Religion and Politics in an African Chiefdom: The Mothowagae Secession Revisited by Leonard Ngcongco I Missionary contact with the Tswana reaches back to the first quarter of the nineteenth century, \\hen Robert M:>ffatestablished himself at Kudumane, anong the Southern Tswana in 1821. Fran his base anong the Batlhaping, M:>ffat visited the Ngwaketse capi tal, then at Kgwakgwe,during the rule of Makaba 1. ~7ithout quite realising it, M:>ffat's visit to Makaba, in 1824, sOWedthe first tiny seed of conversion towards Chris tiani ty arrong the Bangwaketse. By the 1840s agents of the LondonMissionary Society (LMS)were deploying the services of African teacher-evangelists at several of their mission stations and aSSOciated out-stations, where these religious pioneers were toiling away under the Occasional or regular supervision of their white superiors. 1 Thus \\hen the Tlharo teacher-evangelist SeUilii was in 1848 sent from KuduIraneto ....omarrong the Bangwaketsehis mission arrong then was probably not as strange as it might have appeared had M:>ffatnot visited there a generation or so earlier. Sebubi however established himself at Ranaka, fran \\here he paid recplar visits to other Ngwaketse settlements. Setubi's labours were soon to be reintorced by those of Tlhanelanq and other evangelists. 2 SOme of these had been trained ei ther at Lovedale in the Cape Colony or M:>rija in Lesotho before arrangements to provide train- ing had been nounted at KuduIrane. Even though these teacher evangelists operated at the frontline of Church's proselytizing carrpaign neither the church authorities nor traditional Tswana rulers accorded them sufficient respect and credit for the crucial role they were playing. 'The general attitude and opinion of senior church leaders was that the evangelist cadre constituted an inferior or even a half-baked rank in the church minis try, which of necess i ty, required the close super- vision as well as guidance of the European pastors. 'The traditional rulers on the other hand resented the seeming obstructiveness or was it obtuse"'" ness of fellow Africans, often fellow tribesmen, who appear€.d to them nell- bent on aiding and abetting foreign baruti in thpir mischiewus ....ork of undermining and destroying values that fonned the bastions of the life and cuI ture of traditional society. Nor could the evangelist irritant be atten- uated or corrpensated for by the prestige that the European missionary's semi- diplaoatic role accorded a ruler wi th such a residen t missionary. 'This article examines the rebellion of a M:>ngwaketse evangelist against his European supervisor as well as his chief and shows how the secessionist llOVanenttP.at he subsequently led was, for a time, taken over by a qroup of traditional aristocrats and used as a vehicle for opposing the ruling ~Si (chief) Bathoen. It was only later in the course of the struggle tween the secessionists and their kg:>si that the novanent took on the character of the nore traditional Ethiopianist schisms. 59 II Although Gaseitstswe placed no ol:6tacles before the evangelists who preceeded the first resident white missionary arrong the Bangwaketse, and even though he warmly welcomedJames Cood (as his grandfather Makaba II had oone to r-tlffat) and contriJ::uted significantly towards the success of his v.ork, he himself never submitted to ba.ptisro. His son and heir Batb::len, however, did become a convert and was Leptized into the IMSbefore he was installed ~ in 1889. As had happened in other Tswana chiefdoms,3the C9nversion ofaTeadina rnenber of the royalty (in this case the heir to the ~ himself) gave a trEm€J100US boost to the still small J::ut growing number of Christian converts in the conmm.ity. It also helped to increase the gulf between the traditionalists who resisted conversion on the one hand, and the Christian converts on the other. In the years imredi.ately preceding his installation as ;,<;psi Bathoen began drawing closer to the missionary James Good, and also began appearing to many, especially to a group of conservative Ngwaketse aristocrats and traditionalists, as the chanpion in the traditional court or klptla of the converts group in the ccmnunity . 4 This same powerful group of aris- tocrats, manyof whom were descended from Makaba II, r-tlleta and r-tlngala had earlier shownopposition to Bathoen beinS designated heir-apparent to his father Gaseitsiwe, and had pressurized the latter to "divorce" Bathoen's llOther and replace her, as queen, with the daucj1ter of Mathiba, one of these Ngwaketse aristocrats.5 But to their disappointment Bathoen's succession could not be prevented when his father died. Nevertheless to these traditionalists Bathoen's ties with the Christians were a source of alarm and an additional ground for resistance. Conscious of the existence of these stron<:rpockets of resistance to his rule Bathoen deliberately cultivated the support of the Church and strove to develop strong ties with British officials in the Protectorate. He also did his best to rraintain sound relations ,;-.riththe Bamangwato,Bakwena, as well as Tshidi-Barolong royal houses to all of which he was related through rrarriage.6 Bathoen's attachannt to the IMSand to the British nust have been strengthened 'uj his visit along with KharraIII and Sebele to Britain in 1895. It is also worth ranenbering that on that visit this chiefly trio had ~n chaperoned 'uj two LMSmissionaries Willoughby and Edwin Lloyd. It is perhaps llOre against this background of political intrigues within the Ngwaketse state rather than the influence of the sweep of a general wave of "Ethiopianism" in southern Africa that the r-tlthowagaesecession ought to be viewed. III '!he year 1902 was to witness the eruption of a church dispute arrong the Bangwaketse, which started as a sinple dispute in one congregation J::ut grew to take on the features of a secessionist llOvemmt that sinul taneously provided a rrask for incipient political revolution. '!he leader and cen- tral figure of the church dispute was a r-tlngwaketse teacher-evangelist of Kanye known as fobthowagaer-tltlogelwa. A memberOf the Ma-Isantwa m.?Phato or reginent of which Bathoen was the leader, Mathowagaewas probably between the age of 50 and 55 years when the dispute erupted. M:)thowagaewas trained at the Bible School at Kudumaneas a teacher- evangelist reo.een 1880 and 1884.6 At the end of the latter year he was appointed an evangelist at Kanye, a position W"iichit appears rombined the duties of assistant to the pastor as well as instructing the youth wtx:> attended the local mission scln:ll. He is thought to have been a popular teacher-evangelist, a brilliant and in many ways a progressive man,wtx:> was also well-versed in Tswana law and custan. He is also said to have been a powerful speaker, an assertive and rold, if rot a courageous, person. By 1893 M:)thowagaehad already distinguished himself in church activities, where Janes GJod's easy-going and sare.