This section includes the use of ethnographic, anthropological and participant observations and documented accounts by various authors. It examines colonial rule and its influence on the culture of the Mpondo after the introduction of a cash economy and the effects of labour migrancy on the Mpondo. Chiefdom and traditional economic structures of the Mpondo between pre-colonial and post-colonial periods are examined. Essentially this section draws on the casualty of the Mpondo under traditional rule, their colonial masters up to the advent of apartheid in 1948 and democracy in 1994. As mentioned previously, many CBT projects operate with a management committee with a constitution that is fully inclusive and gender-
78
sensitive; however, in reality, traditional authorities dictate the critical decisions (Mitchell & Muckosy, 2008:1). As is discerned later in this section, traditional authorities have been absorbed from colonial times well into the democratic South Africa, and still have a say in matters of community development.
Historical and political position of the Mpondo
Mcetywa (1998:13) describes the Mpondo Kingdom as being well organised and firmly established, where people live in peace and prosperity, growing maize and millet and herding their livestock. In fact, Mason (1918:36) observed that the natives were living without fences. Similarly, the researcher observed during fieldwork in 2013 that many homes were left unattended, assuming that the owners were some place close by within the village. Also, during a visit to the Noqhekwane Village in 2012, the researcher noticed grocery items lying on the side of the gravel road and was informed by a local person that this was not unusual and that the owner would return to collect the balance after dropping off the first load. In earlier times Mpondoland was also inhabited by many different nationalities living together but respecting the Mpondo as the sole owners of the land (Mcetywa, 1998:13). The Mpondo are said to be extremely conservative and adhere to their customs (Callaway, 1939:25). However, this peaceful co-existence and strict adherence to custom may change through exploitation. Their independent, peaceful co-existence was subsequently strained as the Mpondo Chiefs and Kings were at the mercy of foreigners (Mcetywa, 1998:13). These external actors exploited Chief Mdlangaso and King Sigcawu to the point of war, thus weakening the Mpondo (Mcetywa, 1998:13), which led to the incorporation of Mpondoland into the Cape Colony in 1894 (Mcetywa, 1998:13). A strange recurring coincidence is how traditional rule survived under the different phases of administration under both colonial and apartheid governments (Ntsebeza, 2002: ii). This institution of traditional leadership is still recognised in the Constitution of South Africa (Ntsebeza, 2002:1). Traditional leadership still wields great power to this day. The researcher is aware of the power relations that are at play between the community and the traditional leaders. It became apparent that an exploratory meeting in 2013 to discuss CBT development had to be postponed because the Chief of one village complained that he was not aware of the meeting. In 2012 a similar meeting was scheduled with the community and the local headman, and was also postponed when the headman did not attend on account of his not being available in spite of being informed. The meeting did proceed, but constructive issues were omitted in the absence of the headman. A follow-up meeting was
79
convened at the Ingquza Hill local municipality, with representatives from government departments in August 2012, to discuss the Msikaba campsite located in Ndengane Village, and was met with similar frustrations as the power of traditional leadership resurfaced. Beyond this, even government remained confused as to which department was in charge and could take decisions on the Msikaba campsite. These are the reasons why Ntsebeza (2002:2) contends a ‘constitution that enshrines democratic principles in the Bill of Rights, whilst acknowledging a political role, or roles, for unelected and accountable traditional authorities, is inconsistent and contradictory’. In addition, Ntsebeza (2002:2) questions whether rural residents will be forced to concede to the political rule of the unelected traditional authorities. This is a strange paradox, as the communities of Mpondoland have been dictated to in all phases of administration by traditional rulers via colonial masters and the apartheid regime; even stranger is their current constitutional status in the new South African democracy. These rulers add to development constraints. According to Kepe and Ntsebeza (2012:8), this is a repetition of the 1950s’ and 1960s’ establishment of tribal authorities under the control of unelected and unaccountable chiefs in what are now termed Traditional Councils.
