Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: eliotpollak on July 04, 2010, 03:48:50 AM
-
I was reading this week of a match at Villa Park back in 1899, between us and a team of touring black South Africans.
Now obviously matches against non-British clubs were exceedingly rare, let alone versus black players from a different continent. I suspect it was our first match against foreign opposition and 4,000 were in attendance.
Villa won and the £61 raised from the game was donated to the Birmingham Daily Mail Reservists Fund, in support of the British war effort against white South Africans in the Boer War.
Can any of the more eminent AVFC historians on the site add anything to this extraordinary tale?
-
I wonder if any of the traditional vuvuzela's were being 'played'?
-
Sounds a fascinating story. You know, the more you look into it, the more complicated British colonialism gets. Obviously it was a bad thing inherently, but in practice it wasn't quite the "Evil Empire" Americans in particular would like to believe.
-
I wonder if any of the traditional vuvuzela's were being 'played'?
They were. And all the taverns of Aston were alive with arguments about them afterwards.
-
Sounds a fascinating story. You know, the more you look into it, the more complicated British colonialism gets. Obviously it was a bad thing inherently, but in practice it wasn't quite the "Evil Empire" Americans in particular would like to believe.
Maybe Mel Gibson could make a film?
-
Sounds a fascinating story. You know, the more you look into it, the more complicated British colonialism gets. Obviously it was a bad thing inherently, but in practice it wasn't quite the "Evil Empire" Americans in particular would like to believe.
Maybe Mel Gibson could make a film?
Excellent comment - but could the finale of the film actually kill not just the character?
-
Gibson would just take the side of the Boers.
-
Gibson would just take the side of the Boers.
The British killed his family... now he is taking them on at their own sport...
-
First I've heard of it. I'll make enquiries.
-
Thanks Dave
-
Sounds a fascinating story. You know, the more you look into it, the more complicated British colonialism gets. Obviously it was a bad thing inherently, but in practice it wasn't quite the "Evil Empire" Americans in particular would like to believe.
My understanding of the Boer War is basic at best. From what I grasp of it, though, it was simply one colonial power fighting a more established colonial power for the natural resources of a land that belonged to neither of them. Many, many young soldiers' lives were sacrificed out of pure greed.
How the native peoples of southern Africa seem to have forgiven and moved on is a fine testimony to them.
-
Sounds a fascinating story. You know, the more you look into it, the more complicated British colonialism gets. Obviously it was a bad thing inherently, but in practice it wasn't quite the "Evil Empire" Americans in particular would like to believe.
My understanding of the Boer War is basic at best. From what I grasp of it, though, it was simply one colonial power fighting a more established colonial power for the natural resources of a land that belonged to neither of them. Many, many young soldiers' lives were sacrificed out of pure greed.
How the native peoples of southern Africa seem to have forgiven and moved on is a fine testimony to them.
It is. Mind you, I'd like to think most of us have forgiven the Germans, say, or the Japanese despite their conduct in the War. The differential factors with the Africans are the lengths of time suffered and the lack of prosperity since. The War lasted six years and Britain recovered economically, eventually. Africa still hasn't recovered from colonialism.
However, it's not entirely a one-sided thing (though it mostly is). To the extent that many former colonial countries are thriving, the ones who are thriving are the ones who make best use of the infrastructure colonialists installed. India in particular only thrives to the extent it does today thanks to rail networks and the beaurocracy installed by the British. It doesn't go near compensating, but it's something.
-
Sounds a fascinating story. You know, the more you look into it, the more complicated British colonialism gets. Obviously it was a bad thing inherently, but in practice it wasn't quite the "Evil Empire" Americans in particular would like to believe.
My understanding of the Boer War is basic at best. From what I grasp of it, though, it was simply one colonial power fighting a more established colonial power for the natural resources of a land that belonged to neither of them. Many, many young soldiers' lives were sacrificed out of pure greed.
How the native peoples of southern Africa seem to have forgiven and moved on is a fine testimony to them.
It is. Mind you, I'd like to think most of us have forgiven the Germans, say, or the Japanese despite their conduct in the War. The differential factors with the Africans are the lengths of time suffered and the lack of prosperity since. The War lasted six years and Britain recovered economically, eventually. Africa still hasn't recovered from colonialism.
