/ 7 February 1997

Apartheid’s colonial roots

Anthony Egan

COLONIAL SOUTH AFRICA AND THE ORIGINS OF THE RACIAL ORDER by Timothy Keegan= =20

(David Philip, R79,95)

WAS modern apartheid South Africa the product of the “mineral revolution” o= f g old and diamonds of the late 19th and early 20th centuries? Or do the roots= go

back even further into the Dutch and British colonial order?=20

Modern South African historical scholarship has debated this issue at lengt= h.=20

Dr Timothy Keegan of the Institute for Historical Research at the Universit= y o f the Western Cape has synthesised and criticised key themes in this new hi= sto

ry, coming up with a brilliant analytical and narrative argument for shifti= ng=20

the roots of apartheid back to the colonial period.

Anyone familiar with the dry-as-old-cowdung school history syllabus many of= us

endured will at first feel a little put off by some of the names,places an=

d e vents that Keegan describes. Remember Sir Harry Smith, Governor Somerset, = Dr=20

John Philip, the 1820 settlers, Great Trek, frontier wars ? They’re all her= e,=20

but they appear as never before in the classroom! Moreover, Keegan sets Sou= th=20

Africa wit hin the wider context of world history, showing how events and ideologies o= ver

seas affected local affairs – as one would expect in any outpost of a vast = col

onial empire.

Keegan’s point is that talk of the origins of the racial order is largely s= upe

rfluous; the notion of European/white supremacy was there from the start as= an

inherent ethnocentrism. As the players in South African history came into =

con

flict over the control of resources, various means were used to maintain c= olo

nial political and economic supremacy.=20

The Dutch instituted a hierarchy of legal status groups and the British mod= ern

ised, at times liberalising, them, in the interests of free enterprise and = fre

e trade. Humanitarian agents, like some (but definitely not all) missionari= es,

must be seen within this context – although they were opposed to overt opp=

res

sion of slaves, Khoikhoi , Sotho, Zulu and Xhosa peoples, their project was= la

rgely one=20 of assimilating colonised peoples into the colonial political economy, in t= he=20

interests of empire and capital. Cape liberalism, when in the ascendancy du= rin

g the mid- and late-19th century was an integral part of this process.

Likewise, he suggests, we should reread much of the history of conflict bet= wee

n “Bantu, Boer and Brit” (to use the language of earlier historians) in the= se=20

terms. Frontier wars – traditionally blamed on the Xhosa – can, on a more c= are

ful re-examination of sources, be seen as part of this colonising process, = del

iberate provocations on the part of the colonists.=20

Anti-British and illiberal views, a sense of “manifest destiny”,even the em= anc

ipation of slaves, can no longer be seen as causes of the Great Trek but be= com

e almost side issues; the real issues were ones of insecure land tenure and= th

e squeeze put on the Boer economy by the rapid growth of British commercial= en

terprise from the 1820s onwards.

Both Boer and Brit, then, were racial supremacists. Though Boer attitudes w= ere

perhaps more racist, they were also more likely to share land with indepen=

den

t African communities. The British, however, were more systematic and cynic= al:

they pursued maximum profit at minimal cost, often through indirect forms =

of=20

hegemony. It was their policies, Keegan suggests, that actually hardened hi= era

rchies of=20 race in a way that, one must conclude, formed the basis of the apartheid st= ate

.

To say that Colonial South Africa and the Origins of the Racial Order is an= im

pressive work is understatement. It should without a doubt be a major sourc= e f or educators preparing a new curriculum for schools and universities. Unlik= e ( sadly) many books and learned articles of its kind, it is also very well-wr= itt

en and extremely readable.=20