The late 19th century witnessed a dramatic scramble for Africa by European powers. Driven by a complex mix of economic, political, strategic, and (purported) humanitarian motives, European nations carved up the continent, establishing colonial rule over its diverse societies.
Reasons for the Partition/Colonization:
Economic Reasons:
Raw Materials: European industries, fueled by the Industrial Revolution, required vast amounts of raw materials (e.g., groundnuts, rubber, cotton, minerals). Africa was seen as a source of these resources.
New Markets: European manufacturers needed new markets to sell their surplus goods. Africa provided a potential outlet for these products.
Investment Opportunities: Surplus capital in Europe sought profitable investment. African colonies offered new business ventures.
Employment: Colonization was presented as a solution to unemployment issues in Europe, which had been exacerbated by industrialization.
Political and Prestige Reasons:
European Rivalry: Competition between European powers extended to the acquisition of colonies. Colonies became symbols of national strength and prestige.
National Pride: Defeats in Europe, like the Franco-Prussian War, spurred some nations to seek colonies to restore national pride.
Prestige: Even nations without strong economic motives, like Italy and Spain, joined the scramble for prestige and to avoid being left behind.
Strategic Reasons:
Safeguarding Possessions and Trade Routes: Colonies were acquired to protect existing possessions and vital trade routes. For example, Britain's control of the Cape and Egypt was crucial for its route to India.
Humanitarian Reasons (or Justifications):
Abolition of the Slave Trade: Europeans used the claim of ending the slave trade as a justification for their presence in Africa, though their primary motives were often quite different.
Missionary Work: Missionaries sought to spread Christianity. When faced with resistance, they often appealed to their home governments for protection and annexation, believing colonial rule would make populations more receptive.
"The White Man's Burden": This paternalistic idea suggested that Europeans had a duty to "civilize" and "uplift" African societies, a concept often used to mask the exploitative nature of colonialism. Missionaries often played a key role in treaty signing, sometimes through translation and persuasion, as seen with figures like J.S. Moffat and Reverend Charles Helm.
Adventures, Hunters, and Explorers:
Exaggerated Reports: Their often exaggerated reports of Africa's wealth fueled European interest and encouraged investment. Some, like Baines, even secured concessions from African leaders. Livingstone's activities in Malawi exemplify how some individuals advocated for colonial intervention, often framed as a way to address issues like the slave trade.
Chartered Companies:
Royal Niger Company: Companies like the Royal Niger Company and the British South Africa Company (BSAC) were granted charters by their governments to administer and exploit specific territories. They functioned as profit-making entities with governmental authority. Traders also pushed for colonial takeover to establish "law and order" conducive to their commercial activities.
Technological Developments:
Advancements: Advancements like steamboats facilitated access to the African interior via rivers, overcoming geographical barriers. Superior European weaponry (rifles, machine guns) provided a decisive military advantage. Medical advancements, such as quinine to combat malaria, improved European survival rates in Africa.
The Berlin Conference (1884-1885):
Organized by: Otto von Bismarck, it formalized the rules for the partition of Africa.
Key participants: Germany, Belgium, Britain, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and the Netherlands.
Agreements:
"Effective occupation": was required to claim territory.
Major African rivers: were declared open for international navigation.
Signatories: agreed to suppress the slave trade.
King Leopold II's claim: to the Congo Free State was recognized.
A map of Africa: was drawn, delineating claimed and unclaimed areas.
Significance: The conference accelerated the scramble for Africa. African leaders were excluded from these discussions about their own continent.
Contents of Protectorate Agreements:
Land surrender: These agreements, typically between a European company and an African chief, often involved land surrender.
Transfer of power: Transfer of political, judicial, and economic power.
Monopoly trade rights: for the European company.
Indefinite duration: of the agreement.
Promises of benefits: and "civilization" for the African chief and his people.
Control over resources: Control over mineral and other resources.
Effects of the Berlin Conference:
Intensified scramble: for Africa.
European powers: rushed to establish "effective occupation" to secure their claims.
By 1900: almost all of Africa (except Ethiopia and Liberia) was under European control.
Results of Colonization:
Loss of political power: and disruption of existing governance structures.
Expropriation: and exploitation of resources.
Imposition of new laws: and economic systems.
Urbanization: and displacement of populations.
Loss of land: and traditional livelihoods.
Introduction of a monetary economy: and taxation.
Racial discrimination: and social inequality.
Destruction of traditional institutions: and cultural imperialism.
Missionaries in Zimbabwe and Crimes Against Humanity
Missionaries in Zimbabwe: Their Role
Education: Established schools, introducing formal education to some segments of the population.
Medicine: Established hospitals and clinics, providing some access to modern healthcare.
Trade: Some missionaries engaged in trade and encouraged "legitimate commerce," which sometimes benefited local communities but also facilitated economic exploitation.
Architecture: Introduced new building styles (e.g., rectangular, grass-thatched houses, later brick buildings), influencing local architecture.
Technology: Some missionaries repaired weapons for Africans and introduced new agricultural techniques.
Infrastructure: Involved in road building.
Clothing: Introduced European clothing and other products, which became associated with "civilization."
Religion and Culture: Spread Christianity, which led to the abandonment of some traditional practices (e.g., polygamy, raiding).
Treaties and Colonization: Missionaries sometimes facilitated the signing of treaties between African rulers and European colonizers, paving the way for colonial rule.
Advocacy for Colonization: Some missionaries actively encouraged their home governments to colonize specific areas. For example, John Smith Moffat advocated for the destruction of the Ndebele state.
Key Figures: Robert Moffat, Charles Helm, John Smith Moffat, Francois Coillard, Father Robert Laws, etc.
Crimes Against Humanity: Slavery and Colonization
Slavery: A deeply inhumane system of exploitation, practiced for centuries and perfected by European powers during the transatlantic slave trade. It represents the ultimate degradation of human beings.
Colonization as a Crime: While occurring before the establishment of international bodies like the UN, colonization can be considered a crime against humanity. It involved the forceful takeover of territories, the subjugation of populations, and the systematic exploitation of resources and people. It shares similarities with slavery in its disregard for human dignity and its exploitative nature.
Hypocrisy of Colonial Powers: Nations that condemned the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait had themselves engaged in similar acts of aggression and territorial acquisition during the colonial era.
Examples of Colonial Atrocities:
Extermination: The near-total extermination of the Aboriginal population in Tasmania by British settlers.
Destruction: The destruction of empires and civilizations in the Americas by Spanish conquistadors.
Slavery and Colonization:
Slavery in Africa:
Causes:
Demand for Labor: The discovery of resources and agricultural potential in the Americas created a high demand for a disciplined workforce. Indigenous populations (Red Indians) were not able to meet this demand due to disease and other factors.
African Labor as a Solution: African societies, with existing agricultural and industrial practices, were seen as a readily available source of labor.
Disease Impact on Indigenous Populations: European diseases devastated native populations in the Americas, further fueling the need for alternative labor sources.
Role of African Leaders: Some African leaders participated in the slave trade, capturing and selling people in exchange for European goods (e.g., alcohol).
Profit Motive: European trade within Europe was less profitable than trade with less industrialized regions. The use of enslaved labor in the Americas created highly profitable trade routes.
Joint Stock Companies: Companies like the Africa Company were formed specifically for the purpose of engaging in the slave trade. Their objectives were often explicitly exploitative.
Triangular Trade: The slave trade was a key part of the triangular trade between Europe, Africa, and the Americas. This system generated immense profits for European companies.
Connection to European Development: There is a strong correlation between Europe's economic expansion and the exploitation of enslaved African labor. The wealth generated by slavery fueled European industrialization.
Methods of Exploitation: European powers used colonization, protectionism, and the destruction of local economies to consolidate their economic power, often at the expense of African societies.
Slavery and Colonization:
Colonization as an Economic Necessity: Colonization was driven by the need for European merchants to expand their markets and access resources. Merchants actively supported and financed colonial ventures.
Slavery's Evolution: African slavery existed in Europe before the transatlantic slave trade. However, the exploitation of the Americas dramatically increased the scale and intensity of the practice.
End of Slavery and Rise of Colonialism: Slavery was eventually abolished when it no longer served European economic interests. However, this did not represent a moral awakening. Colonization replaced slavery as a new form of exploitation.
Primitive Accumulation: The accumulation of wealth through violence and exploitation, initially practiced within Europe, was extended to foreign lands through colonization.
Destruction of Civilizations: European expansion involved the destruction of civilizations and kingdoms in Africa and the Americas. Examples include the Ashanti Kingdom and the Aztec civilization.
