The three types of geography, cultural, physical and political, all play a major role in the success and expansion of European nations in the 19th century world.
Physical geography is the obstacles and the resources of the land; both things that the powerful colonizing countries in Europe were concerned with. Europe was not very abundant with natural resources, but many other places, such as India and Africa, were. The physical wealth of the land was what originally drew Europeans to these places. However, the physical geography is also the high mountains and dangerous oceans. In our RISK game, you were not allowed to colonize a nation when you did not share a border. This represents real history because of how much more difficult it was to colonize a nation that was overseas. Obstacles like mountains, seas and oceans made it difficult to colonize because of first, the amount of time it took to get there, and second, the amount of time it took to communicate and connect back with the original conquerors.
This idea leads into political geography. The more spread out a nation is, the harder it is to govern and control because of the lack of communication, and therefore, the lack of a sense of unity. This was reflected in our RISK game, because you lost points if your men were scattered on several continents. Although it makes sense that a nation should want to stay united and keep control of their people, this was not as important to the Europeans. All the Europeans cared about was land, land, and more land. Natural resources in another country might be what made the Europeans want to start colonizing, but competition between other powerful countries was what made them want to continue.
Cultural geography did not so much influence the results of imperialism, but more imperialism influenced cultural geography. As the powerful European nations colonized, they took with them their culture. The picture I posted shows a simple image of what could represent Europe colonizing Africa. They influenced Africa with so much of their culture, they left a huge footprint and moved the cultural geography that original held Africa and Europe separate due to language, religion and tradition.
I completely agree with what you say in this article. It is very true that geography can be both the advantage or the obstacle to an end. In many ways, it depends on which side you are on and how you can play the geography to match your needs. As you stated, mountains and seas were bad for invading nations, but for the natives who were used to such features and could navigate them readily, these could be a large help. Of course, this works inversely as well, since an open plain can be an easy attack for invaders and poor defense for natives.
ReplyDeleteHow geography affects communication was another astute point. A large nation spanning several continents could get quite unwieldy (this was reflected by the game in that troops were deducted for numbers of continents). A faltering nationalism was also very true.
I am not entirely sure that I am 100 percent on your last statement about cultural geography though. I think it still has an impact in that if a nation was invaded and captured, the cultural geography will prevent them from being won over by their invaders. This would prevent the spread of nationalism into an invaded country. So I agree, but I would also say that cultural geography is a two way street.
Awesome picture, too!