this post was submitted on 09 May 2026
44 points (97.8% liked)
AskHistorians
1314 readers
5 users here now
QUESTIONS
- Be civil.
- Be specific.
- Historical topic must be from at least 20 years ago.
- Post questions in the title. Elaboration is for the text box.
RESPONSES
- Be civil.
- Provide comprehensive answers.
- Please provide primary and secondary sources upon good faith request. Tertiary sources, like Wikipedia, are not accepted.
askhistorians is a community for academic answers to questions about history. Polls, opinions, bigotry, grammar pedantry, and personal insults will be removed.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is in regard to the decisions during the 1884-1885 Berlin Conference. Guns were not involved. Could you elaborate?
Guns were definitely involved, just because there wasn’t direct fighting doesn’t mean the implication of combat wasn’t on everyone’s mind.
Are you stating that the Berlin Conference resulted in Africa being partitioned due to implied threats of armed combat between the nation states at the table? Is this recorded history?