Heritage or Harm? Rethinking Isithembu Through Responsibility
By Mukelani Cele
During Heritage Month, South Africans consider the traditions that define their identity and
sense of community. Isithembu, which in English is polygamy” , is still one of the most
contentious of these customs. All too frequently, the discussion is boiled down to statistics,
such as the maximum number of wives a man may have or whether polygamy is a cultural
right. However, Siyabonga Mkhize believes that this limited perspective obscures the
institution's fundamental significance. He maintains that isithembu is a spiritual covenant
based on accountability rather than a licence for pleasure. He cautions that using culture as
a pretext for lust is a distortion of legacy and a loss of its authenticity.
Siyabonga believes that the tendency of men to use spirituality or culture as an excuse for
their own desires is dangerous. Instead of isithembu being a practice of responsibility, this
abuse turns into a norm. He contends that culture is not a cover for selfishness. If the
institution wants to maintain its significance, it is a set of duties that must be adhered to.
Without that regard, legacy becomes meaningless, a custom that is evoked in name but
devoid of its core principles. In addition to betraying their spouses, males who cloak their
selfish desires as cultural obligations undercut the cultural values that formerly gave
isithembu validity.
The first wife's agency is central to Siyabonga's viewpoint. In the past, her participation was mandatory rather than discretionary. The choice to add a second wife changed the dynamics of the family and necessitated consultation, respect, and acknowledgement of her role. Ignoring this rule puts the family at risk of animosity, strife, and a decline in trust. Siyabonga views the first wife's voice as both traditional custom and a precaution against harming heritage. The institution is built on her cooperation. Without her involvement, isithembu loses its social and spiritual foundation and becomes a unilateral act.
Additionally, Mkhize questions how polygamy is now framed as a male supposed rights.
According to him, the true question is whether men are ready to fulfill the obligations that
accompany the decision. These duties encompass not just the husband but also the wife,
kids, and other family members. The institution's cultural integrity is lost without them. He believes it is a distortion of legacy and a violation of its spiritual base to assert the right to
choose another wife without accepting the responsibilities associated with that choice.
One of Mkhize's most compelling discoveries is that, in the successful isithembu
partnerships he has seen, the first wife was frequently the one who started the
conversation or consented to it. The process started with communication, respect, and
acknowledgement of her contribution rather than the male merely declaring his purpose.
This illustrates the idea that the agency of the first wife is crucial. The marital and family
structure are altered when a second wife is added, and disregarding her opinions runs the
danger of causing animosity, strife, and the breakdown of trust. For Siyabonga, the first
wive's participation is more than just traditional custom; it serves as a preventative measure
against harming heritage. With her permission, isithembu becomes a practice of
collaborative accountability rather than a possible cause of division.
This warning is especially important when considering how it affects children. Children are
frequently affected by conflict in homes when the first wife's role is disregarded. They could be raised between houses and subjected to conflict, rivalry, or animosity. They may start to see the extended family as a source of division rather than support. According to Siyabonga, this is why accountability is important: children inherit the family structure as well as the effects of its practices. The following generation bears the scars of isithembu when it is
engaged in without honesty and respect. Children raised in polygamous households often
adapt by normalizing what they see, treating multiple partners as a natural part of family
life. Over time, this exposure can shape their own expectations of relationships, making
polygamy or serial partnerships feel like an ordinary choice. In this way, the cultural practice
is not only inherited but reproduced, as children carry forward the patterns they grew up
observing.
In the context of Heritage Month, Siyabonga’s voice is a cautionary reminder that preserving
culture is not about defending practices in isolation. It is about preserving the principles and
responsibilities that give those practices meaning. Without that foundation, isithembu risks
becoming a hollow tradition—a structure without values, a practice without purpose. His
perspective urges South Africans to ask not only whether traditions survive, but whether
they survive with the integrity that once sustained them. Heritage, he insists, must be
practised with honesty, respect, and responsibility, or it ceases to be heritage at all.
Article Edited By: Munei Zoe Mbedzi
Comments