Abigail Gautreau Archaeology & Public History Mock Grant Proposal

Introduction ! This project involves the creation and construction of a visitor center and

museum at Kigorobya, Uganda for the interpretation of the current activities and archaeological ndings at the village of Kibiro. Kibiro, located on the Ugandan shore of Lake Albert, has been the home of signicant salt production for the last millennium. Kibiro is situated in the kingdom of Bunyoro-Kitara, one of a number of East African kingdoms that constitute modern-day Uganda. It is currently listed as a tentative World Heritage Site by UNESCO, due in large part to the archaeological and ethnographic research conducted by Graham Connah and his team in 1989 and 1990. These excavations revealed the time-depth of habitation and salt production at Kibiro, and unearthed a number of artifacts testifying to Kibiros signicance in the economy of Bunyoro and East Africa. Like the neighboring kingdom of Buganda, Bunyoro appears to have developed an advanced and complex society without outside intervention until the mid-nineteenth century.1 This research and material culture has immense value in interpreting the history of Kibiro and Bunyoro for the public through the creation of a visitor center and museum at Kigorobya, the nearest easily accessible village. The visitor center and museum will provide an interpretive context for Kibiros present-day salt production, house exhibits displaying artifacts related to the 1989 and 1990 1

excavations, and provide appropriate storage for artifacts and material culture related to previous and future excavations. The location of Kigorobya has been chosen because of the logistical challenge posed by Kibiros geography, and because Kigorobya is the main market town where Kibiro residents sell their salt and obtain necessities.

Site History ! The nation of Uganda, known as the Pearl of Africa, has a rich and varied

history, made up as it is of several East African kingdoms. While the Kingdom of Buganda, which gave its name to the nation, has been studied in great detail, the neighboring kingdom, Bunyoro, has received less attention from scholars. Bunyoro lacks political signicance2 and, according to the U.S. State Department, the Banyoro only constitute about three percent of Ugandas population, compared to the Bagandas seventeen percent.3 The Baganda 4 gained political signicance through cooperation with the British colonial regime, and used their wealth and expansive kinglists to demonstrate their longevity and legitimacy to the incoming colonizers. These lists have been cast into doubt by late twentieth-century scholarship, but they heavily inuenced the way the British responded to the Baganda as opposed to the Banyoro in the nineteenth century.5 The Ganda King, Mutesa, capitalized on Nyoro resistance to British rule, portraying Bunyoro as antithetical to western civilization.6 As a result, Bunyoro was violently brought under British rule and two of its southern counties

containing many Nyoro royal graves and ritual sites were transferred to Buganda. 7 This early bias of the British colonizers and the Baganda against the Banyoro has clearly inuenced the direction of later scholarship. Shane Doyle argues that contemporary Nyoro identity formed as a response to this prejudice by the British. ! The full name of the Nyoro kingdom is the Kingdom of Bunyoro-Kitara, which

positions the Banyoro as the inheritors of the legacy of Kitara, the ancient kingdom from which all of the kingdoms of East Africa supposedly emerged.8 According to Doyle the traditionally inclusive, multi-ethnic nature of Nyoro society, inspired by a commitment to the multi-ethnic legacy of Kitara, offers a unique narrative in East Africa, where ethnic exclusivity was the watchword of the colonial period.9 Graham Connah has also argued that Bunyoro merits further research, as like Buganda, it seems to have developed a signicant level of social complexity free of outside inuence until the midnineteenth century. Consequently, research on Bunyoro could offer insight into the origins and growth of group culture which has regrettably been termed civilization.10 ! To this end, Connahs research, both historical and archaeological, has focused on

Kibiro, a salt-producing village on the shore of Lake Albert in Bunyoro. Kibiro is geographically isolated by an escarpment created by the eastern side of the Western Rift Valley. The escarpment and lake also alter the environment of village, creating a rain shadow from the top of the escarpment down to the lake where the village sits.11 The hot mineral springs that supply the salt the villagers harvest render the earth too saline

for plants to grow.12 While some domestic animals are kept on a very small scale, the only food produced in the village is the sh harvested from the lake, which is kept and sold or traded both fresh and dried to neighboring markets.13 Vegetables, grains, meat, construction materials, and any goods necessary to daily life must be carried in over the escarpment on foot or brought in by boat on Lake Albert.14 Even the pottery used in the salt trade is brought in from the markets above the escarpment or even from the Congo across the lake.15 The escarpment is prohibitively steep for vehicle trafc, but villagers regularly make their way to markets in Kigorobya, and there is evidence that in the past traders went to Kibiro to obtain salt and exchange wares.16 ! The written record of the village begins about 150 years ago, when it was

mentioned by John Hanning Speke and James Grant as a source of salt beside Lake Albert in 1863. The explorer Samuel Baker mentions the salt-producing village as part of his discovery of Lake Albert in 1864.17 The rst European visitor to the village seems to have been a sighting of Kibiro from the lake by Colonel Charles Gordon in 1876, who recognized the strategic position of the village and suggested building a British fortress there at the junction of Lake Albert and the Victoria Nile.18 European visitors did not become a regular xture of village life until the 1880s when Emin Pasha visited and recorded what he understood of the salt-production process while stationed there as chief medical ofcer of the province.19

