By HRH Princess Eugene Majuru
Zimbabwe’s history has long been contested, distorted, and reshaped by colonial record-keepers, academics, and even local elites who benefited from rewriting the past. Among the most enduring myths is the narrative surrounding Gutsa and Hwata in connection with the trial of Charwe Nyakasikana, popularly remembered as Mbuya Nehanda. The trial, conducted by the colonial High Court in 1898, has shaped much of the “official” memory of resistance against colonialism. Yet, careful scrutiny of the testimonies, trial records, and the broader political context reveals contradictions that demand re-examination.
Central to this debate is the silence, erasure, and misrepresentation of the Mbari clan—true rulers of Harare before colonial intrusion. Writers like D.N. Beach, working from selective colonial records and relying heavily on biased informants such as Professor Zaranyika, perpetuated half-truths and outright distortions. The result has been a deliberate sidelining of the Gurundoro-Mbari dynasty, while elevating clans such as Hwata and Gutsa as central figures in Zimbabwe’s precolonial history.
The Trial of Charwe and the Role of Gutsa and Hwata
Archival evidence shows that Gutsa and Hwata, believed to be aged 22 and 50 respectively in 1898, appeared as witnesses in the trial of Charwe. They were described in court papers as “hunters”—men who, by testifying against her, contributed directly to the British colonial conviction and eventual execution of one of the most revered figures in Zimbabwe’s liberation memory.
This raises critical questions:
If Hwata and Gutsa were supposedly descendants of or linked to Nehanda’s lineage, why did they testify against her?
What credibility can be given to their oral histories when they openly collaborated with the colonial system?
How can modern Zimbabwean heritage institutions ignore this contradiction, failing to showcase these very records in the National Archives or museums?
The fact that such critical documentation remains buried in archives while museums and monuments highlight only selected narratives suggests intentional erasure—a silencing designed to benefit certain groups.
The Mbari Legacy and the Myth of Gutsa’s Supremacy
The Gutsa narrative often paints their ancestors as powerful figures capable of challenging spiritual and political authorities such as King Mbari or Makombe. Yet this does not withstand scrutiny. Mbari, ruler of Harare before colonial conquest, was not a mere chief but a King with authority to install chiefs and to whom many leaders paid allegiance. His kraals were destroyed by the British on 1 March 1897, during the First Chimurenga uprisings.
By this timeline, the so-called “murder of Mbari” attributed to Gutsa becomes historically impossible—Mbari had long established dominion, and Makombe was the reigning ruler by the time of colonial destruction. This means that much of what Gutsa “tradition” claims collapses under historical evidence.
The real reason such myths survive is because colonial and postcolonial scholars preferred Gutsa narratives, which aligned with their political interests, over the silenced Mbari accounts.
The British, the Mhofu, and the Politics of Betrayal
The trial of Nehanda in 1898 also exposed another uncomfortable truth: the role of Mhofu people in undermining indigenous resistance. Constable Bhasvi, a Mhofu man, fought alongside the British against fellow Zimbabweans. Gutsa and Hwata, also Mhofu, betrayed Nehanda in open court. Their testimony was pivotal in exposing her spiritual secrets and undermining her standing.
This act of betrayal echoes through generations. How can a people who sold out Nehanda’s power space claim to be her true descendants? How can they be trusted as custodians of heritage when their role in her death is recorded in the very colonial archives they now try to obscure?
The Case of the 13-Year-Old Girl and the Question of Spirit Possession
Fast-forward to today: Zimbabwe is once again confronted with the mystery of Nehanda’s spirit through the case of a 13-year-old girl said to be possessed. Hwata descendants, who claim lineage, have failed to manage or explain this case, leaving the girl and her mother wandering like nomads. This failure is consistent with their historical contradictions. A people who once betrayed Nehanda cannot be expected to effectively carry her legacy today.
Reclaiming the Mbari Narrative
For too long, the silence of the Mbari clan has been misinterpreted as weakness or acceptance of falsehoods. But silence is not erasure. As the Shona proverb says, “Rinemenyanga hariputirirwe”—a truth with horns cannot be hidden under a cloth.
The time for the Mbari clan to rise and correct these distortions has come. The Gutsa-Hwata narrative must be exposed for what it is: a colonial-era fabrication perpetuated by opportunistic elites and careless academics. Zimbabwe’s heritage cannot be built on lies. The erasure of Mbari kingship is not only an injustice to one clan but a distortion of Zimbabwe’s entire national identity.
The 1898 High Court trial of Charwe remains a key historical marker. But it must be revisited with a sharper eye, not through the narrow colonial lens or the biased accounts of Gutsa and Hwata collaborators. Zimbabwe must confront the reality that betrayal, opportunism, and misinformation have long shaped its written history.
The day has come for the Gurundoro-Mbari people to reclaim their place in the narrative—not as passive victims of erasure, but as custodians of truth. The lies of Gutsa and Hwata, repeated over decades, cannot overwrite the power and foresight of King Mbari and his descendants. The British may have tried to erase him, but as with Nehanda’s spirit, the Mbari legacy remains unbroken.
Comments
About Author
