‘Where Art Thou?’: Ethnocracy, Toponymic Silence, and Toponymic Subjugation in the Harare Commemorative Landscapes During the Mugabe Era (1980–2017)

Abstract

This article explores the post-colonial national identity formation using place names that commemorate the nation’s past in Zimbabwe. Place name alterations that the new political elites implemented at independence in 1980 were aimed at disassembling relics of the deposed regime and craft a new national identity. The commemorative landscapes of Harare, as a national capital, constitute a strategic medium in the constitution of national identity. Ethnicity dominated the political landscape in Zimbabwe. The two main political parties, the Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU) and Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU), have been aligned with the two supertribes, Shona and Ndebele, respectively. The article explores how the ruling ZANU (PF) government whose leadership was largely Shona used a meta-narrative modelled around discourses of exclusionary autochthony and a partial presentation of the liberation war history that projected ZAPU as having made an insignificant contribution to the liberation war to construct a national identity. It concludes that the use of exclusionary definitions of belonging and a one-sided presentation of the war past that projected ZANU as having contributed more to the liberation war entrenched Shona ethnic chauvinistic tendencies and propagated ZANU (PF) political hegemony. Using the theoretical lens of critical toponymy, the article argues that politically motivated place renaming efforts usually select from the past aspects that serve present political purposes.

Discovering Unwritten Stories—A Modular Case Study in Promoting Landscape Education

“…The enduring understand here is: "Toponymy can reveal the political parties and politicians in charge at the time a place got its name or those who had influenced the naming process further in the past" [67]. In this sense, the landscape, through the naming process, is subjected to political power at play-both by regimes that have long been removed (as seen in the USSR example) or even recent political changes [68]. Especially in built-up environments, toponyms and the toponymic naming process are used by governments and their agencies to "create administrative boundaries, demonstrate political authority, define spatial problems, shape and legitimize political subjects and articulate territorial policy agendas" [69] (p. 1601) and builds on the understanding that humans shape their environment through the realm of political action and power structures.…”

The Development of Online Learning Media based on Tiktok for Teaching Local Wisdom Course during the Covid-19 Pandemic

“…Toponyms are cultural artefacts left by a number of complex interactions between people's ideas, culture and environment [28]. In general toponyms have a strong historical sense [29], as they were created at a certain point in time, complete with its current conditions on geography, culture, and the people's cognition and attitudes around that time span [30]. The names of places are an essential part of cultural landscapes and heritage [31].…”

A place called home: an exploration of toponyms and identity

“…The same trend is found in other African counties. In Zimbabwe, where Mamvura (2021) argues that the political elites of each period have the power to direct national identity through the national heroes they chose to accentuate. This links with the question of representation in the ever-changing landscape of South African spaces.…”