Madzikane - 1880

1880

iNkosi Diko was a fierce leader who fought against the annexation of the land by the British Colonial Government and he even resisted handing over amaBhaca nation to become British subjects. As a result of his resistance to the oppressive rule of the colonisers he never became the favourite of colonial government of his time. That government could not stand him and they decided to overthrow in 1880. The oppression of Diko’s house has been felt by all eight (8) generations, for a period of 130 years.

According to the writings of Anderson Mhlawuli Makaula (1988), by virtue of birth and according to tradition, Diko was the heir to iKumkani Ncaphayi, but, because of some councillors of amaBhaca who liked Mamjucu, the mother of Makaula, she was fraudulently made a great wife, hence her son attained chieftainship. Makhohlisa (the mother of Diko and Sogoni) who was Ncaphayi’s wife of the great house (uNdlunkulu), was not loved by these councillors, hence they plotted against her.

It happened that Ncaphayi had killed a man in one of the Mfecane battles and according to amaBhaca tradition, iNkosi was not supposed to have any contact with his wives until he had undergone some medical treatment. A separate accommodation was to be provided for him. Ncaphayi was then placed in isolation for a stipulated period. It was further conspired by the councillors under Qulu Siwela that the wife who goes to cook for iNkosi Ncaphayi in isolation and conceives during that period would be the one who would give birth to the chief that would succeed Ncaphayi after his death.

The councillors first went to uNdlunkulu Makhohlisa, (Diko and Sogoni’s mother) and deceived her that she must not dare put her foot in the isolation place where Ncaphayi was sleeping, because this would weaken her sons and thus cause death by assegai among her children. This sounded reasonable to Makhohlisa. Thereafter the same councillors went to advised Mamjucu, (the second wife) to go and cook for iNkosi Ncaphayi in the isolation place. She acted as instructed and her son, Makaula was then made iNkosi of amaBhaca.

Ever-since then, because of this conspiracy, this trick and treachery, the Great House of Ncaphayi has suffered a great deal of disrespect, degradation and injustice throughout generations that followed.

After iNkosi Ncaphayi’s death Diko (his first and eldest son) led amaBhaca from 1845. iNkosi Diko was always in conflict with the British Government and he blatantly refused the annexation of the land of amaBhaca nation. When the British supremacy pervaded the Transkei territory during the 1860s, the government pioneered the annexation of the Transkeian territories. Amakhosi were to give up their power and paramount and become subjects of the British Colonial government. Magistrates were to take over the power from amaKhosi, especially those who refused submitting their nations to be under the British rule. iNkosi Diko was one of those traditional leaders who resisted and he was then overthrown as iNkosi, deposed and made headman by the colonial government in 1880.

Battles were fought throughout this period, for an example, a friend to iNkosi Diko was iNkosi Mhlontlo of amaMpondomise who is said to have killed a magistrate at Qumbu in resistance against such annexation. Other amaKhosi who accepted annexation were rewarded for their loyalty to the oppressive colonial government and eventually they were looked after and treated well by the colonial government.

The plan to destroy any trace of iNkosi Diko and his descendants has prevailed over generations after this great hero had died. Even today, Diko’s files, from iNkosi Diko himself, Qoza ka-Diko, Mthakathi ka-Qoza, Mabhijela ka-Mthakathi, Dingumhlaba ka-Mabhijela and Mzawugugi ka-Dingumhlaba (all the descendants of Diko) have been removed from the archives in Mthatha. The big question is: What happened to these files and where are they?

AmaBhaca are mainly found in the small towns such as Mount Frere, uMzimkhulu, Xopo and some surrounding areas. The isiBhaca language is a mixture of isiXhosa, isiZulu and isiSwati. The language of isiSwati was influenced by the fact that King Madzikane’s mother was from one of the Royal Houses of the Swatis of aMalambo. He grew up within the Swatis from his mother’s side and therefore spoke the language. Although he accepts that he is not an authority on this, Jordan, A.C. (1953) argues also assets that in the traditional history of the Bhacas, “uDlamini and kwaDlamini” figure a great deal (P.5). He further states that the Bhaca language was stifled to death chiefly by isiXhasa through, amongst others, schools and churches and that a large number of enlightened Bhacas were taught to look down upon their mother tongue.

Diko is the first son of Ncapayi, (Makhohlisa a daughter of Dzanibe clan was the first wife of Ncapayi) with his younger brother Sogoni from the first wife of Ncaphayi. The younger brother from the second wife was Inkosi Makaula followed by Inkosi Dabula and others from other younger wives. Inkosi Madzikane ll Diko is the Crown Prince of iNkosi Dilizintaba, ka Dingumhlaba, ka Mabhijela i, ka kaMthakathi, kaQoza ka Diko ka Ncaphayi, ka Madzikane, ka Khalimeshe, ka Vebi, ka Wabane, ka Didi, ka Zulu, ka Ntombela, ka Malandela, ka Dlungwana, ka Ndaba.