Crusades as Precursors: The Crusades, while often framed as religious conflicts, also involved plunder and the acquisition of wealth, foreshadowing later colonial practices.
Resource Exploitation: The focus shifted from simply stealing wealth to exploiting the mines and agricultural potential of colonized territories. The availability of enslaved African labor was crucial for this exploitation, particularly in the Americas where indigenous populations had been decimated.
The Colonization of Zimbabwe (1885-1965):
Introduction:
The colonization of Zimbabwe, like much of Africa, was driven by European imperialism in the late 19th century. Cecil Rhodes, a key figure, played a pivotal role in this process, driven by his belief in British superiority and his ambition to control a Cape-to-Cairo railway. While European contact with Zimbabwe existed before this period through trade and exploration, the late 19th century saw increased European interest due to reports of the region's perceived wealth.
Reasons for the Occupation:
Imperialism: The prevailing spirit of European imperialism, a competition for territory and power, was a primary driver.
Economic Potential: Zimbabwe's perceived mineral wealth, fertile soils, and potential as a market for European goods made it attractive to colonizers.
Climate: The favorable climate, particularly in the highveld, was seen as suitable for European settlement and agriculture.
Strategic Considerations: Britain's desire to prevent Boer expansion northward and encircle the Transvaal played a significant role. They wanted to deny the Boers access to a seaport and secure control over the region between the Limpopo and Zambezi rivers.
How Zimbabwe Was Colonized: A Step-by-Step Process:
The Grobler Treaty (1887):
Context: The Boer Republic of the Transvaal, seeking to expand its influence and potentially gain access to resources and a seaport, was eager to establish a relationship with Lobengula and the Ndebele kingdom.
The Treaty: Piet Grobler, representing the Transvaal, negotiated a treaty with Lobengula. This treaty, presented as a "friendship treaty," was heavily skewed in favor of the Boers.
Terms:
"Everlasting peace" was declared, though this was more rhetoric than reality.
Lobengula was recognized as paramount chief/king.
Lobengula was obligated to provide military assistance to the Transvaal if needed, but no such reciprocal obligation was placed on the Boers.
The Transvaal was allowed to have a permanent representative in Bulawayo, but Lobengula was not granted the same right in the Transvaal.
Lobengula was required to assist in the capture and return of escaped criminals from the Transvaal.
Boer hunters and adventurers were granted free access to Lobengula's territory.
Lobengula was not allowed to try Boers in his territory.
Significance: This treaty gave the Boers a foothold in Lobengula's territory and demonstrated their interest in the region. It also revealed Lobengula's vulnerability to external pressures and his reliance on advisors, some of whom may have had their own agendas. The treaty's unequal terms highlight the power imbalance between the Ndebele kingdom and the encroaching European powers.
The Moffat Treaty (1888):
Context: The British, particularly Cecil Rhodes, viewed the Grobler Treaty as a threat to their own imperial ambitions in the region. They were determined to prevent Boer expansion northward and secure control over the territory between the Limpopo and Zambezi rivers.
Moffat's Mission: Rhodes sent Reverend John Smith Moffat, a missionary who had previously established a relationship with Lobengula, to persuade the Ndebele king to renounce the Grobler Treaty. Moffat, despite his religious role, acted as an agent of British imperial interests.
Lobengula's Decision: Facing pressure from the British, Lobengula, likely hoping for British protection against the Boers, agreed to repudiate the Grobler Treaty.
Terms: Lobengula agreed to be a friend of the British Queen and promised not to enter into any agreements with other European powers without the knowledge and consent of the British High Commissioner at the Cape.
Significance: The Moffat Treaty marked a significant victory for the British, effectively nullifying the Boer advantage gained through the Grobler Treaty. It placed Lobengula and his kingdom firmly under British influence. Moffat's duplicity, leveraging his past relationship with Lobengula for political gain, highlights the often-unethical tactics used during the scramble for Africa.
The Rudd Concession (1888):
Context: While the Moffat Treaty secured British political influence, Rhodes sought direct control over the region's resources, particularly its rumored mineral wealth. He needed a legal instrument that would grant his company exclusive mining rights.
The Delegation: Rhodes sent a delegation to Lobengula, including Charles Rudd (his close associate), Rochfort Maguire (a lawyer), and Francis Thompson (familiar with Ndebele language and customs).
