How was an Entire Continent Annexed in 1 year? - The Scramble of Africa

Thank you so much for watching our video about The Scramble of Africa You can now support our work on Patreon: www.patreon.com/Knowledgia or by becoming a YouTube Member: youtube.com/c/Knowledgia/join By doing so you will be able to watch our videos FIRST and with No Ads. And you will support us a lot, as any dollar helps immensely in our production process. Thank you for your consideration!

One mistake, von Bismarck was actually opposed to german colonies but the Kaiser made a series of speeches that made it impossible for Bismarck to oppose it without damaging german prestige, therefore calling for the Berlin Conference.

A small mistake on the map was that Djibouti was a French colony, not English and Italian.

It is not about bad guys hurting good guys, it is about stronger taking advantage of the weaker. Weren't african tribes themselves fighting with each other over the lands and power too? I bet have the africans had the power, level of technical development, they would have gone abroad to win the territories the very same way. Why? Because African or European - we are all the same both in our virtues and in our vices! Thirst for power and ambition is all there since the beginning of the world.

Even the representation of how Europe divided Africa is Eurocentric. In 1884 there were already states in North Africa. Morocco, Ottoman Empire, Egypt etc and Ethiopia in the East. Showing them as blank stateless lands is interesting to say the least.

the problem was not that the europeans colonised african regions its when they started dehumamnising africans and sort of gave permission to do whatever inhuman activities i dont think at that time it was morally ok for europeans to do the same to other europeans

Africa: exists Europeans: it's free real estate

One important event that triggered the panic and haste of the scramble was the British occupation of Egypt and the Suez canal, thus leading to Berlin Conference for the Scramble. As a side note: at the start Bismarck didn't really care about colonies but it isn't quite clear why he changed his mind. Worth mentioning that the colonization of Africa was not a unitary process made by the European states but it took on a live of it's own, with explorers doing their own things regardless of their governments.

As a Spaniard, I’d like to say that the Spanish presence in Africa had important repercussions on later events in the history of Spain 🇪🇸. On the one hand, in the Spanish Protectorate of Morocco the Army of Africa was formed, whose move to the metropolitan territory would be key in the development of the uprising and subsequent Spanish Civil War (1936-1939). Regarding the Spanish Sahara, in 1975 Spain signed the Madrid Tripartite Agreement with Morocco 🇲🇦 and Mauritania 🇲🇷, interrupted its decolonization process and abandoned the territory in 1976 but without transferring its sovereignty over it or its status as an administering power. Since then, Western Sahara 🇪🇭 has been a disputed territory between Morocco and the Sahrawis and the UN 🇺🇳 continues to consider Spain as the de jure administrative power.

What's really interesting to me is that, for all the lands conquered by European nations over the past five hundred or so years, look at what they have now. When you look at a map, Europe and nations that make it up are so small when compared to the continents and nations they once ruled over.

Can't believe this was happening just 100 years ago

Taken on a map, sure, but how much of the continent outside of South Africa had non-trivial European settlement? (And not just resource extraction)

Knowledgeable Knowledgia , woo hoo!!!!🤩

Great idea for a video!

Great video ! Thought i'd give some context around a particular case ; One of the challenges that faced colonialism in North Africa, is the fact that a cultural identity was already established, and that connection with the outside world was very much alive. I don't know about neighbouring countries, but even though Tunisia was officially a part of the Ottoman Empire, it was pretty much autonomous, and has been since the late 18th century. It's fair to say that by the time French colonialism rolled around, Tunisia has already matured enough politically, which is one of the reasons French occupation wasn't straightforward and recognized Tunisia as a "protectorate" rather than a colony . However, it was the economic factor that facilitated French rule over Tunisia, debts were the death of the "Beylik Of Tunis"

Have you done anything on the Arab Slave Trade yet? There's plenty of material there.

Its too bad that the few videos these "history channels" about Africa are about how Africa and black people are victimized as opposed to really learning about it's great culture and civilizations. Most of these channels are undoubtedly run by European or white men and are just reinforcing a European and male centric view of history.

British fought against the Marathas to gain land, not the Moghuls. Except Bengal, most of North and Central India then was under Maratha confederation. The Marathas commanded a professional modern army at par with British troops in India. However, the confederation was too decentralised, leading to a disunited front against British.

Video with great efforts

Africa was last, or 2nd to last (depends on Asia or Pasific) to be colonialist. While Portugal started (as always) with others, it wasn't all settled until mid/late 1800s as early 1800s saw Americas break away.