INkosi Madzikane II Thandisizwe Diko is currently the Head of the kwaBhaca/LuBhacweni Traditional Council at ELundzini Royal Kraal, Ncunteni Great Place, LuBhacweni A/A in Mount Frere, KwaBhaca.

AmaBhaca were therefore stripped off their dignity and their Kingdomship by the Colonial Powers, the Boers, the Griquas and later on, the apartheid systems did not make it any better. The home of the Bhacas is in Mount Frere, while other Bhacas who went back to KwaZulu are in Mzimkhulu and Ixopo under the Zulu Kingdom.

SUBMISSION BY HIS MAJESTY, INKOSI MADZIKANE II THANDISIZWE DIKO TO THE COMMISSION ON TRADITIONAL LEADERSHIP DISPUTES AND CLAIMS.

13 SEPTEMBER 2011

Venue: Civic Centre, Mtata, Eastern Cape, South Africa

QUESTIONNAIRES: TRADITIONAL LEADERSHIP CLAIM PROVINCE: EASTERN CAPE NAME OF THE CLAIMANT: KING MADZIKANE II THANDISIZWE DIKO

PROTOCOLS

On behalf of Ndlovukati, Nosive, the Royal Family and the Bhaca Nation from itigodlo ngetigodlo tamaBhaca, I greet the Chairperson of the Commission and other fellow Commissioners.

INTRODUCTION

I, Madzikane II Thandisizwe, kaMzawugugi, kaDingumhlaba, kaMabijela, kaMthakathi, ka Qoza, ka Diko, kaNcapayi, kaMadzikane, kaKhalimeshe, kaVebi, kaWabane, kaZelemu, kaLufulwenjwa, kaLuzumane, kaMnguni, kaNtu, stand here this day in front of the Commission to give a summarized background on the history, nature and state of the Bhaca Kingdom.

The purpose of my participation in making the presentation to this Commission is simply to enable you to gain more insight into our Bhaca Kingdom. This presentation is not an attempt to justify or provide a rationale for the existence of the Bhacas and the Bhaca Kingdom, whose roots date back to centuries when Bhacas were Zelemus, Wushes, Latas, Chunus, Nyavus, Bomvinis, Ncamus, and many more tribes that became part of this nation in the 1700s .

The legitimacy of Bhaca Kingdom emerged and was consolidated by King Madzikane over centuries after having taken over from King Khalimeshe, his father, and can neither be denied nor questioned even if one was to seek testimony from nations that felt and washed his and his descendant’s spears with blood, such as the Boers, Zulus, Mpondomises, Xhosas, Thembus, Qwabes, Phondos and many more. As the legitimate heir (King) to the Kingdom of the Bhacas, I have confidence that it is within my right, authority, the house that I come from, and the Bhacas as a whole to make this presentation to you as the Commission, Chairperson. I am now going to present following your framework, although I found it limiting in that there are issues that this Commission needs to have an insight into on the history of our Bhaca Nation.

1. Historical Background

The history of the royal family from the first to the last traditional leader must be clearly indicated.

1.1 Name your Traditional Community and Provide a family tree/genealogy of your family and explain the house you are born from? (Separate page)

Our roots as Bhaca People are also in the Great Lakes in Central Africa. We share these roots with all other African People whose ancestral and linguistic roots are Ntu. When the general movement of people started and natural evolution occurred, we chose to settle in the South Eastern part of the continent. By this time we were abeNguni, developing our languages, cultures, traditions, music and just ways of life which gave us collective identity as abeNguni. Our relationship as Bhacas with other tribes such as Zulus, Swazis, amaXhosa, Ndebeles etc. is based on this identity. IsiBhaca is our language, the bearer of our culture and traditions.

The sons of Mnguni i.e. Luzumane, uMxhosa, uMswati and Ndebele went their different ways searching to establish their own territories with grazing land and means to establish their nations socially, culturally and economically. Luzumane’s descendants developed into different clans independent from each other under their own governance system who would later proceed with the natural movement of people. These included abaMbo and amaLala. The History of amaBhaca is therefore better traced from one of Luzumane’s descendants, King Lufulwenja, the King whose leadership was geographically rooted in the northern part of Phongola River. This King died in 1734. I belong to the Kingdom that was established by King Lufulwenja, who gave birth to King Zelemu, who gave birth to King Wabane, who gave birth to King Vebi, who gave birth to king Khalimeshe, who gave birth to King Madzikane, who gave birth to King Ncapayi, who gave birth to King Diko, who gave birth to Qoza, who gave birth to Mthakathi, Who gave birth to Mabhijela, who gave birth to Dingumhlaba, who gave birth to Mzawugugi, who gave birth to Madzikane II Thandisizwe, who is presenting now on behalf of the Bhaca Nation that was later re-consolidated by King Madzikane and King Ncapayi. A diagrammatical sketch representing the house I am born from is attached.

