Latest news with #AmaXhosa
Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Nongqawuse was not the primary cause of the 1856 Cattle Killing — we are wrong to make her a scapegoat
I read with great interest the Daily Maverick article dated 6 June by Dr JJ Klaas and felt the need to make my personal observations with regards to the Cattle Killing of 1856-1857, based on my readings of the topic and visits to key locations in the Eastern Cape. A broad range of sources acknowledge that a devastating cattle disease arriving from Europe in Xhosa territories in the mid-1850s was a contributory factor in the mass slaughter of cattle by AmaXhosa and the subsequent undermining of their society. It was unlikely to have been the sole cause of tens of thousands of deaths of amaXhosa by starvation and mass displacement into the Cape Colony. It is likely that the slaughter of livestock was also heavily influenced by the interpretation of Nongqawuse's interaction with the ancestors, by her uncle and other senior leaders in AmaXhosa society. To this extent, the young prophetess (a seer) was a proximate, not the primary cause of this tragedy. We are wrong to blame 'that stupid girl', as she is so wrongly called by many. The real causes were many and sinister. After eight brutal wars against colonial powers, the murder of King Hintsa by British troops, drought, crop disease, cattle disease, persistent erosion of the leaders' dignity, AmaMfengu defection, European encroachment and an undermining of the chiefs' authority by magistrates and colonial governors, many echelons of AmaXhosa were under intolerable strain. Hope of ridding themselves of colonial tyranny would have been evaporating rapidly. Society and its senior leaders were extremely vulnerable. At a time of such intolerable and prolonged strain, notions of sacrifice for salvation from a seer and her supporters may well have fallen on receptive AmaXhosa ears. In fact, prophecies based on sacrifice for salvation or a new beginning, such as Nongqawuse's, were not new in this society. It wasn't an isolated event. We need to be mindful that slaughtering livestock to rid AmaXhosa of European encroachment had been a major theme of the distinguished prophets Makanda Nxele and Mlanjeni in previous decades. Similar prophecies based on livestock sacrifices to deliver better times for all were to continue in the region in future decades, most notably at times of huge societal stress. The notion that the cattle lung disease was deliberately introduced by Sir George Grey as a biological weapon to decimate AmaXhosa does not seem credible. Where's the evidence? Facilitating the importation and spread of cattle disease would have been extremely risky, running the risk of decimating the livestock of colonial settlers and undermining the local economy. Grey was consistently fastidious in controlling all affairs in the Cape. Nothing happened without his approval. Letting a cattle disease spread unpredictably is contrary to the nature of this highly ambitious colonial servant. He needed calm, stability and economic growth in his domain of control, not chaos and anarchy induced by cattle disease. That said, Grey did acknowledge and exploit the cattle killing movement after it had started. While initially concerned that it might start another war with AmaXhosa, he later stated how 'We can draw very great advantages from the situation'. This he did, providing starving AmaXhosa with food, only on the condition they worked in the Cape Colony where labour was scarce. We need to remember that the mass starvation and decimation of AmaXhosa society was not caused by the killing of cattle alone. Based on the spiritual interpretation of the young prophetess and her entourage, many AmaXhosa (the Believers) also followed the demand to destroy all their corn reserves and not to replant any crops the following season. So, many people lacked meat, dairy products and grains to eat. If corn hadn't been deliberately destroyed (as the prophecies demanded) and sowing had occurred the following season, is it likely that the mass starvation and undermining of Xhosa society would have been avoided, and a tragedy averted? Quite possibly. Whatever our interpretations of these events, we all need to be mindful of the colossal suffering resulting from this period of history. We must avoid translating gross suffering into cold, uncaring statistics. Never forget, it was a human tragedy of huge proportions. And lest we forget, many members of the public still blame much of this on Nongqawuse, a teenage orphan girl. I, for one, do not accept this simple explanation. On the occasions that I've stood at her graveside, I've always thought that she has been made a scapegoat for the actions and failings of many others. DM
Daily Maverick
5 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Rectifying the ‘false' colonial narrative of Nongqawuse and the cattle culling of 1856
My book, Triangle of One Hundred Years Wars, provides a compelling African perspective which unravels the forgotten history of the Eastern Cape. It interrogates the longest unparalleled wars of resistance in Africa which used to be defined as Frontier Wars; unravels the false colonial narrative of Nongqawuse as the facade of the biological weapon of mass cattle decimation of AmaXhosa, and is a critical examination of the distorted narrative in the South African secondary schools history textbooks. For purposes of this exercise the focus is on the narrative of Nongqawuse examined in the context of the wars fought by AmaXhosa to resist the Dutch and the British encroachment in South Africa from 1779 until 1879. The book is anchored on the assertion that AmaXhosa killed their cattle in order to arrest the spread of the European cattle lung sickness known as epizootic (C.B Andreas, 2005, The Spread and Impact of the Lung sickness Epizootic of 1853-57) in the Cape colony and the Xhosa