The relationship between Boers (Afrikaners) and flower farming in South Africa is a nuanced story that intersects with broader themes of migration, identity, economic survival, and the evolution of South African agriculture. It’s a history often overshadowed by more prominent narratives of cattle ranching, grain farming, and the political struggles that defined Afrikaner society.
Who Were the Boers?
The term “Boer” (Dutch for “farmer”) originally referred to the Dutch-descended settlers at the Cape of Good Hope who took up farming. Over time, it became associated particularly with those who trekked into the interior during the 19th century, establishing independent republics. Today, their descendants are generally called Afrikaners, though “Boer” is still used, particularly in agricultural contexts and by some as a term of cultural identity.
These were a people shaped by a particular relationship to the land—fiercely independent, often isolated, deeply religious, and developing a distinct language (Afrikaans) and culture separate from their Dutch origins. Their agricultural traditions were adapted to African conditions but retained European sensibilities about cultivation and land use.
Early Boer Agriculture: Substance Over Beauty (17th-19th Centuries)
Early Boer farming was overwhelmingly practical. In the harsh interior of South Africa, where many Boers settled after trekking away from British control at the Cape, survival depended on livestock and hardy crops. The Highveld’s challenges—unpredictable rainfall, occasional droughts, extreme temperature variations, and vast distances from markets—meant that ornamental flower cultivation was a luxury few could afford.
However, Boer homesteads typically maintained small kitchen gardens where women cultivated vegetables alongside a few flowers. These modest flower beds served multiple purposes: they provided beauty in isolated settings, connected families to their European heritage, and offered flowers for important occasions like weddings, funerals, and church services. Common flowers included roses, geraniums, and whatever European bulbs could survive the conditions.
The Boer relationship with flowers during this period was intimate but small-scale—a domestic rather than commercial concern. The farmwife’s flower garden was her domain, a space of beauty carved from a demanding landscape, but it generated no income and received little recognition in a society that measured agricultural success in cattle, sheep, and land.
The Anglo-Boer Wars and Economic Devastation (1880-1902)
The two wars between Boer republics and the British Empire devastated Boer agricultural society. British scorched-earth tactics destroyed farms, killed livestock, and forced tens of thousands of Boer women and children into concentration camps where approximately 28,000 died. The wars left the Boer community economically shattered.
In the aftermath, many Boer families were reduced to poverty. The “poor white problem” became a defining concern of early 20th-century South Africa. Displaced from their farms or unable to make them viable, many Boers moved to cities where they competed for work—often unsuccessfully—with Black laborers and faced considerable hardship.
This period of economic crisis had little room for flower farming. Survival, not beauty, was the imperative. Charitable organizations and government programs focused on helping impoverished Boers return to basic agriculture or find employment, not on developing specialty crops.
Afrikaner Nationalism and Agricultural Recovery (1910-1960s)
The formation of the Union of South Africa in 1910 and the gradual rise of Afrikaner political power created opportunities for economic rehabilitation. The National Party, which came to power in 1948 and implemented apartheid, promoted Afrikaner economic advancement through policies favoring white farmers.
Government programs provided white farmers with access to land, credit, agricultural extension services, and infrastructure that was systematically denied to Black South Africans. These policies helped many Afrikaner farmers establish stable operations, though most focused on traditional staples: maize, wheat, livestock, and fruit.
Flower farming remained marginal to Afrikaner agricultural identity during this period. The Afrikaner self-image was built around pastoral farming—the man with his cattle and land, embodying independence and connection to the soil. Flower farming, seen as delicate and ornamental, didn’t fit this rugged self-conception. Additionally, flower farming required different skills, more intensive management, and access to urban markets or export channels that many Afrikaner farmers lacked.
Where flower cultivation occurred, it was often in the Western Cape among more urbanized, commercially oriented farmers, both Afrikaans and English-speaking. The major flower-growing regions didn’t overlap significantly with the heartland of Afrikaner farming culture in the Free State and Transvaal.
