The discovery of gold in Kakamega in 1931 did more than trigger a rush of European prospectors; it ignited a rare moment of unity among Western Kenya’s diverse Bantu communities, setting the stage for the birth of the Luhya identity.
For a long time, what is today known as “Luhya” were different tribes with their own ethnic independence.
Colonial administrators used to refer to them as “Bantu of Kavirondo” to distinguish them from their Dholuo-speaking neighbours.
Within days, after gold was discovered in Kakamega, more than 3,000 Europeans had occupied densely populated African land, displacing locals to reserves.
This attracted protests from the diverse communities of western Kenya, who wanted their land back.
The arrival of the Kenya Land Commission (KLC) in 1932 to address land grievances provided a platform for a solution for all.
The KLC was tasked both with reviewing the Native Lands Trust Ordinance and with defining the boundaries of the areas occupied by the Whites.
The Commission thus invited representatives from different Western communities to appear before it and express their grievances.
These representatives took up the offer by first putting aside their own rivalry over land and other issues, and decided to speak with one voice before the commission.
Together, they agreed to forward a centralised vision of political community to gain leverage over white miners and Europeans encroaching on their land.
At the end of the hearings, which were dominated by land grievances, one point was also very clear: The representatives wanted Western Bantu communities to be treated as one people.
Then, North Kavirondo District Commissioner Thompson noted that Western communities expressed a desire for a collective identity
“The point raised appeared to be that as their Nilotic brethren had a generic term Luo by which to call themselves, it behoved the Bantu to exhume from the past, or invent for the future, a name for themselves too,” he noted.
The collective name that was later suggested by the representatives of these Bantus was “Abakwe.”
But after they failed to reach an agreement, they proposed “Abalimi,” derived from a common term for agriculturalists, cultivators, or later “common peasant.”
However, communities throughout the district differed on the relative importance of agricultural cultivation to their communal identities, and many objected to the term simply on the basis of its reference to cultivation, which was the work of women. For a moment, the debate died.
It was not until 1935 that the young North Kavirondo Central Association (NKCA) published a pamphlet entitled “Abaluhya – Kinship” and announced “Luhya” as its candidate for a name.
Despite resistance from some colonial officials, the name gained momentum throughout the 1930s through public meetings, petitions, and local associations.
By the late 1940s, prominent leaders like Philip Ingutia defined “Abaluhya” as “people of one clan or origin,” while historian John Osogo later described it as representing shared customs and kinship ties.
Still, the unity symbolised by the Luhya name has often been questioned. Despite becoming one of Kenya’s largest ethnic groups, political and cultural divisions have persisted.
In 1962, prominent politician Argwings-Kodhek dismissed the name “Luhya” as a colonial invention, insisting that the communities it grouped together were originally distinct tribes with independent identities.
Nevertheless, historians argue that the gold rush and land struggles of the early 1930s played a central role in shaping a collective consciousness among Western Bantu communities, an identity that endures nearly a century later.
