Talk:Battle of Blood River
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. | ||||||||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
Battle of Blood River is part of WikiProject South Africa, a WikiProject which aims to systematically improve South Africa-related articles using the tools on the Project page. You are welcome and encouraged to edit the article attached to this page and to join the project. |
I deleted the following:
In 1978 a prominent Pretoria academic Floors van Jaarsveld questioned the motivation behind the commemoration of the victory and was subsequently tarred and feathered during a public lecture by members of the Afrikaner Resistance Movement.
Reason: This is a military history article; not relevant.
Luidier 09:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I changed the sentence "As usual, the ox wagons were drawn into a protective circle (Afrikaans: laager)" to "As usual, the ox wagons were drawn into a protective circle or laager)". This is because the English form, "laager" while sharing the same root as the Afrikaans word is not the same. The Afrikaans word is laer. Booshank 16:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I believe that the information contained under the heading “interpretations of the meaning of the battle” in this article is too opinionated, and that this section should be removed until more supporting evidence can be found. Remember, this incident happened over 160 years ago, so main resources should only be of that created during or not too long after that time.
Let me elaborate: “Afrikaners accepted that the Battle demonstrated God's intervention, and hence their divine right to exist. The claim in the official guidebook of the Voortrekker Monument (unveiled during the centenary celebrations of the Great Trek on December 16, 1949) that Afrikaners were a nation of heroes exemplifies the conclusions drawn from such events. In time, some Afrikaners came to consider the site and the commemoration of the day as sacred.” 1.) First of all, what is the exact resource for this information? 2.) Afrikaner were religious people of the Christian believe, thus it was by their believe that God intervened. 3.) “...and hence their divine right to exist...” Which Afrikaner in those times said it was their “divine right” to exist after the battle? The context or structure of this sentence gives the impression that they “didn’t actually have the right” to exist...? 4.) “were a nation of heroes...” “... exemplifies the conclusions drawn from such events.” I don’t think this sentence gives enough details of “heroes” to what event? Blood river event? And to what conclusion? The conclusion that “Afrikaners came to consider the site and the commemoration of the day as sacred”??? This sentence implies that the Afrikaner came to that conclusion after 16 December 1949, after published works of person’s such as G.M. Theal, while in actual fact: The jurisdiction of South Africa did not exist before 1910, and the Boers Republics were constantly under thread, so they never had a fixed opportunity to commemorate a day such as 16 December (like on 19 December 1949) and after 1910 the Afrikaner cultured parties of that time did not manage the country until 1948. So they could have concluded that before since 1938 and not the Afrikaner after 1949, who just lived on the tradition as most cultured would. 5.) “In time, some Afrikaners came to consider the site and the commemoration of the day as sacred.” Given point 4’s detail, they could have considered the site and the commemoration of the day as sacred since 1838, it just was not “exemplified” as much back then due to the situation mentioned in no 4. “In time” implies that this happened only after 1949 (closer to today’s time), and was not a "believe" of the Afrikaner of that time, but a believe among Afrikaners only in today’s time or closer to today’s time.
“Even some Afrikaners were uneasy with the official version. Mackenzie notes that a Dutch Reformed clergymen later wrote that Blood River " 'was not a battle, it was an execution' "” Meckenzie made the note of a Dutch reformed clergymen, but does “one Dutch person” give substantial evidence to write a sentence such as “Even some Afrikaners were uneasy with the official version”?
EV Wool 17:56, 17 November 2007 (CAT)
