Blank-swart-verhoudinge soos weerspieël in die Vrystaatse historiografie, 1800-1910

[摘要] English: The aim of this dissertation is to conduct, within the framework of existing historiographicclassification, a historiographic investigation into white-black relationships in the Free Stateduring the period 1800-1910. Firstly, to achieve this goal, the relationship of conflictbetween the whites in the Free State and the Basutu was historiographically investigated.Secondly, the relationship between whites and blacks in the Free State as it was during theAnglo Boer War (ABW) was analysed. The perceptions of historians and other writers onwhite-black relationships in social, medical, educational, economical, political, juridical andreligious affairs were also investigated.White-black relationships as reflected in the historiography of.the Free State, 1800-1910As a result of the influence of the personalities of individual historians and memoirists, theeffects of social environments and the spirit of the age, as well as paradigmatic andmethological differences on historiography, it is impossible to obtain any objective, generalaccount of the history of white-black relationships in the Free State.From the historians' and memoirists' picturing of the white-black relationships during theperiod 1800-1910, a clear distinction can be made between pro-white and pro-blackhistorians and memoirists. Regarding pro-white historians, it is possible to distinguishbetween Afrikaner-centric historians from the prescientific phase, their professional andamateur kindret spirits, as well as colonial and imperial historians on the grounds ofmethodological and paradigmatic differences. Pro-black historians and memoirists includeon their turn the contemporary liberals, professional liberals, neo-liberals, revisionists andblack historians.With a few exceptions, the pro-white historians are of the opinion that the whites broughtpeace, progress, civilisation and the Word of God to the uncivilised, warlike heathens in theFree State. On the other side, the pro-black historians show, although from different startingpoints, how the peace and progession that the Basutu experienced under the capable reign ofMosjwesjwe were cruelly disturbed by the whites. The view of these historians andmemoirists that the whites with their thirst for land occupied the land of the Basutuunlawfully, is rejected by pro-white historians and memoirists. The latter point out that thewhites are the lawful owners of the Caledon River because they had occupied unoccupiedland.Various border agreements and peace treaties were made between the whites in the FreeState and the Basutu during the period 1843-1869. The positive and/or negative judgementsof the historians and memoirists concerning these treaties are determined by the writers'interpretations of the benefits or the disadvantages of the treaties to the whites/Basutu.Next to white-black relationships, the other most important relationship-study in the SouthAfrican history is that between the Boers and the British. In historians' discussions of theinvolvement of the British in the white-black conflict in the Free State, these tworelationships are intertwined. Imperial historians propagate for example British involvementin South Africa. They create the impression that British interference is necessary for theestablishment of peace and progression in the Free State. The withdrawal of the British fromthe area in 1854 is seen by these historians as a great mistake. While liberal historiansaccuse Great Brittain that she has failed in her mission to act as protector for the indigenouspeople, the neo-liberals and revisionistic historians are of the opinion that the Boers and theBritish formed a white power base to the cost of the native people. The Afrikaner-centrichistorians are very critical against the conduct of the British against the blacks during theperiod of the Orange River Sovereignty. They work on the assumption that only the whiteAfrikaner had the necessary knowledge and insight to organise white-black relationshipssignificantly.During the republican era, there occured three wars between the whites in the Free State andthe Basutu. The Afrikaner-eentric and colonial historians see the Basutu aggression as themost important cause of the wars, and the pro-black historians do not deny this aggression.They justify it as an attempt of the Basutu to regain their lost land. The historiography onthe wars is full of contradictions. The pro-black historians and memoirists create theperception that Mosjwesjwe was a peace- leader who had no other option than to step up tothe war. The Afrikaner-centric historians, however, describe the presidents of the Free Stateas peace-loving. They tried everything to come to terms with Mosjwesjwe. Due to theBasutu aggression they had to take up the weapons in order to survive. Even regarding thecourse of the wars the historians are not concurrent. Afrikaner-centric historians depict theBoers as brave and virtuous; the Basutu were dishonourable and acted cowardly, directingtheir attacks on defenseless women and children. Exactly the opposite picture is portrayedby the pro-black historians and memoirists. According to them, the Basutu gained victoriesin spite of logistical problems. The destroying strategies of the whites brought Basutulandon the edge of destruction. To survive, they had to ask for peace.The historiographic analysis of white-black relationships in the Free State during the time ofthe ABW was a deviation from the standard historiographic classification. The findings ofABW historians and memoirists were determined mainly by their pro-British and pro-Boerloyalties. Although several historians and memoirists ignored the role of blacks in the war,there are others that specifically pay attention to their contribution as supporting personnelto the Boers and/or British. The acknowledgement of historians and memoirists of this.contribution vary between rude, racist enunciations to positive descriptions. The armamentof the blacks by the British troops create strong reaction from historians and memoirists.The pro-British writers point out that they had provided the blacks with weapons becausethey were tortured and/or killed by the Boers. The pro-Boer historians use this armament ofthe blacks as justification for the prompt killing of armed blacks. Although few memoiristsand historians pay attention to the suffering of black civilians of the Free State in and out ofconcentration camps, this subject is, since the seventies, increasingly receiving the attentionof historians.From the historiographic study of white-black relationships in the Free State in the social,educational, juridical, economical, labour, political and religious spheres, it seems that therole of blacks in these spheres are either marginilised or stereotyped by most historians,historical educationalists, memoirists and church historians. With a few exceptions, themajority of publications on these relationships are those of Afrikaner-centric historians. As aresult, there can be but little significant comparison of the views of historians andmemoirists on white-black relationships in these areas. In spite of the view that Afrikanercentrichistorians find social and economic historiography and research strange andtherefore omit it, the most important publication on the mentioned relationships is that of JHvan Aswegen and CJP le Roux.From the study it seems that there exist differences between writers regarding the selectionof sources, as well as the utilisation of sources or a lack of it. With the exception ofpublished doctoral dissertations, specialised works and a few synoptic works, there seems toexist a serious lack with regard to archival, archeological, linguistic, anthropological,sociological, economical and climatological research and utilisation of oral witness and theoral tradition. In spite of the fact that there exist so much conflicting witnesses on whiteblackrelationships in the Free State, primary research is being neglected by historians. Alarge percentage of authors base their research on the views of other historians - mainlycongenial spirits. While some of these writers acknowledge their sources, others plagiariseblatantly.Historians will have to turn to the oral evidence and black folklore to reconstruct the historyof all the inhabitants of the Free State. The history of the Free State is indeed the history ofall its inhabitants - politicians and ordinary people - as experienced by all its inhabitants.Regional studies are necessary to ensure that the history of the common man IS beingrecorded.The recording of the history of the Free State is far from completed. Themes that ask for.investigation are inter alia the role of whites and blacks in educational, economical,agricultural, medical, juridical and labour spheres. Not only the conflict-situations or thedifferences should be research in such relationship-studies, but also the cooperation betweenwhite and black.The time is ripe to record the history of the Free State in such a way that the role of all thepopulation groups and the interaction between these population groups are portrayed in ascientific justifiable way. Although such a work will not be acceptable to everyone, it willmake a contribution to a better knowledge and understanding of the Free State community.

[发布机构] University of the Free State