1
Bishops History Dept. Grade 10 Examination MEMO
Time: Two hours
100 marks
Wednesday, 4 June 2015
Examiner: Dr R. C. Warwick
Instructions:
1. Section A (Source-based questions) is compulsory
2. Section B contains two essay questions; choose one of these.
3. Write neatly and plan your essays carefully within several separate paragraphs, including a short introduction and conclusion.
4. Good luck….
SECTION A:
Source A (1):
The 2010 unveiling of Shaka’s statue at King Shaka International Airport in Durban; President Jacob Zuma and Zulu King Goodwill Zwelithini in front of the statue .Source A (2):
The same statue photographed further back – showing the cattle and Shaka
Source A (3): Explanation of the statue and later developments
The Shaka statue was removed on 2 June 2010 because the Zulu Royal House (specifically the King) complained the statue made Shaka look more like a cattle herd boy than a king. The statue shows Shaka without a spear or shield and surrounded by cattle. The Inkatha Freedom Party, the main political opposition to the ANC government in Kwazulu-Natal (who strongly protect traditional Zulu culture but are also political opponents to the ANC) complained that the removal and design (and re-design) of the statue had incurred “wasteful expenditure” of tax-payers money. The Zulu King claimed the Zulu Royal House had not been properly consulted about the statue’s likeness. Construction of a new R3.2 million statue has apparently begun. The cattle statues’ depicted with the original Shaka statue still remain at the airport and the sculptor (Andries Botha) is demanding them returned, because his original work has been changed. R6.4 million has already been spent on the King Shaka Airport statue(s) sculpturing and removal, but according to news reports no new Shaka statue has yet been unveiled at the airport.In 2013 the (ANC) economic and tourism minister in the Kwazulu-Natal government announced that KwaZulu-Natal would have its own landmark superstructure - a towering statue of King Shaka holding an assegai - that will rival the Statue of Liberty, the Eiffel Tower and Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro. This statue will be in the region of 106 metres tall; but it is unclear what it would cost.
Shaka’s life long pre-dated the invention of photography – there is no clarity at all as to Shaka’s actual likeness. (Summary of news developments on the Shaka statue as read off IOL.CO.ZA and NEWS24.COM)
Source B: Extract from Peter Becker’s 1964 book: Rule of Fear
Whenever the Zulu army returned from an expedition it reported to Bulawayo (meaning Place of the Elephant -today an historical site in northern KwaZulu-Natal) to deliver the spoils of war and to await further instructions from Shaka……when the gathering was called to order….the tyrant rose and facing the throng immediately scrutinised the stabbing-spears, for by the number of spears held point-upward he was able to judge how many of his warriors had killed at least one of the enemy in battle. Returning to his throne Shaka called upon each of the Indunas (different regiment commanders) in turn to describe the battles recently fought and to bring both heroes and cowards before him. Shaka took pains to praise and reward all who had won distinction in battle, but he had cowards removed to the outskirts of Bulawayo, to Cowards Bush, to be impaled or clubbed to death.”Peter Becker*, Rule of Fear, Manchester, 1964, p.29.
* Peter Becker was a white South African historian of African societies; fluent in Zulu and an expert in traditional Zulu customs and cultures. Becker was very close to and trusted by the Zulu King and Zulu politicians - strong links which remained thus all Becker’s life. Becker’s books were widely read by white South Africans interested in their country’s history and politics. During the 1960s Becker was considered without equal in his historical work on the Zulu people. But his descriptions were later challenged by new interpretations of the Mfecane.
Source C: Extract from Peter Becker’s book: Rule of Fear depicting the end of Shaka, murdered by his half-brother Dingane and associates. Dingane also went on to also establish himself (according to Becker) as a cruel tyrant. Dingane’s Zulu Army was defeated by the Afrikaner Voortrekkers at the battle of Blood River on 16 December 1838. Dingane was murdered in 1840 by his own Indunas (regimental commanders).
