Uploaded byGeorge Dumitrache
CAMBRIDGE AS HISTORY REVISION 2015 - AGE OF IMPERIALISM: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS BOOK
This document provides questions and guidance for answering questions about European imperialism in Africa from 1871-1900. It begins by outlining factors that led European nations to participate in the "scramble for Africa," including strategic, economic and political motivations as well as the impacts of industrialization and developing technologies. Subsequent questions require analyzing these factors in more depth and making judgments about their relative significance. Other questions address the aims of the 1885 Treaty of Berlin, implications of the Boer Wars for British foreign policy, and the extent to which African peoples benefited from European colonization. Guidance is provided for each question emphasizing the need for depth, balance, fully explained arguments, and use of factual evidence from the context provided.
More Related Content
Similar to CAMBRIDGE AS HISTORY REVISION 2015 - AGE OF IMPERIALISM: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS BOOK
More from George Dumitrache
CAMBRIDGE AS HISTORY REVISION 2015 - AGE OF IMPERIALISM: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS BOOK
- 1.
- 2. QUESTION1PAG19 Why did Europeannations take part in a “scramble for Africa” in the period from 1871 to 1900?
- 3. QUESTION1PAG19 Strategic, economic andpolitical factors: • opportunity for territorial expansion without risking major war • developments in transport, medicine and weaponry • impact of the Industrial Revolution in Europe • exploiting Africa under the pretext of spreading civilisation. (see pages 8–11) More is required than a basic list of reasons. Depth of understanding will be demonstrated by explaining the relative signi cance of each causal factor and showing how the causal factors are interconnected. (see model answers on pages 164–5)
- 4. “The Industrial Revolutionin Europe was the main reason for the SCRAMBLE FOR AFRICA between 1871 and 1900.” How far do you agree? QUESTION2PAG19
- 5. This question requiresknowledge and understanding of the same basic factual material as Question 1. This time, however, students are required to make a judgement, weighing the relative significance of the Industrial Revolution in Europe (the need for new sources of raw materials and markets) against other factors that led to the ‘scramble for Africa’. A clear argument is required that either agrees or disagrees with the statement in the question. The argument must be fully explained, supported with facts and show a balanced assessment of the evidence. (see pages 8–11) QUESTION2PAG19
- 6. What were theaims of the Treaty of Berlin (1885)? QUESTION3PAG19
- 7. The aims ofthe treaty were: • to regulate the activity of European nations in Africa in order to prevent conflict between them • to ensure that European nations respected one another’s African possessions • to ensure that vital transport routes (such as the Congo and Niger rivers) remained open to all. (see pages 12–13) Depth of understanding will be demonstrated by explaining: • the historical context of the treaty – rival nations competing for limited land in Africa • the determination of European nations to avoid conflict with one another • the idea that Africa was seen as a ‘safety valve’ – a place where European nations could enhance their power and prestige without risking major war • that the treaty provided a moral justification for European exploitation of Africa by stating that slavery must be abolished throughout Africa. QUESTION3PAG19
- 8. What were theimplications of the Boer Wars for the British foreign policy? QUESTION4PAG19
- 9. Implications of theBoer Wars on British foreign policy include the following: • It highlighted fundamental weaknesses in the British army. The high costs of the war, both in human and monetary terms, led to political debate about whether Britain should continue with its imperialist policies. • A deterioration in Anglo–German relations. Other European countries had been heavily critical of Britain’s actions during the Boer Wars. Britain began to feel vulnerable and moved away from its long-term policy of ‘splendid isolationism’. This led to the Anglo–Japanese Agreement of 1902, the Entente Cordiale in 1904 and the Anglo– Russian Entente of 1907. QUESTION4PAG19
- 10. The danger hereis that students write generally about the Boer Wars rather than focusing on the specific requirements of the question. Producing a good answer depends on a full understanding of the significance of the Boer Wars for Britain and the careful/appropriate selection of relevant factual material. (see pages 14–16) QUESTION4PAG19
- 11. Source A belowis the telegram that German Kaiser Wilhelm II sent to the Boer leader Paul Kruger in 1896. Why did this telegram cause such anger in Britain? Telegram text: I express to you my sincere congratulations that you and your people, without appealing to the help of friendly powers, have succeeded, by your own energetic action against the armed bands which invaded your country as disturbers of the peace, in restoring peace and in maintaining the independence of the country against attack from without. Telegram from Kaiser to Paul Kruger, 3 January 1896. QUESTION5PAG19
- 12. In the telegram,the Kaiser is congratulating Kruger for inflicting an embarrassing defeat on the might of the British Empire. Britain saw this as a provocative intrusion into an issue concerning a part of Africa over which Britain claimed control. The statement ‘without appealing to the help of friendly powers’ could imply that, in any future conflict, Germany was prepared to support the Boers against Britain. (see pages 14–16 and 18–19). Depth of understanding will be demonstrated by outlining the historical context of the telegram: • growing tensions between Germany and Britain • showing how the Kaiser could be seen as breaking the Treaty of Berlin – interfering in an area of Africa that was clearly under British influence • showing how the telegram greatly increased Britain’s fear of being isolated – leading to its move away from the policy of ‘splendid isolation’. QUESTION5PAG19
- 13. To what extentdid the African people benefit from the “scramble for Africa”? QUESTION6PAG19
- 14. Benefits include: • efficientsystems of administration and government • provision of education • new systems of transport and communication • water, sanitation and medical systems • improved methods of farming. However, not all European nations provided these things in their African lands. Drawbacks include: • random partitions, ignoring tribal/ethnic boundaries • Africans were given no say in running their own countries • African cultures were undermined • exploitation by European nations. The answer must be focused on the actual question. Listing the advantages and disadvantages of the ‘scramble’ on the people of Africa will show balance – understanding of both sides of the issue. However, a clear argument is required, showings the extent to which the student believes the African people bene ted. For the argument to be convincing, it must be balanced, fully explained and supported with factual evidence. (pg 16–17) QUESTION6PAG19
- 15. Look at Source B, which showsa cartoon published in 1906. What point was the artist trying to make? QUESTION7PAG19 A British cartoon published in 1906, commenting on events in the Congo. The cartoon is called “In the rubber coils”
- 16. People depicted: • Africanmale being attacked by the ‘snake’ • African woman, clutching her baby, moving away in fear • The ‘snake’ has a human head; evidence that this is King Leopold II of Belgium includes – crown, representing kingship – beard (see picture on page 9) – cartoon deals with events in the Congo – Leopold’s main interest was rubber (‘in the rubber coils’). Context: the cartoon relates to King Leopold’s exploitation of the Congo and its people, so that he could amass a fortune from rubber. His use of forced labour was effectively a form of slavery, which had been expressly banned by the Treaty of Berlin. Message: the cartoonist is heavily critical of Leopold’s exploitation of the local population in the Congo. (see pages 9, 12, 13 and 18) QUESTION7PAG19
- 17. The best answerswill go beyond a basic face-value interpretation. For example, by: • making the point that cartoons usually reflect (and, indeed, help to shape) public opinion; being a British cartoon, it is safe to assume that the British people greatly disliked what Leopold was doing in the Congo • pointing out the irony of this: Britain itself was heavily criticised by the rest of Europe for its own actions during the Boer Wars. QUESTION7PAG19
- 18. Why did theUSA move away from its traditional isolationist foreign policy in the period 1871-1914? QUESTION1PAG23
- 19. Reasons for theUSA’s move away from isolationism include the following: • Industrial growth: the economic downturn of 1893 alerted industrialists to the dangers of relying on the domestic market. Exporting to Europe, where protectionism was practised, was difficult, so the USA wanted to gain access to the Chinese market. This required overseas bases and a strong navy. • The impact of the war with Spain in 1898: the US acquisition of overseas possessions (e.g. Guam). • The actions of President Theodore Roosevelt: Panama Canal, Platt Amendment, Roosevelt Corollary. Please answer why rather than simply how. The best answers will display understanding of the political debate that raged in the USA over this issue. (see pages 20–3) QUESTION1PAG23
- 20. How far wasPresident Theodore Roosevelt responsible for the USA’s move towards a more expansionist foreign policy? QUESTION2PAG23
- 21. This question requiresthe same basic material as that used in Question 1. Here, however, students need to make a judgement regarding the relative significance of Theodore Roosevelt moving the USA towards expansionism. Answers need to contain a clear, consistent and balanced argument. (see pages 20–3). QUESTION2PAG23
- 22. Look at the cartoon. Whatdoes it suggest about the emergence of the USA as a world power by the time it was published in 1906? QUESTION3PAG23
- 23. People depicted: • Europeanmonarch (representing European imperialism) • Inhabitant of ‘Santo Domingo’, looking less than pleased about the interest being shown in his island • US ‘marine’, representing US power in the Americas. Context: the Monroe Doctrine (1823) was the USA’s attempt to prevent further European attempts to gain possessions in the Americas. In 1823, the USA was in no position to enforce the doctrine and relied on British help. By 1906, however, the USA was able to use its own power to enforce it. The country had gained effective control over the Caribbean area (as shown by the Platt Amendment and Roosevelt Corollary). Message: the USA is a powerful country with a strong navy (as shown by the size of the gun). It is not only able but more than willing to defend its control over the Caribbean area. As an American cartoon intended for an American audience, there is an element of ‘boasting’ about the USA’s power. (see pages 20–3) The most effective answers will be able to put the cartoon into context by reference to: • the USA’s increasing control over the Americas, and particularly the Caribbean • the development of the US navy • the reasons for the USA’s increasingly expansionist foreign policy. QUESTION3PAG23
- 24. To what extenthad Japan become a major world power by 1905? QUESTION1PAG27
- 25. In support ofthe view that Japan had become a major world power by 1905: • It experienced rapid and highly impressive industrialisation and modernisation under Emperor Mutsuhito and his Meiji government after 1867. • There was an increase in prosperity and military strength. • Japan won its the war against China (1894–95). • It signed the Anglo–Japanese Alliance in 1902. • It defeated Russia in the Russo–Japanese War (1904–05). QUESTION1PAG27
- 26. Challenging the view: •Japan’s success in the war against China (Shimonoseki Treaty, 1895) was curtailed by the Triple Intervention of Germany, France and Russia. • By forming an alliance with Japan in 1902, Britain had its own strategic motives. • Although a major power, Russia was militarily weak, its navy was outdated and widely dispersed, with the majority of its troops based a long way away from the Far East. • Japanese expansion in East Asia had become a concern to the Western powers, which were keen to protect and extend their own trading activities in the region. The USA, in particular, saw Japan as a threat to what it considered the ‘open door’ to trading activities in China. Any further ambitions that Japan might have had in the region were, therefore, kept in check by the Western powers. • it was not until the First World War that Japan was able to expand its power and influence sufficiently to gain major power status. (pages 24–7) QUESTION1PAG27
- 27. Explain why Japanwas able to defeat one on the major European powers in the Russo-Japanese War. QUESTION2PAG27
- 28. Reasons for Japan’sdefeat of Russia include the following: • Russian arrogance in assuming military superiority over Japan. • Japan’s rapid and devastating response in attacking Port Arthur (February 1904). • The Russian fleet was dispersed worldwide, whereas the Japanese fleet was localised. • Russian troops had to endure a long overland journey across Asia. • With Russian forces tired and incomplete, Japan gained rapid success in Manchuria. • Russia’s Baltic fleet had to make a long journey to the Far East. Since 1902, Britain was in alliance with Japan (partly as a means of protecting British interests against Russia). Britain refused to allow the Russian fleet to use the Suez Canal, forcing it to go around the horn of Africa. By the time the Russian fleet arrived in the Straits of Tsushima (May 1905), Japanese ships were ready for them. • Slow-moving and outdated Russian ships were no match for Japan’s modern warships. (see pages 25–7) QUESTION2PAG27
- 29. The source isa French illustration from 1904. It shows other countries looking on while the champion of Europe (Russia) takes on the champion of Asia (Japan). What can historians learn from this illustration? QUESTION3PAG27
- 30. People depicted: • two‘wrestlers’ – the larger one represents Russia, the smaller one Japan • those watching outside the ring are clearly representative of a variety of different countries from Europe, Asia and beyond, representing the worldwide interest in the Russo–Japanese War. Context: the map on the floor of the ring shows the Chinese Empire, the disintegration of which led to the disputes between Japan and Russia. Japanese attempts to take land from China had been partly thwarted by opposition from European countries (e.g. France, Russia and Germany – the Triple Intervention), which were concerned about their own interests in China. Japanese interests in China particularly clashed with those of Russia. QUESTION3PAG27
- 31. Message: the cartoondates from the beginning of the Russo–Japanese War. The two ‘wrestlers’ are clearly ill-matched. The Russian is drawn big, powerful and con dent. His opponent is depicted as willing, but small and weak. Russia is seen as a major world power; Japan is not. There is a clear expectation that Russia will win the war. It is a French cartoon intended for a French audience. Japan is depicted as an ‘upstart’, trying to establish itself as a major world power, but not able to compete with the might of the European powers. (see pages 24–7) QUESTION3PAG27
- 32. Which side of the argument outlinedin the historical debate on the next slide is the more convincing and why? QUESTION1PAG38
- 33. The danger hereis that students produce an answer that lacks balance – they explain why they support one side of the argument with little or no reference to the alternative viewpoint. Effective answers will contain a clear argument, but will be appropriately balanced and supported by factual evidence. (see pages 28–37) QUESTION1PAG38
- 34. Which of thefollowing posed the greatest threat to international peace in the period from 1871 to 1914 and why? • Imperial rivalry over the “scramble for Africa”. • The emergence of the USA as a major world power. • The emergence of Japan as a major world power. • Rivalry between Germany and France. • Rivalry between Britain and Germany. QUESTION2PAG38
- 35. Answers should demonstrateclear understanding of how each of the alternative suggestions helped to create tension between nations between 1871 and 1914. There should, however, be a clear and consistent argument explaining which had the most significant impact and why. (see Chapter 1) QUESTION2PAG38
- 36. How successful wasBismarck’s foreign policy between 1871 and 1890? QUESTION1PAG39
- 37. In answering ‘howsuccessful’ type questions, it is necessary to establish success criteria – in this case, Bismarck’s aims. Concerned about the vulnerability of the new German state, Bismarck aimed to create a series of alliances that would both protect Germany and isolate potential enemies, while at the same time keeping out of the race for overseas possessions to avoid conflict with possible rivals such as Britain. The Dreikaiserbund failed due to disputes between Russia and Austria-Hungary. The Dual and Triple Alliances did provide Germany with allies, but both Austria-Hungary and Italy were militarily weak. To fully isolate France – potentially the main threat to Germany – Bismarck needed to maintain an alliance with Russia; to some extent, he was successful in this through the Reinsurance Treaty. However, while these alliances were intended as defensive, the secrecy which surrounded them caused concern elsewhere in Europe, leading to alliances between France, Russia and Britain. (28–32) QUESTION1PAG39
- 38. In what waysdid German foreign policy change after 1890? QUESTION2PAG38
- 39. Following Bismarck’s dismissal,Kaiser Wilhelm adopted a more aggressive foreign policy, characterised by actively seeking overseas possessions and rapid naval development. He allowed the Reinsurance Treaty to lapse and adopted a far less diplomatic approach to international relations than Bismarck had done (e.g. the Kruger Telegram). His actions increased tensions in Europe, as other countries believed that Germany was preparing for war. (see pages 30–8) QUESTION2PAG38
- 40. Did the changesto German foreign policy after 1890 make a major war more or less likely? QUESTION3PAG38
- 41. A clear, consistentand balanced argument is required, supported by appropriate and accurate factual material. It could be argued that Wilhelm’s more aggressive foreign policy made war more likely by increasing tensions between the major European countries. On the other hand, it could be argued that the alliance system that emerged as a result was designed for defensive rather than aggressive purposes, and actually helped to preserve peace. (see pages 28–38) QUESTION3PAG38
- 42. Why was Serbiannationalism such a threat to Austria-Hungary? QUESTION4PAG38
- 43. The Habsburg Empirecontained many different national groupings. Giving in to the demands of Serbian nationalism would lead to the spread of nationalism elsewhere and the collapse of the empire. Serbia’s alliance with Russia was also a major threat to Austria-Hungary. (see pages 33–5) QUESTION4PAG38
- 44. Explain why eachof the following countries was keen to form alliances with other European nations in the late 19th and early 20th centuries: • Germany • France • Russia • Britain QUESTION5PAG38
- 45. Reasons include: • Germany:a newly unified country in a potentially vulnerable position in Europe (surrounded by potential enemies). Germany wanted to isolate potential enemies and, in particular, avoid the possibility of facing war on two fronts (from Russia and France). • France: angered by defeat in the Franco–Prussian War. Feared the growing power of Germany and the implications of the Triple Alliance. Desperate to avoid being isolated. • Russia: fearful of the Triple Alliance and did not want to be isolated. Defeat in the Russo–Japanese War highlighted weaknesses in Russia’s military strength, making it vulnerable. • Britain: fearing German naval development and feeling isolated following Europe’s reaction to the Boer Wars, Britain ended its policy of splendid isolation. (see pages 28–38) QUESTION5PAG38