ALKEBULAN INDIGENOUS is a division of KROTOASA RESEARCH INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII), which refers to all Alkebulan communities and Diaspora Slave Descendants who lost their claims to land through colonialism and slavery, also communities with deep historical indigenous ties to the lands, natural resourses and environment, who maintain unique cultures, traditional practices and self-governance,. Alkebulan is considered the oldest and indigenous name for the continent of Africa, translating to "Mother of Mankind" or "Garden of Eden". Used by ancient Moors, Nubians, and Ethiopians, it predates the European-imposed name "Africa" and represents a push to reclaim pre-colonial African identity and history.
Alkebulan Indigeon also points to the rich diversity of Africa's original inhabitants, whose traditional lives and rights are central to understanding the continent's complex history and ongoing social dynamics. These are groups of people native to a specific region, people who lived here before colonist arrived.
Indigenous People like the San and Khoekhoe population both carrying mtDNA +100 000 years in Southern Africa are recognised indigenous peoples by the United Nations and UNDRIP., These two groups chose different lifestyles as hunters and herders but after colonialsm many Khoekhoe populations became hunters due to dispossesion and Genoicide by European and Bantu Settlers. Bantu Settlers was named by the Khoekhoe people as "Xhosas" and adopting the cultures and rituals of the KhoeKhoe population, Bantu's are distinct from the majority African populations who migrated and lost their historic continuity of their culture, tribes, indigenous livestyles, territories and surrounding natural resources.
Political Participation: Indigenous People lack political representation and participation, economic marginlization and poverty, lack of access to social services, discrimination, and protection of rights.
Alkebulan's marginalization in global politics and economics stems from a mix of historical legacies of colonialism, global politics and global economic structures that favor commodity exports, leading to asymmetrical trade, capital flight, and limited industrialization. Key factors include dependence on external powers, poor infrastructure, illicit financial flows, and structural disadvantages within global trade rules, despite rich resources.
Alkebulan's revolution of sweeping transformation, primarily the anti-colonial independence movements (Decolonisation of Africa 1950 -1970s), the anti-colonial restistance, the political revolution, the economic and social revolutions, the labour revolutions with key drivers and goals of self-determination by ending foreign control and achieving political independence and economic independence by moving from exporting raw materials to manufacturing in areas where extraction taking place.
Cape Town – South Africans needed to embrace their “collective history and heritage … the good, the bad and the ugly” as a step towards consolidating an inclusive sense of South Africanhood.
So said Minister of Defence and Military Veterans Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula at the Castle in Cape Town on Friday when she unveiled the statues of former kings Cetshwayo, Langalibalele and Sekhukhune and 17th century resistance leader, Doman.
The three kings had once languished in the castle’s gloomy cells, and Doman had known first-hand the penalty of contesting the power that resided within it.
The statues, Mapisa-Nqakula said, were the “tangible recognition of these, and thousands of other unsung heroes and heroines in colonials wars of resistance”.
The commemorative project, which forms part of the Castle’s 350 anniversary celebration this year, was, she said, “the beginning of an ongoing commitment to honour all those who gallantly fought against colonial conquest and in turn inspired future generations of freedom fighters”.
Mapisa-Nqakula delivered the formal address at the event on behalf of President Jacob Zuma, who was scheduled to unveil the statues, but was detained in Pretoria because of a programme change in the visit of Zambian President Edgar Lungu.
Delegations from the amaZulu, amaHlubi and BaPedi royal houses and from the Khoisan leadership in the Western Cape joined in officiating at the unveiling ceremony.
Mapisa-Nqakula noted the Castle “offers us a unique opportunity to revisit, reinterpret and re-write our complex, brutal colonial and apartheid history in a manner that is fully inclusive, restorative, respectful and educational”.
This would be advanced through the launch of a Centre for Memory, Healing and Learning at the Castle. The centre, sponsored by the Department of Military Veterans, was intended to break “the curse of oppression, persecution and ignorance”.
We can’t believe that the festive season is already upon us. As we all prepare to spend some quality time with our loved ones, may we use this opportunity to wish you a joyous, healthy and happy holiday season. The more we think about it, the more we realize that there are very few architectural and cultural heritage sites around that has the variety of unique cultural experiences the Castle of Good Hope offers.
Many cities like Beijing, Paris, London, Rio, Tokyo, Melbourne, Singapore, Brussels offer what we have but theirs’ are often dispersed or pricey. From the best-preserved 17th century Dutch fort in the world, to larger-than-life statues of indigenous royal warriors to the firing of small but ear-splitting signal cannon to a recreated 17th century military drill; it feels like our Castle is a mall of heritage experiences under one roof!
Highlights
A unique torture chamber/interrogation room, recently upgraded to create an even more authentic experience;
The statues of the Khoi freedom-fighter Nommoä (Doman) next to those of warrior kings Langalibalele, Cetshwayo and Sekhukhune;
A museum collection of 17th century art, craft and furniture (William Fehr);
A separate ceramic art museum where the original lions that use to protect the main entrance, are on display;
The Lady Anne Ballroom and the Dolphin Pool where she supposedly bathed in the nude!
A memorial dedicated to the life of Khoi princess Krotoa (Eva);
A restitution garden with indigenous plants (and where I spent some time reading and reflecting); and
A third museum, depicting the Military History of South Africa. This is also where the original, sea-ward facing entrance of the Castle used to be.
The People's Castle
So, with your heritage-conservation contribution of R50 (±3 Euros) we definitely make sure that you get lots of bang for your buck (pardon the pun) – something like seven for the price of one! Our advice is not to rush through this oldest colonial building in the country. If you want real value for money, take a couple of hours to soak up over 350 years of colonial history – good, bad and ugly!
We are deeply honoured to share our space with tourists, ad-hoc visitors, school children, researchers, musicians, movie-makers, party-revelers, Khoi-chiefs, traditional leaders, actors and the like. Yes, do not be surprised if you bump into a certain Ms Julia Roberts or Mr Denzel Washington, some of the many Hollywood stars who recently visited our shores.
We have developed a slogan that goes like this “Bringing the People to the Castle and taking the Castle to the People!” What underpins this slogan, is a sincere commitment to change the traditional image of the Castle (colonial oppression, pain, exclusion) into one that is inclusive, embracing, healing, educational and leading to nation-building and reconciliation. This is an on-going project that needs all of your support and commitment.
Castle Of Events
It amazes us how the Castle has become a sought-after venue for life-style events. In the coming weeks, tourists and event goers will be treated with a host of exciting events. These include local youth music icon Nasty C, a Gaming Expo (Playtopia), the annual Cape Cultural Picnic and the Sizzled Summer Experience – to mention but a few. Our Castle is now really cooking up a storm!
You will notice from our gardening activities (or rather lack of it) that the Cape is still in the midst of a drought. Though the drought has been down-scaled to level 5, we are still not allowed to water our lawns, trees and other plants. As ardent gardeners, it pains us to see what is usually lush-green lawn is now appearing as a yellow-brown carpet. And the absence of summer flowers at the feet of this majestic, colonial building, is another pity. We kindly appeal to you to be understanding and supportive of our endeavours to preserve and protect this precious, life-giving resource – water.
Welcome to the Castle of Good Hope and enjoy your time with us…
On December 6, four statues of kings and warriors will be unveiled to mark 350 years of the Castle of Good Hope. Here Michael Morris writes about Zulu king Cetshwayo.
Cape Town – Victory has often come at a grave cost to kings and nations, and this much is doubtless true of Cetshwayo kaMpande, the last independent king of the Zulu people, in the weeks after their devastating defeat of the British at Isandlwana in early 1879.
Whether it was wise or foolish of him at that point to resist the urging of at least some of his warrior generals to make the most of the routing of Lord Chelmsford’s force by crossing the border in pursuit and taking the war to the farms and settlements of colonial Natal is hard to judge, and perhaps idle to contemplate.
His restraint was, in its way, a distinctly kingly gesture. But it was also a calculation, for Cetshwayo hoped he might negotiate a peace agreement that would sustain his kingdom, and gain orderly or predictable relations with the British. Violating the border, he seemed to reason, would only make things worse.
Even so, Cetshwayo had no illusions the red coats he had beaten at Isandlwana represented only a fraction of the coercive potential of Queen Victoria’s imperial juggernaut. And it was soon obvious the mightiest army in the world meant to avenge the bloody nose it had been given on the steamy veld of central Zululand in January 1879.
Chastened, and forewarned, the British forces adjusted their tactical procedures for a second invasion that year – dropping the typical linear (Thin Red Line) battle formation for a tighter close-order pattern – and went in for the kill in June. The last major encounter was the Battle of Ulundi on July 4, where a still-smarting Chelmsford ordered the royal kraal to be torched. It is said Cetshwayo’s capital burned for days.
The Zulu kingdom had been feeling the heat for a while – with a Boer settler insurgency to the north, and British ambitions on the coast itching for scope beyond the colony of Natal.
The pall that hung over Ulundi in July 1879 was a grim monument to the flawed – and, not long after, abandoned – big vision (modelled on Britain’s Canadian experience) of a confederacy of southern African states to which, however, an independent Zulu kingdom was considered an intolerable contradiction.
The confederacy enthusiasm, keenly supported by British high commissioner Sir Henry Bartle Frere, prompted a cynical baiting of the Zulu king, and eventually an ultimatum, followed by the invasion that temporarily came short at Isandlwana, but was pressed home months later.
It was an increasingly difficult time in a fast-changing southern Africa.
What had, until the 1850s, been perhaps little more than an expensive and truculent agrarian possession, had begun to assume growing significance as a crown asset after the discovery of diamonds.
And the fall of Cetshwayo – he evaded capture at Ulundi, going into hiding, but was caught eventually in August – was part of a pattern of subjugation repeated across the region.
The incremental conquest was a force of history – driven chiefly by European colonial or imperial competition, insensible to basic notions of justice or fairness – whose consequences Cetshwayo seemed to have recognised in advance with acute penetration.
On January 17, 1879, less than a week before Isandlwana, the king is remembered by one of those present as saying in a speech to his warriors: “I have not gone over the seas to look for the white man, yet they have come into my country and I would not be surprised if they took away our wives and cattle and crops and land.
“I have nothing against the white man and I cannot tell why they came to me. What shall I do?”
Well, he chose his path, but, nine months later, found himself incarcerated at the Castle in Cape Town for his trouble. In 1881, his status was changed to that of being under civil custody and he was relocated to the farm Oude Molen.
It was from here that he wrote to governor Sir Hercules Robinson detailing his own and his father’s good relations with the “English”, adding: “I never for a moment thought that the English would invade my country.”
Cetshwayo, who came to the throne at his father, Mpande’s death in 1872 at the age of about 46, eventually got his chance to put his case to Queen Victoria when he travelled to London in August 1882 (the Queen presented him with a large, ornate three-handled beer tankard), where, by all accounts, he was, as one writer has described him, “a much sought-after social figure, always conducting himself with natural grace and dignity”.
If his personal stature was effortlessly maintained, his official one was deliberately diminished; when he returned to Zululand in January 1883, stripped of effective power, his was a subdued kingdom riven with factionalism and rivalry, of which he himself became a victim. Weakened and ill, he died in Eshowe a few months later, on February 8, 1884.
Cetshwayo has been immortalised in photographs, paintings, books and films. In the 1964 film, Zulu, he was played by none other than his great-grandson, Mangosuthu Buthelezi, future leader of the IFP, and, briefly – while serving in Nelson Mandela’s cabinet in the late 1990s – acting president of a democratic South Africa. A character in the 1889 opera, Leo, the Royal Cadet, is named after him, and he makes vivid appearances in several of adventure novelist H Rider Haggard’s African tales.
One of the most tellingly sympathetic portraits to have survived is the Cape Argus account of September 11, 1879 of the Zulu king’s arrival by ship at “Simon’s Bay”.
“Ever since the news came down from Natal that it was intended to bring Cetywayo to the Cape,” the report began, “the local interest in that monarch has been greatly intensified, and general expectation has been evinced concerning his arrival here.”
We learn that local shops, catching the excitement, sported in their windows photographs (taken from a painting) which, the Argus report says, “no less than common report, picture him a rough-featured and scowling being, old in years and ungainly in aspect”, yet the reality was that “the actual man wears an exceedingly benevolent look”.
The correspondent adds testily: “Those who have desired to see the captive out of mere idle curiosity might be somewhat surprised to find the savage king possessed of a natural gentility and dignity of demeanour which would put such a class of visitors at a terrible distance.”
But there was also something unmistakably forlorn about the man.
“While on board the steamer on his way down he was asked one morning why he did not appear so cheerful as usual, and did not smile. Smile?’ asked the king. Did you ever see a dead man smile? I am dead when my country is taken away’.”
* A statue of Cetshwayo – along with statues of early Cape interpreter and resistance leader Doman, and kings Sekhukhune and Langalibalele – will be unveiled at the Castle next month as part of the 350th anniversary of the construction of the stone fort.
A new project celebrates Cape Town Castle, 350 years old this year, and honours key figures in our past, writes Michael Morris.
We can almost hear Zacharias Wagenaer’s voice in the words passed down to us in the record, and a hint of a surely improbable ambition of being remembered by history as a “somebody” in his time.
“Our conquests,” the commander told a small gathering in January 1666 at the laying of the foundation stone of what would become the Cape Town Castle, “are extending further and further and all the black and yellow people are being suppressed. We are building a stone wall out of the earth that thundering cannon cannot destroy.” Holy Christendom would thus be made known and find a place “in wild, heathen lands”.
“We praise the almighty reign of God,” he went on, “and say in unison: Augustus’ empire, victorious Alexander and Caesar’s great kingdom – none of these had the honour of laying a stone at the end of the earth.”
There was nobody around to dispute the audacious sweep of Wagenaer’s oratory. Yet, as he laid that stone, so far from the salons and guilds and the mercantile sophistication of Holland, Wagenaer could perhaps be forgiven his grandiloquence.
If he could not have been expected to foresee the immense scale of historical, cultural and political consequences of establishing with such rock-solid certainty a widening European presence at the southern tip of his “wild” Africa, the commander’s “stone at the end of the earth” would prove lastingly, too often grimly, significant for growing numbers of people across the sub-continental region, for generations.
Wagenaer’s castle, the country’s oldest building, remains a potent symbol today; at the time, it was the token of a seismic episode. Three and a half centuries ago, southern Africa was poised between East and West. The region had, after all, been known for centuries, if not intimately, to Arab, Indian and Chinese cartographers, traders and travellers.
But the determination of the Dutch to settle in so soon after their first harried efforts to maintain merely a victualling station halfway along the lucrative trade route to the East placed the region squarely within the Western Atlantic world.
It is where the country remains, by and large, despite a greater involvement in Africa than at any time in recent centuries.
Wagenaer’s sturdy fort, though, isarguably more symbolically significant for particular, local South African reasons, for it stands at the centre of a long narrative of conquest and, later, repression.
In a sense, the first unintending settlers were accidental conquerors.
Though the first four-cornered wood-and-earth fort, pegged out within days of Jan van Riebeeck’s arrival in April, 1652, may conceivably have been a ramshackle affair, it was the precursor of Wagenaer’s project, and was the start of something big, bigger than anyone at the Cape then could have foreseen.
Impelled by a range of complex economic and socio-political factors, settler expansion grew, and so, naturally, did resistance and contestation. With a big global player behind them, and ample slaves, the small settler community proved for the most part irresistible. It was a complex social organism which, in time, even produced a wholly new indigenous African language.
When the British took over at the beginning of the 19th century, the region embarked on a 100 years of bloody subjugation – along with continuing integration with the West, with all its attendant benefits and shortcomings. The century culminated in the war with the Boers, whose defeat produced the union of colonial territories and republics that defines the shape, and much else, of South Africa today.
Ever since that day of 1666, the Castle has remained, squat and immovable below Table Mountain, as a reminder of South Africa’s record of endeavours, follies, triumphs and tragedies.
Its meaning as a site of remembering and memorialising the complexity of our society will be evoked next month when statues of four significant historical figures are unveiled at the Castle as a reminder of their role in the national story, and the importance of the building itself in a history of tragic errors and, after so many years, an overwhelming redemptive will.
Caribbean poet and essayist Derek Walcott has warned against the temptation to “take revenge in nostalgia”, and it is doubtless important to remember that these long-dead eminences, the early go-between Doman, and the kings Cetshwayo, Sekhukhune and Langalibalele, were every bit as human, and products of their time, as Commander Wagenaer, with his thoughts about the end of the earth.
They all made our history. The challenge lies, perhaps, in acknowledging our belonging in it, and acknowledging who “they” were.
For the Argus, there’s a touching association in the case of Cetshwayo, who was a friend of the paper’s founding owner, Saul Solomon. When, in September 1880, Solomon’s five-year-old daughter Maggie and her governess Martha Burton, drowned in a reservoir on the slopes of Lion’s Head, Cetshwayo, then a prisoner at the Imhoff Battery, penned a note to him.
“I am writing to you my great friend,” he said, “to express my deep sorrow at the very great misfortune that has come down on your house. I feel so very sorry to hear that one of your branches has withered and left you. I really do not know how to express my great sorrow as touching such a great calamity.” The Zulu king, of course, was no stranger to the great sorrow of inexpressible loss; he had lost his kingdom.
Though, after his unwanted sojourn as a prisoner at the Cape, Cetshwayo was given the opportunity to sail to London to petition Queen Victoria, and was able to return to his kingdom, it was a subjugated fiefdom, and his people, along with all the other subject peoples of the region, had more than a century to wait before being acknowledged as common citizens.
Next month’s event at the Castle, in which Independent Media is a partner, is a step on that path.
Obviously space will not allow us to delve into the rich, difficult history of this world-famous building. Save to say that the story of his Castle is a story of our young country. It is a story of joy, pain, tears, laughter, disappointment, fear, hope – and all the other human emotions that characterize us as a nation…
Built between 1666 and 1679, the Castle is known as the oldest surviving building in South Africa and has been the centre of civilian, political and military life at the Cape from approximately 1679.
In its current state, the Castle arguably represents one of the best preserved 17th century DEIC architecture on the entire globe. The 2015 – 2016 renovation of the Castle – the first in 20 years – will further enhance its appeal and position it well to become South Africa’s next UNESCO World Heritage Site.
This historical building now houses, among others, the William Fehr Collection managed by Iziko Museums of South Africa, an permanent ceramic exhibition (FIRED) and the Castle Military Museum.
The Castle was, however, not the first fort to be built at the Cape. A quadrangular (four-pointed) fort was built after the arrival of Jan van Riebeeck in 1652 where the Grand Parade and the main Post Office are situated today. This fort was completed towards the end of 1653 and its inner structures in 1656. However, constant problems were experienced: The walls of the fort, which were constructed mainly of clay, collapsed and required constant repairs. A model of this original fort can be seen in the Castle Military Museum.
Jan van Riebeeck left the Cape in 1662, and was succeeded by Zacharias Wagenaer. In 1664 there were renewed rumours of war between Britain and the Netherlands. Fearing a British attack on the Cape, the Lords Seventeen instructed Wagenaer to build a five-pointed stone Castle similar to other such fortifications in Europe and the East. The Castle was planned around a central point – a water-well under the “Boog” – with five bulwarks known as bastions.
The site of the new Castle was chosen in 1665 by the Commissioner and later first Governor of the Cape, Isbrand Goske. The engineer, Pieter Dombaer, was responsible for the construction of the Castle which was built by slaves, Khoikhoi, burghers, and company workers. (Anna Ras, die Kasteel en Ander Vestingswerke, p56, 57)
The foundations were dug in 1665 and the cornerstones of the first bastion, later known as the Leerdam Bastion, were laid on the 2nd January 1666, after which building started in all earnest. Three hundred sailors, commandeered from passing ships, soldiers, local Khoikhoi, women and slaves were used as workforce, breaking stone and collecting shells which were burned in lime ovens. One often wonder what was the real human cost of building this European fortress on African soil.
Clinker bricks, also known as “Ijsel-stene”, which were brought as ballasts in Dutch ships, were offloaded at the Cape and were used as decorative features in certain parts of the Castle.
In 1667 peace returned to Europe, which caused building on the Castle to be delayed. The first bastion, Leerdam, was completed on the 5 November 1670. Buuren, Catzenellenbogen, Nassau and Oranje followed.
In 1672 the outbreak of war in Europe caused the building of the Castle to be resumed with new vigour. In 1679 the Castle was completed. It was called a Castle because, as in the case of other Castles in Europe, in addition to being a defensive structure, it comprised a small community or town on its own.
