What do you think?
Rate this book
A History of Modern Uganda
This book is the first major study in several decades to consider Uganda as a nation, from its precolonial roots to the present day. Here, Richard J. Reid examines the political, economic, and social history of Uganda, providing a unique and wide-ranging examination of its turbulent and dynamic past for all those studying Uganda's place in African history and African politics. Reid identifies and examines key points of rupture and transition in Uganda's history, emphasising dramatic political and social change in the precolonial era, especially during the nineteenth century, and he also examines the continuing repercussions of these developments in the colonial and postcolonial periods. By considering the ways in which historical culture and consciousness has been ever present - in political discourse, art and literature, and social relationships - Reid defines the true extent of Uganda's viable national history.
Kindle Edition
Published February 8, 2017
39 people are currently reading
145 people want to read
About the author
Richard J. Reid
19 books5 followersHistorian of modern Africa, with a focus on the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
May 2, 2018
I believe Richard Reid is likely one of the foremost experts in the area and also Uganda has few books in my library that are available. My Library incidentally is the New York Public Library system. It isn't so small.
At any rate, the book goes through modern history along themes that are meaningful to Reid. This may be why the other readers of the book give it a 2. This not so much a history of Modern Uganda as it is a political view of what happened, a bit of economics, that doesn't quite get you what you need, and then a fractured timeline that is at time difficult follow as it surrounds themes rather than what happened. For those that are political scientists who already know a lot about the region and the country, you might really like this. For those that wanted a history, it feels super disjointed. It feels like it's written by an outsider, not an insider.
For history buffs, what I mean is this. We have whole books in the South written about just Gettysburg, what happened exactly, how it happened, and what the ramifications were coming in and going out. Imagine if you tried to condense all of that into a chapter and also were from the UK telling the story. That's what it feels like.
That said, there isn't a lot on Uganda, yet. I hope one day that people of the country will tell their own story and we are fortunate enough to have translators that bring it to the rest of the world. I can't give it less than 3 though. It was very well researched book that compiled the information of nearly every article written on Uganda.
At any rate, the book goes through modern history along themes that are meaningful to Reid. This may be why the other readers of the book give it a 2. This not so much a history of Modern Uganda as it is a political view of what happened, a bit of economics, that doesn't quite get you what you need, and then a fractured timeline that is at time difficult follow as it surrounds themes rather than what happened. For those that are political scientists who already know a lot about the region and the country, you might really like this. For those that wanted a history, it feels super disjointed. It feels like it's written by an outsider, not an insider.
For history buffs, what I mean is this. We have whole books in the South written about just Gettysburg, what happened exactly, how it happened, and what the ramifications were coming in and going out. Imagine if you tried to condense all of that into a chapter and also were from the UK telling the story. That's what it feels like.
That said, there isn't a lot on Uganda, yet. I hope one day that people of the country will tell their own story and we are fortunate enough to have translators that bring it to the rest of the world. I can't give it less than 3 though. It was very well researched book that compiled the information of nearly every article written on Uganda.
October 15, 2025
With a title like this, you imagine an introductory, chronological history of Uganda, one that is maybe focused on the 20th century. This is instead a series of essays on the history of Uganda (in strange order), and not introductory; the level of detail is truly bizarre at times. If you read this without some basic Ugandan history in your pocket you will get lost. Even then, you will probably skim large portions of the mega-paragraphs in this book. As always, however, there are interesting things here.
First are the parallels between Obote, Idi Amin, and Museveni, each of whom take office (by force!) on a mission of unifying the country, rejecting “sectarianism”, and whatever was in vogue at the time with respect to economic policy (with Amin it was state-led development, with Museveni, structural adjustment). These good feelings don’t last, at least in part because, in taking power by force, the country is left full of real and potential enemies that need to be contained or repressed. I ended up drawing on this a lot for my paper on Abiy Ahmed in Ethiopia.
Second is the deeper history you get here of precolonial Uganda, a period I only had read passing reference to. The little I knew, echoed here, is that prior to the British Ugandan Protectorate there were a series of kingdoms that were fairly autonomous. The British team up with seemingly the most powerful of these, Buganda, to conquer and incorporate the others, although only partially; in the end, the North of Uganda is left famously underdeveloped and there are other kingdoms that retain more autonomy. These kingdoms persist politically until Obote famously breaks their back, brought back later by Museveni (?) but only as cultural institutions. An interesting accident of history here is that the North, by virtue of being rebellious and “needing” to be forcefully conquered through military rule, comes to both develop a kind of militaristic culture and becomes associated with militarism in the eyes of the British. The British then heavily recruit from the north to staff the Ugandan military, which ultimately lays the foundation for the conflicts and coups post-independence.
