The causes of the war must be sought first in South African politics and secondly in international politics at the end of the 19th century. Because of their interrelationship these two causes are here treated as one.

To a certain extent it can be said that the seeds from which the war was to stem were sown during the Great Trek. This had as one of its most important results the fact that the second half of the 19th centuty after the two Boer republics, the Transvaal and the Orange Free State, had gained their independence -was to see an increasing conflict between the political aims of the Afrikaners and the British. In events such as the Basuto wars, which the Free State had to wage for self-preservation, and the annexation of the diamond-fields, the germ of the development of Afrikaner nationalism is to be found. The annexation of the Transvaal in 1877 and the First Anglo-Boer War (1880-82) which it caused gave this nationalism such an impetus that it was to become a dominant factor in South African politics.

At the same time British imperialism in respect of South Africa was revealed. Imperialism was not by any means limited to Britain, but was a world-wide tendency. Other European powers, such as Germany, France and Italy, were also engaged in it. The result was the ‘scramble for Africa’, in which these powers competed with one another to establish colonies on the continent. This acquirement of colonies was chiefly motivated by the idea that the colonies would provide raw materials for British industries and at the same time would be markets for manufactured products. When other countries also became industrialised and established their own colonies, Britain could no longer consider herself one jump ahead of the rest of the world. This fact was of particular significance for South Africa.

The champion of the British imperialist cause in South Africa was Cecil John Rhodes, who became a member of the Cape Parliament in 1881 and rose to be Prime Minister in 1890. His great ideal was to bring the whole of South Africa under British control. He was to find his chief antagonist in President Paul Kruger of the Transvaal Republic, who became the leader of Afrikaner nationalism after 1881. Kruger’s great aim was to protect the political and economic independence of his state, to check British influence and to prevent British control. It was inevitable that there would be a clash between him and Rhodes, who succeeded, by the annexation of Bechuanaland and of Rhodesia, in surrounding the two Boer republics completely, precluding any further expansion on their part. After that the only outlet for them that was not in British hands was Delagoa Bay, to which the Transvaal built a railway, financed by German and Dutch capital.

The discovery of gold on the Witwatersrand in the Transvaal Republic in 1886 was to the advantage of British imperialism. Thousands of British subjects moved to the Transvaal to try their luck. They began to campaign for equal political rights, which the original Transvaalers could not grant for fear of losing their independence. After the agitation had continued for some years, some of the leading Uitlanders (foreigners) in Johannesburg conspired with Rhodes, which led to the abortive Jameson Raid at the end of 1895. This event not only marred the relations between English and Afrikaners in South Africa, but also revealed to an amazed world that Britain and Germany were no longer on very friendly terms. Germany had already invested a considerable amount of capital in the gold-mines, and besides she had an idea of gaining possession of Delagoa Bay. The Emperor William II was moved to send a congratulatory telegram to President Kruger on the failure of the Raid. This caused much indignation in Britain, and the Government, in which the Colonial Secretary, Joseph Chamberlain, was a leading figure, was determined to cut the knot in South Africa by terminating the independence of the Transvaal.

It was with this policy in view that Sir Alfred Milner, a convinced Imperialist, was sent to South Africa in 1897 by the British government as Governor of Cape Colony and High Commissioner in South Africa. He seized his opportunity at the beginning of 1899, when the Uitlanders in Johannesburg renewed their agitation. This time they sent a petition to Queen Victoria, begging for British support. Milner also urged interference on their behalf. Pres. M. T. Steyn of the Orange Free State, who feared that war would result and wished to prevent it, then invited both Kruger and Milner to a meeting in Bloemfontein to discuss the situation. The talks lasted from 31st May to the 5th June. The main subject was the granting of the franchise to British subjects who had settled on the Witwatersrand. Although Kruger made considerable concessions, Milner remained unsatisfied, as he was already contemplating the destruction of the independence of the Transvaal by military force. For this reason the Bloemfontein Conference failed.

After his return to Cape Town Milner urged the British government to send troops to South Africa, and they began to arrive in August and September. The Transvaal government now made further concessions regarding the franchise for foreigners, but these were not sufficient to satisfy Milner. The Orange Free State, as well as the Transvaal, saw in the arrival of the British forces a threat to their independence, and on 9th October an ultimatum was sent to the British government: if the troops were not removed, a state of war would exist between Britain and the Boer republics. And so the war began on 11th October 1899. A few days later Chamberlain stated in the House of Commons that the war was necessary to maintain Britain’s position in world affairs. The diminution of British power, owing to the rapid rise of important competitors, turned the problems in South Africa into a matter of prestige for Britain. She had to show that she could compel a recalcitrant small state to submit to British domination.

TV actor Frank Opperman is tracing his father’s roots and his father Frankie Alfred is terminally ill. Frank desperately wants to share their heritage with his father. Can you help?

The Opperman family lived at number 48 Lilian Road in Fordsburg in the 1930′s. His father Frankie Alfred’s father was Nicolaas Phillip Opperman and his mother Anna Elizabeth (nee De Wet). His father’s birth certificate, stamped on 27 November 1939, states that Nicolaas Phillip Opperman was 26 years old at the time and would have been born in 1910.

The other children were:
Nicolaas born 06.10.31
Jacobus born 26.12.32
Elsie born 13.07.34

Anna was in a desperate situation and asked for the Commissioner of Child Welfare to send some of the children to an orphange. Frankie (Frank’s father) was sent to Charlotte Theron-Kinderhuis. We do not know what happened to the other children and want to trace the roots of the family, especially the time between the Great Trek and the Boer War.

Can you help Ancestry24 help solve the Opperman mystery?
Please reply with your comments to this post if you are registered, otherwise send an e-mail to [email protected]

Frank made a movie about his sister, who became Hare Krishna. It contains a brief background on the Opperman family. Watch it below.

Die Boerevrou

In 1918, Die Boerevrou, the first Afrikaans magazine for women, appeared in Pretoria. This illustrated monthly magazine for women was the first published magazine in Afrikaans. Die Boerevrouw (its title until June 1920) was the first women’s magazine in Afrikaans and appeared in Pretoria from March 1919 under the editorship of the owner, Mrs. Mabel Malherbe (nee Rex), whose assistant editor from an early date was Mrs. M. E. Rothmann (M.E.R.), who published her first short stories in it.

The magazine met with public approval almost from its inception, since it was the only Afrikaans magazine entirely for women; it also dealt with national affairs, with special emphasis on matters affecting Afrikaner women, their own past and their people; it aimed to include women as an essential factor in sound national development. Prominent writers like Eugene Marais, F. W. Reitz, G. R. von Wielligh, Jan Celliers, A. G. Visser, F. van den Heever (‘Toon’) and C. M. van den Heever, and artists like Anton van Wouw, Pierneef and Erich Mayer willingly contributed. Of special value were contributions sent in by the readers themselves, once confidence had been established in the editorial leadership.

These were contributed to a column ’round the coffee-table’ which would formerly have been regarded as of purely personal significance, but had a historical interest, for they cast a clear and intimate light upon the development and characteristics of the Afrikaner people, especially since the days of the Great Trek. To delve into the old volumes of the Die Boerevrou is to reveal valuable Africana. Mrs. Malherbe hoped that sufficient advertisements of reliable goods would be forthcoming to cover expenses. Perhaps her estimate was too high and, moreover, she turned down all advertisements of liquor and patent medicines.