Inside the Castle walls there were among others a church, bakery, workshops, living quarters, offices, cells and numerous other facilities.
The slate used as paving in the Castle came from quarries on Robben Island. Wood was brought from Hout Bay. The cement used to build the Castle was obtained by burning shells in lime kilns at Robben Island until they formed lime. This lime was mixed with shells and sand to form extremely strong cement. (Historical Buildings in South Africa, p. 8) This means that the Castle is intrinsically linked to two of South Africa’s icons and UNESCO World Heritage sites – Table Mountain and Robben Island.
The yellow paint on the walls was chosen because it reduces the glare from the sunlight, and reflects less heat. You may recall that former president Nelson Mandela damaged his eyes whilst working in the lime quarries of Robben Island during his long imprisonment there. (Historical society of Cape Town, Newsletter 3, December 1986)
In 1982, a comprehensive restoration process was started to restore the Castle to its former glory. The process was completed early in 1993. Another exciting restoration and renovation is planned to proceed towards the end of 2014.
The Castle is entered through the Main Gateway from the Grand Parade and City Hall side. This entrance was built between 1682 and 1684 to replace the original entrance which was situated between the Buuren and Catzenellenbogen bastions. There are also two smaller entrances to the Castle.
This gateway offers a window on the past. The pediment above the entrance bears the coat-of-arms of the United Netherlands, portraying the crowned lion rampant with the seven arrows of unity in its paw. On the architrave below are carved the arms of the cities of Hoorn, Delft, Amsterdam, Middelburg, Rotterdam and Enkhuizen. These were the Dutch cities in which the United East India Company had chambers. The company’s monogram, VOC, flanks the carvings on either side.
The two pilasters, the entablature and pediment above are built of a grey-blue slate from Robben Island. Built of small yellow bricks, called “Ijsselstein”, the entrance is a unique example of 17th century Dutch classicism in South Africa.
Looking at the Main Gateway from the courtyard, a baroque gable is seen above the entrance. The gable is typically Cape-Dutch and dates back to the early eighteenth century. A painting of the gable by Lady Anne Barnard (painted between 1797 and 1803) was traced to Britain and the colours scheme of the gable was chosen accordingly. The correctness of this bright colour scheme has been confirmed by the Netherlandse Monumenten Zorg. (Dutch Monument Care) (Ref: Mr Green, Restoration Architect, Dept. of Public Works). The relief work is a replica consisting of four basic military elements, which are unusual features in gable decoration namely a flag, a regimental banner, drum, mortar and a pyramid of cannonballs. It is crowned by the helmet of a knight and various weapons of a knight are also shown. On either side of the entrance are the statues of Mercury, the god of commerce and Neptune, the sea god (with the trident).
The look-out tower on the roof is known as the Captain’s Tower. The latter used to be the tallest building in Cape Town for many years to come. The inner courtyard of the Castle is divided by a wall. The wall is approximately 116 metres in length, 12 metres high, three and a half metres wide at the bottom, and two metres wide at the top. Buildings were erected on either side of the wall.
The part of the Castle formerly known as “De Kat,” was the office of the governor and arguably the first seat of political power in our country. The course of history was determined in what are today very humble chambers. In 1674 the Council of Policy and the Council of Justice and the church used the same chamber. The Council of Justice was responsible for hearing all cases at the Cape.
From these chambers, the Council of Policy controlled all facets of early colonial life; where they could live; what they could plant and produce; the prices of their produce and many other aspects of their lives in order to ensure order in the settlement. The new governor’s house became known as “Het Nieuwe Kat” and the transect wall, “Het Oude Kat”. This is where the Castle’s chapel is situated and where one of the great indigenous figures of the time, Cratoa or Eva was buried.
The right-hand entrance in the wall was the entrance to the governor’s residence. His living quarters were on the top floor. The governor’s sleeping quarters were above the arch linking the front courtyard to “Het Wapenplaatz”. On the left of the arch was the residence of the Secunde, who was the second-in-command of the settlement. The bottom floor was mainly used for wine cellars and storage space.
This building currently houses the William Fehr Collection of artworks depicting aspects of cultural life at the Cape from the VOC era until the end of the 19th century. The private collection of Dr William Fehr was exhibited at the Castle at the tri-centenary celebrations of the arrival of Jan van Riebeeck in 1952. This valuable collection has special relevance to the Castle and was bought, on public demand, to be on permanent exhibition in the Castle. (300 Years of the Castle at Cape Town, p. 109)
On the top floor, one finds the Lady Anne Barnard Banquet Hall. The hall originally consisted of four rooms, which were converted into a reception hall in 1930’s.
The well-known porch or stoep (frequently and wrongly referred to as De Kat Balcony) is an outstanding feature of the transect wall. The first porch was built in 1695 and known as “De Puij”. It was rebuilt between 1786 and 1790. From this stoep proclamations were read, announcements made and laws proclaimed to soldiers and civilians at the Cape. All legal sentences were announced from here and here official visitors to the Castle were welcomed (The Standard Encyclopaedia of Southern Africa, p. 124). This remains a great reference point to explain how the announcements affected the lives of indigenes and slaves and in fact the shaped modern South Africa.
In 1936, the stoep which had become derelict was threatened by demolition. This was prevented, however, by an architect by the name of James Morris, who offered to restore it at his own expense.
Sundials were used to tell the time in the early years at the Cape. The sundial on the eastern side (above the ceremonial office) was used to tell the time in the morning. In the afternoon, the sundial next to the balcony was used. The time of the sundials was the official time for the entire Cape settlement. The settlement was kept informed of the time by the ringing of the bell in the bell-tower every hour on the hour. At night, or when the sun did not shine, time was kept by means of an hour glass. The “rondeganger” (guard on duty) turned the hour glass and rang the bell.
The Castle represents, in its restored form, Dutch, English and French building styles. In certain parts the flat roofs favoured by the Dutch were rebuilt during restoration. In other sections the pitched roofs and stone work of the British era can be seen. The original slate roof tiles were replaced with replicas.
The building on top of the roof between the bastions Leerdam and Oranje, is known as the Captain’s Tower. For 150 years, the Captain’s Tower was the highest building in Cape Town.
Sections of the moat around the Castle were restored. The original moat was 25 metres wide and filled with water from the streams of Table Mountain. The building of the moat started on 26 November 1677. Unfortunately, the moat quickly became foul-smelling because the drainage system was inadequate and the residents used it as a rubbish dump. In 1896 the moat on the seaside of the caslte was filled up to make way for the railway line. Later the whole moat was filled up.
From the Buuren bastion, the advantage of the pentagonal shape of the Castle is evident. The range and angle of attack of the cannons on the bastions overlapped, thus providing an impenetrable wall of cannon fire in the event of an enemy attack.
The Castle formed part of a formidable defensive system at the Cape that discouraged attacks. It has never been attacked.
The five bastions were built in the order Leerdam, Oranje, Nassau, Katzenellenbogen and Buuren. The bastions were named after the main titles of Willem, the Prince of Orange. The height of the walls of the bastions on the sea side was 10 metres, and those on the land side were even higher, apparently so that in the event of an attack from the sea, the cannons on the landward bastions could be turned around to fire across the seaward bastions.
The sections of the walls built in stone by the Dutch are evident. The brick sections date back to the British era. During British rule, the walls were made higher. During Dutch rule, the slate roofs were flat. The pitched roofs were erected by the British in the 1830’s (Standard Encyclopedia of Southern Africa, Vol. 3 p. 123).
From the Catzenellenbogen bastion, it is possible to imagine how close the sea came to the side of the Castle, before the land as we know it today was reclaimed between the years 1930 and 1945 with the help of Dutch engineers. The original entrance to the Castle, the “Waterpoort”, used to be in the wall between the Buuren and Catzenellenbogen bastions. This entrance was unsuitable from the outset because at high or spring tide the water level made access to the Castle impossible.
On Catzenellenbogen you also see the mountings of 4 six-pounder rapid-fire Hotchkiss cannons. These cannons were removed from the Castle at the beginning of the Second World War. While these guns were still on the bastion they were used to fire gun salutes on special occasions (The Argus 27.10.88).
The Garrison jail was built by Louis Thibault (1786). (300 Years of the Castle at Cape Town, p. 101).
The double cell to the right of the door was used for locking up drunken soldiers. The large cell with two doors was used for a maximum of 20 prisoners. The holes through which the prisoners received their food are clearly visible.
On the left hand side there are two cells designed for a maximum of ten prisoners.
The double cell to the left of the entrance was the ablution cell or bathroom. Here you can see a primitive stone bath which was used by the prisoners.
On the doors are inscriptions made by the prisoners. It is said that the prisoners used nails which they pulled from their shoes to make the inscriptions; this is probably only partly true. They also had access to other instruments such as cutlery. All these inscriptions were made during the British era. The inscriptions on the outside of the doors were probably made during daytime when the doors of the cells were open and the large entrance locked. The cells were used for the last time during the Second World War to detain prisoners from passing ships on their way to the East.
In these cells we find the first, physical evidence that British military regiments were stationed at the Castle. The inscription that remained intact makes mention of 61 Regiment and dates back to the years 1840-1845.
It is said that the names above the doors of two of the cells are names of well-known Cape taverns at the time.
When you move out of the cells you will see, on your left hand side, the jail warden’s office. The fireplace and safe box for keys can still be seen.
The engraved ship on Robben Island slate may have been placed above the original Castle entrance or Waterpoort.
It is believed that this dungeon or so-called “dark-hole” was used as ammunition store and gunpowder magazine. The room was, however, too damp and was later used as a coal store.
Research has revealed that the two rooms in the corner of the Old Recruitment Building were the original interrogation chamber and dungeon of the Castle. There was a good reason for the interrogation chamber being next to the dungeon. According to Dutch law, a criminal had to confess to his crime before his sentence could be executed. The sound of torture coming from the adjacent room certainly facilitated this process. Prisoners were not supposed to be detained here for longer than 24 hours.
Horseshoes were sometimes put on doors for “luck”. It is interesting to note that the horseshoe on this door is hanging upside down indicating that in this room luck had run out.
The second courtyard of the Castle is known as “Het Wapenplaatz”. The name is evidently derived from the weapon inspections and drill exercises which regularly took place here. The well which is found here, formed part of the water supply system inside the Castle.
The soldiers’ quarters were situated on the top floor between Catzenellenbogen and Nassau. The middle floor was used as storage space. The hooks and large doors behind the hooks are still in evidence. Supplies were hoisted by rope, and swung through the doors. The workshops of tradesmen, as well as stables and storerooms were situated on the ground level.
From this courtyard the other two entrances to the Castle, which were mentioned on your arrival, are found. The larger entrance is known as Sally Port (an opening in a fortification through which to make “a sally”, in other words a sudden charge from a fortification up its besiegers (The Concise Oxford Dictionary).
The lawn on Het Wapenplaatz has been planted according to a Dutch garden design.
The paint used on the walls during restoration, is whitewash mixed with a coloring agent. The condition of the paint is not due to bad workmanship, but to the lack of moisture-resistant methods used during the construction of the Castle. Walls such as these must allow moisture through, which is necessary to bind the clay bricks. Whitewash ensures that enough moisture is allowed through and retained without the wall appearing wet.
The woodwork is painted in different colours. Tradition has it that the windows painted in a reddish-brown colour were the windows of rooms used to store arms. Another possible reason was that this was the only available paint at that time.
“Het Wapenplaatz” faces the back of the Governor’s quarters. The large doors to the left of the arch were three coach houses for the use of the governor. The last smaller door was the Governor’s fuel-wood store.
The date on the stone above the arch is probably the date on which this part of the Castle was completed (show stone to visitors).
“Het Bakhuys” is a modern replica of a building which was built in 1706 during the era of Governor Willem Adriaan van der Stel. The original bakery was converted into a u-shaped building around a pool. The building was demolished by the British in the 19th century to make place for a parade ground. During the restoration of the Castle, excavations exposed the foundations of the original building and revealed the existence of the original Dolphin Pool. The balustrades and decorated walls of the pool were thrown into the pool during demolition, and covered up with soil. It was thus possible to determine exactly what the original pool looked like.
The original pool was named after the impressive fountain in the form of a dolphin in the middle of the pool. It was possible to make a replica of the fountain by examining sketches and descriptions made by Lady Anne Barnard during the late 1700’s. The replica was created by the artist Jan Corewijn. The original fountain was never traced. The dolphin resembles a fish that is found in the Mediterranean. A similar fountain at “Het Loo”, the palace of Willem III, in the Netherlands inspired Willem Adriaan van der Stel to build this fountain.
From May 1797, Lady Anne Barnard, wife of the British Colonial Secretary, acted as first lady to the Governor of the Cape, Lord McCartney whose wife did not accompany him to the Cape. Lady Anne Barnard and her husband lived in the Governor’s residence because he found it far too large for his purposes. She made an everlasting impression on social life at the Cape. From sketches and documents which she left behind, much is learnt about life at the Cape during the period in which she resided here. (Lady Anne Barnard at the Cape, p. 1, 133)
The wooden blocks used as paving under the arch, were installed with the aim of dampening the sound made by the horses’ hooves and coaches when they moved underneath the Governor’s sleeping quarters.
They also ensured that people walking through the arch did not have to walk in mud and water.
The wooden cross found in the arch, was made of wood from the forest at Delville (France), where many South African soldiers lost their lives in the Battle of Delville Wood. As part of the 9th (Scottish) Division, 1 SA Brigade took part in the Somme offensive and in particular the Battles of Trônes Wood, Berfnay Wood, Longueval and Delville Wood, at the beginning of July 1916. The SA Brigade was almost entirely eliminated in these battles, lasting from 5-20 July 1916. After the bloody battle, the brigade had 29 officers and 751 troops remaining out of a total of approximately 4000 that started the battle. (SADF Review, 1991)
The well was originally in the centre of the large courtyard inside the Castle, before the dividing wall was built. According to research, it was the centre spot from where the Castle was measured out. Today we find the well in this small room (show the room).
From the archway, the width of the original dividing wall before the buildings were added can be seen.
The granary is one of the driest rooms in the Castle. Originally it was the governor’s granary. It was later used as a gunpowder magazine, because the previous gunpowder store had become too damp.
Today the room houses an archaeological museum. On display is, among others, one of the two lions which were originally seen on the pillars at the entrance to the Castle. Initially it was thought that they were the work of the German sculptor Anton Anreith. When layers of whitewash had been removed, however, it was found that they were made from baked clay and of Eastern origin, probably dating back to the 13/1400’s.
An example of the archaeological excavations done during the restoration of the Castle found here (the tourist guide will point out the excavation).
Today the Castle stands not only as a bastion of our colonial past but as a beacon of our unsure but bright future. More and more South Africans (and foreigners) are embracing and accepting this citadel as part of their collective heritage and history. Through events, festivals, celebrations, commemorations, concerts, workshops and exhibitions, the Castle of Good Hope is positioning itself for survival over the next 350 years…
Fourth session of the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent
DATE
14 - 17 April 2025
LOCATION
UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS, NEW YORK, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is pleased to announce that the fourth session of the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent will take place from 14 – 17 April 2025.
Registration to participate in the Permanent Forum
All stakeholders advancing the rights of people of African descent are welcome to participate in the sessions of the Permanent Forum. Member States, United Nations specialized agencies and bodies, national human rights institutions, equality bodies, civil society representatives, and organizations of people of African descent are especially invited to attend and contribute to the discussions.
All interested participants are required to register by 11:59PM (Central European Time) on Friday 4 April 2025, through this link: https://indico.un.org/event/1015090/
Please be informed that the 4th session will be also broadcasted via UN Web TV to follow the discussions in real-time with interpretation. We encourage you to register through indico only if you plan to attend in person.
Please be advised that space for this event is limited. If your registration for the event is approved, you will receive an automated email stating that your registration “has been approved”. In the absence of this confirmation, you will not be able to enter the UN premises.
Please inform the Secretariat (pfpad@un.org) if your registration has been approved but you are unable to attend the event.
Call for inputs
Deadline extended. OHCHR invites Member States, civil society actors, non-governmental organizations, academics, experts on issues related to people of African descent, and all other relevant stakeholders to submit inputs on new topics to be considered for discussion during the fourth session of the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent.
Written inputs should be sent in Word format to pfpad@un.org by Tuesday 17 September 2024, 11:59 pm Geneva time. Please see the call for inputs. (English | Français | Español | Portuguese).
Applicants will be selected on the basis of their work representing people of African descent or advocating to protect and promote the human rights of people of African descent. The selection committee will consider the potential of applicants to contribute to specific discussions on the agenda of the Permanent Forum. Due regard will also be made to considerations of geographic and gender diversity.
To apply for financial support, civil society representatives are requested to send the application form (English | Français | Español), completed and signed, together with all supporting documents, in a single e-mail to pfpad@un.org by Wednesday 9th October 2024 at 11:59 p.m. Geneva.
The Fall of Eva Meerhoff, born Krotoa of the Goringhaicona (c. 1643-1674)
Krotoa (c. 1643-1674) – Cape aboriginal woman of the Goringhaicona clan born on Robben Island. Reared by the first Dutch commander Jan van Riebeeck and utilised by the Dutch as interpreter, envoy, trader, guide, cultural broker, mediator, agent and informant. The Cape of Good Hope’s first indigene to be baptised (3 May 1662 as Eva) and to marry (2 June 1664) according to Christian rites. Wife of the VOC’s surgeon and superintendent of Robben Island, the Copenhagen-born Pieter Meerhoff (killed 1667/8 at Antongil Bay, Madagascar while on a trading expedition). As widow, falls into disgrace with the Dutch authorities who disapprove of her drinking, sexual and native habits. Detained and banished without trial to Robben Island. Dies there (29 July 1674) aged 31 years. Her remains are later removed from the demolished church at the Castle and buried in the foundations of the Dutch Reformed Groote Kerk in Adderley Street, Cape Town. Her known progeny form a substantial proportion of the people classified “white” under the apartheid regime.
Advertisement
… een manifest exempel verthoonende dat de natuer,hoe nauw en vast deselve ook door ingeprente reden werd gemuylbant,nochtans tiijner tijt boven alle leeringen seegenpralendetot haer aengeboren eigenschappen wederom uytspat.
At the time of the extraordinary ‘confiscation’ (24 January 1669) of an unnamed Hottentotinfant redubbed Floridaby the colonizing Dutch, the widow Eva Meerhoff is accused of being a drunk, “playing the beast at night” and reverting to her native habits.
A mere fifteen days after Florida’s ‘confiscation’, a new Church Council is elected (8 February 1669). The Council consists of the following men: the resident minister Adriaen de Voogd, as elders (ouderlingen) Johannes Coon[1] and Herman Ernst: Gresnicht[2] (the last named replacing Elbert Dircx: Diemer) and the two deacons Adriaen Wils and Gerrit van der Bijl (replacing Jan Reijniersz:[3] and Gresnicht).
Immediately thereafter, the Council resolves at its very first sitting to confiscate her three Eurafrican children. Thereafter Eva is reprimanded, but informed differently: if she does not change her ways, only then will her children be taken away from her. She flees.
Does she already know about the resolution to confiscate her children?
More importantly; Eva, almost certainly witnesses personallyFlorida’s ‘confiscation’. If not, she would undoubtedly be fully up-dated about Florida’s abduction. Again amongst her own kind, would she not also be outraged by Dutch violation of her people’s customs?
That evening the Widow Meerhoff’s house (the old pottery, then a make-shift abode) is sealed and her children confiscated.
They are immediately placed in the temporary care of the outgoing deacon of the church, Jan Reijniersz:, and his wife, Lijsbeth Jans:. This couple are considered to be “people of an honest and godly character”. They also have first-hand knowledge of dealing with the local indigenes. Jan Reyniersz:, a notorious cattle and sheep rustler, had even once strung up the Goringhaiqua paramount chief Gogosoa, alias the ‘Fat Captain’ and held him hostage (October 1658).[4]
In terms of the pre-emptive resolution, the Meerhoff children are to be placed (as from 1 March 1669) in the care of Hendrik Reynsz: (from Dirksland, Goeree-Overflakkee, Zuid-Holland) and Barbara Geems: (from Amsterdam) who are already safeguarding the ‘rescued’ Florida.[5] Thus, all four Dutch Hottentots are to be confined to one family.
