Source F is an extract from the Cape Times and it again creates controversy about who controls heritage, some people would argue for the analysis of the remains in order to determine who these mystery people were whereas many people would be against it as they will want the bones to be buried again in accordance to traditional beliefs.
2) What is significant about the title of the exhibition Miscast?
The significance of the title ‘Miscast’ is that the Khoisan were cast off from the rest of society by the colonials. The Khoisan were subjected to extreme brutality and suffering at the hands of the Europeans and it can be said that the fact that the Khoisan were literally ‘cast out of time, out of politics and out of history’ makes the title of the exhibition significant.
3) Study Source E and explain the argument put forward.
The argument in source E is by the descendants of the Khoisan against the Miscast Exhibition that was set up in 1996. The Khoisan descendants were furious and outraged about the exhibition and they were not hesitant in venting their feelings. They argued that the exhibition was aimed at white people and that it undermined the true value of the Khoisan in South African history ‘We are sick and tired of naked brown people being exposed to the curious glances of rich whites in search of dinner table conversation’. The descendants claimed that the exhibition made the Khoisan look like objects instead of people and that it humiliated them ‘We were exposed to yet another attempt to treat brown people as objects’.
4) Source E only presents one side of the debate. Work out what the other side would be.
The other side of the argument would argue that by re-establishing the historical presence of the Khoisan and by exposing all their cultural achievements their human dignity is restored. The museum could have argued that the Miscast exhibition made a huge contribution to the effort of re-appraising the past. Another argument could have been that the Miscast exhibition laid the foundations for reconciliations between many rival tribal groups around South Africa.
5) Explain clearly the opposing arguments given in Source F.
The debate about who controls South African heritage is clearly evident in this article. On the one hand you have a group of biology students who are determined to analyze the remains of the mystery people of Prestwich Place and on the other hand you have SAHRA and other people who are firmly against the idea. The question is, who is right? The students claim that SAHRA has ‘denied all South Africans the right to know about their heritage’ another student also went on to say ‘If we bury them without studying them, we’re saying they’re meaningless’. These are all very valid points and especially seeing that these remains are unknown, it could be said that by not studying them we could be leaving out an important part of our heritage. SAHRA as well as many other cultural groups ‘vehemently objected’ to the idea of exhuming the bones and doing research. They claim that the mystery people would be identified by analyzing written and oral accounts.
Activity 3
1) There were over 200,000 slaves altogether at the Cape. Why do you think that those listed in Source H were selected for commemoration?
These slaves were selected for commemoration for many different reasons. Some showed amazing strength of character and went on to become leaders such as Tuan Guru, Adam Kok and Catharina van Palicatte. Others went on to become major success stories like Frederik Opperman and Rangton van Bali. Many women were acknowledged as they often married men whom they disliked just to obtain their freedom; Sara van der Kemp was one of them. Steyntje van de Kaap was an example of a woman who never gave up, her amazing persistence in order to obtain her freedom makes her a worthy receiver of commemoration. Other people such as Ngqika are also worthy as they sacrificed their own lives in order to aid and provide homes for runaway slaves.
2) Why do you think the Order of the Disa, usually given to living people in recognition of their work, was awarded in this case to people who were long since dead?
The commemorates received the awards because despite the fact that they died a long time ago they still form an important part of South African heritage, they deserved to be acknowledged for everything that they went through. It is vital that we acknowledge people for their achievements to the development of South Africa regardless of whether they dead or alive, it is just showing basic respect to the people who died trying to create a fairer and equal society.
3) Since 1994 the government has tried to promote the ideas of democracy, national unity and racial reconciliation. How effectively is this achieved by the selections made for posthumous honours in Source H? Explain you view by selecting evidence from the source.
The posthumous honours made in Source H do reflect the ideas promoted by the government since 1994. There is clear evidence of people from different races being acknowledged ‘Ngxukumeshe’ and ‘Steyntje van de Kaap’ and the source does give the idea that these people suffered for the same cause which was freedom and equality, in other words, national unity. The fact that the honorees are made up of people from all different races does emphasize that the government aimed to make us all as South Africans come together to acknowledge the pain that people went through in order to lay the foundations for our country.
