VIII.

HOUSEHOLD TALES.

41. THE LITTLE WISE WOMAN.

(The original, in the Hottentot language, is in Sir G. Grey’s Library, G. Krönlein’s Manuscript, p. 53.)

A girl, it is said, went to seek for onions. As she arrived at the place where they grew, she met with some men, one of whom was blind (i.e., half-blind, having only one eye). As she dug (for the onions) the men helped her, digging also. When her sack was full, they said to her, “Go, tell the other girls, that many of you may come.” So she went home and told her companions, and early the next morning they started. But a little girl followed them. The other girls said, “Let the little girl go back.” But her elder sister protested against this, saying, “She runs by herself, you need not put her into your awa-skin.”

So they went all together, and having reached the onion-ground, began to dig. Now the little girl saw traces of feet, and said to the one who had guided them thither, “Wonderful! whence so many traces? Were you not alone here?” The other replied, “I walked about and looked out; therefore they must of course be many.” The child, however, did not believe that if the other girl had been alone the traces could be many, and felt uneasy; for she was a wise little woman. From time to time she rose (from her work) and peeped about, and once, while doing this, found by chance an ant-eater’s hole. Still further spying about, she perceived some men, but they did not see her. She then returned and continued digging with the other girls, without, however, saying anything. But in the midst of their work she always rose and looked about her. So the others asked her, “Why do you always spy about you, and leave off digging? What a girl!” But she continued her work in silence. When she rose from it again, she saw the men approaching. As they drew near the One-eyed blew through a reed pipe the following air:—

“To-day there shall blood flow, blood flow, blood flow!”

The little girl understood what was blown on the reed. She said to the elder ones, whilst they were dancing, “Do you also understand the tune that is blown on the reed?” But they only said, “What a child she is!” So she mixed in the dance with the others; but managed while so doing to tie her sister’s caross-cloak to her own, and in this manner they danced on, till it became very noisy, and then they found an opportunity to slip away.

On their way out the little sister asked, “Do you understand the reed—I mean what is blown on it?” She answered, “I do not understand it.” Then the little girl explained to her that the tune on the reed said, “To-day blood shall flow!” When they walked along, the little girl let her elder sister go first, and herself followed, walking backwards, and carefully stepping in her sister’s traces, so that they thus left only one set of footmarks, and these going in a contrary direction. In this manner they arrived at the ant-eater’s hole.

But the men killed all those girls who had remained dancing with them. When the eldest of those who had escaped heard their wailing, she said, “Alas, my sisters!” But the younger one answered her, “Do you think you would have lived if you had remained there?”

Now “One-eye” was the first to miss the sisters, and said to the other men, “Where may the two handsome girls be who danced with me?” The others replied, “He lies. He has seen with his eye” (satirically meaning he had seen wrongly). But “One-eye” insisted that “two girls were truly missing.” Then they went to find their spoor, but the traces had been rendered indistinct enough to puzzle them.

When the men arrived at the ant-eater’s hole, they could not see that the footmarks went further, so they spied into the hole, but saw nothing. Then “One-eye” looked also, and he saw the girls, and cried, “There they sit.” The others now looked again, but still saw nothing; for the girls had covered themselves with cobwebs.

One of the men then took an assegai, and piercing through the upper part of the hole, hit the heel of the larger girl. But the little wise woman took hold of the assegai, and wiped off the blood. The elder sister was about to cry, but the little one warned her not.

When “One-eye” spied again, the little girl made big eyes at him. He said, “There she sits.” The others looked too, but as they could see nothing they said (satirically), “He has only seen with his eye.”

At last the men got thirsty, and said to “One-eye,” “Stay you here, and let us go to drink, and when we have returned you may go also.”

When “One-eye” was left alone there, the little girl said (conjuring him):

“You dirty son of your father, Are you there? Are you alone not thirsty? Oh, you dirty child of your father! Dirty child of your father!”

“I am indeed thirsty,” said “One-eye,” and went away.

