The complicated wealth of human history associated with the eastern coastal region of southern Africa, currently the province of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), seems impossible to exhaust. Diverse and integrated historiographies have demonstrated the region to be an enduring theatre of local and global processes of change, its distinctive aspects evoked by key words like Mfecane, Empire, indirect rule, amakholwa and indenture, among others. Here in KZN, local traditions of oral stories, history-telling, academic history writing, and both public and scholarly debates about the past stand out for their complexity, their passion and their relevance to the politics of the present.
That relevance has been notable during this year, 2021, with a series of acute and unfolding events in KZN: contentions – with violence and assassinations – over tenders and resource extraction, and elite and international corporate interests driving them; the death of the Zulu King in March and the succession crisis; the reinvigoration of traditions; a spurious but energetic ‘diamond’ rush, fueled by COVID-19-related economic downturn; and – perhaps most spectacularly – the civic mobilisation, insurrection and violent strife that followed (former) President Jacob Zuma’s incarceration for contempt of court during corruption hearings.
Such dramas demonstrate how patterns of social, economic and political reality in KZN remain crucial in driving broader trends in South Africa, with legacies that are the product of (and also pre-date) colonialism and apartheid. Historical narratives also constitute a resource in newly brokered identity politics within the new relations and economies of change.
Given these realities, it is ironic, as well as sorrowful, to announce the effective end of an academic journal that has been dedicated to exploring the region’s histories. This double issue of the Journal of Natal and Zulu History (JNZH) represents the final volume in a run of annual issues that began in 1978.
In another sense, it may be that this is simply a new phase in the life of the journal. Happily, the full archive of JNZH will remain available on the Taylor & Francis (T&F) website, found here: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rnzh20. The South African Historical Journal (SAHJ) archive will include a link to this page, and all members who have SAHJ access will have access to JNZH also. Thanks to the generous sponsorship of the Southern African Historical Society, the SAHJ plans to preserve the legacy of the JNZH project also by continuing to consider submissions in the subject area, and perhaps publishing themed special issues in future (as the most recent SAHJ has. And the next SAHJ includes a roundtable on the recent crises in KZN as well as Gauteng).
Notwithstanding these hopeful continuities, this new situation requires our explanation. A few years ago, the JNZH took to the road from its original home of the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN – formerly the University of Natal). The journal had been sustained in recent decades by a passionate community of scholars which included then-members of the UKZN Department of History, its post-graduate alumni (established at other universities) and also transnational (though remarkably intimate) academic networks. From the late 1990s to 2013, the journal was energised through a particular departmental seminar at UKZN. Our editorial in 2018 (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02590123.2018.1464704) and Goolam Vahed’s reflection piece in this double issue help contextualise why and how, following a hiatus in the journal’s run, a few of us worked to re-establish the journal, acting as editors, advisors and board members. These efforts were a labour of love, to ensure the survival of a valued journal and its long-running Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET)-accredited status.
We were fortunate to have T&F as our new publishing partners, who greatly assisted us in making our digitised archive available once again and refurbishing the journal’s brand. We created a new editorial board – a mix of local and overseas experts working in the region – and began to administer submissions through Scholar One. The journal’s editors had hoped to transform and expand the journal as part of its relaunch. In order to stimulate submissions and relevance, we sought to revise its title and its thematic and disciplinary reach for new times. However, we were advised against undertaking such changes, as it was thought this would jeopardise our niche and brand name, as well as our application to maintain accreditation. Yet the JNZH lost its accredited status. Despite numerous queries, it was only (re)evaluated four years after we submitted our application – and, worse, without being awarded an opportunity to update our initial application with an account of our new developments and successes. The high rate of personnel turnover, both with our publisher and with the accrediting body, did not aid our cause. Our case for re-accreditation was rejected, even after an appeal, listing also the journal’s new achievements. We were informed that it was not possible to apply for new accreditation for five years. Stingingly, some of the feedback advised that we should ‘consider’ changing the journal’s title and reach to increase its relevance for new times.
Meanwhile, as we edited issues for 2018 and 2019, the uncertainties about our status meant that we could not in good faith offer guarantees to authors that publishing in JNZH would bring DHET subsidies. This reality limited the scope of submissions by local historians, especially young up-and-coming scholars needing to grow their research funds and pursue promotions. As is well known, increased pressure by university institutions on academic staff to bring in money through publications has continued to be controversial for a number of reasons. For us as editors, it meant that we looked for submissions from established local historians, South African academic researchers from outside of higher education, and international scholars. We had an amazing response! We continued to solicit our network of historians for submissions as well as for their assistance in generating submissions from others.
We can certainly feel proud of the rigour and high standard of excellence that were achieved from our first relaunched issue in 2018 and onwards. Another lovely innovation carried by the re-launched journal was a book forum, replacing the usual cluster of individual reviews that most academic journals feature.
We can also reflect on failed efforts during these last few years. While trying hard for a diversity of local voices, we were not able to achieve collections fully representative of South Africa’s spectrum of backgrounds and perspectives. Given the acute events centred in KZN that invite historical insight, and the range of themes that more generally have faced neglect and silence, we regret not to have inspired a much healthier mass of submissions to break new ground. It may be, also, that removing a journal with a geographical niche from its geographical heart, despite our earnest intentions, has rather highlighted just how important structural conditions (e.g. a vibrant departmental seminar) in fact were for facilitating the journal’s annual flow. Finally, circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic – which of course affected other journals also – curbed the capacities of prospective authors and editors alike at a crucial phase of our new run. The coronavirus exacerbated an already difficult situation.
Our emotions in this moment are somewhat melancholy but also hopeful. This platform for KZN regional history is a varied and important one, as showcased by the research articles, and other writings, in this final volume. The comments and reflections published here show that the journal has offered space both to move forward historical knowledge and questions by stalwarts in the field and to encourage the explorations of new themes, topics and approaches by historians starting to find their feet.
Good history is not nostalgia or heritage for its own sake; rather, it is critical and self-aware, able to embrace new realities and moving with the times. New journals, new platforms, new collaborations and new histories are rising, organically and locally, out of new needs to keep hold of a critical purchase on historical knowledge and its productions.