When was european imperialism

Stivers, William. Stivers points out that oil was so important to the West that the Americans supported British rule or influence over Iraq as well as Anglo-Turkish entente, in order to maintain stability in the area. While the Americans benefited economically, they did not have to get entangled in Middle Eastern politics. This country was not as important as Iraq, but the Hashemite control ensured British security interests.

Wilson provides an excellent biography of King Abdullah I, who had political contacts with the Zionist leadership in Palestine and, later, in Israel, as well as a comprehensive account of Anglo-Jordanian relations during Abdullah's reign, which ended when he was assassinated by a Palestinian.

Wilson, Mary C. King Abdullah, Britain, and the Making of Jordan. Italy fought the Ottoman Empire for possession of this territory but spent many more years trying to control it.

A useful book for understanding the importance of this North African country to Italy. The Japanese occupied both of these territories during World War II, and decolonization followed, with the British able to hold on longer in Malaysia than the Dutch in Indonesia. Emerson compares British and Dutch methods of rule in the Malay Peninsula and Indonesia, respectively, and sees little difference in their objectives.

Andaya, Barbara Watson, and Leonard Y. A History of Malaysia. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, This general account of British imperialism in Malaysia devotes more attention to the period of British rule than any other work. Originally published in Emerson, Rupert. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Press, Despite the title, this is a comparison of the British and Dutch methods of government in the Malay Peninsula and Indonesia, respectively, since about While the British ruled directly through their colonial officials, the Dutch did so through indigenous civil servants.

Thus, to Emerson, the difference is in name rather than in substance. Ricklefs, Merle Calvin. A History of Modern Indonesia since c. While there is no recent book on Dutch imperialism in Indonesia, this general account devotes more attention to the period of Dutch rule than any other work.

The works cited in this section do not fit neatly into the previous country categories, as they are broader in scope. Feis provides an in-depth and readable study of the ties between European financial investment and diplomatic relations during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Fromkin is an excellent comprehensive study of the changes brought to the greater Middle East during World War I and its immediate aftermath, whereas Nevakivi concentrates on Anglo-French relations with respect to the core region during the same time period, leading up to the development of the mandate system. Dann focuses on the interwar period and the involvement of all the European powers and the United States in the region, including how Middle Eastern leaders responded to their actions.

Fieldhouse offers a comparative study of British and French imperialism under the mandate system, asserting that France failed to properly promote self-government in the Levant and that Great Britain had a mixed record, with Jordan a relative success, Palestine a failure, and Iraq somewhere in between. Balfour-Paul, Glen. Dann, Uriel, ed. The Great Powers in the Middle East, — New York: Holmes and Meier, Feis, Herbert. New York: W. Norton, Originally published in , this is an account of European financial investment—specifically that of Great Britain, France, and Germany—and its connection to diplomatic relations.

Fieldhouse, D. Western Imperialism in the Middle East, — A comparative study of British and French imperialism, especially under the mandate system. Fieldhouse contends that British mandatory rule had the most successful outcome in Jordan, had limited success in Iraq, and was a failure in Palestine, while the French failed to properly promote self-government in Syria and Lebanon. Fromkin, David. New York: Henry Holt, A comprehensive book dealing with the core area of the Middle East as well as Afghanistan, the Caucasus, and Central Asia.

Fromkin explores how the region was changed by the decisions and actions of the European powers from to Louis, William Roger, and Roger Owen, eds. Suez The Crisis and Its Consequences. Oxford: Clarendon, Provides the best analysis of one of the most important moments in modern British imperial and Middle Eastern history.

Contributors include leading scholars and participants in the events. Nevakivi, Jukka. Britain, France, and the Arab Middle East, — London: Athlone, Williams, Ann. A concise and informative survey of British and French policies and nationalist resistance in the region. Hoisington offers an indispensable account of how France was able to accomplish its goals in Morocco.

Hoisington, William A. Lyautey and the French Conquest of Morocco. A study of the methods of Marshal Louis-Hubert Lyautey in conquest and rule in administering the protectorate.

Karsh and Karsh examines the time period from the beginning of the French Revolution until the establishment of the Republic of Turkey and asserts that local actors in the region played just as important a role in shaping developments in the area as did the Western imperial powers. McCarthy contends that the Ottoman Empire did not collapse from within but rather due to the imperial ambitions of the Western powers and their encouragement of nationalism.

