Introduction to Bacon & the Art of Living
The story of bacon is set in the late 1800s and early 1900s when most of the important developments in bacon took place. The plotline takes place in the 2000s with each character referring to a real person and actual events. The theme is a kind of “steampunk” where modern mannerisms, speech, clothes and practices are superimposed on a historical setting. Modern people interact with old historical figures with all the historical and cultural bias that goes with this.
narrative
Drums of Despair
Johannesburg, December 1889
In 1889, riding transport between the Colony and Johannesburg allowed me to forge a bond with the disappearing natural world. My interactions with the people of the land allowed me to study humans up close. Both nature and the human mind offered two different pathways to connect with the eternal. Nature seemed more “honest” as it was grounded in reality, whereas religion was the product of our imagination. Still, I was interested in what shapes our “beliefs” and discovered that it is more than daydreaming. Beliefs carry our hopes and dreams and often shield us from our greatest fears.
Reports from the Church
Daniel Jacobs, whom I had the pleasure to host at my campsite, was a dedicated student of history. An author and a historian with a special interest in church and family history. He always travelled with his books. They were his closest companions. I became obsessed with tracing a story back to the beginning. I do this with the story of bacon, but back then, I was fascinated by the first contact of Europeans with the people of southern Africa.
I was fascinated by how the Europeans and Africans interacted. Daniel Jacobs told me about this time in the Cape Colony from the perspective of the Dutch Reformed Church. This was important since the DRC was the dominant church in South Africa. It was the most important Boer church, and its voice would be, if anything, biased toward the Boer settlers. If it paints the early colonists unfavourably to the indigenous tribes, the report has great credibility.
The night we camped together, he read me some of his poetry, and when we spoke about the early history of the Colony, he fetched a book on the Dutch Reformed Church. He read me sections from it. I was fascinated by an entry from 1795.
The DRC recorded how “the colonists had been gradually spreading over the lands occupied by the Hottentot (1) and Bushman(1) tribes.” The church commented that “these, the Hottentot and Bushman, were too weak to make resistance and looked with no satisfaction on the arrival of the whites in their midst. As the latter were taking their lands, they retaliated by driving off cattle, and the Boers, taking up their long-barreled hunting guns, exacted bloody and cruel revenge. The colonists, ground down and oppressed by those in authority, spread themselves thus, heedless of the threats and admonitions of their government. They did not spread more widely to the north and east because, along their northern line, the arid deserts skirting the Orange River offered little temptation to transgress the boundary. At the same time, at the eastern extremity, they were fronted by the warlike and independent Amakoze Kaffirs (1), who, far from allowing any inroad into their territory, commenced a system of aggression upon the colonists.”
The “matter-of-fact” commentary by the Dutch church in Africa startled me. It was the stories about this eastern frontier that my dad would later tell me in detail, which convinced me that the Dutch church was wrong in painting the indigenous tribes as the aggressors. The real aggressor was the white people, as he was in the rest of the land. I knew the facts – how it happened, but I now started to discover why it happened. I uncovered the thinking driving the action and how generational seeds of war are created through cruelty, born and perpetuated through human beliefs that were generated to deal with violence perpetrated on it by others.
On the Eastern frontier of the Cape Colony, “the farms . . . lay very remote from one another, and between them lived the Hottentots (1) in their miserable kraals and smoky huts,” Daniel continued. “They still went unclothed, only covered with a kaross. Under pain of severe punishment, the governor had forbidden that any Hottentot (1) should be enslaved. Still, it was frequently done, as slaves proper were dear to purchase. Many Hottentots (1) and slaves ran away from their masters, particularly if badly used, and formed themselves into bands to rob and murder and make the outlying farms unsafe.” (M’Cater, 1869)
The earliest colonists showed little respect for Africans. I was shocked to learn that a hunter could, in later years, apply for hunting permits for animals, which could include permission to hunt and kill Khoi or Bushmen.
The Frontier in the East
The savagery of the English, like the Europeans, knew no bounds! Whenever I say this, I stop myself to add that many English were fierce opponents of slavery and brutality towards indigenous peoples, motivated by the English Church. We can never forget that. Similarly, slavery has been part of the African culture, especially in West, North and East Africa, as it was part of almost every preceding civilisation. It was by no means a Western phenomenon, similar to violence in general. The history of Africa is replete with inter-tribal cruelty, which was a general human affair and seems especially cruel when one side had guns and the other speers.