Some of our Kings are buried in what was then Natal and some are in the now called Eastern Cape. King Madzikane lies buried in the famous Qgutyini, at Engcobo, while King Ncapayi lies buried kuNowalala around what is now called emaCwerheni. King Diko’s grave is not known as the oppressive colonial government decided, they would build a town of Mount Frere on top of it.

While there are Bhacas who live outside the geographic boundaries, kwaBhaca area in Mount Frere has about 222 villages from Thina Bridge in the South to over uMzimvubu river in the North, and between Ntabankulu boundaries in the East and Matatiele in the West. The governance is headed by 4 (four) Traditional Councils (KwaBhaca Traditional Council, Makaula Traditional Council, KuNcwela Traditional Council and Mpoza Traditional Council), excluding 5 other claims of Senior Traditional Leadership which would make it 9 (nine); and 46 headmen.

This is this land which became the final hold of the Bhacas from the heroic efforts by King Ncapayi and Diko to secure what would become the final place for the nation to settle for ever. These Kings were influenced by the spirit of their fathers and grandfathers, in particular King Khalimeshe and King Madzikane. I would like to remind the Commission, Chairperson, that before Khalimeshe’s death, the Bhaca Kingdom was in the Northern Pongolo River when the KwaZulu Kingdom was a small entity situated along the hills of Babanango, down to the Mhlathuze River. Small as it was, the Kingdom of the Bhacas was always formidable such that this is what would lead to wars between Tshaka and Madzikane after 1818. AmaBhaca were not semi-independent entities, but a Kingdom and that is why you will not find reference to Bhacas as one of the nations that were defeated by King Tshaka in the African History. Instead the Bhacas defeated Tshaka under King Madzikane and defeated King Dingane under King Ncapayi not only once. AmaBhaca refused ukufaka isizwe sawo ngaphantsi kwenye ikumkani.

Back in KwaZulu, while some izizwe resisted, in the upper iLovu, such as abaThembu and amaChunu of Macingwane, amaBombo and Nocandambewu, they were defeated with others that had decided to federate against amaBhaca. These are the Dunges under Mboyiya of Mdakuda; Ngwana of Vazi and Nkani of Msundulu respectively; the oNyavini under Mkalipi and the Funzes under Mahawule, Nombewu, Baleni, Memela and Mdingis. Some of these simply submitted and began the process of ukukhoza (paying tribute and allegiance to King Madzikane) their leaders became known as amaduna engonyama, that is the representatives of the King.

The presence of the Bhacas was to be felt next by the Amampondomise, Abathembu, amaQwathi amaGcina, amaXhosa, amaQwabe and amaMpodo respectively. But this history is written in the sources submitted in the application, dated 15 July 2010. But, I would like to draw the Commission’s attention to the writings of A. M Makaula, (1988) the “Political History of the Bhacas” where he refers to the interaction between King Ngubengcuka of abaThembu and King Madzikane when the Bhacas arrived in the Ngcobo area. Ngubengcuka had sent his iinduna to ask amaBhaca to pay tribute by a herd of cattle on arrival. Iinduna zika Madzikane, led by induna enkulu of the King uJekwa espondend “Ngunongqawuse ke lowo” sihambile kwelakwaZulu ukuze inkosi yethu ingaze ibe ngaphantsi kwenye inkosi. If the Bhacas had done that, it would have meant that the Bhacas were submitting under the Thembus. Battle ensued and abaThembu and amaMpondomise federated but were defeated until they sort support from amaXhosa (amaGcaleka), amaGcina (J.H. Soga, P.343), then the Bhacas were driven off and King Madzikane died at Qgutyini, Engcobo.

All this background history defines the Kingdom and Nation of the Bhacas, (the traditional Community) and gives the family tree. I will now provide insight into what happened to the Kingdom of the Bhacas.

2. When was your traditional leadership lost? And how was it lost? 2.1 When was the traditional leadership lost?

There is a gradual process that reflects the injustices done to the Bhaca Kingdom during the colonial time after 1840s which also extends to the annexation of the former Transkei Territories starting from 1860s and the apartheid/homeland era. These are the eras that mark gradual, planned injustices into the Kingdom of the Bhacas. What must be noted is that in all the literature on Bhacas, there is submission that the Bhacas became a common enemy to Zulus, Xhosas, Mpondos, Thembus, Mpondomises, Boers and Whites. Chairperson, I will now provide the commission with what happened.

2.2 How was it lost?

King Madzikane died in 1824/25 and (Bryant, 1929).

His son, King Ncapayi took over the rule of the Bhacas. Sonyangwe, the first son of Madzikane died without an heir and later his house was to be revived through custom. Sonyangwe was killed by the Bheles in around 1826 (Bryant, 1926). Mdutyane is his heir. After the death of King Madzikane, Mdutyane moved back across uMzimvubu towards Natal in fear of the Phondos, leaving King Ncapayi in wars (Oral History and confirned in sources) reconsolidating the Bhacas. Some of his family is in Ixopo and uMzimkhulu. Some literature says Mdutyane continued to reside in Natal and finally dying there without making it back to the Cape Colony or kwaBhacas (Soga, 445).