-.tlat lethargic manner of directing affairs provided excellent srope for the rather pushful, ambitious as well as capable evangelist. There is reason to believe that in traditional politics he was influential and that Bathoen relied nuch on his counsel.7 It seems likely that when the younger Edwin Lloyd, O::>OO's son-in-law cane to Kanye in 1889, his tighter oontrol over the Kanye church created a great deal of disquiet aIlOng the leading church nanbers accustorred to the easy-cping manner of James G:xJd.8 In the sane year Lloyd divided the mission school at Kanye into a non-fee paying Tswana-rrediumschool under M:Jthowagae, and one in \\hich English was taught and where the pupils had to pay six pence a IlOnth.9 Towards the end of February 1893, Lloyd's fee-pay- ing school had an enrolment of sixty-twJ pupils rot for roth the IlOnths of January and February he had oollected only the sum of sixteen shillings and ninepence in fees. Although Lloyd used twJ Kudumane-rrained IlOnitors at his fee-paying school, it became progressively unpopular with the result that by October 1893 enrolITa1t had dropped below thirty pupils and hardly any of those were paying any fees, while the enrolme:1t at MJthowagae's. school oontinued to climb as many pupils registered there instead of at the "Fee School". 10 In fairness to Lloyd it ought to re stated that he was rot responsible for the unpopular policy of introducing a "Fee School". The originator of that idea was the Reverend R. Wardlaw Thorrpson, Secretary for Foreign Mis- sions of the l14S.11 It appears very likely that it was th" rorden of fees that led to the decline of Lloyd's and the growth of MJthowagae's scln:ll. But given M:)thowagae's own charismatic qualities there is 00 reason to suppose that his popularity as a teacher could rot result in his "Free School" drawing nearly all the pupils from the rival school. To many people in Kanye, the setback experienced by the new "Fee School" project was probably seen as an exanple of MJthowagae's triurrph over Lloyd. ,Vhat is IlOre, MJthJwagae himself, who had l:¥ 1900 come to look upon himself as standing on a par with the youthfl11 LloYd,12 the failure of the English school !lUst have been a personal victory. Lloyd's strict enforcement of a resolution of the Bechuanaland District Comni ttee of IMS banning the consurrption of kgadi l:¥ church members, as well as the d:mbling of church dues, oontriroted a great deal to the unhappiness of many Kanye church merrbers with his strict and autocratic control over the congregation.13 Even before the war, plans were made to appoint a young Lovedale-trained teacher to take over the mission schcol at Kanye. Bathoen, who favoured the idea, pledged one half of the sal~ of the new teacher ....nile the ll1S were expected to raise the other half. 1 The young man in question was Kcpsikoi.:o Chelenyane, who return to Kanye from Lovedale was oonsiderably delayed l:¥ the Anglo-floer war then raging.15 As soon as Kc:psikom Chelenyane arrived in Kanye he was placed in charge of the mission sclxx:>l, r-'othowagaehaving been transferred in 1901 to the small out-station of Lehutu in the Kgalagadi desert.16 Indications are that r-'othowagaehad been arrong the outsroken critics of Lloyd's iron-handed control of the Kanye churdl. It accordingly seems difficult not to conclude that the decision of the Bechuanaland District Carrnitt.ee to transfer him to Lehututu was not inspired or prorrpted by Lloyd's desire to rarove a wilful and troublesane evangelist from his centre of popular suprort. In the event, transferring r-'othowagaeto Lehututu was tantarrount to sending him to Siberia. It is therefore hardly surprising that he should have declined to go, although he softened his refusal by pleading his wife's illness as an excuse for declining. 17 But Lloyd, who desperately desired to rarove Mothowagaefrom Kanye, had found a gxxi excuse. SO he prorrptly dismissed r-'othowagaeand paid him off in July 1901.18 Lloyd's dismissal of r-'othowagae, like his earlier suspension of the salary of the evangelist MQtlhanke Sera of Disaneng, was a blunder that upset rrany church rranbers in Kanye. MQthowagae' s leadership had earned him the respect and admiration of rrany Bangwaketse, while his wis<:bmand eloquence at the royal kgotla made him one of Bathoen's trusted advisers. The senior missionary at Kanye, James Good, had been aware of the traren- <:busrespect MQthowagaeenjoyed at Kanye, and despite MQthowagae's I:::unp- tiousness, oontinued to treat him with great consideration. Good and Mothowagaewere prorebly also men of the same age generation, and MQthowagae\\QUIdaccordingly be more prepared to take reasonable discip- linary action from "MQnareKwiti" than from the younger and not so tactful Lloyd. Further, there was an additional reason that Y.Oulddispose MQthowagaeto be IlDre tolerant to any cmstisement by Good. It was Gcod who identified and coopted him to the position of an assistant between 1874 and 1880, before sending him to Kudumaneto be trained as an evangelist. To the l::ulk of the Bangwaketse, Mothowagae's training spell at Kudumane was prol::ably looked upon as a training whidl \\QUIdmake of him a fully- fledged IlDruti or teacher like "l'k:>nareKwiti". They oould not and did not know of the different gradatiuns and ranks within the clerical cadres. There is al::undant evidence suggesting that MQthowagaehimself had by 1900 come to look upon himself as not just an evangelist rot a fully-fledged pastor on a par with sudl rren as Good and Lloyd.19 It Y.Ould, therefore, appear that MQthowagae'sown pretensions and his social standing aIlDng the Bangwaketse called for great tact or at least considerably more finesse in handling him than Lloyd seeID2dcapable of. To justify his own action, Lloyd deliberately played cbwn the seriousness of the discontent caused by his dismissal of MQthowagae. He suggested that IlDst of those who oom- plained were not full churdl rrerrbers rot "enquirers" whose real discontent was resed on the fact that they had not been too quickly admiHed to full dlurdl membership of the LMSoongregatimat Kanye; AcdJrding to Lloyd that insignificant group of maloontent oonverts gained notoriety by being reinforced by an equally malcontent group of headmen wro were planning rebellion against the dlief.20 This explanation, h::lwever, concealed more than it revealed. Those Bangwaketse who had beoome converts had been with missionaries long enough to have a general grasp of what the requirements were regarding admittance ~ full dlurdJ. rranbership. If they did OOlI'plainit is possible that changes mtroduced by Lloyd were too drastic or had not been adequately eJl~ wtn were only "enquirers" ~uld take such a stand during their period of preparation for rrernbership. Further, a petition sent by sane members of the Kanye IM3 congregation to London gave the sole reason for M:>thowagae's followers rebelling against Lloyd as the prohibi lion of the brew known as k adi.21 Needless to say, this explanation which gave the f point of view 0 the loyal merobersof the il1S was as one-sided as Lloyd S I version. Certainly, the expulsion of Mothowagaewas a very iIrportant factor,22 as was the increasing of church dues from five to ten shillings per year. Manyof these discontended church manbers stayed away fran the regular services of the il1S and attended t1Xlse of Mothowagae,wtn during the rest of the year 1901 held his own services at the royal kg::>tla, although he continued to regard himself as part of the il1S. As we had already roted, Bat:ll)en's supreme authority over his people was qualified by the efforts of a group of sub-chiefs and headmenYJho were always striving to increase their own power at the expense of that of the king. These robles had failed to prevent his autanatic succession mainly because of the relative mirority of the young pretender whom they wished to put up against Bathoen' s candidacy. Bat:ll)en had in the meantime strengthened his ties with the missionaries and the British administration and also wilt up a strong following anong the Ngwaketse Christian converts. 'Ihese alliances made Batloen a formidable ruler to toose who might wish to overthrow his rule. In addition, Bat:ll)en's popularity had been increas- ing arrong Christians and ron-christians as a result of his indefatiguable efforts to prevent any encroachrcents on Ngwaketse territory and property. His strong stand against unpopular or disadvantageous toundary awards, his visit to Britain with KharPa III and Sebele and his attatpts to shield his people against the burdens of hut-tax at a time \f.hen the Bangwaketse were still very depressed by recent disasters - all these policies had done lll.lChto marshall the support of nearly all his ~le. But some of Bathoen's reforms were irksome to manyof the traditionalists. For instance, he started the new year of 1902 by renewing his ban on the ancient initiation cererronies of rogwera and rojale.23 Thus, although the M,a-Lauregiment was fODl£'dwithout having undergone the rite of circum- cision, many of its nenbers had in fact fled to neighOOuring Tswana COIlIlU- nities where the rite was rot outlawed and had undergone cirCUIlCision there. These rites were too deeply enbedded in the cultural lives of the people to be lightly rdingto a petition of the King Edward Church addressed to the Resident Carmissioner, twenty sub-chiefs and headnen were listed as mem- bers of r-tlthowagae's church.'26 While Bathoen was synpathetic to t-bthowagae's personal grievance against Lloyd, he was nevertheless loyal to the 1M3and certainly could rot I::e e~ted to look with favour upon the fonnation of a rival churdl in his own capital. It thus appears that his ambivalent attitude towards the new churdl stemtEd l:x:>thfran his rea- lisation of the forces that were ranged behind r-tlthJwagae, as fran sane vague hcpe that the split was a transient affair that \ooOUld disappear after sore satisfactory set.tlement of problems in the Kanye IMS dlurdl. Thus his permission that r-tl'thowagaeconduct his services in the royal kgotla could have been partly a result of pressure exerted on hiIn by these powerful rel::el headrren,wOOseleader was thought to be Bathoen s own brother- I in-law, Tsina,27 and partly Bathoen's own belief that r-tlthowagae and his group had rot roved so far away from the IMS that they were beyond recon- ciliation with it. It was this belief on the part of Bathoen that made him take the initiative in get.ting IMS authorities to consider the JX)ssibili t¥ of ordaining r-tltho- wagae. It was also the realisation by the B.D.C. of the calibre of IreIl sup- p:>rting r-tlthowagae that nade than yield to Bath::>en's pressure to oonsider ~th:Jwagae as a candidate for ordination. '!his the B.D.C. meeting, sitting at Palapye in May 1902, agreed to do even though r-tlthowagae had broken away from the IMS and f01.ID.ded a separate churdl. According to IMS sources, t-bthowagae failed the test set by the B.D.C. and thus lost all claim to be considered for ordination. schapera is probably correct in stating that in addition to lacking "the necessary educational qualificaions" he was rejec- ted nainl y because he had been guil t:y of schism". 28 I1hile missionary wur- ces are silent on the nature of the test or the panel that examined r-tlth:Jwagae,he himself clairred that he was tested in subjects that the missianaires had never taught him: ••• I was given (a) Latin Book, Greek and Hebrew and asked to read the same, I infonned them that they had rot taught me this language in their Sdlools and they refused to ordain me. Clearly relying for his infornation on missionary accounts, Bathoen sinply stated that r-tlthowagae had failed everything, while Willoughby described him as an "igooran t fellow". 29 Until ~thowagae's failure to secure ordinatioo, Bath::>enhad been handling the M:)th::Jwagae group with nudl consideration. Once ordained, r-tltlowagae \\Ould replace LlOYdas the minister at Kanye. '!his \ooOUld destroy the vehi- cle for the disguised remlt that Bathoen believed the King Edward Church had beccme. It nust have been this realisation of the extent to whidl the dissident heaanen had captured ~thowagae s religious faction that roved I Bathoen to appeal to the Acting Assistant Camlissioner Jules Ellenberger for advice.30- \ihen Ellenberger ~ired of James Cood 'Itlat the real nature of the dispute was, his letter was answered by Edwin Lloyd whJ gave him the missionaJ:y version of the dispute. Obviously very sensitive and irritated by the kting Assistant Catmissioner's interest in the matter, Lloyd rEminded Ellenberger that the dispute was a pu..'"'el.ychurch natter.31 '!his was, of <:n.1rse, incorrect. Whatever it might have been Wlen it started, the r-tlt:hOwagaechurdl rovernent had by June 1902 ceased to be a purely church 64 affair. Still unable to !lake a realistic assesSIreI1t of the extent of the reli~:i!?us-curn-political revolt, missionaries were inclined to ~ hyper- sensltive ab:>ut what they deemed the unwarranted interest of secular authorities in the M:lthowagaeaffair. To reassure the missionaries the Resident COII1I1issionerin Mahikeng affirmed that purely church disputes fell outside the purview of cpverrurent.32 Bathoen, v.ho sought the advice of cpverrunent officials on h;)w to handle the M:lthowagaedispute, had been far nore perceptive than the missionaries ab:>ut the corrplex nature of the dispute. He knew that it was religious only to the extent that M:lthowagaestarted it in opposition to Lloyd, and on what looked like straightforward religious or church grounds. But he soon perceived that the number and calibre of people the new church attracted quickly changed its character turning it into a noverent directed nore against himself than gainst the I.MS. He saw that the King Edward Church was l:x:Jtha novenent to secure a definite African voice and leadership in church matters, as well as being a convenient vehicle for opposition and dissent. James Good was therefore not far off the mark when he described the M:lthowagaenoverrent as part of a wider novem:nt known as "Ethiopianism"; and represented a desire "to cast off the tutelage" in v.hich the Tswana had lived up to that noll'ent.33 lfuere Good was missing the point was in ascribing "Ethiopianism" in Kanye to the inIIUence wielded ~ migrant WJrkers returning from the Johannesb..1rgand Kimberley mines, as wpll as Tswana students at Lovedale v.ho brought back "the HOst WJnderful stories ab:>ut the churches and their retlxJds in the colony .•• the Ethiopians in par ticular" •34 Clearly, the causes of "Ethiopianism" amongthe people of Botswana were not radically different from those that led to the growth of that nove- ment in other parts of Africa. Arrongthe Bangwaketse th;)se causes were partly dissatisfaction with the manner in v.hich the teachings of the v.hite-directed LMSsought to destroy African values and custans through its assault on the very pillars of indigenous cuI ture - rain""1llaking, polygamy, levirate and sororate marriages, initiation (l:x:>th l:x:>gwera and l:x:Jjale) rites and so forth. Partly the Bangwaketse resisted the frustration bred ~ a radal exclusiveness v.hich made little or no provision for talented Afrir.ans in the normal operations of these mission churches. Finally the so-called Ethiopianism was sanetilnes caused ~ the high-handed manner with v.hich white missionaries treated their African congregations or the cavalier treatll'ent that young missionaries like Lloyd reted out to senior and respectable African leaders such as M:ltlanke and M:lthowagae. BatbJen himself did not wish to have anything to dOwith Ethiopianism. Less than four years before he had refused tWJ "Ethi~ians'" Seele and Mareko, permission to b..1ild a small church in Kanye. He had perInitted M:lthJwagae to preach at the kcptla only as long as he th:Jught the:-e was still rope of reconciliation through the ordination of M:lthowagaemto the pastorate of the LMS. Once this appeared irrpossible he had ordered M:lthowagaeto desist, b..1this order had been ignored. To ll'eet BatbJen half-way, the B.D.C. having declined to ordain M:lth:Jwagaefelt it should accede to his other request - nall'ely to transfer Lloyd fran Kanye. But Lloyd's very strong reaction to that decision,36 and a petition against the transfer of Lloyd signed ~ forty-six nanbers of the Kanye LMScongregation resul ted in the cancellation of the transfer. This letter also asked the Board of Directors of the LMSto send a deputation of minister Y.howere 65 thorouohly aCQUaintedwith the Tswana to investigate the religious dispute at Kanye.38 - Early in the following year, a oomnission of enquiry corrprising tw:> v.hite missionaries, who had served a long t:i1re anong the Tswana, was sent to investigate the dispute at Kanye and to prepare the way for a reconcilia- tion. The Bro..n-Willoughby oomnission did rot approach its task with an open mind. The conmi.ssion appears to have proceeded on the resis that M:>thowagae and his followers had defiErl the Mission and could therefore rot be heard at the same meetings as tlose of loyal or regular rranJ:;ersof the IJ.1S. Because Brown and Willoughby insulted the MJtlowagae party by refus- ing them entry at a rreeting held in the church on 'fuesday norning, 17 February 1903,39 the ~'k)thowagaeparty, in turn, administered a similar snub to the ccmnission rnanbers when they subsequently sent for them.40 Thus, when BrcMl1and Willoughby reported that Lloyd was rot to blame for the dis- pute at Kanye they had done so without hearing the case for the ~thowagae party. The blatantly partisan approach of Brown and v1illoughby drew a COIlplaint from Batheen that the comnissioners had "consulted one party and left the other party llnconsulted" despite their having asked hill'. (Bath:>en) to call /Ybthowaqaeand his followers. 41 Bathoen then asked for a different mis- sionary: To this the IJ.1S Secretary for Foreign Missions replied on behalf of the Directors that Batmen was wantonly interfering in church affairs, and reminded Bathoen that ro secular autlori ty, whether it be the chief of the Bangwaketse or the British Q)vernment, could rarove a missionary. 42 In a subsequent letter to TI1onpson,Batloen reported that the /Ybthowagae party had now taken the position that they had finished with the IJ.1S and v,(:mldrot rejoin it even if Lloyd were rffiOved from Kanye. Bathoen had, however, made it clear that ro other society \',QuIdbe permitted to establish itself in Kanye. This was bending over reckwards to retain good- IIJill and reassure the IMSof their virtually "established" posi lion in Ngwaketse country. In this way, Bathoen was taking care rot to break with the missionaries as a ~ even though he enphasized that Lloyd hirrself :,,(luldhave to be raroved. 3 This, Batloen reckoned, \',QuIdclear the way for reconciliation with the IMS and aCCOrdingly facilitate the ending of the schism. BathOen's corrments suggest that he had as his principal ooncerns rot only the division of Ngwaketse unity, rut also the dangerous menace to his own position as king. His apparent tendency to blow hot and cold over the issue of the raroval of Lloyo suggests his tremendous mental conflict and agony as he battled to keep the loyal supporters of the IMS and the dissen- ters happy. But towards the middle of the year 1903 it was beo::ming clear to Bathoen that the J'.bthowagaegroup had becate irreconcilably alienated: wha t was nore, the headrren in /Ybthowagaes church continued their poli tic.al I intrigues designed to supplant Bathoen with Kwenaetsile. Thus, although only t.hree nonths tefore BathJen had been insis ting that Lloyd \',QUIdhave to cp, when in August 1903 he learnt of the decision of the Board of Directors to transfer Lloyd to Barkly West, he expressed the opinion that that transfer \',QuIdmake ro differeroeto the split as the tw:> parties v.l'ere determined rot to te reconciled. 44 AOOuttw:> nonths later, Bathoen had aband::medatte:(pts to appease the secessionists over LlOYd'S position at Kanye. He rDW definitely retracted his earlier pressure to have him trans- ferred: 66 I beg to infom you that I have a missionary here at Kanye the ~ev. Mr E. Lloyd. And if you sent (sic) arother missionary ~t nust be clearly understood that he is rot rorning (sic) to Kanye rot to arother place. 45 Lloyd's letter of 3 September 1903 protesting against his transfer fran Kanye clairred that his continued stay there was desired by his deacons, the entire dlUrd1 as well as by Bathoen. Like Bathoen s letter of 27 August I 1903, it represented the religious dispute as having c:pne into a state of abeyance: Even the r-bthowagae party does rot cause the trouble it once did, as there is every prol::abili ty of its falling to pieces presently. Indeed, several of them have already returned to us. 46 If this slightly reassuring picture was correct at all, that IlllSt have been so only on the denani.national front. There was rothing to suggest that the political rrenace to Bathoen's position and authority was receding. On the contrary, Lloyd advised TlPnpson that: The Headmen\\ho have allied thffilSelves with r-bthowagae are conspirators v.orking against Bathoen, and they have selected Bathoen s own brother to be d1ief, and they have done this I under the cloak of relig ion. 47 The sd1eming of .the headrren in r-bthowagae's d1urd1 appears to have read1ed sud1 an intensity towards the end of 1903 that Bathoen was warned by l:oth Khama III and Sebele arout. lXJW the disloyal headrren were using M::>thowagae as a tool to achieve their own ends. It appears likely that they also counselled him to suppress r-bthowagae's churd1. Meanwhile r-bthowagae' s own bmptiousness and over-confidence, l:olstered by the support of the headrren, caused him to overreach himself, and thereby precipitate a collision between Bathoen and himself. For over a year Bathoen had been watd1ing M:>thowagaefrustrating all his efforts to bring arout reconciliation and end the disunity of the Bangwaketse at Kanye. Noting with oorrow M::>thowagae'sincreasingly obstreperous and insolent bearing towards himself, Bathoen gradually lost 1It1atsyupathy he had Soow.1 for r-bthowagae at the start of the sd1ism. The feeling of Illltual antipathy between these ThOmembersof the Ma-Isantwa reg:i.1rent reached a cliITax in September 1903. At a public prayer rreeting for rain held at the royal kcotla r-bthowagae is said to have stood up and toasted that he had stopped the rain the previous year and had bewitdled or cast a spell on all the efforts of the Bangwaketse to iuprove their lot. As a result, the Bangwaketse claims for conpensation for losses incurred during the Anglo-i3Oerwar v.ould all fail. r-bthowagae s pretensions anroyed I Bathoen: ~, the Bangwaketse, were very nuch hurt ••• at hearing that a tead1er has power exceeding that of God and of the ruler. I saw that r-btho-oa~e v.ould destroy the Bangwaketse by his actions and his v.ords.48 Bathoen further told Rarraeba49 that although r-bthowagae was an urordained teacher, he was dispensing holy camunion and performing l:aptism: "he is 67 oot afraid of anything". He conplained that r-tlthowagae was misleading many Bangwaketse wJ'¥:) were unaware of the fact that rrost of his activities were irregular. If he were penni tted to oontinue to live in Kanye, the Ban9Wal\.etse\oOuldeventually be like a people with:>ut order. "I say that he nust be rerroved from the village before he teaches evil to the Bangwaketse". Bathoen therefore appealed to the Administration because, he said, "I am a man in the hands of the Government ••• and I w:JUldoot like to cb anything of any inportance witrout Government knowing of it". 49 a On 26 October 1903, Bathoen surmoned a large pitso or general assembly of the Bangwaketse and told them he had decided to expel r-tlt:howagaefrom the Ngwaketse reserve because of his persistent defiance of his (Bathoen's) authority. r-tlth:JwagaehiIrself stated m an interview with Ellenberger that Bathoen accused him of having paid a clandestine visit to the Resident Comnissioner at Mahikeng and lodging a conplaint there against him (Bathoen.) 50 After Bathoen s decision to expel r-tlth:Jwagaefran I Ngwaketse countzy, the latter took refuge with the headman Makaba.51 Batl10en s decision to expel r-tltlowagae resulted in a great uproar in the I village; as SCfre of the sub-chiefs and headrren as well as other partisans of r-tlthnwagaeopenly synpathised with r-tlthowagae. That night many people oongregated at Makaba's ~otla and it was clear that Bathoen had little support. 'lhe hostile derronstrations of rrany Bangwaketse ~ed clearly seditious to Bathoen and a few of his closest supporters. It was even oonsidered that a guard be put to defend Bathoen at night, rot he himself turned dJwn the suggestion. Manypleas by several sub-chiefs and hea~ that Bathoen should forgive M:)thowagaewere turned Cbwn by the chief. 2 As Bathoen refused to be rroved by these intercessions and representations from the hostile robles, one of them, Seametso, aC<::alpaIliedr-tlthowagae to Gal:xJroneto request the intervention of the British Administration.53 As might have been eJCpected, Ellenberger sought the advice of the Resident C()IIll1issioner. Although these officers were inclined to support Bathoen, they were hesitant to do so if the dispute was of a purely religious cha- racter. The Resident COllInissioner stated: I don't care if a man is a fire \oOrshipper, a r-tlhametan or a Christian, he is entitled to his awn views - rot if he uses the fact of his religious belief to create disturbance in the tribe and as an excuse for disobedience of lawful authority, it cannot be allO\'.ed ••• If Bathoen turns out !>bthowagaebecause he differs from his religious views, he is, of oourse, wrong. If r-tlthowagae uses his religious belief as an excuse to disobey lawful au thori ty, he is wrong. 54 'Ibis was consistent with the position Ralph Williams had taken the previous year Whenhe told the B.D.A. that the Administration had 00 intention to interfere in strictly church affairs. Ellenberger therefore went to Kanye to determine the exact nature of the trouble there. During his interview With Bathoen, the latter catalogued the sins of r-tlthowagae. These included t-nthOwagae's unauthorised obstruction of Mabe, a r-tlngwaketse who came fran t-nrija in Lesotho, by preventing him teaching the scriptures to sane Bangwaketse at the royal kcptla and !