MARRIAGE--_Concluded_.
WEDDING CEREMONIES -- PROCESSION OF THE BRIDE -- THE WEDDING
DRESS -- THE OXEN -- THE WEDDING DANCE -- MUTUAL DEPRECIATION AND
ENCOURAGEMENT -- ADVICE TO THE BRIDEGROOM -- MUTUAL RELATIONS OF
HUSBANDS AND WIVES -- A KAFFIR PETRUCHIO -- THE OX OF THE GIRL --
UZINTO AGAIN -- THE OX OF THE SURPLUS -- ITS IMPORT -- VARIETIES OF
MARRIAGE CEREMONIES -- POWER OF DIVORCE -- COMPARISON OF THE KAFFIR
AND MOSAIC LAWS -- IRRESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY OF THE HUSBAND -- CURIOUS
CODE OF ETIQUETTE -- KAFFIR NAMES, AND MODES OF CHOOSING THEM --
THE BIRTH-NAME AND THE SURNAMES -- SUPERSTITIONS RESPECTING THE
BIRTH-NAME -- AN AMUSING STRATAGEM -- THE SURNAMES, OR PRAISE-NAMES
-- HOW EARNED AND CONFERRED -- VARIOUS PRAISE-NAMES OF PANDA -- A
KAFFIR BOASTER -- SONG IN PRAISE OF PANDA -- THE ALLUSIONS EXPLAINED
-- A STRANGE RESTRICTION, AND MODE OF EVADING IT -- INFERIOR POSITION
OF WOMEN -- WOMEN WITH FIREWOOD -- DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GIRLS OF
VARIOUS RANKS.
When the marriage-day is fixed, a ceremonial takes place, differing in
detail according to the wealth of the parties, but similar in all the
principal points. The bride, decked in all the beads and other finery
that she can muster, proceeds in a grand procession to the kraal of her
future husband. Her head is shaved with an assagai before she starts,
the little tuft of hair on the top of her bare pate is rubbed with red
paint, and dressed with various appliances, until it stands on end,
and the odd little tuft looks as much as possible like a red shaving
brush, with very short, diverging bristles. She is escorted by all her
young friends, and is accompanied by her mother and many other married
women of the tribe, all bedizened to the utmost. Her male relatives and
friends make a point of joining the procession, also dressed in their
best, but each bearing his shield and a bundle of assagais, so as to
guard the bride against enemies. She then seats herself, surrounded by
her companions, outside the kraal.
About this period of the ceremony there is generally a considerable
amount of by-play respecting certain oxen, which have to be given
by the bridegroom and the father of the bride. The former is called
the “Ukutu” ox, which is given to the mother of the bride by the
bridegroom. The word “Ukutu” literally signifies the leathern thongs
which are hung about the bodies of children by way of charms, and the
present of the ox to the mother is made in order to reimburse her for
the expenditure in thongs during her daughter’s childhood. The mother
does not keep the ox, but slaughters it and dresses it for the marriage
feast, and by the time that the wedding has been fairly begun, the
Ukutu ox is ready for the guests.
Another ox, called by the curious name of “Umquoliswa,” is given by the
bridegroom to the girl’s father, and about this there is much ceremony,
as is narrated by Mr. Shooter. “The day having considerably advanced,
the male friends of the bride go to the bridegroom’s kraal to claim
the ox called Umquoliswa. In a case which I witnessed, they proceeded
in a long file, with a step difficult to describe, being a sort of
slow and measured stamping, an imitation of their dancing movement.
Wearing the dress and ornaments previously mentioned as appropriated to
occasions of festivity, they brandished shields and sticks, the usual
accompaniment of a wedding dance; while their tongues were occupied
with a monotonous and unsentimental chant--
“‘Give us the Umquoliswa,
We desire the Umquoliswa.’
[Illustration: PROCESSION OF THE BRIDE. (See page 82.)]
“In this way they entered the kraal, and, turning to the right,
reached the principal hut. The father of the girl now called upon the
bridegroom, who was inside, to come forth and give them the Umquoliswa.
