U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 07-31-2010, 05:50 PM
 
1,446 posts, read 3,938,133 times
Reputation: 959

Advertisements

OK. During the era of exploration, the Portuguese were sailing around the coast of Africa and began their colonies in Mozambique, Angola, Guinea-Bissau, Cape Verde and Sao Tome y Principe. By the 1500's, Spain was preoccupied by explanding their empire in the Americas. Africa was then ignored for centuries before the introduction of quamine, which allowed Europeans to travel inland in Africa without dropping like flies from malaria. Hence, in the 1870's the scramble for Africa began! The British and French, the two largest Western powers of the day, took the most land in Africa. Germany too took colonies...Cameroon, Tanzania, Togo and Namibia were German colonies before WWI. Even Belgium took the Congo (they actually began the Scramble for Africa after circumnaviagting the Congo River). After WWI, they would also take Rwanda and Burundi from the Germans. Portugal, hung onto their colonies that they already set up. Italy even joined in...they conquered Libya, Eritrea, Somalia and briefly Ethipia (ONLY during WWII)

Spain, on the other hand, was not so interested in Africa. Spanish Sahara, now known as Western Sahara was one small exeption. It was turned over to Morocco in 1975. However, it was mostly a barren desert. The only other Spanish colony in Africa was modern-day Equatorial Guinea. The island of Bioko in EG, was Spanish since the Spanish got it in the 1700's. Annobon, is a very small and remote island that was part of Spanish Guinea, modern day Equatorial Guinea, was transfered to Spain from Portugal (along with Bioko) in 1778. The mainland portion of Equatorial Giunea is and was known as Rio Muni. Spain only occupied the interior of Rio Muni following a military operation in 1927. From the time that Spain established a protectartate over Rio Muni in 1885 until the military operation was completed in 1927, Spain would only occupy the coast of Rio Muni. Anyway, the only portion of Mainland Sub-Saharan Africa that Spain took during the Scramble for Africa was the tiny territory of Rio Muni. Until 1927, it was even really occupied. Note: Spanish Guinea became the independent nation of Equatorial Guinea in 1968 after Franco gave into to international pressure and granted independence. (Yes, Spain also had a several small terriorites along the coast of Morocco Ifni, Ceuta and Medilla. the latter two are still controlled by Spain as a part of Metropolitan Spain due to their Spanish majorities). However for these small territories in modern day Morocco, Spain only conquered a very small area in Sub-Saharan Africa. Most of the European powers took land and set up colonies in Africa during the late 1800's, but Spain took such little land.

Why didn't Spain take much more terriotry than maintaining two islands and only conquering small Rio Muni? Why not take over vast poritons of Africa like the rest of the Europeans? Was Spain in too much turmoil? But still...You would think that after the loss of their colonies in teh Americas they certainly would want to reestablish their position as a European power. Even weak Portugal showed interest in Africa just by trying hard to maintain their colonies in Africa. Note: Any territory not occupied by a European power was up for the taking according to the 1885 Treaty of Berlin. Hence, Portugal valued their positions in Africa enough to maintain their five colonies because the other Euorpean powers could have snatched them from the Portuguese. Note: Portugal did not occupy the interior of their colonies, espeically Angola and Mozambique until teh Scramble for Africa began in the late 1800's. They knew they could lose the interiors if they did not occupt them. Hence, Portugal valued those terriorites enough to maintain them under European law. Spain did not show much interest in the continent or they would have conquered much more. Spain also wpould have occupied Rio Muni much earlier than 1927, if they truely valued Spanish Guinea. To sum it up...Why not more interest in Sub-Saharan Africa on teh part of the Spainsh during the European Scramble for Africa in the late 1800's?
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-31-2010, 09:31 PM
 
Location: Colorado
1,524 posts, read 2,148,144 times
Reputation: 2165
When spain was colonizing the Americas, they did not see much value in colonizing Africa other than a few trading posts and forts to secure lines of commerce and Spanish interests. By the time Europeans seriously considered taking Africa (mid-later 19th century), it was only because everywhere else had been colonized. Around this time Spain was also much, much weaker than it had been several hundred years before. Remember even around the turn of the century (1800), the were often controlled by the French in one way or another and lost almost their entire Empire. By the late 1800's Spain was weak enough to badly lose a war to the US in only 3 months and lose most of the rest. Spain also experienced much internal instability during this period.

First, African colonies were not hospitable climates for Europeans and most of the Europeans who settled Africa were in the South (South Africa, as well as Rhodesia and even Namibia) and Algeria.(Algiers). Secondly, most of the African colonies did not produce a profit but rather a loss for the Europeans. Thirdly, a country needed to have a strong military and be a major player to maintain control of the huge populations of indigenous people. Remember that the Italians were defeated in their attempt to take Ethiopia in 1896 and how much difficulty they had when they returned to conquer Ethiopia in the 1930's even with modern technologies like planes, grenades, and machine guns. What these areas had available to a country like Spain was prestige - and Spain didn't have the time, money, stability, or power to jeopardize in exchange for some prestige. These areas of colonization were often blocked by the powers like Britain or France, and if not, Spain wouldn't stand much to gain from annexing them. They would only come into conflict with stronger nations with whom Spain could not compete in addition to losing money, stability, men and resources.

Last edited by hobbesdj; 07-31-2010 at 10:21 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2010, 10:23 PM
 
Location: New York City
2,790 posts, read 5,065,617 times
Reputation: 1793
There was an agreement between Spain and Portugal shortly after the discovery of the New World that basically divided the world along some meridian - Spain got everything west of it and Portugal east. Portugal got Brazil, the easternmost part of South America, and Africa - Spain got the rest.

In the 1800s Spain was no longer a great power and could not hang on to what it had, much less colonize additional territories.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2010, 03:58 AM
 
2,227 posts, read 4,283,610 times
Reputation: 1019
Treaty of Tordesillas. Portugal cheated Spain.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2010, 04:26 AM
 
11,686 posts, read 13,074,643 times
Reputation: 30973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manolón View Post
Treaty of Tordesillas. Portugal cheated Spain.
No one could expect the Portuguese not to act in their own interests, especially after the biased meddling of the Spanish pope which preceded the Treaty of Tordesilhas.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2010, 06:17 AM
 
2,227 posts, read 4,283,610 times
Reputation: 1019
Do you mean the Borgia?
Somehow something cringed when you said "Spanish"...
He was from Valencia, Kingdom of Aragon, though there was a Confederation and a single king (1492), there was no conscience of Spain, and Aragon was for the most part quite independent.
Of course, Borgia defended Castillian interests.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2010, 07:01 PM
 
4,454 posts, read 5,486,094 times
Reputation: 2148
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevxu View Post
No one could expect the Portuguese not to act in their own interests, especially after the biased meddling of the Spanish pope which preceded the Treaty of Tordesilhas.
Yes thats true, yet Spain had ambitions on the Mediteranian coast of North Africa and occupied parts of Algeria such as the city of Oran and the city of Tunis in Tunisa and parts of Morocco from the 15th century onwards. It still holds on to a few enclaves on the north African coast.

The enclaves Spain still holds is claimed by Morocco, yet there is little chance of Spain giving it up as its been part of Spain for over 500 years, just like Gilbultar is British and claimed by the Spanish.

Last edited by other99; 08-04-2010 at 07:07 PM.. Reason: edit
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 10:03 AM
 
2,227 posts, read 4,283,610 times
Reputation: 1019
Since the conquest of Melilla in 1497, the only interest of Spain in northern Africa were defensive. Avoid any possible invasion and piracy. Africa was considered Portuguese.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2010, 07:30 AM
 
Location: On a Long Island in NY
7,624 posts, read 8,113,732 times
Reputation: 6949
Quote:
Originally Posted by other99 View Post
Yes thats true, yet Spain had ambitions on the Mediteranian coast of North Africa and occupied parts of Algeria such as the city of Oran and the city of Tunis in Tunisa and parts of Morocco from the 15th century onwards. It still holds on to a few enclaves on the north African coast.

The enclaves Spain still holds is claimed by Morocco, yet there is little chance of Spain giving it up as its been part of Spain for over 500 years, just like Gilbultar is British and claimed by the Spanish.
But yet it's ok for them to constantly whine about Gibraltar being a British overseas territory? It's been part of the UK since the early 1700s and the overwhelming majority of the population wishes to remain part of the UK.

Idea: if Spain wants Gibraltar so bad they should give up their Moroccan enclaves
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2010, 10:29 AM
 
2,227 posts, read 4,283,610 times
Reputation: 1019
Quote:
Originally Posted by WIHS2006 View Post
But yet it's ok for them to constantly whine about Gibraltar being a British overseas territory? It's been part of the UK since the early 1700s and the overwhelming majority of the population wishes to remain part of the UK.

Idea: if Spain wants Gibraltar so bad they should give up their Moroccan enclaves


Not really, in Spain nobody cares about Gibraltar. Local politicians and many wealthy people have their stashed there. Gibraltar is bound to become independent.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top