"De La Rey"-debate in South Africa

[Routasydän]

Some time ago I came across the Boer song about General De La Rey, a Boer hero and an important figure in the Second Boer War. It has generated (the song was released in 2006, as far as I know) a lot of debate surrounding the identity of the Boers and Afrikaans.

Here is the song with English subtitles:

+ YouTube Video

And here is a short clip about the controversy and the debate surrounding the song:

+ YouTube Video

Part 2:

+ YouTube Video

[Señor Malo]

The last sentence in the second part of the debate intrigates me.
it says "S.A. is sinking like Africa; why?"

I'm curious to know where do they want to come with

[Menydh]

For years the name of De La Rey caught my curiousity. It is clearly Spanish, even if modified. In Spanish, de el rey (contracted as del rey) means ("of the king", or "belonging to the king"). What changes in the name is the masculine article el for the feminine la.

What I had not realized through all these years, inspite of how obvious it was, is the meaning and the origin of such a family name.

Though I'm reluctant to accept the popular beliefs that certain family names (such as those pertaining to professions, or place of origin, or even those of a saint's name) are of Jewish origin, there is more than one indicator as to the Sephardic origin of this name.

To start with, at times in Castile the Jews were literally the property of the King, as a means to protect them from the rage of the people. So for a family of Marranos to take up on the name of "De el Rey" would make much sense, as they were called los judíos de el Rey.

To continue with, the pressure of the Holy Office over the Marranos (Crypto-Jews) made most of these flee Spain, and join their race brothers who had been expelled after the 1492 Edict (or had fled after the 1391 Progroms), in The Lowlands.

The Marranos, though nominally Christians, did play a role in the making of Protestantism and, more particularly, of Calvinism.

Anyway, with regards to the Apartheid, after having analyzed it with some care, I cannot say that I sympathize in the least with it. At least no if I am to be consequent with my own ideas. It never meant to separate peoples, but only to serve as an excuse to exploit the situation in Southern Africa.

It is therefore their own greed that has lost the Afrikaners, and other White South Africans. Afrikanerdom was one of the most socialist system ever, in the worst and most materialistic sense of the word.

With regards to the Afrikaners today, I would not be consequent either if I supported their presence in Africa. But I wouldn't want them here, in my country.

I'm afraid that they have become another lost tribe without a homeland or... were they not already a lost tribe because of own choice?

I do, however, feel sympathy (as in pity) for them. And I do sympathize (in an historical context) with their fight against the British during the Boer Wars.

The song is excellent.

[Señor Malo]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

For years the name of De La Rey caught my curiousity. It is clearly Spanish, even if modified. In Spanish, de el rey (contracted as del rey) means ("of the king", or "belonging to the king"). What changes in the name is the masculine article el for the feminine la.

Well, there was a french surgeon in Napoleon's army, Dominique-Jean Larrey
May be the two family names were related?

Dominique Jean Larrey - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Amorsite]

were they not already a lost tribe because of own choice?

What do you mean exactly? What about a South African of Dutch descent who wishes to return to the Netherlands for example? Do you still consider him a "traitor" or similar because of the decision of his ancestors to emmigrate?

According to this De La Rey is French.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Amorsite

What do you mean exactly?

They are Calvinists and as such they subscribe those ideas.

What about a South African of Dutch descent who wishes to return to the Netherlands for example? Do you still consider him a "traitor" or similar because of the decision of his ancestors to emmigrate?

I don't know what I said that made you derive such a conclusion of your own, not mine. "Traitors" in which way? What do you mean by "traitors"? "Traitors" to who or to what?

As to what about if they chose to return to The Netherlands, as if they chose to emigrate to Antartida. It is none of my business.

According to this De La Rey is French.

1. American genealogy companies and institutes (if such a difference exists, in reality) are --like anything American-- a big joke. We had one such "study" of our family name years ago, that some American gave as a gift to my father. Since they didn't have a clue because the name is rare over here, they made it derive from the name of one of the Visigothic kings, only because three letters coincided. Our name comes from Brittany, as the family tree attests. Some serious research would have saved them from the embarrassment. And, by the way, this was an institute which is supposed to have the largest family names database in America.
2. Even if it had arrived to The Netherlands from France, the Marrano-Calvinists fled first to France and from there to The Lowlands. Others fled directly to The Lowlands once the Marrano-Calvinist community was well established there.

[Amorsite]

I don't know what I said that made you derive such a conclusion of your own, not mine. "Traitors" in which way? What do you mean by "traitors"? "Traitors" to who or to what?
As to what about if they chose to return to The Netherlands, as if they chose to emigrate to Antartida. It is none of my business

I was merely trying to get at what your view is on someone who descends from a certain country migrating to it (ie a latin american of Spanish descent migrating to Spain for example).

1. American genealogy companies and institutes (if such a difference exists, in reality) are --like anything American-- a big joke. We had one such "study" of our family name years ago, that some American gave as a gift to my father. Since they didn't have a clue because the name is rare over here, they made it derive from the name of one of the Visigothic kings, only because three letters coincided. Our name comes from Brittany, as the family tree attests. Some serious research would have saved them from the embarrassment. And, by the way, this was an institute which is supposed to have the largest family names database in America.
2. Even if it had arrived to The Netherlands from France, the Marrano-Calvinists fled first to France and from there to The Lowlands. Others fled directly to The Lowlands once the Marrano-Calvinist community was well established there.

