Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 105

General discussions discuss Dutch Colonization of Africa in the General Forums forums; From another thread . . . Originally Posted by puritanpilgrim What was wrong with the Dutch colonizing Africa? I hope your kidding. I get the ...

  1. #1
    brianeschen's Avatar
    brianeschen is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,182

    Dutch Colonization of Africa

    From another thread . . .
    Quote Originally Posted by puritanpilgrim View Post
    What was wrong with the Dutch colonizing Africa?
    I hope your kidding.
    I get the feeling I asked a question with an obvious answer, so I am ready to be educated.

    The reason I asked the original question is because the only information I have heard about the Dutch in Africa has been 1) the slave trade which they participated in and 2) the Dutch Calvinist settlement of South Africa to which they brought Christian culture (with the help of some Huguenots).

    I believe the slave trade was clearly wrong, but can't see the South Africa case as wrong. What am I missing?

    Thanks for your help.
    Brian Eschen
    Ruling Elder, PCA
    California

    "When the Lion roars, all the beasts of the forest tremble: when King Jesus speaks, the Kings of the earth should keep silent."
    -Samuel Davies to King George II (1755)

  2. #2
    Kevin's Avatar
    Kevin is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    6,028
    IMO the process of colonisation was a mixed bag. Most of the English colonies, as well as most of the Dutch, I would consider positive.

    Iberian colonies not so much.
    TE Kevin Rogers
    MNA Church Planter
    Redeemer Community Church
    Moncton NB

  3. #3
    Pergamum's Avatar
    Pergamum is offline. Ordinary Guy (TM)
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    14,979
    If we changed the wording to "What's wrong with one culture invading another" the answers might be more obvious. What's wrong with one culture exploring places where they can dominate and use the local peoples for their own gain. That is what, by and large, most Dutch colonization consisted of.

    I don't know about Africa, but the Dutch were oppressive in Indonesia. Islam did not enter a terribly long time into Indonesia before Christianity entered, but the Dutch missionaries, riding on the same boats as the oppressors, made the population move towards Islam and today it is the largest Muslim nation on earth, despite hundreds of years of Dutch colonization. The British colonies in SE Asia fared much better and the British set up much of the infrastructure in Singapore and Malaysia.

    I would say that the British were much kinder colonizers, but they fought wars to help keep the Chinese hooked on Opium becuase it helped their own pocketbooks.
    Pergamum


    "If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
    -- David Livingstone

  4. #4
    Puritan Sailor's Avatar
    Puritan Sailor is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,269
    Quote Originally Posted by brianeschen View Post
    From another thread . . .
    Quote Originally Posted by puritanpilgrim View Post
    What was wrong with the Dutch colonizing Africa?
    I hope your kidding.
    I get the feeling I asked a question with an obvious answer, so I am ready to be educated.

    The reason I asked the original question is because the only information I have heard about the Dutch in Africa has been 1) the slave trade which they participated in and 2) the Dutch Calvinist settlement of South Africa to which they brought Christian culture (with the help of some Huguenots).

    I believe the slave trade was clearly wrong, but can't see the South Africa case as wrong. What am I missing?

    Thanks for your help.
    Colonizing an uninhabited land would be fine. But invading a land, imposing your culture upon another, and oppressing them as second class citizens or slaves is certainly wrong. The result was great animosity toward Christianity because of self-proclaimed "Christians" invading their land and treating them without the dignity that comes with being made in the image of God. The true gospel was/is often rejected because of what the Western "Christian" culture did in their imperialism. Obviously there is no grounds in Christianity to justify such atrocities. That was the result of cultural arrogance and pride. But the damage has been done. Thankfully, the Lord is overruling those evil acts to bring forth indigenous churches who are now teaching us Westerners a thing or two about what it means to take up our cross.
    Patrick
    MDiv, RTS Jackson
    Pastor, Grace Presbyterian Church (OPC), Lisbon, NY

    "He does well, that discourses of Christ; but he does infinitely better, that by experimental knowledge, feeds and lives on Christ." Thomas Brooks.
    "Let us not please ourselves that we have deep understandings, but let us shew our understandings by our practice." Richard Sibbes

  5. #5
    Archlute's Avatar
    Archlute is offline. Puritanboard Senior
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    Hmmm. Methinks that a few of you have been drinking a wee bit too much from anti-Western, revisionist historians. The presentations above seem a little unbalanced in favor of the "lets bash all things white, male, and Christian" crowd, than they ought to be. It reminds me of courses I took in my undergrad studies, right alongside of the our "gay and lesbian" and "minority" studies.