Slavery was a general practice for the Boers. Oom Stefanus Jordaan, whose farm I once visited, told me that the continuation of the practice of slavery in the Transvaal was the spiritual motivation for the English to annex it and for the Anglo-Boer war of 1880 and 1881. (2)
Even in my lifetime, visiting Boer farms in the Transvaal left me with a bitter-sweet taste in my mouth, and I could see that the attitudes of the farmers were steeped in a long tradition of oppression and destruction. On the one hand, these people were the warmest and heartiest people I knew. Rugged, industrious, and hard working with a faith that almost moved mountains. On the other hand, I was angry to see the little black kids indentured by people like the Jordaan’s because they were caught on their farms or captured when the Boers raided native villages or bought as “black ivory” at auctions like you would trade cattle. Slavery was alive and well in the independent Boer republics even after the Anglo-Boer War, and the treatment of black people in this way was a source of great anguish for me. It was and could never be right that any person treats another with such cruelty and disdain. This knowledge was one of my earliest childhood memories, the horror I felt when I saw people being mistreated, and I knew that it did not bode well for the future.
The amaXhosa
In few other places in our land did the savagery of the English find a greater expression than in the eastern frontiers of the Cape Colony. The indigenous people they encountered here were the amaXhosa. The Xhosa nation never adopted the monarch as a powerful, centralizing figure, such as the Zulus from Natal. He was always viewed as the nation’s figurehead in the Xhosa tradition. The king, for example, does not appoint the chiefs. The people appoint them. When new chiefs secured the support of his people, the king would formally appoint them. In the same way, even the kingship was secured after a struggle between the possible heirs to the throne. The monarch would settle disputes and declare wars. The king ruled by the council of his chiefs.
The Xhosa developed a system called segmentation, which allowed the chief’s more aggressive and ambitious sons to depart and carve out an existence away from the ruler’s house, called the Great House. This was often the case with eldest sons from the Right Hand House, a Xhosa invention to give status to the second favourite wife’s children, referred to as the right-hand wife and the accompanying Right Hand House. In this way, sons could splinter off their father’s house, establish new chiefdoms, and remain part of the amaXhosa.
The Colonial expansion to the east directly conflicted with the Xhosa kingdom. The shadowy figure of Phalo set his Great Place from where the tribe would be ruled up to the west of the Kei River. The struggle for dominance between his sons would set the stage for another brutal war against the Cape Colony on its Eastward Expansion.
Two dominant tribes emerged (3), split by the Kei River. To the west of the Kei River was the amaRharhabe, and to the east, amaGcaleka. As far as foreigners are concerned, they are all part of the amaXhosa. Minors ruled both regions, and when they grew up, old scores had to be settled with other chiefs and, more importantly, with the Cape Colony.
The Reply of the amaXhosa
It would be the stories of the frontier wars in the East of the Colony that would provide me with the clearest picture of what the invasion by the colonists did to the psyche of the locals. It became my most vivid example of the development of the mental landscape in people’s minds called religion. The two rules on either side of the Kei River would gather around them religious leaders with opposing views of the white man and divine narrative. It would be a story repeated in the Anglo-Boer War, and countless wars to follow where one side seeks to live under the oppressor and the other fiercely opposes any oppressive rule. For one group, oppression leads to radicalisation and to others, views of moderation and peace through compromise. My interest was in what happened in the thinking of the two groups and their spiritual leaders.
Even in the Cape Colony, these two political and religious positions existed. I spoke to my dad about the Jordaans’ and what I learned from Daniel. He told me that the Boers religion justified them in their eyes to “leave” the Colony where they felt marginalised and treated unfairly and trek to the promised lands where they had, according to the belief of many, the right to dispossess the heathens (as they saw them) who occupy it. It seemed as if they had their religious beliefs forever, but here, in the case of the amaXhosa, I could see the progression of a god concept and how it morphed almost in front of my eyes.
It was the actions of the Boers and the English in particular which caused the development of a theology among native tribes which does not bode well for the future. Like the Jews developed their Messianic theology in slavery, and the Apostle John penned the book of Revelations under intense persecution by the Romans, so the soul of the black African, desperately trying to make sense of the rape of his culture and the persistent onslaught upon his existence, found solace in their deep spirituality which was progressed to bring hope. In so doing, the drums of desperation and despair would be heard for generations in this magnificent land.
