Talk:White settlement in Zimbabwe before 1923

Untitled
I think it is mistaken to refer to European settlement from the 16th century. The Portugese settled on the coast, and althought their influence extended inland, much of this was doen through middle men or agents. To complicate matters, the Portugese prazos intermarried with the Africans, so that each generation became more and more African. There is no record of any Portugese visiting the Great Zimbabwe site only second hand accounts, possibly from mixed African-Portugese. Noel Ellis (talk) 09:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Renaming
I've just changed the name of this article from "Early history of European settlement in Zimbabwe". Here is the reasoning behind the change: I've therefore renamed the article to "White settlement in Zimbabwe before 1923". I'm open for discussion if anybody has any thoughts on this. Thanks, —Cliftonian (talk) 16:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * "Early history" is very vague; this article's scope ends with Southern Rhodesia becoming a British colony with responsible government in 1923, so I think better to say "before 1923".
 * "European" could be construed as misleading in some cases, as many of the white settlers coming into the country in the late 19th century came from families that had been established in southern Africa for generations. The Pioneer Column's members mostly self-identified as South Africans. While I understand very well that the term "European" endured in southern Africa as the preferable term for whites right up to the late 20th century, I still think simply saying "white" is clearer and more accurate, and also does not run the risk of being construed as derogatory. (Oddly, in my eyes, "African" still endures for many today as a simile for "black", but that's another conversation).

Eudu
JfifruueudnwudusbHgFXqvh see dnjducncsx be l know fdCxxxxuhfxSxcccccggxccccccccccccbvvvvxxcggvvvjkxa so f click cxc b jvc 102.128.76.60 (talk) 15:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)