Swaziland: Boer incursion and British meddling (1868-1907)

Updated July 2008

On Mswati II's death in 1868 he was succeeded by his young son Ludvonga II, then still in his minority (Delius & Cope 2006, 84, 85; Lincoln 1987, 152, n4). The annexation of Swaziland by the South African Republic in April 1868, though rejected by the Ludvonga's regents, ominously marked a new phase of eventual aggression and encroachment by the Boers (Delius & Cope 2006, 84). Moreover the Kingdom came under threat from the Zulu, now under King Cetshwayo, who gave refuge to Mbelini, a pretender to the throne (Delius & Cope 2006, 84, 85). In all events Ludvonga was never installed as king, but was murdered in 1872 as a result of internal power struggles within the royal family (Delius & Cope 2006, 84, 85; Lincoln 1987, 152, n4). His half-brother, Mbandzeni who succeeded him, and was installed in June 1875, thus inherited a difficult situation to which he proved unequal (Booth 1983, 11).

The Boers, economically weak, menaced by the Zulu themselves, and embroiled in conflicts with the Pedi, were not able to make good their claims, but matters took a new turn when the British annexed the South African Republic in 1877 and upheld the land concession made by Mstwati in 1855 but not the annexation of 1868 (Delius & Cope 2006, 84; Booth 1983, 12). Nevertheless, the Boers pressed in on the fringes of the Kingdom from the west and the north and occupied areas of the eastern Highveld, effectively detaching them from Swazi control (Macmillan 1989, 291). The dangers posed by Cetshwayo and Mbelini were removed by the British by their defeat of Cetshwayo and the subjugation of the Zulu in July 1879; however, the position of the Boers was improved by the defeat of the Pedi by the British, with Swazi assistance, later in the year and the Boers' successful eviction of the British in 1881 (Beemer 1937, 60; Booth 1983, 12). A further measure of the weakness of Mbandzeni's position was the founding of an Anglican mission in 1880 and a Lutheran mission in 1889, whereas previous attempts in 1845 and 1859 to establish Christian missions had been thwarted by his father (Cummergen 2000, 372; Frescura 2003; van der Merwe 2003).

By the conventions of Pretoria and London of 1881 and 1884 respectively the encroachments of the Boers were effectively acknowledged, and the borders of Swaziland set down roughly as they are today, by agreement between the British and the South African Republic and without regard to protestations by the Swazi, though the independence of the Kingdom was guaranteed (Macmillan 1989, 291; Booth 1983, 12). The discovery of gold in the north of the country in 1882 unleashed a flood of concession hunters and the King acceded to every and any request, so that by the end of his reign the mineral wealth and land of the country had been signed away several times over (Crush 1979, 184; Macmillan 1989, 292, 293; Beemer 1937, 58).

The traditional right of the King to protect himself from threats posed to his life and kingship, especially from senior members of the Dlamini, by summary execution of those suspected of plotting against him was exploited by the Boers and British to undermine the independence of the Kingdom and justify their efforts at subordinating it (Lincoln 1987, 140; Kuper 1963, 12). In December 1888, after executing a senior councillor believed to be involved in a plot to kill him at the next ncwala and fearing British intervention, Mbandzeni felt compelled to write to the governor of Natal and justify his actions (Lincoln 1987, 140; Kuper 1963, 12). It is a measure of how insecure the independence of the kingdom had become during his reign that he is reported to have said on his death bed: "Swazi kingship dies with me" (Lincoln 1987, 140). His youthful death at 32 and efforts to execute those believed to have caused it through witchcraft led to exactly the kind of meddling that Mbandzeni had feared and, as Lincoln (1987, 141) observed: "As a result, a young and inexperienced son of Mbandzeni, Bhunu (r. 1889-1899) ascended the throne in an atmosphere of menace and confusion, as the European press gave prominent and propagandistic coverage to all signs of disorder in Swaziland, presumably as a means to prepare public opinion for direct intervention".