The Cruelty of the English and the Faith of the amaXhosa
My dad loved telling stories. As I learned, a story must have a beginning, middle and end. My dad’s story began with the arrival of a new leader for the Colony at the Cape of Good Hope, Lord Charles Somerset, the second son of the fifth Duke of Beaufort, a direct descendant of King Edward III of England. He arrived in Cape Town on 6 April 1814 as the new governor. Emotions ran high on the eastern front of the Colony, preceded by four bloody wars with the amaXhosa as the Colony expanded and continued to dispossess amaXhosa land. As Summerset arrived, war was again looming on the eastern front. To stabilise it, he first sorted out matters with the Boers. After a small Boer uprising was put down and the ringleaders dealt with, believing that he firmly entrenched English supremacy and their new rule over the Dutch, by 1816, he turned his attention to the amaXhosa.
In Summerset’s estimation, he had two options for dealing with them. He could either completely conquer the amaXhosa and rule over them as subjects of the Colony, or they had to be driven beyond its borders. The amaXhosa continued to raid farms in areas that previously belonged to them. Somerset, from his English- and Eurocentric perspective, believed he could “civilize” them. He looked towards the missionaries to teach them improved agriculture and a more peaceful Christian existence. My dad told me Somerset remarked to Earl Bathurst that through these interactions, “civilization and its consequences may be introduced into countries hitherto barbarous and unexplored.” My dad, as a follower of Alexander von Humboldt, did not share Somerset’s English and Euro-centric view of the superiority of their culture and had great respect for the sophistication of the indigenous peoples and their technology, which, according to him, was above all, more in balance with the natural laws governing our world.
In the end, Somerset chose intimidation as his first direct engagement with the amaXhosa as he tried to end their cross-border raids. He arranged an audience with the chiefs who ruled to the west of the Kei River, Ngqika and Ndlambe, with some minor chiefs. So, I became familiar with two iconic figures in the life of the amaXhosa in King Ngqika and Prince Ndlambe. Somerset incorrectly assumed that they speak for the entire amaXhosa nation and were ruled by two houses since the time of Phalo, the son of Tshiwo, the son of Ngconde, son of Sikhomo, son of Nkosiyamutu, son of King Xhosa. Since the time of Phalo, there has been a Great House under his son Gcaleka and a right-hand house under his son Rharabe.
Conflict was not restricted to Africans against Europeans. It was Rharhabe who crossed the Kei River with several followers who fought a bitter war against the Khoi in the area over land and cattle and eventually killed their king, Hinsati. He negotiated the sale of land for his tribe from the Queen, Hobo, between the Keiskamma and Buffalo rivers.
Summerset staged the meeting with Ngqika and Ndlambe as a theatre-like production intended to intimidate. He was present with his soldiers in full arms while the chiefs had to leave their soldiers behind. Somerset sat on a chair while the amaXhosas had to squat on the floor. Ngqika was the senior chief present. Ngqika was the grandson of Rahrabe or the son of his great house. This gave him the rightful claim to the amaXhosa throne! Still, he could not make binding agreements with the other amaRharhabe chiefs in the Xhosa tradition. Ngqika tried to explain this to him, but Somerset wanted none of it. He lost his temper and, with gifts and threats, coerced Ngqika into an agreement that the chief could not enforce. Confident that he solved the problems of the Eastern Frontier, Somerset returned to Cape Town.
There was another reason why Ngqika was the wrong horse to back in peace negotiations. In 1794, he attacked the great house of Gcaleka to the east of the Kei River. Hintsa, who was only 5 when his father died in 1794, was imprisoned by Ngqika, and by this time, he came of age and turned out to be a good and popular leader. Under his leadership, the Great House of the amaXhosa reestablished itself and intended to assert control over the chiefdoms west of the Kei. Of course, this meant settling a score he had with Ngqika, and he naturally supported Ndlambe as the chief of the amaRharhabe. This support from Hintsa and the new support he received from his powerful son, Mdushane gave Ndlambe great courage. The other encouragement he received was the support he got from a powerful war doctor, Nxele. In a sense, everything I have told you about so far is only background information to set the context of this remarkable man who would profoundly influence the religious life of the amaXhosa. The gifted and spiritual Nxele would become my eyewitness account of the development of religion and the mental images that bind cultures together.
