Page:George McCall Theal, Ethnography and condition of South Africa before A.D. 1505 (2nd ed, 1919).djvu/52

28 and never cleansed even the intestine of an animal before devouring it, was a blood relative of our own, and that we ought to take more interest in him than in any of the brute creation.

The Europeans who settled in South Africa after the middle of the seventeenth century had the palæolithic man, just as he roamed over Europe in times long preceding the dawn of history, living in flesh and blood before their eyes. They were indeed far more familiar with his presence than they desired to be, for he was not at all a respectable neighbour. He belonged to an unimprovable race, incapable of adopting the habits of other people much higher in culture than itself, though, as now known, it could amalgamate with those only slightly in advance. Before the arrival of the Hottentots and Bantu in parts of South Africa, it was not in contact with any other branches of the human species, and hence it remained at its own low level, the level of palæolithic man in Europe, without making much advance of any kind during the long long time it occupied the secluded extremity of the continent. When the Europeans arrived therefore, an opportunity was afforded of becoming intimately acquainted with the condition and language of one of the lowest, if not the very lowest, of all the races on the face of the earth, and of making the information gained known to the civilised part of mankind.

That opportunity was not taken advantage of. The white settlers were entirely occupied with making a living, and regarded the Bushmen simply as robbers, just as the Hottentots and Bantu did. Then down to our own times the savage wanderers were generally considered to be outcast Hottentots, even Dr. Bleek himself when he began his researches believing that they had separated from a common ancestral stock only a few centuries back. There were exceptions to this statement, notably Dr. Henry Lichtenstein, but they were few in number. Further,