Description+of+Africans

= 17th Century Description of Africans =

**First, read this lecture I wrote for you:** During the Scramble for Africa at the end of the 19th century, European powers claimed stake to virtually the entire continent. Their knowledge of the continent was limited to a coastal view from aboard a ship and the statesmen and diplomats had never personally made the voyage to the area. Regardless, the domination of Africa was a fast spreading contagion and competing powers in Europe hoped to expand their global testosterone with quick and brutal occupation of African lands. The maps used to carve up the African continent were grossly inaccurate and paid no attention to the tribal boundaries that had been established for thousands of years. The new boundaries cut through 190 cultural groups thus separating families, kingdoms, and languages. Worse, the boundaries often grouped warring tribes together into very close proximity which would, in later years, result in the modern day civil wars and genocide that we currently see on the news (Darfur, Rwanda, Sierra Leone).

Of course, at the time, the Africans fought back. But their own rivalries prevented a divided front and even some of the more successful battles for their homeland which lasted eight years ended in white control. Some tribal leaders, in hopes to protect their people, made treaties, but these treaties had no value and European/native alliances were typically only used to help the Europeans move deeper into the continent where the Europeans would then force the natives to work. Smori Ture, Ndebele, Mandume, and other African chiefs whose family had led their respective tribes for hundreds of years would be annihilated along with millions of Africans around the continent. Other chiefs fled, only to die in exile, were banished, sold to slavery, or they 'cooperated' with Imperialists in a short lived ransom deal to protect their family. Kingdoms were lost. Stories forgotten. Names of heros washed away with blood.

Most Europeans paid no mind to the shifting of Africa, that is until WWI and many countries including France and Britain 'paid off' their military leaders with huge acreage in Africa. Before long, the African kingdoms would be dominated in white rule. In fact, 87% of the land in South Africa was designated for white farmers only and with the battles slowly subsiding, some Europeans saw Africa as an adventurous undiscovered territory...or a real estate opportunity (whatever you want to call it).

So how did European citizens support the slaughter of millions, the destruction of culture, and the exploitation of free labor when most European countries took great pride in their respect for civility? Much of the support came from the European's desire to **'help'** the natives of Africa. After a few documents and a book or two described the Africans, much of the world saw Africa as a deprived, godless, and desperate nation. They viewed their countries and leaders as humanitarian heros who would bring Christianity, education, and civility to a world of lawless humans who were only slightly above the behavior of animals. And sure, the rubber, cocoa, diamonds, uranium, and poaching offered private companies great gains, the majority of Europeans who worked to cultivate Africa did so with 'good intentions'. **In essence, they came in peace**.

But then again, what have we learned about strangers who come in peace?

Then... Wikipost Assignment: After reading through the old English description of the African's virtues and vices, use the discussion board to describe your reaction to this essay. (Minimum 7 sentences)

Required: One thoughtful reply required. (Minimum 5 sentences)

Here are some prompt ideas for your original post:

1. Sure, the people of Europe would have a negative image of a population that they would never ever meet, but what in particular about this essay sparks up a conversation in your mind? 2. Does this essay create an image of a people who need help? 3. Are there aspects of the virtues section that 'really' aren't complements at all? 4. If this essay is an exaggeration, why would the author do that? 5. Why would Europeans be eager to believe the content of this description? 6. How could European leaders use this essay to their benefit? 7. If YOU were going to go to a new planet and describe the people you saw there, what three judgements of character would you use to best deliver a description of your experience? Does this author focus on those three characteristics? 8. How powerful is writing?

Descriptions of Africans can be found right [|HERE.]