The Gospel According to Nxele
Nxele was “spiritual”, even as a child. The great scholar Tisani, a friend of my dad, says about Nxele that he “was a solitary, mysterious child, often wandering off by himself. When he grew older, Nxele lived in the bush for extended periods. He fasted there, and on occasional visits home, he refused food because, he claimed, it had become unclean during preparation through the sins of his people.” (Tisani, 1987) Early on in his life, he was already recognised as a diviner who called out the sins of his people.
He led the mourning ceremony after Chief Rharhabe and his son Mlawu died. Long before he learned about Christianity, he was a spiritual leader, at least in the same league as the Missionaries he would later encounter. His creativity would prove him to be not only on the same level but superior to them in his natural ability and perception of the power of the divine narrative.
These innovations of Nxele came in the context of a bitter war with the Colony. He experienced the threat of the Colony to his people on many levels. He started meeting the men Somerset relied on to bring about a peaceful British takeover, the English missionaries. He stayed with Chief Ngquika at Joseph Williams’s mission station for a week, where he was exposed to elements of Christianity and its messengers. From the start, there was tension between Nxele and the missionaries.
Nxele could see through the missionaries’ intentions and still take the good out of their message. He started to use concepts that he was exposed to by the missionaries, and so he preached against witchcraft, theft, adultery and blood-shedding, decidedly Christian themes. At one point, he chastised Chief Ndlambe for having more than one wife. He was not opposed to the total teachings of the missionaries, and as a result of his influence, the missionaries were accepted among the amaXhosa.
He was able to identify the fault lines, not only in the Christian system of belief but also in the inconsistencies in the lives of its evangelists. At the heart of the missions of the whites was a belief that they were “better”. Their message, their God, their culture, their language, their music, and their laws were in their mind “better”, and in their view, the Africans were inherently inferior.
It disappointed Nxele greatly! While he respected them for their spirituality and their pursuit of the good in humans, they did not reciprocate in attitude. The missionaries saw him as inferior to them. The “we alone are right” and “we are better” attitude of many Christians is something that I find odd to this day, contrary to the heart of their message. Nxele’s respect for the Christian message and his disappointment in the messengers is something that I would experience myself in the years to follow. His profound disappointment resonates with me.
He correctly saw the missionaries as equally zealous to proselytise the amaXhosa to the English culture and customs as much as to the gospel of Jesus Christ. In a direct response to the desperate plight of the amaXhosa in the face of the brutality of the English and the Boer, Nxele expanded on the belief system of the amaXhosa. From his deep spirituality, and no doubt, to give hope to the afflicted and try to make sense of the brutality perpetrated against them, he progressed their theology. He taught that there were two Gods beings, Thixo and Ndaliphu. According to his teachings, Thixo is the God of the Whites and Mdalidiphu, is the God of Blacks. Mdalidiphu is superior to Thixo, and the world is the battleground between the two – the age-old struggle between good and evil.
Nxele’s theology taught that Mdalidiphu would prevail against Thixo and punish him and his sinful followers. Nxele’s next progression reminds me of the sermon on the mount of Jesus when he said, “You have heard it taught of old, but I say to you. . .” In other words, I now give a new law, becoming a lawgiver as the son of God. Nxele did something similar when he said to the amaXhosa, “you have heard it said of old, but I say to you. . .” He, too, became a lawgiver. According to him, Tayi was the son of God and in an extraordinary move, like Jesus, he proclaimed himself as the son of God when he taught that he was the brother of Tayi. According to him, Tayi was killed by the white people, and for this, they were thrown into the sea. They emerged from the sea in search of land, the abantu abasemanzi. Nxele was, therefore, the agent of Mdalidiphu and his son, and it was he who would drive the white man back into the sea. His teachings were remarkable and powerful to a nation where the fabric of its society was being assailed on all sides.
One can see the comfort that his message brought to people who were dispossessed from their lands and brutalised in every way possible. The hope it inspired in the hearts of young and old reminds me of the hope the Messianic prophecies brought to Israel in exile in the land of Babylon. The fact that one people could inflict such suffering on another to precipitate a shift in theology stands as a testament to the cruelty of humans and, at the same time, the resilience of the human spirit, which can carve out hope amidst the most desperate situations! It speaks to the brilliance of Nxele! It also showcases a cultural device that oppressed people used, probably from the earliest time when the first cognitive and conscious humans roamed Africa, in which the human mind developed mythology to give hope amid desperate circumstances. It connects us with the universal consciousness and allows us to look beyond our immediate circumstances. This is the exact same device that sprang Christianity itself, and still, at this junction in the east of southern Africa, it was Christianity who brought about this unspeakable oppression.
A Gospel of Peace or Eternal Struggle
If we now juxtapose the position of Pretorius and the fundamental Calvinism of the Boers who saw the land before them as a gift of God to be taken and from which all who do not serve their God must be driven with the teachings of Nxele, the clouds of war which I saw from the actions of the Boer and the Brit, becomes drums of war which declare the certainty of a bloody future. Locked up in the beating of the drums was a plea for recognition and humanity.
My dad did not have contact with tribes from the north and could not know their theological leanings. Still, he told me that he would not be surprised if the same fundamental religious developments were taking place in the black consciousness across the region as proud owners of the land, setting them up, in the most fundamental way, against the colonial people and their drive to disposes the African tribes politically, culturally and in terms of land. Whenever I brought up the history of brutal attacks of Voortrekkers venturing into the interior by local tribes, my dad’s response was always the same. “What did they expect? How would they respond to invaders into their lands?” My dad had only harsh words for Voortrekker icons. Still, he reserved his harshest criticism for people like Summerseat and later Rhodes as the enemy of humanity and examples of the most wicked humans.
The supernatural world had failed to deliver, and the amaXhosa faced two options. Either they had to rise up against the white invaders with the help of the divine, or they had to submit themselves to the new order as preached by the missionaries who laboured among them.
Two Roads
In the world of the amaXhosa, Ndlambe was recognised as the leader of the chiefs to the East of the Kai River, and he had the support of the powerful Nxele. However, each Rharhabe chief had the freedom to choose his spiritual counsellors; in reality, they did not all agree with Nxele. Chiefs chose councillors who mirrored what path they favoured. This was nothing sinister or to be frowned upon. It was custom, and truth be told, in line with how these matters were handled in Europe. Not that this matters as some higher standard, but it must be said for Europeans who would frown on this, forgetting their history! It was the practice that the spiritual counsellor would limit his dialogue between the chief and the supernatural to what the chief was willing to accept.
The two rivals Ngqika and Ndlambe represented two opposing choices to the nation. Ngqika appointed Ntsikana as a counsellor who was a Christian convert. His message was one of peaceful coexistence with Europeans through submission. Ndlambe, on the other hand, had the independent-minded Nxele, who did not see himself as subservient to the Christian Missionaries, who was longing to see the awakening of black identity and prophesied that the amaXhosa would prevail against the white man. These notions were fundamentally part of the being of Nxele, as we have seen from the theology he preached.
Nxele, patronised by Ndlambe grew in political power and wealth. He encouraged his adherents to, as it were, “go forth, multiply and fill the earth.” Interestingly, Boer leaders in later years would likewise encourage their people to have many children to strengthen the Boer numbers. Nxele taught that he would bring back to life the black people who had died and their cattle. He prophesied about a long and prosperous future for his people, built upon resisting the white invaders of their land!
Nxele was useful to Ndlambe in building support from other chiefs against Ngqika. Ngqika was married to Thuthula, Ndlambe’s wife whom he abducted, and Nxele preached against him as an adulterer and their marriage as an incestuous relationship. This served the purpose of Ndlambe well.
In contrast to this was the theology of Ntsikana. He was driven by a vision he had to preach the Christian message in isiXhosa using Xhosa imagery and traditional forms of music. He used the image of God as a cloak that protects all true believers, and the way to peace was by submitting to his will. Initially, he approached Ndlambe to be his patron, but he wanted none of it. It was after this that he turned to Ngqika. Ngqika never converted to Christianity and never had a sizable following. Still, Ngqika saw his teachings in line with his view of cooperation with the white colonists and appointed him as a counsellor. Ntsikana, in line with his theology, encouraged him to seek an alliance with the British. Ntsikana passed away in 1821, and his small group of followers were entrusted to the care of the British Missionaries.
When one thinks about the two views, radicalisation on the one hand and strategic compromise on the other, it is interesting that the same two views would later develop among the Boers during and following the Anglo-Boer War.