The deficits, which for years had been borne by her husband, the attorney Kenne Malherbe, eventually became so great that she had to give up the struggle, and in 1931 the magazine ceased publication.

Two fine anthologies were compiled by Mrs. Malherbe from the contents: Die Boerevrou-boek (1950) and Juwele wat steeds bekoor (1951).

This coffee table magazine offered a number of regular features such as:

Sewing and Knitting patterns
Fashions
Childrens Stories

Jong Suid-Afrika – family photo’s sent in by the public

Margaretha Kuhne, 1 jaar en 9 maande. Dogtertjie van Mnr. en Mevr. W. Kuhne. Kleinkind van Mnr. Jurie Loubscher, Graaff Reinet.

George Ferreira Strydom, (8 maande oud, gewig 23 pond), enigste seuntjie van Mnr. en Mevr. J.C. Strydom, Barberton

"Die Wonderbybie" Kobus Van Schalkwyk, Oud 5 ½ maande. Gewig 20 pond. Seuntjie van Mevr. B. Van Schalkwyk, Barberton.

Sebastiaan Valentein Vom Hagen, jongste seuntjie van Mnr. en Mevr. S. Vom Hagen, Gezina.

Home Recipes

Koue Seep
8 lb. vet, 1 lb. seepsoda, 1 3/4 bottel water. Dit kan enige vet of botter wees; natuurlik moet dit uitgebraaide vet wees. 1/2 varkvet, 1/2 skaap of beestevet maak die mooiste seep, ofskoon die hoeveelheid van die ander net so goed is. Harde vet, al is dit baie donker en vuil, kers afdrupsels of enige uitgebraaide vet, sal vir koue seep ewe goed wees, al sal dit nie juis so mooi wees nie. Los op die soda in die water. Smelt die vet oor ‘n vuur. Laat so bietjie afkoel. Intussen voer ‘n kassie uit met ‘n natte doek. Probeer dat die soda en die vet so na as moontlik dieselfde warmte het. Roer nou bymekaar, hou aan totdat dit so dik as gesuikerde heuning lyk.

Gooi uit in die kassie, vou die buitenste stukke van die doek oor die seep. Sit dan ‘n ou sak oor, en laat oornag staan. Sny die volgende oggend uit. Laat in die son of in ‘n trekkerige plek droog word, as dit gou nodig is. Die kassie wat in die vorm gebruik word, kan goed diep wees. Dit kan dan in stene op die volgende manier gesny word. Sny die stuk deur van bo af in stene, sny dan weer deur op die dikte van die steen; 2 of 3 stene kan so opmekaar gevorm word. Dan het dit nie so ‘n groot kassie nodig nie.
Deurskynend koue seep

7 lb. vet, 1 lb. soda, en 1 bot. water. Maak die soda die vorige aand aan. Maak goed warm toe. Volgende oggend smelt die vet af en koel of; roer dan by die soda, en roer vir ‘n uur. Voeg dan by een lepel terpentyn en ‘n half koppie parafien. Roer goed deur. Gooi uit in ‘n kassie (uitgevoer met ‘n nat lap). Bedek baie goed met ou sakke of komberse; laat dit so langs die stoof staan op ‘n louwarm plek vir 4 of 5 weke. Dit sal dan mooi deurskynend wees. Die soda moet in ‘n geëmailleerde emmer of skottel aangemaak word. Die seep moet die volgende dag na dit aangemaak is uitgesny word en teruggesit in die kassie, en goed toegemaak word vir 4 of 5 weke.

Skuurseep (Monkey Soap)

7 lb. vet, 1 lb. seep-soda, 1 bot. water, 1/2 slypsteen (‘bathbrick’) fyn gepoeier, dan deur ‘n kamerdoek gesif, of ‘n fyn siffie (dit moet baie fyn wees anders krap dit strepe) en 2 lepels ‘whiting’. Los die soda op in die bottel water, smelt dan die vet, laat afkoel; probeer om die warmte van die vet en soda so eenders moontlik te kry. Roer bymekaar. Voer ‘n kassie uit met ‘n nat lap. Nes die seep al mooi dik is, amper klaar, moet dit soos ‘n dik pap wees. Roer nou die fyngesifte slypsteen by en die ‘Whiting’; roer goed; gooi in die gevoerde kissie; dit moet goed dik wees voor dit in die vorm gegooi word, anders sak die slypsteen af. Sny dit in mooi klein handige steentjies die volgende dag. Dis net so goed as die gekoopte.
Een van Mevr. van Tulleken se resepte vir:

Aartappel Seep

7 lb. vet, 14 lb. aartappels, 2 1/2 lb. seepsoda, 3 bottels water. Kook die aartappels met hul skil, trek dan die skille af, maal deur die vleesmeule. Weeg af, smelt die vet, roer die aartappels by tot dit ‘n gladde mengsel is. Meng die soda met ‘n 1/2 bottel water, meet die ander 1 1/2 bottel water en sit by der hand neer. Roer nou by die soda, maar haal eers die pot van die vuur; roer 5 min. gooi dan die helfte van die afgemete water by, roer 10 min, nou die res van die water, roer weer 10 min. gooi dan in kassie met ‘n nat lap gevoer. Laat drie dae.staan voor dit uit te sny; maak mooi droog op ‘n trekkerige plek of in die son (die seep moet die drie dae goed toegemaak word voor dit uitgesny word.)

Dikmelkseep

Neem dikmelk, sit dit op die vuur in ‘n parafienblik. Laat nou amper kook tot dit so’n mooi stywe dik aanmekaar stuk maak; dit moet nie baie taai wees nie. Gooi nou in iets waar die water goed van die melk kan afloop (‘n ander bilk met gaatjies – klein – is goed). Werk mooi saggies met die melk, anders gaan te veel verlore. As dit nou mooi droog afgeloop is, vryf dit dan so fyn as moontlik met die hande. Smelt 2 lb. vet en neem 10 lb. van die fyngevryfde melk. Voeg dit daarby, roer goed deur, neem weg van die vuur; roer by 1 lb. soda opgelos met ‘n bottel water; voeg by en roer vir ‘n uur. Gooi in ‘n kassie gevoer met ‘n doek. Laat drie dae staan en sny dan uit. Droog die stene mooi uit. Dit is goeie seep en skuim baie mooi.
(Al die seepresepte kom in Mevr. Tulleken se boek voor. Daar het pas ‘n 5de (vergrote) uitgawe van die nuttige boek verskyn – dit is werklik ‘n onmisbare besitting vir elke Afrikaanse huisvrou)
Verlede maand het ons in die Ruilkolom vertel hoe iemand wat moeite wil doen om die boeke te verkoop een vir haar beloning sal kry. Of anders kos een 11/-pos vry – bestel van Mevr. van Tulleken, P.K. Holmdene

Hoofstuk 1 (Deur Else Louwrens)
Wie sê die lewe in ‘n mierkat-dorpie is saai en eentonig? Moenie glo nie. Kyk, die son loer net effentjies oor die ver blou rante, maar dis genoeg om vir Swartjie en Spitsbek en Jan Hoepelbeen en Takhaartjie en Nooientjie en nog dertig of veertig ander mierkatte uit hul huisies daar in die bult te lok.
Hier is hul. Een, twee, drie, sit hul penorent soos kerse op hul agterpote. Vinnig draai die koppies heen en weer, agtertoe, vorentoe, alkant-toe. Die lewe is nou eenmaal te interessant. Dit sou al te jammer wees om iets daarvan te mis.

