'British expansion into Africa between 1868 and 1902 Essay\r'

'To what extent were improver and missional motives the most main(prenominal) creator for British expanding upon into Africa between 1868 and 1902?\r\nAlthough on that point had been British presence in Africa from the contract of the 19th Century, with British sphere of influences of subdue including macrocosmtel Colony, Orange Free State and scene of actions along the West coast, prior to 1880 Britain had in customary very a couple of(prenominal) possessions in Africa. completely when the ‘Scramble for Africa’ was triggered did Britain, along with many opposite European great powers, begin its tug for territorial acquisition. The unfathomed motives for British elaborateness into Africa were essentially the scotch arouse Africa held for Britain and its entrepreneurs, the arguing Africa created between the Great European Powers, its strategicalal value and what was commonly presented to the British cosmos as being the most burning(prenominal) motive, benevolentitarian purposes.\r\nFor many, including Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain, it was believed that Britain had a moral obligation to bring nicety and Christianity to the native population who were considered to be ‘ brutal’ and racially inferior. Moreover, the church strongly promoted the belief of missionary work in Africa; the Church encour bestrided the nonion that a fundamental element of imperial moving in was the lengthiness of Christianity which and then was a motive rump imperialism in Africa. Many missionary societies were created such(prenominal) as the United Society for the elongation of the Gospel which conducted fund-raising activities and lectures.\r\nAn example of a hygienic known missionary was Mary Slessor who went to direct kayoed her mission in Africa. particularly c oncerned with tribal customs viewed as ‘un-Christian’, she set out to end human sacrifice, slavery and another(prenominal) forms of brutali ty. However, in verity humanitarian motives were of very limited conditional relation in motivating British expansion into Africa; Britain was not simply guided by altruism and a quest to second the native populations, simply kinda was by and large led by the frugal and strategic interests the continent represented for it. Ultimately, it is likely that missionary incentives were simply conveyed as square in order to win over public opinion and support, particularly through the media and best-selling(predicate) entertainment.\r\nOf considerably great significance to Britain was the strategic value that Africa held. Africa had evermore been strategically live for Britain’s carry on highroad to the bejewel of its Empire, India. Although Britain had few possessions in Africa before 1880, the few it did have included Gambia, Sierra Leone, capital Coast and Cape Colony, all of which were advisedly very strategically situated along the coast. This provided Britain wi th stopping points and allowed it to ensure the security of its military strength along the long pot travel guidebook to India.\r\nAfter the construction of the Suez Canal in 1969 Africa, and in particular Egypt, became of even greater strategic grandeur as the canal provided a quick route to India. As a result the canal attracted hefty British investment in Egypt and in the canal itself. This was illustrated when Britain invaded Egypt in 1882 in result to nationalist riots. British intervention exhibit how Britain recognized the need to nurse the monetary investments in Egypt, and most importantly serious the route to India, despite Gladstone’s own personal policy of non-intervention. Moreover, it demonstrates how strategic considerations were at long last only significant in order to protect Britain’s guile routes and its sparing interests in Africa.\r\nHowever, the British occupation of Egypt in 1882 resulted in a bend point in European attitudes tow ards Africa. It was after this occupation that the ‘Scramble for Africa’ by European powers began, thus creating the issue of extreme arguing between the Great powers, something which was very important in motivating nut British control in Africa. Until the 1880’s Britain snarl no real need to usher formal territorial control, instead it relied on an ‘ cosy empire’ in which they had open up a purely sparing influence. Britain had not wished for territorial control in Africa which they recognized absorbed time, great deal and money but rather economical exploitation at minimum cost. Yet British ictus of Egypt meant that other European nations began to show expansionist interest in the region which in turn threatened Britain’s informal arrangement, particularly in West and southerly Africa.\r\nFor example, Britain had an interest in Nigeria but a danger was that important change over along the River Niger would be under threat from cu t expansion in the area. Similar constrict came when Germany seized Togo defeat and the Cameroons in 1884 and the Belgians set up the congou tea Free State in 1885. As a result the governing body give a Royal Charter to the Niger Company, out of which eventually emerged the colony of Nigeria. It is unlikely that the government would have regarded the interests of the Niger traders very sympathetically had it not been for its end not to allow France, Belgium and Germany from shotbing let down which would threaten British trade, something which was of foremost importance to Britain and it would not allow to be compromised.\r\nThe crush in West Africa had alike resulted in Berlin West Africa Conference which laid take down rules for future annexation of territory. The treaty tell that in order to gain land a nation had to prove that they were in ‘effective occupation’. This meant that before winning formal control, an economic influence had to be make believee d in the region by private investors and entrepreneurs. For example, a noted ‘man on the spot’ was Cecil Rhodes. At the age of seventeen Rhodes went to Arica and became a multimillionaire through baseball field and gold mining enterprises.\r\nIn 1889 he founded the British South Africa Company and utilise this organization to iron British control northwards from Cape Colony to establish Rhodesia, a colony named after himself. The utilisation of the individual itself was of limited importance in driving or furthering British expansion into Africa as few entrepreneurs managed o push forward territory as Rhodes had. However, it was ultimately motivated by economic interests and it allowed the British government to most significantly protect British influence in an area by proving ‘effective occupation’ which therefore allowed Britain to compete in the scramble with other nations and thereby protect its trade and economic interests in Africa.\r\nFinally, of foremost importance in motivating British expansion into Africa was the economic interest the continent held for Britain. Firstly Britain’s colonies along the west coast had always been strategically important for the vital trade route to India and later North Africa became as as vital in Britain’s route to India via the Suez Canal. However, beyond this Britain was highly shrill to exploit the continents abundance of natural materials and extremely valuable minerals. This is evident as Britain was clear only interested in prehend colonies that, if not strategically important, were rich in materials to exploit. For example, Egypt was seized by Britain due to its vast economic importance as it provided the quick route to India and additionally produced high quality cotton which was much sought after by British textile makers.\r\nFurthermore the affection to the British of Nigeria disgrace in the ornamentation oil trade as decoration oil was used in the manufac ture of soap and candles and as an industrial lubricant. Britain also saw great dominance for trade in East Africa; Zanzibar imported significant quantities of manufactured goods from Britain and India. It was a major employment point from which came ivory and leather goods and into which went textiles, governance and steel from Britain. Britain’s primary interest was trade and economic gain. Without any economic potential in an area Britain was not interested in colonization, in rail line if a region held great economic investments, for example Egypt, Britain was quick to occupy the area despite its reluctance to extend formal control which it viewed as consuming time, people and money.\r\nIn summary, Africa’s economic potential was clearly the primary reason for British expansion into Africa 1868-1902. Britain was not a simply altruistic nation which became involved in the continent purely to help the people, instead it was driven by its own gains. It is sure t hat rivalry from other great European powers was vital in turning British control in Africa from informal into real occupation, however essentially Britain’s determination not to allow other nations to grab land was to avoid threat to its trade and economic interests in a region. Moreover, Africa’s strategic importance was also highly valued by Britain, yet once again its ultimate value lay in its path along the critical route to India and therefore the protection of Britain’s economic interest.\r\n'