The British engaged in bloody warfare against the king of Zulu society, Cetshwayo, on the grounds that they were freeing the Zulu from a cruel tyrant who kept them enslaved. Ultimately, the British won and sent Cetshwayo into exile, but they then subjected him to official questioning as to the nature of his tyranny. They were convinced that the Zulu were far less civilized than the British and utterly ignorant of representative government or the rule of law. In this passage Cetshwayo responds to the questions of the judge, Sir J. D. Barry, at an official hearing in 1881 as the judge sought proof of Zulu barbarism.

144. As king of the Zulus, was all power invested in you, as king, over your subjects?—In conjunction with the chiefs of the land.

145. How did the chiefs derive their power from you as king?—The king calls together the chiefs of the land when he wants to elect a new chief, and asks their advice as to whether it is fit to make such a man a large chief, and if they say “yes” the chief is made.

146. If you had consulted the chiefs, and found they did not agree with you, could you appoint a chief by virtue of your kingship?—In some cases, if the chiefs don’t approve of it, the king requires their reasons, and when they have stated them he often gives it up. In other cases he tries the man to see whether he can perform the duties required of him or not.

147. In fact, you have the power to act independently of the chiefs in making an appointment, although you always consult them?—No, the king has not the power of electing an official as chief without the approval of the other chiefs. They are the most important men. But the smaller chiefs he can elect at his discretion. . . .

168. If you want to make a new law, to be applicable to all Zululand, how do you set about it?—The king has a discussion with the chiefs about it, and they give out the law, but he cannot make a law without their consent. He consults the chiefs and gives his reasons, and if they conclude to agree to it, it is the law, but he cannot make a law against the wishes of his chiefs. . . .

180. What are the duties of the petty [lower] chiefs?—They principally superintend work for their superior chiefs, and for the king. The larger chiefs send them out to look after men who are doing work for the king. . . .

183. The people are never consulted about either big or little matters? The only consultation is between you and your big chiefs in big matters, and between you and your small chiefs in smaller matters?—Yes, he has a voice in that; he can go to a chief and say it should be done in this or that way.

Source: Report and Proceedings with Appendices of the Government Commission on Native Laws and Customs, Cape of Good Hope Parliamentary Paper, G4, 1883, Part 1, 523–30, excerpted in William H. Worger et al., eds., Africa and the West: A Documentary History, 2 vols. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010) 1:108–9.

Question to Consider

What kinds of answers does the judge try to elicit from former king Cetshwayo, and what kinds of responses does Cetshwayo provide him? To what extent does Cetshwayo prove that he is different from European monarchs?