Abstract:This article focuses on the uses of the archive in contemporary Zimbabwe by individuals and families making claims to chieftaincy. A reading of the colonial archive on chieftainship histories reveals that there is an information gap especially for some years. For instance, from the 1960s to the present, there are relatively few documents specifically relating to the subject of chiefs and headmen in Zimbabwe. As a result, researchers working on chieftainships, hired historians, and claimants to chieftaincy face a frustrating challenge of limited sources. This article analyzes the sources that hired historians use to write chieftaincy claims reports in Zimbabwe for their clients. It also explores the use of oral evidence to complement or counter the narratives offered through colonial documents, and it also recommends the use of alternative sources on chieftaincy, both within and beyond the repositories of the National Archives of Zimbabwe (NAZ).
is a researcher working on unceded Wurundjeri land, including at the University of Melbourne where she received her PhD in 2018 and was a Gilbert Early Career Postdoctoral Fellow in 2019. She researches the persistence of British imperial culture through studying contentious landscapes, buildings, and bodies, with current work drawing on autoethnographies of energy-limiting disability to explore contemporary historical consciousness. Her monograph Milton Keynes in British Culture: Imagining England was published by Routledge in 2019.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.