by Peires, Jeff
5 CO 814 W Edmonds-R Rawson, 3 Jan., 5 Dec. 1863; Queenstown Free Press, 9 Feb. 1859.
6 Cape Monthly Magazine, 6 (1859), p.231.
7 CO 724 JF Minto-Colonial Secretary, 1 Nov. 1858; CO 742 JF Minto-Colonial Secretary, 18 Jan. 1860; Cape Argus, 18 July 1857.
8 For Maqoma’s brief return to Xhosaland, 1/KWT 5/1/2/2 T Liefeldt-Magistrate of King William’s Town, 27 Sept. 1869, 8 Sept. 1871, 19 Feb. 1872.
9 On Maqoma’s last days, Isigidimi samaXosa, 1 Jan. 1872, 1 Oct. 1873; AB 1161 G2, University of the Witwatersrand, Anglican Church records.
CHAPTER 10 – Everything You Always Wanted to Know About the Xhosa Cattle-Killing
CHAPTER 10
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About the Xhosa Cattle-Killing
You probably began this book with a number of questions in mind, and, as it draws to a close, you might be wondering whether any of these questions has really been answered. Analysis does, unfortunately, have a tendency to get in the way of narrative, and I have been forced to leave many of the answers implicit in the text. In this chapter, however, I am going to try to make amends by posing some of the major historical problems raised by the Cattle-Killing in the form of questions a reader might ask. Chapter and section references are given in brackets to locate more detailed treatment of these questions elsewhere in this book.
Who were Mhlakaza and Nongqawuse?
Mhlakaza’s father, a councillor of Sarhili, killed Mhlakaza’s mother. After this the future prophet entered the Cape Colony, where he adopted the name of Wilhelm Goliath and acquired the rudiments of Christianity. In 1848 he met Archdeacon NJ Merriman, a man who was to change his life. He accompanied Merriman on various preaching expeditions around the Eastern Province, and came to perceive himself as a full partner in spreading the Gospel. However the Merriman family viewed him as a common servant and refused to take his religious experiences seriously. He left for Xhosaland about 1853 in order to become a ‘Gospel Man’, but he soon lost his Christian orthodoxy and began to preach the Cattle-Killing message instead (Chapter 1/4).
Nongqawuse’s father was dead, and she viewed her uncle Mhlakaza as her guardian. It is possible that she was orphaned in the battles of the Waterkloof and witnessed for herself the horrors perpetrated by Colonel Eyre in the closing stages of the war.
The Cattle-Killing prophecies were uttered by Nongqawuse, who held conversations with spirits, whom she saw in the bush and in the sea. Mhlakaza then interpreted these prophecies to the believers and clarified the orders and instructions of the ‘new people’. Evidence is lacking, but it seems likely that at first neither Nongqawuse nor Mhlakaza exercised any conscious control over when the ‘new people’ would appear or what they would say. They had devised no preconceived plan of action, but were as dependent as any other Xhosa on the next message from the spirits.
The prophets of the Gxarha were totally unprepared to deal with the crisis which their prophecies initiated. They were obviously unable to produce the ‘new people’ on demand, or to cope with the consequences of the failure of their prophecies. Rather than admit their limitations, they seem to have resorted to deliberate subterfuges such as ‘showing’ enquirers the black shapes of the ‘new people’ but forbidding them to approach close enough to get a proper look (Chapter 3/3). There is some evidence that the continual demands of Sarhili and the other believers eventually cracked the fantasy world of the prophets. Nongqawuse became too ‘sick’ to prophesy, and Mhlakaza began to deny responsibility for the sayings of his niece (Chapter 5/1).
That both Mhlakaza and Nongqawuse sincerely believed that the dead would rise seems beyond doubt. Mhlakaza certainly committed himself to the truth of the prophecies, to the extent of dying of starvation. For the fate of Nongqawuse, see Chapter 11.
Who were the strangers seen by Nongqawuse?
