and granted extensive credentials (see below). At any rate, on the basis of Schapera's (1952: 11–15) meticulous accounts it is evident that very few, if any, royal sections of the merafe here have prevailed permanently beyond their royal centres and represented a potentially challenging force.
In summary, I have argued that the strength and scale of the Northern Tswana merafe in focus here were in progress from the late eighteenth century, mainly conditioned by the linking up with long-distance trade, abundance of wildlife, vast unexploited pastures and incessant population increase by capturing numerous alien groups into their structures. That is, people were either searching for safe harbour in an increasingly violent landscape or conquered and subjected to one of the merafe. Under these conditions, I have argued, the three Tswana merafe in focus here underwent major transformations, the two significant ones relevant to the present argument being: (a) the amalgamation of the power structures around the dikgosi by the formation of cattle clientship of nonroyal leaders, including some of those of foreign origin; (b) the use of the ward system, combined with cattle clientship, which enabled the ruling groups to incorporate people conquered and hosted in ways that effectively put them into the mill of assimilation and made them integral to the hierarchal structure of the merafe, adding progressively to their strength and scale.
The decisive mediating factor was cattle herds which grow fast under favourable ecological conditions and the dikgosi's exclusive linking up with the intercontinental trade of fur and ivory and their control of trading in the region. The propelling factors were thus of a global kind – intercontinental trade and the imperial expansion into the continent that brought numerous communities and families in flight westwards from the most troubled areas. (By the way, it is a highly intriguing point that, as I shall explain in Chapter 3, cattle – in combination with global trade connections – played a similarly crucial significance in the formation of the postcolonial state in Botswana.)
As for people, I have explained that the rise of the Tswana merafe went hand in hand with that core group in due course becoming a numerical minority. In control of bogosi, they prevailed as the ruling communities progressively asserted their dominant position. By means of particular practices of social incorporation and cultural assimilation, political integration of groups conquered or hosted in the royal centres worked to the effect of developing primary identification with the core group which recognized them as full members of their morafe (see Chapter 6). This is, however, not the whole story. Within the vast territories claimed by the merafe, there were always a number of outlying communities that resisted the overlordship of the rulers of the Tswana merafe of present concern. They were mostly of foreign origin, but also included groups seceded from the royal centre of other Tswana communities in the region. In order to comprehend how the Tswana merafe consolidated and expanded their domination at the edge of the Kalahari and beyond, I shall, in a subsequent section, explain the significance of being brought under British overlordship.
Anticipating that, let me point out that the transformations I have been concerned with in this section involved the development of a civic government (puso) highly instrumental to the British establishment of a colonial state in the country, confirmed by Roberts' (1972: 103) assertion that ‘the administrators of the Bechuanaland Protectorate had at their disposal from the outset a group of closely similar and already highly sophisticated judicial systems, the higher levels of which could be incorporated in the official structure almost without modification’. One of the most apparent expressions of civic order was the centrality of the kgotla in the structuring of social life and the settlement pattern, conspicuously manifested in the compact, well-organized royal towns of thousands of people with the royal house at the core (see Gulbrandsen 2007, cf. 1993b). The evangelizing missionaries had already impacted upon these orders for decades before the establishment of the colonial state in 1885. To their engagement with the dikgosi – and the dikgosi with them – we now turn in order to come to terms with their significance.
Strengthening Royal Ancestorhood, Receiving Evangelizing Missionaries and Establishing State Churches
Although the Bakwena, the Bangwaketse and the Bangwato were, at times, riddled by internal conflicts, they succeeded in taking control of many smaller and larger communities, either conquered or hosted. Their respective dynasties had occasionally proved their ability both to stand up to external threats and to force, if necessary, foreign groups into submission. In Tswana thought, royal authority is not only a matter of ascription by virtue of descent: it has to be asserted by a demonstration of strength and the fruits of good governance in the form of welfare, health and prosperity of the population – all proofs being supported by the royal ancestorhood (see Gulbrandsen 1995).
The authority of the ruling dynasty is cosmologically linked to a hierarchy of forces. In the Tswana imagination, this hierarchy is, in brief, projected into the realm of the ancestors (badimo). In this mode of thought, the ancestors of the ruling line (badimo ya dikgosi) constitute the supreme source of power, wisdom and morality, exclusively available to the living ruler. Furthermore, a kgosi is ideally in possession of the most powerful charms to protect himself and the bogosi against internal enemies and guard the morafe against threatening external forces. In addition the kgosi should ideally be in control of the most powerful productive medicines, e.g. for providing rain (see Chapter 8 below; Gulbrandsen 1995). A kgosi who acts in relation to external forces with strength and sustains internal control is spoken of as a kgosi who relates well to his ancestors and asserts his command of productive and protective ‘medicines’.
The notion of a Tswana ruler's authority was dependent not only on descent but also on his personal strength and ability to act upon ever changing historical contexts to the benefit of his people. This is a notion – capacity and engagement – which is intrinsic to the cultural construction of the kgosi as a ruler with, as we shall see, considerable authority to initiate major transformations. This dimension of pragmatic assessment of a ruler's strength and ability is perfectly expressed by the mythological origin of the ruling lines of the Bakwena and Bangwaketse. As for the latter, I was told more than once, in the words of one man, that:
Long ago, there were two brothers, Kuto and Kutoyane, who were the sons of Moleta, one of the ancient dikgosi of the Bangwaketse. Kuto was the eldest one [as indicated by the diminutive form Kutoyane given to the younger brother]. However, although Kuto was the one who according to our custom [mokgwa] should succeed his father, this did not happen. The reason is that Kuto, in the opinion of the people at that time, was found to be too weak. They wanted Kutoyane, who they thought would be a much more forceful kgosi. I think they were very right, because ever since the Bangwaketse have been ruled by people descending from Kutoyane and they have proved to be very strong and wise, like Makaba II, Gaseitisiwe, Bathoen I, Seepapitso III and Bathoen II. The people of Kuto still live here in Kanye and much respect is paid to them, especially their seniors – although they do not have sufficient force to rule people. Their head has a very senior position in the royal kgotla, placed at the right-hand side of the kgosi among his paternal uncles and principal advisors. At the time the Bangwaketse adhered properly to the ritual practice of go loma ngwaka [‘to bite the new year’ – the first fruit ceremony], the head of the Kuto people was the one to bite the pumpkin first, even before the kgosi.
The LMS missionary Willoughby relates a similar myth about a ‘junior’ line constituting the ruling dynasty among the Bakwena (Willoughby 1928: 229). The central notion here, of strength being attributed to a genealogical line of rulers, comes out of the Tswana cultural construction of kgosi authority. Ideally, the kgosi is a motswadintle (‘one from whom good things come’; see Gulbrandsen 1995: 421), ensuring societal order and thus social harmony (kagiso). As I shall elaborate in Chapter
