Comparing Path of Blood and Molope’s Book on Mzilikazi kaMashobane: Agreements, Differences, and the Challenge of Writing Ndebele History

 

Comparing Path of Blood and Molope’s Book on Mzilikazi kaMashobane: Agreements, Differences, and the Challenge of Writing Ndebele HistoryThe story of King Mzilikazi kaMashobane, founder of the Ndebele (Matabele) nation, is one of the most dramatic and complex in Southern African history. A former lieutenant under Shaka Zulu, Mzilikazi broke away, led his followers through epic migrations and wars during the Mfecane/Difaqane era, and eventually established a powerful kingdom in what is now Matabeleland, Zimbabwe.Two notable books tackle this history: Peter Becker’s Path of Blood: The Rise and Conquests of Mzilikazi (1962) and Nthebe Molope’s recent book King Mzilikazi kaMashobane. One is a mid-20th-century popular history by a white South African author; the other is a more contemporary work written from a perspective closer to African oral traditions. Here’s how they compare.Core Similarities: The Big Picture They Agree OnBoth books portray Mzilikazi as an extraordinary military strategist and nation-builder. Key points of agreement include:

• His break with Shaka Zulu and the subsequent northward trek with a small group of followers.
• The brutal realities of the Mfecane period, marked by wars, raids, conquests, and large-scale assimilation of conquered peoples (especially Sotho-Tswana groups).
• Mzilikazi’s success in creating a highly organized, militarized state with the Khumalo/Nguni core at the apex, while incorporating many other groups into the Ndebele nation.
• His leadership in forging a lasting kingdom despite immense pressure from Boers, other African polities, and environmental challenges.

In both accounts, Mzilikazi emerges as a remarkable figure who turned a band of refugees into a formidable nation.Key Differences Between the Two Books

• Perspective and Tone:
  • Path of Blood adopts a dramatic, often sensational style. It draws heavily on missionary reports, traveler accounts, and colonial-era sources, emphasizing the violence and destruction that accompanied Mzilikazi’s campaigns.
  • Molope’s book takes a restorative approach. It seeks to reclaim the narrative using oral histories, praise poetry, and descendant perspectives, while pushing back against outsider accounts that portrayed Mzilikazi primarily as a ruthless conqueror.
• Emphasis on Violence:
  • Becker details raids, mass killings, and harsh punishments without much restraint.
  • Molope contextualizes these events within the extreme survival conditions of the time.
• Cultural Depth:
  • Path of Blood is strong on military campaigns and external observations.
  • Molope’s work gives more attention to internal Ndebele identity formation, assimilation policies, and Mzilikazi’s role as a unifier.

Uncomfortable Truths: Can a Native Ndebele Write an Unbiased History?This raises a sensitive question: Why have relatively few indigenous Ndebele authors produced major, comprehensive histories of Mzilikazi and the early Matabele state?Factors include the dominance of oral tradition over written history, the long control of the written record by missionaries and colonial authors, and modern political sensitivities in Zimbabwe around pre-colonial history and ethnic relations.A major challenge is dealing with uncomfortable truths from Mzilikazi’s reign. Examples often cited include:

• The killing (or execution) of his own son, linked to internal power struggles and the failed northern expedition.
• Rusumbami (Hwange of the Nambya people), whose death involved brutal examination or execution after claims he possessed “two hearts.”
• The case described vividly in Mlimo: The Rise and Fall of the Matabele (1926) by ‘Mziki’ (A.A. Campbell): the Ndzundza Ndebele chief Magodongo. According to this account, after conflict in the Transvaal, Magodongo was captured and impaled anus-first on a sharpened stake, suffering a lingering death over two days and two nights as a warning to others.

Such acts of extreme violence were not unique to Mzilikazi — they occurred across many societies during the chaotic Mfecane wars. Outsider books like Path of Blood tend to highlight these episodes for dramatic effect, while indigenous authors often struggle with the pressure of balancing national pride and historical honesty.Will We Ever See a Major Documentary or Series on Mzilikazi?Given the success of big-budget African historical dramas like Shaka iLembe, many are asking whether Mzilikazi will get his own major documentary or television series.Currently, there is no big-budget, high-production-value documentary or scripted series focused solely on Mzilikazi. Most existing visual content leans more toward the restorative, nation-building narrative similar to Molope’s book rather than Becker’s “path of blood” approach.A future major production would likely lean closer to Molope’s perspective. Reasons include growing demand for African stories told by African voices and the success of Shaka iLembe.
Why didn’t Molope use the famous picture of Mzilikazi drawn by William Cornwallis Harris?

The 1836 sketch by the British hunter-explorer carries the biases of its time. Molope, focused on reclaiming the narrative through oral tradition and African sources, likely chose to avoid heavy reliance on colonial-era depictions.There is real hope ahead. Mzilikazi’s strong portrayal (by Mpilo Mbatha) in Shaka iLembe Season 2 has sparked calls for a spin-off series. If it happens, it could become the definitive on-screen version of his story.The Urgent Call: Africans Must Tell Their Own HistoryThe comparison between Becker’s and Molope’s books makes one thing very clear: Africans should stop waiting for others to write their history.If you do not tell your own story, someone else will tell it for you — and they will often tell it from their own perspective, with their own biases, agendas, or limited understanding.Peter Becker’s Path of Blood is a classic example. While it contains valuable details, it was written through a mid-20th-century European lens that often sensationalized the violence. More African scholars, historians, and storytellers — especially Ndebele voices — need to rise up and produce high-quality, well-researched books, documentaries, and series about figures like Mzilikazi, Shaka, Moshoeshoe, and others.History is not just about the past; it shapes identity, pride, and the future. The more Africans take ownership of writing and producing their own narratives, the richer, more balanced, and more truthful our collective understanding will become. Molope’s book is a good start, but many more must follow.ConclusionPath of Blood and Molope’s King Mzilikazi kaMashobane serve different but complementary roles. As visual storytelling grows through projects like Shaka iLembe, we have a golden opportunity to see Mzilikazi’s full story told with both honesty and pride.Mzilikazi was a product of violent times — a brilliant strategist who built an enduring nation through both genius and ruthlessness. Confronting the full picture, uncomfortable truths and all, ultimately strengthens rather than diminishes cultural pride.Africans must write their own history. If we don’t, others will continue to do it for us.What are your thoughts? Have you read either book? Would you support a major Mzilikazi series, and who should tell the story? Share in the comments.