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

Specifically those in French and British territories.

2007-05-29 02:42:32 · 3 answers · asked by stk1990 2 in Arts & Humanities History

3 answers

Sorry, but there is no realistic answer to your question since such records were not kept in those days. Suffice it to say that there were MANY!!

Chow!!

2007-05-29 03:06:48 · answer #1 · answered by No one 7 · 0 0

There is no way to know because the natives did not communicate well with their neighbors. I've heard it said that the white men carried diseases the natives had never been exposed to and the natives died by the hundreds of thousands on the East Coast from Virginia to Canada, and Westerly about the St. Lawrence seaway.

2007-05-29 09:52:29 · answer #2 · answered by Tim O 5 · 0 0

The British and French were not into wholesale genocide- they tended to be too commercially-motivated and they had some morality. Even though this 'morality' is not recognisable to us today, it was real and visible when you compare the British and French to, say, the Belgians who killed approximately 10 million natives in Congo between 1880 and 1914.

The French and British fought wars in India, Indochina, South Africa, and Egypt but they usually used bullying and political divisions to win their victories without massive bloodshed or massacre.

But many tens of thousands would have been killed in wars, and many more tens of thousands worked to death, displaced, or, in the early years, enslaved.

2007-05-29 10:07:22 · answer #3 · answered by llordlloyd 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers