English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

time. contries/people involved. main cause. significant event/fact. result/treaty.

please give me a short answer, its for a review packet... im not cheating or anything. i could look it up but i have a lot of these

2007-03-07 17:36:42 · 4 answers · asked by Terra 6 in Arts & Humanities History

the one from like the 17th... 18th century... something like that

2007-03-07 17:48:44 · update #1

4 answers

There were apparently 2 of them. The 1st in the late 1890's I think. And the second in about the 1900's. It was between the British and the Afrikaners. They were apparently fighting about gold and diamonds. Um, I don't know so much of it...but you could research it. SOrry=)

2007-03-07 19:37:47 · answer #1 · answered by -♦One-♦-Love♦- 7 · 0 0

The Boere did not go away because slavery became abolished, they did not even own slaves, the Cape Dutch did! Slavery became also unlawful contained in the Boer republics. finally, the British also kept Indian slaves in Natal, they only named them "indentured servants". And the ladies individuals and babies were starved if their adult males did not resign. If that got here about right this moment, they could be tried for conflict crimes! The Boer who stated the camps, did not advise it to damage human beings, he pleaded the British to a minimum of help the ladies individuals and babies if the British burned down their residences. The British used the camps to starve human beings (both Boer and local women individuals and babies. finally, the reason more suitable non-whites sided with the British became because there became only more suitable non-whites residing among the British colonies. The non-whites who lived with the Boere fought with the Boere, the non-whites residing with the English fought with them. At no aspect did the "make certain" to wrestle with one over the different. What about the British who fought many various wars with the Xhosas and Zulus? Are they now to not be reported? finally, the British did not care about the Uitlanders. the on the spot the conflict broke out, many uitlanders joined the Boere. They knew that the British could grab the mines for themselves and a minimum of the Boere allowed them get entry to to the mines (Albeit with tax). sure, the Boere easily had their faults. And it became in no way an excuse to do to others what got here about to them. yet finally save in ideas this: The British began racial segregation in SA. They issued the final pass guidelines Act that divided human beings. The Boere only renamed it in Afrikaans: Apartheid.

2016-12-05 09:50:00 · answer #2 · answered by Erika 4 · 0 0

Answer two gives you the right dates. There were no Boer Wars in the 17th or 18th centuries 'or something like that'.

2007-03-07 20:20:16 · answer #3 · answered by rdenig_male 7 · 0 0

This is about the second Boer war...

2007-03-07 17:42:50 · answer #4 · answered by targiepics 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers