Understanding how Europeans were able to conquer and expand their control in Africa. Local government officials were usedLimited self-ruleGoal: to develop future leadersGovernment institutions are basedon European styles but may have local rulesForeign officials brought in to ruleNo self-ruleGoal: assimilationGovernment institutions are basedonly on European stylesExamples:Examples:British colonies: Nigeria and IndiaU.S. colonies: PhilippinesFrenchcolonies:Somaliland,VietnamPortuguese colonies: AngolaBetween 1878 and 1914, European powers divided up the entire African continent exceptfor the independent countries of Ethiopia and Liberia. Liberia was settled by free slavesfrom the United States and became an independent republic in 1847. Ethiopia, which wasalready independent, routed an Italian invasion in 1896. Defeating the Italians assuredthat the country would stay independent. New Imperialism: The European 'Scramble for Africa'Note - the term 'Scramble for Africa' was created by the British in1884 and is frequently used in textbooks (like the excerpt you'll readbelow). As you read to learn about this time period, also questionthe term itself. Should historians call this time period the Scramblefor Africa? Should modern historians call it something else?The most striking outburst of imperialismtook place in Africa. As late as 1875European peoples maintained a limitedpresence in Africa. They held several smallcoastal colonies and fortified tradingposts, but their only sizable possessionswere the Portuguese colonies of Angolaand Mozambique, the French settlercolony in northern Algeria, and a clusterof settler colonies populated by Britishand Dutch migrants in south Africa -almost all of these limited to the coast ofCha meG DIANOCEANALANTICOCEANANGAAfrica. After the end of the slave trade, alively commerce developed around theexchange of African gold, ivory, and palmoil for European textiles, guns, andmanufactured goods. This trade broughtconsiderable prosperity and economic opportunity, especially to west African lands.re esTensions between those European powers who were seeking African colonies led to theBerlin Conference (1884-1885), during which the delegates of twelve European states aswell as the United States and the Ottoman empire-not a single African waspresent-developed the ground rules for the colonization of Africa. The Berlin Conferenceproduced agreement for future claims on African lands: each colonial power had to notifythe others of its claims, and each claim had to be followed up by "effective occupation" ofthe claimed territory. Occupation was commonly accomplished either by getting a signedagreement from a local African ruler or by military conquest. This conference thus beganthe Scramble for Africa, the invasion, occupation, division, and colonization of Africanterritory by European powers.Superior technology and improved medical knowledge helpedto foster imperialism. The development of the medicinequinine (that protected against deadly malaria in tropicalCopyright Achievement First. Unless otherwise noted, all of the content in this resource is licensed under a Creative Commonsicenseregions) enabled Europeans to venture into the mosquito-infested interiors of Africa andAsia. The combination of the steamboat and the telegraph enabled the Western powers toincrease their mobility and to quickly respond to any situationsFigure 2- rapid fire machine that threatened their dominance. The rapid-fire machine gungun (1800s)also gave Europeans a military advantage against Africans andAsians who opposed European aggression.The earliest approach to colonial rule involved "concessionary companies." Europeangovernments typically granted private companies large pieces of territory and encouragedthem to undertake economic activities such as mining, plantation agriculture, or railroadconstruction. Concessionary companies also had permission to implement systems oftaxation and labor recruitment. Although that approach allowed European governmentsto colonize and exploit immense territories with only a limited investment in money andpeople (since the company assumed the bulk of the work), company rule also led to majorissues. The brutal use of forced labor, which provoked a public outcry in Europe, andprofits smaller than anticipated persuaded most European governments by the early 20century to reduce the powers of private companies and to establish their own rule, whichtook the form of either direct rule or indirect rule.Under direct rule, colonies had administrations headed by European personnel whoassumed responsibility for tax collection, labor and military recruitment, and themaintenance of law and order. Administrative boundaries intentionally cut across existingAfrican political and ethnic boundaries to divide and weaken potentially powerfulindigenous groups. Direct rule aimed at removing strong kings and other leaders andreplacing them with people loyal to the mother country. Underlying the principle of directrule was the desire to keep African populations in check and to permit Europeanadministrators to engage in a "civilizing mission." However, that approach to colonial rulepresented its own difficulties. Key among them was the constant shortage of Europeanpersonnel. For example, in French West Africa some thirty-six hundred Europeans tried torule over an African population of more than nine million. The combination of longdistances and slow transport limited effective communication between regionalauthorities and Europe. An inability to speak local languages and a limited understandingof local customs among European officials further undermined their effectiveadministration.The British employed indirect rule in many of their African colonies. They believed thatthere were moral and financial advantages of exercising control over subject populationsthrough indigenous (local) institutions. This meant that British officials would rule Africancolonies through local leaders. Forms of indirect rule worked in regions where Africanshad already established strong and highly organized states, but elsewhere erroneousassumptions concerning the "tribal" nature of African societies weakened theeffectiveness of indirect rule. Perplexed by the complexities of African societies, colonialofficials frequently imposed their own ideas of what constituted "tribal boundaries" or"tribal authorities." The invention of rigid tribal categories and the establishment ofartificial tribal boundaries became one of the greatest obstacles to nation building andregional stability in much of Africa during the second half of the twentieth century.

Question

Understanding  how Europeans were able to conquer and expand their control in Africa. Local government officials were usedLimited self-ruleGoal: to develop future leadersGovernment institutions are basedon European styles but may have local rulesForeign officials brought in to ruleNo self-ruleGoal: assimilationGovernment institutions are basedonly on European stylesExamples:Examples:British colonies: Nigeria and IndiaU.S. colonies: PhilippinesFrenchcolonies:Somaliland,VietnamPortuguese colonies: AngolaBetween 1878 and 1914, European powers divided up the entire African continent exceptfor the independent countries of Ethiopia and Liberia. Liberia was settled by free slavesfrom the United States and became an independent republic in 1847. Ethiopia, which wasalready independent, routed an Italian invasion in 1896. Defeating the Italians assuredthat the country would stay independent. New Imperialism: The European 'Scramble for Africa'Note - the term 'Scramble for Africa' was created by the British in1884 and is frequently used in textbooks (like the excerpt you'll readbelow). As you read to learn about this time period, also questionthe term itself. Should historians call this time period the Scramblefor Africa? Should modern historians call it something else?The most striking outburst of imperialismtook place in Africa. As late as 1875European peoples maintained a limitedpresence in Africa. They held several smallcoastal colonies and fortified tradingposts, but their only sizable possessionswere the Portuguese colonies of Angolaand Mozambique, the French settlercolony in northern Algeria, and a clusterof settler colonies populated by Britishand Dutch migrants in south Africa -almost all of these limited to the coast ofCha meG DIANOCEANALANTICOCEANANGAAfrica. After the end of the slave trade, alively commerce developed around theexchange of African gold, ivory, and palmoil for European textiles, guns, andmanufactured goods. This trade broughtconsiderable prosperity and economic opportunity, especially to west African lands.re esTensions between those European powers who were seeking African colonies led to theBerlin Conference (1884-1885), during which the delegates of twelve European states aswell as the United States and the Ottoman empire-not a single African waspresent-developed the ground rules for the colonization of Africa. The Berlin Conferenceproduced agreement for future claims on African lands: each colonial power had to notifythe others of its claims, and each claim had to be followed up by &#34;effective occupation&#34; ofthe claimed territory. Occupation was commonly accomplished either by getting a signedagreement from a local African ruler or by military conquest. This conference thus beganthe Scramble for Africa, the invasion, occupation, division, and colonization of Africanterritory by European powers.Superior technology and improved medical knowledge helpedto foster imperialism. The development of the medicinequinine (that protected against deadly malaria in tropicalCopyright Achievement First. Unless otherwise noted, all of the content in this resource is licensed under a Creative Commonsicenseregions) enabled Europeans to venture into the mosquito-infested interiors of Africa andAsia. The combination of the steamboat and the telegraph enabled the Western powers toincrease their mobility and to quickly respond to any situationsFigure 2- rapid fire machine that threatened their dominance. The rapid-fire machine gungun (1800s)also gave Europeans a military advantage against Africans andAsians who opposed European aggression.The earliest approach to colonial rule involved &#34;concessionary companies.&#34; Europeangovernments typically granted private companies large pieces of territory and encouragedthem to undertake economic activities such as mining, plantation agriculture, or railroadconstruction. Concessionary companies also had permission to implement systems oftaxation and labor recruitment. Although that approach allowed European governmentsto colonize and exploit immense territories with only a limited investment in money andpeople (since the company assumed the bulk of the work), company rule also led to majorissues. The brutal use of forced labor, which provoked a public outcry in Europe, andprofits smaller than anticipated persuaded most European governments by the early 20century to reduce the powers of private companies and to establish their own rule, whichtook the form of either direct rule or indirect rule.Under direct rule, colonies had administrations headed by European personnel whoassumed responsibility for tax collection, labor and military recruitment, and themaintenance of law and order. Administrative boundaries intentionally cut across existingAfrican political and ethnic boundaries to divide and weaken potentially powerfulindigenous groups. Direct rule aimed at removing strong kings and other leaders andreplacing them with people loyal to the mother country. Underlying the principle of directrule was the desire to keep African populations in check and to permit Europeanadministrators to engage in a &#34;civilizing mission.&#34; However, that approach to colonial rulepresented its own difficulties. Key among them was the constant shortage of Europeanpersonnel. For example, in French West Africa some thirty-six hundred Europeans tried torule over an African population of more than nine million. The combination of longdistances and slow transport limited effective communication between regionalauthorities and Europe. An inability to speak local languages and a limited understandingof local customs among European officials further undermined their effectiveadministration.The British employed indirect rule in many of their African colonies. They believed thatthere were moral and financial advantages of exercising control over subject populationsthrough indigenous (local) institutions. This meant that British officials would rule Africancolonies through local leaders. Forms of indirect rule worked in regions where Africanshad already established strong and highly organized states, but elsewhere erroneousassumptions concerning the &#34;tribal&#34; nature of African societies weakened theeffectiveness of indirect rule. Perplexed by the complexities of African societies, colonialofficials frequently imposed their own ideas of what constituted &#34;tribal boundaries&#34; or&#34;tribal authorities.&#34; The invention of rigid tribal categories and the establishment ofartificial tribal boundaries became one of the greatest obstacles to nation building andregional stability in much of Africa during the second half of the twentieth century.

Accepted Answer

The motives for African colonization have been primarily financial, religious, and political. At the…