Smuts: Lost in Transmission?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SMUTS: LOST IN TRANSMISSION? by PAUL ANTHONY LUDI Submitted as requirement for the degree MAGISTER HEREDITATIS CULTURAEQUE SCIENTIAE (HISTORY) in the Faculty of Humanities University of Pretoria Pretoria November 2016 Supervisor: Professor Karen L. Harris © University of Pretoria i Abstract This dissertation examines the transmission of the past and how it is affected by context, source materials, and the individual with regards to opinion and inherent bias. The subject of this analysis is Jan Christiaan Smuts and how he has been portrayed over the last century. Various authors are analysed with W. K. Hancock forming a kind of watershed given the access to primary material. The dissertation includes a brief discussion of South African historiography as well as a brief biographical outline of Smuts’s life. The main concern is however a literature analysis of selected material which will set out to illustrate how information is often “lost in transmission.” Keywords: Smuts; Hancock; past; historiography; biography, transmission; literature analysis; South African history. © University of Pretoria ii Acknowledgements Firstly, I would like to thank my long-suffering supervisor for all the support and guidance. I would also like to thank my equally long-suffering family for their support and motivation. A word of thanks must also go to Nick Southey for the inspiration for the title of and indirect motivation for this Masters’ dissertation. © University of Pretoria iii Contents Abstract .................................................................................................................................. i Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... ii List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ v CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 1.1 Rationale for this study .................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Historiographical trends ................................................................................................ 5 1.3 Biographical sketch ...................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Outline of chapters ....................................................................................................... 13 CHAPTER 2: PRE-HANCOCK LITERATURE ............................................................... 15 2.1 Non-biographies ........................................................................................................... 15 2.2 Biography-Sarah Gertrude Millin .............................................................................. 24 2.3 Biography-H. C. Armstrong ........................................................................................ 37 CHAPTER 3: HANCOCK VOLUME ONE ....................................................................... 52 3.1 W. K. Hancock .............................................................................................................. 52 3.2 Early years until the First World War ....................................................................... 53 3.3 First World War and Botha’s death ........................................................................... 66 CHAPTER 4: HANCOCK VOLUME TWO ...................................................................... 69 4.1 Smuts alone ................................................................................................................... 69 4.2 Second World War and death ..................................................................................... 86 © University of Pretoria iv CHAPTER 5: POST-HANCOCK LITERATURE ............................................................ 96 5.1 Non-biographies ........................................................................................................... 96 5.2 Biography-Anthony Lentin ....................................................................................... 130 5.3 Biography-Richard Steyn .......................................................................................... 141 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION............................................................................................ 150 © University of Pretoria v List of Abbreviations OB-Ossewa Brandwag RAF-Royal Air Force UNO-United Nations Organisation USA-United States of America ZAR-Zuid Afrikaansche Republiek © University of Pretoria 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale for this study Historical writing, and indeed all forms of writing, are naturally imbued with bias for a variety of reasons. Deliberate falsification, propaganda and the error of human subjectivity account for much of the distortion in historical reporting. Error can be because of direct motives such as political ambition or unintentional through ignorance.1 Each historian looks at the past through the prism of his own time, background and culture, which is why history is continually reinterpreted leading to various accounts of the past or multiple pasts.2 Therefore the purpose of this dissertation is to illustrate that the transmission of the past is of equal, if not more importance, than the past itself; or as one historian puts it: “The point of 3 history is to study historians, not to study the past.” Or, to put it another way: “Before you study the historian, study his [sic] historical and social environment. The historian, being an 4 individual, is also a product of history and of society.” As we move into the twenty-first century, such a study seems most apt. One important task of historians is to challenge socially motivated misrepresentations of the past.5 To do this an example which has created much variety in the opinions of historians in the past needs to be used and examined. The example chosen for this study is Field Marshal Jan Christiaan Smuts due to the vast amount of literature focused on him. Smuts is also a highly enigmatic character that resulted in many of his contemporaries, and authors to this day, either admiring or despising him. Even his nickname of “Slim Jannie” evokes different emotions among different people. Famous people are often, and quite easily, portrayed as demons or saints, and Jan Smuts is no stranger to this.6 John Tosh refers to “the towering political personalities of the past such as Oliver Cromwell or Napoleon Bonaparte who are interpreted in widely divergent ways by professional historians as well as by lay people, partly according to their own political values.”7 Such a statement could very easily include a man of the stature of Smuts and this is in essence what this study sets out to do. By investigating the literature on 1 R. J. Shafer (ed), A guide to historical method, Dorsey Press: Homewood, 1980 pp 144-5; G. R. Elton, The practice of history, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2002, p 96; M. MacMillan, The uses and abuses of history, London: Profile Books Ltd, 2009, back cover 2 R. J. Shafer (ed), A guide to historical method, p 147 3 R. J. Evans, In defence of history, London: Granta Books, 1997, p 98 4 E. H. Carr, What is history?, Houndmills, Hampshire: Palgrave Publishers Ltd, 2001, p 38 5 J. Tosh, The pursuit of history, London: Pearson Education Limited, 2002, p 21 6 B. L. Michler, Biographical study of H.-A, Junod: the fictional dimension, M.A. Thesis, U.P., 2003, p 17 7 J. Tosh, The pursuit of history, p 180 © University of Pretoria 2 Jan Smuts this study seeks to show how this pivotal figure in South Africa, as well as the broader sphere of Western world history, has been portrayed. This study is in essence a literature review which will be contextualized both in terms of his life history as well as the context of the range of authors who wrote about him. Thus unlike most history Master’s dissertations which include a literature survey before the main body of analysis, in this dissertation the main substance of this study is the literature survey as the focus is on how various literary sources portrayed one individual. Due to the vast body of literature available on Smuts only those texts that are focused mainly on him will be used, rather than broader general histories. A few of the latter will be noted and an explanation will be given as to why they are included within the study. Many of the authors who composed the relevant literature often had some form of bias or subjectivity, both of which are common amongst writers. According to Shafer, “subjectivity” can be described as an inescapable human quality, while “bias” is regarded as a human 8 chosen commitment. But often it is the primary documents that themselves create a bias as 9 they are also written from a particular individual’s point of view or vantage point. Moreover, the nature of the primary sources that are available, indeed accessible, also play a determining role in the historians ability to reconstruct the past. As indicated earlier, before we read the history, we need to examine the background of the historian. Therefore this approach involves the authors’ backgrounds, historiographical approaches and the contexts that they are writing in.10 Any selection of sources will create bias thus in appraising the literature on Smuts a fairly wide range of sources have been selected – both in terms of period and ideological disposition.11 In the light of the parameters of a Master’s