Talk:Barotseland

message: Was Barotseland a separate british colony in the nineteenth century? An atlas I have shows it separate from Northeastern Rhodesia --Astrokey44 09:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I have read it does not appear that Barotseland was separate from Northern Rhodesia; but did have a great level of autonomy, making it a protectorate in a protectorate. What is certain is that Barotseland was the native chiefdom which was by far most had most internal autonomy in Rhodesia and Nyassaland.--Aldux 09:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Barotseland's status as a British protectorate was complex and is still the subject of much debate and politicking in Zambia, and relates to calls for secession, it needs to be expanded in the article (perhaps best by someone who is neutral!) as it is the potential source of future conflict. I can have a go at it later if no-one else does. Rexparry sydney 00:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland was being broken up in 1962-63, the Barotse king expressed strong opposition to becoming part of an independent Zambia. Sir Roy Welensky tried to support him, but to no avail. [The only reference I have is Ian Smith's book "The Great Betrayal"; better sources must surely be available, but I cannot access them]. --DLMcN (talk) 15:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  colony 

message: This article, or at least parts of it, appears to be biased with regard to claiming that Barotseland is or should be independent and is being illegally occupied by Zambia:
:On 4 December 1991, in a landmark Ruling, the High Court of Zambia ruled that the Barotseland Agreement 1964 was abrogated, and no longer exists. The judgment shows vividly how the Zambian Government violated and rendered the Barotseland Agreement null and void.
:This clearly meant that there is no relationship between the two nations and there is nothing people can do to mend the broken relationship between Zambia and Barotseland, because the High Court had clearly stated that the Barotseland Agreement was terminated by introducing amendments to the laws.
:What remains now is an act of illegal occupation; Zambia has terminated the agreement and yet continues to enjoy the privileges and rights contained in the Barotseland Agreement.
The so-called judgment of the High Court of Zambia cited herein can be found at . However, a careful look at it shows that what is here is not the court's judgment, but rather an affidavit supplied by a representative of the Zambian Attorney General's office (the defendant in the case). Even if one could say that the affidavit supports the plaintiff's case that the Zambian government violated the Barotseland Agreement, it is not itself the ruling of the High Court. If there is such a ruling, I don't know how to find it. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 10:51, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pro-independence bias in article 

message: Could we have some clarification on terminology, with local expertise?
The opening says "the Lozi people or Barotse, or Malozi as they call themselves".  I am no expert, but surely malozi is the singular and balozi or 'barotse' a plural?
Hogweard (talk) 22:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Barotseland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140407084326/http://gga.org/stories/editions/aif-18-fault-lines-africas-separation-anxiety/all-shook-up to http://gga.org/stories/editions/aif-18-fault-lines-africas-separation-anxiety/all-shook-up
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:53, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I think this article should stick to facts and not be mixed with fallacies and issues based on political agendas.
The map of the region is not supported by history but created by pro-independence ideology. In particular, History has named all areas that other kingdoms controlled and influenced which this map erroneously includes in Barotseland map. For example, the Lunda-Luba kingdom under Naweji (who died in 1690), covers the northwestern regions of Zambia and this is backed by history again when Mwata Kanongesha and Mwata Ishindi occupied the areas of the now Mwinilunga and Zambezi east respectively of the modern day Zambia with the same area occupied by the Luvales another off-shot of the Luba-Lunda kingdom. 
Further, the link of this map has a historical problem of imposition and claim that the Lozi worked with colonial government to bring colonialism to it's high by falsifying that they controlled Balovale district at the time of "scramble for Africa". This is exemplified by the statement that "Because it suited both BSAC and Lozi interests, Balovale, as it was then called, was regarded as a part of Bulozi" and that "The division of the Upper Zambezi between three colonial powers and the subsequent restructuring of the hierarchy of local chieftainships, when combined with 'recognition' of a very few chieftainships, meant that the Lunda and, especially, the Luvale were given a political structure that was both almost wholly new and without significant customary power." (http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft158004rs&chunk.id=d0e9382&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d0e9231&brand=ucpress) 
This is the fact that should be contained and corrected to reflect the truth and not suit pro-independence ideology of authors.  
Munjunga (talk) 07:05, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not in Line with History 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Barotseland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140423185135/http://zambianeye.com/archives/16797 to http://zambianeye.com/archives/16797
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The current borders of barotseland are within the western province of Zambia Omarmpamba (talk) 13:36, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current borders of barotseland