The latter replied that he had no ox to present to them. He was then
assured that the bride would be taken home; but he remained invisible
until other members of the party had required him to appear. Having
left the house, he hurried to the gateway, and attempted to pass
it. His exit, however, was barred by a company of women already in
possession of the entrance, while a smile on his face showed that his
efforts to escape were merely formal, and that he was going through
an amusing ceremony. The Umquoliswa was now fetched from the herd,
and given to the bride’s party, who were bivouacking under the lee
of a clump of bush. Her sisters affected to despise it as a paltry
thing, and bade the owner produce a better. He told them that it was
the largest and the fattest that he could procure; but they were not
satisfied--they would not eat it. Presently, the father put an end to
their noisy by-play, and accepted the beast. The bride then ran toward
the kraal, and after a while the dances commenced.”
The dances are carried on with the violent, and almost furious energy
that seems to take possession of a Kaffir’s soul when engaged in the
dance, the arms flourishing sticks, shields, and spears, while the legs
are performing marvellous feats of activity. First, the bridegroom
and his companions seat themselves in the cattle pen, and refresh
themselves copiously with beer, while the party of the bride dances
before him. The process is then reversed, the bride sitting down, and
her husband’s party dancing before her. Songs on both sides accompany
the dance.
The girl is addressed by the matrons belonging to the bridegroom’s
party, who depreciate her as much as possible, telling her that her
husband has given too many cows for her, that she will never be able
to do a married woman’s work, that she is rather plain than otherwise,
and that her marriage to the bridegroom is a wonderful instance of
condescension on his part. This cheerful address is intended to prevent
her from being too much elated by her translation from the comparative
nonentity of girlhood to the honorable post of a Zulu matron.
Perfect equity, however, reigns; and when the bride’s party begin to
dance and sing, they make the most of their opportunity. Addressing the
parents, they congratulate them on the possession of such a daughter,
but rather condole with them on the very inadequate number of cows
which the bridegroom has paid. They tell the bride that she is the
most lovely girl in the tribe, that her conduct has been absolute
perfection, that the husband is quite unworthy of her, and ought to be
ashamed of himself for making such a hard bargain with her father. Of
course neither party believes a word that is said, but everything in
Kaffirland must be conducted with the strictest etiquette.
After each dance, the leader--usually the father--addresses a speech
to the contracted couple; and, if the bridegroom be taking a wife for
the first time, the quantity of good advice that is heaped upon him
by the more experienced would be very useful if he were likely to pay
any attention to it. He is told that, being a bachelor, he cannot know
how to manage a wife, and is advised not to make too frequent use of
the stick, by way of gaining obedience. Men, he is told, can manage
any number of wives without using personal violence; but boys are
apt to be too hasty with their hands. The husband of Uzinto, whose
adventures have already been related, made a curious stipulation when
thus addressed, and promised not to beat her _if she did not beat him_.
Considering the exceedingly energetic character of the girl, this was
rather a wise condition to make.
All these preliminaries being settled, the bridegroom seats himself
on the ground while the bride dances before him. While so doing, she
takes the opportunity of calling him by opprobrious epithets, kicks
dust in his face, disarranges his elegant headdress, and takes similar
liberties by way of letting him know that he is not her master yet.
After she is married she will take no such liberties.
Then another ox comes on the scene, the last, and most important of
all. This is called the Ox of the Girl, and has to be presented by the
bridegroom.
It must here be mentioned that, although the bridegroom seems to be
taxed rather heavily for the privilege of possessing a wife, the
tax is more apparent than real. In the first place, he considers
that all these oxen form part of the price which he pays for the
wife in question, and looks upon them much in the same light that
householders regard the various taxes that the occupier of a house
has to pay--namely, a recognized addition to the sum demanded for the
property. The Kaffir husband considers his wife as much a portion of
his property as his spear or his kaross, and will sometimes state the
point very plainly.
When a missionary was trying to remonstrate with a Kaffir for throwing
all the hard work upon his wife and doing nothing at all himself, he
answered that she was nothing more or less than his ox, bought and
paid for, and must expect to be worked accordingly. His interlocutor
endeavored to strengthen his position by mentioning the manner in
which Europeans treated their wives, but met with little success in
his argument. The Kaffir’s reply was simple enough, and perfectly
unanswerable. “White men do not buy their wives, and the two cases are
not parallel.” In fact, a Kaffir husband’s idea of a wife does not
differ very far from that of Petruchio, although the latter did happen
to be an European--
“I will be master of what is mine own;
She is my goods, my chattels, she is my house,
My household stuff, my field, my barn,
My horse, my ox, my ass, my anything.”
