Concept of land holding among cattle keepers
Apr 08, 2008
DEAR readers, as the discussion, mostly misinformation, on the “9000†square miles of Buganda (<i>akenda</i>) continues, it would be useful if I informed the Movement Caucus about the cattle-keepers’ traditional concept of “landholdingâ€.
By Yoweri Museveni
DEAR readers, as the discussion, mostly misinformation, on the “9000†square miles of Buganda (akenda) continues, it would be useful if I informed the Movement Caucus about the cattle-keepers’ traditional concept of “landholdingâ€.
This is important because much of the 9000, square miles of land is in the cattle-keepers’ area. The land referred to is, however, much less as the Caucus will be informed by the Minister of Lands and others who know. That, however, does not change the essence.
Whatever the size, what was the system of land management in this area before colonialism and since? Those cattle keeping areas: parts of Mawogola, Kabula (the two of them are known as Bweera), Buwekula (Rukoba, Kiyonga), Ssingo (Kyenkwanzi, Muyenje, Kiboga), Bulemezi (Ngoma, Wakyato) and Buruuli (whose pre-colonial land management I need to check first) have been managed by different political authorities over the last 1,000 years.
The Headquarters of the Bachwezi kingdom (900AD to 1500AD) was in the area of Mawogola. The excavations at Bigo bya Mugyenyi and Ntutsi leave nobody in doubt that this area was occupied by cattle keepers and that the settlement of Ntutsi was bigger than the city of London at that time. After the collapse of the Bachwezi Kingdom in 1500AD, the successor Kingdoms of Bunyoro, Nkore, Buganda and Bweera controlled these areas at different times. By the time of the colonialism, the kingdom of Bunyoro had somewhat shrank but they still controlled Buhekula (Buwekula), parts of Ssingo, Bulemezi, Buruuli and Bugerere.
Kabarega had also re-occupied Tooro up to Mweya which had earlier succeeded from Bunyoro in 1830. Buddu (Masaka) had been captured by Buganda from Bunyoro between 1700 and 1800 Kooki (Rakai) had been autonomous for sometime although they seem to have been in some alliance with Buganda having broken from Bunyoro earlier. awogola (Bweera) was referred to by Banyankore as Enkiiko (borderland) while Kabula (Lyantonde) was part of Nkore; indeed, the Christian refugees from Buganda were given shelter there by King Ntare V of Ankole when they fled the Moslem regime of Kabaka Kalema.
Whatever, the political regimes, the cattle-keepers stayed in this area continuously for all this time. It was the useless struggles by the myopic kings of the mini-kingdoms that succeeded the Bachwezi state that were disturbing their lives.
That is why I discouraged people like Princess Kabakumba to discontinue these short-sighted claims and counter-claims. Those tribal kingdoms were weak and useless for the purposes of modern Africa. Proof of this: they could not defend us against colonialism. While the Emperor of Ethiopia, Menelik, was able to defeat the Italians in 1896, the Emperors of China and Japan were able to defeat imperialism.
While we have restored the kingdoms for cultural reasons (language, etc.) we should not allow them to drag us back to their failed policy of tribal rivalries. Instead, we should concentrate on respecting the rights of the peoples that live historically and legally in these areas as well as on building a strong Uganda and East Africa.
That is why it becomes useful to understand the indigenous systems of these areas as well as the colonial distortions that were introduced so that we manage them in a win-win way, going forward and not backwards (ideologically, politically, economically and socially).
In the cattle keepers land tenure system, they were nomadic, following water and grass. Indeed, given the undeveloped water infrastructure, this was the rational thing to do. Go to the rivers — Katonga, Kafu, Lugogo, Mayanja, Rwizi, etc. or to the lakes: Kakyera, Mbuuro, etc. during the dry season.
During the wet season, there would be water everywhere; so the herds would come back from the river and Lake areas. This is called kufuruka (verb); hence, the Bafuruki (those who migrate). Who owned the land then? The king (the state) owned the land whatever the kingdom (Nkore, Buganda, Bunyoro, Bweera, Kooki, Tooro, etc).
By the time of colonialism, there was residual clan ownership of land in some areas; but the predominant concept was the kings (the state) owned the land. In Ankole the talk was: Obutaka bw’omugabe — the land of the king.
However, there were residual clan lands such as Kichwamba kya Bagina (Karugire’s clan); this area is now in Rwanda (Mutara region). My clan seem to have had attachment to a place called Bugala (near River Kagera in Tanzania) and Kakamba in Rushenyi County, etc. Although the land belonged to the king, the families had the right of use — on the basis of first come, first served.
In their nomadic way of life, the one who established eka (kraal) first at any one time had the primary right.
Although they would continue to graze communally, there was a radius of about 400 metres from the kraal that was called ekyanya. This was reserved for the calves or sick cows e.g. the fractured ones (empendeki), etc. Even today, when I am checking the census of my cattle at Kisozi, I say the following: “Nyekiro n’entezingahi?†“How many are the cattle at night?†This is because there are calves which are too young to go with the herd during the day and stay in the “ekyanya†the reserved area for the calves. If anybody brought his cattle into this area, you had to fight him or open a case against him. Similarly, one’s well was his by right.
When the Banyoro invaded Ankole towards the end of the 18th Century, they actually made valley dams for communal use. They were called Kyabanyoro. They are still there but silted up. Therefore, when the Europeans, in the case of the cattle areas of Buganda, Ankole and Tooro, brought their new system of mailo land, crown land, etc, they put it on top of this indigenous system.
Whenever there were no crop-settlers, the cattle-keepers continued this system oblivious of the fact that the concerned area was mailo or crown land.
The writer is the President of Uganda
DEAR readers, as the discussion, mostly misinformation, on the “9000†square miles of Buganda (akenda) continues, it would be useful if I informed the Movement Caucus about the cattle-keepers’ traditional concept of “landholdingâ€.
This is important because much of the 9000, square miles of land is in the cattle-keepers’ area. The land referred to is, however, much less as the Caucus will be informed by the Minister of Lands and others who know. That, however, does not change the essence.
Whatever the size, what was the system of land management in this area before colonialism and since? Those cattle keeping areas: parts of Mawogola, Kabula (the two of them are known as Bweera), Buwekula (Rukoba, Kiyonga), Ssingo (Kyenkwanzi, Muyenje, Kiboga), Bulemezi (Ngoma, Wakyato) and Buruuli (whose pre-colonial land management I need to check first) have been managed by different political authorities over the last 1,000 years.
The Headquarters of the Bachwezi kingdom (900AD to 1500AD) was in the area of Mawogola. The excavations at Bigo bya Mugyenyi and Ntutsi leave nobody in doubt that this area was occupied by cattle keepers and that the settlement of Ntutsi was bigger than the city of London at that time. After the collapse of the Bachwezi Kingdom in 1500AD, the successor Kingdoms of Bunyoro, Nkore, Buganda and Bweera controlled these areas at different times. By the time of the colonialism, the kingdom of Bunyoro had somewhat shrank but they still controlled Buhekula (Buwekula), parts of Ssingo, Bulemezi, Buruuli and Bugerere.
Kabarega had also re-occupied Tooro up to Mweya which had earlier succeeded from Bunyoro in 1830. Buddu (Masaka) had been captured by Buganda from Bunyoro between 1700 and 1800 Kooki (Rakai) had been autonomous for sometime although they seem to have been in some alliance with Buganda having broken from Bunyoro earlier. awogola (Bweera) was referred to by Banyankore as Enkiiko (borderland) while Kabula (Lyantonde) was part of Nkore; indeed, the Christian refugees from Buganda were given shelter there by King Ntare V of Ankole when they fled the Moslem regime of Kabaka Kalema.
Whatever, the political regimes, the cattle-keepers stayed in this area continuously for all this time. It was the useless struggles by the myopic kings of the mini-kingdoms that succeeded the Bachwezi state that were disturbing their lives.
That is why I discouraged people like Princess Kabakumba to discontinue these short-sighted claims and counter-claims. Those tribal kingdoms were weak and useless for the purposes of modern Africa. Proof of this: they could not defend us against colonialism. While the Emperor of Ethiopia, Menelik, was able to defeat the Italians in 1896, the Emperors of China and Japan were able to defeat imperialism.
While we have restored the kingdoms for cultural reasons (language, etc.) we should not allow them to drag us back to their failed policy of tribal rivalries. Instead, we should concentrate on respecting the rights of the peoples that live historically and legally in these areas as well as on building a strong Uganda and East Africa.
That is why it becomes useful to understand the indigenous systems of these areas as well as the colonial distortions that were introduced so that we manage them in a win-win way, going forward and not backwards (ideologically, politically, economically and socially).
In the cattle keepers land tenure system, they were nomadic, following water and grass. Indeed, given the undeveloped water infrastructure, this was the rational thing to do. Go to the rivers — Katonga, Kafu, Lugogo, Mayanja, Rwizi, etc. or to the lakes: Kakyera, Mbuuro, etc. during the dry season.
During the wet season, there would be water everywhere; so the herds would come back from the river and Lake areas. This is called kufuruka (verb); hence, the Bafuruki (those who migrate). Who owned the land then? The king (the state) owned the land whatever the kingdom (Nkore, Buganda, Bunyoro, Bweera, Kooki, Tooro, etc).
By the time of colonialism, there was residual clan ownership of land in some areas; but the predominant concept was the kings (the state) owned the land. In Ankole the talk was: Obutaka bw’omugabe — the land of the king.
However, there were residual clan lands such as Kichwamba kya Bagina (Karugire’s clan); this area is now in Rwanda (Mutara region). My clan seem to have had attachment to a place called Bugala (near River Kagera in Tanzania) and Kakamba in Rushenyi County, etc. Although the land belonged to the king, the families had the right of use — on the basis of first come, first served.
In their nomadic way of life, the one who established eka (kraal) first at any one time had the primary right.
Although they would continue to graze communally, there was a radius of about 400 metres from the kraal that was called ekyanya. This was reserved for the calves or sick cows e.g. the fractured ones (empendeki), etc. Even today, when I am checking the census of my cattle at Kisozi, I say the following: “Nyekiro n’entezingahi?†“How many are the cattle at night?†This is because there are calves which are too young to go with the herd during the day and stay in the “ekyanya†the reserved area for the calves. If anybody brought his cattle into this area, you had to fight him or open a case against him. Similarly, one’s well was his by right.
When the Banyoro invaded Ankole towards the end of the 18th Century, they actually made valley dams for communal use. They were called Kyabanyoro. They are still there but silted up. Therefore, when the Europeans, in the case of the cattle areas of Buganda, Ankole and Tooro, brought their new system of mailo land, crown land, etc, they put it on top of this indigenous system.
Whenever there were no crop-settlers, the cattle-keepers continued this system oblivious of the fact that the concerned area was mailo or crown land.
The writer is the President of Uganda