{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027004909983633387, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010638297872340425, 'mean_word_length': 4.863309352517986, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A History of South Africa. By Robert Lacour-Gayet. New York: Hastings House, 1978. Pp. 387. $9.95

The French historian Robert Lacour-Gayet, who has also written about Canada and Australia, first produced this account of South African history in 1970. A new edition, translated by Stephen Hardman, appeared in Britain in 1977 and has now been brought but in the U.S.A. It includes additional material carrying the historical survey up to 1976. Lacour-Gayet's pithy review of South Africa's development is drawn from secondary sources, supplemented by some material from the archives of the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Those accustomed to the British tradition of imperial history will find this Gallic view interesting. It is studded with allusions to events in France and to French personalities where we usually only find references to British history. This.novelty apart, however, the book is not likely to be helpful to specialists in African history, who require much more detail than it provides, or to economic historians, who will find little information relevant to their field. It is aimed at the general reader—one who knows enough about South Africa, I hope, to realize that the conclusions contained in the last chapters are highly controversial. The publishers promise us on the book's jacket flap that Lacour-Gayet presents the events that produced apartheid "with strict impartiality." I doubt if such a thing is possible, especially in a work which makes a point of carrying the narrative up to 1976. It is true that Lacour-Gayet takes a wide view of events up to the Second World War. After that point his vision narrows, and the text becomes noticeably disjointed, especially in the last two chapters. The original book holds together better than the new, expanded version. In the last chapters the author intends to show the logic of the South African government's present policies in the light of the country's history. He accepts the concept of "separate development" with surprising deference. Sometimes he still provides a rounded viewpoint as he outlines the conflicts of interest between the races; but an underlying sympathy for the government's position leads him to chastize forces abroad (particularly the United Nations) for unreasonable hostility to South Africa. Expediency ranks high in his assessment of the South African government's racial policies, but he avoids passing judgment on their morality.