THE NATAL KAFFIRS--PSEUDO-CHRISTIANITY--IDEAS OF A FUTURE STATE--THE
KAFFIR PROPHETS--BLACK LAWYERS--A WIFE'S TRUE VALUE--HUSBAND AND WIFE--
WHITE SAVAGE VERSUS BLACK--INJUSTICE TOWARDS THE KAFFIRS--NOBODY WRONG--
NECESSITY OF AN ARMY--MR HOLDEN'S OPINION--SEVERITY SOMETIMES
NECESSARY--REAL CHARACTER OF THE KAFFIR.
The Kaffirs about Natal are a fine honest set of men; they will outwit
you in a bargain like Englishmen, if they can; but this all seems to be
fair, and in the way of trade. If I went to a kraal for some milk or
anything, they would at once ask me what I would give them for it, and
if I offered a certain amount of snuff or money, they would wrangle for
more; but if I explained to them that I came as a guest, they nearly
always gave freely what I wanted. The less they had been accustomed to
white traders, the more generously disposed they seemed. I never felt
that I incurred the slightest risk in going singly anywhere amongst
these people. They seem to have a very wholesome dread of an
Englishman's power, and so consider it policy to make him a friend.
They were peaceably disposed, in spite of our bad government, and seemed
willing to listen to the missionaries, many of whom were located in the
district. The labours of these teachers were, however great,
unsatisfactory; for whilst they taught by word what was right, many
other white men taught by deeds what was wrong; the simple-minded savage
was therefore sadly puzzled, and was often, I thought, inclined to look
upon us as a set of humbugs, from this difficulty of separating the bad
from the good. "Are your laws and your God so good, that you send
teachers to benefit us, and yet you cannot get your own men to obey
them?" was the question of a young Kaffir to me, after he had seen a
drunken Englishman in the streets of Pietermaritzburg during the day.
It too frequently happens, that in our eagerness to civilise the savage,
as we term it, we but impart to him the vile qualities that are common
amongst the white men. The natural equilibrium of the savage mind is
thus upset, and only those instructions are retained that agree with the
man's own inclination. I once met a Kaffir whose clothes gave evidence
of his having lived near white men. When asked to do some work for me,
he refused, stating as his reason, that the black man was as good as the
white, and he did not think, therefore, one ought to work for the other.
He was sitting down at the time drinking and smoking. Upon
investigating this case, I found that a missionary, endeavouring to
instil religious principles into this savage, and give him a motive for
becoming a Christian, had assured him that in the sight of the Creator
there was no difference between a black and a white man. This fact was
enough for our friend, he jumped at the offer of baptism, answered to
the name of Lazarus, professed belief in everything, and sat down with
the comfortable idea of being as good as the best white man that he had
ever seen. This man, of course, would do more harm than good amongst
his fellows; they could discover the false reasoning, but would conclude
that it had been taught by the missionary, and would reject, in
consequence, all religious instruction. All these Kaffirs seemed to
have a capacity for appreciating the beauties of their country, wild and
graceful as it is to the English eye, which gazes with delight on the
sweet-scented evergreens and graceful vines. The glories of the
European conservatory are here but a common tree or an overgrown weed.
Amongst scenes like these, the men I employed as aids in hunting had
received their instruction. The heavens and the stars were their
wonders and puzzles, spooring, throwing the assagy, and tending the
cattle, their courses of study; the wild animals that they frequently
encountered had infused into them a dash of their own savage natures;
their barters and ambitions were limited to a few cattle, a blanket, and
a gun.
Every man of whom I inquired, appeared to believe in a future state, and
that his position in that state would depend upon his deeds in the
present one. His ideas on the subject were as wild and uncultivated as
his country. Still he had a belief that by doing certain things he
propitiated the spirit that ruled over the future. May not these simple
but earnest proceedings of the good savage, joined to an ever-present
wish to do right, obtain for him from above (when weighed in the scale
of mercy) the position of the man intrusted with one talent? That he
does not do what is right according to our Christian notions, is often
the result of imperfect instruction, and the want of proper example.
But he is in a less dangerous position than the civilised being who has
received his ten talents in the shape of education, and yet wilfully
neglects to use them in the right way. In judging these Kaffirs, if
there appeared any indication of the good, or what could he admired in
their thoughts or deeds, I placed it on record in my memory, with just
the same impartiality that I did when anything equally bad was shown.
