The continued existence of the monarchy and its funding by the state has been debated in many nations for many years. In Africa and Europe, some have retained the institution, while others abolished it. The question of its relevance and funding is one that each nation must resolve for itself, including South Africa.For several years now, the growing expenses of the king's household in KwaZulu-Natal have stirred much debate. But whether the state can afford these expenses and whether they are reasonable can only be debated in the context of why the state funds the monarchy in the first place. How were emoluments to the king first established?In the Zulu kingdom, my grandfather, King Dinuzulu, was the first to receive emoluments from the government. While in exile on St Helena, he and his family were maintained by the British colonial government. On his return, King Dinuzulu was paid a stipend of £500.But since the inception of the Zulu kingdom, it has been the duty of the k ing's subjects to provide for him. The people of KwaZulu were duty-bound, for example, to plough the k ing's lands and build his royal residences.When the king or an inkosi married, lobolo was their own responsibility with the exception of the chief wife - the one from whose house his heir would come - whose lobolo would be paid for by the nation or clan. Thus, when King Solomon ka Dinuzulu offered his sister's hand in marriage to my father, Inkosi Mathole, the king's prime minister, lobolo was paid by the Buthelezi clan.When the apartheid regime foisted the homelands system on black South Africans, Oliver Tambo and Inkosi Albert Luthuli urged me to take up leadership of the government of KwaZulu. Our aim was to undermine the apartheid system from within, as part of a multi-strategy approach to the liberation struggle.This strategy succeeded, for my position as chief minister enabled me to reject nominal independence for KwaZulu, thereby derailing the grand scheme of apartheid to balkanise our country and deprive millions of black South Africans of their citizenship.As soon as we had a budget in the KwaZulu government, I raised with my officials that the king's salary should be higher than mine or any other minister. That became an established policy.When the king married the daughter of King Sobhuza II, the duty arose to build his royal residence. We decided to fund this from the budget of the KwaZulu government, for the alternative was to ask for collections from the people.As the need arose, the budget then funded three more residences, and security for the king and his family. But because we did not have to ask for collections, the burden on our people was alleviated.In 1994, our first democratic government found these arrangements already in place and could not dismantle them. Thus the state continued to fund the king's expenses.Since 1994, however, the king's family has expanded, necessitating the expansion of the budget to proportions which have caused discontent in many quarters. Some have asked why the Zulu king receives proportionally more than any other king in South Africa, and why the state should continue to fund the monarch, regardless of how much it costs.These are contentious questions, but they deserve to be interrogated, so long as we begin our debate from a foundation of facts, rather than rancour, conjecture or ignorance.There must also be place in this debate for the role the monarchy plays in maintaining social unity, discipline and traditional values. It is difficult to give these things a monetary value, and it may be misguided to attempt to do so, for it would be destructive to create contempt for "expensive" values.These values must be strengthened, and the fact that the monarchy does that should not be trivialised.Buthelezi is president of the Inkatha Freedom Party and traditional prime minister to the Zulu monarch and nation..