The Origins of European Imperialism

preview_player
Показать описание
How Europe Dominated the Planet
Correction: 01:07 I characterize Europe as a “continent full of poor miserable farmers” and later go on to compare it to the “thriving” empires elsewhere. While it is indeed true that Europe in the 1400s was full of famine, plague, war, and general suffering, it’s inaccurate to say that Europeans were much worse off than people living in any other parts of the world. Especially if you look to Southern Europe where an explosion of art, science, and trade was taking place at this time. The accurate point would be to say that Europe had been relatively cut off from the world since the Ottoman Empire blocked them from historical trade routes. Europe was not deeply connected to global trade, which was mostly happening in the Indian Ocean regions at that time.

Correction: 04:50 see the correction from 01:07

Correction: 05:43 As noted earlier, Europeans had trade connections with the east. During this time they were cut off by the Ottoman Empire for the reasons I explain in the video

Correction: 07:21 While Portugal had gone out trading and exploring Western Africa first, I present it as if Portugal had made it to Asia before Spain decided to start exploring. This isn’t right. Columbus’ journey west (1492) happened a few years before Portugal’s first voyage that reached India (lead by Vasco da Gama in 1497).

Correction: 08:55 This little dramatization mischaracterizes what happened here. As many have pointed it out it feels like I’m asserting that Columbus “invented” imperialism in this moment. And indeed the way this is presented implies that. Columbus did NOT invent the idea of taking over land. In fact, a part of his contract with the royals was that he would take over any land he could while on this journey. The important point here is that Columbus set out to get in on trade in the east, but that the “discovery” of the America’s turned those efforts away from looking for new trade routes, to a full blown imperial project in the Americas. That’s the point I was trying ot make, but missed the mark in this overly dramatized moment.

Correction: 16:02 In addition “their weapons” and “their city germs” It would have been more accurate to mention a major tool for the conquerors which was the exploitation of local politics and alliances. The conquest of these huge swaths of land required Europeans to ally with and rely on local expertise and man power to colonize these territories.

The Library of Congress has a wonderful map collection which I used to get high res versions of a lot of these old maps. Thank you Library of Congress!

- ways to support -

- where to find me -

- how i make my videos -

- my courses -

- about -
Johnny Harris is a filmmaker and journalist. He currently is based in Washington, DC, reporting on interesting trends and stories domestically and around the globe. Johnny's visual style blends motion graphics with cinematic videography to create content that explains complex issues in relatable ways. He holds a BA in international relations from Brigham Young University and an MA in international peace and conflict resolution from American University.

- press -
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

Just an addendum. When Portuguese came to Brasil, they saw an abundance of a tree along the coast which could be used to produce a bright red paint. Such plants weren't all that common in Europe, and so red paint was expensive and a sign of status. These plants were called "pau brasil", meaning "brasil wood", and "brasil" is a term that originated from French meaning "brazier". So "pau brasil" is a tree that can be used to produce something that looks like a "brazier". They were so excited that they could finally produce this expensive paint in abundance, that they named this land after the product they were after, calling it "Terra do Brasil", literally "Land of Brazil", which then was shortened to just "Brasil". This tree almost went extinct.

LucasSantos-jizp
Автор

The opening of the video is inaccurate, Europe had already been involved in the Silk Road trade routes, and had only been locked out in the 1400s by the ottomans, thus encouraging the search for other trade routes to the east

gabrielking
Автор

With all due respect: this is by far the topic you have covered that I am most familiar with, and the video is so plagued by historical errors that I am starting to wonder whether the things I learnt watching other videos from your channel were as accurate as I thought they were when I watched them.

armanbasurto
Автор

how you rewrite history is almost as fun as real history

BettyDrum
Автор

1:05 - "a continent of poor miserable farmers"
I hear this a lot from people claiming Europe was a backwater (and that "only colonisation" made Europe rich and prosperous). Whilst this was true for the early part of the Middle Ages, due to frequent raids by Vikings, Steppe peoples, low population figures etc. (which devestated the region and were less than ideal circumstances for development) this isn't really correct (unless of course you apply modern standards, which would be a useless comparison, but then you're definitely right).
Since the High Middle Ages (starting 1000AD), (especially Western) Europe had actually been rapidly developing; population skyrocketed, new farming techniques were introduced (the "Ostsiedlung" being an example of early colonization; as well as the Crusades one of expanding influence; which in turn also brought knowledge to Europe), universities were introduced, architectural techniques improved... During the Renaissance (parts of) Europe would in fact become one of the most developed "regions" on the planet, much like the Middle East at that time.
Of course do note that Europe is a continent; some regions did better at certain period. For the High - Late Middle Ages this was mostly northern Italy, southern Germany, the Low Countries etc.
This is important as this is why Portuguese explorers decided to look for new trade routes to Asia/India; when the Ottomans/Muslim had taken control of trade routes previously used (mostly by Italian merchants from Venice etc.; hence their decline as the Ottomans taxed trade; hence also why the Pax Mongolica was such a prosperous period for Silk Route Trade).

You also claimed that the other empires along the Silk Route were already trading and had more valuable goods than Europe did. I'm sorry to say this; but that's almost outrageous as it completely defeats the purpose of trade. You can't trade if you don't have anything valuable to offer in return. Europe had been on the edge of the Silk Route since the time of the Romans and had participated in trade since then. The only issue it had was that it was relatively isolated meaning that it payed large amounts of taxes (as all countries added tax; so every country taxed a merchant passing through; by the time he arrived in Europe his goods were pretty expensive and this wasn't very "efficient" and it drained wealth - so exploration wasn't just fueled by curiousity, but also by well... money, I mean, it almost always is) and was highly dependent on "upstream" states (e.g. embargoes) - similarly, during the Roman period Silk Road trade financed the Persians, a major Roman enemy. Unlike the others which had easier access. If what you claimed was true; then trade with India wouldn't have made Portugal ridiculously rich; because what would they give the Indians if they had nothing to offer and were poor?
Now, the main question: what did Europeans export? Glass (beads, windows etc.), textiles (silk wasn't the only desirable textile; e.g. wool and linen), furs, animals, jewelry and metalworks, olive oil, (grape) wine, honey, walnuts, etc. and yes, even slaves were traded on the Silk Road.

So, instead of arguing Europe was poor; didn't trade on the Silk Road and had little (valuable) goods to trade; a more correct explanation would be that Europe was geopolitically isolated, payed exorbitant amounts of taxes to trade on the Silk Road and that European division caused states to look for ways to get any advantage they could over the other.
Also note that the discovery of new trade routes was horrible for some Silk Road countries such as the Ottoman Empire; as now they'd get less taxes.

Also, Europeans did have black peppers before the Portuguese arrived in India, as Europe did trade on the Silk Road before that. It's what brought Marco Polo to China and what made the Venetians and Genoans so rich (in fact, the Italians often held monopolies, which was another reason for the Portuguese to sail around Africa; so they could compete - European countries were constantly trying to get the edge over the other). The earliest records of black peppers in Europe date back to the Romans.
By the way; the high cost of trade (distance; taxes etc.) explains why goods like black peppers were so rare and valuable in Europe. The opposite was true for European goods in China. Also about silk, it was produced in Europe too, but in smaller quantities (Kos silk or Coa Vestis since 4th century BC, but Chinese silk became more popular; northern Italy, especially the Como region since 1000AD etc.)

As for the Amerindians not having armies and making no resistance: what?
And Europeans did (not always, but often) still trade with Amerindians too - and interestingly, initially also often guided peace negotiations between different tribes. Although you are definitely correct about Columbus laying the fundaments of imperialism with his treatment of the Taino people.

I really liked the maps though. I think that generally speaking you gave a pretty good representation of what happened. I'm certainly curious for the next two videos. Sorry if I used a lot of brackets, but I think this comment would've been even bigger if I didn't.

ewoudalliet
Автор

Before Imperial age, Muslims also viewed themself as superior (hence 'Khairu Ummah'/The Best People) and drew map with Mecca in its center. Up to Opium War, Chinese was also viewed themself as superior and see their culture as the center of civilization (hence Zhong Guo or Central Kingdom). They also drew the map with them in its center.

So much story about human nature, tribalism, and superiority complex can be seen from a simple map.

BruhMoment-cstj
Автор

My graduate class just used this video to power a conversation about the responsibility of content creators in creating accurate historical content. As an example of what NOT to do.

emmyabroad
Автор

Fact: My country Cameroon in west Africa got its name from the early Portuguese explorers/traders who started trading & exploring the coast of west Africa in the 1400 & 1500s, they walked past by a river in Cameroon and saw Prawns in it, they called the river ''Rio Dos Cameroes'' which in portugues translates to River of prawns, from there, the name Cameroon was derived...

on__off
Автор

The Europeans at the time of Columbus didn't think the earth was small (based on the visual presented). The approximate circumference of the Earth had been known since Roman times and the prospect of traveling west was considered dangerous because you'd have to travel enormous distances to reach Asia that way. Columbus purportedly believed the earth was significantly smaller than the general consensus (based on no real evidence) and therefore traveling west would be viable.

Gorrage
Автор

The whole video is like a history lesson but for some reason it feels like its being told backwards. Like European explorers didn't actually decide suddenly to go east from land to start trading just to find out it was blocked. It was already a trade route going hundreds of years into the past that was suddenly cut off.

bengiyardimli
Автор

0:54 "This isn't a history lesson" well at least you warned us... I hope you take all the negative response as constructive criticism, there's not much to had. You are by far my favourite journalist/documentarian in youtube. Your videos are top tier! Glad you corrected some inaccurate information in your video description. Just keep the research/fact checking on the same level as your editing and fight that urge to simplify/dumbify to make the subject more interesting (and inaccurate). And please add sources! Thank you for your work

joaopolonia
Автор

"This isn't a history lesson, I won't talk about names and dates" You mean no actual facts then?

rocky
Автор

A well produced video absolutely full to the brim of historical innacuracies and ignorance, far too invested in telling a good story and not placing the focus on the historical context regarding the events depicted in this video. The idea that europe pre-colonization was a shithole compared to other civilizations of it's time did give me a chuckle though 🤣

zakrio
Автор

Edit: I applaud the efforts Johnny is making to rectify the accuracy of his future video. I am impressed by his humility and understanding, a characteristic that is missing in much of today’s world. He is working with Jochem on his future videos to help him with his fact checking. I hope we can all appreciate this pursuit of truth. Thank you for listening Johnny!!

jordanmagera
Автор

I'm from Srilanka and my last name is Perera. It is now the most commonly used surname in Srilanka followed by "Fernando" and "De Silva". All these names were introduced by the Portuguese.

Omy_Per
Автор

To sum up this video, is Johnny unwrapping map sheets on a table in cool style with "no one making any resistance".

alonsothoth
Автор

The fall of Constantinople was one of the major reasons for all the other stuff that happened later on as what was once the most significant trade route is now under Ottoman control

Kriegter
Автор

I think others have mentioned this but this video just seems far too reductive for the purpose of constructing a simple narrative. The idea that Christopher Columbus went to Cuba and then just invented colonialism on his own while none of his crew agreed is wild. The agreement he reached with the Spanish crown before the voyage was that they would take over the land and he would be rewarded with being Viceroy and Governor of the land. Also Portugal didn't enter the Indian Ocean via the South African route until after Columbus' voyage, rather they first travelled overland routes through the middle east to India and Ethiopia. These routes notably passed through the Ottoman Empire which in the video you say didn't occur as it was refused.

There's probably way more stuff that it makes it hard to draw out conclusions. I think portraying it all as some big plan as well is a bit disingenuous, to me the arguably scarier aspect of imperialism is that it emerged through shifts in the economy not through the nefarious plans of a few bad guys. Your videos look better than any other videos essayist just please for the love of god do a little bit of factchecking.

josephtoner
Автор

This is just basic highschool history with cool transitions, spooky music and incorrect facts

diegoborrajo
Автор

Europe was far form a poor civilization in the 1300s. By the 1100s Europe was already experiencing its 12th century renaissance. It was already the most influential and important part of the world by that time for the first time after the Roman Empire fell.

gvncixx