mundia, The Barotseland Post

Chapter Ten

Lewanika’s 1884 Flight To Mashi: A Historical Perspective

And Lessons Learnt

John Lilemba, University Of Barotseland

Chapter Eleven

Barotse People’s Story, Land, And Culture

Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika African Lineki Courier,

Mukola Memorial Trust

Conclusion

Barotseland’s Tryst With Destiny

Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika African Lineki Courier,

Mukola Memorial Trust

Appendix

The Offsprings Of King Lewanika The First

About Author And Editor

About Other Contributors

PROLOGUE

NDANGWA NOYOO (PHD) UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG

This book is based on an inaugural lecture that was presented by Prince Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewanika on 14 July 2016, which took place at the Freedom Park, Pretoria, Gauteng Province of South Africa. The lecture focused on King Lewanika the First of Barotseland (1842–1916). Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewanika is a grandson of King Lewanika I and a son of Litunga (King) Lewanika II, whose personal name was Mbikusita Lewanika.

The presenter’s father, apart from being the last son of King Lewanika on the Barotse throne, was also the founder president general of the Northern Rhodesia African Congress (NRAC) in 1948, which was renamed the Northern Rhodesia African Congress (NRANC) in 1952. Mbikusita Lewanika had played a pivotal role in laying the foundation for the anti-colonial struggle in colonial Northern Rhodesia. It is important to highlight the fact that Mbikusita Lewanika is the unsung founding father of the political movement to independence and a pioneer of the trade union movement in the country now known as Zambia. In the 1940s, he worked for Rhokana Mine in the town of Nkana-Kitwe in the Copperbelt Province of present-day Zambia. For twenty years, he worked as a senior African clerk, senior welfare officer, personnel, and public relations officer for a copper mine. He led and guided fellow African workers in countless ways. He served as founder president of the Kitwe African Society, proposer of the formation of the Northern Rhodesia Federation of African Welfare Association in 1946, pioneer and promoter of trade unionism. He also wrote several books and published articles in Africa and overseas and later translated the Bible and the classic Pilgrim’s Progress into SiLozi (Lewanika, 2014). As founder president general of the NRAC, Mbikusita Lewanika undertook the 1950 pioneer visit to India. This trip was part study tour, which had him visit every part of India and many of its socio-economic centres. It was a political mission, which had him meet leaders of the Indian Congress Party and government at many levels and in many locations, culminating in meetings with the first Indian state president, Dr Rajendra Prasad, and first Indian prime minister, Nehru (with future prime minister Indira Nehru Gandhi taking notes!), as well as a military ceremony for him to lay a wreath at the grave site of Mahatma Gandhi. It was also a scouting mission for opportunities and facilities for African further education and human resource development, one of whole tangible and long-term results was to conclude and sign for an Indian scholarship scheme with the prime minister—in various and much expanded form, this seed he planted continues to grow more trees and bear more fruits of education (Lewanika, 2014).

This tour turned into an official visit, at the end of which he addressed the Indian nation on All-India Radio. This pioneer visit to India consummated what has become the Indo-Zambia bilateral relationship at a meeting with the Indian first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru. He initiated programmes for sending young future leaders for overseas higher education, at least four of whom were to be in the first post-colonial cabinet of ministers. He facilitated oversees education of one of Zambia’s vice presidents, Simon Kapwepwe, and three of its prime ministers, Mainza Chona, Nalumino Mundia, and Daniel Lisulo. He was the first and only African from Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland to address a meeting attended by members of both the House of Commons and the House of Lords at Westminster, in London, where he spoke against the proposal to establish the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland (Lewanika, 2014). He pioneered cross-border consultation and cooperation among leaders of African freedom movement. This was through correspondence with Kwame Nkrumah, prime minister of the Gold Coast, and meetings with nationalist leaders Mbiyu Koinange and Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya as well as liaison with African support groups in London, through personalities such as George Padmore and Dr Hastings Kamuzu Banda of Nyasaland (Malawi). All these facts and heroic acts by Mbikusita Lewanika were deliberately blotted out of Zambia’s history by the On Party State dictatorship of the country’s first president Kenneth Kaunda and his United National Independence Party (UNIP). This behaviour has been replicated by all successive political administrations in Zambia. All post-colonial Zambian governments have seen to it that Mbikusita Lewanika was omitted from Zambia’s political narrative (Lewanika, 2014).

Prince Akashambatwa has followed in his father’s footsteps as he has served Zambia in different capacities. This gravitation towards public service seems to be something that flows from one generation to another. He was managing director of the Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority (TAZARA). Earlier, he served as a subsidiary general manager as well as group controller of Group Management Services and group director of projects of the Industrial Development Corporation of Zambia. In the private sector, he was general manager of Blackhood Hodge, a multi-national corporation. In political governance, he was the initiator and founder of the popular movement against the one-party state dictatorship of Kenneth Kaunda and UNIP in Zambia which was formally constituted into the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD). He served as the first national secretary of the MMD and was also a legislator, a cabinet minister of science, technology, and vocational training of the first MMD government headed by President Frederick Chiluba after Zambia returned to multi-party politics. He resigned from the ministerial position in protest against creeping corruption, undemocratic tendencies, and socially insensitive economic policies.

He also served as special assistant (political) to the state president, Rupiah Banda, as well as chairman of the National Economic Advisory Council, chairman of the National Governing Council of the African Peer Review Mechanism, and a commissioner of the Anti-Corruption Commission, under President Levy Mwanawasa. He continues to shape national discourses in his private capacity through various write-ups and engagements as he is also a prolific writer. Just like his father, he has written several books, namely, For the seeds in our Blood, 1981; Milk in the Basket!: The political-economic malaise in Zambia, 1990; Hour for reunion: Movement for Multi-party Democracy: Conception, dissension, and reconciliation, Volume 1; A Mulungushi Experience: 2005 MMD’s 5th National Convention, 2005, and he has penned numerous articles touching on inter alia: the social, political, and economic aspects as well as the political economy of Zambia, and other parts of the African continent.

The thoughts that permeate this book revolve around the notion of authenticity as regards to African governance and statehood, both of which are rare, if not, non-existent phenomena in present-day Africa. This is because the former were supplanted by colonial European inventions, and whose boundaries and nomenclature continue to endure in Africa today, whilst being cemented by African governments, regional bodies, and the continent’s highest body, the African Union. There are very few pre-colonial African polities that survived the deleterious effects of colonialism and went on to become sovereign post-colonial states. Many of them were dismantled by the colonialists. Only a few exist, for example, Botswana kingdoms, Ethiopia, Lesotho, and Swaziland.

Curiously, academic discourses in Africa seem to shy away from hailing these indigenous and authentic state formations, but rather they are more concerned with the legitimization of colonial constructs, which are now referred to as post-colonial states. These post-colonial states are nothing but creations of the former colonial masters and not rooted in Africa’s history of state formation, prior to colonial encroachment. Arguably, that is why Africa is littered with examples of failed governance systems.

This is primarily due to the fact that the post-colonial state is itself a caricature of European states. Indeed, African post-colonial states and their forms of governance, which were exported to Africa via colonialism, have failed to resonate with the lives of the mass of the people in Africa, because they are not rooted in the continent’s indigenous socio-political and economic structures. Unlike other non-Western parts of the world, where countries have sought to mainstream their indigenous governance systems into modern ones, by fusing them with those of their former colonial masters, African countries have consistently eschewed their own historical realities in this matter, due to perhaps sectional and vested interests. Undoubtedly, some pre-colonial African societies had created advanced political and economic systems which had generated cohesion amongst different assimilated ethnic groups. Some kingdoms, such as Barotseland, had even unified heterogeneous ethnic polities into unitary self-governing entities.