And the Kaffir wife’s idea of a husband is practically that of the
tamed Katherine--
“Thy husband is thy lord, thy keeper,
Thy head, thy sovereign”--
though she could by no manner of means finish the speech with truth,
and say that he labors for her while she abides at home at ease, and
asks no other tribute but obedience and love. The former portion of
that tribute is exacted; the latter is not so rare as the circumstances
seem to denote.
The sums which a Kaffir pays for his wife he considers as property
invested by himself, and expected to return a good interest in the long
run, and, as has already been mentioned, there are often circumstances
under which he takes credit for the amount, and expects to be repaid.
So, although a bridegroom is obliged to part with certain cattle on the
occasion of his wedding, he keeps a very accurate mental account of
them, and is sure to repay himself in one way or another.
After the Ox of the Girl has been furnished, it is solemnly
slaughtered, and this constitutes the binding portion of the marriage.
Up to that time the father or owner of the girl might take her back
again, of course returning the cattle that had been paid for her, as
well as those which had been presented and slaughtered. Our heroine,
Uzinto, afforded an example of this kind. The bridegroom had a natural
antipathy to the chief, who had tried to marry the lady by force, and
showed his feelings by sending the very smallest and thinnest ox that
could be found. The chief remonstrated at this insult, and wanted to
annul the whole transaction. In this he might have succeeded, but for
a curious coincidence. The father of the bride had finally quarrelled
with his chief, and had been forced to follow the example of his
daughter and her intended husband, and to take refuge in Natal. Just
at the wedding he unexpectedly made his appearance, and found himself
suddenly on the way to wealth. His daughter was actually being married
to a man who had engaged to pay ten cows for her. So he did not
trouble himself in the least about the size of the ox that was to be
slaughtered, but accepted the animal, and accordingly became owner of
the cows in question, _minus_ those which had to be paid as honorary
gifts to the disappointed chief and the successful lover.
After the ceremonies are over, the husband takes his wife home, the
character of that home being dependent on his rank and wealth. But when
the couple have fairly taken up their abode, the father or previous
owner of the wife always sends one ox to her husband. This ox is called
the Ox of the Surplus, and represents several ideas. In the first place
it is supposed to imply that the girl’s value very far exceeds that
of any number of oxen which can be given for her, and is intended to
let the bridegroom know that he is not to think too much of himself.
Next, it is an admission on the father’s side that he is satisfied
with the transaction, and that when he dies he will not avenge himself
by haunting his daughter’s household, and so causing the husband to
be disappointed in his wishes for a large family of boys and girls,
the first to be warriors and extend the power of his house, and the
second to be sold for many cows and increase his wealth. So curiously
elaborate are the customs of the Kaffirs, that when this Ox of the
Surplus enters the kraal of the husband it is called by another name,
and is then entitled “The Ox that opens the Cattle-fold.” The theory
of this name is, that the husband has paid for his wife all his oxen,
and that in consequence the cattle-fold is empty. But the ox that she
brings with her reopens the gate of the fold, and is looked upon as an
earnest of the herds that are to be purchased with the daughters which
she may have in the course of her married life. These curious customs
strongly remind us of the old adage respecting the counting of chickens
before they are hatched, but the Kaffir seems to perform that premature
calculation in more ways than one.
The reader will understand that these minute and complicated ceremonies
are not always observed in precisely the same manner. In many cases,
especially when the Kaffirs have lived for any length of time under
the protection of white men, there is very little, if any ceremony;
the chief rites being the arrangement with the girl’s owner or father,
the delivery of the cattle, and the transfer of the purchased girl to
the kraal of her husband. Moreover, it is very difficult for white
men to be present at Kaffir ceremonies, and in many cases the Kaffirs
will pretend that there is no ceremony at all, in order to put their
interrogators off the track. The foregoing account is, however, a
tolerably full description of the ceremonies that are, or have been,
practised by the great Zulu tribe.
A marriage thus made is considered quite as binding as any ceremony
among ourselves, and the Kaffir may not put away his wife except
for causes that are considered valid by the councillors of the
tribe. Infidelity is, of course, punished by instant dismissal of
the unfaithful wife, if not by her death, the latter fate invariably
befalling the erring wife of a chief. As for the other culprit,
the aggrieved husband has him at his mercy, and sometimes puts him
to death, but sometimes commutes that punishment for a heavy fine.
Constant and systematic disobedience is also accepted as a valid cause
of divorce, and so is incorrigible idleness. The process of reasoning
is, that the husband has bought the woman in order to perform certain
tasks for him. If she refuses to perform them through disobedience, or
omits to perform them through idleness, it is clear that he has paid
his money for a worthless article, and is therefore entitled to return
her on the hands of the vendor, and to receive back a fair proportion
of the sum which he has paid. Sometimes she thinks herself ill treated,
and betakes herself to the kraal of her father. In this case, the
father can keep her by paying back the cattle which he has received for
her; and if there should be any children, the husband retains them as
hostages until the cattle have been delivered. He then transfers them
to the mother, to whom they rightly belong.
Another valid cause of divorce is the misfortune of a wife being
childless. The husband expects that she shall be a fruitful wife, and
that his children will add to his power and wealth; and if she does not
fulfil this expectation, he is entitled to a divorce. Generally, he
sends the wife to the kraal of her father, who propitiates the spirits
of her ancestors by the sacrifice of an ox, and begs them to remove the
cause of divorce. She then goes back to her husband, but if she should
still continue childless, she is sent back to her father, who is bound
to return the cattle which he has received for her. Sometimes, however,
a modification of this system is employed, and the father gives, in
addition to the wife, one of her unmarried sisters, who, it is hoped,
may better fulfil the wishes of the husband. The father would rather
follow this plan than consent to a divorce, because he then retains
the cattle, and to give up a single ox causes pangs of sorrow in a
Kaffir’s breast. Should the sister become a fruitful wife, one or two
of the children are transferred to the former wife, and ever afterward
considered as belonging to her house.
All these details remind the observer of similar details in the
Mosaic law of marriage, and, in point of fact, the social condition
of the Kaffir of the present day is not very different from that of
the Israelite when the Law was first promulgated through the great
legislator. Many of the customs are identical, and in others there is
a similitude that is almost startling. But, as far as the facility of
divorce goes, the Kaffir certainly seems to look upon marriage, even
though he may have an unlimited number of wives, with more reverence
than did the ancient Israelite, and he would not think of divorcing a
wife through a mere caprice of the moment, as was sanctioned by the
traditions of the Jews, though not by their divinely given law.
Still, though he does not, as a general rule, think himself justified
in such arbitrary divorces, he considers himself gifted with an
irresponsible authority over his wives, even to the power of life and
death. If, for example, a husband in a fit of passion were to kill
his wife--a circumstance that has frequently occurred--no one has any
business to interfere in the matter, for, according to his view of the
case, she is his property, bought, and paid for, and he has just as
much right to kill her as if she were one of his goats or oxen. Her
father cannot proceed against the murderer, for he has no further right
in his daughter, having sold her and received the stipulated price.
The man has, in fact, destroyed valuable property of his own--property
which might be sold for cows, and which was expected to work for him,
and produce offspring exchangeable for cows. It is thought, therefore,
that if he chooses to inflict upon himself so severe a loss, no one has
any more right to interfere with him than if he were to kill a number
of oxen in a fit of passion. Sometimes, however, the chief has been
known to take such a matter in hand, and to fine the delinquent in a
cow or two for destroying a valuable piece of property, which, though
his own, formed a unit in the strength of the tribe, and over which he,
as the acknowledged father of the tribe, had a jurisdiction. But, even
in such rare instances, his interference, although it would be made
ostensibly for the sake of justice, would in reality be an easy mode of
adding to his own wealth by confiscating the cattle which he demanded
as a fine from the culprit.
Between married persons and their relatives a very singular code of
etiquette prevails. In the first place, a man is not allowed to marry
any one to whom he is related by blood. He may marry two or more
sisters, provided that they come from a different family from his
own, but he may not take a wife who descended from his own immediate
ancestors. But, like the ancient Hebrews, a man may not only marry
the wife of a deceased brother, but considers himself bound to do so
in justice to the woman, and to the children of his brother, who then
become to all intents and purposes his own.
The peculiar etiquette which has been mentioned lies in the social
conduct of those who are related to each other by marriage and not
by blood. After a man is married, he may not speak familiarly to his
wife’s mother, nor even look upon her face, and this curious custom is
called “being ashamed of the mother-in-law.” If he wishes to speak to
her, he must retire to some distance, and carry on his communication by
shouting: which, as has been truly said, is certainly no hardship to a
Kaffir. Or, if the communication be of a nature that others ought not
to hear, the etiquette is thought to be sufficiently observed provided
that the two parties stand at either side of a fence over which they
cannot see.