Then the two girls came out of the hole, and the younger one took her elder sister on her back, and walked on. As they were going over the bare, treeless plain, the men saw them, and said, “There they are, far off,” and ran after them.

When they came near, the two girls turned themselves into thorn trees, called “Wait-a-bit,” and the beads which they wore became gum on the trees. The men then ate of the gum and fell asleep. Whilst they slept, the girls smeared gum over the men’s eyes and went away, leaving them lying in the sun.

The girls were already near their kraal, when “One-eye” awoke, and said:

“Oh, the disgrace! fie on thee! Our eyes are smeared over; fie on thee, my brother!”

Then they removed the gum from their eyes, and hunted after the girls; but the latter reached home in safety, and told their parents what had happened.

Then all lamented greatly, but they remained quietly at home, and did not search for the other girls.

42. THE UNREASONABLE CHILD TO WHOM THE DOG GAVE ITS DESERTS; OR, A RECEIPT FOR PUTTING ANY ONE TO SLEEP.

(The original, in the o Tyi-hereró or Dámara language, is in Sir G. Grey’s Library, J. Rath’s Manuscript, pp. 39, 43.)

There was a little girl who had an eïngi (pronounced a-inghi, some kind of fruit). She said to her Mother, “Mother, why is it that you do not say, ‘My first-born, give me the eïngi?’ Do I refuse it?”

Her Mother said, “My first-born, give me the eïngi.” She gave it to her and went away, and her Mother ate the eïngi.

When the child came back, she said, “Mother, give me my eïngi?” but her Mother answered, “I have eaten the eïngi!”

The child said, “Mother, how is it that you have eaten my eïngi, which I plucked from our tree?” The Mother then (to appease her) gave her a needle.

The little girl went away and found her Father sewing thongs with thorns; so she said, “Father, how is it that you sew with thorns? Why do not you say, ‘My first-born, give me your needle?’ Do I refuse?” So her Father said, “My first-born, give me your needle.” She gave it to him and went away for a while. Her Father commenced sewing, but the needle broke; when, therefore, the child came back and said, “Father, give me my needle,” he answered, “The needle is broken;” but she complained about it, saying, “Father, how is it that you break my needle, which I got from Mother, who ate my eïngi, which I had plucked from our tree?” Her Father then gave her an axe.

Going farther on she met the lads who were in charge of the cattle. They were busy taking out honey, and in order to get at it they were obliged to cut down the trees with stones. She addressed them: “Our sons, how is it that you use stones in order to get at the honey? Why do not you say, ‘Our first-born, give us the axe?’ Do I refuse, or what do I?” They said, “Our first-born, give us the axe.” So she gave it them, and went away for some time. The axe broke entirely. When she came back she asked, “Where is the axe? Please give it me.” They answered, “The axe is broken.” She then said, “How is it that you break my axe, which I had received from Father who had broken my needle, which I got from Mother who had eaten my eïngi, which I had plucked from our tree?” But they gave her some honey (to comfort her).

She went her way again, and met a little old woman, eating insects, to whom she said, “Little old woman, how is it that you eat insects? Why don’t you say, ‘My first-born, give me honey?’ Do I refuse or not?” Then the little old woman asked, “My first-born, give me honey.” She gave it her and went away; but presently returning, said, “Little old woman, let me have my honey!” Now the old woman had managed to eat it all during her absence, so she answered, “Oh! I have eaten the honey!” So the child complained, saying, “How is it that you eat my honey, which I received from the lads of our cattle, from our children who had broken my axe, which had been given me by Father who had broken my needle, which was a present from my Mother who had eaten up my eïngi, that I had plucked from our tree?”

The little old woman gave her food, and she went away. This time she came to the pheasants, who scratched the ground; and she said, “Pheasants! how is it that you scratch the ground? Why do not you say, ‘First-born, give us food?’ Do I refuse, or what do I?” They said, “First-born, give.” So she gave to them, and went away. When she came back and demanded her food again, they said, “We have eaten the food.” She asked, “How is it that you eat my food, which I had received from a little old woman who had eaten up my honey, that I had got from the lads of our cattle who had broken my axe, which had been given me by my Father who had broken my needle, which was a present from my Mother who had eaten my eïngi, which I had plucked from our tree?” The pheasants, flying up, pulled out each one a feather and threw them down to the little girl.

She then, walking along, met the children who watched the sheep. They were plucking out hairs from the sheep-skins. So she asked them, “How is it that you pull at these skins? Why do not you say, ‘First-born, give us the feathers?’ Do I refuse, or what do I?” They said, “First-born, give us the feathers.” She gave them and went away, but all the feathers broke. When she returned and said, “Give me my feathers,” they answered, “The feathers are broken.” Then she complained, “Do you break my feathers which I received from the pheasants who had eaten my food, which had been given me by a little old woman?” They gave her some milk.

She went again on her way, and found their own handsome dog gnawing bones. She said, “Our dog, how is it that you gnaw these bones?” The dog answered, “Give me milk.” She gave it him, and he drank it all. Then she said to the dog, “Give me back my milk.” He said, “I drank it.” She then repeated the same words which she had spoken so often before; but the dog ran away, and when she pursued him, he scampered up a tree. She climbed up after him, but the dog jumped down again on the other side. She wanted to do the same, but could not. Then she said, “Our dog, please help me down.” He answered, “Why did you pursue me?” and ran away leaving her up the tree.

“That is enough,” say the Damara.

NOTES

[1] Cisgariepian, from the Nama point of view, i.e., to the North of the Orange River.

[2] I give here some extracts from Mr. Wallmann’s letter, dated Barmen, 13th April, 1850, which was the only help of a grammatical or lexical nature then available for me in my study of this Nama translation of Luke’s Gospel:—

“I transmit hereby Luke’s Gospel in Namaqua, ... which I can lend you, however, only for four weeks, as I have already previously promised it to some one else.

“Should your labours permit it, I wish to request you to make a little trial whether the Namaqua is somewhat related to the South African family of Languages. For the present a mere negative decision on this point is all that is wanted, and I should like to have very soon the opinion of some good philologist regarding it. Moffat states that when he gave specimens of Namaqua to a Syrian who came from Egypt, he was told that he (the Syrian) had seen slaves in the market of Cairo who were of lighter colour than other Africans, and whose language resembled that of the Namaqua. Moffat also says that some ancient authors have mentioned a nation in the interior of Africa who were very similar to the Hottentots. Moffat seems himself, however, to ascribe little value to these accounts, for his guesses fall at once upon the Chinese. According to communications from our Missionary Knudsen, the Namaqua language seems well formed. He mentions as personal pronouns:—

Tita saaz χyb sada sako χyku I thou (sāts) he (ǁẽip) we you they (ǁĕiku)

but to show the modifications which the pronouns undergo according to the gender, and whether the person (spoken to) is included or excluded (in the first person plural), the following examples of inclusive or exclusive forms are given:—

“We are captains.”

(incl.) Sake ke kauauke } mascul. (excl.) Sike ke kauauke }

(incl.) Sase ke kautase } fem. (excl.) Sise ke kautase }

(incl.) Sada ke tana-khoida } com. (excl.) Sida ke tana-khoida }

(incl.) Sakhom ke kauaukhoma } dual. mascul. (excl.) Sikhom ke kauaukhoma }

(incl.) Saam he kautama } dual. fem. (excl.) Siim ke kautama }

(incl.) Saam ke tana-khoima } dual. com. (excl.) Siim ke tana-khoima }

“The second person of the plural is said to have not more than half as many distinctions; and the third person plural has only the following:—

χyku ke kauauga—mascul. χyte ke kautate—fem. χyn ke tana-khoina—com. χykha ke kauaukha—dual. mascul. χyra ke kautara—dual. fem. χyra ke tana-khoira—dual. com.

“You will therefore oblige me by looking into the Namaqua Luke, and by having the kindness to write me your opinion regarding it.”