Negotiations and Deception: The delegation faced resistance from Lobengula, who was wary of granting further concessions. However, they eventually gained access through the influence of bribed advisors (Lotshe and Sikombo). Rudd made misleading promises to Lobengula, including limiting the number of white men entering the territory and assuring the surrender of their weapons.
The Concession: Lobengula, under pressure and misled by these assurances, signed the Rudd Concession.
Terms: In exchange for a monthly pension, rifles, ammunition, and/or a gunboat, Lobengula granted Rhodes's group "complete and exclusive charge over all metals and minerals" in his territory, along with the power to do whatever they deemed necessary to procure those minerals. He also agreed not to grant any further land or mining concessions without Rhodes's consultation.
Significance: The Rudd Concession was a pivotal moment. It gave Rhodes and his newly formed British South Africa Company (BSAC) the legal basis to exploit the mineral resources of Lobengula's kingdom. The deceptive tactics used to obtain the concession, including bribery and false promises, demonstrate the unscrupulous nature of Rhodes's ambitions. The vague and expansive language of the concession ("do all things they may deem necessary") gave the BSAC virtually unlimited power.
The BSAC Charter (1889):
Context: With the Rudd Concession in hand, Rhodes needed official backing from the British government to legitimize his control over the territory and its resources.
Securing the Charter: Rhodes traveled to London to negotiate a Royal Charter for his British South Africa Company. He faced some opposition from those who believed colonial administration should be directly under the government, not a private company. However, Rhodes's political connections, financial backing, and assurances that he would not burden British taxpayers ultimately prevailed.
Terms: The Royal Charter granted the BSAC broad powers:
Make treaties with local rulers.
Promulgate laws.
Maintain a police force.
Acquire further concessions.
Develop infrastructure (roads, railways, etc.).
Own or charter ships.
Significance: The Charter gave the BSAC the authority to act as a government in the territory, effectively paving the way for full-scale colonization. It combined the economic motives of a private company with the political and military power of the British Empire. This marked the transition from mere economic exploitation to formal colonial rule.
Key Themes:
Deception and Manipulation: Rhodes and his agents used deception, bribery, and misleading promises to secure treaties and concessions from Lobengula.
Economic Motives: The desire for mineral wealth and control over resources was a primary driver of colonization.
Strategic Competition: The rivalry between the British and the Boers played a crucial role in the scramble for territory.
Imperial Ideology: Beliefs in British racial superiority and the "civilizing mission" provided justification for colonial expansion.
The Invasion and Occupation of Zimbabwe:
The Pioneer Column: A Calculated Incursion
Background: Following the granting of the BSAC Royal Charter in October 1889, Cecil Rhodes moved swiftly to translate his ambitions into action. He orchestrated the formation of the Pioneer Column, a force designed to occupy Mashonaland and establish British control.
Composition and Motivation: The Pioneer Column was a carefully selected group of approximately 200 volunteer settlers. These individuals, drawn from across Europe and South Africa, were lured by the promise of land (3,000 acres per settler) and mineral wealth (15 gold claims per settler). They were supported by a contingent of around 500 armed troops, ensuring the expedition's military capability.
Leadership and Guidance: While Starr Jameson was the nominal leader of the column, the experienced hunter Frederick Selous played a crucial role as the guide. Selous's extensive knowledge of the region's terrain and geography was invaluable in navigating the territory and avoiding potential conflicts.
Strategic Route: The Pioneer Column's route was carefully chosen to minimize the risk of direct confrontation with Lobengula's Ndebele army. Instead of a direct approach through Ndebele territory, the column followed a path along the eastern borders, effectively circumventing Ndebele strongholds.
Forts and Settlements: As the column progressed northward, it established several fortified settlements, marking its advance and solidifying its presence. These included:
Fort Tuli: This served as the initial entry point into the territory, a crucial staging ground for the invasion.
Fort Victoria: This fort, strategically located, became an important administrative and military center.
Fort Charter: Another key fortification, reinforcing the column's control over the land.
Fort Salisbury and the Union Jack: On September 12, 1890, the Pioneer Column reached its final destination and established Fort Salisbury (present-day Harare). The raising of the Union Jack at this location symbolized the formal annexation of Mashonaland and the beginning of British colonial rule.
