What was the reason for the Bambatha Rebellion?
In 1906, Zulu-speaking Africans in the British province of Natal rose up against the colonial administration in what became known as the Bhambatha Rebellion, also known as the Poll Tax Rebellion. So what was the What was the reason for the Bambatha Rebellion? This event was crucial for the history of South Africa in two primary respects: It was the last major uprising organized within the remnants of precolonial African political structures, and it played a role in convincing white people in Natal and in Great Britain’s three other southern African colonies to form the Union of South Africa.
The uprising was led by the Zulu people, but it was also participated in by people from other southern African nations. For the Zulu people themselves, the revolt served as evidence that Zulu ethnic identification was becoming more widespread. This was demonstrated by the fact that many individuals who had previously rejected the Zulu monarch suddenly gathered behind him. The decision made in 1905 by the administration of Natal, which was dominated by European settlers, to impose a poll tax of £1 on all adult males, with the exception of those who paid “hut tax” or were under terms of indenture, was the primary immediate cause of the Bhambatha Rebellion.
In actuality, this meant that the levy had to be paid by every adult male resident in Natal, with the exception of married non-Christian Africans and indentured workers from India. Due to the fact that the tax was not adjusted according to income, it was highly regressive and had the greatest impact on low-income households. However, it was not merely the implementation of the tax that led to rebellion on the part of Africans; rather, it was the fact that the tax was adopted at a time when most Africans were experiencing an economic crisis. This was caused by a number of different things.
To begin with, a growing number of European landowners were evicting their African tenants and opting to farm the land on their own rather than continue to rent it to those individuals. Second, as a direct result of these evictions, the few portions of land that were set aside for Natal’s African majority were severely crowded. Third, Natal was struck by a string of ecological catastrophes in the 1880s and 1890s, including droughts, locust plagues, and, worst of all, an epidemic of the cattle disease rinderpest in 1896–1897 that wiped out more than 90 percent of the colony’s cattle herds.
These events occurred during the time period. Fourth, the South African War, also known as the Anglo-Boer War, took place between 1899 and 1902, and it was the cause of an economic boom in Natal. However, this boom was soon followed by a catastrophic economic downturn. In 1904, the government of Natal made the final decision to allow white settlement on more than 2.5 million acres of land that was previously held by Africans.
This decision made the situation on the African reserves much worse. The capacity of Africans to pay the newly imposed tax on top of the existing taxes was severely hindered as a result of all of these reasons. While it’s possible that these economic pressures had a role in setting the stage for the uprising, it’s more accurate to say that they were the direct cause of it.
In point of fact, up until the very last day before the uprising, the same causes had only been successful in turning Africans against one another, which resulted in constant squabbling in rural areas of Natal. In addition, the uprising required a driving force and a uniting ideology, which emerged in the shape of allegiance to the ousted Zulu monarch, Dinuzulu.
As soon as Dinuzulu was freed from government prison in the year 1898 by the British, millenarian stories about him began to spread among Africans living across the entirety of Natal. According to rumors, Dinuzulu was planning a rebellion to overthrow the colonial authorities and drive the white settlers out of the country. The rumors not only called on the Africans of Natal to band together and be ready to take part in the uprising, but they also spread information about the supernatural forces that Dinuzulu intended to deploy in order to achieve these goals.
It was somewhat ironic that many of the same communities that revolted in Dinuzulu’s name in 1906 had fought for the British against the Zulu king in 1879, contributing to the British conquest and dismemberment of the Zulu kingdom as a result of their service to the British. In 1906, Dinuzulu led a rebellion in the name of his son, Dinuzulu.
The introduction of the poll tax served as a great focal point for the growing ideology of unification via devotion to a rebellious Zulu monarch, and it gave this ideology an ideal center. Immediately after the tax was promulgated and especially once tax collection had begun, young men all around the colony spontaneously engaged in protests filled with aural and visual references to the Zulu monarch. These demonstrations occurred almost immediately.
In most locations, chiefs and other elders made an effort to bring their younger males under control. On the other hand, there was no lack of African patriarchs eager to lead the young men into revolt in the Thukela Valley and the Natal Midlands. Both of these regions are located in Natal. The uprising developed through a number of distinct stages.
Between the months of January and March of 1906, there were several disturbances at poll tax collecting meetings. These demonstrations culminated in the murders of two white constables in the Natal Midlands on February 8, 1906, and the imposition of martial law the following day.
After what appeared to be the successful conclusion of the uprising, Chief Bhambatha and the people who followed him in the upper Thukela Valley engaged in a limited guerrilla battle with the colonial forces beginning on April 3. The only thing that put a stop to Bhambatha’s insurrection was his death during the Battle of Mhome Gorge on June 10, which also led to the defeat of his supporters. This was followed by another uprising in the lower Thukela Valley that was headed by Chief Meseni and lasted from June 19 to July 11.
Last but not least, colonial forces spent the rest of 1906 eradicating little pockets of what they regarded to be resistance on the principle of “shoot first, ask questions later.” This final stage of the battle was the worst of the whole conflict in terms of the number of African losses, with 3,000 to 4,000 African rebels being killed as opposed to 24 Europeans and 6 Africans fighting on the colonial side.
Ironically, in 1908 a colonial court exonerated King Dinuzulu of any responsibility for instigating, organizing, leading, or fighting in the Zulu uprising. Despite the fact that Natal’s white settlers were successful in putting down the rebellion and inflicting far more damage on themselves than they themselves sustained, the rebellion was still successful in persuading many whites across South Africa that they would need to band together in order to preserve white supremacy.
It was impossible for white settlers in South Africa’s four settler-dominated colonies (Natal, the Cape of Good Hope, the Orange River Colony, and the Transvaal) to have much confidence in their prospects against future African revolutions since each colony was too tiny and too weak.
Also, the majority of white South Africans did not believe that they could count on the British government to save them from their predicament, since they believed that the British government had an excessively tolerant attitude toward black South Africans. Therefore, white lawmakers in South Africa came to the conclusion that the best way to pool their resources was to join the Union of South Africa in 1910.
Also Read: The South African Anglo-Boer War 1899–1902
