Download The Age of Imperialism, 1850-1914 Imperialists Divide Africa In the

The Age of Imperialism, 1850-1914
Imperialists Divide Africa
In the early 1800s, European nations had just a toehold in Africa, holding only areas along the coast. In
the mid-18OOs, though, Europeans had renewed interest in Africa. This rose, in part, from a desire to
create overseas empires, a movement called imperialism. European nations wanted to control lands
that had raw materials they needed for their industrial economies. They also wanted to open up
markets for the goods they made. Nationalism fed the drive for empires as well. A nation often felt that
gaining colonies was a measure of its greatness. Racism was another reason. Europeans thought that
they were better than Africans. Finally, Christian missionaries supported imperialism. They thought that
European rule would end the slave trade and help them convert native peoples.
As a result of these factors, the nations of Europe began to seize lands in Africa. Technology helped
them succeed. Steam engines, railroads, and telegraphs made them able to penetrate deep into Africa
and still have contact with the home country Machine guns gave them a weapon of far greater power
than any African peoples possessed. Finally, discovery of quinine gave doctors a weapon against malaria,
which struck Europeans. They were also helped by the lack of unity among African peoples.
The events called the European "scramble for Africa" began in the 1880s. The discovery of gold and
diamonds in Africa increased European interest in the continent. So that they would not fight over the
land, European powers met in Berlin in 1884~85. They agreed that any nation could claim any part of
Africa simply by telling the others and by showing that it had control of the area. They then moved
quickly to grab land. By 1914, only Liberia and Ethiopia were independent of European control.
The Europeans began to build plantations where they grew peanuts, palm oil, cocoa, and rubber. They
also took important minerals. The Congo produced copper and tin. South Africa had gold and diamonds.
In South Africa, three groups struggled over the land. In the early 1800s, the Zulu chief Shaka fought to
win more land. Meanwhile, the British won control of the Dutch colony on the southern coast. Many
thousands of Dutch settlers, called Boers, moved north to escape the British. They fought the Zulus,
whose land they were entering. At the end of the century, Boers fought a vicious war with the British.
The Boers lost, and they joined the British-run Union of South Africa.
The Berlin Conference
1884-1885 - Berlin West African Conference carves Africa into spheres of control
In the second half of the nineteenth century, after more than four centuries of contact, the European
powers finally laid claim to virtually all of Africa. Parts of the continent had been "explored," but now
representatives of European governments and rulers arrived to create or expand African spheres of
influence for their patrons. Competition was intense. Spheres of influence began to crowd each other. It
was time for negotiation, and in late 1884 a conference was convened in Berlin to sort things out. This
conference laid the groundwork for the now familiar politico-geographical map of Africa.
In November 1884, the imperial chancellor and architect of the German Empire, Otto von Bismarck,
convened a conference of 14 states (including the United States) to settle the political partitioning of
Africa. Bismarck wanted not only to expand German spheres of influence in Africa but also to play off
Germany's colonial rivals against one another to the Germans' advantage. Of these fourteen nations,
France, Germany, Great Britain, and Portugal were the major players in the conference, controlling most
of colonial Africa at the time.
The Berlin Conference was Africa's undoing in more ways than one. The colonial powers superimposed
their domains on the African Continent. By the time Africa regained its independence after the late
1950s, the realm had acquired a legacy of political fragmentation that could neither be eliminated nor
made to operate satisfactorily. The African politico-geographical map is thus a permanent liability that
resulted from the three months of ignorant, greedy acquisitiveness during a period when Europe's
search for minerals and markets had become insatiable.
The French dominated most of West Africa, and the British East and Southern Africa. The Belgians
acquired the vast territory that became The Congo. The Germans held four colonies, one in each of the
realm's regions. The Portuguese held a small colony in West Africa and two large ones in Southern
Africa.
After colonial rule was firmly established in Africa, the only change in possessions came after World War
I. Germany's four colonies were placed under the League of Nations, which established a mandate
system for other colonizers to administer the territories.
The Age of Imperialism
Part 1-The Causes of Imperialism
What was Imperialism?
How many European nations were involved?
What were three causes of Imperialism? In other words, why did European nations want to take over
land in Africa?
1.
2.
3.
Part 2-The Industrial Revolution and Colonization
How did industrialization and the idea that European nations were experiencing unprecedented
prosperity help lead to colonization?
How would the introduction on European culture (i.e. religion, language, and economy) change Africa?
