adminPathisa Nyathi
BY virtue of wealth at his disposal, a chief married several wives. All things being equal, he had several sons from among whom one would succeed him. It was imperative to have succession rules universally known and accepted within communities and society at large. It is important to ensure a smooth and peaceful transition so that the communities emerge united and in a position to continue leading normal lives under a new leader.
What is critically important is to realise that succession rules were not decided upon after the demise of the incumbent chief.
All along, rules were known and the successor was not a closely guarded secret either. In any case, he would have been identified during the burial of the deceased chief. There were instances when the heir was spirited out of a community to live among his maternal uncles. Prince Dwangubana Khumalo, son of Chief Matshobana Khumalo, went to live among the Ndwandwes (the Nxumalos) where his mother came from. It was only after the death of Chief Matshobana Khumalo that he was brought back home to assume the chiefly mantle. Unfortunately, he was deemed by the Khumalos to be too weak to stand against the rising Zulu king, Tshaka.
Succession was a cultural practice rooted in, and reflective of, a community’s worldview and philosophy. It was recognised that an incumbent chief’s lifespan and tenure were limited. He could be chief for only a certain period. However, within the transient rule of a chief, there was perpetuity that was restricted to the lineage. Individual incumbents perished, but the lineage endured. If the chief had been chosen on merit, even where it was within the context of preferred kinship, he was deemed to possess qualities that provided the justification for him being succeeded by his eligible son: like father like son, udiwo lufuze imbiza.
Once again, we are face to face with the reality that cultural practices are born of more fundamental and underlying cosmologies or beliefs. Cultural behaviour seeks to achieve some goal in line with beliefs and values of a given community.
Scrutiny of the institution of chief will indicate the real basic culture that gives rise to cultural practices that we see on a day to day basis. However, very often we do not bother to dig deeper to unravel “culture behind the culture.”
Despite the fact that succession rules were in the public domain and internalised by all, contestations never failed to erupt from time to time. Unbridled ambition sometimes got the better of a son who did not qualify. He then resorted to all manner of intrigue to land the chieftainship. Sometimes it was the competing wives’ families who canvassed for their own son so that they would reap abundantly when their son was in control of the reins of power and wealth.
A classical example in the pre-colonial period, and spilling into the colonial period, was the case pitting Chief Faku Ndiweni and Tala Ndiweni from Ezinaleni/Ezisongweni. The chief for Ezinaleni was Chief Thunzi Ndiweni, a son of Mabuyana, son of Khondwane, King Mzilikazi Khumalo’s maternal uncle. Chief Thunzi Ndiweni was accused of rallying behind Nguni chiefs who opposed ascendancy to the throne of King Lobengula Khumalo. Prince Nkulumane Khumalo, the rightful heir, was reported to be coming from the south to succeed his father King Mzilikazi Khumalo who had died in September 1868. Babirwa chiefs, notably Chief Kgoatalala Nare, umswiliswili wenkosi, reported to his boss, Chief Thunzi Ndiweni who did not convey the message to King Lobengula Khumalo.
The king was furious with the Babirwa chiefs, especially Chief Kgoatalala Nare who had been appointed intelligence chief by King Mzilikazi Khumalo. Tala was a minor at the time when Chief Thunzi Ndiweni was killed on royal instructions. Faku Ndiweni was thus appointed to be the regent. Faku Ndiweni was, as a matter of fact, not a biological son of Chief Thunzi Ndiweni. Chief Thunzi had however accepted him and Faku grew up among Chief Thunzi’s family.
When Tala Ndiweni attained the age of majority, Faku would not relinquish the mantle. Acting Chief Faku Ndiweni was a calculating man who endeared himself to King Lobengula who was married to his sister Mpoliyana Ndiweni, the mother of Prince Njube Ndiweni, King Lobengula’s qualifying son. Further, Chief Faku Ndiweni went on to marry King Mzilikazi’s daughter, one Princess Nedlana Khumalo and their son Nyangazonke was set to have his lineage snatch the Ndiweni chieftainship on the grounds that Princess Nedlana Khumalo, by virtue of being a daughter of the king, took precedence over other women. Chief Faku Ndiweni’s last master stroke was to be a loyalist during Imfazo II of 1896. He simply did not join in the fight to restore the Ndebele State. By so doing he endeared himself, initially to Cecil John Rhodes, and subsequently to his successors. Actors within Tala’s lineage, notably Locanda Ndiweni, made some spirited effort to reclaim the lost chieftainship.
His efforts came to naught.
Whereas we shall confine the contents of our forthcoming articles to the pre-colonial period, we seek to illuminate the present with light gleaned and gleamed from the past in order to bring to the authorities concerned the challenges that result from failure to revisit the traditional succession rules. There is no doubt that contestations will emerge with increased frequency and piecemeal approaches to the emerging contestations will not be sustainable. Succession rules ought to be internalised so that potential conflicts are effortlessly avoided.
What is very clear and unavoidable is that a community or society evolves over time as a result of internal change factors and also in response to external factors. Fundamental ideologies and philosophies change and there ought to be corresponding adjustments and adaptations in the various aspects of cultural expressions, including succession rules. It is incumbent upon the rightful authorities to convene consultative meetings that bring together all relevant stakeholders to realign the succession rules to emerging realities on the ground. All those who regard themselves as adhering to Ndebele succession rules should embrace new succession rules that would emerge from the processes of consultation. This will happen when there is some sense of ownership on the part of communities which flows from a well thought out and inclusive process of consultation.
Today we have women chiefs and yet no one knows how succession rules will play out when they pass on. A chieftainship is understood to belong to a particular family. Let’s cite the example of Chief Sinqobile Mabhena of Nswazi in Umzingwane District. It is understood that her chieftainship belongs to the Mabhenas. Meanwhile, she is married to a Sibanda man and her children are thus Sibanda. This is a new situation among the Ndebele which calls for consultation. Does her eldest child or son succeed her? Does the chieftainship revert to the Mabhenas, and if so, just how will that happen? As far as we are aware, there is total lack of clarity and precedent. The worst thing to do is to deal with the issue when the incumbent has passed on. In any case, there will be more women chiefs in future and so a generic resolution known to and internalised by all Ndebele communities is called for. This is something new outside of known Ndebele traditional/cultural succession procedures.
Today we have several chiefs whose mothers would have been disqualified from having their sons considered for succession. Nyathi, Dube, Ngwenya, Ncube and more women of non-Nguni identity have sons who are incumbent chiefs. Equally, Mabhena and Sikhosana women have sons who are serving chiefs. Certainly, all this points to the fact that culture has changed and will continue to do so. All that is needed is convening of consultative meetings of relevant stakeholders to endorse, or reject the fait accompli in line with changing ideas regarding traditional leadership. What will not happen is to seek a reversal of incumbency of those who are holding office who would not have qualified during the heyday of the Ndebele State.
Perceptions and worldviews are never cast in stone; they evolve with time. All that is needed is to formalise the status quo in the full knowledge that Ndebele ideas and perceptions on traditional leadership have not remained static. They certainly cannot do so. However, in the absence of efforts to revisit traditional succession rules, there shall be frequent acrimonious contestations, with some spilling into courts of law. If the qualified authorities do not attend to the issues, then the Ndebele people themselves should initiate the necessary dialogue. Certainly, the situation should not be allowed to go on unchecked.
Conflict and acrimony are not in the best interests of communities.
Bongani Ndlovu