Economic trade and migrant labour – historical position of the Mpondo
The Mpondo owned land, cattle, goats, sheep, farming tools and ploughs (South African History Online, n.d.). They were independent, providing food and shelter for themselves by breeding cattle, growing grain and pumpkins, hunting, and making huts, clothing, household utensils, and weapons (South African History Online, n.d.). Their economic independence rested on their wealth in cattle used for trading to obtain various essential commodities (Mason, 1918:38; Beinhart, 1979a:200). However, the Mpondo had to change their subsistence way of life and develop trade relations with the colonial economies (Beinart, 1979b:472-473). The chiefs viewed this new economic position with the colonial traders as a form of transformation (Beinart, 1979b:473). Thus, in the 1860s, trading and raiding enabled the Mpondo to rebuild their herds of cattle (Beinart, 1979b:474). In the twenty years after 1860, approximately fifty trading stations were established, more than half in the eastern parts of the chiefdom (Beinart, 1982:23). Interestingly, permission was given by the chief allowing these traders to settle permanently on these sites (Beinart, 1982:23). This agreement to protect British subjects, traders and missionaries was acknowledged in an early treaty signed between the British and Chief Faku as early as 1844 (Callaway, 1939:33). This information implies that the colonial rulers were tactful in keeping the traditional leaders (chiefs) as their right-hand men. In a similar
80
fashion, traditional authorities were also absorbed by the apartheid regime ‘as the latter’s extended arm in the rural areas’ (Ntsebeza, 2002:1). Although the colonial rulers had a hold over the traditional leaders, their need for labourers was initially met with resistance by these leaders who kept recruiters out of the ‘country’, Mpondoland, until annexation (Beinart, 1979a:200). Figures in 1927 show that over fifty percent of able men were away at labour centres (Hunter Wilson, 1979:3). The introduction of labour migrancy radically changed the cultural position of the Mpondo (Mcetywa, 1998:23). The need to pay a hut tax, coupled with annexation of their land, forced the Mpondo to become wage labourers (Mcetywa, 1998:24), which undermined traditional Mpondo religion, custom and folklore (Mcetywa, 1998:24).
Resources – conflicts and confusion
The Wild Coast is characterised as one of the poorest regions of South Africa (Ashley & Ntshona, 2003:1; Mniki, 2009:122; Simukonda & Kraai, 2009:35; Province of the Eastern Cape. DEDEAT, 2012). Even after being incorporated into the new South Africa, this area still endures the remnants of years of failed rural planning schemes and sheer neglect (Simukonda & Kraai, 2009:21). Rural areas in the former Bantustans are mostly affected by apartheid land- related laws (Kepe, 2001:5). Land tenure has a domino effect on the livelihoods of communities residing on the Wild Coast (Kepe, 2001:4). The unresolved problem of land tenure leaves the community with little bargaining power (Kepe et al., 2001:2) and incidentally its economic potential is noted as drawing various stakeholders with new power imbalances over the control of natural resources (Simukonda & Kraai, 2009:39). For example, Dellier and Guyot (2009:61) mention the possible threat of re-appropriation and even re-occupation from outsiders through environmental motivations (new conservation projects, ecotourism, and seaside tourism). Evidently many white-owned cottages still occupy the coastline (Mniki, 2009:123). Communities are also heavily dependent on natural resources for their livelihood (Kepe et al., 2000:1). Some of these resources include marine, coastal and estuarine organisms; coastal and riverine forest species; cultivated vegetables; and livestock (Russell & Kuiper, 2003:150). Conflicts surface when local people and tourists compete for the same resources. This problem is exacerbated by tourists harvesting these resources during their pleasure trips, while communities depend on these resources for their livelihood (Russell & Kuiper, 2003:151). Natural resource management and legislation are not complied with by local people and visitors (Russell & Kuiper, 2003:151). Another problem faced by communities that wish to establish a CBT business is the issue of revenue derived from state-owned land that has to be returned
81
to the state (personal communication, S. Gabula, Department of Economic Development & Environmental Affairs, 2012). Repeatedly it can be seen that the unresolved issues of land tenure, conflicts fuelled through natural resource use, and the overlapping roles of various government departments and their impact on CBT development leave the community in a vulnerable position. As mentioned previously, the Eastern Cape Province has spectacular natural and cultural resources with great tourism potential; unfortunately these resources have not been exploited to yield optimum economic growth and development (Province of the Eastern Cape. DEDEA, 2009). Similarly more recent strategic documents, the NHCTS (2012), NRTS (2012) and NTSS (2011), reveal a dire need for SMME development for disadvantaged communities, including infrastructure development in rural areas. Finally, as pointed out in the previous chapter, far too many development and planning initiatives on the Wild Coast have greatly confused the people and resulted in planning fatigue (Simukonda & Kraai, 2009:36).