What’s in a name?

South Africa has a long history of classifying people according to race. People often disagree about what to call people from different ethnic groups. This is not surprising because, throughout our history, people have used labels to refer to groups of people, and sometimes these labels have been used in a derogatory way.

The names San and Bushman are a good example of this issue. The early Dutch colonists called the hunter-gatherer people of the Cape Bushmen. In the sixteenth century, the hunter-gatherers just referred to themselves as “people”. They did not think of themselves in terms of race. The name Bushman became unpopular some years ago and people started using the name San or Sonqua. This was the name that the indigenous herders called the hunter-gatherers. However, some people now consider this name to be disrespectful, because they say that the herders used the name to point out that the hunter-gatherers had no cattle and were therefore inferior to them. This tendency to see one group as better than another group has driven South Africa’s unequal history.

The indigenous herders have also been known by many names. One of the earliest collective names used by the European travellers was Hottentot. The name came from a word that the people used to greet others. The word Hottentot, as well as the abbreviation Hotnot, are no longer acceptable because both words came to be used in a derogatory way. Today people use words like Khoi, Khoikhoi, Khoe, Khoekhoen or Kwena, meaning “real men” or “real people” to refer to the early nomadic herders of the Cape. However, the herders probably did not use a collective name to speak about themselves. Rather, they referred to themselves by their clan names, e.g. Gorinhaiqua, Gorinchaqua.

During the Apartheid era most South Africans were placed into one of four major racial groups: black, coloured, Indian and white. Having these groups served the political and economic interests of those in power. The groups became the basis of an unequal society in which white South Africans had the greatest rights and privileges, but black South Africans were most severely oppressed.

People placed into these groups have been called different things at different times; for example white people have also been called Europeans, even though the ancestors of many white South Africans left Europe more than 300 years ago and they would not have any ancestral rights to live in Europe today.

Many people reject the name coloured. Some refer to this grouping as “so-called coloured” to illustrate that it has no real meaning and was a name created and imposed on people for political reasons. People classified as coloured by the Apartheid government represent a rich diversity of people with varied cultures - including descendants of the indigenous Khoisan people, slaves from Asia and Madagascar, political exiles from Indonesia, and settlers from Europe and other parts of South Africa. Apartheid created some sense of coloured identity by classifying people as coloured and subjecting them to similar social, political and economic restrictions.

Black South Africans have been called many different names at different stages in history. One of the earliest names is now the most unacceptable: kaffir came from an Arabic word meaning “unbeliever” and was first used to describe people who did not follow the religion of Islam. Originally the word was simply descriptive, but it soon became an extremely disrespectful term. Some names for black South Africans started as neutral or even progressive terms. However, because these terms were used by an oppressive regime, they soon became unpopular and needed to be replaced. Some of these names include: native, Bantu and plural.

Today terms like black and African are more popular, but these are also under debate. For example, some people believe that only black Africans have the right to use the name African, while others believe that anyone who is committed to living in and contributing to the African continent should be called an African. Others point to the fact that, because there is evidence that human beings evolved in Africa, all people in the world are in fact Africans!

Names are not just neutral and descriptive. They embody the features, status and rights of people. They can be used by powerful groups to justify giving some people in society more power, privileges and opportunities than others. They can also be used by the oppressed to build unity and solidarity.

A name can be both a blessing and a curse. It can represent the character, nobility and hope of a person or people; or it can be a tool of name-calling, which hurts people and divides communities.

In post-Apartheid South Africa, can we use names to unite us rather than divide us?