The term European scramble in African history means the rush by European powers to get as many territories as possible on the African continent that took place in the last quarter of the 19th century. This rush started early as mid 19th century but did not become serious until 1880. As a result of this, Europeans ended up sharing the African continent like piece of cake hence the origin of the term "Partition of Africa". Therefore the term partition means dividing the continent among the scrambling European powers. It was first done on paper in Berlin conference of 1884-1885 and finally on land thus victimising people on the African continent.

Factors that heralded European Imperialism

Exploration: By the eve of the 19th Century, exploration portrayed a faint view of the African continent which to many European powers had remained mysterious and thus the assertion “The dark continent”.  This is largely because before 19th Century, European activity in Africa was confined along coastal areas for example the Dutch had established a colony at the Cape as far 17th Century and similarly the Portuguese had established themselves along the coastal areas especially of Angola and Mozambique.  Several factors have been advanced to account for the belated penetration of the Europeans into the interior of Africa which include:-

Until 19th Century, European traders faced a lot of opposition from the African rulers who wanted to maintain the monopoly over trade in the interior for example the Sultan of Zanzibar refused Krapf and Rebman to penetrate in the interior of his dominion for fear of other interfering with his trade interests.

This was also evident in West Africa where the rulers resisted the attempt by the Europeans to reach their source of trade for example the Asante and Fante.

Europeans were also hampered by climatical and physical conditions which were not conducive to white penetration.  These natural hazards included; The nature of the mountains, thick vegetation, wild animals, tropical fevers, among others. all of which greatly hindered an earlier penetration of the interior of Africa.

Closely related, there was still influence of slave trade because all Europeans on the coastal areas before 19th Century were involved in slave trade which was facilated by the Africans who acted as middle men hence there was no need of Europeans penetrating the interior since the required item (slaves) could easily be got on the coastal market.  It was the emergence of the industrial revolution that undermined the importance of human labour which propelled the Europeans to move into Africa in the name of abolition of slave trade and subsequent substitution with legitimate trade.  This was the only way through which the Europeans would have acquired the raw materials to feed their industries at home.

Before 19th Century, the winds of the industrial revolution had not as yet penetrated all the European countries for it was still only Britain which was the mother place of the industrial revolution that held the monopoly of markets, sources of raw materials, surplus capital and no wonder it had been referred to as the “workshop of Europe”.  However, following the spread of industrialization in other European countries, there was a need for them to penetrate the interior of Africa in order to satisfy the industrial needs at home.  As Lenin put it “Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism”.

Lastly, many countries before 19th Century had interests in other parts of the world like India, Australia, New Zealand and America.  It was due to increased demand of the industrial needs that forced the European countries to develop interests in the “virgin land of Africa” which was seen as a possible avenue for the industrial requirement at home.  However, for the continent that they wanted to penetrate, European countries did not have a proper knowledge of the geographical, economic and political setting which prompted exploration of Africa a scheme that was taken over by various societies most notably the royal geographical society which sponsored adventure explorers like the Lander brothers (Richard and John) who settled the mystery behind the River Niger.  Dr. David Livingstone who carried out expeditions in East and Central Africa and explored R. Zambezi down to the Indian Ocean.

The other mystery that remained was the source of the Nile which puzzled many European geographers and subsequently in 1855 the Royal Geographical Society appointed two British army officers Richard Burton and John Speke to lead the expedition from Zanzibar and trace the source of the Nile.  The Nile mystery was solved by John Speke on his second expedition which was later confirmed by Henry Morton Stanley who later explored  the Congo river.  Besides his exploration, Stanley signed a number of treaties with the Congo chiefs which were later sold to King Leopold of Belgium it was also through him that the missionaries were invited at the request of Kabaka Mutesa I of Buganda.

Meanwhile Krapf and Rebman moved throughout Kenya and the news that they had seen snow capped mountains prompted the Europeans to carry out further explorations in the interior of Africa.

Its vital to note that the interests of the explorers moving into the interior of Africa shouldn’t only be limited to the intellectual or merely exploration but they were serving as agents of Europe imperialism.  The concern therefore should be to analyse the role of exploration in paving way for European imperialism.

THE SCRAMBLE AND PARTITIONING OF AFRICA

To what extent was the scramble and partitioning of Africa as a result of economic consideration?

The term Scramble makes reference to the rush by European powers to acquire colonies in Africa and other parts of the world to satisfy their social, political and economic needs.  Meanwhile partitioning was the division of Africa among European powers without  recourse to war.  Both of  these ideologies were precipitated by conditions both in Europe and Africa thus making colonization or imperialism inevitable by the dawn of 19th Century.

In the late 18th Century Europe had undergone an industrial revolution which refers to a period of industrial, technological and social economic transformation that begun in England as its mother place between 1760-1850 and later spread to other European countries like North America, Japan, France, Belgium, Germany among others.  It was a period characterized by the emergency of a factory system i.e the capitalistic modern industrial economies with concentration of capital, use of machines, urbanisation, emergence of a capitalist class, rural-urban migration, production for market, and substitution of agriculture with industries.  Its a combination of the above  that historians like Dean Phillis refer to as the industrial revolution.

In regard to the above situation in Europe, there were the need for European countries to rush into Africa to acquire colonies that would satisfy the industrial needs at home among which included the demand for raw materials which had become very acute and competitive and it therefore became the aim of industrialized countries to control the sources for the supply of raw materials like cotton, rubber and minerals thus leading to the rush and occupation of colonies in Africa and else where in the world.

Closely related, there was the need for new markets for surplus manufactured goods caused by the spread of the industrial revolution from its birth place in England to other countries like France, Russia, Germany, Italy among others. during the second 19th Century.  As each country became industrialized, it begun to produce far more goods than could be consumed locally and they therefore begun to look for a solution to this over-production and this was partly through imposition of high tariff duties and in getting colonies whose markets they could comfortably dominate which therefore caused rivalry among powers whose only solution was in the “Virgin Lands” of Africa as echoed in the words of Lugard one of the pioneers of imperialism. 

