UNIT 3

LECTURE 1: A brief overview of general South African history

* This lecture is based on the following sources:

 John Saul “The making of South Africa…and apartheid, to 1970” (available

on Clickup under ‘Unit 3, Lecture 1’)
 Beck R The history of South Africa (2000) 25-27.- This book is available as
an e-book from the University’s library. ( Please note that this book is not
compulsory reading for JUR110).
 Venter A and Landsberg C (eds) Government and politics in South Africa
(2011) 5-7. (Please note that this book is not compulsory reading for
JUR110)

1. INTRODUCTION (Saul, pages 15-16)

In his chapter, John Saul traces the history of South Africa from colonisation (starting
in the 17th century) to the establishment of apartheid in the second half of the 20th
century. It should be noted that the territory known today as ‘South Africa’ did not
exist before 1910. The Union Constitution, formally known as the South Africa Act of
1909 is regarded as the Constitution that established the state now known as South
Africa. This Act established the Union of South Africa in 1910. Therefore, in a
technical sense, the formal state of South Africa only came into in existence in 1910.

2. THE MYTH OF THE ‘EMPTY LAND’ (Saul, pages 16-18)

The main focus of Saul’s chapter is on the history of South Africa which did NOT
start with Dutch colonisation in 1652, but commenced well before this date. Thus, the
colonisers did not find an ‘empty land’ in 1652, but a land already inhabited by
African peoples with their own history. This history continues to have an impact on
post-apartheid South Africa.
Some history textbooks have recorded the myth of the ‘empty land’. According to this
myth, the Dutch colonisers stumbled upon a land that was empty of inhabitants in
1652. This myth has been used throughout history to justify the colonial
dispossession or conquest of indigenous land.

The historian Shula Marks reports that “[f]or over 1,000 years before the Dutch
arrived at the Cape of Good Hope, Iron Age farmers and Late Stone Age peoples
had been living in the interior of South Africa.” Therefore, when the Dutch arrived in
1652, they did not find an empty land, but territories inhabited by various groups of
people.

* See ‘Concepts’ for explanation of the term ‘Conquest’

3. WHO WAS HERE FIRST? (Saul, pages 16-18)

An unsettled debate exists as to who was ‘first’ on South African soil. According to
the ANC’s Freedom Charter , the territory of South Africa belongs to black and
white people. The ANC recognises that the land belongs to blacks as well as the
descendants of the white colonisers. The ANC therefore adopts a non-racial reading
of South Africa’s history. Please note that the view adopted by the ANC in its
Freedom Charter, is not something that you have to agree with. This is an
ongoing debate which is discussed in Saul’s chapter.

* Please see ‘Concepts’ for an explanation of ‘Freedom Charter’

4. THE HISTORY OF THE KHOISAN AND BANTU-SPEAKING PEOPLES (Saul,

pages 17-21)

According to Saul, white domination and exploitation have been so pervasive in

South Africa, that it has been easy to forget that black men and women are historical
actors in their own right, meaning that blacks were making their own history long
before the territory of South Africa was colonised by the Dutch and the British. What
then is this history? From pages 17-19, the author provides a summary of the history
of the indigenous people of South Africa (the Khoikhoi and the San, known
collectively as the Khoisan) and the Bantu-speaking peoples who migrated from the
continent to the territory now known as South Africa. Saul also discusses how black
people were deprived of land and their means of economic production through
conquest. From pages 19-21, the author focuses exclusively on the history of the
Bantu-speaking peoples. From page 21, Saul starts detailing how conquest took
place and its impact on the Khoisan and the Bantu-speaking peoples.

4.1 A brief history of Dutch and British colonisation ( Saul, pages 21-28; Beck
R The history of South Africa (2000) 25-27; 92-98).

Colonisation commenced in the 17th century, to be precise in 1652 with Dutch

occupation of the Cape. The 17th century was the golden age of Dutch colonisation.
The Dutch East India Company (VOC) had by this century accumulated a vast
empire of colonies across Asia. The Cape was considered a safe midway harbour for
the ships of the VOC on route to Asia. On 6 April 1652, Jan Van Riebeeck set foot
on Cape shores and established a refreshment station for the VOC. Initially
considered as only a temporary colony, the Cape became a permanent home for
Dutch freeburgers (or citizens) after they were ‘given’ land by the VOC. It was not
long before employees from the VOC, including Dutch, French, Scandinavian and
other Europeans retired permanently at the Cape. The Dutch occupied the Cape
from 1652 until 1795 and then again from 1803 until 1806.

The British colonised South Africa for the greatest part of the 19th century. Britain
took over control of the Cape in 1795 from the Dutch. The Dutch regained
occupation of the Cape for a brief period between 1803 and 1806. The British
colonised the Cape for a second time from 1806, however the formal cession of the
colony to Britain only took place in 1814. Britain’s direct colonial involvement in
South Africa lasted from 1795 until 1910.

The east of South Africa was mainly occupied by Xhosa-speaking peoples. During
the 18th century and first half 19th century, the Dutch and British engaged in a
series of wars with the Xhosa-speaking peoples with the aim of dispossessing them
of their land.
Some Afrikaners (also called the ‘Boers’) moved from the Cape Colony to the north
and east of South Africa. While some Afrikaners decided to leave the Cape Colony,
many decided to stay behind to benefit from the supply of cheap and docile KhoiKhoi
labour guaranteed by the British authorities at the Cape during the 19th century.

The Afrikaners who left the Cape Colony embarked on the ‘Great Trek’ in the 1830s.
The Afrikaners established the so-called ‘Boer Republics’, namely the Orange Free
State and the Transvaal, also known as the ‘South African Republic.’

At the beginning of the 20th century, the territory of South Africa was embroiled in a
war between the British and the independent Afrikaner Republics of the Orange Free
State and the Zuid- Afrikaanse Republiek (also then known as Transvaal). The aim
of the British was to bring the two Boer Republics under imperial control and to gain
control of their mineral wealth while the Afrikaners were fighting for their
independence. The war, known as the South African War formally ended in 1902
with the signing of the Treaty of Vereeniging. In terms of the treaty, the Afrikaner
republics were forced to surrender their independence to the British in return for the
promise of “eventual political autonomy, the right to maintain their language in
schools and courts and massive economic assistance for post-war construction.” By
1908, there were four separate, self-ruled colonies under British occupation in South
Africa, namely the Cape of Good Hope, Natal, Orange Free State and the Transvaal.
This state of affairs remained until the unification of South Africa in 1910.

4.2 How did Africans respond to European expansion? (Saul, pages 21-28)

First, Saul alludes to the creation of a ‘petty African bourgeoisie’ who sought to
benefit from the opportunities created through trade and employment with the
colonisers. However, the majority of the African population was left in poverty and
became members of the working class.

Second, Saul mentions the impact of the colonisers’ religion on Africans. The
colonisers set out to convert the African population into Christians. In 2001, 80% of
Africans in South Africa identified as Christian. Historically, Afrikaners has used the
Christian message as justification for their belief that they are superior to blacks.
Christianity has also inculcated a passive attitude among some Africans vis-a-vis
authoritiarian (white) rule and impoverishment.

Third, Saul argues that the primary response of Africans to conquest has been of
sustained and impressive resistance. However, despite heroic resistance, the reality
remains that the 19th century was mainly characterised by the violent dispossession
of land by the colonisers. Africans were systemically pushed to the margins of
society.

* Please see ‘Concepts’ for the meaning of the term ‘bourgeoisie’

5. THE MINERAL REVOLUTION (Saul, pages 28-35)

The discovery of diamonds in 1867 and the discovery of gold in 1886 set in motion
the mineral revolution. The British was intent on owning and exploiting South Africa’s
mineral wealth. The mining magnates primarily consisted of the British colonisers.

Since minerals were primarily discovered in the Afrikaner republics, the tensions
between the British and the Afrikaner political authorities eventually culminated in a
war between these parties from 1899 until 1902. However, the Afrikaners and the
British eventually made peace through the Treaty of Vereeniging which set in
process the formation of the white, racist supremacist state of 1910.

The primary casualties of the Treaty/Peace of Vereeniging were black people. In

terms of the Treaty, the white authorities of Transvaal and the Orange Free State
had the discretion to grant black people the right to vote. The franchise was granted
to black men in the Cape Colony, but was later abolished. Ultimately, the British
mining magnates and the Afrikaner political authorities worked together to create a
white supremacist state under Union Rule in 1910 which would benefit all whites,
whether British or Afrikaner. The legal and political system established under Union
Rule guaranteed the endless supply of cheap, black labour to the mines. Basically,
the marginalisation of blacks by the legal, political and economic system of the time
resulted in the creation of a proletariat among the black population.

* See ‘Concepts’ for the explanation of the terms ‘franchise’ and ‘proletariat’.
6. WHITE POLITICS: FROM SEGREGATION TO APARTHEID (Saul, pages 36-47;
Beck The history of South Africa (2000) 98-99; Venter A and Landsberg C (eds)
Government and politics in South Africa (2011) 5-7.)

In September 1909, royal assent was provided to the South Africa Act which unified
the four former British colonies (Cape of Good Hope, Natal, Orange Free State and
Transvaal) into the Union of South Africa. The Act established a “strong central
government with the four colonies reduced to provinces possessing local powers
only.” The date of the establishment of the Union was 31 May 1910 as declared by a
Royal Proclamation of 2 December 1909. The unification resulted in a “British
dominion, meaning that it had a large degree of self-government as far as domestic
affairs were concerned. However, it could not yet be reckoned as a sovereign state.”

A white supremacist state characterised Union Rule.- Saul describes the political
economy of the Union state as ‘racial capitalism.’

* See ‘Concepts’ for an explanation of the term ‘racial capitalism.’

What is clear, is that racial segregation, white supremacy and black exploitation did
not commence with apartheid, but had its roots in colonisation.

Saul depicts how Afrikaners under Union Rule could be categorised into two camps:
One group was in favour of ‘reconciliation’ and unity with the British, another group,
wanted to pursue a radical form of Afrikaner nationalism. Afrikaner nationalism
eventually culminated in the establishment of apartheid in 1948.

