• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

What happened at Sharpeville on 21 March 1960? Massacre or self defence?

Extracts from this document...


What happened at Sharpeville on 21 March 1960? Massacre or self defence? 1. (a) Both Sources A and B agree that there were Saracen armoured cars around on the morning of the events. They also agree that there were large amounts of police. Source A says; "There were plenty of police", Source B mentions "police reinforcements". Another thing on which both sources agree is the large numbers of people protesting in the crowd. The sources mention; "There were crowds on the streets" (Source A) and that there were "thousands of Africans shouting" (Source B). Both sources agree that the Africans were approaching the police station. Also both sources mention the crowds chanting and using slogans. Source A says people were shouting 'Izwe Lethu (Our Land)'. This chant could have created an intimidating atmosphere for the white policeman and they could have become angered, scared and worried for their own and their colleagues safety. This also shows that the Africans were extremely patriotic. The other source shows this aswell but is it not the same slogan that is mentioned; 'Africa, Africa' they are said to be saying. Both sources agree that the crowds were very lively. 1. (b) Sources A and B disagree on the atmosphere that was created at the time. Source A seems to create a happy, joyful atmosphere. It says; 'It was like a Sunday outing'. However Source B creates an atmosphere of a nervous, angry and even violent crowd. It says 'the police station was violently besieged' and '[the car] emerged [from the crowd] as a wreck and the people inside were injured'. ...read more.


Both Sources G and E seem to give the impression that no weapons were found around the bodies of the dead. I think that Source G is more useful because it is not really a person's opinion it is just a photograph whereas the persons opinion could have been biased or he many have not been telling the truth. 5. (a) South Africa is a nation with many different cultures and races. The South African authorities were white and were mainly descendants of the Dutch settlers, the Boers. There were also many black tribes in South Africa including the Bantu farmers, the Xhosa and the Khoisan. The British, Germans and French also had settled in South Africa in the 19th century and before. In the early 20th century (1910 onwards) the South African government started to become mainly made up of people from the Boer or white races. Up until 1948 there was a growing feeling among the white population that blacks and coloured people were inferior and should be controlled and many laws were passed that required blacks to give up land (1913 Land Act) or work for the whites. In 1948 Malan the newly elected President claimed that South Africa belonged to the Afrikaners (Boers) and he set up the apartheid state which restricted blacks even more. Blacks were made to carry passes and had to have different education. This created a great deal of hatred and on the whole the blacks and whites did not like each other. This created a sense that the blacks were inferior to the whites. ...read more.


I think that the second interpretation is poorly backed up because they are mainly people in the South African authorities who may be biased against the Africans. 7. People disagree about the events at Sharpeville because there is no conclusive evidence to show what has happened and people would hear different information from different sources like the ones shown. If somebody had seen Source B they would probably have different views to somebody who had seen Source E. Also there is still some tension between the blacks and whites in South Africa and around the world so people may stick up for their racial group because they were so used to being separate for so long. Different Sources disagree about the basic fact such as how many people were at Sharpeville. It is also hard to tell what really happened because the sources could be biased. For example Dr. Verwoerd the South African Prime Minister would be likely to be biased against the blacks because after all he was encouraging the separation of blacks and whites. Also eyewitnesses at Sharpeville may be exaggerating the truth. It appears that sources A, C, E and F are all against the actions of the police that caused the events at Sharpeville, they all either show the supposedly happy and joyful crowd before the event or the dead and wounded after the event. The other sources, B, G, H and I appear to be supporting the idea that the police where acting in self defence at Sharpeville, these sources suggest that the South African police were provoked and had no other option but to fire on the crowd. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE USA 1941-80 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE USA 1941-80 essays

  1. Was Australia Settled Or Invaded By The Europeans?

    They were shot, whipped, poisoned, arrested, chained, transported jailed, tortured and executed. The Europeans lacked total respect for the Aboriginal people, their beliefs, their culture and their traditions. The Aboriginals were pushed further away from there traditional lands and the Europeans taking more land.

  2. Civil Rights Coursework Sources Questions

    lack of interest from the government- the black activists did remarkably well in succeeding through America's political system. Socially the black people did not fare so well. Once the Civil Rights Act was passed, in the eyes of the law black people were instantly entitled to the same treatment as white people.

  1. Apartheid was created by Dr Malan, and was introduced in 1948 in South Africa. ...

    Apartheid was all going to plan for Dr Malan, but he still hadn't finished yet. The next chapter in the apartheid series, was pass books brought in for blacks to carry on them 24 hours a day, for the rest of their lives.

  2. Study Source A, The Long Shadow of little Rock . What can you learn ...

    In Elizabeth Eckford's account when the crowd was closing in on her is supported by Source C where the events are precisely the same and the crowd is moving closer and closer. Source A as people calling her names, in Source B there is similar evidence as the crowd howls

  1. History on Sharpeville

    be because they thought the blacks were violent people, but we know that they are kind people because they haven't attacked them and the police may thought that they posed a dangerous threat. Source B says that 'there was shooting in the morning in which one African was killed' if

  2. The split in the 19th century - Woman suffrage movement

    every nerve to settle the broad question of suffrage on its true basis while the people were still awake to its importance."[21] Stanton went so far as to insinuate more than once that women were more worthy of the vote than poor, uneducated black men and immigrants.

  1. What happened at Sharpeville On 21st March 1960 - Massacre or Self defence: source ...

    Source B is written a day later that the actual events at Sharpeville, on the 21st of March. Source B agrees with Source A about the fact that there were armoured vehicles about and the Blacks were Chanting. However, Source B actually disagrees with Source A more that it agrees.

  2. How far do these sources agree about what happened in Sharpeville on the morning ...

    our land" However, source B says thousands of them were shouting "Africa". The sources agree on a few key points such as the protesters, the police cars. Their views disagree about what happened on the morning of 21st March Source A suggests that the police were the aggressors but source B show the protestors to be violent.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work