“Swartjie, het jy gehoor?”
“Ja, wat gehoor? Jy weet mos altyd meer as ‘n ander, of jy dink jy weet meer,” en Spitsbek werp hom ‘n venynige bilk toe.
“Die Kriebos meerkatte daaronder in die laagte noem ons dorp mos “Lawaaimakersfort.”

“Begryp jou, Lawaaimakersfort. Hul is net jaloers op ons deftige naam, ‘Rus en Vrede’; hul, wat vir hul ou dorpie nie eens ‘n naam het nie. Papbroekvlakte sou net ‘n goeie naam vir hul wees. Pieperig en afgemaer en papbroekery, dis wat hul is. En wie weet iets van hul afkoms, hul famielies?”

“Ja wie? Ons, Besems, – ons weet! Nie verniet heet ons die Besemstam nie. ‘n Stert soos ‘n besem, elkeen van ons. Kyk vir ou Grootjie. Ses mierkatgeslagte is aan haar te danke, en elkeen van hul, man, vrou, of kind, ‘n opregte Besem, mooi, rats, sterk…”

“En vernuftig ook. Moenie vergeet nie,” val Kannetjie, wat in die tussentyd nader gekom het, horn in die rede.

“En ‘n stert,” en hier waai Spitsbek statig sy rnooi harige stert op en neer – “‘n stert soos ‘n … nou ja, jul weet mos. Jul’s mos ook Besems.’

“Ja, Boetie, ‘n goeie ou stam. Dis die grondige waarheid, al moet ek dit self sê, ek wat Swartjie is. Maar wag, ek moet loop. Tryntjie roep al na my,” en Swartjie maak dat hy wegkom.

“Jy weet dis brekfistyd, man, en jy sit maar en bak in die son, – bak en skinner. Julie mans is almal eners. Kom, die kinders vra kos. Laat ons loop,” en Tryntjie kruip deur die gareboom-laning, gevolg deur haar man en tweeling seuntjies.

Dit word al lewendiger in die mierkat-dorpie. Dit loop en spring en gaat te keer. Eindelik is almal die veld in.

Ai, maar dis ‘n lekker lewe: baie pret, baie gevare ook. Maar dit gee juis die prikkel aan die vcrmaaklikheid daarvan.

Nie ver van hier lê die ou boereplaas van Oom Jan v.d. Vyver. Maar Oom Jan laat die mierkat-volkie maar sy gang gaan. Hy hinder hul nie. “Lewe en laat lewe,” was sy leuse.

Maar daar by hom op die plaas het ook ‘n hond gewoon, ‘n nare rooi- en witgevlekte ding wat van mierkatte niks gehou het nie. Snaakse smaak het sommige mense en diere tog. Sy grootste begeerte was om mierkatte te vang. Juis vandag het hy weer een van sy giere. Hier kom hy aan, kruip-kruip, al nader en nader.

Witpootjie is net met sy brekfis besig – ‘n vet ou muis wat hy al lank in die oog gehad het. Voor jy kan sê “mes” is Aasvoël op hom! Maar ek sê vir jou niks – ou Witpootjie glip vlak onder sy neus weg en woerts om die bos. Maar Aasvoël, ook nie links nie, keer hom voor.

“Nou het ek jou, outjie,” en hy blaf van opgewondenheid en blydskap.
Maar moenie glo nie, Witpootjie fop hom weer. En so gaan die jag voort, agter-toe, vorentoe, tot die kat eindelik sy huis haal en woeps! in is hy. Aasvoël krap en blaf en gaan te keer nes ‘n mal ding, maar dis verniet. “Jep, jep,” blaf Witpootjie terug van binne, net om vir Aasvoël uit te koggel. Ja, die ou diertjie is nog astrant ook.

Nee, Aasvoël, ‘n Besem vang jy so maklik nie. Jy dink miskien aan die dag toe jy een aan die been gehad het en jou klaargemaak het vir ‘n smaaklike middagete, nê? Maar in ‘n kits had die outjie weer handuit geruk – en jy, ou, moes leeg-leeg huistoe draf en ou Hoepelbeen was skoonveld. Maar, “Hoepelbeen” was …

Jokes
Die lesing was verskriklik droog, om die minste daarvan te sê. Die onderwerp was “Die Ontwikkeling van die Mens”, en as ‘n illustrasie wys die geleerde man op die onderskeid tussen die mens en die dier.
“Die mense,” so beduie hy, “maak steeds vordering, terwyl die ander diere bly stilstaan. Neem bv. die esel. Deur al die eeue heen, die hele wêreld deur, bly dit net dieselfde skepsel. Julle het nog nooit, geagte dames en here, julle sal nooit ‘n beter esel sien as wat julle vandag sien nie.”
* * *
Hy: “Vir wat klap jy so? Daardie vrou het akelig gesing.”
Sy : “Ja, ek weet, maar ek is verlief op haar tabberd en ek wil dit graag nog ‘n maal sien.”
* * *
Pa: “Hoe lyk dit, Koos, smaak die medisyne nog so sleg?”
Koos: “Nee, pa, nou gaan dit darem.”
Pa: “Drink jy nog gereeld drie keer op ‘n dag ‘n lepelvol?”
Koos: “Ja, pa, maar my lepel het weggeraak, nou gebruik ek maar ‘n vurk.”
* * *
Tante: “Miena, wie is die luiste in julle klas?”
Miena: “Nee, Tante, ek weet nie.”
Tante: “Wel, dis tog maklik as julle reken wie sit die luiste daarby?”
Miena: “Die juffrou, Tante!”
——————————————————————————–
Letters
Liewe Boerevroutjie,
Nou wil ek ook so’n rukkie met julle saam gesels orn die koffietafel. Ek sien so baie vertel van oumense, nou wil ek ook graag vir julle van my man se Ouma vertel. Sy is, sover ek weet, die oudste oumens in Lydenburg se Distrik, sy is die 12de deser 100 jaar oud, en is nog taamlik sterk vir so ‘n hoë ouderdom. Ouma was ‘n nooie Schoeman en was getroud met Jan Steenkamp. My skoonvader is haar enigste kind. Toe Oupa Steenkamp dood is, is sy weer met Jan Jacobsz getroud, hy is ook al vir jare dood. Ouma bly by my skoonouers. Sy kan nog al die voortrekker-verhale vertel, of dit gister gebeur het, sy was destyds ‘n kind van 11jr jaar.

