How significant was the Berlin West Africa Conference for causing colonisation? Aim – to develop conclusion writing and assess how significant the conference was with examples This was a French cartoon showing the decisions of the Berlin West Africa Conference. How did the French interpret the conference? What would you add to make it more accurate?

How significant was the Berlin West Africa Conference for causing colonisation? Plan Introduction Significant – set the boundaries, sped it up, principle of effective occupation, led to colonisation of the Sudan Significant – Congo to King Leopold and areas of the Niger to Britain, accelerated imperialism as others tried to compete, e.g. In the Sudan Significant – protection of missionaries and slavery, used to support the colonisation of Uganda, Sudan and Malawi Insignificant – circumstantial reasons more important, e.g. Egypt Insignificant – potential profits more important, e.g. Egypt Conclusion

How significant was the Berlin West Africa Conference for causing colonisation? Plan Introduction Significant – set the boundaries, sped it up, principle of effective occupation, led to colonisation of the Sudan Significant – Congo to King Leopold and areas of the Niger to Britain, accelerated imperialism as others tried to compete, e.g. In the Sudan Significant – protection of missionaries and slavery, used to support the colonisation of Uganda, Sudan and Malawi Insignificant – circumstantial reasons more important, e.g. Egypt Insignificant – potential profits more important, e.g. Egypt Conclusion In conclusion, the Berlin West Africa Conference was significant in causing colonisation because of Sudan and the area around the Niger. However, it could be argued that circumstantial reasons were also significant as we can see in Egypt. So overall it was important in the Sudan and Niger. C – why? In conclusion, the Berlin West Africa Conference was significant as it established the principle of effective occupation. This led to the colonisation of Sudan. The area around the Niger was also given to the British which was significant for the Niger, and it sped up the colonisation of other areas as the European governments had to race even more quickly, for example King Leopold quickly tried to push East. However, it could be argued that circumstantial reasons were more important than the Berlin West Africa Conference. This led to the colonisation of Egypt, before the conference, which was the first significant gain for the British. Overall, it appears that the BWAC did contribute to the formalising of colonisation, which led to more of Africa being colonised more quickly, as we can see in the Sudan and aftermath of the colonisation of the Niger. Does it focus on the BWAC and explicitly explain the link in the first and second sentence.

How significant was the Berlin West Africa Conference for causing colonisation? Plan Introduction Significant – set the boundaries, sped it up, principle of effective occupation, led to colonisation of the Sudan Significant – Congo to King Leopold and areas of the Niger to Britain, accelerated imperialism as others tried to compete, e.g. In the Sudan Significant – protection of missionaries and slavery, used to support the colonisation of Uganda, Sudan and Malawi Insignificant – circumstantial reasons more important, e.g. Egypt Insignificant – potential profits more important, e.g. Egypt Conclusion In conclusion, the Berlin West Africa Conference was significant in causing colonisation because of Sudan and the area around the Niger. However, it could be argued that circumstantial reasons were also significant as we can see in Egypt. So overall it was important in the Sudan and Niger. C – why? Rewrite this to improve it.

How significant was the Berlin West Africa Conference for causing colonisation? Plan Introduction Significant – set the boundaries, sped it up, principle of effective occupation, led to colonisation of the Sudan Significant – Congo to King Leopold and areas of the Niger to Britain, accelerated imperialism as others tried to compete, e.g. In the Sudan Significant – protection of missionaries and slavery, used to support the colonisation of Uganda, Sudan and Malawi Insignificant – circumstantial reasons more important, e.g. Egypt Insignificant – potential profits more important, e.g. Egypt Conclusion Introductions!

Feedback on your essays Planning! Iman and Rebeka – plan your essays Others – complete a way to improve it.

Imagine you are a journalists writing about the Berlin West Africa Conference in a paper from one of the following countries: Britain Germany France Portugal Belgium Include... What decisions have been made Whether they are happy with these decisions

Homework – due Thursday 23rd October Read the pages and answer these questions What was the location like where the conference was held? What was Blowitz’s theory? What was Bismarck like in the conference? What was Leopold doing? What did Bismarck want from the conference? (on p. 249) Why was Percy Anderson satisfied? Add another paragraph to your report including information from the chapter.

How should you write conclusions? How significant was the Berlin West Africa Conference for causing colonisation? Aim – to develop conclusion writing and assess how significant the conference was with examples Is it as significant as this cartoon suggests? Give an example in your answer. How should you write conclusions?

Homework You will have a Pre Public Examination in the first week back. You will answer one question out of a choice of two on colonisation. I think it will be in your double on the Tuesday – you will need to get confirmation from your tutors. Revise for this PPE. Learn facts. Plan essay answers.

Exam questions How significant was the Berlin West Africa Conference for causing colonisation? How far do you agree that British expansion in Africa in the years c1875–1914 was primarily motivated by strategic concerns? How accurate is it to say that British expansion in Africa in the years c1875–1914 was achieved more through treaties and agreements than by military conflict? How far do you agree that the extension of British control along the Nile Valley and in east Africa in the years c1875–98 was motivated mainly by economic concerns? How far do you agree that expansion in Africa in the years c1875–1914 was primarily motivated by the need to protect British interests from imperial rivals? How far do you agree that British territorial expansion in Africa in the years c1875–1914 was primarily due to economic factors? To what extent did the Berlin West Africa Conference speed up the formal establishment of British colonies in Africa in the years after 1885? Why did Egypt and the Nile Valley increasingly come under formal British control in the years 1875–99? How accurate is it to suggest that men-on-the-spot were primarily responsible for the expansion of the African Empire in the years c1875–1914? To what extent was the extension of British control along the Nile Valley and within east Africa in the years 1882–98 motivated by a determination to limit the territory gained by its imperial rivals? Remember to plan, included analysis and own knowledge.