No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Critical Analysis of James Stuart’s A History of the Zulu Rebellion 1906
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 February 2014
Abstract
James Stuart was employed by the Natal government to make a “compilation” describing British military operations against a Zulu insurrection in 1906, but he took so long to complete the work that it was published in 1913 with private funds and included a discussion of the event’s aftermath. In this critical analysis of Stuart’s work, emphasis is placed on the long process of its compilation and writing as well as Stuart’s use of sources, and the internal coherence of his argument.
Résumé
James Stuart fut chargé par le gouvernement du Natal de rédiger une “compilation” qui décrivît les opérations militaires de répression de l’insurrection zulu de 1906. Cependant, ce travail lui prit tellement de temps que ceci fut finalement publié en 1913 sur des fonds privés en incluant un débat a posteriori de cet évènement. Dans l’analyse critique du travail de Stuart l’on met en évidence surtout le long processus de production de cette compilation, du travail d’écriture et de l’usage des sources par Stuart ainsi que la cohérence interne de son argumentation.
- Type
- New Sources For South African History
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © African Studies Association 2014
References
Cobbing, Julian, “A Tainted Well. The Objectives, Historical Fantasies, and Working Methods of James Stuart, with a Counter-Argument,” The Journal of Natal and Zulu History 40 (1988), 118–154.Google Scholar
Colenbrander, Benjamin, “An Account of the Zulu Rebellion of 1906: The Unofficial Report of Benjamin Colenbrander, Resident Magistrate of the Nkandhla Division, Province of Zululand,” Natalia 35 (2005), 10–28.Google Scholar
Guy, Jeff, The Maphumulo Uprising: War, Law and Ritual in the Zulu Rebellion (Scottsville: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press, 2005).Google Scholar
Guy, Jeff, Remembering the Rebellion: The Zulu Uprising of 1906 (Scottsville: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press, 2006).Google Scholar
Haggard, Henry R., Diary of an African Journey (Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press, 2000).Google Scholar
Hamilton, Carolyn A., “Authoring Shaka: Models, Metaphors and Historiography,” PhD dissertation, The Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore MA, 1993).Google Scholar
Hamilton, Carolyn A, “James Stuart and ‘the Establishment of a Living Source of Tradition’,” seminar paper, University of the Witwatersrand (1 August 1994).Google Scholar
Hamilton, Carolyn A, Terrific Majesty: The Powers of Shaka Zulu and the Limits of Historical Invention (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
Hamilton, Carolyn A, “Backstory, Biography, and the Life of the James Stuart Archive,” History in Africa 38 (2011), 319–341.Google Scholar
Kearney, J.A., Representing Dissension: Riot, Rebellion and Resistance in the South African English Novel (Pretoria: University of South Africa Press, 2003).Google Scholar
Mahoney, Michael R., The Other Zulus: The Spread of Zulu Ethnicity in Colonial South Africa (Durham NC: Duke University Press, 2012).Google Scholar
Maphalala, Simon Jabulani, “The Policies of the Transvaal and Natal Governments Toward Dinuzulu 1897–1913,” PhD dissertation, University of South Africa (Pretoria, 1989).Google Scholar
Marks, Shula, Reluctant Rebellion: The 1906–1908 Disturbances in Natal (Oxford: Clarendon, 1970).Google Scholar
Stuart, James, A History of the Zulu Rebellion 1906 and of Dinuzulu’s Arrest, Trial and Expatriation (London: Macmillan, 1913).Google Scholar
Thompson, Paul S, “Dinizulu and Bhambatha, 1906: An Invasion of Natal and an Uprising in Zululand that Almost Took Place,” Historia 58–2 (2013), 40–69.Google Scholar
Webb, C.de, B., and Wright, John B. (eds.), The James Stuart Archive of Recorded Oral Evidence Relating to the History of the Zulu and Neighbouring Peoples (5 volumes) (Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press, 1976–2001).Google Scholar