    Much good was done for many of those societies, and it should be admitted that not all cultures are worth saving as to many of the practices that make them a distinct culture (think elements of Islamic society that prepare their young women for their wedding night with needle and thread, if you know what I'm talking about...) Many of the colonized peoples were wrapped up in gross idolatry and paganism, which distinctly shaped those cultures, and because of which we should be glad that they were often subdued and changed, even if not always in an ideal manner.
    Last edited by Archlute; 02-11-2009 at 05:40 PM. Reason: Sheesh. How can a seminary grad misspell "idolatry"?
    Archlute

  6. #6
    he beholds's Avatar
    he beholds is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,101
    I would say what was wrong with the Dutch colonization of Africa was the part of the motives that were steeped in greed.
    What was right with the Dutch colonization of Africa was the part of the motives that were steeped in evangelism.
    I would say the same for the British, etc, colonization of America and the treatment of the Indians.

    I praise God for using man's wickedness for His good.
    J.L.



  7. #7
    TimV's Avatar
    TimV is offline. Puritanboard Botanist
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    8,198
    The Dutch didn't really do much colonizing in Africa. They had a small community they started mostly with retired German security personnel and later at the end of the 1680s with under 200 French Calvinists. The main purpose was to start an agricultural community (hence the French) which could be used as a stop over for the Dutch Merchant Marine on their way to and from the East Indies.

    Later (I'm typing all this from memory, so there may be a date or two off) during the Napoleonic Wars Britain took over, I think in 1812, since Holland was occupied and forced into an alliance with France, but they were in a fairly small area on the tip of Southern Africa. There was an English colony as well some hundreds of miles East.

    Soon after that, the original German, Dutch and French settlers (and let's be clear, folks. Even by THEN, they'd been in Africa longer than most of the people reading this have been in the US) had morphed into a new race of people who weren't Dutch by any definition at all.

    They got tired of English rule, and about half (the joke is the medically unfit were left behind and are now called the Cape Dutch!) of the people left to find land where they could be free. This was in the middle of the 1800s.

    They figured it was God's providence that the land was largely uninhabited due to malaria, the Zulu holocaust, not much rain, etc...and set up several Republics, two of which lasted and formed governments.

    And that will do for now! Some day I'll plan on writing an essay for the PB about South African history through the eyes of an American Calvinist who lived there for a decade, and was involved in the modern "trek" to form a new homeland for them.
    Tim Vaughan
    Member, Redeemer Presbyterian, OPC,
    Santa Maria
    California

  8. #8
    calgal's Avatar
    calgal is offline. Puritanboard Graduate
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by TimV View Post
    The Dutch didn't really do much colonizing in Africa. They had a small community they started mostly with retired German security personnel and later at the end of the 1680s with under 200 French Calvinists. The main purpose was to start an agricultural community (hence the French) which could be used as a stop over for the Dutch Merchant Marine on their way to and from the East Indies.

    Later (I'm typing all this from memory, so there may be a date or two off) during the Napoleonic Wars Britain took over, I think in 1812, since Holland was occupied and forced into an alliance with France, but they were in a fairly small area on the tip of Southern Africa. There was an English colony as well some hundreds of miles East.

    Soon after that, the original German, Dutch and French settlers (and let's be clear, folks. Even by THEN, they'd been in Africa longer than most of the people reading this have been in the US) had morphed into a new race of people who weren't Dutch by any definition at all.

    They got tired of English rule, and about half (the joke is the medically unfit were left behind and are now called the Cape Dutch!) of the people left to find land where they could be free. This was in the middle of the 1800s.

    They figured it was God's providence that the land was largely uninhabited due to malaria, the Zulu holocaust, not much rain, etc...and set up several Republics, two of which lasted and formed governments.

    And that will do for now! Some day I'll plan on writing an essay for the PB about South African history through the eyes of an American Calvinist who lived there for a decade, and was involved in the modern "trek" to form a new homeland for them.
    Tim:

    The Afrikaners are interesting. I wonder if they would have been as angry if Britain had not put them in virtual death camps during the Boer war.

    An interesting sidenote when discussing British colonies: much of the mess in Ireland, the Middle East and India/Pakistan can be traced directly back to the British rulers playing a strategy of "divide and conquer." England was pretty paranoid when it came to their colonies after the American Revolution and the French Revolution. Note that India and Pakistan were used against each other (so were the Arabs and Jews) and the hate has just been built up over the years. South Africa got a bit of that as well which explains the Afrikaners getting really really ticked off and supporting Germany in 2 world wars. Sorry Brits but your government was pretty nasty for a while.
    Gail

  9. #9
    he beholds's Avatar
    he beholds is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,101
    Quote Originally Posted by TimV View Post
    And that will do for now! Some day I'll plan on writing an essay for the PB about South African history through the eyes of an American Calvinist who lived there for a decade, and was involved in the modern "trek" to form a new homeland for them.
    Can we hold you to this? I would love to read a summarized history. I saw a really cool documentary on South Africa, Long Night's Journey Into Day, in college, but I forget much of it. In fact, all my knowledge of the whole continent of Africa comes from movies or books. Movies: Long Night's Journey Into Day, Hotel Rwanda, Sometimes in April, The Color of Friendship (fictional movie for teens).
    Books: Achebe's Things Fall Apart and No Longer At Ease (plus a cool Vonnegut article on the Igbo people).
    Paton's Cry, The Beloved Country and of course, Conrad's Heart of Darkness

    Most of these were fictional accounts and only two dealt with South Africa.

