DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.70004#0103
101
similar to those of chiefs. An excellent example of this is Chilubula, for decades
the White Fathers’ main mission station in the Bemba area. At its foundation
it was explicitly freed from the chief’s authority under whose sovereignty the
majority of mission stations, at least nominally, stood due to the system of
‘indirect rule’. In a letter from the Administrator, Codrington, to Bishop
Dupont of 18.9.1899 one reads:
“I authorise the missionary in charge of Chilubula Station to ex-
ercise the authority of a native chief over an area of not more
than 10 square miles surrounding and including Chilubula Sta-
tion.” (Quoted by Garvey 1974, 104).
Whether this happened in recognition of the particular importance of the
White Fathers, or whether it was out of obligation to award the chief’s ti-
tle to Dupont, named at the death bed of the Bemba Chief Mwamba as his
successor6, it is not very sure. However, it does show that the missions played
a role which extended beyond their spiritual work.
It has already been mentioned that the colonial government influenced the lo-
cation of mission stations. When it had established an administrative structure
itself, it began to give permission for missions to settle in a particular area, or
even on a particular site. It was also involved in the development and reali-
sation of the concept of “spheres of influence” (see below). The BSAC, which
until 1924 administered the country, set up stations for this purpose called
bomas (cf. FETTER 1983, 84 - 87), a term which continues in use in post-
Independence Zambia. Whereas most missions sought to establish stations
near the African population, the administration tended to build its stations
away from existing settlements7. Whilst they needed to be close to the people
to provide effective control, they did not wish to be too close for reasons of
hygiene. Thus in the thirties when the White Fathers were expanding in the
Eastern, Northern and Luapula Provinces, their new mission stations, accord-
ing to Bishop A. Fiirstenberg8, were not generally built near the bomas because
these were often situated in relatively unpopulated areas. It was only from the
fifties onwards that Catholic missions were also built near bomas because by
this time a substantial number of people had also moved there. Another exam-
ple of this situation is to be seen in the North-Western Province, Mwinilunga
boma being located 60 km south of the main concentration of population in
the “Ikelenge Pedicle” whereas the CMML station at Kalene Hill is found in
the centre.
The colonial government approved of the missionaries’ wish to settle near pop-
ulation concentrations, considering the missionaries an additional means of
control over the Africans. This is clearly seen in a remark once made by Ce-
cil Rhodes to the founder of the SDA Mission in Northern Rhodesia, W. H.
Anderson:
similar to those of chiefs. An excellent example of this is Chilubula, for decades
the White Fathers’ main mission station in the Bemba area. At its foundation
it was explicitly freed from the chief’s authority under whose sovereignty the
majority of mission stations, at least nominally, stood due to the system of
‘indirect rule’. In a letter from the Administrator, Codrington, to Bishop
Dupont of 18.9.1899 one reads:
“I authorise the missionary in charge of Chilubula Station to ex-
ercise the authority of a native chief over an area of not more
than 10 square miles surrounding and including Chilubula Sta-
tion.” (Quoted by Garvey 1974, 104).
Whether this happened in recognition of the particular importance of the
White Fathers, or whether it was out of obligation to award the chief’s ti-
tle to Dupont, named at the death bed of the Bemba Chief Mwamba as his
successor6, it is not very sure. However, it does show that the missions played
a role which extended beyond their spiritual work.
It has already been mentioned that the colonial government influenced the lo-
cation of mission stations. When it had established an administrative structure
itself, it began to give permission for missions to settle in a particular area, or
even on a particular site. It was also involved in the development and reali-
sation of the concept of “spheres of influence” (see below). The BSAC, which
until 1924 administered the country, set up stations for this purpose called
bomas (cf. FETTER 1983, 84 - 87), a term which continues in use in post-
Independence Zambia. Whereas most missions sought to establish stations
near the African population, the administration tended to build its stations
away from existing settlements7. Whilst they needed to be close to the people
to provide effective control, they did not wish to be too close for reasons of
hygiene. Thus in the thirties when the White Fathers were expanding in the
Eastern, Northern and Luapula Provinces, their new mission stations, accord-
ing to Bishop A. Fiirstenberg8, were not generally built near the bomas because
these were often situated in relatively unpopulated areas. It was only from the
fifties onwards that Catholic missions were also built near bomas because by
this time a substantial number of people had also moved there. Another exam-
ple of this situation is to be seen in the North-Western Province, Mwinilunga
boma being located 60 km south of the main concentration of population in
the “Ikelenge Pedicle” whereas the CMML station at Kalene Hill is found in
the centre.
The colonial government approved of the missionaries’ wish to settle near pop-
ulation concentrations, considering the missionaries an additional means of
control over the Africans. This is clearly seen in a remark once made by Ce-
cil Rhodes to the founder of the SDA Mission in Northern Rhodesia, W. H.
Anderson: