How early does South Africa's history start?

Oh OK yes then we agree... Your yesterday at 8:16 AM is my yesterday at 11:16 AM ;-)

Don, I agree with you and June about the Barry family history. I think that some of the entries do need to be taken out but not all as the Barry's and others did have a social and economic impact even until today, as I'm sure further investigation will substantiate.
But then what relevance does any other family history have in a general South African Timeline?

Brendan please leave any Barry family history, with historical significance to South Africa as a whole, in... and other family history with similar significance is also welcome?.

I agree that anything that is significant should stay there - BUT - the significance of some events needs to be explained more fully. If we aren't careful this will just become much too unwieldy

More could be read on his profile page rather than have events included in a national time-line?

2 Very good reads: Out of Africa's Eden by Stephen Oppenheimer - The Story of Humankind from the Cradle of Humankind.The author is world recognized expert in the synthesis of DNA studies with achaeological and other evidence to track ancient migration. He took mouth swobs around the world by starting in Cape Town.
AND Slave Species of God by Michael Tellinger a Captonian. This one is for open minded researchers.

I would suggest you err on the side of inclusivity wherever people's feelings might be hurt, Too much info from an involved collaborative team is much better than too little on a 'perfect' project that no-one knows about.

That being said, i'm really happy for an editorial team to edit and re-format anything I put onto the project, as I'm adding to it only to be helpful, and am not invested in it. I suspect most people will feel the same, and you won't have to stress too much about refining and streamlining it afterwards :-)

Don come and visit cousin. Mrs Ples skull is nearby here in the lovely Heritage site. One of the many lovely eating, weekending and running/cycling places.
'n Hele uistalling with all the history as you walk along the footpath tp the restaurant and then in the "cave" - man made this one, not the real one, is all these heritage items. Teeth, skulls, etc.
You will be able to get the name from Con, Jan's brother. We always go and have lunch there when they come here.
I have missed out and will still do as I went to the Archives yesterday and took about 300 photo's.
Even got a few interesting German,Polish, Chinese, Scott and lots of England.
I want to work through them, but first sent my clients there stuff.
Keep an eye for me people. Sharon I will help where I can with whatever culture I can.
Juds

Couldn't resist any more: 'Mrs Ples' Australopithecus Africanus :-)

Love it!

Ugh!

Ugh??? explain Brendan!!

Come on, people. This is a genealogy site which, by definition, is about people. The kind, species, that you and I are. The South African Timeline project should be about our general history but within genealogical boundaries, involving our kind/species. I don't believe that Australopithecus Africanus and/or any other kind/species belongs here. Emphasis and a short note should on the person who made the discovery, not the discovery itself.

So, for example, I think that the paragraphs about Raymond Dart and Robert Broom should be in but any further comment/expansion about their discoveries should be linked.

I am with you in many ways Brendan - to my mind there are many mythical profiles on Geni! Perhaps we need to see this profile as an information page, and in that respect it should be converted into a project instead Sharon Doubell?

Having said that I feel that a link to other online information pages or a document would be more suitable.

Oh why not!? It's a bit of fun :)) and, after all, A. Africanus is a distant ancestor, and by no means mythical.

Whatever suits everyone!!

That project sounds like a very good idea, June. A separate project in which all the involved and surrounding theories and discoveries can go, with their dates, including their profiles. A standalone tree that will allow us to see possible links to other similar discoveries in other countries.

Guys the profile was a joke. Although I do think that it is genealogically significant that South Africa is one of the two places that might have been the cradle of the human family; the idea was simply to make people smile.

:))

I must agree with Sharon here, sorry people. But I agree with all the other arguments as well.
Just came back from the doctor - early flu, sinusitis and tonsilitis (no tonsils though as that has been taken out at aged 5) but seertjies on the tonsil bed.
Got a hengse injection and are feeling high. Lekker nê.
Think I will rather go and read my Beroemde SA Krygsmanne van alle tye. Stating of with the Unknown Hottentot guy who killed the first whites, the Portuguese "edelman" dom Francisco d"Almeida and 65 of his men at Tablebay in 1510, and going on to "Rommel"in Angola - Kol Koos v Heerden en Taakmag Zulu in 1975.
Names included with there birth and death dates are The Black Napoleon - Shaka Zulu, Mzilikazi and a inscribtion on a plaque in the former Rhodesa, etc.etc.
I bought this book in 1984 when it 1st came out. Lovely pics and even "kaarte". Sorry Afrikaans again.

:-)

Well. Ok, then. Perhaps we should draw up a set of guidelines of what is permissable and what isn't. Because at the moment it looks like a free-for-all. And at the moment it looks as if point number 1. will be that any discovery made in South Africa or associated with South Africa even if its a theory, a speculation, or an assumption, even if it has absolutely nothing to do with genealogy, even if its not the the view or belief of the majority of South Africans especially in the absence of THE LINK, is permissible. As is putting more emphasis on the discovery, say maybe a page or so. And anyone can add their personal comments about it.

Of course, I don't believe or agree with that at all.

I understand the argument about trying to stick to purely genealogical information but, let's face it, this isn't an isolated case. Many profiles all over Geni have been entered based on ancient, mythological and even Biblical sources that aren't necessarily verifiable in the traditional way. And there's no way anyone is ever going to be able to trace a relationship path back to Mrs Ples, so I still feel it's OK to have the profile out there. Geni is a wiki, so if anyone would like to change the information related to that profile now or in the future, they can do so ...

