Hi I’m John Green and this is Crash Course
European History.
So we’ve made it to the nineteenth century,
and as European societies are trying to build
cohesive political structures known as nations,
many are also expanding or initiating overseas
empires.
And so while more European nations were grounded
in the rule of law and constitutional guarantees,
including property rights, life was very different
in the empires governed by those nations,
where there were few if any rights.
While many nation-builders and citizens supported
rights and the rule of law as a bedrock of
their nations, expansion entailed taking away
the rights of others.
And understanding how this contradiction functioned,
and who it benefited, is key to understanding
not just 19th century colonialism, but also
the contradictions we still live with today.
[Intro]
So, when we last looked at expansion, the
British were moving forcefully into India,
in part to compensate for losing monopoly
rights over trade with North America, while
the Spanish and French were losing their grip
in the Western Hemisphere.
But by the mid-19th century, Asia, Africa,
and the Pacific islands were now the focus
of imperial activity, much of it to gain trading
advantages and acquire more raw materials
like palm oil for industry.
And much firmer political control of territories
was established, as in India, North Africa,
and Australia.
In the nineteenth century, the Chinese continued
to attract European trade because of their
excellent products, especially tea and silk.
The English were leaders in industrialization,
but they mostly made low quality products
that pretty much nobody wanted, including
the Chinese.
But the British needed something to sell in
exchange for tea and silk, and they ended
up focusing on drug smuggling.
When the Chinese government began to crack
down on the opium smugglers—many of whose
descendants are today some of the most respected
and wealthy families in Britain—the smugglers
convinced the British government to initiate
the Opium Wars of 1839-1842 and 1856-1860.
British success in these wars forced China
to open new ports to trade.
And while China had banned opium in 1799,
the British used the idea of “freedom of
trade” to keep opium sales going and increasingly
imposed their political and economic will
on Chinese rulers.
Regions in Southeast Asia and the Pacific
were also targets for forced trade and takeovers
of land.
The French set up rubber and other plantations
in Indochina, the British took vast quantities
of lumber from Burma, and the Dutch set up
a variety of plantations in Indonesia, no
longer confining their interests simply to
trading posts.
Pacific islands also became way-stations for
ships to resupply and obtain other raw materials.
The French, British, and Belgians headed for
the interior of Africa, now that they had
quinine with which to treat malaria infections.
While the Portuguese maintained a toehold
on a part of Southwestern Africa, the French
took over much of West and North Africa and
the British took areas in the south and east.
Belgian King Leopold assaulted the Congo for
its rubber (and yes, we are using that verb
intentionally), while Otto von Bismarck, generally
not a fan of expansion outside of Europe,
allowed German businessmen and adventurers
to head for regions in Asia and southeastern
and southwestern Africa.
He also allowed them to launch ventures in
the Middle East, especially the Ottoman Empire.
But the largest and most continuous enterprise
was the one the British built in India and
Central Asia.
They sought manufactured goods and raw materials,
but they were also motivated by simple plunder.
The British invested little in ruling India,
instead using different princes’ well-trained
soldiers for conquering new areas and policing.
Governance of the colony involved some 4,000
British officials and tens of thousands of
local civil service workers who did the main
work.
And as in the past, European invaders relied
on local people to serve as informants, and
guides, and go-betweens and negotiators.
They were some of the human “tools of empire.”
And while “explorers” and colonial generals
were portrayed in European newspapers and
magazines as standard bearers of heroic masculinity,
they required vast entourages of local people
to survive.
This was especially true in Africa where from
village to village go-betweens and guides
had to lead and negotiate the supposedly “lone”
adventurer’s food, and safe passage, and
health care needs.
It is well-documented that many of these romanticized
heroes became addicted to drugs and alcohol
because of the stresses but also because of
the boredom of the slow movement of hundreds
of animals and carriers of supplies and weapons.
Let’s go to the Thought Bubble.
1.
Other tools of empire were industrial, like
steamships built to navigate rivers
2. and weaponry that local people lacked (at
least initially).
3.
Europeans often sold inferior or outdated
weapons to the people they wanted to conquer,
4. who were quick to duplicate the better
models that fell into their hands.
5.
Railroads also became tools of empire in that
they were set up not to benefit local people
6.
but to strip them of their goods and get those
goods to ports as quickly as possible.
7.
Infrastructure was built to disadvantage not
advantage colonized peoples.
8.
A final and crucial tool of empire was the
aforementioned quinine,
9. which was made from the bark of the cinchona
tree found primarily in South America.
10.
Jesuit priests were introduced to the drug
by indigenous people in South America,
11.
but initially the bark had to be procured
and ground up,
12. which made quinine difficult to produce
in large quantities.
13.
But after the 1820s, French scientists devised
procedures to extract quinine from the bark,
14. and then in the 1850s, the Dutch finally
obtained the closely guarded cinchona seeds,
15. which South Americans were embargoing,
16. and the Dutch set up successful plantations
in Indonesia.
17.
The medicalization and plantation production
of cinchona meant that quinine was widely
available to Europeans,
18. which in turn allowed for the invasion
of Africa’s interior, where malaria was
common.
Thanks Thought Bubble.
Oh my gosh, the center of the world just opened!
Our two main bits are right next to each other!
So this is a train.
I’m not sure if its a real train, it might
just be a model train, I’m not a scientist.
All I know is that railroads were incredibly
important in the 19th century, and remain
so.
And if you look at where nations built railroads
inside their nations, and where they built
railroads inside their colonies, you’ll
immediately understand the difference between
living in a nation and living in a colony.
In Britain, for instance, the railroads primarily
connect cities to each other, so people and
goods can be connected and distributed.
But if you look at where Britain built railroads
in, for instance Sierra Leone in the early
20th century, you’ll see that those railroads
are designed almost entirely to get goods
from the interior of the country to a port.
and that brings us to resource extraction.
The discovery of diamond and gold mines in
South Africa from the 1860s into the 1880s
provided another impetus to colonization and
contests over territory.
To get Africans to leave their homes and work
in the mines, the British demanded that taxation
be paid in currency instead of in produce
or other goods.
So to acquire funds, Africans had to leave
their farms for the mines, where work was
treacherous and often fatal.
South African lands were also simply stolen
to drive people into the mines.
Was there resistance to the violence, theft,
and exploitation of imperialism?
Yes.
Colonized people rebelled in a variety of
ways.
In 1857, local people in India including Indian
soldiers and even the widow of a local ruler,
Rani Lakshmi Bai, Queen of Jhansi, launched
a rebellion against expanding British rule
and its seizure of property.
Her wealth had been stolen, and she had been
removed from power.
“We all know,” read a circular letter
that year, “that if [the English] stay in
Hindustan [India] they will kill everyone
and spoil our faith.
. . In this scenario we ask you what you are
doing to defend your faith and our lives.
. . . And this has been published in order
to save the religion and faith and the lives
of all you Hindus and Muslims.”
As they crushed the rebellion, the British
justified the ensuing slaughter as needed
to punish the supposed rapes that vicious
Indians had inflicted on “white” women.
But later investigations proved that no such
rapes had occurred.
The English additionally branded the Rani
a prostitute.
She died in battle during the uprising, one
of more than 5,000 Indians killed on June
17, 1857.
Resistance to empire took many forms.
In the Belgian Congo, for instance, where
local people were horrifically abused by the
colonial authorities, officials realized that
the fertility level was dropping.
Across the colonized world drop in births
like this, seen by historians as a form of
intentional “strike,” and they’ve been
happening for a long time.
For example, in the Caribbean, women used
the peacock flower to abort fetuses; enslaved
women elsewhere used rue, willow, ergot, and
other plants so that additional children would
not be born into slavery.
Such was the horror of colonial oppression
that many people did not want a new generation
to be born into the world.
That said, some local people living under
colonial conditions prospered not just as
soldiers and civil servants but as business
and professional people.
They were labor contractors, and merchants,
and large property owners.
The Tagores of Bengal owned agricultural estates
but as the English advanced, they invested
their growing funds in establishing silk and
other mills while also serving as high level
agents for British companies in India.
Rabindranath Tagore of that family won the
Nobel Prize for Literature in 1913—the first
non-European to do so.
Empire builders justified their conquests
by describing themselves as fully entitled
to take the wealth, land, and know-how of
distant peoples and even to enslave them.
Initially they argued that local people, whom
they often called “savages” needed to
be turned into Christians for their salvation.
In this explanation, imperialism became a
holy endeavor, as it had been for the Spanish
and Portuguese more than three centuries earlier.
But after the mid-nineteenth century publication
of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species and
The Descent of Man, empire was viewed as imperative
in order to save civilization from violent
brutes.
Now, I know what you’re thinking.
“I’ve studied European history a bit,
and its pretty violent.”
We agree, obviously, but people tell themselves
stories in order to justify the oppression
of others.
And indeed, to justify wherever they find
themselves in life.
In this telling, humans had evolved from lower
forms of existence, and Darwin argued that
human development reached a pinnacle in white
men.
So according to him, all people of other races
were less-evolved and less accomplished.
Social Darwinists—people who took Darwin’s
scientific studies and made them the basis
of expansionist and domestic politics—believed
that white people needed to be engaged in
conquest to preserve their superior lives.
So the justification for, say, stealing palm
oil or diamonds from colonized regions was
that it helped keep white people superior,
and those were the people who really mattered.
I know that it’s tempting, especially for
people who benefitted from colonialism to
say that this is all in the past, but the
wealth extracted from colonized regions had
a lasting effect on both the colonizer and
the colonized.
And ideas about race that were contructed
to justify colonialism are still deeply ingrained
in lived human experience around the world.
Imperialists eventually tried to calm what
came to be called the “Scramble for Africa”
with the Berlin Conference of 1884-85, which
ruled that European nations with outposts
on African coasts could claim the corresponding
interior region.
There were also conditions, for example, against
selling firearms to Africans.
But the main result of all of this was to
intensify imperial competition.
The British and French almost came to blows
at Fashoda in Sudan in 1898; the Germans threatened
French holdings in North Africa early in the
twentieth century.
And eventually these growing international
tensions within Europe would lead to World
War, which we’ll hear more about that in
a few more weeks.
But for now, I want to ask you to shift perspectives
and consider the experience of those who were
most negatively affected in this imperialism.
How that imperialism is still shaping life
today.
Thanks for watching, I’ll see you next time.