I discovered that not all good stories need to have a beginning, middle, and end. It depends on what you want from the story, and if you have what you want, sometimes it’s good to leave it there. So, it is with this story. My intention is not to retell the story of the war that followed. It is the development of the Black contentiousness in response to colonial aggression, which was the point my dad wanted to convey and the fact that informed my decisions about my future. It also taught me the valuable lesson that our religion exists only in our minds. It is our creation and as much a part of our culture as our language and technology. Without us, it does not exist. As such, it has no permanency. It is not fixed but ebbs and flows with the tide of human affairs.
Seeds of War on African Soil
Seeds of war were germinating in the soil of Africa. The exploits of the invader and the resister alike were being calcified through their religious belief systems. In a world where neither the white colonists nor the black people would disappear or annihilate the other, it signalled a long and bitter future of deep mistrust, hatred, and bloodshed. I predicted that true peace would not come as long as the traditional Afrikaans church represented most of the white population. That the time would have to come when a new religion must take hold, which is not focused on annihilating and dispossessing and killing, but where a positive message of hope and possibilities would prevail. I could well imagine a time when many will turn their back on a religion based on differences and what it is “against”. When others will not be demonised for being different and when respect will be mutual. This would signal the start of a truly reconciled future where both black and white would live together as humans and recognise the power of unity and freedom for all, represented by a new faith!
My Time to Play was Over
I knew my time was up to crisscross this vast land, and I had to seek out other opportunities. Apart from the nature of mental constructs and culture, I started to see science as a particular cultural development built upon a completely different set of presuppositions and an altogether more productive worldview. Science would help me understand that life is evolving, changing, and progressing!
I am comfortable with the image of science as many rivers feed into the ocean of truth, running down many different hills. These hills are African, Chinese, American, and European. Every culture on earth contributed to science. Science is the new religion that many turn to, and as much as it is also a construct of the human mind, the outcome of the entire enterprise is “better.” The one aspect of culture that I could wholeheartedly ascribe to was science. So began one of the most thrilling adventures of discovery!
One day, I embarked on another trip to the Transvaal from Cape Town. This would be the trip where a most fortuitous event would occur. A problem leading to a meeting would lead to a plan that would result in the rest of my life. On this trip, I met the most interesting Boer from Potchefstroom, Oscar Klynveld.
Notes
1. The words “Hottentot”, “Bushaman”, and “Kaffirs” were used in the original publication and are repeated for the sake of accuracy. Today they are recognized as derogatory terms, and the use of the term Kaffir is prohibited by legislation.
2. An article setting out the case for the First Anglo-Boer War of 1880/ 1881 and the continued annexation of the Transvaal; published in The Times (London, Greater London, England), 22 Feb 1881, page 9.
3. A short introduction to some of the key players in the drama will set the stage. Gcaleka inherited the Phalo’s Great House with Rharhabe as his Right-Hand son. When Phalo passed away in around 1775, Gcaleka was the heir of Phalo’s Great House. Rharhabe was his right-hand son. In an ensuing battle for the throne, Rharhabe lost to Gcaleka and the former moved west of the Kei with his followers. The white Colonists would later call this region Ciskei. The region where Phalo resided with Gcalekas Great House later became known as Transkei.
When Phalo died, Khwawuta succeeded him. West of the Kei, Rharhabe was killed in battle in around 1782 along with his heir, Mlawu. Mlawu’s son, Ngqika became heir apparent, but since he was still underage, his uncle, Ndlambe, was appointed until Ngqika was old enough to rule. Ndlambe was the second son of Rarhabes Great House and Mlawu’s full brother. Back to the east of the Kei River, Khawuta died in 1794. The heir in line as chief of the amaGcaleka was his son Hintsa, who was also to be the ruler of the amaXhosa. Councillors would rule in his place till he came of age. This means that minors ruled both houses east and west of the Kei.
Reference
Laband, J. 2020. The Land Wars. The Dispossession of the Khoisan and AmaXhosa in the Cape Colony. Penguin Randon House.
M’Cater, J.. 1869. Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa. With Notice of the other Denominations. A historical Sketch. Ladysmith, Natal. W & C Inglis.
https://www.sahistory.org.za/people/makhanda-nxele
(c) eben van tonder
Join us on Facebook