If, as is often the case, the man and his mother-in-law happen to meet
in one of the narrow paths that lead from the kraal to the gardens and
cultivated fields, they must always pretend not to see each other.
The woman generally looks out for a convenient bush, and crouches
behind it, while the man carefully holds his shield to his face.
So far is this peculiar etiquette carried that neither the man nor
his mother-in-law is allowed to mention the name of the other. This
prohibition must in all places be exceedingly awkward, but it is more
so in Kaffirland, where the name which is given to each individual is
sure to denote some mental or physical attribute, or to be the name
of some natural object which is accepted as the embodiment of that
attribute.
Supposing, then, that the name of the man signified a house, and that
the name of his mother-in-law signified a cow, it is evident that each
must be rather embarrassed in ordinary conversation. Persons thus
situated always substitute some other word for that which they are
forbidden to pronounce, and that substitution is always accepted by the
friends. Curiously circumlocutory terms are thus invented, and very
much resemble the euphemisms which prevail both in Northern America and
Northern Europe. In such a case as has been mentioned, the man might
always speak of a cow as the “horned one,” and the woman would use the
word “dwelling” or “habitation” instead of “house.”
As, moreover, a man has generally a considerable number of
mothers-in-law, it is evident that this rule must sometimes be
productive of much inconvenience, and cause the memory to be always
on the stretch. How such a man as Panda, who has at least a thousand
mothers-in-law, contrives to carry on conversation at all, is rather
perplexing. Perhaps he is considered to be above the law, and that
his words are as irresponsible as his actions. The reader may perhaps
remember that a similar custom prevails throughout the greater part of
Polynesia.
[Illustration: KAFFIR PASSING HIS MOTHER-IN-LAW.]
The wife, again, is interdicted from pronouncing the name of her
husband, or that of any of his brothers. This seems as if she would
be prevented from speaking to him in familiar terms, but such is not
really the case. The fact is, that every Kaffir has more than one name;
and the higher the rank, the greater the number of names. At birth, or
soon afterward, a name is given to the child, and this name has always
reference to some attribute which the child is desired to possess, or
to some circumstance which has occurred at the time.
For example, a child is sometimes called by the name of the day on
which it is born, just as Robinson Crusoe called his servant Friday.
If a wild beast, such as a lion or a jackal, were heard to roar at the
time when the child was born, the circumstance would be accepted as an
omen, and the child called by the name of the beast, or by a word which
represents its cry. Mr. Shooter mentions some rather curious examples
of these names. If the animal which was heard at the time of the
child’s birth were the hyæna, which is called _impisi_ by the natives,
the name of the child might be either U’mpisi, or U-huhu, the second
being an imitative sound representing the laugh-like cry of the hyæna.
A boy whose father prided himself on the number of his stud, which of
course would be very much increased when his son inherited them, called
the child “Uso-mahashe,” _i. e._ the father of horses. This child
became afterward a well-known chief in the Natal district. A girl,
again, whose mother had been presented with a new hoe just before her
daughter was born, called the girl “Uno-ntsimbi,” _i. e._ the daughter
of iron. The name of Panda, the king of the Zulu tribes, is in reality
“U-mpande,” a name derived from “impande,” a kind of root.
These birth-names are known by the title “igama,” and it is only to
them that the prohibitive custom extends. In the case of a chief, his
igama may not be spoken by any belonging to his kraal; and in the case
of a king, the law extends to all his subjects. Thus, a Kaffir will not
only refuse to speak of Panda by his name, but when he has occasion to
speak of the root impande, he substitutes another word, and calls it
“ingxabo.”
A Kaffir does not like that a stranger should even hear his igama,
for he has a hazy sort of idea that the knowledge might be used for
some evil purpose. One of my friends, who lived in Kaffirland for some
years, and employed a considerable number of the men, never could
induce any of them to tell him their igama, and found that they would
always prefer to be called by some English name, such as Tom, or Billy.
At last, when he had attained a tolerable idea of the language, he
could listen to their conversation, and so find out the real names by
which they addressed each other. When he had mastered these names, he
took an opportunity of addressing each man by his igama, and frightened
them exceedingly. On hearing the word spoken, they started as if they
had been struck, and laid their hands on their mouths in horrified
silence. The very fact that the white man had been able to gain the
forbidden knowledge affected them with so strong an idea of his
superiority that they became very obedient servants.
In addition to the igama, the Kaffir takes other names, always in
praise of some action that he has performed, and it is thought good
manners to address him by one or more of these titles. This second name
is called the “isi-bonga,” a word which is derived from “uku-bonga,” to
praise. In Western Africa, a chief takes, in addition to his ordinary
name, a whole series of “strong-names,” all allusive to some portion of
his history. Sometimes, the isi-bonga is given to him by others. For
example, as soon as a boy is enrolled among the youths, his parents
give him an isi-bonga; and when he assumes the head-ring of manhood,
he always assumes another praise-name. If a man distinguishes himself
in battle, his comrades greet him by an isi-bonga, by which he is
officially known until he earns another. On occasions of ceremony he
is always addressed by one or more of these praise-names; and if he
be visited by an inferior, the latter stands outside his hut, and
proclaims aloud as many of his titles as he thinks suitable for the
occasion. It is then according to etiquette to send a present of
snuff, food, and drink to the visitor, who again visits the hut, and
recommences his proclamation, adding more titles as an acknowledgment
of the chief’s liberality.
A king has, of course, an almost illimitable number of isi-bongas, and
really to learn them all in order requires a memory of no mean order.
Two or three of them are therefore selected for ordinary use, the
remainder being reserved for the heralds whose peculiar office it is
to recite the praises of their monarch. Panda, for example, is usually
addressed as “O Elephant.” This is merely a symbolical isi-bonga, and
is given to the king as admitting him to be greatest among men as the
elephant is greatest among beasts. In one sense it is true enough, the
elephantine proportions of Panda quite justifying such an allusion.
This title might be given to any very great man, but it is a convenient
name by which the king may be called, and therefore by this name he is
usually addressed in council and on parade.
For example, Mr. Shooter recalls a little incident which occurred
during a review by Panda. The king turned to one of the “boys,” and
asked how he would behave if he met a white man in battle? Never was
there a more arrant coward than this “boy,” but boasting was safe, and
springing to his feet he spoke like a brave: “Yes, O Elephant! You see
me! I’ll go against the white man. His gun is nothing. I’ll rush upon
him quickly before he has time to shoot, or I’ll stoop down to avoid
the ball. See how I’ll kill him!” and forthwith his stick did the work
of an assagai on the body of an imaginary European. Ducking to avoid a
bullet, and then rushing in before the enemy had time to reload, was a
very favorite device with the Kaffir warriors, and answered very well
at first. But their white foes soon learned to aim so low that all the
ducking in the world could not elude the bullet, while the more recent
invention of revolvers and breech-loaders has entirely discomfited this
sort of tactics.
In a song in honor of Panda, a part of which has already been quoted,
a great number of isi-bongas are introduced. It will be therefore
better to give the song entire, and to explain the various allusions
in their order. It must be remembered that in his earlier days Panda,
whose life was originally spared by Dingan, when he murdered Tchaka
and the rest of the family, was afterward obliged to flee before him,
and very ingeniously contrived to get off safely across the river
by watching his opportunity while the army of Dingan was engaged in
another direction. He then made an alliance with the white men, brought
a large force against Dingan, and conquered him, driving him far beyond
the boundaries, and ending by having himself proclaimed as King of the
Zulu tribes. This fight took place at the Makonko, and was witnessed by
Panda’s wife, who came from Mankebe. The various praise-names of Panda,
or the isi-bongas, are marked by being printed in italics.