• THE REIGN OF KING NCAPAYI AND THE COLONIAL ONSLAUGHT

There had been a relationship between King Ncapayi and King Faku. J.H. Soga, asserts that cupidity is said to have been the force that brought Faku and Ncapayi to work together. It is also cupidity that is said to have destroyed their good working relationship. Because they were both strong, it became difficult to know which one was more powerful that the other. There is more literature on the wars between Faku and Ncapayi and Diko and Mqikela. Before colonial forces deprived us of our status, the Bhacas fought the Boers in about 1838 after their arrival in Natal in 1937. This is about the same year that the Boers had also been fighting with the Zulus at banks of iNcome River. We must remember, Chairperson that Boers got into some arrangements with some neighbouring nations of the Bhacas that they considered friendly to them and rated their military strengths less than that of the Bhacas. The Blue Book on Native Affairs, 1885 kept records of some of the events as they happened.

“The Boers at this time were in correspondence with him (Faku), and regarded him as a friendly chief. They did not however consider him a potentate of any great importance, but rated his military strength below that of Ncapayi” (Blue book, p. 68)

The most insulting attack to the Bhacas by the Boers took place in 1840 (Bryant, p. 400; Blue Book, p 69) Nchanga, p 119). According to the Blue Book (1885), this is said to have been a severe attack that had its sole object a plunder and to destroy the Bhaca Kingdom. But, Chairperson, in the minds and the memories of our people, the Kingdom of the Bhacas still lived on, and survived throughout. The book argues that Faku (Pondo) himself instigated the Boers to attack, with a view of weakening an old enemy. The book further supports this argument by referencing it to the document dated Pietermaritzburg, 7 April 1841, and signed on behalf of the Volksraad by J. Prinsloo, the President, and J. J. Burger, the Secretary. In this document the following reference to Faku is said to be contained:

“As in the year 1838, we had, by an interchange of letters, concluded a sort of amicable understanding with Faku, we were requested by him in the course of last year to allow Captain Fodo to come to assist him against an attack from Ncapayi. When on their march the Commandant, Mr Pretorius sent to Faku three of our burghers, who then found that just before arrival Ncapayi had again been in hostile collision with Faku. They even saw some of the killed. Faku was then appraised of our friendship and requested to come to the Commandant, who was desirous of taking that opportunity of entering into a permanent treaty of peace with him. He on the other hand expressed himself highly gratified with the mission, but declined to come on the ground of age and ill health, adding that he deemed it unnecessary to make peace with us, as we had always been friends and never enemies. Our messengers further obtained from Faku and his captains a full confirmation of all the information we had previously received, and also that Ncapayi was our sworn enemy, that he had before in the war with Dingane offered to assist him against us, and had tried to induce Faku to join him in an attack upon us” (p. 69)

The book further registers the outcomes of the meeting that was held in January 1841 at Faku's residence on the Mzintlava between Faku and Missionaries: Rev. Palmer, Jenkins and Garner. After the meeting a letter was sent to the Governor who was then on the Colonial Frontier requesting the protection against the Bhacas (p. 70).

The response of the Boer Imperial Government, Sir George Napier, was to send a force of two hundred and fifty (250) men of the 27th Regiment, a few Cape Mounted Riflemen, and some artillery men. There is a quoted record of minutes by government explaining their action against Ncapayi in this regard. This is as follows:

“It is difficult to understand how Faku could have seen reason to request protection against an attack from us. We are however, very glad that Your Excellency has stationed a detachment of troops at the uMzimvubu, as we trust that the troops will have sufficient influence to protect Faku against Ncapayi, and that they will also assure the latter that their protection is no license to him to enable him now to plunder us more securely (p.71)”

King Ncapayi never enjoyed the support of the Boers and Natal Government while other Kings enjoyed such support, but Bhacas were regarded as enemy.

When Natal was wrested from the Boers and became a British Colony, on the 7th of October 1844 a treaty was prepared and signed by Sir Peregrine Maitland at Fort Beaufort. Missionaries including Theophilus Shepston and William Fynn were sent to Faku with it. Rev Thomas Jeckins explained the clauses to Faku and the treaty was signed with Faku and Ndamase on the 23rd of November 1844 in the presence of Messrs T. Shepstone, W. Fynn and T. Jeckins. In this treaty, Faku is acknowledged as “paramount chief” (King) over the whole country between the Umtata and Umzimvubu Rivers, from the Kahlamba Mountains to the sea, and this territory is secured to him against all claims and pretensions on the part of British subjects. On the other hand it binds him to be the faithful friend of the colony (p. 72). It is to be noted that this land includes the land under the Bhaca nation.

The Blue Book however acknowledges that Sir Peregrine Maitland’s dispatches at this time prove him to have been deplorably ignorant of native politics, but when the treaty was signed he was aware that there were other tribes within the boundaries assigned to Faku, that they were frequently fighting with Pondos and that Faku exercised no Jurisdiction over them. Of their past history and their claims to independence he knew nothing. But for their protection the treaty contained a provision that “the rights of all other petty chiefs and native tribes who have at any period heretofore resided upon any part of the said territory remain unaltered and they will be at liberty to reside within the said territory in the same manner as they did before” (p. 72).

The Maitland Treaty marked another blow to the Bhaca kingdom as the treaty included the land under the Bhaca nation. While the Bhacas were recognised as an independent nation the oppressive government robbed us of our Status as Kingdom. We were then referred to petty Chiefs while at the same time an independent nation.

Speculations about the motives of the Maitland are set aside in his explanation of the treaty to the Secretary of the State: “My immediate object was to restrain them (the Frontier Kaffirs) from rashly attempting any hostile operations against the Colony, by the knowledge that in case of their doing so they would have in their rear an enemy more powerful than themselves, in alliance with the British Government, and ready to fall upon them with an overwhelming force. But I had other objects in view, and principally three: to secure a friendly neighbor on the south – west boundary of Natal, whereby marauding incursions similar to those by which this colony has been harassed may be prevented, to keep open an uninterrupted land communication with Natal through the territory of friendly tribes, and to hinder ships from discharging cargo along the coast between Natal and the Colony without a license, to the injury on the revenue”(p. 72).

The above history of the Bhacas and Pondos with interventions by the Missionaries and Boers and the British Government against the Bhacas, (Ncapayi) lead to one conclusion that reference to Frontier Kaffirs and hostile operations against the colony; unfriendly tribes; incursions also referred to the Bhacas. The Kingdom of the Bhacas under these circumstances would not have been given due status. The Kingdom was reduced to a petty nation till today.

Ncaphayi died in 1845 in the Battle with Faku, revenging for his younger brother Ndamase after Ncapayi had attacked and raided Western Pondoland. Ncapayi lies buried in the area called emaCwerheni, Kunowalala. On his death, His Great Son from the Senior House took over and kept the independence of the Bhaca Kingdom although under difficult times.

When Faku died, his great son Mqikela took over and led Pondoland. Mqikela decided to attack Diko (Bhacas) like his father had done before. This was the Battle of Notinta sometimes referred to as Nopoyi. This attempt turned into “complete fiasco” (Soga, p. 315) as the whole three divisions of Pondos were driven off and many killed at Nopoyi in the Kinira River. This is the last battle fought between Pondos and Bhacas before the Annexation of the former Transkei Territories in the 1860s. Still this land was called Bhacaland (Soga. P 315)

• ANNEXATION OF THE FORMER TRANSKEI TERRITORIES

The history of dispossession of King Diko and how King Diko protected his brothers and allocated land for them i.e. Makaula, Sogoni, Dabula, Nomthseketshe Mdutyane are contained in the submission document dated 15 July 2010.

King Diko was against annexation and therefore the relationship between him and the colonial forces was not good. When the Griquas under Adam Kok moved to what was called Nomansland in 1961-2, they found the Bhacas (See: Office of the Chief magistrate of the Transkeian Territories, uMtata, 11 June 1914, Petition: Rolobile and others; p 3). Connected to a plot that was devised to strip King Diko off his power; during the annexation, Makaula, Diko’s younger brother became the favourate of the Colonial Forces for he made an application for the Bhacas to be annexed for British protection like most other nations, hoping that he would be made a Paramount Chief/King of the Bhacas. This protection was granted to other nations under colonial forces. In 1879 the annexation of the Bhaca Kingdom was completed and in 1880 King Diko was stripped off his power and was reduced to a headman. What must be noted Chairperson is that amaBhaca were the last nation to be subjected under any colonial rule or any nation because the three Kings, refused to submit: King Madzikane, King Ncapayi and King Diko.

• APARTHEID ERA

The apartheid era in many ways was a continuation of the colonial oppressive rule to the Bhaca Kingdom. There were few Traditional Leaders who benefited in their individual capacity but using their status as (illegitimate) primary leaders of the Bhaca nation. Greed at the expense of nation became the order of the day and this is what the Colonial, and apartheid forces took advantage of. This is attested by the record of their meeting where they confessed that their sole intention was to diminish the power of the “Native Chiefs” when they granted them farms in exchange for loyalty to the forces.

“Convinced that it will be beneficial in the interest of both the chief and people, that grants for such request should be made, as the means of strengthening the influence of government by securing their loyalty and good conduct, this was discussed and considered on the occasion of the recent visit of the Prime Minister to the territories, and, as the outcome of that discussion, it was decided that proposals for grant of land, not exceeding in extant 6000 acres, should be submitted by government for parliamentary sanctions to the Chief, in recognition of their loyalty and their restraining influence over their people, manifested at different times, when excitement and the probabilities of disturbance were present” (Parliamentary Memorandum, 1 May 1897: Native Affairs Office.)