Provide 3 examples
1.
2.
3.
Part 3Write a paragraph defending or refuting the colonization of Africa by Europeans. Provide three reasons
that support your argument. Use the information you collected above in parts 1 and 2 to construct your
response.
The East India Company
British involvement in India during the 18th century can be divided into two phases, one ending and the
other beginning at mid-century. In the first half of the century, the British were a trading presence at
certain points along the coast; from the 1750s they began to wage war on land in eastern and southeastern India and to reap the reward of successful warfare, which was the exercise of political power,
notably over the rich province of Bengal. By the end of the century British rule had been consolidated
over the first conquests and it was being extended up the Ganges valley to Delhi and over most of the
peninsula of southern India. By then the British had established a military dominance that would enable
them in the next fifty years to subdue all the remaining Indian states of any consequence, either
conquering them or forcing their rulers to become subordinate allies.
At the beginning of the 18th century English commerce with India was nearly a hundred years old. It was
transacted by the East India Company, which had been given a monopoly of all English trade to Asia by
royal grant at its foundation in 1600. Towards the end of the 17th century India became the focal point
of the Company's trade. Cotton cloth woven by Indian weavers was being imported into Britain in huge
quantities to supply a worldwide demand for cheap, washable, lightweight fabrics for dresses and
furnishings. The Company's main settlements, Bombay, Madras and Calcutta were established in the
Indian provinces where cotton textiles for export were most readily available. These settlements had
evolved from 'factories' or trading posts into major commercial towns under British jurisdiction, as
Indian merchants and artisans moved in to do business with the Company and with the British
inhabitants who lived there.
The East India Company's trade was built on a sophisticated Indian economy. India offered foreign
traders the skills of its artisans in weaving cloth and winding raw silk, agricultural products for export,
such as sugar, the indigo dye or opium, and the services of substantial merchants and rich bankers.
During the 17th century at least, the effective rule maintained by the Mughal emperors throughout
much of the subcontinent provided a secure framework for trade. The British did, however, start to
intervene in Indian politics from the 1750s, and revolutionary changes in their role in India were to
follow. This change of course can best be explained partly in terms of changed conditions in India and
partly as a consequence of the aggressive ambitions of the local British themselves.
In India, the governors of the Company's commercial settlements became governors of provinces and,
although the East India Company continued to trade, many of its servants became administrators in the
new British regimes. Huge armies were created, largely composed of Indian sepoys but with some
regular British regiments. These armies were used to defend the Company's territories, to coerce
neighbouring Indian states and to crush any potential internal resistance.
Indian Resistance
By the 1880s many of these Indians were frustrated. The British Viceroy and his Council ruled the
country. These educated Indians wanted the opportunity to reach the top jobs in the civil service. They
also wanted India to have its own government, in which men like them would become involved. The
Indian National Congress first set out these ideas in 1885. However, they had little impact on British
attitudes. Many British settlers in India had contempt for the Indians and did not believe they were fit to
run their own country. The British government in London favoured some measures to involve Indians in
ruling India. However, they were afraid to upset their own settlers. Also, India was so valuable to Britain
that they were reluctant to lose too much control.
By the end of the First World War in 1918 British rule was still secure. However, protests from Indian
nationalists had become more common and were sometimes violent. Indians had sent and paid for
thousands of troops to fight in the Great War and they felt that this sacrifice should be recognised with
more say in running the country.
In 1919 there was a huge demonstration at Amritsar. The commander of the British forces in the area
was General Dyer. He ordered troops to fire on the peaceful protesters. Around 400 were killed and
about 1000 injured. His actions caused horror and outrage in India and back in Britain. General Dyer was
forced to retire (but was not charged with any crimes).
One of the reasons for the British reaction at Amritsar was that they were nervous about the growing
nationalist movement. One of its leading figures was a remarkable man called Gandhi. He began his
career protesting about the ill treatment of non-whites in South Africa. In 1915 he returned to India to
convince the British to leave. He believed in non-violent protest, and his methods were extremely
effective. He led many demonstrations against British rule. For example, he led thousands of Indians in a
protest against the tax on salt. This tax discriminated against Indians. The protests were broken up
violently by British troops who used clubs against the peaceful protesters. International opinion began
to turn against Britain and its control of India, especially in the USA.
