The Negative Effects of European Control in Burma

793 WordsFeb 24, 20183 Pages
Burma was economically promising for the British in the nineteenth century and was not left out of the fad that was imperialism. England’s forceful hand in Southeast Asia had countless results, but European control over Burma had virtually no positive effects. Burma’s bountiful history has roots thousands of years ago. Initially, Burmese people lived in city-states throughout the land, each with separate cultures. The nation was united under the rule of Anawrahta in 1104 until it was savaged by the Mongol army. Centuries later, the powerful Arakanese took charge and successfully controlled the land of people in mountain villages before the British set their sights on the lucrative area. ("Burma [union of Myanmar]") Undoubtedly, the small country was suited to give Britain useful resources. Along with timber products, Burma offered plentiful amounts of minerals like tin, silver, and copper. Even more appealing to the British was the vast supply of precious stones (Long). After colonizing and trading, England had a monopoly on teakwood and its decision was paying off (Stockdale). There were several business advantages for Great Britain and they often ended in violence. Evidently, the British were successful in trade due to the lack of competitors. Burmese merchants were prevented from making a living (Stockdale). Commonly, denizens were separated from their businesses to make way for European traders. Burma played a crucial role in timber production, an industry

More about The Negative Effects of European Control in Burma

Open Document