“The scramble for Africa... was due to the growing commercial rivalry which brought home to the civilized nations the vital necessity of securing the only remaining fields for industrial enterprise and expansion... find an outlet for our manufacturers and surplus energy”.

Other  historian like Hobson and Marxist theorists contend that the scramble for colonies was greatly as a result of the desire by European powers to invest their surplus capital for as more and more profit accumulated in the European countries, the need for new areas where surplus capital would be more profitably invested became felt and some people like Jules Ferry the Premier of France found the answer in the acquisition of colonies because at this moment considering the great depression in the European economies from 1875 to 1900 investment of capital had become less profitable in European countries thus foreign European powers to rush in for colonies where they could invest their surplus capital in mines and plantations among others.

Its a combination of the above economic aspects that historians like Lenin have referred to as the Marxist theories (on scramble & partition).

Another factor was high population growth which greatly came as a result of the increased population which was characteristic of the industrial revolution in Europe where there was a tendency by the population to flee from the rural to urban areas in search of greener pastures and thus leading to population explosion whose only solution was colonial acquisition as reflected in the words of Lugard 

“I hold that our right is the necessity that is upon us to provide for our ever growing population either by opening new fields of migration or by providing work and employment which the development of overseas extension...”

Its also argued that some European countries came to Africa  and took over colonies because of strategic reasons for example it’s believed that South Africa was taken over majorly because of the Cape of Good Hope which provided a resting place for the British merchants on their way to and from the far East and India.  Similarly, Kenya was taken over because it had Mombasa harbour which had deep waters and also provided a resting place for British merchants.  Likewise Zanzibar was taken over as a centre from which Britain would properly patrol the waters of the Indian ocean for the smooth movement of the British merchants to India.

The most important however was the British occupation of Egypt, a theory that has greatly been advanced by professors Robinson and Gallagher in their book “Africa and the Victorians” in whose opinion

“without the occupation of Egypt, there is no reason to suppose that any international scramble for Africa either East or Central West would have begun when it did”.

In as much as this sounds an over statement, the British occupation of Egypt majorly because of the Suez cannal which had become the shortest route to India and the far East saw the subsequent occupation of Sudan and Uganda which has the source of the Nile and was a lifeline for the people of Egypt.  Likewise, Kenya was occupied because Uganda was a land locked country and therefore Kenya was to provide an outlet from and outside Uganda.  It’s therefore from this background that the British occupation of Egypt in 1882 has been regarded very significant in having sparked off the scramble and partitioning of Africa.  Its significance to the interests of Britain can be echoed in the words of collin cross

“To protect the suez canal, it was regarded as essential to control Egypt, to control Egypt is was essential to control the hinterland, Sudan and the source of the Nile on which Egypt depends it was necessary to control Uganda...”.

The second half of 19th Century in Europe saw an era of nationalism for that period saw the emergence of the states of Germany and Italy which shifted the balance of power in European politics for before this time there were two major European powers on the globe notably France and Britain however these were undermined following the unification of Germany and Italy the worst of which was that during the last stage of German unification, France went to war with Prussia in what came to be known as the Franco-Prussian war (1870-1871).  Accordingly, France was mercilessly defeated and by the end of the war was forced to pay a war indemnity, accept a Prussian army of occupation. France also had to lose her mineral regions of Alsace and Loraine and therefore with this great humiliation, France turned her attention overseas and that is why in a way of compensating, France took over same colonies in Africa which were not even economically viable.  The importance of the French colonization can be reflected in the words of Jules Ferry who proclaimed in 1882

“colonization for France is a question of life and death; either France will become a great African power or she will be no more than a secondary European power”.

Closely related, with the emergence of two states was the rise in the forces of nationalism European countries rushed to acquire colonies majorly because of prestigious reasons because by this time (1880’s), colonies had become a symbol of pride in other words, the more colonies a country had, the more powerful she was considered.  It’s therefore not surprising that even Germany which had initially shown no interest in colonial acquisition did move in and talked of “getting a place in the sun” and so did Italy enter the colonial race mainly for prestigious reasons.

Closely related to the above was “Darwinism” or “Jingoism” which looked at the colonization of Africa as having been a right of the Europeans.  Charles Darwin in his theories of evolution wrote about the evolution of mankind and portrayed Europeans as a superior race and therefore made them believe that since they were more civilized, it was their duty to colonize the African races and put them at the required standard.  The pride of the European imperialists can rightly be portrayed in the words of one British imperialist in the persons of Cecil Rhodes who said

“We are the first race in the world... the more of the world we inhabit, the better, for the human race”. 

Therefore as one English poet Rurdyard wrote,

“it was a Whiteman’s burden and therefore the duty of Europeans to colonize and civilize Africans in this region”.

Another social factor in what has come to be referred to as the humanitarian or philanthropic motive that tends to purport the revival of Christianity in Europe which entailed the duty of various religious organizations to move into African colonies purposely to spread Christianity, bring civilization, stop slave trade however these missionary activities did not have the blessing of African societies for many of them and their rulers resisted missionary activities which later on entailed the need for these missionaries to call upon their home governments to provide protection against the hostile tribes and societies in Africa which therefore witnessed European powers occupy Africa in order to protect the civilizing mission and the anti-slavery campaign.  This can be supported by the words of one historian  tidy

“The civilizing mission and the anti-slavery provided both an ideological and a moral justification for political invasion”.

Another factor that has been advanced by historians are the activities of King Leopold of Belgium and France who had sent out Stanley and De Brazza respectively to conclude treaties with the rulers of the Congo basin which had hitherto been exclusively a reserve of the Portuguese.  The activities of Leopold greatly alarmed the European powers because initially when Leopold called an international conference in 1876 in Brussels on Africa in Brussels, he “seemed” to have wanted to suppress slavery and slave trade but the European powers realized he had wanted to establish a political empire in the Congo region.  This was greatly seen in 1878 when Leopold recruited Stanley who mapped Congo river and later on set up stations and begun to make treaties with the rulers of these regions.  These activities worried European powers who felt they were being left out of the political race notably France had also pushed in their agent in the person of De Brazza who was also sent to Congo to make treaties with the African local rulers the most prominent of which was the De Brazza-Makoko treaty  which was signed with King Makoko the ruler of the Bateke.  This treaty allowed a French post at Makoko’s home who had “ceded” his territory to the French.

It’s from this background that in 1882 De Brazza returned to France to get his treaty ratified by his government although his government did not initially show interest despite the press campaign that had been launched by De Brazza.  However, the resistance of the French government was altered over-night by the unexpected British occupation of Egypt in July 1882, and therefore France sought compensation in the Congo.  Its greatly from this background that the advocates of the Egyptian question notably Prof. Robinson and Gallagher claim that the British occupation of Egypt sparked off the scramble and partitioning of Africa.

The climax of which was Bismarck’s change in the colonial policy for initially Bismarck showed dis-interest in colonial acquisition as he at one time declared “colonies are not even worth the bones and the blood of a single German soldier”.  This statement reflects that Bismarck wasn’t interested in colonial acquisition however it was a surprise to many European powers when during the Berlin conference 1884-85 Bismarck made a declaration for having entered the colonial race by announcing colonies over Togo, Cameroon, Tanganyika and South West Africa.  The entry of Bismarck into the colonial race German was greatly because of the pressure put on him by chambers of commerce at home; Nationalists, capitalists and merchants hence Bismarck heeded to these demands such that in 1884 considering the presence of France, Germany, Britain, Portugal, Belgium, the scramble for colonies reached its climax.  Unless there would be a solution considering the pressure from the European public opinion, European powers were likely to go to war and indeed this solution was found in the Berlin conference that was chaired by Otto Von Bismarck from 15th November 1884 - 30th January 1885 purposely to lay down the rules to govern this race.

The Berlin act among others that:-

       i.Any power that wanted to claim any territory in Africa was to notify other signatory powers.

     ii.Any annexation should be followed by the theory of effective occupation before they become valid.

   iii.There should be freedom of trade in the Congo basin and freedom of navigation on the   Niger river.

  iv.Slave trade was to be suppressed in the “sepheres of influence”.

    v.Any country with coastal possessions could extend in the Hinterland as long as it notified the       others of its intention.

By this conference, Africa was divided into partitions such that between 1885-1912 the whole continent except Ethiopia and Liberia were under colonial rule.

THE CAUSES OF THE PARTITION AND SCRAMBLE FOR AFRICA.

It has been noted that in the last quarter of the 1911 century, African territories were shared among European powers except Liberia and Ethiopia. Many reasons have been forwarded to explain this predicament, which can be categorised into social, political and economic aspects.

A. ECONOMIC REASONS:

1.                Economic imperialism was the most overriding factor that drove many Europeans into Africa in the last quarter of the 191 century. This was developed from the industrial revolution that had began in Britain in 1750s. Britain for many years was considered as a workshop for European countries but after 1880 with the spread of industrial revolution to the rest of Europe, these countries had to compete with Britain by protecting their young industries from the British high quality goods, for market of the products in the rest of the world even competition for sources of raw materials.

2.                North America as Britain's source of raw material had got her independence; amidst acute competition, North America (Canada) had got her independence by 1775 and Britain was forced to look for an alternative source of raw materials hence switching to Africa for cotton, Sugarcane, Coffee, Mineral deposits among others.

3.                High demand for oil raw material items:- The increased use of machinery in this period led to increased demand for oil products for example groundnuts and Palm oil for lubrication of their machines. Earlier on explorers had indicated the abundance of these raw materials in Africa especially West Africa. There was agricultural fertile soils in West Africa and at the same time missionaries had stopped slave trade and had succeeded in the struggle to develop legitimate trade hence the need for raw materials made the Scramble for and partition of Africa inevitable,

4.                Appeal for protection from their home government made by trading companies in Africa: The appeal was for protection against competition from any European countries and for removal of African middlemen whose profits had been reduced to the minimum amounts. Therefore, the British intervention of areas like Niger Delta states and Oil rivers (Ghana and Nigeria) was a result of the business cries of British trading companies in West Africa hence making the Scramble for and partition of Africa innevitable.

5.                Impact of Economic depression in Europe; This came about as a result of growth of industrial revolution and consquent business competition. Before 1880, business was prosperous and profits were high in Europe. Merchants had resisted the extension of their businesses in colonial Africa in order to avoid paying taxes and custom duties. But the economic depression which affected Europe after 1880 made European merchants to change their attitude and they considered the extension of their business in colonial Africa for better profits and ready markets for example the R.N.Co, German East African Company, British South African company came to Africa partly to solve the problem of economic depression in Europe.

6.                The investment of surplus capital: According to Lenin who shared his view with Hobson they argued that; "Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism". I.e. they acquired colonies in order to invest their surplus capital there. That Europe had accumulated a lot of capital and investment at home was not yielding the expected profits. Colonies were therefore an outlet for surplus capital in Europe. However, little capital was invested in Africa and was done accidentally. Much of capital was invested in western developed colonies like Canada and Australia.

7.                Impact of overproduction: J.A Hobson added on that; "The overproduction in sense the of excessive manufacturing and surplus capital which could not find some investment within Europe forced great Britain, German, Holland and France to acquire larger pieces of land where they could market their products and get raw materials." It was therefore agreed that without internal pressure for capital investment in Europe, the acquisition of new colonies would not have existed.

8.                However, this argument is being criticised by many historians as most European imperial countries did not invest much of their capital in colonies of Africa. They instead invested in developed countries like USA, Brazil, Canada and Australia, which by that time had developed infrastructure, facilities, and skilled personnel to assist in running of such investments for example engineers and statisticians.

9.                Mineral discovery in South Africa: David Field House, an American further argued that other than the above economic theories which Europeans targeted in Africa, there was also wide prospects for mining activities in Africa following the discovery of diamonds at Kimberly in 1867 and later the largest gold deposit in the world at Witwatersrand in 1886. This convinced many European powers that the whole of Africa was mineralised as this was followed by many other rumours for example the existence of the minerals in Katanga region of the Congo basin hence leading to a serious rush for colonies in Africa.

B. SOCIAL REASONS:

These factors are greatly linked to humanitarian or philanthropic theories in Europe. They include the following:

1.                Need to spread Christianity: By 1880's it had become necessary for European powers to colonize Africa in order to spread Christianity and save Africans from poverty. Ignorance, diseases, and slavery. This was necessary if it could extend fruits of European civilization to the backward people of Africa commonly called the "Dark Continent". This arguement emphasises that it was a social obligation for the most developed races (Whites) to come to Africa and hence facilitate the origin of the phrase that "Africa's occupation was a white man's burden" to civilise the black race. However, before the coming of missionaries, Africans had their own traditional African Religions which they respected much thus the spread of Christianity is not a sufficient factor to explain the major reasons for the scramble for and partition of Africa.

2.                Stopping of slave trade: This was one of the pretexts that gave chance to a number of missionaries and trading companies to come to Africa promising or claiming that they had come to uproot the /inhuman trade from Africa completely and replace it with legitimate trade and therefore civilise the Africans. It's greatly doubted whether the aim of stopping slave trade was purely humanitarian. Truly if it was for this motive, then the partition of Africa could have taken place in 1840s and 1850s following the coming of the first group of explorers and missionaries who tried to stop slave trade. Therefore, the economic factor was more paramount in this European colonisation of Africa.

3.                Solution for redundant labour after the industrial revolution: The need to solve their social problems after the industrial revolution was another reason for the scramble for and partition of Africa. Many people were unemployed. The solution was to come to Africa and work in colonies as colonial administrators, European farmers. White settlers and slaves were made to produce the needed raw materials in Africa, for example, towards 1880 there were 1,000,000 jobless people in great Britain alone while the situation was worse in France, Germany and Italy. It was therefore the need to resettle the unemployed and surplus population that had been replaced by machines in Europe that accelerated the European scramble for and partition of Africa.

4.                The theory of racial Darwinism: This was developed by Charles Darwin which states that life first evolved among the white race of Europe and therefore they were duty bound to expand civilisation of the human race beyond Europe- This is according to his book, "The origin of natural species". This book sold like a hot cake in the 19th century Europe. He added on that Africans should remain inferior while whites should become superior in terms of social developments. This made Africans to acquire an inferiority complex . For this matter there was a racist desire by whites to liberate these Africans from backwardness hence leading to the scramble for and partition of Africa,

5.                However, most African scholars refute this theory by claiming that civilisation began in Egypt where such things as the mode of writing, mode of reading and clothing were started hence another reason such as economic could have precipitated the scramble for and partition of Africa other than the humanitarian reasons.

C. POLITICAL REASONS

1.                Imbalance of power in Europe: The second half of the 19th century witnessed the growth of European nationalism and saw the unification of both Germany and Italy. By 1870 France, a former master of the land, was disastrously defeated during the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-1871 which caused the European balance of power change in favour of Germany. This new state of political affairs in Europe had a number of impacts outside Europe.

·      The newly formed states of Italy and Germany entered them into the colonial scramble with other countries such as Britain, France and Portugal.

·      The defeated France during the 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian war was forced to come to Africa and compensate the loss of Alsace and Lorraine and prove to the rest of the world that it was still strong by colonising territories in Africa.

·      France started expanding in Africa to acquire territories regardless of how rich or poor those territories were. This is why territories such as Mali, Chad and Central Africa Republic became colonised by France although they had little resources.

·      In an attempt to plan for revenge against Germany, France needed territories from where to recruit enough soldiers in a plan to recover her lost Alsace and Lorraine territories. Although this was not achieved until 1914 but it made France to come to Africa and acquire territories. Therefore, the unification of Italy and Germany as independent states caused political imbalance in Europe whose effects led to the scramble for and partition of Africa.

2.                Rise of Nationalism and development of Jingoism; These were theories that were developed by the European powers where they regarded colonies as symbols of prestige amongst fellow European powers in Europe. This made Britain appear stronger and respected among European powers as she had acquired many colonies in Africa faster than any other. For example during the 19th C, European powers believed that the power of any country in Europe was determined by how many external colonies it had on the African continent. Colonies therefore became a measure of national greatness and hence many European powers rushed for them in pride for national glory.

3.                European political and social superiority over African race:- Equally important was psychological development in which Europeans stressed their superiority. They believed that the black races were inferior and therefore free to be colonized. According to them it was a good order for master races (Whites) to colonise the inferior races (Blacks). This kind of belief saw many African cultures and beliefs being replaced by European cultures and beliefs.

4.                The European counter rivalry in Africa and the calling of the Berlin conference in 1884- 1885 which politically laid down proper procedures for official partition of Africa. Such colonial rivalries in Africa were in Congo basin between Leopold of Belgium and De Brazza, a French imperialist. In 1879 the Niger delta conflict between European companies, the 1882 British take over of Egypt from France, the 1888-93 religious wars in Buganda plus attempts by Carl Peters to extend Germany control into Uganda all of which were solved by Chancellor Bismark of Germany when he called the Berlin conference in 1884-85. It was an important political factor in scramble and partition of Africa as it concluded the contentious issues of scrambling powers in Africa and accelerated the scramble for and partition of Africa.

D.  STRATEGIC REASONS.

1.                Some scholars such as Robinson and Gallagher in their book "Africa and the Victorians" stress the idea of strategic aims to have been the overriding factor in the Scramble for and partition of Africa. They add that it was because of the Suez Canal which opens Africa to Europe that was opened in 1869 that provided a short cut route to India by 32,000 km which was an important colony to British by that time. Other European powers such as France wanted to control Egypt basically because it would provide a base of control of their colonies in Africa. However the two professors failed to stress the fact that nothing can be of strategic value in an economic vaccum.

2.                The influence of the Suez canal: The control of this canal was for the survival of the British commercial interests in the Middle and far East countries. The competition with other European powers to control the strategic Canal increased the scramble for Egypt as a nation which forced Britain to oust France in the joint control of Egypt and finally to British occupation of Egypt in 1882.