These visits were not always peaceful. Europeans had a more established

relationship with the Baganda, as previously stated, and the Baganda were keen to cast aspersions on the Banyoro. By 1884, relations between Bunyoro and the Europeans had soured as a result of the revolt of the Mahdi in Sudan, which cut off communications from Egypt and made Bunyoro and Buganda the main line for communication with Zanzibar. Emin sent his liaison, Casati, to speak to the Nyoro king Kabarega20 about making peace with Buganda and allowing British troops to pass through Bunyoro. Kabarega recognized that this would seriously undermine his kingdoms sovereignty and that the European position was weakening. Casati attempted to strong-arm Kabarega into cooperating, and the king responded by humiliating and expelling Casati from Bunyoro. 21 Emin retaliated by burning and looting Kibiro, in order to destroy the great market which was the pride and wealth of the country of [B]unyoro.22 ! By 1893, the British were ready to bring Bunyoro under imperial control by

whatever means necessary. They were in control of Buganda, and from there sent Colonel Henry Colvile with Bugandan troops to subdue Bunyoro to advance the prosperity and development of Buganda.23 The Bunyoro Wars, as this conict would be known, were long and violent, but Kabarega continued to resist. He believed that while his troops could not defeat the British imperial forces, which included mostly Ganda troops augmented by some Sudanese soldiers, they would be able to outlast them as they had before.24 The conict was brutal; the barbaric and inhumane cruelty of the

British ofcers and their forces was considered remarkable even to contemporary British observers.25 Nyoro resistance was complicated by the need to defend themselves not only against their traditional Ganda enemy, but also against the artillery and heavy machine guns imported by the British.26 This conict saw the burning once again of Kibiro, though it is unclear whether this was done by the British or by eeing residents as part of Kabaregas scorched earth policy. The British who arrived at Kibiro to construct a British fort were irritated by the destruction but not overly inconvenienced. The grain stores were buried, so they were able to nd ample food for their stay.27 Once again, the construction of the fort highlights Kibiros strategic signicance. ! Though the villagers soon returned and salt production resumed, these two

disasters combined with a two-decade sleeping sickness epidemic at the start of the twentieth century ensured that production and shing would never again reach the heights of production they once enjoyed. This also marks the point at which the center of trade left Kibiro, and villagers began to transport the salt themselves to markets on the other side of the escarpment.28 The British government did little to encourage the restoration of salt production to its prior levels; salt was heavily taxed and the villagers faced stiff competition from imported salt. These combined factors saw the population decline from over 5,000 in the pre-colonial era to only 353 by 1928.29 Over the course of the twentieth century, Kibiro, like Bunyoro and Uganda as a whole, continued to struggle with poverty and political upheaval, though its inaccessibility allowed the

population and salt production to recovery slowly. Geographic isolation meant protection from the vehicular trafc used to move troops, though the villagers retained vivid memories of the panic that ensued when a few of Idi Amins troops came down the escarpment in specialized four-wheel-drive vehicles called Unimogs in the 1970s.30 ! Kibiro today is a village of around 2,000 people, and salt is still produced there

according to methods very similar to those used for the last thousand or so years. 31 Although the scale of production is not what it once was due to competition from commercially produced salt, salt production still sustains the village, though now with increased help from commercial shing.32 The method of salt production is unique in two major ways: rst, women have a monopoly on salt production, and second, the method of production continuously reuses the same materials, making it indenitely renewable. ! All of the documentary evidence available indicates that women have always

controlled the salt-gardens, as they are called. Salt gardens have only recently been available for lease, and as of the 1990s it was impossible to purchase one. They are passed through female descendants and are owned exclusively by women.33 In the past, men carried salt up the escarpment to the markets and traded it, but at present, women take on this task and use the money to buy food, alcohol, and daily necessities and goods to be sold or traded back in Kibiro.34 Because salt production was often the sole or primary source of household income, it put women in a position of social

advantage. The missionary Ruth Fisher, writing in 1911, commented that women in Kibiro were likely among the only wives who were not mistreated by their husbands, as the men were totally dependent on their wives for shelter, food, and clothing. .35

The Salt Production Process ! The salt production method utilized at Kibiro follows a series of steps that are

not easily understandable to the outside observer. The salt is introduced by the hot springs, which carry sodium, chloride, magnesium, sulfate, calcium, and potassium, with sodium chloride (salt) accounting for about .41 percent of the mineral content. While the water could certainly be boiled out to produce salt at these levels, this would require a tremendous amount of rewood not readily available in Kibiro.36 Importation of that amount of wood would be prohibitively expensive, so the women use a system of recycling earth to increase the salination. Graham Connahs informal sampling indicated that the process at Kibiro can increase salination to over ve percent, but more advanced research would be necessary to establish a true baseline.37 According to Connahs observations, there are four steps in the production of salt. The rst is to prepare and maintain the salt garden. Salt gardens stay in use for long periods, but are usually left to lie fallow when their salt yield declines. The size and shape of the gardens varies depending on the space and the water ow, but the rst step is always to clear the garden of grass and allow the surface to dry by digging small channels to

divert excess water. The garden is then left to dry completely, with loose soil sprinkled over it to draw the moisture to the surface. The sun dries the earth, and the water evaporates, leaving behind salt and minerals in the loose surface soil.38 ! The second step is to spread, dry and scrape the salty soil. This essentially

repeats the last part of the rst step, and the soil used in established salt gardens is usually leftover soil from the leaching process, so that the same soil is used and reused. This is done in the morning, around 9am, and by 4pm, the women return to scrape up the now saline soil with iron scrapers. This process will be repeated over several days, and each sprinkling and scraping increases the salt content of the soil. Once the workers judge the salt content to be high enough, usually by the color of the soil, it is ready for the third step, leaching.39 ! The leaching process is usually done by older girls or married women, as it

requires careful attention to detail. Three large stones are placed on the ground to support a large aluminum saucepan. The saucepan has a roughly 8mm perforation at its base, into which a small stone is placed and surrounded by even smaller stones. The dried saline soil is then scraped into this saucepan until it is full. Water from a drainage channel (itself saline) is then poured into the pot. This water percolates through the soil and is collected in a smaller pot beneath the hole in the bottom of the large pot. This process is repeated over a period of hours until a dark solution with a much higher salt content than the hot spring water is left. The mud left from the leaching is scraped out

of the pot and spread along the edges of the gardens to dry, where it will likely eventually be broken up and used again.40 ! The nal step is the boiling of the briny solution, which requires a good supply of

rewood. Firewood must be brought down the escarpment, a task at one time completed by men, which is now done exclusively by women. The boiling is usually done is purpose-built structures with wattle-and-daub walls and a thatched grass roof. Because this process involves extremely high temperatures, it is often done at night. The evaporation is done in a steel pan, often improvised from an empty oil drum, which is propped up on three stones on an elevated mud platform. The platform acts as a hearth, and the re is built under the pan between the stones and kept burning for long periods. When the water evaporates, the remaining salt forms a porridge-like consistency, and is ladled off into cones right on the mud hearth. It dries almost instantly and hardens quickly into cones that are easily transported. The residue left in the evaporation pan is very hard, but will scraped off and reused for cooking locally or re-leached during wet periods when salt cannot be made in the usual way.41 ! Although the materials used in this process have changed over time, most

notably a transition to metal or plastic pots rather than traditional pottery, the process itself has remained largely unaltered.42 Like many archaeological sites that have seen continuous occupation, the archaeological resources at Kibiro are close to and beneath the current village site. Connah states that the Kibiros extensive archaeological record

10

is unique in western Uganda because it is the only place in the area where there are known to be deep, extensive, well-stratied occupation deposits by iron-using agriculturalists over the last millennium.43

Excavation History ! The earliest archaeological research in western Uganda took place in the early

part of the twentieth century and was driven by a desire to bolster the oral histories that existed in lieu of written records. Although these early archaeologists were interested in the iron-using agriculturalists of the last two millennia, these researchers concentrated their excavations on large earthwork enclosures.44 By the 1950s and 60s, routine archaeological research was being done regularly on the earthworks, usually in an attempt to match their archaeology to local oral tradition for historic reconstruction.45 Archaeological research ceased during the political upheavals and violence of Idi Amins regime and its collapse in the 1970s and early 1980s, only resuming in 1987. At this time the types of questions archaeologists asked shifted from historical to archaeological in nature. While previous excavations were done to match physical evidence related to the earthworks with oral traditions, Connahs aspiration was to nd a site that could provide a timeline of material culture and shed light on the economic underpinnings of state emergence in Western Uganda.46 Prior to Graham Connahs excavations in 1989 and 1990, the last major excavation at Kibiro was done in 1957 by

11

Jean Hiernaux and Emma Maquet. This excavation found signicant amounts of pottery, but the work was not completed even to the standard of the day, with no description of methodology and a complete lack of attention to or drawings of stratigraphy.47 Connah chose to excavate Kibiro because of the central economic role its salt production had in the Bunyoro economy and because salt production was likely to leave an archaeologically traceable material culture record.48 Connahs excavations were funded by the British Institute in East Africa, the Australian Research Council, and the University of New England (Australia), where Connah was head of the Department of Archaeology and Paleoanthropology, and is currently Professor Emeritus. In addition to the publication of the complete site report in 1996 by the British Institute in East Africa, Connah published a number of articles beginning in 1989 detailing his teams ndings. The excavations were completed with the cooperation of the Ugandan Department of Antiquities and Museums and the approval of the Ugandan National Research Council, and all archaeological materials were deposited at the Uganda Museum.49 ! The goal of Connahs excavation was to give Kibiro a regional context alongside

a broader archaeological eld program. This program included the surface survey of a total of 36 sites in and around the Western Rift, and an ethnographic investigation of contemporary pottery-making in the Kigorobya area by anthropologists who were part of the team. Through the excavations in Kibiro, Connah hoped to build a pottery