White Settlement in Mashonaland: Displacement and Exploitation
Land Seizure: The arrival of the Pioneer Column marked the beginning of large-scale land appropriation by white settlers. Vast tracts of land were claimed, disregarding the existing land rights and occupancy of indigenous Shona communities.
Squatting and Displacement: The Shona people found themselves increasingly displaced from their ancestral lands, becoming "squatters" on farms now owned by white settlers. This displacement disrupted traditional ways of life and forced communities to adapt to new, often exploitative, conditions.
Labor Exploitation: The white settlers, eager to develop their farms and mining operations, required a readily available and cheap labor force. The displaced Shona people were compelled to provide this labor, often under harsh conditions and for minimal compensation. This system of forced labor became a cornerstone of the colonial economy.
Resource Extraction and Mining: The settlers aggressively pursued the extraction of mineral resources, particularly gold. They often took over existing Shona mines, benefiting from indigenous knowledge and expertise. The Shona people were then forced to work in these mines, further contributing to their exploitation.
Resistance and its Suppression: While some Shona communities attempted to resist the colonial encroachment, their efforts were largely unsuccessful. Their traditional methods of resistance were no match for the superior weaponry and organization of the colonial forces.
Undermining Lobengula's Authority: Treaties and Concessions
Treaties with Shona Chiefs: Despite Lobengula's claims of paramountcy over the Shona people, the BSAC actively sought to undermine his authority by signing separate treaties with individual Shona chiefs. These treaties, often obtained through dubious means, granted the BSAC mineral rights and the right to establish a presence in their territories. This strategy effectively weakened Lobengula's position and fragmented the pre-colonial political landscape.
The Lippert Concession: In a desperate attempt to counter Rhodes's growing influence, Lobengula granted land and mineral rights to a Johannesburg businessman named Lippert. However, this move backfired, as Rhodes quickly bought out Lippert's concession, further consolidating his control over the region's resources.
The Erosion of Ndebele Power: These events demonstrated the increasing vulnerability of Lobengula and the Ndebele kingdom. Faced with the combined forces of British imperialism and the machinations of Cecil Rhodes, Lobengula's ability to protect his people and his territory was severely compromised.
In summary, the invasion and occupation of Zimbabwe was a multifaceted process characterized by military force, land appropriation, economic exploitation, and political maneuvering. The Pioneer Column's arrival marked the beginning of white settlement and colonial rule, while the subsequent treaties and concessions served to undermine Lobengula's authority and pave the way for the establishment of BSAC control. This period laid the foundation for decades of colonial rule and its enduring legacy in Zimbabwe.
The 1893 Anglo-Ndebele War: A War of Dispossession
Underlying Tensions: A Clash of Interests
The 1893 war between the Ndebele and the British South Africa Company (BSAC) was the culmination of simmering tensions and conflicting ambitions. The Ndebele, wary of the encroaching white settlers, desired their removal from Mashonaland, a region they considered their traditional raiding ground. The BSAC, driven by Rhodes's imperial vision and the desire for economic gain, sought to eliminate the Ndebele as a political and military force.
Motivations of the BSAC:
Challenging African Self-Rule: The Ndebele kingdom, a powerful and well-organized state, stood as a symbol of African independence. Its existence challenged the racist European narrative of African inferiority and the justification for colonial rule.
Strategic Location: The Ndebele territory lay between Salisbury (Harare) and Mafeking (in South Africa), a crucial link in Rhodes's envisioned Cape-to-Cairo railway. Control over this territory was essential for his grand imperial scheme.
Economic Greed: The BSAC coveted the Ndebele's land, cattle, and labor resources. They also suspected the territory held significant mineral deposits, particularly gold.
Personal Ambition: Rhodes's ambition and desire for fame played a role. Conquering the Ndebele, perceived as a formidable African power, would enhance his reputation and solidify his position.
Expansionist Drive: The BSAC's expansionist policies sought to control as much territory as possible, and the Ndebele kingdom represented an obstacle to this goal.
Motivations of the Ndebele:
Loss of Raiding Grounds: The presence of white settlers in Mashonaland disrupted the Ndebele's traditional raiding practices, a vital source of resources and a demonstration of their power.
Reasserting Control over the Shona: The Ndebele viewed the Shona as subjects and were angered by their growing allegiance to the white settlers and their refusal to pay tribute.
Fear of Encroachment: The Ndebele recognized the growing threat posed by the white settlers and their relentless expansion. They feared losing their land, their independence, and their way of life.
The Precarious Peace:
Both sides were wary of initiating open conflict. They attempted to maintain a fragile peace, hoping for a resolution that would serve their respective interests. For the Ndebele, this meant the continuation of raiding the Shona. For the BSAC, it was a temporary arrangement that would allow them to consolidate their power and eventually exert control over Matabeleland without a large-scale war. A tentative boundary was established between Matabeleland and the area under BSAC rule, but this was constantly violated by both sides. The Ndebele, particularly the younger warriors, resented the white presence and desired more aggressive action. The BSAC, for its part, used these border incidents as a pretext for further encroachment and provocation.
The Victoria Incident: A Spark Ignites the Flame
Shona Tribute and Ndebele Retaliation: Some Shona chiefs, believing that white settlement offered them protection from Ndebele raids, stopped paying tribute to Lobengula. In response, Lobengula ordered punitive raids against these Shona communities.
BSAC Intervention: These raids alarmed the white settlers, who relied on Shona labor. They also provided the BSAC with a convenient excuse to intervene. Despite Lobengula's assurances that he intended to avoid conflict with the whites, the BSAC used the raids as justification for military action.
The Clash at Fort Victoria: A series of incidents, including the theft of telegraph wire and cattle, further escalated tensions. When a Ndebele raiding party, under the command of Manyawo and Mgandani, entered the Fort Victoria area, clashes with white settlers and their Shona allies became inevitable. Despite Lobengula's attempts to communicate his intentions and prevent conflict, these efforts were undermined by the BSAC.
The Fatal Skirmish: A confrontation between a BSAC patrol led by Lendy and a portion of Mgandani's force resulted in gunfire and the death of Mgandani and several Ndebele warriors. This incident, though likely initiated by the BSAC, was used as the catalyst for full-scale war.
The 1893 War: The Ndebele's Last Stand
BSAC Preparations: The BSAC, eager for war, mobilized its forces and recruited volunteers. The Victoria Agreement, a secret pact between the BSAC and the volunteers, promised land, gold claims, and a share of Lobengula's cattle as incentives for participation in the war.
Lobengula's Attempts at Peace: Even as the BSAC prepared for war, Lobengula made efforts to avert conflict, sending ambassadors to Queen Victoria and agreeing to negotiations. However, these attempts were ignored by the BSAC, who were determined to destroy the Ndebele kingdom.
Military Campaigns: The BSAC forces, equipped with superior weaponry, launched a three-pronged invasion of Matabeleland. The Ndebele, though brave and determined, were ultimately outmatched. Key battles included the Battle of Mbembezi.
Loss of Cattle and Resources: During the war, the BSAC seized vast quantities of Ndebele cattle, a devastating blow to the Ndebele economy and their way of life. This loss, combined with the loss of land and independence, had a profound impact on the Ndebele people.
Lobengula's Flight and Fate: After the defeat at Mbembezi, Lobengula fled north, eventually ordering his people to surrender. His fate remains a mystery. While some accounts claim he died of smallpox or old age, Ndebele oral tradition suggests he was killed by his own advisors to prevent his capture by the BSAC.
Effects of the War: The Ndebele's Subjugation
Destruction of the Ndebele Kingdom: The war resulted in the complete destruction of the Ndebele state, removing the last major obstacle to BSAC control over the region.
Loss of Independence: The Ndebele people lost their independence and were subjected to colonial rule.
Economic Devastation: The loss of cattle, their primary economic resource, crippled the Ndebele economy.
Social and Political Disruption: The Ndebele social and political structures were dismantled, and the people were subjected to oppressive colonial administration.
Land Appropriation: White settlers claimed vast tracts of land in Matabeleland, displacing the Ndebele people and confining them to reserves.
Forced Labor: The Ndebele were forced to work in white-owned farms and mines, often under harsh conditions.
The 1893 Anglo-Ndebele War was a war of dispossession, driven by greed, imperial ambition, and racist ideology. It resulted in the destruction of the Ndebele kingdom, the loss of Ndebele independence, and the beginning of a long period of colonial oppression. The war's legacy continued to shape Zimbabwe for decades to come.