“1. Thou brother of the Tchakas, _considerate forder_,
2. _A swallow which fled in the sky_;
3. A swallow with a whiskered breast;
4. Whose cattle was ever in so huddled a crowd,
5. They stumbled for room when they ran.
6. Thou false adorer of the valor of another,
7. That valor thou tookest at the battle of Makonko.
8. Of the stock of N’dabazita, _ramrod of brass_,
9. _Survivor alone of all other rods_;
10. Others they broke and left this in the soot,
11. Thinking to burn it some rainy cold day.
12. _Thigh of the bullock of Inkakavini_,
13. Always delicious if only ’tis roasted,
14. It will always be tasteless if boiled.
15. The woman from Mankebe is delighted;
16. She has seen the leopards of Jama
17. Fighting together between the Makonko.
18. He passed between the Jutuma and Ihliza,
19. The Celestial who thundered between the Makonko.
20. I praise thee, O king! son of Jokwane, the son of Undaba,
21. The merciless opponent of every conspiracy.
22. Thou art an _elephant_, an _elephant_, an _elephant_.
23. All glory to thee, thou _monarch who art black_.”
The first isi-bonga in line 1, alludes to the ingenuity with which
Panda succeeded in crossing the river, so as to escape out of the
district where Dingan exercised authority. In the second line, “swallow
which fled in the sky,” is another allusion to the secrecy with which
he managed his flight, which left no more track than the passage of a
swallow through the air. Lines 4 and 5 allude to the wealth, _i. e._
the abundance of cattle, possessed by Panda. Line 6 asserts that Panda
was too humble-minded, and thought more of the power of Dingan than
it deserved; while line 7 offers as proof of this assertion that when
they came to fight Panda conquered Dingan. Lines 8 to 11 all relate
to the custom of seasoning sticks by hanging them over the fireplaces
in Kaffir huts. Line 14 alludes to the fact that meat is very seldom
roasted by the Kaffirs, but is almost invariably boiled, or rather
stewed, in closed vessels. In line 15 the “woman from Mankebe” is
Panda’s favorite wife. In line 19, “The Celestial” alludes to the name
of the great Zulu tribe over which Panda reigned; the word “Zulu”
meaning celestial, and having much the same import as the same word
when employed by the Chinese to denote their origin. Line 21 refers
to the attempts of Panda’s rivals to dethrone him, and the ingenious
manner in which he contrived to defeat their plans by forming judicious
alliances. Line 22 reiterates the chief isi-bonga by which he is orally
addressed, and the words “Monarch who art black” have already been
explained at p. 12, when treating of the appearance of the Kaffir
tribes.
As is the case in many countries, when a man has his first-born son
presented to him he takes as a new isi-bonga the name of the son,
with that of “father” prefixed to it; while, on the other hand, if
his father should happen to be a man of peculiar eminence he takes as
a praise-name that of his father, with the word “son” prefixed. It
will be seen, therefore, that while the original name, or igama, is
permanent, though very seldom mentioned, his isi-bonga, or praise-name,
is continually changing.
Fortunately, the Zulu language is complex in its structure, and its
purity is jealously preserved by the continual councils which are held,
and the displays of oratory which always accompany them. Otherwise,
this curious custom of substituting arbitrarily one word for another
might have an extremely injurious effect on the language, as has indeed
been the case in the countries where a similar custom prevails, and
in which the language has changed so completely that the natives who
had left their own country, and returned after a lapse of some thirty
years, would scarcely be able to make themselves understood, even
though they had perfectly retained the language as it was when they
last spoke it in their own land.
There is a curious regulation among the Kaffirs, that a man is not
allowed to enter the hut in which either of his son’s wives may be.
If he wishes to enter he gives notice, and she retires. But, when he
is in possession of the hut, she is placed at equal disadvantage, and
cannot enter her own house until he has left it. This rule, however, is
seldom kept in all its strictness, and indeed such literal obedience
is hardly possible, because the eldest son very seldom leaves his
father’s kraal until he has married at least two wives. In consequence
of the great practical inconvenience of this rule, the Kaffirs have
contrived to evade it, although they have not openly abandoned it. The
father-in-law presents an ox to his son’s wife, and in consideration of
this liberality, she frees him from the obligation of this peculiar and
troublesome courtesy. The native name for this custom is “uku-hlonipa.”
From what has been said, it is evident that women hold a very inferior
position among the Kaffirs, and are looked upon quite as if they were
cattle; liable, like cattle, to be bought and sold. A Kaffir never
dreams that he and his wife are on terms of the least equality, or
that he does not deserve praise at her hand for his condescension in
marrying her at all. A man will scarcely condescend to notice the women
of his own household. If they go out on their several labors, they go
their several ways. Supposing, for example, that a man were to cut
sticks for firing, or poles for the support of a new house; his wives,
in going to the same spot, would be careful to choose a different
path. When he has cut the wood he walks off, leaving his wives to
perform the really heavy labor of bringing it home, and no man would
ever think of assisting a woman in so menial a labor.