It is too frequently the custom, not only when judging the savage, but
also our own kindred,
"That for some vicious mode of nature in them,
Or
By the o'ergrowth of some complexion,
* * * * * * * * * *
These men--
Carrying, I say, the stamp of one defect;
Being nature's livery, or fortune's star--
Their virtues else (be they as pure as grace,
As infinite as man may undergo)
Shall in the general censure take corruption
From that particular fault: The dram of base
Doth all the noble substance often dout,
To his own scandal."
Some of the Kaffir prophets are most wonderfully eloquent and clear.
They will talk for an hour or two without being at a loss for a word,
and, strong in argument, they can bring many examples to make good their
case. They are very gentlemanly in their language, and I do not think
that they use as much personal abuse as do many gifted orators in
civilised countries. An Englishman ought not to underrate their talents
in this particular, or he will probably be worsted in an encounter of
words. A proof of this lawyer-like talent was exhibited by a great
chief near Natal; he was met, however, with equal skill by the officer
who went to him as ambassador. There is no greater crime amongst
savages than for a simple man to accumulate cattle in large quantities,
as it is thought an attempt to rival his chief. When this is the case,
a cause for slaughter and appropriation is soon discovered; the other
parties are equally on the alert to watch for suspicious demonstrations
against them. If they suppose that anything is intended, they leave
their cattle, and make a rush into the district under English control:
they are _there_ safe, and cannot be pursued by the army of the
indignant chief, as it would be a breach of frontier rules. The chief
to whom I refer had upon one occasion crossed the boundary after a
renegade; so we sent an ambassador to him to remind him of his conduct,
and demand an apology. On the matter being discussed, the Kaffir
remarked that it was very hard that we did not allow him to punish his
traitors by following and slaying them. "If," said he, "your own men
mutinied, murdered your officers, and ran into my country, you, I know,
would want to follow and punish them, while I am not allowed to do so."
It was true enough that, should this have happened, we certainly should
have followed and captured the mutineers. So the ambassador had but one
answer, which was, "The Englishman's laws are so just and good that all
men, black or white, run to them instead of away from them." A Kaffir
is very grasping in bargains; he will always ask much more than he
purposes taking, and will argue and talk for a considerable time before
he can be beaten down. If some easy person once pays a high price for
an article, it is afterwards very difficult to obtain the same sort of
thing for a lower, and the market is at once spoiled. A man of mine
wounded by accident an old Kaffir woman in the leg; the headman of the
kraal at once demanded from me a cow as compensation, as accidents are
not recognised by Kaffirs. He brought his dinner and snuff-box to my
hut early, and sat talking until late, for three days, gradually
lessening his demands, until two sticks of Cavendish tobacco eventually
satisfied him. Had I given in to his exorbitant demand, the price would
have been an established one, and an old Kaffir woman could not have
been wounded under the penalty of a cow. The Kaffir notation is
different from ours; they calculate so many elephants' tusks = so much
money, so much money = one cow; six cows = one wife; this being the
highest currency amongst them. It may strike many of my readers (in
case I have them) as odd, that a wife should be valued at such a price.
Their family arrangements, however, are different from ours: whereas our
first expense is generally the least, with them it is the greatest, and
the only one; all that takes place afterwards being interest on their
original investment. If a Kaffir has a large family, especially of
girls, they are soon made useful in the cultivation of his gardens, and,
when at a "coming-out" age, are sold at their fair valuation in cattle.
The honeymoon over, Mrs Matuan, or Eondema, is set to work at once at
turning over the Indian-corn garden, or making baskets to hold milk,
etc. The master of the house, in the mean while, has a look at his
cattle while they are feeding, milks the cows on their return at night,
and then lies in his hut smoking dakka, a very intoxicating root,
something between tobacco and opium. Thus, an investment in wives is a
very common custom amongst rich Kaffirs. I made a great mistake on one
occasion when I intended to give the Kaffir Monyosi a reproof. On going
to his kraal, on a warm beautiful day, to ask him to come out and shoot,
he told me that he was very lazy, and wanted to stay in his hut and
smoke. I told him to come out and shoot, and show himself to be a man,
and not stop in his hut all day like a woman (thinking of our English
customs). He gave a knowing sort of grin, and said, "The _men_ stop in
all day; the _women_ go out and work!" A Kaffir's riches consist in
either wives or cattle, some of the great chiefs having a hundred wives,
and many thousand head of cattle.
Travellers vary in their accounts of the nature of the South-African
savage. Each should speak according to his experience, but at the same
time he should judge fairly, and with all due allowance for the ignorant
state of these people.
