Forgotten Soldiers: Continued dis-remembrance of the Zulu fallen at Isandlwana

Presentation abstract

Abstract

The Western trope of the physical monument, triggering memory and evoking pride and social cohesion, is well documented. In South Africa, the contestation of such monuments was exacerbated by the 2015 #Rhodesmustfall movement, closely associated with the international Black Lives Matter campaign. For these movements, monuments considered associated with colonialism particularly, were targeted and defaced, removed or destroyed. The paucity of black-associated monuments was bemoaned despite a concerted move towards redressing this issue having been in place for over two decades.

With this, the recent vandalism of the Monument to the Zulu Fallen at Isandlwana battlefield (completed in 1999) in KwaZulu-Natal came as a surprise. It celebrates the significant Zulu victory over the British at the battle of Isandlwana on 21 January 1879. Large chunks of the bronze installation were removed, most likely for sale as scrap. Whilst criminal activity is most likely the underlying cause, it is of concern that a monument communally purchased through subscription by the amaKhozi (chiefs of clans) and deliberately intended to redress the ills of history, has befallen this fate. Further, that community members, fully reliant on cultural tourism did not guard the site, questions whether materiality is important in post-colonial monuments, and to what degree different worldviews and perceptions of space may contribute to their interpretation.

This paper describes the battle and the site, before considering the monument through an autoethnographic lens; its design, siting and construction. It then dissects post-colonial thinking considering materiality and monuments, weaving in comments from the public domain about the monument’s dismantling. The essay concludes by suggesting that alternative experiences may be required in order to evoke monumentality and memory in post-colonial societies and suggests that, despite perceived participatory processes in its design, the power of the ‘monument’ may be compromised by alternative worldviews of material and space.