This precolonial history gets at the question of what role colonialism had in Uganda’s trajectory (and the development or underdevelopment of Africa more broadly). It seems to me both progressives and conservatives largely assume that, pre-Europe, there was “not much there” politically speaking; it’s the Europeans who either ruined (progressive) or improved (conservatives) the continent. At least in Uganda, however, there are clearly large political units in existence, engaging in conflict and conquest with one another, etc. Reid, in fact, describes the British as effectively being coopted by Buganda against its rival kingdoms. The puzzle then is: on the one hand, it seems clear that the British lumping all of these kingdoms together and putting them under the thumb of one group would lead to bad outcomes. On the other, it is not clear that these kingdoms absent intervention were on the road to prosperity (none of them, for instance, were strong enough to rebuff the British), or that they would have avoided conflict with one another (they were fighting long before the British arrive).
First are the parallels between Obote, Idi Amin, and Museveni, each of whom take office (by force!) on a mission of unifying the country, rejecting “sectarianism”, and whatever was in vogue at the time with respect to economic policy (with Amin it was state-led development, with Museveni, structural adjustment). These good feelings don’t last, at least in part because, in taking power by force, the country is left full of real and potential enemies that need to be contained or repressed. I ended up drawing on this a lot for my paper on Abiy Ahmed in Ethiopia.
Second is the deeper history you get here of precolonial Uganda, a period I only had read passing reference to. The little I knew, echoed here, is that prior to the British Ugandan Protectorate there were a series of kingdoms that were fairly autonomous. The British team up with seemingly the most powerful of these, Buganda, to conquer and incorporate the others, although only partially; in the end, the North of Uganda is left famously underdeveloped and there are other kingdoms that retain more autonomy. These kingdoms persist politically until Obote famously breaks their back, brought back later by Museveni (?) but only as cultural institutions. An interesting accident of history here is that the North, by virtue of being rebellious and “needing” to be forcefully conquered through military rule, comes to both develop a kind of militaristic culture and becomes associated with militarism in the eyes of the British. The British then heavily recruit from the north to staff the Ugandan military, which ultimately lays the foundation for the conflicts and coups post-independence.
This precolonial history gets at the question of what role colonialism had in Uganda’s trajectory (and the development or underdevelopment of Africa more broadly). It seems to me both progressives and conservatives largely assume that, pre-Europe, there was “not much there” politically speaking; it’s the Europeans who either ruined (progressive) or improved (conservatives) the continent. At least in Uganda, however, there are clearly large political units in existence, engaging in conflict and conquest with one another, etc. Reid, in fact, describes the British as effectively being coopted by Buganda against its rival kingdoms. The puzzle then is: on the one hand, it seems clear that the British lumping all of these kingdoms together and putting them under the thumb of one group would lead to bad outcomes. On the other, it is not clear that these kingdoms absent intervention were on the road to prosperity (none of them, for instance, were strong enough to rebuff the British), or that they would have avoided conflict with one another (they were fighting long before the British arrive).
July 17, 2018
This is probably not the first book one should read about the history of Uganda, as it is idiosyncratically organized and will be hard for a beginner to follow. That said, it is an extraordinary, comprehensive synthesis, with interesting insights on every page. I will be returning to it often.
The central thesis is that "Uganda" is not merely a tenuous colonial creation, but a long durée entity, albeit one always characterized by divisiveness. Reid argues that if you want to understand Uganda today, in its problems and strengths, you have to understand the precolonial history, as much as or more than the colonial and postcolonial histories.
The central thesis is that "Uganda" is not merely a tenuous colonial creation, but a long durée entity, albeit one always characterized by divisiveness. Reid argues that if you want to understand Uganda today, in its problems and strengths, you have to understand the precolonial history, as much as or more than the colonial and postcolonial histories.
January 25, 2024
Two stars. If you’re new to the history of modern Uganda (as I am): look elsewhere, this book definitely does not deliver what the cover advertises. Aside from the non-chronological approach, most of the major periods of modern Ugandan history which you likely care about (I.e., Museveni’s insurrection, Uganda’s military operations in Congo, even a lot to do with Idi Amin) are basically not covered at all. Clearly, the author intended this more as a series of academic essays aimed at other experts in the field rather than an actual history of any period of Ugandan history, let alone one intended for a general audience.
To give credit where credit is due: I believe Reid is a knowledgeable and insightful observer of Ugandan history. At times I found his observations thought-provoking.