3.                Other Strategic points in Africa included the port of Mombasa, the source of river Nile, the coast of East Africa, the Cape of Good Hope, the Coast of Mozambique and West African coast of Niger delta states. These important ports in Africa were controlled by a cross section of colonising power as they w^re important for commercial interest as well as military bases for their home governments on the African continent.

THE EFFECTS OF THE BRITISH OCCUPATION OF EGYPT

1.                Egypt lost her independence to Britain and France was outplayed from Egypt and she turned to West Africa for compensation where she acquired a lot of territories such as Senegal, Ivory Coast, Gambia and Mali. This created Haste in the scramble and parttion dramma.

2.                France developed a desire to control the Nile river valley in order to bring Britain to her Knees as regards Britain's interests in Egypt in light of how important was the Nile waters to Egyptians.

3.                France thought it was possible to link her Western colony of Senegal and others to that of Eastern end of Africa, i.e. the French Somali land where she could get a chance to control the Nile waters in Sudan and threaten British life in Egypt. This explains why France acquired a continuous block of territories in West Africa some of which were dry, infertile and sometimes used force in acquiring them. for example the acquisition of Mandika empire of Samoure Toure.

4.                The British expansion: This expansion towards the Nile valley from West Africa brought about a change in the British colonial policy especially on how to control Sudan. This culuminiated into the famous Fashoda incidence when a contingent of French troops led by captain Marchand moving eastwards from west Africa encountered with Anglo-Egyptian troops moving

5.                down from Egypt trying to block the French. They met in Sudan at a place known as Fashoda geographically full of sand banks as it was in a desert region. The Anglo- Egyptian troops were led by Lord Kitchener and in 1896 the two forces almost went to war hence the famous "Fashoda incident" in Sudan.

6.                The French troops being inferior to those of the British, Captain Marchand had to withdraw his forces leaving Britain takeover the control of Sudan after silencing the Mahdists government of Khaliph Abdallah and in 1898 the British declared Sudan as its colony.

7.                It was the same strategic motive over Egypt that led to the scramble for Uganda as the source of River Nile. France advancing from Rwanda trying to bring the source of River Nile under its control, Belgium from Congo republic and Germany from Tanganyika all targeting to conquer Uganda, the source of the Nile so as to paralyse the life of Britain in Egypt. Britain couldn't afford seeing the source of the Nile in the hands of another European power. In 1890, Britain signed the Heligo land treaty with Germany by which Uganda became a British protectorate which pushed off other contending colonisers

8.                Uganda being a landlocked country, it was important to open the way to the coast from Uganda which forced Britain to take over the control of Kenya to the coast and yet Kenya was not under British control, this is why after 1895 British control of Kenya building of Uganda railway had to begin in 1896 under William Macknon with its headquarters in Mombasa town.

9.                The British occupation of Egypt also led to the Germany intervention in the scramble drama. Germany supported the differences between Britain and France so as to get a chance to bring some African territories under her control when these two historical colonising powers were busy in conflicts for example Bismark of Germany encouraged Britain to tighten her control on Egypt on one hand and encouraged France to go elsewhere to acquire territories to compensate for her loss of Egypt. At the same time Bismark aimed at making France forget its lost territories of Alsace and Lorraine which Germany had annexed in 1871 Franco-Prussian war hence making France to rush to West Africa to acquire as many territories as possible.

10.           Meanwhile Germany used the opportunity of conflicts to satisfy the interests of her Germany merchants at home who were pestering their government of Chancellor Bismark to come to Africa and look for colonies so as to promote their commercial activities in Africa by opening up Markets and sources of raw materials just like other European countries which were successful at the time. Following this, Germany declared protectorates over Togo-land land in 1884, Cameroon, Namibia and Tanganyika hence the British occupation of Egypt brought Germany into the scrambling race of the African continent.

11.           With the British occupation of Egypt, the imperialist minded Cecil Rhodes of BSACo started thinking of how the whole of Africa would be put under British control i.e. "painting Africa red" where red meant the colour of British flag. Cecil Rhodes wanted to link Cape Town to Cairo by railway and this policy led to colonisation of central African societies like Matebele and Ma^hona-land.

12.           To block Cecil Rhodes' plans, Portugal had strengthened her hold on to Angola and Mozambique, Belgium was already in Congo, and France in Rwanda. Germany controlling Tanganyika and Namibia and this demarcation hindered Cecil Rhodes dreams of connecting South African territories to those of North Africa.

13.           The other strategic areas which increased the partition and scramble were the establishment of port Alexandria by the British to check sea pirates on the Mediterranean sea, the coast of East Africa, the coast of West Africa all were very important to the British because she wanted to protect her trade and naval power. This made other colonial powers to take over the remaining African strategic points, for example, Portugal and France on the Coast of Congo.

The British occupation of Egypt equally increased the scramble and partition of Africa but it is also clear that Africa would have been colonised whether or npt Britain colonised Egypt in 1882, therefore it acted as an accelerator for the scramble for and partition of Africa but not an initiator. This is because the scramble had started before 1882 as supported by the following factors:

·      The exercise for the abolition of slave trade had begun as early as 1780's by the British which resulted into introduction of legitmate trade. It was very much concerned with production of cash crops that European industrialists needed plus the need for market of these products which was enough to cause the drama for scramble and partition come to a climax thus making the 1882 incident minor.

·      By this time, Europeans were very many in Zanzibar and the Portuguese were already in coastal areas of Angola and Mozambique for trading activities, therefore with the hinterland theory of Berlin conference these countries would have entered into the interior and colonise various African territories as the theory stipulated.

·      On top of this, trading companies had started conflicting in African continent by 1882 which necessitated the coming in of their home governments to take over their responsibilities if the process of colonisation was to be achieved peacefully i.e. the R.N.Co, in West Africa was competing for trade monopoly with the French trading companies which forced the British government to take over the control of many oil states (Niger Delta states).

