A history of the Zulu Rebellion, 1906, and of Dinuzulu's arrest, trial, and expatriationStuart, James
History
A history of the Zulu Rebellion, 1906, and of Dinuzulu's arrest, trial, and expatriation
Stuart, James
Dinuzulu, approximately 1868-1913; Zulu Rebellion, 1906; Zululand (South Africa) -- History
By way of stimulating the troops to put forth their best efforts in
war, the King would call a couple of regiments into the great cattle
enclosure and there urge individuals of the one to challenge those of
the other, one at a time. "I have," he would say, "summoned you all
to hear how you mean to behave on coming in sight of the enemy." It
is of melancholy interest to know that this practice was observed by
the regiments Kandempemvu and Ngobamakosi, which proved so terribly
destructive at Isandhlwana. After the King had spoken, the challenging
proceeded in this way: Some man belonging to, say, the Ngobamakosi
jumped up and shouted: "I can do better than you, son of ... (giving
name); you won't stab a white man, before one has already fallen by
my hand. If you do, you can carry off the whole of our kraal and the
property attached (giving name of the kraal), or, you shall take my
sister ... (giving her name, and implying marriage)." Having said this,
he started to dance a _pas seul_, with a small shield and stick (on
such occasions assegais and war-shields were not carried). The other
man, stung by the words uttered in public, jumped up as smartly and,
dancing towards and after his challenger as the latter retired, called
out defiantly: "Well, if you can do better than I, you may take our
kraal ... and my sister too ... (giving names)." As each danced, they
were loudly applauded by their respective comrades. When a man, known
by the King to be a brave fellow, sprang up and danced, the King might
point and shake his hand at him approvingly. Others followed the same
process, though by no means in monotonous or regular fashion; and so it
went on until sunset. Occasionally the one addressed or "selected," as
it was called, refrained from taking up the challenge. Such a fellow
was called a coward, and, when the regiments had left the King, his
failure was freely commented on. He was then made to suffer the usual
indignities of cowards, viz. having his meat dipped in cold water, etc.
A day or two afterwards, two other regiments were pitted against one
another. Again the process of "selection" and challenging went on
excitedly until sunset.
After the fighting had taken place, the same challenging pairs of
regiments were called before the King to "discuss" the campaign.
(Such rule was, however, not followed during the Zulu War, for
obvious reasons). Some young man then jumped up and accosting the one
"selected" by him before hostilities occurred, shouted exultingly:
"What did you do, son of ...? I did this and did that (reciting various
deeds of valour or supposed valour). What have you to your credit?" The
other replied. The man generally allowed by those assembled to have
distinguished himself the more, was declared to have won the wager. The
property, as a matter of fact, did not change hands, though, at first,
it seemed as if it would do so. The stakes were merely figuratively
referred to for heightening public interest in the achievements.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account