Chiefdoms). The construction of the Nongqawuse narrative was a cover-up in order to hide the historical fact that the resistance of AmaXhosa was broken by decimating their productive capabilities through what one defined as the continuation of the war through the introduction of the highly contagious and lethal European cattle lung sickness. Why was it necessary to resort to the biological weapon of cattle destruction? One may recall that the royal leaders of AmaXhosa, such as Prince Chungwa of AmaGqunukhwebe, Prince Langa of AmaMbalu, Prince Ndlambe and Prince Mdushane of AmaRharhabe, fought five wars against the Dutch and the British settlers from 1779 until 1819. The wars were fought in what was known as the Zuurveld between the Gamtoos and Fish rivers. In the first three wars, between 1779 and 1803, the Dutch failed to dislodge AmaXhosa in the coveted Zuurveld region. In the fourth war of 1811-1812 AmaXhosa retreated from the Zuurveld after the British-led army resorted to ethnic cleansing by killing women and children. In the fifth war of 1819, AmaXhosa were crushed by the British artillery in the Battle of Grahamstown, which is still celebrated annually in South Africa. The rise of the highly courageous sons of King Ngqika, such as Maqoma, Tyali, Anta, Xhoxho, Mathwa and Sandile, became a game-changer in the wars of resistance. The bone-crushing confrontation between Prince Maqoma Ah! Jongumsobomvu and Major General Harry Smith, the Duke of Wellington, in 1835 marked the first defeat of the British army in Africa. Smith and the governor, Sir Benjamin Durban, were fired. The Dutch settlers embarked on the Great Trek after they suffered heavy losses in the war. In 1846, the region witnessed the spectacle of a convoy of 125 wagons loaded with ammunition and supplies led by the revered Major General John Hare, a Knight of Hanover, in the invasion of Keiskammahoek in order to dislodge AmaXhosa from the fortress of the Mathole mountains. AmaXhosa were led by the young unassuming King Sandile Ah! Mgolombane. While the British army was navigating its way to the designated military base near Mkhubiso village, Sandile launched a surprise and ruthless ambush. The overwhelming power of the pulverising onslaught dismantled the core of the British army. Noel Mostert, in his book Frontiers, defined it as the worst humiliating defeat of the British army in Africa. Hare resigned and later succumbed to a heart attack. He was buried on the Island of St Helena. On 24 December 1950, the AmaXhosa regiments and the British army locked horns in what became the longest war of resistance in Africa. It was an agonising encounter. The British named Mthontsi, Mount Misery because of the worst unbearable suffering in the history of the wars of resistance. The huge losses on the battlefield led to the recall of Harry Smith and Henry Sommerset. They were replaced by Colonel Fordyce who was later killed on Mount Misery. The collapse of the government of Prime Minister John Russell in Britain in 1852 was attributed to the war. The three consecutive defeats of the British army in 1835, 1846 and 1850-1853 raised questions about whether the army had the capabilities to counterbalance the sting of the relentless resistance of AmaXhosa. In the three defeats the British commanders were outsmarted and outmanoeuvred by the highly gifted sons of King Ngqika. The fact that the firepower of the British artillery was rendered obsolete by the brilliant execution of the surprise, simultaneous attacks remained a source of frustration. The unprecedented collective resolve displayed by AmaXhosa supported by Nkosi Mapasa of AbaThembu and Nkosi Ngxukumeshe Matroos of the Khoi-San in the War of Mlanjeni, drew a line in the sand. In essence the continued, rapid ascendancy of AmaXhosa on the battlefields through their highly innovative military strategies and the ability to sustain wars meant that an alternative strategy had to be devised to attain the colonial conquest of South Africa. The arrival of Sir George Grey in the Cape colony in 1854 – the first civilian governor since the second British occupation of the Cape in 1806 – signalled a major shift from the application of military action as an instrument of conquest of AmaXhosa. Hence AmaXhosa started experiencing an alien European cattle lung sickness at the beginning of 1855. In 1856, AmaXhosa resorted to cattle culling to arrest the rapid spread of the disease. They continued doing so until 1857. Interestingly, Professor Jeff Peires, in his book The Dead Will Arise, acknowledged the correlation between the rapid spread of the cattle lung sickness and the cattle culling implemented by AmaXhosa. On the same note, the colonial narrative that AmaXhosa killed their cattle in response to the prophecy of Nongqawuse claimed that it occurred in 1856 and 1857. The deliberate omission of the effects of the catastrophic calamity of the cattle lung sickness which occurred in the same period was meant to drive a particular narrative in perpetuation of the colonial interest to the detriment of AmaXhosa. In retrospect, the false colonial narrative of Nongqawuse created deep-seated psychological scars of shame, self-hatred and a mental inferiority complex. To a certain extent the Nongqawuse narrative contributed to the creation of a permanent state of psychological self-induced surrender and submission. The false narrative of distorted history continues to manifest itself through self-destructive tendencies such as a consumer mentality and the death of Ubuntu. In conclusion, one of the contributions of the Triangle of One Hundred Years Wars is the rectification of the continued perpetuation of distorted history. The book attempts to create possibilities of critical interrogation and the deeper understanding of our history, hence it unearthed the brilliant contributions of AmaXhosa in the longest, unparalleled wars of resistance in Africa. DM