There are now before me several photographs representing women carrying
bundles of sticks, and it is wonderful what huge burdens these hard
worked women will carry. A man will not even lift the wood upon the
head of his wife, but expects that one of her own sex will assist her.
Sometimes, when a number of women are returning from wood cutting,
walking in single file, as is their custom, a “boy” will take the head
of the procession. But he will not degrade himself by carrying so much
as a stick, and bears nothing but his weapons, and perhaps a small
shield.
The unceremonious manner in which these hard worked women are treated
is little less singular than the cheerful acquiescence with which
they obey the commands of their sable masters. Once, when Captain
Gardiner was visiting Dingan, he was roused long before daybreak by the
vociferation of a man who was running through the kraal, and shouting
some command in a most peremptory tone. It turned out that Dingan had
suddenly taken into his head to build a new kraal, and had ordered all
the women into the bush to procure reeds and branches for building
purposes. In a few minutes a vast number of female voices were heard
uniting in a pleasing melody, which became louder and louder as the
numbers of the singers increased on their mustering ground, and then
gradually died away in the distance as they moved to the scene of their
labors. The bush to which they were sent was ten miles from the kraal,
but they went off quite cheerfully, and in the afternoon, when they
returned, each bearing a huge bundle of bushes on her head, they were
singing the same song, though they had walked so long a distance and so
heavily laden. The song does not seem to have possessed much variety,
as it chiefly consisted of one line, “Akoosiniki, ingonyama izezewi,”
and a chorus of “Haw! haw! haw!” It was probably intended for the same
purpose as the tunes played by regimental bands; namely, to enable the
party to keep step with each other.
Dingan was so tenacious of the superiority of his own sex that he would
never allow his wives to stand in his presence, but made them shuffle
about from place to place on their knees.
In consequence of their different habits of life, the men and women
hardly seem to belong to the same race. The men, as a rule, are
exceptionally fine specimens of humanity; and, despite their high
cheek-bones, woolly hair, and thick lips, might serve as models for a
sculptor. Their stature is tall, their forms are elastic and muscular,
and their step is free and noble, as becomes the gait of warriors. In
all these respects they are certainly not inferior to Europeans, and
in many are decidedly superior. The women, however, are rather stunted
than otherwise: their figures are bowed by reason of the heavy weights
which they have to carry, and they rapidly lose that wonderful symmetry
of form which distinguished them while still in the bloom of youth. The
men preserve their grandeur of demeanor and their bold, intelligent
aspect, even until their hair is gray from age, while the elderly
Kaffir woman is at best awkward and unsightly, and the old woman
irresistibly reminds the observer of an aged and withered monkey.
Exceptions to the general rule are sometimes found. A chief or wealthy
man, for example, would take a pride in freeing his daughters and chief
wife from the exceptionally hard labor which falls to the lot of the
sex in Kaffirland. In the case of the daughters, he is moved quite as
much by self-interest as by parental affection. A girl fetches a price
commensurate with her appearance, and the very best price is always
to be obtained for the best article. The daughter of a poor man, or
dependant, is obliged to work hard and live hard; and the natural
consequence is, that she has scarcely any real youth, and that her
form is spoiled by the heavy labors which are imposed upon her at an
age when all the bodily powers ought to be employed in adding to the
physical energy of her frame. Therefore, when such a girl is old enough
to be married, she is thin, careworn, and coarse, and no one will give
very much for her. Indeed, if she should be married, she is perfectly
aware that her real post in the kraal of her husband is little more
than that of a purchased drudge.
The daughter of a wealthy man, on the contrary, undertakes but little
of the really hard work which falls to the lot of her sex; and as she
is not only allowed, but encouraged, to eat the most fattening food
with as much despatch as possible, it naturally follows that, when
compared with the ordinary drudge of every-day life, she is by far the
more prepossessing, and her father is sure to obtain a very much higher
price for her than would have been the case if she had been forced to
do hard labor. Thus the three great requisites of a Kaffir girl are,
that she should be fat, strong, and have a tolerably good-looking face.
This last qualification is, however, subordinate to the other two. That
she is fat, shows that she has not been prematurely worn out by hard
work; and that she is strong, gives promise that she will be able to do
plenty of work after her marriage, and that the purchaser will not have
reason to think that he has wasted his money.