40 AFRICAN POLITICAL SYSTEMS
was different, for he was related to the members of his group by different ties from those linking them to the head of the larger group of which it was part. Besides the ties of sentiment, homestead and lineage, heads exercised authority because of their kinship status and their importance in their inferiors' social and economic life; indunas and their followers shared in common social, and often economic, activities, as well as political affairs; tribesmen were attached to their chiefs mainly by political bonds; and all Zulu to the king by their military duties. The average Zulu's importance decreased the bigger the group of which he was a member. The king's position in the state was essentially his establishment in the 'barrack area'. He symbolized for the Zulu their identity as a nation as against the Swazi and other Bantu, and European, Powers. The nation was a federation of tribes whose separate identities were symbolized by their chiefs. The tribes were even autonomous within the national organization for on occasion many tribesmen supported their chiefs in quarrels with the king, though some were swayed by national loyalties.1 However, it was in the relations between tribes that tribal identities mainly appeared. There existed between the tribes a strong hostility which radically affected the course of Zulu history after the Zulu War of 1880; it was mirrored at court in the competition of the chiefs for power. For the people of any tribe of some strength were proud of their traditions and their chiefly line, were loyal to their chief and quick to resent any attempt by other chiefs to interfere in their tribal affairs. Occasionally, especially on the borders of tribes, this hostility broke out in affrays. It appeared most clearly in the people's attachment to their own chief as against other chiefs. Therefore, as will be seen in the next section, the chiefs tried by ruling well to win adherents from other chiefs. Nevertheless, the chiefs were often related to one another and on friendly terms. As part of the administrative machinery they served together on the king's council and they might even combine to constrain the king.
Within a tribe, there was a similar opposition between sections. The tribes were divided, as described in the paragraphs on the Army, into sections attached to homesteads of the chief, his
1 This is how Zulu describe it; in fact, they may have been moved by self-interest or other motives, but their actions are described in terms of tribal and national values.