South African tour of 1899

[eliotpollak]

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?

[BannedUserIAT]

I wonder if any of the traditional vuvuzela's were being 'played'?

[Monty]

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.

[not3bad]

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.

[Small Rodent]

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?

[newtonsballs]

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?

[Monty]

Gibson would just take the side of the Boers.

[not3bad]

Gibson would just take the side of the Boers.

The British killed his family... now he is taking them on at their own sport...

[dave.woodhall]

First I've heard of it. I'll make enquiries.

[eliotpollak]

Thanks Dave

[Billy Walker]

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.

[Monty]

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.

[pauliewalnuts]

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).

[Monty]

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.

[Andy_Lochhead_in_the_air]

First time I have ever heard a story along these lines.  Where were you reading about this?