The multiplicity and conflicting concessions in circulation led to the creation of a special court by the British and the Boers in 1890 to adjudicate and settle the conflicting claims (Macmillan 1989, 292, 293; Crush 1979, 185; Booth 1983, 16). In 1894 an agreement was reached between the British and the South African Republic, by which Swaziland became a Boer protectorate in 1895 in exchange for Boer recognition of British interests in what was to become Rhodesia, once more without consulting the Swazis themselves; the convention provided for that the King and his heirs would have "the usual powers of Paramount Chief... in so far as the same are not inconsistent with civilized laws and customs" and that the Swazis occupying land given away by concession would be protected from the concessionaires (Macmillan 1989, 292, 293; Lincoln 1987, 153, n7; ; Booth 1983, 16). The concessionaires, for their part, found it extremely difficult to obtain the labour needed to work their concessions, either to extract gold or to create agricultural estates, and in 1898 a cash hut tax was levied by the South African Republic to force Swazis to enter the cash economy and especially to engage in wage labour, but they preferred to earn their cash working on gold or coal mines outside the country and the acute shortage of labour persisted (Crush 1979, 185; Beemer 1937, 58, 59).

This unprecedented tax was bitterly resented by the Swazi and the possibility of resistance led Boer distrust of the Swazis in general and the King Bhunu in particular (Beemer 1937, 58). When Bhunu executed a senior councillor that he believed had betrayed him, but was highly regarded by the Boers, the South African Republic seized upon the opportunity and ordered him to stand trial and sent troops in arrest him (Lincoln 1987, 141; Beemer 1937, 58, 59). King Bhunu fled to Natal where he attempted to play the British off against the Boers, but nevertheless was forced to accept the trial and a fine of £500 as well as a Boer-British protocol which reduced his powers (Lincoln 1987, 141; Kuoer 1863, 12, 13). In October 1899 the South African War broke out and in December King Bhunu died during the ncwala at the age of 23 (Lincoln 1987, 142).

The succession of his six months old son Sobhuza II, under the regency of his grandmother Queen Labotsibeni, was relatively free from conflict within the royal family and the Swazis were able to remain neutral in the conflict between the British and the Boers (Macmillan 1985, 644, 645; Kuper 1963, 12). The annexation of the South African Republic by the British also legally entailed the ultimate transfer of its protectorate over Swaziland to Britain, a responsibility that became a reality with the secession of hostilities in 1902; initially administered as part of the Transvaal, the Resident Commissioner in Swaziland reported to the High Commissioner in Pretoria (Beemer 1937, 58, 59; Macmillan 1989, 292, 293). In 1907 it received its own High Commissioner when the Transvaal became self governing (Macmillan & Levin 2007, 1155; Booth 1983, 19).

References

BEEMER, H 1937 "The Development of the Military Organization in Swaziland", Journal of the International African Institute , 10(1), January, [www] http://www.jstor.org/stable/1155846 [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

BOOTH, AR 1983 Swaziland : Tradition and Change in a Southern African Kingdom, Boulder, New York, 1983.

CRUSH, JS 1979 "Settler-Estate Production, Monopoly Control, and the Imperial Response: The Case of the Swaziland Corporation Ltd", African Economic History, 8, Autumn, 183-197, [www] http://www.jstor.org/stable/3601564 [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

CUMMERGEN, P 2000 "Zionism and Politics in Swaziland", Journal of Religion in Africa, 30(3), August, 370-385, [www] http://www.jstor.org/stable/1581497 [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

DELIUS, P & COPE, R 2006 "Hard Fought Frontiers: Mpumalanga 1845-1883" IN Delius, P (ed) Mpumalanga: Reclaiming the past, defining the future, [www] http://www.docstoc.com/docs/8511162/MpumalangaReclaiming-the-past-defining-the-future [PDF document, opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

FRESCURA, F 2003 "The Mission Stations" IN Frescura, F (ed) Missionary settlement in South Africa, South African History Online, [www] http://www.sahistory.org.za/pages/places/mission-stations/stations-m.htm [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

KUPER, H 1963 The Swazi : a South African kingdom, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.

LINCOLN, B 1987 "Ritual, Rebellion, Resistance: Once More the Swazi Ncwala", Man, New Series, 22(1), March, 132-156, [www] http://www.jstor.org/stable/2802967 [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

MACMILLAN, H 1989 "A Nation Divided? The Swazi in Swaziland and the Transvaal, 1865-1986" IN Vail, L (ed) The Creation of Tribalism in Southern Africa, University Of California Press, [www] http://www.escholarship.org/editions/view?docId=ft158004rs& chunk.id=d0e7328&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d0e7328&brand=eschol [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

MACMILLAN, H & LEVIN, R 2007 "Swaziland: Recent History" IN Frame, I (ed) Africa South of the Sahara 2008, Routledge.

VAN DER MERWE, W 2003 "Missionary Organisations" IN Frescura, F (ed) Missionary settlement in South Africa, South African History Online, [www] http://www.sahistory.org.za/pages/places/mission-stations/missionsFrameset.htm [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).