Know African history and identity before reviving mental colonialism
AS A PROUD Dlamini daughter, an activist of African liberation theology and a critic of colonialism, I feel so embarrassed by the recent revival of the celebration of the colonial pledge of May 14 1835 at Fort Malan, Willowvale by the descendants of some leadership of AbaMbo nation who were welcomed in Butterworth by King Hintsa (Zanzolo) of AmaXhosa.
I think those who are in the forefront of this so-called revival of this mental slavery in a democratic dispensation lack historical analysis and political awareness of their nation.
What is worse is that they are misleading the young people who have got no idea of the circumstances surrounding this incident of May 14 1835 – a colonial-led pledge that happened in Peddie.
What is also strange is that this myopic activity was performed in a very minor house of AbaMbo clans in a historical colonial area of where Malan put his fort, hence it is called Fort Malan.
If the aim of this revival is to promote the nation’s identity as claimed by these chiefs and headmen, I think it is a displaced nostalgia and wishful thinking which will not only undermine the integrity of many of us but will also show that we are reviving colonialism and are historically short-sighted.
First of all, people must know the use of the term “Mfengu” (translated as “Fingo” in English) is an insult and there is no nation called AmamMfengu.
What happened is that during migration from Thukela, a certain group of AbaMbo arrived in Butterworth in 1828. When they were asked by Zanzolo who they were, they said: “SingAbaMbo, siyamfenguza sifuna umhlaba” (“We are AbaMbo, we are destitute, we are looking for land”).
That was the beginning of the use of the term “mfengu”, meaning “the destitute” and in the Bantu history there was never a nation called “The Destitutes”.
That is why I find it very strange for some respectable chiefs and headmen to proudly promote this incongruity and to believe the use of the term “destitute” to define themselves, could bring back our identity, unity, cultural revival and development. That is irrational.
Have we ever thought of those clans of AbaMbo who are in Mpondoland, Bhacaland, Mount Fletcher, etc because they never came to Butterworth and are not AmaMfengu?
Some more ill-researched misinformation is that of the nature of the pledge and its author. How can we think that we are reviving our identity by using a pledge that was not written by our ancestors but was imposed on our ancestors?
History states that it was Mr Ayliff who called all the men under an umqwashu (milkwood tree) and reminded them of what Christianity and the British governor had done for them.
He recited a pledge which they all audibly repeated. In this pledge they were forced to make the following promise: ● To be faithful to God; ● To be loyal to the British king; ● To do all in their power to support their missionaries; and
● To educate their children (Ayliff 1912:34).
Maybe I don’t understand English, this pledge is not three-fold as they claim, but consists of four promises.
If AbaMbo are reviving the historic 1835 pledge, they must not be selective. When citing an author, no one has the right to change somebody’s statement.
AbaMbo did not write this pledge, Ayliff did it for them. The pledge is colonial, hence it speaks of the British king.
Secondly, Chapter 2 Section 15 of our constitution speaks of the freedom of religion. How then do these chiefs and headmen expect all of us, irrespective of religious affiliations, to be part of their revival if the pledge states we will do all in our power to support the missionaries?
It is the same missionaries who uprooted us from our identity and paganised the indigenous beliefs and practices. That will be religious hegemony and is unconstitutional.
Last, it is naive to also think that sending children to school is exclusively for those who took the “Fingo” pledge. What about AmaMpondo, AbaThembu, AmaBhaca, AmaMpondomise, AmaXhosa and others? They are schooled without any colonial pledge, this is not “Fingo” specific. This must be scrapped, it’s irrelevant.
I also find it strange for Dr Bikitsha, a headman of the Ntshatshongo administrative area, to claim to be a chairman of something called the Fingo General Council. To me this is like people gathering and proudly naming themselves the k***** general council, because the term Fingo and k***** are all insults.
I think these respected leaders must first do introspection about how they understand their identity and their history before making a joke out of all of us – not all of us will revive mental colonialism and betrayal of an African identity.
Dr Nokuzola Mndende is the director of Icamagu Heritage Institute. She writes in her personal capacity