Preview

British Brutality toward the Boer Population When Fighting the Boer Guerrilla Fighters

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
883 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
British Brutality toward the Boer Population When Fighting the Boer Guerrilla Fighters
I agree that the way the British soldiers treated the Boer fighters and civilians was in fact brutal. With the use of the ‘refugee camps’ and the scorched earth policy it made them seem that much more brutal. Sources P, Q and R all offer different insights into how brutally British soldier dealt with the Boer guerrilla fighters during the Second Boer war in 1899, with evidence to support the brutality of it all. Source R strongly agrees that the British treated the Boers badly, particularly the women and children, with this being said the source also has elements of disagreements. At a first glance source Q seems to disagree but that disagreement is later challenged within the source. Source P takes an agreeing approach to the statement. From the sources it appears that the way the British dealt with the Boers was brutally, but how brutal were they when trying to defeat the Boers guerrilla fighters is debatable.
There is evidence in source Q and elements of source R would support the fact that the British soldier didn’t treat the Boers brutally. Source Q explains that ‘The English did burn down farm houses, but never shot the people within them’ and ‘Of course, brutal treatment did occur, but mostly the Boer prisoners were treated with respect.’ This links in with a certain part of source R where it ways ‘The high death rate was the result of incompetence and lack of foresight on the part of the British military authorities.’ The scorched earth policy was brought in by Kitchener, it involved British soldiers going into the Boer farm houses, evacuating them and then burning them down. By burning the houses down Boer men couldn’t use their farm houses as a way of hiding from the British and the women couldn’t resupply their men during the guerrilla warfare. The policy itself isn’t considered to be a brutal tactic as it wasn’t killing or harming anyone; if killings were taking place then this would have made it brutal. The none-brutality of this tactic suggests

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    In the novel, Remarque presents the brutality of war. Early on in the novel, he describes the sound of the wounded horses and how brutal the war atmosphere is. “There is a whole world of pain in that sound, creation itself under torture, a wild and horrifying agony” (p44). The brutality of war in the novel, however, is mainly shown through human suffering. Baumer talks about brutal things that soldiers are just expected to do. He says, “When you put a bayonet in, it can stick, and you have to give the other man a hefty kick to get it out…” (p74). The German soldiers attack the enemy with extreme instinctive brutality. “With the butt of his rifle, Kat smashes to pulp one of the machine-gunners…We bayonet the others before they can get their grenades out” (p84). The use of poison gas is also a very brutal practice throughout the novel. Baumer describes this while he is in a gassed area, hoping that his gas mask is working properly. He says, “I know the terrible sights from the field hospital, soldiers who have been gassed, choking for days on end as they spew up their burned-out lungs, bit by bit” (p48).…

    • 1285 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    The Boer War was fought between the British and white Dutch settlers in South Africa 1899-1902. It had many effects, and led to the growth of anti-imperialism within British politics and society, and highlighted the incompetence of the British military. It also resulted in the formation of the union of South Africa and to the formation of a Dominion in South Africa. The whole idea of imperialism had changed – the meaning of it went from being positive to negative. The war would turn attention away from social reform. As Lloyd George put it “Every shell fired amounted to the cost of a pension for an old person in Britain.”1 It re-focused priorities upon domestic issues. However Lloyd George could have been exaggerating the cost of the war as he was not in the government at the time but wanted to win votes. Zara Steiner said that the war was a catalyst in changing the way Britain looked at itself. For example, it led to reforms and the strengthening of the British navy, which would help Britain maintain its colonies in Africa. This fits alongside the increased popularity of Eugenics, which was belief that the human race needed to be protected from the “unfit” “degenerates”, and which while vile in tone did ultimately lead to the recruitment of healthier soldiers. Therefore there was still continuity. Andrew Marr said that the “British Empire still stood tall but was wobbling on a feet of clay”2 which implies that Britain still maintained its African empire but was weakened as a result of the Boer war. C.C Eldridge goes further. He says that the British Empire not only survived all the traumas produced by the Boer war but expanded as a result of its victory and became even more important for British trade and investment than it had ever been before. Between 1903 and 1914 British exports to the empire in Africa increased by 31 per cent.…

    • 1816 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Their leader Shaka had planted all his ideas and teachings into the Zulu people and because of him, they had this fearless persona about them to. All they were known for was wreaking havoc and growing their already growing empires with trained a killer, which was going to be a problem. I resented the British Laws that was passed to abolish slavery. If they never passed these laws things would have never changed and this would have never stroked their already growing egos. These laws caused us Boers to revolt and try to escape British rule. This was one of the key opponents that lead us into battle with the Zulu people. These ignorant, blood-thirsty, man slaying, people are dangerous. They start countless wars and make a lot of enemies which would hurt them because they were creating countless enemies. The only thing that they know how to do is how to kill and to start war amongst themselves, when we were trying to compromise with them. We was only trying to teach these barbaric people some of our ways and to civilize them, trying to help the blacks of the South Africa. All the “Great” King of The Zulu Land had to do was disband his military and recognize Britain’s authority, or face invasion. As usual they chose what they knew how to do best, which was how to start war. The same British people that passed the slave abolishing law for these people they were now going into war with them. So not only did they have wars with Boers they also had war with the British now to, how ironic. Even though I despise these people they were very courageous. It’s almost funny how the Zulu’s thought they could defeat us with their sticks. They knew that they could not have stopped us with their assegai which was basically a spear, while we…

