"In Cape Town's
Kirstenbosch Botanic Gardens are the remains of a hedge of bitter
almonds, planted by Jan van Riebeeck in February 1660 to protect
the settlement, the grain farms and the forests from the Khoikhoi,
who inhabited the area when the Dutch arrived. Planted in a half
moon and punctuated by watch-towers, it effectively isolated the
settlers from the African continent. The bitter-almond hedge grew
into the apartheid divisions that ran through every aspect of life
in South Africa, and that invaded the psyche of the nation"
(Martin, 1996: 3)
"In many ways that
hedge still exists today, both physically and metaphorically.
Almost 300 years later, the architects of apartheid continued Van
Riebeeck's act of separation by legislating the "hedge" into
existence through the Group Areas Act."
(Essop, 2004)
Map of the Cape Colony ca 1660 (Böeseken, 1948: 52)
What you will find at this cache location is a very important
plant. It is a remnant of a boundary wall planted on van Riebeeck's
orders over 350 years ago. The boundary wall included this hedge,
thorn bushes, wooden walls, and watch towers. It stretched from
here to Wynberg Hill (Bosheuyel) and along the Liesbeeck River to
the mouth of the Salt River. The above map shows the hedge forming
the border of the colony. In his journal, on February 23 1660, van
Riebeeck recorded the initial planting of this hedge, stating:
"Within the compass of this hedge, the whole settlement and all the
grain farms, forests, etc. will be beautifully enclosed as in a
half-moon, and everything will be well protected" (Thom 1954
Vol.III: 185-186).
This barrier cut off the indigenous Khoikhoi
from the grazing land they traditionally used. van Riebeeck
recorded an encounter where the Khoikhoi confronted him about land
rights and asked him "Who should rather in justice give way, the
rightful owner or the foreign intruder?" (Thom 1954 Vol.II: 95-96).
In response to this demand to withdraw, van Riebeeck said that the
territory had been won in battle and now belonged to the VOC. The
Khoikhoi then asked for at least the right to collect "veldkos"
(bush food), specifically wild almonds (Brabejum
stellatifolium) from their traditional lands. Van Riebeeck
denied this request as well. He needed the very same wild almond
plants to form his barrier hedge to keep the Khoikhoi out (Goodwin
1952).
Efforts to protect the hedge began as soon as it
was planted. Van Riebeeck even issued a Plakaat (a posted law)
forbidding everyone "not only from making passage through ... the
said hedge, but not even to break off from it the smallest twig, no
matter what the reason is supposed to be, on pain of being banished
in chains for 3 years" (van Zyl 1908: 16). Today, there are only
two surviving portions of van Riebeeck's hedge, the Kirstenbosch
section and another in Bishops Court. The declaration of the
Kirstenbosch portion of the hedge as a National Monument was made
in Government Notice No. 529 of 6 April 1936. The Bishops Court
portion of the hedge on Wynberg Hill was declared as a national
monument in 1945.
The Bishops Court portions of the hedge can be
best experienced by completing the
"View from the Top" cache (GC211PM). That cache is also hidden
amongst the branches of the hedge, and you walk along it on your
way to gz. Photos and a bit more information can be
found here
The complexity of acknowledging and preserving
much of South Africa's heritage can be illustrated in the mixed
reaction to this plant and what it represents. This hedge can be
seen to represent the colonial legacy of domination, separation and
exclusion. It could also represent a legacy of determined settlers
who planned on staying. The difference between this hedge and the
wall that used to barricade the colonists from the Native Americans
on the island of Manhattan (now Wall St.) is
not in the barrier itself, but in what came after.
In 2001, the plaque commemorating the Bishops
Court portion of the hedge was vandalized. The South African
Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA) removed it and asked for public
opinion on if a new plaque should be made, and what it should say.
The following (rather long) quote sums up the task ahead for all of
us (and I include geocachers) concerned with the importance of
public places and their significance.
"As much as
statues and plaques bear the brunt of people's anger, precisely
because they are tangible markers of national heritage, the simple
act of removing them does not erase history from people's memories,
from their lives, or from the city spaces they share. The past
persists in spaces, in words, and in the intersection of the two.
While any combination of cities and words may be available for use,
we cannot simply organize cities and words into just any
combination. We are bound to work with, and even work through, the
city spaces and rhetorical practices into which our lives are
thrown. Recognition that rebuilding Cape Town as a post-apartheid
city demands the past not get erased or become forgotten, that Cape
Town residents are bound to work through the spaces and practices
into which they are thrown, was captured in questions asked of
visitors to the 2002 exhibition on Riebeeck's legacy, "Do you think
that SAHRA should replace the plaque? If so, what words would you
inscribe on a new plaque?"
The question of
choosing the right words to mark the hedge challenges the people of
Cape Town to recall what many would probably just as soon forget,
but what they cannot forget. But it is not only that. It is also
the challenge of having to put into words what they know all too
well in their hearts and minds about the racial geographies of
colonialism and apartheid. Their challenge is finding words to do
more than remember, to do more than describe the landscape, to do
more than pass judgment on the boundaries of Dutch colonialism. The
question of choosing words to inscribe a new plaque invokes the
broader question of truth and reconciliation faced by South
Africans since the end of apartheid rule. Truth and reconciliation
require reinterpretation of the separation of self and other across
boundaries of difference built into the landscape, memorialized in
monuments, and expressed in words."
(Marback 2004:
257-258)
Maybe, if you are so inspired, you can share
your thoughts as to how best to commemorate or acknowledge this
important plant, or other aspects of South African heritage, in
your logs.
More information about the hedge can be found at
these links
http://www.sanbi.org
http://www.plantzafrica.com
http://www.biodiversityexplorer.org
For information on all aspects of Kirstenbosch,
click here.
The Garden is open 365 days a year from 08:00 - 19:00 (September
-March) and from 08:00 - 18:00 (April - August). The entrance fee
is R35 for adults and R20 for South African students with student
ID cards. Fees for school children (6-18 years old) are R10.
Children under 6 years old and Botanical Society members have free
entry. SA senior citizens have free entry on Tuesdays, if it is not
a public holiday.
Works Cited
Böeseken,
A.J., 1948. Geskiedenis-atlas vir Suid-Afrika Kaapstad,:
Nasional pers.
Essop,
T., 2004. Budget Speech 2004/2005: Department of Environmental
Affairs and Development Planning (21 June 2004).
http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eng/pubs/speeches/2004/Jun/76350
[Accessed: 22 March 2010]
Goodwin,
A.J.H., 1952. Jan van Riebeeck and the Hottentots 1652-1662
South African Archaeological Bulletin, 7: 7-53.
Marback,
R., 2004. A Tale of Two Plaques: Rhetoric in Cape Town. Rhetoric
Review, 23: 253-268
Martin,
M., 1996. The Rainbow Nation: Identity and Transformation.
Oxford Art Journal, 19: 3-15.
Thom,
H.B. (ed.) 1954. Journal of Jan Van Riebeeck, 1651-1662 Vols
I-III, Cape Town: Balkema.
Van Zyl,
C.H., 1908. The Batavian and the Cape Plakaten - An Historical
Narrative. South African Law Journal, 25: 4-25.
Acknowledgements
The cache container and its contents was
provided complete and readymade as a (booby) prize at the
nICE Event in Cape Town (GC2480V). Thank you for a great event,
we hope we've put the container to good use.
Dr. Antonia Malan was kind enough to fact check
this entry for us.
|