Hence, it is of critical importance that this book, which reflects on the legacy of King Lubosi Lewanika, not only examines the evolution of an indigenous African polity, namely, Bulozi-Barotseland, in present times, but also celebrates this nation’s continued existence for close to five centuries. This is despite concerted efforts by the British colonialists and the post-colonial Zambian political authorities to vitiate and attempt to erase this African indigenous nation from the face of the earth. Given the foregoing, and since almost all of Africa’s post-colonial governance systems were superimposed on its social fabric by Europeans, it thus becomes pertinent in the twenty-first century (after almost fifty years, or more, of independence for most of sub-Saharan Africa) to pose the question: Are the current national boundaries really relevant in regard to the obtaining challenges of Africa? Moreover, since they are also products of a failed mission, namely, colonialism, should African countries continue to be constituted in the same way that they have since independence?

Unfortunately, the monolithic post-colonial African state, with its equally highly centralised and mainly ineffectual governance systems, with vast powers concentrated in one person, the president, has not been effective in delivering the public good to the mass of the people in Africa. It is quite ironic that almost all African countries treat the boundaries, which their former colonial masters bequeathed them, as sacrosanct. Strangely enough, this wrong formula for nation state building and development continues to be post-colonial Africa’s ‘Holy Grail’. The bringing together or even coercing of a disparate array of polities, cultures, and peoples into the new post-colonial state seems to have failed.

It can therefore be argued that a new approach is thus needed in order for the post-colonial state to deliver overall well-being to Africa’s people. This discussion debunks the myth of the efficacy of the monolithic post-colonial African state and argues that, in fact, it is the main problem behind Africa’s protracted and seemingly insurmountable social problems. In this regard, there is a need for more regional governance or autonomy in African countries, if progress is to be attained in matters of development. It is contended here that the post-colonial African state, in its current form, will continue to reproduce social discord and civil wars that will also produce alienated and excluded Africans from national affairs. Moreover, since the problem in Africa is the ‘winner takes it all’ syndrome, whereby more dominant ethnic groups pervert the electoral system in order to entrench themselves in power, since they have numerical strength, democracy in Africa has become a sham. With larger ethnic groups having the lions’ share of government posts, not because of merit, but due to primordial ties, some African governments do not see the need to respond to the needs of all citizens, but of a particular ethnic group.

That is why in almost every part of Africa different ethnic groups are pitted against each other. Thus countries are held together in a state of ‘semi-peace’ through the threat of violence and not due to individual ‘buy-in’, voluntary affiliation, and association. This situation seems to mirror that of Barotseland in Zambia. A closer examination of the former situation is needed in order for one to come to grips with the question of Barotseland in post-colonial Zambia.

mid-book.jpg

King Lewanika I at Edinburg, Scotland in 1902

INTRODUCTION

KING LEWANIKA IN SOUTHERN AFRICAN LIBERATION

AKASHAMBATWA MBIKUSITA-LEWANIKA AFRICAN LINEKI COURIER, MUKOLA MEMORIAL TRUST

Jane Mufamadi is the chief executive officer of Freedom Park, which is an agency of the Department of Arts and Culture in the Government of South Africa. She gave the welcome remarks at the inaugural memorial lecture of King Lewanika the First of Barotseland. This memorial lecture depicts a broader appreciation of the Southern African liberation movement’s foundations and scope. It highlighted cross-colonial borders aspect and contributions of indigenous African leadership in the resistance to European occupation and African dispossession.

The subject memorial lecture pays homage to one of the African kings appointed as honorary presidents of the South African Native National Congress, at its founding at Bloemfontein on 8 January 1912. These were Dalindyebo of the Thembus,¹ Montsioa of the Barolong, Lewanika of the Barotse, Letsie the Second of Basotho Khama of the BaMangwato of Botswana, Marclane of the Pondo, and Mopei of the Bakgatla. Later, there was an addition of the king of Zululand, Dinizulu, who was exiled at the time. Of these royal heroes of the Southern African struggle, King Lewanika of Barotseland is the particular subject of the memorial lecture.

King Lewanika the First, like King Letsie the Second of Lesotho and King Khama the Third of the Bamangwato of Botswana, was from beyond the borders of present-day South Africa. It is significant that the first president of post-Apartheid South Africa, Nelson Mandela, named his second son, Makgatho Lewanika, in honour of Sefako Mapogo Makgatho, the second president of the ANC, who was from the Mapedi royal family, and King Lewanika the First of Barotseland.

