South African slavery differs from slavery practiced in other frontier zones of European settlement in that the settlers enslaved indigenes as a supplement to and eventually as a replacement for imported slave labor. On the expanding frontier, Dutch-speaking farmers increasingly met their labor needs by conducting slave raids, arming African slave

South African slavery differs from slavery practiced in other frontier zones of European settlement in that the settlers enslaved indigenes as a supplement to and eventually as a replacement for imported slave labor. On the expanding frontier, Dutch-speaking farmers increasingly met their labor needs by conducting slave raids, arming African slave

The idea that the period of social turbulence in the nineteenth century was a consequence of the emergence of the powerful Zulu kingdom under Shaka has been written about extensively as a central episode of southern African history. Considerable dynamic debate has focused on the idea that this period – the ‘mfecane’- left much of the interior depopulated, thereby justifying white occupation. One view is that ‘the time of troubles’ owed more to the Delagoa Bay Slave trade and the demands of the labour-hungry Cape colonists than to Shaka’s empire building. But is there sufficient evidence to support the argument? The Mfecane Aftermath investigates the very nature of historical debate and examines the uncertain foundations of much of the previous historiography.