The strangers introduced themselves as messengers of Sifuba-Sibanzi (the Broad-Chested One) and Napakade (the Eternal One). Although these figures represented themselves as the indigenous gods of the Xhosa people, they were most probably more recent conceptions bred partly from Christian ideas and partly from the felt need of the Xhosa people for more powerful gods of their own (Chapter 4/4).
But did Nongqawuse really see any strangers at all? Many Xhosa believe that the strangers were the agents of Sir George Grey, or possibly even Grey himself in disguise. Other Xhosa believe that Nongqawuse’s visions were the typical fantasies of a young girl or, as one knowledgeable old man expressed it, ‘She stared in the water and saw her own reflection.’1
It is not possible to prove this matter beyond doubt, but the weight of probability must be that the strangers seen by Nongqawuse never existed, except in her imagination. Nongqawuse was an orphan raised by an uncle who was himself a religious visionary. She had witnessed the horrors of war and the catastrophe of lungsickness, and she must have heard the prophecies of resurrection inspired by the supposed Russian victories in the Crimean War (Chapter 2/4). At the same time, as was indicated by her appearance (‘has a silly look and appeared to me as if she was not right in her mind’),2 she was undergoing an experience akin to the thwasa initiation of Xhosa doctors (Chapter 3/3). It is not to be wondered at if, given her history and her circumstances, the visions which she saw were not those of the normal thwasa initiate but others, inspired by rumours of the resurrection of the ancestors.
It would seem, then, that the mysterious strangers were nothing more tangible than the imaginary friends of Nongqawuse’s daydreams, and that the fatal prophecies originated in the fantasies of two young girls playing in a bush. As Nombanda, Nongqawuse’s younger companion, related it, ‘I frequently accompanied Nongqawuse to a certain bush where she spoke with people … I neither saw them nor did I hear them speak till after I had constantly visited the bush with her.’ The little girls on the Mpongo River (Chapter 6/4), who built huts for their pet stranger to sleep in, were behaving in a similar fashion. Normal Xhosa parents living in normal times would have dismissed such childish games with a friendly laugh. But the times were not normal, and Nongqawuse’s uncle, the frustrated Gospel Man Mhlakaza/Wilhelm Goliath, was a preacher in search of a prophecy. And so, instead of curbing Nongqawuse’s talk of the two strangers, he actively encouraged it and brought it to the attention of Sarhili.
What did they tell the people?
Nongqawuse said that she had met with a ‘new people’ from over the sea, who were the ancestors of the living Xhosa. They told her that the dead were preparing to rise again, and wonderful new cattle too, but first the people must kill their cattle and destroy their corn which were contaminated and impure. They should also put away their witchcraft, which was the cause of all their afflictions.
They should not cultivate in the new season, but they should build great new cattle enclosures for the cattle which would rise, and dig deep grainpits for the corn which would miraculously appear. They should build new houses and wear new ornaments to greet a new and perfect world. On the appointed day, the sun would rise blood-red with a terrible heat until it turned back at midday to set again, turning the earth pitch-black. (An alternative version had two suns in the sky at once.) A terrible storm would follow complete with thunder, lightning and hurricanes. All this while, the believers were to wait in their newly built and carefully sealed houses, while the burning sun and the fearsome winds destroyed the unbelievers, their impure cattle, their tools of witchcraft, and all the other malevolent beings such as baboons and lizards which carried evil about the world.
After the storm would come the rising of the dead and the appearance of the new cattle and the new corn. All kinds of food and clothing and household goods would rise out of the ground. The blind would see, the deaf would hear, the cripples would walk, and the old would become young again. Peace, plenty and goodness would reign on earth. The ultimate goal of the Cattle-Killing movement was ‘a happy
state of things to all’ (Chapters 3/1, 4/4, 5/2).
Why the emphasis on cattle-killing?
An important cause of the Cattle-Killing was the lungsickness epidemic which reached Xhosaland in 1855. Cattle mortality was as high as one half to two thirds in some places, and many Xhosa lost all their cattle. The great believer Chief Phatho, for example, lost 96 per cent of his 2 500 cattle. Even those who retained their cattle were fearful that these might yet be struck down. The Xhosa began to believe that their cattle were rotten and impure, and that they might as well kill them since they were probably going to die anyway (Chapter 2/4).