At the same time the fiscal Cornelis de Cretzer[6] is instructed to find Eva and arrest her:[7]
“In the evening the three children [Jacobus, Pieternella andSalomon] begotten by the late Junior Surgeon Pieter van Meerhoff out of the femaleHottentoo Eva, appear in the hall, naked and destitute, the eldest [Jacobus Meerhoff] sending in word that his mother, being quite drunk, had with all her household things and bedding gone to the Hottentoos, and that in their home (which had been prepared and finely furnished for her in the house at the old pottery) she had left nothing behind in the shape of food, clothing or otherwise. This afternoon in consequence of her excessive drunkenness, and her shameful behaviour in the hall and at the dinner table of the Commander, she had been severely reprimanded, and advised to lead a better and more civilized life, and abandon her adulterous and shameful conduct. Associating as she did with all sorts of men especially at night time, if she did not amend, her children would be taken away from her, and she herself banished on an Island. Now having heard in the evening of her running away and at the same time seeing these poor children standing there so destitute, and bearing in mind that a short time previously the church council had decided to remove the children from this drunken swine, we decided to look out for a respectable burgher who would be prepared to receive them gratis in board and clothing, and before it was quite dark, they were entrusted to the freeman Jan Reyniersz:, deacon of the church, who, (with his wife [Lijsbeth Jans:]) were people of an honest and godly character. The house was at the same time properly secured.
Advertisement
The Church Council had also in its meeting, selected the names of two members of the Congregation, to be submitted to us, that we might choose one of the office of Elder.The retiring deacon Harman Ernest von Gresnich was appointed to the office, and of the other names, submitted in the same manner, Adriaan Wils, and Gerrit van der Byl were chosen to serve as deacons.“
Two days after the confiscation of Eva’s children (10 February 1669), Eva is arrested and thrown into the donker gat (‘black hole’ – the dungeon of the Fort de Goede Hoop) after an abortive attempt to rescue her children the night before. The same day as the decision by the church to seal Florida’s fate with Barbara Geems: (1 March 1669), Eva’s children are put into the care of this same woman.[8]
The Journal (10 February 1669) recounts the events as follows:[9]
“Fine weather. In the afternoon a beautiful and edifying sermon was preached by the minister on board the ship Zierikzee. The same afternoon, Eva, who, since she had run away and abandoned her children, did nothing else here and elsewhere than lead a life of debauchery, playing the beast at night with one or another, caused such a noise and commotion outside in the neighbourhood that some complaints were brought against her, whilst one person was nearly killed in consequence. He had fortunately parried the blow with his left arm, and so escaped. But in order to prevent such irregularities, and all accidents that might result from them, the Fiscal [Cornelis de Cretser] received orders in the evening to take some soldiers with him and hunt up that Hottentoo pig in order to place in custody in the Fort. After an absence of about half and hour, he returned with that fine lady and locked her up, reporting that he had found her drunk again at the entrance to the downs among the Hottentoos, with a little pipe in the mouth. Having asked her what reason she had to abandon her children and take her bedding with her, he was mocked and derided by her; and further what she had done with her feather bed? She replied that she had sold it for a piece of tobacco, and spent all her money on drink so that she had nothing left except a small bundle of children’s clothing and her own which she had hid in a little bush, and was ready to sell. This the Fiscal took away from her and brought to the Fort for the use of the children.”
Their mother, the Widow Meerhoff, is finally banished – without trial – to Robben Island (26 March 1669):[10]
“Our little yacht De Bruydegom proceeds to Robben Island to fetch thence some Dutch slaughter wethers for the ships on the roadstead. She takes with her to the Island theHottentoo woman Eva, who has now for some time already been sitting in the hole (prison) in consequence of her godless life.“
Advertisement
Her arrival is confirmed in a letter from the superintendent of Robben Island Jan Zachariasz::[11]
“By the Bruydegom Thomas Hendrikse and Gabriel Teunissen arrived here, being banished hither, tho one for two and the other for one year. Also the female HottentooEva … PS— I send you 10 wethers, and await your orders regarding the rations to be given to Mrs. Eva.”
The Widow Meerhoff returns to the mainland intermittently from time to time – and gives birth to two illegitimate sons Jeronimus and Anthonij each of whom she has baptised on the mainland[12] – until her untimely death (29 July 1674).[13]
“How changeable this African climate is, is almost incredible. The West wind which had by its violence caused a boisterous sea, and during the last two days had threatened everything with destruction, had to-day gone down completely, followed by such calm weather that not the slightest motion could be observed in the air, whilst the bay was as smooth and bright as a mirror. This day departed this life, a certain female Hottentoo, namedEva, long ago taken from the African brood in her tender childhood by theHon: van Riebeeck, and educated in his house as well as brought to the knowledge of the Christian faith, and being thus transformed from a femaleHottentoo almost into a Netherland woman, teas married to a certain Chief Surgeon of this Residency [Peter Meerhoff (from Copenhagen, Denmark)], by whom she had three children still living [Jacobus, Pieternella and Salomon], and some others which had died. Since his death however at Madagascar, she had brought forth as many illegitimate ones, and for the rest, led such an irregular life, that for a long while the desire would have existed of getting rid of her, had it not been for the hope of the conversion of this brutal aboriginal, which was always still hovering between. Hence in order not to be accused of tolerating her adulterous and debauched life, she had at various times been relegated to Robben Island, where, though she could obtain no drink, she abandoned herself to immorality. Pretended reformation induced the Authorities many times to call her back to the Cape, but as soon as the returned, she, like the dogs, always returned to her own vomit, so that finally she quenched the fire of her sensuality by death (door de lijdelycke doot], affording a manifest example that nature, however closely and firmly muzzled by imprinted principles, nevertheless at its own time triumphing over all precepts, again rushes back to its inborn qualifies.”
… een manifest exempel verthoonende dat de natuer, hoe nauw en vast deselve ook door ingeprente reden werd gemuylbant, nochtans tiijner tijt boven alle leeringen seegenpralende tot haer aengeboren eigenschappen wederom uytspat.
The Widow Meerhoff is buried the following day at Church of new Castle of Good Hope:[14]
“The body of the deceased Hottentoo, Eva, was, notwithstanding her unchristian life, buried today according to Christian usage in the church of the new Castle.”
Her remains are later exhumed (with others) after demolition of the Castle’s wooden church and re-interred under the foundations of the present-day Dutch Reformed Groote Kerk, Adderley Street, Cape Town (sometime after 15 December 1677).[15]
Barbertje Geems – both whore and whoremonger
… een knap en handigh vrouwtje, en daar toe seer bequaam …[16]
Is Barbara Geems: the nurse, referred to by De Grevenbroek[17], who had been hired to care for Florida immediately after the infant’s confiscation? Considering that her daughter, Sara Jacobs: van Rosendael – later the wife of Adriaen Willemsz: van Brakel, alias Baes Arrie[18] who becomes ouderling (1671), is later appointed as official vroedvrouw(midwife), the likelihood exists that she learns her vocation from her mother. The personal circumstances of Barbara Geems:, however, are not so good. Impoverished and living off the proceeds of her bakery and also liquor sales, she and her husband are more than willing to take in the ‘abandoned’ Meerhoff orphans at the same time as Florida in exchange for payment for services rendered.
Advertisement
Barbara Geems is a known hoer (whore) and pol (whoremonger). Her nocturnal activities are exposed at the trial of the Company’s tamboer (drummer) Hendrik Coerts: / Courtsz:(from Deventer).[19] Her husband is considered to be one of the two laziest free-burghers in the colony. Pleading poverty, he rejoins the Company and is removed to work at the VOC’s post at Mauritius (1666). His wife and family, however, remain at the Cape. In his absence, his wife runs a brothel. He returns (1669) but permission is quickly given for him to go to Batavia. He leaves (1670). Once again his family remains behind at the Cape. He never returns.
The decision by the Church Council, no doubt with the blessing of the colony’s most influential women, comes as a surprise (or perhaps not) – especially in the case of the Meerhoff children. Had Florida survived, would she too be made available for prostitution? From the trial of Hendrik Coerts: / Courtsz: we know that when Barbara Geems: herself is in no position to satisfy regularly his sexual needs, she makes her female slave available to him.
As for the Meerhoff children, at least the two youngest, Pieternella Meerhoff and Salomon Meerhoff are shipped off (1677) to Mauritius as wards (servants?) to Theuntje Bartholomeus: van der Linde and her husband, Bartholomeus (Bart / Bartel) Borns(from Woerden).
The eldest, Jacobus Meerhoff, a free spirit in touch with his native side and prone to wander, is later sent to join his sister in Mauritius. Unwanted and unmourned, he dies mysteriously on the voyage back to the Cape.[20] It is not known who looks after Eva Meerhoff’s two illegitimate sons, Jeronimus and Anthonij, after her death (1674). Does Barbara Geems: also take them in? Significantly, the Church Council and the authorities do not ever concern themselves with these children.
The records are silent.
Only Anthonij appears to reach adulthood and is recorded (1712) alone and without a family as Anthonij Meerhoff. In all probability, he dies prematurely (1713), a victim of the smallpox epidemic.
Paragons of Virtue, Upholders of Dutch Civilisation
During this time the Cape’s commander is the immensely unpopular, and purportedly sickly and generally indisposed, Jacob Borghorst. He is installed (18 June 1668). He had already stopped over at the Cape (1 March 1665-22 April 1665) en route from the Indies to the Netherlands. The resolutions by the Council of Policy during his time as commander, reveal a skeleton staff of sorts when contrasted with the membership and attendance of councils chaired by his predecessors and successors.
Furthermore, there is even disarray in the Burgher Council as the heemraadThielman Hendricksz: (from Utrecht) is dismissed (6 August 1669) from his position for giving the Council of Justice a piece of his mind. The removal of Thielman Hendriksz: from office undoubtedly jeopardises whatever little favourable treatment Eva Meerhoff and her children might have got from the Dutch. François Valentijn (1666-1727) writes later of Borghorst’s unpopularity:[21]
Advertisement
“The HeerenWagenaar and Van Quaalbergen had indeed left good instructions and set good examples to HeerBorchorst as regards the artisans; but on his own authority, and without the knowledge of the Council he had so altered these, that he made them work by day and stand at night, by which he had made himself so hated by them that scarce any wished to remain here longer, and also during his rule he had caused very great discontent among the civil population, so that it was full time for him to depart …”.
Even the local aborigines dislike Borghorst intensely. This is confirmed by the visiting VOC official Arnout van Overbeke (1632-1674)[22]. Calling Borghorst the only monsterthat he can find at the Cape, Van Overbeke states further:[23]
All his quarrelsomeness came from the fact that Quaelbergen[24] was still so beloved that no one was very willing to have anything to do with him. Even the Hottentots, who each year give a free-will present to the Commandeur, were fed up with him: “What sort of a Captain is that?” they said, “always Sieckum!” (that is to say sick, bad, grumpy, ugly – everything that is no good is sieckum, thus bad tobacco is “sieckum Tabak,” etc.); and that made our friend mad. He wants to get by force what in reality can be had only by affection. For that matter, he punishes himself every evening with a few glasses of spirits which one of those in his confidence brings him under cover …
The man in Borghorst’s confidence is Hendrik Crudop[25], then butler or steward (hofmeester) to the commander. Crudop’s meteoric rise within the ranks of the administration parallel – at least in terms of success – those of the wealthy and highly respectable Elbert Diemer whose career also starts out as butler and personal attendant to the commander. Crudop’s presence at the Cape requires careful monitoring as he plays an instrumental, personal and destructive part in the initial colonial undoing of the aboriginal Khoe / San. Crudop’s wife, Catharina de Voogd, significantly, is sister to the resident minister, Adriaan de Voogd[26]. How else do we explain the extraordinary intervention on the part of the Church Council – almost always subordinate to the VOC’s administration – and the inaction on the part of both the Council of Policy and the Council of Justice?
A Masterpiece of Nature …
“Authors are to be blam’d for their Wantonness and Precipitations in the Characters they have drawn of the Hottentots, whose Minds and Manners, tho’ wretched enough, are not so wretched as they have made ’em …” – Peter Kolbe (1731)
Florida’s and Eva’s stories become a source of literary legend in terms of colonial travel-writings on the primitive, the ‘other’ and the exotic. The incident, no matter how blurred or rehashed and now almost forgotten, became nevertheless one of the cornerstones whereby the Khoe / San peoples became occidentally (universally?) maligned and well-nigh dehumanised in perpetuity. It is surely opportune and imperative that the intertwined stories of Florida and Eva Meerhoff now be re-evaluated. At the time, the moral outrage is so great that the Dutch authorities ‘resolve’ the matter by dumping these children, these Hottentotmisfits, with the colony’s most notorious whore and whoremonger. Is this a cop out done on the pretext of inducing moral self-upliftment on the part of Barbara Geems:? Barbara Geems:, it must be remembered, is allowed to indenture Florida on condition that she bring up the girl as a Christian. Midwife, privileged tavern-keeper, storekeeper, baker and purveyor of bread to the garrison, Barbara Geems’s meteoric rise to respectability thereafter begs further and closer scrutiny.
Advertisement
We have been left with one final, equally enduring, gracious and ironic, contemporary portrayal of Eva Meerhoff during the time of her fall from grace.
When the royal Danish ship Oldenborg stops over (26 November 1672) at the Cape of Good Hope, on board is Hans Petersen Kertminde aka Jan Pietersz: Cortemünde. Amsterdam-born but of Danish parentage, he is author of the delightful Orientalische Reijse des Königlichen Schiffs Oldenborg which original manuscript is now in Det Kongelige Bibliotek [The Royal Library] in Copenhagen, Denmark.
He disembarks (29 November 1672) on Robben Island and recounts his meeting with the banished Eva Meerhoff:[27]
“In the house of the local commander [ie the commander of Robben Island, Danish-born Christian von Aalborg] we also met a Hottentot woman [Eva] who had been born in Africa of pagan, bestial parents, but had been brought up in the Cape by a Dutch woman, so that compared with her own countrymen she now appeared to be a masterpiece of nature. She had embraced Christianity, spoke fluent Dutch, English, French and Portuguese and was conversant with the Holy Scriptures so that she was able to discuss everything with our pastor to our very great astonishment. She was much better proportioned than is generally the case with her compatriots. In short, she was most commendable being capable and well trained in all womanly crafts and married to one of the physicians serving in the Company. After the death of her husband, the noble Company allotted her 9 rixdollars monthly for her maintenance, for so long as she would remain a widow and stay virtuous. But when, after the death of her husband, she became pregnant out of wedlock and her “fountain” dried up[28] she was punished by being kept here in a kind of custody … quasi in arrest zu sitzen … for a certain time.”
[1]LieutenantJohannes (Joan / Johan) Coon / Coonen / Coone / Coons: / Koon (from Sommelsdijk, Zuid-Holland) in the Netherlands; prior to transfer to the Cape, serves already 8 years in the Indies; succeeds Pieter Evraerts: van Cruijssaert; arrives at the Cape with his wife Alexandrine / Alexandrina (Sandrina) Jacobs: Maxvelt / Maxwell – better known as Juffrouw Coon – on board Walcheren [Anna J. Böeseken, Wagenaer’s Journal, p. 153; this Journal entry has been overlooked by Margaret Cairns in her article, ‘Alexandrina Maxwell: Juffrouw Coon, her second marriage’, Familia, pp. 54-56]; she witnesses (25 April 1666) baptism of Elisabeth Louisa (daughter of Joannes de Nyssen and Catharina Herbert, who are returning to the Fatherland); she witnesses (7 November 1666) – with Leendert de Klerck, Joan van As (from Brussels, Brabant) and Maryke Tielemans: [Maijcke Hendricks: van den Berg (from Diest, Brabant) – the baptism of Anna (daughter of Matthijs Coeijmans (from Herentals) and Catharijn de Klerck): den November een dochter van Matthys Koymans en Cathrijn [sic] syn huysvrouw wiert genaemt Anna de getuygen waren Leendert de Klerck,Joan van As, Juff.[rouw] Coon en Mayke Tielemans:; she appears (1676) as a Cape congregation member listed as Sandrina Jacobs:, huisvrouw van Joannes Coon [ CA: VC 603: (Lidmaatregister)]; his death at St Helena (3 February 1673) is referred to in a Despatch(10 May 1673) [CA: C 496, Deel II, p. 576]; she marries (2ndly) at Cape (29 September 1679) Louis / Lodewyck Francois B(o)ureau (from Brussels), locally known as Lodewyk Francen, a nickname which he greatly deplores according to Hendrik van Reede tot Drakenstein in his Journaal van Zijn Verblijf aan de Kaap; born (c. 1649), he is the son of Carel Burouw, an advocate in Brussels; after military service in Europe, he joins the VOC serving at Cape as soldier, clerk and finally victualler in which position of trust he falls foul of the law; charged with theft he is dismissed from service for life and deported to Netherlands; his deportation order, however, is initially not carried out and he becomes a free-burgher at Cape; Commissioner Van Rheede appears to refuse to condone laxity of his former protectors Ryklof van Goensthe Elder and Ryklof van Goensthe Younger. Alexandrina Maxvel appears alone in Muster Roll (1682). Juffrou Koon witnesses (29 August 1683) the baptisms of Jacob (son of her mesties slave Maria Lossee / Lozee[daughter of Maria van Angola]) and Lysbet (daughter of her mesties slave Anna Pieters: [van Batavia]); she appears (1684) as Alexandrina Buro and she appears (1685) with Lodewyk Breureau as Alexandrina Maxwal; it is not known whether she accompanies her 2nd husband once he is finally deported. She appears to have no children.
Advertisement
[2]Harmen Ernst Gransicht / Gresnigt / Gresnicht / Gressens (from Utrecht); son of Hilletjen Teunis:) – baeshovenier (Company gardener), superintendent of Slave Lodge and burgher ensign, husband to IJtje / IJtjen Hendriks: (from Naerden, Het Gooi region of Noord-Holland).