Before the introduction of apartheid in 1948, the Union government enacted various
pieces of legislation which cemented white supremacy and the subordination and
exploitation of the black population. These included the Mines and Works Act of
1911 and the Industrial Conciliation Act of 1924 which contained the wage levels of
black workers and restricted the rights of blacks to self-organise through workers’
unions.

The notorious Natives Land Act of 1913 was also passed under Union Rule. This Act
prohibited Africans from purchasing land in 93% of South African territory.
The Union government also embarked on affirmative action programmes for white
workers and poor Afrikaners. For example, the Colour Bar Bill of 1926 reserved jobs
exclusively for whites.

In 1948, the National Party gained an electoral victory over the United Party and
assumed control of South Africa. Their rule lasted for 46 years, from 1948 until 1994.
In 1961, the Afrikaner’s “passion of freedom from British dominium had been
resolved” when South Africa became a sovereign republic. The National Party
government was most notorious for the adoption of apartheid, a legislated system
which extended to “most aspects of economic, social and political life.” South
Africans were classified into different race groups, including Blacks, Coloureds,
Whites and Indians under the apartheid regime. Legislation was adopted that racially
segregated public and private spaces, including schools and residential areas.
Marriage and sexual relations across the colour line were proscribed. It is estimated
that more than three million black people were forcibly removed from their homes
and settled in so-called “group areas.” A system of “Bantustans” was devised which
by 1959 culminated in nine so-called “independent African states” taking up 13% of
South Africa’s territory. The remaining 87% of land would remain in the hands of the
white population. Black people in urban areas were consigned to “townships with
almost no economic base…and therefore underresourced and underdeveloped.” In
sum, “[t]o be white in [apartheid] South Africa was to be privileged and to be black
was to be repressed and restricted.”

During apartheid, job reservation for whites and government favouritism towards
Afrikaner firms and banks flourished. Afrikaners were guaranteed supervisory
employment and the government ensured that Afrikaner firms and financial
institutions received government contracts.

7. RESISTANCE, TO THE 1960s (Saul, pages 47-56)

In this section, Saul traces the resistance to white colonial rule from the 19th century
to the 1960s. Although various organisations has played a role in the resistance
movement, the African National Congress (ANC) has to be singled out because it
eventually became the ruling party of the first post-apartheid South African
government. The ideology/ies of the ANC therefore, will be focused on.
Although the ANC initially only allowed Africans as members of the party, it did form
alliances with organisations representing non-African communities, such as the
Indian National Congress. Saul regards the ANC’s willingness to form alliances
across the racial divide as the first seeds of the ANC’s commitment to multi-
racialism.

In the ANC, two opposing ideologies were present. On the one hand, the African
nationalists were resistant to multi-racial politics of resistance. On the other hand, the
more liberal group believed that some sort of democratic redress was required to the
racist system in South Africa, but they did not question the capitalist structure which
underpinned this racial system.

In 1955, the ANC adopted the Freedom Charter at Kliptown. The Charter represents
a compromise between the opposing ideologies in the ANC. The charter contains
classic liberal ideas such as the guarantee of basic rights for all and ‘one person,
one vote’. It also embraces ‘multi-racialism’ to the extent that it explicitly states that
‘South Africa belongs to black and white people.’ However, the Charter also
entrenches socialist notions to the extent that it supports the principle that ‘the
mineral wealth beneath the soil, the banks and monopoly industry shall be
transferred to the ownership of the people as a whole.’

See ‘Concepts’ for an explanation of the terms ‘capitalism’, ‘liberalism’ and

‘socialism’.

8. THE 1960S: THE APARTHEID BOOM (Saul, pages 56-62)

The Sharpeville Massacre of 1960 is a defining moment in apartheid history.

The international response to Sharpeville? The UN rebuffed South Africa on the

diplomatic front. Although it initially seemed that South Africa would suffer
economically as a result of Sharpeville, the international economic actors eventually
rallied together to bail out South Africa. The international actors (mainly American
and European companies) protected their investments in South Africa and thus
supported the SA economy despite the fact that the apartheid regime had murdered
innocent black people during the Sharpeville massacre.
The economic boom in SA between 1963 and 1972 was a golden age for those who
benefited from a system that was built on the exploitation and repression of the black
working class. The mere fact that the West did not retreat, but instead protected their
investments reveals the role of the West in the preservation of apartheid during this
time.

In the final part of this chapter, Saul concentrates on the rise of Hendrik Verwoerd
who was instrumental in the creation of Bantustan territories and the implementation
of the Bantu Education Act which entrenched inferior education for black people.
Verwoerd was also instrumental in ensuring that the police obtained sweeping
powers, such as the power to detain people without charge.

Saul concludes this chapter by focusing on the formation of student organisations in

opposition to apartheid and the general uprising of the youth which eventually
culminated in the Soweto protests of 1976.

Please see ‘Concepts’ for a reference to the ‘Sharpeville Massacre’ and the
‘Soweto Protests’.