How does Zulu culture deal with divorce?

The king’s move is unprecedented because wives typically remain part of the royal household even if their relationship with the king ends. Generally, the indigenous laws of the AmaZulu discourage divorce.

This is because the clan plays a major role in the marriage contract, its stability, and its dissolution. Due to the close-knit nature of pre-colonial society and the communal nature of income generation, bridewealth (lobola/ilobolo) was raised by the groom’s family mostly through livestock given to the bride’s family. Being heavily invested in the marriage, the families of the couple usually intervened when issues that threatened marriage arose. This made divorce rare.

Before European colonialism, divorce did not need the intervention of a court. Marriage could be nullified only on the grounds of witchcraft, adultery or insanity.

So, as unions between families rather than couples alone, marriage was considered a bond between families. The implication is that a divorced wife in good standing with her husband’s family could continue to live in his family homestead. However, this situation is changing.

What is the impact of western culture?

Western culture reflects socio-economic changes of colonialism and globalisation. These include technology, urbanisation, personal income, formal education, social media and statutory laws. It’s important to contextualise how these changes are influencing divorce.

Indigenous laws emerged in close-knit social settings and were aimed at promoting clan welfare.

In contrast, modern conditions promote individualism, urbanisation, personal income, and binary ideas of gender equality. In the past, the groom’s family communally transferred bridewealth. After divorce, bridewealth was returned – fully or partially – to signify divorce. Communal cohesion ensured that the clan promoted marriage stability.

Today, bridewealth is no longer required to validate a customary law marriage. Its role in divorce has diminished, and only state courts can dissolve marriages. In any case, a wide range of customary laws regulate all aspects of marriage.

Professor Diala's research shows that western culture contributes to divorce when Africans adapt their indigenous behaviour to modern conditions. In essence, modernity is altering Zulu indigenous behaviour to conform to western-inspired statutory laws.

Can a balance be found?

Although the Zulu people still cherish the institution of marriage, western culture is changing their attitudes towards divorce. Its influence highlights the struggle between indigenous laws and the legal system imposed by Dutch and British colonisers.

Roman-Dutch law is a fusion of English customary laws, Germanic tribal laws and Roman law forms. It forms the basis of South African common law. Balancing indigenous laws and Roman-Dutch law is difficult precisely because indigenous laws are increasingly subject to western culture.

South Africa’s 1996 constitution mandates the courts to “apply (recognise) customary law when that law is applicable”. But the laws they recognise must not contradict constitutional values and any legislation that regulates customary law.

So, indigenous laws are compelled to conform to constitutional values of equality, non-discrimination and human dignity. Therefore, the regulation of indigenous laws presents western values as superior to indigenous laws. This forces Africans to seek normative validation through western yardsticks.

Balancing indigenous laws and state laws would need policy focus on how Africans adapt their indigenous behaviour to socio-economic changes.

These adaptations create customary laws, which should be understood as the practices that people regard as obligatory. The solution to balancing indigenous and western culture is to recognise and interpret indigenous laws with their own foundational values, instead of using values that represent the legal systems imposed during colonial rule.

This piece first appeared in The Conversation

SUNDAY TRIBUNE