Anderson, M. A comprehensive study of the rivalries among the Europeans powers with regard to the Ottoman Empire, which also had to deal with the rise of nationalism. Earle, Edward Mead. New York: Russell and Russell, A classic study of the conflicting political, economic, and cultural policies of the European powers between and the immediate aftermath of World War I, focusing on the issue of the Baghdad Railway, a project financed by the Germans and opposed by the Russians and the British.

Examines developments in the Caucasus and Turkey and how they affected the foreign policies and actions of Soviet Russia and Great Britain. Karsh, Efraim, and Inari Karsh. The theme of this book is that local actors in the region played just as important a role in shaping developments in the area as did the Western imperial powers. Indeed, the authors view the time period as a delicate balance of manipulation and intrigue, even though the Ottomans were weaker militarily and economically.

Macfie, A. The Eastern Question, — An important survey of the historiography of this subject, as well as a good summary and introduction to its history. Marlowe, John. London: Elek, A comprehensive account of the relations between the two European powers with regard to developments in the Middle East from the Treaty of Paris, when France was driven out of India, until Egypt was forced to evacuate Syria by joint European action. McCarthy, Justin.

The Ottoman Peoples and the End of Empire. London: Arnold, McCarthy asserts that the Ottoman Empire, despite internal problems, did not collapse from within but rather due to the imperial ambitions of the Western imperial powers and the development of nationalism, often encouraged by the European empires.

The period of the British mandate is a well-studied subject. The British could please neither the Arabs nor the Zionists and were forced to withdraw as the two parties engaged in a conflict still in need of resolution. Friedman concentrates on the motivations of British policy during World War I toward the Zionist movement and contends that the British saw a Jewish national home as an obstacle to German ambitions in the Middle East. Segev offers a detailed account of the British mandate, which he views as primarily pro-Zionist.

Cohen and Cohen provide a two-volume study of the international dimensions of the problem, which made it impossible to fully satisfy the ambitions of either the Zionists or the Palestinian Arabs.

Louis and Stookey examines the international and domestic perspectives of the respective main parties involved in the Palestine issue at the time of the United Nations partition and its aftermath. Palestine and the Great Powers, — Surveys and analyzes the complex international dimensions of the Palestine issue and explains how the British decided to turn over the problem to the United Nations because of the inability to develop a common policy with the United States.

Friedman, Isaiah. New York: Schocken, Primarily concerned with the motivations of British policy during World War I toward the Zionist movement. Louis, William Roger, and Robert W. Stookey, eds. The End of the Palestine Mandate. Includes essays examining the issue from the British, American, Soviet, Zionist, and Arab perspectives. Segev, Tom. Offers a detailed account of British rule over Palestine from to and contends that British policies were primarily pro-Zionist.

This area was of interest to Great Britain as a means to protect the western flank of India. Busch offers a comprehensive account of British policy and involvement in the region as well as the challenges provided by rival European powers during the twenty years leading up to World War I.

Busch, Briton Cooper. Britain and the Persian Gulf, — Berkeley: University of California Press, Shows how the British, who had been the predominant power in the region during much of the 19th century, came to be challenged by the Ottoman Empire, Germany, Russia, and France at different times during the twenty years leading up to World War I.

Although the British had the strongest political interest in the area, the Americans were subsequently able to gain dominance in the oil industry of this country.

Troeller, Gary. Sudan was one of the more important issues affecting Anglo-Egyptian relations until the Sudanese received their independence. Together, Daly and Daly provide an excellent account of British rule in Sudan and the development of Sudanese nationalist politics from to Daly, M.

An examination of British political, economic, and social policies, as well as Sudanese resistance and collaboration, since the establishment of the Anglo-Egyptian condominium. The French were better received in Lebanon than in Syria, but neither country wanted the mandate.

While France was the junior partner to Great Britain in the region, nationalism, rather than the actions of Great Britain, was responsible for the French withdrawal from the Levant. Longrigg offers a detailed account of French rule in the Levant from to , while Gaunson examines Anglo-French relations during World War II, contending that the acceleration of the anticolonial process at that time, not British actions, led to the end of the French mandate.

Gaunson, A. Contends that France was on borrowed time in the Levant and that World War II, not British actions, accelerated the anticolonial process and forced an end to the mandate. Longrigg, Stephen Hemsley. Syria and Lebanon under French Mandate. New York: Octagon, Shorrock, William L. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, While France staked its claim to a mandate over the Levant after World War I on the basis that it was the protector of Christians and had economic interests in the area, it had alienated a large segment of the Syrian nationalist movement, who felt that France had abandoned their cause prior to the war.

Morocco now occupies most of the former Spanish colony, and the United Nations has been unable to resolve the problem between Morocco and the Saharawis, who want their independence. Hodges is the better of the two books in terms of the amount of political and economic detail it covers, but Mercer offers more historical background.

The fact that the two books complement one another is an asset due to the paucity of material available regarding this region. Hodges, Tony. Westport, CT: Lawrence Hill, Mercer, John. Spanish Sahara. London: George Allen and Unwin, Deals in part with the Spanish invasion, colonization, and administration of the territory that became known as the Western Sahara in , when Spain withdrew as Morocco and for a time Mauritania occupied the phosphate-rich territory. China sent settlers to the region to outpopulate the Turkic Uighurs, claiming that those who opposed its rule were aligned with Islamic terrorists.

Starr is the only book available in the English language on Xinjiang that provides comprehensive coverage on the history, politics, economics, and social issues with regard to the region.

The articles by Gladney and Milward and Tursun are relevant to the issue of Chinese imperialism. Gladney, Dru C. Edited by S. Frederick Starr, — Armonk, NY: M. Sharpe, Examines three mutually contradictory patterns of control by the Chinese state since the late s: ethnicization, integration, and transnationalization.

The first separates ethnic groups, the second emphasizes national unity, and the third encourages economic ties with neighboring states. Milward, James A. Frederick Starr, 63— Points out that beginning in the late 19th century the Qing dynasty promoted Chinese-style administration in the province, along with Han officialdom, Chinese immigration, and cultural assimilation. Starr, S. Frederick, ed. Provides comprehensive coverage on the history, politics, economics, and social issues of the region.

Although Great Britain gave independence to India in , it remained in Aden until and the Persian Gulf until Its presence in the Persian Gulf was supported by the conservative rulers it protected, but there was much opposition to British rule in South Yemen during the s. Gavin offers a unique comprehensive account of a strategic region for the British Empire, whereas Pieragostini provides insight regarding British decision making that led to withdrawal from the area.

The latter work is more thorough than the account in Balfour-Paul Gavin, R. Aden under British Rule, — London: C. Hurst, The port of Aden was a key base along the route referred to as the "imperial lifeline" between Great Britain and India. Pieragostini, Karl. Not a member? Sign up for My OBO. Already a member? Publications Pages Publications Pages.

Subscriber sign in You could not be signed in, please check and try again. Username Please enter your Username. Password Please enter your Password. Forgot password? Don't have an account? Sign in via your Institution. You could not be signed in, please check and try again. Sign in with your library card Please enter your library card number. Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about About Related Articles close popup.

Your current browser may not support copying via this button. European Imperialism by Michael B. Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » A useful brief introduction to imperialism, but heavy on the explanation of economic arguments and neocolonialism. Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » Concentrates on the military aspects of imperialism and colonial politics.

Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » A concise survey of the dynamics of empire building as well as the historiographical literature of political, economic, and social natures of European imperialism. Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » Should be read together with Casanova , as it deals primarily with political, social, and cultural motivations.

Find this resource: Google Preview» WorldCat». Reference Works The following books are useful and informative. Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » Contains over entries from some sixty scholars dealing with all aspects of imperialism, including conflicts, treaties, conferences, concepts, institutions, movements, and important people, as well as primary documents and a good bibliography. Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » A comprehensive guide to international relations and national domestic politics throughout the world, with articles contributed by almost scholars.

Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » This survey of the experience of colonialism is organized chronologically, thematically, and geographically, with an emphasis on social and cultural history.

Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » Includes entries on colonies, people who played a role in the empire, wars, treaties, and major events. Textbooks The topic of European imperialist empires has received much attention beginning with the period of decolonization in Asia and continuing into the period of African imperialism that followed World War II. Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » This book, translated from the original German, goes beyond the subject of decolonization and analyzes the colonial policies of fascist Italy and the development of supraregional nationalist movements.

Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » A readable survey and analysis of the motives and actions of the European powers from to Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » Betts, a specialist in French colonialism, presents a concise, mostly cultural history. Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » A concise and well-documented overview written for undergraduate students and the general public.

Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » A comprehensive description and analysis of the process of colonization with regard to political, economic, social, and cultural issues. General Overviews Most explanations of 19th- to early 20th-century colonial expansion are Eurocentric and largely concern intervention in Africa and East Asia.

Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » A classic account of European expansion that emphasizes political rivalries as being of greatest importance in the promotion of imperialism. Save Citation » Export Citation » Share Citation » Includes all the noteworthy articles by Ronald Robinson and John Gallagher as well as criticisms of and comments about their works by leading scholars. In , in a famous memorandum, Eyre A.

Crowe , a senior diplomat in the British Foreign Office, concluded that not Russia but Germany was the most dangerous competitor for Great Britain. Consequently, the British tried to minimize existing imperial tensions with Russia. On the face of it, the Anglo-Russian Entente of was an agreement relating only to Persia; Persia was divided into a British, a Russian, and a neutral zone of interest. In reality, this treaty ended all imperial tensions between the two countries, allowing the British to focus on the German danger.

The Austro-Italian antagonism led to other imperial conflicts that overshadowed the harmony of the so-called Concert of Europe before However, during the following decades Franco-Italian relations improved while tensions with Austria grew, especially in the Balkans. In Italy the Balkans were seen as a possible field of future expansion, while most politicians in Vienna regarded this region as the natural backyard of the Habsburg Empire.

Tensions in the Balkans, such as the Austrian annexation of Bosnia in , seriously threatened the relationship between Austria-Hungary and Italy. Although both countries were members of the same military alliance, they built systems of fortresses against each other at the Austro-Italian border and initiated an arms race. The Second Moroccan Crisis, which reached its climax in September , was a watershed event. Even though the French had violated some articles of the Algeciras Treaty of , which had regulated the status of Morocco, most of the European governments regarded the German step as an overreaction not justified by German interests in the region.

As the French government could count both on Russian and British support, it saw no reason to retreat. Both sides escalated the conflict until in September Europe was on the brink of war.

To make matters worse, public opinion in both countries left little room for diplomatic maneuvering. In France, the German gunboat was seen as a direct attack on the French semi-colony Morocco. The nationalist press mobilized the public to stand firm against German imperialist demands. Consequently, the nationalist press initiated a public outcry in favor of annexing West Morocco. However, this strategy failed. The government had little trouble setting the nationalist outcry in motion, but rather more trouble stopping it.

After contentious negotiations, a compromise was found. France received the right to establish a full colonial regime in Morocco. As compensation it handed over territories in central Africa that it barely controlled. For the French nationalists the concessions were too much, while for their German counterparts they were much too little. Germany acted as the main aggressor.

The diplomatic constellation of the July Crisis had already become visible. Although neither the Entente Cordiale nor the Anglo-Russian Entente contained any military regulations and Great Britain did not join any European military alliance before August , at the climax of the crisis British and French talks started between the army leadership. Over the following years the informal military cooperation intensified. The imperialist policy in the Balkans contributed significantly to the July Crisis.

Between and , the region was in permanent turmoil. Nation-building at the expense of the Ottoman Empire went hand in hand with processes of decolonization. Moreover, to a growing extent ethnic cleansing became a weapon used against civilians.

However, in these multilingual and multi-religious regions it was impossible to define territorial borders according to nationalities. In a newly formed coalition of Balkan states started a war of aggression against the Ottoman Empire. Within a couple of weeks the Turkish army collapsed. Some of the Great Powers were drawn into the struggle against their wishes and were forced to define their interests. On several occasions, leading officers of the Central Powers demanded a preemptive war.

However, even if some Russian intellectuals and young officers supported a pan-Slavic ideology, it hardly influenced the decisions of the Russian government. However, in the situation in the Balkans was still dangerous, as the Great Powers were unable to control the strong revisionist and nationalist tendencies. Especially in Austria-Hungary, influential politicians and the general staff were pushing for a great war in order to realize far-reaching imperial ambitions.

Unlike other imperial powers, who saw war as a threat to the integrity of their imperial domains, the Young Turks regarded war as a chance for national and imperial renewal. Even if imperialism was one of the crucial factors that led to World War I, it is striking that by early all colonial disputes between Germany and Britain had been solved. After long and difficult debates and diplomatic maneuvers, the agreements concerning the Baghdad Railway had resulted in compromise solutions in which all parties except the Ottoman Empire profited.

British diplomacy stopped resisting the German-Turkish project of building a railway from Constantinople to the Persian Gulf. However, the Germans agreed that the last section of the line would be built only by British investors and would be under sole British political and economic control. A compromise was also found in the question of the Mesopotamian oil fields. The secret Anglo-German treaty of concerning the partition of the Portuguese colonies was a German success as well.

Britain agreed to act against the political interests of its traditional ally, Portugal, and used the question of the colonies to appease Germany. From this perspective, World War I began as a European war but then had global and imperial consequences because of the nature of the states that took part in it.

Barth, Boris: Imperialism , in: online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War, ed. DOI : Version 1. By Boris Barth. Imperialism was responsible for reforming the European alliances. Imperialist expansion played a major role in the growing tensions between Germany and Great Britain after the turn of the century.

The growing imperialist rivalry was responsible for the slow formation of an anti-German alliance system in Europe. Because of the increasing imperial competition and the naval race, the British decided to work with France and to sign the Entente Cordiale in , thus putting an end to long-standing Franco-British colonial rivalries.

German diplomacy was based on the conviction that the Anglo-Russian antagonism would remain a central factor for Great Power diplomacy no matter how Germany acted. In Eyre Crowe formulated his famous memorandum predicting that Germany, not Russia, would become the most dangerous threat for Britain. In the same year the Anglo-Russian treaty on the partition of Persia was signed, ending any major imperial rivalry between the two countries. Neither of these treaties was a military alliance, but they shaped British foreign policy, as the British continued to view Germany as the only dangerous international competitor.

Between and the British concluded that relations with the aggressive Wilhelmine state had to be improved to avoid the danger of a major European war. After the failure of the famous Haldane Mission, British statesmen looked for initiatives in imperial affairs for which compromise solutions with Germany could be found. The difficult negotiations for the Baghdad Railway were successfully finished in the spring of Additionally, with the treaty partitioning the Portuguese colonies, the British allowed Germany to acquire territory in Africa at the cost of its traditional ally Portugal.

As a result, by the summer of the period of Anglo-German imperial rivalry had ended. By the end of the Second Moroccan Crisis most of the colonial disputes between Berlin and Paris had also disappeared.

The French colonial administration focused on penetrating and stabilizing its newly acquired African territories. In the Balkans, however, the combination of conflicting Austro-Hungarian, Italian, and Russian imperialist aspirations, the breakdown of the European region of the Ottoman Empire, and aggressive processes of nation building in Greece , Bulgaria , Serbia , Romania had been an increasing threat since Ultimately, the explosive combination of these events contributed to the constellation of the July Crisis in Imperiale Weltverbesserung seit dem Jahrhundert, Konstanz The Advocacy of War and Rearmament , London Roger: Imperialism.

A Short History, Princeton Sir Charles Addis, , London , p. Barth, Boris: Die deutsche Hochfinanz und die Imperialismen. Banken und Aussenpolitik vor , Stuttgart Steiner. Bayly, Christopher A. Global connections and comparisons , Malden Blackwell. Bentley, Jerry H. Cain, Peter J. Chickering, Roger: We men who feel most German. Hobson, Rolf: Imperialism at sea. Naval strategic thought, the ideology of sea power, and the Tirpitz Plan, , Boston Brill Academic Publishers.

Kennedy, Paul M. Louis, William Roger ed. Mommsen, Wolfgang J. Morris, A. Anthony: The scaremongers. A theoretical overview , Princeton; Kingston M. Wiener; Ian Randle Publishers. A short history , Princeton Princeton University Press.

Porter, Andrew N. The nineteenth century , volume 3, Oxford Oxford University Press. British Protestant missionaries and overseas expansion, , Manchester Manchester University Press.

Rosenberg, Emily S. Citation Barth, Boris: Imperialism , in: online. Metadata Subjects. In both countries, the solution was cultural assimilation. American and Canadian policies regarding the Native Americans are examples of the most naked assimilationist imperialism of the nineteenth century.