Mevr Annie Catharina Jacobtz – Gebore Schoeman, gebore 12de Jan 1825

Maar nou wil ek somar ‘n grappie vertel, wat in die Boere-oorlog plaasgevind het. Ouma had een suster wat baie op haar gelyk het, maar sy was toe deur die Engels eweggevoer. Op ‘n dag kom ouma in ‘n winkel en sien haarself in ‘n groot spieel. Sy dog dis haar suster, sy loop na die spieel en steek haar arms uit, en sê “My liewe ou suster, is jy ook hier?” Dit het glo gedreun in die winkel soos die klerke en mense gelag het. – Mevr. Willem Steenkamp.
* * * * * *
Mej. C. Benade skryf : “Ek sien dat die vrouens en meisies saam gesels oor die armblanke, so wil ek ook baie graag iets daaroor skryf, want as almal dink en saamwerk kan die saak opgelos word.
Ek dink die vrouens en meisies moet werk om Suid-Afrika ‘n droë land te maak soos Amerika, want deur die drank is daar duisende kinders wat armoede en gebrek ly. Die vader werk miskien, en sodra as hy die geld gekry het, gaan dit na die kantien. Die kinders kry geen behoorlik opvoeding nie, en volg naderhand hulle vader se voetstappe. Ek het gehoor hulle sê, solank as hulle onder die in vloed van drank is, voel hulle so gelukkig en ryk. Ek dink al die vrouens en meisies moet saamspan om in die saak te werk. Ek wens die “Boerevroutjie” alle seën toe, en hoop sy sal nog lank lewe. Ons almal geniet haar baie.”
Source: Standard Encylopeadia of South Africa and Die Boerevrou Magazine 1922 November & December, 1925 January, March & June, 1926 April & June, December 1931

(*Pretoriuskloof, Graaff-Reinet dist., 17.9.1819 – † Potchefstroom, 19.5.1901), president of the Transvaal republic and of the Orange Free State, was the eldest child of Andries Wilhelmus Jacobus Pretorius, the Voortrekker leader, and his first wife, Christina Petronella de Wit. Because of the pioneering conditions under which he grew up, Pretorius did not receive much formal education, but, nevertheless, was given some elementary schooling, as his earliest correspondence is in very legible handwriting and shows a command of language unusual among his contemporaries. He was continually adding to his store of knowledge and until an advanced age was still receiving tuition, as he did, for example, from J. G. Bantjes, his father’s former secretary. His youth was uneventful, but he learnt to know the native problem at an early age and when he left the Cape Colony at nineteen, he fully realized the underlying motives for the Great Trek.The Pretorius family cannot be regarded as belonging to the first Voortrekkers, for it was only after an exploratory expedition that A. W. J. Pretorius decided to settle in Natal. On 31.10.1838 his party of sixty-eight wagons departed from the colony. After a call for help from Natal , the trek was left behind on the Modder river and, together with his father, P. travelled ahead of the others to the Voortrekker encampments on the Little Tugela. There they arrived on 2.11.1838. Young P. was a member of the commando that took action against Dingane and he also participated in the battle of Blood river, but, while in Natal, he remained in the background.

On 19.12.1841 he married twenty-one-year-old Aletta Magdalena, widow of François Alewyn Smit. Several children were born, but only one daughter, Christina Johanna Petronella (Chrissie) Pretorius, survived, Christiana and Lake Chrissie in the Transvaal are named after her. Pretorius settled on a farm bordering on that of his father and about an hour on horseback (six miles) from Pietermaritzburg. Pretorius must have learnt a good deal from his father, as Andries Pretorius would not have left his son ignorant of the important developments in which he, the father, was involved. Pretorius was aware of the major principles of Voortrekker policy such as economic and political freedom, and relations with Britain and the Bantu.

Believing that some agreement with the British government was possible, Andries Pretorius remained on his farm after the annexation of Natal (1843), but the British native policy created a difficult situation. While Pretorius was attempting to have an interview with the high commissioner, Sir Henry Pottinger, in Grahamstown (September 1847), the position became so serious that the Pretorius family was forced to leave Natal. This exodus took place under the leadership of Pretorius, who proceeded as far as the Tugela river, where his father again joined the family. There, too, the famous interview between Sir Harry Smith and Andries Pretorius took place towards the end of January 1848, shortly before the British annexation of the Transorange. This resulted in some delay and the Pretorius family were able to settle in the Transvaal only during the first months of 1848, Pretorius occupying the farm Kalkheuvel in the vicinity of Magaliesberg, about twenty miles to the west of modern Pretoria, and about twelve miles from his father’s farm, Grootplaas, at the Hartebeespoort.

Pretorius completed his first assignment on behalf of the government in October 1851. By that time the Basuto problem was so acute that the burghers of the Orange River Sovereignty called for the intervention of Andries Pretorius and it was decided to send young Pretorius, together with a certain D. Botha, to the sovereignty to make an opportunity for an interview between Maj. H. D. Warden and Andries Pretorius, who had been outlawed by the British government since August 1848. Warden reacted favourably and undertook to forward any proposal by the Emigrant Boers to the high commissioner in Cape Town. In a sense, this visit of Pretorius’s helped to pave the way for the Sand River convention.

The conclusion in January 1852 of the Sand River convention, by which the independence of the Transvaal was formally recognized by Britain, caused initially some measure of dissatisfaction to the north of the Vaal river. After Andries Pretorius and A. H. Potgieter had become reconciled, however, prospects for the immediate future brightened considerably and for this reason the death of the two leaders in such a short time was so tragic. The death of his father on 23.7.1853 almost immediately involved Pretorius, as his son, in his country’s affairs. On 8.8.1853 he was unanimously nominated commandant-general in his father’s place, pending confirmation by the volksraad. The following day he was sworn in as such by the interim committee of the volksraad and, when he made his appearance in the krygsraad (‘military council’) a day later, he was elected its chairman by that body.

From the beginning Pretorius showed an extraordinary ability to deal with national problems. A factor which at this stage hindered national unity was the lack of a central site for the volksraad. When the public and the general assembly of the N.H. Kerk asked for a suitable site, Pretorius acted somewhat hastily and informed the volksraad at its next meeting that he had bought two centrally situated farms for this purpose. To his great disappointment the volksraad did not, however, share his enthusiasm and postponed the matter sine die.

In the same way his attempts to achieve unity with the O.F.S. were impeded by hasty action. From his father he had inherited the desire to combine into one large whole the Boer communities resulting from the Great Trek. In this, too, he succeeded his father at a very critical stage, for towards the end of 1853 Sir George Russell Clerk, the special commissioner, was abandoning the O.F.S., and openly hinted that there would be no objection by Britain to the union of the two Boer states. Pretorius wished to use this opportunity to share in the discussions on the British withdrawal, but this was not granted. His ideals were shared by many in the O.F.S. and were expressed by the provisional government on the day after independence had been declared. The first elected volksraad of the O.F.S. subscribed to the ideal of union by sending Paul Bester and M. Wessels to the Transvaal in June 1854. They were the bearers of a document which they placed before the Transvaal volksraad at Rustenburg and which could be interpreted as indicating that the O.F.S. was thinking in terms of union.

Although this fitted in perfectly with Pretorius’s projects, he was not in a position to carry the matter any further. Within the Transvaal new groups were developing. This not only frustrated Pretorius’s plans for amalgamating with the O.F.S., but also delayed the much more important task he had set himself: to provide a constitution for a Transvaal republic. This is to a certain extent attributable to the arrival in May 1853 of the Rev. Dirk van der Hoff as the Transvaal ‘s first minister of religion. Instead of consolidating the republic this event caused internal tension and the formation of dissenting religious groups.

When, initially, the Transvaal succeeded in obtaining a minister, assistance was promised from the Cape Colony on condition that the Transvaal parishes would be incorporated in the Cape synod of the N.G. Kerk. This condition was accepted but scarcely a week later, on the arrival of the Rev. Van der Hoff, the consistory of Potchefstroom decided, with Pretorius’s moral support, to contest incorporation in the Cape synod. This resolution was confirmed by the volksraad at its sitting in Rustenburg (August 1853), in the absence of the representatives from Lydenburg. Scarcely a month later, at a meeting of the full volksraad in Lydenburg, the resolutions of the previous meeting were endorsed, except that renouncing the Cape synod. In this matter the Lydenburg section wished provisionally to temporize. Notwithstanding this, the breach with the Cape synod was ratified (November 1853) in the presence of the Lydenburg representatives. On the surface all seemed well and the Transvaal, as far as church affairs were concerned, was apparently a unified whole.

