The recent Pretoria high court challenge to Misuzulu’s kingship has thrust the Zulu royal household into the spotlight and unearths a complex web of historical, cultural, political and economic dynamics.
The Zulu monarchy, once favoured by British colonial administrators as a chief supervisor of restless natives in the Natal Colony, is now in crisis. This was after the defeat of the Zulu empire in 1879 as part of its imperial victories over African polities and the Boere republics which culminated in the formation of the Union of South Africa in 1910.
Today, the same Zulu royal household is in disarray and is in court to seek assistance in deciding on the rightful heir to the late king Zwelithini. Challenges began to emerge well before the passing of Mangosuthu Buthelezi, the architect of the modern Zulu dynasty and nationalism. His pivotal role shaped the political position and status of the Zulu monarch through the now-defunct KwaZulu Bantustan, and later in the early days of the democratic dispensation.
Political scientists Brian Lai and Dan Slater would argue that his ‘strongman’ rule is what kept the ship steady all along. Now that he is gone, the walls of this house he worked hard to build, through violence, lies and deceit, are crumbling. It would be a grave mistake to analyse the power struggles in the Zulu royal household outside their rightful historical contexts. Even long before its demise in the late 1800s, Zulu power had been contested and served the interests of both settler powers and the polity’s internal rival factions.
First, the defeat of Dingane by his brother Mpande in the mid-1800s weakened the Zulu Kingdom and allowed external powers to indirectly influence it. This happened through the double-gaming of Mpande and the Boer’s installation of Cetshwayo as king. Some of these events eventually facilitated the annexation of the Zulu polity by the British in 1879. Then the Battle of Mandlakazi in 1883, between the uSuthu kingdom of Cetshwayo and the Mandlakazi kingdom of Zibhebhu kaMaphitha, was a proxy war between Boers and the English.
It also marked the beginning of the end of the uSuthu kingdom. Cetshwayo was captured by the British in 1884 and the uSuthu kingdom was then taken over by the British Colony of Natal. Historian Charles T. Binns refers to Cetshwayo as “the last Zulu king” to denote the end of a presumably autonomous Zulu polity. The period towards the consolidation of British power in Southern Africa saw a weakened Dinuzulu assuming the reins in the equally weakened Zulu polity. Notwithstanding this sad state, he was conferred the status of a paramount chief who was going to assist the Natal colonial administration in managing belligerent Natives.
When Bhambatha led the head tax rebellion in 1906, Dinuzulu was blamed for failing to carry out his duties and imprisoned. He spent the rest of his life in exile and died a broken man in the Eastern Transvaal. His death in 1913 marked the end of an era in Zulu history. Now in charge of the entire SA, the British realised that they needed help to run this vast territory. Besides the political alliance with ‘verligte’ Boers, they unleashed the old Shepstonian doctrine (a system of indirect rule), which gave chiefs judicial powers as part of public administration architecture. Zulu paramountcy continued to be relevant.
This allowed the state to retain overall control and rule African subjects by executive decree, rather than the normal legislative process. The colonial and apartheid governments passed a number of laws, such as the Black Authorities Act and the Promotion of Black Self-Government Act, to strengthen the institution of traditional leadership to advance their own political goals. The creation of the KwaZulu under Buthelezi ‘restored’ the Zulu royal family to a position of power, but it was a puppet role that frustrated the late King Zwelithini.
Building on the colonial “creation of tribalism”, Buthelezi used his fierce power to centre the Zulu identity, often to the detriment of other polities that are found in Natal. His influence also assisted in undermining the goals of the Nhlapo Commission, which was appointed to investigate the role of traditional leaders. As a result, Buthelezi secured the Zulu royal family more political power than any other traditional leadership group, not only in KZN but in all of SA.
This was not going to be possible without the ANC making serious political concessions such as the continuation of the Zulu paramountcy in KZN and the preservation of the old KwaZulu Bantustan (now called the Ingonyama Trust). Today, the Zulu royal house is estimated to control about 30% of the land in the province and also receives substantial annual funding directly from the fiscus. The unfolding power battle between Zwelithini’s sons Simakade and Misuzulu can be located in the praxis of resources, politics and the historically unequal, parasitic and opportunistic relationship between the Westphalian state and traditional leaders.
Being a Zulu king is a lucrative and prestigious position that comes with a great deal of wealth and political recognition. The Westphalian state’s historical and continuing use of money and law to control traditional leaders is a major but under-discussed problem facing the ‘new’ SA dispensation. The ill-defined role of traditional leaders in local government remains controversial. Some people argue that traditional leaders are undemocratic and that they should not have a role in government.
With people facing many socioeconomic challenges, including poverty, landlessness, unemployment, illiteracy and economic marginalisation, the position of traditional leaders is heavily challenged. They are also yet to announce where their valueaddition lies in the lives of people. On the other hand, others argue that traditional leaders are an important part of SA culture and that they should play a role in society.
This assertion is fiercely opposed since they have been accused of sticking to their colonial roots of oppressing their own people. They are also seen as being out of touch with the needs of modern society. The outcome of the power struggle will have a significant impact on the future of the Zulu monarchy and on SA politics, especially in the already unstable KZN province. Zulu loyalists are already polarised and the legal outcome will complicate matters for the postapartheid state, which has itself to blame for some political choices it made.
• Hadebe is an independent commentator on socioeconomic, political and global matters, based in Geneva, Switzerland.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.