Nongqawuse’s first instruction to the Xhosa was simply that they should ‘get rid’ of their cattle. Many sold their beasts to white traders, and when the first prophecies of the Cattle-Killing failed in August, this sale of cattle was blamed. It was said that the cattle should be slaughtered in a ritual manner, so that their spirits might also rise on the great day. This revised order to sacrifice their cattle fitted in very well with existing Xhosa ideas concerning the correct way to communicate with the ancestors, to please them, and to prove themselves worthy of the great benefits to come (Chapter 5/4).
Why did the people believe Nongqawuse?
The Cattle-Killing cannot be divorced from the colonial situation which was imposed on the Xhosa in 1847 by Sir Harry Smith. Although it has been necessary in this history to examine the personal role of Sir George Grey in detail, it should be remembered that the essential objectives of Grey were identical to those of Smith and of colonial rule generally: to destroy the political and economic independence of the Xhosa, to bring them under British law and administration, to make their land and their labour available to the white settlers, and to reshape their religious and cultural institutions on European and Christian models (Chapter 1/2).
The failure of Mlanjeni’s efforts to shake off this domination left thousands of Xhosa dead and all their best land in settler hands. The one small concession wrung out of Governor Cathcart, the right to govern themselves in their own way, was rescinded by Sir George Grey, who sought to destroy the political and economic independence of the Xhosa chiefs by making them salaried adjuncts of British magistrates. The lungsickness epidemic finally pushed the people over the edge of despair – they would have clutched at any hope (Chapters 1/3, 2/3-4).
That hope was supplied by the supposed victories of the Russians in the Crimea and, in particular, the death in battle of ex-Governor Cathcart. No Xhosa had ever heard of these Russians before, and it was supposed that they were the ancestors of the Xhosa. Throughout Xhosaland prophets and prophetesses sprang up, who claimed to have seen the Russians or earlier prophets like Nxele and Mlanjeni (Chapter 2/4).
It is important to note that the idea of cattle-killing was widespread before Nongqawuse started to speak. This shows that the central beliefs of the movement were a logical development of existing Xhosa religious concepts, namely (1) that the dead do not really die, but live on; (2) that the cattle sickness was a sign from the ancestors that they were troubled and wished to communicate with the living; (3) that if all impure and evil things disappeared, the world would be a perfect place; (4) that all living things on earth originated from the uHlanga, and that the creative power of the uHlanga was not yet spent. The success of the movement also depended on the common belief in the Christian notion of the resurrection, which had been popularised by the prophet Nxele before 1820, and in the new Xhosa/Christian concept of Sifuba-Sibanzi (the Broad-Chested One), the expected redeemer (Chapter 4/4). Nongqawuse’s ideas were thus not original. She succeeded where other prophetesses had failed because her claims were supported by King Sarhili, who was deceived by the little show which the prophetic group set up at the Gxarha River.
Sarhili was a man of religious inclination, who had all his life attended to the sayings of doctors and diviners. He was in great distress over the death of his Great Son, and haunted by guilt over the death of Bomela, whom he had allowed to be put to death. When Nongqawuse ‘showed’ the King his lost son, Sarhili was captivated. From that time onwards, he was responsible for driving the movement forward, even when it was weak and flagging from its own failures. As one old councillor put it, ‘the whole movement [was] Krieli’s, and so resolute was he in carrying it out that he would permit no one to reason with him on the subject’.
One should not forget that most Xhosa did not have the time or the opportunity to visit the Gxarha and see for themselves. It was known by all that Sarhili had visited Nongqawuse and confirmed the truth of her prophecies. For most Xhosa, this was more than enough. The Ngqika Xhosa, for example, maintained that ‘a chief in Kreli’s position would not send the message he has sent unless he was fully convinced of Umhlakaza’s assertions’.