The frontier Kaffirs, I have before said, are confirmed rascals; but I
doubt whether we have not made them so ourselves; and we are pursuing a
plan to form the Natal Kaffirs on the same model. Let us see whether
other writers differ from me in their conclusions with regard to the
savages. Captain Harris, in his "Wild Sports of Southern Africa," says:
"How truly it has been remarked by Captain Owen, that the state of those
countries which have had little or no intercourse with civilised nations
is a direct refutation of the theory of poets and philosophers, who
would represent the ignorance of the savage as virtuous simplicity,--his
miserable poverty as frugality and temperance,--and his stupid indolence
as laudable contempt for wealth. Widely differing, indeed, were the
facts which came under our observation; _and doubtless it will ever be
found that uncultivated man is a compound of treachery, cunning,
debauchery, gluttony, and idleness_." Here the hinge appears to turn
upon the term uncultivated man; and I am convinced that there are very
many in the most civilised countries of Europe who as well deserve the
term, without any of the excuses, as the savages of Africa,--at least,
as those about Natal, of whom I now speak. Was the treatment I received
at the kraal of Inkau, alone and at their mercy, either a compound of
"treachery," "cunning," or "debauchery"? The gluttony and idleness I
care not to defend; but these are not very grievous crimes to lay to the
charge of able-bodied men who can taste meat scarcely once a week.
I doubt whether I should have been treated as well in many of the
manufacturing districts of England as I was here in Africa. In the
former place, the only notice a stranger may get is having "arf a brick
eaved at him," or being "pinned by a bull pup."
Imagine the feelings of a Highland chieftain and his clan upon being
quietly told that they must move away from their mountains and their
country, but must not grumble, because the government has made a grant
of land of five acres per man for his people on the Plumstead marshes,
or some other place equally unsuited to their taste; the only reason
assigned for this act being that their ancestors' land, hallowed by
victories and associations, is now required for a cotton-spinning
manufactory. Would these otherwise loyal subjects become rebels, think
you?
Now let us see if the treatment of the Kaffirs of Natal is very
different from this. It must be borne in mind that the poor heathen, in
addition to his natural _amor patria_, believes firmly that the spirits
of his fathers are watching over him from the hills that they have
during life inhabited; and that if he quits those hills, he, in a
measure, withdraws from their care. The Journal of the Bishop of Cape
Town, dated June 9th, 1850, states: "I have heard to-day from a lady who
lives in the neighbourhood, that the chief, Umnini, of whom I have
before spoken, removed from his lands on the Bluff (Natal) last Friday.
He came to bid her farewell before he left; for they had been kind
neighbours to each other. It was not without sorrow that he quitted his
birthplace, where he has resided all his life, and withstood in his
fastnesses the victorious troops of Tshaka, who conquered the whole
country, and brought into subjection all the native chiefs, except this
one and another. But now we want his land; it is important for our
growing settlement at D'Urban that it should be in our possession;
therefore he must go. He is weak and we are strong." Although it is
not sacrilege to suppose a bishop might be mistaken, still we will ask
which of the two following is the more probable case:--
That the Lord Bishop of Cape Town knew perfectly well what he was
writing about, had good information of the facts he mentioned, and
merely forbore from using stronger language on account of his holy
character; or, that he was quite wrong altogether, and was mistaken with
regard to the affair?
_Might_ it not have been Umnini's own wish that caused him to quit the
land on which he had dwelt for half a century? _Could_ it not have been
that he at last came to consider the soil that had drunk the blood of
his warriors who died in defending it from the attacks of the savage
Tshaka, as desecrated by the act instead of hallowed? Or did he not
consider that _though hundreds of moons_ had shone upon him and his
fathers in this place, future moons ought hereafter to shine upon him in
a less fertile soil; and therefore, agreeing to the white man's wishes,
he _willingly_ quitted his home for the price of a few head of cattle
and went forth a wanderer?
As to our strength and the Kaffirs' weakness--oh, no! those things never
happen here; if they did, some might ask, with the innocence of the
child in the show, which was the uncultivated savage famous for "a
compound of treachery and cunning," and which the Christian. The same
ambiguous answer might naturally be returned, "that we had paid our
money and might take our choice."
These proceedings are all very well, if we look merely to this world as
all and everything; but when we think of the next, the reflection is
hardly so satisfactory.
