Ruanda-Urundi Colonial Perceptions

There is an inherent bias in the way Americans and Europeans have been educated about African cultures and civilizations. Rwanda is a prime example. For most of the 20th century, public knowledge of Rwanda was shaped and determined by eurocentric sources looking at the country through a European lens. It is for this reason that the country’s heritage, cultures, and history may be lost on us. 

How did US and European media portray Rwanda in the first half of the 20th century? Did these portrayals vary between different forms of Western media? In order to answer these questions, our research team searched for items from popular media in the US and Europe, including newspapers, magazines, articles, movies, travel magazines, and advertisements. The team developed a set of keywords to identify relevant items. Finally, we identified themes in the dataset based on keywords, repetition, references to specific people or places, and opinions about Rwanda or its people.

Findings:

The team found that the popular media relied on racist ideologies of White superiority that were common in Europe and the United States in the first half of the 20th century. They often portrayed Rwandan people as “savage,” “uncivilized,” or as animals. A second significant theme emphasized European “discovery” and exploration of East Africa and African people. These racist ideologies also rationalized Rwandan athleticism and social structures. Western sources in the 20th century employed the so-called “Hamitic hypothesis” to incorrectly contextualize Rwandan social hierarchies with those of Aryan nationalism. 

Conclusions:

The portrayal of Rwanda in the early 20th century by US and European media perpetuated racist perceptions of Rwandan people and their culture which continue to influence European and North American perceptions of the region today. Hidden from view is the influence colonialism had on the country’s culture, traditions, customs, and politics. More research should be done to uncover the stories wrapped in a ‘colonial veil’ and deconstruct present-day misconceptions of Rwanda brought about by only listening to one side of the story.