Unfortunately J. A. Smellekamp made his appearance in Lydenburg at this stage and the personal feud between him and the Rev. Van der Hoff spread so widely that the whole of the Transvaal was involved. Ultimately Smellekamp was reprimanded and fined by the volksraad and, on his failure to pay, was banished from the republic. This, however, happened only after the krygsraad, of which Pretorius was chairman, had stepped in and taken the Rev. Van der Hoff under its protection at the consistory’s request.

Here Pretorius was not a statesman, and allowed himself to be involved in a personal feud. The old Transvaal differences between east and west, already obvious in the days of Andries Pretorius, were revived. The Lydenburg faction headed by H. T. Bührmann, blamed Pretorius for his actions but at the same time held the Rev. Van der Hoff responsible for Smellekamp’s banishment. It was contended that the best way of demonstrating disapproval was for Lydenburg to call its own minister and again to seek its inclusion in the Cape synod. Thus the authority of the volksraad was challenged and the unity of the state destroyed.

During these troubles (September 1854) Pretorius was paying the O.F.S. a friendly visit, and although in certain quarters this visit was associated with sinister motives, it proved a success. On his return, and before he could consider the grievances of Lydenburg, the shocking murder of Field-Cornet Hermanus Potgieter took place. Throughout the Transvaal native truculence flared up and even the people of the western Transvaal were forced to gather in laers for safety. Because of this and, in February 1855, a serious outbreak of lung sickness which paralysed normal transport, it was impossible to summon the volksraad and, in effect, the country was for some time without a government.

Only approximately a year after the previous meeting of the volksraad, which had ended on a comparatively minor note, was a session arranged (1.6.1855). Again there was dissension because of the presence of Jacobus Stuart, who was seeking only his own advancement, and in this was opposed by Lydenburg. To eliminate Lydenburg’s opposition Stuart formulated a case against the Lydenburg representatives, basing it on their actions in connection with the Cape synod. He skilfully involved Pretorius and succeeded in having the Lydenburg representatives declared unfit to hold any public position. Because of his own actions Pretorius became more and more deeply involved in quarrels that were to make his personal position almost unbearable.

The presence of Stuart was, nevertheless, not without its significance. As a result of his efforts a commission was nominated in September 1855 to prepare a draft constitution for the state. Pretorius, not a member, enthusiastically supported the commission and pleaded for acceptance by the volksraad of the draft bill; this, in fact, took place in Potchefstroom in November 1855. This constitution formed the basis for Pretorius’s election as provisional state president on 15.11.1855. A few days later the volksraad showed further signs of its support by approving the establishment of a village on the two farms that P. had bought more than two years before and stipulating that it should be named Pretoria after his father.

Unfortunately there was as yet no national unity, as the support that Pretorius enjoyed came from only a part of the community. The Lydenburg section displayed a chilly indifference, while Stephanus Schoeman, who was in control at Soutpansberg after the death of Pieter Johannes Potgieter, also rejected the new constitution.

Thus, notwithstanding its constitution, the Transvaal was still more or less without a government in March 1855. The course of events had, however, convinced Pretorius of his blunders and in a spirit of sincere remorse he strove to achieve reconciliation with Schoeman and Lydenburg. Because of his efforts a representative meeting was held at Potchefstroom in December 1856. A new constitution, based on Stuart’s draft, was prepared and provision was made for a state president and an executive council. As prematurely as on the previous occasion, Pretorius was again elected state president and Schoeman, although absent, commandant-general. Pretorius was sworn in on 6.1.1857 and on that same day the new flag, the Vierkleur, designed by the Rev. Van der Hoff, was officially hoisted for the first time.

In this way a major ambition of Pretorius’s was realized: the state had a constitution and, theoretically, had sound foundations. Feelings were, however, mixed at this time, as Lydenburg broke away from the republic on 17.12.1856 and Schoeman ignored the resolutions of the national assembly.

With this as the background Pretorius committed the greatest political blunder of his career. In the O.F.S. Pres. J. N. Boshof. accepted the so-called citizenship act to consolidate his country against the rest of the world but at the same time he embarrassed Transvaal burghers with property in the O.F.S. The interim volksraad committee of the western Transvaal consequently sent M. A. Goetz and Pretorius to the O.F.S. amicably to discuss the matter with the government. Pretorius hastily left for Bloemfontein without making an effort at reconciliation with Schoeman, who was declared a rebel during Pretorius’s absence and, in turn, blockaded the whole of the northern Transvaal.

Pretorius’s visit to the O.F.S. developed into an awkward attempt at amalgamating the two republics. Encouraged by supporters in the O.F.S. he, without justification, claimed the O.F.S., but this claim was contemptuously rejected by Boshof. Pretorius was forced to beat a retreat in somewhat humiliating fashion, but not before dangerous threats had been made on both sides.

After a hasty return to Potchefstroom Pretorius visited Natal to negotiate common boundaries, but his absence did not calm ruffled feelings. Boshof, in particular, was nervous and did everything in his power to isolate Pretorius while he himself tried to contact Pretorius’s enemies, Schoeman and the Lydenburg section. During Pretorius’s absence his lieutenants compromised him through their clumsy and dangerous handling of Boshof, acting without Pretorius’s knowledge or assistance. In this way they made an awkward situation even more difficult. This quarrel almost led to an armed clash when burghers were called to arms on either side of the Vaal and two commandos faced each other on the Renoster river (25.5.1857). Sound common sense, however, won the day and the breach was healed when, on 1.6.1857, Pretorius recognized the O.F.S. government and territory.

Peace between Pretorius and the O.F.S. to some extent checkmated his Transvaal opponents and left the political initiative in his hands. During the following few months Pretorius for the first time showed signs of diplomatic skill. The blockade of Soutpansberg was raised, the proclamation against Schoeman was revoked, and an agreement was entered into with him (1.7.1857) whereby all disputes would be referred to an independent court which would sit at Rustenburg in November 1857. When, in spite of the agreement, Schoeman sought the active support of Lydenburg in connection with the court case, Pretorius acted quickly and four days before Schoeman and Lydenburg reached an agreement he proposed a compromise with Lydenburg to the volksraad. As the volksraad was enthusiastic, Pretorius invited Lydenburg to a discussion that would coincide with the court session. When, at Schoeman’s request, the session was postponed until the following year, Pretorius took the opportunity of sending a delegation to Lydenburg and subsequently receiving a Lydenburg deputation at Potchefstroom (21.2.1857). There Pretorius was contrite; he admitted complicity in the Smellekamp case and in the condemnation of the Lydenburg members of the volksraad. In this way he cleared the air and managed to effect a reconciliation. Instead of being an enemy Lydenburg was more likely to be an ally against Schoeman at the pending session of the court. At court developments proved unsatisfactory. Both parties clearly indicated that they would not accept an unfavourable verdict, the court was dissolved, and the respective military councils took over. A commission of twelve was nominated to review the laws of the land. The outcome of the commission’s work, which was completed on 13.2.1858, was a complete victory for Pretorius Practically unaltered, the 1856 constitution was accepted as the law of the land. For the third time Pretorius was elected as state president, while Schoeman on this occasion accepted the post of commandant-general.

