During the same War took place the Holkrantz massacre referred to in a former chapter. Owing to the tribe (Baqulusi) which carried out the massacre being known to be intimately associated with the Zulu royal house, credit for the achievement was regarded as attaching principally to Dinuzulu as head of the house. The massacre created a profound impression on Natives in general; it revealed new and unexpected possibilities.
The attitude assumed by him when questioned by the Government for allowing messengers to come and see him about the poll tax and the pig-killing order can be readily understood. He practically said: "You allowed me to come back, but gave me a position not in keeping with my rank. This, Natives at large, have begun to see. Although my jurisdiction is limited to my particular ward, and such fact is well known, it is impossible for me to prevent people coming to see me." When Sir Henry McCallum spoke to him at Nongoma in 1904, he was distinctly instructed to report the arrival of people from tribes other than his own. These instructions he frequently disobeyed, and such disobedience was subsequently admitted by his induna, Mankulumana, as well as by himself.
There is another aspect in regard to the man which should not be lost sight of. The question arose many years ago as to whether the Chiefs of Zululand were prepared to surrender the status conferred on them by Sir Garnet (afterwards Viscount) Wolseley, in order that Cetshwayo should become Paramount Chief. On the Chiefs in question being approached, several objected in the strongest terms, among them Zibebu and Hamu. The Zulus regarded it as impossible to serve a King who had been conquered by another race, and whose restoration was on the condition, inter alia, that the regimental system should be done away with, and his jurisdiction confined to territory reduced by about a third of its original size. This opposition to his father or his becoming Paramount Chief, is what was always uppermost in Dinuzulu's mind, and what it was ever his greatest care to break down or remove. The long-continued warfare (1883 to 1887) between Cetshwayo (and, later, himself) and Zibebu took place for no other reason than that the latter had refused to acknowledge his father's and, therefore, his own authority. It was in consequence of this attempt, vigorously carried on as it was after formal assumption of the administration by the Queen, that Dinuzulu was arrested, tried and convicted of high treason, and banished to St. Helena. On coming back, he realized the futility of waging war as a means of attaining his object. The problem then was: How am I, by adopting means to which the European Government can take no reasonable exception, to induce the great mass of the Zulu people to become unanimous in the proposal of my being appointed Paramount Chief? Here, as we believe, is the motive for his sedulously promoting the development of his influence in the extraordinary, irrepressible and obscure manner outlined above.
It can, therefore, be seen that he found himself ere long in a serious dilemma. His position has, indeed, always been recognized as difficult. But, owing to being a Native, and therefore living out of touch with the European community, the nature and intensity of his embarrassment could not be realized as completely and as vividly as they were by him and his immediate followers.
And yet at the beginning of the Rebellion he stood in a singularly favourable light as far as the Government was concerned. The Commissioner had, as is commonly known, implicit confidence in his loyalty; he lost no opportunity of supporting the Chief, repudiating every allegation and calumny in the most vigorous manner. The earnest and determined way in which Dinuzulu was defended by this officer excited the admiration of all who observed it.[339] By his ready response in paying the poll tax, as well as by protestations of loyalty, coupled with an offer to take or send an impi to Nkandhla to deal with Bambata, Dinuzulu at once ingratiated himself with the Government and the European public, who, though not absolutely believing in his loyalty, were only too anxious for him to co-operate at that most critical juncture. But, as it happened, he had already cast the die which, as time went on and the truth eked slowly out, rendered it more and more impossible for him to restore those good relations which, but for his own lapse, would undoubtedly have been even more cordial than ever before.
It would, we believe, be unfair to assume that he deliberately and systematically persuaded people to come and see him. He was astute enough to know that, by adopting a merely passive and nonchalant attitude, many would be seized by an overpowering inclination to pay their respects, especially when they observed that an increasing number of other people came to do so. To visit and get in touch with him became, from their point of view, quite the proper thing to do. There is no instinct among the Zulus stronger than that of desiring to do what everybody else is doing. Such arises, no doubt, from the force of long-continued custom. Living, as they once did, under the rule of as despotic kings as could be found anywhere on the globe, whose political and social habits made all sorts of demands on the people, they became alive to the necessity of being always on the alert for fear of being punished unless conforming to what others were doing. For, whatever others did was supposed to be in accordance with the will or desire of the king, even though unproclaimed. Apart from this, respect for authority is ingrained in their natures to a remarkable degree. As proof of this, it is necessary merely to mention the custom of hlonipa, which universally enforces propriety of behaviour, especially in the female sex.
Instead, therefore, of sending out messages to persuade people to come and see him, Dinuzulu adopted the more law-abiding and dignified policy of waiting until they called.
When, after the promulgation of the Poll Tax Act, agitation arose among the Natives to such an extent that many sent messages to him, including Chiefs who, it would seem, had never communicated with him before, he had a valid answer always ready: "What is the use of your coming to me? I can do nothing. You are a Chief just as I am. I do not refer to you when in a quandary. Go to the Government and lay your case before it for yourself." Profiting by his experience at St. Helena, and not again wishing to come into conflict with the Government, he at once made his own tribe comply with the demands. They did so at the earliest date, viz. January, 1906.