The Buganda Agreement of 1900 was instrumental in formalizing British colonial dominance over Buganda, with a significant focus on land appropriation. Under the agreement, nearly 9,000 square miles of Buganda’s land were divided, with large portions allocated to the Kabaka (king), chiefs, and notables as “mailo land.” However, the majority of the remaining land—dubbed Crown land—was placed under British control. This designation allowed the British to exploit resources and restrict traditional land-use practices of the local population.
The agreement not only commodified land but also altered the traditional relationship between the Baganda people and their land. The land tenure system it introduced prioritized private ownership, creating a framework that excluded many ordinary Baganda from accessing land that they had historically cultivated. The taxation system further entrenched British economic control, with hut and gun taxes forcing Baganda to engage in wage labor to meet colonial demands.
This systematic land reallocation stripped many Baganda of their ancestral rights, marking the beginning of widespread land alienation. As historian Low put it, the agreement was “a legal mechanism for the expropriation of land under the guise of partnership with the Buganda monarchy.”
While the Treaty of Westphalia (1648) is primarily known for ending the Thirty Years’ War and introducing the concept of sovereignty, it also legitimized land grabs within Europe. By recognizing the territorial integrity of states, it formalized the redistribution of land seized during the war. States like France and Sweden emerged as significant beneficiaries, gaining vast territories at the expense of weaker powers, such as the Holy Roman Empire.
The treaty codified a new power structure, enabling dominant states to consolidate control over contested lands. This marked the transition from empires to sovereign states, where rulers had absolute authority over their territories. In many cases, this meant dispossessing local populations or minorities who had previously held claims to the land.
By cementing territorial gains through war and negotiation, the treaty reinforced a precedent for land acquisition as a legitimate outcome of state conflict. As historian Peter Wilson observed, the treaty “enshrined a system where might equaled right in the competition for land and power.”
The Treaty of Berlin, born out of the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, institutionalized one of history’s largest land grabs: the colonization of Africa. The treaty enabled European powers to carve up the continent without African representation or consent, using the principle of effective occupation to legitimize claims. This led to the arbitrary division of African lands, disregarding existing cultural, ethnic, and territorial boundaries.
King Leopold II of Belgium emerged as a significant beneficiary, securing personal ownership of the Congo Free State. His administration engaged in brutal exploitation, forcing local populations to extract resources like rubber under horrific conditions. The treaty also facilitated land acquisition by other colonial powers, such as Britain, France, and Germany, further displacing African communities from their ancestral lands.
This systematic appropriation of African territories not only dispossessed millions but also laid the groundwork for enduring conflicts over borders and resources. As Thomas Pakenham noted, “The Berlin Conference legitimized the theft of an entire continent under the guise of civilization.”
The Buganda Treaty of 1894 was a precursor to full-scale colonial land appropriation in Uganda. By declaring Buganda a British protectorate, the treaty allowed the British to assert control over the kingdom’s external relations and military affairs. This strategic foothold enabled the gradual erosion of Buganda’s sovereignty, including over its lands.
Although the treaty left internal governance largely intact, it set the stage for future land reallocation. The British used the protectorate status to legitimize their economic and territorial interests, creating pathways for the eventual expropriation of vast tracts of land under the 1900 Buganda Agreement. The treaty thus marked the beginning of a systematic approach to land alienation in the region.
As historian D.A. Low noted, “The 1894 treaty was a tactical maneuver that masked the broader imperial agenda of consolidating control over Buganda’s land and resources.”