By Edward Mberikunashe Sanyanga, from Nyandoro village under Headman Mparutsa, Chief Mutasa in Honde Valley
It is now 45 years since we gained our Independence. As I reflect, it was the true commitment of the majority of Zimbabwean freedom fighters, including myself and nationalists, in collaboration with the masses, including Traditional Leaders, to dismantle colonialism, to bury its “bodies” and “ghosts.” During the struggle, many thought decolonization, would bring about a corrective approach to colonial injustices and historical distortions that colonialism brought about. But today, we still find ourselves confronting the many “ghosts” of colonialism, including inequality, unequal access to land, and the recusancy of traditional authorities, which my story is concerned with today
As part of the decolonization efforts, the subject of resuscitation of defunct Chieftainship remains an important driver of change. Unfortunately, we have seen these processes done in ways that did not follow historical research and knowledge gleaned from our oral histories and archival records. While oral histories are an important form of knowledge customarily, they’re usually unacceptable in the courts of law when contestations about chieftainships or land disputes emerge. This is why I want to focus on what the existing written record says about the Sanyanga people and the Chieftaincy. Let me begin with an anecdote, which was orally transmitted to me but also found in colonial archives (thanks to our historian, who shared with me my father’s original letter of 1959).
In 1959, my father, Wakanyi Edward Sanyanga (now late), who was next in line for the Chieftainship, wrote to the Native Commissioner Nyanga , following up on his earlier correspondence of 1951, which the Native Commissioner had not responded to due to logistical reasons. The subject of his letter concerned the restoration of the Sanyanga Chieftainship and the history of the Sanyanga people before and during the arrival of Europeans. After narrating the history, my father stated to the Native Commissioner, “With this history, I see no reason why I should not be considered among the Nyanga Senior Chiefs.” He reminded him, “The first Native commissioner of Nyanga was Mr Jack Greer who was welcomed by my father at our Kraal in 1894 and named the territory under his jurisdiction Nyanga.” He concluded the letter by saying, “Now it seems that I am a forgotten person.” The Native Commissioner replied that he was still busy with the movement of people and did not have the time to look at his request then (i.e. busy with the displacement of the indigenous people from their ancestral homes to enable land allocation to colonial setters). Colonial displacements were happening at a greater pace this time, and many people were forcibly removed from the Sanyanga territory to pave the way for more European settlement in the 1940s. In 1945, the Sanyanga clan were frog-marched to Honde Valley from their homelands in Nyanga.
The abolition of the Sanyanga Chieftainship in Nyanga was a colonial project and strategy for displacement in which other African traditional leaders participated. This is a sad colonial injustice that we must redress today. Here is an example of how it was achieved following the SaNyanga’s forced displacement from their ancestral homelands Nyanga. After holding several meetings with other African chiefs on the subject on “ Nyanga Chiefs and Headman,” and “cutting the boundaries” the Southern Rhodesia Secretary of Treasury wrote to the Auditor General and Secretary for Native Affairs about the purchase of a 76,392 acres Holden by Estate (Honde Valley), on March 24, 1948, for “native occupation,” and about Minister of Finances’ approval of the purchase of 2400 acres Mtarazi Falls Area Again, on March 10, 1949, for “European settlement.” Two years later, these land purchases and prior meetings had one major objective: to alter local leadership and disrupt African land ownership claims in Nyanga. Consequently, two years after this, the Provincial Native Commissioner Umtali wrote on 29th May 1951, about the “New Provisional Establishment of Chief’s and Headmen.” He stated, “Further to my confidential minute of the 20th November 1950 and your PER 5/3/1951 of the 16th April, I have to inform you that the Chief Native Commissioner has approved, in terms of Section 27 of the Native Affairs Act (Chapter 72) of the abolition of the following headmanships in the Nyanga District, together with their subsidies as from July 1st 1951:
1. SANYATWE
2. SANYAMANDWE
3. SANYANGA
4. SAKAROMBE.”
The other Headmen who also fell in the same predicament were: Saruchera, Mandeya 1, Samanga. Zindi, Mudzindiko, Mawoko and Chikomba whose appointments were all confirmed on 01 April, 1921. Some passed on and were not replaced, and others received other considerations within the colonial machinations. The office reference approving the appointments and subsidies of the said Headmen is C.N.C.F 8111/8509 of 23rd December 1920.