    Edit: I do remember when substitute teaching a week for a history teacher, I did get to plan and present lessons on the Uganda child soldiers, and I used all non-fiction for teaching and researching that. I was so unaware of any of that, and this teacher hands me a stack of books and articles and says, "In World Cultures, you'll be teaching of present-day Uganda for the week." I had no idea...
    J.L.



  10. #10
    TimV's Avatar
    TimV is offline. Puritanboard Botanist
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    8,198
    Sure, Jessi

    Tim:

    The Afrikaners are interesting. I wonder if they would have been as angry if Britain had not put them in virtual death camps during the Boer war.
    Please take note, all who read, of the remark I made about Gail the other day on the What do you think of PBers thread. My comment was accurate!
    Tim Vaughan
    Member, Redeemer Presbyterian, OPC,
    Santa Maria
    California

  11. #11
    brianeschen's Avatar
    brianeschen is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,182
    Thanks. I'll be waiting for the history of South Africa. My knowledge of Africa in general is very limited . . . the only connection being with a missionary (one with a Dutch name, but he considers himself as much African as the next). I am always glad to fill up some holes in my understanding of history.

    The Dutch part is particularly interesting to me as my wife is from Dutch heritage. For those of you who bashed the Dutch, I can assure you she is very offended.
    Brian Eschen
    Ruling Elder, PCA
    California

    "When the Lion roars, all the beasts of the forest tremble: when King Jesus speaks, the Kings of the earth should keep silent."
    -Samuel Davies to King George II (1755)

  12. #12
    TimV's Avatar
    TimV is offline. Puritanboard Botanist
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    8,198
    And you do NOT want to offend Brian's wife looks, cooking, schooling, organizing...she's got it all, plus a whole lot of folks who will stand up for her.
    Tim Vaughan
    Member, Redeemer Presbyterian, OPC,
    Santa Maria
    California

  13. #13
    Pergamum's Avatar
    Pergamum is offline. Ordinary Guy (TM)
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    14,979
    Quote Originally Posted by Puritan Sailor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by brianeschen View Post
    From another thread . . .
    Quote Originally Posted by puritanpilgrim View Post

    I hope your kidding.
    I get the feeling I asked a question with an obvious answer, so I am ready to be educated.

    The reason I asked the original question is because the only information I have heard about the Dutch in Africa has been 1) the slave trade which they participated in and 2) the Dutch Calvinist settlement of South Africa to which they brought Christian culture (with the help of some Huguenots).

    I believe the slave trade was clearly wrong, but can't see the South Africa case as wrong. What am I missing?

    Thanks for your help.
    Colonizing an uninhabited land would be fine. But invading a land, imposing your culture upon another, and oppressing them as second class citizens or slaves is certainly wrong. The result was great animosity toward Christianity because of self-proclaimed "Christians" invading their land and treating them without the dignity that comes with being made in the image of God. The true gospel was/is often rejected because of what the Western "Christian" culture did in their imperialism. Obviously there is no grounds in Christianity to justify such atrocities. That was the result of cultural arrogance and pride. But the damage has been done. Thankfully, the Lord is overruling those evil acts to bring forth indigenous churches who are now teaching us Westerners a thing or two about what it means to take up our cross.
    Can you name a historical occurrence of colonists occupying an uninhabited land?

    Maybe Antarctica qualifies.

    -----Added 2/8/2009 at 09:35:18 EST-----

    Quote Originally Posted by Archlute View Post
    Hmmm. Methinks that a few of you have been drinking a wee too much from anti-Western, revisionist historians. The presentations above seem a little unbalanced in favor of the "lets bash all things white, male, and Christian" crowd, than they ought to be. It reminds me of courses I took in my undergrad studies, right alongside of the our "gay and lesbian" and "minority" studies.

    Much good was done for many of those societies, and it should be admitted that not all cultures are worth saving as to many of the practices that make them a distinct culture (think elements of Islamic society that prepare their young women for their wedding night with needle and thread, if you know what I'm talking about...) Many of the colonized peoples were wrapped in gross idolotry and paganism, which distinctly shaped those cultures, and because of which we should be glad that they were often subdued and changed, even if not always in an ideal manner.
    I think a counter-reply could be that for too long the revisionist histories of the West made them out to be the benevolent do-gooders who saved the world from native superstition.

    Only now can differing voices be heard.