But Sarhili was a victim himself. He was ‘shown’ a demonstration of some sort down at the Gxarha, and so were hundreds of other enquirers who flocked there. Unlike the other prophetesses, Nongqawuse did not simply proclaim the truth of her visions. She induced other people to share them. The enquirers were predisposed to do so by the remote situation and suggestive physical features of the Gxarha River area. Most of them had travelled several days to reach Mhlakaza’s place, and when they did they found a locale redolent of mystery and awe: bush, cliffs, caves, river and, above all, the sea. Add mist and shadows and black shapes – dolphins or even seaweed – floating by, and any wishful thinker standing at a distance could easily be persuaded to believe that he was witnessing the magical forms of the new people, waiting and yearning to rise. On a clear day, with no mist or shadow, Nongqawuse either announced that the new people were not present that day, or contrived to satisfy her audience by inaudible conversations with spirits in her magic bush. Rumours, assurances, dreams and exhortations around the visitors’ fire at night supplied any deficiency. Several of Nongqawuse’s visitors – Nxito, Ngubo, Mjuza and Smith Mhala, for example – were thoroughly disillusioned and left the Gxarha as fierce unbelievers. But they were in a small minority.
But why didn’t people get disillusioned when the prophecies failed to materialise?
Mhlakaza was always able to point to the disobedience of the unbelievers as the cause of the failure, or rather the postponement, of the prophetic predictions. For example, he claimed after the December disappointment that Napakade had been about to rise with 600 cattle, until the ancestors of the unbelievers begged for a delay so as to give their descendants another chance.
Many believers were also guilty of only partial obedience to the cattle-killing command. They slaughtered some of their cattle immediately in the hope that these would suffice, but held others back just in case. As one of the Thembu believers put it, ‘Many who have listened have only done so with one ear: the cattle are not all dead, and there is still a little corn left.’ Even staunch believers like Phatho, Mhala and Sarhili himself did not kill their last head of cattle until eight days before the Great Disappointment. Thus there was always room for the ‘new people’ to say something like ‘We said that all your cattle were to be killed, you have not done so – we leave you in disgust.’
The believers were naturally conscious of the ‘stinginess’ of the unbelievers, and of their own derelictions of duty. The disappointments did not therefore lessen their fervour; on the contrary, they increased the pressure on those who had not already fully complied with the orders of the prophet to destroy their last beast and their last grain of corn (Chapter 5/2).
Why did some Xhosa believe and others not?
So many factors affected the decision of a Xhosa homestead head whether or not to kill his cattle that it is impossible for any generalisation to be absolutely valid. Certain distinguishable tendencies did operate. Chiefdoms which had been sorely afflicted by lungsickness were more likely to adopt the prophecies of the Cattle-Killing than chiefdoms which had not. Women, who performed the toilsome and socially unrewarding labour of cultivating the soil, were liable to be responsive
to a message which promised them a future free of agricultural work. Those who had long collaborated with the colonial authorities were more likely to resist belief than those who had always been hostile. But there were significant exceptions even to these limited generalisations, and concerning factors such as age, status and religious belief it is impossible to generalise at all.
We should therefore adopt the distinction which the Xhosa themselves made between the ‘soft’ believers (amathamba) and the ‘hard’ unbelievers (amagogotya). The believers described themselves as ‘soft’ because they submitted themselves and their private interests entirely to the requirements of the national community as defined by Nongqawuse. By and large, they stood committed to the social ethos and the economic structure of the old, precolonial social formation which depended on reciprocal generosity and communal endeavour. The unbelievers were thought of as ‘hard’ because they stuck by their own conceptions of what was right and stingily exalted their private economic interests above the national well-being of the community at large. In as far as the personal lives of the leading unbelievers are known to us, it would seem that the backbone of the ‘hard’, gogotya party was made up of prosperous and wealthy men who were in a position to profit from the new economic opportunities created by the expansion of the colonial market. The ‘soft’, thamba party, on the other hand, was ‘peculiarly … one of the common people’, who stood or fell by the viability of the precolonial economy. The division between believers and unbelievers was not therefore a simple reaction to the crisis of the prophecies, but a reflection of the deeper communal tensions generated by the breakup of Xhosa society under colonial pressure (Chapter 5/4).
Wasn’t the Cattle-Killing anti-white?