During the 1920s and 1930s British attitudes towards India began to shift. This was partly a result of
Gandhi's protests and the work of other nationalist leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru. At the same time,
India stopped being as important to Britain's economy as it had been in the past. There was also the fact
that Britain gave self-rule to the Irish Free State in 1921 and this made it even harder to deny self-rule to
India.
Throughout the 1920s and 1930s Britain introduced a range of measures that gave more and more
independence to India. The number of Indians who were eligible to vote was increased. Indians began to
serve on the Council of the Viceroy and also got jobs as ministers in the government. By 1929 Indians
were playing an important role in running their country. In 1935 the British Parliament passed the
Government of India Act. India was divided into self-ruling territories, which were to be a united
federation along the same lines as Australia or Canada. However, India did not have the same levels of
independence as these countries.
The British saw their actions as gradually preparing India to earn its liberty and to rule itself. Indian
nationalists saw the British measures as a way of hanging on to power and not giving power to Indians.
The Indian National Congress, headed by Nehru, became the focus of the campaign for Indians who
wanted to see an end to British rule.
Protests continued through the 1930s and even during the Second World War. It should be remembered
that India again sent and paid for thousands of troops to fight for the British empire during this war. In
fact, the British made an offer of Dominion status to India in 1942 in return for full co-operation during
the war. However, there were too many restrictions on this offer and Indian National Congress leader
Nehru turned it down. Gandhi and other nationalists continued to demand independence for India
throughout the war, although they were careful to avoid disrupting the war effort. When the war ended
the protests increased. International opinion, especially in the USA, was increasingly hostile to British
rule.
One reason why the British were reluctant to leave India was that they feared India would erupt into
civil war between Muslims and Hindus. The country was deeply divided along religious lines. In 1946-47,
as independence grew closer, tensions turned into terrible violence between Muslims and Hindus. In
1947 the British withdrew from the area and it was partitioned into two independent countries - India
(mostly Hindu) and Pakistan (mostly Muslim). Around 2 million people fled from their homes to areas of
Pakistan or India where they would not be a minority, violence continued for some time after final
partition, and there were disputes over territory between the two newly created countries. Jawaharlal
Nehru went on to become the first Prime Minister of India and a key force in making the country a
stable, democratic state.
Part 1
SPRITE Factors that describe the reason for Indian Colonization by the British then SPRITE Factors that
explain how Indians achieved independence
SPRITE COLONIZATION-European Settlers
SPRITE INDIAN INDEPDENDENCE-Indian
Nationalists
S-social
P-political
R-religion
I-intellectual
T-technology
E-economy
S-social
P-political
R-religion
I-intellectual
T-technology
E-economy
Part 2
Represent the European Colonists and Indians that demanded independence. Pay attention to the
time periods.
Point-of View Colonist Pre World War 2
How did this group feel about colonization?
What three aspects did this group think they were
entitled to because of their racial background in
India?
What other groups or countries supported this
group? Why did other groups support it?
Point-of View Indian- After World War 2
How did this group feel about colonization?
What three aspects did this group think they were
entitled to because of their racial background in
India?
What other groups or countries supported this
group? Why did other groups support it?
Part 3
Following World War II support for Indian Nationalists grew. What caused this shift?
1.
2.
3.
The Boer War
The Boer Wars was the name given to the South African Wars of 1880-1 and 1899-1902, that were
fought between the British and the descendants of the Dutch settlers (Boers) in Africa. After the first
Boer War William Gladstone granted the Boers self-government in the Transvaal.
The Boers, under the leadership of Paul Kruger, resented the colonial policy of Joseph Chamberlain and
Alfred Milner which they feared would deprive the Transvaal of its independence. After receiving
military equipment from Germany, the Boers had a series of successes on the borders of Cape Colony
and Natal between October 1899 and January 1900. Although the Boers only had 88,000 soldiers, led by
the outstanding soldiers such as Louis Botha, and Jan Smuts, the Boers were able to successfully besiege
the British garrisons at Ladysmith, Mafeking and Kimberley.
Army reinforcements arrived in South Africa in 1900 and counter-offences relieved the garrisons and
enabled the British to take control of the Boer capital, Pretoria, on 5th June. For the next two years
groups of Boer commandos raided isolated British units in South Africa.