>bthowagae's refusal to appear before 68 Bathoen ~ eJ(plain his behaviour even thouah Bathoen had sent four times for him. MJthowagae also refused to pay ~tax. SOne time back r-tlthowagae had l:x:>rrowed roney from Bathoen to have a wagon made for himself at Grah:rrrstown and was rrJW refusing to repay the loan. Then there was his uncalled-for and provocative declaration that he had stopped the rain and had bewitched the v.ork of the Bangwaketse. Finally, MJthowagae spoke to Bathoen in a rost disrespectful manner, and was treatL'1g him as an equal rather than as his chief.56 While it \\OUld appear from the foraping that Bathoen was making a cp;:>d case for a charge (If civil disobedience by M::>thowagae,he did rot press the dlarge home. While he regretted his people following M::>thowagae, who was misleading them, he also stated that his banishment of r-bthowagae had nothing to cb with religion. In the eyes of British officers, M:>tho- wagae's offence was rot sufficient to warrant the extreT'e punishment of banislunent fran the Ngwaketse reserve. Ellenberger acoordingly suggested his banislunent to an isolated part of Bangwaketse territory. All this was oonditional upon r-bthowagae apologising publicly to Bathoen and stating that he recognised him as his chief. Following very closely the advice gi ven by Ellenberger, Bathoen announced at a public gathering held on 11 N:Jvenber 1903, his decision to send M:>thowagaerot. "across the lxmndary" as he had orig.inally stated rot. to LekgoloJ::otlo. M:>thowagaenow displayed his thorough knowledge of Tswana law am custom. On the same night on ¥.hidl Bathoen proclaimed his banishment. M::>thawagae found his way into the hut. of Bathoen's rother, who brought. him to the royal kcptla early the next rorning. This, according to Tswana custom, left Bathoen with ro other option rot to parCbn M::>t:howagae, since MJthowagae had by so doing taken refuge in the belly of Gaseitsiwe.57 In a subsequent letter to Ellenberger, Bathoen explained that acoording to an a!1cient Tswana law an offender (who was not a nurderer) oould by run- ning into the dlief s hOuse be said to have taken refuge in the Chief s I I belly, from where he oould not be extracted. "As M::>t:howagae has clearly found out his fault he has rem into my House and that. only has saved him from being punished. "58 Thus through the skilful exploitation of ancient. Tswana custom, M:>th:lwagaegained a last. minute reprieve, and was allo~ to continue to live at Kanye. Bat.hoen's handling of MJt:howagaeis difficul t to understand if one for- gets his predicament concerning the rebellious nobles who were really the roving spirits behind MJthowagae. MJst of these men seened to be involved in the conspiracy to replace Bathoen with his younger brother Kwenaetsile. Thus to the Bamangwato and other Tswana watc.~ing the activities of M:>tho- wagae at a distance, Bathoen's ambivalence in dealing with the refractory "Ethiopian" evalgelist was baffling. In November 1903, a Tswana newspaper published in Mahikeng, printed a COI11leI1tary on the f.othowagae affair pur- porting to "The argmnent of the Bamangwato". It derounced ~bt:howagae on his own testillOny, as a wizard for claiming to have stopped rain, and warned that MJthowagae was leading a seditious rovarent that v.ould even- tually bring the sane kind of ruin on the Bangwaketse as similar rovanents in the past had brought on both the Bamangwato and Bakwena societies. '!he article ended with a veiled and gentle reproof of Bathoen for his inabilit)' to punish M:>thowagae. Turning to M::>thowagae,the article stated that had he been aIlOng the Bamangwato, they v.ould have taken him "round to those v illages (that he had bewitdled) and \«)uld have caused you to wash 69 yourself with bitter roots" .59 ArX:>ther article in the sarre organ address- ed itself to the follo\\ers of M:lthowagae,calling upon than to be a little llClrecritical in looking at his own teachings and reconciling these with the lpspel as it was contained in the scriptures. Accusing him of being a charlatan and a false prophet, the article concluded by addressing M:lthowagaein these tenns: Truly, if you speak in this way (and) you were arrong us, M:lkhalahari, we should place you in the sun, and would rub you with the rain-stopper's roots, ~til you kn>w that a rain-stopper is oot spared from pity or love. 0 The articles in Koranta were in fact saying that if the Bangwaketse did oot kn:M row to deal with a "false prophet" the Banangwato would show than how to 00 it. Early in 1904 the young pretender Kwenaetsile was reported to be dying of consunption. Dr Macrae wh::> was attending him held out 00 0Clpe for his recovery although he was of the opinion that he could linger a long time. At this tine, 1rohileon his death-bed, Kwenaetsile, \'A1o was the only nanber of the Ngwaketse ~al rouse to have actually joined M:lthowagae's church, returned to the Il1S 1 In January I.loyd had reported that twenty-seven persons had returned from M:lthowagaeJi2 Kwenaetsile's death occurred on 25 May 1904, his l:urial providing the final round in the long drawn~t contest between Lloyd and M:lthowagaefor the position of pranier cleric of the Bangwaketse.63 The deat.h of Kwenaetsile also rerroved the focus for the political intrigues and machinations of Bathoen' s opponents, as well as disposing of 1rohathad been a veritable Achilles heel for that king. M:lst of the dissident oobles were oot so vocal in their opposition and tended to rely on M:ltlowagae stirring up trouble on the religious side, 1rohileKwenaetsile was to keep the cauldron roiling on the political front. Thus the death of the young prince ar.d the terrporary silencing of MJthowagaethrew these oobles into cx:xrparative obscurity, until BatOOen's prograrrme of reform gave than fresh cause for rallying around M:lttvwagae. A letter written late in June 1904 described how dramatically Bathoen prarulgated one of these refonns. This was oone at a lecholo or me.eting of anred rren held outside Kanye on the veld. There Bathoen deoounced kgadi as foreign liquor, brought into the country fran the south: Three strangers came into our country long ago - t\\Q were rren, and the third was only a dlild. (1) The first man-stran- ger was called Brandy: him I sent away long ago. (2) The second man-stranger is called Khadi (madeof roney, sugar , golden syrup etc.): him I denounce as an enaT¥ today, on this eleventh of July 1904, and I herel::y drive him out of my country, as a dangerous enaT¥. The seretse with whidl you leaven the khadi IlUst all be brought to Ire that I micjlt destroy it with fire. (3) The third stranger is a harmless child called "Coffee". Him I find l'XJ fault with - he can rEmiin arrong us. Learn my people that khadi ceases today throughout my coun- try.64 70 Caning as it did after his recent renewal of his ban on initiation cere- nonies, the banning of kgadi was rot well-received by manyBangwaketse. ~i~a:'nt~t ~ising from the banning of kgadi and the renewal. of the ban on l.Dltiahon ntes was soon intensified by Batroen's levy of an education tax of Tho Shillings. This was to sul:6idise the costs of the school at Kanye, and to augment the Nowaketse educational fund which was being paid through i.l levy of one shilling since 1901. At f./bshupa the chief of the Kgatla-Mmanaana, Cotuamang, defied Bathoen's ban on initiation cerffiOnies by organising his own !:oqwera in 1904. At Kanye many Bangwaketse derronstrated their displeasure with Bathoen's latest reforms by going owr to f./bthowagae, who though a little nore cautious in his bearing towards the chief, had nevertheless continued to hold separate services. On MJth::>wagae himself, these reforms had an indirect influence. His novement appeartcd to fare best when the Bangwaketse were upset with affairs at Kanye. Kwenaetsile's death sears to have marked a turning point in the career of /Vbthowagae. Hitherto his efforts tended to b~directed !:oth towards oustina Lloyd from Kanye and conpellina rcliaious a~ political auth::>rities to rel, makil'lg it difficult for him to send a meaningful report to London. It is probable that James ('rrpromisethat "-OUldfacilitate reooncilia- tion with the schismatics. But ~en tok)thowagaeand a few die-hards (many returned after Lloyd's departure) refused to rejoin the IM>, rurrours spread that tobthowagae was in oontact with one Matolo, an "Ethiopian" at Taung in the oorthern Cape COlony.71 Bathom first accused the headIre1 who backed tobthowagaeof attelpting to bewitdl him and his s:xm Seepapitso. He stated that those responsible for bewitdling him were the sons of Makaba, ~leta and tobnaala, toqether with several ward-heads and even sane of his personal retainers were -part of the plot to destroy him.72 He acrordingly gave all those y,b) held ~o cattle from him the option of reoouncing tobthowagaeand the schismatic ITOvanentor surrendering the cat- tle under their care. Bathoen's last years were heavily l:urdened with the weienstill oould neither COIlpeInor persuade r-t:>th::Jwagae and his followers to return to the "established" church. An errergency meeting (letsholo) attended by. the Resident COitrnissioner Ellenberger was called early in 1910 to discuss the dispute. r-t:>thJwagaeand hiw followers declared thanselves unwilling 'to abanCbn their faith. ,,73 Batlx:>endied soortly thereafter. I t was therefore left to his son iU1dsuccesoor Seepapi tso to deal con- clusively with the problen that to him nust have seemed responsible for driving his late father to his untimely death. Seepapitso pronptly banned the ITOvanentfrom his chiefdan and banished r-t:>thowagae to the tiny hamlet of Lek<;plobotlo, in a renote corner of the Ngwaketse reserve. 74 NOneof his followers except !llBI1bersof his family were all~ to join him there. Thereafter, the secessionist ITOvementflickered weakly at a few ioolated centres and appears to have finally eJq)ired with the death of r-t:>th::Jwagae. IV In retrq>pect the facts of the r-t:>tmwagaesecession Cb not appear to con- front us with a classic case of "Ethiopianism", ~ich ex hypothesi should present a situation of African remIt. against European leadership. While it is true tha t r-t:>thowagae I s reml t could be said to have been promked by the relationship that subsisted between the younger Edwin Lloyd and him- self, he appears noi: to have resented the supervision of the older James Good and indeed seened qui te happy to accept him as his mentor. Also it is essential to remember that through::lUtMathowagae's conflict with the LMShe was striving for recoqnition as a fully fledged pastor within the LMSfold since he believed his own preparation and experience had equip- ped him for such a role. Thus his disqualification at ~at he considered a grossly unfair examination with the final judgement that he ~ulcl there- fore never be ordained nust have driven him into the arms of Matolo, par- ticularly after Seepapitso had banned his ITOvementfrom Ngwaketse country. case therefore appears to have been ITOreone of a struggle r-t:>tlx:lwa.gae's for independency of ~rship (during which for a time the prota<;pnists were skilfully manipulated by "extraneous" elenents ITOreconcerned with dynastic squabbles than with either religious independency or "Ethiopian- ism" per se. Given the long-standing rivalry between Batmen and his adversaries on the one hand, and also MJthowagae's personality ~ich was generally characterised by extrene intransigence one is talpted to ~nder ~ether in the situation then prevailing in Ngwaketse society one oould not still see the eruption of a r-t:>th::Jwagae-type secession without either an Edwin Lloyd or Janes Good for that matter. 73 FCXJIWIES 1. J.M. Chirenje, A History of IDrthern Botswana 1850-1910, London, '~sociated University Presses, 1977, p.202 2. L.D. Ngcongco, Aspects of the History of the Bangweketse to 1920, unpublished Ph.D 'Ihesis Dalhousie Universi ty, 1977, dlapter 4, passim; Chirenje, A History of Northern Botswana, pp.202-4. 3. ~., PP.196-198, 199-206. 4. Ibid., r.hapter 5, passim. 5. ~., pp. 297-298. Sa. Batmen's wife was Gag:>ang'#le a daughter of the Kwenaking Sechele and sister to Sebele. His sister Gasikete married Khama III. His paternal aunt Tshadinyana had been rrarried to MJntshiwa whose other wife was GadibJsanye, daughter of Sentlinfe Sebecp and aunt to Bathoen see E. Lloyd, Three Great African Chiefs. pp. 165-166; S.M. MJlana, Montshiwa: Barolonq Chief and Patriot 11814-1896) pp. 198, 216-217; Ngcongco, Aspects ••. , pp.278-279. 6. Before that, i.e., fran 1874 to 1880 MJthowagaewas an assistant under James Good. (See B.N.A., R.C. 10/11, MJthowagaeand others, "Petition of the King Edward Bangwaketse Free Church", dated 19 October 1903.) 7. See L.M.S., Box 50, Folder 1, Jacket B, for Bathoen's consultation with M:lthowagaeregarding the transfer of MJtlhanke to Kooi in the desert. 8. In 1893 Lloyd suspended the stipend of the evangelist MJtlhanke Sera of Disaneng on the grounds that MJUhanke al::sented himself for long periods from stations without. just cause. 9. Chirenje stat.es that. Lloyd's "Fee Sdlcol" did not. teadl English. (The !\lQrthern Tswana, p.209). In a letter to 'IhaTpson dated 21 February 1893, Lloyd described his scrool as an English teadlinq sdlool. (L.M.S., Box 50, Folder 1, Jacket B). - 10. L.M.S., Box 50, Folder 2, Jacket 0, Lloyd to Tb:mpson, 21 December 1893. 74 11. L.M.S., Box 50, rolder 1, Jacket B, Lloyd to'Ih:>npson, 21 Februaty 1893. At M::>shupa John Kesieran reported that there were IX) arrears at the one sch::lol \J1.ich was also a "Fee Sch:ol". 12. B.N.A., R.C. 10/11/1, Petition of King Edward Bangwaketse Church. 13. Schapa::a,"A Short History ••• ", p.20., L.M.S., Box 62, Folder 1, Kanye L.M.S. COngregation to Directors of L.M.S., London, 16 December 1902. 14. L.M.S. Box 56, Folder 2, Jacket A, Lloyd to 'lbaTpson, 23 May 1899. 15. L.M.S., Box 59, Folder 1, Lloyd to ThJnpson, 18 Januaty 1901. 16. Schapera, "A Short History ••• ", p.20. 17. Y'lhile Bathoen gave as a reason for M::>thowagae I s inabili ty to go to Lehututu the excuse that Mothowagae's wife was in poor health, he him- self stressed that Bathoen and the Kanye congregation wanted him to stay. 18. It is interesting that ...menin 1897 Lloyd was sent to Molepolole by the B.D.C. to act as locum tenens for the Rev. HowardWilliams, Lloyd refused to cpo No-one even amsidered dismissing him. (See L.M.S., Box 54, Fblder 2, Jacket B, Lloyd to COusins, 23 Septenber 1897). 19. B.N.A., R.C. 10/11/2, Evidence of M::>thowagae,"Petition of King Edward Bangwaketse Free Church" dated 19 October 1903. 20. L.M.S., Box 60, Lloyd to 'TI1cttpson,9 May 1902; also B.N.A., R.C., 10/11/1, Lloyd to Assistant Carmissioner, June 1902. 21. L.M.S., Box 62, Folder 1, Kanye L.M.S. COngregation to Directors of the L.M.S., London, 16 December 1902. 22. Lloyd admitted afterwards that M::>thJwagaes dismissal and replacement I by the young ooy trained at Lovedale, Kcpsikolx> Chelenyane, was a fundamental cause of his secession. (See L.M.S., Box 62, Folder 4, Lloyd to 'Ihonpson, 23 December 1903, ...mere Lloyd says of Kcpsikolx>: "He carne and replaced M::>tho-oa-gae (sic) in the school, and this was one of M::>tho-oa-gae's grievances".) 23. L.M.S., Box 60, Folder 1, Lloyd to ThJnpson, 15 January 1902. 24. B.N.A. R.C. 10/11/2. Evidence of M::>thowagae,"Petition of Members of the King Edward Bangwaketse Free Church", dated 19 October 1903, enclosed in Ellenberger to Ralph WilliamS, 31 October 1903. 25. L.M.S., Box 60, Folder 1, Lloyd to ThJnpson, 29th January 1902. 26. B.N.A. R.C. 10/11/3; the sub-chiefs and headrren listed were: Paul, Tsilw., Koke, Ratlhaudi, Boakgaro, Tlrori, Kcokodi, M::>remedi, Kgosiearen, Nakatlou, Rasepe, Kcorapetse, Kelailwe, M::>disenyane, Kganpu, Johanae, Loalp, MOncrolcmi, M::>nyenyane and Seana. 75 27. L.M.S., BOx60, Folder 1, Lloyd to R.W. Thorrpson, 27 January 1902. 28. Schapera, "A Short History ••• ", p. 20 29. Chirenje, 'Ihe Northern Tswana, p.250 30. B.N.A., R.C. 7/8, Bathoen to Acting Assistant Corrroissioner 12 June and 27 June 1902. 31. B.N.A., R.C. 7/8, Lloyd to the Acting Assistant Cornnissioner, 27 June 1902. 32. B.N.A., R.C. 7/8, Ralph Williams to B.D.C., 18 August 1902. 33. B.N.A., R.C. 7/8, James G:lod, Kenilv.orth, Cape, to Ellenberger, 20 June 1902. 34. Ibid. 35. L.M.S., BOx55, Folder 2, Jacket 0, Gc::xJd to Th:>rrpson,11 November 1898. On that OCcasion Bathoen told the "Ethiopian" representative, in the presence of ITodIlY Bangwaketse, that he (Batloen) was in the "Lontone". All he knew he had learnt from the "Lontone". 'Ihey had COIlE to his help y,hen spoilers wanted to take his oountry. The "Lontone" had taken him to England. He asked Vohether the "Ethiopians" oould do the same for him and ~is people. 36. L.M.S., Box 60, Fold er 1, Lloyd to TtDrrpson, 9 ~1aY1902. 38. L.M.S., Box 52, Folder 1, Kanye L.M.S. Congregation to Directors of the L.M.S., London, 16 December 1902. According to Chirenje there had been an earlier request J:y twelve members of the Kanye L.M.S. oongrega- tion claiming to speak for five hund red rrembers. (Chirenje, 'Ihe Northern Tswana, p. 252•) 39. See Report of Brown and Willoughl::¥, p.5, in L.M.S., BOx 62, Folder 1, ~rcil 1903. 40. Acoording to the Bmwn-+/illoughl::¥Report, Vohenthe a:mnissioners sent for M:>thawagaeand his people suggesting alternative places of rreeting then, the M:>thowagaeparty sent a message stating that they tharselves had ro particular wish to see the members of the cc.mni.ssion; rot if Brown and Willoughl::¥wished to see then they oould "follow them arrong the stones and go to MJthawagae'shouse" • This the corrmi.ssioners judged an "irrpudent rressage" and rrade ro further efforts to oontact them. 41. L.M.S., Box 62, Folder 1, Batheon to 'Iharpson, 19 February 1903. 42. L.M.S., BOx67, Folder 2, 'Iharpson to Bathoen, 28 Marcil 1906. 43. L.M.S., BOx62, Folder 2, Bathoen to Thatpson, 21 ~y 1903. 44. L.M.S. , BOx62, Folder 2, Bathoen to TtDrrpson, 27 August 1903. 45. L.M.S., BOx 62, Folder 4, Bathoen to TI1alpson, 23 October 1903. 76 46. L.M.S., Box 62, Folder 3, Lloyd to 'lb:Ilpson, 3 Septenber 1903. 47. Ibid. 48. B.N.A., R.C. 10/11/1, Bathoen to RaIlaeba, n.d. enclosed in Ellenberger to Ralph Williams, 31 October 1903. 49. Contrary to Troschel's view that "RaIlaeba" was one of BathJen's trus- ted headmen, he was in fact 0000 other than the Acting Assistant O:mmissioner, Lieutenant O.)lonel Jules Ellenberger. "Ramaeba" was the name by which the Tswana called him. (Cf. Truschel, Acrol1Odation, p. 168) 49a. B.N.A., R.C. 10/11/1, BathoE'n to Ramaeba, n.d. 50. B.N.A., R.C. 10/11/4. Evidence of M:>trowagaeat interview with tre Act ilg JI.ssistant COIm1i.ssionerheld at Gal:x:>rone on 30 October 1903. Moth.owagae's subnission on this allegation was corrol:x:>rated by Ellenberger wOO was present at that Ireeting. 51. Chirenje incorrectly stat.es that Makaba was "one of Bathoen's brothers". ('!be lItJrthem Tswana, p.258). He was oot a brother rot an uncle of Bat:h;)en as l1e was the son of Set1hanke, then Siele, later he sent Thata-ea-ooo and finally Gabatshwane. All these messengers \wagae,rot he refused to appear tefore the cnIef:" 56. B.N.A., R.C. 10/11/9, Evidence of Batmen, intery ew with the Assistant Conmissiooor held at Kanye on 10-12 Novanber 1903. 57. B.N.A., R.C. 10/11, RalphWilliarns to Ellenberger, 20 November 1903. 58. B.N.A., R.C. 10/11/10, Bathoen to Assistant CamU.ssioner, 14 Novenber 1903. 59. Translation fran Koranta Ea Becoana, 25 rbvembPr 1903, in B.N.A., R.C. 10/11. 60. Koranta Fa Becoana, 2 December 1903. 61. L.M.S., Box 64, Folder 1, Lloyd to 'lb:Jlpson, 3 Mard1 1904. 77 62. L.M.S., Box 64, Folder 1, Lloyd to Tnonpson, 23 Jan. 1904. 63. L.M.S. , Box 64, Folder 2, LloYd to 'Ihorrpson, 25 June 1904. 64. L.M.S., Box 64, Folder 3, Lloyd to Tncrnpson, 22 July 1904. 65. Ibid. 66. L.M.S., Box 67, Folder 1, Bath:)en to Thorrpson, 8 February 1906. 67. Chirenje, The Northern Tswana, p.266, citing Report of Deputation to Kanye, July 1906. II did not see this report). 68. L.M.S., Box 68, Folder 3, HowardWilliams to Geo. Cousins, 27 March 1907; Box 68, Folder 4, \\1illiams to 'IOOnpson, 24 Nov6T1ber 1907. 69. L.M.S., Box 68, Folder 3, \.;illiams to Cousins, 4 February 1907; Box 71, Folder 1, \>Jilliams to Thonpson, 24 February 1909. 70. L.M.S. Box 69, Folder 3, Williams to Th:mpson, 5 August 1908. 71. B.N.A., R.C. 10/11/26, Seepapitso to Resident Conmissioner, 28 June 1911. According to Parsons it was Matolo wto ultimately ordained Mothowagaeat Taung in 1911 into t.he Ministry of the Native Independent Church (see N. Parsons, "Ethiopianism Arrong the Tswana in the 19th and early 20th Centuries" in Societies of SOuthern l\frica in the 19t.h and 20th Centuries, University Lanoon (ICS), 1970, pp. 1-12 72. "Kgosi Bathoeng ••. a sirrolola go dira mabatla, a bolelela morafe fa o nTlDlaya, e bile batlhanka ba gaClWe". (Schapera, "Bangwaketse", Ditirafalo, pp. 147-148.) 73. L.M.S., Box 71, Folder 1, Williams to Thorrpson, 24 February 1909. 74. Schapera, Migrant Labour and Tribal Life, pp. 28-29. 78