The company is Canadian but you could be right, I was merely posting the link. Take it for what its worth. I don't endorse or disapprove it.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Amorsite

I was merely trying to get at what your view is on someone who descends from a certain country migrating to it (ie a latin american of Spanish descent migrating to Spain for example).

Fine. I'm afraid that you will have to describe all cases where you would consider an American as of "Spanish descent".

[Amorsite]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Fine. I'm afraid that you will have to describe all cases where you would consider an American as of "Spanish descent".

Anyone born in the American continent who is only of Spanish ancestry.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Amorsite

Anyone born in the American continent who is only of Spanish ancestry.

You mean that both his parents or all of his/her [great-]grandparents are/were Spanish?

They are Spanish and no one except for themselves can ever deny what is theirs by their own right of blood.

Other cases (mostly alleged ancient ancestry) should be very carefully considered on a one to one basis. For example, I would never dare to deny his right to his Spanish heritage to a man like Colombian ex-senator and member of Parliament Pablo Victoria, whose loyalty to Spain is beyond any doubt and above that of so many others, who are Spanish by both a right of blood and soil.

But these are cases which are limited to an elite of men, to a race of men who are among the few and between.

For the rest, let me quote you an extract from the comparative work Empires of the Atlantic World, by History Professor John H. Elliot:

Los españoles europeos habían lanzado sin cesar a los criollos la acusación de que no sólo habían degenerado en el entorno americano, sino que también se habían contaminado con un mestizaje continuado.

The Spanish from Europe[sic] had been continuously accusing the Creoles^* not only of having degenerated in the American habitat, but of also having polluted [their bloodlines] with a continuous mixing.

This was in the XVIIIth century. What would you say that the feeling of "kinship" of Spaniards to Americans is today, two hundred years later?

(*) "Creole" as in the original Spanish word Criollo, which used to mean just a Spaniard "raised" (criado) in The Americas.

[Amorsite]

You mean that both his parents or all of his/her [great-]grandparents are/were Spanish?

Yes.

They are Spanish and no one except for themselves can ever deny what is theirs by their own right of blood.

I asked because I thought European descendants from the Americas were held in an unredeemable "colonial" status here. Seems like this is not the case.

Other cases (mostly alleged ancient ancestry) should be very carefully considered on a one to one basis.

Agreed.

For the rest, let me quote you an extract from the comparative work Empires of the Atlantic World, by History Professor John H. Elliot:This was in the XVIIIth century. What would you say that the feeling of "kinship" of Spaniards to Americans is today, two hundred years later?

That's right, even the countries believed to be "white" like Argentina (and many "respected sources" repeat this nonsense), are actually mostly mixed.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Amorsite

I asked because I thought European descendants from the Americas were held in an unredeemable "colonial" status here. Seems like this is not the case.

Indeed.

What makes the difference in the colonial/creole status on Stirpes is that the vast majority stick to alleged heritages of little (if any) consistency in the reality. It is, if you want, even more fantastic than those funny genealogy institutes that sell figured crests and family name origins, with the added value of freakness.

That's right, even the countries believed to be "white" like Argentina (and many "respected sources" repeat this nonsense), are actually mostly mixed.

Well, you obviously refer to the alleged percentage of population classified as "white" there, there is a reasoning behind it: like I believe that you already will know, south of the U.S. border race becomes caste. What is defined as "white", what is defined as "native", and what is defined as anything in between or "other" goes by some standards of their own.

And with this I mean that it is right that someone with some little degree of native ancestry, should be considered as "white".. for their standards. After all, "white" is much a concept from the colonial world.

You'll find similar cases north of the Mexican border, although there the element of European origin is larger due to a larger immigration from Central and Northern Europe. And, you can find a parallel in what they call "black" in North America. Are they actually "black" for African standards?

[Amorsite]

What makes the difference in the colonial/creole status on Stirpes is that the vast majority stick to alleged heritages of little (if any) consistency in the reality. It is, if you want, even more fantastic than those funny genealogy institutes that sell figured crests and family name origins, with the added value of freakness.

I understand what you mean, even though I have a hard time believing that "the vast majority" of people from the New World stick to heritages with little basis in reality (for sure a few do, but most? and how can you tell the difference online?). It is enough for me that you consider someone of exclusively Spanish descent a Spaniard though.

Well, you obviously refer to the alleged percentage of population classified as "white" there, there is a reasoning behind it: like I believe that you already will know, south of the U.S. border race becomes caste. What is defined as "white", what is defined as "native", and what is defined as anything in between or "other" goes by some standards of their own.

And with this I mean that it is right that someone with some little degree of native ancestry, should be considered as "white".. for their standards. After all, "white" is much a concept from the colonial world.

You'll find similar cases north of the Mexican border, although there the element of European origin is larger due to a larger immigration from Central and Northern Europe. And, you can find a parallel in what they call "black" in North America. Are they actually "black" for African standards?

In Argentina in particular, the myth is that the majority of the population is white (in an European sense) due to high levels of Southern European immigration in the latter half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th. The source I linked you (CIA Factbook), claims 97% of Argentines are White.

While this is indeed correct to some extent (Argentina has a far larger proportion of Whites than any other latin american country save perhaps Uruguay), it is a complete exaggeration to say that it is predominantly (leave aside 97%) white.