    A balanced approach would show the evils of the colonial gov'ts as well as the evils of the local populations. A balanced view would show the evils of colonialism but be fair to those like the British who often built schools, orphanages and hospitals.
    Pergamum


    "If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
    -- David Livingstone

  14. #14
    calgal's Avatar
    calgal is offline. Puritanboard Graduate
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by brianeschen View Post
    Thanks. I'll be waiting for the history of South Africa. My knowledge of Africa in general is very limited . . . the only connection being with a missionary (one with a Dutch name, but he considers himself as much African as the next). I am always glad to fill up some holes in my understanding of history.

    The Dutch part is particularly interesting to me as my wife is from Dutch heritage. For those of you who bashed the Dutch, I can assure you she is very offended.
    My in-laws are Dutch. I do not ever even consider doing that. A very very bad idea (they hold a grudge forever!)
    Gail

  15. #15
    brianeschen's Avatar
    brianeschen is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,182
    Quote Originally Posted by calgal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by brianeschen View Post
    Thanks. I'll be waiting for the history of South Africa. My knowledge of Africa in general is very limited . . . the only connection being with a missionary (one with a Dutch name, but he considers himself as much African as the next). I am always glad to fill up some holes in my understanding of history.

    The Dutch part is particularly interesting to me as my wife is from Dutch heritage. For those of you who bashed the Dutch, I can assure you she is very offended.
    My in-laws are Dutch. I do not ever even consider doing that. A very very bad idea (they hold a grudge forever!)
    Am I allowed to take this thread if I started it? I know what you mean. When I first met my grandparents-in-law I was asked, "Eschen, that's not Dutch is it?" I thought he was joking. He wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pergamum View Post
    Can you name a historical occurrence of colonists occupying an uninhabited land?

    Maybe Antarctica qualifies.
    I believe that there is an historical occurrence listed in Genesis 11:8-9. (This from my Dutch wife by the way)
    Brian Eschen
    Ruling Elder, PCA
    California

    "When the Lion roars, all the beasts of the forest tremble: when King Jesus speaks, the Kings of the earth should keep silent."
    -Samuel Davies to King George II (1755)

  16. #16
    Pergamum's Avatar
    Pergamum is offline. Ordinary Guy (TM)
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    14,979
    Yes, Genesis 11 and Antarctica! Thanks.
    Pergamum


    "If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
    -- David Livingstone

  17. #17
    Theognome's Avatar
    Theognome is offline. Burrito Bill
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,263
    Quote Originally Posted by Pergamum View Post
    Yes, Genesis 11 and Antarctica! Thanks.
    The examples of occupying a land I've read in the OT show scouring- eliminate the existing culture entirely... Kill the men, women, children and even livestock. Evangelism had nothing to do with it, for when scouring was not done, judgment came upon God's people.

    If indeed the Dutch had biblical justification for occupying the land, would it have been theologically proper for them to eliminate entirely the existing population as opposed to 'evangelizing' them?

    Theognome
    Bill Cunningham
    Covenant Reformed Church, URC
    Kansas City
    There are three kinds of people- those who can count, and those who can't.

  18. #18
    he beholds's Avatar
    he beholds is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,101
    Quote Originally Posted by Theognome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pergamum View Post
    Yes, Genesis 11 and Antarctica! Thanks.
    The examples of occupying a land I've read in the OT show scouring- eliminate the existing culture entirely... Kill the men, women, children and even livestock. Evangelism had nothing to do with it, for when scouring was not done, judgment came upon God's people.

    If indeed the Dutch had biblical justification for occupying the land, would it have been theologically proper for them to eliminate entirely the existing population as opposed to 'evangelizing' them?

    Theognome
    Of course.
    J.L.



  19. #19
    Puritan Sailor's Avatar
    Puritan Sailor is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Archlute View Post
    Much good was done for many of those societies, and it should be admitted that not all cultures are worth saving as to many of the practices that make them a distinct culture (think elements of Islamic society that prepare their young women for their wedding night with needle and thread, if you know what I'm talking about...) Many of the colonized peoples were wrapped in gross idolotry and paganism, which distinctly shaped those cultures, and because of which we should be glad that they were often subdued and changed, even if not always in an ideal manner.
    The ends do not justify the means.
    Patrick
    MDiv, RTS Jackson
    Pastor, Grace Presbyterian Church (OPC), Lisbon, NY

    "He does well, that discourses of Christ; but he does infinitely better, that by experimental knowledge, feeds and lives on Christ." Thomas Brooks.
    "Let us not please ourselves that we have deep understandings, but let us shew our understandings by our practice." Richard Sibbes

  20. #20
    Archlute's Avatar
    Archlute is offline. Puritanboard Senior
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    Quote Originally Posted by Puritan Sailor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Archlute View Post
    Much good was done for many of those societies, and it should be admitted that not all cultures are worth saving as to many of the practices that make them a distinct culture (think elements of Islamic society that prepare their young women for their wedding night with needle and thread, if you know what I'm talking about...) Many of the colonized peoples were wrapped in gross idolotry and paganism, which distinctly shaped those cultures, and because of which we should be glad that they were often subdued and changed, even if not always in an ideal manner.
    The ends do not justify the means.
    Obviously, but neither should the good that has come about through God's hand of providence working in history be downplayed.

    I think that this reaction to all things "Western" tends to overlook the gritty reality of historical fact that those cultures were not of the "noble savage" as imagined by Paul Gauguin (who, by the way, also despised his European heritige).
    Archlute

  21. #21
    satz is offline. Puritanboard Senior
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Theognome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pergamum View Post
    Yes, Genesis 11 and Antarctica! Thanks.
    The examples of occupying a land I've read in the OT show scouring- eliminate the existing culture entirely... Kill the men, women, children and even livestock. Evangelism had nothing to do with it, for when scouring was not done, judgment came upon God's people.

    If indeed the Dutch had biblical justification for occupying the land, would it have been theologically proper for them to eliminate entirely the existing population as opposed to 'evangelizing' them?

    Theognome
    The canon being closed, I think it would have been impossible for the Dutch (or anyone else) to have biblical justification of that kind. Even God's mandate to OT Israel extended only to a particular portion of land, the promised land. Israel was not to go off invading Egypt and scouring the populace there.
    Mark
    Independent baptist
    Singapore

  22. #22
    Pergamum's Avatar
    Pergamum is offline. Ordinary Guy (TM)
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    14,979
    I think there is revisionism also in the opposite direction among Christians in reaction to postmodern Western hate-mongering of all things Western.

    Examples: Take a look at the Vision Forum catologue and a lot of Christian homeschooling books and you'll somehow think dressing your kids in colonial clothes is a godly activity. Or read some Christian accounts of American hisotry which are also horribly revisionist and many are mere apologetic propaganda for the South.


    Charges of revisionism cut both ways.

    -----Added 2/9/2009 at 02:32:41 EST-----

    P.s. suggestions that Christians "scour" lands are merely jokes...right?
    Pergamum


    "If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
    -- David Livingstone

  23. #23
    Jan Ziska's Avatar
    Jan Ziska is offline. Puritanboard Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    107
    I studied South African history in uni. Did my final paper on the National Party.

    It is true that the Voortrekkers (Afrikaners et al who moved north from British territory) moved into a pretty much empty area (thanks to the human catastrophe known as the Mefecane). As they moved in, so did Bantu groups. The descendants of the Voortrekkers have as much right to these parts of SA as any other ethnic group, if you consider length of habitation to be the rule in these sorts of things (I don't, but that's another story).

    I have a huge amount of respect for the Afrikaner nation, but the National Party victory in 1948 was in many ways a tragedy. A proud, self-sufficient, Calvinist & hard working people are now a byword for arrogance, racism and greed.

    Also, I can see why the Voortrekkers thought they were given the land by God. Their victory at Blood River seems miraculous.

    As for the evils etc of colonizing, I think we can get a bit precious about it. Indigenous British culture was extinguished/colonized in succession by the Romans, Saxons, Angles, Vikings and Normans. All other European nations experienced similar issues.

    The British Empire simply did what empires or dominant cultures have always done. In its wake it left Christianity, the rule of law and parliamentary democracy. As far as empires go, it was one of the most benevolent.

  24. #24
    calgal's Avatar
    calgal is offline. Puritanboard Graduate
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Jan Ziska View Post
    I studied South African history in uni. Did my final paper on the National Party.

    It is true that the Voortrekkers (Afrikaners et al who moved north from British territory) moved into a pretty much empty area (thanks to the human catastrophe known as the Mefecane). As they moved in, so did Bantu groups. The descendants of the Voortrekkers have as much right to these parts of SA as any other ethnic group, if you consider length of habitation to be the rule in these sorts of things (I don't, but that's another story).

    I have a huge amount of respect for the Afrikaner nation, but the National Party victory in 1948 was in many ways a tragedy. A proud, self-sufficient, Calvinist & hard working people are now a byword for arrogance, racism and greed.

    Also, I can see why the Voortrekkers thought they were given the land by God. Their victory at Blood River seems miraculous.

    As for the evils etc of colonizing, I think we can get a bit precious about it. Indigenous British culture was extinguished/colonized in succession by the Romans, Saxons, Angles, Vikings and Normans. All other European nations experienced similar issues.

