The Actions and Reactions of Most of the Indigenous People of Africa to the European Scramble for Africa
The actions and reactions of most of the indigenous people of Africa to the European Scramble for Africa were to not be colonized and were mainly expressed through conflict, religion, or social/political behavior. The African people behaved in a way similar to Newton’s first law of motion, an object at rest will stay at rest, until acted upon. If an African country did agree to the European’s terms, it was because they thought they were making the best decision for their country to maintain peace. When force was applied to the indigenous people by the Europeans, they naturally fought back in one of the three ways.
One of the ways the Africans retaliated against European actions was through social/political behavior. The Europeans, had government issued contracts made that appeared to give the Africans a choice in the colonization of their tribe (Doc1). However, African leaders like Prempeh 1 (Doc2) and Menelik 2 (Doc3) did not wish for their tribes to be colonized. They just wanted to be allies with the Europeans. The industrialized contracts left blanks to change details like how much the tribe gets paid. Promising to respect the natives and not to instigate with them, the contracts were supposed to be persuasive, convincing the natives to hand over their territory. The Ashanti leader mentions how he was asked to join the protection of the Queen of England, while the emperor of Ethiopia mentions not letting the Europeans divide Africa. Considering how documents two and three start out are both set at 1891, and decline being colonized in different ways, some ‘other form’ of the contract must have been used, hence the words “specialized form” in document 1 possibly indicating there are other customized versions. Document one should have provided other contracts filled out to show comparisons, while document two should provide the British offer.
Religion has always served as peace-giver throughout history. It is always used to bond or give reason. Religion was
One of the ways the Africans retaliated against European actions was through social/political behavior. The Europeans, had government issued contracts made that appeared to give the Africans a choice in the colonization of their tribe (Doc1). However, African leaders like Prempeh 1 (Doc2) and Menelik 2 (Doc3) did not wish for their tribes to be colonized. They just wanted to be allies with the Europeans. The industrialized contracts left blanks to change details like how much the tribe gets paid. Promising to respect the natives and not to instigate with them, the contracts were supposed to be persuasive, convincing the natives to hand over their territory. The Ashanti leader mentions how he was asked to join the protection of the Queen of England, while the emperor of Ethiopia mentions not letting the Europeans divide Africa. Considering how documents two and three start out are both set at 1891, and decline being colonized in different ways, some ‘other form’ of the contract must have been used, hence the words “specialized form” in document 1 possibly indicating there are other customized versions. Document one should have provided other contracts filled out to show comparisons, while document two should provide the British offer.
Religion has always served as peace-giver throughout history. It is always used to bond or give reason. Religion was