How would European Colonization of South Africa go if the Zulu Empire was either Much Smaller or non-existent?
Last edited:
I don't think you quite understand the question's subject, sir.
He probably meant South Africa.
In any case, without the Zulu conquests, tensions between the Boers and the various African native tribes will be much lower without the pressures of the Mfecane displacing or killing hundreds of thousands of people. So too will Blood River be butterflied away.
Oh, my bad then.He probably meant South Africa.
Would this mean no apartheid or not so harsh apartheid?
I doubt it. Even if there was no apartheid it's unlikely they'll be treated well.
![]()
I don't think you quite understand the question's subject, sir.
Would this mean no apartheid or not so harsh apartheid?
Oh, my bad then.
I doubt it. Even if there was no apartheid it's unlikely they'll be treated well.
Yeah, the Boers are going to look to expand their power base eventually, and given the common European colonial mindset at the time I can't really see the natives being treated well, even if Apartheid is less extreme/not implemented.
How would European Colonization of South Africa go if the Zulu Empire was either Much Smaller or non-existent?
You do know that it was the British who broke the back of the British Empire, not the Boers, right?
While your statement is literally true, I think you may mean the Zulu Empire.
You do know that it was the British who broke the back of the British Empire, not the Boers, right?