It’s ob­vi­ous who re­ally owns the land

The Star Late Edition - - LETTERS -

WE SEEM to have ac­cepted the false nar­ra­tive that South Africa’s mod­ern his­tory started in 1652, when Jan van Riebeeck landed at the Cape.

This view is con­ve­niently es­poused be­cause it ig­nores the land­ing of the Por­tuguese in 1488.

The ob­vi­ous in­ten­tion of this is to dis­miss the first “war” on South African soil be­tween the Khoisan and the Por­tuguese, which em­anated from a sit­u­a­tion where the Por­tuguese re­fused to com­pen­sate the Khoisan for their cat­tle and other pro­duce, as well as to drive them off their land be­cause they were con­sid­ered to be “sav­ages”.

Need­less to say, the Por­tuguese were heav­ily de­feated and never set foot in the Cape again – Sal­danha as they called it then.

The rea­son why this is im­por­tant to re­mem­ber, is that had the Por­tuguese de­feated the Khoisan, our his­tory, lan­guage, re­li­gion and cul­ture would have been en­tirely dif­fer­ent – sim­i­lar pos­si­bly to those of An­gola, Mozam­bique and Brazil.

A few years later, Bartholomew Diaz got ship­wrecked in the Mos­sel Bay area, where he came into con­tact with some of the other Khoikhoi tribes like the Gourigua, At­te­qua, Hesse­qua, etc. And some in­ter-breed­ing took place.

An­other se­ri­ous lie that has to be dis­pelled is that the Khoisan peo­ple were dec­i­mated, first by sev­eral out­breaks of small­pox epi­demics and later by a de­lib­er­ate process of scalp-hunt­ing.

This an­ni­hi­la­tion nar­ra­tive pre­sup­poses that all the Khoisan peo­ple were con­cen­trated in the “Cape Town” area, which is un­true.

A sim­ple en­quiry into the spread of the Khoisan peo­ple would re­veal that they were to be found through­out the land. In fact, to avoid the small­pox scourge in the Cape, large num­bers of them had moved north. Some as far as Namibia (the Basters of Re­hoboth).

It’s ob­vi­ous why this lie had to be per­pet­u­ated, which was for it to fit into the “empty land” set­tler nar­ra­tive. Which al­lowed them to steal, with­out con­science, the Khoisan’s land, cat­tle and other live­stock.

The ar­gu­ment was that “sav­ages” weren’t de­serv­ing of such a beau­ti­ful piece of the earth.

Study­ing the his­tory of the Khoisan, would re­veal that they were very wealthy by the stan­dards of the day – own­ing thou­sands of head of cat­tle.

Also a com­mon sense un­der­stand­ing of the time would con­vince one that nei­ther the Dutch nor Bri­tish could have ar­rived here with cat­tle on their flimsy ves­sels in those days.

Any­one who be­lieves that, would be ca­pa­ble of be­liev­ing any­thing. And yet that is what is gen­er­ally be­lieved.

Be­cause of the Khoisan’s in­ter-breed­ing with the white set­tlers – Dutch, Brits, Por­tuguese, French Huguenots and Mo­ra­vian mis­sion­ar­ies – their phys­i­cal fea­tures ob­vi­ously changed and are now re­ferred to as “coloureds”.

This does not al­ter the fact that the ma­jor­ity of “coloureds” to­day re­main the dom­i­nant car­ri­ers of the Khoisan genes, and can there­fore lay claim to that her­itage, which goes back thou­sands of years in this coun­try.

So, in re­spond­ing to the land claim ques­tion and whose land this is – the an­swer is ob­vi­ous.

Ron­ald Dip­pe­naar El­do­rado Park

FOR­GOT­TEN HIS­TORY: The Khoisan peo­ple were wealthy by the stan­dards of the day, own­ing thou­sands of head of cat­tle.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa

© PressReader. All rights reserved.