But who is wrong? Surely it is not the soldier, who merely goes to see
that the orders given to him are carried out. The Colonial Government
will say it is not they that are to blame, as land must be had. And it
certainly is not the English Government that should bear the onus. It
appears that amongst many of the officials of South Africa, there is a
practice of adhering to the letter of the law, instead of the spirit;
that is in strict accordance with the character shown by the soldier,
who did not save a woman from drowning when he was close beside her,
because he had been taught not to act without orders, and there was
nothing in the Articles of War about drowning women.
Let it not be supposed for a moment that I agree with those who are ever
crying, "Do away with the soldiers," or "Spare the poor savage from
punishment." When we have to deal with the ferocious savage, whether he
is so naturally or has been made so by the mistaken policy of our
forefathers, it is nothing but the strong arm and the firm hand that can
and will ever keep him in subjection or prevent him from being a
murderer and confirmed thief.
Soldiers may be an evil, but so are doctors; and whenever the disease
war breaks out, it must be vigorously attacked by the physicians, in the
shape of soldiers; and the more ably and the better these soldiers
attack the disease, the sooner will it be stopped, and the less frequent
will be its recurrence. It would be as ridiculous and short-sighted a
policy to send away all the doctors, hoping thereby to stop sickness, as
to weaken our force anywhere in any country, by withdrawing or reducing
its army, in the hope of better maintaining peace.
The savage invariably considers that forbearance in war is caused by
fear, and he is more ready and eager for battle after kindness and mercy
have been shown him than he would be after a severe lesson. The Kaffir,
when he really is a savage, is a most ferocious one; and although the
distance that separates England from the Cape is so great, that events
taking place there are scarcely discernible; still, they would cause a
great stir did they happen nearer. Twelve hundred men, the number slain
by these savages in the last war, would look a large body in Hyde Park.
The same policy that punishes and subdues the aroused and vindictive
Kaffir, ought to encourage and sympathise with him when he is quietly
and peaceably disposed.
Since penning the preceding pages, I have read a work on Natal and the
eastern frontier of the Cape Colony, by the Rev. William Holden, who was
living at D'Urban during my pilgrimage in the same neighbourhood. As he
was an excellent Kaffir linguist, and was always spoken of by Kaffirs
and white men with respect and affection, it is gratifying to find that
his fifteen years of experience bring him to the same conclusions, with
regard to the treatment of the Kaffirs, at which I may be considered to
have jumped hastily after only three years' investigation. I will quote
from page 215 of his work:--
"But let not those who are invested with a little brief authority use it
in playing all sorts of fantastic tricks, or something worse. A Kaffir
has a sharp sense of justice, and whilst he will respect and reverence
the officer who will give him just punishment for his misdeeds, he will
abhor the man who does him wanton wrong, and may be tempted to settle
accounts in his own way.
"The Kaffirs must be treated like children. If a man has a large
family, and leaves them without restraint or control, his children
become a plague to himself and a scourge to the community. The Kaffirs
are children of a larger growth, and must be treated accordingly;
_children_ in knowledge, ignorant of the relationships of civilised
society, and strangers to many of the motives which influence the
conduct of the white man. But they are _men_ in physical and mental
powers; _men_ in the arts and usages of their nation, and the laws of
their country; and the great difficulty in governing them is, to treat
them as men-children, teaching them that to submit and to obey are
essential to their own welfare as well as to that of others.
"Some kind-hearted Christians will say, `This is much too severe;' but
my firm conviction, after many years' experience, is, that it is not
merely the best, but also the only way to save the native races from
ruin and annihilation; and that, had the Kaffirs on the frontier of the
old colony been treated with more apparent severity after the first war,
a second outbreak would not have taken place. Who, I would ask, is
their best friend, the man who would save them by apparent severity, or
the man who would destroy them by mistaken kindness? I presume the
former. Besides, it should not be forgotten that what appears to be
severe to us is not so to them, since many of them have lived under the
iron rule of cruel capricious despots, with no security for fife or
property, and are consequently unable to appreciate or understand our
excess of civilised kindness; being strangers to those refined feelings
which operate in the breast of the Christian. The result of too mild a
policy is, that in a few years they are changed from crouching,
terror-stricken vassals, to bold, lawless, independent barbarians."
These latter remarks may appear out of place in a book of rough sketches
of sport, but the Kaffirs were to me such trusty allies, faithful
servants, and kind instructors in many, things, that, as a small token
of gratitude for their services, I cannot refrain from making known the
rough and thorny path that they are made to tread.