Ethnic identity as performance: lessons from Namaqualand

Abstract

Some of the present‐day descendants of the precolonial Nama‐speaking Khoikhoi pastoralists of the north‐west Cape have recently begun to assert a Nama ethnic identity. Since the people involved were officially regarded as ‘coloured’ people, their assertion of Nama identity is, clearly, part of the current, widespread debate about the meaning and significance of ‘coloured’ identity in a future South Africa. But it also has an important local dynamic, in that it was closely linked to the establishment of the Richtersveld National Park in Namaqualand in 1991. The main aim of this paper is to unravel the local dynamic of Nama identity.

We believe, for reasons set out below, that this statement of Nama ethnic identity is a carefully controlled performance. It is role‐play, a highly self‐conscious statement of ‘who we are’ that is being formulated collectively through dialogue, and modified according to context. It seems to us that the manner in which Nama identity is being performed contrasts sharply with the way in which Zulu identity is currently portrayed by Inkatha.

In this paper, we attempt to explain the notion of ethnic identity as controlled performance, to show why Nama ethnic identity should take this form, and to explore the contrast between the way in which people in the north‐west Cape interpret their ‘Namaness’ and Inkatha's interpretation of ‘Zuluness’. We argue, in relation to the third of these goals, that comparative analysis has the potential to provide important insights in the complex field of ethnic identity formation and ethnic mobilisation, and suggest that too little of this kind of analysis takes place in South Africa.