History of the Zulu war and its originColenso, Frances E. (Frances Ellen)
History
History of the Zulu war and its origin
Colenso, Frances E. (Frances Ellen)
Zulu War, 1879
Sir T. Shepstone, however, was greatly alarmed when he first heard of
the building of this kraal, and writes concerning it—November 16th,
1877 (1961, p. 224): “I feel, therefore (because of the irritating
effect of it upon the Transvaal), that the building of this kraal
must be prevented at all hazards.” The “hazards” do not appear to
have proved very serious, as a simple representation on the part of
Captain Clarke, R.A., and Mr. Rudolph, sent to the spot by Sir T.
Shepstone, resulted in the Zulu force retiring, _having made only
a small cattle kraal and chopped and collected some poles_, which
they left on the ground, to be used for the building of the huts
hereafter, but which were very soon carried off and used as firewood
by the Luneburg farmers.
But this did not satisfy Sir T. Shepstone, who sent messengers to
Cetshwayo, complaining of what had been done, and of “finding,” as
he says, “a Zulu force in the rear of where he was staying;”[78]
and saying that, in consequence, and in order to restore confidence
amongst those Boers living on the Blood River border, he (Sir
T. Shepstone) had decided to send a military force down to the
waggon-drift on the Blood River, to encamp there on our side of the
river. Cetshwayo replies that he did not send to have the kraal built
that trouble might arise, but because his people were already living
on the ground in dispute. He admits that of course the administrator
could do as he pleased about sending an armed force to encamp on his
own borders; but he urges him to think better of it, saying that
the Zulus would be frightened and run away, and, if he in his turn
should send an armed force to encamp just opposite Sir T. Shepstone’s
encampment, to put confidence into _his_ people’s hearts, he asks,
somewhat quaintly, “would it be possible for the two forces to be
looking at one another for two days without a row?”
Many expressions are scattered through the Blue-books at this period
concerning “Zulu aggressions;” and Sir T. Shepstone makes frequent,
though vague and unproven, accusations concerning Cetshwayo’s
“mischievous humour,” and the terror of the Boer frontier farmers.
But, so far as these remarks allude to the border squabbles
inseparable from the state of affairs, the score is so heavily
against the Boers that the counter-charges are hardly worth
considering. The only acts chargeable upon the king himself are,
first, the building of this kraal, which really amounted to no more
than a practical assertion of the Zulu claim to land north of the
Pongolo; and, secondly, the execution of a (supposed) Zulu criminal
there, which was an exercise of Cetshwayo’s authority over his own
people living in the district.
For the acts of violence committed by the robber chief Umbilini, the
Zulu king could not justly be considered responsible; but of this
matter, and of the raid committed by the sons of Sihayo, we will
treat in a later chapter.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account