Publications
Partners
I wonder too, how many of those taking part in the protests, do so out of hearsay, and not based on any tacit knowledge of Rhodes and/or his deeds? I thought it might be instructive to relay some pertinent historical facts, to perhaps add to the debate, or even change some minds.
Rhodes arrived in South Africa, a sickly 17-year old. At first he joined his brother on a farm in Natal, but did not meet with success. A year later, he moved to the newly established diamond fields at Colesberg Kopje (Kimberley) in search of his fortune.
Rhodes was not a miner per se, but shrewdly used capital provided by his financiers, to buy up claims from prospectors desperate to sell. Through the production of gems from his amalgamated workings, he amassed a substantial fortune.
Rhodes returned to England periodically, and ended up taking a degree from Oxford. Such was his regard for that institution, that he would ultimately establish the Rhodes Scholarship scheme, with the aim of sending students from around the world to study there.
At the age of 28, he became a Member of Parliament in the Cape Colony, becoming Prime Minister in 1890. As much as Rhodes was an unashamed imperialist and devoted to the Crown, he was particularly mindful of the Cape Afrikaners, more so than the average Cape English-speaker. He abolished legislation that discriminated against the Dutch, encouraged the use of Dutch, and funded Dutch education.
In 1888, his already considerable diamond holdings were increased manifold, through the establishment of the De Beers Conglomerate. At around the same time, he also invested in the newly established gold fields on the Rand.
In the early 1890s, in his quest for a red band traversing the map of Africa from Cape to Cairo, he set about the establishment of a territory north of the Limpopo, through the vehicle of the British Southern Africa Company.
The Matabele of southern Zimbabwe were having none of it, and a series of wars took place between them and BSAC patrols. Ultimately, western fire power would triumph over traditional weaponry, and King Lobengula was vanquished. In a grotesque show of gloating, Rhodes built his Bulawayo home over the ruins of Lobengula's wagon kraal. The structure remains to this day, and is known as State House.
By the mid-90s however, Rhodes recognised that antagonism between settlers and the local peoples were not beneficial, and he set about achieving peace with the Matabele, at a series of indabas in the Matopos hills. In 1895, the country that bore his name, Rhodesia, was officially constituted.
When Rhodes died in Cape Town, in 1902, his casket was brought from the Cape to Bulawayo, by train. The train stopped at a great many stations along the way, for people to pay their respects. Rhodes was interred on a granite hilltop at World's View, Matopos. His grave is covered with a brass plate bearing the simple epithet: "Here lie the remains of Cecil John Rhodes".
At his funeral, such was his rebuilt esteem with the Matabele, Rhodes became the first white man to be accorded the salute, bayete! By any measure, Cecil John Rhodes stands as a colossus in history.
One would expect that the one who brought "white evil" to Zimbabwe, would be reviled by Zimbabweans. There have even been moves to have his remains exhumed and sent elsewhere. But all such attempts have been thwarted, most notably by Robert Mugabe himself. Today, World's View is a World Heritage Site and popular tourist attraction.
Fast forward over one hundred years. One cannot entirely exonerate Rhodes for his mischief and cruel deeds. Workers in his mines were poorly treated. He distrusted the Afrikaner republics so much, that he motivated to have Kimberley zoned within the Cape, and not the Free State. For the same reason, he funded the invasion and attempted coup of the Zuid Afrikaansche Republiek, in 1895, so that his Johannesburg interests might fall under English control. He endorsed the killing of local peoples, as he set about the establishment and furtherance of empire.
However, what we must guard against, is the measurement of the man, strictly against today's "gold standards" for gender and fraternal egalitarianism. He is doomed to failure. In the same way that, by today's standards, Shaka would be seen as a genocidal maniac.
It is not for me to say the statue must stay or go. I do believe that some form of compromise, where it is retained, but moved to a place of less prominence, is required. What I do hope is that protesters and university management alike, take their actions based on a solid understanding of the character, and the era he lived his life in, and not on raw emotion.
