Land, Migration and Belonging: A History of the Basotho in Southern Rhodesia c. 1890 1847012167, 9781847012166

Citation preview

EAS Mujere Land Migration TJI 18mm PPC small 50 years_B+B 17/12/2018 12:26 Page 1

Joseph Mujere is Senior Lecturer in History, University of Zimbabwe and Research Associate, Society, Work and Development Institute, University of the Witwatersrand. Cover photograph: Basotho people, Southern Africa (© Prisma by Dukas Presseagentur GmbH / Alamy Stock Photo) Published in association with the British Institute in Eastern Africa

ISBN 978-1-84701-216-6

9 781847 012166 www.jamescurrey.com

Land, Migration & Belonging Joseph Mujere

Land, Migration & Belonging

The Basotho, a small mainly Christianised community in Southern Rhodesia (modern Zimbabwe), used ownership of freehold land, religion, and a shared history to sustain a particularistic identity, whilst at the same time engaging with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and colonial administrators as well as with their non-Sotho neighbours. This book analyses the challenges they faced, as well as the nature and impact of the internal schisms within the community that have impacted on their struggles for belonging, and shows how the Basotho’s ‘unity in diversity’ shaped their lives. Contributing to ongoing debates about migration, missionary encounters, identity, land and the politics of belonging, the author sheds light on the difficulties faced by minority ethnic groups in colonial Zimbabwe and their legacies and shows how they tried to strike a balance between particularism and integration.

A HISTORY OF THE BASOTHO IN SOUTHERN RHODESIA c.1890–1960s

‘... a fascinating account of what may appear to be a highly unusual community, but whose history allows a bright light to be cast on a broad and highly topical set of debates over the politics of belonging that should attract a wide readership’ – Jocelyn Alexander, University of Oxford

MUJERE

‘... a significant contribution to the histories of southern Africa … [and] our understanding of how community identity is constructed‘ – Diana Jeater, University of Liverpool

A HISTORY OF THE BASOTHO IN SOUTHERN RHODESIA c.1890–1960s

Eastern Africa Series

Mujere.indb 1

LAND, MIGRATION AND BELONGING

10/12/2018 16:17

Eastern Africa Series Women’s Land Rights & Privatization in Eastern Africa BIRGIT ENGLERT & ELIZABETH DALEY (EDS) War & the Politics of Identity in Ethiopia KJETIL TRONVOLL Moving People in Ethiopia ALULA PANKHURST & FRANÇOIS PIGUET (EDS) Living Terraces in Ethiopia ELIZABETH E. WATSON Eritrea GAIM KIBREAB Borders & Borderlands as Resources in the Horn of Africa DEREJE FEYISSA & MARKUS VIRGIL HOEHNE (EDS) After the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in Sudan ELKE GRAWERT (ED.) Land, Governance, Conflict & the Nuba of Sudan GUMA KUNDA KOMEY Ethiopia JOHN MARKAKIS Resurrecting Cannibals HEIKE BEHREND Pastoralism & Politics in Northern Kenya & Southern Ethiopia GŰNTHER SCHLEE & ABDULLAHI A. SHONGOLO Islam & Ethnicity in Northern Kenya & Southern Ethiopia GŰNTHER SCHLEE with ABDULLAHI A. SHONGOLO Foundations of an African Civilisation DAVID W. PHILLIPSON Regional Integration, Identity & Citizenship in the Greater Horn of Africa KIDANE MENGISTEAB & REDIE BEREKETEAB (EDS) Dealing with Government in South Sudan CHERRY LEONARDI The Quest for Socialist Utopia BAHRU ZEWDE

Mujere.indb 2

Disrupting Territories JÖRG GERTEL, RICHARD ROTTENBURG & SANDRA CALKINS (EDS) The African Garrison State KJETIL TRONVOLL & DANIEL R. MEKONNEN The State of Post-conflict Reconstruction NASEEM BADIEY Gender, Home & Identity KATARZYNA GRABSKA Remaking Mutirikwi JOOST FONTEIN Lost Nationalism ELENA VEZZADINI The Oromo & the Christian Kingdom of Ethiopia MOHAMMED HASSEN Darfur CHRIS VAUGHAN The Eritrean National Service GAIM KIBREAB Ploughing New Ground GETNET BEKELE Hawks & Doves in Sudan’s Armed Conflict SUAD M. E. MUSA Ethiopian Warriorhood TSEHAI BERHANE-SELASSIE Land, Migration & Belonging JOSEPH MUJERE Land Tenure Security * SVEIN EGE (ED.) Tanzanian Development * DAVID POTTS (ED.) The Mission of Apolo Kivebulaya * EMMA WILD-WOOD * forthcoming

10/12/2018 16:17

Land, Migration and Belonging A History of the Basotho in Southern Rhodesia c. 1890–1960s

JOSEPH MUJERE

Mujere.indb 3

10/12/2018 16:17

James Currey is an imprint of Boydell & Brewer Ltd www.jamescurrey.com and of Boydell & Brewer Inc. 668 Mt Hope Avenue, Rochester, NY 14620-2731 (US) www.boydellandbrewer.com Published in association with The British Institute in Eastern Africa © Joseph Mujere 2019 First published in hardback 2019 The right of Joseph Mujere to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 All Rights Reserved. Except as permitted under current legislation no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in a retrieval system, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted, recorded or reproduced in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the copyright owner The publisher has no responsibility for the continued existence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978-1-84701-216-6 (James Currey cloth) ISBN 978-1-84701-225-8 (James Currey Africa only paperback) This publication is printed on acid-free paper

Typeset in 11 on 13.5pt Cordale with Gill Sans MT display by Avocet Typeset, Somerton, Somerset, TA11 6R

Mujere.indb 4

10/12/2018 16:17

Dedication

To my father Lucas Joseph and my mother Scholastica

Mujere.indb 5

10/12/2018 16:17

Mujere.indb 6

10/12/2018 16:17

Contents

List of Illustrations ix Acknowledgements xi Abbreviations xiii 1. Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

1

2. Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

19

3. Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

43

4. KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas

75

5. Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School

99

6. Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries

131

Epilogue: Uncertainty and the Basotho’s Quest for Belonging

155

Bibliography 169 Index 177

Mujere.indb 7

10/12/2018 16:17

Mujere.indb 8

10/12/2018 16:17

List of Illustrations

MAPS 1  Gutu District showing the location of Dewure Purchase Areas 16 2  Farms owned by the Basotho farmers in the Dewure Purchase Areas 51 FIGURES 1  Bethel Cemetery 2  Bethel Farm bus stop 3  Bethel Church and the church bell

Mujere.indb 9

92 96 148

10/12/2018 16:17

Mujere.indb 10

10/12/2018 16:17

Acknowledgements

This book has had a long gestation period and I have accumulated debts of gratitude to many institutions and individuals along the way. The Centre of African Studies, University of Edinburgh provided me with funding that enabled me to do the greater part of the research which led to this book. The British Institute in Eastern Africa (BIEA), through its small grants, provided part of the funding for my fieldwork. I would also want to thank a number of scholars who mentored me and helped me shape my ideas over the years. At the University of Edinburgh, I particularly owe a debt of gratitude to Paul Nugent, Joost Fontein, Francesca Locatelli and Sara Rich Dorman. At the University of Zimbabwe, Gerald Chikozho Mazarire supported me in various ways in my academic journey. He remains a mentor, an elder brother and a friend, all rolled into one. I also want to thank my colleagues in the History Department who read and commented on numerous parts of the manuscript, which I presented in the department’s seminar series. In particular, I want to thank Gilbert Pwiti, Ivan Marowa, Munyaradzi Nyakudya, Ken Manungo, Tapiwa Zimudzi, Wesley Mwatwara, Anusa Daimon and Plan Shenjere-Nyabezi. I have also benefited from discussions I had with many scholars based at different institutions both in Zimbabwe and beyond the country. Although I cannot recall all of them, I wish to mention the following: Sabelo Ndlovu-Gatsheni, Jocelyn Alexander, JoAnn MacGregor, Diana Jeater, Ray Roberts, Glen Ncube, Grasian Mkodzongi, Leila Bright, George Hamandishe Karekwaivanane, Musiwaro Ndakaripa, Kundai Tichagwa-Manamere, Sylvester Dombo and Admire Mseba. I further want to thank my history students at the University of Zimbabwe who took a great interest in my research and challenged me in many respects. Of these, Joseph Jakarasi, Nicholas Nyachega, Abraham Seda, Innocent Dande,

Mujere.indb 11

10/12/2018 16:17

xii

Land, Migration and Belonging

Asa Mudzimu, Passmore Chishaka and Perseverance Muguti deserve a special mention. The staff at the National Archives were always helpful and keen to discuss with me the progress of my research and to assist me in getting access to archival material. I also want to acknowledge the support I got from Rebecca Mafuwe-Homodza and Kennedy Homodza, who made sure that my numerous visits to the UK were as comfortable as possible. My research would not have been possible without the cooperation of members of my research participants, especially the Basotho community and their families. In particular, I would like to thank the Sikhala, Thema, Mphisa, Komo, Lehobo, Molebaleng, Morodu, Masoha and Phosa families who welcomed me in their homes and shared with me their family histories. Job ‘Wiwa’ Sikhala, Alexander Morudu and Nelson Thema read my drafts with a keen interest and offered useful feedback. It is my hope that this book has helped, albeit in a small way, to tell the amazing story of the Basotho community in Zimbabwe. I also want to thank Sekuru Munashe Chitare who took me to his farm in the Dewure Purchase Areas and introduced me to many farm owners and their families. Finally, I would like to thank my family, who provided me with incalculable support during the process of research for this book. My wife Tendai was a pillar of strength, especially during very difficult moments during my research. I also want to thank my father, Lucas Joseph Mujere, who took a great interest in my research and accompanied me during a number of my field trips, and my mother, Scholastica, who continued to believe in me even when I despaired. In spite of this, however, I remain wholly responsible for any shortcomings that can be found in this book.

Mujere.indb 12

10/12/2018 16:17

Abbreviations

AICs CNC DRC NADA NAZ NC NPA (S)RBVA SRNA

Mujere.indb 13

African-initiated Churches Chief Native Commissioner Dutch Reformed Church Native Affairs Department Annual National Archives of Zimbabwe Native Commissioner Native Purchase Area (Southern) Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association Southern Rhodesia Native Association

10/12/2018 16:17

Mujere.indb 14

10/12/2018 16:17

1 Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

When I began doing research on the Basotho community in the Dewure Purchase Areas in Gutu District in 2005, I was working under a number of assumptions. Some of the assumptions were that the Basotho migrants had largely been integrated into the local community; that they had lost their language and that nothing set them apart from the rest of the farmers in the Dewure Purchase Areas except ownership of their community farm, Bethel. My initial interviews seemed to confirm this image of an immigrant community that had almost seamlessly managed to integrate itself into the local community and had also adopted the local language. At that stage of my research, my hypothesis was that the Basotho community’s sense of belonging was built on gradual integration into the local community, which was helped by their ownership of freehold land as well as their close interactions with the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) missionaries and colonial officials. However, when I returned to do more fieldwork in 2009, I noticed a number of things I had missed in my initial fieldwork. One incident in particular captured the complex nature of the Basotho’s, and, perhaps other immigrant groups’ sense of belonging in Zimbabwe. In August 2009, I had the opportunity to attend a memorial service of a deceased member of the Basotho community who had been one of my key informants in 2005. During this memorial service, I noticed that members of the community sang some hymns in Sesotho which may have been intended to exclude non-Sesotho speakers. As well as singing in Sesotho, they used their language when speaking among themselves, yet in their everyday interactions they ordinarily use Chikaranga (a local dialect of Chishona). Sotho etiquette was also used in interactions between kinsmen.

Mujere.indb 1

10/12/2018 16:17

2

Land, Migration and Belonging

From this incident, it became clear to me that there were certain contexts where the Basotho (see explanation of the name on p. 13) expressed their ‘Basothoness’ more explicitly and others that constrained them. Thus although over the years the Basotho have seemingly been assimilated into the local community, this situation revealed that, alongside their interaction with their Karanga neighbours, they have also maintained a great deal of ethnic particularism.1 Basotho particularism was usually performed during funerals, memorial services, weddings and other gatherings where the Basotho retreat to their kinship networks, speak in Sesotho, adhere to Sotho etiquette and even sing church hymns in Sesotho. The Basotho, however, have also sought active cooperation with their non-Sotho neighbours with whom they closely interacted in the Dutch Reformed Church, Native Councils and farmers’ associations, among other fora. Against this background, it is important to explore the Basotho’s changing strategies of belonging over time and the factors that influenced these changes. It is also critical to explore the complex and multi-layered nature of the Basotho’s conceptualisation of their identity and belonging. Another distinctive feature of the Basotho community since their settlement in Southern Rhodesia (modern Zimbabwe) was how they managed their relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. As will be elaborated later, in spite of their close relationship with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, the Basotho were keen to maintain their independence from the church and were always suspicious of the missionaries’ interest in how they ran their farms and schools. In the end, they sought to align more with colonial administrators than with missionaries, although most of them remained adherents of the Dutch Reformed Church. It also struck me that in spite of having invested in freehold land and other forms of property, some members of the Basotho community never lost connections with South Africa, their place of origin. And when Zimbabwe experienced economic downturns in the post-2000 period, some of them applied for South African citizenship. For instance, in September 2007, Nelson Thema, a member of the Basotho community in Zimbabwe, together with his siblings, decided to apply for South African citizenship on the 1  Although the Karanga are viewed as autochthons in the local discourses of insiders and outsiders, this is by no means self-evident. There are indeed interesting dynamics in Karanga communities’ belonging, which, however, will not be discussed here.

Mujere.indb 2

10/12/2018 16:17



Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

3

basis of descent. They used archival documents, school registers and oral interviews to create a dossier to prove that their father migrated to Southern Rhodesia during the colonial period and had never renounced his South African citizenship. His application was successful and he, together with his siblings and family members, were granted South African citizenship in 2008. In the same year he emigrated to South Africa, where he worked until his retirement in 2016. He then returned to Zimbabwe and settled. Mr Thema’s story is interesting in that it brings to the fore the complex nature of a migrant group’s quest for belonging. In particular, it shows that even a return to the ancestral home may fail to bring closure to one’s quest for belonging. In a way, the Basotho have maintained a sense of home in both the place of emigration and their ancestral home. Using these experiences and observations from my fieldwork as an entry point, this book contributes to ongoing debates about migration, missionary encounters, identity, land and the politics of belonging during the colonial period and their legacies. The case of the Basotho in Southern Rhodesia is not only interesting in that they were among the earliest Africans to migrate to the north of the Limpopo River in the 1890s, but also because of the way in which they engaged with both the missionaries and colonial administrators. At the core of the Basotho who are the subject of this book were evangelists who were part of the evangelisation expeditions of the Dutch Reformed Church, Berlin Missionary Society and the Paris Evangelical Mission Society, while others came with Cecil John Rhodes’ Pioneer Column or migrated independently much later coalescing in Victoria Province. This book examines how as a small, mainly Christianised community, the Basotho were able to use the ownership of freehold land, graves, their school as well as religion and language to sustain a particularistic identity while at the same time engaging with their non-Sotho neighbours. It argues that such tensions between the Basotho’s particularism and their attempts at integrating into the local community, or between being ‘strangers’ and seeking to become ‘autochthons’, defined the Basotho’s strategies throughout the period under study. A key leitmotif in this book is that the Basotho over the last century, in their different struggles and strategies to belong, have been fundamentally caught between being seen and treated as locals, and being seen (as well as seeing themselves) as different or ‘outsiders’.

Mujere.indb 3

10/12/2018 16:17

4

Land, Migration and Belonging

Although members of the Basotho community are tied to each other due to their intertwined kinship web, the community’s internal schisms have had varying impacts on the community’s struggles to belong. By analysing the nature and impacts of these internal schisms, the book seeks to show how the Basotho’s ‘unity in diversity’ shaped the way they interacted with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and colonial officials as well as with their non-Sotho neighbours. This book uses the case of the Basotho community to illuminate the challenges faced by minority ethnic groups in Southern Rhodesia and how they tried to strike a balance between ethnic particularism and integration. The book uses belonging as an analytical tool to explore the history of the Basotho in Zimbabwe. It avoids using identity as an analytical category because of its conceptual limitations and the many connotations that it carries. Identity has been overburdened by multiple meanings making it ambiguous and this affects its usefulness as a conceptual tool. Cooper and Brubaker argue that, as a category of analysis, identity ‘tends to mean too much (when understood in a strong sense), too little (when understood in a weak sense), or nothing at all (because of its sheer ambiguity)’.2 As a result, they suggest, scholars should move beyond identity and make use of ‘terms less ambiguous and unencumbered by reifying connotations of identity’.3 Although they do not provide a specific alternative, preferring instead to suggest a range of terms, such as commonality, connectedness and groupness, Cooper and Brubaker’s critique of identity exposes its conceptual limitations.4 Other scholars have also observed the need to go beyond identity because of its ambiguities. For instance, Geschiere argues that identity ‘has an unfortunate tendency to fix what is in constant flux (which is often exactly what its protagonists are striving for), and it often acquires teleological implications, suggesting that there is a basic need for a group or a person to produce a clearly outlined and unequivocal identity’.5 Thus although it is difficult to completely do away with identity as an analytical category, there is need to look for alter2 

F. Cooper and R. Brubaker, ‘Identity’, in F. Cooper, Colonialism in question: Theory, knowledge, history (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005), p.59. 3  Cooper and Brubaker, ‘Identity’, p.59. 4  Cooper and Brubaker, ‘Identity’, p.76. 5  P. Geschiere, The perils of belonging: Autochthony, Citizenship, and Exclusion in Africa and Europe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009), p.31.

Mujere.indb 4

10/12/2018 16:17



Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

5

natives that are less encumbered and less ambiguous. Drawing on Gerd Baumann’s work,6 Geschiere suggests that we use belonging as an analytical tool and ‘follow its different languages that so strongly assert themselves in quite different recent configurations. One of its advantages over identity is that it is at least in the -ing form’.7 This book, therefore, employs belonging as an analytical tool and explores how the Basotho have made use of it, and deployed its ‘different languages’ since their migration. In recent years studies on migration and the politics of belonging have focused on the nature of relationships between the so-called ‘first comers’ or autochthons and ‘late comers’ or strangers.8 These studies have revealed the divisive and exclusionary nature of the politics of belonging. Notions of autochthony, in particular, have often been a powerful weapon in the hands of a political elite that was keen to remain in power by exploiting the division of people on autochthon–allochthon basis. It is however important to note that belonging is not entirely about autochthony, or rootedness but it is also about how people use symbols and metaphors to claim rights to authority and resources. This section discusses the usefulness of belonging as an analytical tool or theoretical framework that can be used in understanding African migrations. As a category of belonging, autochthony is a highly contested phenomenon. This makes it very susceptible to different interpretations and reinterpretations such that no one can safely say that they are the ‘real autochthons’. Given its malleability, autochthony leads to its violent manifestations since claims to autochthony are usually met with counterclaims or result in the violent displacement of the perceived strangers. Practically anyone can claim autochthony and by the same token anyone can be unmasked as a fake autochthon. This has strong resonance with ongoing debates about invention of tradition and identity and fluidity of ethnic identities.9 As a form of belonging, ethnicity 6 

G. Baumann, The multiculturalism riddle: Rethinking national, ethnic, and religious identities (London: Routledge, 1999). 7 Geschiere, The perils of belonging, p.32. 8  See P. Geschiere and S. Jackson, ‘Autochthony and the crisis of citizenship: Democratization, decentralization, and the politics of belonging’, African Studies Review, Vol. 49, No. 2 (2006); P. Geschiere, ‘Funerals and belonging: different patterns in Southern Cameroon’, African Studies, Vol. 48, No. 2 (2005). 9 T. O. Ranger, ‘The invention of tradition revisited: The case of colonial Africa’, in T. O. Ranger and M. Vaughan (eds), Legitimacy and the state in twentieth century Africa (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1993); T. O. Ranger, The

Mujere.indb 5

10/12/2018 16:17

6

Land, Migration and Belonging

is also negotiated. People can also assume different identities depending on the situation. According to Li et al., ‘people may have multiple identities, with each identity dependent upon where they are at any particular moment and who they are with’.10 Often migrants have to decide whether to stick with their old identities or adopt new ones. Hence plurality or fluidity of identities is unavoidable in the politics of belonging. In the past decade, more scholarly attention has been paid to the link between migration, identity and belonging.11 This shift has largely been influenced by the democratisation process in most African states in the 1990s, which has fuelled the desire among political elites to use autochthony as a tool to exclude political opponents. Geschiere and Nyamnjoh assert that ‘democratisation seems to engender fierce and often violent struggles over who “really” belongs and who is a stranger’.12 Migration analysis has thus revolved around the impact of migration on identity, citizenship and belonging as well as its impact on the relationship between migrants and locals. This relationship has been marked by contested definitions of ‘first comers’ and ‘late comers’, which have sometimes resulted in xenophobic violence.13 As Konings puts it, ‘with the introduction of multi-partyism, the ruling party and government often fear being outvoted during local and regional elections by “strangers” who tend to support the opposition for the representation and defence of their interests’.14 The exclusion of those viewed as strangers has in some cases resulted in the crafting of citizenship laws designed to exclude (contd)

invention of tribalism in Zimbabwe (Gweru: Mambo Press, 1985); T. Spear, ‘Neo-traditionalism and the limits of invention in British colonial Africa’, Journal of African History, Vol. 44 (2003). 10  F. L. N. Li et al. ‘Discourses on migration and ethnic identity: Interviews with professionals in Hong Kong’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers (New Series), Vol. 20, No. 3 (1995), p.342. 11  See, for example, B. Ceuppens and P. Geschiere, ‘Autochthony local or global? New modes in the struggle over citizenship and belonging in Africa and Europe’, Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 34 (2005). 12 P. Geschiere and F. Nyamnjoh, ‘Witchcraft as an issue in the politics of belonging: Democratisation and urban migrants’ involvement with the home village’, African Studies Review, Vol. 41, No. 3 (1998), p.71. 13  See Geschiere and Jackson, ‘Autochthony and the crisis of citizenship’. 14  P. Konings, ‘Mobility and exclusion: Conflicts between autochthons and allocthons during political liberalization in Cameroon’, in de Bruijn, M., R. van Dijk and D. Foeken (eds), Mobile Africa: Changing patterns of movement in Africa and beyond (Leiden, Brill, 2001), p.170.

Mujere.indb 6

10/12/2018 16:17



Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

7

and delegitimise those people who are labelled outsiders. In Ivory Coast and Cameroon, sitting governments have sought to narrow definitions of citizenship in order to exclude their political opponents. In Ivory Coast, for example, former President Laurent Gbagbo’s National Operation of Identification stipulated that ‘every Ivorian had to go back to his or her “village of origin” in order to be “identified” there. Only after such an identification could a person be registered as a full citizen of the country and claim full citizen’s rights – notably rights to own land and to vote’.15 This was, as Geschiere and Jackson argue, ‘a tragic example of the violent extremes to which autochthonie can be stretched’.16 The ruling elites have benefited from this situation since strained relations between autochthons and migrants have encouraged the perpetuation of the political status quo. Discourses of autochthony and belonging affect migrants’ access to land. In fact, funerals and burial places are viewed as pointers of where one actually belongs.17 Hence death and funeral rituals have assumed an amplified role in discourses of belonging, as burial places are often associated with where one ‘really belongs’. As Konings puts it, ‘the autochthony–allochthony discourse has not only become an important ploy for political entrepreneurs in their struggles for power. It appears also to have become part and parcel of the people’s daily lives in south west Province [of Cameroon]’.18 As a result of this, immigrants who are often more numerous than those who consider themselves first comers are viewed as a threat as they are perceived to have homes elsewhere where they actually belong. In spite of it being seemingly embedded or primordial, autochthony is a very fluid form of identity. This makes the process of defining who is an autochthon and who is a stranger a very difficult task. Since identities are fluid, claims to autochthony are often met with counterclaims. In the end autochthony is by no means cast in stone as ‘strangers’ can also claim autochthony, thereby turning the former autochthons into strangers. It is in this light that Geschiere and Jackson argue that ‘belonging turns out to be always relative: there is always the danger of being unmasked as “not really” belonging, or even of being a “fake” 15 Geschiere,

The perils of belonging, p.98. Geschiere and Jackson, ‘Autochthony and the crisis of citizenship, p.2. 17  Geschiere, ‘Funerals and belonging’, p.47. 18  P. Konings, ‘Mobility and exclusion’, p.188. 16 

Mujere.indb 7

10/12/2018 16:17

8

Land, Migration and Belonging

autochthon’.19 Hence autochthony and belonging are contested and negotiated notions that are open to various interpretations and reinterpretations. The autochthon–allochthon dialectic is also played out in conflicts over control of natural resources such as land. Lentz argues that land and land rights play an important role in the politics of belonging in Africa due to the fact that rights to land ‘are intimately tied to membership in specific communities’.20 Scarcity of land has also increased the need to identify those who ‘really belong’ to the area and those who are ‘late comers’ and therefore have limited rights to the land. Control over land therefore becomes a sign of the extent to which one belongs.21 It is the scramble for resources and political manipulations that has led to the crystallisation of the divisions between autochthons and allochthons and the crippling of former processes through which immigrants could be integrated into the society and enjoy the same rights as the autochthons. Autochthony is also closely linked with the concept of rootedness. This entails an attachment to place, being an indigene or having roots in a certain place as opposed to being a stranger. Malkki, however, suggests that the idea of being rooted needs to be revised as it fails to appreciate people’s ability to construct new notions of belonging when they get ‘uprooted’ or migrate.22 She argues: there has emerged a new awareness of the global social fact that, now more than perhaps ever before, people are chronically mobile and routinely displaced, and invent homes and homelands in the absence of territorial, national bases – not in situ, but through memories of, and claims on, places that they can or will no longer corporeally inhabit. 23

Consequently, ‘to plot only “places of birth” and degrees of nativeness is to blind oneself to the multiplicity of attachments that people form to places through living in, remembering, and 19 

Geschiere and Jackson, ‘Autochthony and the crisis of Citizenship’, p.1. C. Lentz, ‘Land and the politics of belonging in Africa’, in P. Chabal, U. Engel and L. de Haan (eds), African Alternatives (Leiden: Brill, 2007), p.37. 21  C. Lentz, ‘Land rights and the politics of belonging in Africa: An introduction’, in R. Kuba and C. Lentz (eds), Land and the politics of belonging in West Africa (Leiden: Brill, 2006), p.1. 22  L. Malkki, ‘National geographic: The rooting of people and the territorialization of national identity among scholars and refugees’, Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 7, No. 1 (1992). 23  Malkki, ‘National geographic’, p.24. 20 

Mujere.indb 8

10/12/2018 16:17



Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

9

imagining them’.24 Thus rooted, autochthonous or indigenous are all notions that need to be re-examined and problematised especially in the context of migrants’ construction of belonging in both the colonial and post-colonial periods. The link between identity and territory can also not be ignored. In particular, there is a need to consider seriously how de-territorialised people construct belonging. In exploring issues concerning graves, land and belonging, which are, in the case of the Basotho, strongly represented, this book engages in and draws insights from works by a number of scholars who have analysed similar issues elsewhere in Africa. In her recent article on what she calls ‘new meanings of home’ in post-apartheid South Africa, Marchetti-Mercer demonstrates how ‘home’ as a trajectory of belonging can mean different things to different people in the same country.25 She argues that the different notions of home among South Africans influence their experience of belonging in post-apartheid South Africa. Some South Africans who felt at ‘home’ in the apartheid era found it quite difficult to really belong in the post-apartheid South Africa and ended up leaving the country. Yet those who were returning from exile also found it quite difficult to belong to a country that they had spent so many years away from. The place they once called home had changed and had become as strange to them as exile. This supports the argument that belonging is a dual process of claiming and being accepted in a group, a place and a country among other identity categories. Perhaps more than anything else, funerals and graves put into perspective the politics of belonging in many African societies. There is a tendency among many African communities to want to bury their dead in their home villages. Most Africans desire to be buried ‘at home’ when they die even though they might have spent their lives in towns or elsewhere. Others are forced by tradition to be buried at family cemeteries. As a result, being detached from ancestors’ bones carries a lot of stigma. According to Geschiere and Nyamnjoh, many Cameroonians consider burial locations a very important criterion for belonging.26 In essence, 24 

Malkki, ‘National geographic’, p.34; see also L. H. Malkki, Purity and exile: Violence, memory, and national cosmology among Hutu refugees in Tanzania (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), p.4. 25 M. Marchetti-Mercer, ‘New meanings of “home” in South Africa’, Acta Academica, Vol. 38, No. 2 (2006). 26  P. Geschiere and F. Nyamnjoh, ‘Capitalism and autochthony: The see-saw of mobility and belonging’, Public Culture, Vol. 12, No. 2 (2000): 423–452. p.435.

Mujere.indb 9

10/12/2018 16:17

10

Land, Migration and Belonging

the basic test for someone’s belonging will be to ask them to show where their ancestors are buried. Failure to do so would be interpreted as meaning that the person belongs elsewhere, in this case where the bones of their ancestors are interred. In his recent publication, Chabal asserts that burials reinforce a collective sense of belonging and strengthen an individual’s attachment to the community. As he argues, ‘the link to the ancestors, wherever they are buried, is an integral part of the meaning of origin, and of the texture of identity, which cannot be disregarded’.27 Belonging is here linked with attachment to a physical place, which draws its meaning from people’s attachments with the ancestral graves. Attachment to a physical place is however not the only variable in the belonging matrix. It is but one of the many variables in complex assemblages of ethnicity, kinship, religion and language among others. Even in the case of rural–urban migrants, there is almost always an obligation to go back ‘home’ to attend funerals. Tradition also often dictates that even if one considers oneself an urbanite, one is still supposed to have one’s remains buried at the ancestral burial grounds with all funeral rituals being performed. Smith observed that among the Igbo in Nigeria, rural–urban migrants ‘face powerful expectations to be buried at home in their ancestral villages and perform elaborate and expensive funeral ceremonies for their dead relatives’.28 The value of this is basically in maintaining migrants’ ties with their rural homes, and each funeral they attend is a reminder of where they belong. It also means that the urban migrants in the end have dual or multiple notions of belonging. Cohen and Atieno Odhiambo’s ethnographic study of the conflicts surrounding the burial of S. M. Otieno, a prominent Luo Kenyan lawyer, illustrate the extent to which some people can go to prove where they really belong.29 The conflict over who had the right to bury S. M. Otieno between his widow, a Kikuyu, and his Luo kinsmen became a test of his belonging. His widow desired to bury him on his farm close to Nairobi while his Luo kinsmen 27  P. Chabal, Africa: The politics of suffering and smiling (New York: Zed Books, 2009), p.29. 28  D. J. Smith, ‘Burials and belonging in Nigeria: Rural–urban relations and social inequality in a contemporary African ritual’, American Anthropologist, Vol. 106, No. 3 (2004), p.569. 29  D. W. Cohen and E. S. Atieno Odhiambo, Burying SM: The politics of knowledge and the sociology of power in Africa (London: James Currey/Portsmouth NH: Heinemann, 1992).

Mujere.indb 10

10/12/2018 16:17



Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

11

wanted him to be buried at his home village among the Luo in spite of his having spent the better part of his life in Nairobi. The case dragged on in the courts for six months until the High Court declared that the deceased’s Luo community had the rights to bury him. It was indeed a contestation of where Otieno actually belonged or where his corporeal remains should belong and also whether one could truly belong to an urban area, away from one’s kinsmen. Graves can therefore be markers of where somebody belongs. Ownership of freehold land, which has been a key feature in the Basotho’s construction of belonging, has also received scholarly attention in debates about attachment to land. Parker Shipton’s ethnographic study of the Luo people in Kenya provides an interesting contribution to the debates on the interplay between land and the politics of belonging in Africa.30 Shipton uses the case of the Luo in Kenya to show that ideologies about land and attachment have often clashed with governments’ policies aimed at titling land and making it possible to use it as collateral in applying for agricultural loans. Particularly important is the debate on the applicability of the concept of freehold tenure in Africa and whether land can be bought or pledged as collateral for a loan and consequently forfeited if the debtor defaults. As Shipton argues, the spectre of losing ancestral lands provided as collateral, ‘threatens to separate people in rural areas from home, from kith and kin, and from ancestral graves, with all that these mean’.31 Interestingly, in the case of the Basotho, the ability to purchase land helped them to ‘buy homes’ and to establish an attachment to the land that, in the absence of freehold tenure, would have proved difficult given their status as colonial migrants. The case study presented in this book shows how a migrant group used freehold land and state planning regimes to construct enduring emotive attachments to land. The experiences of the Basotho in Southern Rhodesia demonstrate how the distinction between freehold tenure and attachment to land established through kinship, graves, old homes and other factors is largely blurred. Most studies have, however, tended to focus on the problem of belonging in the contemporary period without considering the long historical trajectory. Such an approach risks being ahis30 

P. Shipton, Mortgaging the ancestors: Ideologies of attachment in Africa (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009). 31 Shipton, Mortgaging the ancestors: Ideologies of attachment in Africa, p.ix.

Mujere.indb 11

10/12/2018 16:17

12

Land, Migration and Belonging

torical. For example, recent studies on the politics of belonging in Africa have focused largely on the upsurge of autochthony following the emergence of multiparty democracy,32 or the recent xenophobic violence in southern Africa.33 Belonging is, however, a continuous process involving negotiation and contestation over a long period of time. Specific historical epochs engender specific ways through which people construct, negotiate, contest and assert their belonging. The Basotho case study provides an opportunity to reconsider these older migrations and examine how they can illuminate contemporary migrations. It also allows for a more historically informed analysis of the migrations which, in my view, can unravel the various challenges faced by immigrants in different historical contexts and the strategies they deployed in the face of such challenges. By analysing the longue durée of the Basotho’s history in Zimbabwe, this book shows how different historical contexts brought specific imperatives in the Basotho’s construction and negotiation of belonging. It shows how the Basotho used different but interrelated strategies in their struggles to belong. The book, therefore, takes a historical perspective, while simultaneously mobilising and deploying anthropological insights to analyse the history of a community that emerged within the context of missionary and colonial encounters. It also examines the Basotho’s attempts to construct a sense of belonging within the colonial context characterised by struggles over ownership of freehold land, displacements and contentious construction of identities. Apart from studies on the Mfengu migrations and their settlement in Matabeleland, works on African migrations during the colonial period have focused largely on labour migrations from Northern Rhodesia (modern Zambia), Nyasaland (Malawi), Tanganyika (Tanzania) and Portuguese East Africa (Mozambique) to Southern Rhodesia and South Africa.34 The case of the 32 

See Geschiere and Jackson, ‘Autochthony and the crisis of citizenship’; Geschiere, ‘Funerals and belonging’; Geschiere and Nyamnjoh, ‘Capitalism and autochthony’. 33  F. Nyamnjoh, Insiders and outsiders in southern Africa: Citizenship and Xenophobia in Contemporary southern Africa (Dakar: Codesria, 2006). 34  The most recent works on African migrations during the colonial period that focus on migrations from the north to Southern Rhodesia and South Africa include: A. Daimon, ‘Mabhurandaya: The Malawian Diaspora in Zimbabwe, 1895 to 2008’, PhD thesis, University of the Free State, 2015; Z. Groves, ‘Malawians in colonial Salisbury: A social history of labour migration in Central Africa, c.1920s–1960s’, PhD thesis, Keele University, 2011; I. Mudeka, ‘“We

Mujere.indb 12

10/12/2018 16:17



Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

13

Basotho provides us with an interesting case of Africans who migrated from South Africa and settled in Southern Rhodesia. Experiences of these migrants from south of the Limpopo River provide new perspectives on African migrants’ experiences involving both missionaries and colonial administrators. It is important to highlight that the term ‘Sotho’, or ‘Basotho’, is here used more loosely to refer to a community of immigrants who claim to be predominantly of Sotho (northern Sotho/Pedi) origin and were, and continue to be, viewed by the surrounding communities as such. I am, however, aware of the challenges in the ethnic categorisation of Sotho and the etymology of the term Sotho or Basotho.35 Landau argues that the categorisation of the Basotho into Western Sotho (tswana), Sotho proper (i.e. the domain of the French Protestant missionaries and Chief Moshoeshoe) and the Transvaal Sotho or ‘Eastern Sotho’ is not only ahistorical but the Sotho themselves do not accept these subcategories. In addition, he argues that even the categories southern, northern and eastern were imprecise.36 Although the people who are the subject of this study identify themselves as Sotho, some of them do not fall neatly into the ethnographic categorisation provided above, but through years of associating with the Basotho they began to identify themselves as members of the Basotho community. NOTE ON FIELDWORK AND SOURCES In spite of having begun as a small community of immigrants, initially occupying two farms in Victoria and Ndanga Districts, the Basotho attracted so much attention from the colonial administration and Dutch Reformed Church missionaries with whom they had established links prior to their migration to Rhodesia. Consequently, both missionaries and colonial administrators, especially native commissioners and superintendents of natives, generated much correspondence regarding this community from as early as 1909. For example, native commissioners reported on (contd)

faced Mabvuto”: A gendered socio-economic history of Malawian’s migration and survival in Harare, 1940 to 1980’, PhD thesis, University of Minnesota, 2011. 35  See P. S. Landau, Popular politics in the history of South Africa, 1400–1948 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010). 36 Landau, Popular politics in the history of South Africa, 1400–1948, p.236.

Mujere.indb 13

10/12/2018 16:17

14

Land, Migration and Belonging

Basotho’s purchase of farms, their activities on the two farms they purchased in 1909 and 1911, their fraught relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church and schisms within the community among other issues. In addition, Dutch Reformed Church missionaries also wrote numerous letters to the native commissioners and other officers in the Native Affairs Department concerning Basotho’s applications for freehold land as well as their desire to run their own schools. On their part, the Basotho also generated much correspondence especially with the Dutch Reformed Church and the native commissioners. The fact that Basotho were among the first Africans to acquire freehold land put them on a collision course with white settlers who argued that the presence of these ‘new native land-owning gentry’ devalued their own farms. This generated considerable debate in newspapers such as The Rhodesia Herald and The Bulawayo Chronicle, as a number of white settlers used the ‘letters to the editor’ facility in these newspapers to complain about Africans’ purchase of freehold land. Thus while in most cases it is assumed that colonial archives represent largely the voice of the colonial administrators and not that of the colonial subjects, the Basotho were able to make their voices heard and make their position known through their constant engagement with colonial officials through letters, memoranda and minutes of community meetings, which found their way to the National Archives of Zimbabwe. As a result, there exists a remarkable collection of archival material on and about the Basotho in the National Archives of Zimbabwe which are critical in the reconstruction of their history. In addition to this, the book also makes use of oral histories collected from members of the Basotho community as well as their non-Sotho neighbours. Family histories were collected alongside the more individual life histories. Family histories helped to reveal the broader history of the community, more so given the fact that the community engaged in endogamous marriages. From these family histories I was able to reconstruct family trees, which made complex kinship ties easier to comprehend. Personal reminiscences or life histories were, therefore, richer than the community’s collective memories. Their main weakness, however, was that at times they tended to be too narrow and excluded crucial material on other families not connected to the individual giving his/her reminiscences. In the processes of carrying out oral interviews, I was also able to

Mujere.indb 14

10/12/2018 16:17



Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

15

get access to diaries, letters and written-down family trees and family histories, all of which was very useful in my endeavour to reconstruct the history of this community. As Basotho’s interest in my research grew through my interactions with them they also began to appreciate the usefulness of my research in the preservation of their history and also some of the members’ attempts to apply for South African citizenship on the basis of descent. Some of them read my drafts with a keen interest and offered feedback on the drafts and ‘corrected’ what they considered to be my misreading of their kinship relations as well as misspelling of their names. STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK The book is divided into six broadly thematic chapters. This first chapter introduces the book, and discusses the theoretical approaches employed in the book. Chapter 2 explores Basotho migrations to what is now Zimbabwe, their relationships with the Dutch Reformed Church and Berlin Missionary Society missionaries. It also analyses the Basotho’s purchases of freehold farms and their interactions with colonial administrators in their struggles to establish themselves as a community of Christian migrants from the Union (South Africa). The chapter argues that ownership of farms was a central feature in the Basotho’s construction of belonging, an issue that was also repeated when they moved to the Dewure Purchase Areas. Chapter 3 examines the impact of the 1930s’ colonial displacements on the Basotho living on Erichsthal and Niekerk’s rust farms. It commences by analysing the 1925 Morris Carter Land Commission and its recommendations, which formed the basis for the 1930 Land Apportionment Act. The Act legalised the segregation of land and the creation of (Native) Purchase Areas. The chapter examines the Basotho’s experiences with the displacements and their settlement in the newly created Purchase Areas. It also explores the Basotho’s early attempts at negotiating belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas, which included the purchase of family farms and most importantly the purchase of Bethel, their community farm. It was on this farm that the Basotho built a school and a church and also established a cemetery. Chapter 4 discusses the centrality of Basotho’s community farm and the cemetery to their struggles to belong to the colony

Mujere.indb 15

10/12/2018 16:17

Mujere.indb 16

10/12/2018 16:17

Map 1  Gutu District showing the location of Dewure Purchase Areas (drawn by Mukundindishe Chifamba)

Kilometres



Introduction: The Basotho and the Politics of Belonging in Southern Rhodesia

17

in general and the Dewure Purchase Areas in particular. In many African societies, graves form a very important part of communities’ attachment to place and in most cases they become a rallying point in their construction of belonging. For autochthons, ancestral graves serve as evidence of a community’s history and long attachment to a place. Thus for newcomers, ownership of land and the graves of their relatives become key factors in their bid to establish their own attachment to a new place. The chapter explores how Bethel Farm and the Basotho graves, most importantly those at Bethel Cemetery, became not only key symbols of the Basotho presence in the Dewure Purchase Areas, itself dominated by the local Karanga autochthons, but also representations of their attachment to the land. The central argument in this chapter is that although, as ‘late comers’, the Basotho had no ancestral graves in the area to back their claims to autochthony, their cemetery and family graveyards have been critical in the identification of the area as a Basotho enclave and also in cementing their attachment to it. Focusing on the rise and fall of Basotho’s Bethel School, Chapter 5 explores the link between education and identity construction. The chapter examines the challenges that the Basotho faced in establishing Bethel School as well as their attempt at making the school a ‘Basotho school’. It also demonstrates how, in many ways, Bethel School represented the triumphs, failures and challenges faced by the Basotho in Gutu in their quest for belonging. It also asserts that the way the Basotho community ran Bethel School exposed some subtle cleavages and fault lines within the community as well as contradictions in colonial administration’s perceptions of it. The chapter is also an attempt at evaluating the success of a school that aimed primarily at catering for the needs of a minority group in an area dominated by an autochthonous majority. Chapter 6 examines the salience of religion in the Basotho’s construction of belonging. The Basotho had a long relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, which dated back to the period before the establishment of the first Dutch Reformed Church mission in the country in 1891. The chapter thus analyses the complexities that existed in the relationship between the Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. It argues that below the veil of an amicable relationship between the two were subtle and concealed tensions, mistrust and fault lines. In most cases, these tensions were expressed in conflicts over the

Mujere.indb 17

10/12/2018 16:17

18

Land, Migration and Belonging

control of the Basotho community’s Bethel Farm and Bethel School, but most importantly on the running of the church the Basotho had established on Bethel Farm in the 1930s. In the end, the Basotho showed their desire to retain a measure of independence from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries by insisting on running their own affairs and refusing to fall under the direct control of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries working at Morgenster, Gutu, Alheight and Pamushana missions. What ensued was a series of both clashes and contestations that reached breaking point in the 1938 impasse over a bell donated to the Basotho community by Dutch Reformed Church missionaries.

Mujere.indb 18

10/12/2018 16:17

2 Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

The history of the Basotho community now found in the Dewure Purchase Areas in Gutu District is intertwined with the history of evangelisation of the region. Most of the members of this community are descendants of the Basotho evangelists who migrated to present day Zimbabwe from South Africa in the late nineteenth century with missionaries who were carrying out evangelical work among the southern Shona. Upon their settlement in Southern Rhodesia the Basotho first purchased two farms in the Victoria area, Niekerk’s Rust (in Harawe) and Erichsthal (in Chinhango). Having lived on these two farms for almost three decades they were evicted in the 1930s following the enactment of the Land Apportionment Act, after which they moved to the newly created Dewure Purchase Areas in Gutu. The history of these Basotho thus revolves around migration, evangelisation, ownership of freehold farms and struggles over belonging. The main objective of this chapter is to analyse the migration history of these Basotho, their relationships with missionaries of the Dutch Reformed Church, the Paris Evangelical Missionary Society and the Berlin Missionary Society, and to examine how they used their position as owners of freehold land to negotiate belonging. It is argued that ownership of farms, and to some extent the presence of graves, have long been central to the Basotho’s constructions of belonging and as a result they feature prominently in the Basotho memorialisation of their migration, displacement and settlement in their present farms. Religion, education and farm ownership were also central issues in the construction of the Basotho as progressive Africans.

