The mfecane was for most of the twentieth century regarded as a historical certainty for the South African public and the Apartheid government, as well as for historians here and world-wide. The mfecane had achieved the permanence of a paradigm and a dominant discourse, as it was accepted equally by settler, liberal, Afrikaner, Africanist and Neo-Marxist historians. This certainty was shaken when Cobbing’s mfecane critique appeared in 1988, with which I concur. This study examines how mfecane history was written from the first published articles in mid-1823 until Walker coined the concept mfecane in 1928. This thesis undertakes a journey through a host of published works, books, pamphlets and articles in journals, magazines and newspapers, from which a number of conclusions emerge. The mfecane narrative was developed over a period of a hundred years in the English language by almost exclusively white, English-speaking male amateur historians and ethnographers. Their occupations, age, ideology and level of education differed markedly, but they shared one European ideological value, the discourse of the European “Image of Africa”, which regarded Africans as the negative Other of their own positively perceived society. This was a culturallyshared view of Africans, which formed the baggage in the mind of all writers examined, and accounts for the mfecane narrative’s negative attitude towards Africans. Furthermore, mfecane history was influenced by racism and the use of literary devices such as the gothic novel and the romance. Authors writing in the 1823 to 1846 period on events which had taken place in the “blank space” beyond the Cape Colony, which most of them had never visited, laid the basis for the mfecane narrative. It constituted a set of geographical or ethnically focused, separate accounts. These separate accounts focused on the themes of Shaka’s creation of the Zulu state, including his expulsion of several chiefdoms; his depopulation of Natal and the flight of the Fingo to the Transkei; the path of destruction of the Hlubi and Ngwane during their flight from Natal via the greater Caledon Valley area to the Transkei; the incorporation of the Kololo and other Sotho chiefdoms into the Mantatees - due to pressure from the invaders from Natal - who subsequently laid waste the Free State and Transvaal as far as Dithakong, where they were defeated; the further depopulation of the Transvaal by the Ndebele during their escape from Shaka; the flight of Moshoeshoe and his people to Thaba Bosiu where he built up the Sotho state, with Moshoeshoe being the only positive figure in this history. This multi-narrative was thereafter repeated without any critical thought by all authors examined until in 1885 Theal created a Zulu-centric, geographically integrated mfecane narrative whereby he integrated the previously separate accounts into one coherent whole - a whole which was so much more than the sum of its parts, but so far without a defining name. That was provided by Walker in 1928 when he coined the Xhosa neologism, mfecane. The Theal, Cory and Walker racist mfecane was thus bequeathed as the mfecane to the rest of the twentieth century.

The interpretations of the war of 1835 and the identity of the Fingo that were presented by the English settlers, have remained the mainstays of all subsequent histories. They asserted that the war of 1835 was the fault purely of 'Kaffir' aggression, that it was controlled by Hintza, the paramount chief, and that the ensuing hostilities were justifiable colonial defence and punishment of the Africans. The arrival of the Fingo in the Colony, it was claimed, was unconnected with the war. It was alleged that the seventeen thousand Fingo brought into the Colony in May 1835 were all Natal refugees who had fled south from the devastations of Shaka and the 'mfecane', and who had then become oppressed by their Gca1eka hosts. Both of these 'histories' need to be inverted. The 'irruption' of December 1834 was not unprovoked Rharhabe aggression, but the final response to years of the advance of the Cape Colony. Large areas of Rharhabe land had been expropriated, and their cattle regularly raided. Their women and children had been seized and taken into the Colony as labourers. The attacks were carried out by only a section of the Rharhabe on specific areas in Albany. The damage caused, and stock taken, was vastly exaggerated by the colonists. The Cape Governor, D'Urban, and British troop reinforcements arrived in Albany in January, and the Rharhabe were invaded two months later. D'Urban later invaded the innocent Gcaleka, took cattle, wreaked havoc and killed Hintza after he refused to ally with the Colony. The Fingo made their appearance at this moment. They were not a homogenous group. There were four categories within the term: mission and refugee collaborators (who were given land at Peddie and had chiefs appointed), military auxiliaries, labourers, and later, destitute Rharhabe seeking employment in the Colony. Only a small minority of the total Fingo were from Natal. The majority of the Fingo appear to have been Rharhabe and Gcaleka women and children, captured by the troops during the war and distributed on farms in the eastern districts to ameliorate the chronic labour shortage. Thus, instead of the year 1835 being one of great loss for the eastern Cape, as claimed by the settler apologists, it was a catalyst to the economic development of the area. All Rharhabe land was seized, to be granted as settler farms. Well over sixty thousand Rharhabe and Gcaleka cattle were captured and distributed amongst the colonists. The security threat of the adjacent Rharhabe and the independent Gcaleka was removed. And a large colonial labour supply was ensured.