WeeklySA_AdminHISTORY: Zulu-Boer bloodbath – a plot by Voortrekkers to use a ruse of divine favour to colonise Africans
By Jacob Mawela
History is written by the victors, is a statement attributed to former British Prime Minister, statesman and World War 2 wartime veteran Winston Churchill.
Which is to suggest that history is not always objective, but has the tendency to advance the version of events of those who document it, or wield power or influence, or even control the narrative.
The book, The Great Trek Blood River 1838: The Zulu-Boer War is a contentious narration which ought to be read with great caution for its projection of history is depended on colonialists’ expressions and perspectives. The book’s contents are as controversial as the battle of Blood River itself, dated December 16, 1838. It is about conquest and land dispossession, with the Zulu Amabuthos defending their territory and history.
According to the author, the Afrikaners viewed the war as a dispensation from God to rule the country. But how can that be logical true? God allowing evil to prevail, rewarding the aggressors and colonisers handsomely for the evil acts of land dispossession?
The narrative appears to be distorted and one-sided. The assertions made in the book have been roundly disputed by the African historians and scholars as nothing but as “Afrikaner propaganda” – a perspective that continues to expose the fractious perspectives prevalent to this day, with President Cyril Ramaphosa entering the fray.
In his speech on the day, during a Day of Reconciliation speech in 2019, Ramaphosa described the Voortrekkers as invaders and the amaZulu army as freedom fighters.
With that said, what can we make of the author’s assertions in his book, given that Knight is acknowledged in some quarters as a leading authority on colonial campaigns of the Victorian Empire?
One can come to the conclusion that the author’s account of events may be suspect, or even speculative, reflecting a mind or agenda that seeks to project the colonisers and land grabbers as victors in a territory that did not belong to them.
It is therefore up to the readers to read the book with a discerning mind, keeping their guards up to avoid being led down the garden path.
Andries Pretorius, a 40-year-old farmer had assembled a fighting kommando of 464 men. He had a narrow escape when one warrior stabbed him, inflicting a wound on his hand.
Knight further narrates that the plain on both sides of the river was littered with the remains of Zulu combatants, with many killed in the hippo pool that seemed like a sluggish pool of blood.
After the battle, continued the historian, Pretorius assessed the Zulu casualties at no less than 3 000 men killed. Pretorius allegedly drafted a covenant with God in which the Trekkers agreed to hold the day holy should they be granted victory.
Pitted against Pretorius’ force were Zulu warriors numbering between 10 000 and 15 000. Other authorities estimate their number at between 25 000 to 30 000, according to the author.
The bigger question, though, is: how is it conceivable that about 464 Voortrekkers pitted against thousands of experienced amaButho warriors could not suffer a single fatality?
That seems to be an impossibility, but not an innocent impossibility. It is an impossibility that glorifies the might of the Voortrekkers with no attempt to venture into serious implications of what that victory did to race relations in this country.
One cannot guess that apartheid was conceived by the apartheid system to as a direct consequence of such wars – wars of land dispossession and oppression of African people.
The Blood River was no victory. It was an act of furthering the ends of colonialism and the injustice of land dispossession. Churchill was right. History tends to be written by the victors.
• A paperback, Blood River 1838: The Zulu-Boer War is published by Osprey Publishing and distributed in South Africa by Jonathan Ball Publishers. Available at leading bookstores countrywide. It retails for R350.