Mujere.indb 19

10/12/2018 16:17

20

Land, Migration and Belonging

MISSIONARIES AND AFRICAN INTERMEDIARIES Although a number of African evangelists, among them Zulu, Venda and Xhosa, played a critical role in the evangelisation of the southern Shona to the north of the Limpopo River, the Basotho or Sotho speakers were arguably the ones who played the greatest role. The Basotho in particular had a longer history of participation in evangelisation work. As Weller and Linden argue: the Sotho Christians had an early opportunity to act independently, for the missionaries were expelled from the country by the Boers in 1865; their converts rose admirably to the challenge, and ‘gave themselves up to preaching the Gospel most zealously, and with remarkable results.’1

The Basotho converts took the initiative to evangelise fellow Africans to Christianity. European missionaries’ preference for the Basotho was a result of the fact that they were some of the earliest converts to Christianity and also that they showed great interest in evangelisation work. According to Van der Merwe, the Basotho evangelists, among them Lucas Mokoele, Joshua Masoha and Micha Makgatho were some of the greatest African evangelists during the early period of evangelisation in Transvaal and Mashonaland, rivalled only by Isaac Khumalo (a Zulu) and Gabriel Buys (a Coloured), who worked with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries.2 Thus African evangelists and lay preachers, especially from South Africa and Lesotho, were quite indispensable in the evangelisation of areas to the north of the Limpopo. The Basotho and other Africans became trusted evangelists and aides of missionaries of Protestant churches such as the Paris Evangelical Missionary Society and the Berlin Missionary Society (and the Dutch Reformed Church in the late nineteenth century). In the end, most missionaries who set off to carry out evangelical work among the southern Shona (then generally referred to as Banyai) from South Africa and Lesotho took with them some Basotho and other African converts who became indispensable as guides, porters and most importantly as evangelists. Other Basotho evangelists even initiated and directed some missionary expeditions. 1  J. Weller and J. Linden, Mainstream Christianity to 1980 in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe (Gweru: Mambo Press, 1984), p.27. 2  Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe, The day star arises in Mashonaland (Fort Victoria: Morgenster, 1953), p.13.

Mujere.indb 20

10/12/2018 16:17



Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

21

The Basotho in Lesotho and in the Transvaal region of South Africa were some of the earliest Christian converts in the region. The threats of the Zulu and the Ndebele raids greatly contributed to the conversion of the Basotho to Christianity as they saw it as a way of ensuring their security. King Moshoeshoe (of Lesotho) also encouraged this development, ‘not only because he genuinely had no real objections to the message, but also because it happened to suit his political purposes and reinforce his security’.3 Moshoeshoe thus encouraged missionaries to set up mission stations in his kingdom to create buffer zones against his potential enemies. Though not very successful in converting Moshoeshoe and his court, ‘the PEM [Paris Evangelical Missionary Society] managed to style itself as the “church of Moshoeshoe”’.4 The Paris Evangelical Missionary Society carried evangelisation work among the Basotho in Lesotho and also in the mine compounds of South Africa. Over the years a number of the Basotho converts became trusted evangelists for a number of Protestant churches, among them the Paris Evangelical Missionary Society, the Berlin Missionary Society and the Dutch Reformed Church. According to Coplan, ‘in the mid 19th century, the Basotho (sing.: Mosotho) were lauded by missionaries and resident British officials for their courtliness, ingenious adaptability, and eagerness for the “progress” they believed would come from the adoption of European ways’.5 In the end, most missionaries who set off to carry out evangelical work among the southern Shona from South Africa and Lesotho took with them some Basotho converts. This is the reason why the Basotho emphasise their links with missionaries when narrating their migration histories. Hence in tracing the history of the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas it is imperative to examine it in the light of the general history of the establishment and development of mission stations among the Shona in the southern parts of Zimbabwe. The development of mission stations among the southern Shona can be divided into two broad phases. The first phase began in the 1870s and ended in 1883. This phase saw the Dutch Reformed Church, the Paris Evangelical Missionary Society and the Swiss Mission Vaudoise taking the first steps towards estab3 

Van der Merwe, The day star arises in Mashonaland, p.90. T. Maloka, Basotho and the mines: A social history of labour migrancy in Lesotho and South Africa c.1890–1940 (Dakar: Codesria, 2004), p.158. 5  D. B. Coplan, ‘“Fictions that save”: Migrants’ performance and Basotho national culture’, Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 6, No. 2 (1991), p.164. 4  E.

Mujere.indb 21

10/12/2018 16:17

22

Land, Migration and Belonging

lishing mission stations among the southern Shona, especially in Chibi and Zimuto areas.6 Although the missionaries did not have much success during this period, they worked closely together and shared experiences and information about the area. The second phase, from 1883 to 1894, saw the Berlin Missionary Society and the Dutch Reformed Church sending expeditions among the southern Shona people that culminated in the establishment of Morgenster and Chibi missions by the Dutch Reformed Church and the Berlin Missionary Society respectively.7 The second phase of missionary penetration saw a greater inflow of missionaries into the country and the establishment of more permanent mission stations across the Limpopo River. That period saw the missionaries commissioning no fewer than twenty-one expeditions from South Africa into Mashonaland. Interestingly, although the expeditions were directed by the white missionaries, most of them were conducted by African evangelists, among them the Venda, Zulu and Basotho, thus underlining the importance of African evangelists in missionary activities.8 The surge of interest in the evangelisation of Shona people in the late nineteenth century is attributed mostly to the work of the Reverend Stephanus Hofmeyr of the Dutch Reformed Church who established a mission station at Goedgedacht in February 1865.9 Although Reverend Hofmeyr’s main objective was the conversion of the Venda and Sotho people in Zoutpansburg he was soon making enquiries into the possibility of evangelising the Shona people to the north of the Limpopo River after hearing about them from the Buys brothers who had ventured there on two occasions.10 The Buys brothers were Coloured members of the Dutch Reformed Church congregation at Goedgedacht who were descendants of Coenraad de Buys and his many African wives.11 Goedgedacht quickly became a springboard from which the evangelisation of the southern Shona was launched. As Mazarire 6 

D. N. Beach, ‘The initial impact of Christianity on the Shona: The protestants and the southern Shona’, in A. J. Dachs (ed.), Christianity south of the Zambezi (Gwelo: Mambo Press, 1973), p.27. 7  Beach, ‘The initial impact of Christianity on the Shona’, p.27. 8  E. K. Mashingaidze, ‘Forgotten frontiersmen of Christianity’s northward outreach: Black evangelists and the missions’ northern hinterland, 1869–1914’, Mohlomi: Journal of Southern African Historical Studies, Vol. 2 (1978), p.68. 9  W. F. J. Van der Merwe, From mission field to autonomous Church in Zimbabwe (Transvaal: N. G. Kerkboehandel, 1981), p.37. 10  Van der Merwe, From mission field to autonomous Church in Zimbabwe, p.28. 11  Beach, ‘The initial impact of Christianity on the Shona’, p.28.

Mujere.indb 22

10/12/2018 16:17



Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

23

argues, the establishment of the Dutch Reformed Church mission at Goedgedacht constituted a major step towards the evangelisation of the ‘southern Shona’.12 Reverend Hofmeyr realised the need for the missionaries to recruit African evangelists for the evangelisation of the Shona (also referred to as Banyai) to the north of the Limpopo River.13 He believed that African converts could play a significant role in the conversion of other Africans, especially given that they understood their world view better. As a result of this early work of Hofmeyr and African evangelists, Reverend A. A. Louw set out from Goedgedacht on 8 April 1891 to Chief Mugabe’s area.14 His objective was to establish a permanent Dutch Reformed Church mission station in Chief Mugabe’s area. According to Van der Merwe, Reverend Louw left Kranspoort (Goedgedacht) with around seven Basotho volunteers who included Micha Makgatho, Joshua Masoha, Jeremiah Morudu, Petros Morudu and Lucas Mokwile.15 These Basotho volunteers worked as evangelists, guides and interpreters since some of them had knowledge of the area as they had been to these areas before. On 9 September 1891, Reverend Louw and his Basotho evangelists arrived in Chief Mugabe’s area and established a mission station at Mugabe hill, which became the first Dutch Reformed Church mission in colonial Zimbabwe and the centre of Dutch Reformed Church’s evangelisation work among the southern Shona people.16 Reverend Louw sent out the Basotho evangelists to different communities where they had to carry out their evangelical work. Jeremiah Morudu and his brother Petros Morudu were posted at Matibi and Neshuro respectively, Isaac Khumalo went to Vurumela among the Hlengwe, Lucas Mokoele went to Madzivire, Joshua Masoha to Ruvanga and Micha Makgatho to Nyajena. David Molea and Petrus Khobe were posted in the territories of 12  G. C. Mazarire, ‘A right to self-determination! Religion, protest and war in south-central Zimbabwe: The case of Chivi district 1900–1980’, unpublished MA thesis in African history, History Department, University of Zimbabwe, June 1999, p.19. 13  Mashingaidze, ‘Forgotten frontiersmen of Christianity’s northward outreach’, p.68. 14  Van der Merwe, The day star arises in Mashonaland, p.13. 15  W. F. J. Van der Merwe, Kuvamba nokukura kwekereke yeReformed muZimbabwe (Reformed Church in Zimbabwe) (Masvingo: Morgenster Mission, 1987), p.22. 16  A. R. Mutumburanzou, D. P. Mandebvu and E. C. Esterhuyse, Ten years of development in Reformed Church in Zimbabwe 1977–1987 (Masvingo: Morgenster Mission, 1989), p.4.

Mujere.indb 23

10/12/2018 16:17

24

Land, Migration and Belonging

Mugabe (where Morgenster Mission was located) and Shumba Chekai.17 David Molea also acted as Reverend Louw’s interpreter since he could speak chiKaranga, the language spoken by the locals, further cementing the reputation of the Basotho as people who were conversant with local languages.18 David Molea had been to this area on several evangelisation and hunting expeditions and had learned the languages spoken in the area during these expeditions. As well as carrying out evangelical work in the communities they had been posted, the Basotho also served as teachers and opened out-schools in these communities. Most of these Basotho and other African evangelists and their families settled permanently in the country and continued to play a crucial role in the evangelisation of the communities around Morgenster Mission and other areas. Gradually the Basotho began to coalesce in the Fort Victoria area as they were joined by relatives and friends. As well as these migrations, which were associated with evangelisation, there were also migrations by Africans from South Africa that were associated with Cecil John Rhodes’ Pioneer Column and colonial conquest. The migration of the Mfengu, for example, and the land grants they received from Cecil John Rhodes in Matabeleland are well-documented.19 There were also a number of Basotho who were part of this migration. Although the core of this community was composed of those Basotho who had worked with the Dutch Reformed Church, the Paris Evangelical Missionary Society and the Berlin Missionary Society at various levels and were pioneer missionaries in their own right, the community was also joined by other Africans from South Africa who had come to the country with the Pioneer Column in 1890 and others who joined in the early years of colonial rule. These Africans or ‘colonial Natives’, as they were called, included the Xhosa, Basotho, Zulu and Mfengu among others.20 The Basotho evangelists and their families were thus gradually joined by other Basotho migrants from South Africa, which led to the emergence of a community of Basotho immigrants in Victoria District. 17 

Van der Merwe, From mission field to autonomous Church in Zimbabwe, p.52.

18 Ibid.

19  See for example, E. P. Makambe, ‘The African immigrant factor in Southern Rhodesia, 1890–1930: The origin and influence of external elements in a colonial setting’, PhD thesis, University of York, 1979. 20  See R. S. Roberts, ‘The settlers’, Rhodesiana, Vol. 39 (1978).

Mujere.indb 24

10/12/2018 16:17



Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

25

THE POLITICS OF FREEHOLD LAND PURCHASES BY AFRICANS Section 83 of the 1898 Southern Rhodesia Order in Council explicitly stated that ‘a native may acquire, hold, encumber and dispose of land on the same conditions as a person who is not a native’.21 This section gave all Africans the right to acquire and dispose of land on the same basis as whites. This right subsisted until it was expunged by the Land Apportionment Act (1930), which effectively segregated land on the basis of race. In spite of the existence of the Order, the British South Africa Company and white settlers were reluctant to allow Africans to purchase freehold land beyond the few land grants given to the Mfengu by Cecil John Rhodes for the services they had rendered to the British South Africa Company. Colonial administrators and white settlers found it more convenient to hold on to the clichéd argument that ‘native’ title to land throughout Africa was largely usufructuary in nature.22 In the end, many Africans who applied for freehold land had their requests turned down by the company administration. However, because they were considered to be ‘progressive’ Africans the Basotho and other ‘alien’ or ‘colonial Natives’ were given preferential treatment. 23 The fact that some of the Basotho had owned freehold land in the Union (South Africa) put the Basotho immigrants in Southern Rhodesia in good stead in their applications for freehold land. In 1919, the Privy Council considered that the Basotho had ‘made considerable progress both in the idea of transferable property and in tribal land and in usages for ensuring the assent of a tribe to alienation of it’. 24 In spite of this, most African communities were still considered as lacking an understanding of titled land. According to Klug, ‘although willing to countenance evolutionary develop21 

Southern Rhodesia Order in Council (1898), p.15. H. Klug, ‘Defining the property rights of others: political power, indigenous tenure and the construction of customary land law’, Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, Vol. 35 (1995), p.123. 23  Whilst the Basotho were able to purchase Erichsthal Farm in Victoria District in 1909, Mr Matebu and a group of local Karanga farmers had their application to purchase land in the same district turned down. See National Archives of Zimbabwe (hereafter NAZ) L2/1/157 Matebu (Native) and twenty-two others, 26 April–13 July 1909. Unless stated, all archival files are from the National Archives of Zimbabwe. 24  H. Klug, ‘Defining the property rights of others’, p.123. 22 

Mujere.indb 25

10/12/2018 16:17

26

Land, Migration and Belonging

ments, especially as a result of “contact with white men and […] residence under their rule”, the Privy Council maintained that most aboriginal people had no comparable notion of ownership over land’. 25 Across the African continent colonial administrators were unwilling to support a property regime that would separate Africans from the ‘tribe’, as doing so would be viewed as a threat to traditional authority under the indirect rule regime. 26 Although they could not stop private white farm owners from selling land to Africans, the British South Africa Company administration was reluctant to sell land to Africans. Consequently, apart from the land grants given to the Mfengu, the company did not sell any land to Africans until the 1920s. It was within the context of the colonial regime’s reluctance to allow Africans to purchase freehold land and their disregard for the 1898 Order in Council that the Basotho immigrants in Victoria District purchased two farms in 1907 and 1909. In 1907 Jacob Molebaleng and three other Sothos purchased Erichsthal Farm in the Victoria District from the Posselt family for £1,000.27 The farm measured 14,202 acres and was located between the Shagashe and Mutirikwi Rivers.28 The farm was in four equal but undivided shares. The four owners of the farm were Jacob Molebaleng, Ernest Komo, Matthew Komo and Jona Makola (Mmakola).29 In 1909, a group of nine members of the Basotho community, led by Ephraim Morudu, purchased Niekerk’s Rust Farm, which was located close to Harawe Hill in Ndanga District just a few kilometres from Erichsthal Farm. The farm originally belonged to H. C. van Niekerk but was later sold to W. B. Richards.30 Richards in turn sold the farm to a group of Basotho immigrants.31 The purchase price of the farm was £900 and the 25 

H. Klug, ‘Defining the property rights of others’, p.123. P. E. Peters, ‘Conflicts over land and threats to customary tenure in Africa’, African Affairs, 112 (2013), p.545. 27  NAZ AT1/2/1/10 Land owned by Natives in 1925. 28 R. Palmer, Land and racial domination in Rhodesia (London, Heinemann, 1977), p.280 (appendix II); Shutt, ‘We are the best poor farmers’, p.28. The farm measured 14,202 acres and together with Niekerk’s Rust was one of only 14 farms owned by Africans before 1925. 29  S1042 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 20 December 1927; S1857 Distribution of Estate: Joseph and Johanna Komo (no date). 30  S1542/F2/1 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to C. Bullock, Assistant Chief Native Commissioner, Salisbury, 2 August 1933. 31 Ibid. 26 

Mujere.indb 26

10/12/2018 16:17

Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans



27

farm measured 3,249 acres.32 Like Erichsthal, Niekerk’s Rust was owned in undivided shares. In the same year a group of twenty-two local Karanga farmers led by Mr Matebu also made an application to purchase Rugby Farm in Fort Victoria. They requested Reverend Louw, a Dutch Reformed Church missionary, to provide a reference letter on their behalf. The fact that this request was being made following the purchase of land by the Basotho in the same area worked against Mr Matebu and his colleagues. The Basotho were already showing a measure of independence, especially from the Dutch Reformed Church, which made Dutch Reformed Church missionaries such as Reverend Louw rather uncomfortable. Although acknowledging Africans’ right to purchase land, Reverend Louw refused to support Mr Matebu and his colleagues’ application for land, stating that: I know that they have as much right to purchase land as any European who can satisfy the British South Africa Company that he is fit and qualify … to hold land. As a missionary however, I would like to say that I feel convinced that it can do these people in their present semi-traditional condition no good whatever, to possess their own farm. What they drive at I fear is a measure of independence which savours of the Ethiopian spirit and venture to predict that such a farm would become a harbour for those who are dissatisfied with the church government and discipline. Without due ecclesiastical control, there is no knowing what immorality and other evils will be tolerated in such a community of irresponsible natives, a lamentable example in Niekerk’s Rust, as you know. I shall therefore be very glad if you can do all you can to discourage them in this matter. 33

Consequently, this application for land was turned down. Mr Matebu and others eventually purchased Rugby Farm for a hundred head of cattle in 1911 after employing an agent to do the purchase on their behalf. The purchase of farms by Africans caused disquiet among white settlers who complained bitterly about how the value of their farms was being lowered by it. As one of the settlers wrote in 1911: this practice seems to be on the increase in this district and tends to the depreciation of all land adjoining to farms sold to natives, judging 32 R.

Palmer, Land and racial domination in Rhodesia (London, Heinemann, 1977), p.280. Although the farm owners were generally viewed as Basotho there were some members like Jona Makola (Mmakola), who was a Hlengwe, and Isaac Khumalo, who was a Zulu or Ndebele. 33  L2/1/157, Letter from Reverend A. A. Louw to the Magistrate, Fort Victoria, 28 April 1909.

Mujere.indb 27

10/12/2018 16:17

28

Land, Migration and Belonging

to [sic] farms already sold to natives they appear to be most undesirable neighbours and certainly tend to retard the closer settlement of whites. 34

Although not based on any verifiable evidence, this letter expressed white settler sentiments with regard to purchases of land by Africans. White settlers clamoured for the enactment of legislation that would prohibit the purchase of freehold land by Africans.35 ‘Is it not quite time some Act was passed by the Legislative Council to forbid Basutos [sic] and other Black gentry obtaining possession of land in and in some cases the pick of it, midst the heart of the white population?’ one angry white settler wrote in the Bulawayo Chronicle.36 ‘So many farms occupied by Ham’s descendants will not enhance the value of this country in the estimation of would-be settlers, as it does tend to have exemplary benefits either on white adults or their children especially to those holding the adjoining land’,37 he added. In spite of the reluctance of colonial administrators to allow Africans to purchase land as well as the strong protests of white settlers, the Basotho and the local Karanga farmers were able to exploit the provisions of the 1898 Southern Rhodesia Order in Council to purchase freehold land in Fort Victoria. Within a few years colonial administrators were praising the Basotho and Karanga farmers in Victoria District for being productive on their farms and setting a good example for other Africans. As will be elaborated later, Basotho owned wagons, ploughs and carts and produced milk, cream and other types of farm produce. In his annual report of 1908, the Native Commissioner for Victoria District reported that, ‘two farms were acquired some years ago by syndicates of Basutos and these Natives are proving themselves to be fairly progressive. They have acquired a number of cattle and are doing a certain amount of cultivation with ploughs etc.’38 This indicates a gradual change in the attitude of colonial administrators towards Africans who had purchased freehold land and an acceptance of the fact that Africans could be productive on their farms. 34  A3/18/3 Administrator’s Correspondence, Native Affairs General, undated letter addressed to the Secretary, Department of Administrator, Salisbury (1911). 35  ‘Native Landowners Protest from Victoria’, The Rhodesia Herald, 28 June 1911. 36  Letter from Micawber, Victoria, The Bulawayo Chronicle, 6 March 1916. 37 Ibid. 38  NVA 4/1/1 NC Victoria District, Annual Report for year ended 30 November 1908.

Mujere.indb 28

10/12/2018 16:17



Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

29

As the community grew, officials in the colonial administration began to discuss ways in which these ‘Union Natives’ or ‘Alien Natives’ could be administered.39 Unlike indigenous Africans, the Basotho did not have any traditional authority, a factor that placed them in a very ambiguous position in the colonial set-up. Some members of the community recognised that they needed to have their own traditional authority in order to fit into the schema of the colonial state. The Superintendent of Natives noted that the Basotho ‘desired to have a recognised mouth piece, through whom they may approach the government, and through whom notification of new legislation or government orders can be conveyed to them’.40 After some deliberations and with the support of the Superintendent of Natives, Cornelius Makola (Magoba) was appointed headman (or chief) of the Basotho community on 1 October 1924.41 Unfortunately, Cornelius died just ten days after his appointment and he was replaced by Jacob Molebaleng on 1 April 1925.42 Jacob Molebaleng was given the title of chief or headman of the community and was addressed as such in much government correspondence.43 As the leader of the community, Jacob Molebaleng coordinated most of the activities of the community and made representations to colonial officials. The creation of a ‘customary authority’ for the Basotho was part of the colonial administration’s way of dealing with the ambiguous position of the Basotho as colonial subjects. Generally, all Natives were supposed to be under some form of customary authority such as a chief, so that they could be easily administered and monitored. However, as Alien Natives the Basotho did not fall under any traditional authority in Victoria District, hence the need to create one for them. As will be shown later, the appointment of a traditional authority did not go down well with some members of the community, who argued that, as owners of freehold land, they did not need to be under a customary authority. This caused a lot of discord within the community and created fissures. 39 

Migrants from South Africa were generally referred to as Union Natives or Alien Natives. 40  S1561/10/7 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 4 September 1924. 41  S1561/10/7 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 1 October 1924. Makola was also spelled ‘Maqula’ or ‘Magoba’, although the most appropriate spelling was ‘Mmakola’. 42  S1561/10/7 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 21 March 1925. 43  S924/G33/App.2 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 14 October 1927.

Mujere.indb 29

10/12/2018 16:17

30

Land, Migration and Belonging

THE BASOTHO AS ‘PROGRESSIVE’ AFRICANS Colonial administrators largely viewed the Basotho as a Christianised community of ‘progressive’ Africans. Hardly a year passed without the Native Commissioner for Victoria District reporting specifically on the activities of the Basotho on their two farms. They were portrayed as hardworking, educated, progressive and model Africans. The native commissioners’ reports thus revealed a great deal of information about how the colonial administration perceived the Basotho community in comparison with the local Karanga communities. They also show how the Basotho perceived their own position as colonial subjects in relation to other Africans in the colony. Colonial administrators’ perceptions of the Basotho as ‘progressive’ or ‘better Natives’ as compared to the indigenous Karanga communities owed much to the Basotho’s links with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, their conversion to Christianity and their attainment of a certain level of Western education. They could also afford to send their children to study in South Africa, which few indigenous Africans were able to do. It is important to highlight that the Basotho also actively participated in cultivating this image, as they sought to be viewed as ‘more advanced natives’. As has already been highlighted, education was one of the central pieces in the work of missionaries as it helped in their conversion of locals. Consequently, from the early years of the establishment of the Dutch Reformed Church missions in Mashonaland much emphasis was placed on the establishment of schools. As early as 1892 the Dutch Reformed Church had established a school to cater for the children of their Basotho evangelists.44 In his report for the year ending 31 December 1909 the Native Commissioner for Victoria District noted that: at Morgenster mission, under the DRC [Dutch Reformed Church], natives are learning rough carpentry. The Basuto children are being taught by a Basuto who was sent to Basutoland for education. This school was formerly under the supervision of the DRC but is now, I understand, independent. It is situated on a farm owned by the Basutos.45 44 

Van der Merwe, The day star arises in Mashonaland, p.19. N9/1/12 Victoria District, Report for the Year ended 31 December 1909, 8 January 1910. 45 

Mujere.indb 30

10/12/2018 16:17



Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

31

The Basotho communities in Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms thus managed to establish schools on their farms with the help of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries at Morgenster Mission. In 1911 the Native Commissioner (NC) for Victoria District reported: the natives (local Karanga communities) are somewhat apathetic on the question of education. The older people are usually opposed to it. At the Basuto Farm Erichsthal the Basuto children are taught by a Basuto girl. Some of the Basuto boys have been sent to the Southern Colonies for education. Practically all the Basuto [sic] are members of the DRC [Dutch Reformed Church].46

Such disparities in appreciation of Western education between the Basotho and the Karanga in the surrounding areas under Chiefs Mugabe, Chikwanda, Murinye and other chiefs clearly shows why the Native Commissioner viewed the Basotho as more ‘progressive’ Africans. It is apparent that the Basotho manipulated their ambiguous position as non-indigenous Africans as well as their links with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries for access to land and education for their children. The colonial administration’s perception of the Basotho as ‘better and progressive Natives’ was also enhanced by the fact that the Basotho were enterprising on their farms, producing grain, butter, cream and other types of farm produce. The Native Commissioner for Victoria District estimated that more than half of the butter that was sold in the Victoria market was produced by the Basotho farmers. He further reported that some of the Basotho were also involved in ‘transport riding’, which at the time was largely a preserve of white Rhodesians.47 Sayce notes that the transport riders of Fort Victoria ‘trundled around the district in their rickety carts and wagons buying grain and meal and selling it in Victoria’.48 Among Africans in Victoria, the Basotho farmers were only rivalled by Karanga farmers of Rugby Farm, who were also producing milk, butter and cream, which they sold in Fort 46 

N9/1/14 Victoria District: Report for the Year ended 31 December 1911. N9/1/14 Victoria District: Report for the Year ended 31 December 1911; N9/1/15 Victoria District, Report for the Year ended 31 December 1912. Transport riding was a system where a group of entrepreneurs moved around the country with wagons trading in grain and other commodities. For detailed analysis of transport riding in Rhodesia see Stanley P. Hyatt, The old transport road (Salisbury: Books of Rhodesia, 1963). 48  K. Sayce, A town called Victoria or the rise and fall of the Thatched House Hotel (Bulawayo: Books of Rhodesia, 1978), p.61. 47 

Mujere.indb 31

10/12/2018 16:17

32

Land, Migration and Belonging

Victoria and Gwelo.49 Most of the farm owners were teachers from the Dutch Reformed Church mission at Morgenster.50 One of the part-owners of Rugby Farm managed to purchase a cream separator, and soon became a regular supplier of cream to the Gwelo Creamery.51 Together with the Karanga of Rugby Farm, the Basotho were often referred to as ‘progressive’ Africans by colonial administrators in Victoria District because of their level of education, ownership of property and entrepreneurial skills.52 These farmers were producing a lot of farm produce while the ordinary reserve farmers were struggling to make ends meet. It was clear that for colonial administrators in Victoria District, the Basotho owners of Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms and Karanga owners of Rugby Farm were the epitome of hard work and determination that the rest of the people in the district had to emulate. In 1924, the Native Commissioner for Victoria District reported that: cotton seed supplied by the government has been distributed to the Native Teachers in charge of kraal schools and is being grown under the supervision of the visiting missionaries. Seed was also supplied to a selected number of intelligent natives including the Makaranga [sic] owners of the Farm ‘Rugby’ and the Basutu [sic] owners of the Farms ‘Erichsthal’ and ‘Niekerk’s Rust’.53

In the minds of the colonial administrators the Basotho and the other local elites who included teachers and the owners of Rugby Farm were, as the Native Commissioner put it, ‘progressive’ Africans who deserved support from the government. In this regard, being progressive was linked to having a level of Western education and, most importantly, property ownership. Although the Basotho and a few Karanga farmers were still able to sell surplus produce to surrounding towns in the 1920s, the early period of colonial rule (from 1898 to 1902) was the golden period of peasant production. Bundy argues that although a number of scholars have argued that colonial rule had a devastating impact on traditional African agriculture, there was an initial period of prosperity as Africans responded to the demand from urban 49  N9/1/14 Victoria District: Report for the Year ended 31 December 1911. Rugby Farm was owned by twenty-one indigenous Karanga people who had purchased the farm, which measured 3,246 acres, at the price of a hundred head of cattle. 50 Palmer, Land and racial domination in Rhodesia, p.279. 51  N9/1/17 Victoria District: Report for the Year ended 31 December 1924. 52 Ibid. 53 Ibid. Added emphasis.

Mujere.indb 32

10/12/2018 16:17



Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

33

centres.54 According to Phimister, by 1904 African farmers in Southern Rhodesia ‘produced over 90 per cent of the country’s total marketed output, and as the reconstruction of the mining industry proceeded, so they helped to supply the hundreds of markets which sprouted across the countryside’.55 In Victoria District peasants were able to supply surrounding mines and towns with their agricultural produce, which fuelled their initial prosperity during the early years of colonial rule. Similarly, Ranger notes how peasants in Makoni District increased the size of pieces of land they cultivated each year and how the native commissioners were complaining about why the success of peasant production was having an adverse effect on labour supply.56 However, as Bundy has shown in the case of South Africa, this period of general prosperity for African peasants did not last long.57 As the capitalist economy developed and the demand for labour in mines and towns increased, peasant production began to disintegrate. Moreover, settlers were demanding more and more land for capitalist agricultural production and displacing Africans from their land. The main argument in Bundy’s The rise and fall of the South African peasantry is that: there was an initial period of prosperity after colonial domination had been established over the indigenous people of the Eastern Cape; that this prosperity was based on a positive response towards the ‘market’ and that the decline of this ‘prosperity’ was inseparably associated with the rise of industrial capitalism in the shape of the gold mines.58

In the case of Victoria District, Phimister argues, the opening of the Gwelo–Salisbury railway line in 1902 and the Gwelo–Salukwe railway line in 1903 marked the beginning of the end of this prosperity as the railway lines saw a dramatic increase in the supply of cheaper produce from other areas in Southern Rhodesia.59 54 

C. Bundy, The rise and fall of the South African peasantry (London: Heinemann, 1979), p.xiv. 55  I. Phimister, An economic and social history of Zimbabwe 1890–1948: Capital accumulation and class struggle (London: Longman, 1988), p.68. 56  T. O. Ranger, Peasant consciousness and guerrilla war in Zimbabwe (Harare: Zimbabwe Publishing House/London: James Currey, 1985), p.36. 57 Bundy, The rise and fall of the South African peasantry. 58  J. Lewis, ‘The rise and fall of the South African peasantry: A critique and reassessment’, Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (1984), p.1. In this article, Lewis provides a critique of Bundy’s thesis. Among other things, she challenges the homogeneity in the South African peasantry Bundy assumes in his book. 59 I. Phimister, ‘Peasant production and underdevelopment in Southern Rhodesia, 1890–1914, with particular reference to the Victoria district’, in

Mujere.indb 33

10/12/2018 16:17

34

Land, Migration and Belonging

THE BASOTHO AND THE SOUTHERN RHODESIA NATIVE ASSOCIATION The 1920s saw the emergence of a number of organisations that sought to represent the interests of African farmers and workers.60 These associations were, however, largely dominated by African elites who were also mostly migrants from South Africa and other surrounding countries. For example, the founding president of the Southern Rhodesia Native Association (SRNA), which was formed in 1919 was Eli Nare who hailed from South Africa. His successors in the position, Johannes Mokwile and S. J. Matebese were also of South African origin.61 Thus although the organisation drew much of its support from rural African elites in Mashonaland, it also attracted a number of influential non-Rhodesian Africans. Similarly, the Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association (RBVA), formed in 1923, was the brain-child of another migrant, Abraham Twala, who was a Zulu. Twala was a convert to the teachings of the South African, John Tengo Jabavu, who advocated for Africans’ right to vote, among other civil rights.62 Martha Ngano, the organisation’s general secretary and a prominent organiser, was also a migrant from South Africa. According to West, one of the reasons that contributed towards the decline of the Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association by 1930 was the fact that members of the Matabele Home Society, which had been formed in 1929, ‘resented what they perceived as black South African domination of the RBVA’.63 This shows how African migrants were asserting themselves and how they had managed to become part of the emerging African elite in Southern Rhodesia. Although it claimed to be a national organisation, the Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association was dominated by African elites from Bulawayo in particular and Matabeleland in general. In spite of the fact the Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association claimed to be an apolitical organisation, it was to all intents and purposes a political organisation because its major aim was to (contd)

R. Palmer and N. Parsons (eds) The roots of rural poverty in central and southern Africa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977), pp.262–263. 60  See T. O. Ranger, The African voice in southern Rhodesia, 1898–1930 (London: Heinemann, 1970). 61  M. O. West, The rise of an African middle class: Colonial Zimbabwe, 1898–1965 (Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 2002), p.131. 62 Ranger, The African voice in southern Rhodesia, p.90. 63 West, The rise of an African middle class, p.129.

Mujere.indb 34

10/12/2018 16:17



Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

35

represent African voters.64 Moreover, in spite of being stronger in urban areas, it also recruited members in reserves, criticised native commissioners and encouraged Africans to submit their grievances through the organisation. As a result of this, colonial administrators viewed the Southern Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association (SRBVA) as a radical organisation. As has already been highlighted, although the SRNA was dominated by farmers from Mashonaland it also attracted a number of African migrants from South Africa. Johannes Mokwile, who became the second president of the SRNA, was a prominent member of the Basotho community in Fort Victoria. His father, Lukas Mokwile, was one of the African evangelists who accompanied Reverend Louw and helped in the establishment of the Dutch Reformed Church mission at Morgenster. He later, together with other Basotho, purchased Niekerk’s Rust Farm in Fort Victoria. Johannes Mokwile received his industrial training at the London Missionary Society-run Tiger Kloof Institution in South Africa. Upon completion of his studies he returned to Rhodesia and began to work for the government as a masonry instructor.65 As a result of his Christian background, Johannes Mokwile’s ideology was strongly influenced by Christian values. When Mokwile assumed the presidency of the SRNA in 1924 he began to steer the organisation from its regional outlook to a more national one. Mokwile’s ideological position, which became the guiding philosophy of the SRNA, was articulated in an article he published in the Native Affairs Department Annual (NADA). In this particular article, Mokwile argued that Africans needed to imitate Indians’ work ethic and entrepreneurial skills and to become ‘men of the soil’ if they were to succeed in their endeavours.66 The article was based on the conversation he had with a certain member of the Indian community in Rhodesia on a train somewhere between Gwelo and Fort Victoria. The Indian had challenged the Basotho to be more productive on their farms. ‘Why did your father buy a farm, yet you do not know how to make money out of the farm?’ the Indian asked Mokwile.67 Mokwile felt challenged and wrote what he considered to be the ideals of hard work and progress that the Basotho and other Africans had to 64 Ranger, The

African voice in southern Rhodesia, p.90. J. Mokwile, ‘Native ideals’ Native Affairs Department Annual, Vol. 2 (1924), p.95. 66 Ibid. 67 Ibid. 65 

Mujere.indb 35

10/12/2018 16:17

36

Land, Migration and Belonging

follow if they wanted to be as prosperous as the Indian community in the country were. He stated that: It is so far clear that the way these Indians have worked or used the soil, even if it is only rented, has overloaded them with profits. These profits derived from the soil came from the character of the Indians themselves, and not from any special privileges given them which natives do not enjoy … Now then, unless we who live side by side with these white men resolve to depart from primitive conditions, progress is impossible. Natives then must move with times, use their opportunity, talk less, work more. Today I cannot go in where an Indian goes, just because he is a worker and I am a talker.68

The ideals of hard work and discipline were thus perceived to be at the centre of what Mokwile considered to be the Indian work ethic, which he and other Africans had to emulate. This had strong resonances with the work ethic that was at the centre of Protestant theology. It espoused entrepreneurial skills and the values of hard work and self-discipline. As a member of a Protestant church (the Dutch Reformed Church), Mokwile identified with the Protestant work ethic and also sought to adopt similar traits from the Indian community in the country. He compared the Basotho’s position with that of other colonial subjects, such as Indians, who were comparatively more prosperous. He also desired to help his people escape from the colonial image of Africans as generally indolent people by preaching the gospel of hard work and good entrepreneurial skills. Mokwile also took the opportunity to criticise what he considered to be the ‘radical politics’ of John Tengo Jabavu which had found a following among members of the Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association. In particular, he criticised Jabavu’s claim that Africans had reached a stage where they had grown ‘so strong that they now see the injustices done to them to which formerly they were unable to see’, which Jabavu had expressed in an article titled ‘Native Opinion’.69 In a scathing attack on Jabavu’s career and his philosophy, Mokwile argued thus; I am afraid that if I do live long I may become an old man before I am able to witness any improvement in native administration being sought about by extravagant talk of men who make leadership their own only profession. It will not be those who seek high education that natives will always listen to. Their real leaders will be men of the soil; men who have learned how to use the soil, and who are not ashamed to be seen with their coats off …70 68 

Mokwile, ‘Native ideals’, pp.95–96. African voice in Southern Rhodesia, p.105. 70  Mokwile, ‘Native ideals’, p.97. 69 Ranger, The

Mujere.indb 36

10/12/2018 16:17

Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans



37

This was strong repudiation of Jabavu’s philosophy, and also a veiled attack on Jabavu himself. It is important to note that Mokwile was a moderate who believed in the moral force of Christianity. As well as his firm belief in the importance of a good work ethic, he also believed that the presence of whites would help Africans to achieve their aspirations. His ideology became the driving force behind the SRNA. According to Ranger, the Southern Rhodesia Native Association ‘was a movement of the “men of the soil”, the progressive farmers of Mashonaland’.71 These progressive farmers included the Basotho owners of Erichsthal and Niekerk’s Rust, the Karanga owners of Rugby Farm in Fort Victoria and other farmers in other districts of Mashonaland.72 In Fort Victoria the association was stronger in Gutu, Chibi and Bikita Districts. Initially, the colonial administrators were reluctant to allow the SRNA to gather African grievances. In 1927, the Chief Native Commissioner declared that the SRNA ‘has no right to claim representation of the Natives of the Colony, nor is it desirable that it should be fostered with that end’.73 In spite of this, the SRNA continued to raise African grievances with colonial administrators. In the same year a delegation of the association went to see the Chief Native Commissioner in Salisbury and registered their disquiet at the employment of male attendants in female hospital wards. They viewed this as: an outrage on the modesty of female Native patients that Native male attendants should enter the wards occupied by women. They argued that women should be employed either as nurses or even for the performance of necessary, unskilled duties in such wards.74

Thus as well as presenting African grievances to colonial administrators the association also suggested solutions to the problems raised. They complained about poor wages, Indians establishing businesses in reserves and conditions in prisons. They also requested, among other things, that Africans be provided with free education and that they be given enough land to purchase. It is clear that African voices during this period were becoming 71 Ranger, The

African voice in Southern Rhodesia, p.106. N9/1/17 Victoria District: Report of the Native Commissioner for the year ending 31 December 1926. 73  S1561/25, Native Councils Bill, 1926–1937 (Minutes and Memoranda): CNC to PM’s Secretary, 10 March 1927. 74  S1561/25, Native Councils Bill, 1926–1937 (Minutes and Memoranda): Notes on Meeting between CNC and SRNA, 1 June 1927; CNC to Secretary, Department of the Colonial Secretary, 20 June 1927. 72 

Mujere.indb 37

10/12/2018 16:17

38

Land, Migration and Belonging

increasingly louder and clearer as African associations became more articulate in their demands. Although they had similar broad objectives, the SRNA and the Southern Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association often clashed because of their different philosophies and regional biases. Colonial administrators fanned these differences in order to encourage animosities so as to avert a possible union of these associations. The SRNA’s less radical slant earned it acceptance from the colonial administration, ‘which tended to play off “moderate” Rhodesian Native Association against the incipiently radical RBVA’.75 At one point the President of SRNA tried to forge a special relationship between his organisation and the government so as to put other organisations such as SRBVA in its shadow.76 Such links with the colonial administrators put the SRNA on a collision course with other associations. As a result of the above, the South African Industrial and Commercial Workers Union, which had opened branches in Southern Rhodesia in 1926, accused the SRNA of being a ‘good boy’ association because of its close ties with colonial officials. This obviously annoyed the leadership of the SRNA, which retaliated by writing to Prime Minister Moffat asking him to help in keeping Africans away from the Commercial Workers Union, which they accused of agitation.77 In spite of the seemingly less radical ideology of Mokwile and his organisation, it remained a voice for most ‘progressive farmers’ in Mashonaland. It was by no means a tool to be used by colonial officials. It had its fair share of confrontations with colonial officials and complained at their reluctance to take their grievances seriously. For example, due to lack of action on their various requests to the government, in 1929 the SRNA Fort Victoria Branch complained to the Chief Native Commissioner. It wrote, ‘we natives have had some requests to the government through your hands; yet we have not got anything which we can say government has done some good to us’.78 They had requested compulsory education, a court interpreter with better knowledge of their language, a review of Native wages and 75 Ranger, The

African voice in Southern Rhodesia, p.105. African voice in Southern Rhodesia, p.107. 77  S1561/25, Native Councils Bill, 1926–1937 (Minutes and Memoranda): Walter D. Chipwaya to Moffat 28 June 1929. 78  S1561/25, Native Councils Bill, 1926–1937 (Minutes and Memoranda). Letter was sent to CNC via National Secretary by the Fort Victoria branches: in Zimuto Reserve, Gutu, Zaka, Bikita, Fort Victoria Township and Chibi, 1 November 1929. 76 Ranger, The

Mujere.indb 38

10/12/2018 16:17



Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

39

a superintendent who knew their customs, among other issues. They concluded the letter by saying, ‘all people are disheartened saying that the government of this country belongs to whites only, if it were ours; it should do some good to us we natives’.79 Although the national office of the SRNA distanced itself from this letter, it certainly shows that in spite of the bad image it had as a ‘good boy’, the SRNA was also quite forceful in its engagement with the Chief Native Commissioner and other colonial officials on various African grievances. INTERNAL STRUGGLES WITHIN THE BASOTHO COMMUNITY Although it would appear that, because of their shared migration history and the fact that they were a minority and migrant group, the Basotho lived harmoniously, behind this veil of unity were internal schisms that manifested themselves in cliques and schisms. The conflict between the Komo brothers, Matthew and Ernest, and Jacob Molebaleng illustrates the problems caused by these cliques in the Basotho community. While most of the members accepted Jacob Molebaleng as the leader of the community (on both Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal Farms) the Komo brothers did not respect Molebaleng’s authority, especially given the fact that he was gradually establishing himself as ‘the chief’ of the community. Emboldened by the fact that they had managed to get the services of a lawyer named Mr Winterton, the Komo brothers took a defiant stance against Jacob Molebaleng and disregarded his authority. They argued that they did not recognise Jacob Molebaleng’s authority because ‘they did not wish to live under tribal control’.80 The Komo brothers were basing their argument on the fact that they were owners of freehold land, and thus could not live under a traditional authority like other Africans living in reserves. The Komo brothers were thus keen to differentiate themselves from Africans who did not own freehold land and were administered through traditional authorities. The stance taken by the Komo brothers may, however, have been influenced by Mr Winterton, who was obviously benefiting 79 Ibid. 80 

S924/G33/App.2 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 14 October 1927.

Mujere.indb 39

10/12/2018 16:17

40

Land, Migration and Belonging

from their bickering by providing them with legal representation. This caught the attention of the of the Superintendent of Natives, who complained to the Chief Native Commissioner about what he considered to be an exploitative relationship between Winterton and the Komo brothers. Writing to the Chief Native Commissioner in 1927, the Superintendent of Natives for Fort Victoria noted that: I explained to them [the Komos] that in this country every native who is domiciled must live under tribal control and that the only alternative was to take out the blue registration certificate and be treated as a non-indigenous native. They did not take advantage of this, but have taken every opportunity to make the headman’s position difficult and flout his authority and in order to more effectively do this they employ the local solicitor Mr Winterton, who is, in my opinion exploiting the unfortunate position and fomenting more trouble out of which he of course reaps certain pecuniary advantages.81

It is evident from the Superintendent’s letter that colonial officials in Fort Victoria believed that Winterton was taking advantage of the conflicts among the Basotho to enrich himself. Moreover, the fact that the Komos refused to ‘take the blue registration certificate’, which would have allowed them to be treated as non-indigenous natives, shows that they felt that they were now ‘locals’, although they did not wish to be placed under a ‘traditional authority’. In the end, this became a conflict about what type of colonial subjects they were and how this related to their security of tenure and sense of belonging. The ‘blue registration certificates’ would have greatly impacted on their status in the colonial set-up as well as their access to land, as they would have been identified as ‘non-indigenous natives’. As well as their disregard for Jacob Molebaleng’s authority as the traditional leader of the Basotho community, the Komos also failed to consider the rights of other part-owners of the farm before proceeding with any deal or transaction involving the farm. They defiantly entered into a partnership with Mr Van Blerk to build a general dealer business on the farm.82 This did not go down well with Jacob Molebaleng because the Komo brothers did not inform him and, most importantly, because Van Blerk was neither a member of the Basotho community nor a part-owner of Erichsthal Farm. Mr Winterton was at the centre of this business arrangement as he was the one who assisted the Komo brothers 81 Ibid. 82 

Van Blerk was a Coloured who was also an in-law of the Komos as he was married to Johanna Komo, the daughter of Joseph Komo.

Mujere.indb 40

10/12/2018 16:17



Evangelists, Migrants and ‘Progressive’ Africans

41

and their partner Van Blerk in obtaining a business licence for the shop. This prompted Jacob Molebaleng to seek legal advice to resolve this challenge, as he argued that either the Komos had to pay rent since their partner Van Blerk did not own any share in the farm, or they could contribute money towards the costs of subdividing the farm into individual holdings to avoid such problems arising again.83 Clive Carbutt, the Superintendent of Natives, believed that the only solution to this conundrum was the subdivision of the farm into individual shares, a strategy that had already been used to resolve a similar problem among the Karanga owners of Rugby Farm.84 Jacob Molebaleng was saved from going through the costly process of surveying and subdividing the farm by the Superintendent of Natives (Fort Victoria), who advised him that this was rather unnecessary because the 1925 Land Commission had placed this farm in the European area, meaning that the Basotho were soon going to be asked to vacate the area and move to the newly created Native Purchase Areas. The Superintendent of Natives complained that Mr Winterton had earned so much money from the Basotho through taking to court matters that could have easily been solved without going to court and causing a lot of schisms within the community.85 CONCLUSION This chapter has discussed the context in which Basotho migrated to Southern Rhodesia and the challenges they faced in purchasing freehold land during a time when white settlers were generally opposed to purchases of freehold land by Africans. This was in spite of the existence of the 1898 Southern Rhodesia Order in Council, which had a provision allowing Africans to purchase land anywhere in the colony. Having managed to purchase two farms, which they held in undivided shares, the Basotho strove to be identified as progressive Africans who were wedded to the idea of land-based entrepreneurial prosperity. This endeared them to the colonial officials who believed that their presence among indigenous Africans would have a positive impact. Although the Basotho were able to purchase two farms on which they lived as 83 

S924/G33/App.2 Superintendent of Natives to CNC, 14 October 1927. C. L. Carbutt, ‘Communal land tenure’, NADA, 1927, p.42. 85  S1042 1924–1937 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 20 December 1927. 84 

Mujere.indb 41

10/12/2018 16:17

42

Land, Migration and Belonging

a cohesive migrant group with strong ethnic ties, they did not accept the idea of being a ‘traditional’ African community to be administered through a ‘chief’ or ‘headman’. They preferred the independence that came with ownership of freehold land. Thus the appointment of a ‘traditional leader’ by the colonial administration caused a lot of friction in the community between those who supported the move and those who were opposed to it. This chapter also discussed the role played by the Basotho farmers in the emergence of African associations in the 1920s. Although they were among the rural African elites who established the SRNA, they steered away from the radical and confrontational approaches of other African associations, especially the Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association and the Commercial Workers Union. This was, of course, informed by their desire to endear themselves to the colonial administrators. Consequently, the Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association and the Commercial Workers Union accused Africans in the SRNA of being ‘good boys’ who worked closely with colonial officials.

Mujere.indb 42

10/12/2018 16:17

3 Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

The previous chapter discussed the migration history of the Basotho community, their links with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, and also how they were generally viewed by colonial administrators as ‘progressive’ Africans compared with other indigenous communities. The major focus was on the Basotho activities on Erichsthal and Niekerk’s Rust, their two farms in the Victoria and Ndanga Districts respectively. The 1930s, however, witnessed fundamental changes in Southern Rhodesia’s land policy. The Land Apportionment Act (1930) effectively legalised the division of land to segregate the races, with productive land being reserved for white settlers, while Africans were crowded into reserves and the newly created Purchase Areas. Africans who occupied areas that were declared European Areas were ordered to vacate the land and move to reserves. However, most of them stayed on as ‘squatters’ on Crown land or white-owned farms. The creation of purchase areas became a concession Africans received for their loss of rights to purchase land anywhere else in the country. This change also affected those Africans such as the Basotho, who had owned land prior to 1925. The Basotho’s two farms, Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal, were declared to be in an area reserved for Europeans and the owners were asked to vacate their farms in 1932 and 1933 respectively. This chapter discusses the Basotho’s experiences of the 1930s displacements and how, through the purchase of farms in the Dewure and Mungezi Purchase Areas, they established an enclave for themselves, reforging their entitlement strategies. The chapter also discusses the challenges that the Basotho faced in purchasing their farms and dealing with inheritance disputes involving land.

Mujere.indb 43

10/12/2018 16:17

44

Land, Migration and Belonging

LAND ALIENATION AND THE BASOTHO’S SETTLEMENT IN THE DEWURE AND MUNGEZI PURCHASE AREAS From 1890 to 1923 Rhodesia was governed by the British South Africa Company, which obtained a charter from the British government in 1889. The charter gave the company the right to administer the colony for an initial period of twenty-five years, after which the charter could be renewed for ten-year periods. There was no serious challenge to the status quo until at the end of the first period in 1914. Although the charter was extended for a further ten years, increased opposition to the British South Africa Company led to the end of company rule in 1923, after which a settler regime, also referred to as the Responsible Government, took over. The end of company rule allowed white settlers to deal with the contentious land question by effectively segregating land between the races. Consequently, it appointed the Morris Carter Land Commission in 1925 to resolve this issue. Its mandate was to investigate how land could be distributed. The recommendations of the commission were incorporated into the Land Apportionment Act, leading to the creation of Native Purchase Areas, where land was reserved for purchase by Africans.1 One of the key recommendations of the commission was the segregation of land on the basis of race. Purchase areas became a quid pro quo for Africans’ loss of rights to purchase land elsewhere in the colony.2 It should, however, be stressed that the most Native Purchase Areas were located in areas with poor soils and poor rainfall patterns. One of the recommendations of the Morris Carter Commission was that a statutory board be set up to process land applications by Africans and also to determine the size of the farms depending on the quality of soil. This saw the establishment of the Native Land Board, which started its operations in April 1931. One of the challenges that the Native Land Board was immediately confronted with was the large number of non-indigenous Africans who wanted to purchase land. The Natives Affairs Department had already registered its concern about the possibility that Union Natives would take up most of the farms in 1  Native Purchase Areas were also called Purchase Areas or African Purchase Areas. I use Purchase Areas here just for consistency. 2  See A. K. Shutt, ‘“We are the best poor farmers”: Purchase area farmers and economic differentiation in Southern Rhodesia c. 1925–1980’, DPhil Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, 1995.

Mujere.indb 44

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

45

the purchase areas.3 The fact that a number of these migrants already owned freehold land further accentuated this anxiety. The fact that a number of Africans who were of foreign ancestry desired to buy land in the purchase areas also caused a lot of disquiet among some indigenous Africans who felt that ‘Alien Natives’ were receiving favourable treatment from colonial officials. Even the Native Land Board’s stipulation that they would only grant land to those Africans who had entered the country before 1 April 1931 failed to silence the dissenting voices among indigenous Africans.4 As a result of the pressure from indigenous Africans, in July 1933 the Native Land Board decided to place a five-year moratorium on land applications from non-indigenous Africans so as to allow the indigenous Africans to benefit from the scheme.5 This shows the complex politics of inclusion and exclusion that emerged as a result of colonial administration’s desire to protect indigenous Africans from immigrants from the southern African region in the purchase of farms. The Basotho’s Erichsthal and Niekerk’s Rust farms were deemed to fall in areas designated as European Areas, which meant that the owners had to move elsewhere. In anticipation of their displacement, the Basotho started to enquire with the Native Land Board, which considered applications for farms and was responsible for development in the newly created Native Purchase Areas, about the possibility of acquiring land there. Since the Basotho were not permitted to buy land in the purchase areas because they already owned freehold land, the Native Land Board suggested that they exchange their shares in Erichsthal and Niekerk’s for farms in the Mungezi and Dewure Purchase Areas in Bikita and Gutu Districts.6 Niekerk’s Rust Farm was officially alienated in 1932 and the Basotho owners of the farm (who included Samuel Malete, Reuben Mphisa, Petros Morudu, Joshua Masoha, David Molea and Peter Rasitoo) were offered 5,228 acres 3 

R. J. Challiss, ‘The foundation of the racially segregated education system in southern Rhodesia, 1890–1923, with special reference to the Education of Africans’, PhD thesis, University of Zimbabwe, 1982, p.451. 4  A. C. Jennings and G. M. Huggins, ‘Land apportionment in Southern Rhodesia’, Journal of the Royal Society, Vol. 34, No. 136 (1935), p.306. 5  M. C. Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy: Southern Rhodesia, 1923– 1933’, PhD thesis, Simon Fraser University, August 1972, p.451. 6  NAZ, S924/G33, Native Affairs Department, Native Area Administration, Correspondence, General, 1927–50: (Farms Erichsthal and Niekerk’s Rust), Application 1, Assistant Director of Native Lands, Salisbury to Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria, 19 March and 13 April 1932.

Mujere.indb 45

10/12/2018 16:17

46

Land, Migration and Belonging

in the Dewure Purchase Areas in Gutu District in exchange for the farm.7 They were also paid £374 in total in compensation for improvements they had made to the farm.8 Erichsthal Farm was alienated the following year with the owners of the farm – Jacob Molebaleng, Ernest Komo, Matthew Komo and Jona Makola (Mmakola) – being given until 31 July 1934 to vacate the land.9 The Basotho owners of Erichsthal Farm were initially offered 11,656 acres in the Mungezi Purchase Areas in Bikita District in exchange for their farm, and were paid £2,118 as compensation.10 According to Steele, ‘to lower the cost of expropriating the Basotho owners of “Erichstahl” [sic], a farm placed in the European Area, the Board offered the senior partners 1,500 morgen (about 3,000 acres) each in an adjacent Purchase Area’.11 The Mungezi and Dewure are contiguous purchase areas separated by the Mungezi River, which is also the boundary between Gutu and Bikita Districts. In spite of the offer, however, most of the Basotho, including those who had stayed on Erichsthal Farm, chose to take up farms in the Dewure rather than the Mungezi Purchase Areas. The reason for this was that by the time the Basotho from Erichsthal Farm were offered land in the Mungezi Purchase Areas those from Niekerk’s Rust had already started settling in Dewure, which made it attractive for those coming from Erichsthal Farm as they preferred to take up farms close to other Basotho. Mr Craig, the government land surveyor working in Fort Victoria, actually advised all the Basotho who came to him wanting to purchase land to go to the Dewure Purchase Areas which had been ‘reserved for them’.12 Land surveyors were therefore complicit in the creation of a Basotho enclave in the Dewure Purchase Areas and to a lesser extent in the Mungezi Purchase Areas. Farm holdings 16 to 38 in the Dewure Purchase Areas were provisionally surveyed and set aside for the Basotho owners of Niekerk’s Farm.13 7 

NAZ S1542/F2/1 Assistant Director of Native Lands to Chief Native Commissioner (CNC), 9 December 1932. 8 Ibid. See also Palmer, Land and racial domination in Rhodesia (London, Heinemann, 1977), p.280. 9  NAZ S1044/10 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to Assistant Director of Native Lands, 23 June 1934. 10 Palmer, Land and racial domination in Rhodesia, p.280. 11  Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy’, pp.448–449. 12  NAZ S138/81 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC Salisbury, 10 October 1932. 13  NAZ S1044/9 A. C. Jennings, Assistant Director of Native Lands to Superin

Mujere.indb 46

10/12/2018 16:17

Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas



47

The Basotho families who purchased farms in the early 1930s include Mphisa, Masoha, Leboho, Sikhala, Makgatho, Ramushu, Komo, Molebaleng, Morudu, Moeketsi, Mojapelo and Mokwile among others.14 Most of these families were related through intermarriages as the Basotho practised ethnic endogamy. Because of their close connections with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, these families also assumed prominent roles in the Dutch Reformed Church as evangelists, lay preachers and teachers. The Basotho community that was established in the Masema area of the Dewure Purchase Areas was composed largely of families who had come from Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms, although some of the Basotho continued to come from other areas throughout the 1930s. Although the Native Land Board operated on the assumption that Purchase Areas would be established on land not occupied by anyone, in reality most of these areas were already settled by indigenous Africans. While some decided to remain on the farms as rent-paying squatters, others left to go to the nearby reserves. Although the interactions between the Basotho and with other farmers and squatters were not always cordial, there is evidence that suggests a great deal of harmony. Nelson Thema recalled how his family would rely on a Mr Chademana, a Karanga farm owner, for supplies of groceries and other necessities that he brought from Fort Victoria town: Our farms were located very far from urban centres. I remember growing up that there was a neighbour called Mr Chademana who had a mule cart. He would do a trip to Fort Victoria once a month or so to buy supplies, simple things like sugar, flour, soap, etc and collect the post. The post was very important because that is how my parents used to communicate with their relatives in South Africa. This became known as the Chademana Post.15

Thus as well as their interactions at church, Native Councils, farmers’ associations and other fora, the Basotho and their Karanga neighbours interacted at an individual level as they established friendships and other social networks. Through these everyday interactions, some Karanga farmers ended up being able to speak Sesotho.16 (contd)

tendent of Natives, Fort Victoria, 14 February 1933. Schools 1933–1949, Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, 25 October 1941. 15  Mr Nelson Thema, personal communication, 8 November 2017. 16  Interview with Mrs Gumbi, Harare, 20 September 2017. 14  S1859

Mujere.indb 47

10/12/2018 16:17

48

Land, Migration and Belonging

WHAT’S IN A NAME? THE POLITICS OF FARM NAMES The early years of settlement in the purchase areas saw farm owners giving quite curious names to the farms they were buying. These farmers were keen to make a statement about their status through the names they gave to their farms. The majority of the names given related to the idea of progress and their advancement as African elites. Other names referred to the farmers’ places of origin, a phenomenon that appealed mostly to farmers of foreign descent. This naming practice was also quite common among the Basotho farmers in the Dewure Purchase Areas. For example, Farm number 28, which belonged to Paul Mphisa, was named Progress Farm in keeping with the ideals of progress that were being preached by the African elites during the pioneering years of the purchase areas. Similarly, Jacob Molebaleng’s farm was named Sekukuniland Pioneer Farm, which was a reference to the BaPedi homeland in South Africa where the Molebaleng family originated from.17 The name also highlighted the fact that the Basotho viewed themselves as pioneer farmers in the Dewure Purchase Areas as well as highlighting Molebaleng’s Pedi roots in Sekukuniland. As highlighted earlier, although most of the members of the community were not Sotho in the sense of originating from Lesotho, most of them being actually BaPedi (from northern Sotho in the Transvaal region), they appealed to the greater Sotho category (which encompasses both southern Sotho and northern Sotho/Pedi), as a strategy for forging unity and articulating their belonging. Farm names were thus carefully chosen to make a statement about the religion, status or historical roots of the farm owners. This naming practice became so pervasive in the pioneering years of the purchase areas that Africans began to debate the meanings of these novel farm names in various fora, especially The Bantu Mirror. In 1936 the editor of The Bantu Mirror noticed this trend in the Marirangwe Purchase Areas and decided to initiate debate in the newspaper. He wrote: What do you think of these names of some of the farms (in Marirangwe Purchase Areas) Hope Farm, Catch Farm, New Zululand, Zangwa, Nzondelelo Farm, Nkululeko, Pekamani, Zuvarabuda and Canaan. From these names, you will notice and study the meaning of each, for yourself. Let us hear some of the names from the other Native Purchase Areas.18 17 

Kingfisher, ‘Fort Victoria news’, The Bantu Mirror, 2 October 1937. ‘The AME Church Conference and the Superintendent’s visits’, The Bantu Mirror, 15 February 1936, p.6. 18 

Mujere.indb 48

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

49

These were carefully chosen names that were loaded with meaning and history. Names like New Zululand and Sekukuniland Pioneer Farm were a clear reference to the owners’ history as well as their desire to be progressive farmers in the purchase areas. Other names like Hope Farm, Nkululeko (freedom), Zuvarabuda (dawn) and Progress Farm were a constant reminder that the farmers had to strive for prosperity on their new farms as well as asserting class differentiation between purchase area farmers and peasants in the reserves. The Basotho farmers belonged to this emerging African middle class who valued progress, as encapsulated in some of the names they gave their farms. As will be discussed in greater detail in the following chapter, as well as purchasing their individual farms, the Basotho also made contributions to purchase a farm that they owned communally. They established a school, clinic, church and dip tank and also made a site for the community cemetery on the farm.19 They named this farm Bethel. Although it is not clear why they chose that particular name, it is clear that as Christians they named the farm after the Biblical Bethel. Over time, Bethel Farm became synonymous with the Basotho community in the Dewure Purchase Areas. The farm became a symbol of not only the presence of the Basotho community in the Dewure Purchase Areas, but also their belonging. KuBhetere (Bethel Farm), as the local Shona people call it, became accepted as a place for the Basotho. Therefore, a combination of ownership of freehold land and naming of those farms was a key factor in both the emplacement of the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas and the establishment of a strong sense of attachment to the place. This naming of farms was a vital method by which the Basotho expressed their sense of belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas. For example, names such as Sekukuniland Pioneer Farm reflected the roots of the community, while names like Progress Farm pointed to the community’s aspirations. Christian or Biblical names such as Bethel Farm reflected the Basotho’s Christian faith and their strong desire to project themselves as such.20 In other words the name helped them project their religious belonging as it differentiated them from non-Christians. Hence, just like other pioneer purchase area farmers such as those in Marirangwe 19  The significance of Bethel Farm in the Basotho’s belonging will be discussed in greater detail in the following chapters. 20  It is thought that the name Bethel was suggested by one of the DRC missionaries.

Mujere.indb 49

10/12/2018 16:17

50

Land, Migration and Belonging

described by the editor of The Bantu Mirror, the Basotho made use of this naming practice to articulate their belonging by celebrating difference. Although their use of the greater Sotho category was a useful strategy in their struggles for belonging, the members of the community also remained conscious of their specific historical roots. It is evident that the Basotho were keen to be viewed as progressive Africans who were setting a good example for other Africans as they were wedded to the ideas of progress, which came from agricultural production. Writing in the 1930s, a columnist using the penname Kingfisher contributed a number of articles to The Bantu Mirror. Kingfisher covered various activities of the Africans in Fort Victoria and surrounding districts in his column, ‘Fort Victoria News’.21 From the content of most of his articles, especially his celebration of the Basotho community’s progress in the areas of education and farming, it is possible that he was a member of the Basotho community. Interestingly, most issues covered by Kingfisher resonated strongly with ideas that had been raised by Johannes Mokwile in his 1924 article.22 In spite of this, however, it is by no means clear that Johannes Mokwile was indeed the man behind the Kingfisher column in The Bantu Mirror. Kingfisher was once asked by the editor to reveal his actual name but it was never published in the paper. As well as providing regular news about the Basotho’s advances in agriculture and educations, Kingfisher’s articles also revealed that Basotho in Southern Rhodesia continued to have strong connections with South Africa decades after their migration. In 1936, he wrote: Mr Cephas Mmakola and his wife have returned from a long leave in the Transvaal. They have a Sedan car which they bought there. Pambili ma-Africa … (Forward Africans). We hear that Rev. A. Mukwili is coming out to southern Rhodesia next month. He comes to stay and work among the Basutos [sic] in the Fort Victoria District. Mr Mukwili belongs to the Dutch Reformed Church. Readers of the ‘Bantu Mirror’ will note that there are no African Ministers of the DRC [Dutch Reformed Church] Mission in this colony. So, we who belong to this church are ready to give Rev. Mr Mukwili a hearty welcome when he comes.23 21 

Kingfisher’s real identity remained a mystery. However, from his intimate knowledge of the everyday life in the Basotho community, it seems he was probably a member of the Basotho community. 22 See J. Mokwile, ‘Native ideals’ Native Affairs Department Annual, Vol. 2 (1924). 23  Kingfisher, ‘Fort Victoria news’, The Bantu Mirror, 6 June 1936.

Mujere.indb 50

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

51

Map 2  Farms owned by the Basotho farmers in the Dewure Purchase areas (drawn by Mukundindishe Chifamba)

In an interview, Nelson Thema reminisced about how his aunts, uncles and cousins from South Africa would visit them in the Dewure Purchase Areas and also attend family gatherings such as weddings and funerals.24 This helped to perpetuate the transnational kinship bonds between the Basotho migrants in Southern Rhodesia and their kinsmen in South Africa. LAND AND INHERITANCE DISPUTES By the early 1930s, when the Basotho began to move from Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms to the Dewure and Mungezi Purchase Areas, most of the original part-owners of the two farms had died. In the case of Niekerk’s Rust, of the nine original owners of the farm, only three – Jeremiah Morudu, Lucas Mokwile and Isaac Khumalo – were still alive when the farm was expropriated.25 This led to a number of inheritance disputes as the deceased owners often died intestate and left multiple heirs. 24 

Interview with Nelson Thema, Harare, 23 September 2017. NAZ S1542/F2/1 Assistant Director of Native Lands to CNC, 9 December 1932. 25 

Mujere.indb 51

10/12/2018 16:17

52

Land, Migration and Belonging

Hence inheritance of immovable property became one of the most problematic issues in the early 1930s as families fought over inheritance of the different individual shares in these two farms and also over what laws to use in such cases. These disputes opened up debate on the legality of African wills, the position of women in inheritance cases, Christian marriages and community of property in marriages and the applicability of customary law in inheritance cases. As non-indigenous Africans in the colony, the Basotho saw ownership of freehold land as crucial in their construction of identity and community reproduction. From their time in Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms to the time they moved to purchase areas in the 1930s, the Basotho saw ownership of freehold land as very important in their quest for belonging. As a result, land played a central role in inheritance disputes among the Basotho, as they felt that they would be insecure without ownership of freehold land. It was often unclear to colonial officials whether it was appropriate to use customary law or common law to distribute the estates of Africans who had died either testate or intestate. There was also interference from colonial officials in determining what was custom and what was not. According to Shutt: the end result of much administrative musing was an uneasy mix of European conceptions of inheritance of private property and African ideas about traditional succession to the head of the family. These ill-fitting pieces formed the basis of the colony’s administration of estates in the Purchase Areas.26

This resulted in constant disputes over inheritance, especially where immovable property such as land was concerned.27 The purchase area scheme tremendously increased the number Africans who owned land on a freehold basis, which in turn led to increase in inheritance disputes involving immovable property.28 This emergent socio-economic environment brought a number of challenges for Africans whose inheritance laws with regards to 26 

Shutt, ‘We are the best poor farmers’, p.15. For a discussion of the complexity of customary law in colonial Africa see M. Chanock, Law, custom, and social order: The colonial experience in Malawi and Zambia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985); K. Mann and R. Roberts (eds), Law in colonial Africa (Portsmouth: Heinemann, 1991). 28  For examples from other purchase areas see A. P. Cheater, ‘Fighting over property: The articulation of dominant and subordinate legal systems governing the inheritance of immovable property among Blacks in Zimbabwe’ Africa: Journal of the International African Institute, Vol. 57, No. 2 (1987): 173–195. 27 

Mujere.indb 52

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

53

immovable property remained ambivalent. The interface between customary law and the common law used in the colony threw Africans into legal quagmires. Inheritance cases also opened up issues such as women’s legal minority status, Africans’ rights to transfer immovable property using wills and the importance of Christian marriages in inheritance. A number of Africans turned to colonial courts to settle the many inheritance cases that native commissioners and other colonial officials had failed to resolve. Some of the inheritance disputes were complicated by the fact that they involved land, and some members of the community wrote wills in terms of the African Wills Act (1933). There were debates about what constituted customary law and what were the situations in which it could be applied. However, far from being static, customary law emerged out of colonial encounters. As Roberts and Mann aptly put it, ‘customary law, regarded by some Europeans as immutable tradition, evolved out of the interplay between African societies and European colonialism’.29 In the same vein, Merry argues that customary law ‘was not a relic of a timeless pre-colonial past but instead an historical construct of the colonial period’.30 Thus customary tenure as part of this customary law also evolved out of interactions between Africans and colonial administrators. With regards to inheritance, customary law tended to put men at an advantage since heirs were almost always chosen from the male members of the family. Traditional marriages also tended to weaken women’s ability to inherit from their deceased spouses. In most communities in colonial Zimbabwe, heirs were usually selected using the primogeniture system (with the eldest son becoming the heir) or the collateral system, in which ‘the eldest son succeeded the father after which all brothers succeeded in a row until the first son of the eldest brother succeeded and the system was repeated over generations’.31 These customs were, however, never universally applicable as they changed from one community to another and from one generation to the next. As the number of Africans seeking legal recourse in various disputes increased, especially after the establishment of purchase 29 

R. Roberts and K. Mann ‘Law in colonial Africa’, in K. Mann and R. Roberts (eds) Law in colonial Africa (Portsmouth: Heinemann, 1991), p.4. 30  S. E. Merry, ‘Land and colonialism’, Law and Society Review, 25, 4 (1991), p.897. 31  G. C. Mazarire, ‘A social and political history of Chishanga: South-Central Zimbabwe c.1750–2000’, PhD thesis, University of Zimbabwe, 2010, p.45.

Mujere.indb 53

10/12/2018 16:17

54

Land, Migration and Belonging

areas, they began to be viewed as litigious by colonial officials. Colonial courts were important forums in which Africans engaged with European settlers and with fellow Africans. According to Roberts and Mann, ‘Africans met one another on the legal battlefield far more often than they did Europeans’.32 Inheritance cases and other legal disputes can therefore provide a lens through which Africans’ colonial experiences can be viewed and analysed. With a large number of Africans being able to own freehold land after the establishment of purchase areas, the applicability of customary law in inheritance cases involving land became a major issue of legal debate among colonial officials and legal experts. Although customary tenure was regarded as the law governing land ownership and use among Africans, purchase area farms were owned on a freehold basis. According to Cheater: during the colonial period cases of disputed inheritance of freehold land were never brought before tribal or customary courts, but were normally decided within the colonial administrative system by native (later district) commissioner in conjunction with the Master of the High Court and the successive land boards responsible for the allocation of these freehold farms. 33

In spite of this, however, some Africans sought further legal recourse in magistrates’ courts and the High Court. Some Africans also wrote wills in terms of the African Wills Act (No. 13, 1933), which complicated inheritance disputes among Africans. As Cheater argues: [the] general guideline indicating either testate or intestate disposal has been complicated by a number of intervening factors: interaction between these two alternatives; further interaction between the rules governing inheritance among blacks and those pertaining to whites; marriage law; and ignorance of customary law on the part of white administrators. 34

As will be shown below, the position of the Basotho as ‘Alien Natives’ who owned freehold land created a number of challenges regarding inheritance of immovable property. In most of these cases, women had to seek the help of colonial administrators and colonial courts in order to inherit or take possession of immovable property, especially land. 32 

R. Roberts and K. Mann ‘Law in colonial Africa’, in K. Mann and R. Roberts (eds), Law in colonial Africa (Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann/London: James Currey, 1991), p.3. 33  Cheater, ‘Fighting over property’, p.175. 34  Cheater, ‘Fighting over property’, p.176.

Mujere.indb 54

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

55

CUSTOMARY LAW, COMMON LAW AND INHERITANCE DISPUTES The case involving the estate left by Joseph Komo epitomises the challenges faced by Africans in dealing with inheritance issues in the 1930s and 1940s. Joseph Komo was a Mosotho who was one of the four part-owners of Erichsthal Farm. He also owned a large herd of cattle. He died in 1914 and was survived by his wife Johanna, two daughters, Pauline Leboho (Komo) and Johanna Jr, and a son, Ernest Komo.35 Johanna Komo Jr married Joseph van Blerk (a Coloured man) with whom she had two children, Joseph Jr and Stephen.36 Joseph Komo’s estate became a bone of contention between the Komo family and the Van Blerks because Joseph van Blerk left his estate, part of which was his late wife (Johanna Komo)’s inheritance from her father Joseph Komo, to his two sons. The Komo family argued that it was improper for the children of Joseph van Blerk, their brother-in-law, to benefit from Joseph Komo’s estate through their father. They were also challenging the legality of Van Blerk’s will together with the notarial deed signed between Van Blerk and the Komo family dividing the estate of Joseph Komo. In a sworn statement, Fredrick Komo, the late Joseph Komo’s brother, argued that Ernest Komo was the rightful heir to the estate, being Joseph Komo’s only son.37 This argument was based on the Basotho custom, which stipulated that the eldest son of the deceased was supposed to inherit his land. However, because there was a will and a notary deed dividing the estate, it was difficult for the case to be decided only on the basis of customary law. Due to the complex nature of this inheritance dispute, the case ended up being decided in the High Court of Rhodesia in the Komo and Leboho v. Holmes NO High Court case, which started in 1933 and was concluded in 1935.38 The facts before the court were that Joseph Komo at the time of his death in 1914 was the owner of one-quarter of an undivided and undefined share of Erichsthal Farm. Komo was survived by his wife, Johanna, and six children. However, only three of those 35 

NAZ S1857 Distribution of estate: Joseph and Johanna Komo. A Coloured in this context refers to a person of mixed blood. 37  NAZ S1857 Distribution of Estate, Fredrick Komo sworn statement before NC Gutu, 30 September 1940. 38  Komo and Leboho v. Holmes NO (31 May and 1 August 1935), Southern Rhodesia Law Reports, 1933–1935. I am grateful to Tererai Mafukidze for sending me this report. 36 

Mujere.indb 55

10/12/2018 16:17

56

Land, Migration and Belonging

children were part of his estate. Joseph Komo’s daughter Johanna married Joseph van Blerk by Christian rites and died in 1929 without leaving a will. She had, however, told her family that she wished her estate to go to her husband. Johanna Komo (the widow of Joseph Komo), and her children Ernest Komo and Paulina Leboho then entered into a notarial deed with Van Blerk dividing the estate of Joseph Komo equally among them.39 Up to this point all the beneficiaries of Joseph Komo’s estate were in agreement. However, disagreements started after the death of Joseph van Blerk in 1933: […] van Blerk died and bequeathed all his property by will to his own children and appointed defendant [Ernest Komo] as executor. Ernest K [Komo] and Paulina L [Leboho] thereafter lodged objection to the confirmation of the accounts in van Blerk’s estate on the grounds that van Blerk was not at that time entitled to make a will, and alternatively, if he was so entitled, he had bequeathed property to which he was not entitled. They also objected to the notarial deed on the ground that the estates of Joseph K. [Komo] and Johanna van Blerk should have devolved by native custom and that van Blerk could not have acquired any property through his wife.40

It therefore became a test case to determine whether Africans had the capacity to dispose immovable property by will and also whether marriage by Christian rites had any effect on community of property.41 As well as challenging the fact that their father’s estate had devolved to Van Blerk through marriage, the Komos were also arguing that, as a Native, Van Blerk was not entitled to make a will. Although the position of Coloureds during this period was quite ambivalent, the Komo family chose to identify Van Blerk as African to bolster their argument that he was not entitled to make a will. Although the Komo family were living on freehold land and were not under any particular traditional authority, they insisted on following customary law on inheritance. They sought to deploy customary law to stop Van Blerk (and his children) from inheriting the estate of Joseph Komo through his wife. This would ensure that Van Blerk would not inherit the estate of Joseph Komo because he was an in-law. The court, however, found that ‘the administration of the Estates Ordinance, 1907 applied to all inhabitants of Southern 39  Van Blerk was taking the share that was due to his late wife who was one of the beneficiaries of the estate of her father, Joseph Komo. 40  Komo and Leboho v. Holmes NO (31 May and 1 August 1935), Southern Rhodesia Law Reports, 1933–1935. 41 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 56

10/12/2018 16:17

Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas



57

Rhodesia whether Native or European and clearly recognised the rights of all persons, including natives’.42 This meant that Van Blerk’s will was considered valid by the court, which found that Van Blerk was entitled by common law to dispose by will his rights in Erichsthal Farm.43 One of the rulings of the court with significant consequences was on the applicability of customary law on the inheritance of immovable property. The court ruled that ‘native law could not be used [as] guide to these cases because; although “native law” did recognise to some extent individual rights of ownership of property it did not recognise land as private property as such or as community of property’.44 This was a blow to the Komo family who had sought to have the inheritance dispute settled using customary law. Crucially, this part of the judgement meant that customary law could no longer be applied to inheritance issues involving immovable property. This case had far-reaching effects on issues around gender, patriarchal control, property and inheritance. It challenged patriarchal customary traditions on inheritance, especially inheritance of immovable property. Most importantly the case set a precedent for African women’s ownership of property. On the question of community of property in Christian marriages, the court held that: although Komo and his wife were natives, community of property did apply to their marriage, as it was a marriage by Christian rites, and therefore the widow became entitled to one-half of his estate on Komo’s death, and so it was rightly awarded to the three children in equal shares.45

This became a defining case on how the colonial administration might deal with inheritance disputes among Africans and how customary law could be applied in relation to inheritance.46 The Komo and Leboho v. Holmes NO High Court case ruling therefore resolved the inheritance dispute involving the estate of Joseph Komo and cleared the way for Van Blerk’s children to inherit part of the estate. Van Blerk had two sons, Joseph Jr and Stephen, and one daughter, Johanna Jr. Joseph Jr lived in Nelspruit in South Africa and his brother Stephen lived in Fort Victoria. The court 42 Ibid. 43 

‘Validity of native will: Judgment in high court: Interpretation of Order-incouncil’, The Rhodesia Herald, Saturday 3 August 1935. 44  Shutt, ‘We are the best poor farmers’, p.48. 45  ‘Validity of native will: Judgment in high court: Interpretation of Order-incouncil’, The Rhodesia Herald, Saturday 3 August 1935. 46  Shutt, ‘We are the best poor farmers’, p.47.

Mujere.indb 57

10/12/2018 16:17

58

Land, Migration and Belonging

ruled that they be granted £57 each as part of their share of their father’s estate.47 Their grandfathers Francis Lekula and Fredrick Komo, the head of the Komo family, were, however, against the idea of allowing the two to be given the money due to them in their father’s estate. They suggested that the money should go towards the purchase of a farm for their families. They feared that the two might misuse the money. Fredrick Komo believed that ‘had Erichsthal not been expropriated under the Native Land Apportionment Act the descendants of Joseph Komo would have had a home, but if the money is now paid to the sons, Stephen and Joseph, they might squander the money and it will be lost to the family’.48 Moreover, Joseph Jr had once been described by the Native Commissioner for Nelspruit District in South Africa as ‘a shiftless fellow’ who was not very keen to work, making him likely to misuse his inheritance.49 From the statement by Fredrick Komo, it is quite evident that the idea of securing land for their families was a very important issue among the Basotho, especially during the years when they had been displaced from Erichsthal and Niekerk’s Rust farms. Ownership of freehold land was thus at the centre of the Basotho’s strategies for community reproduction and sustenance. Francis Lekula and Fredrick Komo’s views on how Stephen and Joseph Jr should manage their inheritance was informed by a need to continue the tradition of ownership of freehold land, and also to ensure the security of future generations. The Komo and Leboho v. Holmes NO High Court case set a precedent for African inheritance cases. The High Court ruling established the legality of Africans disposing of land through wills, community of property in Christian marriages and the applicability of customary law in inheritance cases. By the time the High Court ruled on the Komo case, the government had enacted the Native Wills Act (No. 13 of 1933), which ‘made it legally possible for blacks to dispose of their property by will, but reconfigured the automatic customary inheritance in cases of intestacy’.50 In other words, the Act stipulated that where the deceased died intestate their property was to be disposed following customary 47 

NAZ S1857 Distribution of Estate: Master of High Court to NC Gutu, 11 May 1942. 48  NAZ S1857 Distribution of Estate: Joseph and Johanna Komo, statement by Fredrick Komo. 49  NAZ S1857 Distribution of Estate: Joseph and Johanna Komo, NC Nelspruit to NC Gutu, 7 October 1941. 50  Cheater, ‘Fighting over property’, p.177.

Mujere.indb 58

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

59

law.51 Nevertheless, it was never quite clear which cases could be governed by solely customary law, since some black farmers were married in Christian ceremonies. Another inheritance court case showing the Basotho’s struggles over custom and land was the one involving the estate of Reuben Mphisa, one of the twelve part-owners of Niekerk’s Rust Farm. When the Basotho were being given compensation for the loss of their farms in the 1930s the government accepted Paul Mphisa as heir in the estate of his deceased father, Reuben. Consequently, Paul Mphisa was granted a farm in the Dewure Purchase Areas in exchange for his father’s share in Niekerk’s Rust Farm. He took up Farm number 28 in a section of the Dewure Purchase Areas where the Basotho who had formerly owned Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms were also settling.52 This arrangement, however, was complicated by the fact that at the time of the purchase of Niekerk’s Rust, Reuben Mphisa did not have sufficient money to pay for his share. He borrowed £40 from his sister Martha Mphisa, but died before he could repay the loan. 53 Since Paul Mphisa did not have the money to repay his aunt Martha Mphisa either, the Superintendent of Natives suggested that one-third of the 300-morgen farm that Paul Mphisa was taking up in the Dewure Purchase Areas be ceded to Martha Mphisa to settle the old debt. Although Martha was willing to have the debt settled by taking up the 100 morgen of land, she preferred to take up land that was close to another nephew, Cephas Mphisa, who was also resettled on land in the Dewure Purchase Areas. 54 The Superintendent of Natives then suggested that Paul Mphisa ‘should be granted 200 morgen of land free; that Martha should be given the balance of 100 morgen free; that Paul be allowed to purchase 100 morgen on the usual terms’. 55 This deal was, however, jeopardised by the fact that Paul Mphisa was reluctant to let Martha take up 100 morgen of his land, preferring instead to pay her the £40 she was owed. Martha had wanted to get a farm, but Paul was reluctant to subdivide his farm. 51 

Cheater, ‘Fighting over property’, p.177; see also Native Wills Act, No. 13, 1933. 52  NAZ S1044/9 AC Jennings, Assistant Director of Native Lands to Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria, 22 January 1934. 53  NAZ S1044 /9 Native Purchase Areas 1934–1942, Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to Native Commissioner (NC) Gutu, 8 January 1934. 54 Ibid. 55 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 59

10/12/2018 16:17

60

Land, Migration and Belonging

Since he did not have the money to pay Martha immediately, the Superintendent of Natives advised that Paul use his farm as security to borrow money to pay for the land that Martha wanted to purchase.56 Consequently, in 1934 Paul Mphisa agreed to pay the instalments for the farm that Martha had purchased, making Martha one of the first women to own a farm in the Dewure Purchase Areas.57 This was quite significant in terms of women’s rights of ownership of immovable property, especially given their legal minority status in Southern Rhodesia. Apart from Martha Mphisa, Esther Mojapelo was also one of the few women in the Basotho community who became pioneer farm owners. In 1935 Esther Mojapelo took over the farm that formerly belonged to her brother, Barend Rasitoo. Barend Rasitoo was employed as a driver in the Nuanetsi Ranches in Nuanetsi District (now Mwenezi). His work commitments made it difficult for him to manage his farm, which made him decide to transfer ownership of the farm to his sister, Esther Mojapelo.58 This decision was also influenced by the fact that the Native Land Board wanted farm owners to stay on their farms. The transfer was registered with the Deeds Registry on 25 April 1935.59 Esther Mojapelo became an influential member of the Basotho community. When the Basotho opened their own school in the Dewure Purchase Areas, she became one of the teachers at the school. It should be stressed that even well after their resettlement in the Dewure and Mungezi Purchase Areas, inheritance disputes and gendered access to land continued to be critical issues among the Basotho. Although the Komo and Leboho v. Holmes NO High Court case (1935) and the African Wills Act (1933) had helped clarify a number of issues, including whether Africans could dispose of land through wills as well as community of property in Christian marriages, the position of women as legal minors continued to affect a number of women in the community. The Elizabeth Makola v. Gondongwe (1953) case is illustrative of this, and shows how some of the Basotho women took the legal route to negotiate their ownership of land. This case involved Elizabeth Makola, the widow of Cornelius Makola (Magoba), who was the owner of Farm number 5 in the Mungezi Purchase 56  NAZ S1044/9 Native Purchase Areas 1934–1942, Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to NC Gutu, 5 January 1934. 57 Ibid. 58  NAZ S1044/10 NC Victoria to Assistant NC Nuanetsi, 18 March 1935. 59  NAZ S1010/10 NC Victoria to NC Gutu, 27 April 1935.

Mujere.indb 60

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

61

Areas.60 The two married in 1929. Cornelius died in May 1950, but left a will in which he made his wife one of the heirs to his estate.61 The will further stated that the farm be sold after his death and the proceeds be divided among the heirs named in the will.62 By making a will in terms of the 1933 African Wills Act, Cornelius Makola effectively replaced customary law with common law in as far as the distribution of his estate was concerned. A number of issues arose after the death of Cornelius Makola. First, Elizabeth rejected the idea of being under guardianship. Stephen Khumalo was the nearest male relative who was supposed to be Elizabeth’s guardian after the death of her husband. She however continued to act independently on the farm and later got work as a nurse at Bikita Clinic.63 In her affidavit submitted to the court Elizabeth stated: Stephen Kumalo is my nearest relative under whose guardianship I would normally fall. He lives in Gutu district and has no control over me whatsoever. When I planted the cotton, I did not consult Stephen Kumalo. He was unaware of my actions, having no control over me. I do not now consent to falling back under guardianship.64

Second, after she sold the farm to Mr Gondongwe in 1951, Elizabeth entered into an agreement with Gondongwe whereby she was allowed to occupy the farm and plant her crops until July 1951.65 Later that year Gondongwe demanded £20 from the proceeds of a cotton crop that Elizabeth had planted on the bases of the farm now belonging to him and the agreement he had signed with Elizabeth. Elizabeth, however, disowned the contract and appealed against Gondongwe arguing that: her consent was obtained from her by duress in that when she signed it [the contract] she did so upon the advice of the Assistant Native Commissioner and at the request of the respondent as she was afraid that she would have been moved off the land forthwith if she did not do so and thus lose her crops, and this borne out by the fact that as soon as the Assistant Native Commissioner and respondent left the 60 Makola

was usually spelt Mmakola. However, here I use the spelling employed in the legal documents. 61  NAZ S643 NC Bikita to the Registrar, Appeal Court, 2 June 1953 (Reference JUD 3/4/53), I am grateful to George Karekwaivenani for pointing me to this and other files on this case. 62 Ibid. 63 Ibid. 64  NAZ S643 Gondongwe v. Makola, NC’s court records, 20 January 1954. 65  NAZ S643 N. E. Nelson, Clerk of the Court, Office of NC Bikita to the Registrar, Court of Appeal, 27 October 1952 (Gondongwe 15421 Bikita v. Elizabeth Makola).

Mujere.indb 61

10/12/2018 16:17

62

Land, Migration and Belonging

farm, appellant went to protest against their actions to the Provincial Native Commissioner, Fort Victoria.66

This demonstrated that in spite of their disadvantaged position under customary law, some women were able to use colonial courts to secure their rights to land. Elizabeth was an educated woman and as well as working on the farm she was also a nurse. Taking into consideration what she had been able to do to fend for herself since the death of her husband; the court ruled that Elizabeth could no longer be regarded as a legal minor. The court also declared the contract she had entered into with Gondongwe null and void on the grounds of duress.67 The court further found that although the respondent (Gondongwe) had paid the purchase price of the farm in January 1951 the transfer of the land was not completed until 1952, which meant that legally the farm still belonged to the original owner (through his widow, Elizabeth).68 Although this could have been an isolated case given the fact that women generally found it difficult to seek further legal recourse by lodging an appeal, it shows the resilience of some Basotho women in the face of customary laws that oppressed them. The Basotho women challenged customary laws on inheritance as well as their purported legal minority status and proved that they could act independently without a guardian. Although on the surface this and other legal cases were about inheritance and property, on a deeper level they are indicative of the intricate gender struggles that were played out in everyday interactions. They were about resistance to patriarchal control, women’s access to property – especially land, the position of women in marriages, and the ability of women to enter into agreements without the help of a guardian. Thus these inheritance cases not only shaped the history of the Basotho community in colonial Zimbabwe, but also affected African women in the colony more widely. THE BASOTHO FARMERS AND THE DEWURE NATIVE COUNCIL In spite of the evidently strong Basotho in-group ties built around shared migration history and kinship ties strengthened by endog66  Elizabeth Makola v. Gondongwe (Native Appeal Court), Appeal Case No. 64/52, 7 December 1954. 67 Ibid. 68 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 62

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

63

amous marriages, the Basotho were not entirely inward looking; they interacted with other farm owners in the Dewure Purchase Areas in their everyday lives and in various organisations and institutions established in the area. They joined a number of associations and other bodies in which they interacted with other farm owners. There were three main bodies serving farmers in the Dewure Purchase Areas: the Dewure Native Council, the farmers’ associations and the Intensive Conservation Areas committees (in the Dewure East, Central and West sections).69 The committees of Intensive Conservation Areas were responsible for conservation of the areas and dealt with the implementation of good farming methods among farmers. The Natural Resources Act had made provisions for the creation of Intensive Conservation Areas where farmers of a specific area agreed to voluntarily undertake conservation work in return for enhanced government subsidies.70 Besides the Natural Resources Board, Intensive Conservation Areas also worked with the Department of Agriculture. The farmers’ association was an organisation run by the farmers themselves and they used it to channel their grievances, apply for grants and lobby the government. The Native Council and the farmers’ association were the two most important bodies in the purchase areas as they provided a platform for farmers to work for the improvement of their lot. The idea of establishing Native Councils was introduced by Prime Minister Moffat in 1929. Comparisons were being drawn with countries like Kenya where Native Councils had been introduced in 1925 and were being used as conduits to levy rates and for medical and educational works.71 According to Steele, ‘in the initial stage, they [Native Councils] represented an attempt to graft European institutions onto a rapidly changing tribal society with a view to the installation of a democratic system of local government at some future stage’.72 This was meant to provide a government-controlled body where rural and later purchase area farmers could pursue their aspirations without resorting to political agitation. Native Councils were also designed to preclude the 69  S2929/8/3 Delineation Report, Gutu: Report on Dewure NPA, by C. J. K. Latham, 19 February 1964. 70  J. McGregor, ‘Conservation, control and ecological change: The politics and ecology of colonial conservation in Shurugwi’, Environment and History, Vol. 1, No. 3 (1995), p.267. 71  S1561/25, Native Councils Bill, 1926–1937 (Minutes and Memoranda): G. V. Maxwell, CNC, Kenya, 18 August 1927. 72  Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy’, p.74.

Mujere.indb 63

10/12/2018 16:17

64

Land, Migration and Belonging

influence of African pacifist movements such as the Southern Rhodesia Native Association (SRNA), the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union and the Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association (RBVA), which were becoming increasingly politically agitated. They were also designed to become new conduits used by the government to introduce ‘Native development’ programmes. The precursors to the statutory Native Councils were the Native Boards, established in 1930. They were chaired by native commissioners and were composed of chiefs and other elected members. The depression, however, made it quite difficult to find sufficient funding to run these nascent Native Boards. Moreover, African associations such as the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union resisted the Native Councils as they saw them as a ploy by the government to increase its control over Africans.73 In particular, they loathed the Native Councils Bill’s provision that the councils should be chaired by native commissioners, who they felt would dominate the council and impose their ideas on Africans. After the experimental phase, the statutory Native Councils were established in 1937 with a similar structure to that of their antecedents, the Native Boards. Each council was composed of six members; two government appointees, two elected tax-paying members (or farm owners in the case of purchase areas). In the councils in reserves, native commissioners would also appoint two chiefs to serve on the board.74 Native commissioners presided over all the Native Councils in their districts and decisions were taken by vote. They could make decisions on matters such as the construction and maintenance of roads, bridges, dams, ridges, dip tanks and hospitals, among other issues.75 Native Councils became semi-autonomous units that taxed and administered the distribution of resources in their own areas. This is why they gained notoriety for exploitation. Native Councils were more easily established in the reserves than in the purchase areas. In the former they worked with what were called Tribal Land Authorities, headed by chiefs. In the latter, there were no equivalent tribal institutions, so they were composed of farmers headed by the Native Commissioner. A number of purchase areas resisted the establishment of these Native Councils, arguing that 73 

Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy’, p.179. S1561/25, Native Councils Bill, 1926–1937 (Minutes and Memoranda): Acting AG to CNC, 24 December 1928. 75 Ibid. 74 

Mujere.indb 64

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

65

they were exploitative and enhanced the powers of the native commissioners. Mazarire notes that the farmers in Mshawasha Purchase Areas completely rejected the establishment of Native Councils in their area, drawing the ire of officials of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, who threatened to punish them.76 However, in spite of widespread resistance, especially by African elites in African associations such as Industrial and Commercial Workers Union, Native Councils were established in a number of purchase areas including the Dewure Purchase Areas.77 In 1938 the Basotho requested a council in which they could be the dominant group. This, however, was complicated by the fact that the Basotho farms were not geographically contiguous. The impracticality of such an arrangement was also highlighted by the Chief Native Commissioner. The Native Commissioner, however, noted that the Basotho were making such a request on the assumption that all the remaining plots in the area would be sold only to members of their community.78 Following the Basotho’s requests for a Native Council the Native Commissioner convened a meeting of all members of the Basotho community in both the Mungezi and Dewure Purchase Areas on 5 July 1938, where they discussed the establishment of the Native Council.79 It was unanimously agreed that the Basotho form a Native Council composed of the Basotho in both the Mungezi and Dewure Purchase Areas. It was also agreed that the council would be composed of seven office bearers, and members from both Purchase Areas were elected to the first committee.80 Elected from the Mungezi Purchase Areas were Jona Makola (Mmakola) and Matthew Komo with Ephraim Morudu, Paul Mphisa, Andries Masoha, Seroka Morudu and Malachi Phosa coming from the Dewure Purchase Areas.81 The creation of a Basotho Native Council was, however, problematic because the Dewure and Mungezi Purchase Areas were in different districts, which rendered the proposal impractical. As 76 

G. C. Mazarire, ‘A social and political history of Chishanga: South-Central Zimbabwe c.1750–2000’, PhD thesis, University of Zimbabwe, 2010, p.290. 77  Examples include Jenya Purchase Areas in Chibi, Nyazvidzi in Gutu, and Mungezi Purchase Areas in Bikita, among others. 78  National Archives of Zimbabwe (NAZ) Records Centre, Loc.30.3.3r.Box 71832, Assistant Director of Lands, Native Land Board to NC Gutu, 21 February 1939. 79  NAZ Records Centre, Loc.30.3.3r.Box 71832 NC Gutu to CNC, 7 July 1938. 80 Ibid. 81 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 65

10/12/2018 16:17

66

Land, Migration and Belonging

already highlighted, the Basotho farms in the Dewure Purchase Areas were not geographically contiguous, making the drawing of geographical boundaries for the Native Council difficult if not impossible.82 In the end it was resolved that the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas join other farmers in the Dewure Purchase Areas to form the Dewure Native Council. This council excluded those Basotho in the Mungezi Purchase Areas because they fell into another district (Bikita). The Native Council had three subcommittees, namely public works, education and finance. The major concern of public works was with the construction and maintenance of roads, bridges, dams and dip tanks. This committee also had members co-opted from the Intensive Conservation Areas. The education committee dealt with the running of Tirizi Council School and applications for new council schools.83 The council also worked on the establishment of other social amenities such as postal services, telephone services, recreational facilities, clinics, grinding mills and general dealers, among other matters.84 The trading services that the council handled between 1948 and 1957 include Mr Nyanyiwa’s application for a general dealer in Reservation C; Herbert Fanny and Manjonjo’s application for a butcher’s shop; and Vandirayi and Takavinga’s application for a further general dealer’s site on Reservation C. All the applicants were from the district and their applications were approved.85 Although the Basotho seemingly worked well with other farmers, discourses of inclusion and exclusion often emerged in the associations, bodies and committees. It was clear that there was a see-saw of mutuality and difference between farmers in these bodies. Notions of difference and exclusion often emerged during deliberations in the Dewure Native Council. More often than not, debates on policies and proposals ended up dividing the council between members of the Basotho community and the non-Sotho members. As early as 1948, the Native Commissioner for Gutu District was already complaining about discord in the Dewure Native Council as he observed that the Basotho, who 82 

NAZ Records Centre, Loc.30.3.3r.Box 71832 CNC to NC Gutu, 22 July 1938; NC Gutu to CNC, 30 July 1938. 83  Education in the Dewure Purchase Areas will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5. 84  S3285/43/38/3 D. J. Y. Woods to the Secretary, Working Party of Community Development and Local Government Coordinating Committee (1971). 85  S2797/4663 Dewure Division Native Council, Gutu 1947–1957.

Mujere.indb 66

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

67

were viewed as more ‘progressive’ and ‘modernising’, were more willing to pay high taxes, while the Karanga farmers were either reluctant to do so or could not afford it. The Native Commissioner explained: we have in this division a minority of progressive Basutos and a majority of Karanga. The two sections number at present about 150 farmers and for the success of any council it was stressed that high taxation would be necessary. While the Basothos [sic] agreed and used all forceful arguments in favour of taxation being from £2 to £5 a male, the Karanga were bemoaning poverty and benefits of taxations from 2/6 [2 shillings and 6d] to 10/–. One decision being called the majority the Karanga voted for 5/– taxation and it was only when the disappointed Basuto [sic] cast their votes for 10/– tax, that the higher taxation governed the majority to carry it through.86

Of the ten members of the Dewure Native Council in 1948, five, Jacob Molebaleng, John Moeketsi, Malachi Phosa, Ephraim Morudu and Paul Mphisa, were Sotho, which made it possible for them to sway the council to accept the higher taxes they proposed.87 This general dissension in the council was influenced largely by the fact that the Basotho were comparatively well-to-do and could afford to pay the high taxes they were advocating. As people who were generally regarded as progressive by colonial officials, it is also possible that the Basotho proposed these high taxes so as to fit into this constructed image and to be in the good books of the colonial officials. As a result of these differences between the Basotho farmers and their Karanga counterparts, especially with regards to the taxes and other council rates their community had to pay, the Native Commissioner toyed with the idea of creating a separate Native Council in which the Basotho would be the dominant group. He argued that the Basotho were being ‘held back by the more cautious Karanga’, who were reluctant to pay the high taxes that would, in his opinion, help in the development of the area.88 This idea was quickly dropped because it was then felt that it would accentuate ethnic divisions between the Basotho and Karanga farmers.89 Thus although these bodies provided a forum in which all farmers in the Dewure Purchase Areas interacted 86  S2797/4663 NC Gutu to Provincial NC, Fort Victoria, 12 August 1948, Dewure Division Council. 87  S2797/4663 NC Gutu to Provincial NC Fort Victoria, 19 March 1948, minutes of Dewure Division Native council Meeting held at the Office of NC, Gutu, 18 March 1948. 88  S2797/4663 Acting Provincial NC Fort Victoria to CNC, 16 August 1948. 89  S2797/4663 NC Gutu to Provincial NC, Fort Victoria, 12 August 1948, Dewure Division Council.

Mujere.indb 67

10/12/2018 16:17

68

Land, Migration and Belonging

and shared ideas, discourses of difference continued to bedevil the community. Disputes in the council thus illustrate how, in spite of being seemingly inclusive and non-partisan, bodies such as the Native Council became a platform where notions of exclusion took centre stage. As well as being members of the Native Council and the Intensive Conservation Areas, the Basotho were also involved in the farmers’ associations. After the Native Council, the farmers’ associations were the most important organisations in the Dewure Purchase Areas. In 1964, the Delineation Officer for the district noted that: the Farmers’ Association, we were given to understand, is primarily concerned with the agricultural economics of the Division. Besides this, however, it is the organ of the farmers for all grievances, requests and general plans for the area … general meetings are held regularly at which all farmers may voice their opinions and their views, they consider the association theirs, it is something with which they can readily identify themselves. As one person put it, ‘the Association is our mother body, the council is more like a father from these two bodies all our bodies have sprung’.90

Overall, the farmers’ associations were concerned with general progress of farmers and dealt with issues such as applications for funds and grants. Compared with the Native Council, which was under the control of the Native Commissioner, farmers expressed their views and aspirations better in the farmers’ associations. However, although the Basotho were very vocal in the Native Council and often came into conflict with members of the council who were not Sotho, the farmers’ associations were dominated largely by the Karanga farmers, who outnumbered the Basotho farmers.91 FARM SUBDIVISIONS AND THE BASOTHO FAMILY NETWORKS From the 1950s, sales and subdivisions of farms became a common phenomenon among pioneer farmers in most purchase areas. In Marirangwe Purchase Areas, the 1950s began ‘with a flurry of subdivisions and sales’.92 According to Shutt, this 90 

S2929/8/3 Delineation Report, Gutu: Report on Dewure NPA, by C. J. K. Latham, 19 February 1964. 91 Ibid. 92  Shutt, ‘We are the best poor farmers’, p.392.

Mujere.indb 68

10/12/2018 16:17



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

69

contradicted the Rural Land Board’s argument that Purchase Area farmers were loath to sell their farms.93 The farmers gave a number of reasons for subdividing their farms. In Marirangwe Purchase Areas, Matthew Rusike argued that the reason he sold 235 acres of his 715-acre farm was that market gardening had better returns than traditional plough agriculture.94 Others sold portions of their farms in order to pay off debts or to service their mortgages. This explains why a large number of these sales happened after the Native Land Board demanded that the farmers pay their arrears.95 In spite of the stated reasons, there were other peculiar family reasons that necessitated such sales, such as family squabbles after the death of the original owners of the farm. However, for the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas, the selling of farms was not common. As migrants without the option of going to reserves, the Basotho were usually reluctant to sell their farms preferring, instead, to subdivide them so that they could retain a portion for themselves. In 1964, the Delineation Officer for Gutu, C. J. Latham, reported that ‘some of the farms taken up by these people [Basotho] were very large. The majority has now been sub-divided and only the remnants of this rather colourful group remain today’.96 The attachment that most of the Basotho had to their farms, together with the fact that they had established an enclave in the Dewure Purchase Areas, made it unlikely for them to sell their farms. Moreover, over the years these farms became family farms, making it difficult for the descendants of the original owners to sell them. Consequently, they resolved to live together on the farms with each core family having its own homestead and fields where they grew crops, with other resources such as water sources, pastures and forests being exploited by all the families on the farm. As in other purchase areas, the subdivision of farms was thus a common phenomenon among the 93  Shutt,

‘We are the best poor farmers’, p.392. The Native Land Board was replaced by the Rural Land Board in 1963: this change came after the electoral victory of the Rhodesian Front in 1962, which ended the Responsible Government’s experiment with racial partnership and ushered in an era of hostility against purchase areas. See also A. K. Shutt, ‘Squatters, land sales and intensification in Marirangwe Purchase Area, colonial Zimbabwe, 1931–65’, Journal of African History, Vol. 43, No. 3 (2002), p.496. 94  Shutt, ‘Squatters, land sales and intensification’, p.53. 95  Shutt, ‘We are the best poor farmers’, p.402. 96  S2929/8/3 Delineation Report, Gutu: Report on Dewure NPA, by C. J. K. Latham, 19 February 1964.

Mujere.indb 69

10/12/2018 16:18

70

Land, Migration and Belonging

Basotho. For example, the Mphisa family decided to sell part of their farm to Ben Chabhanga, a family friend who had worked as teacher at Bethel School in the 1950s.97 Similarly, Farm number 53, belonging to Jacob Molebaleng, was also subdivided, with one portion being sold to Pirikisi.98 Such subdivisions became common among most of the Basotho families in the Dewure Purchase Areas as a number of people fell into arrears with their mortgages. Subdivisions were also an easy option for the Basotho since most of them had fairly large farms that could easily be subdivided, compared with later settlers who tended to have smaller farms. The Sikhala family is one of the best known of the Basotho families. According to Sam Sikhala, Andrew Sikhala was one of the Basotho who migrated to Zimbabwe in the late nineteenth century. He first settled in the Niekerk’s Rust Farm in Harawe together with the other Basotho who included Andreas Malete, Ephraim Morudu and Seroka Mphisa. He was married to Margret Malete, the daughter of Andreas Malete, who also migrated with him. Andrew had three daughters Deborah, Wilmina and Hendrinah, and two sons, Job and Harry.99 Andrew Sikhala died when the Basotho were still living on Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal Farms and he was buried on a cemetery close to the railway station in Fort Victoria (Masvingo) town.100 Job Sikhala’s children were Andrew (Jnr), also known as Munyinaha, Andreas, Samuel, Margret (Jr) and Deborah (Jr). Job Sikhala bought Farm number 35 in the Dewure Purchase Areas when he was moved together with other Basotho from Niekerk’s Rust Farm in 1932. Currently, there are three homesteads on the Sikhala farm belonging to Andrew Munyinaha, Andreas and Samuel, who has remained at his father’s original homestead where the original farm house still stands.101 Like many of the first farms in the Dewure Purchase Areas, the Sikhala farm was also subdivided, with a portion being sold to Mr Mazorodze, a friend of the Sikhalas.102 97  Interview with Carly Mphisa: in fact the Mphisa farm was composed of two farms, numbers 28 and 29. Farm number 29 was thus the one sold to Ben Chabhanga, although it cannot be established when the transfers were registered with the Registrar of Deeds’ Office. 98  Interview with Mazvinetsa Pirikisi, Farm number 159, 28 December 2005. 99  Interview with Samuel Sikhala, Farm number 35, 16 July 2009. 100 Ibid. 101 Ibid. 102 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 70

10/12/2018 16:18

Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas



71

Job Sikhala’s sister Deborah married Timothy Mgijima, a Mfengu who lived in Silobela District.103 As a result, Deborah lived in Silobela away from the Basotho community in Gutu. She also broke with the traditional marriages between cousins (motsoala). By contrast, her sibling Hendrinah married Mr Mokwile, a Mosotho, and they bought Farm number 31 in the Dewure Purchase Areas. Hendrinah, however, died in 1961 without any children of her own and she left the farm to the children of her sister Deborah.104 Currently, the farm is registered under the name of Andrew Mgijima, the son of Deborah and Timothy Mgijima.105 However, although they are not ethnically Sotho because their father was a Xhosa, over the years the children and grandchildren of Deborah have largely been viewed as members of the Basotho community. This was made easier by the fact that they inherited Hendrinah’s farm and quickly integrated into the community. The Mgijima family were thus integrated into the Basotho community through kinship ties with the Mokwile family and inheritance of a farm. The case of the Mgijimas is interesting in that it speaks to the complex nature of the Basotho identity in the Dewure Purchase Areas. While ordinarily the term Basotho referred to people who can be referred as northern Sotho or Pedi, gradually this term also encompassed anyone who had kinship ties with the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas. Consequently, there were members of this community who were of Xhosa and Zulu origin, but were able to integrate into the community through intermarriage. There were others who could not even speak Sesotho, but were still considered members of the Basotho community because they were of South African origin, owned farms and chose to identify with the Basotho community. The Basotho identity in the Dewure Purchase areas was thus constructed on the basis of ethnicity, language, kinship ties and social interactions. As a result of subdivisions and the increasing number of family members staying on the same farms, the types of farms envisaged by colonial administrators were never realised. Inter and intra-generational conflicts also often emerged over inheritance and usufruct rights to the farm. While among the Karanga farmers who still had links with relatives in reserves it was possible for some descendants of the original farm owners to 103 Ibid.

104 Ibid. 105 

Mujere.indb 71

Dewure Purchase Areas, Registrar of Deeds Records, Harare.

10/12/2018 16:18

72

Land, Migration and Belonging

move to reserves, this option was difficult for the Basotho who did not have any such links. A 1971 report of the Ministry of Internal Affairs noted that ‘on many farms, heads of household operate as “mini chiefs” wielding authority over small but growing groups of people in a quasi-tribal context’.106 Thus as highlighted above, though there was often one person appointed as the heir when the former owner of the farm died, other family members continued to stay on the farm, established their own homesteads and had their own fields where they did their farming, thus making the farm a mini village. CONCLUSION This chapter has analysed the Basotho’s experiences of colonial displacements following the enactment of the Land Apportionment Act in 1930, which legalised segregation of land in the country. After their displacement from their two farms, Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal, the Basotho moved to the newly created purchase areas. The Native Land Board set aside the Dewure Purchase Areas in Gutu District and the Mungezi Purchase Areas in Bikita District for purchase by the Basotho moving from Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal. Although the Native Land Board was against syndicate purchases of farms in the purchase areas as it was keen to avoid the development of miniature chiefdoms, it gave tacit approval for the creation of a Basotho enclave in the Dewure Purchase Areas. Having previously built their sense of belonging in the colony on the seemingly strong footing of owning freehold land (having purchased Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal Farms prior to the establishment of Purchase Areas), the Basotho saw the creation of the purchase areas as providing them with an opportunity to once again coalesce and rebuild their entitlement to land as well as negotiating their belonging. However, their resettlement in the Dewure Purchase Areas also brought some challenges, as the community had to deal with complex inheritance disputes where immovable property such as land was involved. Some members of the Basotho community died testate, which further complicated inheritance disputes since in the early 106  R.

F. Loxton et al. ‘Report on the survey of natural resources and socioeconomic circumstances of Gutu District in relation to economic development and land use policy’, Ministry of Internal Affairs, Rhodesia, May 1971, p.139.

Mujere.indb 72

10/12/2018 16:18



Colonial Displacements and the Establishment of Native Purchase Areas

73

1930s it was not yet clear whether Africans could dispose of their properties, especially land, through a will. The Komo case showed how difficult it was for Africans to dispose of immovable property through a will and how the contentious interpretation of what was customary and what was not allowed people to make claims and counterclaims. The chapter has demonstrated how inheritance disputes and court cases illuminate the internal dynamics within the Basotho community, the gender tensions and the Basotho’s struggles to negotiate space and belonging in the colonial set-up. Inheritance disputes as well as the court cases that followed also provided Africans, especially women, with an opportunity to challenge customary law with regards to inheritance of immovable property. Thus in spite of their legal minority status and subservient position in accordance with customary law, some women saw colonial courts as a platform for securing their rights to land. As well as ownership of freehold land it should also be highlighted that the names that the Basotho gave their farms also reflected their sense of belonging as these names reflected their religious beliefs, their historical roots and as their aspirations. These farm names, in a number of ways, encapsulated the Basotho’s struggles to belong and their nostalgia.

Mujere.indb 73

10/12/2018 16:18

Mujere.indb 74

10/12/2018 16:18

4 KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas

This chapter examines the centrality of Bethel Farm, the Basotho’s communally owned farm, and its features in the everyday life of these Basotho. The cemetery, in particular, became a key feature of the farm and a marker of the Basotho’s attachment to the land. The chapter also explores the various factors that influenced most members of the Basotho community’s decision to bury their dead at Bethel Cemetery and the social significance attached to this exclusive Basotho burial place. Being recent immigrants, ownership of land and attachment to it, often established through links to graves and other landscape features, became factors in how the Basotho formulated and continue to formulate their sense of belonging to the land. This is, arguably, the reason why kuBhetere, as Bethel Farm is called by the surrounding communities, became a symbol of the Basotho’s belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas. BETHEL FARM AND THE BASOTHO’S BELONGING As highlighted in the previous chapter, as Alien Natives, the Basotho’s belonging in the purchase areas largely hinged on ownership of freehold farms and establishing an attachment to these farms. It is, however, important to note that as well as purchasing their individual farms, the Basotho also bought a community farm, which became a feature in the Basotho’s everyday life. As the leader of the community, Jacob Molebaleng sent numerous letters to the Native Land Board on behalf of the community requesting a farm that would be used as a site for building a ‘non-denominational’ church, school and clinic. They also planned to make the farm a site for a community cemetery

Mujere.indb 75

10/12/2018 16:18

76

Land, Migration and Belonging

and a dip tank. While the establishment of a school, dip tank and clinic represented the Basotho’s desire to foster development through the provision of education and health services, the cemetery largely showed their keenness to establish an attachment to the land through graves. In essence their desire was to make the farm the centre of all their activities and a spiritual marker of their unity as a community. The idea of having a community farm in a purchase area was quite a novel one. Consequently, it began to be suggested by some colonial officials that, as ‘Alien Natives’ without any rights in the reserves, maybe the Basotho wished to establish a ‘reserve’ of their own. This suggestion prompted the Superintendent of Natives for Fort Victoria to write to the Chief Native Commissioner stating how he thought the Basotho wished to make use of the farm. The superintendent pointed out that the Basotho did not wish to have a ‘reserve’ of their own as was being suggested in other circles but wished to purchase their own farm, which would be controlled by their chief (Jacob Molebaleng) and a committee of four.1 He also stated that ‘the Basutos [sic] have been scattered throughout this area and now wish to grasp the opportunity of building up the tribe into one harmonious whole and restoring their old customs and manners which have to a large extent been lost through detribalization’.2 The Superintendent of Natives therefore saw the purchase of a community farm and the establishment of an enclave in the Dewure Purchase Areas as a noble enterprise that would help in the process of the Basotho’s ‘re-tribalisation’, a process which entailed being under the control of a traditional authority. His justification for the Basotho’s desire to have a community farm is vital in explaining how the farm became crucial in the Basotho’s construction of a sense of belonging. It is also apparent that in spite of the Native Land Board’s policy against syndicate purchases of farms, some government officials were prepared to let the Basotho establish an enclave for themselves in the Dewure Purchase Areas. It is interesting to see how the Basotho and the Native Affairs Department’s agendas seemed to overlap. The Native Affairs Department and the Basotho were clearly linking land or territory to identity and belonging and therefore saw the establishment of a Basotho enclave in the Dewure Purchase Areas as critical in their quest for belonging. However, as will be shown later, not all 1 

S1044/10 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 26 January 1934.

2 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 76

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 77

Basotho viewed Jacob Molebaleng as their traditional authority and some of them openly challenged his ambiguous position as ‘chief’ of the community. The community was also quite fragmented with members of different factions often fighting for control of the community. The Basotho saw the purchase area scheme as providing them an opportunity to have a place where they could reconstitute themselves as a community. The Native Commissioner for Gutu District was, however, hesitant to allow the Basotho to create what he termed a ‘miniature nation’ in the purchase areas. He sharply differed with the sentiments of the Superintendent of Natives for Fort Victoria. While the superintendent saw the coalescence of the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas and their purchase of a community farm as providing them with an opportunity to build a community that would be under a traditional authority and therefore aid in the ‘re-tribalisation’ process, the Native Commissioner saw this as setting a bad precedent that could be followed by other Africans. After holding a meeting with the representatives of the community he sent a report to the Chief Native Commissioner stating: it appeared they (Basotho) wished to start as a separate nation in Rhodesia, distinct from Karanga and Ndebele that they wished teachers of the Basutu [sic] tribe who teach through the medium of Sesutu [sic] and English [at Bethel School], making no provision for education in the Chikaranga tongue. That were government to aid in this isolation other settlers might feel that they, too, should be aided in self isolation, and that eventually the government might be faced with the requirements and demands of a number of nations in miniature, all seeking to avoid coalescences one with the other rather than unite and thus simplify a general programme of general control and advancements as a whole. 3

In spite of these early misgivings, the Native Commissioner was ready to allow the Basotho to establish themselves as a community in the purchase areas as he saw it as ultimately beneficial to the locals who could copy ‘the Basutu’s [sic] more advanced ideas and ideals’.4 The Native Land Board approved Molebaleng’s application and granted the Basotho community Farm number 24, which they named Bethel Farm. The conditions for the grant were that the farm would be ‘for the use and benefit of the Basotho community for religious, educational and recreational purposes and also as 3 

S1859 NC Gutu to CNC Salisbury, 6 November 1935.

4 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 77

10/12/2018 16:18

78

Land, Migration and Belonging

sites for a dipping tank, burial ground and clinic’.5 The deed of grant stated that the farm was granted to Jacob Molebaleng in his capacity ‘for the time being as chief of the Basutu [sic] community and his succession in office in trust for Basutu [sic] community in southern Rhodesia’.6 The farm was, like other farms, not to be leased or subdivided without the consent of the Native Land Board.7 The purchase price for the farm, which measured 151.70 morgen, was £75 inclusive of the cost of surveying and pegging.8 A number of members of the Basotho community contributed towards the purchase of the farm as they saw it as an opportunity for the community to have a communally owned farm around which they could rally. This was a great privilege for the community as no other group in the purchase areas had been given the opportunity to purchase a farm for such purposes. The Chief Native Commissioner’s reluctance to allow the Basotho to own a community farm provides an example of how the Native Affairs Department and the Department of Native Development had conflicting visions of African development within Southern Rhodesia. While the Native Affairs Department preferred ‘tribal’ structures to be maintained as a framework for administering Africans, the Department of Native Development preferred to see the end of communal tenure and a movement towards individual tenured farmers. Since the ownership of the farm was ultimately vested in the whole Basotho community, members had to make contributions for the purchase of the farm. Jacob Molebaleng asked all members of the Basotho community in the Dewure Purchase Areas (and the few families in the Mungezi Purchase Areas in Bikita District) to make their contributions. Initially, all the Basotho farm owners were asked to contribute £2 each towards the purchase of the farm.9 Some of the members who contributed towards the purchase of the community farm included Matthew Komo, Paul Mphisa, Jacob Molebaleng, Silas Molebaleng, Lucas Mokwile, Shadreck Leboho and Fredrick Komo among 5  S1044/9 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to Chief Jacob Molebaleng, Erichsthal, 23 February 1934. See also S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Makumbe Mission, Buhera) to Director of Native Lands (no date). 6  S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (no date). 7 Ibid. 8  S1044/9 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to Chief Jacob Molebaleng, Erichsthal, 23 February 1934. 9  S1859 Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, summary of minutes of a meeting held at Bethel School, 8 October 1938.

Mujere.indb 78

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 79

others.10 However, for various reasons some members failed to make their contributions. The figure was however, raised to £4.10.0 when Jacob Molebaleng realised that not many people were making their contributions. Only nine members had managed to pay their £2 contributions and as a result a further £2.10.0 had to be paid by those members who were willing to contribute. This led to tension in the community as other members became disgruntled by the reluctance of their colleagues to make their contributions. Leading the way, Jacob Molebaleng contributed £13 towards the purchase of the farm.11 In total, forty members later managed to make contributions of various amounts. Tension between members who had contributed and those who, for various reasons, had failed to make their contributions, however, continued. It should be stressed that although the Basotho were a seemingly harmonious community, behind this veil of unity were some deep-rooted differences that resulted in conflicts and divisions. It is therefore crucial that we disaggregate the community and analyse these fault lines and cleavages. One issue that exposed these fault lines was the problem the community was facing in raising money for the purchase of the community farm. In spite of the challenges, a large section of the community was unwilling to accept ‘donations’ from sources outside the community such as the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and other farmers in the purchase areas. As the problem of raising the money continued, the community split into two with, on one side, Jacob Molebaleng and the larger section insisting on accepting only contributions from members of the Basotho community, and the other section, which was reluctant or unable to pay up, willing to accept donations from outsiders, especially the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries.12 The latter section solicited for a donation from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries at Morgenster Mission and were offered £40.13 Jacob Molebaleng and other members of 10 

S1044/9 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to Chief Jacob Molebaleng, Erichsthal, 23 February 1934; S1859 Reverend Dr W. F. J. van der Merwe (Makumbe Mission, Buhera) to Director of Native Lands (no date). 11  S1859 Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, summary of minutes of a meeting held at Bethel School, 8 October 1938. 12  S1044/9 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to Chief Jacob Molebaleng, Erichsthal, 23 February 1934. See also S1859 Reverend Dr W. F. J. van der Merwe (Makumbe Mission, Buhera) to Director of Native Lands (no date). 13 S1859 Interview: Jacob Molebaleng, Malachi Phosa, Silas Molebang (no date).

Mujere.indb 79

10/12/2018 16:18

80

Land, Migration and Belonging

the community, however refused to accept the donation. They argued that such a donation would give Dutch Reformed Church missionaries powers to interfere with their activities on the farm and possibly give them an excuse to take over the farm at a later stage. The Basotho also had to deal with the challenges of running Bethel Farm. The Farm was run by an elected committee of Basotho farm owners. The Basotho indicated in their constitution that: The committee shall consist of a Chairman, who shall be the Native Commissioner of the district for the time being, a vice-chairman, who shall be the Headman of the Basuto community for the time being, and seven members elected as hereinafter provided. In the absence of the chairman, the Assistant Native Commissioner of the District for the time being shall preside at meeting of the meeting of the committee be styled the Deputy Chairman.14

This committee was empowered to run Bethel Farm and also to make decisions on other issues affecting the Basotho. It met once every three months at Bethel School, kept minutes of deliberations, and held general meetings every calendar year that were attended by all members of the Basotho community who would then vote for a new committee. Elections to the committee were held by secret ballot in the event of there being more than seven nominees to the committee.15 With the Native Commissioner chairing all the committee meetings, the Basotho were almost always under the patronage of the colonial officials who wanted them to be a model of progress for the rest of the farmers in the purchase areas. It is clear that they had thrown their lot with the colonial officials who framed them as ‘progressive’ compared to their non-Sotho counterparts. By cooperating with the Native Commissioner and distancing themselves from the patronage of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, the Basotho seemed to be willingly making themselves ‘good’ or ‘progressive’ Africans in the eyes of colonial administrators. However, due to their internal squabbles, they did not always live up to the expectations of colonial officials. However, just like what happened during their stay on Niekerk Rust and Erichsthal Farms, some members of the community 14  S1859 Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, minutes of an advisory committee meeting for Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, held at Bethel School, 29 July 1941. 15 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 80

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 81

continued to dispute the authority of Jacob Molebaleng. A group composed of Ephraim Morudu, Paul Mphisa, Andries Malete, Seroka Morudu and Job Sikhala among others was quite antagonistic towards Jacob Molebaleng. They opposed what they considered to be the growing powers of Jacob Molebaleng in the community, which he derived from his position of a ‘chief’. They contested this, arguing that he was not a chief in the traditional sense and therefore did not have the power to run the community farm as he pleased.16 During a meeting held at Bethel Farm on 8 October 1938, Ephraim Morudu told the Native Commissioner: we are worried because we see Molebaleng visit you every month. He comes back bringing troubles. I went with Molebaleng to visit Mr Phyre. Mr Phyre said the real chief of the Basutos [sic] was in Transvaal and that Molebaleng was only an overseer. I want the NC to understand that Molebaleng was never appointed Chief. We never said he could do as he liked. The NC appears to back Molebaleng. He should say Molebaleng is only an overseer.17

Morudu and his group thus felt that as people living on freehold land they could not subject themselves to a traditional authority, a phenomenon associated with reserves where communal tenure was used. They were, thus refusing to fall in the same category as other colonial subjects who were administered through their traditional authorities, but wanted to be somewhere between citizens (primarily whites) and subjects (primarily Africans living in Native reserves and ruled through traditional authorities). Although they were not comfortable dealing with traditional authorities or decentralised despots, they could not escape their position as colonial subjects.18 This arguably explains why the Basotho chose to have an elected committee run the affairs of the community instead of allowing Jacob Molebaleng to have absolute authority. The position of Jacob Molebaleng as ‘chief’ of the Basotho community was, thus ambiguous and became a source of discord. The issue continued to fester with no clear solution in sight. Jacob Molebaleng, who clearly had the support of the bigger section of the community, countered Ephraim Morudu’s claims by arguing that Morudu and his group were troublemakers who wanted to derail the progress of the community and tarnish 16  S1859

Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, minutes of meeting held at Bethel School, 8 October 1938. 17 Ibid. 18  See M. Mamdani, Citizen and subject: Contemporary Africa and the legacy of colonialism (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996).

Mujere.indb 81

10/12/2018 16:18

82

Land, Migration and Belonging

the otherwise good image of the community in the district. In 1946, Molebaleng wrote a long letter to the Native Commissioner complaining about the conduct of Morudu and his group, saying: the community recommends and confirms that nobody should come to your office reporting any matter about the community without the consent of the public. I find that the community under my leadership has been brought into a most muddled of conditions. I think you will agree with me that any matter concerning the community be reported to you by the means of the minutes. There are very few people who have caused and will still cause such trouble, reporting to your office about selfish disputes which have caused and will still cause the government official representatives to distrust this community. The minutes of the last meeting and the minutes of this meeting will show that only four people, namely Paul Mphisa, Andries Malete, Seroka Morudu and Job Sekhala [sic] are the sources of all the trouble of the figure shown by the minutes. Paul Mphisa was ordered by the meeting to bring to me the Dipping tank books of Bethel and he agreed to do so. To my surprise Paul Mphisa and Andries Mokoele write the attached notes refusing to send the books. Andries Mokoele has nothing to do with the work at Bethel Dipping Tank. May I appeal to your support what I can do with these people? It seems that if they are left to do what they like the community will always suffer the blame and distrust of the officials.19

When Paul Mphisa was asked by the Basotho Community Committee why he was refusing to hand over the dip tank books he stated that he had been away from home and would hand them over.20 It is possible that he was taking his time to hand over the books in order to make a point about the contentious nature of Jacob Molebaleng’s authority. Each time a new committee was elected, one of the groups would get into the committee with the other leaving office. For example, in 1941 the committee was composed of Jacob Molebaleng (the vice-chairman), and Messrs Matthew Komo, Ephraim Morudu, Seroka Morudu, Paul Mphisa, Job Sikhala, Andries Malete and Silas Molebaleng. All of the members of the committee, except Silas Molebaleng, belonged to the Ephraim Morudu group, who felt Jacob Molebaleng’s position as chief did not have any basis in tradition, and as such they took every opportunity to challenge his authority.21 Thus as long as the issue of Jacob Molebaleng’s position was not dealt with to the satisfaction of Ephraim Morudu and his group such clashes were 19 

S1859 Jacob Molebaleng to NC Gutu, 6 October 1946. Added emphasis. S1859 Jacob Molebaleng (school secretary) to NC Gutu, 3 October 1946. 21  S1859 Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, minutes of an advisory committee meeting for Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, held at Bethel School, 29 July 1941. 20 

Mujere.indb 82

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 83

bound to continue. As illustrated in the dispute between the Komo family and Jacob Molebaleng discussed in Chapter 2, the problem of different groups engaging in some kind of war of attrition was one of the greatest challenges the Basotho community faced even before their settlement in the Dewure Purchase Areas. It is apparent that personal and family networks played a crucial role in the emergence of these groups or factions. Conflicts emanating from such clashes permeated almost all aspects of everyday life. The Native Commissioner for Gutu, however, seemed to take sides with Morudu and his cohort in their conflicts with Jacob Molebaleng. His view was that Molebaleng was taking advantage of his ambiguous position as chief and the equally ambiguous statement in the grant for the farm, which stated that it was being offered to him, ‘in his capacity for the time being as chief of the Basuto [sic] community, and his successors in office in trust for the Basuto community in Southern Rhodesia’.22 This, according to the Native Commissioner, was the reason why Jacob Molebaleng viewed himself as ‘the Big Noise among the Basuto [sic], that he was so approached and he so accepted the offer of the community holding’.23 Yet some of the Basotho landholders in the Mungezi (Bikita District) and Nyazvidzi Purchase Areas (Gutu District) had also contributed to the purchase price of the farm on the understanding that Molebaleng would hold the farm in trust of the community at large.24 He could not really make decisions that affected the community without the approval of the Basotho committee. The community also established a school on Bethel Farm, which was to cater for the children of Basotho farmers. The school was established in 1937 under the supervision of Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe of the Dutch Reformed Church who was based at Alheight Mission.25 Since this school was largely meant for the children of Basotho farmers, the only languages taught at the school were English and Sesotho. This was in spite of the fact that some Shona children also enrolled at the school.26 The school was run by a school committee, which was composed 22 

S1859 NC Gutu to Director of Native Lands, 26 June 1943.

23 Ibid.

24 Ibid.

25  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 22 September 1942. The establishment of Bethel School will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5. 26  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to CNC Gutu, 6 November 1935.

Mujere.indb 83

10/12/2018 16:18

84

Land, Migration and Belonging

of the Basotho farm owners.27 The Basotho saw the teaching of Sesotho, their language, at Bethel School as one of the ways in which they could perpetuate the preservation of their Sotho cultural identity and language. Chishona, the language of the local people, was not taught at this school in spite of the fact that it enrolled both Sotho and non-Sotho children. As will be expanded upon in Chapter 6, even the running of Bethel School was greatly affected by conflicts within the community.28 The Basotho community also established a clinic at Bethel Farm with the help of Reverend Van der Merwe. He had lengthy discussions with Jacob Molebaleng and other members of the Basotho committee including Matthew Komo, Paul Mphisa, Seroka Morudu and Ephraim Morudu on the logistics of building the clinic as well as the possible site for it on Bethel Farm. He also provided the plan for the clinic, a four-roomed building, and the Basotho agreed to contract Seroka Morudu to build it.29 In one of his many letters to the Native Commissioner for Gutu District on the subject of the establishment of a clinic on Bethel Farm, Reverend Van der Merwe wrote, ‘I propose that the proposed erection of a clinic at Bethel has been somewhat retarded. You will realise that I am naturally anxious for the erection of such a building so as to secure more efficient medical services for the Basutu [sic] community’.30 It is important to note that during this period most communities in rural districts in the country were spearheading the construction of clinics in their communities with very little help from the colonial administration.31 By 1947, Gutu District had only four state-run clinics, one in Chikwanda Reserve (Chitando Clinic) and three in Gutu Reserve (Gutu, Chin’ombe and Chitsa). In fact, the clinic in Chief Chitsa’s area was established somewhat to the embarrassment of the Medical Department who were [sic] not ready to equip it. The local chief and his people were insistent 27 Interview

with Rachel Mphisa, Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, 17 July 2009. 28  In some cases, the superintendent of the school complained that often if one section was in the school committee the other would do all it could to cast it in bad light. This, of course, greatly affected the way the school was run, which also contributed to its ultimate failure. 29  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 10 August 1942. 30  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 11 June 1942. 31  Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy’.

Mujere.indb 84

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 85

that they provided some of the outbuildings with their own unpaid labour, so the department was obliged to complete the work. 32

Hence, with the colonial administration very slow in providing health services, the Basotho sought to use their own resources to construct their own clinic, thereby forcing the authorities to provide services. Although the Native Commissioner did not object to the construction of the clinic at Bethel, however, he expressed his disquiet at what he considered to be the Basotho’s failure to justify the ‘privileges’ they were getting from the government.33 The Basotho were getting this privilege of a clinic on their community farm, yet the other farmers were relying on the government or mission clinics, which were few and far between. The Native Commissioner was also against the idea of the construction of the house for a Home Demonstrator34 as he felt that the government was not in a position to provide the Basotho with such a person. In his letter to the Native Commissioner in September 1942, Reverend W. F. J. Van der Merwe noted that he had advised the Basotho not to proceed with the building of the clinic because the services of the Home Demonstrator, Aletta Kamungoma, would not be available for them.35 Aletta Kamungoma was a Mosotho from the Mphisa family who was married to Hopwood Kamungoma, a Bemba who also owned a farm in the Dewure Purchase Areas. The clinic was later constructed and operated for some time with Aletta Mphisa Kamungoma working at the clinic. However, because of lack of support from the government, the clinic was not a great success. In a meeting of the Dewure Division Native Council held on 29 January 1954, one of the Basotho councillors stressed the need for the government to provide clinics in the area. He argued that the people from the Dewure Purchase Areas were very far away from government clinics and that they needed the government to provide them with a clinic on the farms.36 However, the chairman of the council, L. C. Mino, 32 

S1563 Annual Report of the Native Commissioner, Gutu, 1947; see also Annual Report of the Native Commissioner, Gutu, 1946. 33  S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe, 22 August 1942. 34  A Home Demonstrator was a woman trained as a Jeanes teacher whose duty was to instruct other African women on issues to do with hygiene and domesticity. 35  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 22 September 1942. 36  S2797/4663 Minutes of Dewure Division Native Council, Gutu, 29 June 1954.

Mujere.indb 85

10/12/2018 16:18

86

Land, Migration and Belonging

who was also the Assistant Native Commissioner of the District, stressed that the position of the government was that there were some areas that did not have any medical facilities close by and until such areas were provided with these facilities the purchase areas would not be a priority.37 As a result of the lack of government funding the clinic established by the Basotho community later closed. As one of the members of the community observed, ‘to say it was a clinic would be an overstatement, but it was just a dispensary where people went to receive treatment on common ailments otherwise people largely travelled to Gutu Mission for treatment’.38 The debate over the construction of the clinic captures the contradictions that were growing in the Native Commissioner’s office over the position of the Basotho in the purchase areas in comparison with that of other farm owners. In the early years of the Basotho’s settlement in the district, colonial administrators perceived them as ‘more advanced natives’ whose presence in the farms would help the local Karanga emulate their supposedly ‘advanced ideals’. However, in the 1940s the same office was already showing great signs of disillusionment with the Basotho, whom they saw as failing to justify the privileges they received. Similarly, in Marirangwe Purchase Areas the Xhosa and Fingos (Mfengu), who were also of South African origin, were also perceived as ‘advanced natives’, yet their attitude to conservation and other farming methods was viewed by the colonial administration as not justifying that position. 39 It is also apparent that although the Superintendent of Natives was very keen on seeing the Basotho establish themselves in the purchase areas, the native commissioners were cautious about allowing them to create what they called a ‘miniature nation’.40 This probably explains why the Native Commissioner was quick to express his disillusionment and condemn the Basotho farmers when they failed to conform to the set stereotype. By choosing to align themselves with colonial officials and pledging to be ‘progressive natives’ the Basotho had taken a 37 Ibid. 38 

Interview with Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi, Old Location, Mpandawana Growth Point, 31 January 2006. She was a cousin of Aletta Mphisa-Kamungoma. 39  A. K. Shutt, ‘Pioneer farmers and family dynasties in Marirangwe Purchase Areas, colonial Zimbabwe, 1931–1947’, African Studies Review, Vol. No. 3 (2000), p.73. 40  S1044/10 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria, to CNC, 26 January 1934.

Mujere.indb 86

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 87

risk, which became more apparent when they failed to live up to the constructed image. BETHEL CEMETERY The Basotho were so keen to make Bethel Farm the centre of their activities as a community that as soon as they had finished paying for the farm they embarked on many initiatives, chief among them being the construction of the church, the clinic and the school. At the same time, they also identified and fenced off a site for a community cemetery. The idea of a community cemetery, however, was a new phenomenon in the purchase area.41 Most farmers buried their relatives in their burial grounds on their farms. Bethel Cemetery however, became a burial site of choice for the majority of the Basotho, an issue that was made even stronger by the fact that it was meant exclusively for the burial of the Basotho.42 The fact that both the farm and the cemetery were meant exclusively for the Basotho soon led to the general association of Bethel Farm with the Basotho community. KuBhetere soon became a generic term for the area occupied by the Basotho farmers. After a while it became the custom for most of the Basotho living in or originating from the Dewure and Mungezi Purchase Areas to be buried on the cemetery on Bethel Farm. It is at this cemetery that most of the Basotho have buried and continue to bury their deceased relatives.43 Some of the notable members of the Basotho community buried at this cemetery include the long-time leader of the community Jacob Molebaleng and his brother Silas Molebaleng. Other people buried at the cemetery are from families such as Phosa, Nyathi, Mulota, Makola and Mojapelo, among others.44 Sangu Musindo, the caretaker of Bethel Farm, stated that the Basotho who live in Gutu or originate from the farms in the Dewure and Mungezi Purchase Area view this cemetery as such a key feature in the Basotho’s lives that even when a member of the community dies in a faraway 41 

S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (no date). Interview with Jeremiah Masoha, Farm number 223, 16 July 2009. 43 Interview with Sangu Musindo (caretaker of Bethel Farm), Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, 1 February 2006. 44 Ibid. Most of the graves in this cemetery have tombstones marking the names of the deceased. 42 

Mujere.indb 87

10/12/2018 16:18

88

Land, Migration and Belonging

place efforts are always made to bring them back to be interred there together with other members of the community.45 Over the years the cemetery became a symbol of the Basotho’s sense of belonging and, in the words of the Sangu Musindo, the caretaker of the farm, ‘the Basotho’s own heroes’ acre and a significant symbolic feature of their attachment to the area.46 As a result of such strong connections to this farm together with their individual farms, which is strengthened by the burials, the Basotho are reluctant to sell their farms as selling a farm is equated to selling one’s history and attachment to the area as well as risking separation from the community. Thus although in the past they could not sell their farms because they did not have any claims to land in the reserves, later it was largely because of the graves, old homes and farms that consolidated their emotive ties to the land. Moreover, since the farm was bought using contributions from the members of community, it would also be difficult for all the members to make a unanimous decision to sell the farm. Thus keeping the farm has also ensured the sustenance of a sense of unity among members of the community as it has become something of a focal point. By the early 1940s the Basotho were already travelling from their various farms in the Dewure Purchase Areas as well as the Mungezi and Nyazvidzi Purchase Areas, to bury their kith and kin at Bethel Cemetery. The Basotho in the Mungezi Purchase Areas travelled somewhere between fifteen and twenty kilometres to Bethel Farm on foot because there were no buses servicing that area. The layout of the cemetery was designed in such a way that each family had its own row in which they would dig graves for their deceased. There are very neat rows of graves in the cemetery, and to show the level of affluence of the Basotho farmers, most of the graves have expensive engraved granite tombstones. To underline the significance of Bethel Cemetery to the Basotho, Sangu Musindo pointed out that in some instances people travel long distances to bury their dead relatives at this cemetery. In fact, during public holidays, Bethel Farm becomes a hive of activity as a number of members of the Basotho community go there either to unveil tombstones, put flowers on graves of their loved ones or conduct memorial services. The desire to be interred together with one’s relatives is very strong among the Basotho and 45  Interview

with Sangu Musindo, Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, 17 July 2009. 46 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 88

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 89

indeed among many African communities. According to Geschiere, it is usually assumed that ‘a person who still has family will at death be brought back to the village to be buried there’, even if they had spent their lives in towns.47 In some instances even those who sold their farms and moved to towns still return to bury their deceased relatives at Bethel Cemetery.48 This act seems to complete the town dwellers’ sense of belonging to this farming community. As Chabal has observed: burial is important not just because it is a key element in the circle of life but because it makes manifest and keeps alive the concrete link between the individual, the community and the land with which it is identified. It is, thus, the core of individual and collective identity, which defines a relationship between the person and the group, or network.49

In the same vein, Christopher argues that ‘the place of burial is an emotionally highly charged site, not only for the families concerned, but also at times for the ethnic or cultural group concerned. Monuments to the dead, whether individuals or groups, may be of significance long after the immediate family connection has gone’.50 Burials at Bethel Cemetery thus carry a lot of significance for members of the Basotho community as they help them cement their networks. The material significance of land and graves helps to cement the Basotho’s attachment to the Dewure Purchase Areas in spite of their position as ‘late comers’ or ‘outsiders’ in the district. This is a result of the notion that there are always sentimental ties to graves: whether recent or ancestral, there is a tendency to want to identify with the area where the remains of one’s relatives are interred. Other farmers as well as communities in the surrounding areas also recognise the significance of Bethel Farm to the Basotho. When talking about Bethel Farm, the Basotho’s Karanga neighbours refer to it as ‘kuBhetere kuBasotho’, which means ‘Bethel the place of the Basotho people’.51 KuBhetere was and has cont47 Geschiere,

The perils of belonging: Autochthony, Citizenship, and Exclusion in Africa and Europe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009), p.55. 48  Interview with Sangu Musindo, Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, 17 July 2009. 49  P. Chabal, Africa: The politics of suffering and smiling (London and New York: Zed Books, 2009), p.49. 50  A. J. Christopher, ‘Segregation and cemeteries in Port Elizabeth, South Africa’, The Geographical Journal, Vol. 161, No. 1 (1995), p.43. 51  During my fieldwork, I was told this each time I asked for directions to Bethel Farm or when I told people that I was going to Bethel Farm.

Mujere.indb 89

10/12/2018 16:18

90

Land, Migration and Belonging

inued to be ‘home’ to the Basotho, including those who spent most of their time working in different locations in the country. During fieldwork, each time I travelled to one of the farms belonging to the Basotho I was often asked if I was going to Bethel (or KuBhetere). This became a constant reminder of the meanings that Bethel Farm has assumed among both the Basotho and the surrounding communities. Thus the name Bethel transcends references to Bethel Farm and encapsulates the Basotho’s sense of belonging and an acknowledgement by other farmers and surrounding communities of the area as a Basotho enclave. The cemetery thus helped the Basotho cultivate a sense of belonging in an area surrounded by the Karanga of the Gumbo Madyirazhe and Moyo Duma clan under Chief Chiwara and other clans. It should be highlighted that purchase areas attracted a number of African elites who used the farms as power bases for family dynasties. Due to their relative privacy purchase area farms were often viewed by elite Africans as status symbols, homes as well as places to establish their family graveyards. One such case was the Samkange family, whose Tambaram Farm became the centre of the establishment of the Samkange family dynasty. The farm was one of the first to be purchased in the Msengezi Purchase Areas in the 1930s and at that time, ‘its acquisition had been a landmark in the establishment of an elite family’.52 With time Tambaram, like many other purchase area farms, became more or less a family burial ground and a place where all the Samkange family members would return to bury their relatives or for memorial services. As a result, the Samkanges affectionately refer to the family graveyard on the farm as the ‘Samkange Heroes Acre’.53 Interestingly, Ranger points out that the idea of writing a book based on the Samkange family came while he was attending a memorial service at Tambaram.54 This practice of having family burial grounds was repeated in many other Purchase Areas as African elites saw the farms as not only economic units, but also symbols of status and retirement homes. The case of the Basotho community is, however, unique in that it is a communal cemetery set on an exclusively Basotho-owned farm. Funerals and burial rites provide a platform where group, religious and ethnic boundaries are negotiated and sometimes 52 

T. O. Ranger, Are we not also men?: The Samkange family and African politics in Zimbabwe 1920–1964 (London: James Currey, 1995), p.vii. 53 Ibid. 54 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 90

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 91

accentuated. A number of anthropological works have shown the centrality of deaths and funerals in the shaping of social relations and strengthening kinship ties.55 As Durham and Klaits argue, ‘in the context of death, people shape forms of community and difference –along lines of ethnicity, class, religion, gender and kinship – through the mutuality of their emotions’.56 Similarly, the Basotho’s exclusive cemetery set them apart from their non-Sotho neighbours in the Dewure Purchase Areas. Bethel Cemetery and other Basotho graves located on individual farms have continued to the present day to play a significant role in the Basotho’s strategies of belonging. There have been clear continuities between the past and the present in the Basotho’s attachment to the area, established through the emotive significance of the graves of their relatives. However, it is not merely the presence of the Basotho graves that matters here, but most importantly it is about how the Basotho make use of their materialities to negotiate and assert belonging. The Basotho’s attachment to Bethel is so strong that even those who do not have any close relatives buried at Bethel Cemetery still refer to ‘graves of our relatives’ at Bethel Cemetery.57 Thus not only do graves help in physically marking and identifying the area as a Basotho area, but they also tell a story of the Basotho’s migration and settlement in an area dominated by Karanga communities, who claim autochthony. They also evoke a sense of belonging among the Basotho, as well as pointing to the difference between the Basotho and those who viewed themselves as autochthons in the purchase areas. As Fontein argues, graves actually have an active and ‘affective’ presence in the landscape.58 This resonates with Bunn’s assertion that, tombs and graves are not mute, but have a great influence on the living.59 Therefore, there is a need to consider more closely the salience of graves in negotiating not 55 

R. Lee and M. Vaughan, ‘Death and dying in the history of Africa since 1800’, Journal of African History, Vol. 49 (2008), pp.344–345. 56  D. Durham and F. Klaits, ‘Funerals and the public sphere of sentiment in Botswana’, Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 28, No. 4 (2002), p.277. 57 Interview with Fredrick Komo, Farm number 392, Dewure, Gutu, 28 December 2005. 58  J. Fontein, ‘Graves, ruins, and belonging: Towards an anthropology of proximity’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 17 (2011), p.713. 59  D. Bunn, ‘The sleep of the brave: Graves as sites and signs in colonial Eastern Cape’, in P. S. Landau and D. D. Kaspin (eds), Images and empires: Visuality in colonial and post-colonial Africa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), p.57.

Mujere.indb 91

10/12/2018 16:18

92

Land, Migration and Belonging

Figure 1  Bethel Cemetery (© Joseph Mujere)

only autochthony but also other forms of belonging that are not necessarily based on being a first comer or ‘son of the soil’. The Basotho case demonstrates that it is not only among the autochthons that graves matter, but they are also vital in the belonging of even those people who are conscious of being ‘late comers’. Although being buried at Bethel Cemetery has great significance among the Basotho it should be noted that not all members of the Basotho community bury their dead there. The families that do not use the Bethel Cemetery include the Mphisa, Komo, Sikhala and Morudu. Varying reasons are often proffered to explain why these families use private graveyards. Samuel Sikhala argues that his family and other Basotho families decided not to use Bethel Cemetery because they feared that in the event that the farm was sold and the community ‘lost it’ to a new owner, they would be alienated from the graves of their relatives, a risk they were not prepared to take.60 Others argue that the distance between their farms and Bethel Farm is too long and this dissuades them from burying their loved ones there.61 It has also been observed that some families were, until recently, not aware of the fact that their parents had contributed towards the purchase of the Bethel 60  61 

Mujere.indb 92

Interview with Samuel Sikhala, Farm number 35, 16 July 2009. Interview with F. Komo, 28 December 2005.

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 93

Farm, hence they could not bury their dead at the cemetery there.62 Thus burials at Bethel are not just rituals of belonging, but they are platforms on which the Basotho engage each other on ownership of the farm, which usually exposes those who are accused of not having contributed anything towards its purchase and therefore have limited rights over it. LANGUAGE AND THE BASOTHO’S CONSTRUCTION OF BELONGING Language has also been one of the major tools used by the Basotho in maintaining as well as constructing and articulating a sense of belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas. When I began doing fieldwork among the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas in 2005, I had assumed that most of them had lost much of their language. My first interviews seemed to confirm this assumption, as members of the community I spoke to were very comfortable speaking in Chikaranga during my interviews with them and did not seem to see any need for them to display their knowledge of Sesotho to me. However, during my subsequent fieldwork in 2009, I began to notice that although they spoke Chikaranga in their everyday interactions, there was a tendency for them to revert to Sesotho during occasions such as funerals, memorial services and other family gatherings. The use of Sesotho on such occasions is quite intriguing given the fact that the language is seldom used in the Basotho’s daily interactions. On such occasions, Sesotho become the language of choice. In addition to language, members of the Basotho community also observe Sotho etiquette and refer to their relatives in Sesotho kinship terms. For instance, an aunt becomes raghali, uncle becomes maloame and cousin becomes motsoala and so on, as they shy away from using the Shona terms they would otherwise use in their everyday interactions. The occasions clearly provide a platform for the Basotho to display their knowledge of Sesotho and also to rekindle some aspects of Sesotho culture and etiquette. Such performances serve to authenticate the occasion and cultivate a sense of togetherness among members of this community. Sesotho cements their relations and helps to unpack the otherwise complex kinship webs. Certainly, keeping their language, albeit 62 

Mujere.indb 93

Job Sikhala, personal communication, 13 September 2017.

10/12/2018 16:18

94

Land, Migration and Belonging

reserving it for important gatherings, is increasingly becoming a way for the nostalgic elders of the community to reminisce about their history and also to inculcate their knowledge to the younger generations. The use of Sesotho also helps them to cultivate a sense of togetherness as it excludes the non-Sotho, who cannot speak the language. Such rituals and ceremonies unite the Basotho and cement their sense of belonging. Others even make an effort to teach their children Sesotho although they do not get to use the language in their day-to-day communication.63 In spite of them being ‘late comers’ or ‘strangers’ in the area, the Basotho use funerals in much the same way as those who claim autochthony to negotiate belonging and to ritualise their attachment to the soil. As Geschiere observed, ‘in many parts of Africa the funeral “at home” – in the place where the deceased was born and not where (s)he lived – is acquiring an ever explicitly political significance’.64 The return of urban dwellers to the farms for occasions such as funerals and all the attendant ceremonies therefore shows that even those Basotho who now live in urban areas, far away from their farms, still believe that although they spend much of time in towns, their ultimate belonging is among their people in the purchase areas. As a result, convoys of vehicles are often seen going to the farms as the Basotho ‘return home’ to bury their loved ones, attend some ceremonies or just to be with others during public holidays. The salience of Sesotho language is also shown by the importance given to the Basotho choir on occasions such as funerals, memorial services, church services and other gatherings. This choir is exclusively composed of the Basotho members of the Dutch Reformed Church who sing hymns in Sesotho. During one memorial service I attended during my fieldwork in 2009, the choir and other members of the community held a night vigil on the eve of the memorial service, singing hymns in Sesotho.65 As noted by Rachel Mphisa, the wife of the caretaker of Bethel Farm and a key member of the choir, the choir was ‘such an important group in the community that no gathering of the Basotho ends without the choir singing some hymns in Seso63 

Interview with Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi, Old Location, Mpandawana Growth Point, 31 January 2006. 64 Geschiere, The perils of belonging, p.55. 65  I attended the memorial service for Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi held on Farm number 28 Dewure PA on 21–22 August 2009. I interviewed the deceased in my first fieldwork in 2005.

Mujere.indb 94

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 95

tho’.66 Thus funerals and other social gatherings in the Basotho community provide members with an opportunity to gather and strengthen their kinship as well as reaffirming their positions in the kinship webs. They also help reaffirm one’s belonging to the purchase areas, a link that is established through attachment to one’s family farm and also to Bethel Farm. For the people in Gutu District, ‘kuBhetere’ has become a generic term for the Basotho community and everything that is associated with them. Buses that ply the route between Mpandawana Growth Point (Gutu Service Centre) and Vhunjere, a communal area to the east of the Dewure Purchase Areas, often have an unmistakable destination board that is written boldly: ‘Vhunjere via Bhetere’.67 For the locals the destination board evokes many images with great significance to the politics of belonging in the purchase areas. It is evident that Bethel is not just another farm or bus stop, but an important node in the political and cultural geography of the district (see Figure 2). It tells a story of the Basotho’s belonging in an area where they are clearly ‘late comers’ and their only claim to attachment to the area is through ownership of freehold land. Their struggles to belong have revolved around ownership of freehold land, religious linkages, their attachment to graves and the preservation of family networks strengthened by a practice of ethnic endogamy, which involved marriages between cousins (motsoala) although the later started to marry out. KuBhetere is therefore not simply a reference to a farm, but also an important reminder of the spatial politics of the Dewure Purchase Areas. The names of some bus stops along the road are also significant in the Basotho’s attachment to the area. These include the Mphisa and the Sikhala bus stops. These bus stops are so named because they are located at the farms belonging to the Mphisa and Sikhala families. They have become ‘active’ in shaping the Basotho’s belonging as people who use them engage with the Basotho’s presence in the area. These features tell stories of the Basotho’s settlement in the Dewure Purchase Areas and most importantly they also tell a story of a minority and migrant group carving out an enclave. Thus interactions with such features, 66 Interview

with Rachel Mphisa, Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, 17 July 2009. 67  During my fieldwork, I used Munashe Bus Service which at the time was the only remaining regular bus plying this route after Madondo Bus Service stopped servicing the route.

Mujere.indb 95

10/12/2018 16:18

96

Land, Migration and Belonging

Figure 2  Bethel Farm bus stop (© Joseph Mujere)

together with the performance of rituals of belonging such as funerals, help in strengthening a people’s attachment to a place. As Tilley argues, ‘identifying with place does not just happen. It requires work, repeated acts which establish relations between peoples and places’.68 The attachment of the Basotho to their farms makes it very difficult for them to sell them for any reason. They often say that, unlike their Karanga neighbours who can sell their farms and return to the rural areas (formerly reserves/tribal trust lands), they do not have other places that they can go to if they sell their farms. Explaining the importance of Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s family farms, one of my informants had this to say: As members of the Basotho community in the Dewure and Mungezi Purchase Areas, these farms are very important to us. It is very rare to see a member of this community selling their farm because they are aware that they will be selling more than a farm, but a very important asset and the future of their children and their children’s children. Where would one go with their family if they sell the farm? The few who sold their farms either bought plots in peri-urban areas, or bought houses in towns. But it is rare for that to happen. As for Bethel Farm, it can never be sold. In fact, we will never accept any offer for it. Recently, 68 

C. Tilley, ‘Introduction: Identity, place, landscape and heritage’, Journal of Material Culture, Vol. 11, Nos 1–2 (2006), p.14.

Mujere.indb 96

10/12/2018 16:18

KuBhetere: Bethel Farm and the Basotho’s Belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas 97

a certain politician in this district tried to buy the farm claiming that it was idle. Our position was however very firm. We stated that it was impossible to buy Bethel Farm because it was purchased by our forefathers and most of them are buried there. It will therefore remain a Basotho farm for generations and generations; maybe forever.69

It is clear that farms and graves are at the core of the Basotho’s belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas. This belonging is often performed though rituals such as funerals and memorial services, where Sesotho comes alive, and with it Basotho etiquette and other rules of engagement among kinsmen, helping the Basotho reaffirm their belonging to both place and group. CONCLUSION Studies of belonging have tended to emphasise the importance of funerals in autochthony-based claims to belonging. However, as has been shown in this chapter, groups such as the Basotho community in the Dewure Purchase Areas, who are conscious of being ‘late comers’ in the area, also use funerals and graves to negotiate and articulate their belonging. In fact, by carrying out rituals of belonging such as burials and funerals, which help them establish an attachment to the land, ‘late comers’ would actually be gradually transforming themselves into autochthons by establishing an attachment to the soil. This chapter has shown the centrality of farms as well as the place of funerals and graves in the Basotho’s construction and negotiating the politics of belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas. It is apparent that without the aid of freehold land, it is possible that the Basotho would negotiate their belonging to land in a different way. The ‘affordances’ of family farms and of Bethel Farm, such as privacy and autonomy, have allowed the Basotho to frame and negotiate their belonging in the manner they have done and are doing. Bethel Farm became a focal point for the Basotho in the Dewure and Mungezi Purchase Areas, and graves helped the Basotho cement their sense of belonging. As the fulcrum of the community’s activities, Bethel Farm in many ways encapsulates the Basotho’s belonging and projects the point that although they are newcomers in the area they have managed to assert their belonging by establishing an attachment to it. Moreover, funerals and other family gatherings also go a long way in defining who 69 

Mujere.indb 97

Interview with Jeremiah Masoha, Farm number 223, 16 July 2009.

10/12/2018 16:18

98

Land, Migration and Belonging

the Basotho are, as it is on such occasions that the kinship web is unravelled and Sesotho language becomes the language of choice. Farms, graves, roads and bus stops among other features are material representations of the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas that are active in shaping the Basotho’s sense of belonging. As Fontein has observed elsewhere, such evidence of recent occupiers can easily be juxtaposed with and ‘conjure up images of particular pasts just as readily as caves, sacred springs and ancestral graves can’.70 Within this broad sense of unity among the Basotho are, however, subtle schisms and fault lines that have been expressed through the conflicting groups emerging in the community. 70 

J. Fontein, ‘Graves, ruins, and belonging: Towards an anthropology of proximity’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 17 (2011), p.716.

Mujere.indb 98

10/12/2018 16:18

5 Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School

The previous chapter analysed the significance of Bethel Farm in the Basotho’s construction and negotiation of belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas. Focusing on the challenges the Basotho faced in establishing and running Bethel School, this chapter explores the link between the provision of education and immigrants’ negotiation of belonging. The chapter examines the challenges that the Basotho faced in establishing Bethel School and their attempt to project it as a Basotho school by maintaining control of the school and also by insisting that the Sesotho language become part of the school curriculum. The chapter also seeks in many ways to demonstrate how Bethel School illustrates the triumphs, failures and challenges faced by the Basotho in Gutu in their quest for belonging; it highlights how the way the Basotho ran the school exposed otherwise subtle cleavages and schisms within the community; and it endeavours to evaluate the success of an attempt at an education system that is aimed primarily at catering for the needs of an immigrant minority group. BETHEL SCHOOL: EDUCATION AMONG THE BASOTHO The 1920s saw most British colonies adopting an education policy that was specifically modelled to cater for Africans. This policy gained currency in the aftermath of the publication of the findings of the Phelps Stokes African Education Commission in 1920. The commission was led by Thomas Jesse Jones, who had earlier made a similar survey in the United States of America (Southern states) and recommended that ‘schools for Negroes should place more emphasis on the industrial and agricultural

Mujere.indb 99

10/12/2018 16:18

100 Land, Migration and Belonging

aspects of education’.1 As well as industrial work, the Phelps Stokes Fund advocated an education system that would inculcate Christian values, which explains why missionaries were greatly involved in the programme.2 One of the conduits for introducing these policies in Southern Rhodesia was A. E. Alvord, an American missionary and agriculturalist who was appointed Agriculturalist for the Instruction of Natives in 1926. In 1929, Alvord was transferred from the Native Affairs Department and joined Jowitt’s Native Development Department with all his staff. Southern Rhodesia’s ‘Native education’ policy had not changed much from the time of occupation up until the end of company rule in 1923. ‘Native’ education was generally the concern of missionaries, who were given some financial assistance by the government. The education policy was broadly geared towards the production of educated African elites and emphasised academic subjects. However, after the change in colonial administration as company rule ended, there were some changes in the policy. These changes were implemented by the newly established Native Development Department (NDD), which had been established in 1920 under H. S. Keigwin. One of Keigwin’s objectives was to ‘promote the growth of Native industries and to rectify the alleged deficiency in industrial education taught in missions’.3 By so doing he sought to transform Native education, making it oriented towards the training of artisans who would do appropriate work in the rural areas rather than just producing educated African elites who would work in towns. As Steele aptly puts it, ‘Keigwin stressed the need to raise the masses, rather than an academically qualified elite: the schools would assist this process by turning out skilled artisans “who shall be able, both by their conduct and knowledge to set a higher standard of life to those around them”’.4 Berman describes Keigwin as ‘one of Jones’ staunchest advocates, arguing that all Africans should be trained to a due appreciation of their industrial and agricultural possibilities’.5 Keigwin believed that industrial training would help curb self-assertiveness, which was ‘so often the mark 1  E. H. Berman, ‘American influence on African education: The role of the Phelps–Stokes Fund’s Education Commissions’, Comparative Education Review, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Colonialism and Education) (1971), p.133. 2  Berman, ‘American influence on African Education’, p.143. 3  M. C. Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy: Southern Rhodesia, 1923– 1933’, PhD thesis, Simon Fraser University, August 1972, p.306. 4  Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy’, p.307. 5  Berman, ‘American influence on African education’, p.142.

Mujere.indb 100

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 101

of the “book-learned” African’.6 To promote industrial training, schools relied on ‘capitation grants’ (grants-in-aid).7 However, such grants were seldom adequate.8 It was within this model of Native education and development that, with the help of funding from the American Carnegie Corporation, the colonial administration established the Jeanes teacher training programme. The Jeanes teachers’ programme had been imported from the United States of America and introduced in Rhodesia in 1929 as part of Harold Jowitt’s concept of Native Development. Using funding from the Carnegie Corporation, the Jeanes scheme trained male teachers at Domboshawa and female teachers at Hope Fountain mission. Jeanes teachers were often sponsored by their missions, and upon completion of the course they returned to work under the supervision of these missions. According to Summers: Jeanes programs sought to give African men and women advanced training in the basic skills of community development: hygiene, school improvement, industrial skills, medical aid , and domesticity. After a course at Domboshawa School and a community-based internship, the men would go back to the missions that sponsored them. Working under a missionary supervisor, each man would have responsibility for a circle of rural schools.9

In particular, women on the Jeanes teachers’ programme were taught first aid, pharmacy and domestic science among other skills. This developed women into domestic science specialists, public health professionals and entrepreneurs. In spite of the seeming general consensus among colonial officials on the necessity of industrial training for Africans, there were some colonial officials who were less enthusiastic about this policy and called for caution as they feared that industrial training would stimulate competition between European and African artisans, which would ultimately affect European migration to Southern Rhodesia.10 6 

Berman, ‘American influence on African education’, p.142. See C. Summers, ‘Giving orders in Southern Rhodesia: Controversies over Africans’ authority in development programs, 1928–1934’, International Journal of African Historical Studies, Vol. 31, No. 2 (1998). 8  C. Summers, Colonial lessons: Africans’ education in Southern Rhodesia, 1918– 1940 (Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2002), p.5. 9  Summers, ‘Giving orders in Southern Rhodesia’, p.280. 10  R. J. Challiss, ‘The foundation of the racially segregated education system in southern Rhodesia, 1890–1923, with special reference to the Education of Africans’, PhD thesis, University of Zimbabwe, 1982, p.350. 7 

Mujere.indb 101

10/12/2018 16:18

102 Land, Migration and Belonging

The Basotho generally valued their close ties with the colonial officials and sought to be viewed as progressive Africans who were wedded to the colonial ideals of development. As they had done during their stay on Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms prior to 1930, the Basotho sought to establish a school for themselves when they settled in the Dewure Purchase Areas. The emphasis on industrial training also had some resonances with the Protestant work ethic to which, as members of the Dutch Reformed Church, the Basotho had already been introduced. The desire to be viewed as progressive and disciplined colonial subjects meant that many members of the Basotho community enthusiastically supported this new education policy. Since among them were some qualified teachers, the establishment of the schools was not a difficult goal to achieve. At Morgenster Mission the children of the Basotho evangelists were taught by a Sotho teacher who had been educated in Lesotho.11 As highlighted in Chapter 2, they established two schools, one on Niekerk’s Rust and another on Erichsthal Farm before their displacement to purchase areas in the early 1930s.12 In some instances the Basotho even sent their children to schools and colleges in South Africa. Hence, the Basotho already had experience with running schools before their settlement in the Dewure Purchase Areas, and they also had the qualified personnel to run them. Consequently, as soon as they resettled in the Dewure Purchase Areas in the early 1930s, the Basotho did not wait for the government to establish a school for them. Instead, they took the initiative to establish their own school. In a letter to the Native Commissioner for Gutu District requesting the establishment of a school among the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas, Reverend I. Botha (a Dutch Reformed Church missionary stationed at Pamushana Mission) pointed out that the Basotho community previously ran two schools under the Dutch Reformed Church on Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal Farms before their displacement following the enactment of the Land Apportionment Act (1930).13 Reverend Botha also stated that the Basotho wished to appoint Jona Makola (Mmakola) and his wife Selina Makola (Mmakola), members of their community. Jona 11 

N9/1/12 Victoria District, Report for the year ended 31 December 1909. N9/1/14 Victoria District: Report for the year ended 31 December 1911, S1859 Reverend I. Botha (Pamushana Mission) to NC Gutu, 27 December 1934. 13  S1859 Reverend I. Botha (Pamushana Mission) to NC Gutu, 27 December 1934. 12 

Mujere.indb 102

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 103

held a Teacher’s Provisional Certificate from Transvaal, South Africa, while Selina was a Standard III teacher.14 Jona had been sent to a South African school by the Dutch Reformed Church who paid part of his school fees with the remainder being paid by his parents.15 Selina Makola’s qualifications were of course lower than the government ideal was in the 1930s, which was Standard IV or higher. The Dutch Reformed Church was, however, notorious for employing teachers with lower qualifications than those recommended by the government.16 As well as Jona and his wife, there were a number of other Basotho with various levels of qualifications who could be employed as teachers. For example, in 1936 Deborah Molebaleng, the daughter of Chief Jacob Molebaleng, who had just passed her Standard VI at Morgenster, left for Hope Fountain in Matabeleland where she was to do a Jeanes teachers’ course.17 Since they were already integrated into the colonial education policy and some members of the Basotho community already had teaching qualifications, the Basotho found the establishment of their own school possible. The Superintendent of Natives (Fort Victoria) also reiterated this point by observing that there were a number of Basotho who could take up posts as teachers at the school. He noted that ‘among their community are qualified teachers and tradesmen of all kinds’.18 It should also be noted that the demand for schools from farmers in the purchase areas was quite high. This was because that, as people seen as progressive Africans, purchase area farmers were keen to establish schools in their areas to cater for their children. Since the colonial administration was reluctant to fund schools for Africans, farmers took the initiatives to establish their own schools, making a number of requests to local native commissioners to be allowed to build schools in their areas. What arguably set the Basotho apart from 14 Ibid. 15 

S1859 NC Gutu to CNC, 23 September 1936. See Summers, Colonial Lessons. 17  Cornelius Molebaleng (Dewure Purchase Areas) ‘Chief’s Daughter Takes Jeanes Course’, in The Bantu Mirror, 22 February 1936; Kingfisher, ‘Fort Victoria News’, The Bantu Mirror, 27 June 1936; Susana Khumalo, another member of the Basotho community completed a Jeanes teachers’ course in 1938. See Kingfisher, ‘Fort Victoria News: Basuto Settlement’, The Bantu Mirror, 5 March 1938. For a more detailed explanation of the Jeans teachers’ programme in Southern Rhodesia see also Summers, ‘Giving orders in Southern Rhodesia’. 18  S924/G33/ App. 3 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 2 February 1933. 16 

Mujere.indb 103

10/12/2018 16:18

104 Land, Migration and Belonging

other farmers was that they were an organised group of immigrants who had made an effort to establish a school to primarily cater for their children. They also sought to make Sesotho one of the key subjects taught at the school. Moreover, the school was to be built on a Basotho-owned farm instead of the plots that had been reserved for schools. This, in a way, was an expression of the Basotho’s desire to be independent of both the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and other farmers in the purchase areas. The Basotho community’s initial application to establish a school was turned down by the Native Commissioner for Gutu District on the grounds that they had not yet acquired any rights to the land on which they wished to establish the school.19 Native commissioners had been given the authority to approve such applications and also to visit schools in their districts without any prior notice.20 Under the regulations put in place in 1923 ‘no school could be opened without the [Chief Native Commissioner]’s consent, his approval regarding character had to be obtained for every new Native teacher designated for work in the reserves’, although the Director of Education still had the powers to veto teacher appointments.21 After the application was blocked by the Native Commissioner, the Basotho temporarily shelved it as they sorted out the purchase of their community farm. In 1936, however, with the help of Reverend Van der Merwe, the Basotho were eventually granted the permission to establish a school on Bethel, their community farm, and the school was opened in January 1937.22 Malachi Phosa was employed as the first teacher at the school and also acted as its head teacher.23 Malachi Phosa had been trained at Waddilove Institute where he obtained a teaching course. As a native speaker of Sesotho, he could also teach the language.24 He was the son of Laban Phosa, a Sotho farm owner in the Dewure Purchase Areas.25 Although it is possible that Malachi was employed because he hailed from the community and also because he had the qualifications, it 19 

S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend I. Botha (Pamushana Mission), 10 January 1935. Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy’, p.333. 21 Ibid. 22  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 20 June 1942; Kingfisher, ‘Basuto Settlement: Fort Victoria News’, The Bantu Mirror, 5 March 1938. 23  ‘Gutu Notes’, The Bantu Mirror, 16 January 1937. 24  S1859 Malachi Phosa (Morgenster Mission) to NC Gutu, 11 October 1936. 25  S1859 C. S. Davis, Circuit Inspector, Gwelo, report on Bethel School, date of visit 16 October 1937. 20 

Mujere.indb 104

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 105

is also possible that he was found to be suitable because he had been educated at Waddilove, which was considered to be one of the best schools. Coming against the background of the controversies surrounding the quality of teachers in Dutch Reformed Church-run schools, this was a very important development. Moreover, as Malachi was not a beneficiary of Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ patronage it was possible that he would be independent from them. It also shows the Basotho’s desire to stay clear of the influence and control of Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. Other members of the Basotho community employed as teachers at the school included Laura Moeketsi, Reuben Mphisa and Michael Mojapelo, among others.26 Although the Basotho were assisted by Reverend Van der Merwe in their application to establish a school at their community farm, this was not without its own challenges. A large section of the Basotho community was not keen on having Dutch Reformed Church missionaries wielding any significant influence in the community. Although they did not have any problem with a Dutch Reformed Church missionary helping them establish a school, they could not entertain a situation where Dutch Reformed Church missionaries would either own or control the school. The Basotho saw Sesotho as playing a crucial role in their group identity and they sought to preserve it for future generations. Language can be argued to be one of the crucial markers of identity: hence the need for any minority and immigrant group to preserve it if they have a desire to maintain their group identity. One way the Basotho sought to ensure the survival of their language was by teaching it at Bethel School. They made a conscious decision to make Sesotho and English the only languages of instruction at the school although some students at the school were non-Sesotho speakers. This was a bold decision given the minority status of the Basotho in the Dewure Purchase Areas. In 1938, Kingfisher triumphantly reported that ‘this [Bethel School] is the only school in Southern Rhodesia where Suto [sic] speaking children are allowed to enjoy their mother language in full’.27 This shows the importance the Basotho placed on the teaching of Sesotho at Bethel School and how the community viewed it as a major 26  Interview with Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi, Old Location, Mpandawana Growth Point, 31 January 2006. 27  Kingfisher, ‘Basuto settlement, Fort Victoria News’, The Bantu Mirror, 5 March 1938, p.7.

Mujere.indb 105

10/12/2018 16:18

106 Land, Migration and Belonging

achievement. The teaching of Sesotho shows that the Basotho initially sought to construct their belonging by maintaining a distinct group identity that was distinct from that of the rest of the farming community. Although its success was debatable, the teaching and use of Sesotho at Bethel was projected to help in the sustenance of Sotho culture and values. The Dutch Reformed Church missionaries were supportive of the idea of the Basotho teaching Sesotho alongside English at Bethel as they thought that this would help the community forge unity. The colonial administration was also not averse to the idea of the Basotho and other Africans putting an emphasis on their vernacular languages in their schools. In fact, the colonial education policy supported the teaching of vernacular languages in third-class schools. Order ‘D’ of 1907 required that ‘pupils in these schools should “acquire habits of discipline and cleanliness” and make satisfactory progress in their vernacular studies’.28 Even when the order was revised in 1921, it just emphasised reading in one’s vernacular language as well as progress in arithmetic.29 The challenge, however, was in getting teachers qualified to teach the vernacular languages as well as on getting teaching materials. The challenge was even bigger for the Basotho given that they were a very small migrant community and that theirs was the only school teaching Sesotho in the whole country. Therefore, when they established Bethel School in the Dewure Purchase Areas, they employed teachers from among themselves. This was a pragmatic decision, which was informed by the fact that they could not get teachers outside their community who could speak Sesotho. Although the main objective of establishing Bethel School was the provision of education to children of the Basotho farmers, the school also served other purposes. The establishment of Bethel School also showed that the Basotho were modernising Africans who were keen to foster development in their community through education. The fact that they intended it to be an almost exclusively Basotho school was also a sign of Basotho particularism. ‘This is our school’ was a common mantra showing the Basotho’s strong attachment to it. Education can therefore be argued to have been one of the strategies used by the Basotho 28 

Challiss, ‘The foundation of the racially segregated education system in southern Rhodesia’, p.204. 29 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 106

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 107

to weave their notion of belonging, especially in the 1930s and 1940s when they were very keen to project an image of being progressive Africans that would endear them to colonial officials. Although the two Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, Reverend Botha of Pamushana Mission (Bikita District) and Reverend Van der Merwe of Alheight Mission (Gutu District), had played a key role in the establishment of Bethel School, the Basotho were reluctant to allow Dutch Reformed Church missionaries to have control over it. This was a significant move given the fact that the two schools that the Basotho had established on Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms had been run by Dutch Reformed Church missionaries.30 It also showed a major shift in the relationship between the Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, which had hitherto been cordial. The Basotho were clearly remodelling their belonging by aligning themselves with colonial officials and moving away from their formerly very strong ties with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. They feared that the domination of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries would not only create discord in the community, but would give the missionaries an opportunity to take over their school and community farm. Consequently, they decided not to place their school under the direct control of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries choosing, instead, to place it under direct government control. In 1935, the Native Commissioner for Gutu noted that ‘the Basutos [sic] wish their school to be under direct government supervision, and quite distinct from mission control something similar to a farm school’.31 They also declared that their school was non-denominational, meaning that Dutch Reformed Church missionaries could not claim it to be one of their schools.32 Although they did not succeed in this endeavour, it represented a significant shift in the Basotho’s relationship with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. Even though they never clearly stated the reason for their reluctance to place their school under direct control of Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, it is important to note that Dutch Reformed Church missionaries were already notorious for their exploitation of Africans in Gutu District. Dutch Reformed Church missionaries were loathed in the district 30  S1859 Reverend I. Botha (Pamushana Mission) to NC Gutu, 27 December 1934. 31 Ibid. 32  S1859 NC Gutu to Circuit Inspector, Native Schools, Gwelo, 7 May 1936.

Mujere.indb 107

10/12/2018 16:18

108 Land, Migration and Belonging

for many reasons. They levied fines for ‘moral offences’, rearranged marriages, charged very high school fees and enriched themselves at the expense of their converts. 33 The Chief Native Commissioner, Colonel Carbutt, observed that Dutch Reformed Church missionaries arrived in the Victoria Circle from the Union (South Africa) poor, but before long they accumulated wealth by exploiting Africans and ended up investing in real estate in Fort Victoria town and even in South Africa. 34 It was against such a background of exploitation of Africans by the missionaries that in 1925 the Victoria Branch of the Southern Rhodesia Native Association (SRNA) lobbied for the replacement of missionary control of the education system with government schools under the administration of Africans. 35 Since some members of the Basotho community were members of the SRNA, it is possible that the Basotho based their decision on the numerous complaints that they and other Africans had against Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, especially with regards to the manner in which they ran their schools and also their overbearing attitude towards Africans. Reverend Orlandini of Alheight Mission in Gutu District, in particular, was infamous for imposing fines on Dutch Reformed Church adherents for moral crimes such as illicit sex and pregnancies among unmarried women.36 Dutch Reformed Church schools in Gutu and other districts were also generally of poor quality, as the missionaries used them as a tool to enrich themselves through the money they were paid by the government to supervise them. In 1932 the Superintendent of Natives observed; ‘the unpopularity of the Dutch Reformed Church in Gutu is extraordinary … were any other missionary body to open schools in the district, the Dutch Reformed Church could close its doors’.37 The notoriety that Dutch Reformed Church missionaries had gained in the district for their exploitation of Africans and also for the poor quality of their schools arguably explains the Basotho’s insistence on retaining control of their school and maintaining its status as a ‘non-denominational’ school. 33 

S1542/M8 CNC to Secretary to the Premier (Native Affairs), 8 May 1933.

34 Ibid. 35 

B. Davis and W. Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu: Class formation and the rise of the State in colonial Zimbabwe, 1900–1939’, Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1 (1987), p.78. 36  Davis and Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu’, p.78. 37  S1542/M8 Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 22 August 1932.

Mujere.indb 108

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 109

Although Bethel School was run like other third-class schools in the district, however, it had a school committee headed by the district Native Commissioner with a missionary, Reverend Van der Merwe, being the superintendent of the school.38 Native commissioners and Dutch Reformed Church missionaries worked together on matters to do with the Basotho’s running of Bethel School, especially on the issue of finances and general management. Both the NC and the superintendent of the school, who was always a Dutch Reformed Church missionary, attended the school meetings and had a strong influence on developments at the school. The school therefore still continued to be within reach of the state and missionaries’ paternalism. Thus the Basotho were forced to accept paternalistic structures of control in the form of the NC and the superintendent. It needs to be emphasised that although Reverend Van der Merwe supervised the school, it remained ‘non-denominational’, and the Basotho community had some control over school finances and other issues. Thus although Reverend Van der Merwe was a Dutch Reformed Church missionary, the Basotho did not object to him being the superintendent of the school as long they retained ‘ownership’ of the school. The first structure erected at the school was a classroom block, which was built using burnt bricks and had a thatched roof. 39 In November 1935 the Native Commissioner reported that he expected the first intake of pupils at Bethel School to be fifty Basotho children and five Karanga children.40 Although there was no deliberate policy to exclude children of other farmers from the school, the Basotho wanted to maintain the image of the school as a Basotho school by insisting on the use of Sesotho and English only. The school, however, failed to open in 1935, and could only do so two years later. Thus the few Karanga pupils at this school had to deal with learning in English and in Sesotho, as Chishona, their first language, was not part of the curriculum. A close comparison can be drawn with Gwebu School in Buhera District, which was established in 1934 for the Ndebele people resettled in the area from Fort Rixon in Matabeleland. Since the school was specifically established for the Ndebele people, IsiNdebele, rather than Chishona, was 38  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 20 June 1942. 39  S1859 NC Gutu to CNC, 6 November 1935. 40  S1563 NC Annual Reports, Gutu 1935.

Mujere.indb 109

10/12/2018 16:18

110 Land, Migration and Belonging

taught alongside English until 1965 when Chishona replaced IsiNdebele.41 From the 1950s the school was run by an elected school committee under the superintendence of Reverend Van der Merwe and the chairmanship of the Native Commissioner.42 The school committee handled the school finances, paid teachers and also purchased school equipment among other necessities. The constitution of the school stated that any member of the Basotho community who was a part-owner of Bethel Farm could be elected to the school committee at a general meeting.43 This effectively meant that although other farm owners had children attending school at Bethel, they could not be elected into the school committee for the simple reason that they were not members of the Basotho community or part-owners of Bethel Farm. Furthermore, the constitution also stipulated that the school committee was vested with the powers to investigate complaints made by parents, teachers or pupils about anything at the school and to report their findings to the school inspector in the event of anything adversely affecting the school being exposed. The school committee also had the powers to dismiss any member of the school staff if he/she was found guilty of any misconduct.44 Hence, although the school committee worked in conjunction with the superintendent, the Native Commissioner and the Education Circuit Inspector, the constitution empowered it to deal with any disciplinary issues at the school. The subjects taught at Bethel School were similar to those taught at other schools in the district. These included arithmetic, religious education, English, music and industrial work among other subjects.45 What was missing from the school curriculum were agriculture and sports, which were quite common in first-class schools. In 1940, the Circuit Inspector of Schools, A. R. Mather, reported that although he had been impressed by the quality of academic work of pupils at Bethel School, he had not been particularly impressed by the boys’ industrial work and he 41 

F. Musoni, ‘Educating the Ndebele in Buhera district, Zimbabwe; A case for a multi-cultural approach?’, paper presented to the Curriculum and Arts Education Departmental Seminar, University of Zimbabwe, 31 March, 2006, p.9. 42  S1859 Bethel School Committee to NC Gutu, 19 June 1950. 43  S1859 Constitution of Bethel School, 19 June 1950. 44  S1859 Bethel School Committee to NC Gutu, 19 June 1950. 45  Interview with Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi, Old Location, Mpandawana Growth Point, 31 January 2006.

Mujere.indb 110

10/12/2018 16:18

Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 111



recommended that this subject be prioritised.46 To this end, he recommended that agriculture and vegetable gardening be taken more seriously at this school.47 The school had a piece of land on the farm reserved for its agricultural activities and another one that became a gum tree plantation.48 This was in line with the general trend in colonial education, which put much emphasis on practical subjects to prepare Africans for work. Since they were keen to maintain their image as progressive Africans and also given the fact that industrial work was tied to the capitation grants, the Basotho made efforts to reach the standards of industrial work, especially in agriculture and gardening, which were being recommended by the Education Circuit Inspector. It is in this light that one of the conditions imposed on schools for obtaining government capitation grants by the Education Ordinance was to have four hours per day devoted to the teaching of industrial work.49 The Southern Rhodesia Education Commission of 1962 noted that some African witnesses claimed that ‘the industrial subjects are useful in the preparation of the school-leaver who wishes to earn his living as a jobbing builder or carpenter in his rural areas’.50 Industrial work was thus recommended because it was viewed as providing the pupils with skills that could be useful to them in wider society. While boys did carpentry, agriculture and building, girls were taught home craft, which involved sewing, cookery and other skills that were theoretically considered important for future housewives.51 Industrial work would teach the young people not only to work for themselves but also to work for Europeans. As West argues, industrial work was meant to make Africans tractable labourers and docile subjects.52 In essence industrial work was meant to train Africans for lower level jobs which involved manual work and were seen as commensurate with their position as colonial subjects. Africans generally rejected this kind of education, preferring more academic education, which put them on a collision course with the government. Schools in purchase areas were generally few and far between and pupils often had to travel long distances to attend. This was 46 

S1859 A. R. Mather, Circuit Inspector, Gwelo to NC Gutu, 5 August 1940.

47 Ibid. 48 

S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (no date). rise of an African middle class, p.41. 50  A. V. Judges et al., ‘Report of the Southern Rhodesia Education Commission 1963’, presented to the Legislative Assembly, Rhodesia, 27 June 1963, p.50. 51 Ibid. 52 West, The rise of an African middle class, p.40. 49 West, The

Mujere.indb 111

10/12/2018 16:18

112 Land, Migration and Belonging

largely because of the fact that the farms were large, which meant that students would travel long distances to attend school. The school committee sought to solve this problem by establishing ‘boarding facilities’ to cater for those pupils who had to travel very long distances.53 In 1938 almost half of the school was using ‘boarding facilities’.54 In 1940 the Circuit Inspector, Mr Mather, recommended that all pupils in Standard II and above become ‘boarders’, since the work they were doing demanded that they be at school longer than the other pupils.55 What needs to be stressed, however, is that the so-called ‘boarding facilities’ did not resemble a boarding school in any way but name. From the narratives of the former students, they were just a collection of ramshackle buildings at the school where students slept from Monday to Friday. They made their own food and were not really monitored by their teachers. On Friday, they would go to their respective homes to get more food provisions to last them for another week.56 Other students who had relatives among the teachers were fostered, only going home during school holidays. THE BASOTHO AND THE CHALLENGES OF RUNNING BETHEL SCHOOL Due to limited government funding the Basotho relied largely on school fees in the running of the school. This problem was compounded by the fact that part of the teacher’s salaries had to come from the school fees. 57 As a result fees charged at Bethel School were generally high compared to most schools in the district. In fact, schools in Gutu District were infamous for charging the highest school fees in the country, which ranged from 5/– (5 shillings) for lower grades to 10/– (10 shillings) for Standard IV. 58 Bethel School was charging even higher fees. In 1937, the fees at Bethel School were pegged at 12/– (12 shillings), which was higher than the district average, 53  Kingfisher, ‘Basuto Settlement, Fort Victoria News’, The Bantu Mirror, 5 March 1938, p.7; S1859 NC Gutu to CNC, 6 November 1935. 54  Interview with Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi, Old Location, Mpandawana Growth Point, 31 January 2006. 55  S1859 A. R. Mather, Circuit Inspector, Gwelo, to NC Gutu, 5 August 1940. 56  Interview with Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi, Old Location, Mpandawana Growth Point, 31 January 2006. 57 Ibid. 58  Davis and Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu’, p.78.

Mujere.indb 112

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 113

yet the Circuit Inspector even recommended that the figure be maintained because it helped stabilise the finances of the school. 59 The Basotho continued to pay these high fees not only because it was the Circuit Inspector’s recommendation but also because they wanted to maintain their status as modernising African farmers who were keen to foster development through education. In spite of their desire to maintain their status as ‘progressive natives’, a number of Basotho families failed to pay the school fees on time. This caused much discord in the community because the day-to-day running of the school depended largely on the amount of school fees the school committee was able to collect. The fees issue therefore became a major drawback in the development of Bethel School. Reverend A. A. Louw Jr, who replaced Reverend Van der Merwe as the superintendent of the school in 1942, also complained about the time the Basotho were taking to pay the fees and threatened to turn away those pupils who had not paid them. In September 1946, he wrote to the Native Commissioner of Gutu saying: I understand also that a large number of the parents have up to date not yet paid the school fees fixed by the School Council, and it seems as if the council is unable to get the fees from them. I know what I would do in such a case. I would just refuse to admit the children to attend school until all the fees have been paid up.60

Coming from the superintendent of the school, this evaluation of the state of affairs at Bethel revealed a very gloomy picture. It is noteworthy that although the Native Commissioner had previously viewed the Basotho as progressive people whose ideals had to be copied by ‘Karanga farmers’, their failure to pay school fees for their children and to run their school properly was a clear sign of their failure to fit into this idealised image. As a result, the superintendent of the school and the Native Commissioner were usually left with no option but to recommend drastic measures such as turning away those students who had not paid their school fees so as to ensure the smooth running of the school. Although some of the parents may have failed to pay the school fees because of impoverishment, Reverend Louw saw it as a sign of a lack of commitment. 59  S1859 C. S. Davis, Circuit Inspector, Gwelo, report on Bethel Kraal School, Gutu District, 16 October 1937. 60  S1859 Reverend A. A. Louw Jr (Pamushana Mission) to NC Gutu, 9 September 1946.

Mujere.indb 113

10/12/2018 16:18

114 Land, Migration and Belonging

One of the major impacts of the school fees payment problem was the high staff turnover at the school as teachers resigned from their posts at an alarming rate. This was largely because teachers went for long periods of time without receiving their monthly salaries, often because the parents had not paid school fees for their children. The rate of resignation of teachers at Bethel was acute: 1943 was the fourth consecutive year that the school began the year with a complete change in its teaching staff.61 Dickson Zinondo and Kathleen Thema had resigned from their posts at the end of 1942 citing among other things, the late payment of their monthly salaries.62 Dickson Zinondo’s salary from 1 April to 31 December 1942 had not been paid and Kathleen Thema was also owed her salary from 1 June to 31 December 1942.63 This situation forced the two teachers to resign from their posts at the end of 1942. The superintendent of the school threatened not to appoint any new staff at the school until he was satisfied that the school committee had paid what it owed the teachers who had served in 1942.64 He also suggested that the school be reduced to a one-teacher school or even close if the problems persisted, thus putting the future of the school in danger just a few years after its establishment.65 The Basotho community was reprimanded by the Native Commissioner and the superintendent of the school as well as by the Circuit Inspector for their sluggish payment of school fees and also for their mismanagement of school finances. There was such gross mismanagement of funds at the school that in 1946 police had to be called to carry out investigations into missing funds.66 It seems members of the school committee were in the habit of diverting school funds to their own use, which affected the smooth running of the school. The Native Commissioner was so incensed by this that he wrote to the superinten61 

S1859 A. R. Mather, Circuit Inspector, Gwelo to Reverend A. A. Louw (Pamushana Mission), 7 October 1942. 62  S1859 Reverend A. A. Louw Jr (Pamushana Mission) to NC Gutu, 14 December 1942. 63  S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend A. A. Louw Jr (Pamushana Mission), 22 December 1942. 64  S1859 Reverend A. A. Louw Jr (Pamushana Mission) to NC Gutu, 14 December 1942. 65 Ibid. 66  S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend A. A. Louw Jr (Pamushana Mission), 13 September 1946.

Mujere.indb 114

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 115

dent of the school noting that ‘these Basutos [sic] are the most non-cooperative crowd of Africans I have yet struck and to my mind nothing short of closing the school will bring them to their senses’.67 The Basotho were thus failing to live up to their idealised image of being ‘more advanced natives’ whose presence in the Dewure Purchase Areas would be a positive influence to the local Karanga.68 Though the Native Commissioner did not have the school closed, what is interesting is the way the various Gutu native commissioners’ perceptions of the Basotho as ‘decent and law-abiding members of the district’, which had been expressed by the then Native Commissioner in 1935, had completely changed by 1946. As the payment of school fees continued to be a challenge for most of the Basotho, Jacob Molebaleng and some members of the Basotho community suggested that the fees that were being collected from the dip tank be used to pay the teachers.69 This led to the division of the community into broadly two antagonistic groups. These factions failed to agree on the right course of action to take with regards to solving the teachers’ salaries problem. On one hand were Jacob Molebaleng, his brother Silas Molebaleng, Nathaniel Thema, Michael Phosa and their followers who were proposing that the community use dip tank fees to pay teachers; and on the other Ephraim Morudu and his followers, who included Seroka Morudu, Paul Mphisa, Andries Malete, Job Sikhala, Matthew Komo, were against the idea.70 The two factions failed to cooperate with each other thereby throwing the running of the school into chaos. Ephraim Morudu and his group argued that dip tank fees were supposed to be used only for the purposes of buying dipping chemicals and other veterinary 67 

S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend A. A. Louw Jr (Pamushana Mission), 13 September 1946, p.269. In 1946 J. E. S. Turton, the Provincial NC, also complained about the behaviour of the Xhosa and Fingo (Mfengu) farmers in the Marirangwe Purchase Areas who were not paying up instalments for their farms on time. He saw them as failing to live up to their constructed image of being more advanced Africans. See S2588/1991/1 PNC J. E. S. Turton to NC Salisbury, 28 January 1947, S924/G6 NLB minutes, 12/13 May 1947. 68  See A. K. Shutt, ‘“We are the best poor farmers”: Purchase area farmers and economic differentiation in Southern Rhodesia c. 1925–1980’, DPhil Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, 1995, p.269. The farmers of foreign origin in the purchase areas, mostly the Basotho, Xhosa and Mfengu, were viewed as ‘advanced natives’ but later they were accused of not living up to this constructed image. 69  S1859 Jacob Molebaleng to NC Gutu, 6 October 1946. 70 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 115

10/12/2018 16:18

116 Land, Migration and Belonging

necessities and not for paying teachers.71 They therefore viewed the proposal as bordering on abuse of authority by Jacob Molebaleng. They accused Jacob Molebaleng of behaving like a chief when he was just an ‘overseer who could not act as he wished’.72 Battle lines were thus drawn between Jacob Molebaleng and his supporters, who were the majority, and Ephraim Morudu and his supporters, who were fighting what they considered to be Molebaleng’s overbearing behaviour. This obviously impacted on the smooth running of the school. When the proposal was presented during a community meeting, sixteen members, largely belonging to the Molebaleng group, voted in favour of the proposal while four members voted against it. Not surprisingly, the four members who voted against the proposal were Andries Mokoele, Paul Mphisa, Seroka Morudu and Job Sikhala, who were already known for their animosity towards Jacob Molebaleng.73 It is not clear, however, whether Ephraim Morudu voted or abstained. It is possible that he may have abstained, having realised that his group’s votes were not enough to carry the day. Although the majority decision prevailed, this was not before Morudu and his group had put up a fight and showed that they would not just accept Molebaleng’s proposals without their opinions being heard. The tension between the two factions was not helpful in that it eroded the confidence of colonial officials that they had initially set out to gain. The timing of these factional disagreements at the school was also quite inauspicious given the irritable nature of the presiding Native Commissioner, whose opinions about local African affairs carried much weight in government circles. The Native Commissioner’s opinion was that the factions that had emerged in the community were adversely affecting development of the school. He wrote to the superintendent of the school complaining that the Bethel School Committee was hamstrung by factionalism, which affected decision making. In a tone showing lack of hope in the future of the school the Native Commissioner wrote: 71 Interview

with Fredrick Komo, Farm number 392, Dewure, Gutu, 28 December 2005. 72  S1859 Jacob Molebaleng to NC Gutu, 6 October 1946. 73  S1859 Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, Bethel School meeting held on 1 October 1946; Jacob Molebaleng (school secretary) to NC Gutu, 3 October 1946.

Mujere.indb 116

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 117

It may be said that I have withdrawn my interest and that with truth. In the early days of my service in this district I queried with your predecessor the necessity of a school committee for these folk; furthermore, I declined to have anything to do with the election of one. That is still my view. It is a case of Jakob [Jacob Molebaleng] and his followers versus Komo–Murudu–Mphisa element, what the one side supports the other opposes [my own emphasis]. At the moment, the Komo–Murudu– Mphisa gang are in the school committee, last year it was Jakob and his crew, the one does its best to annoy the other. It would be far better for you, as the superintendent, to run the whole show, even if you decide to remit any monies collected to me for disbursement later and salaries or whatever it may be. Carrying on under the present arrangement is simply asking for more of unseemly squabbles which have sickened me.74

It is clear from the Native Commissioner’s letter that the tension between Jacob Molebaleng and the Komo–Morudu–Mphisa group was so deep that it was tearing the community apart. Morudu and his followers viewed Jacob Molebaleng as overbearing. They even challenged his position as chief which, according to them, was not based on tradition although it was an official position recognised by the colonial administration. The school committee thus provided Morudu and his colleagues with a platform to contest Jacob Molebaleng’s authority without necessarily breaking away from the group. Seeing that the Basotho were using the school committee as a stage for different groups to contest power, the Native Commissioner suggested that the school committee be dissolved so that the superintendent could run the school directly. The school was obviously caught up in the cross-fire of a larger and older contest for power and influence between the two camps, which as explained in Chapter 2, had emerged even before their settlement in the Dewure Purchase Areas. The faction opposed to Molebaleng saw the school committee as a democratic structure where office bearers were elected rather than headmanship, which they saw as despotic and retrogressive. Although the Native Commissioner did not carry out the threat to dissolve the committee, the threat showed his frustration with the Basotho, who only a few years previously were viewed as ‘more advanced natives’. Thus although the Basotho sought to assert their right to belong as progressive Africans close to colonial officials, their failure to run their schools, as well as their constant squabbles, worked against them. By trying to avoid the patronage of Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and choosing to align themselves with colonial 74 

Mujere.indb 117

S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe, 25 November 1942.

10/12/2018 16:18

118 Land, Migration and Belonging

administrators, especially the Native Commissioner, the Basotho were taking a calculated risk in which they modelled themselves as progressive farmers who would adhere to the demands of colonial officials and become an example to other farmers. Their constant bickering and failure to run their school properly, however, eroded the initial gains they made when they successfully established their school. This strategy also set them on a collision course with other famers, who were not keen to follow all orders coming from the Native Commissioner and other colonial officials. For example, the Dewure Division Native Council was almost always split into two camps during meetings, with one side led by the Basotho councillors advocating high fees and levies and the other, composed of mostly Karanga farmers, resisting them. Consequently, the Basotho had to adjust their stance because of their small numbers as compared to Karanga farmers. Internal squabbles in the Basotho community seem to have been a result of both internal rivalries and their external relations with both the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and colonial officials. The patronage of Dutch Reformed Church missionaries caused many internal problems especially in the running of Bethel School and the unsolicited donations that the missionaries were trying to make. Meanwhile, colonial officials’ imposition of Jacob Molebaleng as a chief for the community created its own problems since some members of the community were willing to live according to the desired traditional structures expected of Africans to make them legible to the state, while others argued that Molebaleng’s position was only symbolic. All these factors related to the various strategies the Basotho deployed to secure tenure, entitlement, attachment to the land and ultimately belonging. SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENCE AND THE BASOTHO AUTONOMY The Basotho’s determination to preserve their independence from Dutch Reformed Church missionaries saw them get into a conflict with the missionaries over the superintendence of Bethel School. Reverend Van der Merwe, who had been the superintendent of the school since its establishment, resigned from his post in 1942 as he had been transferred from Alheight Mission in Gutu to Makumbe Mission in Buhera District. As he felt that he could not

Mujere.indb 118

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 119

continue to supervise the school from Buhera District he recommended that Reverend Louw Jr of Pamushana Mission become the new superintendent of the school. This move however, did not go down well with the Basotho community who saw it as another move by the missionaries to undermine their autonomy.75 In defiance of this recommendation, the Bethel School Committee appointed Reverend Botha, who had replaced Reverend Van der Merwe at Alheight Mission, as the new superintendent of the school.76 This decision showed the Basotho’s desire to run their school without any interference from Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. At a meeting of the Basotho community held on 31 August 1942, Michael Phosa ‘explained that the school was not under any denomination and that the Basuto [sic] therefore had the right to choose any superintendent they liked’.77 Although after some negotiations the Basotho eventually accepted Reverend Louw as the superintendent of their school, the impasse that had happened went a long way to revealing the Basotho’s determination to maintain their autonomy from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. Their choice of Reverend Botha over Reverend Louw Jr was influenced largely by a desire to show that they did not want the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries to have influence on them. The Basotho case was quite similar to what obtained in Marirangwe Purchase Areas, where farmers were against the appointment of missionaries as superintendents of their schools. Farmers in Marirangwe established their school in 1950 and, like the Basotho, declared it a ‘non-denominational’ school. In addition, they refused to accept a missionary as a superintendent of the school arguing that this would create financial problems at the school as missionaries could end up using school funds for church projects.78 They also argued that a non-denominational school would mean that every 75 

S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 11 June 1942. 76  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 10 August 1942. The transformations in the relationship between the Basotho and Dutch Reformed Church missionaries will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 6. 77  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 31 August 1942. 78  A. K. Shutt, ‘“We are the best poor farmers”: Purchase area farmers and economic differentiation in Southern Rhodesia c. 1925–1980’, DPhil Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, 1995, p.283.

Mujere.indb 119

10/12/2018 16:18

120 Land, Migration and Belonging

child would be welcome regardless of religious affiliation.79 According to Shutt, ‘one of the Marirangwe farmers, Walter Nyambezi stated that he was tired of missionaries as school superintendents. “Why cannot we have a person not connected to a church?” he asked’. 80 It is quite clear that these farmers were keen to escape the patronage of the missionaries, preferring, instead, to run their own schools as they pleased. Similarly, when some Mshawasha Purchase Area farmers were applying for a boarding school in the Chishanga section of the purchase area they indicated that they wanted the school to be run by the government and not by missionaries. 81 It therefore seems that most purchase area farmers were keen to escape missionary patronage and manage their own affairs. However, due to the historical ties they had with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, the Basotho accepted missionary superintendents but only on condition that they worked with their school committee and did not dictate anything to them. They also wished to have the powers to decide whom they wanted to be the superintendent of their school. Their desire was to maintain a delicate balance between benefiting from missionary patronage and maintaining their autonomy. ABUSE OF FEMALE STUDENTS AT BETHEL SCHOOL One of the major problems faced by the Basotho community in running Bethel School was the abuse of female school students by teachers. It was quite common during the colonial period for children to start their schooling when they were already in their teens. This increased the incidences of sexual abuse of female students by their male teachers. This problem was also rife at Bethel School. For example, in 1942 Reuben Robert Mphisa, who was one of the teachers at Bethel School, was accused of raping one of his students, Rhoda Tawu.82 The principal witness in this case was Priscilla Molebaleng who was a female teacher at the school.83 After an investigation, overwhelming evidence 79 

Shutt, ‘We are the best poor farmers’, p.282. Shutt, ‘We are the best poor farmers’, p.283. See also S2797/2451 Marirangwe Council minutes, 12 October 1949. 81  Mazarire, ‘A social and political history of Chishanga’, p.224. 82  S 1859 NC Gutu to Circuit Inspector, Gwelo, 22 April 1943. 83 Ibid. 80 

Mujere.indb 120

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 121

implicating Reuben Mphisa was found and he was dismissed in September of the same year.84 Although no criminal charges were levelled against Reuben Mphisa as the Attorney General refused to prosecute, the Native Commissioner reported that ‘what is recorded reveals a dreadful state of affairs sufficient to justify the name of the school being altered from Bethel to ‘Brothel’ school’.85 One of the members of the Basotho community argued that the only reason why the perpetrators were never convicted was that the Basotho community felt it would tarnish the image of the school and the community at large.86 Against this background, sexual abuse of pupils at Bethel School could have possibly been higher than the case of Rhoda Tawu’s abuse revealed, especially given the fact that a large number of pupils stayed in the ‘self-catering’ ‘boarding facilities’, which were not well supervised by the school authorities. The case could have been a tip of the iceberg in a widespread abuse of school children by male teachers at the school. It was, therefore, not surprising that it took Priscilla Molebaleng, a female teacher at the school, to expose the sexual abuse. The sexual abuse of pupils at Bethel School can therefore be said to have been one reason why the Circuit Inspector, A. R. Mather, ordered the boarding facilities at Bethel to be closed in 1946.87 Aletta Mphisa, who was one of the pupils at this school at the time, remembers that Mather was disturbed by the living conditions of pupils in the boarding facilities and ordered them to be closed.88 Rather than being saddened by the closure of the boarding facilities, pupils at Bethel School were happy to leave. This was because of the many challenges they faced in these boarding facilities, which included shortage of food and other necessities, as well as the squalid conditions in which they lived.89 Explaining the challenge of food provision for the pupils at the 84 

S1859 NC Gutu to Circuit Inspector, Gwelo, 22 April 1943. Reuben Robert Mphisa, however, was not arrested because, for unclear reasons, the Attorney General declined to prosecute him and the case was dropped. 85  S1859 NC Gutu to Circuit Inspector, Gwelo, 22 April 1943. 86  Interview with James Mathe (pseudonym), 15 November 2009. 87  Interview with Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi, Old Location, Mpandawana Growth Point, 31 January 2006. 88 Ibid. 89 Ibid. She highlighted that on the day Mr Mather came at the school and announced that the boarding facilities had been closed all the students were very happy and relieved that they no longer had to face the daily routine of having to cook for themselves before going to school and after classes.

Mujere.indb 121

10/12/2018 16:18

122 Land, Migration and Belonging

school, Reverend Van der Merwe noted that ‘parents pay school fees but are required to provide the food for any of their children who do not go home at night and supply them with bedding’.90 The problem of food supplies was so acute that the community began to toy with the idea of planting a maize crop on the farm to help alleviate this problem. In addition to the closure of the boarding facilities, the education authorities also began to consider removing Standard IV from the school because of the many problems the school was facing running it. The superintendent of the school saw the higher standards, especially Standard IV, as the ones that caused so many problems for Bethel School because of the problems associated with administering them, such as the limited numbers of students and the rate at which teachers were resigning from work.91 A. R. Mather concluded that it had been a mistake to have Standard IV allowed at Bethel School.92 Taking his cue from Mr Mather, Reverend Van der Merwe ordered Standard IV to be discontinued for the year beginning January 1943 and all the affected students to be transferred to Pamushana Mission.93 The Basotho community thus lost Standard IV largely because of their failure to run the school properly, their mismanagement of school funds, and their failure to pay teachers on time. This, however, was not unusual for third-class schools. Indeed, most of these schools were characterised by poor management, poorly qualified teachers and low levels of instruction. As Challiss argues, ‘in hardly more than a handful of third-class schools were pupils likely to advance beyond standard 3 at the most’.94 Hence, although the Basotho were striving to set themselves apart from other Africans and projecting themselves as progressive, they faced the same challenges that other Africans in rural areas were facing in running third-class schools.

90 

S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (no date), circa 1943. S 1859 Reverend A. A. Louw Jr (Pamushana Mission) to NC Gutu, 14 December 1942. 92  S1859 A. R. Mather, Circuit Inspector, Gwelo, to Reverend A. A. Louw Jr (Pamushana Mission), 7 October 1942. 93  S1859 Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission) to NC Gutu, 22 September 1942. 94  Challiss, ‘The foundation of the racially segregated education system in southern Rhodesia’, p.206. 91 

Mujere.indb 122

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 123

CONTESTATIONS OVER THE STATUS OF BETHEL AS A BASOTHO SCHOOL The problems that were increasingly threatening to cripple the running of Bethel School also caught the attention of the Dewure Division Native Council in the 1940s. The councillors began to debate whether against the backdrop of the emerging problems it was good for the school to remain under the control of the Basotho community. Some councillors began to suggest that the management of the school be placed in the hands of the Dewure Division Native Council. It should be highlighted that although the Basotho had some measure of influence in the council, the majority of the councillors were non-Basotho farmers. In one of its meetings in 1948 the council debated a proposal to have the council take over control of the school from the Basotho community. John Moeketsi, a Sotho councillor in the Native Council, recommended that the school remain under the Basotho, arguing that ‘this was primarily a Basuto [sic] School put there to teach in Sesutu (Sesotho) and English languages and for the purpose of teaching the Basuto [sic] children their own customs’.95 Moeketsi therefore saw the school as playing a key role in the Basotho community, especially by showing Basotho exceptionalism, as it was viewed as helping to inculcate Basotho values and culture in the pupils. As well as helping in forging Basotho unity by the teaching of Sesotho, ownership of a modern institution such as a school was also a matter of pride for the community as it helped advance their image as progressive Africans. It was against this background that Councillor Moeketsi viewed the school as having a significant role in the community – hence the need for the community to retain control of the school. The majority of the members of the Basotho community supported Moeketsi’s argument for the community to maintain its ownership and control of the school. It is important to note that even Ephraim Morudu, who was well known for his refusal to go along with majority decisions, supported the idea of the Basotho retaining the control of the school. He argued that it was not possible for the school to be transferred to the council because not only was it built by the Basotho community but it was also built on a farm owned by the community, thus making 95 

S2797/4663 Minutes of Dewure Division Native Council meeting, 18 March 1948.

Mujere.indb 123

10/12/2018 16:18

124 Land, Migration and Belonging

it a Basotho school and therefore un-transferable.96 It is therefore apparent that, for some the Basotho, the school continued to play a critical role in the sustenance of the community’s identity as they saw its major role as being that of teaching Sesotho and Sotho cultural values. This meant that as long as the school remained in the hands of the Basotho and Sesotho continued to be taught at the school, the community’s identity would be preserved. Moreover, the school provided a platform where the Basotho articulated their unity and their attachment to the area, although such unity was often destabilised by tensions between different factions. Thus for John Moeketsi and Ephraim Morudu, the Basotho community took pride in the knowledge that this was a Basotho school. Interestingly, not every member of the Basotho community shared these views about the value and importance of Bethel School to the community. Jacob Mojapelo, who was another Sotho councillor in the Dewure Native Council, disagreed with Moeketsi’s views with regards to the future of the school and also its significance in the sustenance of Sesotho as well as Basotho customs. He argued that he had been a teacher at Bethel School for many years and was convinced that no Sotho customs were being taught at the school.97 Thus Mojapelo saw the school as playing nothing more than a symbolic role in the sustenance of Basotho cultural values. He added that the majority of the children at the school were actually children of the local Karanga farmers and not Basotho children.98 He therefore reasoned that transferring the school from the control of the Basotho community to that of the Dewure Division Native Council would, as far as he was concerned, have no significant impact on the Basotho community. Mojapelo’s argument summed up the fluid nature of the Basotho community at that time and also the extent to which they had failed to make Bethel a Basotho school. Furthermore, Mojapelo exposed the thinness of the rhetoric of Bethel School’s importance in teaching the Basotho children Sotho language and culture. Although at the time the school was established in 1937, the majority of its pupils were the Basotho, by 1948 the children of Karanga farmers had become the majority, as a number of the Basotho had enrolled at other schools in the 96 Ibid. 97 

S2797/4663 Minutes of Dewure Division Native Council meeting, 18 March 1948. 98 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 124

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 125

district and beyond, and also because Karanga farmers were the majority in the area. In the end, it had become difficult to identify Bethel School as a Basotho school, whose mandate was to teach Sotho children their culture, as the majority of the pupils were now children of the local Karanga farmers. In spite of these arguments however, the Basotho community managed to fight off the attempts to transfer Bethel School to the council as they argued strongly that the school had great significance for them and was built on their community farm. It is clear that the significance of the school for the Basotho had changed over time. Although in the 1930s the school was also very significant to the Basotho as the majority of the pupils were Sotho and the teaching of Sesotho was the pride of the community, by the late 1940s, with the number of Basotho pupils drastically reduced, the school carried less significance. The Basotho had lost the demographic battle and with it their isolationist approach. Such conflicts among the Basotho over the importance of Bethel School shows the challenges they faced in their attempts to model themselves as progressive Africans. The conflicts also reveal the challenges the Basotho faced in maintaining social cohesion in their struggles for belonging. In spite of their keenness to project an image of unity, the many instances of disagreements or conflict betrayed cleavages within the community. Bethel School provided a platform where different factions fought turf wars and sought to gain positions of influence in the community. In some instances, the Basotho did not even agree on the significance of the school, with members like Mojapelo suggesting that the school be taken over by the Dewure Division Native Council. As Jannecke aptly puts it, ‘representations of identity typically ignore and repress internal differences within community’, while emphasising a strong sense of belonging and membership to a community.99 It is clear that, in the case of the Basotho community, there were both instances when strong in-group ties were revealed and a sense of belonging well-articulated, and moments when unity was threatened and factions emerged. Moreover, the developments at the school contributed to and also revealed the gradual hybridisation of the Basotho community. While in the early 1930s the community emphasised and celebrated their strong in-group ties, which were cemented by 99 

C. Jannecke, ‘Strategies of representation in Tsitsikamma Fingo/Mfengu land restitution claims’, South African Historical Journal, Vol. 60, No. 3 (2008), p.142.

Mujere.indb 125

10/12/2018 16:18

126 Land, Migration and Belonging

endogamous marriages and also by their pride in the teaching of Sesotho of at Bethel School, the same cannot be said of later decades. As the discussion above has shown, Bethel School gradually began to be dominated by non-Sotho students and began to lose its image as a Basotho school. Moreover, the Basotho’s increased interaction with other farmers in the farmers’ associations, the Dewure Division Native Council, the Dutch Reformed Church and other platforms meant that the Basotho could not remain isolated, especially now that their farms were not actually geographically contiguous.100 Thus the Basotho’s interaction with other farmers on matters to do with Bethel School, together with their interactions in other spheres described in the preceding chapters, greatly impacted on their sense of group identity. Bethel School was indeed one of the platforms on which the Basotho sought to articulate cultural difference with varying degrees of success. Over the years the Basotho community became more and more fluid due to its interaction with the local Karanga farmers at various levels. Furthermore, some of the Basotho farmers were dropping their cultural practices, such as endogamy, by marrying into the local communities. Moreover, as highlighted in Chapter 4, the Basotho were also increasingly using Chikaranga (a Shona dialect) in their everyday interactions, reserving Sesotho for their more private gatherings, such as funerals. Since language is one of the most important markers defining an ethnic group, the adoption of Chikaranga provides interesting trajectory in the hybridisation of the Basotho community. By mid-1974 Bethel School had been closed and it was never reopened.101 One of the reasons for the closure of the school was the fact that the Roman Catholic Church had opened up Masema School, close to Bethel School. This school charged very low school fees compared to Bethel and offered Standard IV, which was no longer being offered at Bethel.102 Therefore, it made more sense even for the Basotho to send their children to Masema School. Tirizi School was opened close to the Dewure Purchase Areas and Dewende School was also opened in the purchase areas in the 1950s. These developments went a long way to solving the 100 See

Map 2 showing the distribution of farms owned by the Basotho in Chapter 3, p.51. 101  Interview with Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi, Old Location, Mpandawana Growth Point, 31 January 2006. 102  Interview with Mazvinetsa Pirikisi, Farm number 159, Dewure East, 18 September 2009.

Mujere.indb 126

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 127

problem of long-distance students in the Dewure Purchase Areas who had to travel to attend school, which resulted in Bethel School losing many students because the new schools were closer and more affordable than Bethel.103 The problems at Bethel School increasingly pushed pupils to transfer to other schools. Furthermore, the Basotho community also began to move away from their isolationist tendencies. Fredrick Komo recalls that while in the early years of their settlement in Gutu the Basotho people insisted on having their children learn only English and Sesotho, from the 1950s they began to see the need for their children also to learn local languages to help them integrate better in the wider society. As a result, they began to send their children to other schools where they could learn other languages such as Chishona and IsiNdebele.104 Those Basotho who were working in towns and mines also took their children and enrolled them in schools there, further depriving Bethel School of students. For example, Junerose Phosa transferred from Bethel School in the 1960s and enrolled at Senga School in Gwelo (now Gweru), where her brother Antipas was teaching.105 Such a situation meant that Bethel School was left with too few pupils for its own sustenance, leading to its closure. This engendered a closer cooperation between the Basotho and other farmers in the area of education, which can be argued to have contributed to the emergence of a hybrid community. It can be argued that the articulation of any form of belonging is context specific. Although in the 1930s they appealed to some form of particularism, from the late 1940s they began to realise the problems with this strategy. The Basotho pupils were gradually becoming the minority at Bethel School, thus eroding its image as a Basotho school. Furthermore, the rhetoric of the importance of the school as an institution dedicated to the teaching of Sesotho and Sotho cultural values also began to be challenged by some of the members of the Basotho community. It therefore became imperative for the Basotho to transform the way they constructed and negotiated their belonging. No longer could they base their belonging on exceptionalism. 103 

S2929/8/3 Delineating Reports Gutu, Report of Dewure NPA by C. J. K. Latham, 19 February 1964. 104 Interview with Fredrick Komo, Farm number 392 Dewure, Gutu, 28 December 2005. 105  Interview with Junerose Phosa, Kuwadzana Phase 3, Harare, 13 March 2006.

Mujere.indb 127

10/12/2018 16:18

128 Land, Migration and Belonging

CONCLUSION Debates about migration and belonging have often led to the overplaying of the stories of those who view themselves as the autochthons or first comers.106 This has led to a general neglect of the stories of those viewed as ‘strangers’ or ‘late comers’ and their agency in the politics of belonging. However, as has been shown in this chapter, ‘late comers’ do actually have agency and use a plethora of methods to construct, negotiate, contest and articulate their belonging. The Basotho used Bethel School to articulate their belonging based on their image as modernising Africans and sought to maintain its status as a Basotho school. Although gradual processes of assimilation and integration in the local community led to the hybridisation of the Basotho community, the significance of the school in the articulation of difference cannot be overlooked. The teaching of Sesotho at the school had great significance in the construction of the image of Bethel as a Basotho school. Bethel School, therefore, had an important function in the Basotho community in the purchase areas, as it was associated with the Basotho’s community farm and by extension with their attachment to the land. The chapter has also shown how, like land, graves, funerals and religion among other factors, schools and by extension education can also play a significant role in the belonging matrix. As people who framed themselves as modernising or progressive Africans, the Basotho viewed the establishment of a school as a major achievement. The school thus became a platform where cultural difference as well as integration was played out. Thus although the school was a symbol of progress, it was also about language and Sotho customs. The many challenges that the Basotho faced in running their school exposed the fissures within the community, which often came to life during debates on the running of the school. Often the community was split between the Molebaleng and the Morudu factions. Although these factions did not ultimately lead to the complete breakdown of unity, they show the complexities and contradictions within the seemingly cohesive Basotho community. Internal conflicts also revealed the contradictions within the Basotho’s attempts to project Bethel School as a critical institution in forging unity among the Basotho and in asserting their attachment to Bethel, their community farm. The image of 106 

Mujere.indb 128

See, for example, Geschiere, The perils of belonging.

10/12/2018 16:18



Building a Community School: The Rise and Fall of Bethel School 129

Bethel as a Basotho school was challenged by other farmers and most significantly by some members of the Basotho community. The conflicts over the school thus exposed both those moments when the Basotho showed their strong in-group ties and those occasions when the fault lines within the community were exposed. Conflicts between the Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries as well as their numerous factional disputes were more about struggles over who controlled those institutions, such as Bethel School, which mediated the Basotho’s identity and sense of belonging. Bethel School is, therefore, a window through which one can view and appreciate the various strategies the Basotho used in dealing with the ever-changing contours of belonging.

Mujere.indb 129

10/12/2018 16:18

Mujere.indb 130

10/12/2018 16:18

6 Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries

The recent upsurge in Pentecostal Christianity has placed religion at the centre of politics of belonging in Africa as it creates new trajectories of belonging based on the doctrine of being ‘born again’. Its ambiguities notwithstanding, Christianity can provide adherents with something on which to build networks and solidarities. It creates a new form of identity for the converts, and engenders new notions of inclusion and exclusion. This has been the case with the Basotho, whose adoption of Protestant values over the years has been an important factor in their everyday interactions with other farmers. Religion is often intertwined with autochthony, ethnicity, identity and politics among other factors in the belonging matrix. Hence, it should be viewed as just one piece in the complex milieu of strategies of belonging. In spite of having spent almost three decades enjoying the patronage of Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, when the Basotho moved from Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms to the Dewure Purchase Areas in the early 1930s, they made a conscious decision to run their affairs with limited interference from the missionaries. This was a significant shift from the close relationship that the Basotho had established with the missionaries. This chapter explores the various ways through in the Basotho used religion, in this case Christianity, to construct and negotiate their belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas. The chapter also analyses the interface between religion, ethnicity, ownership of land and notions of inclusion and exclusion and how it impacted on the relationship between the Basotho and their non-Sotho neighbours. It argues that below the veil of an amicable relationship between the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and their Basotho converts were subtle mistrust, schisms and religious fault lines

Mujere.indb 131

10/12/2018 16:18

132 Land, Migration and Belonging

that found expression in the numerous disputes between the two. In the end, the Basotho expressed their desire to retain a measure of independence from the missionaries by refusing to accept missionary paternalism. The first section focuses on the colonial period and the unique challenges the Basotho faced in their dealings with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and the second section is an analysis of the tensions within the Bethel congregation over the position of the Basotho within the local church. THE BASOTHO AND DUTCH REFORMED CHURCH MISSIONARIES IN THE DEWURE PURCHASE AREAS Religion often helps to forge unity among adherents and separate them from other people with different beliefs. Its strength is that it tends to transcend kinship, ethnic, political and other differences. Once a person converts to a new religion, they adopt a new way of life which their new religion demands of them and changes their sense of belonging. As well as being relational, belonging is also situational making it possible if not desirable for individuals to use different strategies in negotiating belonging in different contexts. Thus while appealing to religion can work in some contexts it may not work in others, necessitating the use of other strategies. Hence, appealing to religion is just one of the many strategies available to communities in their strategies of belonging. For the Basotho, Christianity in general and membership of the Dutch Reformed Church in particular were key factors in their construction and negotiation of belonging. As highlighted in the previous chapters, the Basotho have long historical links with missionaries who carried out evangelical work among the southern Shona, especially the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. Their relationship with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries also gave them access to educational facilities that were being established by the church. Hence, the fact that they were Christians who had also acquired a level of education helped in the construction of the Basotho as progressive and modernising colonial subjects. However, as contexts changed, the Basotho found it necessary to remodel their relationship with the missionaries. This was influenced by their desire to avoid missionary patronage, given the Dutch Reformed Church’s missionaries’ paternalistic tendencies.

Mujere.indb 132

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 133

It should be highlighted that religious denominations enable adherents to create solidarities and networks based on belonging to the same church. There are often different associations within most denominations that are based on age, gender and other factors. In the Dutch Reformed Church, for example, leagues (sungano) were and continue to be important associations that enable members to interact both within and outside the church.1 There are four major leagues in the church: the women’s league (sungano yamadzimai), the men’s league (sungano yavarume), the girls’ league (sungano yavasikana) and the boys’ league (sungano yavakomana). Members of these leagues meet regularly at the local church or organise meetings in the congregation (chiunga), where they interact with each other. This helps create solidarity among church members that also operates outside the church environment. Since belonging is relational, the leagues have become important social safety nets, which can be critical when a member faces some social or economic challenges. Such networks may, however, intersect with or transcend other networks such as those based on political affiliation, kinship and ethnicity among others. It should be noted that, although the Basotho community was composed largely of Dutch Reformed Church congregants there were some members who belonged to other religious denominations. Notable among those individuals who did not belong to the Dutch Reformed Church were T. Makgatho and L. Phosa and their families who belonged to the First Ethiopian Church (FEC).2 Fredrick Komo, David Leboho, Jacob Molebaleng, Silas Molebaleng and Shadreck Leboho were Lutherans,3 while J. Moeketsi and M. Phosa were Wesleyans.4 Although the non-Dutch Reformed Church members of the Basotho community remained a minority, the dominance of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries in the community was bound to lead to some tension. The Basotho were therefore keen to avoid having one religious denomination dominating in the community. The fact that Jacob Molebaleng, the leader of community, was not a member of the Dutch Reformed 1 

See Mutumburanzou et al., Ten years of development in Reformed Church in Zimbabwe. 2  Interview with Junerose Phosa, Kuwadzana Phase 3, Harare, 13 March 2006. 3  S1859 Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, minutes of interview: Jacob Molebaleng, Malachi Phosa, Silas Molebang (no date). 4  Interview with Aletta Mphisa-Mazanhi, Old Location, Mpandawana Growth Point, 31 January 2006.

Mujere.indb 133

10/12/2018 16:18

134 Land, Migration and Belonging

Church represented an interesting dynamic, and explains why he was keen to see that all religious denominations had equal recognition in the community. Moreover, as pointed out in Chapter 4, even those individuals who did not belong to the Dutch Reformed Church contributed to the purchase of the community farm making the dominance of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries a possible source of conflict. Thus the decision to maintain autonomy from Dutch Reformed Church missionaries was also made with this denominational diversity in mind. In addition, the Basotho feared that the missionaries would use their influence to take over control of the church they were establishing on their community farm and ultimately the farm itself. Such fears should be understood in the context of the Basotho having lost their two farms following the enactment of the Land Apportionment Act (1930). Against this background, they still felt that their tenure was not quite secure, hence their desire to keep the missionaries at arm’s length. It was against the background of the above that, upon leaving Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal Farms in the early 1930s, the Basotho agreed that no single religious denomination was to have a dominant position in the community. As the Native Commissioner for Gutu reported, to avoid the domination of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, ‘when moved from Victoria, all Basutos [sic] agreed that no mission of any denomination should have anything whatever to do with their school or church. This was in order that no one class or religion dominate or have more claim than another’.5 This was, indeed, an unequivocal statement articulating the Basotho’s desire to keep Dutch Reformed Church missionaries at bay in as far as the running of their communal farm, school and church was concerned. They were also making efforts to avoid making those members of the community who were not members of the Dutch Reformed Church feel excluded from the rest of the community. By making such a decision, the Basotho were effectively forging a form of belonging built on religious diversity and accommodation as opposed to the one based on denominational homogeneity. The Basotho’s displacement from Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal farms, where they had lived for close to three decades, left them disillusioned with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and their ability to protect their interests. After their resettlement 5  S1859

Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, minutes of interview: Jacob Molebaleng, Malachi Phosa, Silas Molebang (no date).

Mujere.indb 134

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 135

in the Dewure Purchase Areas, colonial officials, especially the native commissioners, assumed more significant roles, chairing meetings of the community and the Bethel School Committee and settling disputes. Native commissioners were effectively micro-managing the affairs of the community while the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries were being kept at bay. The Basotho’s decision not to allow the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries to interfere in their affairs also needs to be understood in the context of the growing unpopularity of the missionaries. The Dutch Reformed Church’s problems with their African converts started as early as the late nineteenth century when they resolved to institutionalise a policy of separating races in the church.6 Moreover, as Mazarire argues, ‘the DRC [Dutch Reformed Church] preached the need for a radical break from the customs and religious beliefs of the past by the convert and although the church could be “indigenised” it alienated the Africans and subjected them to rather too much European tutelage’.7 It was this tutelage which the Basotho were beginning to resist. Dutch Reformed Church missionaries had also gained notoriety for exploiting the African converts in Victoria, which may have influenced the Basotho’s decision to rethink their ties with them. According to Mazarire: the DRC [Dutch Reformed Church] personnel in particular were notorious even in their involvement in underhand dealings involving expropriating cattle and grain from Africans, taking advantage of restrictive marketing regulations in the search for rapid capital accumulation to end up investing in real estate in the town of Fort Victoria’.8

In Malawi, Dutch Reformed Church missionaries were also known for their exploitation of converts, and were loathed for it. According to Lamba, although most missionaries generally viewed Africans as second-class citizens, ‘the Dutch [in Malawi] seem to have stuck to it more tenaciously and consistently, with 6  M.

L. Daneel, Old and new in southern Shona independent churches, Volume 1: Background and rise of the major movements (The Hague: Mouton, 1971), p.196. 7  G. C. Mazarire, ‘The rise and fall of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) in the Victoria Circle 1888–1950: A dissenting view of the Church’s alleged invention of Chikaranga with particular reference to the Chibi Circuit’, New Dimensions in History Seminar Paper No. 5, Department of History, University of Zimbabwe, 28 May 2004, p.9. 8  Mazarire, ‘The rise and fall of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) in the Victoria Circle’, p.11.

Mujere.indb 135

10/12/2018 16:18

136 Land, Migration and Belonging

a record of more brutality’.9 As a result, Dutch Reformed Church missionaries began to be disliked by many Africans, including some of their converts. In Gutu District, Dutch Reformed Church missionaries became so notorious for exploiting Africans that the issue drew the attention of colonial officials. The Dutch Reformed Church entered Gutu in 1907 when they took over Gutu Mission from the Berlin Missionary Society. In 1909 Reverend Orlandini established Alheight Mission, which became the second Dutch Reformed Church mission in the district. As well as its religious influence through its network of churches and schools, the Dutch Reformed Church also became influential in the economic sphere in the district as it employed teachers, preachers, agriculturalists and other workers as well as trying cases, imposing fines and collecting taxes. The church therefore became a source of employment as well as a source of exploitation of Africans due to the excesses of the missionaries, which led to its unpopularity. In 1933 the Superintendent of Natives of Victoria wrote to the Chief Native Commissioner noting that ‘the unpopularity of the Dutch Reformed Church in Gutu is extraordinary. It is quite clear to my mind that the success of the African Methodist Episcopal Church was due to this very dislike’.10 Reverend Orlandini, who was stationed at the Dutch Reformed Church Alheight Mission in Gutu for twenty-two years until his expulsion from the district in 1934, was so notorious for evolving a paternalistic and overbearing hold over Africans around the mission that they began to see him as their Native Commissioner. According to Davis and Döpcke, Reverend Orlandini ‘established a virtual dictatorship over the surrounding African population. As chief of the mission, he and his staff of African evangelists, teachers and messengers judged cases, collected fines and “taxes”, recruited labour.’11 Orlandini enriched himself by exploiting Africans, establishing a virtual fiefdom for himself and his personnel. As Davis and Döpcke noted, in 1933 Orlandini ‘had at least 900 cattle grazing in the Gutu Reserve. He had herds at the villages of all his teachers 9 

I. C. Lamba, ‘The Cape Dutch Reformed Church Mission in Malawi: A preliminary historical examination of its educational philosophy and application, 1899–1931’, History of Education Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 3 (1984), p.377. 10  S1542/M8, Superintendent of Natives, Fort Victoria to CNC, 22 August 1932. 11  B. Davis and W. Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu: Class formation and the rise of the State in colonial Zimbabwe, 1900–1939’, Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1 (1987), p.64.