12

typology that would allow him to give the other sites relative dates. 50 Kibiros pottery might also shed light on the cultural aspects of the economic and social interactions that took place in and around the village.51 Connahs research found stratigraphic evidence that occupation at Kibiro started in the second millennium C.E., and seems to indicate relative isolation. However, as previously established, Kibiros environment is hostile to cultivation, so salt production would have to have been a mainstay of the economy from the outset, which would imply some sort of regional trade network.52 The best way to evaluate this network is to look at material culture introduced into Kibiro, as Kibiros salt has never left the village with any sort of packaging that might withstand the rigors of time. Today the salt is carried in the cones formed by the extraction process, and documentary evidence refers only to its transportation in banana leaves. 53 Although acculturation is a two-way process, the evidence in Kibiro, as is so often the case, reects only one part of that exchange.54 Connahs focus on pottery typology is one way in which the two-way exchange of acculturation can be seen, as pottery was both imported and in some cases made at Kibiro, thus the decorations on the pots can reveal sources of inspiration. ! In addition to the aforementioned surface surveys, Connahs excavation in Kibiro

included four cuttings, the rst in 1989, and the other three in 1990. The 1989 cutting, referred to as Cutting I in Connahs site report, was a test excavation to gather samples for radiocarbon dating, determine the depth and character of the deposit, and get a

13

sense of the material culture and economy.55 Cutting I measured 1.5 x 1.5 meters, and the location was chosen based on information from the 1957 excavation, which indicated that it ought to be a shallower deposit. This information was unsurprisingly incorrect, and digging to three meters failed to reach natural deposits. The test hole, initially narrow, became more cramped still as loose deposits necessitated cutting the space in half approximately halfway into the dig, and then in half again when apparent termite activity further destabilized the pit. 56 In deference to the close quarters, the pit was excavated in arbitrary .2 meter spits, though stratigraphy was clear enough to be drawn. 57 Cutting I included a high number of sherds, some so small they were nearly impossible to differentiate from pebbles.58 Radiocarbon dates were taken from charcoal samples in each spit, providing an approximate chronology with some aberrations likely caused by the fact that a portion of the cutting seemed to fall alongside a pit of some sort and there was evidence of disruption by insects.59 ! Cuttings II, III, and IV were excavated during the 1990 season, in the order in

which they are numbered. The most common nds in Cutting II were pottery sherds and pieces of smoking pipes.60 Pottery sherds were by far the most common nd all of the cuttings, though Cutting III contained the most notable features: several hearths and a gravesite. The hearths are consistent with salt-boiling and were identied as such by several Kibiro men and women upon being shown the feature.61 The gravesite included the remains of what appeared to be an adult woman and several grave goods including

14

shell and glass beads, a copper or copper-alloy ring, and iron bracelets. 62 According to Connah, the lavish burial indicates an individual of superior status, as well as the hinting at the economic success possible at Kibiro, since glass beads and copper were uncommon and not immediately available.63 The radiocarbon dates from Cutting III indicate habitation from the end of the rst millennium AD to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and provide perspective for evaluating the dates from the other three cuttings. Additionally, the hearths indicated salt processing as far back as the earliest settlements.64 ! Unlike many archaeologists in Africa, Connah was able to analyze all of the

pottery sherds unearthed at Kibiro. While many of the sherds were too small to evaluate, they were factored into the overall pottery analysis as many were likely portions of larger pots with only shoulder and neck decorations. Additionally, many sherds were waterworn, reecting a complex site history and sherd taphonomy.65 Along with the presence of ironwork, the sherds indicate abundant pottery that may reect a strong regional trade network, while simultaneously indicating a remarkable level of isolation into latter part of the second millennium AD.66 A preponderance of the archaeological evidence indicates that while Kibiro has been dependent on some form of trade since its rst settlement, long-distance trade is a phenomenon of the much more recent past.67

15

The excavation found that the salt production method, while shared by other

East African sites, is unique in its continual recycling of the same earth.68 Salt production is certainly what made Kibiro more than a quiet shing village, and the salt produced was far in excess of what would be used by the local population. The need for a wide trade network for dispersing the commodity implies the existence of a sociopolitical authority to organize, protect, and control it. The pottery decorations found on sherds excavated at Kibiro point to the origins of the population in migrant groups from the upper Nile and further north who mixed in with the Bantu populations in the area.69 These ndings are in keeping with the claims of multi-ethnic origins espoused by the Banyoro. 70 It seems likely that the salt produced at Kibiro, given its strategic position, was indeed the commodity that formed the economic base of the emerging state of Bunyoro. Bunyoro would seem to have emerged early in the second millennium with little or no inuence from societies outside of East Central Africa.71

