This article investigates the historicity of Gideon von Wielligh’s collection of /xam folklore, history, and observational accounts published predominantly in Afrikaans during the early 20th century. Von Wielligh’s collection is often portrayed as suspect in relation to the ‘great’ /xam archive, namely that of Wilhelm Bleek and Lucy Lloyd – with accusations of plagiarism a common charge. Through a holographic archaeological reading, an approach conceptualised by drawing on linguistic archaeology and philology specifically, and the holographic paradigm and archaeology of knowledge in general, the article analyses the traces of /xam in Von Wielligh’s otherwise Afrikaans texts. The reading focuses on Von Wielligh’s texts on the one hand and Specimens of Bushman Folklore (1911) on the other. Since Specimens was the only selection from the Bleek and Lloyd archive to which von Wielligh had access when he published his collection between 1919 and 1921, it is, within holographic archaeological terms, the ‘urtext’ or ‘source of certainty’. In contrast, von Wielligh’s texts are regarded as the ‘source of suspicion’, with the /xam linguistic data within it ‘dated’ in relation to Specimens. The analysis leads to the following three conclusions: first, von Wielligh’s command of /xam linguistic data validates the authenticity of the collection; second, we can use von Wielligh’s recordings to change the idea of the extant /xam archive in a way that challenges the fixation on Bleek and Lloyd; third, the politics of intellectual history, such as the defaming of von Wielligh, is tied not simply to ideas but to the history of the book as a material object. This acknowledgement and changed perspective on the /xam and the available records could, in turn, lead to deeper and more generative research on the /xam specifically, Khoesan studies generally and South (and southern) African studies more broadly.

本文调查了 Gideon von Wielligh 在 20 世纪早期主要以南非荷兰语出版的 /xam 民间传说、历史和观察记录合集的历史真实性。Von Wielligh 的收藏经常被描述为与“伟大的”/xam 档案有关，即 Wilhelm Bleek 和 Lucy Lloyd 的收藏——剽窃指控是一项常见的指控。通过全息考古学阅读，一种通过特别利用语言考古学和语言学以及一般知识的全息范式和考古学概念化的方法，本文分析了 /xam 在 Von Wielligh 的其他南非语文本中的踪迹。阅读一方面侧重于 Von Wielligh 的文本，另一方面侧重于Specimens of Bushman Folklore (1911)。自从标本是 von Wielligh 在 1919 年至 1921 年间出版他的收藏时可以访问的 Bleek 和 Lloyd 档案中的唯一选择，在全息考古学术语中，它是“原始文本”或“确定性来源”。相比之下，von Wielligh 的文本被视为“可疑来源”，其中的 /xam 语言数据与标本相关“过时”. 分析得出以下三个结论：第一，冯维利对/xam语言数据的掌握证实了该藏品的真实性；其次，我们可以使用 von Wielligh 的录音来改变现存 /xam 档案的想法，以挑战对 Bleek 和 Lloyd 的固定；第三，思想史的政治，例如对 von Wielligh 的诽谤，不仅与思想有关，而且与作为物质对象的书的历史有关。这种对 /xam 和可用记录的承认和改变的观点可能反过来导致对 /xam 的更深入和更具生成性的研究，特别是 Khoesan 研究和更广泛的南（和南部）非洲研究。