[3] Report of the Correspondence and Paper read at the General Meeting of the Syro-Egyptian Society, Session of 1851 and 1852. Read at the Anniversary Meeting, held April 20th, 1852, 8vo. pp. 6, 8.

[4] “Ethnology of the Indo-Pacific Islands.” By J. R. Logan, Esq., Hon. Fellow of the Ethnological Society. Language, Part ii. “The Races and Languages of S.E. Asia, considered in relation to those of the Indo-Pacific Islands,” Chapter v., sections i. to vi. [From the Journal of the Indian Archipelago and Eastern Asia, June and December, 1853, to December, 1854.] Singapore: Printed by Jakob Baptist, 8vo., pp. 229, 294, sec. 6. The Semitico-African Languages, viz.:—1. General Characters, p. 229; 2. Egyptian, p. 248; 3. Hottentot, p. 248; 4. Shemo-Hamitic, or Assyro-Berber, p. 259.

[5] Mr. Rath’s Manuscript consists of sixty-one pages, with double columns, foolscap folio. It contains the following pieces:—

1. The Spectre Sweethearts, pp. 1, 2. 2. The Lion Husbands, pp. 2, 5. 3. Tenacity of a Loving Mother’s Care, pp. 5, 6. 4. The Girl who ran after her Father’s Bird, pp. 6, 12. 5. The Handsome Girl, pp. 12, 15. 6. The Little Bushman Woman, pp. 17, 18. 7. Punishment of Imposition, pp. 19, 21. 8. The Spectre who Fell in Love with his Son’s Wife, pp. 22, 23. 9. The Lunatic, p. 23. 10. The Girls who Escaped from the Hill Damaras, pp. 24, 26. 11. The Elephant and the Tortoise, pp. 27, 29. 12. The Two Wives, pp. 29, 33. 13. The Lion who took different Shapes, pp. 34, 35. 14. The Little Girl left in the Well by her wicked Companions, pp. 35, 38. 15. The Unreasonable Child to whom the Dog gave its Deserts, pp. 39, 43 16. Rutanga, p. 44. 17. The Ghost of the Man who was Killed by a Rhinoceros in consequence of his Father’s Curse, pp. 45, 47. 18. The Trials of Hambeka, a Spirit risen from the Dead, pp. 47, 50. 19. The Little Girl who was teased by an Insect, p. 51. 20. The same as 16 (Rutanga) p. 52. 21. Conjugal Love after Death, p. 53. 22. The Bad Katjungu and the Good Kahavundye, pp. 54, 57. 23. The Wife who went after her Husband, pp. 57, 59. 24. The Little Girl Murdered by the Hill Damara, pp. 59, 61.

[6] The title of Mr. Knudsen’s first Manuscript is, “Südafrica: Das Hottentot-Volk; Notizzen (Manuscript) H. C. Knudsen.” 4to., p. 12. Its contents are, Bushman Land, p. 3; the different kinds of Rain, p. 3; Bethany (in Great Namaqualand), p. 3; the Damara, p. 4; the Grassy Plain, p. 4; the Diseases, pp. 4, 5; Birdsnests, p. 5; Marriage and Wedding among the Namaqua, p. 5; Extent of Authority among the Namaqua, p. 5; Similarity with the Jewish manner of Thinking, Counting, Eating, Drinking, Praying, Mode of Speech, and manner of Reckoning Relationship, p. 6; Heitsi Eibip or Kabip, p. 7; Origin of the Modes of Life of the Namaqua and Bushmen, pp. 7, 8; Coming of Age among the Hottentots, p. 8; Names of Hottentot Tribes and their probable Etymology, pp. 8, 9; Are the Hottentots of Egyptian or Phœnician Origin? p. 9; Are the Hottentots of Jewish or Moabitic Origin? pp. 9, 10; Appendix, pp. 11, 12.

Mr. Knudsen’s second Manuscript has the following title, “Stoff zu einer Grammatik in der Namaquasprache (Manuscript), H. C. Knudsen.” 4to. pp. 29. After a few general introductory remarks, and a short explanation of the Hottentot Alphabet, Mr. Knudsen treats of the different Parts of Speech:—I. Nouns, pp. 3, 4; II. Adjectives, pp. 4, 5; III. Pronouns, pp. 5, 10; IV. Numerals, p. 11; V. Verbs, pp. 12, 24; Interrogative Sentences, pp. 25, 26; Concluding Remarks, pp. 26, 29.

[7] The little Fox, in Nama the ǃKamap, a small kind of Jackal, who is a swift runner. The Jackal’s name is ǀGirip. (The ǀ is the dental and the ǃ the cerebral click; vide Notes to Fables 23 and 27, pp. 47, 62.)

[8] “When the Hyena first starts, it appears to be lame on the hind legs, or gone in the loins, as one would say of a horse.”—L. Layard.

[9] “Because the Giraffe is said to give blue ashes when burnt.”—Krönlein.

[10] In token of approval, according to a Hottentot custom.

[11] With reference to the Baboon’s great power of distancing his pursuers.

[12] The ǀ is the dental click, which is “sounded by pressing the tip of the tongue against the front teeth of the upper jaw, and then suddenly and forcibly withdrawing it.”—Tindall.

[13] The ǂ is the palatal click, described in note to Fable 24. p. 55, and χ is the German ch.

[14] ǂ Indicates the palatal click, which is sounded by pressing the tip of the tongue, with as flat a surface as possible, against the termination of the palate at the gums, and withdrawing it suddenly and forcibly.

[15] The stage is that apparatus in the background of the hut (built of mats) opposite the door, upon which the Hottentots hang their bamboos, bags of skins, and other things, and under which the women generally keep their mats.

[16] Vide Note to Fable 24, p. 56.

[17] Χ is the German ch, and ǃ the cerebral click of the Hottentot language, which is “sounded by sending up the tip of the tongue against the roof of the palate, and withdrawing it forcibly and suddenly.”—Tindall.

[18] Hottentot huts being merely made of skins stretched over a frame, are carried about by the people in their wanderings.

[19] “We are now angry with the Hare,” say the old Namaqua, “because he brought such a bad message, and therefore we dislike to eat his flesh.”—Knudsen.

[20] Old Namaquas will not therefore touch Hare’s flesh; but the young men may partake of it; that is, before the ceremony of making them men is performed, which merely consists in slaughtering and eating an ox or a couple of sheep.—Alexander.

[21] Ohlangeni. Vide Colenso’s “Zulu-English Dictionary,” p. 179.

[22] Knudsen, who heard this legend from the Hottentot Petrus Friedrik, was afterwards informed that Heitsi Eibip was not the person meant in this tale. It looks very much like the end of our 27th Fable, of the Woman who outwitted the Elephants.

[23] Sir James E. Alexander, in his “Expedition of Discovery into the Interior of Africa,” vol. i. p. 166, speaking of the people at Warm Bath, or Nisbett Bath, says:—“These Namaquas thought that they came from the East. In the country there is occasionally found (besides the common graves covered with a heap of stones) large heaps of stones, on which had been thrown a few bushes; and if the Namaquas are asked what these are, they say that Heije Eibib, their Great Father, is below the heap; they do not know what he is like, or what he does; they only imagine that he also came from the East, and had plenty of sheep and goats; and when they add a stone or branch to the heap, they mutter, ‘Give us plenty of cattle.’”

[24] Sir James Alexander, in his “Expedition of Discovery into the Interior of Africa,” vol. ii. p. 250, states:—“On the 3rd of August the waggon went on to Aneip, or Wet Foot, and I went out of the way with Jan Buys, and two or three men, to see a hole, which was supposed to be inhabited by Heije Eibib, and was the wonder of the country.”

[25] The ǂ is the palatal click, described in Note to Fable 24, p. 55; and indicates the nasal pronunciation of a syllable.

[26] The ǃ is the cerebral click described in Note to Fable 27, p. 62.