Apartheid system used agents to undermine the Bhaca Kingdom. During the Apartheid and Homelands system, some of those who had worked with the colonial forces still had been rewarded positions such as ambassadors in the former Transkei Government. Because they benefited from the government, they could not challenge the oppressive government of the time even if that meant compromising the Bhaca nation’s dignity and identity. They were made members of Town Councils and some members of the parliament and other positions in Government. Chairperson, this is how the Status of the Bhaca Kingdom was robbed and how my great grandfathers were undermined.

I now will reflect on the steps which were taken to restore the dignity of this Kingdom.

2.3 What actions were taken by you or your family to restore it prior to submitting a claim to the Commission?

This question is best answered in three folds: It must be kept in mind Chairperson that King Diko had been reduced to a headman from 1880. Having been reduced to a headman, there was little to do to claim reclaim Kingship.

(1) PETITION BY ROLOBILE MDUTYANA TO BE RECOGNIZED AS THE KING OF THE BHACAS:

Nomtsheketshe, the younger brother to Cijisile and both sons of Mdutyane who moved to Natal and died there had been fetched by Diko/Makaula and given land in the now Mpoza area. He had been booted out of the Griqua Land for certain crimes. His son Rholobile decided in 1914 to file a petition to claim Paramouncy over the Kingdom of the Bhacas (See Petition dated 11 June 1914). This, however, was declined and will be discussed later. While this was illegitimate claim, this shows the recognition and the efforts to never undermine the Bhaca Kingdom.

(2) PETITION OF MAKAULA TO BE RECOGNIZED AS THE KING OF THE BHACAS:

Mngcisane Makaula, Son of Makaula, the younger brother of Diko who also is from the second house (right hand) of King Ncapayi also filed an application to be recognized as a King of the Bhacas in 1826 (See submission dated 4 January 1926). This was declined as well. It must be noted that in 1879 Makaula himself registered his concern that when the annexation of the Bhacas was completed, he had not been put fully in control of the land which he had hope and been promised to rule over as the King (Blue Book). While this as well was illegitimate claim, this shows the recognition and the efforts to never undermine the Bhaca Kingdom.

(3) RESTORATION OF UBUKHOSI TO THE GREAT HOUSE OF DIKO AND THE INAUGURATION OF INKOSI MADZIKANE II THANDISIZWE DIKO IN APRIL 2010.

For years after that the apartheid government and the Homeland system took over. The issue of the Bhaca Kingdom was put under the carpet. It became a sensitive issue and a closed chapter because every time the Makaulas would claim it, they would not be able to give account of why it was not Diko who claimed the Kingdomship. Because they did not want some of the conspiracy acts against Diko to come out to the fore, they would rather chose not to pursue it.

After many efforts to restore the dignity of the Great House during the Homeland Government, which were organised by some elders of the Diko, Sogoni, Bhekezulu, Dabula and some Makaula families, had failed, it became clear that best strategy would be to restore it step by step. The target was therefore the recognition of Diko as a Senior Traditional Leader first, which too was met with resistance for 15 years, since 1993.

It is the change of government in 1994 that allowed for the gradual restoration of the dignity of this House and that marked the beginning of restoration process of the Kingship of the Bhaca nation. In 2008, nations were once more allowed by the Eastern Cape Government to make submissions and state reasons with supporting documents. This as our first step was achieved, marked by the provincial proclamation of the kwaBhaca Traditional Council in 2008 and the Inauguration of Inkosi Madzikane II on the 15th April 2010.

Chairperson, it must be noted that, myself, Madzikane II, I was not inaugurated by any King as this would have signaled that I was subjecting myself and my nation under another King, which is “unongqawuse”. I was inaugurated by the nation of the Bhacas, supported by the Government of Eastern Cape, Contralesa (See attached letters from Contralesa dated 18 January 2010 and Department of Local Government and Traditional Affairs dated 7 December 2009) and private partners, in the presence of nations and Kings such as amaXhosa, amaMpondo, amaPedi, amaNdebele, amaMpondomise and other representatives of the nations from the African continent, such as Ghana, Zambia and Swaziland. This marked the rebirth of this Kingdom and the beginning of another phase (4th phase) for reconsolidation of the Bhacas.

I believe, Chairperson, that these actions are indicative that in the memory of our people, this Kingdom will always live on.

2.4 Actions taken by the family/claimant to restore the traditional leadership

On this point, I have mentioned that as from 1993, it had become clear that the strategy would be to first attain the level of a senior traditional leadership as Diko had been reduced to a headmen, then restore the next level, the Kingship of the Bhacas under King Diko. The first level was achieved in 2008 and in April 2010 I was inaugurated as Inkosi Madzikane II as discussed above. When the Royal Family and the Nation decided on the inauguration, they understood that they were not only inaugurating a senior traditional leader but also he who would reign as the King of the Bhacas in the process of the 4th phase of reconsolidation of the Bhacas.

2.5 Step by step actions and the results of each step taken to prove to the authorities that they were the correct house to have the position of traditional leadership

I have indicated the steps taken by those who were at the higher level than the Great House, and also have indicated that they both failed because they were illegitimate claimants. This house applied the first step of its efforts and strategy and that was successful i.e. Inauguration of the 15th April 2010.