A day or so later, on 22 September 1828, Dingane and Mhlangana (later joined by Mbopha), each arrived at Shaka’s kraal with a shortened stabbing spear concealed beneath a skin cloak…..The sun was setting as the three men waited. Although they could scarcely discern the tyrant’s shape….they could hear his voice….slating (abusing-shouting) that messengers had arrived late….At that moment Mbopha, an assegai (stabbing spear) in one hand and a knob-headed stick in the other….dashed into the open…Shaka rose to remonstrate with Mbopha, but then, as if struck by a thunderbolt, …jerked back on his stool and raised his voice in a piecing scream of agony as stabbing spears, thrust by Dingane and Mhlangana, plunged through his left-arm and deep in his back. Turning ponderously Shaka met the murdering gaze of his brothers with eyes screwed up in pain. “Children of my father”, he whined, “what is the matter”?.....with that Mbopha stepped forward and thrust an assegai into the King’s body. Frantic with pain Shaka struggled with difficulty on to an elbow and slowly fixed a haggard gaze on his assassins. “Mark my words,” he muttered huskily, “you will not rule for long. Soon this country will be overrun by white men”. And Shaka died.** Becker used as source material for this account of Shaka’s murder, the Diary of Henry Francis Fynn – Fynn was an English settler and trader; one of the first white men to arrive in what is today Kwazulu-Natal; originally he was part of an expedition to set up an ivory trade with the Zulu and arrived in Durban Bay (today the lagoon which makes up the harbour) in May 1824. Fynn soon made contact with Shaka and learnt a great deal about Zulu customs and had contact with Shaka during several visits. Fynn’s trading expedition was by all accounts a success and later Natal became another British colony.
Source D:
Shaka as a role model for 21st century businessmen
Shaka’s name (has been) appropriated for commercial ends……by members of South Africa’s rising black middle classes. In 2000, lawyer and strategic consultant Phinda Madi published a motivational book for business people entitled Leadership Lessons from Shaka the Great. Amongst his injunctures (effectively his suggestions to business people to remedy any of their business difficulties): “To be a conqueror be apprenticed (be a learning assistant of) to a conqueror”; “Lead the charge from the front”; “Know the battlefield”; and, (with an eye to Shaka’s murder and downfall); “Never Believe your Public Relations personnel”. (Dingane and his brothers were Shaka’s close confidants – effectively advisors when Shaka was murdered).Source: http://www.sahumanities.org/ojs/index.php/SAH/article/viewFile/214/173 p.152
Source E:
Shaka as one of the greatest men of all time
“Shaka is universally acknowledged for creating and consolidating the Zulu as one of the most powerful and respected on the African continent and indeed on earth. His wisdom, leadership, strategic prowess, military genius and valour are legendary. In short it is difficult to imagine a handful of equals in history…..”Written by President Jacob Zuma in a forward to Phinda Madi’s book: Leadership Lessons from Shaka the Great.
Source: http://www.sahumanities.org/ojs/index.php/SAH/article/viewFile/214/173 p.152
Questions: Section A.
Source A (1, 2 and 3):
(1) Studying the photos of Shaka’s statue, how do you think he has been depicted? Just a Zulu?....Zulu warrior/soldier? Herd Boy?...dignified depiction of a southern African pre-industrial black man of the 19th century?....patronizing* and kitsch#? Give reasons for your descriptions. /4/
* Treating something with apparent kindness but (the sculptor) betraying a superior attitude.