    The British Empire simply did what empires or dominant cultures have always done. In its wake it left Christianity, the rule of law and parliamentary democracy. As far as empires go, it was one of the most benevolent.
    The Afrikaners, Indians and Pakistanis may have a different opinion (not going to touch Ireland: not opening that ). A correction: Christianity was NOT brought to America or South Africa by Britain: dissenters who were Christians fled Britain for America (New England colonies, the Roman Catholic colony of Maryland) and there were these wooden shoe wearing folks down at the Cape to wave Hello to the Brits.
    Gail

  25. #25
    SolaScriptura's Avatar
    SolaScriptura is offline. Puritanboard Softy
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    7,210
    Quote Originally Posted by Archlute View Post
    Hmmm. Methinks that a few of you have been drinking a wee too much from anti-Western, revisionist historians. The presentations above seem a little unbalanced in favor of the "lets bash all things white, male, and Christian" crowd, than they ought to be. It reminds me of courses I took in my undergrad studies, right alongside of the our "gay and lesbian" and "minority" studies.

    Much good was done for many of those societies, and it should be admitted that not all cultures are worth saving as to many of the practices that make them a distinct culture (think elements of Islamic society that prepare their young women for their wedding night with needle and thread, if you know what I'm talking about...) Many of the colonized peoples were wrapped in gross idolotry and paganism, which distinctly shaped those cultures, and because of which we should be glad that they were often subdued and changed, even if not always in an ideal manner.

    I agree. Having been to some of these cess pools called nations and seeing what passes for culture in these areas... I am, by and large, all in favor of colonization. I think the world would in most cases be better if some of these Asian and African nations were more Western.
    Ben
    Chaplain, US Army
    Stuttgart, Germany
    TE Potomac Presbytery, PCA
    www.thebenaddiction.com

    "Whenever I'm about to do something, I think, 'would an idiot do that?' And if they would, I do not do that thing." -- Dwight Schrute

    "I've been so thoroughly trained that I don't even need to think before I speak." -- Harry Crumb

  26. #26
    TimV's Avatar
    TimV is offline. Puritanboard Botanist
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    8,198
    Can you name a historical occurrence of colonists occupying an uninhabited land?
    I could start with a list of several dozen places, the Madeiras, etc....but since the topic is Africa and Jan added something to it...

    There was a rebellion against Zulu misrule lead by a guy named M'zilakaze. He could have given Joseph Stalin lessons in scorched earth tactics. The rebels who became known as the N'debele, and are now the second biggest ethnic group in Zimbabwe, and who are currently leading the revolt against the worst dictator in Africa, moved north.

    The loyalists followed, sending their Impis, their military formations put together by age groups raised for battle against the rebels. They were on foot, and had to live off the land. The main ethnic group in the area, Sothus and related peoples were exterminated except for those whom the rebels incorporated into their own Impis and tribe. By the time they were away from the Zulus they were ethnically 90 percent Sothu because of this.

    There were some bands of local who survived, and lead by a charismatic leader named Masheshe settled in what is now the country of Lethsuto, which is bordered by mountains tailor made for ambush.

    So when the Afrikaners left the British zone parts of where they went were uninhabited, and parts were, especially by bushmen and the descendants of runaway slaves from the Cape now known as Coloureds. Our district veterinarian was the 10th generation born on his farm, which they bought from a tribe of Coloureds called the Griqua.

    Other areas like the lowvelt were made malaria free by the Afrikaners, and there were some tribes like the Rolong who allied themselves with the Afrikaners to the north.

    It all gets so magically confusing. I'll tell one story for Jessi and Gail and the rest who are interested, and please forgive me not looking up spelling on some of the names.

    The Griqua came up from the Cape with horses and guns, so they lorded it over the Bushmen and Hottentots. Remember, the western to central part of South Africa had no Blacks or Whites, but rather the "Khoisan", who are Bushmen and their relatives. So, a leader got his men together and attacked the N'debele during their Long March. They were accomplished raiders and took the tribes cattle, and some women as well.

    M'zkilkazi fell to the ground and wept. Cattle was the National Wealth of his people, and they were now totally broke. He called his Impis together and started after the Griqua on foot!

    The Coloureds have a weakness or two like the rest of us, and that is alcohol. After the raid the raiders decided that they were far enough away and all got blistering drunk. The captive women said that they needed to move on, since they were now polluted in the eyes of their people and would be killed as well, and that their people would never give up.

    The Impis caught up with the Griqua, and speared them to the ground as they laid in a drunken stupor. There were only three survivors.

    The leader survived, and vowed vengence of his own. After the Zulu civil war was over, and the N'debele were in the north of what is today called South Africa, hostiities broke out between several factions, and a group of Afrikaners, Rolong and Griqua, led by the surviving leader fought a pitched battle with the N'debele. The Afrikaner and Griqua used the same battle method; platoons of four men road to the front line, one held the horses, three fired, then retreated. When the N'debele broke, the Rolong (who had long greivences against the N'debele) went in with spears along with the horsemen.

