No description available.

No description available.

This thesis forwards a critical analysis of Khoesan assimilation in the Cape Colony between 1795 and 1858. The narrative traces Khoesan responses to colonial domination and representation with a particular focus on their identity as colonial subjects and the role that Khoesan, as assimilated 'Hottentots', played in the making of their own identity during this period. The study presents the hypothesis that British loyalism became a defining feature of 'Hottentot' identity during the early to mid-nineteenth century. Expressions of loyalty to the British Crown reflected 'Hottentot' claims to a civic identity that transcended their ethnically defined place within Cape colonial society. It is argued that 'Hottentot' loyalism functioned as a powerful collective identity that imbibed a sense of belonging to an imagined, British-inspired, civic nation via multiple and varied expressions of subjecthood. During the early nineteenth century, the Cape Colony witnessed spirited public debates over the desirability of the extension of civil rights to its indigenous subjects. In the process, 'Hottentot' subjecthood became entangled with loyalist impressions of empire which transcended local authorities and social hierarchies. The thesis contends that Khoesan appeals to social independence and 'Hottentot' nationalism - a label which has become standard in Cape historiography - did not run counter to loyalism, but rather functioned as affirmations of loyalism. The argument accommodates the seemingly contradictory, dual responses of resistance and assimilation, whereby assimilation as subjects became a potent form of resistance to settler colonialism. There was no universal group response to settler colonialism by the Cape Khoesan. The path to assimilated, 'Hottentot' subjecthood was determined by the individual's degree of exposure to ideas and imaginings of imperial civic nationhood. Colonial law, evangelical-humanitarianism and imperial commissions of inquiry all functioned as important conduits of the notions of imperial subjecthood and loyalism; together, and to varying degrees, these influences shaped 'Hottentot' civic identity within the ambits of settler households and mission stations.

This thesis looks at concepts of progress and agricultural deveIopment in the Cape Colony in the aftermath of the South African War (1899-1902). The first decade of the twentieth century was one of economic crisis. War was followed by a severe depression exacerbated by a slump in the diamond industry, which prompted doubts about the longevity of the country’s mineral resources. It was also a period of recurrent drought which aroused concerns about food security and criticisms about the Colony’s reliance on imported victuals and primary products such as timber. In this context, self-professed ‘progressive’ politicians and commercial farmers looked to the land as the most viable source of national wealth. Politically this period was dominated by Leander Starr Jameson’s Progressive Party, which held office from February 1904 until February 1908. The thesis analyses how this Party, usually associated with mining capital and Rhodes’s legacy, deliberately promoted itself as the progenitor of agricultural progressivism in terms of its rhetoric and the policies it pursued. Agricultural amelioration was linked to conservation. Scientific methods and systematic land management strategies were advocated to protect and enhance scarce water resources, soil fertility and pastures on which the rural economy depended. The state positioned itself as the provider of scientific expertise and introduced legislation to promote and regulate the agricultural economy and environment. The Cape was influenced in part by conservationist developments, which occurred contemporaneously in Australia and, in particular, in the United States. Historians of American history have identified the early twentieth century there as the ‘Progressive Era’. This thesis explores the scientific links that emerged between the governments of these two countries and argues that the Cape too self-consciously promoted itself as a progressive state with agricultural development and conservation constructed as two of the principal pillars of progress.

Any person studying the history of the Cape Colony in the mid- Victorian years must soon grow aware of the contrast between what the imperial authorities said they intended to do and what they actually did. This is particularly obvious in the treatment of the frontier tribes, who lost their lands (and sometimes their lives) in the name of a policy described by one governor as based on 'morality and religion'. But it is also evident in many other spheres of government, and insistently raises the question of that British intentions really were and how far Ministers managed to achieve them. The evidence available is too vast and amorphous for a gene- ral survey to be attempted. In order to investigate the problem it is necessary to limit its scope. The period from 1846 to 1854 has been chosen because it embraced two frontier wars and a series of major administrative changes, involving prolonged consultation between Government House and Downing Street, and raising matters which affected the vital interests of the colonial population itself. It is also ground covered by other historians, but they have frequently differed as to the aims of the imperial government and the colonial reaction to them. One reason for their differences is plain: they have failed to take a comprehensive view of the sub- ject, such as the imperial government itself might have taken. Frontier policy is described as if it bore no relation to constitutional changes in Cape Town; local politics are discussed as if the British connection had little relevance. Britain's treatment of the Afrikaners led one of their leaders to style the nineteenth century a 'Century of Wrong.‘ But those sympa- thetic to the British approach have seen in it an attempt to infuse the spirit of British tolerance and justice into Cane society. They explain its contradictions by depicting an imperial power those 'high natives and worthy ends were frustrated by the inadequate resources which could be spared for the resolution of Cape problems. The material on which this conclusion rests is predominantly that found in official archives in Cape Town and London. A glance at the bibliographies of works by de Kiewiet, Galbraith, Morrell and Macmillan reveals no systematic attempt to study newspapers or other sources to check the accuracy or discover the undertones of official reporting from the Colony. Furthermore, large collections of private correspondence belonging to prominent politicians have recently been made public in Britain. Although often edited of financial or other sensitive items they still raise similar doubts about the comprehend- siveness of Colonial Office despatches. A new assessment of these sources is therefore required. In 1867 Bagehot differentiated between the 'distinguished' and the 'efficient' parts of the British constitution. The former he described as designed to 'excite and preserve the reverence of the population'; the latter as 'those by which it, in fact, works and rules'. This thesis attempts to show that Colonial Office pronouncements on the Cape likewise fall into two categories. Some were intended (again borrowing Bagehot's words) to 'win the loyalty and confidence of mankind'; others to 'employ that homage in the work of governmental. From this it follows that the statements in despatches are not invariably to be trusted, and that some are of greater significance in the interaction of Cape and British politics than others. The private correspondence helps us to differentiate. It also shows the Colonial Office less as a place where policy was made and more as one where decisions taken by Mini- sters were translated into a form understandable to governors and acceptable to the British public. Continued in thesis ...