culture. Because of this apparent inconsistency between the usual definition of ethnicity and the actual reality of ethnicity in Rwanda, scholars have long debated the origins of ethnic difference in Rwanda, and the question of whether this difference is based in class, better resembles the concept of"caste, or in fact reflects the distinct historical origins of the three Rwandan groupings. 18 What is resoundingly clear in examining the history of ethnicity in Rwanda, however, is that, more than anything, ethnicity in Rwanda is about power, a means of structuring access to and exclusion from political and economic power. It is for this reason that, when discussing ethnicity in the Rwandan context, the author finds it most useful to employ anthropologist Mahmood Mamdani's conception of ethnicity as political identity, a conception based on his argument that ethnic identity must be understood as a direct consequence of the way in which power is rganized in relation to the state. Such a "processual approach to ethnicity is also articulated by Catharine Newbury, a well-known historian of Rwanda, who maintains that ethnicity must be seen as a dynamic process that develops in relation to state power and political processes These particular interpretations of ethnicity are critical to understanding Rwanda, not only because they allow us to see the concrete political implications and origins of ethnicity, but also because they emphasize that ethnicity, rather than being a primordial, static, and thus insurmountable reality, is in fact a historical process. of equal importance this approach to ethnicity as "political identity allows us to extricate ourselves from the highly contested(and ultimately irresolvable)question of the historical origins of the Hutu and Tutsi groups in Rwanda 21 es Forges, 31-38; Prunier, 1-40 For a taste of these debates, see Des Forges, 31-38: D. Newbury, 73-97; Mamdani, When Victims Become Killers. 41-75 Mamdani. When victims Become killers. 2 Catharine Newbury, The Cohesion of Oppression(New York: Columbia University Press, 1988),14 2I There are two main competing interpretations of the nature of ethnicity in precolonial Rwanda. Some claim that in the precolonial era, Tutsi, Hutu and Twa lived in harmony, and that it was European colonialism that introduced and created cleavages between these groups. Others assert that the precolonial period involved the brutal conquest of the Hutu and Twa by the Tutsi "who imposed an oppressive exploitative rule, and that colonial rule only intensified these already-deep divisions. However, as historian Catharine Newbury points out, these two stances "reflect political positions more than valid historical reconstruction"and ignore the complex historical processes that have shaped the current form of6 culture.17 Because of this apparent inconsistency between the usual definition of ethnicity and the actual reality of ethnicity in Rwanda, scholars have long debated the origins of ethnic difference in Rwanda, and the question of whether this difference is based in class, better resembles the concept of “caste,” or in fact reflects the distinct historical origins of the three Rwandan groupings.18 What is resoundingly clear in examining the history of ethnicity in Rwanda, however, is that, more than anything, ethnicity in Rwanda is about power, a means of structuring access to and exclusion from political and economic power. It is for this reason that, when discussing ethnicity in the Rwandan context, the author finds it most useful to employ anthropologist Mahmood Mamdani’s conception of ethnicity as political identity, a conception based on his argument that ethnic identity must be understood as a direct consequence of the way in which power is organized in relation to the state.19 Such a “processual approach to ethnicity” is also articulated by Catharine Newbury, a well-known historian of Rwanda, who maintains that ethnicity must be seen as a dynamic process that develops in relation to state power and political processes.20 These particular interpretations of ethnicity are critical to understanding Rwanda, not only because they allow us to see the concrete political implications and origins of ethnicity, but also because they emphasize that ethnicity, rather than being a primordial, static, and thus insurmountable reality, is in fact a historical process. Of equal importance, this approach to ethnicity as “political identity” allows us to extricate ourselves from the highly contested (and ultimately irresolvable) question of the historical origins of the Hutu and Tutsi groups in Rwanda.21 17 Des Forges, 31-38; Prunier, 1-40. 18 For a taste of these debates, see Des Forges, 31-38; D. Newbury, 73-97; Mamdani, When Victims Become Killers, 41-75. 19 Mamdani, When Victims Become Killers, 22. 20 Catharine Newbury, The Cohesion of Oppression (New York: Columbia University Press, 1988), 14. 21 There are two main competing interpretations of the nature of ethnicity in precolonial Rwanda. Some claim that in the precolonial era, Tutsi, Hutu and Twa lived in harmony, and that it was European colonialism that introduced and created cleavages between these groups. Others assert that the precolonial period involved the brutal conquest of the Hutu and Twa by the Tutsi “who imposed an oppressive, exploitative rule,” and that colonial rule only intensified these already-deep divisions. However, as historian Catharine Newbury points out, these two stances “reflect political positions more than valid historical reconstruction” and ignore the complex historical processes that have shaped the current form of