    The N'debele crossed the river dividing South Africa with Zimbabwe, and that is why the second biggest tribe in Zimbabwe speak Zulu, and the name of their area is called Matebeleland.
    Last edited by TimV; 02-09-2009 at 07:53 AM.
    Tim Vaughan
    Member, Redeemer Presbyterian, OPC,
    Santa Maria
    California

  27. #27
    brianeschen's Avatar
    brianeschen is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,182
    Thank you for filling up some of my holes . . . especially Tas, Gail and Tim. I appreciate it.
    Brian Eschen
    Ruling Elder, PCA
    California

    "When the Lion roars, all the beasts of the forest tremble: when King Jesus speaks, the Kings of the earth should keep silent."
    -Samuel Davies to King George II (1755)

  28. #28
    discipulo's Avatar
    discipulo is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,324
    I would like to add a colourful note, Dutch wanted to fight escorbut and diseases caused by long shipping with few fresh food, and thought about wine, they knew little of wine and Holland has no good weather for wine anyway.

    But the French Huguenots that fled to Holland from Catholic persecution knew a lot about wine, so they were encouraged by several means to go to South Africa and produce wine there, since then Wine is a major asset of South Africa, and exported to all the World
    César Proença

    there is no will nor running by which we can prepare the way for our salvation, it is wholly of the Divine Mercy Jean Calvin Institutes II . V. 17

    Reformed Churches in The Netherlands (liberated) http://www.gkv.nl/main.asp?intTreeviewID=954

    Igreja Reformada em Massamá Portugal http://www.igrejareformada.pt

    Church Creek Presbyterian, PCA, Charleston, SC. Visiting member http://www.church-creek.org

  29. #29
    Baroque Norseman's Avatar
    Baroque Norseman is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    11,013
    if a culture practices femal circumcision and immolation of widows, and stopping those practices involves imposing your culture on theirs, is the imposition of a culture necessarily wrong?

    If so, how do you know? Aren't you implying that some cultures are superior to others?
    Jacob
    M.A., Louisiana College
    Studied at RTS Jackson
    ARP, Louisiana

    2Kingdomz4Life

    My blog: Extra Nos

  30. #30
    kvanlaan's Avatar
    kvanlaan is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    8,484
    Aren't you implying that some cultures are superior to others?
    Yes, what's wrong with that?

    On another note, the Battle at Blood River, please remember, was not only a victory, it was a shut-out; 400+ against almost 13,000 (or more) and not one dead. I know people argue about the superiority of the Afrikaner's weaponry, but you'd think that a lucky spear throw would have gotten someone at some point during the battle. Add to that the covenant made before the battle by the Afrikaners, and you have some really compelling reasons that they saw it as God's hand on the field of battle. $.02
    Kevin, husband of a truly angelic woman, and father to twelve.
    Zion United Reformed Church of Sheffield
    Ontario, Canada

  31. #31
    TimV's Avatar
    TimV is offline. Puritanboard Botanist
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    8,198
    On another note, the Battle at Blood River, please remember, was not only a victory, it was a shut-out; 400+ against almost 13,000 (or more) and not one dead. I know people argue about the superiority of the Afrikaner's weaponry, but you'd think that a lucky spear throw would have gotten someone at some point during the battle. Add to that the covenant made before the battle by the Afrikaners, and you have some really compelling reasons that they saw it as God's hand on the field of battle. $.02
    The Afrikaner's weapon was a smooth bore musket loaded from the front. And a generation later, 4 times that many British regulars, armed with rocket launchers and breach loading weapons that fire many times faster and more accurately than the Boer weapons faced the same Zulu army, and were killed to the last man. The Zulus were GOOD.

    My third son's middle name is Sarel, after the Pastor who administered the oath. Even today many Afrikaners still hold December 16 as a Sabbath because of that vow.
    Tim Vaughan
    Member, Redeemer Presbyterian, OPC,
    Santa Maria
    California

  32. #32
    kvanlaan's Avatar
    kvanlaan is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    8,484
    The Afrikaner's weapon was a smooth bore musket loaded from the front. And a generation later, 4 times that many British regulars, armed with rocket launchers and breach loading weapons that fire many times faster and more accurately than the Boer weapons faced the same Zulu army, and were killed to the last man. The Zulus were GOOD.
    I still think there is no match, man for man, in terms of resilience, toughness, and unwavering faith, than a true Boer. Drop a Boere family in the desolate wilderness, and within 12 months, you will have a flourishing farm and a church.
    Kevin, husband of a truly angelic woman, and father to twelve.
    Zion United Reformed Church of Sheffield
    Ontario, Canada

  33. #33
    Hamalas's Avatar
    Hamalas is offline. whippersnapper
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,674
    Blog Entries
    1
    I've never studied this before, fascinating!
    Ben Franks

    I'm a member of Heartland Community Church (PCA) in Wichita, Kansas.
    I'm currently a student at Whitefield College majoring in Christian Classical Education.
    Starting in August of 2014 I'll be a student worker/pastoral intern for a year with Sheffield Presbyterian Church in England
    I'm hoping to attend PRTS in the fall of 2016 and then pursue the Gospel Ministry either in the US or the UK.