However, it's not entirely a one-sided thing (though it mostly is). To the extent that many former colonial countries are thriving, the ones who are thriving are the ones who make best use of the infrastructure colonialists installed. India in particular only thrives to the extent it does today thanks to rail networks and the beaurocracy installed by the British. It doesn't go near compensating, but it's something.
I'm not too sure Britain ever really did recover economically from the second world war. We lost pretty much everything. In many ways, we lost the war as much as the Germans or Japanese did, if not more.
Colonialism in the wider sense is one thing, but we did some pretty awful things in the Boer War. The obvious one being the invention of concentration camps.
Slight tangent, and speaking generally rather than re your post, Monty, but I don't really get the argument that most of us have forgiven the Germans, when these days the vast majority of us have nothing to forgive the Germans for.
I don't, I was born in 1968. My father doesn't, either, he was born in 1939 (three days before we declared war, as it happens!).
It is also strange how the British talk so much about forgiving the Germans when other nations suffered far, far more at their hands (pretty much the entirety of non-neutral Europe, including the Italians, who were initially their allies), or the Japanese (look at how the Chinese suffered).
-
Oh absolutely, and I think that's more to do with it. Modern South Africans don't have much to forgive the British for as it's so far in the past - the younger generation didn't even live through Apartheid! Time does its thing, and people don't so much forgive as forget.
I also agree with your first point, Paulie - the story of the 20th century is America's victories in two bloodless wars: the economic decline and fall of European, mostly British, empire (accelerated rapidly by the war), and the ideological Cold War with the USSR.
As for the British Empire itself, it was on course to be an all right thing long-term until the 1820s, where dangerous ideas such as political dominion, state imperialism and especially religious superiority and evangelicism. Until then, in India at least, there was a sense of economic partnership - indeed, many Indians welcomed the early British settlers as economic and political liberators from the decayed Moghul era - and there were many examples of "partnership thinking" with the Indians. But then we lost America, and the hurt pride of the nation led to more domineering thinking, and by the mutiny the whole thing had just gone nuts.
-
First time I have ever heard a story along these lines. Where were you reading about this?
-
Have you read Empire by Niall Ferguson, Monty?
Is very good, if a little bit rose tinted.
-
Not it itself, but I know his views and for every one that's informative and seemingly true there seems to be another which is a bit Cecil Rhodes-ish. Interesting stuff, though.
-
The only vague snippet I have been able to find which may be relevant is here.
http://www.actsa.org/Pictures/UpImages/ACTSA_Timeline%20table%20with%20football.pdf
1898 The Orange Free State Bantu Football
Club tours England, becoming the first South
African team to play in Europe.
-
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a747726452&fulltext=713240928#references
The author notes that the first South African team to play in England in 1898 was the Orange Free State Bantu Football Club based in Bloemfontein and states that 'virtually nothing is known about this group'.[14] However Raath, drawing on English newspapers, the Newcastle Daily Journal, Bolton Evening News, and Reading Standard, suggests a team out of depth on tour, playing and losing 37 matches, bar one draw and conceding over 200 goals in 1899
-
http://www.sa2010.gov.za/en/confederations-cup/football-sa
The first recorded history of organised black football is in the Orange Free State Bantu Football Club, who went on to famously tour Britain before the turn of the 20th century.
Their side was made up of 20 players, who had a lengthy journey by steamer and were thrust straight into action just days after arrival with a match at Newcastle United. After that they played many of the leading clubs , among their opponents modern giants like Glasgow Celtic, Manchester City, Bolton Wanderers, Aston Villa, Tottenham Hotspur and Middlesborough.
-
John Russell (who else) has unearthed a load of information about this. I'll post it when I return.
-
Excellent
-
John, God bless him, "couldn't find much." This is his 'not much' about an obscure friendly from the century before last.
Report 30 June 1899 Arrangements have been made for the visit of a Kaffir football team to England next season. The visitors will tour under the auspices of the Orange Free State Club.
