Chirios said:
Another problem is that that sets a bad precedent. If the Kings sons are constantly terrified that the eldest is going to slaughter them the second he gets on the throne doesn't that encourage them to engage in coup attempts every time there's an ascension to the throne? How did other kingdoms manage to deal with this problem?
Some kind of Zulu equivilent to The Cage?
"Here! Have as many deaf-mute concubines as you like, but if you leave this hut, you'll be speared to death."
On a more serious note, even just exiling those brothers would be a decent solution. They get kicked out of the kingdom and told 'make something of yourself'. This could add another interesting dimension to the Mfecane, as younger Zulu sons attempt to carve out their own kingdoms.
In fact, that could be a good way to get the kingdom modernised in the first place: exiled younger brother is forced out of the kingdom, makes his way to Capetown, gets a bit of an education, pulls together a band of mercenaries and heads back to Zululand to claim his brother's kingdom.
Chirios said:
This is why I think any attempt at centralisation needs to occur before the arrival of Europeans.
Butterflies would mean that the Europeans the Zulu are up against won't be the ones they're up against in this timeline. It's an interesting proposition, but I think the original poster wanted something with Shaka as we-knew-him and the British as-we-know-them.
Certainly, I'd love to see a Great Zimbabwe timeline, though.
Chirios said:
The religious elites weren't gotten rid of, and as for the secular elites, well there's never going to be total control in any absolute monarchy. Most monarchs had to go to ridiculous lengths towards controlling their nobles (in this case: any man who had large herds of cattle); Louis XIV had to force them to spend sh-tloads of money to keep them from trying to overthrow him. But, the general trend from Shaka going on will be absolute monarchy, there's not really another option that wouldn't result in anarchy.
Well, from what I can see from Shaka's reign is that the man was a psychopath who terrified his subjects into submission. If it worked for one generation, it might well work for another: just have subsequent kings use the same methods, and get Westernised at the same time. There are plenty of white tyrants to prove that you don't need to be a democrat with a belief in human rights in order to make use of modern technology.
I think we're operating on the assumption here that the Zulu kingdom is fundamentally unstable, which it isn't really. At a fairly early stage it seems to have been decided that the kingship would be confined within one, ruling family, and struggles subsequent to Shaka were between members of that family. However, it wasn't until the British intervened that we see the kingdom split up. The Zulu kingdom is there to stay, European intervention notwithstanding. It just needs its structures regularised to a position analagous to a European nation's in order to be taken seriously.
As I say, the Zulu king has to give each of his 'chiefs' a uniform and a staff of office, and start calling them 'District Governors' rather than chiefs. While there will be some who will be unhappy with their reduced status, a lot of them will just be happy with their shiny new uniform, and continue in much the same style as they did previously.
Chirios said:
Assuming that a Zulu king would be willing, would Westerners be willing to hire out scholars for gold?
I don't see why not. It should be a fairly straightforward thing for Zulu to be translated, written down and taught back to those who already speak it. What you would need to do, however, is create a literate Zulu administrative class fairly quickly, or you're going to have a society with a black bottom, a white middle, and a mixed black-white top. Essentially, a buggered up Haiti.
Anybody can see the value of literacy fairly quickly, though. Those Zulu who learn to read and write will rapidly assimilate new ideas, and become the nucleus of the 'moderniser' faction.