After this major success it was a suitable time for Pretorius to continue with his plans for reunion with Lydenburg. Before this could be achieved, however, clashes between the O.F.S. and the Basuto compelled Pretorius to visit the O.F.S. once again. The O.F.S. was in such a predicament that amalgamation with the Transvaal could have followed Pretorius’s approaches, if, as Britain’s representative, Sir George Grey had not prevented it by threatening the possible suspension of the conventions of Sand river and Bloemfontein.

While Pretorius was away in the O.F.S. relations with Lydenburg deteriorated because of the divided loyalty of Utrecht. While the territory as a whole joined Lydenburg (8.5.1858), a group of inhabitants remained loyal to Pretorius He initiated a meeting between the executive councils of Lydenburg and the T.R. on the farm Onspoed (26.2.1859). A joint commission under his leadership was sent to Utrecht and satisfactorily solved the difficulties there.

Thus reunion was only a question of time. At Onspoed a basis had been initiated and was completed on 24.11.1859. Pretorius was the leading figure in these negotiations and was generous enough to admit past mistakes and to correct them. Although he made concessions on numerous points, Lydenburg joined the unified state on the basis of his constitution and took part in the session at Pretoria, on 4.4.1860, of the first combined volksraad.

Meanwhile, on 12.12.1859, Pretorius was also elected state president of the O.F.S. by an overwhelming majority, after the resignation of Boshof. The Transvaal volksraad granted Pretorius six months’ leave, but on 9.4.1860, after a report that Pretorius had been sworn in as state president of the O.F.S., decided to suspend him as state president until September. Pretorius took umbrage at this and concluded that the dual presidency was not supported by the Transvaal. Convinced that the O.F.S. needed his assistance more, he, on 15.9.1860, requested his honourable discharge as president of the T.R. and left for Bloemfontein. As president of the O.F.S. for almost three years he did splendid work. With great skill he brought several rebellious native chiefs to heel, and, with Moshweshwe especially, he ratified a boundary advantageous to the O.F.S. He examined the critical financial position of the O.F.S. and introduced limited, but profitable reforms. As a result of his interest education also benefited. The complete political chaos which developed in the Transvaal after his departure, however, prevented him from giving his undivided attention to the O.F.S.

Things came to such a pass in the Transvaal that he resigned as president of the O.F.S. on 1.10.1862, but subsequently allowed himself to be persuaded to withdraw his resignation and to proceed to the Transvaal on two months’ leave. But he arrived too late to avert a clash between the Staatsleger (‘state army’) and Volksleger (‘people’s army’), though he did his utmost to calm their feelings. As Pretorius had identified himself with the rebels in this civil strife he was, however, not acceptable to the Staatsleger as a mediator. Because of rumours that his life was threatened, he retired to the O.F.S. with the rebel leader, Stephanus Schoeman. Following an urgent request he returned to the Transvaal, where, on 24.11.1862, he acted as chairman at a meeting between the warring factions. There it was decided to refer all disputes to a special court. When hostilities broke out once again after the temporary peace, Pretorius again resigned as president of the O.F.S. (5.3.1863), but allowed himself to be persuaded a second time to withdraw his resignation. On being granted special leave he left for Potchefstroom, where he finally resigned as state president of the O.F.S. (15.4.1863).

Pretorius’s desire for a calm, quiet life was not to be granted. The extraordinary court session of January 1863 ruled that a state president should be elected. Pretorius was nominated, but W. C. Janse van Rensburg was elected. As irregularities had, however, occurred, another election was held on 1.10.1863. Van Rensburg again obtained a majority, but continued rumours of tampering with the ballot papers moved Comdt. Jan Willem Viljoen, of the western Transvaal, to advance with a commando that clashed with the Staatsleger on the Crocodile river (5.1.1864). Blood was shed; this catastrophe brought all the parties to their senses, and peace was made, a new presidential election was announced, and on 29.3.1864 Pretorius was again elected.

On his readmittance to the government of the T.R. he found many problems awaiting him. The most urgent was undoubtedly the dismal economic position, which had been gravely damaged by the civil strife. To improve the country’s financial position it had, in 1855 and 1857, been considered, under Pretorius’s leadership, whether, with state-owned land as its backing, paper money should be issued. Nothing, however, came of this idea. At the time of the civil war, when the treasury was quite empty, Schoeman was compelled to issue mandaten , which, without security, had no value as currency. To save the situation Pretorius persuaded the volksraad in June 1865 to issue paper money and to recall all mandaten. The appearance of paper money did not solve the problem as the security was insufficient and forgeries often occurred. In April 1866 the volksraad decided to issue new notes in British currency, while it was decided in 1870 to have these banknotes printed on proper banknote paper in Britain. The issuing of paper money was, to a great extent, only a temporary measure to save the national economy, and more constructive measures were considered under Pretorius’s leadership. Because of his ignorance of economic matters the initiative usually came from others, but he seized on new possibilities for development with surprising comprehension. Alexander McCorkindale’s schemes played an important part in this connection. Since 1864 the government had concluded with him arrangements such as the settlement of immigrants in Nieuw Schotland (New Scotland) in the eastern Transvaal, industrial development, a river route to the East coast, a harbour and a commercial bank, but these projects had not yet come to anything by 1871. Pretorius exerted himself to get citizens of the republic to take the lead in economic matters. He set an example when he suggested the possibility of coffee production to the volksraad after he had paid a visit to the Soutpansberg. Because of his zeal a large number of concessions were granted, but not much was effected. In 1866 several agreements were entered into between Pretorius and burghers of the republic, the intention being to establish an agricultural and animal husbandry company, a mining company, and a land and immigration company.

Internationally Pretorius was successful in getting the republic recognized as an independent state by Holland (29.10.1869), France (29.11.1869), Belgium (17.12.1869), the United States of America (19.11.1870) and Germany (29.1A 871). In return Pretorius appointed representatives abroad with well-disposed powers. Consulates were established in Britain, Ireland and Antwerp. Pretorius also strove for peaceful relations with neighbouring states and for this purpose consuls were appointed in Natal and the Cape Colony.

With Britain, however, no permanent peace appeared to be possible. The convention policy of 1852 was, in course of time, regarded in Britain as a mistake and pressure was exerted to bring the British government to change its views. The accusation that slavery was being practised in the Transvaal Pretorius successfully refuted, but could not free himself from the economic stranglehold of the British colonial harbours in Natal and in the Cape Colony. His claim to part of the customs duties on goods going to the Transvaal was blandly refused. Because of this the Transvaal began to turn to its Portuguese neighbour and tried to find its own harbour. In 1861 an unsuccessful effort had been made to obtain St Lucia bay for this purpose. When McCorkindale’s ambitious scheme of 1867 came to nothing, Pretorius himself acted. Convinced that the southern section of Delagoa bay, into which the partly navigable Maputa river flowed, was no man’s land, he, on 29.4.1868, extended the boundaries of the Transvaal so as to include the Maputa river up to where it flows into the Indian ocean. By proclamation he extended the boundaries of the republic as far as Lake Ngami in the west.

These annexations immediately roused Britain and Portugal, but with totally different results. Britain maintained that Pretorius’s actions menaced her supremacy and replied with threats and counter-demonstrations which weakened a relationship already strained. Discussions with the Portuguese were, on the contrary, quite friendly, and a permanent agreement was reached on 29.7.1869: a ‘treaty of peace, friendship, trade and frontiers’ was concluded between the republic and Portugal.

The demands created by these circumstances became, in the long run, too exacting for Pretorius. At times he was autocratic, but easily became the victim of any selfish adviser. When his administration was sharply criticized in 1867, he proved touchy, impatient and so unwilling to listen to criticism that he resigned as president on 29.11.1867. This elicited a half-hearted response from the volksraad and Pretorius quickly seized an opportunity of withdrawing his resignation. Although the volksraad showed increasing signs of indifference towards the president, the burghers still supported him. At the usual five-yearly election in 1869 Pretorius gained an overwhelming majority, securing more than double the number of votes gained by the other thirteen candidates.

But the writing was on the wall. Pretorius’s inability effectively to control national affairs is proved very clearly by the diamond dispute which arose in 1870. The Transvaal had, as an interested party, to deal with many intrigues which proved too much for Pretorius. On his own, moreover, he signed an act of submission wherein provision was made for arbitration on claims to the diamond-fields. In 1871 the lieutenant-governor of Natal, R.W. Keate, who was appointed the final arbiter, passed judgement against the Transvaal and, by so doing, roused a storm of opposition against Pretorius. In his absence the volksraad discussed whether he could remain president of the republic any longer. In seemingly bewildered fashion Pretorius concurred in this doubt and admitted that, because of altered circumstances ‘his capabilities were now quite inadequate’. This confession marks the temporary disappearance of Pretorius from public life (20.11.1871). He had shown himself to be a man devoted, enthusiastic and conscientious, but with too many limitations to be a statesman.

After his resignation he disappeared into the background, but after the annexation of the Transvaal in 1877 he, surprisingly quickly, returned to prominence. During the period of passive resistance he was elected chairman of the committee of Boer leaders; he was also a member of the committee that negotiated with Sir Bartle Frere at Hennops river (12.4.1879), and acted as chairman of the national assembly at Wonderfontein on 15.12.1879. For his share in these proceedings he was accused of treason by the British and imprisoned, but was almost immediately released on bail. On 13.12.1880, when the Transvaal burghers challenged Britain, and the restored government was placed in the hands of a triumvirate, Pretorius was a member of it, together with P. J. Joubert and S. J. P. Kruger. In this capacity he was a fellow signatory of the peace terms at Laingsnek, at the conclusion of the war on 21.3.1881, and also of the Pretoria convention (3.8.1881).

Although relatively young and physically strong, he retired from political life and went to live at Potchefstroom. He married the widow Hartog(t) on 26.11.1890.

During the final years of the republic’s existence he was appointed acting historian and received an annuity of £300. In a way the appointment was recognition of services rendered and his emolument was more of a pension. He, however, took his work seriously, moved temporarily to Pretoria and managed to collect a large number of valuable documents. Of these, few have been preserved for posterity; a valuable manuscript consisting of information from him was lost in A. D. W. Wolmaran’s house during the Second Anglo-Boer War, when the British occupied Pretoria, Pretorius’s personal documents were damaged by British troops on the farm of his son-in-law when, to keep him under surveillance they took the ex-president to Pretoria.

In his old age he was staying with a friend when, on a cold night in May 1901, he was aroused from sleep by suspicious British troops who, on the stoep, interrogated him for two hours in the cold. This proved too much for the constitution of this veteran of eighty-one; the next morning he said he felt ill and he died a few days later.

He is not one of South Africa’s greatest figures. Every unbiased observer will admit that many limitations made him increasingly incapable of being the head of a state under more advanced conditions. Both mentally and intellectually he was inadequately fitted to take an independent stand and for this very reason he, on the one hand, was imposed on by others, while, on the other, he offended his own people by his touchiness and alienated whole groups through impulsive and injudicious decisions. Nevertheless a place of honour has at all times to be allotted to him in the history of the Transvaal. In pioneering conditions he had an almost instinctive sense of duty and this compelled him to become a leader because he realized that there was work to be done. He never lacked patriotism and a dutiful spirit of self-sacrifice. With the limited means at his disposal he laid stronger foundations, both politically and otherwise, than any of his contemporaries.

A memorial in honour of Pretorius was erected by the state on his grave in the Potchefstroom cemetery and on 4.12.1913 this was unveiled by Gen. Louis Botha, prime minister of the Union of South Africa.

Even in old age Pretorius was an imposing figure with clear blue eyes, a well-formed head and strong features. There are quite a number of portraits of him, dating from the sixties to his more advanced years; they are, for example, to be found in the collections of the Pretoria city council, the S.P. Engelbrecht collection in the N.H. Kerk archives, Pretoria, and in the Transvaal archives, Pretoria. An oil-painting of Pretorius standing in the volksraad, which was in the Raadsaal, Pretoria, until 1900, became the possession of the Transvaal museum until, in 1964, it was returned to the Raadsaal after Jacobina van Tilburg had made a copy for the National Museum of Cultural History, Pretoria. There is a bronze bust in the possession of the city council of Pretoria. In front of the Pretoria city hall a statue (by Coert Steynberg) was unveiled in November 1955 at the time of the Pretoria centenary celebrations.

Marthinus Wessel Pretorius

Source: Dictionary of South African Biographies (Volume I)

Summary

What is the significance of the Great Trek in a demo-cratic South Africa of the 21st century? This article examines the different perspectives – historical to modern – on the movement of Boer/Afrikaner trekkers from the Cape Colony into the interior of southern Africa from 1835/6.

The movement of Boer/ Afrikaner trekkers from the Cape Colony into the interior of southern Africa from 1835/6 became known as ‘the Great Trek’ for three main reasons:

- From soon after the event, writers called it ‘great’ because they wanted to distinguish it from earlier Boer treks, for the Boer people had been moving into the interior for well over a century by the time the Great Trek took place. (Another way of distinguishing this movement from the earlier treks was by calling the earlier trekkers ‘trekboers’ and those who went on the Great Trek ‘Voortrekkers’.)

- Secondly, the Great Trek was an organised affair, not individuals acting on their own. It was an ‘emigration’, as the most important South African historian of the nineteenth century, George McCall Theal, called it: the ‘emigrants’ did not want to break all ties with the Cape Colony, but did intend to set up new states in the interior.

- The third and most important reason why historians have used the term ‘Great Trek’ is because of what they saw to be its significance.

Early account

The main overall account of the Great Trek for half a century was Eric Walker’s book of that name, published in 1934, on the eve of the centenary of the event. Though he had come to South Africa from England, Walker was caught up in what he saw to be the ‘romance’ of what he called a ‘great adventure’. He did point out that fewer people went on the Great Trek than on other treks that took place at roughly the same time, though he did not know – and neither do we – precisely how many black servants accompanied the Boers into the interior.

Even though Walker’s Great Trek included Boer migration from the Cape colony over more than a decade (1835 to 1848), only some twelve thousand Boers were involved in that process. More Mormons left Missouri and Illinois, and they moved together over greater distances than the Boers. They also encountered more significant physical obstacles. The Voortrekkers advanced by what Walker called ‘easy stages’, and he tended to play down the military challenges from the African societies they encountered in the interior.

Walker related the Great Trek of the early nineteenth century to the trek of Afrikaners from the countryside to the cities in his own day, but he did not extend his comparisons, either to black treks in nineteenth-century South Africa or to the treks of Native American people in the United States, let alone the movement of black people from the South to the North of the United States in the early twentieth century.

Nor did Walker concede that in a sense the Great Trek was reversed by the British conquest of the Boer republics in the course of the Anglo-Boer/South African War, for if the aim of the Trek had been to establish independent states in the interior, that independence was brought to an end in 1900. Walker claimed, instead, that that the Great Trek ‘earned its title’, for it was ‘the central event in the history of European man in South Africa ‘, which ‘set the stage for all that was to follow in South Africa from that day to this’.

Modern perspective

From our vantage point, seventy-five years after Walker wrote, this appears a ridiculously Eurocentric vision.

Afrikaner perspective

That the Great Trek continues to resonate among Afrikaners can be seen, say, in the autobiography of F W de Klerk, for whom stories of the Trek were central in his childhood – three De Klerks were among those Voortrekkers killed by the Zulu king Dingane in 1838 – and whose earliest memory is of being taken in 1938 to the laying of the cornerstone of the Voortrekker Monument in Pretoria, at the ceremony to mark the centenary of the Great Trek. For De Klerk, the ‘last Trek’ of the title of his book published in 2000 was the journey that took him to the inauguration of Nelson Mandela in May 1994 – a journey of a new kind for Afrikaners, this time not to win territory but to survive into the twenty-first century by surrendering political power.

From a very different perspective, Norman Etherington, Professor of History at the University of Western Australia, rejects the idea that there was one ‘Great Trek’. For him, the Boer ‘Great Trek’ was but one among a number of treks that took place in early nineteenth-century southern Africa that deserve that name. He wishes to get away from an ‘ethnic’ interpretation, which privileges the importance of the Boer Great Trek, and instead to bring together separate histories – those involving white people and those involving blacks.

He argues that the various treks were part of one overall process of change, and that the root cause of the ‘transformation’ involved was expansive forces coming ultimately from Europe. The Voortrekkers were not backward economically, he maintains, but helped carry capitalism into the interior.

White presence established

Such arguments have not convinced most historians. In passing, N Etherington in his The Great Treks. The Transformation of Southern Africa, 1815-1854 does in fact recognise that the Boer trek had consequences out of proportion to its size. One does not have to accept the exaggerated views of Walker, let alone all the mythology that Afrikaner nationalists wrapped around the Great Trek, to accept that the Boer Trek was a fundamental event in the long history of white conquest of southern Africa.

It carried whites into the far interior, and involved in it was massive defeats of the Zulu, among others, and much dispossession. Though the white presence in the interior for long remained fragile – we now know that a number of African states, including the Zulu and the Pedi ones, continued to pose significant challenges to white authority long after the trekkers were established – the whites were not to be dislodged (except briefly in the Soutpansberg).

White rule firmed over time over all of what is now South Africa, and lasted for over a century, and a significant white presence survives after the transfer of political power from whites to blacks in 1994.

Long-term consequences

From the perspective of the early twenty-first century, the Great Trek no longer seems a central event in the history of South Africa, but Etherington’s desire to downplay its significance will not wash. Yes, it cannot be seen in isolation, as an event only in the history of those who became known as Afrikaners, but must be seen in the context of other treks, by the Rolong, the Griqua and others. Yet the more it is seen in context, the more the Great Trek stands out as the most important trek of all, because of its long-term consequences.

It was not until 1910 that a united South Africa came into being, but such a state was prefigured and made possible by those who moved out from the Cape into the interior in the late 1830s and early 1840s and set up new white states in other parts of what became South Africa. The Great Trek, therefore, remains important.

(Prof Christopher Saunders)

Extra information:

The Voortrekkers

The ‘Voortrekkers’ were a group of some 10 000 Afrikaners and about 4 000 coloured servants who left the border districts of the Cape Colony from 1835 onward in an organised manner to seek a fixed abode north and east of the Orange River.

They left for various reasons, but as a result a commitment to a common destiny and an own identity, different from the British policy, took root among them. They believed that they could realise their values, characteristics and interests only in a free and independent state.

The Voortrekkers left the Colony in five main groups. The leaders of the first groups were Louis Trichardt, Hendrik Potgieter, Gert Maritz, Piet Retief and Piet Uys. The first Voortrekker government was elected on December 2, 1836, at Thaba Nchu by the followers of Hendrik Potgieter and Gert Maritz, then totalling about 1 400 to 2 000. A burgher council of seven members was elected, Potgieter became laager commandant and Maritz was elected president of the burgher council and also magistrate.

On April 17, 1837, the second Voortrekker government was established at the Vet River. Retief was elected governor and military commander, while Maritz was elected magistrate and president of the so-called Council of Policy (later Volksraad) of seven members. Potgieter remained commandant of his trek party. On June 6, 1837, a temporary constitution, the so-called Nine Articles, was adopted. Piet Uys did not acknowledge this constitution.

Differences of opinion on the direction of the trek led to every leader trekking on his own with his followers. Retief trekked over the Drakensberg to Natal, while Potgieter, Maritz and Uys trekked in the direction of the Vaal River. While the Voortrekkers in Natal were involved in a ferocious fight with the Zulus, the so-called Council of Representation of the People, consisting of 24 members, and a constitution came into existence in February/March 1838. This Council became the Volksraad of the Republic of Natalia. A commandant-general would be the military commander, but no provision was made for a head of state.

In the meantime the Winburg-Potchefstroom Republic came into being. Chief commandant Potgieter was assisted by a war council of 12 members. In October 1840 the two republic united: Andries Pretorius was to be chief commandant of Natalia and Potgieter would hold the same position for Winburg-Potchefstroom. The war council became the adjunct council of the Natal Volksraad. After the British annexation of Natal in 1843 the adjunct council proclaimed its independence in April 1844 and adopted the 33 Articles as legal code.

The Natal Voortrekkers left Natal in groups and settled to the west of the Drakensberg. Potgieter trekked further north and founded Ohrigstad in 1845. There more dissension among the followers of Potgieter and the Voortrekkers from Natal arose because the latter group was in favour of the supreme authority of an elected volksraad, while Potgieter as chief commandant would be the supreme authority. Potgieter could not have his way and founded Schoemansdal in 1848, while some Natalians founded Lydenburg.

After Sir Harry Smith had annexed the later Orange Free State on February 3, 1848, Pretorius and his followers departed for Transvaal. Political differences and rivalry now came strongly to the fore. Representatives of the three most important groups (the Pretorius followers of the Western Transvaal, the Potgieter followers of Soutpansberg and the Lydenburgers) held various meetings to promote political unity among the Voortrekkers. Despite Potgieter’s absence, a United Confederation of all the Voortrekkers north of the Vaal River was established under a Representative Volksraad.

Dissension continued, mainly over the question of whether the office of chief commandant should be retained. In January 1851 the Volksraad found a solution to the problem by nominating four commandant-generals, namely Potgieter (Soutpansberg), Pretorius (Magaliesberg and Mooi River ), W J Joubert (Lydenburg) and J A Enslin (Marico). Because the government was ineffectual, Pretorius took the lead in negotiating with the British government regarding acknowledgement of the independence of Transvaal.

This was recognised in January 1852 and that of the later Orange Free State in 1854. The constitution adopted in 1853 for the ZAR was in broad terms a repetition of the executive arrangements of the Republic of Natalia and Ohrigstad. The Voortrekkers had therefore succeeded in obtaining their freedom and independence. At the same time white presence was extended in the interior from the Fish to the Limpopo Rivers and from the Natal coast to the Kalahari Desert.

Source: South African Encyclopedia
(http://www.saencyclopedia.co.za/content/home.aspx)

The Voortrekkers crossing the Drakensberg, by W H Coetzer. (Ensiklopedie van die Wêreld)