Talk:Lozi kingdom

Why is this article linked to twenty in other languages entitled “Barotseland”? Mccapra (talk) 06:44, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Barotseland is another name for the kingdom, its the most common name for referring to it post-1899 Kowal2701 (talk) 07:20, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

ok so if that’s the case why don’t we use it, per WP:COMMONNAME? Mccapra (talk) 07:38, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Because it isn’t the common name in sources when referring to the precolonial kingdom, I guess because it’s anachronistic, it’s the colonial name Kowal2701 (talk) 08:00, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Predecessor states and modern states often have separate articles. Would that be beneficial here? Alternatively, the history section is long enough to be its own article if it were split. I have no strong preference, just some thoughts. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 02:02, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I've thought about having a separate article for the non-sovereign polity but it's a bit tricky since the situation changes several times, and it's still the same institutions. I will probably create Barotse Royal Establishment for that purpose though (I've been using Lozi secessionism for contemporary details but it makes the article lose its focus). Yeah, I'm a bit concerned about size, was aiming for 9000 but it's at 10,600 and I think I've exhausted trimming-by-notes. I'll think about it, thanks Kowal2701 (talk) 14:22, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Scootertop, re this edit

• where they were best received by southern groups reviled under Luyana rule changed the meaning of the sentence away from the source, the point Mainga makes is that they were best received because they were hostile to the Luyana, not the other way around
• soothsayer isn't a term used by the sources and is imprecise
• annexation also isn't how sources frame it
• Queen Victoria, readers not from the UK may not know who she is, I think specifying she's the British queen is helpful, but not wedded to this
• European farms and towns in other parts of BSAC territory misrepresents the source slightly, the source says "white sectors of Southern Africa", where white can also refer to Boers and Southern Africa to areas outside BSAC territory, also what the source means by "white sectors" isn't terribly clear, so probably just best to quote

Kowal2701 (talk) 14:12, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

To take each point in order - the use of reviled instead of opposed is because the text above relating to the rule under the Luyana describes the southern groups not simply as opposition but as discriminated and excluded so "opposed to" isn't communicating correctly. Your comment suggests that you don't understand that the sentence is describing the southerners, not the Kololo.

• Although soothsayers describes exactly who they are (practitioners who claim to reveal/foretell events using various rituals) rather than diviners, who only throw bones or blocks that they interpret, I can't find a refernce for soothsayers so I'll revert that.
• I looked through the sources and I can't find that reference to colonisation of the Lozi. Only Northern Rhodesia as a whole received colonists i.e. white farmers; the Lozi kingdom was treated differently. I doubt there was any settlement until later, where it is covered in the article (although I can't read the source). The territory was annexed because it was brought under the control of the BSAC.
• For Victoria, that what the link to Victoria in the sentence is for, to give the information to those who wonder who the queen was.
• A quote is not in itself information or helpful. White sectors is vague and undefined and as so much racial terminology it's not neutral. The migrants worked on farms and for other employers.

--Scootertop (talk) 12:20, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Scootertop, btw WP:ONUS is on the person making the changes to gain consensus (like it's WP:BRD, not BRRD), it doesn't really matter here since these are minor and uncontroversial, but just for future

• Mainga pg 66 says

  These Tonga groups did not hesitate to seize every opportunity which promised to under¬ mine Luyana authority or to reverse the political roles of the two groups. Whenever the central kingship showed signs of weakness a section of the Tonga groups in the south would rebel and seek to establish some sort of autonomy. Similarly, as became clear during the nineteenth century, they did not hesitate to ally themselves with any outside group which offered them a chance to defy Luyana authority. To a great extent this seems to explain why the Makololo, after their successful invasion of Bulozi, concentrated on the south, on Linyanti and Sesheke.

So far, the only explanation given for the Kololo concentration on the south has been their fear of Matebele attacks from the present Rhodesia. The Matebele certainly raided the southern limits of Bulozi and the Batoka country.

Livingstone and other writers concluded that the Makololo were concerned with guarding the fords on the Zambezi, and that the Linyanti and Mashi swamps3 kept them in the south. This explanation, however, does not seem adequate since, later on, the Lozi were to be similarly inflicted with Ndebele raids, and yet they did not move their government headquarters to the border with the Matebele. It is possible that the Makololo concentrated their settlement in the south because there they met with least resistance. As will be seen, the Ma Subiya had solicited Kololo support in a dispute with the Leya, at the time Sibitwane crossed the Zambezi into the present Southern Province and before entering Bulozi. The Makololo then were, in the south, among old allies. It is interesting also that there were some significant contrasts in later Lozi recol¬ lections of the Makololo when the pioneer missionary, Frampois Coillard of the Paris Evangelical ' Missionary Society, visited Sesheke in 1878 and the valley where he founded a permanent mission after 1885. At Sesheke, Coillard sensed admiration for, and great attachment to, the Makololo, while similar sentiments were hardly noticeable in the valley.

(basically, they settled in the south partly because they met the least resistance there, because those groups opposed Luyana rule)

• You're right, idk where I got that impression from. Annexation is better
• I still think British is necessary, we shouldn't assume everyone is familiar with British history, but it doesn't really matter, happy to leave it
• Caplan pg 144 says

  As increasing numbers of Africans were being attracted to urban centres, the colonial office was discovering the stable virtues of traditional African societies. Such societies ought to be preserved, it was argued, but many of them, not least Barotseland, proved to have little worth preserving. Beneath the impressive facade of a state in alliance with the British Crown lay the stark reality of a totally underdeveloped, almost poverty-stricken labour reserve. Under Crown as under Company rule, Barotseland’s primary function was to provide cheap labour for the white sectors of southern Africa. The Crown government had not the slightest intention of investing in Barotseland the kind of capital necessary to create the infrastructure of a viable economy.

  Pg 145 says

  As a result, the overwhelming proportion of Lozi males was forced to leave home in search of paid employment, whether as unskilled miners in South Africa or the Copperbelt, farm workers in Southern Rhodesia or, white-collar workers in towns along the line of rail. In the Nalolo district in 1927, for example, it was reported that about half the able-bodied men were working at various distant centres, while most of the other half were resting before leaving again.1® By the end of the decade, Lozi communities existed in Kimberley and Johannesburg, Salisbury, Bulawayo and Wankie, Livingstone, Broken Hill, the Copperbelt and lesser Northern Rhodesian towns outside Barotse Province.?”

  Usually I substitute European for white etc. (except when it's commonplace in the local English dialect, like w South African English), but it's the most precise term we can use here to refer to Boers and British (Boers aren't referred to as just "European" AFAICT), and we can just say 'white' in quotes. People also worked in mining in the Copperbelt, and in non-BSAC territory. 'white'-owned farms and mines in Southern Africa would probably be best

Kowal2701 (talk) 14:01, 6 February 2026 (UTC)