[3]Jan Reijniers(z): / Reijnierssen / Reyniers(z): (from Amsterdam) – arrives (16 August 1653) as bosschieter on the Ph(o)enix – with junior merchant brother Jacob Reijniersz: [which brother soon marries (2 November 1653) Jan van Riebeeck`s niece and ward Elisabeth (Lijsbeth) van Opdorp (from Charloos [Charlois, Rotterdam]) who arrives (6 April 1652) on Drommedaris and which couple soon leave (24 January 1654) the Cape for Batavia on the Vrede]; one of the 1st free-burghers; elected burgher councillor (1658); Commissioner Ryckloff van Goens to the Heeren XVII (16 April 1657) reports the following about Jan Reijnierse: “Last night two more burghers were granted their freedom. They are the first who have accepted your condition of 20 years. The one is named Jan Reijnierse. His wife lives in Amsterdam, and his sister is named Stynt Reijnierse who is, as he says, in the service of Burgomaster de Graaff. He prays that his wife Lysbet Jansen, cloth napster in the Koningstraat may be sent over with her niece. These two persons [the other appears to be Wouter Cornelisz: Mostert (from Utrecht)] have each received ten roods in breadth more than the others, because in accordance with your intentions they have set an example to those that follow. The Company’s cows, which he knows how to manage very well, we have transferred to Reijniersz:; because the gardener has sufficient to do without them. [Report: Commissioner Ryckloff van Goensto the Heeren XVII in Session at Middelburgh (16 April 1657), H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope, Letters & Documents Received 1649-1662, Part II, p. 334]; his wife Lijsbeth / Luysken / Lysbeth Jans(z:) (from Amsterdam) – [Not to be confused withLijsbeth Jansz: who is the wife of Jan Jansz: [van Eeden] van Oldenborg] arrives (17 November 1658) with (and 1 child on voyage) – flute Harp brings (17 November 1658) 5 women and their children [Letter from Amsterdam, 2 September 1658]: “Passage granted to the daughter of the wife of Herwerden and other women who have been ordered out”. [Letter (10 October 1658)] – these women (and children) are:
Petronella Does & Johannes van Harwaerden [children of Johanna Boddijs, wife to Herwerden]
Neeltje Arens:
Mayken Hendricx: van den Bergh & daughter Catharina Theuns:
Jannetje Ferdinandus:
Lijsbeth Jans: & 1 child (her niece) – [Johanna (Jannetie / Jannetje) Gerards: / Gerrids: / Gerrits: (from Amsterdam) – stammoeder of Bezuidenhout family and future wife to (1stly) Wijnand(t) / Wynant Leender(t)sz: from Besuyenhouten / den Haagh ‘t Bezuydenhouwt and (2ndly) Cornelisz Stevensz: Botma (from Wageningen, Gelderland)];
Jan Reyniersz: and other free-burghers hang (October 1658) Gogosoa by the neck from a beam their unmannerly treatment of the Natives (vide LD 4 May 1661), p. 192]; Jan Reyniersz:experiences serious financial loss (1659) following the death of a female slave, the escape of two other slaves and having his house ransacked by aborigines; as one of the many accosted attempted stowaways from the Cape, he declares (2 March 1660) that this year’s return crews cried out on the ways, the jetty and near the Fort, “Get into the boat, who wants to join?” &c., using much infamous language against this place; and that even a quarter-master of Het Wapen van Holland , which carried the admiral, had been guilty of such irregularities [H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope,Letters Despatched from the Cape, 1652-1662, Attestations, p. 437]; 22 March 1660: [Van Riebeeck’s Journal, vol. III, pp. 191-192]: “It has been growing more and more apparent how little one can rely on some people. The Company’s Schapenjacht is thus in great danger of being deserted by her crew some time or other, since some of them were amongst the stowaways on the return fleet which left recently. It could be easily have happened that the quarter-master of the Schapenjacht could have gone on board one of the ships and made off, leaving the boat drifting on the open sea. To prevent such a loss and so as to have a reliable man aboard her, it has been decided to appoint the free-burgher, Jan Reijnierssenof Amsterdam, as quartermaster in command of the Schapenjacht. He is a married man and as things are not going well with him, he has asked that he may be given this employment and also that he be employed as sail-maker, all for the same wage of 18 guilders which he used to receive before he became a free-burgher. Here follows the deed of appointment: Jan Reijnierssen of Amsterdam landed here from the ship Vogel Phenicxon 16 August 1653 as arquebusier, receiving a wage of 11 guilders. Afterwards, when his term had expired, he was promoted to sail-maker at 18 guilders a month. Since 14 April 1657 he has earned his living here as a freeman and in the meantime he had his wife brought out from the Fatherland. As a result of the war with the Hottentots and the robberies committed by them, he has been ruined and is now destitute. As we are short of suitable men, we hereby reappoint him as sail-maker in the Company’s service, at his own request and also because of his capability. So that we may have a steady and reliable man on the Company’s vessel, he is appointed as quartermaster in command of the Schapenjacht, on the understanding that for the combined duties he shall receive his former pay of 18 guilders a month. This shall take effect from primo April next and he shall continue to serve the Company for 5 years in the said dual capacity of sail-maker and quartermaster of the vessel named, unless he decides in the meantime to apply for his freedom again, in which case it may be granted him”; Hendrik Boom sues (26 July 1664) Jan Reijniersz: – water dispute – Reijneirsz: must ensure that Boom must receive the water to which he is entitled [CA: CJ 1, p. 238]; Jan Reijneirsz: and Matthijs Coeijmans / Cooymans (from Herentals) convicted for theft (27 May 1666) – remanded until evidence is obtained; Lysbeth Jans: (with husband Jan Reyniers:), witnesses (26 December 1666) baptism of Catarina van den Bergh’s daughter Jannitje; she is briefly foster mother to the confiscated Meerhoff children before handing them over to Barbara Geems: / Geens:;Gijsbert Dircksen / Dircx: Verveij / Verweij (from Oijeck) [? Cuijk (near Mill) in Gelderland]) sues (12 June 1670) Jan Reijniersz: for debt; Jan Reijniersz: arraigned for using insulting language before the Council of Justice and made to apologise (2 July 1670) fining him 8 reals of 8 plus costs; transfer (5 February 1671) of erf belonging to Reynierse to Hans Ras; (from Angeln, Slesvig) Jan Reyniersz: requests (1672) to leave the Cape.
Advertisement
[4] VOC Journal, Cape of Good Hope (18 Jan 1660) and Letter Despatched: Jan van Riebeeck to Heren XVII (4 May 1661).
[5] … den 8 Febr.[uarie] [1669] is resolveert der 3 kinderen [Jacobus, Pieternella and Salomon Meerhoff] van Pieter van Meerhof [sic] [(from Copenhagen in Denmark)] ratoden weduwe [Krotoa of the Goringaicona baptised Eva] om haer godtloos en ongebonden leven te ontnemen en door de Diaconio op te voeden, zijn den 1 Maert besluit ten huys van Hendrick Reynsz: vryman alhier voor de som .van 250 gl Indiesche valuatie in’t jaer – [1669] …
[6]Cornelis de Cretser / Cretzer (1637-1677) (from Culemborg, Gelderland) – son of Cornelis de Cretser and Adriana Breeckevelt; baptized Culemborg, Gelderland (24 November 1637); witnesses (1671) baptism at the Cape of Good Hope [Anno 1671] Den 22 Mart Een dochterje van Mr:Jan Hol en Jacomyntje Backers: syn huysvr[ouw] wiert genaamt Geertuyda tot getuyge stonden Cornelis de Cretser en Anna de Vooght; promising career of Cornelis de Cretser, Secunde at the Cape, abruptly ends (evening of 10 April 1671) with arrival of flute Wimmenium ex Batavia under command of skipper Adriaen Drom and junior skipper Isaacq Fonteyn who are received at De Cretzer’s place during which time a quarrel breaks out between Drom and Fonteyn. Despite admonitions by De Cretzer that Drom should refrain from fighting in his house, Drom eventually draws his dagger and wounds an intervening De Cretzer instead of Fonteyn. A seething and bleeding De Cretzer is taken to an adjoining room to dress his wound. When the bleeding worsens an infuriated De Cretzer grabs a dagger and fatally stabs Drom. Consteration ensues, the Castle gate is locked, yet De Cretzer flees but cannot be found despite search parties sent out to arrest him. With the help of locals, he is helped onto a ship returning to Patria and he again applies (1673) to the Here XVII to be accepted back into VOC service. The Here XVII allow him to return on condition that “… zich bij de competente rechter aldaar (de Raad van Justitie) voor zijn gedragingen kon rehabiliteren”. De Cretzer departs (30 April 1674) on the Stermeer ex Texel but his ship is taken by Barbary pirates and he is taken as captive to Algeria. In a letter (18 September 1675) the Here XVII confirm that De Cretser is still a captive in Algeria. Hy dies there according to a letter (11 May 1677) from the Amsterdam Chamber; he is captured (1674) by pirates and enslaved (18 September 1675) – In een brief van 18 September 1675 melden Heren XVII dat De Cretser nog te Algiers vertoeft. Hij is er overleden, meldt tenslotte een brief van de Kamer Amsterdam van 11 Mei 1677, zonder een preciese datum te noemen); he dies (1677) in Algeria in captivity [Gerrit J. Schutte, (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) ‘Zomaar een VOC-dienaar: de carriere van Cornelis de Cretser’, Historia (Historical Association of South Africa, 26 September 2021).
[7] H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Wagenaer’s Journal (8 February 1669), p. 266-267.
[8]den 8 Febr.[uarie] [1669] is resolveert der 3 kinderen van Pieter van Meerhof rat[i]o den weduwe om haer godtloos en ongebonden leven te ontnemen en door de Diaconio op te voeden, zijn den 1 Maert besluit ten huys van Hendrick Reynsz: vryman alhier voor de som van 250 gl Indiesche valuatie in’t jaer [CA: DRC: G1/1 & G1/2: Kaapstad Notule 1665-1724, p. 96].
[9] H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Wagenaer’s Journal (10 February 1669), pp. 267-268.
[10] H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Wagenaer’s Journal (26 March 1669), p. 270.
[11] H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope:Wagenaer’s Journal (29 March 1669), p. 271. Jan Sacharias: / Zachariasz: (from Amsterdam) – husband to freed private slave Maria van Bengale (previously owned by Company gardener (later fee-burgher) Hendrik Boom and subsequently by sick-comforter Pieter van der Stael, brother-in-law to 1st VOC Cape Commander Jan van Riebeeck); as widower, he and 2 Cape-born daughters Maria Jans: sister Hester Jans: later go to Mauritius. Maria marries (4 December 1672) on DePijl en route to Mauritius Jacob Jansz: de Nijs (from Amsterdam) quartermaster (speisemeister) – their son Jan de Nijs returns to the Cape after the Dutch abandon their colony on Mauritius leaving descendants in South Africa. Hester marries on Mauritius free-burgher Gerrit Jansz: (from Ewijk) – accused of adultery and committing fornication with their slave, she is arrested and sent to Cape, put on trial and sentenced (14 September 1691) to 5 years hard labour in chains at public works with muster rolls listing her future (but later estranged) husband as neighbour or housemate to the freed Cape-born Company slave Armozijn the elder (1690 & 1695).
Advertisement
[12]Jeronimus Meerhoff is baptised (23 November 1670) and Anthonij Meerhoff is baptised Cape (6 August 1673).
[13] H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Journal 1671, etc. (29 July 1674), p. 209.
[14] H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Journal, 1671, etc. (30 July 1674), p. 209.
[15] “The little wooden church inside the fortress was now quite full of graves. The ground on which it stood was higher than the general surface, and it was considered advisable to level it and to remove the old building. It was necessary to select a site for a new church. It was resolved to take a portion of the lower end of the great garden for this purpose, as the garden could be extended with advantage towards the mountain. A plot of ground sufficiently large for a cemetery was enclosed with a strong wall, and on 9th of April 1678 the foundation stone of the new church was laid in the centre of it. That stone still rests under the church, the present building being only an enlargement of the original one, the end walls of which were left standing … The church was not completed until December 1703, but the ground was used as a cemetery. The first interment was the body of the Rev. Petrus Hulsenaar, clergyman of the Cape, who died on the 15th of December, 1677, and was buried in the middle of the site on which the church was afterwards to stand. Subsequently the remains of those who had been buried in the old church were removed to this ground and deposited in a common grave” [George McCall Theal: Chronicles of Cape Commanders, pp. 209-10].
[16] Resolution of the Council of Policy (4 & 5 March 1670).
[17] J.G. Grevenbroek, An elegant and accurate account of The African Race Living Round The Cape of Good Hope commonly called Hottentots (1695) [vide I. Schapera, The Early Cape Hottentots, pp. 181 & 183]. Born (1644). Sails (June 1684) to the Cape. Secretary of the Council of Policy (October 1684). Accompanies (1684) Ryklof van Goens to Batavia returning to the Cape (1686). Free-burgher at the Cape (June 1694). Signs will (3 February 1714) while living at his farm Welmoed near Eerste Rivier, Stellenbosch. Dies (ante 1726).
[18]Baes Adriaen (Arie / Arije) Willemsz van Bra(a)(c)kel (from Den Bosch / ‘s Hertogenbosch, North Brabant) – Company master carpenter (baes timmerman); later free-burgher; 2 March 1671: Lijsbeth van de Caep [Lisjbeth Sanders: – voordogter of Anna van Guinea] (aged 12), sold by Matthijs Coeijman for f 160; 10 March 1676: Isak Caste van Malabar sold by Marthinus van Banchem to baas timmerman Arije van Brakel for Rds 40; 24 May 1687: Matthijsvan Java (aged 27 / 28) sold to Louis van Bengale for Rds 35; 1688 owns 2 slave men and 1 slave woman; marries Cape 28 May 1670 Sara Jacobs: van Rosendael (from Amsterdam, North Holland), daughter of Jacob Huibrechtsz: / Huybertsz: Rosendael (from Leyden, South Holland), widower of NN, and Barbara / Barbera (Barbertje) Ge(e)ms / Geens / Goens (from Amsterdam, North Holland); step-daughter of Hendrik Reynste / Rynsen [Gulicks] (from Dircxlant); children: (1) Willem van Brakel (baptised Cape 12 April 1671); (2) Elisabeth van Brakel (baptised Cape 12 March 1673) (dies in infancy); (3) Elisabeth van Brakel (baptised Cape 13 May 1674) marries (1stly) 25 July 1700 Hans Jürgen Grimpen (from Gehrden, Brunswick), widow of Jannetje Ferdinandus (from Coutrai, Flandres), wid. Barend Hendricks: (from Leeuwen, Friesland) and widow Joris / Jurgen Jansz: Appel (from Amsterdam, North Holland); marries (2ndly) 7 June 1703 Adam Tas (from Amsterdam, North Holland); (4) Jacobus van Brakel (baptised Cape 12 April 1676) (dies in infancy); (5) Maria van Brakel (baptised Cape 30 May 1677) marries (1stly) Jacobus Louw son of Jan Pietersz: Louw aka Broertje (from Marne in the Dithmarsh) and Beatrix Weijmans: (from Amsterdam, North Holland) and marries (2ndly) Jan Valk (from Zevenhuizen, South Holland), wid. Josina Mos – farmer Elsenburg; (6) Jacobus van Brakel (baptised Cape 19 May 1679) (dies in infancy); (7) Jacobus van Brakel(baptised 8 January 1681) – banished marries 22 January 1702 Margeretha Elbers (daughter of Aletta ter Mollen / Vermeulen (from Schüttorf, Lower Saxony); (8) Hermanus van Brakel (baptised 13 December 1682) (dies in infancy); (9) Hermanus van Brakel (baptised 2 January 1684) (dies in infancy); (10) Magtelt van Brakel (baptised 25 February 1685); (11) Hermanus van Brakel (baptised 30 June 1668) marries 1 April 1708 Geertruida van der Bijl; (12) Leendert van Brakel (baptised 5 October 1687); (13) Barbara van Brakel (1688-1713) (baptised 14 November 1688) dies 1713 (smallpox epidemic?) – marries 29 December 1709 Johannes Kraay / Cray / Craa (from Dresden) – he marries (2ndly) 21 October 1714 Aletta van Wyk; (14) Magtelt van Brakel (baptised 31 December 1690).
Advertisement
[19] Cape Archives (CA): CJ 1, p. 326 (4 August 1666); C 2394, p. 418 / 25 / 137 (Attestation: Hendrick Barentsz: van Leewarden and Hans Coenraet Veugelein, 23 August 1666).
[20] 3 October 1686: VOC Commander on Mauritius, Isaacq Johannes Lamotius, informs VOC Cape Commander (later Governor) Simon van der Stel that the Eurafrican, prone-to-walkabout, eldest son of the banished-without-trial, Robben Island-relegated Cape aborigine, Eva Meerhoff born Krotoa, the Eurafrican: Jacobus Meerhoff(1661-1687) – eventually sent to Mauritius (October 1685) to join his sister Pieternella Meerhoff (1663-1713) – is to be sent back to the Cape following innumerable complaints (“menigvuldige Klagten”) by Jacobus Meerhoff’s brother-in-law, Daniel Zaijman / Zaayman (from Vlissingen, Zeeland), concerning Meerhoff’s “quaat comportement en wederhoornheijt” and “aangesien hij nergens toe nut en van seer kwaden wandel verlies” … Jacobus Meerhoff, however, mysteriously dies during the voyage back to the Cape. Lamotius is VOC commander of Mauritius (1677-1692) during which time his wife and baby daughter perish in a fire. Accused (1692) of despotism, he is finally banished for 6 years to a remote island in the East Indies returning thereafter to Patria via the Cape (1718).
[21]François Valentijn, Description of the Cape with matters concerning it, vol. II, pp. 192-193.
[22]Magister Arnout van Overbe(e)ke (1632-1674) – VOC’s Honourable Councillor of Justice, poet and diarist, returning to the Netherlands as admiral on the Return Fleet from Batavia (now Jakarta, Java, Indonesia), appointed commissioner to inspect the VOC’s administration at Caput Bonae Spei (‘Cape of Good Hope’); sailing on
The Mutapa Empire – sometimes referred to as Mwenemutapa, (Shona: Mwene we Mutapa, Portuguese: Monomotapa) – was an African empire in Zimbabwe, which expanded to what is now modern-day Mozambique, Botswana, Malawi, and Zambia. It was ruled by the Nembire or Mbire dynasty.[2]
Map of trade centres and routes in precolonial Zimbabwe. A sixteenth-century Portuguese map of Monomotapa lying in the interior of southern Africa.
The Portuguese term Monomotapa is a transliteration of the Shona royal title Mwenemutapa derived from a combination of two words, Mwenemeaning "Lord" and Mutapa meaning "conquered land".[3] Over time the monarch's royal title was applied to the kingdom as a whole, and used to denote the kingdom's territory on maps from the period.[4]
History
Origins
There are several Mutapa origin stories, the most widely accepted told by oral tradition is of the princes of Great Zimbabwe. Shonaoral traditionattributes Great Zimbabwe's demise to a salt shortage, which may be a figurative way of speaking of land depletion for agriculturalists or of the depletion of critical resources for the community.[5][6]: 10 The first "Mutapa" was a warrior prince named Nyatsimba Mutota from the Kingdom of Zimbabwe who expanded the reach of the kingdom searching for new sources of salt in the north, near the Zambezi, with some traditions saying he was sent by his father, the mambo (king) of Great Zimbabwe.[7]: 203 Mutota is said to have found salt in the lands of the Tavara,[7]: 204 and settled around the Ruya-Mazowe Basin, conquering and incorporating the pre-existing chiefdoms to control agricultural production and strategic resources. This placed the state at a key position in the gold and ivory trade.[8]
Around 1440, Mutota began aggressive campaigns against the surrounding tribes, expanding the boundaries of the lands under his control to the west along the Zambezi River.[9] In the early 15th century Angoche traders opened a new route along the Zambezi via Mutapa and Ingombe Ilede to reach the goldfields close to Khami, precipitating the rise of the Kingdom of Butua. This bypassed Great Zimbabwe to the east, contributing to its decline.[10]: 50–51
It was believed that only Mutapa's most recent ancestors would follow them, with older ancestors staying at Great Zimbabwe and providing protection there. A Shona king's claim to land is through their ancestors, and this would have impacted the legitimacy of Mutapa's leaders.[11]
Further expansion
Mutota's son and successor, Nyanhewe Matope, moved the capital to Mount Fura and extended this new kingdom into an empire encompassing most of the lands between Tavara and the Indian Ocean.[12] This empire had achieved uniting a number of different peoples in Southern Africa by building strong, well-trained armies and encouraging states to join voluntarily, offering membership in the Great council of the Empire to any who joined without resistance.[13] Matope's armies overran the Manyika and Tonga as well as the coastal Teve and Madanda.[12] By the time the Portuguese arrived on the coast of Mozambique, the Mutapa Empire was the most powerful state in the region.[12] The empire had reached its full extent by 1480, a mere 50 years following its creation.[13]
Changamire I and loss of the southern regions
There appear to have intermarriages between the Nembire dynasty and the Torwa dynasty of Butua.[2] According to oral traditions, Changamire was likely a descendant of both dynasties, being the son of Matope or had married Matope's daughter (or both were true and he married his sister as was commonplace in the royal family).[2] He had been appointed governor (amir) of the southern portion of the Mutapa Empire (Guruhuswa).[14]: 46 Diogo de Alcáçova's report in 1506 indicates that Changamire I was a member of the Torwa dynasty who had served as a wealthy and influential governor of the Mwenemutapa(Mutapa king).[15]: 54
In 1490, Changamire I rebelled against the Mwenemutapa, his elder brother Nyahuma, and deposed him, reportedly with help from the Torwa. He ruled Mutapa for four years until he was killed by the rightful heir to the throne, reportedly his nephew. His son Changamire II continued the conflict,[15]: 54 ruling the southern portion which broke away from the Mutapa Empire.[14]: 46 Whether this breakaway state maintained independence or came back under the rule of the Mwenemutapa is unclear, as we don't hear of the Changamire dynasty again until the 17th century.[15]: 54
Portuguese contact
The Portuguese dominated much of southeast Africa's coast, laying waste to Sofala and Kilwa, by 1515.[16] Their main goal was to dominate the trade with India; however, they unwittingly became mere carriers for luxury goods between Mutapa's sub-kingdoms and India. Main commodity brokers included Zharare and mhere mhere.[17] As the Portuguese settled along the coast, they made their way into the hinterland as sertanejos (backwoodsmen). These sertanejos lived alongside Swahili traders and even took up service among Shona kings as interpreters and political advisors. One such sertanejo, António Fernandes, managed to travel through almost all the Shona kingdoms, including Mutapa's metropolitan district, between 1512 and 1516.He mainly travelled with Dhafa Zharare,son of Chipere Zharare who wanted the son to learn how to trade.[18]
The Portuguese finally entered into direct relations with the Mwenemutapa in the 1560s.[19] They recorded a wealth of information about the Mutapa Kingdom as well as its predecessor, Great Zimbabwe. According to Swahili traders whose accounts were recorded by the Portuguese historian João de Barros, Great Zimbabwe was a medieval capital city built of stones of marvellous size without the use of mortar. And while the site was not within Mutapa's borders, the Mwenemutapa kept noblemen and some of his wives there.[12] By the 17th century, other Europeans would extensively describe Mutapa architecture through paintings. Olfert Dapper revealed four grand gateways which led to several halls and chambers in the Mutapa palace. The ceilings of the rooms in the palace were gilt with golden plates alongside ivory chandeliers which hung on silver chains and filled the halls with light.[20]
In 1569, King Sebastian of Portugal made a grant of arms to the Mwenemutapa. These were blazoned: Gules between two arrows Argent an African hoe barwise bladed Or handled Argent – The shield surmounted by a Crown Oriental.[clarification needed] This was probably the first grant of arms to a native of southern Africa; however it is unlikely that these arms were ever actually used by the Mwenemutapa.[21]
The accidental crusade
Martyrdom by strangulation of Jesuit Father Gonçalo da Silveira in Monomotapa
In 1561, a Portuguese Jesuit missionary, Gonçalo da Silveira managed to make his way into the Mwenemutapa's court and convert him to Christianity.[4] This did not go well with the Muslim merchants in the capital, and they persuaded the king to kill the Jesuit only a few days after his baptism. This was all the justification the Portuguese needed to penetrate the interior and take control of the gold mines and ivory routes. After a lengthy preparation, an expedition of 1,000 men under Francisco Barreto was launched in 1568. They managed to get as far as the upper Zambezi, but local disease decimated the force. The Portuguese returned to their base in 1572 and took their frustrations out on the Swahili traders, whom they massacred. They replaced them with Portuguese and their half-African progeny who became prazeiros (estate holders) of the lower Zambezi. Mutapa maintained a position of strength exacting a subsidy from each captain of Portuguese Mozambique that took the office. The Mwenemutapa also levied a duty of 50 percent on all trade goods imported.[22]
Decline and collapse
Engraving of Congo and Monomotapa on elephant back showing off two Caffer "barbarians".