The next step was to declare the Bhaca Kingdom as a distinct cultural, linguistic, religious community in the Eastern Cape and in South Africa, in terms of Chapter 9 of the Constitution of the Republic, and the Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Rights Commission Act, No 19 of 2002. Attached, Chairperson, is the certificate confirming the registration of the Bhaca Community as a Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Community to the CRL Commission. This was done successfully as well.

Our submission and my presentation to this Commission Chairperson is the third step on our actions to prove that we are the correct house and that amaBhaca are a distinct Kingdom.

However, Chairperson, since in your questionnaire you also want the result of each step taken, I may as well go into a little detail on the results of the illegitimate claims that were made by other houses of my bigger family, and these are mentioned above in brief, including claims by Rholobile Mdutyane and Mncisane Makaula respectively.

• RESULTS OF THE CLAIM BY RHOLOBILE MDUTYANE

The results of this claim did not dispute the Kingdom of the Bhacas, but the claimant in that Rholobile could not have been successful for his great grand father Mdutyane abandoned the Bhaca nation in time of need and King Ncapayi was left to reconsolidate the Kingdom. Nomtheketshe, notwithstanding that he the younger brother of Cijisile, only was fetched by Diko, his cousin brother from Pondoland after he had been ejected by Griqualand government. He himself and his father Mdutyane were not there when King Ncapayi protected the sovereignty of the Bhaca Kingdom for 30 years, when the Bhacas where hard pressed from all sides. On the 11th June 1914, the uMtata Chief Magistrate responding to Rholobile’s Petition to the Secretary for Native Affairs in Pretoria writes as follows:

“… the control of the tribe fell by natural processes into the hands of Ncapayi who by his courage and ability seems to have kept the tribe together and to have gained for it a foot-hold” (Office of the Chief magistrate of the Transkeian Territories, umtata, 11 June 1914, Petition: Rolobile and others; p 2)

It further elaborates on the fact that Mdutyane abandoned the Bhacas and left Ncapayi in wars and therefore his descendants could not have legitimately put a claim and cannot even today waste their time put a claim on the Kingdom of the Bhacas, as ascendance to Kingship did not only take the blood line but also courage and leadership in protecting one’s country. In the same response I may add:

“The remnants of the tribe were kept together by Madzikanes second son, Ncapayi who by his courage and ability secured them a country and finally brought them into the district they now occupy. ……Mdutyane followed by a portion of the tribe left that part of the country and settled with his followers elsewhere. It was not the case that the Lutateni section moved further afield, but the truth is that the Lutateni House secured a territory for them and that the Lutateni House secured a territory for the tribe and the other house ….abandoned the tribe in its time of need …… and this abandonment of Lutateni section of the tribe…involves also the abandonment by him of his rights to rule over it.” (Ibit, p 6).

This cannot be over emphasized. A true leader and warrior is the one that will not abandon his nation, who will stand and die by his nation during difficult times. He will not run away with some of his following cowards, leave it and expect to come back once those who refused to flee with him have reconsolidated themselves into a formidable army and be their King from being a refuge.

I have proved that Mdutyane ran away, Chairperson, and I am wondering if his descendants, my brothers, can ever have courage to once again try make fools of themselves in this day and age and let the future generation further read about their attempts. Their Great Grand father, Mdutyane understood well the blunder he had made, hence he never claimed Kingship of the Bhacas, which the blunder was not only a concern to the Bhacas Kingdom but also an insult to Africans as a whole. But I must also hasten to indicate that according our oral history, Mdutyane is not the great son of King Madzikane, but Ginyane who was left in Natal. I am wondering if that is not the reason why Mdutyane never claimed Kingship also.

• RESULTS OF THE CLAIM BY MNGCISANE MAKAULA

As discussed above, Makaula aspired to be the King of the Bhacas in 1926. Mngcisane would also not have been a King of the Bhacas because our culture and custorm is very clear on issues of succession. Otherwise, we would be wasting time dwelling on how Makaula got into power, working with the missionaries, apartheid and homelands government.

The point is that Makaula’s allies (colonial forces) could not grant his descendant, (Mngcisane Makaula in his 1926 application) Kingship because they believed that this would have been a blunder:

“ to create Mncisane Makaula paramount chief of the Bhacas would be a blunder…..” (Chief Magistrate of the Transkeian Territories, uMtata, writing to Secretary for native Affairs, Pretoria, 13 September 1930, p. 1)

To spend more time on claims by Makaulas would therefore not be justifiable, more so that the intention is not to embarrass any of our own, but to bring about justice to the Kingdom of the Bhacas.

• RESTORATION OF UBUKHOSI TO THE GREAT HOUSE OF DIKO AND THE INAUGURATION OF INKOSI MADZIKANE II THANDISIZWE DIKO, 15TH APRIL 2010. I have already discussed the results of the inauguration and the registration as Cultural Religious and Linguistic Community in terms of the Constitution and the CRL rights Act, 19 of 2002.