    • 619 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In document 1 by Ndansi Kumalo who was the Ndebele chief in Rhodesia 1890’s told people who were interested in learning about life under European rule how the British mistreated people. They attacked them, raped their wives and daughters, took their cattle and goat without their consent and treated them like slaves. Africans had no land of their own because since white’s had much better weapons, they easily defeated the native Rhodesians. This document shows how the effects under European imperialism were socially negative because it talks about how British mistreated Africans in their own land and did as they pleased with them and their properties. Furthermore, in document 6 by Kikuyu chief Kabongo who was the chief of Kenya in 1935 wanted to show the British how they changed their way of living. Because he was the chief of Kenya, he might’ve understood better what his people were going through a little better. The British tried to enforce their beliefs on Africans which caused them to change their african traditions and way of living. Africans felt like they weren’t able to live happily and freely under British rule. Children were being taught British customs at a young age. After the British took over, Chief Kikuyu believed their land became violent and hateful. This document shows how the effects of European imperialism were socially negative because it shows how the British came and enforced their culture on…

    • 985 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Boer war had effects on the soldiers on both sides of the war, the indigenous people of South Africa and the families of the Boer soldiers. The Boers were constantly shelling the British and this meant that the British soldiers could not move openly during the day and had to camp in insanitary dugouts rather than in the open, which accelerated the spread of disease in the British camp. Evidentially, this is a social impact and has affected South…

    • 676 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    As we have discussed and examined over the past two weeks of our seminar, John Keegan’s The Face of Battle explores warfare from the viewpoint of the common soldier by analyzing and comparing the three well-known battles of Agincourt, Waterloo and Somme. Keegan's three examinations of Agincourt, Waterloo and the Somme begin by analyzing the traditional outlines of events. Keegan then moves through the main phase of each battle, attempting to make sense of the major events, providing the frame and context necessary in order to begin considering the combatants: how the soldiers felt before the battle, what actually happened when the troops engaged, focusing-in on what these nuanced psycho-sociological details provide. Towards this monumental effort, while limiting much of his coverage largely to the first day of the offensive, Keegan was particularly focused revealing the brutality of the first day of Somme: “In all, the British had lost about 60,000, of whom 21,000 had been killed, most in the first hour of the attack, perhaps the first minutes" (Keegan, 1983). The conditions of the battle were so abhorrent, Keegan describes, with “long docile lines of young men, shoddily uniformed, heavily burdened, numbered about their necks, plodding forward across a featureless landscape to their own extermination" (1983).…

    • 631 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Shame be brought on Paul Kruger. How dare he bring Boer offensives into British held Colony areas. This has caused trouble and now it has been declared that the British are fighting in war, another war in which we shall not lose!…

    • 348 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Americans changed the rules of war during the American Revolution with their new military tactics of guerrilla warfare. In early 1777, General John Burgoyne was commissioned to lead a big army from Canada down Lake Champlain and the Hudson River Valley. During this expedition, Using highly skilled fighters and sharpshooters from the frontier, the American army was able to pick off all 400 of the British troops’ Native American scouts and about all of the British officers leaving the regiment of soldiers without any leadership or guidance. Eventually the battalion was forced back to the confines of the city of Boston.…

    • 307 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    At the conclusion of 18th century, colonialism was uncommon and became a thing of the past. **Britain had lost its Thirteen Colonies in America, Spain and Portugal had lost most of South America and Holland was having difficulties holding onto the East Indies.…

    • 734 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The Boer War took place In South Africa under the command of the then Prime minister Lord Salisbury and was mainly started to gain access to South Africa’s cheap raw materials, especially gold and to add another colony to the empire as the conservatives who were in control were all for the British empire and very patriotic. Before the War England was in control of cape colony in South Africa which was below the two Boer colonies (Rhodesia and the Orange Free State) and was also in control of Zimbabwe which was above the two. These two colonies were once controlled by the Dutch but they had pulled out and given the two colonies independence. This was even more of a reason for England to take over as now the colonies were independent the Dutch would not come to their aid. The take over was expected to be quick and fast and take no longer than 5 months seeing as the colonies were made up of villages and farmers against the might of the British army. The war did not go to plan and these so called farmers put up a strong fight by using guerrilla warfare. A war that was expected to last 5 months ended up lasting 3 years and along with it came a huge loss of life with around 20,000 British soldiers dying. This news was not taken well back in England and the war was classed as a huge disaster. Also the way in which the war was won was treated with disgust too. With desperation setting in, in order to stomp out this guerrilla warfare Lord Kitchener burned down villages and put all Boers in prison camps. The conditions in these camps were awful and many people caught diseases such as cholera and typhoid and many died of malnutrition. This news got back to England and many voters were angered in the way at which the Boers were being…

