Marching along the path to destroy the narrative of Reconciliation Day

Dingane is known as that terrible man who, in his moment of laziness, must have spent time titivating himself, getting into bed with several women at the same time, and dreaming of a day when he’d be ruling over the entire… to use a modern concept… SADC region. This narrative has been perfected to have us believe that Dingane decapitated Piet Retief, thus inviting upon himself a gruesome revenge in Ncome which culminated in the historic Blood River. Not exactly.

My mother, who worked in the “huisies” of several Afrikaner farmers in the Free State while growing up, told us the story of how the Afrikaners used to celebrate “Tinkane”. They would go to some chosen place. There they’d construct a statue of Dingane with iron sheet or something of that sort. They’d hurl insults, stones and bullets at the statue for the whole day.

The popular historians do not tell us about the personality of Piet Retief. Only his heroic deeds in their march to garner swathes of land come to light. In his book Writings of a Zulu Witchdoctor, Credo Mutwa amplifies this when he says ‘It seems to be that white historians are more concerned about the deeds of an historical figure than with his personality. They thereby turn him into an actor pirouetting on the stage of history. Nobody’s deeds or words can possibly make any sense unless these are seen against the background of the particular person’s character.’

I concur, but, even after this bashing of the ways of white historians, Ntate Mutwa’s attempt at Retief fills one page and leaves me wanting more. In a nutshell, Piet Retief could be heard making jokes and laughing with people wherever he went. He could speak in Xhosa although with a strange accent. I would have loved to know if he also owned a harem, like Dingane, or if he looked like Eugene Terreblanche. I wish we knew if he wanted to build himself a Nkandla homestead after securing a title deed around Natal. I want to know if he was a bully while growing up, and if so, who he may have bullied – Pik Botha’s great grandfather maybe?

Credo Mutwa’s version offers a different anecdote. Dingane was not as bad as we’re told. The circumstances around Piet Retief’s death had not been explained accurately. It was a long story involving Dingane having asked Piet Retief, in exchange for land, to retrieve the cows which the renowned cattle-thief, and wizard, Sikonyela, had stolen from Dingane. It was believed that wizardry could not work against the white people. So Retief was a perfect weapon. A cunning Retief handcuffed Sikonyela. The book says the Sikonyela and his scoundrels had never seen the handcuffs. So they were alarmed at how a handcuffed Sikonyela was reduced to a wailing, helpless moron. Intimidated, Sikonyela released Dingane’s cattle.

Halstead, the man who came with Retief, messed things up for everybody. Halstead remained at Dingane’s homestead when Retief had gone to Sikonyela. Only God can explain why Halstead was travelling with the Afrikaners when he could have remained with his own people in the Cape Colony. (People, colonization did not start with Apartheid in 1948.) Halstead was hobnobbing, spying, sticking his nose in the business of Zulu people when one of Dingane’s women caught him looking into the kraal occupied by Dingane’s wives and concubines, in the dead of night. No man was allowed near that kraal. Dingane’s wife fainted, and suffered a miscarriage. This is what Credo Mutwa knows. The other version of the story is that Halstead had actually raped Dingane's wife. It is said that the sexual indiscretions among white men and African women, and rape, were rampant during that period. White people really mesmerized the black forebears with their strange ways.

Dingane, fearing that the white people had brought their wizardry to destroy his already weakening power, hatched a plan. Credo Mutwa’s version persuades you to think that Retief was guaranteed the land upon his return with the Dingane’s cattle. But the damned spying Halstead messed things up with his spying and disrespectful ways!

The plan by Dingane would be to ambush Retief at the time when he’d thoroughly let down his guard. So he threw a party (feast) and asked Retief not to rush to his newfound land but remain to celebrate with everybody.  Dingane loathed seeing bloody violence. So he pulled away from the scene before ordering the rout. Retief and his men fought back but the ambush was too sophisticated for them to escape.

The Afrikaners took revenge to Dingane even though, Credo Mutwa tells us, Dingane had already been killed by his own men, who had lost faith in his leadership and had defected to a rather struggling Mpande. Accordingly, the Afrikaners never got to lay their hands on Dingane when the bloodshed happened by the river. The other version of the story is that while the bloodshed took place in 1838, Dingane only died sometime in 1840.

In his legendary classic titled Down 2^nd Avenue, Es’kia Mphahlele brings us the picture of how the Dingane Day celebrations used to happen in places like Pretoria around the 1950 and 1960s. He tells us of how he found himself in the crowd of the celebrating Afrikaners in town.

‘We hadn’t been standing long inside there when a huge Afrikaner prodded me in the ribs and said, “Step out Kaffir! This is no monkey show.” His friend replied, “We’re only looking.” In a split second I felt a large hand take me by the scruff of the neck and push me out. Another hand from nowhere reached out for me. Another slapped me a few times on the cheek. My face ran into yet another object, so that I felt a sting on the bridge of my nose. I don’t know how I was eventually thrust out of the crowd, but I stumbled down the curb. Only then did I feel that someone had kicked me in the back as well.’
So the Black people knew to stay inside their houses because those who were found in the streets and around town got the beating of their lives in the hands of pissed off Afrikaners.

The new South Africa’s reconciliation changed the essence of today’s celebration to be what it is now. I cannot say I know what this day should be about. And I am not writing about that, but the historical context of Reconciliation Day. It is ironic that the first black president of a democratic South Africa, Nelson Mandela, was laid to rest just a day before Reconciliation Day, and has, in my view, overshadowed the day considerably. Oh, somebody also pointed out to me recently that Paul Kruger, was buried on 16 December 1904.

While some of us treat it is a holiday, some of us go out to the fun events being organised even by government. And there’d be some of us who take to twitter and facebook to lambast the day’s significance, complaining about how other races are not attending the public gatherings and events to impress upon the spirit of reconciliation.

The broadcast and print media would typically be awash with stories of the day. The debates end up being a racial blow-by-blow, with certain sections of the media giving certain strata of opinion-makers airtime to dominate the narrative. Whatever you are doing today to celebrate, or commemorate, remember the brutality of that time, and the arrogance which still lingers around us to this day. About 74 years after the battle of the Blood River, South Africa, under the British rule legislated land dispossession of black people through the Land Act.

The reconciliation which happens before justice is an insult. The majority of the people of this country need, and deserve, to own productive land which they need to use both for commercial purposes and as rental income of a sort. The sooner we become honest with ourselves, and stop normalizing black poverty, the better.