As the populations of both countries moved westward, they steadily dispossessed Native Saylor URL: www. In both countries, Native American tribes were coerced into signing treaties to move them off land that settlers wanted. Sometimes, because of the nature of Native American understandings of property, they did not realize that they were signing away their land. Eventually, Native Americans throughout North America were moved to the land that the settlers did not want; these areas of land, most of which still exist, are called reservations.

In some cases in the United States, the Native Americans rose up violently against the settlers, and they were invariably massacred. Americans assumed that part of the reason Native Americans were uncivilized, or at least backwards, was because they had no concept of land ownership. The Dawes Act of attempted to rectify this backwardness. The act provided a land grant for any Native American who wanted to become a U. The idea of a land grant for individuals was itself a method of cultural assimilation, as it attempted to persuade Native American tribes to put aside the idea that land was held in common and instead see it as private property.

In Canada, authorities pursued cultural assimilation through the residential school system. Instead, they learned English; and, as almost all of the schools were run by Protestant or Catholic missionaries, they converted to Christianity. The program of assimilation was similar in the United States. Traditional religious ceremonies were outlawed throughout the country. Even a mere description of the residential schools gives credence to recent claims that they exemplify cultural genocide. The schools were overcrowded and had poor sanitation, so disease was widespread.

Sexual abuse and molestation was common, as was physical abuse. While some aspects of the residential schools, such as mandatory attendance, had been dissolved by the mid-twentieth century, the last school did not close until American and Canadian attempts to assimilate Native Americans represent the starkest example of European or, in this case, Western cultural imperialism.

It is also notable that while in the other cases considered in this reading cultural assimilation was haphazardly imposed and the subject people usually recovered, in North America the dominant culture was much more uniformly imposed, with drastic consequences. Most historians of nineteenth-century European imperialism overlook the Russian and German empires in Eastern Europe. Nonetheless, the impulses behind Russian and German imperial expansion were much the same as those behind British, French, and American expansion; each country wanted more territory and the ability to expand their economies.

Germany established a small overseas empire in the late nineteenth century, but in general it was a latecomer to imperialism. Russian imperialism was concentrated on its borders; throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Russia expanded its borders east, south, and west and conquered numerous peoples of different languages and races. In the nineteenth century, the Russian and German empires embarked upon large-scale programs of cultural assimilation and standardization, both in the territories they had conquered and at home.

The Kulturkampf has a very specific beginning and end; it began in earnest in , after the completion of German unification, and fizzled out after some success by the end of the century.

Before this, however, the German state had been cobbled together since the early nineteenth century out of the ashes of the Holy Roman Empire. In basic terms, the German culture that Bismarck attempted to impose included the German language and the particular religion of Lutheranism.

The Kulturkampf is considered something of a hybrid, however, because its program of nationalization also extended to a large Polish minority who lived in territories Prussia had conquered in the late eighteenth century.

The Poles resisted Prussification fiercely; as part of the wider European nationalism in the nineteenth century, the Poles had developed a strong national culture that they defended against the Germans.

A similar program had already been attempted in Russia, where Emperor Nicholas I r. Like other nationalizing projects in Europe and like cultural imperialism in the European overseas empires, Official Nationality attempted to bind citizens and subjects to an identity based on a common language, religion, and culture.

It was also based on a feeling among Russian intellectuals that their nationality was superior to that of the peoples they had conquered. The attempt to Russify the subjects of the vast empire was accompanied by an effort to centralize government; the loss of regional autonomy was viewed as one way to assure the eventual victory of Russian culture.

The program was only partly successful and became less so the further one moved from the capital at St. The Polish provinces of Russia, for instance, where the Polish people had established their own national identity, were minimally affected. The people of modern-day Belarus and Ukraine, who lived closer to St. Petersburg, were more affected. Nonetheless, the desire to assimilate foreign cultures and replace them with the culture of the dominant nationality shows that the Russification programs of the nineteenth century fit neatly into the wider pattern of European empires that attempted to do the same overseas.

Imperialism was a matter of national pride as well as a means of economic exploitation, and this first reason helps to explain Italian imperialism. Italy was reunified in and wanted to show that it was the equal of the other European powers. Since Britain and France had obtained large empires and Germany was beginning to do the same, at the end of the nineteenth century Italy began to seek an empire of its own in Ethiopia.

Ethiopia was a special case in many ways, however.