Mutapa proved invulnerable to attack and even economic manipulation due to the Mwenemutapa's strong control over gold production.[22] What posed the greatest threat was infighting among different factions which led to opposing sides calling on the Portuguese for military aid. However, the Portuguese proved to be happy with the downfall of the Mutapa state.
Portuguese control
In 1629 the Mwenemutapa attempted to throw out the Portuguese. He failed and in turn he himself was overthrown, leading to the Portuguese installation of Mavura Mhande Felipe on the throne.[23] Mutapa signed treaties making it a Portuguese vassal and ceding gold mines, but none of these concessions were ever put into effect.[22] Mutapa remained nominally independent, though practically a client state. All the while, Portugal increased control over much of southeast Africa with the beginnings of a colonial system. The Portuguese were now in control of the trade and the trade routes.
Loss of prestige
Monomotapa as featured in Jeu de la Géographie (1644) Baptism of king Siti of Mutapaby workshop of Tomasz Muszyński, 1683, Dominican Monastery in Lublin. The baptism of Siti Kazurukamusapa was celebrated by João de Mello on 4 August 1652, the feast day of St Dominic.
Another problem for Mutapa was that its tributaries such as Kiteve, Madanda and Manyika ceased paying tribute. At the same time, a new kingdom under the Rozvi dynasty near Barwe was on the rise. All of this was hastened by Portugal retaining a presence on the coast and in the capital.[22] At least one part of the 1629 treaty that was acted on was the provision allowing Portuguese settlement within Mutapa. It also allowed the praezeros to establish fortified settlements across the kingdom. In 1663, the praezeros were able to depose Mwenemutapa Siti Kazurukamusapa and put their own nominee, Kamharapasu Mukombwe on the throne.[24]
Butwa invasion
In the 17th century, a low ranking Mutapa prince broke away from the Empire, invading the neighboring Kingdom of Butua. The leader of this Dynasty became known as Changamire Dombo. A possible reason for the breakaway was Dombo's dissatisfaction with the levels of Portuguese interference in the Mwenemutapa Empire's governance.
By the late 17th century, Changamire Domborakonachingwango (or Dombo for short. Pronounced as Ɗömbö) was actively challenging Mutapa. In 1684 his forces encountered and decisively defeated those of Mwenemutapa Kamharapasu Mukombwe just south of Mutapa's metro district at the Battle of Mahungwe. When Mukombwe died in 1692, a succession crisis erupted. The Portuguese backed one successor and Dombo another. In support of his candidate, Changamire Dombo razed the Portuguese fair-town of Dembarare next to the Mutapa capital and slaughtered the Portuguese traders and their entire following. From 1692 until 1694, Mwenemutapa Nyakambira ruled Mutapa independently. Nyakambira was later killed in battle with the Portuguese who then placed Nyamaende Mhande on the throne as their puppet.
In 1695, Changamire Dombo overran the gold-producing Kingdom of Manyika and took his army east and destroyed the Portuguese fair-town of Masikwesi. This gave him complete control of all gold-producing territory from Butwa to Manyika, supplanting Mutapa as the premier Shona Kingdom in the region.[25]
Shifting rulers
It appears neither the Rozwi nor the Portuguese could maintain control of the Mutapa state for very long, and it moved back and forth between the two throughout the 17th century. Far from a victim of conquest, the Mutapa rulers actually invited in foreign powers to bolster their rule. This included vassalage to Portuguese East Africa from 1629 to 1663 and vassalage to the Rozwi Empire from 1663 until the Portuguese return in 1694. Portuguese control of Mutapa was maintained or at least represented by an armed garrison at the capital. In 1712, yet another coveter of the throne invited the Rozwi back to put him on the throne and kick out the Portuguese. This they did, and Mutapa again came under the control of the Rozwi Empire. The new Mwenemutapa Samatambira Nyamhandu I become their vassal, while the outgoing king was forced to retreat to Chidama in what is now Mozambique.
Independence and move from Zimbabwe
The Rozwi quickly lost interest in Mutapa, as they sought to consolidate their position in the south. Mutapa regained its independence around 1720. By this time, the Kingdom of Mutapa had lost nearly all of the Zimbabwe plateau to the Rozwi Empire. In 1723, Nyamhandi moved his capital into the valley near the Portuguese trading settlement of Tete, under Mwenemutapa Nyatsusu. Upon his death in 1740, the young Dehwe Mapunzagutu took power. He sought Portuguese support and invited them back to Mutapa along with their garrison of armed men, but Mutapa remained independent.
Collapse
The Mwenemutapa died in 1759, sparking yet another civil war for the throne. This one was more destructive than its predecessors and Mutapa never recovered. The "winners" ended up governing an even more reduced land from Chidima. They used the title Mambo a Chidima and ruled independently of Portugal until 1917 when Mambo Chioko, the last king of the dynasty, was killed in battle against the Portuguese.
Religion
The Emperor Mutope had left the empire with a well-organised religion with a powerful shamanism. The religion of the Mutapa kingdom revolved around ritual consultation of spirits and of ancestors. Shrines were maintained within the capital by spirit mediums known as mhondoro. The mhondoro also served as oral historians recording the names and deeds of past kings.[26]
Mutapa as Ophir
The empire had another indirect side effect on the history of southern Africa. Gold from the empire inspired in Europeans a belief that Mwenemutapa held the legendary mines of King Solomon, referred to in the Bible as the biblical port of Ophir.[27]
The belief that the mines were inside the Mwenemutapa kingdom in southern Africa was one of the factors that led to the Portuguese exploration of the hinterland of Sofala in the 16th century, and this contributed to early development of Mozambique, as the legend was widely used among the less educated populace to recruit colonists. Some documents suggest that most of the early colonists dreamt of finding the legendary city of gold in southern Africa, a belief mirroring the early South American colonial search for El Dorado and quite possibly inspired by it. Early trade in gold came to an end as the mines ran out, and the deterioration of the Mutapa state eliminated the financial and political support for further developing sources of gold.[citation needed]
Legacy
For several centuries, this trading empire enabled people across a large territory to live in peace and security under a stable government and succession of rulers. With primary records dating back to 1502, the empire is a "prime testing ground for theories … concerning economic, political and religious development" in pre-colonial Africa. Beach comments that the Mutapa was one of only four Shona states that was not entirely "uprooted by new settlements of people" and the only one "close to Portuguese centers" thus providing important data on contact and relationships between this and other Shona states as well as with Europeans. The Mutapa Empire is an example of a working system of government in Africa and of a flourishing civilization, both of which are often assumed to have been absent before the coming of the Europeans.[citation needed]
As his brother said after Australia’s high court declared game over, ‘he was the one who had the vision’
Thu 13 Mar 2025 02.54 GMT
Yunupiŋu was 15 years old when the Yirrkala Bark Petitions – or Ṉäku Dhäruk in the Yolŋu language – were sent to Canberra from his home in north-east Arnhem Land and presented to the House of Representatives in August 1963. The “petitions” sought parliamentary intervention after the Menzies government excised a portion of the Arnhem Land Reserve and covertly issued licences to a French company to mine bauxite on Yolŋu land. The text of the petitions was typed in English and Yolŋu matha (language) and stuck on to stringy-bark frames painted with the traditional signs and symbols that, if you knew how to read them, proclaimed Yolŋu sovereignty.
Though a precocious student at the Yirrkala Methodist mission school, Yunupiŋu was deemed too young to be a signatory by the clan elders, including his father, Mungurruway. That task was appointed by the ŋärra – Yolŋu parliament – to nine men and three women between the age of 18 and 36, literate representatives of the 17 clans of the Yolŋu nation who were sending their bark emissaries to the federal capital of the Australian nation.
This unique act of political diplomacy did not attempt to block mining but instead sought three outcomes fundamental to Yolŋu law: consultation before coming on to land; consent before taking any resources from that land; and compensation for any resources extracted. Yolŋu had to abide with these laws in respect of their own territorial clan borders. Macassan traders had been complying with such Yolŋu domestic and foreign policy regulations for centuries.
Yunupiŋu’s name mightn’t have been written on the bark but his quick, curious eyes were trained on his elders’ dignified attempt at agreement-making with the commonwealth, his searching face looking up to the future. Indeed, when the principal of the Yirrkala mission school held a mock election in mid-1963, ahead of the federal election that Menzies would contest later that year with a knife-edge, one-seat majority – and the first election in which Indigenous Australians would enjoy the federal franchise – Yunupiŋu was voted prime minister by his student peers.
Three years later, Yunupiŋu was one of only a handful of Yolŋu boys sent away to bible school in Brisbane. Did he want to go into the church, become a minister? I asked him in a series of conversations we conducted in his home on the Gumatj homelands at Gunyaŋgara in 2021, marooned in his beloved Jason recliner chair, one leg short after kidney disease had extracted its rueful price. (He called what we were doing over those weeks ŋarraku dhäwu landrightsbuy – telling “my land rights story”.)
No, he told me. He went to Brisbane to learn about “the games that they played”. Why? “To look after the elders.” Yunupiŋu wanted to learn how leadership in the white world worked. His ambition, he said, was not to join them, but to know their game so as to beat them at it, fair and square. To do this he needed to learn how to be a leader “in both ways”. To live in two worlds. But he was crystal-clear on one score: his two-ways education was necessary to protect and defend “the oldest way, the Yolŋu way”.
The generous gift of the Näku Dhäruk | Bark Petitions having been rejected and the Menzies government re-installed in a landslide, Yunupiŋu first put his vigilance to work in acting as translator for his father and other elders in Milirrpum v Nabalco, known as the Gove land rights case. Handing down his decision in 1971 – and despite the repeat diplomacy of the elders giving him unprecedented access to their secret sacred knowledge of country – Justice Blackburn rejected the notion of native title.
In 2019, over half a century after Mungurruway and other clan leaders first asked for a voice in the decisions being made about their country and fate, Yunupiŋu lobbed the land rights ball back in the federal court. On behalf of the Gumatj people, he launched a claim for compensation over the impact of five decades of mining on lands which, he argued, had not been acquired under just terms. (“Just terms”, it seems, being a legal precept of both the Australian constitution and Yolŋu rom/law.)
The federal court found in Yunupiŋu’s favour but the commonwealth was not prepared to concede just yet. The Labor government – appearing to want to turn back the sands that Whitlam began pouring into Vincent Lingiari’s open hand in 1975, a legal hourglass flipped – appealed to the high court.
Like Eddie Mabo, who did not live to see the court decision that would overturn the legal fiction of terra nullius by which Australia’s First Nations had been dispossessed of their land – their sovereignty breached and their property stolen – Yunupiŋu was not in the high court of Australia to see the government’s appeal quashed. He passed away in April 2023.
Outside the court, Djawa Yunupiŋu saluted his late older brother as the “mastermind” behind the endeavour to safeguard the future of his people.
“He was the one who had the vision,” Djawa said.
As a watchful, reverent teenager, Yunupiŋu determined to master the white man’s game. He played for his ancestors, his elders, his children and his grandchildren. He played hard. He played the long game.
“Native title recognises that, according to their laws and customs, Indigenous Australians have a connection with country,” the judgment read.
“It is a connection which existed and persisted before and beyond settlement, before and beyond the assertion of sovereignty and before and beyond federation.”
“It is older and deeper than the constitution.”
In one of our interview sessions, Yunupiŋu proposed a historical hypothetical: what if Blackburn had to face Yolŋu law? Would the scales of Yolŋu justice weigh in his favour? What would a Makarrata process have looked like for a man who had not listened to and respected the elders?
Yunupiŋu gameplanned this idea for a while, animated, fire in his eyes. He concluded: “Everybody stands in front of the law. No one escapes judgment.”
“A judgment once and for all.”
Clare Wright is professor of history at La Trobe University. Her latest book is Ṉäku Dhäruk The Bark Petitions: How the People of Yirrkala Changed the Course of Australian Democracy (Text, 2024)
The Hadza, or Hadzabe (Wahadzabe, in Swahili),[3][4] are a protected hunter-gathererTanzanianindigenous ethnic group, primarily based in Baray, an administrative ward within Karatu District in southwest Arusha Region. They live around the Lake Eyasi basin in the central Rift Valleyand in the neighboring Serengeti Plateau. As descendants of Tanzania's aboriginal, pre-Bantu expansion hunter-gatherer population, they have probably occupied their current territory for thousands of years with relatively little modification to their basic way of life until the last century.[5] They have no known close genetic relatives[2] and their language is considered an isolate.
Since the first European contact in the late 19th century, governments and missionaries have made many attempts to settle the Hadza by introducing farming and Christianity. These efforts have largely failed, and many Hadza still pursue a life similar to their ancestors. Since the 18th century, the Hadza have come into increasing contact with pastoralist peoples entering Hadzaland, sometimes declining in population. Tourism and safari hunting have also affected them in recent years.[6]
Hadza people traditionally live in bands or 'camps' of around 20-30 people, and their social structures are egalitarian and non-hierarchical. Traditionally, they primarily forage for food, eating mostly honey, tubers, fruit, and, especially in the dry season, meat. As of 2015, there are between 1,200 and 1,300 Hadza people living in Tanzania.[7] Only around a third of the remaining Hadza still survive exclusively by traditional foraging.[1][8]
Language
Once classified among the Khoisan languages primarily because it has clicks, the Hadza language (Hadzane) is now thought to be an isolate, unrelated to any other language.[9][10] Hadzane is an entirely oral language. UNESCO states that the language is vulnerable because most children learn it, but the use is restricted to certain areas of life, such as in their homes.[1] Still, it is not predicted to be in danger of extinction.[citation needed] Hadzane fluency is also considered the most important factor in distinguishing whether someone is Hadza.[11] In more recent years, many of the Hadza have learned Swahili, the national language of Tanzania, as a second language.[12]
History
Oral tradition
One telling of Hadza's oral history divides their past into four epochs, each inhabited by a different culture. According to this tradition, at the beginning of time, the world was inhabited by hairy giants called the akakaanebee (first ones) or geranebee (ancient ones). The akakaanebee did not possess tools or fire; they hunted game by running it down until it fell dead; they ate meat raw. They did not build houses but slept under trees, as the Hadza do today in the dry season. In older versions of this story, they did not use fire because it was physically impossible in the earth's primeval state. Younger Hadza, who have been to school, say that the akakaanebee did not know how to use fire.
In the second epoch, the akakaanebee were succeeded by the xhaaxhaanebee (in-between ones), who were equally gigantic but without hair. Fire could be made and used to cook meat, but animals had grown more wary of humans and had to be chased and hunted by dogs. The xhaaxhaanebee were the first people to use medicines and charms to protect themselves from enemies and initiated the epeme rite. They lived in caves.
The third epoch was inhabited by the people of hamakwanebee (recent days), who were smaller than their predecessors. They invented bows and arrows, cooked with containers, and mastered the use of fire. They also built huts like those of Hadza today. The people of hamakwanebee were the first of the Hadza ancestors to have contact with non-foraging people, with whom they traded for iron to make knives and arrowheads. They also invented the gambling game lukuchuko.
The fourth epoch continues today and is inhabited by the hamayishonebee (those of today). When discussing the hamayishonebee epoch, people often mention specific names and places and can say approximately how many generations ago events occurred.[13]
Archaeology and genetic history
The Hadza are not closely related to any other people. The Hadza language was once classified with the Khoisan languages because it has click consonants; however, there is no further evidence they are related. Genetically, the Hadza do not appear to be closely related to Khoisan speakers; even the Sandawe, who live around 150 kilometres (93 mi) away, diverged from the Hadza more than 15,000 years ago. Genetic testing also suggests significant admixture has occurred between the Hadza and Bantu. Minor admixture with Nilotic and Cushitic-speakingpopulations may have occurred in the last few thousand years.[2] Today, a few Hadza women marry into neighbouring groups such as the Bantu Isanzu and the Nilotic Datooga, but these marriages often fail, and the women and their children return to the Hadza.[14] In previous decades, rape and capture of Hadza women by outsiders seems to have been common.[15] During a famine in 1918–20, some Hadza men were reported as taking Isanzu wives.[14]
The Hadza's ancestors have probably lived in their current territory for tens of thousands of years. Hadzaland is about 50 kilometres (31 mi) from Olduvai Gorge, an area sometimes called the "Cradle of Mankind" because of the number of hominin fossils found there, and 40 kilometres (25 mi) from the prehistoric site of Laetoli. Archaeological evidence suggests that the area has been continuously occupied by hunter-gatherers much like the Hadza since at least the beginning of the Later Stone Age, 50,000 years ago. Although the Hadza do not make rock art today, they consider several rock art sites within their territory, probably at least 2,000 years old, to have been created by their ancestors, and their oral history does not suggest they moved to Hadzaland from elsewhere.[5]
Until about 500 BCE, Tanzania was exclusively occupied by hunter-gatherers akin to the Hadza. The first agriculturalists to enter the region were Cushitic-speaking cattle herders from the Horn of Africa. Around 500 CE, the Bantu expansion reached Tanzania, bringing populations of farmers with iron tools and weapons. The last major ethnic group to enter the region were Nilotic pastoralists who migrated south from Sudan in the 18th century.[17]
Each of these expansions of farming and herding peoples displaced earlier populations of hunter-gatherers, who were at a demographic and technological disadvantage and vulnerable to the loss of environmental resources (i.e., foraging areas and habitats for game) to farmland and pastures.[18] Groups such as the Hadza and the Sandawe are remnants of indigenous hunter-gatherer populations that were once much more widespread, and they are under continued pressure from the expansion of agriculture into their traditional lands.
Farmers and herders appeared in the vicinity of Hadzaland relatively recently. The Isanzu, a Bantu farming people, began living south of Hadzaland around 1850. The pastoralist Iraqw and Datooga were both forced to migrate into the area by the expansion of the Maasai, the former in the 19th century and the latter in the 1910s. The Hadza also have direct contact with the Maasai and with the Sukuma west of Lake Eyasi. The upheavals caused by the Maasai expansion in the late 19th century caused a decline in the Hadza population.
The Hadza's interaction with many of these peoples has been hostile. Pastoralists often killed Hadza as reprisals for the "theft" of livestock since the Hadza did not have the notion of animal ownership and would hunt them as they would wild game.[19] The general attitude of neighboring agro-pastoralists towards the Hadza was prejudicial. They viewed them as backward, lacking a "real language," and made up of the dispossessed of neighboring tribes that had fled into the forest out of poverty or because they committed a crime. Many of these misconceptions were transmitted to early colonial visitors to the region who wrote about the Hadza.[20]
The Isanzu were hostile to the Hadza at times. Isanzu people may have captured them as part of the slave trade until as late as the 1870s when it was halted by the German colonial government. Later interactions were more peaceful, with the two peoples sometimes intermarrying and residing together, though as late as 1912, the Hadza were reported as being "ready for war" with the Isanzu. Still, folk tales depict the Isanzu as favorable and, at times, heroic, unlike the Iraqw and the cattle-raiding Maasai. Moreover, many goods and customs come from them, and the Hadza myths mention and depict a benevolent influence of the Isanzu in their mythology.[21][22]
The Sukuma and the Hadza had a more amicable relationship. The Sukuma drove their herds and salt caravans through Hadza lands and exchanged old metal tools, which the Hadza made into arrowheads, for the right to hunt elephants in Hadzaland.
