A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Arts in fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the Department of History at the University of Zululand, 2000. / The policy of the Natal Colonial government towards amakhosi was overtly hostile. In 1843 the British forcefully took over a large territory, which formerly belonged to kwaZulu, from the Voortrekkers. They renamed their newly acquired land as Natal. Three years later a Boundary Commission was instituted with a clear mandate to demarcate boundaries. The results were very unfavourable to the African people in Natal. Fertile land was given to white people, while Africans were crowded into eight land barren magisterial districts. This meant that the Africans were deprived of land to live, plant and graze then-livestock. It also meant the introduction of foreign administration, customs and religion to amaZulu. Furthermore it meant that African people were converted into a cheap labour force for whites in the territory which historically belonged to them. This foreign rule greatly demolished amaZulu system of administration. Amakhosi, the institutions which formed the core of amaZulu bottom-up system of administration, were highly disregarded. In an attempt to run kwaZulu without any cost and responsibility, the British government implemented its indirect rule policy in the kingdom. Here hereditary leadership was replaced by the British appointed amakhosi. As the description points out, the latter paid allegiance to the colonial government. To ascertain that laws promulgated by the Natal government were implemented in kwaZulu, a hierarchy of white officials was introduced over these appointed amakhosi. These officials were granted powers to appoint and demote amakhosi. Furthermore they had powers to confiscate lands and to define and re-difine boundaries. Following the defeat of amaZulu in 1879 by the British government, kwaZulu was further divided into thirteen "Chiefdoms". The 1879 Settlement dealt a tremendous blow to hereditary amakhosi. The British tried to neutralize amakhosi who were loyal to the Royal House by exalting respected men in the former kingdom, abanumzane and complete strangers to the position of ubukhosi. The main objective was to divide and rule the kingdom. This policy successfully worked for the Natal Colonial Government. The results were civil wars and faction fights. The kingdom witnessed a prolonged civil war between the royalists, supporters of the Royal House, and the loyalists, supporters of the Natal Colonial Government. The loyalists strictly enforced their rule over the supporters of the Royal House, while the latter fiercely resisted the imposed order and were calling for the return of the hereditary and traditional amaZulu leadership. The government responded by supporting their appointed amakhosi against the supporters of the Royal House. As long as African people were fighting and killing each other, the Natal Colonial Government remained assured that a strong and united force against it would not be formed. It argued that if the African people in kwaZulu were divided, it would be easier to rule them. AmaZulu who were crowded in the reserves were also righting each other in endless wars in an attempt to get more land. In the process livestock, crops and property that belonged to their perceived enemies were severely damaged. The governor, who had powers to intervene, was not prepared to do this. Fighting and killings continued. In 1910 when the whites only Union Government was formed, the aspirations of the African people were ignored. Today the South African Government is still struggling with the inherited policies of the Natal government towards amakhosi. And the solution lies not only with the government but with all the role-players.

Includes bibliographical references (leaves 72-79). / The following study is an ethnographic exploration into young people’s entangled experiences of health and illness in relation to both HIV/AIDS and traditional forms of healing. The research employed a creative, didactic methodology based around a series of workshops conducted with two non-governmental organisations based in Grahamstown’s peri-urban townships: The first, Siyapumelela, maintains a focus on youth and HIV/AIDS; the second, Sakhuluntu, is a cultural group aimed at keeping young people off the streets. The argument begins by challenging the dichotomous relationship that is maintained between Modern Scientific Medicine and traditional forms of healing and calls for a dual standard system in which both epistemologies can be free to operate according to their own medical standards. The study explores young people’s therapeutic environments and tracks, in particular, how young people talk about and represent HIV/AIDS. HIV/AIDS is discussed as a concept metaphor; a domain term that orients a person towards areas of shared exchange and meaning. It is clear that most young people have a well-informed biomedical understanding of HIV/AIDS, yet metaphorically, they see it as a dangerous and destructive force; an uncertain threat in the world. The research poses the question as to why young people continue to put themselves at risk of contracting HIV by exploring the social environments which many young people are subject to – environments that are often characterised by extreme social structural violence. The argument examines the nature of social structural violence as it plays itself out in the everyday lives of the participants and identifies the kinds of challenges that many of them face on a day-to-day basis. Due to fragmented avenues of support and conditions of domestic fluidity, many young people from structurally violent communities are left with feelings of vulnerability and insecurity. Alongside experiences of social and structural insecurity, young people also harbour a sense of spiritual insecurity that stems from the dissolution of the ancestral cult as a result of the historical, yet persisting, fragmentation and reorganisation of the African family unit. The research discusses a form of spirit possession known as Amakhosi that young people engage in in order to (re)gain a sense of security and protection from forces beyond their control.