The Nature of the Presentation ! This project involves construction of a combined museum and visitor at

Kigorobya. As previously established, access to Kibiro itself is complicated by the difcult terrain. Kigorobya, situated only ten kilometers from Kibiro, is more accessible and is still an appropriate venue from which to explore the role of the salt trade in state formation, as it is the present location of the primary salt market for Kibiro. From this

16

location, physically able visitors will be able to make their way down to Kibiro on foot to observe salt production and village life if they so chose. The building to be constructed will house two separate but related facilities: a visitor center for greeting foreign and domestic tourists and introducing them to the salt production process at Kibiro, and a museum for the curation of objects and artifacts and the creating of interpretive exhibits related the history of Kibiro. ! There are a number of goals this project, including creating appropriate storage

and display space for Bunyoro and Kibiro related artifacts, promoting and attracting international, domestic, and local interest and awareness of the unique history of Kibiro, and enhancing local awareness of the value of archaeological material still in the ground. These goals will be met through outreach to specic audiences. Although the primary audience for such the Kibiro site will be local, it will also serve as a tourist attraction for this part of Bunyoro. According to the Uganda Tourism Boards website, the majority of attractions in the western part of the country are ecotourism centered on safaris, particularly those geared toward primate viewing.72 While ecotourism is economically signicant for Uganda, its aims are not in keeping with those of an historical and archaeological site like that of Kibiro. The museum and visitor center will promote greater understanding of the unique cultural, social, and economic development of the Kingdom of Bunyoro-Kitara, combining the material culture and archaeological evidence with the most recent developments in history and

17

anthropology. The availability of such a facility alongside ecotourism opportunities will also help to promote a more nuanced and holistic view of Uganda and East Africa. ! The museum will eventually provide traveling exhibits to promote knowledge

and understanding of Kibiro and its signicance to individuals unable to travel to Uganda. While one duty of museums is to interpret objects and history in its own context, museums also ought to speak to the larger story of humanity as a whole. The story of the salt of Kibiro is part of this story; Connah has argued that it helped drive the development of a complex society in Bunyoro through the need to regulate a growing trade network. Beyond this, the zero-waste style of production at Kibiro is also relevant to current interests in renewable resources. Bringing the material culture related to Kibiro to museums where they can be seen in the worldwide context will reinforce the centrality of Africas contribution to the development of civilization, for lack of a better term. As Neil MacGregor of the British Museum points out, objects speak truths, and objects from other cultures tell us not only about distant peoples but about ourselves too, about our souls.73 The story of Kibiro is not simply a footnote relevant only to local residents, and a traveling exhibit will bring its signicance home to a much broader audience than is possible in the remote corner of an East African nation. ! The main audience of the museum will of course be the local population. This

local audience will gain a greater understanding of their position in relation to the

18

historical development of Uganda and East Africa, and a stronger appreciation for the importance of protecting archaeological sites in the region. In his site report, Connah states that one of the most immediate threats to archaeological material in the region is the practice over the last twenty years or so of digging two to three meter-deep pit latrines.74 Museum staff, which will include a full-time archaeologist, will be available to advise residents in how best to locate latrines so that they will be both convenient and unlikely to disturb archaeological evidence. They will also be available to assist with artifacts unexpectedly disturbed by this process. The museum will be available to provide storage and protection of archaeological materials, as well as to display such materials as part of both permanent and traveling exhibits. ! In addition to housing material from the proposed excavation, the museum

would also serve as a repository for Kibiro and Bunyoro-related artifacts held at the Uganda Museum in Kampala, which currently holds all artifacts from the Connah teams excavations in 1989 and 1990. 75 The Uganda Museum has recently been in the news after coming under threat of destruction in 2011 when the government announced plans to construct a 60-story East African Trade Centre on the museum site. The announcement prompted an outcry from the domestic and international community, who recognized the threat to Ugandan heritage.76 Concerns were raised that many of the collections are uncatalogued and would be irreparably damaged or lost in the storage and transition process.77 While these plans seem to have been put on hold with

19

a change in administration, this is far from the only threat to Ugandan World Heritage Sites. 78 In March 2010, the Kasubi Tombs, resting places of Ganda kings signicant in religious worship and a UNESCO World Heritage Site, were destroyed in a suspicious re. Tensions between the Baganda and the Ugandan government spiked when the Baganda accused the government of arson. The president has agreed to nance the restoration of the tombs, but this incident highlights the importance of preserving World Heritage Sites in Uganda.79 Creation of a museum and visitor center at Kigorobya will provide outreach to increase popular support and connection with the local and regional history and help prevent these sorts of disasters in the future.

Partner Agencies/Specialists ! There are a variety of potential partners for the establishment of a museum and

visitor center for Kibiro. Locally, the organization to coordinate with is the BunyoroKitara Kingdom Cultural Trust (http://www.bunyoro-kitara.org/14.html) a nonprot foundation begun in 2000 to promote and protect the cultural heritage of BunyoroKitara. Because Kibiro is an integral part of Bunyoro history, the input of the Cultural Trust is essentially to creating an interpretation that takes into consideration the concerns and interests of the Banyoro. One of the most important parts of any public history or preservation undertaking is creating a positive, functional dialogue between researchers and those whose culture is being researched. In order for the excavations

20

and projects to have a positive outcome, all organizations must recognize that they share agency with communities that are still active and dynamic forces in contemporary society. ! The Uganda Tourism Board (www.visituganda.com) includes in its mission

statement a commitment to encourage and promote domestic tourism in Uganda, as well as to direct tourism investment into less developed areas. The proposed museum and visitor center will meet both of these requirements. The tourism board will also provide staff and training for the new museum and visitor center. The Tourism Board also liaises with the Ugandan Ministry for Tourism, Trade, and Industry, which oversees the current Uganda Museum. This relationship will be invaluable in coordinating the transfer of any artifacts from the museum in Kampala to the new site in Kigorobya. This project is working to ensure that the Uganda Museum, the Ministry, and the Tourism Board all see the museum visitor center and museum at Kigorobya as partners rather than competitors. The Uganda Museum in particular will be a strong partner in developing exhibits and training and supplying staff until the Kigorobya project is well established. ! The Cross-Cultural Foundation of Uganda (http://

www.crossculturalfoundation.or.ug/) is another potential partner. They are a local NGO (Non-Governmental Organization) registered with the National NGO Board since 2005 and a member of the International National Trust Organization. Their dedication

21

and activism in promoting and protecting world heritage is in line with the mission of the proposed project. They are also advocates of local and community museums in Uganda as ways of creating a positive dialogue about the past.80 ! The British Institute in Eastern Africa (http://www.biea.ac.uk/index.htm) will

also be brought in to consult on the project. They support and encourage scholarship on topics of interest in East Africa, including archaeology, anthropology, history, linguistics, and geography. They have supported the publication of works that are at the forefront of research on Bunyoro, including Shane Doyles 2006 Crisis & Decline in Bunyoro and Graham Connahs Kibiro: The salt of Bunyoro, past and present. The BIEA is the organization best equipped to provide archaeologists to guide this effort. Beyond this, the Institute offers graduate students schemes for conducting research in East Africa, based in their headquarters at Nairobi. It is possible that a partnership could be worked out whereby interested graduate students in archaeology and anthropology could carry out research and work in conjunction with the continued excavations in Kibiro. This work could also be done in conjunction with Makerere Universitys Archaeology and Heritage Studies Department, which could potentially use the site for eld schools in conjunction with their archaeology courses.81

Presentation Plan

22

The goals and nature of the presentation have already been discussed; what

follows is a detailed description of how the visitor center and museum will function. Although they will share a physical space, each plays a distinct role in interpretation of the Kibiro site. ! The role of the visitor center is to greet domestic and international tourists and

provide an explanation of what Kibiro is and its signicance. The rst exhibit will address the question of the signicance of salt itself; visitors cannot appreciate the importance of Kibiro and its salt production unless they understand what salt meant in a time prior to refrigeration and other chemical preservatives. Visitors will then watch include a brief documentary lm describing the salt production process to introduce visitors to the objects and activities they can expect to see. This lm will not be more than ten minutes in length, and include information on the unique nature of salt production at Kibiro, the environmental context of the village, and the social ramications of sexual labor division. In addition to using actual footage of the salt production process, the lm will include animated graphics where appropriate, as the process is somewhat confusing to the uninitiated. The visitor center will also include sample artifacts of the contemporary salt production process, that is, examples of the material culture associated with salt production including pots, scrapers, wooden bowls, a sample hearth, samples of the saline soil and brine at various stages, and a sample cone of salt. The visitor center will also be the base of operations for tours of

23

Kibiro, where visitors will be able to see and ask questions of the archaeologists at work on the excavation, as well as witness the salt production process itself. These tours will take place on specic days and times to minimize the disruptions to the womens salt production. Tours will be limited to specic, pre-established areas to protect the salt gardens and the archaeological sites. The visitor center will not sell or give away the salt of Kibiro, which tourists ought to be encouraged to purchase at the market if they so desire to avoid favoring any particular salt producers and so disrupting the local economy. ! The role of the museum is more complex. All museums have two major

responsibilities: curation and education. The Kibiro museum is no different in this regard. It will include archival quality storage to protect the artifacts and documents housed there as well as a traditional museum for visitors. The museum will also showcase the artifacts and material culture of Kibiro and Bunyoro, and rather than presenting a pure narrative of site, it will offer an examination of the role of the salt of Kibiro in the economic formation of Bunyoro. It will address the historical changes to Kibiro, with special attention to its signicance as a crossroads of communication, and a discussion of why archaeology is so relevant to discovering the history of a place where the past is not fundamentally understood in a chronological sense. It will discuss what the story of Bunyoro can tell us about how societies and governments evolve, and will tie this story into the larger story of the role of salt in the history of the world.

