By Princess Eugene Majuru
As Zimbabwe advances toward establishing a new administrative capital in Mount Hampden, the country faces an important historical and cultural decision: what identity should define this emerging centre of power?
The relocation of Parliament and major government infrastructure away from old Harare is more than urban development. It represents the birth of a new political heart of Zimbabwe. Yet, paradoxically, this new seat of governance still bears the name of a British colonial figure — Mount Hampden — a reminder of imperial memory rather than indigenous sovereignty.
If Zimbabwe is serious about completing the process of decolonisation, then the renaming of Mount Hampden must become part of the national conversation.
A capital city is not merely a collection of buildings. It is a symbol of identity, authority, ancestry and legitimacy. It tells future generations whose story matters and whose memory the nation chooses to preserve.
For a territory deeply rooted in the history of the Mbari royal clan, there is a compelling argument that its future name should reflect the ancestral custodians of the land.
As a descendant and Sovereign Custodian of the Mbari clan, I believe the renaming of Mount Hampden presents an opportunity for historical correction and cultural restoration.
Why Mount Hampden No Longer Fits Zimbabwe’s Future
The name “Mount Hampden” originates from colonial history and honours a British political figure disconnected from Zimbabwean civilisation, kingship or indigenous governance.
This contradiction becomes even more glaring when one considers that the surrounding territory is historically linked to Mbari clan royalty — rulers, farmers, land custodians and political authorities whose heritage predates colonial occupation by centuries.
Can Zimbabwe truly establish a sovereign new capital while continuing to carry the symbolic imprint of colonial naming?
The answer increasingly appears to be no.
Political independence without cultural restoration remains incomplete.
Zimbabwe has already demonstrated the importance of reclaiming indigenous identity through renaming. Salisbury became Harare. Fort Victoria became Masvingo. Gwelo became Gweru. Umtali became Mutare.
Yet one of the most significant developments in independent Zimbabwe — the creation of a new capital city — still bears a colonial label.
This is an opportunity to finally align geography with history.
Why Mbari Is a Strong Option
One of the most fitting names for the new capital is simply:
Mbari
Short, powerful and deeply ancestral, Mbari would honour the royal lineage historically tied to the territory.
The name immediately reconnects governance with indigenous authority and custodianship of the land.
Unlike imported colonial names, Mbari speaks directly to Zimbabwean memory and history.
It is dignified, authentic and rooted.
A capital city named Mbari would send a powerful message: Zimbabwe is confident enough to govern from a place named after its own civilisation.
Haarari: Correcting History
Another deeply compelling option is:
Haarari
Many Zimbabweans know Harare as the nation’s capital, but historical reflection suggests an important correction may be needed.
According to Mbari clan tradition, Haarari was the nickname associated with King Mbari, from whom the city name later evolved.
If this understanding is respected, then Zimbabwe may have inherited a colonial distortion or simplification of the original name.
Restoring Haarari would not merely rename the city — it would correct history.
It would represent an act of linguistic restoration and cultural dignity.
At a time when Zimbabwe seeks to reclaim its narrative, embracing Haarari could symbolise a return to authenticity.
Rather than reproducing inherited colonial spellings or pronunciations, Zimbabwe would reclaim the ancestral meaning embedded in the land.
In this sense, Haarari becomes more than a name.
It becomes correction.
New Harare: A Practical Yet Symbolic Option
For those who favour continuity while embracing change, New Harare remains another strong possibility.
Its meaning is immediately clear.
As Zimbabwe’s administrative functions gradually relocate, Mount Hampden is increasingly functioning as a new national capital.
Naming it New Harare would recognise continuity with the old city while acknowledging political transformation.
Like capitals across the world that evolved through expansion and relocation, New Harare would symbolise national transition rather than rupture.
It would also preserve familiarity while allowing Zimbabwe to shape a new political centre with its own identity.
Gurundoro: Rooted in Totemic Royalty
Perhaps among the most culturally profound possibilities is:
Gurundoro
This name draws directly from the Mbari clan totem:
Shumba Gurundoro.
In Shona culture, totems are not decorative symbols. They are repositories of identity, ancestry and social belonging. They preserve memory and define lineage.
A capital named Gurundoro would therefore anchor the new city firmly within indigenous systems of meaning.
It would honour ancestral authority while reinforcing continuity between past and present.
Importantly, the symbolism of Gurundoro evokes royalty, guardianship and legitimacy.
These are fitting qualities for a seat of national governance.
Shumba: The Symbol of Royal Power
Equally powerful is the option:
Shumba
Meaning lion, the name immediately communicates strength, sovereignty and kingship.
The lion has long symbolised leadership and authority across many African societies.
Within the Mbari tradition, Shumba is already embedded in the clan identity through Shumba Gurundoro.
A capital called Shumba would project confidence, prestige and indigenous pride.
It would also position Zimbabwe symbolically within a broader African tradition where leadership and rulership are closely associated with the lion.
Few names carry such immediate political symbolism.
The Legacy of King Makombe
As discussions continue, it is also worth recognising the legacy of King Makombe, remembered as the last king within the historical line.
His place within Mbari memory offers another important avenue for cultural recognition.
Future public institutions, roads, monuments or districts within the new capital could bear names connected to King Makombe and other royal figures tied to the land.
A decolonised city should not only change names.
It should restore memory.
Culture, Tradition and Sovereignty
Zimbabwe often speaks of protecting culture and tradition.
Yet genuine respect for culture demands more than speeches.
It requires practical action.
A nation that respects its heritage must ensure that its most important spaces reflect indigenous history rather than colonial inheritance.
The territory surrounding Mount Hampden is not culturally neutral land.
It carries royal memory.
It belongs to a historical landscape shaped by Mbari clan rulers, farmers and custodians long before colonialism imposed foreign names.
For this reason, names such as Mbari, Haarari, New Harare, Gurundoro and Shumba are not random proposals.
They emerge from history.
They emerge from lineage.
They emerge from belonging.
A Defining Moment for Zimbabwe
The construction of a new State House and the rise of a new capital city provide Zimbabwe with a rare historical opportunity.
Few nations receive the chance to redefine their political geography in real time.
This moment should not be wasted.
A capital city should tell Zimbabweans who they are.
It should honour ancestors.
It should respect custodianship.
It should reflect sovereignty.
If Zimbabwe truly seeks to complete its decolonisation journey, then renaming Mount Hampden in a way that honours Mbari royal heritage is not merely symbolic.
It is necessary.
The question is no longer whether change should happen.
The real question is whether Zimbabwe is ready to finally call its new capital by a name that belongs to its own people.
Comments
About Author