20th century
A Hadza hut. Huts have been built in this style for as long as records have been kept.
In the late 19th century, European powers claimed much of the African continent as colonies in a period known as the Scramble for Africa. The Hadza became part of German East Africa, though there is no evidence that Europeans had ever visited Hadzaland before the colony was proclaimed. The earliest mention of the Hadza in a written account is in German explorer Oscar Baumann's Durch Massailand zur Nilquelle (1894). The Hadza hid from Baumann and other early explorers, and their descriptions are based on second-hand accounts.
The first Europeans to report meeting the Hadza are Otto Dempwolff and Erich Obst. The latter lived with them for eight weeks in 1911. German Tanganyika came under British control at the end of the First World War (1917), and soon after, British colonial officer F. J. Bagshawe wrote about the Hadza. The accounts of these early European visitors portray the Hadza at the beginning of the 20th century as living in the same way as they do today. Early on, Obst noted a distinction between what he considered the 'pure' Hadza (those subsisting purely by hunting and gathering) and those that lived with the Isanzu and practiced some cultivation.
The foraging Hadza foraged and hunted using many of the same techniques they do today. Game was more plentiful in the early 20th century because farmers had not yet begun directly encroaching on their lands. Some early reports describe the Hadza as having chiefs or big men, but those reports were probably mistaken; more reliable accounts portray the early 20th century Hadza as egalitarian, as they are today.[20] They also lived in similarly sized camps, used the same tools, built houses in the same style, and had similar religious beliefs.[23]
The British colonial government tried to make the Hadza settle down and adopt farming in 1927, the first of many such government efforts. The British tried again in 1939, the independent Tanzanian government tried in 1965 and 1990, and various foreign missionary groups have tried the same since the 1960s. These numerous attempts, some forceful, have largely failed. Generally, the Hadza willingly settle as long as provided food stocks last, then leave and resume their traditional hunter-gatherer lives when the provisions run out; few have adopted farming for sustenance. Disease is also a problem – because their communities are sparse and isolated, few Hadza are immune to common infectious diseases such as measles, which thrive in sedentary communities, and several settlement attempts ended with outbreaks of illness resulting in many deaths, particularly of children.[citation needed]
Of the four villages built for the Hadza since 1965, two (Yaeda Chini and Munguli) are now inhabited by the Isanzu, Iraqw, and Datooga. Another, Mongo wa Mono, established in 1988, is sporadically occupied by Hadza groups who stay there for a few months at a time, either farming, foraging, or using the food given to them by missionaries. At the fourth village, Endamagha (also known as Mwonyembe), some Hadza children attend school, but they account for just a third of the students there. Numerous attempts to convert the Hadza to Christianity have also been largely unsuccessful.[23]
Tanzanian farmers began moving into the Mangola area to grow onions in the 1940s, but they came in small numbers until the 1960s. The first German plantation in Hadzaland was established in 1928, and later, three European families settled in the area. Since the 1960s, the Hadza have been visited regularly by anthropologists, linguists, geneticists, and other researchers.[24]
Present
Hadza hunters
In recent years, Hadza territory has seen increasing encroachment from neighboring peoples. The western Hadza lands are now a private hunting reserve, and the Hadza are officially restricted to a reservation within the reserve and prohibited from hunting there. The Yaeda Valley, long uninhabited due to the tsetse fly, is now settled by Datooga herders, who are clearing the Hadza lands on either side of the valley for pasture for their goats and cattle. The Datooga hunt out the game, and their land clearing destroys the berries, tubers, and honey that the Hadza rely on. Watering holes for Datooga cattle can cause the shallow watering holes that the Hadza rely on to dry up.[25] Most Hadzabe are no longer able to sustain themselves in the bush without supplementary food such as ugali.
After appearing in documentaries on the Hadza on PBS and the BBC in 2001, the Mang'ola Hadza have become a tourist attraction. Although this may seem to help the Hadzabe, much of the money from tourism is allocated to government offices and tourism companies instead of the Hadzabe. Money given directly to Hadzabe also contributes to alcoholism, and deaths from alcohol poisoning have recently become a severe problem, further contributing to the loss of cultural knowledge.[26]
In 2007, the local government controlling the Hadza lands adjacent to the Yaeda Valley leased the entire 6,500 square kilometres (2,500 sq mi) of land to the Al Nahyan royal family of the United Arab Emirates for use as a "personal safari playground".[27] Both the Hadza and Datooga were evicted, with some Hadza resisters imprisoned. However, after protests from the Hadza and negative coverage in the international press, the deal was rescinded.[28]
The Hadzabe were part of major studies concerning evolutionary anthropology and bioenergetics, primarily conducted by Duke University professor Herman Pontzer and Pontzer's research team. Pontzer's fieldwork was also overseen by the Tanzanian National Institute for Medical Research and Commission for Science and Technology. The Hadzabe were instrumental in the researchers' discovery of the exercise paradox, which found that the Hadzabe had comparable caloric expenditure to sedentary individuals in industrialized nations, despite being more physically active.[29]
Range
Range of the Hadza people (dark grey) in Tanzania Serengeti hunting grounds in Hadzaland
There are four traditional areas of Hadza dry-season habitation: West of the southern end of Lake Eyasi (Dunduhina), between Lake Eyasi and the Yaeda Valley swamp to the east (Tlhiika), east of the Yaeda Valley in the Mbulu Highlands(Siponga), and north of the valley around the town of Mang'ola (Mangola). During the wet season, the Hadza camp outside and between these areas. During the dry season, they readily travel between them. People access the western area by crossing the southern end of the lake, which is the first part to dry up, or by following the escarpment of the Serengeti Plateau around the northern shore. The Yaeda Valley is easily crossed, and the areas to either side abut the hills south of Mang'ola.
The Hadza have traditionally foraged outside of these areas, in the Yaeda Valley, on the slopes of Mount Oldeani north of Mang'ola, and up onto the Serengeti Plains. Such foraging is done for hunting, berry collecting, and for honey. Although hunting is illegal in the Serengeti, the Tanzanian authorities recognize that the Hadza are a special case and do not enforce the regulations on them, just as the Hadza are the only people in Tanzania not taxed by the local or national government.
The Hadza are organized into bands or 'camps' of 20–30 people. Camps of over a hundred may form during berry season. There is no tribal or other governing hierarchy, and almost all decisions are made by reaching an agreement through discussion. The Hadza trace descent bilaterally (through both paternal and maternal lines), and almost all Hadza people can trace some kin tie to all other Hadza people.[11] Furthermore, the Hadza are egalitarian, so there are no real status differences between individuals. While the elderly receive slightly more respect, all individuals are equal to others of the same age and sex, and compared to strictly stratified societies, women are fairly equal to men. This egalitarianism results in high levels of freedom and self-dependence.[30] When conflict arises, one of the parties involved may voluntarily move to another camp as resolution. Ernst Fehr and Urs Fischbacher point out that the Hadza people “exhibit a considerable amount of altruistic punishment” to organize these tribes.[31] The Hadza live in a communal setting and engage in cooperative child rearing, where many people, both related and unrelated, provide high-quality child care.[32]
The Hadza move camp for several reasons. Camps can split when individuals move to resolve conflicts. Camps can be abandoned when someone falls ill and dies, as any illness is associated with the place it was contracted. There is also seasonal migration between dry-season refuges, better hunting grounds when water is more abundant, and areas with large numbers of tubers or berry trees when they are in season. If a man kills a particularly large animal, such as a giraffe, far from home, a camp will temporarily relocate to the kill site. Shelters can be built in a few hours, and most of the possessions owned by an individual can be carried on their back.
Hadza children
The Hadza are predominantly monogamous, though there is no social enforcement of monogamy.[33] After marriage, the husband and wife are free to live where they decide, which may be with the father or mother's family. This marital residence pattern is called ambilocality and is common among foragers. Specifically among Hadza, there is a slightly higher frequency of married couples living with the mother's kin than with the father's kin.[11] Men and women value traits such as intelligence, strenghth, ability, skills, dexterity and hard work when evaluating partners. They also value physical attractiveness, and many of their preferences for attractiveness, such as symmetry,[34]averageness[35] and sexually dimorphic voice pitch,[36] are similar to preferences found in Western nations.
A 2001 anthropological study on modern foragers found that the Hadza men and women had an average life expectancy at birth of 33. Life expectancy at age 20 was 39 and the infant mortality rate was 21%.[37] More recently, Hadza adults have frequently lived into their sixties, and some have even reached their seventies or eighties. The Hadza do not keep track of time and age exactly as the Western world does, so these life expectancies are approximate and highly variable.[12]
Subsistence
Two Hadza men returning from a hunt
During the wet season, the Hadza diet comprises mostly honey, fruit, tubers, and occasional meat. The contribution of meat to the diet increases in the dry season when game becomes concentrated around water sources. The Hadza also eat tubers and fruit from baobab trees, which give them about 100 to 150 grams of fiber daily.[38]
The Hadza are highly skilled, selective, and opportunistic foragers who adjust their diet according to season and circumstance. Depending on local availability, some groups might rely more heavily on tubers, some on berries, and others on meat. This variability results from their opportunism and ability to adjust to prevailing conditions.
Gendered division of labor
While men specialize in procuring meat, honey, and baobab fruit, women specialize in tubers, berries, and greens. This division of labor is relatively consistent, but women will occasionally gather a small animal or egg or collect honey, and men will occasionally bring a tuber or some berries back to camp.
Hadza men usually forage individually. During the day, they usually feed themselves while foraging and bring home any additional honey, fruit, or wild game. Women forage in larger parties and usually bring home berries, baobab fruit,[39] and tubers, depending on availability. Men and women also forage cooperatively for honey and fruit; at least one adult male will usually accompany a group of foraging women.
Women's foraging technology includes digging sticks, grass baskets for carrying berries, large fabric or skin pouches for carrying items, knives, shoes, other clothing, and various small items held in a pouch around the neck. Men carry axes, bows, poisoned and non-poisoned arrows, knives, small honey pots, fire drills, shoes and apparel, and various small items.
A myth depicts a woman harvesting the honey of wild bees, and at the same time, declares that the job of honey harvesting belongs to the men.[21] For harvesting honey or fruit from large trees such as the baobab, the Hadza beat pointed sticks into the trunk of the tree to use as ladders. This technique is depicted in a folk tale[21] and documented on film.[40]
Hunting
Hadza hunters
During the dry season, men often hunt in pairs and spend entire nights lying in wait by waterholes, hoping to shoot animals that approach for a night-time drink with poisoned bows and arrows.[10] The poison is made of the branches of the shrub Adenium coetaneum. The Hadza hunt and eat a variety of animals including impala, dik-dik, kudu, baboon, vervet monkey, bush baby, shrew, warthog, bushpig and various birds. They also catch fish.[41]
Traditionally, the Hadza do not use hunting dogs, although this custom has been borrowed from neighboring tribes to some degree. Less than 20% of Hadza men use dogs when hunting or foraging.[citation needed]
Honey
There exists a dynamic relationship of mutualism and manipulation between the Hadza and a wild bird, the Greater honeyguide (Indicator indicator).[42][43] To obtain beeswax, the bird guides people to the nests of wild bees (i.e., Apis mellifera). Sometimes, Hadza men whistle, strike trees, and shout to attract and keep the attention of the honeyguide.[44][42] Other times, the bird calls to attract the human honey-hunter with a distinctive chatter. Once the honey-hunter has located a bee nest, he uses smoke to subdue the bees and chops his axe into the tree to open the bee nest. The human eats or carries away most of the liquid honey, while the honeyguide consumes beeswax that may be left adhering to the tree, spat out, or otherwise discarded at the site of acquisition. In many cases, instead of actively feeding the honeyguide, Hadza men burn, bury, or hide the wax that remains at the harvest site, intending to keep the honeyguide hungry and more likely to guide again.[42][43]
The honeyguide also appears in Hadza mythology, both in naturalistic and personified forms.[21] Honey represents a substantial portion of the Hadza diet (~10-20% of calories), which is similar to many other hunter-gatherer societies living in the tropics.[45] Honey likely carried an evolutionary advantage via an improvement in the energy density of the human diet when it contained bee products.[44][45][42]
Religion and folklore
Religion
The Hadza do not follow a formal religion, and it has been claimed that they do not believe in an afterlife.[46]: 45 They offer prayers to Ishoko (the Sun) or to Haine (the moon) during hunts and believe they go to Ishoko when they die. They also hold rituals such as the monthly epeme dance for men at the new moon and the less frequent maitokocircumcision and coming-of-age ceremony for women.
Epeme
The Hadza people embrace epeme, which can be understood as their concept of manhood, hunting, and the relationship between sexes. "True" adult men are called epeme men, which they become by killing large game, usually in their early 20s. Being an epeme comes with an advantage: only epeme men are allowed to eat certain parts of large game animals, such as warthog, giraffe, buffalo, wildebeest, and lion. The parts of these animals that are typically considered epeme are the kidney, lung, heart, neck, tongue, and genitals. No one besides other epeme men are allowed to be present for the epeme meat-eating. If a man still has not killed a large game animal by his thirties, he will automatically be considered epeme and will be allowed to eat the epeme meat.
In addition to eating epeme meat, the epeme men participate in an epeme dance. In Jon Yates's summary[46]: 45 of Frank Marlowe's account,[11] this dance occurs every night when the moon isn't visible, and must occur in near-complete darkness, with camp-fires extinguished.
To begin the ritual, the women separate from the men and sit where they cannot be seen. The men gather behind a tree or hut and prepare for the dance. In the pitch dark, as the women begin to sing, the first man starts to dance. He wears a headdress of dark ostrich feathers, bells on one of his ankles, a rattle in his hand, and a long black cape on his back. He stamps his right foot hard on the ground in time with the women's singing, causing the bells to ring while marking the beat of the music with his rattle. He sings out to the women, who answer in a call and response. As the singing grows in strength, the women rise to join the man, who continues to dance—committing his efforts to a family member, one of the women, a friend, or one of his children. At this point, the child may join the dance as well. After each man has danced the epeme two or three times, the ritual is finished, by which time it is close to midnight.
The ritual has been shown to promote social cohesion among the Hadza, and those who share the epeme dance show elevated levels of mutual trust and support.[46]: 46–47
Folklore
Mythological figures with celestial connotations
Ishoko and Haine are mythological figures who are believed to have arranged the world by rolling the sky and the earth like two sheets of leather and swapping their order to put the sky above us; in the past, the sky was under the earth.[47] These figures are described as making crucial decisions about the animals and humans by choosing their food and environment,[48] giving people access to fire, and creating the capability of sitting.[47] These figures have celestial connotations: Ishoko is a solar figure, and Haine, her husband, is a lunar figure.[22][49] Uttering Ishoko's name can be a greeting or a good wish to someone for a successful hunt.[50]
The character "Ishoye" seems to be another name for Ishoko.[22] She is depicted in some tales as creating animals, including people.[51][52] Some of her creatures later turned out to be man-eating giants, disastrous for their fellow giants and people. Seeing the disaster, she killed these giants, saying, "You are not people any longer."[53]
Culture heroes
Indaya, the man who went to the Isanzu territory after his death and returned,[54] plays the role of a culture hero: he introduces customs and goods to the Hadza.[22]
The Isanzu people neighbor the Hadza. They are regarded as peaceful, and the Hadza myths mention and depict this benevolent influence of the Isanzu in their mythology. This advantageous view of the Isanzu gives them a place as heroes in Hadza folklore.[22] In some of the mythical stories about giants, it is an Isanzu man who liberates the Hadza from a malevolent giant.[22]
Stories about giants
The Hadza have many stories about giants, which describe people with superhuman strength and size but otherwise with human weaknesses. They have human needs, eat and drink, and can be poisoned or cheated.
One of the giants, Sengani (or Sengane), is depicted as Haine's helper. As the story goes, Haine gave him the power to rule over the people. In Haine's absence, the giant endangered people with his decisions. The people resisted his choices, so the giant ordered the lions to attack them. This surprised the humans, who had previously regarded lions as harmless. The people killed the giant in revenge.[55]
This giant had brothers, rendered as "Ssaabo" and "Waonelakhi" in Kohl-Larsen. Several tales describe the disaster these giants caused by constantly killing and beating the Hadza. The Hadza had to ask for help from neighboring groups, and finally, the giants were tricked and either poisoned or shot to death by poison arrows.[56]
Another story tells of a man-eating giant, rendered as "!Esengego" by Kohl-Larsen. He and his family were killed by a benevolent snake, which turned out to be the remedy applied by the goddess Ishoko to liberate people. Ishoko changed the corpses of the giant family into leopards. She prohibited them from attacking people unless an arrow provoked or wounded them.[57]
Another giant, rendered "!Hongongoschá" by Kohl-Larsen, appears as a different sort of mythological figure. He did not bother the Hadza much in his tales, only secretly stealing small things at night. His nourishment was the flowers of trees (and occasionally stolen vegetables). The people greeted him with great respect, and the giant wished them good luck in hunting. This changed when a boy deliberately injured the giant, and though he attempted to provide goodwill, !Hongongoschá took revenge by killing the boy. Finally, the god Haine determined a course of justice: he warned the people, revealed the boy's malevolent deed, and changed the giant into a big white clam.[58]
Land rights in Tanzania are a complicated issue, but they are extremely important to the future of Tanzania and its people. Communal lands are central to the Hadzabe and other groups, and gaining legal rights to those lands as a community is the first step toward keeping those lands undeveloped.
Our partner Ujamaa Community Resource Team (UCRT), with support from the Dorobo Fund and TNC, pioneered the Certificate of Customary Right of Occupancy (CCRO), a form of individual, and more recently, group land tenure within a larger village holding. This is an effective tool for strengthening community land rights and securing communal lands.
In October 2011, the Hadza took the innovative step of asserting legal claim to their homeland with a CCRO. They received official title — recognized by the government of Tanzania — to 57,000 acres.
In 2012, we secured four more homeland designations and protected 90,000 additional acres for the Datoga tribe. Their designations assert that more than 80 percent of their lands will now be managed as grazing areas for livestock and wildlife.
Securing additional land for pastoral use helps both tribes, as the Datoga no longer need to move onto Hadza land to graze cattle.
Now, the Northern Tanzania Rangelands Initiative, a coalition of 10 NGOs working to create a thriving landscape where people and wildlife co-exist, has helped secure more than 1.2 million acres of land for communities like the Hadza.
With legal rights to the land, the Hadza then had the means to earn income from it in a sustainable way. Working with Carbon Tanzania and other NTRI partners, the Hadza established a mechanism that pays them for protecting their traditional forests.
They've since earned more than $300,000, which has gone toward paying school fees for dozens of students, training rangers to monitor the community's land and its wildlife, and improving health clinics. The money also pays to keep the forest protection program running and expanding.
This nature-based solution to helping mitigate the effects of climate change is also preserving a people's traditional way of life in a modern world. And for this reason, the Hadza’s Yaeda Valley Project is a recipient of the 2019 Equator Prize, one of the United Nation’s most prestigious awards for environmental protection and climate resilience.
To see God glorified through an abundance of Christ followers within every people group.
Our Mission
Joshua Project highlights peoples and places with the least access or response to the gospel so the Body of Christ can prioritize its prayer and mission efforts.
About Us
Followers of Jesus around the world are commissioned to “go make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19). Christians may perceive they are fulfilling Jesus’s commission because churches are thriving in almost every country. The word translated as “nations,” however, is “ethne” in the original Greek, which can equate to “ethnic groups.” Christians are called to make disciples of all ethnic groups, not just modern nation states, because God desires his acts of love, hope, and salvation to extend to all peoples of the world.
Joshua Project highlights the peoples and places with the least access or response to the gospel.
Who are these ethnic groups? As long as they remain unknown and hidden, followers of Christ would be seeking to obey Jesus’s Great Commission like someone traveling without a map or destination. Joshua Project provides a destination map for the Great Commission by highlighting peoples and places with the least access or response to the gospel, empowering the Body of Christ to prioritize its prayer and mission efforts.
