The discontinuation of Jan van Riebeeck in African schools.

By: Olwethu Mthethwa

In recent years, there has been a growing debate about how history is taught in African schools, especially in South Africa. One important topic in this discussion is the role of Jan van Riebeeck in the school curriculum. Many educators, students, and activists are questioning whether his story should still be taught in the same way or even taught at all. This has led to calls for the discontinuation or reconsideration of his place in African education.

Picture of the Journal of Jan van Riebeeck via Google Images.

Jan van Riebeeck was a Dutch colonial administrator who arrived at the Cape of Good Hope in 1652. He is often credited with establishing the first permanent European settlement in South Africa and is pivotal for founding Cape Town, introducing new agriculture, and establishing the foundation for Dutch colonial expansion. For many years, South African schools taught his arrival as the “beginning” of the country’s history. Learners were taught about his role in building a refreshment station for ships travelling between Europe and Asia, and he was often presented as a kind of founding figure for our country. However, this way of teaching history has been strongly criticised. A major issue is that it ignores the fact that indigenous African communities were already living in the region long before van Riebeeck arrived. Groups such as the Khoikhoi and San had their own cultures, systems, and histories. By focusing on van Riebeeck as the starting point, the curriculum has allegedly erased these important African histories.

Another concern circulating this topic is that van Riebeeck’s arrival marked the beginning of colonialism in South Africa. Colonialism involved the taking of land, the exploitation of black people in South Africa, and the destruction of local cultures. As time passed, this system developed into more formal structures of oppression, with the most popular example being apartheid. Because of this, many people argue that celebrating or centring van Riebeeck in education can be harmful, especially in a country still dealing with the effects of its past.

As a result, there has been a shift in how history should be taught in schools. Instead of focusing mainly on European figures like van Riebeeck, there is a growing push to include more African perspectives. This includes teaching about pre-colonial African societies, resistance to colonial rule, and the contributions of African leaders and communities.

The idea of “discontinuation” does not mean that Jan van Riebeeck should be completely removed from the curriculum. Rather, it focuses on how to change how it is taught to students. For example, instead of presenting him as a hero or founder, teachers can explain his role in a more balanced way. They can discuss both his actions and their consequences, including the impact on indigenous people. In some cases, schools have already started making these changes. New history textbooks have been issued, which include more diverse voices and stories. Now, lessons focus more on African agency, meaning the ability of African people to shape their own history. This approach helps learners understand that history is not just about powerful individuals, but also about communities and their experiences.

Picture of Jan van Riebeeck via Stock Images.

Students themselves have also played a role in this movement. During protests like the #RhodesMustFall campaign in 2015, young people questioned the continued celebration of colonial figures in education and public spaces. Although that movement focused mainly on Cecil John Rhodes, it also opened broader discussions about other colonial figures, including Jan van Riebeeck. These conversations have influenced how schools think about their teaching. There are also arguments against removing van Riebeeck from the curriculum. While some people believe that history should include all important figures, even those with controversial legacies, the journey to decolonising African countries starts with these small details. Individuals argue that removing him completely could lead to a lack of understanding of how South Africa was developed. Others support teaching history in a critical way, where learners can question and analyse different perspectives.

This debate reflects a larger issue about education in post-colonial societies. Many African countries are still working to decolonise their education systems. This means moving away from Eurocentric views and making space for African knowledge, languages, and experiences. In this context, the discussion about Jan van Riebeeck is not just about one person, but about the kind of education that best represents African realities. The discontinuation of Jan van Riebeeck in African schools is a complex and ongoing issue. It is not simply about removing a historical figure, but about rethinking how history is taught. By including more African perspectives and presenting a more balanced view of the past, schools can create a more inclusive and accurate understanding of history. This is important for helping learners understand their identity, their country, and the world around them.

Edited by: Erin Arends