This article looks at the public debate, mostly in newspaper articles, which followed recent attempts to coronate a king of the Ndebele people in Zimbabwe. The High Court of Zimbabwe declared that it was unconstitutional for the Ndebele royal family to install a king. What ensued was a polarised public debate between those who strongly supported the resuscitation of the pre-colonial monarchy and those who had strong reservations against the move. Pro-monarchists alleged that the cultural rights of the Ndebele people as enshrined in various international human rights protocols as well as the constitution of Zimbabwe were being violated. Whilst those against the revival of the traditional institution claimed that national security was at stake. This case was a litmus test for the post-colonial African nation-state’s commitment to upholding cultural rights of its citizens. In this article we look at the issues associated with the restoration of the Ndebele monarch. We also attempt to establish how the various actors in this issue have deployed cultural heritage in the quest for legitimacy as well as to foster counter narratives. We argue that cultural heritage and cultural revivalism should be harnessed for the common good of society and not incite civil or ethnic strife. Emerging issues from this article are of interest to heritage management theory and its general practice on the African continent.