There were other Headmen in Nyanga who were unsubsidized and had no record of any official appointment but were recognized under the Sanyanga Chieftainship, these were:
1. Maereka (2) Kanganya (3) Mredzwa
4. Nenjerama (5) Sachirarwe (6) Sadomba
7. Sakupwanya (8) Sanyamandwe (9) Sherukuru
10. Manunure (11) Mandeya 2 (12) Samhembere
13. Muparutsa
The recognized and subsidized traditional leaders present clear cases for reparation, restitution and restorative justice as they were victims of colonial machinations.
Should I give up and let the history and legacy of the Nyanga people die? No! These colonial disruptions and changes to our history and heritage must be confronted today. I have been on that journey for two decades now. It is now 24 years since my first inquiry and request for the resuscitation, inauguration, and installation of a legacy distorted and disrupted by British Colonial Occupation and the signing of controversial treaties like the Mutasa Peace Treaty of 14 September, 1890 at Binga Guru.
I firmly lay claim to the incumbency and completion of the Sanyanga Chieftainship resuscitation process based on the following submissions.
• Confronting Colonial “Ghosts” and Distorted histories: The appetite of the Wanyanga clan to redress colonial and post-colonial era historical distortions and legacies rooted in colonial alliances and misrepresentations from the time of 1890 Mutasa Peace Treaty with the British South Africa Company, which led to the abolishment of the Sanyanga Traditional leadership, starting with the Chieftainship in 1923 and finally the Sanyanga Headmanships in 1950. These changes came about through misrepresentations and some false claim that Sanyanga was subject to Mutasa when in actual fact the Sanyanga Chieftainship pre-exists that of Mutasa in the region. Objective and unbiased research reveals that the Sanyanga Chieftainship existed in the 14th – 15th century, while chiefs like Mutasa, who marvelled in believing that Sanyanga was one of his n’anga, started featuring in the region in the 19th century.
It must be appreciated though, that, despite the maverick Shenanigans exhibited by Chief Mutasa in his pursuit, he already had, at that time, acquired a smattering knowledge of the English language from missionary stations that had been established in Portuguese East Africa, his area of origin, in the 16th – 17th century. Hence the advantage over our local Traditional Leaders.
Colonial officials further reviewed that when “the first Native Commissioner was sent to Nyanga, he established his camp and office in the vicinity of Chief Sanyanga’s Headquarters, which was referred to by the early settlers as Sanyanga’s gardens. The first native commissioner was Jack Greer, an ally of the Mutasas (see discussion below). When Mr Greer and other Europeans first settled, they recognized Chief Sanyanga’s the Chief of Nyanga.
Seeking a Return to our ancestral Homeland: Further to this rich and contested history, and the need to restore the Sanyanga Chieftaincy, a return to our ancestral land in Nyanga will not only be an act of restoration but will also cement the relationship that has always existed between the Wanyanga and their ancestral land which was the only thing that colonial legacies and their proxies failed to completely erase. The Wanyanga people have always been and are still being consulted whenever traditional/cultural rituals are required to cleanse and/or appease the environment. The Mutare Pungwe Water Project, which was implemented in the mid to late 1990s, is a typical case in point. When several strange mishaps were encountered during project implementation, sitting traditional leaders in the surrounding areas who were approached for traditional intervention could not intervene but referred Mutare Town City Council and the construction engineers (SKANSKA) to Wanyanga, who were led by Wakanyi Edward Sanyanga (my father) in Honde Valley. My father willingly assisted as he always did and as we continue to do in support of the development of the area as well as the well-being of the people in general. There were other cases like the Baboon menace, the fires, and the disappearance of an Indian tourist, the Sanyanga were approached for assistance. Unfortunately, these moments of recognition are not publicized, and people barely acknowledge the present and historical roles the Sanyanga play in the region. I believe that this story will touch the hearts and minds of the Zimbabwean public.
● No historical imbalance will ever go unchecked.’ It may be long, but will never be forever. The Mutasa Peace Treaty signed by Tendai Chifambausiki Mutasa on 14 September 1890, purportedly representing Manicaland North, Archibold Ross Colquhoun, a member of the Pioneer Column representing Rhodes and the British South Africa Company (BSAC), significantly elevated Chief Mutasa’s status, allowing him to claim and perform influentially over the two districts Mutare and Nyanga. This came at the expense of traditional leaders in Nyanga as narrated earlier, particularly Chief Sanyanga. Interestingly, Chief Sanyanga’s territory of Nyanga was deeply admired by colonialists who were impressed by its unique features and weather. It is worth noting that the colonial era was marked by significant changes in the administrative and political structures of many African regions. The BSAC, for instance, played a substantial role in shaping the colonial landscape, especially in Nyanga, where distortions and erasure of territorial boundaries were palpably rampant. In 1896, when Rhodes visited Nyanga, he wrote to his agent. “Dear Macdonald, Nyanga is much finer than you described. Before it is all gone, buy me quickly up to 100, 000 acres (4002Km) and be sure to take in the Pungwe Falls. I would like to try growing sheep and apples do not tell people you are buying it for me.’’ An extra 550h was added in 1938 when Rhodes trustees realized that the Pungwe Falls had not been included in the Rhodes Nyanga Estate.
● Looking at the Nyanga Estate, which includes Nyanga National Parks, Gaerezi, Chingamwe, Mutarazi, Selborne, Erin Estate Holdenby A and B and surrounding farms and properties and like the rest of Zimbabwe, was a unique and complex history of land and property ownership. Land is owned by the Monarch, right of the Kings and Chiefs, “whose right to land ownership are based on a centuries old legal principle called “the rule of first possession” in opposition to the colonial principle of “might is right’’ which has no legal foundation under British and International law. The rule of first possession applies the legal maxim “first in time, first in right.” This rule has been used to establish land and property ownership rights throughout civilizations.
The first Native Commission, Mr Jack Greer who arrived in 1894, established his domicile near Chief Sanyanga’s kraal and named the area Nyanga after the Chief of the area – Sanyanga. He later established his offices at the present-day District Administration Offices of Nyanga, which was Chief Sanyanga’s official Court known as “ PAMUTUNDURU” – the name of a wild fruit tree.
During these years, and following the Mutasa Treaty, the Traditional Leaders of Nyanga and the rest of the country lost the management and control of their ancestral lands to the settler-colonial Government for no fixed payment what so ever, except for Chiefs Lobengula and Mutasa whose emoluments have continued with their successors, established enterprises and the British Treasury. The signing of the Peace Treat strengthens and extended Chief Mutasa’s influence and domain and turned Chief Sanyanga’s territory of Nyanga into a vassal of the British South Africa Company and Cecil John Rhodes with benefits to Chief Mutasa as follows:
(a) Chief Mutasa and his successors would receive in perpetuity annual payments of 100 pounds or the equivalent in trade and goods.
(b) The payment could also be in the form of arms, i.e. muskets and powder.
(c) The British South Africa Company was to appoint a representative who would ensure the security and defence of Chief Mutasa and his successors against any attack.
The Treaty enhanced Chief Mutasa ego and assured his pursuit for territory expansion and the satisfaction of his colonial master’s interest. Hence in 1896 he attacked Chief Chingaira Makoni and was defeated and annihilated. In July 1896 the Mashonaland Field Force of the British South Africa Company dispatched an infantry force of 440 fighters from Mutare for war with Chief Chingaira Makoni. The setters were not going to entertain rebellions conduct from the Indigenous traditional leaders and their subjects anymore after the earlier experiences of the Matebele and Mashona rebellions. Following defeat and heavy loses Chief Makoni and the remaining fighters sought refuge in care, but were smoked out by the setter forces who were in that pursuit. After three attempts, Chief Makoni finally surrendered and the identification of Chief Makoni was done by Chief Mutasa, who had offered to assist the setters, since they did not know what Chief Chingaira Makoni looked like. Perhaps as revenge for his defeat in the earlier battle encounter, and also fulfilling the proxy/vassal role he had assume with/to the white setters.
The Mutasa Treaty was not without dispute from the Portuguese who had arrived earlier felt cheated following earlier arrangements with Chief Mutasa in light of his previous contacts in Portuguese East Africa. Whatever arrangements had been made or agreed, they unfortunately were not compliant without the Berlin Conference agreements of 1884-85 on the occupation of colonies. This led to the Anglo Portuguese Concession of 1894 which saw the establishment of the boundary between Rhodesia and Portuguese East Africa.
A 24-year Journey – In search of Restorative Justice
1. In March 2001, I submitted my first correspondence to the Ministry of Local Governance through the District Development Coordinator (DDC), the then District Administrator, (DA), requesting for consideration of the resuscitation of the Sanyanga Chieftainship which was finally abrogated in 1950 following the death of…. the incumbent traditional leader. The response I got was that the government had not started the exercise of institutionalizing the resuscitation of defunct chieftainships in Zimbabwe. However, my request would be considered in due course (unspecified).
2. In 2006, the Sanyanga Clan proactively convened a meeting that nominated me, the writer Edward Mberikunashe Sanyanga, to officially lead and represent the clan in its pursuit of the chieftainship resuscitation plight.
3. In 2007, the then DA summoned the Sanyanga clan to his Nyanga offices for consultation on the matter. The DA’s main aim was to ratify the nominated candidate and clarify with other members of the clan who were present in the meeting and had made submissions concerning the Sanyanga Chieftainship. There was unanimous concurrence with the rest of the clan on the candidature of Edward Mberikunashe Sanyanga.
4. In 2010, the then Nyanga DA submitted his recommendation to the minister stating that, in his observation, there was ‘a grain of truth’ in the Sanyanga clan’s request for the resuscitation of its chieftainship. He recommended that the Minister appoints a commission of enquiry to advise on the way forward.
5. In 2010, the clan was advised by the Director, Traditional Leaders Affairs, to undertake research and produce a well-documented analysis on the history of Sanyanga Chieftainship. The Wanyanga went out and hired a consultant, a historian with the Museums and Monuments of Zimbabwe who was partnered by a graduate student in History with the University of Western Cape, South Africa. The consultant produced a document that stressed on the background of the Wanyanga, Nhewa, Muteyi, Simboti Dynasty, its origins, and the impact of colonial rule on its wellbeing.
In July 2011, the then Provincial Administrator Manicaland, requested that a meeting be convened to discuss and establish, from those knowledgeable, the demarcations of the original traditional boundaries of Nyanga District. His request came up following disputes between Chiefs Tangwena and Mutasa on the issue of boundaries. Present at the meeting, which was convened at the Ruda Police Station, (substation of Nyanga District Police Office), were the assistant DA Mutasa Chairing, assistant DA Nyanga, Officer in Charge THE WANYANGA DYNAST”? The Pursuit of The Resuscitation and Inauguration of the Sanyanga Chieftainship and the Installation of substantive Chief Sanyanga of Nyanga.” police, the President’s Office, the then incumbent Chiefs Mutasa and Tangwena and Chief Sanyanga Designate and their subjects. The Wanyanga clansman clearly described the demarcations of the original traditional boundaries of the Nyanga District, and Chief Sanyanga’s territory.
Chief Mutasa was also asked to define his boundaries but he could not, requesting that the meeting be postponed to a future date to allow him time for further enquiries with members of his council. Unfortunately, he passed on before giving his response.
7. Two more meetings were convened at the Nyanga DA’s Office with acting Chief Mutasa, who was still unable to describe the demarcations of the Mutasa territory. If the restoration process is to be satisfactorily completed and closure to decolonization established, the Government should pursue the emplacement exercise with all relevant and affected parties present .
8.In March 2013, the Wanyanga clan members were summoned to meet the first commission of enquiry into the validity of the existence of the Sanyanga Chieftainship. Evidence was gathered and recorded by the commission to determine and subsequently advise on the way forward. This commission was chaired by the Chairman of Manicaland Provincial Assembly of Chiefs.
9.In March 2014, the Sanyanga clan members were again summoned to meet the Second Commission, which was chaired by the Provincial Administrator, Mashonaland East, who ultimately announced that they would recommend the resuscitation of Sanyanga Headmanship, while Chieftainship would be considered later to allow time for gathering further evidence.
10. On 11 November 2015, the Sanyanga clan met the 3rd and final commission at the Nyanga DA’s Office which was chaired by the then Director for Traditional Leaders Affairs and Welfare, who finally announced that the Minister had approved the resuscitation of Sanyanga Chieftainship. The relevant departments and authorities would move in to initiate procedures for the appointment of the new Chief and make recommendations. A letter to that effect from the Minister’s office was received in February 2016.
11. On 18 August 2018, the Sanyanga clan was summoned to the DA’s office in Nyanga, where they met the select committee appointed by the Provincial Assembly of Chiefs, and the purpose was to receive from the clan the name of the person selected traditionally for the chieftainship. Edward Mberikunashe Sanyanga was selected and confirmed. The committee took up the name for the presentation and recommendation to the National Chiefs’ Council. The DA Nyanga followed up on the matter with a meeting with the Sanyanga clan to verify and confirm the selected individual, following which he presented his findings and his recommendations to the President through the Minister of local governance, recommending the inauguration and installation of Edward Mberikunashe Sanyanga as the substantive Chief Sanyanga of Nyanga.