We provide a comprehensive people group database of the world, and we track what God is doing among these peoples, so we can assist the Global Church in the vision of seeing God glorified through an abundance of Christ followers within every people group.
Our History
Joshua Project was birthed in 1995 out of a world evangelism initiative called the AD2000 and Beyond Movement which had four key founders from four different countries (Argentina, Malaysia, China, and India). Luis Bush, from Argentina, was the main influencer in founding Joshua Project.
Joshua Project provides a comprehensive people group database of the world.
At the time, there were various people group lists being formulated without universal acceptance. To inspire the global church in working toward the vision of a "church for every people and the gospel for every person", an initial Joshua Project list of 1,700 largest unreached people groups was agreed upon by key global leaders and creators of various people group lists.
Many missionaries were inspired to pray and labor among these largest unreached people groups, particularly in the 10/40 window, during that time. Joshua Project continued after the AD2000 and Beyond initiative ended, expanding its list to include all people groups, with a special emphasis remaining on unreached peoples.
Joshua Project seeks to inspire prayer and ministry among unreached people groups.
Joshua Project was a ministry associated with the U.S. Center for World Mission (now known as Frontier Ventures) from 2005-2023. In 2024, Joshua Project was established as a non-profit organization within the United States.
Our Beliefs
Joshua Project believes God has uniquely created and orchestrated the peoples, languages, and cultures of the world to reflect his own creativity and beauty in this world. Joshua Project provides dignity to all peoples by acknowledging their existence and value, while also recognizing that humanity can only fulfill its purpose by knowing and being reconciled to its Creator. We are followers of Jesus who help likeminded people join God’s story of seeing his message of hope and reconciliation through Jesus extend to all people groups of the world. We adhere to the following statements of faith:
Service - We delight in serving churches, ministries, and individuals with information to help them take prioritized next steps in missions.
Generosity - We are committed to steward people group information with a radical generosity. We believe this resource is crucial to the church’s obedience to the Great Commission and offer the majority of that resource for free.
Neutrality - We are evangelical Christians with a people group focus, but we otherwise seek to be neutral in denominational and missiological particulars.
Resourceful - We seek to honor God by being good stewards of resources. Joshua Project is far more impactful than what seems possible for our limited budget and staff.
Diligence - We love what we do and work hard to do all things as unto the Lord (Colossians 3:17).
Having a people group lens - We understand the Global Church has many responsibilities, but Joshua Project advocates for the Body of Christ’s involvement in intercession and mission work among unreached people groups who have had little access or responsiveness to the gospel.
Having a responsiveness to the field - Joshua Project relies on feedback from the field to accurately display people’s identities and their status of Christian witness. We seek to display the local realities and viewpoints of people’s identities and responsiveness to the gospel.
Maintaining data integrity - At tension with the prior value, Joshua Project seeks to maintain integrity in our data, which means we work diligently to provide updates on population counts and take seriously the level of reputability of field data sources. We also compare data with other sources and seek to reconcile disparities.
Obtaining enough demographic data on all people groups to catalyze prayer and ministry among them - We are not exhaustive in our understanding and presentation of information on particular people groups or the details of mission activity among them. Instead, we seek to create a comprehensive list of people groups that defines the mission field as accurately and adequately as possible to help the Body of Christ prioritize their prayer and mission activity.
The Sandawe are a Southeast African ethnic group that dwell in central Tanzania’s Dodoma Region’s Chemba District. In the year 2000, Sandawe was expected to have a population of 40,000 people.
The Sandawe language is a tonal language with click consonants, similar to the Khoe languages of southern Africa. There’s no further proof of a connection between the two.
History of the Sandawe People
The Beginning
The Khoisan were once considered the earliest human DNA lineages. However, the Sandawe DNA lines are older. Southern Khoisan is said to have originated in East Africa.
Unlike their contemporary neighbors, the Gogo, the Sandawe are descendants of an early Bushmen-like people. They dwell in the geographic center of ancient German East Africa, with the ‘Street of Caravans’ running parallel to their southern border.
The Khoe languages of southern Africa may have shared an ancestor with Sandawe language. Unfortunately, it contains clicks, making it difficult to learn for the Bantu people in the area. It is unrelated to the Bantu languages surrounding it; however, nearby Cushitic languages have been affected.
Emini Pasha
Because of their intense hunting and gathering heritage, the Sandawe have traditionally been regarded as skilled survivalists during times of food scarcity. They also become herdersand agriculturalists during the time Charles Stokes and Emin Pasha’s had expeditions (the late 1880s to early 1890s). However, they continue to be identified as part of the Gogo people.
As a result, the Sandawe were not recognized as a separate people by Europeans until Lt. Prince’s travels in 1895, when they were eventually recognized as such. Despite their technologically primitive civilization, European colonists thought of them as politically and militarily crucial until the twentieth century.
The Sandawe learned agriculture from their Bantu neighbors, most likely the Gogo, and set up homesteads wherever reasonable ground for their primary food crops of millet, sorghum, and later maize could be found. However, they disliked and had little purpose for longterm village life. They mainly remained stateless, with no interest in ’empire-building.’ The Sandawe, on the other hand, had a long history of mutual collaboration in activities like hoeing and threshing, homebuilding, and organizing informal pig and elephant hunts.
They constructed their makeshift shelters far away from water sources and then went hunting in the nearby countryside. Thus, polygamy was probably not practiced until after they adopted agriculture.
During the Colonial Period
When Germany began colonizing Sub-Saharan Africa in the mid-nineteenth century, certain Sandawe clans exploited their reputation as rainmakers to claim the foremost rank, but they were never recognized. Others rejected European control as well as the enormous migrations of colonists arriving all around them. The Germans were told that Mtoro, a guy with some power, was in charge. He was named headman or commander of the Nyamwezi colony, which had just been formed.
Mtoro and Nyamwezi immigrants were despised by the Sandawe, who expelled them in 1902 and took their animals. According to reports, Lieutenant Kohlerman was dispatched to maintain the peace and killed 800 Sandawe warriors in three days without losing a single man. A second expedition arrived and took 1,100 cattle. ‘Progress,’ said the district commander:
The rock-strewn land of Usandawe…is home to a still warlike, predatory, and undiscovered mountain tribe whose members refuse to recognize the German government, live far apart, and allow no headmen or superiors, and thus have no headmen or superiors far ejected those experimentally implanted by the station. We’ve taken control of the issue.
The German colony was encouraged and withdrew its armed forces. As the troops left, the Sandawe attacked, proclaiming their preparedness to face a new expedition and tormenting the Nyamwezi. The Sandawe were eventually ‘pacified,’ and 22 were selected, mainly from the traditional rainmaking tribes. “One of the headmen stated,” said another, “If anyone refuses to obey my orders, I will file a complaint with European Sergeant Linke. He is the one who uses fetters and the whip to punish people… As a result, my people see that you live in harmony.”
Tom Von Prince and his wife Magdalene von Prince, prior year 1908
The institution of the chiefdom, on the other hand, soon collapsed and vanished once colonization ended. In their tales, the Sandawe compare themselves to tiny creatures that utilize their cunning and intellect to overcome their more powerful and dangerous adversaries. “The deathly terror that must have existed to send these people hundreds of kilometers south of the equator, into the center of many foreign tribes to find peace, can only be guessed at,” Tom von Prince said in his book Gegen Araber und Wahehe.
Culture of the Sandawe Tanzania
The Sandawe have a secret and highly spiritual society based on animism. Caves in the mountains were revered and sometimes feared since they were thought to house ghosts. As a result, caves were avoided, no animals were herded there, no wood was chopped, or twigs were broken to avoid disturbing these ghosts. Instead, the Sandawe would go to the caves once a year to perform sacrificial rituals to ensure that the spirits would not be vengeful and disrupt the community‘s overall well-being.
People would travel to the hills’ caves in groups, chanting prayers to the ghosts and assuring them that they had not come to disturb them but to show their love. These prayers were screamed as loudly as possible to ensure that the spirits could hear them regardless of their location. The Sandawe believed in the moon, stars, seasons, and the mantis bug, among other things. The moon was seen as a symbol of life and fertility, bringing rain and regulating the cycle of fertility in women. The mantis was a heavenly messenger with a specific cause for arriving. The explanation was generally sought through a medium.
Warongwe, a god who was abstract, remote, and unrelated to the well-being of ordinary life, was rarely worshipped to or sacrificed to. Instead, in virtually every African region, religion was based on a lengthy line of ancestors and a close-knit extended family system that served as a conduit between living creatures and a distant all-powerful God.
The Sandawe were and continue to be extroverted people who like singing, dancing, producing music, and drinking beer. They have an extensive song library. Harvest and courting rituals, healing rituals with their trances, circumcision celebrations, and simba possession dances, in which dancers mimicked lions to resist witchcraft, were all distinct from one another. Nevertheless, the Sandawe still have a strong oral tradition, and they enjoy telling stories that represent the group’s accumulated knowledge.
For more articles on the Tanzania Tribes click here!
Cape Town – South Africans needed to embrace their “collective history and heritage … the good, the bad and the ugly” as a step towards consolidating an inclusive sense of South Africanhood.
So said Minister of Defence and Military Veterans Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula at the Castle in Cape Town on Friday when she unveiled the statues of former kings Cetshwayo, Langalibalele and Sekhukhune and 17th century resistance leader, Doman.
The three kings had once languished in the castle’s gloomy cells, and Doman had known first-hand the penalty of contesting the power that resided within it.
The statues, Mapisa-Nqakula said, were the “tangible recognition of these, and thousands of other unsung heroes and heroines in colonials wars of resistance”.
The commemorative project, which forms part of the Castle’s 350 anniversary celebration this year, was, she said, “the beginning of an ongoing commitment to honour all those who gallantly fought against colonial conquest and in turn inspired future generations of freedom fighters”.
Mapisa-Nqakula delivered the formal address at the event on behalf of President Jacob Zuma, who was scheduled to unveil the statues, but was detained in Pretoria because of a programme change in the visit of Zambian President Edgar Lungu.
Delegations from the amaZulu, amaHlubi and BaPedi royal houses and from the Khoisan leadership in the Western Cape joined in officiating at the unveiling ceremony.
Mapisa-Nqakula noted the Castle “offers us a unique opportunity to revisit, reinterpret and re-write our complex, brutal colonial and apartheid history in a manner that is fully inclusive, restorative, respectful and educational”.
This would be advanced through the launch of a Centre for Memory, Healing and Learning at the Castle. The centre, sponsored by the Department of Military Veterans, was intended to break “the curse of oppression, persecution and ignorance”.
Castle Of Good Hope: Turning History Into Our Story
12th April 2018.
Constructed in the mid-17th century out of rock hewn from Signal Hill and slate gathered from Robben Island, the Castle of Good Hope is the oldest surviving colonial building in South Africa and one of the best-preserved examples of Dutch East India architecture. Originally perched on the coastline of Table Bay after land reclamation, the erstwhile fort is now a sprawling landmark on the corner of Darling and Castle Streets on the way to Cape Town’s bustling Foreshore.
We discovered the Cape Doctor certainly lives up to its name as we cross the moat and enter the Castle’s precincts to meet Doreen Hendricks, the Castle’s powerhouse Tourism & Marketing Manager. The interview becomes a fascinating journey about the possibilities of transformation and how the colonial past can be transformed into a reimagining of our future.
“The Castle was exclusive for many years, whether to a particular racial group or individuals on a particular career path. It was specifically designed and built to keep people out, but as a tourism heritage site we want to invite people in. We can’t change the structure of the building, but we can change the perceptions of people.
“Everything in the Cape started here at the Castle. Our slogan is, ‘The beginning of everything’. We also position ourselves as the centre for shared heritage in South Africa. Here you have the culmination of so many things and so many people. We are all connected in some way, and the Castle played a major role in that.
“We aim to bring people together and not only recognise differences, but also commonalities and move forward from there. That’s what we started doing in 2016 during our 350-year commemoration and what we are continuing to do going forward.
“How do we do that? A lot of people talk about deconolising history, but in the words of our good friend Professor Denis Goldberg, we do deconolisation of history. We give people a platform to have a voice, to tell their stories and to be recognised. We want them to remember, heal and learn through this process; whether it be via an exhibition, a debate, a community forum or a traditional ceremony.
“The Castle of Good Hope is a self-sufficient public entity. We generate income via our commercial tourism and event activities, which in turn help us fund community heritage initiatives. We rely heavily on partnerships to do development work and appeal to corporate South Africa to support us in order for us to grow our heritage, culture and education department. The fact that our Department of Defence is looking after the maintenance of the Castle, is a huge bonus.
Recently we launch a 350-legacy project, focusing on the passing of the history onto the youth of today. Even though the 350-commemoration was concluded in 2016, the story has actually just begun.We have created a timeline of the inclusive history of the Castle – from when it was first built up until 2016. The timeline, as seen above, includes untold stories of the past as well as the recognition of unsung heroes and warriors. These timelines have been rolled out in 72 schools nationwide with the aim of getting them rolled out into 400 more throughout the country. We want our kids to feel included and become excited about their heritage. hot hot
“We also know that the youth nowadays learn through technology, so we have developed an interactive website, virtual tour and video which would speak to them in a language that they understand. We are in the process of developing an app that they would be able to download onto their phones and tablets, which makes history available to them immediately and in a fun way.
“We are positioning ourselves as an exciting, forward-thinking heritage site. People – whether they are locals or tourists – want an experience. They don’t want to stand at a glass window looking in; they’re looking for interaction – touching, feeling, talking, engaging. We are therefore working hard to ensure our product is interactive.
“Over and above all the exhibitions, we also host a variety of events…. from flower shows to lifestyle markets, from music festivals to conferences and weddings.
“We want to open our doors to not only tourists, but to locals, to Capetonians. People whose lives have links here – and who may not even know it.”
Cape Town – The Castle of Good Hope turns 350 this year – and to mark the occasion, the Independent Media group will take readers on an intriguing journey of discovery, with South Africa’s oldest existing building as its focal point.
Over the years, the Castle has been many things to different people, a place of pleasure and pain. To the first white settlers it was a refreshment station for ships from their home country. To the indigenous people it eventually became a symbol of dispossession – of land, livestock and, ultimately, dignity.
But back to the Castle…
Perhaps appropriately, it had its origins in something that was commonplace along the southernmost tip of Africa: a violent storm… followed by a shipwreck.
On March 25, 1647, a Dutch Indiaman, De Nieuwe Haerlem, on its way to Holland from the East Indies, ran aground in the vicinity of present-day Milnerton – and although there were no casualties, its sinking was destined to change the course of history.
A junior merchant named Leendert Janszen was instructed to stay behind with about 60 crew to look after the cargo while fellow crew members boarded other ships in the fleet and continued their journey to Holland.
While waiting to be picked up, Janszen and other members of the party grew vegetables, caught fish and bartered fresh meat from indigenous inhabitants.
It proved to be a trial run for something more permanent.
On his return to his homeland, Janszen and a fellow officer, Nicolaas Proot, were asked by their employers, the Dutch East India Company, to compile a report on the suitability of the Cape to serve as a refreshment station.
Their report, known as the “Remonstrantie”, highly recommended the idea. They were supported by Jan van Riebeeck, a member of the fleet that picked them up.
In 1651, Van Riebeeck, accompanied by 79 men and eight women, set sail for the Cape – to set up a refreshment station.
The first commander of the Cape built the first “permanent” structure – a fort – on the site of the present-day Grand Parade.
It was built out of clay and timber, and it was not very secure, making the word “fort” seem like a misnomer. Van Riebeeck was well aware of the need to have something more secure, and he called on his principals to give the go-ahead for the construction of something more secure.
The Dutch East India Company eventually did say “Yes”, but four years after Van Riebeeck’s tour of duty had ended.
The Castle had other faces too.
Over the course of time it was the administrative centre of the Cape, a garrison, a prison (its dungeons served as temporary holding cells for troublesome chiefs of indigenous groups from the Cape and much further afield).
Some of its purposes, though, were even more sinister…
For example, it – or rather a section of it – served as a torture chamber (Die Donkergat) and a place where people were executed. And it also housed a gallows.
In this regard, one of the more fascinating stories associated with the Castle involved the ghost of an 18th century governor, Pieter van Noodt, who had been cursed on the gallows by one of seven men he had condemned to death for desertion.
The curse did not take long to kick in. Van Noodt died on the same day he was cursed. Legend has it he died with a look of surprise on his face.
One of the earliest “hangmen” was married to a slave “owned” by one of the Cape’s best-known 18th century socialites, Lady Ann Barnard.
Barnard was most impressed at the way the hangman performed his duties, but she felt nothing but contempt for his wife.
As part of the Castle’s 350th anniversary celebrations, the Department of Defence has commissioned statues of four African leaders who fought to maintain the independence of their people during various eras of dispossession.
The earliest of these featured leaders will be a Goringhaiqua Khoikhoi chief named Doman, whose relationship with the Dutch shifted from watchful collaboration (he was regarded by the Dutch as a highly skilled interpreter) to open hostility when he realised that the stay of the colonialists was likely to be permanent.
On a cold, wet day in May 1659, Doman launched the first “war of independence” by indigenous people in southern Africa against colonial invaders.
Zulu King Cetshwayo also spent time as a prisoner at the Castle. This was after he had been captured in the Ngome Forest (near Nkandla) after his forces had suffered horrific losses against the British at Khambula and Gingindlovu.
Despite angry protests from whites in the colony of Natal, he was granted permission to travel to England to plead his case to British politicians.
Dubbed “The Ladies Man” because of his striking good looks, even more so in tailored European clothing, he inspired what was described as “some very bad verse”:
“White young dandies get away-o,
Clear the way for Cetewayo….”
Another “guest” of the Castle was Sekhukhune, the king of the Pedi, who like so many other African leaders throughout southern Africa was forced into war by land-hungry white invaders.
In his case, it was strife with the Boers in the 1870s that proved to be the beginning of his downfall.
Although he was able to hold his own against the Boers, the British proved to be a different proposition.
Theophilus Shepstone, the administrator of the Transvaal (after the first Anglo-Boer war), was scathingly critical of the Boers for not being able to defeat the Pedi.
This, he said, had seriously undermined the authority of the white man in Africa.
The notoriously cynical Shepstone pushed Sekhukune into war by instituting a series of taxes and fines that the Pedi were unable to comply with – until the only option open to them was war.
Also to be featured will be Langalibalele, chief of the Hlubi, who was also forced into a war he didn’t want by the white authorities.
The Hlubi people were driven into conflict because they proved to be much more successful at farming from their base in the foothills of Natal than their white counterparts.
Spirit Of Krotoa Returned To The Castle Of Good Hope
22nd August 2018.
Cape Town- Traditional and religious leaders gathered in Cape Town on Friday to celebrate the life of Krotoa, a Khoi woman who was an instrumental interpreter and negotiator alongside Jan van Riebeeck.
Gathered around a tree at the Groote Kerk, they burned an incense plant and beckoned for her soul to rise from the unmarked grave where her bones had been held.
Her remains had been removed from the grounds of the Castle of Good Hope, nearly a century after she was buried there.
On Friday, some of her descendants returned with her spirit to the castle.
This coincided with the 350th commemoration of the castle and a Women’s Day military parade.
Defence Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, custodian of the castle, first laid a wreath at the church and then at the castle.
She unveiled a wooden bench in Krotoa’s honour and addressed the crowd on the Khoi woman’s struggle.
Krotoa, still a child, worked as a servant in Van Riebeeck’s household.
Fluent in Dutch, English and Portuguese, she was said to be instrumental in working out terms for ending the first Dutch-Khoi war in the Cape.
She was baptised, given the name Eva and married off to Danish surgeon Pieter van Meerhof.
He was killed in a slave hunt in Madagascar and when Krotoa returned to the Dutch Colony to reclaim her status, she was declined.
She was later banished to Robben Island and her children sent to Mauritius.
“Her life depicts pretty much the example of millions of women in our country, but Krotoa didn’t wallow in self-doubt and rose to distinguish herself as a pioneer,” said Mapisa-Nqakula.
“It is my wish that all of us, and young women in particular, make it a point to learn from this incredible resilient woman whose true account of her life was never told.”
Some protesters dressed in traditional garb stood outside the castle.
They questioned why not all Krotoa’s descendents were allowed inside, why she was being returned to the castle, and why the defence and military forces were there.
Mapisa-Nqakula said there was nothing wrong with the demonstration as it was people asserting their identity and history.
“If anything, it further buttresses that which we are talking about, that we must tell the true South African story.”
What was important for her was that Krotoa’s spirit was repatriated to a place, now a sacred ground, where she suffered pain.
A process was underway to have the castle listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
President Jacob Zuma would commemorate the castle’s anniversary on September 30.
Spirit Of Krotoa Returned To The Castle Of Good Hope
22nd August 2018.
Cape Town- Traditional and religious leaders gathered in Cape Town on Friday to celebrate the life of Krotoa, a Khoi woman who was an instrumental interpreter and negotiator alongside Jan van Riebeeck.
Gathered around a tree at the Groote Kerk, they burned an incense plant and beckoned for her soul to rise from the unmarked grave where her bones had been held.
Her remains had been removed from the grounds of the Castle of Good Hope, nearly a century after she was buried there.
On Friday, some of her descendants returned with her spirit to the castle.
This coincided with the 350th commemoration of the castle and a Women’s Day military parade.
Defence Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, custodian of the castle, first laid a wreath at the church and then at the castle.
She unveiled a wooden bench in Krotoa’s honour and addressed the crowd on the Khoi woman’s struggle.
Krotoa, still a child, worked as a servant in Van Riebeeck’s household.
Fluent in Dutch, English and Portuguese, she was said to be instrumental in working out terms for ending the first Dutch-Khoi war in the Cape.
She was baptised, given the name Eva and married off to Danish surgeon Pieter van Meerhof.
He was killed in a slave hunt in Madagascar and when Krotoa returned to the Dutch Colony to reclaim her status, she was declined.
She was later banished to Robben Island and her children sent to Mauritius.
“Her life depicts pretty much the example of millions of women in our country, but Krotoa didn’t wallow in self-doubt and rose to distinguish herself as a pioneer,” said Mapisa-Nqakula.
“It is my wish that all of us, and young women in particular, make it a point to learn from this incredible resilient woman whose true account of her life was never told.”
Some protesters dressed in traditional garb stood outside the castle.
They questioned why not all Krotoa’s descendents were allowed inside, why she was being returned to the castle, and why the defence and military forces were there.
Mapisa-Nqakula said there was nothing wrong with the demonstration as it was people asserting their identity and history.
“If anything, it further buttresses that which we are talking about, that we must tell the true South African story.”
What was important for her was that Krotoa’s spirit was repatriated to a place, now a sacred ground, where she suffered pain.
A process was underway to have the castle listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
President Jacob Zuma would commemorate the castle’s anniversary on September 30.
Bastion Of Past Conquests 11th November 2018. Doman, the go-between and resister at thpe during the ine Cacremental Dutch conquest, appears to have been misunderstood right from the start, says Michael Morris. The life of Doman, the go-between and resister at the Cape during the incremental ...
A Warrior Of Grace, Dignity 8th November 2018. On December 6, four statues of kings and warriors will be unveiled to mark 350 years of the Castle of Good Hope. Here Michael Morris writes about Zulu king Cetshwayo. Cape Town – Victory has often come at a grave cost to kings and nations, an...
Discover Castle's Ghostly Past 5th November 2018. Cape Town – The Castle of Good Hope turns 350 this year – and to mark the occasion, the Independent Media group will take readers on an intriguing journey of discovery, with South Africa’s oldest existing building as its focal point. Over the...
Cape's Bastion Of History 4th November 2018. A new project celebrates Cape Town Castle, 350 years old this year, and honours key figures in our past, writes Michael Morris. We can almost hear Zacharias Wagenaer’s voice in the words passed down to us in the record, and a hint of a surely impr...
Spirit Of Krotoa Returned To The Castle Of Good Hope 22nd August 2018. Cape Town- Traditional and religious leaders gathered in Cape Town on Friday to celebrate the life of Krotoa, a Khoi woman who was an instrumental interpreter and negotiator alongside Jan van Riebeeck. Gathered around a t...
History Obviously space will not allow us to delve into the rich, difficult history of this world-famous building. Save to say that the story of his Castle is a story of our young country. It is a story of joy, pain, tears, laughter, disappointment, fear, hope – and all the other hu...
Identification document: passport / driving license / ID card
Must be presented when collecting the badge.
[Indico] Registration complete for 4th Session of the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent for 4th Session of the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent
pfpad@un.org (via Indico.UN) <noreply@un.org>
Mon, Mar 24, 4:12 PM (12 days ago)
to me
United Nations - Accreditation System
English
Dear Ms. LENDY SPIRES,
Your registration for the meeting
4th Session of the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent - United Nations Headquarters - Apr 14, 2025, 10:00 AM (America/New_York)
Historian Sir Hilary Beckles pays tribute to the millions of men, women and children who suffered as a result of the Transatlantic Slave Trade, one of most devastating chapters in human history.
Indigenous leaders celebrate as court rejects appeal in landmark Yunupingu compensation case
High court upholds ruling against commonwealth that Gumatj clan’s land was not acquired ‘on just terms’, in case initiated by renowned land rights activist
Australian Associated Press
Wed 12 Mar 2025 03.00 GMT
Traditional owners say justice has been served for their people as the high court dismissed a commonwealth appeal in a landmark compensation case.
The commonwealth lost the high court battle over whether it may be liable for up to $700m in compensation for bauxite mining at Gove in north-east Arnhem Land.
Gumatj leaders Djawa Yunupingu and Balupalu Yunupingu celebrated outside the high court on Wednesday after hearing the judgment against the commonwealth.
“Justice has been served for my people and the people of north-east Arnhem Land,” Djawa Yunupingu said.
Renowned land rights activist the late Gumatj leader Dr Yunupingu originally brought the case in 2019, alongside an application for native title on behalf of his clan.
Fortescue and WA government say traditional owners’ $1.8bn compensation claim is worth $8m
Read more
Djawa Yunupingu emotionally acknowledged his late brother as the “mastermind” behind the effort.
“He was the one who had the vision,” he said.
Gumatj lawyer Sean Bowden told reporters the decision was a “victory for decency, common sense and the rule of law”.
“Today’s decision validates the strength of belief in Aboriginal people, generally, not just in themselves but in their place in Australia,” he said.
In May 2023, the federal court found native title rights and interests are property, and the extinguishment is an acquisition, and therefore be made under “just terms”.
It found the Gumatj clan’s land was not acquired “on just terms” before being leased to the Swiss-Australian mining consortium Nabalco in 1968.
In its decision on Wednesday, the high court upheld this decision.
“Native title recognises that, according to their laws and customs, Indigenous Australians have a connection with country,” the judgment read.
“It is a connection which existed and persisted before and beyond settlement, before and beyond the assertion of sovereignty and before and beyond Federation.
“It is older and deeper than the constitution.”
The federal government had argued if its appeal failed it would be liable to pay native title holders compensation “to an indeterminate number of grants of interests” in the Northern Territory land and that would have “enormous financial ramifications”.
After the high court judgment, the attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, said the government recognised the “significant contribution” the late Dr Yunupingu made in initiating the case.
“The commonwealth appealed to the high court to settle critical constitutional issues in this case,” he said.
“This decision clarifies the constitution’s application to those issues for parties to this and future matters.”
Dr Ed Wensing, Honorary Research Fellow at the Centre for Indigenous Policy Research at the Australian National University, said the decision would have implications for the ACT, not just the NT.
Greens Senator Dorinda Cox said the government must now “step up” and ensure the Gumatj people receive the compensation they are owed.
“For too long, First Nations people have borne the cost of mining and resource extraction on our lands without proper respect and shared benefit,” she said.
“This ruling sends a clear message and precedent: the commonwealth cannot ignore its obligations when it comes to First Nations land rights.”
A native title application, which Dr Yunupingu filed at the same time as the compensation case, will continue to be heard in the federal court.
Help for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is available on13YARN on 13 92 76
RESTITUTION AND REPARATION: AFRICA AND THE POST-COLONIAL CONDITION FELLOWSHIP
The annual fellowship program themed, “Restitution and Reparation: Africa and the Post-Colonial Condition,” will convene scholars or practitioners interested in restitution and repatriation issues related to African art and artifacts. By fostering dialogue and research, the program aims to shed light on this critical issue and contribute to meaningful progress in returning looted artifacts to their rightful homes in Africa.
This fellowship program aligns with The Africa Institute’s broader mission to foster critical thinking and dialogue around African and African diaspora studies. By bringing diverse voices and perspectives together, the program promises to advance crucial conversations about cultural heritage, historical accountability, and the path toward a more just future.
The program will run over the course of three academic semesters, beginning September 1, 2025, and ending December 31, 2026. The fellowship program aims to host three expert fellows at different stages in their careers over a year-and-half period (Fall 2025, Spring 2026, and Fall 2026).
About Open Society Foundations
The Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros, are the world’s largest private funder of independent groups working for justice, democratic governance, and human rights. Visit opensocietyfoundations.org for more.
Applicant Criteria
Applicants must demonstrate a clear scholarly focus on restitution, repatriation, and reparation of cultural heritage, particularly in the context of Africa and African diaspora, and the post-colonial condition. Preference will be given to scholars whose work bridges multiple disciplines or engages diverse methodologies to explore the theme. The research must be original, feasible within the fellowship duration, and impactful for ongoing and future debates around restitution and reparations. Awarded fellows are required to submit a publishable paper or chapter based on their fellowship research as part of the final publication by the end of the fellowship program.
Research Project topics may include, but are not limited to:
The historical and contemporary debates on cultural restitution and reparation
Case studies of looted artifacts, human remains, or cultural heritage
The role of Western institutions (museums, archives, universities, etc.) in perpetuating or addressing colonial legacies
Neo-nationalist policies and campaigns for repatriation and restitution
The impact of racial reparations and lessons for cultural restitution
Eligibility Criteria and Expectations
Candidates must have a minimum of a master’s degree or Ph.D. in a relevant specialization and/or area of research.
Candidates must demonstrate how their research aligns with and contributes to the broader objectives of the Open Society-funded project, including the lecture series, residential fellowships, conference, and final publication.
Fellows are expected to present their work as part of The Africa Institute’s lecture series and participate in the final conference and publication of its proceedings.
Submission Guidelines
All files must be submitted in PDF format, combined into one file, to streamline the review process. The required documents should be submitted in the below order :
Candidates must submit a detailed research proposal/letter of interest (1,500–2,000 words) outlining the abstract for the publishable paper, project goals, research questions, methodology, and intended outcomes. The proposal must articulate how their work contributes to the larger conversation on restitution, repatriation, and reparations, as framed by the synopsis
Curriculum Vitae
Two sample writings (e.g., articles and book chapters)
Two reference letters from a specialist in an area relevant to the fellowship themes and objectives
Please name the file using the residency title abbreviation and the applicant’s name in this format: Open Society_LASTNAME_FIRSTNAME. Use the same name in the email subject heading, ensure you specify the semester you are applying for, and send the PDF as an email attachment to applications@theafricainstitute.org.
Deadlines and Key Dates
April 1, 2025, for applicants interested in Fall Semester 2025 (commencement date of the fellowship is September 1, 2025)
October 1, 2025, for applicants interested in Spring Semester 2026 (commencement date of the fellowship is January 10, 2026)
April 1, 2026, for applicants interested in Fall Semester 2026 (commencement date of the fellowship is September 1, 2026)
The Department of Social Development derives its core mandate from the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa:
Section 27 (1) (c) of the Constitution provides for the right of access to appropriate social assistance to those unable support themselves and their dependants.
In addition, Section 28 (1) of the Constitution sets out the rights of children with regard to appropriate care (basic nutrition, shelter, health care services and social services) and detention.
Schedule 4 of the Constitution further identifies welfare services, population development and disaster management as functional areas of concurrent national and provincial legislative competence.
The following existing laws or parts thereof, can be regarded as constituting the legislative mandate of the Department of Social Development in South Africa:
All the abovementioned laws, excluding the Welfare Laws Amendment Act, 1997 and the Advisory Board on Social Development Act, 2001 have been amended a number of times since April 1994.
Aged Persons Act, 1967
This Act provides for the protection and welfare of certain aged and debilitated persons, for the care of their interests, for the establishment and registration of certain institutions and for the accommodation and care of such persons in such institutions. The Act was amended a number of times before April 1994. Further amendments were made in November 1994 in order to, amongst others, repeal certain discriminatory provisions and in November 1998 in order to provide for the establishment of management committees for homes for the aged, to require reporting on the abuse of aged persons and to regulate the prevention of the abuse of aged persons. The Department is currently drafting a Bill on the status of older persons.
Fund-raising Act, 1978
The Fund-raising Act, 1978 that provided for control of the collection of contributions from the public and for the establishment of various relief funds was, except for the relief fund chapter thereof, repealed in 1997 by the Non-profit Organisations Act, 1997. The Department is in the process of amending the remaining part of the Act.
Social Service Professions Act, 1978
This Act, formerly known as the Social Work Act, provides for the establishment of the South Africa Council for Social Work and defines its powers and functions. The Act was amended on a number of occasions – in 1995 it provided for the establishment of the South African Interim Council for Social Work and for the rationalisation of certain laws relating to social workers that remained in force in the various areas of the national territory of the Republic. The Act was also amended in 1996 in order to make the South African Interim Council for Social Work more representative of the people of the country. The 1998 amendment established the South African Council for Social Service Professions and professional boards for social service professions.
Child Care Act, 1983
The Child Care Act, 1983 which provides for the establishment of children’s courts and the appointment of commissioners of child welfare, for the protection and welfare of certain children, for the adoption of children and for the establishment of certain institutions for the reception of children and for the treatment of children after such reception, was amended in 1996 to provide for legal representation for children and for the registration of shelters. The 1998 amendment provided for the rights of certain natural fathers where the adoption of their children born out of wedlock has been proposed and for certain notice to be given. The 1999 amendment provided for the establishment of secure care facilities and for the prohibition against the commercial sexual exploitation of children. The Department and the South African Law Commission is currently preparing new comprehensive children’s legislation.
Probation Service Act, 1991
This Act provides for the establishment and implementation of programmes aimed at the combating of crime and for the rendering of assistance to and treatment of certain persons involved in crime. A new amendment Bill has been prepared, which will be introduced in Parliament during April 2002.
Prevention and Treatment of Drug Dependency Act, 1992
This Act provides for the establishment of a Central Drug Authority, the establishment of programmes for the prevention and treatment of drug dependency, the establishment of treatment centres and hostels, the registration of institutions as treatment centres and hostels and the committal of certain persons to and their detention, treatment and training in such treatment centres or registered treatment centres. The Act was amended in 1996 to extend the application of the Act to the whole of the national territory of the Republic and in 1999 to establish the Central Drug Authority.
Social Assistance Act, 1992 and Welfare Laws Amendment Act, 1997
The Social Assistance Act, 1992 provides for the rendering of social assistance to persons, national councils and welfare organisations. The Act was amended in 1994 to further regulate the making of grants and financial awards to certain persons and bodies. In 1997 the Welfare Laws Amendment Act, 1997 amended the Social Assistance Act, 1992 in order to provide for uniformity of, equality of access to, and effective regulation, of social assistance throughout the Republic, to introduce the child-support grant, to do away with capitation grants, to abolish maintenance grants subject to the phasing out of existing maintenance grants over a period not exceeding three years, to provide for the delegation of certain powers, and to extend the application of the provisions of the Act to all areas in the Republic.
Non-profit Organisations Act, 1997
This Act repealed the Fund-raising Act, 1997, excluding the chapter, which deals with the relief funds, and provided for an environment in which nonprofit organisations can flourish. The Act also established an administrative and regulatory framework within which nonprofit organisations can conduct their affairs. The Act was amended in 2000 to effect certain textual alterations.
Advisory Board on Social Development Act, 2001
The Act provides for a national advisory structure in the social development sector with the aim of building and consolidating partnership between government and civil society and for that purpose, to establish a body to be known as the Advisory Board on Social Development.
White Paper for Social Welfare (1997)
The White Paper sets out the principles, guidelines, proposed policies and programmes for developmental social welfare in South Africa. As the primary policy document, the White Paper serves as the foundation for social welfare in the post 1994 era.
White Paper Population Policy for South Africa (1998)
The White Paper aims to promote the integration of population issues in development planning with the view to achieving sustainable human development. The Department of Social Development is responsible for monitoring population trends and for supporting national, provincial and local spheres of government through capacity building, research and information dissemination on population issues. Issued by Department of Social Development.
According to many credible studies, the Tanzania demography data about its population of people in the country includes more than 120 Tanzania tribes that are of African descent, most of whom are grouped together in large groups. As a result of the effects of rural-to-urban migration, modernity, and politics, some small tribes in Tanzania are gradually disappearing.
At the beginning of 5000 years before this era (bce), the San hunters settled in the country. The Sandawe hunters in northern Tanzania Mainland are considered to be their descendants. By 1000 years before this era (bce), agricultural and pastoral activities were introduced through the migration of the Cushite people from Ethiopia. Iraqw, Mbugu, Gorowa, and Burungi are of Ethiopian descent. Nearly 500 years ago (ce), the Bantu farmers who used iron arrived from the west and south, began to relocate or replace Sandawe hunters and collectors; meanwhile, Nailotic pastoralists invaded the area also from Southern Sudan.
Today most Tanzanians are of Bantu descent; The Sukuma – who live in the north of the country, south of Lake Victoria – form the biggest tribe in Tanzania. Other Bantu peoples include the Nyamwezi, based in the midwest region; The Hehe, who are in the highlands of the south of the country and the Haya in the northwest corner who is one of the most educated tribe inTanzania; The Chagga of the Kilimanjaro region, who live south on the slopes of mountain Kilimanjaro; and Makonde, who live in the Mtwara and Ruvuma regions of the southeast. The Nailotic people – represented by the Maasai, Arusha, Samburu, and Baraguyu – live in the northern part of central Tanzania. The Nazarenes, a very mixed and urban group, form another ione of the influential tribes of Tanzania. Most Zaramo live in the Dar es Salaam and coastal environment. The Zanaki – the smallest tribe in number – live near Musoma in the Lake Victoria area. Julius Nyerere, the founding father of the country and the first president (1962-85), came out of this group.
The list of tribes in Tanzania also include Asians and European communities in few numbers. During the colonial period, Asian migration was encouraged, and Asians dominated the domestic production trade. Originally from Gujarat in India, they form several groups: Ismāʿīlīs, Bohras, Sikhs, Punjabis, and Goans. Since independence, however, the Asian population has declined sharply due to immigration. The population of Europeans, never became large because Tanganyika was not a settlers’ colony, but was composed mainly of British, German and Greek societies. After independence, the influx of foreigners from Europe, North America, and the Japanese linked to foreign aid projects made Tanzania their temporary home.
Unlike many African countries, Tanzania does not have a single politically or culturally dominant tribe, although groups that gained Christian missionary influence and Western education during colonial times (especially Chagga and Haya) are well represented in the government sector and financialeconomy.
Zanzibar Tribes
The first Ismaili settlers of East Africa first settled in Zanzibar
There are several groups of Africans present on the islands. Indigenous Bantu groups, including the Pembas in Pemba and Hadad and Tumbatu in Zanzibar, have inherited settlers who came from Persia in the 10th century. These groups and some of the slave generation call themselves Shirazis. There is also a small area of Comoros and Somalis. Arab settlements were also established early, and intermarriage with the natives took place. The arrival of the Arabs in the 18th and 19th centuries from Oman led to the formation of a group of elites. Omani immigrants at the beginning of the 20th century were relatively wealthy. Asians form a very small number.
For more articles on Tanzania ethnic groups click here!
The Sandawe are a small group living in north-central Tanzania in Kondo District, near the town of Kondoa, between the Mponde and Bubu rivers. The Sandawe are a small remaining group of a race of people that originally lived over much of Africa. The San, called Bushmen by the Dutch in South Africa, were the first people we know in the Rift Valley. The Sandawe are racially different from the surrounding tribes. They have lighter skin and are smaller, with knotty hair like that of the Bushmen, commonly referred to as peppercorn hair. They have the epicanthic fold of the eye lid (like East Asian people) common to the Bushmen.
The Sandawe language includes click sounds as consonants and is also tonal. Totally unrelated to other languages around them, it is difficult to learn. The language is related to the languages of the Bushmen (San) and the Hottentots (Khoi) of the southern Africa and is therefore classified as a Khoisan language. The Hadzapi, also in northern Tanzania, are the only other aboriginal people in Eastern Africa still speaking a Khoisan language.
To get content containing either thought or leadership enter:
To get content containing both thought and leadership enter:
To get content containing the expression thought leadership enter:
You can enter several keywords and you can refine them whenever you want. Our suggestion engine uses more signals but entering a few keywords here will rapidly give you great content to curate.
Your new post is loading...