24

The museum will include an exhibit on pottery featuring some of the pottery

sherds found at Kibiro with information about how the decorations can tell archaeologists about the spread of trade and resources. Research on contemporary pottery making at Kigorobya and its environs has shown that pots being made there share decorative patterns with sherds unearthed at Kibiro.82 Samples of sherds will be displayed alongside contemporary pots made with the same decorations to illustrate the continuity of the patterns. Exhibit panels will explain that these decorations are not purely ornamental; they are frequently added along the necks of pots to facilitate transportation. ! There will be another exhibit to address the acculturation process at Kibiro,

which was complex but difcult to evaluate archaeologically. The evidence suggests that Kibiro has been a production site for a commodity that was traded in order to obtain goods necessary for daily subsistence. There is little evidence of the salt that left Kibiro, as it was transported either without packaging or in materials that were not preserved, like banana leaves. By contrast, materials brought into Kibiro for trade were likely to be of a more permanent nature. The exhibit will address this issue, and house artifacts that were likely brought to Kibiro to exchange for salt, such as iron artifacts, which were not made at Kibiro. There will also be a display of the smoking pipe artifacts recovered. The pipes are unique in that they include a distinctive narrow perforation on the lower side of the socket from the lip to the underside, probably to

25

facilitate the attachment of a reed or wood stem using wire or string looped through the hole. This feature is unique to the Lake Albert area. The pipes were presumably used to smoke tobacco, which was growing in the Bunyoro area by the time of the earliest European arrivals, and stratigraphic evidence at Kibiro suggests they appeared as early as the seventeenth century. This evidence of tobacco use suggests that even the isolated area around Lake Albert had some regional interaction before Europeans arrived.83 ! The museum will also include an exhibit on archaeology, describing the

archaeological process used at Kibiro by the Connah team with comparisons to early archaeology at the site to illustrate the importance of protecting sites and use of proper excavation techniques. While this is particularly relevant to the residents of Kibiro and the area whose activities sometimes threaten archaeological deposits, tourists and visitors from further abroad would also benet from learning more about how archaeology works and how good archaeology ought to be done. ! Museum displays will be attractive and clear, but fairly low-tech to avoid taxing

strained resources. In addition to displaying artifacts related to Kibiro and Bunyoro, the museum will also include historic images of Kibiro to emphasize both the change and continuity of life there. Visitors should not have the impression that this is the village that time forgot, but rather that the people of Kibiro have found a uniquely sustainable way of harvesting a renewable resource that has brought them continued success for the past millennium. The museum staff will include a number of docents available at all

26

times to answer questions and provide tours of the museum to organized groups and individual visitors. Displays in both the museum and visitor center will be in English and Lunyoro, and docents will be available who can give tours in both languages.

Conclusion ! The visitor center and museum at Kigorobya will bring both domestic and

international attention to the unique current and historical activities at Kibiro. Tourism dollars and international attention will aid in the preservation of the existing sites, and provide a base of operations for future archaeological and anthropological activities in the area. The process of developing the museum will contribute to the creation of the nomination le required as the next step of having Kibiro included on the ofcial World Heritage List.

27

Maps

Map of Kibiro and its hinterland from Connah, Kibiro, 13.

28

Map of sites examined by Connah team. Connah, Kibiro, 185. 29

Section of map of sites examined by Connah team. Connah, Kibiro, 186.

30

31

1
2

Shane Doyle, From Kitara to the Lost Counties: Genealogy, Land and Legitimacy in the Kingdom of Bunyoro, Western Uganda, Social Identities 12, no. 14 (July 2006): 457.
3

U.S. Department of State Bureau of African Affairs, Background Note: Uganda, U.S. State Department http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2963.htm [accessed December 27, 2011].
4

According to current linguistic conventions, the prexes associated with the root word name of each nation change depending on use. The prex bu refers to the geopolitical country (Buganda, Bunyoro), while the prex ba refers to the people (Baganda, Banyoro). The root word (Ganda, Nyoro) may be used to encapsulate both the country and its people somewhat interchangeably with the other terms. The language used in this proposal is in keeping with current scholarly practice.
5

Doyle, From Kitara, 459-460.

Doyle, From Kitara," 461; John Beattie, Bunyoro: An African Kingdom (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960), 18.
7

Doyle, From Kitara, 461. Doyle, From Kitara, 460. Doyle, From Kitara, 457-470.

10

Graham Connah, The salt of Bunyoro: seeking the origins of an African kingdom, Antiquity 65 (1991): 479.
11

Graham Connah, Kibiro: The salt of Bunyoro, past and present (London: The British Institute in East Africa, 1996), 6.

12

Connah, Kibiro, 14. Connah, Kibiro, 9-10. Connah, Kibiro, 10. Connah, Kibiro, 10-11. Connah, Kibiro, 14. Connah, Kibiro, 16. Connah, Kibiro, 17. Connah, Kibiro, 17. Doyles text spells Kabarega, Kabaleega.

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

Shane Doyle, Crisis & Decline in Bunyoro: Population & Environment in Western Uganda, 1860-1955 (Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2006), 49.
22

Connah, Kibiro, 19-20; Casati, as quoted in Connah, Kibiro, 20. Doyle, Crisis, 63-64. Beattie, Bunyoro, 21-22. Doyle, Crisis, 69-72, Doyle, Crisis, 72-73.

23

24

25

26

27

Connah, Kibiro, 21. Connah, Kibiro, 29. Doyle, Crisis, 112-113. Connah, Kibiro, 12. Connah, Kibiro, 31. Connah, Kibiro, 29. Connah, Kibiro, 51. Connah, Kibiro, 52. Ruth Fisher, as quoted in Connah, Kibiro, 26. Connah, Kibiro, 40. Connah, Kibiro, 40-42. Connah, Kibiro, 45-46. Connah, Kibiro, 46-47, Connah, Kibiro, 47-49. Connah, Kibiro, 49-51.

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

Connah, Kibiro, 30. Connah, Kibiro, 56. Connah, Kibiro, 2.

43

44

45

For a detailed analysis of the earthworks, including a summary of previous ideas related to the excavations of the early to mid-twentieth century, see Peter Robertshaw, The Age and Function of the Ancient Earthworks of Western Uganda, Uganda Journal 48 (2002): 17-32.
46

Connah, Kibiro, 2. Connah, Kibiro, 63-64. Connah, Kibiro, 4. Connah, Kibiro, 5. Connah, Kibiro, 65. Connah, Kibiro, 65. Connah, Kibiro, 98. Connah, Kibiro, 21.

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

Brad Bartel, Acculturation and ethnicity in Roman Moesia Superior, in Centre and Periphery: Comparative Studies in Archaelogy, ed. T.C. Champion (London: Unwin Hyman, 1989), 175-176.

55

Connah, Kibiro, 65. Connah, Kibiro, 66. Connah, Kibiro, 66. Connah, Kibiro, 67. Connah, Kibiro, 70-71. Connah, Kibiro, 76-80. Connah, Kibiro, 87. Connah, Kibiro, 91. Connah, Kibiro, 91. Connah, Kibiro, 92-93. Connah, Kibiro, 105.

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

Connah, Kibiro, 98 [Please note that there is an error in the pagination of this book; pages 105-112 are mistakenly bound between pages 96 and 97.]
67

Connah, Kibiro, 98. Connah, Kibiro, 214. Connah, Kibiro, 214-216.

68

69

70

Doyle, From Kitara, 457-470. Connah, Kibiro, 216.

71

72

Western Uganda, Uganda Tourism Board http://www.visituganda.com/ destinations/western/ [accessed December 29, 2011].
73

Neil MacGregor, To Shape the Citizens, in Whose Culture?: The Promise of Museums and the Debate over Antiquities, ed. James B. Cuno (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2009), 50.
74

Connah, Kibiro, 57. Connah, Kibiro, 5.

75

76

Ellady Nuyambi, Why Uganda Museum is not transferable, The Independent (Uganda), April 1, 2011 http://www.independent.co.ug/column/insight/4056-whyuganda-museum-is-not-transferrable [accessed December 29, 2011].
77

Nuyambi, Why Uganda Museum,; Chapurukha M. Kusimba, Plans to Demolish the Uganda Museum: An Open Letter to President Yoweri Museveni, Republic of Uganda, The Field Museum http://eldmuseum.org/explore/plans-demolishuganda-museum [accessed December 29, 2011]; Dennis Laumann, Letter to President Yoweri Museveni, H-AFRICA http://list.africom.museum/pipermail/africom-l/2011February/002263.html [accessed December 29, 2011].
78

Wolfgang Thome, Uganda news update Museum case is heading back to court, Wolfganghthomes Blog http://wolfganghthome.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/ugandanews-update-museum-case-is-heading-back-to-court/ [accessed December 29, 2011]; Thome, Uganda news update Museum to stay says new Minister for Tourism, Wolfganghthomes Blog http://wolfganghthome.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/ugandanews-update-museum-to-stay-says-new-minister-for-tourism/ [accessed December 29, 2011].

79

Jeffrey Gettleman and Josh Kron, Suspicion of Arson at Royal Tombs Fuels Deadly Clashes in Uganda, New York Times, March 17, 2010 http://www.nytimes.com/ 2010/03/18/world/africa/18uganda.html [accessed December 29, 2011]
80

Frederick Nsibambi, Support community museums to boost domestic tourism, New Vision (Uganda), September 27, 2011 http://www.newvision.co.ug/news/584-Supportcommunity-museums-to-boost-domestic-tourism.html [accessed December 29, 2011]
81

Similar programs exist at a number of sites in the United States, and have proven very effective in promoting archaeology and educating the public. See: William R. Iseminger, Public Archaeology at Cahokia, in Presenting Archaeology to the Public: Digging for Truths, ed. John H. Jameson, Jr. (Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 1997), 147-155.
82

Connah, Kibiro, 177-180. Connah, Kibiro, 155.

83