Lord Kitchener, the Chief of Staff in South Africa, reacted to these raids by destroying Boer farms and
moving civilians into concentration camps. the journalist, Emily Hobhouse, visited the Bloemfontein
Concentration Camp in January 1901: "When the eight, ten or twelve people who lived in the bell tent
were squeezed into it to find shelter against the heat of the sun, the dust or the rain, there was no room
to stir and the air in the tent was beyond description, even though the flaps were rolled up properly and
fastened. Soap was an article that was not dispensed. The water supply was inadequate. No bedstead or
mattress was procurable. Fuel was scarce and had to be collected from the green bushes on the slopes
of the kopjes by the people themselves. The rations were extremely meagre and when, as I frequently
experienced, the actual quantity dispensed fell short of the amount prescribed, it simply meant famine."
The British action in South Africa was strongly opposed by many leading Liberal politicians and most of
the Independent Labour Party as an example of the worst excesses of imperialism. The Boer War ended
with the signing of the Treaty of Vereeniging in May 1902. The peace settlement brought to an end the
Transvaal and the Orange Free State as Boer republics. However, the British granted the Boers £3 million
for restocking and repairing farm lands and promised eventual self-government (granted in 1907).
Boer War Gallery Walk
There are six images from the Boer War. For each image make three observations and two inferences.
Observations are 3 facts from the image and Inferences are what you deduce from the image.
There is also a poem that you must analyze.
Images
Image #1
Observations
1.
2.
3.
Inferences
1.
2.
Image #4
Observations
1.
2.
3.
Inferences
1.
2.
Image #2
Observations
1.
2.
3.
Inferences
1.
2.
Image #5
Observations
1.
2.
3.
Inferences
1.
2.
Image #3
Observations
1.
2.
3.
Inferences
1.
2.
Image #6
Observations
1.
2.
3.
Inferences
1.
2.
Poem The Drummer Hodge by Thomas Hardy
1. What are three images from the poem?
A.
B.
C.
What does EACH image tell you about the author's view of the Boer war?
A.
B.
C.
Point-of-View Question
What does Hardy's tone from the poem suggest about the drummer's death and the distance from his
family?
Image #1
Boer girl from a
concentration camp run
by the British
Image #2
Celebration in Britain
when soldiers
return from South
Africa
Image #3 Boer Concentration Camp
Image #4
Boer Soldiers
Image #5 Boer Home Burn by British Army
Image #6
Battle during the
Boer War
Drummer Hodge
by Thomas Hardy1
They throw in Drummer Hodge, to rest
Uncoffined -- just as found:
His landmark is a kopje-crest2
That breaks the veldt around:
And foreign constellations west
Each night above his mound.
Young Hodge the drummer never knew -Fresh from his Wessex home -The meaning of the broad Karoo3,
The Bush, the dusty loam,
And why uprose to nightly view
Strange stars amid the gloam.
Yet portion of that unknown plain
Will Hodge forever be;
His homely Northern breast and brain
Grow to some Southern tree,
And strange-eyed constellations reign
His stars eternally.
1
An English poet
2
a small mound of dirt
3
a large desert in South Africa
Wrapping up Colonization and Industrialization
1. What is this unit's Essential Question?
2. What does this question mean?
How does this question relate to the positive and negative aspects of the Industrial Revolution?
3 Positive Outcomes from the I.R. that show
3 Negative aspects from the I.R. that show a lack
progress. Why is EACH outcome an example of
of progress. Why is EACH aspect an example of a
progress?
lack of progress?
1.
1.
2.
2.
3.
3.
Given the good and bad impacts of the industrial revolution do you think a country such as England
could use the industrial revolution as an example of progress? Why or why not? Provide 3 SPRITE
examples to support your answer.
S-social
P-political
R-religion
I-intellectual
T-technology
E-economy
Now make an image that represents your answer.
Colonization and Progress
Why would the European nations say that colonization in Africa and India were an example of success?
What did they (the Europeans) receive from colonization that helped them progress?
1.
2.
3.
In your opinion do you agree or disagree with the European nations' colonization of India and Africa?
Provide three pieces of evidence that support your claim.
1.
2.
3.
How were colonization and industrialization related? How did industrialization lead to colonization?
Use the diagram below to explain your answer.
Industrialization
2 factors that led European
nations to colonize territory in
Africa and India-think industry
and social values
1.
Colonization
What did Africa and India
have that Europeans wanted
(don't say LAND that's too easy
Captain Obvious)
1.
Outcome
What were two effects on
colonized territories
2.
2.
2.
1.
After considering ALL the evidence from this unit use a specific example to answer the question: How
and why would a nation measure its progress?