The opening of the call by your commission, Chairperson naturally became another step as we had been waiting for it. The results of it therefore will only be realized once the commission has applied its mind and we look forward to the findings of the commission.

3. Traditional Community: Does the community recognize and acknowledge the claimant as their traditional leader? Yes.

3.1 How do you know that they acknowledge and recognize you as their traditional leader?

The Inauguration of the 15th April 2010, marked the turning point for what the Bhacas had been waiting for, the correct house restoring the dignity of the Bhaca Kingdom. The communities from all around the Bhacaland voluntarily came to pay tribute and allegiance in acknowledgement of the Great House of Ncapayi.

During the Recognition of the Bhacas as the independent and distinct community with the CRL Commission, the Bhaca nation came in numbers and understood that there was no better house to proclaim the independence of the Bhacas than the house of King Ncapayi.

It is also not by default that the KwaBhaca Traditional Council serves all the communities of kwaBhaca,

3.2 If not, why and what have you done to get it recognized?

………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………

3.3 If yes, by whom?

The communities of Bhacaland, do. The community under KwaBhaca Traditional Council including the town of KwaBhaca Mount Frere, which forms the majority of the population in the Mount Frere district, do acknowledge that I am their Traditional Leader, the Leader of the Bhacas and the King of the Bhaca Nation. All those who understand the history of the Bhacas acknowledge that I am the King of the Bhacas including those under other senior Traditional Leaders in Mount Frere. These include Hlubis and others under our relative houses.

3.4 Why don’t you join another community that shares the same cultures and traditions as yours instead of wanting to be recognized as a separate community?

“NguNonqgawuse ke lowo”. There is a track record of existence of the Bhacas as a distinct traditional community with its own traditional leadership higher than others from 1700s to date. This is the reason for recognition of the Bhaca Community in terms of Chapter 9 of the Constitution of the Republic and the CRL Commission Act 19, of 2002. Besides, there is no traditional community that shares the same culture and traditions as Bhacas (language, ingcubhe, traditional dance and songs, traditional wear, some traditions such as ukwaluka) and most of all our history would not allow that.

3.5 What is so different or distinct between you and another traditional community that will compel the commission to recommend your recognition as a traditional leader of your community

It is the language (ukutsefula), celebration of first fruits - ingcubhe, traditional dances and songs, traditional wear, some traditions such as ukwaluka nentonjane, ukufukutsa – eating of raw meet which is originally peculiar to the Bhacas (ivutshw’ikhamba eyamaBhaca) and our history

3.6 if yes, since when?

From time immemorial. AmaBhaca were distinct from around 1700s till to date.

3.7 How many headmen/women do you have in the villages/ward? (claimants to provide proof of the area of Jurisdiction)

Under the KwaBhaca Traditional Council and in terms of the Proclamation of 2008, I work with two headmenships. One Headmen of Lubhacweni A/A heading 13 villages and one in Ngxabaxha heading 4 villages. However, the Bhacaland under claim has 4 Senior Traditional Leaders and 46 headmen in the 222 villages of Bhacaland.

3.8 Where are they based?

One Headmen, Prince NgangoBhaca Sogonu of Lubhacweni A/A is heading 13 villages and one in Ngxabaxha, Ndlunkulu Nozuko is heading 4 villages in Ngxabaxha.

3.9 Do you know the process of recognition of a traditional community vis a vis the exercise of cultural functions like presiding over conflicts of the people? Explain the difference

Recognition process is prescribed in term of the law and set out in section 2A and 2B of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Amendment Act 2009, while the exercise of cultural functions will be guided by culture, custom and any other applicable legislation but within the confines of the Constitutional principles as the case may be.

4. Under which king (if any) do you pay allegiance to?

None other than King Madzikane, King Ncapayi and King Diko

4.1 Is the King recognized by Government or not?

What we know is that our current Government has never said King Madzikane was never recognized as the King of the Bhacas. The Government process such as the establishment of the Commission is to bring about such an answers. i.e. Does the Government recognize the Kingdom of the Bhacas and in turn the King of the Bhaca?

4.2 Does the King (if any) know that you have applied for the position you have applied for? Is the king happy with your application? Give evidence?I believe Chairperson that my ancestors including iingonyama zamaBhaca ngokulandelana kwazo are happy that we cannot let their legacy be undermined just like that.

Njengabantu abantsundu I doubt if I would be expected to give evidence that my ancestors are happy with this application. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, as the Bhaca Kingdom we fully support the democratic process to bring about dignity of ubukhosi in our Country and applaud Government for having tried to move this fast in forming this Commission so that as nations we may quickly diffuse any confusion about our history and start to tell the true diverse history of this country, South Africa, and Africa.

We are ready to provide any clarity.

Persondata
Name	Madzikane
Alternative names
Short description
Date of birth
Place of birth
Date of death
Place of death