As reported in the mass media, at the official opening of the Makgatho Lewanika Mandela Primary School at Mvezo in the Eastern Cape of South Africa, State and ANC President Jacob Zuma said,

‘The fact that King Lewanika was named honorary president with other traditional rulers of the time … speaks volumes of his character and the spirit of ANC in southern region. Even though his grandson and his granddaughter have not been able to make it due to unforeseen circumstances, we honor King Lubosi Lewanika from Barotseland, in Zambia.’

Of course, at the founding of the South African Native National Congress in 1912, there was no Zambia—though, of course, there was Barotseland, as a centuries-old indigenous African kingdom, which pre-dated and ultimately outlived European colonialism. My sister Dr Mbololwa Mbikusita-Lewanika and I were the King Lewanika’s grandchildren referred to by President Zuma. We greatly appreciated the invitation, although we were unable to be present due to a change of opening date and logistical complications. We hope the near future holds prospects for some Barotse nationals paying a visit to this significantly named school and linking up with the offsprings of Mandela’s son, who were named after our King Lewanika the First of Barotseland.

It is gratifying that Freedom Park is addressing the neglected subject of the launching Pan African Cross-Border and African traditional leadership in the historical and continuing Southern African liberation struggle. This is the significance of the inaugural memorial lecture of King Lewanika the First of Barotseland. This brings into focus the significant roles of African kings’ whole leadership and impact underscores both the multi-national and traditional African roots of the Southern African Struggle. The traditional leadership directs to rediscovery of the brand of indigenous African nationalism that first encountered European colonialism and which has tended to be eclipsed by the non-indigenous African nationalism to whose leaders post-colonial power was handed over by departing European colonial authorities.

Indigenous African nationalism desists from using rank-degrading terms like paramount chief or chief in reference to African kings and rulers. It rejects usage of other debasing terms such as tribe for African communities and nations. It does not accept use of the term dialect for African languages. Thus, for example, in reference to the royal heads of regional branches of the government of Barotseland, the term that is adopted is Mulena (singular) and Malena (plural). The term king and Litunga are used interchangeably.

In the central southern African indigenous Kingdom of Barotseland, one does not necessarily ascend to the throne with own given name or names. When per chance a king is granted to adopt a kingship name that coincides with own given name or names, this has to be more or less as an adopted name. If, as in the case of Mwanawina the son of Lewanika the First, the name adopted for the throne has earlier been granted to another king, then then that name is formalised.

For example, the first King of Barotseland, Litunga Mboo, and the tenth king, Litunga Mulambwa, as well as the fourteenth king, Litunga Lewanika the First did not have their given names adopted upon ascending to the throne, and rather their given names were eclipsed. Similarly, the sons of King Lewanika the First Litia ascended the throne as Litunga Yeta the Third, and Mwanang’ono Imasiku ascended the throne as Litunga Imwiko. Up to the reign of Litungas Yeta the Third and Imwiko the First, the given names were eclipsed upon ascending to the throne under a different adopted name.

Lubosi and Mawaniketwa are some of given names of Barotseland’s sovereign ruler from 1878 to 1916. His given name Lubosi was adopted for the first six years of his reign up to 1884. The name Lewanika was adopted for the last thirty-one years of his reign from 1885, after which time he commonly referred to as King Lewanika, Since 1968, he is referred to as King Lewanika the First, in order to distinguish him from his son, who has enthroned as Litunga Lewanika the Second.

King Lewanika the First has been succeeded by six personalities. The first was Litunga Yeta III, whose given names are Litia Malikana. The second is Litunga Imwiko, whose given names are Mwanang’ono Imasiku – since 2000, he is referred to was Litunga Imwiko the First, in order to distinguish him from his son who was enthroned as Litunga Imwiko the Second. The third was Litunga Mwanawina III, who is Sir Mwanawina Lewanika. The fourth is Litunga Lewanika the Second, whose given names include Mbikusita Akabiwa. The fifth is Litunga Yeta IV, whose given name is Ilute. The sixth is Litunga Imwiko the Second, whose given name is Lubosi.

Of late, the previously given names remained attached to the names adopted upon ascending the throne. Thus, Mbikusita Akabiwa Mando ascended the throne as Litunga Lewanika the Second and is usually referred to as Litunga Mbikusita Lewanika the Second, Ilute the son of Litunga Yeta the Third ascended the throne as Litunga Yeta IV and is usually referred to as Litunga Ilute Yeta IV, and Lubosi the son of Litunga Imwiko the First ascended the throne as Litunga Imwiko the Second and is usually referred to as Litunga Lubosi Imwiko the Second. Despite what has been adopted since the 1968 ascendancy of Litunga Mbikusita Lewanika the Second. Thus, the current common reference is to Litunga Ilute Yeta IV, and Litunga Lubosi Imwiko the Second. However, Barotse kings do not necessarily inherit the adopted names of their biological fathers.

The kingdom inherited and bequeathed by King Lewanika the First is referred to as Barotseland. It is stressed that names, titles, and language applied to people and their situation, and the right to self-naming and self-description, are integral to human rights to self-determination and national sovereignty. This is part of the contestation between indigenous African nationalism and European colonialism, which continues under non-indigenous African post-colonial governance. You are a slave if other people can impose a name like Cassias Clay on you, you are a champion if you can insist on freely choosing your own name like Mohamed Ali.

In SiLozi, the hybrid Sesotho-based national lingua franca commonly shared language of Barotseland the head of the national state, the king, goes by the title Mulena-Yo-Muhulu, meaning Supreme Ruler. In the Siluyana language, which is the language of the founding leadership of Barotseland, the king goes by the title Mbumu-wa-Litunga, or simply Litunga. Following the 1884 outbreak of civil war and after the 1885 triumph of being reinstated on the throne, Lubosi was referred to as Mbumu-wa-Litunga, Lewanika la Matunga Mwana Kokoma Milonga!—meaning the Supreme Lord of the Land, Unifier of Realms and Great Conqueror!

From the first communications and encounters, the British government and its colonial authorities and agents acknowledged Litunga Lewanika as King Lewanika of Barotseland. But once the British protectorate arrangement was agreed and settled, even during King Lewanika’s life, the British authorities begun to use the terms king and paramount chief interchangeably. The same applied to King Khama of Bamangwato in Botswana and King Moshoeshoe of Lesotho.

Later the British insisted on degrading the status of African kings by calling them paramount chiefs. This was to underscore the notion of only one king in their empire. But African leaders like Lewanika, Khama, Moshoeshoe, and Tshaka usually continued to be referred to as kings during their lifetimes. However, the debasing title of paramount chief became more of a standard practice when it came to their successors.

This discourteous attitude was met with civil but relentless Barotse government protest, until finally in 1953 the British conceded to officially recognise the king of Barotseland as the Litunga, which is the proper designation, as explained above. The post-colonial Zambian government and media has usually maintained the usage title of Litunga. However, on a de jure basis and in some governance practices, belittling attitude, categorisation and treatment of African indigenous authorities has continued, except during vote-seeking electioneering exercises.

The memorial lecture on King Lewanika the First of Barotseland was an opportunity to critique incomplete and biased narrations of history, share knowledge, learn, and determine enlightened way forward for Barotseland and Zambia. This is the motivation in sharing reflection on the contextual background, personality, and leadership of this King of Barotseland. The subject of the lecture is about, but not only, the Barotse land, people, and leadership through history, which goes back to pre-colonial indigenous independent national state of Barotseland, from the seventeenth and even sixteenth century.

This covers the British South African Company and British Colonial Office administration of Barotseland Protectorate, for the first six and half decades of the twentieth century. It reaches into the half a century of the Zambian post-colonial era, including the fate of the Barotseland Agreement 1964 and its aftermath up to date and onward into the future. The lecture, together with contributions of discussants, participants, and follow-up commentators, is intended to light the way to address the predicament and way forward of Barotseland within or outside of Zambia. Apart from the inevitable relevance to Zambia, this subject is of enlightening comparative value to reflection over the broader universal experience of colonialism and post-colonial regimes.

My lecture and the presentations by discussants in this book focus on the roles and legacy of this African king. His story is in danger of being lost together with his leadership that underscores both traditional African roots and multi-national span of the Southern African liberation struggle.

My lecture was on the topic of ‘Indigenous African Nationalism over Changing Times: Barotseland in the Southern African Liberation Struggle’. This fits in well with Freedom Park’s own endeavour towards telling, ‘3.6 billion years of history … told from an African perspective’. Freedom Park has come to the rescue of this buried aspect in the history of the Southern African liberation struggle. It is an honour to have been welcomed and facilitated to present this inaugural memorial lecture. However, I refuse to rest on this honour, instead am inspired to choose to use it as a launching pad continue and spread the dialogue. This is with emphasis on first and foremost digging out the roots of subject problems before proclaiming solutions.

Continuing to address the Barotse issue is further necessitated by the repeated and unfailing psychological and political reaction exhibition of Zambian discomfort that leads to a failure to squarely, conclusively, and satisfactorily address it. There is a standing negativity and ignorance over the issue of Barotseland. The dominant tendency is to trivialise it. The Zambian establishment belief and hope is that the problem will evaporate and the aggrieved will shut up, while the triumphant will celebrate their victory in peace and stability.

For example, on 5 October 2016, I was condemned for exhibiting a 1960 picture of Litunga Mwanawina the Third of Barotseland standing with British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan. Over this picture, Elvis Tembo declared,

‘At some point I thought you were wise, after being accorded a chance of saving [serving?] on different portfolios in the Zambian government this is how you show your gratitude. I am disappointed with your endeavours of dividing mother Zambia, really I thought you had grown past through this. I guess I was wrong to even befriend you, shame on you!’

This is a typical acrimonious reaction which aims to attack the person of the one who speaks out. It seeks to suppress freedom of speech rather than address the facts presented and the merits of issues raised. The reaction was condemning me for even presenting these facts. The idea is that I should shut up over these uncomfortable issues, even if they are facts, on account of a gratitude I am presumed to owe for having rendered service to Zambia! This is part of cowardly, dishonest, and intimidating culture that hopes that nation building of Zambia is better accomplished by ignoring or not knowing some historical facts.

Given the freedom in the social media, and the fact that the truth endures and cannot be forever suppressed, Elvis Tembo received a counter-reaction from a descendant of Silumbu, the heroic warrior of the 1864 war of independence from Basotho (Makololo) occupation and the 1885 civil war that brought back Lubosi Lewanika to the Barotse throne. This descendant of Silumbu, Mwangelwa Akapelwa, responded by writing back,

‘What is wrong with you, Elvis Tembo? You mean we still have people in Zambia who still want their children to remain ignorant of their history merely for political expediency? Our new generation deserves better. Information is power. My people perish because they lack knowledge. Sometimes you need to look back in order to move forward. Let us be proud of our past and learn from it. It is gratifying to learn that our participants in the scheme of things before, during and after the scramble for and partition of Africa with a clear conscious of what they stood for. Indigenous African Nationalism is a welcome history book that should not be politicised.’

In another example, over a Facebook posting of a factual tabulation of the repeated demands for optimum self-rule, land reservation, and adherence to treaties, from 1898 to 1964, the reaction from Peter Kunda was,

‘These kind[s] of memories and thinking are not good for a modern society. The best way is to learn to think & practice inclusiveness. Times have changed. Wanting and demanding a Stone Age is impractical in the current setting. The Modern Lozi people should learn to rise above Barotseland & think of 72 ethnic groupings making Zambia. May the Spirit of God open the eyes of my Fathers, Mothers, Brothers, Sisters, Nieces & Nephews of Western Province to see a new season with wider and broader prospective for the hardworking Zambian to thrive?’

This underscores the environment of history-phobia, political suppression and social hostility that faces those who raise the question of Barotseland’s historical relationship with Northern Rhodesia / Zambia. The critic is propagating the notion that what is good for modern society is selective and collective lapse of memory and the discarding of uncomfortable facts of history. Ndangwa Noyoo expects people to learn and practice inclusiveness while fearing some of the historical background of some of those who are to be included. He also thinks that the years 1878 to 1964 were in