Notes on Khoisan Resistance to the Dutch in the 17th and 18th Centuries

The Khoisan peoples, often referred to as Bushmen and Hottentots in historical literature, have received negative portrayals from historians and contemporaries from the 17th and 18th centuries.
Definitions in dictionaries (e.g., Shorter Oxford Dictionary) depict 'Hottentots' as inferior in intellect and culture.
Jan van Riebeeck characterized Hottentots as dull, lazy, untrustworthy, yet simultaneously thievish.
Stereotypes of the Bushmen depict them as uneducable and incorrigible banditti.

Most historians focus on successful groups in history, leading to the marginalization of Khoisan herders and hunter-gatherers.
The Khoikhoi and San have largely disappeared from contemporary South Africa.
Historical assessments often gloss over extensive experiences, with figures like Robin Hallett summarizing them in just a sentence.

Historians like W.M. Macmillan and J.S. Marais frame Khoisan resistance as negligible, attributing it primarily to thievery while dismissing their struggles as weak.
Macmillan states: "The 18th century had all but completed their extermination," underscoring a lack of recognition for their resistance efforts.
Marais and other authors fail to adequately consider or honor the complexity of Khoisan resistance to colonial encroachment.

The Khoisan were significantly impacted by the smallpox epidemic of 1713, which decimated their population, affecting their ability to resist colonial advances.
Conflicts with the more populous Bantu resulted in inadequate historical recognition of Khoisan resistance.

The distinctions between 'Hottentots' and 'Bushmen' are unclear, with anthropological evidence suggesting overlap and fluidity.
Terms define ways of life rather than strictly racial categories: Hottentots as herders and Bushmen as gatherers.
Evidence suggests acquisition of cattle could occur, blurring lines of identity between Khoisan groups.
The term 'Khoisan' helps capture the diversity among Late Stone Age peoples of the Cape, emphasizing socio-cultural interactions.

Historical interactions necessitated looking into how societies adopted new social practices.
Hunter-gatherer groups in contact with pastoral societies faced assimilation, decimation, or retreated into less accessible areas, yet they also significantly adapted and sometimes thrived by adopting pastoralism.

Khoi pastoralists initially engaged in trade with Europeans, exchanging cattle for goods but maintaining suspicion toward unfair practices.
Reports from the Dutch reveal tensions over cattle thefts, where Khoisan resistance took form in raiding efforts against colonists.

Following Dutch settlement, Khoisan resistance emerged as aggressive retaliation against settlement.
First Khoi wars erupted, demonstrating coordinated resistance even as some Khoi collaborated with the Dutch for trading benefits.
Conflicts saw Khoi attacking Dutch farmers and strategically stealing livestock, illustrating their military capabilities despite ongoing encroachment.

The history reflects the complexity of colonial relations marked by shifting alliances, collaboration, and interpersonal dynamics.
Economic pressures led to tensions between settler farmers and Khoi as demand for meat and cattle escalated.
The rise of various Khoi factions led to an evolving resistance trajectory, even resulting in cooperation with Bantu-speaking people against European settlers.

The halt of Khoisan resistance emerged around the end of the 18th century as hybrid identities formed through intermarriage and acculturation to colonial society.
The collapse of traditional systems and the economic desperate state led many Khoisan to adopt menial roles under colonial rule.
Resistance turned to strategic survival through integration or expatriation beyond colonial boundaries.
By the end of the colonial period, the legacy of Khoisan resistance was marginalized, yet had significantly influenced attitudes and adaptive strategies among surrounding Bantu-speaking populations.