The Young Biblical David and Guerilla Warfare – Part 1

Rationale, ethics and godly matters in guerilla warfare

The Origin of David’s Guerilla Army

In 1 Samuel 1:13-14, Samuel rebuked King Saul for being impatient and performing sacrifice himself in the absence of Samuel. He said:

“¹³ You have not kept the command the Lord your God gave you. Had you kept it, the Lord would have established your kingdom over Israel forever. ¹⁴ But now your kingdom must end, for the Lord has sought out a man after his own heart. The Lord has already appointed him to be the leader of his people, because you have not kept the Lord’s command.” (1 Samuel 1:13--14, NLT).

"^{28 …,} “The Lord has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today and has given it to someone else—one who is better than you.” {1 Samuel 1:28, NLT)

It is due to this rebuke and punishment that King Saul started to nurse and nurture jealousy and hatred towards the youthful David who was initially unknown to King Saul.

So it came to pass that “²⁸ When Saul realized that the Lord was with David and how much his daughter Michal loved him, ²⁹ Saul became even more afraid of him, and he remained David’s enemy for the rest of his life.” (1 Samuel 18:28—29, NLT)

During the rest of his life King Saul spent hunting down David who ended up always on the run and evading capture and slaughter. It then so happened that David ended up leading a guerilla army of discontented men.

“¹ So David left Gath and escaped to the cave of Adullam. Soon his brothers and all his other relatives joined him there. ² Then others began coming—men who were in trouble or in debt or who were just discontented—until David was the captain of about 400 men.” (1 Samuel 22:1—2, NLT)

Thus, David is probably the first leader of a guerilla army that lived and operated from the wilderness to avoid direct confrontation with King Saul’s army. In world history, guerilla warfare is said to have been the brain-child of the Chinese general, Sun Tzu, during the 6th century BC. However, Guerilla tactics of the modern era are said to have been originated in the 3rd century BC by Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus who devised the Fabian strategy which was used against Hannibal Barca's army. Michael Collins the general of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) is said to have started urban guerillar warefare. Mao Zedong then basing on these past ideas and methods, further developed guerilla warfare theory and practice and adapted  it to peasant environment outside urban conditions. Despite these claims, guerilla warfare has probably been the natural form of war since time immemorial even among animals that hunt for food. David’s guerilla army could be one of the earliest such organised army. In Part 2, we will look at how the David’s guerilla army operated in the face of onslaught from King Saul’s manhunt for David.

Great Zimbabwe and the Lemba Claims

Has anyone noticed a determined effort to re-write the history of Great Zimbabwe? There seems to be a systematic amplification of the claim of the Lemba people on the building of Great Zimbabwe. The discovery of Mapungubwe in South Africa triggered this determined effort.
The Great Zimbabwe Lemba claim says: (1) That the Lemba arrived at first Mapungubwe during the period 1025 - 1225 and later at Great Zimbabwe around 1100 before the Shona people and built these cities; (2) That the Shona arrived later and conquered the Lemba and drove them out of Great Zimbabwe and possibly Mapungubwe; (3) That the Shona then started living in these cities and placing all the ancient Shona artefacts that were found at the site of these ancient cities.
Furthermore, the Lemba also have a second claim relating to their origin as a people. They are claiming that they are not African nor Bantu but Jewish people who happened to find themselves marooned by a sea of Bantu people in Southern Africa, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemba_people . The Lemba language is quite close to Shona language, especially "ChiKaranga chekuMasvingo", and so the Lemba actually speak a Bantu language and not a Jewish language. However, their clan names are said to be of Jewish origin. See http://www.kulanu.org/newsletters/1999-summer.pdf When combined together, the above two claims by the Lemba can be used to perpetuate the colonial and white supremacists claim that Bantu people did not build Great Zimbabwe or that if they did, then they could not do it alone.
It is important to note that the Lemba are only about 70 000 while the Shona are more than 15 million (in Zimbabwe and Mozambique and other countries). The Shona people are the most populous Bantu group in the whole World with Zulus coming second. The Shona language is the most widely spoken Bantu language on earth when we do not consider Swahili, whose large population of speakers speak it only as a second language and not as a mother tongue. Consequently, the Lemba people who once built prosperous ancient cities from Mapungubwe to Khami to Dlodlo to Great Zimbabwe are now found to be almost extinct in the land of their prosperity for centuries past.
It would seem to be more sensible if the Lemba claim were that they are a Shona group and that they participated in building Great Zimbabwe. They would also present the Jewish claim by saying that the Shona people (them included) have Jewish origins. Thus, many aspects of Shona culture and customs are quite close to Jewish ones not because of Lemba influence but possibly because the Jews were originally Shona or Lemba!
Historically, the decline of Great Zimbabwe and even Mapungubwe is attributed to over-population and exhaustion of economic resources. Therefore, one would expect that the Lemba population would dwarf that of the Shona and not the other way round. History has not yet recorded a mass extermination of the Lembas by the any other groups such as the Zulus or Shonas. That the Lemba built these ancient cities and yet appear to be almost extinct within the regional vicinity of these cities is quite baffling to me.
One of the languages that is associated with the Lemba is Kalanga. From Wikipedia, we read: "The conclusion that Kalanga is a Shona dialect is one of the most eroneous conclusions that have ever been
made in history. It will be understood that this is a battle that has been going on for over eighty years now. Way back in 1927 the Rhodesia Missionary Society wanted to create a standard Shona orthography, but
they could not agree on Kalanga being listed as a Shona dialect. They enlisted the help of Professor Clement M. Doke, then a Bantu Studies professor at the University of the Witwatersrand. After a year long study in Zimbabwe, he actually concluded that Kalanga is cannot be listed as a Shona dialect because it is too phonologically diverse from what can be called Shona. In fact, a simple test that this is true is this: those who speak the so-called Shona cannot understand the Kalanga when they speak, though the Kalanga can understand the Shona." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalanga_language The above could be considered to be a lame conclusion. The fact that a Kalanga speaker can understand spoken Shona while the reverse is not true may not necessarily be a good test simply because Shona is the mostly widely spoken Bantu language on earth. The Kalangas in Zimbabwe and South Africa are bound to understand Shona language since it is the majority Bantu language. Similarly, many Ndebele people in Zimbabwe would understand Shona, while not as many proportionate number of Shona people may understand Ndebele. Phonological diversity may be due to more exposure to other languages and not derivation of the language. Its possible that Kalanga was derived from Shona and that it later experienced a lot of exposure to other languages to which Shona was not exposed. For example, it could have been exposed to the Khoisan language.
How else could the Shona become the largest Bantu group in the World which has remained largely undisplaced geographically despite many historical migrations passing through them? It is most likely because
they built ancient cities and a collective memory and experience that has largely enabled them to remain undisplaced between Zambezi and Limpopo in the North and South and the Indian Ocean in the East and
and the western deserts despite huge migrations passing through this region. Mapungubwe is largely an empty site and yet it has attracted a large amount of attention than Great Zimbabwe, where one can actually see an ancient city with concrete evidence of Shona habitation in ancient times.
It is important to note also that the name Mapungubwe is a Shona name and absolutely not a Jewish name (the Lemba claim Jewish origin)!

I also wonder why it is so hard for the Lemba to claim that the Jews have Lemba origin instead of the reverse.

Two Cultures Fifty Years On - Baroness O’Neill of Bengarve

As part of the 2010 NZ Aronui Lecture Series, the public lecture by Baroness O’Neill of Bengarve was held in the Japan Lecture Threatre, University House, Massey University Campus, Tennent Drive, Palmerston North on 20th September 2010 at 17:30 hours (NZ standard time). The abstract of the lecture is as follows:

The humanities and science were once seen as entirely different cultures. Now that we appreciate their similarities, how will looking at the world through two lenses infl uence our future? In his 1959 Rede lecture The Two Cultures, C.P. Snow contrasted what he called ‘the traditional culture’ of literary study with the culture of natural science, and judged them wholly different in approach and achievements. The scientific culture, as he saw it, was rigorous and productive; the literary culture was neither. However, a wider look at inquiry in the humanities and the natural sciences reveals a very large overlap in approach. In both domains inquiry relies on interpretation and inference,
aims at empirical truth claims and relies on normative assumptions, in variable proportions.

in reference to: 20101020 Two Cultures Fifty Years On - Baroness O’Neill of Bengarve (view on Google Sidewiki)

"Red Hills of Home" as a critique of the betrayal of Independence

Exerpt from Where is Chenjerai Hove’s Resistance? by Maurice Vambe, January 1, 2005, zimbabwe.poetryinternationalweb.org

In Red Hills of Home, Hove continues to bemoan the environmental disaster wrought by colonialism in the form of the “bulldozer” that desecrates African burial sites and undercuts their sense of place, to the extent that the village is “home no more”. But he goes on to suggest that the wounds of the red hills of home, which fester with “pus”, have not been healed by independence. In ‘Independence Song’, Hove’s persona underscores the enigma of freedom: “Independence came” but ordinary men and women were still bound by “the noose”. Cynicism informs the poet’s understanding of the capacity of Zimbabwe’s leaders to do good: “people’s bare feet maul the dry earth till freedom come”. For Hove, Independence becomes a dream deferred, as members of the new parliament debate ideas but fail to raise issues that will improve the lives of the people in whose name the war was fought and whom the delegates supposedly represent. In ‘Child Parliament’, the debate degenerates into a demand for higher salaries for MPs. The duplicity of the representatives of the new political dispensation is revealed in the way they discuss again and again, “stale overdue projects that crawl now when they should have run yesterday”. There is a real sense in this poem that the new political élites have failed to deliver, because there is “no debate about us”.

---

Maurice Taonezvi Vambe is a lecturer at the Bureau for Learning Development, University of South Africa, where he teaches African, African American, and Theories of Literature.

Born near Zvishavane in 1956, poet, novelist and social commentator Chenjerai Hove now lives in exile in Europe. His critical social and political commentary in the weekly newspaper The Standard (2000-2002) gave rise to threats that he was forced to take seriously. For a creative writer who cares deeply about his country’s welfare, leaving is a moment of profound loss. And yet for a writer for whom ideals are central, such loss is intensified by what he believes is a betrayal of governance in an independent Zimbabwe. ~~ from zimbabwe.poetryinternationalweb.org

Sanctions on Zimbabwe

 The Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act (ZDERA)) of 2001 says that U.S. sanctions are against the Zimbabwean "government". Is this not a euphemism for "the people" of Zimbabwe?  ZDERA also says that these sanctiosn will continue as enacted until the U.S. President (Obama) certifies that the "rule of law has been restored in Zimbabwe, including respect for ownership and title to property. . . and an end to. . .lawlessness."  ZDERA 2001, no matter how well-intentioned, is clearly not targetted towards ZANU-PF alone and its impact has a devastating effect on the ordinary peasants on the "Red Hills of Home". The influence of ZDERA 2001 goes beyond the USA's jurisdiction.

The MDC campaigned for sanctions in a systematic manner. ZANU-PF created the conditions where it was deemed necessary to impose such sanctions. The only people who do not deserve these sanctions and contributed nothing to their imposition are the ordinary people who live on the fringes of the Red Hills of Home.

ZANU-PF is the primary culprit in having brought about the whole situation that led to MDC agitating for sanctions. This situation is similar to the conduct of the Rhodesian Front under Ian Smith. However, sanctions on Rhodesia affected only the minority white Rhodesians precisely because the majority black population where already under severe economic sanctions imposed on them by successive Rhodesian Governments (on its own black citizens) such that international sanctions on Rhodesia were nothing more than the status quo for the majority black population. ZANU-PF should have realised that a chaotic land reform programme (1) that is undertaken at a time when this party was loosing popularity, (2) that does not take into account the national economy, (3) that maliciously exposes the economic vulnerability of our nation, would amount to irresponsible and corrupt conduct of treasonous propotions. The mere size of the diaspora point to the disastrous consequences of the irresponsible conduct of ZANU-PF and its leadership. That they were resuming the prosecution of the legitimate Chimurenga revolution aimed at resolving the land question is not a sensible excuse - in fact, it is an irresponsible claim as there is no real  reason why Chimurenga of this nature could not be waged while taking into account economic stability, the health and general welfare of the people of Zimbabwe.

Impossing economic sanctions, of the ZDERA 2001 sort, on your own people is the brutish and highest form of punishment that one could ever impose on one's own people. The people of Zimbabwe have no other government except that which is the subject of ZDERA 2001. It is generally agreed: 1) that MDC did have to do with sanctions, 2) that they did put some effort towards their being put into place against Zimbabwe; and 2) there are different views as to the degree to which the MDC involved themselves in these sanctions with some people saying they designed and other saying they supported and yet others, indlucing the MDC itself, saying they have absolutely nothing to do with the sanctions. Note that this is a scale of the degree MDC involvement in the range:

designed <---> supported/encouraged/campaigned <-----> did nothing

The ordinary people on the fringes of the Red Hills of Home do not support sanctions of the ZDERA 2001 sort. It is in the interest of the people that these sanctions be removed. The view from the Red Hills of Home is that ZANU-PF must deliver to the people the freedom package from Chimurenga and this include the people's freedom to give birth to political parties such as the MDC and the freedom to decide peacefully how they are to be governed and whom they choose to be governed by. There is also the view that the MDC must act responsibly and exercise retraint in selecting strategies that involve powers that they cannot control and have the potential to hurt the people of Zimbabwe. The Rhodesian era strategy of international economic sanctions on Zimbabwe were grossly inappropriate in the Zimbabwean scenario.

The "Red Hills of Home"

Red Hills have come
With wounds whose pus
Suffocates the peasant.
The peasant's baby sleeps
Knowing only thin dreams of moonlight joy
Dying too are the songs
Of the seasons that father once sang
Red Hills and the smoke of man-made thunder
Plunder the land under contract

"Red Hills of Home", Chengerai Hove, Mambo Press, 1985: Pages
68

This blog's is concerned with the effects of human technological advances, political and other turmoils, and the new ways of life, on the simple but versatile minds of the common man whose innocent and genuine struggle is against the odds that are characteristic at the centre of the Red Hills of Home.