229
« on: October 16, 2008, 09:57:17 PM »
The way I see it is that the difference btwn the Xhosa and Zulu is the centralisation and decentralisation of power. In the Zulu kingdom power was centralised, Shaka was the paramount chief aka king aka ikumkani aka isilo samabandla. With the Xhosa's it was otherwise, they had chiefs not a king, tribes not a nation. Perhaps the Xhosa was once one tribe but grew and in its growth many tribes were formed instead of one big nation thus came the Amabomvana, AbaThembu, AmaMfengu etc. Others adopted the Xhosa language and thus became Xhosa. E.g. The Bhaca were are Zulu exiles (amaBhaca) who settled near the Mzimvubu river and then adopted ways of living similar to those of the Xhosa tribes. An example of a consequence of this is that Xhosa tribes do not necessarily practise the same traditions or the same traditions in the same way. AmaMpondo for example originally did not get initiated, infact even now very few do. This is a consequence of how any tradition start (another long schooling for ya'll cats which I won't go into). The AmaBhaca as a consequence of them being originally Zulu did not practise initiation (apparently Shaka burnt it). There are even different dialects of Xhosa, check how the Mpondo speak it for example.