{"title":"Chieftaincy, the State, and Democracy: Political Legitimacy in Post-Apartheid South Africa","authors":"R. H. Davis","doi":"10.5860/choice.47-7109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chieftaincy, the State, and Democracy: Political Legitimacy in Post-Apartheid South Africa. By J. Michael Williams. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2010. Pp. viii, 282; maps, bibliography, index, list of abbreviations. $65.00 cloth, $24.95 paper. \"One of the most vivid political reminders of the apartheid past, the institution of chieftaincy\" (p. 1), has maintained its legitimacy in a country where the ruling African National Congress (ANC) has dedicated itself since 1994 to eradicating that past. J. Michael Williams explores how the \"conflicting worldviews about the nature of authority and the right to rule\" (p. 2) between chieftaincy and the post-apartheid state have produced an inevitable struggle about political legitimacy. To understand how this struggle plays out at the local level, he focuses on three chieftaincies in KwaZulu-Natal in order to \"tell the stories of real South Africans dealing with the everyday struggles that exist in the postapartheid dispensation\" (p. 31). Utilizing \"the multiple legitimacies framework,\" he argues \"that even though both the democratic state institutions and the chieftaincy seek to exercise exclusive political control in the rural areas\" (p. 19), neither is able to dominate. Instead, the outcome is a \"syncretism of authority relations\" in which \"the different sources of legitimacy overlap\" (p. 19). Having introduced his overall argument in the Introduction, Williams uses the next six chapters to understand how and why the chieftaincy in each of his three study areas remains \"a central pillar to the local populations\" (p. 38). The second chapter, \"The Binding Together of the People,\" examines chieftaincy in historical perspective and how through the changing circumstance of colonial and apartheid rule the principle of the unity of the community through the chieftaincy persevered. This was in large part due to the chiefs and izinduna (\"headmen\") learning \"to selectively invoke particular principles and ideas in different circumstances\" (p. 79). The third chapter \"examines the national debates concerning the chieftaincy in the 1990s\" (p. 80), and the official integration of the institution into the new constitutional order, which resulted in the creation of a mixed polity. With the passage of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act (TLGF Act) in 2003, the ANC seemingly came to recognize \"the unique qualities of the chieftaincy and that it indeed occupies a space distinct from the state or civil society\" (p. 106). The next chapters focus on the local level to gain insight into how the TLGF Act was largely reactive to events unfolding from the early 1990s. …","PeriodicalId":45676,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AFRICAN HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":"44 1","pages":"141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"45","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AFRICAN HISTORICAL STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.47-7109","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 45
Abstract
Chieftaincy, the State, and Democracy: Political Legitimacy in Post-Apartheid South Africa. By J. Michael Williams. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2010. Pp. viii, 282; maps, bibliography, index, list of abbreviations. $65.00 cloth, $24.95 paper. "One of the most vivid political reminders of the apartheid past, the institution of chieftaincy" (p. 1), has maintained its legitimacy in a country where the ruling African National Congress (ANC) has dedicated itself since 1994 to eradicating that past. J. Michael Williams explores how the "conflicting worldviews about the nature of authority and the right to rule" (p. 2) between chieftaincy and the post-apartheid state have produced an inevitable struggle about political legitimacy. To understand how this struggle plays out at the local level, he focuses on three chieftaincies in KwaZulu-Natal in order to "tell the stories of real South Africans dealing with the everyday struggles that exist in the postapartheid dispensation" (p. 31). Utilizing "the multiple legitimacies framework," he argues "that even though both the democratic state institutions and the chieftaincy seek to exercise exclusive political control in the rural areas" (p. 19), neither is able to dominate. Instead, the outcome is a "syncretism of authority relations" in which "the different sources of legitimacy overlap" (p. 19). Having introduced his overall argument in the Introduction, Williams uses the next six chapters to understand how and why the chieftaincy in each of his three study areas remains "a central pillar to the local populations" (p. 38). The second chapter, "The Binding Together of the People," examines chieftaincy in historical perspective and how through the changing circumstance of colonial and apartheid rule the principle of the unity of the community through the chieftaincy persevered. This was in large part due to the chiefs and izinduna ("headmen") learning "to selectively invoke particular principles and ideas in different circumstances" (p. 79). The third chapter "examines the national debates concerning the chieftaincy in the 1990s" (p. 80), and the official integration of the institution into the new constitutional order, which resulted in the creation of a mixed polity. With the passage of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act (TLGF Act) in 2003, the ANC seemingly came to recognize "the unique qualities of the chieftaincy and that it indeed occupies a space distinct from the state or civil society" (p. 106). The next chapters focus on the local level to gain insight into how the TLGF Act was largely reactive to events unfolding from the early 1990s. …
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of African Historical Studies (IJAHS) is devoted to the study of the African past. Norman Bennett was the founder and guiding force behind the journal’s growth from its first incarnation at Boston University as African Historical Studies in 1968. He remained its editor for more than thirty years. The title was expanded to the International Journal of African Historical Studies in 1972, when Africana Publishers Holmes and Meier took over publication and distribution for the next decade. Beginning in 1982, the African Studies Center once again assumed full responsibility for production and distribution. Jean Hay served as the journal’s production editor from 1979 to 1995, and editor from 1998 to her retirement in 2005. Michael DiBlasi is the current editor, and James McCann and Diana Wylie are associate editors of the journal. Members of the editorial board include: Emmanuel Akyeampong, Peter Alegi, Misty Bastian, Sara Berry, Barbara Cooper, Marc Epprecht, Lidwien Kapteijns, Meredith McKittrick, Pashington Obang, David Schoenbrun, Heather Sharkey, Ann B. Stahl, John Thornton, and Rudolph Ware III. The journal publishes three issues each year (April, August, and December). Articles, notes, and documents submitted to the journal should be based on original research and framed in terms of historical analysis. Contributions in archaeology, history, anthropology, historical ecology, political science, political ecology, and economic history are welcome. Articles that highlight European administrators, settlers, or colonial policies should be submitted elsewhere, unless they deal substantially with interactions with (or the affects on) African societies.