Resources & archives

Government recognition, 2016

Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs announced formal recognition of the Balobedu Queenship in July 2016 under the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act.

Traditional leadership legislation and succession

The Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003 was the historical framework used during the 2016 Queenship recognition; it has been repealed. Section 8 of the later Traditional and Khoi-San Leadership Act 3 of 2019 provides for the royal family concerned to identify a qualifying king or queen with due regard to customary law and customs. The Constitutional Court declared the 2019 Act invalid for defects in public participation, but suspended the declaration of invalidity; the suspension was extended to 29 May 2027. Neither statute names the particular Balobedu houses: that is a matter for evidence of living custom and relevant records.

Recognition of Masalanabo Modjadji VII, 2024

SAnews, the South African government news service, reported the President’s recognition in December 2024 and described the Balobedu Queenship as the country’s only legally recognised Queenship at that time. This is a government account of the recognition, distinct from the earlier 2016 recognition of the institution.

Commission findings and historical boundaries

The commission report, supporting evidence and maps are priority acquisitions. This collection will document its recommendations and examine how Bantustan boundaries affected Balobedu villages, including areas assigned to Gazankulu and Lebowa. The exact wording and mapped boundaries await the report itself.

“Genealogy of the Rulers of the Lobedu of Modjadji,” p. 820

The supplied photograph shows a table headed with that title and a direct line from Dzugudini’s son Makhapele through Mohale, Phetole, Kheale and Mokoto to Modjadji I. It says the table was compiled from Kruger (1936), Krige and Krige (1943), Mönnig (1963), Hattingh (1974), and field research from 1977 and July 2005. The page shows “VISSER” in the running header and “MW PRINSLOO, University of Johannesburg” at the foot. The full publication title, author attribution and context have not yet been independently established from this single page.

As a scholarly compilation it is valuable evidence of a recorded genealogy, but its generations and spellings should be compared with living Balobedu accounts and the earlier sources it cites. In the founding-house reading, Makhapele is also called Phetole; the later Phetole in the table is a namesake.

Matatanya, Ditaba tša Balobedu

Transcript S.159, eight scanned pages, from the University of Pretoria digitised collection. It describes the southward migration with Tsokotleng and Makaphele, names Modika and Mahasha among groups that diverged on the journey, and gives a succession from Makaphele to Mohale and later rulers. The four supplied files are byte-identical copies. Names and relationships require careful transcription and comparison with oral histories.

A. Mathekga, Lobedu history and custom transcripts

Files labelled mathekga_136_lobedu_history_transcript_ns (5 pages) and mathekga_179_lobedu_custom_history_transcript_ns (29 pages). S.136, p. 1, and S.179, p. 3, name Modika, Mahasha and Mohale as sons of Phetole/Makaphele; S.179 also describes Seale, Sekgopo, Sebela and Sefomolo among Mohale’s sons and mentions the Makgoba hills. The versions supplied under “179” appear to be duplicate scans.

Jack Modiba, Lobedu history and miscellaneous manuscripts

Files labelled modiba_142_lobedu_history_transcript_ns (4 pages), modiba_172_lobedu_history_custom_transcript_ns (43 pages) and modiba_245_miscellaneous_information_lobedu_manuscript_ns (52 pages). The 142 transcript names Sekgopo and Sebela in an account of Mohale’s sons. S.172, PDF pp. 8–9, records a sequence of marriage exchanges and the part played by relatives and elder women; pp. 37–38 recount a dispute over cattle in a proposed marriage between related families that came before the chief’s court. Its p. 6 also discusses ironworking and exchange. These are historical descriptions, with names and quantities affected by imperfect text recognition. The handwritten S.245 requires closer transcription before specific marriage claims can be attributed to it.