AGE3702 ASSIGNMENT 05 2025
UNIQUE NUMBER: 887207
DUE DATE: 18 AUGUST 2025
QUESTION 1
OPTION 1
Impact of Apartheid Ideology upon South African Archaeology 1950s to Early
1990s
The apartheid regime, which governed South Africa from 1948 until the early 1990s,
had a marked impact on the practice, development, and public representation of
archaeology in South Africa. From ideological superiority and racial segregation,
apartheid controls had an impact on the manner in which archaeology was practiced,
what narratives were being told, and the way archaeology was represented to the
public. This essay critically examines these impacts from specific examples and
considers the reactions of archaeologists to them.
1. State Attitudes towards Archaeology
During apartheid, the South African state broadly viewed archaeology as a tool to
further nationalist and racially informed ideas. Archaeological excavations regularly
sought to work in support of notions of racial superiority, focusing on the supposed
supremacy of certain groups and exclusion of others. For instance, the focus on the
"Homo erectos" Sterkfontein fossils, which belonged to early human ancestors, was
selectively employed to create racial origin myths that promoted the Afrikaner-
dominated regime's ideology (Inskeep, 1970). Such explanations had a tendency to
exclude or devalue histories of indigenous peoples, notably Black South Africans and
the San.
Furthermore, government policies towards archaeology were generally restrictive,
aiming at those projects that worked towards the political vision. Government
investments went to excavations and research that promoted the dream of a
"civilized" white South Africa with deep historical roots in the prehistory of the
country, while those that highlighted indigenous or minority history were repressed or
overlooked. For example, archaeological sites belonging to San and Khoikhoi
,communities were demoted or misrepresented, corresponding with the regime's
sidelining of such communities (King, 2012).
2. Apartheid Education Policies and Representation in Textbooks Roles
Apartheid education policies endeavoured to make racial segregation easier and
maintain ideological narratives, extending to representations of archaeology and
prehistory in school textbooks. School textbooks at that time often depicted
prehistory and archaeology on racial lines, centering on stories that supported
apartheid ideologies. Textbooks, for example, would emphasize the supposed
superiority of certain racial groups by depicting their "civilizational" accomplishments
while neglecting or skirting the histories of Black and indigenous peoples (Smith,
1990).
Prehistory was, at times, represented as a story of "progress" which linked white
ancestors to advanced civilizations, subtly pushing non-white histories to the
periphery. The San and Khoikhoi were represented typically as peripheral or primitive
figures in the archaeological record, perpetuating racial inferiority stereotypes
(Lewis-Williams, 1986). This representation worked to justify the apartheid regime by
creating a prehistoric narrative of racial distinction.
3. Reactions and Actions of Archaeologists
Despite these ideological constraints, there were some archaeologists who tried to
counter and challenge the hegemonic discourses. Various scholars tried to put
indigenous and marginalized histories at the forefront, advocating an inclusive
practice of archaeology. For example, J.D. Lewis-Williams (1986) emphasized
understanding San rock art as a necessary part of South African cultural heritage
against apartheid government marginalization.
Additionally, some archaeologists set up opposing movements or became involved in
activism to push for the recognition of indigenous pasts. The development of
educational archaeology, as described by King (2012), aimed to democratize
archaeological knowledge and place it within affordable reach beyond elite
academies to foster a more inclusive understanding of South Africa's past. These
actions tended to be met with resistance from official institutions but opened the door
for post-apartheid efforts toward decolonizing archaeology and diversifying histories.
, In short, apartheid ideology significantly influenced South African archaeology
between the 1950s and early 1990s by restricting government control, pro-apartheid
educational books, and censoring public debate. As archaeologists resisted with
critique and trying to broaden the record, though, the period was also characterized
by an archaeology leaning all too frequently in the direction of facilitating the
ideological objectives of a segregated state. Post-apartheid periods have since tried
to balance these out by focusing on inclusive and decolonized archaeological
practice
REFERENCES
Inskeep, R.R. (1970). Archaeology and society in South Africa. South African
Archaeological Bulletin, 25(99), 1-10.
King, R. (2012). Teaching archaeological pasts in South Africa: Historical and
contemporary considerations of archaeological education. Educational Archaeology,
LU 7.
Lewis-Williams, J.D. (1986). The San: Life, belief and art. Southern Book Publishers.
Smith, A.B. (1990). The Hotnot syndrome: myth-making in South African school
textbooks. South African Journal of Education, 10(2), 123-134.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPTION 2
Archaeology and apartheid: a critical review of the National Party
government's role in the formulation and practice of archaeology in South
Africa, 1950s-1990s.
The apartheid ideology of the National Party administration impacted significantly
upon the practice, development, and public presentation of archaeology in South
Africa between the 1950s and early 1990s. This essay critically examines the
government's response to archaeology, the impact of apartheid education policy, and
the responses of archaeologists to these challenges.
The apartheid ideology of the National Party administration attempted to justify its
racist policies by manipulatively constructing histories. Archaeology as a field was
not immune to these influences. The policies of the government towards archaeology
UNIQUE NUMBER: 887207
DUE DATE: 18 AUGUST 2025
QUESTION 1
OPTION 1
Impact of Apartheid Ideology upon South African Archaeology 1950s to Early
1990s
The apartheid regime, which governed South Africa from 1948 until the early 1990s,
had a marked impact on the practice, development, and public representation of
archaeology in South Africa. From ideological superiority and racial segregation,
apartheid controls had an impact on the manner in which archaeology was practiced,
what narratives were being told, and the way archaeology was represented to the
public. This essay critically examines these impacts from specific examples and
considers the reactions of archaeologists to them.
1. State Attitudes towards Archaeology
During apartheid, the South African state broadly viewed archaeology as a tool to
further nationalist and racially informed ideas. Archaeological excavations regularly
sought to work in support of notions of racial superiority, focusing on the supposed
supremacy of certain groups and exclusion of others. For instance, the focus on the
"Homo erectos" Sterkfontein fossils, which belonged to early human ancestors, was
selectively employed to create racial origin myths that promoted the Afrikaner-
dominated regime's ideology (Inskeep, 1970). Such explanations had a tendency to
exclude or devalue histories of indigenous peoples, notably Black South Africans and
the San.
Furthermore, government policies towards archaeology were generally restrictive,
aiming at those projects that worked towards the political vision. Government
investments went to excavations and research that promoted the dream of a
"civilized" white South Africa with deep historical roots in the prehistory of the
country, while those that highlighted indigenous or minority history were repressed or
overlooked. For example, archaeological sites belonging to San and Khoikhoi
,communities were demoted or misrepresented, corresponding with the regime's
sidelining of such communities (King, 2012).
2. Apartheid Education Policies and Representation in Textbooks Roles
Apartheid education policies endeavoured to make racial segregation easier and
maintain ideological narratives, extending to representations of archaeology and
prehistory in school textbooks. School textbooks at that time often depicted
prehistory and archaeology on racial lines, centering on stories that supported
apartheid ideologies. Textbooks, for example, would emphasize the supposed
superiority of certain racial groups by depicting their "civilizational" accomplishments
while neglecting or skirting the histories of Black and indigenous peoples (Smith,
1990).
Prehistory was, at times, represented as a story of "progress" which linked white
ancestors to advanced civilizations, subtly pushing non-white histories to the
periphery. The San and Khoikhoi were represented typically as peripheral or primitive
figures in the archaeological record, perpetuating racial inferiority stereotypes
(Lewis-Williams, 1986). This representation worked to justify the apartheid regime by
creating a prehistoric narrative of racial distinction.
3. Reactions and Actions of Archaeologists
Despite these ideological constraints, there were some archaeologists who tried to
counter and challenge the hegemonic discourses. Various scholars tried to put
indigenous and marginalized histories at the forefront, advocating an inclusive
practice of archaeology. For example, J.D. Lewis-Williams (1986) emphasized
understanding San rock art as a necessary part of South African cultural heritage
against apartheid government marginalization.
Additionally, some archaeologists set up opposing movements or became involved in
activism to push for the recognition of indigenous pasts. The development of
educational archaeology, as described by King (2012), aimed to democratize
archaeological knowledge and place it within affordable reach beyond elite
academies to foster a more inclusive understanding of South Africa's past. These
actions tended to be met with resistance from official institutions but opened the door
for post-apartheid efforts toward decolonizing archaeology and diversifying histories.
, In short, apartheid ideology significantly influenced South African archaeology
between the 1950s and early 1990s by restricting government control, pro-apartheid
educational books, and censoring public debate. As archaeologists resisted with
critique and trying to broaden the record, though, the period was also characterized
by an archaeology leaning all too frequently in the direction of facilitating the
ideological objectives of a segregated state. Post-apartheid periods have since tried
to balance these out by focusing on inclusive and decolonized archaeological
practice
REFERENCES
Inskeep, R.R. (1970). Archaeology and society in South Africa. South African
Archaeological Bulletin, 25(99), 1-10.
King, R. (2012). Teaching archaeological pasts in South Africa: Historical and
contemporary considerations of archaeological education. Educational Archaeology,
LU 7.
Lewis-Williams, J.D. (1986). The San: Life, belief and art. Southern Book Publishers.
Smith, A.B. (1990). The Hotnot syndrome: myth-making in South African school
textbooks. South African Journal of Education, 10(2), 123-134.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPTION 2
Archaeology and apartheid: a critical review of the National Party
government's role in the formulation and practice of archaeology in South
Africa, 1950s-1990s.
The apartheid ideology of the National Party administration impacted significantly
upon the practice, development, and public presentation of archaeology in South
Africa between the 1950s and early 1990s. This essay critically examines the
government's response to archaeology, the impact of apartheid education policy, and
the responses of archaeologists to these challenges.
The apartheid ideology of the National Party administration attempted to justify its
racist policies by manipulatively constructing histories. Archaeology as a field was
not immune to these influences. The policies of the government towards archaeology
