|
|
Where Have All The Hottentots Gone? The Archaeology And History Of The Khoekhoen
Professor Andrew B Smith, Department of Archaeology,
University of Cape Town
The name 'Hottentot', or its Afrikaans shortening 'Hotnot', became a
disparaging term for people of colour at the Cape. Today we refer to the
aboriginal herders of the Cape by the name they would have called themselves:
Khoekhoen ='people people' or 'real people' (non-gender specific plural). This
name would have been in contrast to hunters known as Soaqua = Sonqua or San-qua
who had no domestic animals and lived off bush foods (wild game animals and
plants). These Bushmen or San were looked down upon by the herders whose stock
made them so rich they could afford to coat themselves in a mixture of butter
fat and red ochre, which made them gleam like a well-fed brown cow, and gave
them status. We will look at discussions about where these people may have
originated, what happened to them as a result of the colonial experience at the
Cape, and conclude with where their descendants are today.
Origins of Khoekhoen
There is some debate on where the Khoekhoen came from. In archaeological
terms, the earliest herders in Southern Africa introduced sheep and pottery.
Some archaeologists and linguists believe that the Khoisan (people who spoke a
click language and are genetically related to the Bushmen of Southern Africa)
lived much further north towards East Africa (Zambia, Tanzania) than they have
been found historically (Kalahari, Caprivi, Southern Zimbabwe, South Africa).
The argument on this side of the debate would say that Nilotic herdsmen found
archaeologically on the border between Kenya and Tanzania were the prototype
pottery makers for the early ceramics in Southern Africa. The linguists would
argue that these were Nilotic language speakers, and that they were immediate
neighbours of another language group known as East Saheliens. The East Sahelian
groups were in turn the source of loan words, such as 'ewe', 'ram', 'grains' and
'porridge' into Khoisan languages, particularly Khwe, the language family of the
Khoekhoen.
By 2000 years ago this early spouted pottery , known as Bambata, was
widespread across Southern Africa from Northern Namibia to Limpopo Province of
South Africa. Pottery and sheep moved rapidly southwards into the Vaal/Orange
drainage, from whence they dispersed to the Western and Southern Cape, where the
Khoekhoen were found historically by the first European travellers in the 15th
century AD. Hunters, who were already living at the Cape speaking a /Xam
language, lived alongside the herders who spoke a mutually unintelligible Khoe
language (Nama, etc). The most prominent herder site is Kasteelberg which was
occupied from about 1600-800 years ago. These people had large flocks of sheep,
although a few cattle bones have also been found in levels dating to around 1000
years ago.
Small numbers of sheep bones have been found in earlier hunter sites, such as
Die Kelders and Blombos (on the south coast), Witklip (near Vredenberg) and
Spoegrivier (Namaqualand) as early as 2000 years ago. The assumption is that
there were herders around at this time from whom the sheep came.
This model of pastoral expansion recognises that people who move camp
frequently leave few material remains behind, often making them 'invisible' in
the archaeological record. A good example of this is the historical information
we have on the Khoekhoen at the Cape. We have been unable to find any sites with
large numbers of cattle bones from the early colonial period, except from
colonial sites, such as the Fort in Cape Town. Kasteelberg thus becomes an
important window into early pastoral presence in the Cape, and would have
appeared to be an aggregation site, where people came together for a short
period during the rainy season to celebrate marriages, births, and other
important ritual activities. The fact that they repeated re-occupied the site
has made them 'visible'.
The
alternative view of the introduction of herding to the Cape does not accept
'invisibility' of pastoralists as a predictive model. Instead, proponents would
argue that sheep and pottery were taken up by hunters in the Cape 2000 years
ago, and they then adopted herding as their lifestyle. This model also assumes
that there was little difference between hunters and herders: when a herder lost
stock, through theft, drought, etc. he could always fall back on hunting, and
later when he had recouped his losses, would once more become a herder.
Although recent work at Kasteelberg shows contemporaneous hunter sites on the
kopje close to herder sites, and perhaps fewer distinctions than considered
previously, nonetheless there still remain considerable differences. Perhaps the
greatest of these is in the size of ostrich eggshell beads. Hunters made tiny
beads (less than 5mm) while herders made them much larger (greater than 5 mm).
The herders also focused on collecting seals from the coast 4 km away and
bringing them up onto the sites as a source of fat. If the hunters used seals at
all, they left their bones down on the beach.
Khoekhoen in History
This debate on Khoe origins means we are still somewhat unsure about Khoe
antecedents. Historically, their cattle herds were the prime focus for
provisioning of East Indiamen by the Dutch, and so the reason for setting up the
station at Table Bay.
Khoekhoen quickly realised that the Dutch were not like previous visitors,
and were setting a more permanent presence when they started building the Fort
in 1652. The Khoekhoen fought two wars with the Dutch, and, had they persisted,
they probably would have pushed them back into the sea. Unfortunately, they
treated the Dutch like other Khoekhoen, and just stole their cattle, thinking
that this would undermine their economy. They had no way of knowing the power
behind the mercantile capital backing the Dutch up in Holland.
The Khoekhoen in the Southwestern Cape lost their grazing lands and slowly
their herds were stolen by colonists and brigands taking advantage of
instability. In 1713 a smallpox epidemic massively affected the Khoe at a time
when the herds were taking strain from drought conditions and stock diseases.
The Khoe around Table Bay never recovered from this. There were other instances
of Khoe resistance to colonial repression in the 18th and 19th centuries, and
attempts to maintain their cultural separation from the colony, but ultimately
these also proved ineffectual. Many fled the colony to become refugees
up-country, others became farm workers for the colonists, and intermarried with
slaves
This is the basis for the 'Cape Coloured' population, as the people were
known under apartheid. Khoe descendants were unwilling to admit their lineage,
as Khoekhoen were considered 'primitive' or 'uncivilised'. A revival of interest
in their own history was sparked in the 1980s and 90s among the people of
Namaqualand who won a court case to prevent their common lands being broken up
and falling into individual hands. They were also successful in negotiating
grazing rights with Parks Board when the Richtersveld National Park was
proposed. This new-found power and identity resulted in 'Nama' (both language
and culture) having a cachet that was previously downplayed. Equally, the Griqua
National Council has been pushing for Khoe recognition by the ANC-controlled
government. No click language has been given status as an official language in
South Africa (although Nama is recognised in Namibia). In land claims and
restitution most Khoe descendants have been left behind because loss of land
occurred before the cut-off date of 1913. This, however, has not stopped the
people of the Richtersveld pushing their claim for compensation from the
government-owned Alexcor Diamond mine (similar to what they receive from
TransHex mining on the Orange River). So far the government has won the court
battle, but the Khoe descendants may yet be able to establish their aboriginal
title (as native people have done in Canada, Australia and NewZealand).
Article by: Professor Andrew B Smith,
Department of Archaeology, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7700, South
Africa.
|