Imperialism: Crash Course World History #35
Summary
TLDRThis Crash Course World History episode explores 19th-century imperialism, focusing on its economic and technological underpinnings. The video delves into the British opium trade with China, the Opium Wars, and the subsequent shift in trade balance. It then discusses the 'scramble for Africa,' highlighting the role of industrialization, nationalism, and technological advancements like steamships and quinine in facilitating European colonization. The episode also touches on the complexities of European rule, often through indirect means and local collaborators, and the enduring impact of imperialism on the modern world.
Takeaways
- 🏰 The 19th century saw a significant rise in imperialism, especially by European powers, who sought to expand their empires for various economic and political reasons.
- 🌍 China, a major manufacturing power at the time, was heavily involved in world trade, primarily as an importer of silver, until the British introduced opium which disrupted the balance of trade.
- 💊 The opium trade led to the Opium Wars, where the British forced China to open up to trade through military might, resulting in China ceding Hong Kong and other concessions.
- 🛳️ Industrialization was a key factor in European imperialism, providing both the motive and the means for Europeans to establish colonies, securing raw materials for their growing economies.
- 🔫 Technological advancements, such as steamships, quinine medicine, and improved gun technology, including the Maxim machine gun, gave Europeans a significant military advantage over colonized peoples.
- 📜 The Treaty of Nanjing marked a significant shift in Sino-British relations, with Britain gaining Hong Kong and other benefits, while China lost sovereignty over European spheres of influence.
- 🌾 The Taiping Rebellion, one of the most destructive civil rebellions, contributed to the eventual dominance of Europeans, particularly the British, in China's economy.
- 🤝 European colonization often relied on indirect rule, using local rulers and collaborators to govern colonies, which was more efficient and less costly than direct rule.
- 🎖️ Despite technological disadvantages, some African rulers were able to successfully resist European imperialism, such as Menelik II of Ethiopia, who defeated the Italians in battle.
- 💼 The business aspect of imperialism, where industrialized nations pushed economic integration upon developing nations and extracted value, is highlighted by the example of Khedive Ismail of Egypt.
- 🌐 The legacy of 19th-century imperialism continues to shape the modern world, influencing global trade patterns and the economic relationships between different regions.
Q & A
What was the primary method of trade between China and Europe in the 18th century?
-In the 18th century, the primary method of trade between China and Europe involved Europeans using silver because they did not produce anything else that the Chinese wanted.
What was the Macartney Mission's objective in 1793?
-The Macartney Mission's objective in 1793 was to negotiate better trade conditions with China, but it ultimately failed.
What was the Qianlong Emperor's response to the British regarding trade?
-The Qianlong Emperor responded to the British by stating that the Chinese empire possessed everything in abundance and lacked no product within its borders, indicating no need for significant trade changes.
How did the British exploit the Chinese market in the 1830s?
-In the 1830s, the British exploited the Chinese market by flooding it with opium, which threatened China's favorable balance of trade and created a significant number of drug addicts.
What was Commissioner Lin Zexu's drafted response to the British trade practices?
-Commissioner Lin Zexu drafted a stern letter that included a threat to cut off trade in valuable Chinese products such as rhubarb, silk, and tea, although this letter was never actually sent.
Why did the British demand compensation and access to Chinese territory after the Chinese confiscated British opium?
-The British demanded compensation and access to Chinese territory to carry out their trade because the confiscation of opium disrupted their lucrative drug trade.
What was the outcome of the Chinese counterattack in 1842 against British gunships?
-The Chinese counterattack in 1842, which included a plan to catapult flaming monkeys onto British ships, was unsuccessful, leading to the signing of the Treaty of Nanjing.
What did the Treaty of Nanjing result in for Britain and China?
-The Treaty of Nanjing resulted in Britain gaining Hong Kong and five other treaty ports, as well as a substantial indemnity in cash, while China essentially gave up all sovereignty to European spheres of influence.
What was the primary reason for the European colonization of Africa in the 19th century?
-The primary reason for the European colonization of Africa was industrialization, which created a need for securing sources of raw materials such as cotton, copper, iron, and rubber.
How did the Taiping Rebellion impact the economic power dynamics in China?
-The Taiping Rebellion was one of the most destructive civil rebellions in Chinese history, and its aftermath allowed Europeans, especially the British, to become the dominant economic power in China.
What technological advancements enabled Europeans to successfully colonize Africa in the late 19th century?
-Technological advancements such as steam ships, quinine medicine for disease prevention, and improved gun technology, including the Maxim machine gun, enabled Europeans to successfully colonize Africa.
How did European colonizers typically rule their colonies?
-European colonizers typically ruled their colonies through indirect rule, relying on local governments and leaders, and exerting control over them, which was often easier, cheaper, and involved less risk of disease.
What was the role of indigenous rulers in the context of European imperialism?
-Indigenous rulers often retained real power and were not simply puppets. They maintained their prestige and power to some extent, and some even gained advantages such as access to European education.
Why did some African rulers successfully resist European imperialism?
-Some African rulers were able to successfully resist European imperialism by effectively adapting European technology and military tactics, as exemplified by Ethiopia's Menelik II, who defeated the Italians in battle.
What was the consequence of Khedive Ismail's ambitions for Egypt?
-Khedive Ismail's ambitions led to financial troubles due to excessive borrowing, which resulted in Britain taking control over Egypt's finances and its shares in the Suez Canal, eventually leading to a full-scale British intervention.
How did the legacy of imperialism shape the modern world's economic landscape?
-The legacy of imperialism shaped the modern world's economic landscape by establishing patterns of trade and economic integration, affecting the origins of commodities such as bananas, call centers, and chocolate, and influencing the global distribution of manufacturing.
Outlines
🌍 Introduction to 19th Century Imperialism
John Green introduces the topic of 19th-century imperialism, mentioning China's thriving trade status before being overtaken by Europe. The British exploited China's demand for opium, leading to trade imbalances and drug addiction. The Opium Wars ensued, resulting in the Treaty of Nanjing, which ceded Hong Kong and opened treaty ports to Britain. Despite gaining Hong Kong, the British trade deficit with China initially increased.
🌍 European Colonization of Africa
John Green discusses the European scramble for Africa in the late 19th century, driven by industrialization and the need for raw materials. Technological advancements, such as steamships and quinine, enabled Europeans to navigate Africa's interior and survive its diseases. The Maxim machine gun was a critical tool in subduing African resistance. European powers often ruled through native intermediaries to maintain control with minimal personnel.
🌍 The Impact of European Imperialism
Green highlights the complex legacy of European imperialism. Indigenous rulers often collaborated with Europeans for practical reasons, such as preserving their power and accessing European education. Resistance to imperialism was common but often unsuccessful due to technological disparities. The British, for example, struggled for 25 years to defeat the Maori in New Zealand. The economic motives behind imperialism, such as securing resources and integrating local economies, were central to its persistence.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Imperialism
💡Opium Trade
💡Treaty of Nanjing
💡Industrialization
💡Nationalism
💡Scramble for Africa
💡Quinine
💡Maxim Machine Gun
💡Indirect Rule
💡Hiram Maxim
💡Economic Integration
Highlights
19th century imperialism took empire to new heights, but also to lows.
China was a thriving manufacturing power heavily involved in world trade, especially importing silver.
Europeans used silver for trade with China due to lack of other desired goods.
Macartney Mission in 1793 failed to improve trade conditions with China.
Qianlong Emperor's response highlighted China's self-sufficiency and foreign trade limitations.
British policy led to a surge in opium trade with China in the 1830s.
China's response to opium trade included Commissioner Lin Zexu's drafted threat to cut off valuable product trade.
British demanded compensation and access to Chinese territory after China's confiscation of opium.
General Yijing's plan to use flaming monkeys as a counterattack was never executed.
Treaty of Nanjing resulted in Britain gaining Hong Kong, five treaty ports, and indemnities.
Despite the Opium War, British trade deficit with China increased due to tea imports.
European industrialization was a key driver for imperialism, seeking control over raw materials.
European colonization of Africa was facilitated by technological advancements, including steamships and quinine.
Maxim machine gun was a significant technology enabling European domination in Africa.
Europeans often ruled colonies indirectly through local intermediaries and collaborators.
Indigenous rulers sometimes retained real power under European indirect rule.
Embracing European technology allowed some African rulers to resist imperialism, like Ethiopia's Menelik II.
Khedive Ismail of Egypt's modernization ambitions led to financial crisis and British intervention.
Imperialism's legacy impacts current global economic structures and trade patterns.
Transcripts
Hi, I'm John Green, this is Crash Course World History, and today we're gonna discuss 19th
century imperialism. So the 19th century certainly didn't invent the empire, but it did take
it to new heights, by which we mean lows, or possibly heights, I dunno, I can't decide,
roll the intro while I think about it.
[theme music]
Yeah, I don't know, I'm still undecided. Let's begin with China! When last we checked in,
China was a thriving manufacturing power, about to be overtaken by Europe, but still
heavily involved in world trade, especially an importer of silver from the Spanish empire.
Europeans had to use silver because they didn't really produce anything else the Chinese wanted,
and that state of affairs continued through the 18th century. For example, in 1793, the
Macartney Mission tried to get better trade conditions with China and was a total failure.
Here's the Qianlong Emperor's well known response to the British: "Hither to all European nations
including your own country's barbarian merchants have carried on their trade with our celestial
empire at Canton. Such has been the procedure for many years, although our celestial empire
possesses all things in prolific abundance and lacks no product within its own borders."
But then Europeans, especially the British, found something that the Chinese would buy:
opium. By the 1830s, British free trade policy unleashed a flood of opium in China, which
threatened China's favorable balance of trade. It also created a lot of drug addicts.
And then in 1839 the Chinese responded to what they saw as these unfair trade practices
with...a stern letter that they never actually sent. Commissioner Lin Zexu drafted a response
that contained a memorable threat to "cut off trade in rhubarb, silk, and tea, all valuable
products of ours without which foreigners could not live."
But even if the British had received this terrifying threat to their precious rhubarb
supply, they probably wouldn't have responded because selling drugs is super lucrative.
So the Chinese made like tea partiers, confiscating a bunch of British opium and chucking it into
the sea. And then the British responded to this by demanding compensation, and access
to Chinese territory where they could carry out their trade.
And then the Chinese were like, "Man that seems a little bit harsh," whereupon the British
sent in gunships, opening trade with Canton by force.
Chinese General Yijing made a counter attack in 1842 that included a detailed plan to catapult
flaming monkeys onto British ships. Stan, is that true?
All right, apparently the plans actually involved strapping fireworks to monkeys' backs and
were never carried out, but still!
Slightly off topic: obviously I don't want anyone to light monkeys on fire. I'm just
saying that flaming monkeys lend themselves to a lot of great band names, like the Sizzling
Simians, Burning Bonobos, Immolated Marmoset...Stan, sometimes I feel like I should give up teaching
world history and just become a band name generator. That's my real gift.
Anyway, due to lack of monkey fireworks, the Chinese counterattacks were unsuccessful,
and they eventually signed the treaty of Nanjing, which stated that Britain got Hong Kong and
five other treaty ports, as well as the equivalent of two billion dollars in cash. Also, the
Chinese basically gave up all sovereignty to European spheres of influence, wherein
Europeans were subject to their laws, not Chinese laws.
In exchange for all of this, China got a hot slice of nothing. You might think the result
of this war would be a shift in the balance of trade in Britain's favor, but that wasn't
immediately the case. In fact, the British were importing so much tea from China that
the trade deficit actually rose more than 30 billion dollars.
But eventually after another war and one of the most destructive civil rebellions in Chinese
and possibly world history, the Taiping Rebellion, the situation was reversed, and Europeans,
especially the British, became the dominant economic power in China.
Okay. So but when we think about the 19th century imperialism, we usually think about
the way that Europe turned Africa from this [map] into this [map], the so-called scramble
for Africa. Speaking of scrambles and the European colonization of Africa, you know
what they say--sometimes to make an omelette, you have to break a few eggs. And sometimes,
you break a lot of eggs and you don't get an omelette.
Europeans have been involved in Africa since the 16th century, when the Portuguese used
their cannons to take control of cities on coast to set up their trading post empire,
but in the second half of the 19th century, Europe suddenly and spectacularly succeeded
at colonizing basically all of Africa. Why?
Well, the biggest reason that Europeans were able to extend their grasp over so much of
the world was the same reason they wanted to do so in the first place: industrialization.
Nationalism played its part, of course. European states saw it as a real bonus to be able say
that they had colonies--so much so, that a children's rhyme in An ABC for Baby Patriots
went, "C is for colonies. Rightly we boast. That of all great countries Great Britain has the most."
But it was mostly, not to get all Marxist on you or anything, about controlling the
means of production. Europeans wanted colonies to secure sources of raw materials, especially
cotton, copper, iron, and rubber, that were used to fuel their growing industrial economies.
And in addition to providing the motive for imperialism, European industrialization also
provided the means. Europeans didn't fail to take over territory in Africa until the
late 19th century because they didn't want to; they failed because they couldn't. This was mostly due to disease.
Unlike in the Americas, Africans weren't devastated by diseases like smallpox because they'd had
smallpox for centuries and were just as immune to it as Europeans were. Not only that, but
Africa had diseases of its own, including yellow fever, malaria, and sleeping sickness,
all of which killed Europeans in staggering numbers.
Also, nagana was a disease endemic to Africa that killed horses, which made it difficult
for Europeans to take advantage of African grasslands, and also difficult for them to
get inland, because their horses would die as they tried to carry stuff.
Also, while in the 16th century Europeans did have guns, they were pretty useless, especially
without horses. So most fighting was done the old-fashioned way, with swords. That worked
pretty well in the Americas, unless you were the Incas or the Aztecs, but it didn't work
in Africa, because the Africans also had swords. And spears, and axes.
So as much as they might have wanted to colonize Africa in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries,
Africa's mosquitoes, microbes, and people were too much for them.
So what made the difference? Technology.
First, steam ships made it possible for Europeans to travel inland, bringing supplies and personnel
via Africa's navigable rivers. No horses? No problem.
Even more important was quinine medicine, sometimes in the form of tonic water, mixed
into refreshing quintessentially British gin and tonics. Quinine isn't as effective as
modern antimalarial medication, and it doesn't cure the disease, but it does help moderate its effects.
But of course the most important technology that enabled Europeans to dominate Africa
was guns. By the 19th century, European gun technology had improved dramatically, especially
with the introduction of the Maxim machine gun, which allowed Europeans to wipe out Africans
in battle after battle. Of course, machine guns were effective when wielded by Africans,
too, but Africans had fewer of them.
Oh, it's time for the open letter? And my chair is back!
An open letter to Hiram Maxim. But first, let's see what's in the secret compartment today.
Oh, it's Darth Vader! What a great reminder of imperialism.
Dear Hiram Maxim, I hate you. It's not so much that you invented the Maxim machine gun,
although obviously that's a little bit problematic, or even that you look like the poor man's
Colonel Sanders. First off, you're a possible bigamist. I have a long standing opposition
to bigamy. Secondly, you were born an American but became a Brit, thereby metaphorically
machine gunning our founding fathers. But most importantly, among your many inventions
was the successful amusement park ride, the Captive Flying Machine. Mr. Maxim, I hate
the Captive Flying Machine. The Captive Flying Machine has resulted in many a girlfriend
telling me that I'm a coward. I'm not a coward, I just don't want to die up there! It's all
your fault, Hiram Maxim, and nobody believes your story about the light bulb.
Best wishes, John Green.
All right. So, here is something that often gets overlooked. European imperialism involved
a lot of fighting and a lot of dying. And when we say that Europe came to dominate Africa,
for the most part that domination came through wars, which killed lots of Africans and also
lots of Europeans, although most of them died from disease. It's very, very important to
remember that Africans did not meekly acquiesce to European hegemony: they resisted, often
violently, but ultimately they were defeated by a technologically superior enemy.
In this respect, they were a lot like the Chinese, and also the Indians, and the Vietnamese,
and -- you get the picture.
So by the end of the 19th century, most of Africa and much of Asia had been colonized
by European powers. I mean, even Belgium got in on it, and they weren't even a country at the beginning
of the 19th century. I mean, Belgium has enjoyed like, 12 years of sovereignty in the last 3 millennia.
Notable exceptions include Japan, which was happily pursuing its own imperialism, Thailand,
Iran, and of course Afghanistan. Because no one can conquer Afghanistan,
unless you are -- wait for it -- the Mongols. [Mongoltage]
It's tempting to imagine Europe ruling their colonies with the proverbial topaz fist, and while
there was always the threat of violence, the truth is a lot more complicated. Let's go to the Thought Bubble.
In most cases, Europeans ruled their colonies with the help of, and sometimes completely
through, intermediaries and collaborators. For example, in the 1890s in India, there
were fewer than 1,000 British administrators supposedly ruling over 300 million Indians.
The vast majority of British troops at any given time in India, more than two-thirds,
were in fact Indians under the command of British officers.
Because of their small numbers relative to local populations, most European colonizers resorted
to indirect rule, relying on governments that were already there but exerting control over their leaders.
Frederick Lugard, who was Britain's head honcho in Nigeria for a time, called this "rule through
and by the natives." This worked particularly well with British administrators, who were
primarily middle class men but had aristocratic pretensions, and were often pleased to associate
with the highest echelons of Indian or African society.
Now, this isn't to say that indigenous rulers were simply puppets. Often, they retained
real power. This was certainly true in India, where more than a third of the territory was
ruled by Indian princes. The French protectorates of Morocco and Tunisia were ruled by Arab
monarchs, and the French also ruled through native kings in Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam.
For the most part, Europeans could almost always rely on their superior military technology
to coerce local rulers into doing what the Europeans wanted. And they could replace native
officials with Europeans if they had to. But in general, they preferred to rule indirectly.
It was easier and cheaper. Also, less malaria. Thanks, Thought Bubble.
So while we can't know why all native princes who ruled in the context of European imperialism
put up with it, we can make some pretty good guesses. First of all, they were still rulers.
They got to keep their prestige and their fancy hats, and to some extent their power.
Many were also able to gain advantages through their service, like access to European education
for themselves and for their children. Mahatma Gandhi, for instance, was the son of an Indian
high official, which made it possible for him to study law in England.
And we can't overlook the sheer practicality of it. The alternative was to resist, and
that usually didn't work out well. I'm reminded of the famous couplet, "Whatever happens,
we have got the Maxim gun, and they have not."
But even with this enormous technological advantage, it wasn't always easy. For example,
it took 25 years, from 1845 to 1870, for the British to fully defeat the Maori on New Zealand
because the Maori were kick-ass fighters who had mastered musketry and defensive warfare.
And I will remind you, it is not cursing if you're talking about donkeys.
In fact, it took them being outnumbered three-to-one with the arrival of 750,000 settlers for the
Maori to finally capitulate. And I will remind you that the rule against splitting infinitives is not an actual rule.
Those of you more familiar with U.S. history might notice a parallel between the Maori
and some of the Native American tribes, like the Apaches and the Lakota, a good reminder that the
United States did some imperial expansion of its own as part of its nationalizing project in the 19th century.
But back to Africa. Sometimes African rulers were so good at adapting European technology
that they were able to successfully resist imperialism. Ethiopia's Menelik II defeated
the Italians in battle, securing not just independence but an empire of his own.
But embracing European-style modernization could also be problematic, as Khedive Ismail
of Egypt found out during his rule in the late 19th century. He celebrated his imperial
success by commissioning an opera, Giuseppe Verdi's Aida, for the opening of the Cairo
Opera House in 1871. Giuseppe Verdi, by the way -- no relation to John Green.
And Ismail had ambitions of extending Egypt's control up the Nile, west toward Lake Chad.
But to do that, he needed money, and that's where he got into trouble. His borrowing bankrupted
Egypt and led to Britain's taking control over the country's finances and its shares
in the Suez Canal that Ismail had built, with French engineers and French capital, in 1869.
The British sent in 1,300 bureaucrats to fix Egypt's finances, an invasion of red tape
that led to a nationalist uprising, which brought on a full-scale British intervention
after 1881 in order to protect British interests.
This business imperialism, as it is sometimes known, is really at the heart of the imperialistic
impulse. Industrialized nations push economic integration upon developing nations, and then
extract value from those developing nations, just as you would from a mine or a field you owned.
And here we see political history and economic history coming together again. As western
corporations grew in the latter part of the 19th century, their influence grew as well,
both in their home countries and in the lands where they were investing.
But ultimately, whether the colonizer is a business enterprise or a political one, the
complicated legacy of imperialism survives. It's why your bananas are cheap, why your
call centers are Indian, why your chocolate comes from Africa, and why everything else comes from China.
These imperialistic adventures may have only lasted a century, but it was the century in
which the world as we know it today began to take shape.
Thanks for watching. I'll see you next week.
Crash Course is produced and directed by Stan Muller, our script supervisor is Danica Johnson,
the show is written by my high school history teacher Raoul Meyer and myself, and our graphics
team is Thought Bubble. Oh, our intern! I'm sorry, Meredith the Intern. Our intern is Meredith Danko.
Last week's Phrase of the Week was "homogeneous mythologized unitary polity." Thank you for
that suggestion. If you want to guess this week's Phrase of the Week or suggest future
ones, you can do so in comments, where you can also ask questions about today's video
that will be answered by our team of historians.
Thanks for watching Crash Course. Remember, you can get this shirt, the Mongol shirt,
or our poster at dftba.com. Speaking of which, as we say in my hometown, "Don't Forget to be Awesome."
浏览更多相关视频
How Europe Stole Africa (so quickly)
How Indian Opium Shaped British Colonial Expansion Across the World | UPSC Mains GS 1
E.H. Gombrich 'A Little History of World' 37. Across the Seas
Communists, Nationalists, and China's Revolutions: Crash Course World History #37
State EXPANSION [AP World History] Unit 6 Topic 2
Colonialism
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)