Thus the external evidence relating to Ruganzu suggests that Ruganzu may have lived sometime near, and maybe shortly after,1700. Of course, the search for such chronological precision may be, as Henige suggests, but a chimera. Nonetheless, inquiry of this type is still worthwhile since it can direct attention to new issues and lead to greater understanding of the internal processes of historical social change. In this case the questions on chronology, which derive from an examination of the external sources, suggest the need to look closely at the Rwandan sources for internal inconsistencies as well.

Such a query elicits many questions on the cycle of the three Rwandan kings to follow Ruganzu Ndori. In the principal historical sources associated with the Rwandan central court, very few historical details are provided for these kings over the course of a century (by Kagame’s chronological reckoning), and those observations that are mentioned are suspect; furthermore, such vagueness contrasts with the quality of historical knowledge for the periods both preceding and following this cycle of kings between Ruganzu and Rujugira.

The reign of Kigeri Nyamuheshera serves well by way of illustration, partly because there is more concrete historical data (as opposed to attributed ethno-graphical innovations) for Nyamuheshera than for the kings either before or after. This should make him less suspect as a later addition to the list. Kagame notes that Kigeri Nyamuheshera was a renowned warrior king, and the claims advanced for Nyamuheshera’s conquests are indeed extensive: Busozo and Bukunzi in the mountainous areas of what is today southwestern Rwanda; Ngweshi, a Shi state west of the Rusizi River, in what is now eastern Zaire; Buzi and Buhunde, northwest of Lake Kivu; the area around Lake Edward (Lake Idi Amin) in the north; and Ndorwa, in the mountainous region northeast of central Rwanda.

Vansina seems to have sensed the vulnerability of the traditions on this point—grandiose claims without much corroboration; he mentions that many of the attacks associated with Ruganzu in the official traditions may actually have been undertaken by Nyamuheshera.49 But it is also possible that many of the claims advanced for Nyamuheshera in fact are attributable to other kings. From current knowledge, it is impossible to give credence to traditions citing Nyamuheshera’s exploits in Busozo and Bukunzi. Ruganzu is said to have raided there, and Rwabugiri remained in Kinyaga for an extended period of time, butthere is no evidence of any conquest of Bukunzi, nor is there local evidence of Nyamuheshera’s presence there—despite extensive fieldwork in that region; as far as can reasonably be ascertained, these areas were autonomous of the Rwandan state until the 1920s.50 In addition, while de Lacger attributes to Nyamuheshera the death of Balishake, king of Bukunzi, Kagame refers to Balishake as “of Itahire” (north of Rusenyi).There is no mention of Balishake in the available genealogies of the Bukunzi royal family.

As for Ngweshe, the indications are that it was Gahindiro who first submitted the ruling line of Ngweshe (i.e., Bishugi) to tributary status to the Rwandan kings, in protecting them from the senior Shi line in Buhaya (Kabare)— Gahindiro, who lived in the early nineteenth century, not Nyamuheshera, who lived in the late sixteenth century (by Kagame’s chronology).Furthermore, the exploits attributed to Nyamuheshera on Ijwi are almost certainly misattributed. “II dirigea … une expédition punitive contre l’île d’Idjwi, qui refusait de payer tribute.”In fact there was no kingdom on Ijwi for the period Kagame identifies with Nyamuheshera.Aside from these references in the Rwandan sources, there is virtually no mention of Nyamuheshera in the poetry; Kagame mentions him in three fragments of poems totaling less than a hundred lines, and without a trace of his military exploits.From the Ijwi sources there is no question that what Kagame describes for Kigeri Nyamuheshera is attributable only to his homonym Kigeri Rwabugiri in the late nineteenth century.

The attack attributed to Nyamuheshera on Buzi and Buhunde was probably in fact carried out by Gahindiro or Rwogera—Hunde tradition says that Rwogera killed Kalinda; Rwandan records attribute this to Gahindiro. The attack on Masisi, far into the mountains northwest of Lake Kivu—a long march not to have more of an account than appears in the sources—is more likely that of Kigeri Rwabugiri (who did pursue a Buhunde king to Masisi). Rwabugiri was the homonym of Nyamuheshera—they shared the same dynastic name (Kigeri), and hence, in theory, the same ideological/historical attributes, and it is not unusual to find the historical events associated with one repeated for the other.The same is true of the Rwandan penetration toward Lake Edward, attributed to Kigeri Nyamuheshera. In the east, despite claims of a glorious victory over Ndorwa, there were neither major territorial gains nor traditions on the war left as a legacy to such exploits.In sum, there is no evidence in the western “conquered” regions for the vaunted military exploits claimed for Nyamuheshera, and little evidence in the Rwandan traditions to support the claims put forth on Nyamuheshera’s behalf elsewhere.

Nyamuheshera is cited always as a warrior king of immense stature, but we still find from the army histories that there was only a single army created under his reign, a single army that “disappeared without explanation” leaving no military organization to his credit, and no names of the leaders of the army to posterity.One of the companies of his army appears to have been the Ingangurarugo; that name reappears as the name of the personal royal guard under Kigeri Rwabugiri. (While it is plausible that each of the two kings had an important military company of same name, it needs to be seen also as part of a wider pattern of intellectual appropriation and shifting attribution.) In addition, in the histories of the armies formed preceding Kigeri Nyamuheshera, there is no mention, or even trace, of any of the immense campaigns that Nyamuheshera is said to have launched against his neighbors.

Thus the man whom the court histories claim as one of Rwanda’s grand warrior kings has left no trace in the countries he is said to have conquered, though they remember Ruganzu, of greater antiquity. Kigeri Nyamuheshera re-cruited only a single army (which disappeared mysteriously), and he receives no mention in the military histories of armies formed before his time (although such histories typically include references to subsequent campaigns under later kings). In short,“the renowned monarch added not a single army to the military institutions of the country.”And even Kagame, never one to underplay the glorification of the kings of Rwanda, concludes that “Kigeli [Kigeri] II left no other institutional legacy that we know of.”In addition, Kigeri Nyamuheshera was not at first buried in the cemetery reserved for sepulchres of kings of the dynastic name of Kigeri; we are told that at the time of Nyamuheshera’s death this cemetery was included in land conquered by Ndorwa. His body was interred there only later, during the time of Cyilima Rujugira, some four reigns later.

Furthermore, Delmas states that for three successive generations (Ruganzu, Mutara Semugeshi, and Kigeri Nyamuheshera) the king left only a single son, his heir; and that the successor to Nyamuheshera, Mibambwe Gisanura, left only a single son in addition to the heir.Thus four generations of kings from Ruganzu left a total of only five male offspring. (It is nonetheless notable that Delmas does note another son of Semugeshi, Nzuki, eight to ten generations back from 1950, whose descendants are called, interestingly enough, the Abaganzu, thus indicat-ing descent from Ruganzu).Such an eventuality is curious, given the status of descent from the king and the reign lengths which Kagame attributes to these kings. At the very least it raises questions about the veracity of the claim that they were indeed successive kings.

Post Views: 41
https://uk.amateka.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/king-kigeli.webphttps://uk.amateka.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/king-kigeli-150x150.webpBarataHistory of kingsSocial & cultureThus the external evidence relating to Ruganzu suggests that Ruganzu may have lived sometime near, and maybe shortly after,1700. Of course, the search for such chronological precision may be, as Henige suggests, but a chimera. Nonetheless, inquiry of this type is still worthwhile since it can direct attention to...AMATEKA