CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 30African history and culture studiesArchaeology and Rock Art StudiesAfrican Studies and Geopolitics

The (in)visible roots of Bunyoro-Kitara and Buganda in the Lakes region: AD 800–1300

Schoenbrun, David L.·1999·Beyond Chiefdoms
DOI 10.1017/cbo9780511558238.012
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Introduction Between 1600 and 1800, in eastern Africa's Great Lakes region, the states of Bunyoro-Kitara and Buganda formed and began to export their bureaucratic, militaristic, and religious hegemony to neighboring societies. They did so with little or no connection to intercontinental or maritime trading systems. They did so in wet, dry, highland, and lakeshore environments. They did so using metals, cattle, bananas, grains, fishing, and hunting, in varying combinations, as their technological and agricultural bases. But they also did so with less visible resources, with funds of meaning and concepts of power and with sometimes abstract units of social organization. This essay will argue that the history of these visible and invisible roots of these two states between the Great Lakes reveals that any sort of evolutionist model for state formation must take these factors into account. Exploring these issues begins with the evidence from Great Lakes societies which diagnoses their own analytical categories for social life. If scholars choose to settle on chiefdoms as important units of study they must understand their importance to those who lived in them. Such a condition highlights the necessity of interdisciplinary scholarship. Archaeologists, comparative linguists, and comparative ethnographers generate information on the varieties of chiefdoms and, more importantly, these scholars may suggest what other sorts of social and material relations – family structure and gender…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cbo9780511558238.012

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Rather than instrumental power based on probabilities and capacities, leaders engage in creative acts of composition in which meaning is negotiated and invented.

    “Rather than instrumental power based on probabilities and capacities, leaders engage in creative acts of ''composition,'' in which meaning is negotiated and invented (Fleisher and Wynne-Jones 2010;Schoenbrun 1999).”

    From The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation (2016) · cites this paper as Schoenbrun 1999

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Schoenbrun, D. L.
Corresponding author
Schoenbrun, David L.
ORCID
Schoenbrun, David L.
Venue
Beyond Chiefdoms
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Published
1999-06-10
Pages
136-150
DOI
10.1017/cbo9780511558238.012
OpenAlex
W1493066405
Cited by
29
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 11 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
13.60
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 3779 d)
Locations
Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › African history and culture studies
  • Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and Rock Art Studies
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › African Studies and Geopolitics
Keywords
Buganda, Great Lakes region, state formation, chiefdoms, social organization, lexical innovation, precolonial states, Lake Victoria, Lake Tanganyika

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review