This project should be factual and relevant. It needs to be impartial - it is a timeline of the history of South Africa - it needs to be as complete as possible, with references included to all events of significance regardless of points of view or beliefs of people. It should also concentrate on the events that shaped the history of South Africa, and it should include all broad spectrums - genealogy, geographic, historical and social. It needs to be impersonal!

I agree ...

Good. So we agree then.
The project should be factual and relevant, which cuts out any theory and speculation, which is what the whole Mrs. Ples/hominid/evolution thing is all about - theory. It needs to be as complete as possible with references included to all events of significance regardless of point of view or beliefs of people, which cuts out personal comments and personal beliefs, provisional or otherwise. And the whole Mrs. Ples/hominid/evolution thing has certainly not shaped the history of South Africa nor is it included in any of the broad spectra of genealogy, geographic, historical and social.

Guys, I really really don't mind one way or the other - it was a smile moment, that I think you shouldn't need to worry about, and leaving her off your project is perfectly good. No need to justify it at all.

Having received a personal query about the meaning of ‘Fictional’ genealogy, I am moved to correct the descriptor here of the fossil as 'fictional' or, even more strange - having something to do with ‘personal beliefs’.

1.FICTIONAL GENEALOGY (See our project: http://www.geni.com/projects/Fictional-Genealogy/8908) applies to profiles for whose existence there appears to be no primary source as proof. When all circumstantial evidence suggests that a profile is as likely to have been 'made up' as not - by genealogists or historians, for eg - I always indicate in a Curator Note that this element of doubt exists. For example, we have no primary proof that 'Banquo, {FICT}' from Hector Boece's histories existed at all. The Norse sagas are also often semi-mythological history, but include people we know to have lived, just with the ‘impossible’ historical details that result from oral record-keeping: eg Eithne / Audna Kjarvalsdatter, Princess of Ireland
So having no primary proof for a profile’s existence, as Lee correctly points out is the case for the Old Testament profiles, is far from the same as having proof that the person never existed. In many of these cases the ‘where there’s smoke there’s the possibility of fire’ adage applies. And if we were to make primary sources a pre-requisite for every profile on the tree, we’d eliminate more than half of the world tree, including all the profiles of people in pre-literate societies, or before census documentation.

The more cut and dried cases of Fictional Genealogy are those where we do have positive proof that the character never lived: For eg, the ubiquitous “Harry James Potter, {FICT}” tree that we have finally given up trying to eradicate, and created an MP for so we could monitor that it didn’t get merged back into the main tree. (I must admit, that, so long as they remain cut off from the main tree, I find these kind of sweet.)

So, by these indicators ‘Mrs Ples’ is not fictional at all. Her skull is one of the best primary sources of evidence of existence there is! The fact that Mrs Ples is not and should not be merged into our Geni World Tree, doesn’t automatically render hers a 'fictional' profile.

2.The PERSONAL BELIEFS point makes no sense to me in this context. ‘Mrs Ples’ is a pre-homind fossil for which South Africa is famous. My ‘belief’ in ‘her’ is no more ‘personal’ than my ‘belief’ in dogs.

She is pertinent to your topic: ‘How early does South Africa's history start?’ and June’s descriptor :“It should also concentrate on the events that shaped the history of South Africa, and it should include all broad spectrums - genealogy, geographic, historical and social” , insofar as her discovery shaped world archaeology and South Africa’s place in it as a potential 'cradle of humankind'. Wikipedia tells us that in 2004, Mrs. Ples was voted 95th in the SABC3's and e.tv's Great South Africans Top 100 list. Given the new DNA emphasis that My Heritage is pushing on Geni, this may be a relevant and interesting profile to have on the tree from that aspect too.

But she is certainly not necessary to include on this project, and as I’ve said repeatedly – there is no need to justify not using her. It’s all good by me.

I think that the discovery is an important one and needs to be mentioned in the time line - both under the date of discovery and under the probable time of existing. Links should be to external pages (or a Geni project) where more information can be found.

Brendan - nope, we don't agree because we see this issue very differently. I see ancient hominid discoveries as both factual and relevant (and, into the bargain, I don't see any harm in the 'fun' addition of Mrs Ples as an ancient ancestor in the world tree). When June said 'all broad spectrums', I assumed that to include homind discoveries, which I regard as historical. The Mrs Ples discovery (and other homind and pre-hominid discoveries) should, I feel, certainly be mentioned in the timeline.

Also, why is there a problem with having a profile for Mrs Ples? It's not as if this is going to affect anyone's genealogical research - and if there can be a profile for God, why not one for Mrs Ples? After all, Geni is a wiki, which is designed to engage everyone interested in the subject of genealogy, however broad that interest might be. There are other platforms available for those who prefer a more purist approach.

Interesting topic!, Not sure whether the South African Timeline is the right place to have it, as it may be of interest to a wider range of users?... however it may just be a can of worms... and we may just upset the creationists...

... which is why I stress impartiality and accuracy. All history affects some people adversely and benefit others but events took place whether the repercussions upset one side of the community or another. South Africa has many such events and the only way to record them is clinically - factually - it happened - record the basics. I don't believe that any events need to have judgemental, descriptive words attached to them. Just as I believe the pages to do with the Boer wars and the concentration camps (both British and German) need to be clinical accounts. That is the roll of the historian - or at least how I think our roll as recorder and family historian needs to be. Morality doesn't come into it.

Our opinion or beliefs are not what is important.