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

Why was the Sharpeville Massacre Produced such different interpretations?

Extracts from this document...


Why was the Sharpeville Massacre Produced such different interpretations? The first white settler's arrived at the Cape of Good Hope in 1652. In 1707, the Dutch company stopped all immigration; for over 100 years, no new immigrants arrived. This ended abruptly in 1806 when the British captured the cape: In 1814, Britain bought the cape from the Dutch and it became part of the growing British Empire. The Boers were furious when Britain banned slavery in its empire in 1833. From the very outset the white Boers set up the country so that legally they controlled the whole law making process, Government and 93% of the land. They believed in white supremacy and deliberately took actions to keep the black people in extreme poverty so that they had to work for white farmers and miners for an appallingly law wage. It was not clear exactly what apartheid meant but it definitely did not mean interrogation and it did not mean rights for blacks Apartheid meant 'Separateness' the separation of blacks and whites. In reality it came not only to mean segregation but also white domination of all other races. ...read more.


Also there was evidence that the blacks were defenceless because there were shot in the back which implies that they were surprised and were running away from the whites. Although no weapons were found and that the government were consistent with the blacks in treating them wrongly the evidence does swing in the blacks favour because the white had thought to pre-meditate the attack. That s why there were so many different interpretations with the Sharpeville massacre. The government tried to apportion all of the blame on the blacks because they knew that the whole world was watching this historical event. The purpose of source C was that it was the 'chronicle of the 20th century' so it was there to inform and provide factual information not to give opinions. Source E was from an encyclopaedia, which is the same as the chronicle, it was there to provide factual information. Source H was an account from an eyewitness, which was published, in a liberal magazine (i.e.- antiapartheid) The purpose of Source H was to get a message across to the black people that it all of the blame was to be blamed on the white police. ...read more.


For example in source E it was written in 1961 so it was must be an accurate account of what happened because it was written just one year after it happened so it will be fresh in the writers memory. But in source G it is quite obvious that it was written some thirty years on and the woman's memory will be not as clear. Perhaps some people thought that it was acceptable to speak their views when atmosphere in SA had changed- apartheid nearing end. Sources B and F are very powerful images- very valuable sources. Photos only one moment but they don't catch what happened before and after. They back up the idea of the blacks running away because they were shot in the back. Some sources have a personal interpretation of the events, which are different views, which raises the question of bias. There are many different interpretations so no there are no definite versions of what happened. The weight of the evidence suggests that the Government was responsible. We need more evidence e.g. video, white police and a wider range of views. Scott Mulligan 11PBY History coursework 1 ...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. What happened at Sharpeville on 21 March 1960? Massacre or self defence?

    the machine guns went off separately or at least not exactly at the same time. This shows that the source may not be completely reliable. Both Sources F and E do agree on the fact that there was no warning from the police before the gun fire and this increases the chances of the Source being reliable as evidence.

  2. The Sharpeville massacre.

    However, there is photo evidence of the people running away, (source) so this may mean that the Black's really didn't have any weapons, otherwise they may have stayed and fought.

  1. Civil Rights Coursework Sources Questions

    However, changing the laws of such a racist country did come at a price- the lynching in gaining the Voting Rights Act and the violence of protests such as the Edmund Pettis Bridge incident. Considering the obstacles that had to be overcome- racist authorities/courts etc, opposition from the public and

  2. History on Sharpeville

    case, it leads us to wonder exactly how much information is incorrect. In my conclusion, Source A says that the Africans were gracious and safe, while the police were destructive; Source B suggests that the Africans were destructive and untamed creatures, while the police were blameless and only trying to protect themselves.

  1. The Planet of Which Apes Exactly?

    Finally, both authors discuss the question of humans' rights over animals. David Suzuki questions humanity's right to utilize animals to their own and only ends: "Underlying the "animal rights" movement is the troubling question of where we fit in the rest of the natural world."

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

    How reliable is Source F as evidence of what happened at Sharpeville? Use the sources to explain your answer. Source F is a statement made a few days after Sharpeville shootings by the Anglican Bishop of Johannesburg, Ambrose Reeves. He interviewed all of the surviving blacks when they were in hospital and they were all kept in different wards.

  1. South Africa and Apartheid: Have the effects of apartheid disappeared?

    The two comparisons show that the whites are still very much more educated than the Africans even after Apartheid has finished. However, besides the results, a number of factors make these results inaccurate. Firstly, these statistics were published in 1995 which is only a year since Apartheid was abolished and

  2. What Happened At Sharpeville in March 1960?

    The pictures also supports source "A" by showing many people but not thousands as source "B" does. 3/ I believe that source "F" is highly reliable, not just because the man in question is a Holy man, but also because he has no reason to lie.

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