When the slave trade ended, the Trans-Atlantic trade changed - to an emphasis of legitimate goods, rather than human trades. The accumulation of labour, along with the centralised and organised states along the West coast, resulted in a significant sum of wealth.
Africans started to create their own businesses, most of which worked with Europeans. Tropical oil became an important commodity along the West Coast, for it being easy to be grown in this area - and it had great use in the context of the Industrial Revolution - for lubrication, and other purposes that may become products derived from these oils. Tea, coffee, and tobacco plantations also expanded in this area. Traditional exports like ivory and gold still thrived in this area. These businesses, in the mid-19th century, were still controlled by African enterprises, most of which grown by the slave trade. Early to mid-19th century, the Atlantic trades were controlled by Africans themselves.
Europeans started to settle in this area. In southern Africa, South Africa, Dutch settlers occupied the Cape of Good Hope area, and later joined by French Protestants (prosecuted from their own country) and British... Even from India and parts of East and South Asia. But overall, this area remained in European control. South Africa was an exception to today's topic.
For many Europeans in this area, the end of Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade meant merely a change in business. Chartered trading firms were established for purposes of commercial protectivism - Dutch East India Company, French West Africa Company, etc. There were little cross-nation interaction in these trades. Although trading with other nations were allowed, it had little point as profits were often times higher for in-nation trades.
Around the 1880s, the idea of business expansion brought the European governmental bodies over to the African coast and interior for more efficient and controlled trade between Africa and Europe. Merely a copy of what was done in the Americas and Asia - direct control, no middle man. Private companies thus became protected by its domestic government from competitions from other countries, including African traders who expected to gain fragments of profit from the European trades.
Technological impediments and innovations (medical, transport, coercion) - vaccines, trains, justification of cheap labour in post-slavery era. These issues were to be resolved before trades and settling could be possible. The development of European weaponary over what was commonly available in Africa allowed for conquest over opposition in Africa with relative ease.
Ideological developments (the civilizing mission and Christianity), the colonialism in Africa was regarded by the Europeans as an aid provided to the backwards Africa. Slavery began to be deemed wrong by the Europeans back in late 19th century, it was considered a novel and progressive to take over backwards and less sophisticated, and moreover, non-Christian people - The White Man's Burden.
Again, the most progressive people regarded colonialism as a civilizing mission! It was not until much later that the European progressives began to realize the value and morals associated with colonialism - and that it was all about plunder - colonies provided the so-called mother nation with cheap labour and cheap goods for great profit.
The ideological values of colonialism were highly paradoxical.
If we say that colonies allowed us to extract goods and profit easier, it adds to the economical equation associated with colonialism. Materials were bought from Africa, and manufactured into products in Europe, and finally, sold back to the Africans. By far the most important aim of colonialism, then, became a collective plunder. In much contrast to the original motives of colonising the African nations.
"This should be a familiar story to the United States."
Promises of social infrastructures and economical welfare began to be realised by the Europeans and Africans. Running colonies is a process of great expense, both in terms of capital and trust. Government infrastructures created in service of the trades and the running costs only allowed for European companies to gain more profit.
In 1884, King Leopold claimed the territory of the Congo basin, solely to himself. This brought outrage all over Europe, and the wondering on what to be done for this aggressive act by King Leopold.
German Chancellor Bismarck in the Berlin Conference concluded that the act by King Leopold was to be admitted - but in the later partitioning, the territory claims were required to be in the interest of a nation. Any nation in Europe wishing to take territory in Africa had to be occupied - the scramble of Africa thus began in 1885. The process was finished within 5 years.
African perspectives were varied regarding this colonial partitioning.
The logic of European colonial expansion and partition was much like a bulldozer, a simple logic, pushing through the continent. For the large amount of territories taken from Sub-Saharan Africa, resistance from Africa, or more specifically, effective resistance was limited.
European weaponary was often times one or two generations ahead of those held by Africans - especially the introduction of the Maxim guns, effectively rendering the African resistance a lost cause. In combination for the business minds and their long time collaboration with Europeans made it less difficult for them to alledge to the new governing power - for a lack of national identity, business interests outweight the issues of occupation - let alone the convenience Europeans provided some African political groups with eliminating their enemies, a clever exploitation of animosity. It was never enought resistance for Africans to turn the tide of occupation.
Additionally, military ground works were put in that Africans joined the colonial armed force that they at least brought a degree of familiarity to those occupied.
- Out of the whole map of Africa, Ethiopia and Liberia were the only two not officially colonised.
- The area occupied by each of the nation often times reflected the military might of their respective occupiers.
Part of the reasons why some colonies were settled by Europeans were the climate and relatively less possibility for tropical diseases. Additionally, plantations were easier to be established in some areas, where Europeans tended to settle in.
...Whatever the strategy of rule, effectively governance occurred by divide and rule.
1885-1920: Conquest and harsh rules, force labour, military conquest and government, threats and coersion. The initial establishment of colonial infrastructures (lands, laws, governmental rules). Creation of roads, ports, and administrative buildings - all required cheap labour... Or in best cases, free labour.