Their opening match will be against AV in Aeptember and a fixture has also been settled with Sheffield United. The Kaffirs will play in Bristol and then tour South Wales. The team is said to be strong, the players being of splendid physique.
report 19 August 1899 ... the opening engagement will be with AV in the first week of September. W.Williams of Llanelly is acting for the visitors and has arranged over 40 fixtures with the crack combinations in England and Scotland. The Kaffir team who with reserves will number 18 are first class players with wonderful staying powers
Report 29 August 1899 The football match arranged between Aston Villa and the Kaffirs for Friday (September 1st) has been indefinitely postponed on account of the team having missed their connection in CAPETOWN, due, it is thought to the floods. They do not arrive until next week.
(So the cancellation was nothing to do with the fact that Villa were due at Sunderland on Sat Sep 2 - what sort of team were the villa going to put out? - JR)
A decided compliment was on Monday (20th November 1899) paid to Wheldon the tricky AV forward by the Kaffirs who played a game with the Villa at Aston in aid of the local Reservists fund.
They averred that Wheldon was "the mightiest football chief they had ever seen", and indeed some of his passing work amazed most of the crowd. The Kaffirs, who paid their own expenses to Birmingham so that the gross great receipts might go to the fund, were beaten by 7 goals to 4."
Just as fascinating is the next item...
"Howard Spencer, the Aston Villa player who received a kick on the knee at Liverpool has been found extremely lame.......
"When he reached Birmingham the limb was so stiff that he could not walk home, and there being no cabs, he had to stay at a neighbouring hotel.
"He will probably be out of the team for two or three weeks"
The Kaffir story continues....
"The Kaffirs, who are making a long tour of the country visited Portsmouth on Wednesday (6 December 1899) and were entertained by the Portsmouth Reserves at Fratton Park. The Africans had not much idea of football, and although Portsmouth took matters very calmly, they won by 7 goals to 3."
They then played Bristol City at St. Johns Lane, Bristol on New Years Day 1900 at 2.15. The pre-match publicity states, "they have been touring England, Scotland and France and although the do not profess to be quite the equals of AV, Sunderland and other clubs of note they have had the honour of playing against them."
-
Brilliant.
-
Please pass on a doff of the cap to John.
-
Thanks and very interesting stuff.
If the match had been played on Friday 1st Sept, I bet in those days we would probably have still put the first team out even though it was the opening league game of the season the next day at Sunderland.
Good stuff about Howard `sick note` Spencer too.
(http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/ASTONevansA.jpg)
-
As for the British Empire itself, it was on course to be an all right thing long-term until the 1820s, where dangerous ideas such as political dominion, state imperialism and especially religious superiority and evangelicism. Until then, in India at least, there was a sense of economic partnership - indeed, many Indians welcomed the early British settlers as economic and political liberators from the decayed Moghul era - and there were many examples of "partnership thinking" with the Indians. But then we lost America, and the hurt pride of the nation led to more domineering thinking, and by the mutiny the whole thing had just gone nuts.
We lost the Thirteen colonies some 50 years before 1820 and a good thing to, as they were costing us money. There was more revenue from the fishing in Nova Scotia than the 13 colonies, including the Virginian tobacco.
India, like most of the Empire, was gained by accident really in the 1850's, when the Crown took over from the East India Company which had been running British interests, politically, economically and militarily for two hundred years.
The sense of “revenge” at the time was held in French, who were steaming following our victory in the Seven Years War in Canada. Their entire intervention into the civil war now daubed the American War of Independence was an attempt to put down Nova Carthago as they saw us. Hilariously for them, the war bankrupted them and lead to the revolution and their decapitation. Waap waap waaa.
Waaaaaaaaaaaay off topic.
Have you read Empire by Niall Ferguson, Monty?
Is very good, if a little bit rose tinted.
Nothing rose tinted about it all. An excellent analysis that stresses the critical point that it wasn’t a case of British rule or democratic self-determination, but always something a whole lot worse like the Belgians or the Japanese. People without an historic education too easily fall into the problem of viewing history in a vacuum.
Back on topic.
That information is really fascinating. It makes you wonder what other gems have been lost.