Still though, Reid has a tendency to overwrite and over-intellectualize to the point where his analysis feels a lot like navel-gazing at times. Additionally, I wonder if his recurring point that history is uniquely important to modern Uganda isn’t overstated: is every country not a product of its history? Is everything not illuminated in the light of the past? Bearing these points in mind, the author’s assessments and proscriptions come off as hopelessly academic: “If the NRM’s primary goal was to face ‘forwards’ and demonise the past, the next frontier in Uganda’s long-term development is to look ‘ backwards’, too. There needs to be a recognition of what Ugandans of various hues have achieved and contributed to what the nation has become; a recognition that Uganda has not merely survived but has in many respects flourished, both because of, and despite, the history which is the country’s bedrock.”
Sure. THAT should be the next frontier in Uganda’s long-term development.
All in all, this book is a disappointment which I do not recommend. This is a shame as I find the author knowledgeable and I think if a better group of editors had been able to work with him on this is suspect this might have been a very different and much better book.
To give credit where credit is due: I believe Reid is a knowledgeable and insightful observer of Ugandan history. At times I found his observations thought-provoking.
Still though, Reid has a tendency to overwrite and over-intellectualize to the point where his analysis feels a lot like navel-gazing at times. Additionally, I wonder if his recurring point that history is uniquely important to modern Uganda isn’t overstated: is every country not a product of its history? Is everything not illuminated in the light of the past? Bearing these points in mind, the author’s assessments and proscriptions come off as hopelessly academic: “If the NRM’s primary goal was to face ‘forwards’ and demonise the past, the next frontier in Uganda’s long-term development is to look ‘ backwards’, too. There needs to be a recognition of what Ugandans of various hues have achieved and contributed to what the nation has become; a recognition that Uganda has not merely survived but has in many respects flourished, both because of, and despite, the history which is the country’s bedrock.”
Sure. THAT should be the next frontier in Uganda’s long-term development.
All in all, this book is a disappointment which I do not recommend. This is a shame as I find the author knowledgeable and I think if a better group of editors had been able to work with him on this is suspect this might have been a very different and much better book.
December 11, 2018
Excellent review of Ugandan history from precolonial times through today. Having studied abroad in Uganda and having read several books on modern Uganda, I was already familiar with Uganda's postcolonial history (especially the conflict in northern Uganda). I was less familiar with Uganda's precolonial and colonial history, however, so this book filled a lot of gaps for me.
Reid's book is not strictly chronological, as it starts out by reviewing Uganda's postcolonial history and then starts over again from precolonial times, with additional chapters on economic history and traditional institutions. He covers the history of interactions between the Buganda and Bunyoro kingdoms in particular, as well as that of other ethnic groups in what today constitutes Uganda and neighboring peoples. In the process, he makes a strong case that a national history of Uganda should cover precolonial roots as well as colonial and postcolonial history. Contrary to the tendency of many historians to treat colonial/postcolonial Africa as somewhat disconnected from precolonial history, modern Uganda cannot be fully understood unless this longer history is taken into account. Rather than viewing the nation of Uganda as a product of British colonialism and postcolonial developments alone, modern Uganda should be viewed as the culmination of several historical processes, several of which were well underway prior to the arrival of the British.
Well written and an enjoyable read, I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in delving into Ugandan history. It might be a little much if you're looking for an introductory history, but if you already have a general grasp of Ugandan history this will help you get the more complete story.
Reid's book is not strictly chronological, as it starts out by reviewing Uganda's postcolonial history and then starts over again from precolonial times, with additional chapters on economic history and traditional institutions. He covers the history of interactions between the Buganda and Bunyoro kingdoms in particular, as well as that of other ethnic groups in what today constitutes Uganda and neighboring peoples. In the process, he makes a strong case that a national history of Uganda should cover precolonial roots as well as colonial and postcolonial history. Contrary to the tendency of many historians to treat colonial/postcolonial Africa as somewhat disconnected from precolonial history, modern Uganda cannot be fully understood unless this longer history is taken into account. Rather than viewing the nation of Uganda as a product of British colonialism and postcolonial developments alone, modern Uganda should be viewed as the culmination of several historical processes, several of which were well underway prior to the arrival of the British.
Well written and an enjoyable read, I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in delving into Ugandan history. It might be a little much if you're looking for an introductory history, but if you already have a general grasp of Ugandan history this will help you get the more complete story.
June 21, 2022
I want to give the author a couple gifts.
First, a thesaurus. You are using "putative" just way, way too much.
Second, though Dr. Reid far outranks me in academia, please read some beautiful literature. History does not need to avoid beauty to be credible. Perhaps a healthy dose of Sinclair Lewis who writes great sentences or Octavia Butler who writes great stories would help.
This work earns all of four stars because it's scope is tremendous, it's research is breathtaking, it's lessons are robust. It loses a star because it is duller than it needs to be. Most people, even people who love history ... even those trained and published in history (looking at myself) will have to fight. It is very possible to put down.