12. Following a 2-year delay, on 1 March, 2022, the Sanyanga clan presented a petition to the Clerk of Parliament requesting the legislature to enquire from the Minister of Local Government for the reason behind the 2-year delay of the inauguration of Sanyanga Chieftainship and the installation of substantive Chief Sanyanga. We were summoned to parliament, where we sat before the parliamentary portfolio committee responsible for local Government and presented our case. The ministry represented by the Chief Director responsible for Traditional Leaders Affairs and Welfare confirmed that the Sanyanga Chieftainship had long been settled, and the matter was awaiting the alignment of the Traditional Leaders Act with the new (2013) Constitution. Members of the portfolio committee quizzed the Chief Director on the incumbent’s benefits. The chief director confirmed that the benefits would be given due consideration.
On a surprising twist of events, on 23 December, 2023, the Minister of Local Government wrote to the new District Development Coordinator (DDC) of Nyanga District, instructing him to process the Sanyanga Headmanship under the Tangwena Chieftainship in the meantime. The instruction was read to the Chiefs Tangwena, Mutasa, and Sanyanga Designate (myself). I was asked during the meeting on that breaking news if it were acceptable to me to assume Headmanship under Chief Tangwena, and if I was able to find Kraal Heads who could vouch for this position. I instinctively accepted the compromise and went back to meet my clansmen. I managed to secure their support, and ten of them had duly signed affidavits which were filed in the DDC’s Office for further processing as instructed. 25 months to date, no further action has been taken to effect this development, a very sad affair indeed.
We fail to understand the Ministry’s and or the Government’s problem in completing the installation process, especially considering that numerous resuscitations of defunct Chieftainship and installations that have taken place since our case was presented. Yet in early November 2024, the President, Dr E.D Mnangagwa, went on record at the commissioning of the Zimbabwe National Elders Forum (ZNEF) with, “calls for reparations must grow louder.” (Sunday Mail of 16 November 2024), Land displacements, the untold stories of crimes of injustices, trauma and losses experienced by indigenous Zimbabweans during the colonial era (1890 – 1980), are cases of reparations and restorative justice. He aligned the theme of the year to that of the AU 2025; “Justice for Africans and people of African descent through reparations.” He further proclaimed that Africa needs to speak with one voice to ensure justice and closure for crimes committed under colonial rule. “Many make the mistake of thinking colonialism was an aberration of a bygone era, well, it was not.” the president said. Is the Sanyanga Chieftainship not one such case?? Why is it taking so long? Are we being forgotten as my father was in 1951/1959?
1 . It is in that light that I seek the revival of our heritage, restorative Justice and reparations with a call for the inauguration and installation of Edward Mberikunashe Sanyanga as Substantive Chief Sanyanga.
The Sanyanga Clan of Nyanga carries a legacy which was disrupted by colonial history. In 1902 Cecil John Rhodes Will led to the seizure of vast lands- the Rhodes Nyanga Estate (44, 970 hectares) and Rhodes Matopo Estate (39,074 hectares) forcibly removing the Nyanga people from their indigenous land. Today these estates are protected under the Rhodes Estates Act (Chapter 20:17) with the President of Zimbabwe as Trustee. 46 years after our claims to Independence, we still have the colonizers Vast Will firmly entrenched in our Constitution and protected by the Presidents institution a cause for the delay in the alignment of the Traditional Leaders Act with the New Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No.20), 2013)
This legal framework, while preserving the estates overlooks the cultural and historical rights of the Sanyanga people. Recognizing the Sanyanga Chieftainship is not just a reclaim of heritage, it is a step towards redressing past injustices, empowering communities and enriching Zimbabwe’s cultural tapestry.
We need the Presidents authority to inaugurate and install substantive Chief Sanyanga of Nyanga aligning with Zimbabwe’s values of land reform and culture preservation. This is not a reflection of progress but a call for inclusive development that honours our roots. In respect of this presentation, we now wish to invite
• Support from Communities who value justice and heritage
• Legal experts to explore pathways within the Rhodes Estates Act
• Traditional Leaders to champion this cause of decolonization, reparation, restoration and recognition.
Together we can weave history, culture and progress.
I want to end by extending my gratitude to all who have taken the time to listen to our story and to those who have collaborated with us in sharing their valuable historical insights regarding the Wanyanga people. We remain hopeful in our continued pursuit of a rich history, one that is characterized by authentic traditional leadership in the land historically known as Wanyanga, now referred to as Nyanga. We believe in change, and we will continue to fight for restorative justice. We keep our eyes open; we hope to learn from the readers of this piece.
Author: Edward Mberikunashe Sanyanga
Comments
About Author