    To follow my year in England click on the links below:
    http://spcinternship.wordpress.com/
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Engla...22600707793421

    "Remember, it is not hasty reading, but serious meditating upon holy and heavenly truths, that make them prove sweet and profitable to the soul...It is not he that reads most , but he that meditates most, that will prove the choicest, sweetest, wisest and strongest Christian." - Thomas Brooks (1608-1680)

  34. #34
    Croghanite's Avatar
    Croghanite is offline. Puritanboard Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by TimV View Post

    And that will do for now! Some day I'll plan on writing an essay for the PB about South African history through the eyes of an American Calvinist who lived there for a decade, and was involved in the modern "trek" to form a new homeland for them.
    You should make it a book. It sounds very interesting.
    Joe
    Christ Bible Church
    Pageland, SC

  35. #35
    Puritan Sailor's Avatar
    Puritan Sailor is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Archlute View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Puritan Sailor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Archlute View Post
    Much good was done for many of those societies, and it should be admitted that not all cultures are worth saving as to many of the practices that make them a distinct culture (think elements of Islamic society that prepare their young women for their wedding night with needle and thread, if you know what I'm talking about...) Many of the colonized peoples were wrapped in gross idolotry and paganism, which distinctly shaped those cultures, and because of which we should be glad that they were often subdued and changed, even if not always in an ideal manner.
    The ends do not justify the means.
    Obviously, but neither should the good that has come about through God's hand of providence working in history be downplayed.

    I think that this reaction to all things "Western" tends to overlook the gritty reality of historical fact that those cultures were not of the "noble savage" as imagined by Paul Gauguin (who, by the way, also despised his European heritige).
    I do not want to forget or overlook the good that has been done. But too often that is used to justify or white-wash the atrocities that were comitted by professing Christians. I agree there are not any noble savages, but there are not many noble Westerners either. Christianity and the "West" are not synonymous.
    Patrick
    MDiv, RTS Jackson
    Pastor, Grace Presbyterian Church (OPC), Lisbon, NY

    "He does well, that discourses of Christ; but he does infinitely better, that by experimental knowledge, feeds and lives on Christ." Thomas Brooks.
    "Let us not please ourselves that we have deep understandings, but let us shew our understandings by our practice." Richard Sibbes

  36. #36
    brianeschen's Avatar
    brianeschen is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,182
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamalas View Post
    I've never studied this before, fascinating!
    This has been wonderful.
    Brian Eschen
    Ruling Elder, PCA
    California

    "When the Lion roars, all the beasts of the forest tremble: when King Jesus speaks, the Kings of the earth should keep silent."
    -Samuel Davies to King George II (1755)

  37. #37
    Pergamum's Avatar
    Pergamum is offline. Ordinary Guy (TM)
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    14,979
    Great thread...makes me want to go buy a book on Afrikaner hisotry. Any suggestions?
    Pergamum


    "If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
    -- David Livingstone

  38. #38
    brianeschen's Avatar
    brianeschen is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,182
    Quote Originally Posted by Pergamum View Post
    Great thread...makes me want to go buy a book on Afrikaner hisotry. Any suggestions?
    Yup. Pester Tim until he relents.
    Brian Eschen
    Ruling Elder, PCA
    California

    "When the Lion roars, all the beasts of the forest tremble: when King Jesus speaks, the Kings of the earth should keep silent."
    -Samuel Davies to King George II (1755)

  39. #39
    kvanlaan's Avatar
    kvanlaan is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    8,484
    Pakenham's book on the Boer War is fascinating and incredibly detailed but tragic - I have read it several times but always lose momentum after the Brits start in with the concentration camps and literally walling off the country with barbed wire and blockhouses to defeat the Boers. It's only the war, and does not include much in the way of general Boer history, but I still think it's great.

    Just remember this one statistic and you'll get a feel for what the Boere are: it took almost half a million British regulars to defeat 85,000 Dutch farmers. And they simply couldn't do it on the battlefield; they had to resort to scorched earth and concentration camps to win.

    -----Added 2/10/2009 at 07:18:06 EST-----

    One small addition: Bok van Blerk's song on the war - you can see that the way the Boere talk about the war bears much resemblance (and then some) to many Southerners today. Many are still yearning for Koos de la Rey (or the like) to lead them back to Boere sovereignty.

    Last edited by kvanlaan; 02-10-2009 at 06:54 AM.
    Kevin, husband of a truly angelic woman, and father to twelve.
    Zion United Reformed Church of Sheffield
    Ontario, Canada

  40. #40
    Kevin's Avatar
    Kevin is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    6,028
    Kvan, I love that song!
    TE Kevin Rogers
    MNA Church Planter
    Redeemer Community Church
    Moncton NB

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72