Activity 4
1) What aspects of History have been selected to promote heritage commercially in Sources I and J?
Both sources give visitors a unique experience of particular aspects of South African culture. Source I describes Gold Reef City as being a unique place where guests will be able to experience ‘African music, dance and history’. The source emphasizes the glamour and benefits of gold mining to promote Gold Reef City which in turn attracts tourists. Source J promotes heritage commercially as visitors can stay in an actual Zulu village. The guests are able to experience all the traditions of the Zulu culture as well as understanding their heritage. In both the sources only the positive aspects of history have been used to promote heritage. For example in source I all the positives of gold mining are emphasized but what about the people who suffered and died? The marketers were clearly not interested in portraying the true heritage of South African gold mining but they were mainly concerned with showing the luxuries and wealth associated with gold, in order to generate as much profit as possible.
2) What objections do you think there could be to using heritage in this way?
I think there could be a lot of objections to using heritage in this way as it does not give an accurate description of heritage. Since the aim of such projects in Source I and J is to make as much money as possible I do not think that the managers of such projects care about giving an accurate portrayal of true heritage and cultural identity. There main aims are to generate income and therefore their main concerns are attracting tourists and this is achieved by giving the tourists what they want and not by showing the grim aspects or negative sides of gold mining or Zulu culture etc. ‘It wants visitors to have fun, not to be reminded of the grim aspects of the history of the mine’.
3) Who makes the most convincing argument in Source K? Explain your choice.
I think the property developers have the most convincing argument because if their title deeds allow them to build on land that is outside the burial sites there is absolutely no reason why they should not be permitted to do so. It is ridiculous that the whole stretch of land along the slopes should be restricted especially when only a fraction of the land is actually sacred.
4) Is the distortion of heritage for economic purposes any better or worse than the distortion of history for political purposes? Justify your point of view.
I think that distortion of history for political purposes is far worse than the distortion of heritage for economic purposes. Distorting heritage for economic purposes is bad but it is a drop in the ocean compared to the devastating effects that the distortion of history has had on millions of people around the world. One example is Nazism; Hitler blamed the Jews for Germany’s shortcomings and therefore distorted the image of the Jews to make it look like they were the reason for Germany’s poor economic state. Communism is another example as in both Russia and China books and other written documents were destroyed and opponents were crushed in order for leaders such as Mao Zedong and Stalin to stay in power, the destruction of documents and lack of freedom of speech were tactics that were employed to control the population and convince them that communism was the only way and this is another example of the negative effects that the distortion of history had.
Unit 7.2
Activity 1
1) Why are the fossils in the Karoo such a valuable record?
The fossils found in the Karoo give us valuable insight into life millions of years ago. Fossils, once analyzed can be dated and therefore scientists can work out form which period the fossils come from and thus timelines can be produced which map out the evolution of various plants and animals. All the fossils found in the Karoo carry huge importance as the Karoo is recognized as one of the world’s biggest and richest fossil deposits.
2) In what ways has the material in this section on paleontology changed your ideas about South African heritage?
The material in this section has changed my views about South African heritage because I had no idea that South Africa had such a rich and vast source of fossils! I was also oblivious to the fact that South Africa also contains some of the oldest fossils ever found. This makes South African heritage even more important not only to us as South Africans but to the whole world.
3) Some people question whether pre-human remains should be considered part of our heritage or not. Suggest an argument both for and against this idea.
One definition of heritage states ‘Heritage is what ever each one of us individually or collectively wish to preserve and pass on to the next generation. If we want to preserve something, then it is our heritage’. Based on this definition and my beliefs I would say that pre-human remains should be considered an integral part of our heritage based on the fact that fossils are part of our intellectual, spiritual, political and economic world and therefore they are a vital part of our heritage and they should be acknowledged. An argument against the idea is that many people feel that only items of recent significance should be considered part of our heritage, many people would not consider pre-humans as being humans and they would consider them inferior and uncivilized.