·      By 1882, various groups of missionaries were already operating in African territories where they had faced problems like African hostility and they had started appealing for home protection from European governments and actually they came and took over the control of the respective areas where their missionary groups had been operating.

·      The Cape Town in South Africa was also another strategic point which attracted many European explorers and the Dutch in particular who stayed there until the coming of the British who invaded them in 1805 in their original land in Cape Province hence leading to 1835 great Trek upheaval in South Africa. This kind of competition for land which started in South Africa would have spread to the whole of Africa where different European tribes would have met thus leading to scramble for and partition of Africa before 1882.

·      By 1882 king Leopold's activities were already in Congo (1876) which culminated into severe conflicts by a number of European powers which were solved by the calling of the Berlin conference in 1884-85.

·      By this time, Europeans were very many in Zanzibar and the Portuguese were already in coastal areas of Angola and Mozambique for trading activities, therefore with this hinterland theory of Berlin conference these countries would have entered into the interior and colonise various African territories as the theory stipulated.

·      The French at that time were already in Somali land, Algeria, Tunisia and were in Congo Basin by 1875. By 1806, British had landed at the Cape of Good Hope (Cape Province), and by 1835, they had chased away the Dutch and established themselves in the area for mineral exploitation a factor that brought many other Europeans in Africa.

·      By 1856 Florence Nightangale had discovered quinine drug for malaria. This disease had scaled down the influx of Europeans into Africa as, for example, West Africa had been branded as a "white man's grave" at the beginning of the 19th Century. Thus after 1860, European imperialists came in large numbers.

·      By 1875, the first missionary group had arrived in East Africa. In 1840, missionary enterprises were progressive in West Africa although with minimum success while in 1860, many missionary groups were operating in central Africa. Incisive scholars have accused missionaries of being fore runners of colonialism in Africa. Therefore without 1882 take over of Egypt by Britain, still scramble for and partition of Africa would have been inevitable.

Therefore, the economic, social and political conditions in Europe had created favourable circumstances for the partition of Africa. The British occupation of Egypt in 1882 was not a primary factor for the scramble and partition of Africa. It only accelerated the process that was already in Africa by 1882.

THE ACTIVITIES OF CECIL RHODES:

His business and discovery of minerals in South Africa incited other Europeans to come to Africa, imagining that the whole of Africa was mineralised. At such a moment, they would not think of the existance of empty territories like Mali and Chad in Africa

In 1890, he became a British prime minister of Cape Province, a chance he used to bring a reality of his political dreams in South Africa i.e. "of painting the whole of Africa red" where red meant the colour of the British flag that was to be hoisted in the territories between Cape province and Cairo.

This worried other European colonising powers and they were forced to act urgently and effectively, for example, Portugal had to impose firm control over Mozambique and Angola, Germany controlled Namibia and Tanganyika. Belgium Strengthened her control over Congo while France was in Rwanda. The purpose of such colonial mapping was to cut off the imperial designs of Cecil Rhodes between Cape province and Cairo thus accelerating the Scramble for and Partition of Africa.

THE ACTIVITIES OF FRANCE

In 1879, the Prime Minister of France Junes Ferry had sent an imperialist and explorer in the names S. De Brazza to secure the northern part of Congo basin for France in order to threaten the activities of king Leopold IT of Belgium in Congo. In northern Congo, De Brazza had secured a treaty with chief Makoko of the Makonde society hence abusing the authority of Leopold II that almost erupted into war that necessitated the calling of the Berlin conference.

Therefore the rivaling for territories in the Congo by these two powers created an international conflict that led to the calling of the Berlin conference in 1884-85 which officially partitioned Africa among the colonising powers.

In 1879, France acquired a republican leadership under Julles Ferry who supported the colonial expansion as a solution for psychological effects France was nursing after the loss of Alsace and Lorraine her rich territories in the Fanco-Prussian war of 1870-71.

THE ACTIVITIES OF LEOPOLD II IN CONGO

Whereas the objective of his association were good in outlook, other European powers begun to be suspicious when he asked Henry Marton Stanley to start signing treaties on his behalf from African chiefs in Congo. It became clear that his aim was to exclude other Europeans from Congo that was considered to be the second richest country in minerals after South Africa on the African continent. This caused European countries such as France to start planning for room to jointly share the exploitation of the Congo basin an event that ended up by calling of the Berlin Conference in 1884 that officially partitioned the African continent.

It is said that his initiative in 1876 to come to Africa (Congo) with a claim of humanitarian agenda to stop slave trade, spread Western civilisation and Christianity when in reality he aimed at the exploitation of Congo changed the European outlook towards Africa. All European powers envied his excessive profits from minerals and rubber plantations and decided to come for them in Africa. Thus as much as France is blamed for sparking off the rush for colonies, some historians maintain that it was not France but Leopold II of Belgium who caused the scramble and partition of Africa.

In conclusion therefore, the scramble for and partition of Africa had a number of causes ranging from political, social to economic. Some of them accelerated events of the scramble such as the 1882 British occupation of Egypt while others were independent causes Jike the activities of France, activities of Leopold II, works of Cecil Rhodes towards colonisation of south and central Africa among others. What is clear is that by 1914 the whole of Africa had been sliced like a piece of cake by European powers for their economic drive except Liberia and Ethiopia.

THE BERLIN CONFERENCE OF 1884 / 85 AND THE PARTITION OF AFRICA.

The European rivalry for colonies in Africa had reached an alarming situation by 1884. Most serious European clashes occurred in the strategic positions of Africa for example in Egypt between France and Britain, in Congo between France and Belgium, in the Niger Delta states between France trading companies and Britain trading companies. Bismark, the then German empire Chancellor realised that international rivalry over Congo was likely to cause a strong war among Europeans in the African continent.

He then called the Berlin conference in 1884 of the powers concerned in scramble to discuss their claims for African territories and to reach an agreement in a peaceful way of partitioning the continent among themselves, Bismark's initiative has been attributed to his ambition to become the central figure in search for international peace and stability that it may also have been done for his desire to make Germany claims on the African continent be recognised by other European powers.

The conference that met from November 1884 to June 1885 was attended by France, Britain, Germany, Portugal and King Leopold II of Belgium representing the international African Association of Congo. Although the conference was called to solve conflicts over Congo, Egypt and the Niger Basin, its effects were far reaching for the whole of the African continent between 1884 to 1900.

Among others, the conference at Berlin solved a number of problems and laid down procedures to be followed by the powers in the acquisition of territories in the African continent.

The main decisions or provisions reached on in the conference included the following

·      King Leopold II of Belgium had legal claims over the Congo that became to be known as the Congo Free State C.F.S.

·      There would be freedom of trade in the Congo Basin and rivers Congo and Niger were to be opened for Navigation by all interested European powers.

·      Any power claiming any part of Africa was supposed to back it up with effective occupation of the area.

·      Any power to occupy the coastal area of any part of Africa had a legal right to extend her influence into the hinterland area i.e. the hinterland theory of The Berlin conference.

·      There was to be free access to the interior of Africa by traders, missionaries and other agents of the colonisation in order to avoid slave trade and promote the western civilisation in order to avoid slave trade and to promote western civilisation among others.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BERLIN CONFERENCE TO THE PARTITION OF AFRICA

The Berlin conference aimed at solving problems that came out of the scramble and partition of Africa. In short, it did not partition Africa but laid down the necessary procedures to be taken by the powers that were already involved in the scrambling of Africa.

The Berlin conference played a significant role in the colonisation of Africa in the following ways:

1.                It solved the Congo Crisis that would have resulted into a European war. King Leopold's claims were recognised and the area became known as Congo Free State.

2.                Increased the speed of partition of Africa through its policies of effective occupation i.e. countries that had temporarily taken over some territories had to quickly put in place the essential mfrastructure in order to honour their claims and beat off other interested European powers.

3.                It reduced the possibility of serious clashes between the great powers as they partitioned Africa. This was possible because any power claiming any part of Africa was formally to notify other powers since many coastal areas were already occupied by one colonial power or the other. The hinterland theory didn't cause many problems.

4.                The Berlin provision of effective occupation was probably the most effective in the cotonisation of Africa. Any power claiming an area was expected to support her claim by developing that area infrastructure. This meant the establishment of physical and social emenities like schools, hospitals, roads and recreational centers. They also had to establish administration in that area, impose taxation in order to challenge any interested European rival.

5.                The conference opened the interior of Africa for colonisation. Most European powers which had established themselves on the coastal areas were given chance to put the hinterland zones under their control for example Britain in West Africa took the oil river, France took Senegal, while Portugal took Angola and Mozambique. It helped these people to have legal claims over the interior hence leading to colonisation of various African regions.

6.                The conference instructed Britain to stop its previous habits of preventing other colonial powers from occupying African territories i.e. after this conference Belgium was able to continue operating in Congo. France continued its operations in Niger region and other European powers were free to participate in colonisation of Africa-

7.                 The conference drew boundaries of different European spheres of influence. This was important because each country knew its boundary in African region. However this theory led to the issue of ethnicity (tribalism) hence leading to future national political and economic problems for example in East Africa, the boundary between Uganda and Kenya cut across the Samia tribe.

8.                The conference also ensured that no European powers will ally with an African state to oppose the European colonialism. For this matter the colonisers found it easy to defeat the African resistors against them. This is because whereas the Europeans had agreed to unite in dominating Africa, the Africans were disunited along religious, tribal and other philosophical lines.

9.                Accelerated the scramble for African territories because after this conference many European nations sent out their agents officially to colonise African territories, for example Karl Peters in Tanganyika, Sir George Goldie in Nigeria and H.M Stanley in Congo plus many other imperial agents rushed to Africa after the signing of the Berlin act and secured a number of treaties from African Chiefs which resulted into the colonisation of different African territories.

10.           Nevertheless the conference failed to stop slave trade for example in northern Nigeria slave trade continued even after 1884. In Africa after 1884 there were isolated cases of conflicts for example the Fashoda incident of 1896 in Sudan between Britain and France.

11.           Another weakness was that it never established an organised body to keep supervising the implementation of the Berlin act. This is why some colonial powers got a chance to challenge some of the Berlin conference articles for example Leopold II of Belgium Congo never allowed other European powers to operate in the Congo basin as it was decided in the Berlin conference.

12.           Navigation on river Niger was also a pure monopoly of British traders. Even missionaries, imperialists, and other agents of Western civilisation were barred from operating in colonies controlled by powers not of their home origin.

In conclusion therefore Berlin conference was an important step in the scramble and partition of Africa as important procedures of how Africa was to be officially controlled by European powers was made in this conference although it had some weaknesses as seen above.

Question  

Discuss the mechanism used by colonial powers in occupying Africa.

Discuss the reaction of Africans towards European colonialism.

The first quarter of the 19^th Century witnessed the scramble for colonies among European powers largely as a result of the development of the industrial revolution in Europe;  Such that by 1914 the greatest proportion of Africa save Liberia and Ethiopia had fallen prey to European  colonialism.  The Berlin conference of 1884-85 under the chairmanship of Otto Von Bismarck only served to legalise the partitioning of Africa among European powers.

A number of mechanisms were employed by the European powers in occupying Africa and these included the use of chartered companies and explorers some of which provided information about the dark continent of Africa, drew maps that enabled the travelling of imperial groups.  Companies developed the economic infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, roads and signed treaties.

Following the role of companies, missionaries supplemented by continuing with the work of infrastructure especially establishment of educational institutions which were purposely intended for the production of cadres of European imperialism.  This therefore made it easy for the metropolitan governments to occupy these regions/colonies.

In some regions, Europeans used threats of military force to make African chiefs and societies submit to European control.  This is what scholars refer to as the Gunboat Diplomacy which was first used on Jaja of Opobo in West Africa and the Basoga in Uganda.  These were merely intimidated and they had to succumb to European occupation to avoid military conquest.

In other areas, Europeans used treaty signing with African chiefs purposely to fulfill the theory of “effective occupation” which was required by the Berlin conference of 1884-85.  It’s vital to note however that many of the treaties were signed by African chiefs in ignorance of the contents which saw the loss of their independence.

Furthermore, in order to defeat Africans easily and occupy their territory, some European powers especially Britain employed the divide and rule policy whereby in addition to the already existing divisionism among African along tribal and ethnic lines.  Europeans  supplemented by supporting one region against the other and by dividing people along religions line.  Its not surprising therefore that by the time of actual European imperialism, Africans were already weakened because of divisionism and therefore were vulnerable to European penetration. Its therefore from this basis that many of the African resistances were undermined.

Lastly, in areas of resistances, Europeans used military conquest and outright force which was typical of areas where Africans attempted to oppose colonial intrusion for example in Bunyoro; the Nandi, the Maji-Maji, Dahomey, the Mandika empire among others.. 

ROLE PLAYED BY EXPLORERS IN PAVING WAY FOR EUROPEAN IMPERIALISM

Question   Discuss the role played by explorers in paving way for European imperialism.

The role of explorers can largely be evident in the activity of the personalities and their impact on Europe and Africa and their future relations.

The explorations by these explorers through the interior of Africa provided a clear picture of the possibility of navigation and movement into the interior of Africa this is majorly because many of these explorers drew maps, wrote books which provided enough data about “mysterious Africans” in terms of their cultures, tribal conflicts, geography of Africa and economic potentiality of crops, ivory, minerals among others.. which were later to prompt the coming in of the European powers and laying a strategy for economic interests.

Closely related some of the explorers did greatly invite European powers to come and take over the economies of the region whose path had been opened by explorers as evident in the words of Dr. David Livingstone in his speech at Cambridge University. 

“I beg to direct  your attention to Africa .... I again go back to Africa to make an open path for commerce and Christianity”. 

The words of Dr. David Livingstone express the economic role played by the explorers in paving way for European colonialism.

In addition explorers threw a death blow to slave trade especially Dr. David Livingstone who appealed for a war against the evil trade especially in North Malawi and Zambia cries that prompted humanitarian sentiment in Europe and subsequently led to the coming in of missionaries who were only to continue the role of imperialism therefore one can also comfortably argue that explorers led to the coming in of missionaries for example Dr. David Livingstone efforts led to the formation of the Universities mission to Central Africa which pioneered the missionary work in Malawi and Zambia.  Similarly the coming in of the C.M.S. in 1877 in Uganda was a direct outcome of the activities of Stanley who also only came to pave way for the coming in of European imperialism thus the assertion

      “The flag followed the cross”.

Finally explorers also signed treaties of friendship which provided a basis for the colonization of Africa - Apart from opening the interior by drawing maps and providing the vital information which opened the hitherto “dark” continent; they developed trade activities laying a foundation of colonial economy.

AGENTS OF COLONIAL RULE IN AFRICA

THE MISSIONARY FACTOR IN AFRICA.

The Missionaries were a group of European humanitarian evangelists who came to Africa during the 19th century with a lot of open aims like spreading Christianity, Civilization, Stopping slave trade. Promote legitimate trade, open up Africa for benefits of commerce to fight against poverty, ignorance and diseases.

Missionary workers in Africa has been accused of having accelerated the colonization of the African continent as it prepared the ground socially, economically and politically. The colonizers exploited that aspect for example missionaties built schools, roads, health centres and mission stations all of which helped in the settlement of colonizers. This dismisses the above idea where missionaries claimed that they had come to Africa for purely humanitarian reasons. This is why about missionaries in Africa, professor Roland Oliver says that;

"The flag followed the cross" or "Missionaries had a bible in one hand and a sword in the other."

Missionary work in Africa was mainly as a result of men like Stanely, Dr David Livingstone, John Speke, Rcbman and Krapf. These explorers during the 191 C in Africa witnessed havoc, which was created by slave trade and saw the economic potentials of Africa, which they became interested in to exploit to European advantage.

It's against this background that following the impact of the industrial revolution and the information of these explorers on the African continent, that missionaries had to be funded by. European capitalists to come to Africa and secure a ground for the supply of raw materials, market for European manufactured goods, land for settlement of slaves, in claim of humanitarian reasons.

In Europe, industrialists realised the necessity for the abolition of slave trade, create a room for use of machines, reduce the level of redundant labour force in Europe by enslaving Africans on their own land, equip them with some skills of agriculture and produce raw materials that were heavily needed in European industries.

The explorers after taking home the reports about the nature of Africa, Europeans saw an immediate need for missionary work on the African continent through the following medias:

·      Better communication systems were improved and the industrialization led to increased opportunity for overseas missionary work since the means of communication to Africa from Europe were solved by invention of a steam engine and other sea going vessels that were discovered by scientists during the industrial revolution era.

·      Increased wealth; The industrial revolution led to increased wealth such that industrialists could now spare some funds to sponsor missionary activities world wide. Moreover if industrialists sponsored missionaries, it became clear that they had to open up Africa as a market for European manufactured goods and a source of raw materials for industries in Europe.

·      Provision of home support:- Due to the usefulness of evangelical movement, missionaries were now assured of domestic military support and sufficient finance that they bribed African chiefs by giving them grants and gifts to allow their missionary enterprises or activities in the interior of Africa.

·      Besides that; the determination of Europeans to exterminate slavery and slave trade worldwide was now on its peak and this greatly facilitated missionary enterprises in Africa. Moreover, some Africans who were victims of this inhuman trade cooperated with European Christian missionaries to avert/stop this problem.

·      Following the industrial revolution; health conditions in Africa that were affecting Europeans became improved for example the drug for malaria which was the most killer disease of the time especially in West Africa where Europeans had named the region "A white man's grave" was discovered. The discovery of Quinine during the industrial revolution reduced the number of white men who were dying in Africa annually.

Questions

1.                To what extent were missionaries the fore runners of European imperialism.

2.                The flag followed the cross is this a fair description of the role played by missionaries.

3.                What were the effects of missionary activities in Africa?

4.                What problems did missionaries meet in their activities?