It is also just not in the least bit chronological. It has its organization. It has a logic to that organization. It sort of starts at the beginning and proceeds to the present. But it also really doesn't and rarely seems to get to the stories you are waiting for. Undoubtedly, the author believes this is the 3rd or 10th book you've read on Ugandan history - and perhaps it should be. It should not be your first.
But gosh, there is so little story in this book of history. That is sad. Story is everything.
Reid, in the end, effectively makes his case that historical reflection is urgently needed in the continued journey of Uganda. It is well argued that education systems cannot focus only on technology.
The book earns a place on my shelf as a collection of essays on Ugandan history. That is it's true value. It doesn't tell the stories you need... The stories I need. But I hope it has and continues to influence Ugandan historians to do that very thing.
First, a thesaurus. You are using "putative" just way, way too much.
Second, though Dr. Reid far outranks me in academia, please read some beautiful literature. History does not need to avoid beauty to be credible. Perhaps a healthy dose of Sinclair Lewis who writes great sentences or Octavia Butler who writes great stories would help.
This work earns all of four stars because it's scope is tremendous, it's research is breathtaking, it's lessons are robust. It loses a star because it is duller than it needs to be. Most people, even people who love history ... even those trained and published in history (looking at myself) will have to fight. It is very possible to put down.
It is also just not in the least bit chronological. It has its organization. It has a logic to that organization. It sort of starts at the beginning and proceeds to the present. But it also really doesn't and rarely seems to get to the stories you are waiting for. Undoubtedly, the author believes this is the 3rd or 10th book you've read on Ugandan history - and perhaps it should be. It should not be your first.
But gosh, there is so little story in this book of history. That is sad. Story is everything.
Reid, in the end, effectively makes his case that historical reflection is urgently needed in the continued journey of Uganda. It is well argued that education systems cannot focus only on technology.
The book earns a place on my shelf as a collection of essays on Ugandan history. That is it's true value. It doesn't tell the stories you need... The stories I need. But I hope it has and continues to influence Ugandan historians to do that very thing.
June 9, 2020
A haphazard collection of historical essays about Ugandan history in no discernable order, certainly not chronological.
My takeaway is that Uganda takes it's name from tribe of Buganda which English colonists allied with. The Bugandan tribe became aristocrats that looked down on other tribes. There was a bunch of conflict as a result especially with nilo saharan speaking north, but also tension with the east.
Various epic fails in the 70's led to huge amount of death numerous orphans, and bankruptcy. Apparently plutocracy left by colonists was rather unstable.
Currently they are doing the neo liberal thing which leads to the same problems we see around the world.
They don't have political parties aka single party system and elections are rather questionable.
Catholicism still holds a lot of sway, which may have been a factor in the internationally abhorred anti gay bill Uganda passed.
Some say independence day only makes sense to celebrate by the people in power as few others have benefitted.
Well that's what i read anyways.
There was a lot more there but due to the jumping backwards and forwards through time every chapter it was hard to make much sense of it.
Main thing lacking is compassion for the people.
My takeaway is that Uganda takes it's name from tribe of Buganda which English colonists allied with. The Bugandan tribe became aristocrats that looked down on other tribes. There was a bunch of conflict as a result especially with nilo saharan speaking north, but also tension with the east.
Various epic fails in the 70's led to huge amount of death numerous orphans, and bankruptcy. Apparently plutocracy left by colonists was rather unstable.
Currently they are doing the neo liberal thing which leads to the same problems we see around the world.
They don't have political parties aka single party system and elections are rather questionable.
Catholicism still holds a lot of sway, which may have been a factor in the internationally abhorred anti gay bill Uganda passed.
Some say independence day only makes sense to celebrate by the people in power as few others have benefitted.
Well that's what i read anyways.
There was a lot more there but due to the jumping backwards and forwards through time every chapter it was hard to make much sense of it.
Main thing lacking is compassion for the people.
May 30, 2018
Masterful. The organization was sometimes a little puzzling and I found the selection (and omission) of secondary literature a bit arbitrary, but there is no question this is a critical and much-needed contribution to the history of Uganda. Very useful.
February 17, 2021
A mixed bag...
The author clearly has a vast knowledge of his subject and has bought together a huge amount of information about Uganda and it's fascinating history. The structure of the book is idiosyncratic and it needs a bit more editing. Overall a very good history of Uganda.
The author clearly has a vast knowledge of his subject and has bought together a huge amount of information about Uganda and it's fascinating history. The structure of the book is idiosyncratic and it needs a bit more editing. Overall a very good history of Uganda.
May 17, 2025
I wish there was more focus on more recent history, which it mostly skims over, to focus on Uganda's "longue duree." Nevertheless, this was one of the only nonfiction books I could find on the country, and it's certainly insightful.
August 10, 2025
The introduction and first few chapters are insightful, but hard to read for the uninitiated.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews