Healthy debate on place names is key to shared sense of ownership
“For indigenous people, place names act as mnemonic devices, embodying histories, spiritual and environmental knowledge, and traditional teachings. Place names also serve as boundary markers between home and the world of outsiders.”
These are observations that historian Kaleigh Bradley makes in the article “What’s in a Name? Place Names, History, and Colonialism”.
As we enjoy our heritage and tourism month, it is important to contextualise debate regarding the naming of our towns and certain places in the city. This debate was initiated by the process undertaken by the Eastern Cape Provincial Geographic Names Committee, more particularly the release of the outcomes of the public hearings regarding names of towns and certain places in Buffalo City Metro.
This has been a healthy debate, even though there were some minor offside comments, some of which border on racism and glorification of colonialism. There appears to be general agreement that the names East London, King William’s Town and Berlin ought to be changed but divergence seems to be on the names and on the pace of the process.
During a lecture organised by the University of Fort Hare and the Daily Dispatch in 2017, renowned academic Ngugi wa Thiong’o reflected that upon his arrival in the city he thought he was lost as he travelled from Cambridge Street and made a turn into Oxford Street in a town named East London.
This made him counsel those at the gathering that, “You need to do something about the name of this city and its streets. You need to take all those [colonial names], put them in an envelope and write ‘return to sender’.”
This point is not new as it has been raised by many people within and outside of our city. I am therefore glad that the process regarding it is being supported by many and that it is moving at a reasonable pace. It is, however, important to amplify this point in order for all to understand the reason and rationale for such a move. This requires that we briefly sketch the evolution of the town that is now called East London as an example.
The town has its roots in the Amatola War, often known as the War of the Axe, which took place from 1846. This was a war between AmaXhosa and the colonial settlers. The indigenous groups who fought in that war included AmaNgqika, Amandlambe and AbaThembu. Chief Mgolombane Sandile led the Xhosa people in the seventh, eighth and ninth frontier wars, the latter in which he was killed. The colonialists in that war were led by Andries Stockenström, who massacred many Africans and now has a town named after him.
During the Amatola War, the English had a fort near what is now King William’s Town, and they wanted a way of moving weapons from Port Elizabeth to that fort without being attacked by the Xhosa army led by Chief Sandile, which was highly effective inland and in mountainous areas. East London therefore came into being as a service port to the fort. With the dispossession that then ensued, it grew into a colonial city.
Initially, when the settlers arrived, they named the place Port Rex, but they later changed the name to East London in honour of the capital city of Great Britain. On January 14 1848 the new governor, Sir Harry Smith, annexed the port and a 3km radius to the Cape Colony and named it East London.
While all this was happening, there were Africans residing in the area and they had an organically evolved name for the place. The name East London, with the accompanying domination, was forced on them with sheer brutality and murder.
It is therefore my view that the naming process currently taking place is aimed at restoring the original name which is consistent with the character, culture and traditions of the majority of its inhabitants. It is therefore not a move of unguided triumphalism but a negotiated, widely consulted and socially engaged process aimed at creating a sense of place and belonging for all residents of the city.
The intention is to restore the dignity of the majority inhabitants of the city, which was wiped out through deliberate acts by colonialists.
Steve Biko reflected years later that “the most potent weapon of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed”.
Identity and creating a sense of being for the African is therefore necessary if there is to be a move from economic and cultural neocolonialism.
The effects of the cruel intentions of the colonialists are still visible in our country today and this is why the restoration of the dignity of black people is at the core of the government’s programme of social and economic transformation.
The correct naming of places is therefore essential in this regard and it is as important as the development measures that we continue to implement in addressing the triple challenges of poverty, unemployment and inequality.
It is my view that apart from being critical in affirming who we are, properly naming the city will elevate the uniqueness and create an African authentic feel for our city.
This will help us to better display our natural and cultural heritage.
The reality is that many international tourists are fascinated by our culture, our arts, crafts and the overall hospitality of our people.
International tourists are not interested in coming to our city in order to see a copy of what they are leaving in Europe. They want to experience an authentic African sense of place. The affirmation of our towns as African towns will therefore greatly boost tourism and create the necessary jobs.
The financial costs associated with a change of a name will be far outweighed by the longterm developmental impact and the socio-cultural significance. Let us continue to have a healthy debate, knowing that in the end we will have to arrive at a decision. We should be proud of our heritage as a nation, for it is the main source of our identity, imparting for us a sense of belonging and ownership.
Initially, when the settlers arrived, they named the place Port Rex, but they later changed the name to East London in honour of the capital city of Great Britain