# Bad taste – vulgar/offensive
Marks according to a logical and consistent explanation fitting the description, as per a mark for a valid point…./4/
(2) King Goodwill Zwelithini attended the statue’s unveiling, then later criticized the statue and was instrumental in its removal. Give your own opinion as to how justified you think this decision was (and particularly the King’s role therein.) /4/
The boys need to think this through – perhaps Zwelithini felt disappointed the statue did not portray Shaka as a warrior and this “warrior” is central image of Zulu nationalism, which the King also represents. Clearly he changed his mind for a cultural depiction that was more aggressive because it suited his own constituency or even his own whims. It could also represent the political tension existent between the ANC government and the Zulu Royal House where the King feels the need to assert himself. Mark according to a reasoned, insightful argument, point by point. /4/
(3) The KwaZulu-Natal government have subsequently planned Source A (3) a huge Shaka statue but for a different site. Although nothing has yet transpired on this project, can you suggest a political reason why such an idea was put forward? /2/
The ANC run the provincial government and the organisation is increasingly Zulu-dominated with Zulu-speakers being the largest ethnic grouping in the country; announcing the creation and siting of such a huge Shaka statue is probably aimed at cornering remaining Zulu voters for the ANC. It is also an aggressive assertion of African nationalism which defines black politics in South Africa. Mark point by point trying to credit intelligent insight and logical thinking. /2/
(4) Do the Source A (1-3) serve as useful historical information – in other words, do they assist in enlightening us about Shaka’s life? Write a six line paragraph explaining your answer. /4/
Only very superficially do these sources tell us much about Shaka’s life; they portray a pre-industrial era Zulu herdsman. But they say a great about how current traditional leaders and politicians would like to portray Shaka’s life - as a very powerful and aggressive figure of black leadership, and one which they want both Zulus and other SA cultures to know and respect (if not fear). There is clearly an attempt to place African Zulu culture and history symbolically on a level (African nationalists) assume other huge statues (Like the Statue of Liberty) accord Western culture – measured in grandiosity and the size of monuments (like the Voortrekker monument too). /4/
Source B:
(5) How is Shaka’s leadership portrayed in this extract: Stern; tyrannical; just; well balanced? Within a short (six line paragraph) chose one or more of these descriptions (or your own) to describe Shaka apparent attributes as a military leader. /4/
Perhaps in an African context of the day iShaka can be described as very strict but the awe and fear Shaka engendered was also tyrannical, certainly by pre-Mfecane African norms as we are led to understand. An insightful student will explain his answer with some contextual explanation including Peter Becker’s background and that his tyrannical portrayal of Shaka would have been realistic for his readers, and that the Zulu leaders back then no doubt wanted to emphasize to Becker that the Zulu King was one a formidable man. (Which might have meant something different to them as it does with the Zulu King and others today) Ascertain the intelligence behind the responses, awarding top marks only to those showing particular insight. /4/
(6) Peter Becker’s writings were based upon both written white missionary/settler sources (see footnote in source C) and the oral (history passed on by word of mouth from generation to generation) history he received via his close and trusted associations with the Zulu leadership of his time (1950s and 1960s). Discuss how verifiable (trustworthy, accurate, possible to prove) you believe such accounts can be. Write an eight line paragraph explaining your answer. /6/ Level 1: 1-2 marks; Level 2: 3-4 marks; Level 3: 5-6 marks.
The white missionaries/settlers/traders wrote what they saw or were told about Shaka and obviously they wrote from their own perspectives and prejudices of the times. A good answer would note this but also that this does not completely invalidate these sources; Afro-centric historians and Zulu nationalists have also depended upon colonial sources. The boys should point out that because the Zulus of Shaka’s time were not literate and had no tangible means of recording experiences over time, there is remains a dependence upon colonial sources and to some extent archeological sources, leaving Zulu oral sources which are passed along and re-embellished to a point where reliability has to be questionable. A good answer will be able to sift some of the above points out well – leave “6” for an exceptional answer.
Source C:
(7) There seems little dispute that Shaka was murdered by his brother Dingane (even strongly Afro-centric historians accept this); Becker in fact concentrated more on describing Dingane’s history than he did Shaka’s. Could you suggest any reason why? /2/
No doubt because Dingane was also defeated in battle by the Afrikaner Voortrekkers and murdered by Zulus himself; Dingane has no victory mythology attached to him only the of a tyrant, murderer and loser. Shaka has all the other mythology and attributes of a leader connected to his person – and he never went to battle against whites. /2/
(8) Shaka’s dying words, according to Becker who may well have been using poetic licence (his own imagined descriptions) were prophetic (foretold the future), particularly as Becker was writing in 1964. Do you agree? /4/
Yes, because the Zulu were to be defeated by both Afrikaners and the British; Natal became a British colony. Again Becker was writing for a white South African audience in the 1960s who would have been affirmed by Shaka’s supposed “prophecy”. Becker could not have foretold that Shaka would make such a big cultural and nationalistic return long after the 1960s. Some students might also argue Shaka was wrong as Zulu nationalism is again a very powerful force in the country today and build on that kind of argument. /4/
Source D:
(9) Phinda Madi’s book is intended for a very different historical context than the Zulu Kingdom of the early 19th century. Do you see any link between 21st century business practices and the points Madi makes (underlined in the source…) Refer to historical points before commenting on a “business” point. /6/ Level 1: 1-2 marks; Level 2: 3-4 marks; Level 3: 5-6 marks.