We have a very clear idea of what happened from contemporary reports. The terrorist, racist, incitor of murder, ordered that ‘European men’ (ie: white) should be killed and that, specifically, William Livingstone should be beheaded and his head brought to him. Do you accept that he preached in his church with Livingstone’s head on a pole beside him, or perhaps you think he was short-sighted and thought it was a flower arrangement put there by the local women’s institute?

Edited by georgenorman (12 Jul 2021 7.03pm)

BS. The contemporary reports of any war, no matter how small, are always going to reflect well on the victor and badly on the loser. Have you never heard that history is always written by those who win?

We just don't know the real truth. We only know what those on one side said was the truth. The real truth is that it is all conjecture. The whole story, including the head on a pole, could easily be a piece of propaganda intended to shock the people back in England. I am NOT saying it was, only that it might be, because we just don't know.

Trusting what was said back then is foolish in the extreme.

No doubt you accept reports and history that suits your own political agenda though.
Perhaps you should invest in a subscription to the British Newspaper Archive, there you can read many reports of the uprising in many different newspapers with eye-witness accounts, including the widow of Livingstone who was made to watch the beheading of her husband along with her young children (of course you will say she made it up). You will also say all the newspapers conspired together to falsely accuse the racist, terrorist, incitor of murder, of being a racist, terrorist, incitor of murder. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I don't accept ANY historical accounts written by those who won.Or lost. If a non-partisan observer was
an eyewitness then that's more likely to be reliable. It's less true today when so much is recorded but as we know that can be faked, edited and manipulated to tell pretty much whatever story you want, if you have the motivation to do so. Propaganda has always been alive and well.

The British Newspapers of those days were flying the flag of Empire as enthusiastically as anyone. Whether their stories, eyewitnesses or not, have any truth can only be conjecture. If you have ever had much direct involvement with the way even a modern newspaper twists a story to suit it's narrative, as I have, then you will know to treat them all with a huge block of salt.

If you are prepared to accept things at face value, or believe propaganda, then you should be ashamed of yourself. I am a cynic. I am not defending, or condemning anyone. All I am saying is we really need to keep an open mind and consider the context of when, where and to whom it happened before rushing to judgement.

I take it you are a holocaust denier then?