Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 February 2016
Are South African chiefs rural and peri-urban despots or have they transformed to legitimate representatives of local interests in the post-apartheid era? This article argues that the legitimacy of chieftaincy in KwaZulu-Natal is not only based on constitutional and legal recognition, but that chieftaincy may rely on different forms of ‘basic legitimacy’. Chieftaincy is neither despotic nor civil but occupies an intermediary position between local citizens and the state. This junction position provides chiefs with specific opportunities to gain power but also requires a navigation between cooperation and conflict in the relationship with the ANC and the state.
This article is a revised version of a paper presented to the Emory Institute of African Studies Conference ‘Twenty Years Later: South Africa and the Post-Apartheid Condition’ (17.–19.4.2014) and to the African Studies Workshop at Harvard University (11.2.2015). I would like to thank Clifton Crais, Loren Landau, George Paul Meiu and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and critique. I am particularly grateful to the residents of KwaXimba and eThekwini Municipality who made time for me and took an active interest in my research.