The Arrival of Dutch Expertise and New Opportunities (1970s-1990s)
A significant shift began when Dutch immigrants with horticultural expertise arrived in South Africa from the 1970s onward. These newcomers brought knowledge of modern flower farming—greenhouse technology, variety selection, integrated pest management, and access to European market networks.
The relationship between these Dutch immigrants and established Afrikaner farmers was complex. They shared linguistic and cultural similarities (Afrikaans and Dutch are closely related), and both groups were classified as white under apartheid, giving them access to the same privileges. However, there were also distinctions: the Dutch immigrants often had more sophisticated technical training, international connections, and capital. Some Afrikaners viewed them with a mixture of respect for their expertise and resentment at their relative advantages.
Some Afrikaner farmers, particularly those seeking to diversify or younger generations looking for alternatives to traditional farming, began entering flower production during this period. They learned from Dutch experts, attended agricultural colleges that incorporated horticultural training, and recognized the economic potential of high-value flower crops.
The apartheid government’s support for white agriculture meant that Afrikaner farmers who chose to enter flower production had access to subsidized credit, infrastructure development, and research support. This created opportunities that would have been impossible without the systematic racial discrimination that characterized the era.
Flower Farming and Afrikaner Identity
Flower farming never became central to Afrikaner cultural identity the way cattle ranching or maize farming did. Several factors contributed to this:
Gender associations: Farming culture was strongly masculine, and flowers were often associated with women’s work—fine for the farmwife’s garden but not serious agriculture. Commercial flower farming required challenging this perception.
Economic scale: Many Afrikaner farmers operated extensive rather than intensive farms—large properties with cattle or grain. Flower farming required a different model: smaller areas, higher inputs, more technical management. This was a psychological as well as practical shift.
Market orientation: Traditional Afrikaner farming supplied domestic food markets or agricultural commodities. Flower farming was oriented toward luxury markets, exports, and urban florists—a more cosmopolitan economic sphere that didn’t align with rural Afrikaner culture.
Technical requirements: Flowers demanded horticultural knowledge that differed from traditional farming expertise. Older generations of Afrikaner farmers often lacked this training and were reluctant to acquire it late in their careers.
However, some Afrikaners did embrace flower farming successfully, particularly in regions where climate and infrastructure made it viable. These farmers often became bridge figures—maintaining Afrikaner identity while adopting cosmopolitan business practices and technical sophistication.
The Apartheid Context: Uncomfortable Realities
Any honest discussion of Boer/Afrikaner involvement in flower farming must acknowledge the apartheid system. From 1948 to 1994, systematic racial discrimination structured every aspect of South African agriculture.
White farmers, including those in flower production, benefited from policies that reserved the best agricultural land for whites, provided preferential access to water rights and electricity, offered subsidized credit and crop insurance unavailable to Black farmers, and supplied agricultural extension services exclusively to white farmers.
The flower farms operated by Afrikaners and Dutch immigrants relied heavily on Black labor—workers who planted, tended, harvested, and packed flowers under conditions typical of apartheid-era agriculture. These workers faced low wages, poor housing, limited labor rights, and no opportunity to own land or establish their own operations. The beauty of the flowers cultivated was built on a foundation of racial injustice.
Some Afrikaner farmers treated workers relatively well within the constraints of the system, while others were exploitative. But even the better treatment occurred within a framework of profound inequality. Black South Africans possessed extensive indigenous knowledge of South African plants, including many native flowers that became commercially important (like proteas), yet this knowledge was appropriated without recognition or compensation.
Post-Apartheid Transformation (1994-Present)
The end of apartheid in 1994 fundamentally changed South African agriculture. For Afrikaner flower farmers, this brought both challenges and opportunities.
Challenges included: the end of subsidies and preferential treatment that had advantaged white farmers; new labor laws that increased costs and gave workers greater rights; land reform pressures and debates about redistributing agricultural land; rising crime and security concerns affecting farm operations; and psychological adjustment to a society where Afrikaner political dominance had ended.
Opportunities emerged: international sanctions ended, opening new export markets; some Afrikaner farmers found opportunities in mentorship and partnership programs with emerging Black farmers; the growing domestic market as Black middle-class consumers increased created demand for flowers; and some younger-generation Afrikaners embraced transformation and sought to build more equitable business models.
The response among Afrikaner flower farmers varied widely. Some left agriculture entirely, emigrating or moving to cities. Others adapted, accepting new labor relations and seeking to remain competitive through efficiency and quality. A smaller number actively engaged in transformation efforts, though progress has been slow.
Contemporary Landscape: Diversity and Division
Today, flower farming in South Africa includes Afrikaners, Dutch immigrants and their descendants, English-speaking white South Africans, and a slowly growing number of Black farmers. The Afrikaner presence in the sector is significant but no longer dominant or monolithic.
Some Afrikaner flower farmers have become leaders in sustainable agriculture, implementing water conservation, renewable energy, and fair labor practices. Others cling to older models, resisting change and viewing transformation as a threat. Many fall somewhere between, trying to navigate economic viability while adjusting to new social realities.
The flower farming regions show these patterns clearly. In Mpumalanga, where rose farming is significant, operations range from high-tech enterprises exporting to Europe to smaller domestic suppliers. In the Western Cape, protea farming includes multigenerational Afrikaner operations alongside emerging Black farmers learning the trade.
The Question of Land and Knowledge
One of the most complex aspects of this history concerns indigenous knowledge. South Africa has extraordinary floral diversity—the Cape Floral Kingdom is one of the world’s six floral kingdoms despite covering less than 0.5% of Africa’s area. Many native flowers became commercially valuable: proteas, leucadendrons, ericas, and others.
Indigenous and Black South African communities had centuries of knowledge about these plants. Yet the commercialization of these flowers was overwhelmingly controlled by white farmers, including Afrikaners, who claimed intellectual property rights, developed cultivars, and captured economic benefits. This appropriation of biological and cultural heritage remains a contentious issue.
Land reform has proceeded slowly in the flower sector. Commercial flower farming requires substantial capital, technical expertise, and market access—barriers that make it difficult for new entrants. While some programs aim to support emerging Black flower farmers, success stories remain limited. Many Afrikaner farmers argue they’ve built their operations through generations of work and shouldn’t lose them, while critics note this “work” occurred within a system that violently dispossessed Black South Africans.
The Cultural Legacy
Despite never becoming central to Afrikaner identity, flower farming has left cultural traces. Some Afrikaner families who entered the sector developed real passion for horticulture, contributing to botanical research and conservation. Certain Afrikaner-owned operations became known for quality and innovation. And the presence of Afrikaners in flower farming helped diversify an agricultural sector that had been narrowly focused.
The tension between flowers’ beauty and the ugliness of the system that enabled their cultivation remains unresolved. Walking through a stunning protea farm or rose greenhouse, it’s easy to admire the horticultural achievement while forgetting the historical context. Yet that context matters—the question of who got to farm, on what land, with whose labor, and who benefits, remains central to understanding South African agriculture.
Moving Forward
The future of Afrikaner involvement in flower farming is uncertain. Younger generations face choices: some continue family operations, others pursue different careers. Those who remain in flower farming must navigate a changing South Africa where historical advantages no longer guarantee success and where moral questions about land, labor, and restitution persist.
Some are genuinely attempting to address historical injustices through equitable labor practices, skills transfer, and partnerships. Others resist change, viewing transformation as persecution. Most probably fall somewhere in the middle, trying to maintain viable businesses while adapting to new realities.
The story of Boers and flower farming is ultimately a story about adaptation and resistance, about maintaining identity while circumstances change, and about the complicated relationship between beauty and justice. The flowers themselves—whether European roses or indigenous proteas—are blameless. But the human systems that cultivate them carry the full weight of history, with all its achievements and atrocities, progress and persistent inequalities.
Understanding this history requires holding multiple truths simultaneously: recognizing genuine agricultural achievement while acknowledging its unjust foundations, appreciating horticultural beauty while remembering the laborers whose work created it, and honoring cultural traditions while questioning the systems that sustained them.