Mujere.indb 136

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 137

and at others. He dealt extensively with European cattle buyers, selling 200 to 300 head at a time’.12 The mounting complaints from Africans and the Native Commissioner about the conduct of Orlandini and his personnel resulted in his expulsion from Gutu Reserve in 1934. Realising that the promises of progress made by the missionaries had not been fulfilled and also having been victims of missionaries’ exploitation, a number of Africans began to seek alternatives outside the Dutch Reformed Church. The Dutch Reformed Church’s many schools were ill-equipped and charged extortionate fees and the Dutch Reformed Church’s Gutu mission hospital was charging higher patient fees than government hospitals.13 According to Lamba, Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ goal of creating ‘a Bible loving, industrious and prosperous peasantry proved a fiasco, since the prosperity was never realised; the Dutch adhered to an educational policy which from the beginning aimed for literacy for a people classified as children’.14 These and other grievances gave a number of Africans enough impetus to seek alternatives outside the Dutch Reformed Church. In the case of Gutu District, some left the mission and returned to African Traditional Religion, while others invited the Catholics to establish a school in the district and end the Dutch Reformed Church’s monopoly.15 However, the most significant impact of Dutch Reformed Church’s growing unpopularity was the increase in people joining African-initiated Churches (AICs), especially Reverend Samuel Mutendi’s Zion Christian Church (ZCC), which was taking hold in the district and had already established a school in 1927.16 In 1932 Luka Jarawani of the African Methodist Episcopal Church (AMEC) appeared in the district, preaching that “‘American Negroes” would end white rule and abolish taxes’.17 His promise to provide education for all in a few months had a particularly drastic effect on Dutch Reformed Church schools in the district, which dramatically lost a large number of students, a situation that was only reversed when the Superintendent of 12 

Davis and Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu’, p.79. Davis and Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu’, p.80. 14  Lamba, ‘The Cape Dutch Reformed Church mission in Malawi’, p.388. 15  Davis and Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu’, p.81. 16  For the rise and spread of AICs in Gutu see Daneel, Old and new in southern Shona independent churches, Volume 1. 17  Davis and Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu’, p.84. 13 

Mujere.indb 137

10/12/2018 16:18

138 Land, Migration and Belonging

Natives revoked the preaching licences of the African Methodist Episcopal Church preachers in the district.18 Luka was prohibited from entering the reserve and later imprisoned for forgery.19 After this incident E. G. Howman, the Superintendent of Natives (Fort Victoria), was approached by some men who requested permission to form their own church rather than revert to being members of the Dutch Reformed Church.20 It became clear to the Superintendent of Natives that, due to Orlandini and other Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ exploitation of Africans in the district, the Dutch Reformed Church had become very unpopular with Africans, allowing AICs to gain a foothold in the district. However, for many reasons, most of the Basotho chose to remain attached to the Dutch Reformed Church amidst this dramatic waning of the church’s fortunes in the district. In spite of this, they were also seeking to maintain their autonomy from the missionaries. In 1935, C. S. Davis, the Schools Inspector for the Gwelo Circuit, noted that ‘they [Basotho] have steadily grown away from that mission [Dutch Reformed Church] and from conversations with some of them lately I gather they have grown to dislike it’.21 Coming against the background of the long history of cordial relationships between the Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, this was a cause for concern for the missionaries. However, instead of taking the route of breaking away from the church and forming or joining an AIC as other disgruntled Africans were doing, the Basotho chose to carefully negotiate their relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries by insisting on having the power to run their affairs with minimal interference from missionaries. This was aided by the fact that they owned a community farm and were also united through their historical links and kinship ties. Thus although they desired autonomy from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, the Basotho clearly did not wish to disengage completely from the Dutch Reformed Church. They, sought a flexible arrangement that would allow them to manage their own affairs without necessarily seceding from the church. They still desired to have Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ 18 

Davis and Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu’, p.84. M. C. Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy: Southern Rhodesia, 1923– 1933’, PhD thesis, Simon Fraser University, August 1972, p.210. 20  Steele, ‘The foundations of a Native Policy’, p.84. 21  S1859 C. S. Davis, Circuit Inspector, Gwelo to Director of Native Education, 9 December 1935. 19 

Mujere.indb 138

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 139

minister to them as long as they did not seek to exert any control over the community. Their strategy was therefore based on ‘hesitation and contingency – rather than fierce certainties’, to borrow Hughes’ concept.22 They neither wanted complete secession nor desired Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ paternalism. Their appeal to religion in their negotiation of belonging was marked by ambivalence and suspicion. They therefore decided to keep ties with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, their long-time allies, with the proviso that it would be on their own terms. In a way, they also felt that they had grown up spiritually, such that they could now run their own affairs with little help from missionaries. The purchase of their community farm had given them a new site and a base from which to negotiate and bargain on the forms of tolerable missionary interference. As a community that was perceived by colonial officials as progressive and an example for other Africans to follow, joining AICs, which were taking foothold in the district and surrounding areas, would have brought them on a collision course with colonial officials given that such churches were viewed as subversive. Hence, although they had many grievances against the missionaries and were aware that native commissioners were also concerned about the missionaries’ maltreatment of Africans, they chose to negotiate their space in the church by keeping missionaries at arm’s length rather than leaving the church. The Basotho’s careful negotiation of their relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries was therefore both about their desire to resist missionary patronage and also about how they wanted colonial officials to perceive them, which would have changed dramatically if they had joined AICs. Thus in spite of their distrust of Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, because they needed to keep their image of being good and progressive Africans in the eyes of colonial officials they could not turn to AICs. The Dutch Reformed Church missionaries were concerned about the Basotho’s policy of denominational diversity because they sought to maintain their sphere of influence in the district. The Dutch Reformed Church was in direct competition with other religious denominations in Gutu District, especially the Roman Catholic Church and a number of emerging AICs. Dutch Reformed Church missionaries were rapidly establishing congregations and setting up schools as a way of spreading their influence and 22  D.

M. Hughes, Whiteness in Zimbabwe: Race, landscape, and the problem of belonging (New York: Palgrave, 2010), p.142.

Mujere.indb 139

10/12/2018 16:18

140 Land, Migration and Belonging

carving out territory in the district. The Native Commissioner’s office also noted this rapid expansion of the Dutch Reformed Church in the district with great concern. Dutch Reformed Church congregants were usually required to attend Dutch Reformed Church-run schools even if there were other schools nearby and Roman Catholic adherents also had to attend Catholic-run schools. Competition with other denominations was thus arguably one of the key reasons why Dutch Reformed Church missionaries saw the need to keep the Basotho community within their sphere of influence and avoid a situation where another denomination might gain influence in the community. This is a scenario similar to colonial Kenya where ‘different missions and Christian denominations colonised certain regions as their “mission fields” sometimes barring “other” missionaries from operating in the area. This was characterised by denominational superiority and “othernisation” of other denominations’.23 According to Comaroff and Comaroff, the missionary encounter in Africa was a ‘long conversation’ which created imaginative dualisms such as white/black, Christian/heathen as well as denominational dichotomies.24 Although they were drawn into this dialogue and identified themselves as Protestants, the Basotho were reluctant to get involved in the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ turf wars with other denominations in the district as they sought to maintain their community’s denominational diversity. Parallels can be drawn between the Basotho’s appropriation of Christianity and the case of the Peki Ewe in Southern Ghana’s, where the German missionaries of the Norddeutsche Missiongsellschaft (NMG) established the Ewe Presbyterian Church (later called the Evangelical Presbyterian Church).25 The Basotho’s changing relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries unravels the nature of the encounters between Western missionaries and their African converts. As Meyer argues, ‘African Christianity is not merely an extension of the missionary impact, but a product of the encounter between 23  E. Kamaara, ‘Towards Christian national identity in Africa: A historical perspective to the challenge of ethnicity to the Church in Kenya’, Studies in World Christianity, Vol. 16, No. 2 (2010), p.135. 24  J. Comaroff and J. Comaroff, Of revelation and revolution, Volume II: The dialectics of modernity on a South African frontier (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), p.7. 25  B. Meyer, ‘Translating the devil: An African appropriation of Pietist Protestantism, the case of the Peki Ewe in Southern Ghana, 1847–1992’, PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, 1995.

Mujere.indb 140

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 141

missionaries and Africans’.26 In the case of the Peki Ewe, when the German missionaries of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church were expelled after World War I, Ewe pastors and teachers were left to run the mission without the assistance of the missionaries.27 They were able to appropriate Pietist Protestantism while at the same time also incorporating some aspects of their own cosmology. Similarly, although they had played a pivotal role in the establishment of Dutch Reformed Church missions in the country, the Basotho community decided to establish its own local church, which was free of the control and patronage of missionaries. This was helped by the fact that there were many evangelists and lay preachers within the community. Although academics have long largely focused on AICs, viewing mission churches as uninteresting, a focus on mission churches and the myriad small, local Christian communities such as the Peki Ewe in Southern Ghana studied by Meyer28 or the Basotho discussed in this study, reveals new and interesting insights. As well as showing Africans’ appropriation of Christianity, such studies can also unravel the nature and consequences of encounters between African Christian communities and Western missionaries. It is also important to explore Africans’ creative responses to the challenges they faced in their interactions with Western missionaries. The next section analyses how the Basotho used a dispute over a church bell donated to their local church by Dutch Reformed Church missionaries to articulate their autonomy from the missionaries as well as highlighting their recognition of denominational diversity within the community. THE BELL INCIDENT: TENSIONS BETWEEN THE BASOTHO AND THE DUTCH REFORMED CHURCH MISSIONARIES The inter-war years saw the emergence of AICs as disgruntled Africans broke away from missionary churches. These AICs included a ‘wide range of prophetic groups, varying from semi-Messianic to simple Zionist or Apostolic Churches’.29 Beginning in South Africa, this phenomenon spread rapidly across 26 

Meyer, ‘Translating the devil’, p.1. Meyer, ‘Translating the devil’, p.2. 28 Ibid. 29 Daneel, Old and new in southern Shona independent churches, p.285. 27 

Mujere.indb 141

10/12/2018 16:18

142 Land, Migration and Belonging

southern Africa, threatening the mainline churches.30 As well as these Messianic and Apostolic Churches, Pentecostal Churches also grew rapidly. Pentecostal Churches gave their new converts a new sense of belonging based on the phenomena of being born again, speaking in tongues, being smartly dressed and prosperity, among other issues that differentiate them from those belonging to other churches.31 Thus religious denominations and their unique doctrines created a sense of unity among converts and at the same time also accentuated differences between individuals belonging to different religious denominations. As one of the earliest churches to establish missions in Gutu District (Gutu Mission and Alheight Mission) as well as a network of schools, the Dutch Reformed Church was threatened by the emergence and spread of AICs in the district. Although AICs, especially Zionists and Apostolic churches, were rapidly spreading in Gutu District, the majority of the Basotho largely remained members of the Dutch Reformed Church.32 Instead of breaking away or joining AICs, they chose to remodel their relationship with missionaries and insisted on maintaining some autonomy. Their decision not to take the route of AICs was arguably a result of their long history in the Dutch Reformed Church. Thus while other Africans saw joining AICs as the solution to their grievances against mainline churches, the Basotho chose to negotiate space within the church instead of breaking away. This move was also probably inspired by the fact that native commissioners generally distrusted AICs, given the fact that a number of them were messianic and challenged white domination.33 Thus as a community who valued their image of being progressive Africans and sought to align themselves with native commissioners, the Basotho may have felt that it was best for them to stay within the Dutch Reformed Church and negotiate their space within the church rather than secede and risk losing the trust and support of the colonial officials. Tensions between the Basotho and Dutch Reformed Church missionaries revolved around the Basotho community’s Bethel 30  See

B. Sundkler, Bantu prophets in South Africa (Cambridge: James Clark, 1948). 31  See D. Maxwell, African gifts of the spirit: Pentecostalism and the rise of a Zimbabwean transnational movement (London: James Currey, 2007). 32  See Daneel, Old and new in southern Shona independent churches. 33  Some of the leaders were actually making prophesies about the end of white rule.

Mujere.indb 142

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 143

Church and by extension their farm and school. Many subtle battles were fought over control of these institutions. As the Orlandini case showed, there was tension between colonial officials and missionaries due to the fact that the missionaries were effectively establishing fiefdoms by imposing control on converts and communities around their missions.34 The complex relationship between the Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries can best be explained in light of the Basotho’s desire to forge a new form of autonomy from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and to align themselves more with the colonial officials. The community was broadly divided into two sections. One section believed that it was important for the group to continue having close ties with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and to accept donations and other forms of assistance. The larger section of the community, which included the vocal Jacob Molebaleng, was against the dominance of any religious denomination in the community. They feared that getting any assistance from the Dutch Reformed Church would give the missionaries the power to control them and influence decisions in the community. Interestingly, the ‘pro-missionaries’ solicited for donations from the missionaries. They received a £40 donation from the missionaries, which was however turned down by the rest of the community as they feared that it would allow the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries to have an influence in their affairs, and possibly also enable them to claim a stake of the farm. The rejection of the missionaries’ donation showed some of the Basotho’s determination to have total control of their community farm and also their desire to avoid missionary patronage. Thus in spite of the Basotho community’s determination to escape from missionary paternalism, the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries continued to have some influence in the community because of the existence of those whose religious sympathies remained with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. This meant that tension continued to simmer because of the pro-missionary clique’s desire to maintain strong ties with missionaries and the rest of the community’s determination to shed off missionary control. The 1938 impasse between a larger section of the Basotho community and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries (with 34 

Mujere.indb 143

Davis and Döpcke, ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu’.

10/12/2018 16:18

144 Land, Migration and Belonging

the support of the smaller section of the community) over the donation of a church bell encapsulated the transmogrification of the relationship between the Basotho community and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries since their resettlement in Dewure Purchase Areas. It should be noted that although they were making plans to build a proper church on Bethel Farm, the Basotho were yet to build one, so they were holding services in the open. Two Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, Reverend Louw and Reverend Hofmeyr, went to Bethel Farm to conduct a church service.35 Since missionaries did not conduct church services among the Basotho every week this was an important occasion. Jacob Molebaleng, the leader of the Basotho community, had purchased a bell from Johannesburg for the sum of £7.10.0 for use by the church and the school.36 However, Reverend A. A. Low and Reverend Hofmeyr produced another bell, which they presented to the community ‘on behalf of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’.37 They proceeded to demand that the bell that had been bought by Jacob Molebaleng on behalf of the community be taken away and the ‘mission bell’ be installed instead.38 It is possible that the mission bell may have been brought at the behest of the pro-missionary section, which saw no problem in the missionaries taking charge of the running of affairs on Bethel Farm.39 The majority of the members of the community, except the pro-missionary section, refused to accept the bell as they saw it as a symbol of Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ paternalism, which they were fighting against. It is important to note that bells have been part of the paraphernalia of a number of churches (such as the Roman Catholic and Dutch Reformed 35 

S1859 Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, minutes of interview: Jacob Molebaleng, Malachi Phosa, Silas Molebang (no date); S1859 Summary of minutes of meetings held at Bethel School, 8 October 1938. 36  S1859 Minutes of interview: Jacob Molebaleng, Malachi Phosa, Silas Molebang (no date). One important dynamic in this case was that Jacob Molebaleng was not a member of the DRC but a Lutheran, which may explain his determination to avoid the domination of DRC missionaries in the community. In spite of this, he attended the service, which was conducted by the two DRC clergymen. 37 Interview with Fredrick Komo, Farm number 392 Dewure, Gutu, 28 December 2005. 38  S1859 Minutes of interview: Jacob Molebaleng, Malachi Phosa, Silas Molebang (no date). 39 S1859 Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, position on Basutu Community Plot and summary of meeting held at Bethel School, 8 October 1938.

Mujere.indb 144

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 145

Church) for a long time and have, through history, been invested with considerable meaning.40 They are therefore very important religious symbols in some Christian communities, defining the local auditory landscapes.41 Thus because of the significance of the church bell, the Basotho saw the need to have their own bell installed instead of the one donated by the missionaries. Although the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries may have had other intentions when they donated the bell, the majority of the Basotho interpreted it as an explicit sign of the missionaries’ desire not only to take control of their church, but also to take over their community farm. They viewed the replacement of their bell with that of the missionaries as signifying the return of missionaries’ domination in the community. Consequently, the bell became an object of conflict between the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, represented by Reverend Louw and Reverend Hofmeyr, who brought the presumably unsolicited donation, and the Basotho community represented by Jacob Molebaleng. The incident exposed the cleavages within the Basotho community as the same people who had earlier solicited donations from the missionaries towards the purchase of the community farm and were failing to make their contributions towards its purchase were the ones who were taking sides with the missionaries on the issue of the bell. The pro-missionary section was obviously seeing an opportunity to use the missionaries in their own struggles for influence in the community. It can also be argued that they used missionaries’ support to cover their own failure to pull together with the rest of the community as they were failing to make their contributions towards the purchase of the farm. It is also likely that this section was being used by the missionaries to thwart the influence of members who did not belong to the Dutch Reformed Church. Whatever reason behind this section’s support for the missionaries, it is clear that the rest of the community, which also included other members of the Dutch Reformed Church, could no longer allow the missionaries to have any control of the way they ran their affairs. As a 40 

I. A. Weiner, ‘Religion out loud: Religious sound, public space, and American pluralism’, PhD dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 2009, p.55. 41 Weiner, ‘Religion out loud’, p.186. However, in the case of the Basotho community it would be an exaggeration to say that the bell defined the local auditory landscape due to the fact that homes are spaced and the church is in the middle of a farm.

Mujere.indb 145

10/12/2018 16:18

146 Land, Migration and Belonging

result of the negative perceptions of the mission bell held by most members of the Basotho community, Molebaleng advised the two Dutch Reformed Church missionaries to take their bell away and reminded them to respect the community’s sovereignty over their farm and all the institutions they had established on it.42 Molebaleng also reminded Reverend Louw that ‘the rest of the community were carrying his followers (Dutch Reformed Church adherents, especially the pro-missionaries section) who had not worked on the buildings or contributed towards the cost and had ceased paying subscriptions for the plot (Bethel Farm)’.43 The majority of the Basotho saw accepting the mission bell as being tantamount to accepting missionary patronage. The incident caught the attention of Kingfisher, who reported that: there was a big gathering at Bethel recently when Minister, Dr Van der Merwe [accompanied by Reverend Hofmeyr] preached a touching sermon on ‘Ye are the salt of the earth, but if the salt has lost its savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is henceforth good for nothing’. Matt.5:13… Two gifts of bells were given to Bethel, one by Chief J. Molebaleng and the other by the Rev. A. A. Lonns [sic.] (Senior). How shall they be hung and how shall they be rung?44

It is evident from Kingfisher’s report that the Basotho sought carefully to negotiate their autonomy from Dutch Reformed Church missionaries by refusing to accept potentially contentious donations. They therefore resolved to refuse to accept the mission bell because of its association with missionary control. Since both bells could not be hung or rung together, it was obvious that one of them, in this case the mission bell, had to be taken away. The impasse was only resolved after the intervention of the Native Commissioner who, after talking to Jacob Molebaleng, approached Reverend Van der Merwe, a Dutch Reformed Church missionary at Alheight Mission, to help break the deadlock. He wrote to Reverend Van der Merwe stating; ‘I have been asked by Molebaleng’s followers (the bigger section of the community) to enquire whether you would act as mediator or otherwise help all sections in settling their differences which led to the bell incident’.45 Calm only returned a month later after Reverend Van der 42 S1859

Minutes of interview: Jacob Molebaleng, Malachi Phosa and Silas Molebaleng (no date). 43 Ibid. 44  Kingfisher, ‘Fort Victoria News’, The Bantu Mirror, 21 May 1938, p.4. Added emphasis. 45  S1859 NC Gutu to Reverend W. F. J. van der Merwe (Alheight Mission), 30 August 1938.

Mujere.indb 146

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 147

Merwe ensured that both parties had agreed that the mission bell be removed and that the missionaries stop interfering with the activities of the Basotho so that peace could prevail.46 The fact that Molebaleng approached the NC to help resolve this impasse further demonstrates how the Basotho had thrown their lot with colonial officials as they endeavoured to disentangle themselves from the clutches of missionary control. The incident reveals the Basotho’s growing disenchantment with the missionaries and the extent to which they were prepared to go to assert their autonomy. The incident also shows the undercurrents in the relationships between the Basotho and the missionaries as well as the fissures within the Basotho community itself. In the end, the mission bell became the symbol of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ paternalism that the Basotho robustly resisted. As an object that was part of the paraphernalia of the church, the bell was important in the community’s ownership of Bethel Church. It was thus not only the physical presence of the mission bell that the Basotho objected to, but also the meaning it carried. Consequently, the two bells created an interesting dichotomy; one representing Basotho autonomy and the other being a symbol of missionary domination. It is even more interesting that the bell purchased by Jacob Molebaleng, which was later erected instead of the mission bell, has remained at the church up to the present day. The bell is mounted on a wooden pole at the entrance of the churchyard and is still being used by the community.47 It is important to highlight that at this stage ethnicity was not a key issue in Bethel Church since during its formative years it was attended almost exclusively by the Basotho. However, as the non-Sotho farmers gradually began to join the church ethnic tensions began to emerge.48 The problem of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ involvement in the affairs of the Basotho, however, continued even after the bell incident. Soon afterwards the pro-missionary section demanded the right to build a church on the farm. This was turned down by other members of the community on the grounds that most of the members of this section had not paid 46 Ibid. 47 See

Figure 3. The bell, which is mounted on a wooden pole close to the entrance of the church yard, is still rung every Sunday as members of the Basotho community and other members of the Reformed Church in Zimbabwe (RCZ) gather for church services. 48  This will be discussed in greater detail in the next section.

Mujere.indb 147

10/12/2018 16:18

148 Land, Migration and Belonging

Figure 3  Bethel Church and the church bell (© Joseph Mujere)

their contributions towards the purchase of the community farm.49 The community demanded that everybody pay their contributions before the church could be built. It was also resolved that the community was not going to accept any assistance or donation from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries in building the church because of the connotations that such donations were likely to have and the potential exclusion of people belonging to other denominations.50 The conflict between the pro-missionary section and the rest of the Basotho community over the building of the church again caught the attention of the Native Commissioner for Gutu District, who was constantly called to resolve disputes between the Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries as well as internal disputes in the community. The Native Commissioner lamented that the Basotho were the most troublesome people he had ever come across since he had arrived in the district.51 In March 1941, the Native Commissioner reported: 49 S1859 Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, position on Basutu Community Plot and summary of minutes of meeting held at Bethel School, 8 October 1938. 50 Ibid. 51  S1859 NC Gutu to CNC, 27 March 1941.

Mujere.indb 148

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 149

in the last six months there has been constant bickering if not quarrels and threats of blood being shed because a certain section (the pro-missionaries section) wish to build a church in which to follow their particular creed against the desire of headman (Jacob Molebaleng) and his section of followers.52

This shows the amount of attention the conflict over the building of the church and the role of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries in the community attracted from the Native Commissioner. Although they had initially been praised for being progressive and modernising Africans when they arrived in the district, the Basotho were failing to live up to this image due to their constant disputes with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and among themselves. The Native Commissioner realised that the saga surrounding the building of this church could escalate into a more serious internecine conflict and again sought to find an amicable solution to the problem. On 29 May 1941, H. A. Cripwell, the Native Commissioner for Gutu District, held a meeting with the Basotho community at Bethel Farm, with the aim of resolving the Basotho’s religious disputes. The meeting was also attended by E. T. Palmer, the Assistant Chief Native Commissioner and Reverend Van der Merwe of Alheight Mission.53 The fact that the Assistant Chief Native Commissioner attended the meeting shows the extent to which the colonial officials were getting increasingly concerned about the Basotho community’s internal squabbles. During the meeting Jacob Molebaleng highlighted the following resolutions that the community had made on the matter concerning the building of the church on the community farm: that the church should be erected by Basutus [sic] for the use of members only; that the church should be the Dutch Reformed Church but should be available for the use of other denominations; that the church should be the property of Basutu [sic] people; that they feared the DRC European ministers would obtain possession of the church and land on which it was situated, plot 24; that a building should be erected open or available for worship.54

These were major concerns that the Basotho community wanted the Native Commissioner and the Assistant Chief Native Commissioner to address, especially given that Reverend 52 Ibid.

53 S1859

Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, memorandum of meeting held at Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, 29 May 1941. 54  Ibid. Added emphasis.

Mujere.indb 149

10/12/2018 16:18

150 Land, Migration and Belonging

Van der Merwe, who represented the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, was present. The community was thus prepared to make the concession that the church would be principally a Dutch Reformed Church, but with a proviso that other denominations would be allowed to use it. It is evident from Molebaleng’s declarations that the Basotho community was not going to countenance a situation whereby Dutch Reformed Church missionaries would impose any control on their community through their religious influence, especially given the community’s fear of losing its farm to the missionaries. Although he was prepared to accept some of the proposals put forward by Molebaleng, however, what Reverend Van der Merwe found difficult to accept was the suggestion that other denominations be allowed to use the proposed church building. He saw such an arrangement as unacceptable, especially given the turf wars that different denominations fought in the district and in other areas. Moreover, there were also obvious differences between different religious denominations’ iconography, which influenced how the inside of their churches look. It was, therefore, unprecedented for different denominations to use the same church given the differences in doctrines and also their battles to attract converts. As a result, Reverend Van der Merwe threatened that ‘if a DRC (sic) were erected and other denominations were permitted to hold services therein he personally would cease to officiate in that church’. 55 Although Reverend Van der Merwe never carried out his threat, it is clear that the Basotho’s desire to allow denominational diversity in the community and also to keep the missionaries at arm’s length did not go down well with the missionaries. Even though they still wished to have a Dutch Reformed Church missionary to work with them, the Basotho did not want the church to be exclusive to members of the Dutch Reformed Church. This shows the transformation in the relationship between the Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries since the former’s resettlement in the Dewure Purchase Areas. No longer could missionaries expect to impose their tutelage on the Basotho without expecting some form of resistance. It was against the background of the meeting held between the Native Commissioner and the Basotho community that in 1941 Silas Molebaleng presented an application to the community 55 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 150

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 151

requesting approval for ‘a site to build an “un-denominational” church’.56 He cited in his application twenty other individuals who supported his proposal.57 The application was turned down on the grounds that three individuals who supported it were not farm owners in the Dewure Purchase Areas and one of them was already deceased at the time the application was submitted.58 In spite of the committee’s refusal to grant Silas Molebaleng and his colleagues the right to build this non-denominational church, it is vital to note that the community was in agreement that for the avoidance of any internal squabbles there was a need to avoid creating a situation where one denomination would dominate over others. This could only be achieved through the building of this non-denominational church without the assistance of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. The Basotho’s aim in showing such unprecedented levels of religious accommodation was to show that they were a united community in spite of their religious differences and that they did not wish to see the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries taking over any of the assets that they had accumulated as a community, especially their community farm. The controversies surrounding the building of Bethel Church expose the challenges the Basotho faced in trying to use religion to establish their belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas. The Basotho projected themselves as Protestants with a very strong Dutch Reformed Church element in the community. This strong image was at the core of their migration history as the large part of the community was composed of descendants of the Basotho evangelists who worked with a number of missionaries. Although without doubt a majority of the members of this community belonged to the Dutch Reformed Church, the community resolved to maintain unity by allowing denominational diversity. Thus the community strove to make all religious denominations have equal access to Bethel Church. This was achieved to some extent by making both their school and their church building non-denominational. The designation 56  S1859

Schools 1933–1949, Basutu community, Gutu, minutes of an advisory committee meeting for Bethel Farm (Farm number 24), Dewure Native Purchase Area, Gutu District, held at Bethel School, 29 July 1941. Silas Molebaleng was Jacob Molebaleng’s brother and like Jacob, he was not a member of the DRC. 57 Ibid. 58 Ibid.

Mujere.indb 151

10/12/2018 16:18

152 Land, Migration and Belonging

‘non-denominational’, therefore, became an important label that the Basotho used to articulate a form of belonging that was based on denominational diversity and tolerance. It also became a symbol of their defiance of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries’ paternalism. However, it is important to avoid overplaying the differences between missionaries and their converts as the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries continued to conduct church services at Bethel Church and also to engage with their Basotho converts. Maxwell warns us against ‘simplistically pitting missionaries against Africans as if they were polar opposites’.59 He further argues that ‘it is important to weigh up missionary hegemony against African agency, but, as some of the best work on religious encounters has demonstrated, it is equally important to study how missionaries and Africans interacted to create new cultural forms and new types of knowledge’.60 Hence, although the Basotho showed their agency by resisting missionary hegemony, there continued to be some space for engagement as the missionaries continued to conduct church services at Bethel and to play other roles in the community, such as serving as superintendents of Bethel School. The Basotho community later managed to build their non-denominational church in the 1940s and, despite Reverend Van der Merwe’s earlier threats, the missionaries continued to come to Bethel to conduct church services. Gradually the church began to be used almost exclusively by the Dutch Reformed Church as members of other denominations began to go elsewhere to attend church services. In spite of the dominance of the Dutch Reformed Church, however, the church remained the property of the Basotho community. Another dynamic that emerged was the gradual increase in the number of non-Sotho Dutch Reformed Church congregants who were attending church services at Bethel Church. This made the congregation increasingly cosmopolitan, and it became a platform for interactions between the Basotho and their non-Sotho neighbours in the Dewure Purchase Areas and surrounding areas.

59 

D. Maxwell, ‘Writing the history of African Christianity: Reflections of an editor’, Journal of Religion in Africa, Vol. 36, Nos 3–4 (2006), p.387. 60  Maxwell, ‘Writing the history of African Christianity’.

Mujere.indb 152

10/12/2018 16:18

Adherents and Rebels: The Basotho and the Dutch Reformed Church Missionaries 153

CONCLUSION Not only do religious institutions provide platforms on which belonging can be negotiated, but they can also be a stage on which notions of difference can be played out. Thus it is important to understand the centrality of Christianity in the Basotho community. This chapter has shown how, through a long historical period, the Basotho’s have used religion to construct and negotiate their belonging within the Dewure Purchase Areas and also within the Dutch Reformed Church. It has also shown that different historical contexts brought unique challenges to the Basotho, which required specific strategies. While their identity as members of the Dutch Reformed Church was an important label given their history in the church, diversity in the community meant that the Basotho had to ensure that all religious denominations had equal status in the community. Hence, although the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries were keen to carve out a territory by establishing schools and churches in the area, the Basotho did not always share the same vision, leading to the blurring of denominational boundaries in their everyday interactions. The Basotho even took this further by resisting missionary patronage and by resolving to make their local church non-denominational. Although religion has continued to be a key factor in the lives of the Basotho, there have been significant shifts in how the Basotho have framed their religious belonging over time. The Basotho have been seen as Christians who played a significant role in the establishment of the Dutch Reformed Church’s Morgenster Mission and the evangelisation of the surrounding areas. However, when they moved to the Dewure Purchase Areas in the 1930s they carefully calibrated their relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries as they sought to avoid missionary patronage. It is against this background that the Basotho refused to accept help from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries in purchasing their communal farm and building the church and the school. Yet in spite of all these conflicts with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries the Basotho did not break away to form an independent church, as was common during this period. While a number of other Africans in the district and beyond either formed or joined AICs, the Basotho chose instead to negotiate their space within the Dutch Reformed Church and maintained a special form of autonomy from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. This

Mujere.indb 153

10/12/2018 16:18

154 Land, Migration and Belonging

uneasy relationship was best illustrated by the ‘bell incident’ and the impasse it triggered. The Basotho’s refusal to accept the bell donated by the missionaries was a significant move that showed their determination to maintain their autonomy from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and preserve their social and religious cohesion.

Mujere.indb 154

10/12/2018 16:18

Epilogue: Uncertainty and the Basotho’s Quest for Belonging

Although the Basotho have deployed a number of strategies to construct and assert their belonging, questions have continued to be asked about their origins and where they ‘actually belong’ in daily conversations with their non-Sotho neighbours. In the course of my fieldwork for this book, one of the members of the Basotho community shared with me his experience of constantly being asked about his ‘unusual’ surname, first at school, and afterwards at work. He highlighted how, each time he introduced himself to people, they invariably quizzed him about his origins, given that his surname is considered uncommon in Zimbabwe. Faced with such uncertainties, some of the progenies of the original Basotho migrants who settled in the country in the 1890s have turned to retracing their roots in South Africa and, in some instances, applying for South African citizenship. While some have turned to this option because of the tumultuous economic and political conditions in Zimbabwe since 2000, there are also examples of others who made efforts to retrace their origins in South Africa much earlier. I intend, here, to show how the Basotho, in the present, are using history as a resource in their struggles to reclaim South African citizenship while at the same time holding on to their belonging in Zimbabwe. The strong kinship ties among the Basotho, based on years of practising endogamous marriages as well as attachment to their family farms, has meant that a large number have continued to have some kind of attachment to the Dewure Purchase Areas. Moreover, the Basotho’s communal ownership of Bethel Farm and the practice of burying their dead at Bethel Cemetery have also meant that even though some individuals have migrated to other areas, they still consider the Dewure Purchase Areas their home and a number continue to bury their dead there. They even

Mujere.indb 155

10/12/2018 16:18

156 Land, Migration and Belonging

continue to refer to Bethel Farm as ‘our farm’.1 Thus for them, Bethel has remained a key reference point in their construction of belonging in Zimbabwe because it is where some of their relatives are buried and also because a number of their kinsmen still live on farms in the area. However, in spite of their attachment to Zimbabwe in general and the Dewure Purchase Areas in particular, the Basotho feel strongly about their historical roots in South Africa more than a century after their forefathers migrated into what is now Zimbabwe. The cases discussed below help to unravel the Basotho’s appeal to multiple belonging in the context of Zimbabwe’s socio-economic and political crises. ‘OUR ROOTS ARE IN SOUTH AFRICA’: THE BASOTHO’S QUEST FOR SOUTH AFRICAN CITIZENSHIP In spite of the length of time they had spent in their adopted home, many members of the Basotho community retained a strong nostalgic connection with their relatives in South Africa. Those who had lost such connections made efforts to retrace their roots. For example, when Catherine Mphisa travelled to South Africa in 1992, she retraced her roots to connect with her South African relatives. She travelled to Pietersburg (Polokwane) where she was able to find the village her family lived before they migrated to Southern Rhodesia. She was well-received and spent a night at the homestead of one of the village heads who was her distant relative. Reminiscing on her journey, Catherine Mphisa stated: I was very happy to be back in our village where we originally came from. When I told the village elders my family name and totem, I was shown where my great grandfather lived and where descendants of his siblings still live. I went there and they were very happy to see me. I was very happy to be back home. However, at that time I never thought of claiming South African citizenship. In any case I was already married to somebody who was not even a Sotho. I was just happy to have managed to retrace my roots. My family was also very happy to know that I had managed to visit the very village we originate from and that I had been welcomed by people from the South African side of my clan.2

Catherine Mphisa’s story shows the Basotho’s strong desire to retrace their roots and to reconnect with their South African relatives. This, of course, should not be equated with a desire for 1  2 

Mujere.indb 156

Interview with Jeremiah Masoha, Farm number 223, 16 July 2009. Interview with Catherine Mphisa-Hakata, Harare, 17 September 2010.

10/12/2018 16:18



Epilogue: Uncertainty and the Basotho’s Quest for Belonging 157

reverse migration. As she highlighted, hers was just a desire to know her ancestral roots, and not to return there. The post-2000 period, with its myriad of uncertainties, gave the Basotho a new impetus to retrace their roots in South Africa, and also to reclaim South African citizenship. Having experienced many challenges in the post-2000 period, Nelson Thema, a member of the Basotho community whose story was briefly related in Chapter 1, made a decision together with his siblings and their families to apply for South African citizenship on the basis of descent.3 After making enquiries at the South African embassy in Zimbabwe, they were told to submit proof that they were indeed of South African descent and that their father had never renounced his South African citizenship when he migrated to Southern Rhodesia. They then turned to oral and archival research to prove their case. Nathaniel Thema, Nelson Thema’s father, left Pietersburg (Polokwane), South Africa, in the 1920s to work as a teacher at Waddilove, a Methodist school in Marandelas (now Marondera). While there, he met Kathleen Reedman, the daughter of Esther Rasitla, a Sotho, and Alexander Reedman a White man. Kathleen could speak Sesotho, which quickly drew Nathaniel to her since he also spoke Sesotho. The two later got married. When Nathaniel Thema got married he took his wife to South Africa to introduce her to his relatives in Pietersburg. He later bought a farm in the Dewure Purchase Areas where he joined other Basotho who had bought farms there. Nelson Thema narrated how his family continued to keep close ties with their relatives in South Africa. For instance, when his elder sister got married in 1956 their South African uncles and cousins travelled to Southern Rhodesia to attend the wedding. When Nelson Thema got married in 1983 his uncles, aunts, cousins and other relatives based in South Africa attended his wedding in Zimbabwe. Another factor that perpetuated the close ties between Nathaniel Thema and his family and his South African relatives was arguably the fact that he had migrated to Southern Rhodesia in the 1920s, well after the others had settled in the country. Therefore, he continued to feel much closer to his South African cousins and uncles than to other Basotho who had settled in the country much earlier. In order to lodge their bid for South African citizenship, the 3  Interview

with Nelson Thema, Harare, 23 September 2017. The narrative that follows is based on this interview.

Mujere.indb 157

10/12/2018 16:18

158 Land, Migration and Belonging

Thema family had to gather archival evidence from both South Africa and Zimbabwe, as well as written testimonies from their relatives in South Africa. In South Africa, they went to Lovedale College in Eastern Cape Province where Nathaniel Thema attended school. They were fortunate to get school registers from Lovedale College archives, which proved that Nathaniel had indeed attended school there prior to his emigration to Southern Rhodesia. In Zimbabwe, they managed to find documents relating to Nathaniel’s purchase of a farm in the Dewure Purchase Areas in Gutu District, which stated that he was a Sotho of South African origin. Armed with all these sets of data, the Thema family was able successfully to apply for South African citizenship, which was granted in 2008. Having been granted South African citizenship, Nelson Thema and other family members immediately applied for South African passports. Nelson Thema went to South Africa, where he worked for almost ten years: After getting my South African citizenship and passport, I went to South Africa to look for a job. I got employed by the Ekurhuleni Municipality in 2008 as a town planner. In 2015, I reached the age of 65 and I retired from my job. I got another job with a consultancy company and worked for just a year. In 2016, I decided to return to Zimbabwe to settle down.4

Nelson Thema’s story is interesting in that, together with his family, he was able to use his South African ancestry to deal with the economic uncertainty in Zimbabwe. After achieving that and getting a job, he returned to Zimbabwe on retirement. Clearly, the quest for South African citizenship by some members of the Basotho community can be viewed as a pragmatic way of dealing with the uncertainties presented by Zimbabwe’s economic challenges. While some individuals simply made efforts to reconnect with their relatives in South Africa, others took the decision to apply for South African citizenship. Although these two Basotho informants have a great attachment to their farms in the Dewure Purchase Areas and to Zimbabwe, it is clear that their sense of belonging in both Zimbabwe and South Africa is fraught with ambivalence and uncertainty. Thus as the contours of belonging have continued to shift, ambivalence has become one of the most important strategies employed by minority groups in their quests for belonging. 4 

Mujere.indb 158

Interview with Nelson Thema, Harare, 23 September 2017.

10/12/2018 16:18



Epilogue: Uncertainty and the Basotho’s Quest for Belonging 159

However, even though some members of the Basotho community in Zimbabwe have succeed in returning to their roots in South Africa, they have discovered that the place is unfamiliar or even unwelcoming to them. The fantasies of returning ‘home’ are seldom transmitted into reality when one physically returns. Since belonging is a relational concept that requires one to be accepted into a group, returning to one’s roots does not always result in acceptance. As Christiansen and Hedetoft argue, ‘belonging implies that individuals identify with a certain type of community and, conversely, that communities see and construct themselves as containers for individual belonging’.5 Thus Grinberg and Grinberg’s argument that ‘no return is simply a return; it is in fact a new migration’ seems plausible.6 Thus as the Thema case has demonstrated, returning to South Africa did not, in itself, bring closure to the Basotho’s quest for belonging. It is also affected by other rational considerations such as marriage, property ownership and employment among others. In the Thema case, Nelson is married to a Zimbabwean with strong family ties in Zimbabwe. They also own a comfortable family home in Zimbabwe as well as a family business in Harare. However, one important issue that multiple belonging raises is the possibility of the erosion of the idea of a citizen belonging to a single nation.7 This has the effect of threatening the idea of national belonging. By disengaging from the state, migrating to other countries and possibly changing citizenship, Zimbabweans are effectively challenging the notion of national belonging imagined and deployed by political elites. Thus by appealing to multiple belonging, many Zimbabweans are deconstructing the singular notion of national belonging. According to Christiansen and Hedetoft, ‘the citizen who does not belong … is therefore to be understood as the citizen who feels (s)he belongs to multiple settings in different ways, whose sense of attachment is in a state of temporal and spatial constructedness’.8 Hence, for the Basotho and other Zimbabweans of foreign descent, resorting to multiple belonging has been one of the ways in which they have reacted 5  F. Christiansen and U. Hedetoft, ‘Introduction’, in F. Christiansen and U. Hedetoft (eds), The politics of multiple belonging: Ethnicity and nationalism in Europe and East Asia (Burlington: Ashgate, 2004), p.4. 6  L. Grinberg and R. Grinberg quoted in Marchetti-Mercer, ‘New meanings of “home” in South Africa’, Acta Academica, Vol. 38, No. 2 (2006), p.210. 7  S. Castles and A. Davidson, Citizenship and migration: Globalization and the politics of belonging (London, Macmillan, 2000), pp.156–157. 8  Christiansen and Hedetoft, ‘Introduction’, p.11

Mujere.indb 159

10/12/2018 16:18

160 Land, Migration and Belonging

to hegemonic assumptions of national identity and belonging. The Basotho’s attempts to re-establish links with their historical roots, either by reconnecting with their distant relatives in South Africa or by finding ways to gain South African citizenship, should therefore be understood in the context of the existence of a singular and hegemonic construction of national belonging, which has tended to downplay the diversity of the country. It is, therefore, easy to agree with Hedetoft’s conclusion that national belonging ‘has never been more than an ideal model, always practically contradicted by messy borders, migratory movements, ethnic minorities, dual citizenships and multicultural policies’.9 In spite of all this drive towards multiple belonging and reconnecting with historical roots in South Africa, the Basotho who have remained on their farms in the Dewure Purchase Areas have continued to have a strong attachment to their farms. As has been highlighted in preceding chapters, the material significance of Bethel, the Basotho’s community farm (as well as the cemetery and the church on the farm), coupled with the importance of their individual farms, has gone a long way in helping the Basotho establish a strong attachment to the place. These features have been key pillars in the Basotho’s constructions of belonging since the 1930s when they moved to the Dewure Purchase Areas. In addition to this, ceremonies such as funerals, memorial services and weddings have also served as forums for the Basotho identity to be played out and the divisions between the Basotho and their non-Sotho neighbours have become more pronounced. LAND, MIGRATION AND BELONGING Although the Basotho invested in their belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas and in Zimbabwe, there have continued to be some instances when their historical links with South Africa take centre stage. This engendered a form of dual or multiple belonging. The Basotho have been able to confront a seemingly hegemonic national imaginary that is intolerant to plurality 9  U. Hedetoft, ‘Discourses and images of belonging: Migrants between new racism, liberal national and globalization’, in F. Christiansen and U. Hedetoft (eds), The politics of multiple belonging, p.26. See also E. Msindo, Ethnicity in Zimbabwe: Transformations in Kalanga and Ndebele societies, 1860–1990 (Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2012).

Mujere.indb 160

10/12/2018 16:18



Epilogue: Uncertainty and the Basotho’s Quest for Belonging 161

by appealing to notions of multiple belonging informed by the knowledge that their forefathers migrated from South Africa. As a strategy, multiple belonging empowers minorities without necessarily eroding the idea of national belonging. Hence in spite of the obvious impediments, the Basotho have been able to use many strategies to construct and articulate multiple belongings. This book has explored the various strategies that the Basotho community in the Dewure Purchase Areas have used in order to construct a sense of belonging since their migration into what is now Zimbabwe in the late nineteenth century. It has shown how a multiplicity of experiences and processes of belonging can work in different ways for different individuals and communities. The Basotho had to use different but interrelated strategies to construct and articulate their belonging at different times. The community had to continually negotiate and re-negotiate their belonging, whether by appealing to their strong in-group ties or aligning with the missionaries and colonial officials. They also did so by making efforts to integrate into the local community while at the same time seeking to maintain strong ties with their ancestral homes in South Africa. The book has, therefore, demonstrated the importance of taking a long historical trajectory in analysing the problem of belonging in Africa in order to unravel how the configurations of various historical contours impact on migrants’ belonging. The migration history of the Basotho has also illustrated the vital role played by Africans in the evangelisation of Africa. As Mashingaidze has argued, African evangelists like the Basotho who worked with the Dutch Reformed Church and other missionaries were the ‘frontiersmen of evangelisation’ in southern Africa.10 Their role in evangelisation was as important as that of the European missionaries. This book has analysed the role played by Basotho evangelists in the evangelisation of areas to the north of the Limpopo River and especially how they became the core of the group of African evangelists who assisted Reverend Louw in establishing the Morgenster Mission, the first Dutch Reformed Church mission in the country. Thus African evangelists served as both intermediaries and frontiersmen in the spread of Christianity in southern Africa, which also resulted in their migration and permanent resettlement in their mission fields. 10 

E. Mashingaidze, ‘Forgotten frontiersmen of Christianity’s northward outreach: Black evangelists and the missions’ northern hinterland, 1869–1914’, Mohlomi: Journal of Southern African Historical Studies, Vol. 2 (1978), p.68.

Mujere.indb 161

10/12/2018 16:18

162 Land, Migration and Belonging

This study has also shown how litigation was one of the most important strategies used by Africans in negotiating space and access to resources in the colonial period. Africans, in various colonies, used colonial laws and courts as a forum in which to resolve their disputes and to negotiate space.11 Being among the first Africans to own land on a freehold tenure basis, the Basotho faced a number of challenges with regards to inheritance of land. Without a clear legal precedent in African inheritance cases in which the estate included immovable property (land), the Komo and Leboho v. Holmes case discussed in Chapter 3 became one of the most important legal disputes that set a legal precedent with regards to inheritance of immovable property by Africans in Southern Rhodesia. This and other legal cases involving members of the Basotho community and other Africans raised important legal issues about gender and ownership of land, inheritance, the legal minority status of women and the legality of African wills. These cases reveal how the Basotho and other Africans used litigation as a strategy to resolve inheritance and other land disputes and how these legal disputes impacted on their position as colonial subjects. Furthermore, this book has demonstrated the need to consider the salience of the materialities of graves, farms and old homes in the belonging matrix. As shown in the book, although initially legal title to land was a key factor in the Basotho’s strategies to negotiate belonging in Southern Rhodesia, the emotive presence of graves, farms and old homes increasingly became central in Basotho belonging. For instance, graves became important as they helped them create the material links with the land itself, through which they could substantiate their claims of being locals. This explains why Bethel, the Basotho’s community farm, and most importantly the community cemetery on the farm, became a key rallying point in the community’s construction of belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas. The very act of interring the remains of the deceased in the soil, thereby turning the body into soil, helps the living to establish an attachment to the land as the body of the deceased becomes part of the soil. This resonates with Chabal’s argument that burials keep alive the links between the individual, the community and the land.12 Although some members of the community chose to bury their 11 

See for example Mann and Roberts (eds), Law in colonial Africa (Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann/London: James Currey, 1991). 12  P. Chabal, Africa: The politics of suffering and smiling (London and New York: Zed Books, 2009), p.49.

Mujere.indb 162

10/12/2018 16:18



Epilogue: Uncertainty and the Basotho’s Quest for Belonging 163

dead on their individual farms, Bethel Cemetery continued to have great significance to the the Basotho community. Consequently, kuBhetere, as Bethel Farm is commonly called by members of the surrounding communities, is generally viewed as a farm that, in many ways, consolidates the Basotho’s attachment to the area. The emotive presence of Basotho graves in Bethel Cemetery and various individual farms therefore helped the community in making a claim to the area and in developing some form of autochthony by anchoring themselves on the land. Attachment to graves and old homes allowed many communities to articulate their belonging to the said lands and to claim entitlement. Even for third- and fourth-generation Basotho, who may no longer consider being buried at Bethel as important, Bethel Farm will always be a place they consider ‘home’ in the sense of it being their ‘other roots’. Alongside their attempts to integrate, the Basotho also appealed to notions of particularism and, on some occasions, celebrated their historical roots. This was largely articulated through their activities at Bethel Farm and, most importantly, at funerals and family gatherings. It was on occasions such as funerals that the kinship web became more apparent and Sesotho became the language of choice. The salience of the Sesotho language was also shown by the importance given to the Basotho Choir (which sang church hymns in Sesotho) on occasions such as funerals, memorial services, church services and other gatherings. Reverting to Sesotho for special occasions, when they used Chikaranga, the local dialect of Chishona, in their everyday interactions, the Basotho were building their sense of unity by appealing to ethnicity and kinship, and their own particularism as ‘outsiders’. Thus the Basotho’s constructions of belonging fluctuated between particularism and attempts to integrate into the local community. Their construction of belonging has thus been a dual process involving trying to become autochthons and at the same time remaining ‘outsiders’. The attainment of education was one of the ways in which Africans attained respectability in the colonial period. A number of farmers in purchase areas made efforts to establish schools in their areas to cater for their children, with very little help from the colonial administration or missionaries. Although projects designed to showcase and accentuate a distinct Basotho identity and also to show that they were ‘progressive’ Africans, such as the establishment of Bethel School, were not always

Mujere.indb 163

10/12/2018 16:18

164 Land, Migration and Belonging

successful; nonetheless, they showed Basotho’s underlying intentions. Established in 1938, Bethel School became an important institution in the Basotho’s everyday lives. By establishing their own school, the Basotho were both addressing an important communal need and appealing to ideals of ‘progressiveness’ through acquiring Western education. In spite of this, however, the school also became a stage on which the Basotho’s internal struggles were played out. Their numerous clashes over the running of the school also exposed the futility of the Basotho’s bid to establish a school to cater primarily for their own children and ostensibly to teach them Sesotho and Sotho culture. By the late 1940s some members of the Basotho community were beginning to have doubts about the significance of the school to the community and were openly questioning even the idea that the school was a Basotho school which, as well as the usual academic and practical subjects, had also to teach Basotho children aspects of their culture. Thus the challenges that the Basotho faced in running Bethel School illustrate the delicate balance that the community had to strike between particularism and attempts to appeal to colonial ideals of ‘progress’ and ‘modernisation’. Although the Basotho remained a closely knit group due to their shared experiences, ethnic and religious ties as well as interconnected kinship ties, this study has avoided projecting the community as a very cohesive group without any internal fissures. Instead, the study has shown that in spite of their unity, there were indeed some cross-cutting cleavages within the community in friendship, kinship and religion among other factors. Such fissures demonstrated that members of the Basotho community did not always share the same vision. As illustrated in Chapter 6, while the majority of the members of the community resolved to avoid missionary patronage by building their church without the assistance of the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, other members saw no problem in enjoying the patronage of the missionaries. These internecine struggles caused so much tension within the community that it affected progress. This caught the attention of the local Native Commissioner who began to view the Basotho as a quarrelsome community. By exploring both the Basotho’s struggles as a community and its internal fissures, this book has demonstrated the complex dynamics within this community. It also showed how the community sought to use their ‘unity in

Mujere.indb 164

10/12/2018 16:18



Epilogue: Uncertainty and the Basotho’s Quest for Belonging 165

diversity’ as a tool to negotiate their autonomy from the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and also how the diversity of the community became a source of internal schisms. The Basotho’s internal squabbles were, in essence, largely about struggles over who controlled institutions, such as Bethel School, which helped mediate their identity, and also about the community’s external relations with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and colonial officials. Sometimes it was the external factors such as the community’s relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries that triggered these internal squabbles. There was therefore an interface between the Basotho’s internal struggles and their external relations with both Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and colonial officials. The Basotho were, indeed, strategic in building alliances with dominant colonial groups, with place and time playing a crucial role. Tensions with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries over the running of Bethel School and Bethel Church were indicative of how the Basotho’s displacement from Niekerk’s Rust and Erichsthal in the 1930s had changed their relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries. The Basotho’s careful negotiation of their relationship with the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries was informed by both their desire to negotiate space within the church by keeping the missionaries at arm’s length and also their relationship with the colonial officials, which they were not prepared to jeopardise by turning to AICs that were taking hold in the district. As well as showing Africans’ appropriation of Christianity this study has illuminated the nature and consequences of encounters between African Christian communities and Western missionaries. The case of the Basotho also shows that African Christian communities who remained within the mission churches shaped African Christianity as much as those who joined AICs. The complex relationship between the Basotho community and the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries revealed how some African communities appropriated Protestant Christianity and negotiated their position within the church without necessarily breaking away from these mission churches. By establishing their local church and maintaining a level of autonomy from missionaries, the Basotho managed to establish a form of autonomy within the church. However, in spite of the grievances they had against the Dutch Reformed Church missionaries, they did not want to break away

Mujere.indb 165

10/12/2018 16:18

166 Land, Migration and Belonging

to join AICs. One of the reasons why they took this decision was arguably the fact that AICs were generally viewed by colonial officials as subversive. By joining these churches the Basotho would therefore have seriously altered colonial officials’ perception of them as ‘progressive’ Africans from whom the rest of the communities in the district had to learn. In terms of their use of Bethel Church to forge unity and construct a sense of belonging in the Dewure Purchase Areas, the post-colonial period presented the Basotho with new challenges. Interestingly, ethnicity had never been such a crucial issue within Bethel Church during the colonial period because of the small number of non-Sotho people in the church. The increasing number of non-Sotho people attending the church in the post-colonial period, however, caused some Karanga converts in the church to challenge what they considered the Basotho’s dominance of the local church. This shows how surrounding communities’ perceptions of the Basotho community tended to oscillate between accepting them as locals and seeing them as ‘outsiders’ who could not be allowed to dominate the local church. Overall, it is hoped that the book has made a contribution to the debates about politics of belonging in Africa by shedding more light on how migrant groups construct their belonging over a long period of time. While debates on migration and belonging in Africa have largely focused on the dual process of exclusion and inclusion or the insider–outsider dialectic, this study has shown that there are important nuances that require careful scholarly attention. As the case of the Basotho has shown, some immigrant communities seek to strike a delicate balance between maintaining a particularistic identity and making efforts to establish an attachment to their new homes. The Basotho community sought to both become autochthons of sorts by making use of various strategies and also to remain ‘outsiders’ by also maintaining some form of particularism. This has a larger impact on the broader debates about the politics of migration, citizenship and belonging in Africa as it shows the importance of historically grounded analyses in understanding the intricacies of the politics of belonging. Thus while similarities can be drawn between this study and many other studies on belonging, the Basotho’s peculiar experiences and the variety of strategies they deployed in their struggles to belong over the last century enriches our understanding of the intricacies of belonging in Africa. Moreover,

Mujere.indb 166

10/12/2018 16:18



Epilogue: Uncertainty and the Basotho’s Quest for Belonging 167

while a number of studies have largely looked at the problem of belonging in the contemporary period, this study has shown how analysing a long historical period, with its many contours, can help illuminate the changing nature of the politics of belonging in Africa.

Mujere.indb 167

10/12/2018 16:18

Mujere.indb 168

10/12/2018 16:18

Bibliography

Baumann, G. The multiculturalism riddle: Rethinking national, ethnic, and religious identities (London: Routledge, 1999). Beach, D. N. ‘The initial impact of Christianity on the Shona: The protestants and the southern Shona’, in A. J. Dachs (ed.), Christianity south of the Zambezi (Gwelo: Mambo Press, 1973). Berman, E. H. ‘American influence on African education: The role of the Phelps–Stokes Fund’s Education Commissions’, Comparative Education Review, Vol. 15, No. 2 (1971): 132–145. Bundy, C. The rise and fall of the South African peasantry (London: Heinemann, 1979). Bunn, D. ‘The sleep of the brave: Graves as sites and signs in colonial Eastern Cape’, in P. S. Landau and D. D. Kaspin (eds), Images and empires: Visuality in colonial and post-colonial Africa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002). Carbutt, C. L. ‘Communal Land tenure’, NADA, 1927. Castles, S and Davidson, A. Citizenship and migration: Globalization and the politics of belonging (London, Macmillan, 2000). Ceuppens, B. and Geschiere, P. ‘Autochthony local or global? New modes in the struggle over citizenship and belonging in Africa and Europe’, Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 34 (2005): 385–407. Chabal, P. Africa: The politics of suffering and smiling (London and New York: Zed Books, 2009). Challiss, R. J. ‘The foundation of the racially segregated education system in southern Rhodesia, 1890–1923, with special reference to the Education of Africans’, PhD thesis, University of Zimbabwe, 1982. Chanock, M. Law, custom, and social order: The colonial experience in Malawi and Zambia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985).

Mujere.indb 169

10/12/2018 16:18

170 Land, Migration and Belonging

Cheater, A. P. ‘Fighting over property: The articulation of dominant and subordinate legal systems governing the inheritance of immovable property among Blacks in Zimbabwe’, Africa: Journal of the International African Institute, Vol. 57, No. 2 (1987): 173–195. Christiansen, F. and Hedetoft, U. ‘Introduction’, in Christiansen, F. and Hedetoft, U. (eds), The politics of multiple belonging: Ethnicity and nationalism in Europe and East Asia (Burlington: Ashgate, 2004). Christopher, A. J. ‘Segregation and cemeteries in Port Elizabeth, South Africa’, Geographical Journal, Vol. 161, No. 1 (1995): 38–46. Cohen, D. W and Atieno Odhiambo, E. S. Burying SM: The politics of knowledge and the sociology of power in Africa (Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann/London: James Currey, 1992). Comaroff, J and Comaroff, J. Of revelation and revolution, Volume II: The dialectics of modernity on a South African frontier (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997). Cooper, F. and Brubaker, R. ‘Identity’, in F. Cooper, Colonialism in question: Theory, knowledge, history (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005). Coplan, D. B. ‘“Fictions that save”: Migrants, performance and Basotho national culture’, Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 6, No. 2 (1991): 164–194. Daimon, A. ‘Mabhurandaya: The Malawian Diaspora in Zimbabwe, 1895 to 2008’, PhD thesis, University of the Free State, 2015. Daneel, M. L. Old and new in southern Shona independent churches, Volume 1: Background and rise of the major movements (The Hague: Mouton, 1971). Davis, B. and Döpcke, W. ‘Survival and accumulation in Gutu: Class formation and the rise of the State in colonial Zimbabwe, 1900–1939’, Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1 (1987): 64–98. Durham, D and Klaits, F. ‘Funerals and the public sphere of sentiment in Botswana’, Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 28, No. 4 (2002): 777–795. Fontein, J. ‘Graves, ruins, and belonging: Towards an anthropology of proximity’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 17 (2011): 706–727. Geschiere, P. ‘Funerals and belonging: Different patterns in southern Cameroon’, African Studies, Vol. 48, No. 2 (2005): 45–64.

Mujere.indb 170

10/12/2018 16:18



Bibliography 171

—— The perils of belonging: Autochthony, Citizenship, and Exclusion in Africa and Europe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009). Geschiere, P and Jackson, S. ‘Autochthony and the crisis of citizenship: Democratization, decentralization, and the politics of belonging’, African Studies Review, Vol. 49, No. 2 (2006): 1–6. Geschiere, P and Nyamnjoh, F. ‘Capitalism and autochthony: The see-saw of mobility and belonging’, Public Culture, Vol. 12, No. 2 (2000): 423–452. Geschiere, P and Nyamnjoh, F. ‘Witchcraft as an issue in the politics of belonging: Democratisation and urban migrants’ involvement with the home village’, African Studies Review, Vol. 41, No. 3 (1998): 69–91. Groves, Z. ‘Malawians in colonial Salisbury: A social history of labour migration in Central Africa, c.1920s–1960s’, PhD thesis, Keele University, 2011. Hedetoft, U. ‘Discourses and images of belonging: Migrants between new racism, liberal national and globalization’, in Christiansen, F. and Hedetoft, U. (eds), The politics of multiple belonging: Ethnicity and nationalism in Europe and East Asia (Burlington: Ashgate, 2004). Hughes, D. M. Whiteness in Zimbabwe: Race, landscape, and the problem of belonging (New York: Palgrave, 2010). Hyatt, S. P. The old transport road (Salisbury: Books of Rhodesia, 1963). Jannecke, J. ‘Strategies of representation in Tsitsikamma Fingo/ Mfengu land restitution claims’, South African Historical Journal, Vol. 60, No. 3 (2008): 452–476. Jennings, A. C and Huggins, G. M. ‘Land apportionment in Southern Rhodesia’, Journal of the Royal Society, Vol. 34, No. 136 (1935): 296–312. Judges, A. V. et al., ‘Report of the Southern Rhodesia Education Commission 1963’, presented to the Legislative Assembly, Rhodesia, 27 June 1963. Kamaara, E. ‘Towards Christian national identity in Africa: A historical perspective to the challenge of ethnicity to the Church in Kenya’, Studies in World Christianity, Vol. 16, No. 2 (2010): 126–144. Klug, H. ‘Defining the property rights of others: political power, indigenous tenure and the construction of customary land law’, Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, Vol. 35 (1995), 119–148.

Mujere.indb 171

10/12/2018 16:18

172 Land, Migration and Belonging

Konings, P. ‘Mobility and exclusion: Conflicts between autochthons and allocthons during political liberalization in Cameroon’, in de Bruijn, M., R. van Dijk and D. Foeken (eds), Mobile Africa: Changing patterns of movement in Africa and beyond (Leiden, Brill, 2001). Lamba, I. C. ‘The Cape Dutch Reformed Church Mission in Malawi: A preliminary historical examination of its educational philosophy and application, 1899–1931’, History of Education Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 3 (1984): 373–392. Landau, P. S. Popular politics in the history of South Africa, 1400– 1948 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010). Landau, P. S. and Kaspin, D. D. (eds) Images and empires: Visuality in colonial and post-colonial Africa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), Lee, R. and Vaughan, M. ‘Death and dying in the history of Africa since 1800’, Journal of African History, Vol. 49 (2008): 341–359. Lentz, C. ‘Land and the politics of belonging in Africa’, in P. Chabal, U. Engel and L. de Haan (eds), African Alternatives (Leiden: Brill, 2007). —— ‘Land rights and the politics of belonging in Africa: An introduction’, in R. Kuba and C. Lentz (eds), Land and the politics of belonging in West Africa (Leiden: Brill, 2006). Lewis, J. ‘The rise and fall of the South African peasantry: A critique and reassessment’, Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (1984): 1–24. Li, F. L. N. et al. ‘Discourses on migration and ethnic identity: Interviews with professionals in Hong Kong’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 20, No. 3 (1995): 342–356. Loxton, R. F. et al. ‘Report on the survey of natural resources and socio-economic circumstances of Gutu District in relation to economic development and land use policy’, Ministry of Internal Affairs, Rhodesia, May 1971. Makambe, E. P. ‘The African immigrant factor in Southern Rhodesia, 1890–1930: The origin and influence of external elements in a colonial setting’, PhD thesis, University of York, 1979. Malkki, L. ‘National geographic: The rooting of people and the territorialization of national identity among scholars and refugees’, Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 7, No. 1 (1992): 24–44. —— ‘National Geographic: The rooting of people and the territorialization of national identity among scholars and refugees’,

Mujere.indb 172

10/12/2018 16:18



Bibliography 173

Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 7, No. 1 (1992): 24–44. Malkki, L. H. Purity and exile: Violence, memory, and national cosmology among Hutu refugees in Tanzania (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995). Maloka, E. T. Basotho and the mines: A social history of labour migrancy in Lesotho and South Africa c.1890–1940 (Dakar: Codesria, 2004). Mamdani, M. Citizen and subject: Contemporary Africa and the legacy of colonialism (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996). Mann, K and Roberts, R. (eds) Law in colonial Africa (Portsmouth NH: Heinemann/ London: James Currey, 1991). Marchetti-Mercer, M. ‘New meanings of “home” in South Africa’, Acta Academica, Vol. 38, No. 2 (2006): 191–218. Mashingaidze, E. K. ‘Forgotten frontiersmen of Christianity’s northward outreach: Black evangelists and the missions’ northern hinterland, 1869–1914’, Mohlomi: Journal of Southern African Historical Studies, Vol. 2 (1978). Maxwell, D. ‘Writing the history of African Christianity: Reflections of an editor’, Journal of Religion in Africa, Vol. 36, Nos 3–4 (2006): 379–399. —— African gifts of the spirit: Pentecostalism and the rise of a Zimbabwean transnational movement (London: James Currey, 2007). Mazarire, G. C. ‘A right to self-determination! Religion, protest and war in south-central Zimbabwe: The case of Chivi district 1900–1980’, unpublished MA thesis in African History, History Department, University of Zimbabwe, 1999. —— ‘The rise and fall of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) in the Victoria Circle 1888–1950: A dissenting view of the Church’s alleged invention of Chikaranga with particular reference to the Chibi Circuit’, New Dimensions in History Seminar Paper No. 5, Department of History, University of Zimbabwe, 28 May 2004. —— ‘A social and political history of Chishanga: South-central Zimbabwe, c.1750–2000’, DPhil thesis, University of Zimbabwe, 2010. McGregor, J. ‘Conservation, control and ecological change: The politics and ecology of colonial conservation in Shurugwi’, Environment and History, Vol. 1, No. 3 (1995): 257–279. Merry, S. E. ‘Land and colonialism’, Law and Society Review, Vol. 25, No. 4 (1991): 889–992.

Mujere.indb 173

10/12/2018 16:18

174 Land, Migration and Belonging

Meyer, B. ‘Translating the devil: An African appropriation of Pietist Protestantism, the case of the Peki Ewe in Southern Ghana, 1847–1992’, PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, 1995. Mokwile, J. ‘Native ideals’, Native Affairs Department Annual, Vol. 2 (1924): 95–97. Msindo, E. Ethnicity in Zimbabwe: Transformations in Kalanga and Ndebele societies, 1860–1990 (Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2012). Mudeka, I. ‘“We faced Mabvuto”: A gendered socio-economic History of Malawian’s Migration and Survival in Harare, 1940 to 1980’, PhD thesis, University of Minnesota, 2011. Musoni, F. ‘Educating the Ndebele in Buhera district, Zimbabwe; A case for a multi-cultural approach?’, paper presented to the Curriculum and Arts Education Departmental Seminar, University of Zimbabwe, 31 March 2006. Mutumburanzou, A. R., Mandebvu, D. P. and Esterhuyse, E. C. Ten years of development in Reformed Church in Zimbabwe 1977–1987 (Masvingo: Morgenster Mission, 1989). Nyamnjoh, F. Insiders and outsiders in southern Africa: Citizenship and Xenophobia in Contemporary southern Africa (Dakar: Codesria, 2006). Palmer, R. Land and racial domination in Rhodesia (London, Heinemann, 1977). Peters, P. E. ‘Conflicts over land and threats to customary tenure in Africa’, African Affairs, 112 (2013), 545. Phimister, I. ‘Peasant production and underdevelopment in Southern Rhodesia, 1890–1914, with particular reference to the Victoria district’, in R. Palmer and N. Parsons (eds), The roots of rural poverty in central and southern Africa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977). —— An economic and social history of Zimbabwe 1890–1948: Capital accumulation and class struggle (London: Longman, 1988), p.68. Ranger, T. O. The African voice in southern Rhodesia, 1898–1930 (London: Heinemann, 1970). —— Peasant consciousness and guerrilla war in Zimbabwe (Harare: Zimbabwe Publishing House/ London: James Currey, 1985). —— The invention of tribalism in Zimbabwe (Gweru: Mambo Press, 1985). —— ‘The invention of tradition revisited: The case of colonial Africa’, in T. O. Ranger and M. Vaughan (eds), Legitimacy and the

Mujere.indb 174

10/12/2018 16:18



Bibliography 175

state in twentieth century Africa (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1993). —— Are we not also men?: The Samkange family and African politics in Zimbabwe 1920–1964 (London: James Currey/Portsmouth NH: Heinemann, 1995). Roberts, R. S. ‘The settlers’, Rhodesiana, Vol. 39 (1978), 55–61. Roberts, R and Mann, K. ‘Law in colonial Africa’, in K. Mann and R. Roberts (eds), Law in colonial Africa (Portsmouth NH: Heinemann/London: James Currey, 1991). Sayce, K. A town called Victoria or the rise and fall of the Thatched House Hotel (Bulawayo: Books of Rhodesia, 1978). Shipton, P. Mortgaging the ancestors: Ideologies of attachment in Africa (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009). Shutt, A. K. ‘“We are the best poor farmers”: Purchase area farmers and economic differentiation in Southern Rhodesia c. 1925–1980’, DPhil Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, 1995. —— ‘Pioneer farmers and family dynasties in Marirangwe Purchase Areas, colonial Zimbabwe, 1931–1947’, African Studies Review, Vol. 43, No. 3 (2000): 59–80. —— ‘Squatters, land sales and intensification in Marirangwe Purchase Area, colonial Zimbabwe, 1931–65’, Journal of African History, Vol. 43, No. 3 (2002): 473–498. Smith, D. J. ‘Burials and belonging in Nigeria: Rural–urban relations and social inequality in a contemporary African ritual’, American Anthropologist, Vol. 106, No. 3 (2004): 569–579. Spear, T. ‘Neo-traditionalism and the limits of invention in British Colonial Africa’, Journal of African History, Vol. 44 (2003): 3–27. Steele, M. C. ‘The foundations of a Native Policy: Southern Rhodesia, 1923–1933’, PhD thesis, Simon Fraser University, August 1972. Summers, C. Colonial lessons: Africans’ education in Southern Rhodesia, 1918–1940 (Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2002). —— ‘Giving orders in Southern Rhodesia: Controversies over Africans’ authority in development programs, 1928–1934’, International Journal of African Historical Studies, Vol. 31, No. 2 (1998): 279–300. Sundkler, B. Bantu prophets in South Africa (Cambridge: James Clark, 1948). Tilley, C. ‘Introduction: identity, place, landscape and heritage’, Journal of Material Culture, Vol. 11, Nos 1–2 (2006): 7–32.

Mujere.indb 175

10/12/2018 16:18

176 Land, Migration and Belonging

Van der Merwe, W. F. J. Kuvamba nokukura kwekereke yeReformed muZimbabwe (Reformed Church in Zimbabwe) (Masvingo: Morgenster Mission, 1987). —— The day star arises in Mashonaland (Fort Victoria: Morgenster, 1953). —— From mission field to autonomous Church in Zimbabwe (Transvaal: N. G. Kerkboehandel, 1981). Weiner, I. A. ‘Religion out loud: Religious sound, public space, and American pluralism’, PhD dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 2009. Weller, J. and Linden, J. Mainstream Christianity to 1980 in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe (Gweru: Mambo Press, 1984), p.27. West, M. O. The rise of an African middle class: Colonial Zimbabwe, 1898–1965 (Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 2002).

Mujere.indb 176

10/12/2018 16:18

Index

African converts 20, 23, 135, 140 African Methodist Episcopal Church (AMEC) 137 African Traditional Religion 137 African wills 52, 162 African Wills Act (1933)   53–4, 60–61 African–initiated Churches  (AICs) 137–8, 139, 141–2, 153, 165–6 Reverend Samuel Mutendi  137 Zion Christian Church (ZCC)  137 agriculture 32, 50, 63, 69, 110–11 Alvord, A. E. 100 autonomy 97, 118–20, 134, 138, 141–3, 146–7, 153–4, 165 Basotho 2–5, 7, 9, 11–17, 18–32,   35–7, 39–41, 43, 45–52, 58–60, 62–3, 65–73, 75–81, 83–7 Basotho belonging 162 dip tank 49, 64, 66, 76, 82,  115 burial place See Also   Cemetery

Mujere.indb 177

Basotho community xii,  1–2, 4, 13, 17, 18–19, 26, 29–30, 35, 40, 43, 47, 49–50, 50n21, 60, 62, 65–6, 71–3, 75, 77–84, 86–90, 92–3, 95–7, 105, 108–10, 114–15, 129, 133, 140–45, 145n41, 146–7, 147n47, 148–50, 152–3, 155–9, 161–6 Basotho councillors 85, 118 Basotho Evangelists 19–20,   23–4, 30, 102, 151, 161 belonging 1–12, 15–17, 19, 40,   48–50, 52, 61, 70, 72–3, 75–6, 88–99, 106–7, 116, 118, 125, 127–9, 131–4, 139, 142, 148, 151–3, 155–6, 158–63, 166–7 politics of belonging 3, 5,  5n8, 6, 6n12, 8, 8n20–21, 9, 11–12, 95, 97, 128, 131, 151n7, 166–7 belonging matrix 10, 128, 131, 162 Bethel 1, 15, 49, 84–5, 89–91,  93, 95, 104, 106, 110, 113–14, 121, 124, 126–9, 132, 152, 160, 162–3 Cemetery 17, 75, 87–89,   91–92, 155, 163

10/12/2018 16:18

178 Index

Farm 17, 18, 49, 75, 77, 80–81,  83–4, 87–90, 92, 94–7, 99, 110, 144, 146, 149, 155–6, 163 School 17, 18, 70, 77, 80,  84, 99, 101, 105–7, 109–10, 112–13, 116, 118–19, 121–9, 135, 152, 163–5 British South Africa Company 25–7, 44 Bundy, Colin 32–3, 33n54n57n58

Natural Resources Act 63 Natural Resources Board 63 converts 20–21, 23, 108, 131–2, 135–6, 140, 142–3, 150, 152, 166 customary law or common law 52–9, 61–2, 73

dams 64, 66 descendants of 19, 22, 58, 69, 71, 151, 156 displacements 12, 15, 43, 72 disputes 43, 51–5, 57, 60, 68,  72–3, 82, 129, 132, 135, Chibi Area 22, 37, 38n78, 65n77, 148–9, 162 135n7 inheritance 43, 51–60, 62, 71, chiefs 31, 64, 72  73, 162 Chishanga 53n31, 65n76, 120 Domboshawa 101 Christianity 20–21, Dutch Reformed Church 1–4,  22n6n7n8n11, 23n13, 13–17, 18–24, 27, 30–32, 30, 37, 131–2, 140–41, 35–6, 43, 47, 50, 79–80, 83, 152n59n60, 153, 161, 165 94, 102–9, 117–20, 126, 129, Pentecostal Christianity 131 131–54, 161, 164–5 Church-run schools See also Missions education 17, 19, 30–32, colonial administrators 2–3,  36–8, 45n3, 50, 63, 66, 13–15, 25–6, 28, 30, 32, 35, 76–7, 99–102, 104, 106, 108, 37–8, 42–3, 53–4, 71, 80, 86 110–11, 113, 122, 127–8, Comaroff, J. and Comaroff, J. 132, 136n9, 137, 163–4 140 education policy 99–100, Commissions 100n1  102–3, 106, 137 Land Commission/ Morris Erichsthal Farms 30, 32, 39, 47,  Carter Land Commission 51–2, 59, 70, 72, 80, 102, 107, (1925) 15, 41, 44 131, 134 Community Farm 1, 15, 75–9, European Areas 43, 45 81, 85, 104, 107, 125, 128, Evangelical Presbyterian 134, 138–9, 143, 145, 148–9, Church 140–41 151, 160, 162 Evangelists 3, 20–21, 23, 47, conservation 63, 86  141 Intensive Conservation African evangelists 20, 22–4,  Areas 63, 66, 68  35, 136, 161 Intensive Conservation Basotho evangelists 19–20,  Areas committees 63

Mujere.indb 178

10/12/2018 16:18



 23–4, 30, 102, 151, 161 exclusion 4n5, 5–6, 7n18, 45, 66, 68, 89n47, 131, 148, 166 farmers 1–2, 25n23, 26n28,  27, 32, 35, 37–38, 44n2, 47–49, 52n26, 57n44n46, 59, 63–69, 71, 78–80, 85, 86n39, 87, 89–90, 103–104, 109, 115n67n68, 118–20, 126–7, 129, 131, 163 African farmers 33–4, 113 Basotho farmers 31, 42,  48–9, 62, 67–8, 83, 86–8, 106, 123, 126 Karanga farmers 25n23,  27–8, 31–2, 47, 67–8, 71, 113, 118, 124–6 farmers’ associations 2, 47, 63, 68, 126 Fontein, Joost 11, 91, 98 graves 3, 9–11, 17, 19, 75–6, 87n44, 88–9, 91–2, 95, 97–8, 128, 162–3 Gutu District 1, 19, 45–6, 61, 66, 72, 77, 83–4, 87n43, 88n46, 89n48, 95, 102, 104, 107–8, 112, 136–7, 139, 142, 148–9, 158

Index 179

124–6 kinship 2, 4, 10–11, 14–15, 51, 62, 71, 91, 93, 95, 98, 132–3, 138, 155, 163–4 land 3, 7–9, 11, 14–17, 24–8,  31–3, 37, 40–41, 44–7, 52–5, 57–62, 72–3, 75–6, 88–9, 97, 104, 111, 118, 125n99, 128, 131, 149, 162–3 freehold land 1–3, 11–12, 14,  19, 25–6, 28–9, 39, 41–2, 45, 49, 52, 54, 56, 58, 72–3, 81, 95, 97 land policy 43 ownership of land/land ownership 17, 54, 60, 75, 131,  162 Land Apportionment Act 15, 19, 25, 43, 44, 58, 72, 102, 134 Limpopo River 3, 13, 20, 22–3, 161 locals 3, 6, 24, 30, 40, 77, 95, 162, 166 Luka Jarawani 137

Mashingaidze 22n8, 23n13, 161 Masoha, Joshua xii, 20, 23, 45, 47, 65, 87n42, 97n69, 156n1 Mazarire, Gerald C. xi, 22, 23n12, 53n31, 65, 120n81, 135 institutions 63–4, 129, 143, migrants 1, 6–7, 9–11, 13, 15,  146, 165 21n5, 24, 29n39, 34–5, 45, 51, religious institutions 153 69, 155, 160n9, 161 Jacob Molebaleng 26, 29, 39–41, migration 3, 5–6, 12–13, 15,  19, 21, 24, 39, 43, 50, 62, 46, 48, 67, 70, 75–9, 81–4, 87, 101, 128, 151, 157, 159, 161, 103, 115–18, 133, 143–4, 147, 166 149 African migrations 5, 12 Karanga Farmers 25n23, 27–8, labour migrations 12 Mfengu migrations 12 31–2, 47, 67–8, 71, 113, 118,

Mujere.indb 179

10/12/2018 16:18

180 Index

mismanagement of funds 114 Mission station 21–3 Alheight Mission 83, 107–8,  118–19, 136, 142, 146, 149 missionaries 2–3, 13, 19–24,  30, 32, 100, 107–9, 118–20, 131–2, 134–47, 149–52, 154, 161, 163–5 French Protestant  Missionaries 13 Dutch Reformed Church  missionaries 2, 4, 13–14, 17, 18, 20, 27, 30–31, 43, 47, 79–80, 104–9, 117–20, 129, 131–54, 164–5 Hope Fountain mission 101 missionary paternalism 132, 143 missionary patronage 120, 132, 139, 143, 146, 153, 164 Missionary Society Berlin Missionary Society 3,  15, 19–22, 24, 136 London Missionary Society  35 Paris Evangelical Missionary  Society 19–21, 24 Missions Gutu 18, 107–8, 118, 142 Morgenster 18, 22, 24, 30–32,  35, 79, 102–3, 153, 161 Pamushana 18, 102, 107, 119,  122 Swiss Mission Vaudoise 21 Moffat, Howard Unwin 38, 63 Molebaleng, Jacob xii, 26, 29,  39–41, 46–8, 67, 70, 75–9, 81–4, 87, 103, 115–18, 120, 133, 143–7, 149 Mozambique 12 Mphisa, Paul xii, 47–8, 59, 60,

Mujere.indb 180

65, 67, 78, 81, 82, 84, 115–16 Mugabe, Chief 23 Native commissioners 13–14, 30, 33, 35, 53, 64–5, 86, 103–4, 109, 115, 135, 139, 142 Native Development Department (NDD) 100 Native Land Board 44–5, 47, 60, 69, 72, 75–8 Native Purchase Areas 15, 41,  44–5, 48 Dewure Purchase Area 1,  15–17, 19, 21, 45–9, 51, 59, 60, 63, 65–72, 75–8, 83, 85, 88–9, 91, 93, 95, 97–99, 102, 103n17, 104–6, 115, 117, 126–7, 131–2, 135, 144, 150–3, 155–8, 160–62, 166 Mungezi Purchase Areas 43,  44, 46, 51, 60, 65–6, 72, 78, 87–8, 96–7 Marirangwe Purchase Areas  48, 68–9, 86, 119 Nyazvidzi Purchase Areas  83, 88 Northern Rhodesia See also Zambia outsiders 2n1, 3, 7, 12n33, 79, 89, 163, 166 See also strangers Palmer, Robin 26n28, 27n32, 32n50, 34n59, 46n8n10, 149 patronage 80, 105, 117–18, 120, 131–2, 139, 141, 143, 146, 153, 164 peasant production 32–3 Phimister, Ian 33, 33n55n59 Pietist Protestantism 140n25, 141

10/12/2018 16:18

Index 181



Pioneer Column 3, 24 Portuguese East Africa See also Mozambique prisons 37 Progressive Africans 19, 25, 30, 31–2, 41, 43, 50, 80, 102–3, 107, 111, 117, 123, 125, 128, 139, 142, 163, 166 Protestant Christianity 165 Protestant churches 20–21 Ranger, Terence 5n9, 33, 34n60n62, 35n64, 36n69, 37, 38n75n76, 90 rebels 131 religion 3, 10, 17, 19, 23n12, 48, 91, 128, 131–2, 134, 137, 139, 145n40n41, 151, 153, 164 religious diversity 134 Reserves 35, 37, 39, 43, 47, 49, 64, 69, 71–2, 76, 81, 88, 96, 104 Reverend Botha 102, 107, 119 Reverend Stephanus Hofmeyr 22 Reverend Van der Merwe 84, 104–5, 107, 109–10, 113, 118–19, 122, 146, 149, 150, 152 Rhodes, Cecil John 3, 24–5 Rhodesian Bantu Voters’ Association (RBVA) 34–6, 38, 42, 64 rituals 7, 10, 93–4, 96–97 funerals 2, 5n8, 7, 9–10,  12n32, 51, 90–91, 93–7, 126, 128, 160, 163 memorial services 2, 88, 90,  93–4, 97, 160, 163 Roman Catholic 126, 139–40, 144 Rusike, Matthew 69

Mujere.indb 181

Samkange family 90 school fees 103, 108, 112–15, 122, 126 Shutt, Allison 26n28, 44n2, 52, 57n44n46, 68, 69n93n94, 86n39, 115n68, 119n78, 120 Sikhala, Job xii, 47, 70–71, 81–2, 92, 93n62, 95, 115–16 South Africa 2–3, 9, 12–13, 15, 19–22, 24–5, 29n39, 30, 33–5, 38, 47–8, 50–51, 57–8, 71, 86, 89n50, 102–3, 108, 125n99, 140n24, 141, 142n30, 155–61 South African Industrial and  Commercial Workers Union 38 Industrial and Commercial  Workers Union 64–5 Southern Rhodesia Native Association (SRNA) 34, 64, 108 strangers 3, 5–7, 94, 128 See Also Outsiders Tanganyika See also Tanzania taxes 67, 136–7 Tribal Trust Lands 96 See also Reserves United States of America 99, 101 Venda 20, 22 Victoria District 24–6, 28–33, 50 violence 6, 9n24, 12 World War I 141 Zambia 12, 20n1, 52n27 Zimuto Area 22 Zulu 20–22, 24, 27n32, 34, 71

10/12/2018 16:18

Mujere.indb 182

10/12/2018 16:18

EASTERN AFRICAN STUDIES These titles published in the United States and Canada by Ohio University Press

Revealing Prophets Edited by DAVID M. ANDERSON & DOUGLAS H. JOHNSON East African Expressions of Christianity Edited by THOMAS SPEAR & ISARIA N. KIMAMBO The Poor Are Not Us Edited by DAVID M. ANDERSON & VIGDIS BROCH-DUE Potent Brews JUSTIN WILLIS Swahili Origins JAMES DE VERE ALLEN Being Maasai Edited by THOMAS SPEAR & RICHARD WALLER Jua Kali Kenya KENNETH KING Control & Crisis in Colonial Kenya BRUCE BERMAN Unhappy Valley Book One: State & Class Book Two: Violence & Ethnicity BRUCE BERMAN & JOHN LONSDALE Mau Mau from Below GREET KERSHAW The Mau Mau War in Perspective FRANK FUREDI Squatters & the Roots of Mau Mau 1905-63 TABITHA KANOGO Economic & Social Origins of Mau Mau 1945-53 DAVID W. THROUP Multi-Party Politics in Kenya DAVID W. THROUP & CHARLES HORNSBY Empire State-Building JOANNA LEWIS Decolonization & Independence in Kenya 1940-93 Edited by B.A. OGOT & WILLIAM R. OCHIENG’ Eroding the Commons DAVID ANDERSON Penetration & Protest in Tanzania ISARIA N. KIMAMBO Custodians of the Land Edited by GREGORY MADDOX, JAMES L. GIBLIN & ISARIA N. KIMAMBO Education in the Development of Tanzania 1919-1990 LENE BUCHERT

Mujere.indb 183

The Second Economy in Tanzania T.L. MALIYAMKONO & M.S.D. BAGACHWA Ecology Control & Economic Development in East African History HELGE KJEKSHUS Siaya DAVID WILLIAM COHEN & E.S. ATIENO ODHIAMBO Uganda Now • Changing Uganda Developing Uganda • From Chaos to Order • Religion & Politics in East Africa Edited by HOLGER BERNT HANSEN & MICHAEL TWADDLE Kakungulu & the Creation of Uganda 1868-1928 MICHAEL TWADDLE Controlling Anger SUZETTE HEALD Kampala Women Getting By SANDRA WALLMAN Political Power in Pre-Colonial Buganda RICHARD J. REID Alice Lakwena & the Holy Spirits HEIKE BEHREND Slaves, Spices & Ivory in Zanzibar ABDUL SHERIFF Zanzibar Under Colonial Rule Edited by ABDUL SHERIFF & ED FERGUSON The History & Conservation of Zanzibar Stone Town Edited by ABDUL SHERIFF Pastimes & Politics LAURA FAIR Ethnicity & Conflict in the Horn of Africa Edited by KATSUYOSHI FUKUI & JOHN MARKAKIS Conflict, Age & Power in North East Africa Edited by EISEI KURIMOTO & SIMON SIMONSE Property Rights & Political Development in Ethiopia & Eritrea SANDRA FULLERTON JOIREMAN Revolution & Religion in Ethiopia ØYVIND M. EIDE Brothers at War TEKESTE NEGASH & KJETIL TRONVOLL From Guerrillas to Government DAVID POOL Mau Mau & Nationhood Edited by E.S. ATIENO ODHIAMBO & JOHN LONSDALE

A History of Modern Ethiopia, 1855-1991(2nd edn) BAHRU ZEWDE Pioneers of Change in Ethiopia BAHRU ZEWDE Remapping Ethiopia Edited by W. JAMES, D. DONHAM, E. KURIMOTO & A. TRIULZI Southern Marches of Imperial Ethiopia Edited by DONALD L. DONHAM & WENDY JAMES A Modern History of the Somali (4th edn) I.M. LEWIS Islands of Intensive Agriculture in East Africa Edited by MATS WIDGREN & JOHN E.G. SUTTON Leaf of Allah EZEKIEL GEBISSA Dhows & the Colonial Economy of Zanzibar 1860-1970 ERIK GILBERT African Womanhood in Colonial Kenya TABITHA KANOGO African Underclass ANDREW BURTON In Search of a Nation Edited by GREGORY H. MADDOX & JAMES L. GIBLIN A History of the Excluded JAMES L. GIBLIN Black Poachers, White Hunters EDWARD I. STEINHART Ethnic Federalism DAVID TURTON Crisis & Decline in Bunyoro SHANE DOYLE Emancipation without Abolition in German East Africa JAN-GEORG DEUTSCH Women, Work & Domestic Virtue in Uganda 1900-2003 GRACE BANTEBYA KYOMUHENDO & MARJORIE KENISTON McINTOSH Cultivating Success in Uganda GRACE CARSWELL War in Pre-Colonial Eastern Africa RICHARD REID Slavery in the Great Lakes Region of East Africa Edited by HENRI MÉDARD & SHANE DOYLE The Benefits of Famine DAVID KEEN

10/12/2018 16:18

EAS Mujere Land Migration TJI 18mm PPC small 50 years_B+B 17/12/2018 12:26 Page 1

Joseph Mujere is Senior Lecturer in History, University of Zimbabwe and Research Associate, Society, Work and Development Institute, University of the Witwatersrand. Cover photograph: Basotho people, Southern Africa (© Prisma by Dukas Presseagentur GmbH / Alamy Stock Photo) Published in association with the British Institute in Eastern Africa

ISBN 978-1-84701-216-6

9 781847 012166 www.jamescurrey.com

Land, Migration & Belonging Joseph Mujere

Land, Migration & Belonging

The Basotho, a small mainly Christianised community in Southern Rhodesia (modern Zimbabwe), used ownership of freehold land, religion, and a shared history to sustain a particularistic identity, whilst at the same time engaging with Dutch Reformed Church missionaries and colonial administrators as well as with their non-Sotho neighbours. This book analyses the challenges they faced, as well as the nature and impact of the internal schisms within the community that have impacted on their struggles for belonging, and shows how the Basotho’s ‘unity in diversity’ shaped their lives. Contributing to ongoing debates about migration, missionary encounters, identity, land and the politics of belonging, the author sheds light on the difficulties faced by minority ethnic groups in colonial Zimbabwe and their legacies and shows how they tried to strike a balance between particularism and integration.

A HISTORY OF THE BASOTHO IN SOUTHERN RHODESIA c.1890–1960s

‘... a fascinating account of what may appear to be a highly unusual community, but whose history allows a bright light to be cast on a broad and highly topical set of debates over the politics of belonging that should attract a wide readership’ – Jocelyn Alexander, University of Oxford

MUJERE

‘... a significant contribution to the histories of southern Africa … [and] our understanding of how community identity is constructed‘ – Diana Jeater, University of Liverpool

A HISTORY OF THE BASOTHO IN SOUTHERN RHODESIA c.1890–1960s