Activity 2
1) a) Why is archaeology particularly important in Africa?
Archaeology is important in Africa as Africa is considered the birth place of human kind and it is where scientists think that humans originated from. This makes archaeology in Africa particularly important as in order for us to determine where we come from we have to analyze the fossils and remains of humans found on the African continent as they are the oldest fossils on earth and they give us valuable insight into the history and evolution of the human being.
b) What are the advantages and disadvantages of archaeological evidence?
Advantages of archaeological evidence include the facts that it helps us as humans to understand our past and where we originated from. Other advantages are that archaeological evidence can answer unanswered questions about certain aspects of history and can help us fill in gaps and understand more about our continents past. Archaeological evidence can also aid us in understanding more about ancient animals that roamed the earth and how they became extinct.
Disadvantages include religious opposition and inaccurate details and results. Many religious activists do not believe in the evolution of mankind and therefore refuse to believe that man has continuously evolved over millions of years.
2) Why do you think that the findings of archaeology have only been included in the South African school history curriculum in the last few years?
I think that there are two main reasons for this; the first reason is related to the Apartheid government, I think that the apartheid government would not have wanted African archaeology to be included in school curriculums as there is sufficient evidence to suggest that the first humans came from Africa and that the African man was here thousands of years before the white man which obviously would not have gone down well with the Apartheid government. Another reason may have been the possible link to the Neanderthal would have been against their principles of theology which were against evolution, in other words they believed in the Creation (in the USA teaching evolution in some schools is banned).
3) In the light of Source C, why do you think that Sterkfontein was made a UNESCO World Heritage Site?
Sterkfontein is one of the worlds most productive and important palaeoanthropological sites. It is the site of some of the most important discoveries concerning the evolution of man as it contains ancient fossils of both man and other creatures that once lived such as giant hyena and saber-toothed cats.
4) What does Source E reveal about the impact of globalization on heritage?
According to Source E, globalization has had a positive effect on heritage as now there are more World heritage sites all over the world. Before, the sites were restricted to certain areas (Europe and North America) ‘Imbalance on the world heritage site list’ but now due to globalization, World heritage sites are prominent all over the world. It is vital to create and maintain a balance of World heritage sites all over the world and this is exactly what Source E is suggesting. ‘It’s an important step, but it’s a first step.’
What does Source E reveal about the ideas of heritage in different knowledge systems? Propose a way in which world heritage criteria could be less ‘Eurocentric’ (refer to the discussion of heritage in different knowledge systems in unit 7.1).
Source E reveals a lack of interaction and communication between the committees that choose the World heritage sites and the ethnic people who propose the sites. The bottom line is that the committees that choose the sites must be more tolerant and they must consider the true value of the site to the ethnic people before accepting or rejecting the site. It is true that both parties have different opinions about potential sites but there must be some sort of agreement in order for World heritage sites to become less ‘Eurocentric.’ Ethnic people must become more involved in choosing World heritage sites as peoples’ values and beliefs must be considered when assessing the importance of a site.
Activity 3
1) Why would the picture on the cover in Source G have caught the attention of many readers?
The picture would have caught the attention of many readers as Adam and Eve are stereotyped as being white, however recent research has suggested that the origin of man comes from Africa. The picture is very controversial especially to religious people as the picture is a contradiction to what the bible says.
2) How has recent genetic research changed ideas about race?
Due to genetic research, we now know that we did not evolve from different ancestors in different parts of the world but we are all descendants from the same ancestor who inhabited Africa about 200,000 years ago. These findings explain why the earliest human remains were found in Africa.
3) According to Source H, what theory is unlikely to change because most people now accept it?
According to the source, South Africa has the oldest remains this is the least likely theory to change as people all over the world accept this fact and it is common knowledge.