    • 2058 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Dbq On African Americans

    • 665 Words
    • 3 Pages

    He believed that Government policy had created an atmosphere in which “violence by the African people had become inevitable” and that “unless reasonable leadership was given…to control the feelings of [the]people”, “there would be outbreaks of terrorism which would produce…hostility between the various races.” No other way was open to the African people, to fight “in their struggle against the principle of White Supremacy.” He refused to acknowledge the decree that the ANC was an “unlawful organization” and said the acceptance of such a decree would be “equivalent to accepting the silencing of the Africans for all time”. Mandela was not a violent man and did not resort to violence lightly, but it seemed to be the only way to accomplish the ANC’s goals, as “all lawful modes of expressing opposition to this principle had been closed by legislation.” Mandela did not want an “international war and tried to avoid it to the last minute”, but also stated that his ideals were “worth dying for”. It was degrading for the African people to be thought of as a “separate breed” and “the fight against poverty and lack of human dignity” “was real and not imaginary.” To say differently was demeaning. The enforcement of apartheid lead to terrible conditions for blacks and “to a breakdown in moral standards” resulting in “growing violence.” Mandela and the ANC leaders were attracted to communism for the simple fact that “for decades [the] communists were the only political group in South Africa who were prepared to treat Africans and human beings and their…

    • 665 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Imperialism was a movement that affected all parts of the world, beginning as early as the 19th century. Wealthy and established nations would annex and take control of underdeveloped nations and civilize them. This may sound good in theory, but Imperialism seemed to take advantage of the so-called “inferior” nations more than truly help them. The economic superpowers seized the land of the territories they thought to be subordinate, using it as trading depots, an outlet to gain natural resources, and to civilize the native people. These three factors continued to be a main staple in society of South Africa even after imperialism ended and it was an independent nation. Racial segregation was extreme, and it all stemmed from imperialistic qualities left from those such as Ferry and Paton. Qualities assumed from imperialistic times had a lasting negative effect on South Africa, leading to racial segregation and a sense of inferiority in the black population during the second half of the 20th century.…

    • 1446 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    While they said they were fighting these “savage wars of peace” (Kipling) to allow the Africans to become civilized, in reality they were being the uncivilized ones, treating the Africans as less than human and murdering entire villages when things didn’t go their way. They were colonizing Africa in the name of progress, but demolishing entire villages and destroying innumerable forests doesn’t seem like a radical reform for the Congo. Kipling asked imperialists to “search their manhood” for a reason to let the Africans suffer in their uncivilized bubble, but which was worse: living in a low-tech world where everyone was generally happy and close with their family, or being forced to work through terrible conditions that encouraged fatal health problems to free the wives and mothers that white soldiers had taken hostage (Hochschild 161)? Is it really more shocking that the Africans found a way to survive in a world without industrialization than the fact that countless innocent lives were lost so Europe’s consumerism could continue to flourish? Hopefully the answer is clear: while the Europeans argued otherwise, they were the real barbarians, both directly and indirectly murdering Africans for mere consumer goods and the money it would…

    • 1705 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Article about African Policemen brutality, this case was about a police officer who arrested a taxi cab driver named Mido Macia because he parked illegally and handcuffed him and dragged him by their police car. Mido died in prosecution after being dragged. The policemen went to court and they claimed that he fell out of the van and the handcuff accidently hooked onto their van, but the judge found this unacceptable because when they realized they should have got him help but they didn’t. They we found guilty for the murder of Mido Macia, the family of Mido Macia had a sense of victory from this case and was able to work on their healing of their love one that they lost in police brutality.…

    • 303 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marais Van der Vyver shot one of his farm labourers, dead.An accident. There are accidents with guns every day of the week: children playing a fatal game with a father's revolver in the cities where guns are domestic objects, and hunting mishaps like this one, in the country. But these won't be reported all over the world. Van der Vyver knows his will be. He knows that the story of the Afrikaner farmer - a regional Party leader and Commandant of the local security commando - he, shooting a black man who worked for him will fit exactly their version of South Africa. It's made for them. They'll be able to use it in their boycott and divestment campaigns. It'll be another piece of evidence in their truth about the country. The papers at home will quote the story as it has appeared in the overseas press, and in the back-and-forth he and the black man will become those crudely-drawn figures on anti-apartheid banners, units in statistics of white brutality against the blacks quoted at United Nations - he, whom they will gleefully call 'a leading member' of the ruling Party.People in the farming community understand how he must feel. Bad enough to have killed a man, without helping the Party's, the government's, the country's enemies, as well.They see the truth of that. They know, reading the Sunday papers, that when Van der Vyver is quoted saying he is 'terribly shocked', he will 'look after the wife and children', none of those Americans and English, and none of those people at home who want to destroy the white man's power will believe him. And how they will sneer when he even says of the farm boy (according to one paper, if you can trust any of those reporters), 'He was my friend. I always took him hunting with me: Those city and overseas people don't know it's true: farmers usually have one particular black boy they like to take along with them in the lands: you could call it a kind of friend, yes, friends are not only your own white people, like yourself, you take…

    • 2026 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics