Scramble for Africa by Pakenham

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Introduction

This work provides a simple overview based on chapters in the book ‘Scramble for Africa’ by Pakenham. The essay helps answer pertinent questions about the scramble for Africa. Of key concern in this essay are the participants in the scramble, their motivations, the different personalities, and their decisions, African’s reaction to the scramble and finally factors that led to the scramble out of Africa.

The Scramble

The scramble for Africa was triggered by the upsurge of interest in Africa by competing for European powers. By the early 1800s, several European powers laid claim to many territories in Africa. The five nations that were at the center of the scramble included: Britain, German, Portugal, Belgium, and France. One leader at the heart of the scramble for Africa was King Leopold of Belgium.

Historians’ explanation of the Scramble

There are many reasons or factors leading to the scramble for Africa. Despite many other reasons, e.g., need to stem out slavery, historians explain that tensions between European powers are the reason or factor that led to the arbitrary subdivision or partitioning and apportioning of Africa.

Author’s intent

Pakenham, in his book, tries to distinguish between the selfish interest of rulers and the good intentions of explorers and missionaries. Two important figures in the book are King Leopold and Dr. Livingstone. While Livingstone, the explorer, and missionary were genuinely interested in discovering more about Africa and its people, the king and other colonialists were interested in the economic benefits that would accrue from Africa.

David Livingstone

Dr. David Livingstone was an early explorer, missionary and philanthropist from Great Britain. He is one of the early explorers into the interior of Africa Dr. Livingstone contributed in a big way towards the scramble for Africa. He was opposed to the slave trade and thus encouraged Britain and others to rein on the practice.

Slave trade had been abolished on the coasts, but it thrived in the interior of Africa. Livingstone wrote about this phenomenon in his reports, which were used by movements in Great Britain to push the government into considering doing something about it. He also urged Europeans to contribute towards bettering Africa through (3 Cs) commerce, Christianity and civilization.

Response to 3Cs Call

Livingstone 3 Cs’ call buoyed the capitalists in Europe who saw a great opportunity in doing legitimate business in African resources once the slave trade had been abolished. The explorers, Livingstone included, described the vast resources and markets in Africa.

Colonialists Interest

Commercial interests were the basic interests of the colonialists. Industrialization and new technology played a critical role in facilitating the scramble for Africa. The industries in Europe needed raw materials which were abundant in Africa. As a result, many traders headed to Africa, and competition among them contributed to annexing of Africa. For example, the English had discovered great deposits of gold in the Transvaal and thus did everything to ensure their control over the area was not challenged.

Another critical motivator for the colonialists was the desire to prove their power. European countries at that time were eager to prove their power. Acquisition of colonies was like a fashionable thing for the imperialists. The scramble of Africa could thus be understood to be about the balance of power in Europe. It was about supremacy or sphere of influence between the European powers.

The colonialists were also motivated by new technology. New technology had enabled easy traveling either on water or by rail — this facilitated movement. At around the same time, quinine had been discovered, and thus, deadly malaria was no longer a challenge to those who wished to reach the interior of Africa.

Britain’s Role in the Scramble

Unlike other colonialists, the English were more concerned about the spread of Christianity and abolishment of the slave trade than say the French or Belgians under King Leopold II. The British had managed to contain slave trade on the east African coast and the West African coast. However, the interior of Africa was a haven for the slave trade. Therefore, the Englishmen moved into interior Africa with the motive of containing slave trade and protecting the citizens.

African Response to Scramble

Majority of Africans rejected or revolted against the scramble for Africa. Many armed resistances are recorded against the annexing of Africa and colonialism in general. The only problem was that Africans resisted with their spears and arrows while the colonialists used rifles or guns. Several massacres are recorded due to the use of guns by the Europeans.

Symbol of Age in Africa

Although Dr. Livingstone had prescribed Christianity, commerce, and civilization as the sure way of liberating Africa and ending the slave trade, this was later forgotten and only the gun dictated operations.

Death and Reputation of Livingstone

Livingstone is said to have died in present-day Zambia. By the time of his death, he was searching for a connection to the Nile. The Nile was believed to be the one opening into the interior of Africa; an easy access route from Europe and Asia. Livingstone was obsessed about finding the source of the Nile.

He did not manage to find it but his efforts informed later explorer Stanley who is claimed to have found the source. Livingstone was posthumously declared national hero due to his exploits as a scientific explorer, anti-slavery crusader, an informer for the British government which was instrumental to British exploits in East and southern Africa.

Morton Stanley

Stanley was a reporter in New York before embarking on exploration. His first assignment was to find Livingstone after the latter had disappeared in Africa. He was able to search and find Livingstone at Ujiji in Tanganyika which is part of present-day Tanzania.

Later, Stanley was contracted by the King Leopold II of Belgium to explore and make treaties with chiefdoms in Africa leading to the establishment of a state owned by the king in the Congo basin. Stanley is known to have despised Africans and treated them inhumanely (Pakenham 1992, 28).

Lieutenant Verney Cameron

Cameron was sent out to Africa to assist Livingstone. However, by the time he arrived Livingstone was already dead. Guided by Livingstone’s writings, he was able to explore the greater part of equatorial Africa. He is famed for having crossed the whole of Equatorial Africa from the east to the west or sea-to-sea.

King Leopold II of Belgium

Cameron’s reports caught the attention of King Leopold II of Belgium because of the enormous diversity in the hinterland that they described (Pakenham 1992, 15). Leopold II had this obsession of making finding a colony for Belgium. The details that Cameron established helped Leopold II to understand how to access the Congo basin, thus his sending Stanley.

Stanley’s mission in the cong basin was to establish treaties with the chiefdoms for Leopold claiming ownership (Pakenham 1992, 23). The British were keen on curbing the expansionist moves of France. Leopold II tapped into the crusading spirit of the British by asking them to support his plans as a way of cutting off French interests in the interior of Africa but also in the exchange of favorable treatment in commerce.

Jules Devaux

Jules Devaux was a secretary in King Leopold’s kingdom. Jules did not support Leopold’s Quest for a colony in Africa. He reckoned that this was an expensive affair that would not pay off (Pakenham 1992, 15). At the Berlin conference, Leopold II was triumphant because he insisted his intentions were purely philanthropic. To achieve his aims, Leopold II needed Stanley who had been in Africa and understood the area well enough. By that time Stanley was in Africa doing more exploration on the Nile and Congo basin.

Stanley had a great desire to be recognized as follower or disciple of Livingstone. He had pledged to complete Livingstone’s work and successfully solved the mystery that was the interior of Africa. Unlike his predecessor Livingstone who was magnanimous, Stanley despised the locals and condoned or encouraged their maltreatment.

Cameron and Livingstone had failed to navigate further after reaching Nyangwe. However, although facing the challenge of hostile communities, Stanley with the help of Tipu Tipu was able to explore and determine the Congo River (Pakenham 1992, 29).

Pierre Savorgnan de Brazza

Brazza was an explorer from France. He was born an Italian but naturalized to become a Frenchman (Pakenham 1992, 143). He was a charming individual whose ways were very agreeable among the Congolese. De Brazza achieved his mission of reaching the source of the Congo River. He later settled as a colonial appointee but fellow colonialists were unhappy with his ways.

An embarrassing article was written about him but the national assembly supported him. In Congo, Brazza was the greatest enemy of Stanley who was helping establish an empire for Leopold II in the name of Comité d’Études du Haut Congo (CEHC), which was a fake exploration and philanthropic organization; it aimed to exploit Africans (Pakenham 1992, 150).

Jean Jaurenguiberry

Jean was a French admiral, elected as life senator due to his exploits in the military. He was suspicious of Brazza because by Brazza raising attention and attracting French government investment in the Congo, fewer funds would be available to continue flowing towards West Africa, which was of great interest to him (Pakenham 1992, 145). Jean was also suspicious of Brazza because according to him, Brazza was just an Italian aristocrat who had succeeded through being favored (Pakenham 1992, 145).

Admiral Montagnac

Admiral Montagna was a French admiral, a predecessor of Jaurenguiberry. He is known to have supported Brazza in every way. He is the one who approved Brazza’s mission to Congo (Pakenham1992, 145).

Makoko Treaty

The Makoko treaty was between the French and king Makoko of the Batekes. This treaty meant the Bateke kingdom was under France’s protection thus establishing a strong French presence in the Congo basin. The treaty limited or halted Leopold II’s interest to the other side of the Congo River.

The decision to ratify the Makoko treaty had been encouraged by a treacherous maneuver by the British in Egypt, bringing it under their occupation. The ratification of the Makoko treaty caused fears and anxiety among other powers. They feared a replication of the same in some other areas by France. Many countries responded to the happening differently. This scenario led to the initiative of Otto Van Bismarck, which culminated into the partitioning of Africa.

Arthur Hodister

Arthur Hodister was a British ivory trader in Africa who was well known for his charming and charismatic approach to business. He was rumored to have been murdered in 1892 by the Arabs who had become a powerful force in the interior of Africa (Pakenham 1992, 434).

Guillaume Van Kerchkhoven

Guillaume was a Belgian soldier sent by Leopold to complete a mission abandoned by Stanley of hacking through the Ivory reach rainforest from Congo and connecting with east Africa as Britain was rumored to be planning a withdrawal from Uganda (Pakenham, 436). Armed with the best weaponry, Guillaume was successful in the initial phase of his expedition having dealt mercilessly with Arabs, but he was later murdered (Pakenham 1992, 438).

Francis Dhanis

Dhanis was a Belgian garrison commandant charged with the responsibility of ruling the entire region between Kasai and Katanga. He was shaken at the news of Hoddister’s death because it was a gruesome death meted by angry Arabs out to avenge for Guillaume’s actions. After Hoddister’s death, despite many expecting him to yield and give in to the Arabs, he resiliently refused to yield and put up a resistance (Pakenham 1992, 442).

Lieutenant Michaux

Michaux was a young officer in Dhani’s army sent to patrol the river banks. He is the one that led the attack on Sefu’s fort (Pakenham 1992, 443).

Nyangwe

After the defeat of Sefu, Dhanis was buoyed and wanted to bring down the Arab dominion headquartered at Nyangwe (444). Aided by Gongo’s cannibals, he was able to march over the Arabs at Nyangwe and defeated them completely (Pakenham 1992, 447).

Gongo

His support to Dhanis had given a reason to his rivals who plotted for his assassination. Dhanis’ effort at rescuing him was unsuccessful leading to an enraged confrontation with Gongo’s native army (Pakenham, 448). This outrage culminated into a mutiny later on that denied Leopold the final hoped for the hold on the Nile basin (Pakenham 1992, 449).

Lord Rosebery

He was a British prime minister who had pushed for Uganda becoming a British protectorate. To prevent the French advance on the Nile Basin, he proposed to Leopold to lease the region from Britain in exchange of a Belgian corridor south of German East Africa (Pakenham 449). Leopold accepted the proposal; however, he became treacherous by trying to sign another secretive treaty with the French. The secretive treaties became known and a tussle for control ensured with Leopold as the main looser (Pakenham 1992, 451).

Belgian solution to Congo problems

Leopold’s single interest in the Congo was to blunder and grab the abundant resources in the region. He mistreated natives and to hide his heinous acts chased away missionaries from the region. The ills committed by Leopold and his agents had reached Europe through reports by missionaries, the USA and Britain chose to intervene.

However, Leopold fought back through a campaign aimed at attracting sympathy (Pakenham 1992, 659). In response to the crisis, the Belgian government proposed a Belgian solution. The Belgian solution was to turn Congo into a Belgian colony as opposed to Leopold’s property.

Sir Edward Grey

Sir Edward was the Prime Minister in Britain. He was confronted by pressure from humanitarian groups led by Moreland the Belgian Kings’ opposition to the Belgian solution. However, he was unable to confront the Belgians because he did not fancy the idea of appearing to bully the weak (Pakenham 1992, 660).

Cohesion Treaty

In the face of Leopold’s opposition to Congo becoming a Belgian colony, the government proposed what was called the cohesion treaty. This proposal advocated for Belgian takeover of administration of Congo from Leopold but not the revenues (Pakenham 1992, 661)

US and British demarche

Realizing that Leopold was hell-bent on retaining control over revenues from the Congo, the US, and Britain, yielding to pressure from the public, issued a directive that the Belgian government takes over the Congo and stops abuses in line with the Brussels and berlins acts. Further, Belgium had to respect the rights of missionaries, institute freedom of trade, and stop the mistreatment of natives (Pakenham 1992, 662).

Schollaert

Schollaert, then leader of the Belgian government, dealt with pressure from the US and Britain by reaching a deal with the King. According to the deal, the king hands over Congo and is compensated for his sacrifices (Pakenham 1992, 663)

Berlin Act

Suspecting mischief in how easily the king had given up on Congo, Sir Grey appealed to other nations not to recognize Belgium. However, due to selfish interests or not understanding what the fuss was about, the other nations did not heed Grey’s call (Pakenham 1992, 664).

Morel

Morel was the major player or force behind the pressure on Sir Edward Grey. He seriously campaigned for the rights of Africans in the Congo. However, with the king still at large, the gains could easily be eroded. Although the Belgian parliament had proposed far-reaching reforms, the king was secretly still in control of affairs in Congo (Pakenham 1992, 668). This is why Morel still opposed the stated plans or reforms.

The Scramble out

World War I ended with German losing its colonies to other powers. After the Second World War, the League of Nations has formed as well as the mandate system (Pakenham 1992, 673). The system of mandates meant that former colonies that could not stand on their own are governed until such a time when they could stand on their own. This system did not succeed because the powerful nations continued their imperialists or colonialists approaches in the mandates (Pakenham 1992, 673).

Attitude after Mussolini exit in Ethiopia

After Mussolini’s exit, the colonialists’ attitude changed to ‘last in and first out’ kind of approach (Pakenham 1992, 673). This expeditious approach meant more hurried plunder than say focus on building structures. Apart from amassing wealth for the colonialists, this approach created huge opposition to colonialism.

European powers were in a hurry to leave because if they did not leave they would be shuttled out by the guns of Africans fighting for independence and western interest groups pushing for African independence (Pakenham 1992, 671).

While the scramble was driven by an alliance between business people, missionaries and imperialists, the scramble out was due to change in thinking, especially among Christians and business people. For the business oriented, the colonies were no longer profitable while the opposed religious colonialism on humanitarian grounds (Pakenham 1992, 674).

Mode of leaving: France and Britain

The colonialists had to leave the colonies or allow for independence due to widely changed times. The colonies had largely become unsustainable while natives strongly and even violently agitated for independence. The British tried to prepare their colonies for independence while France was more hurried in leaving (Pakenham 1992, 278).

Reference List

Pakenham, Thomas. 1992. The Scramble for Africa: White Man’s Conquest of the Dark Continent from 1876-1912. New York: Harper Perennial.

Click Here To Order Now!