Similarities Between 19th Century And 16th Century Imperialism

During the 19th century, European nations took part in imperialism and expanded their influence to foreign lands across the globe. This expansion of influence marked a turning point in history compared to the expansion in the 17th and 16th centuries. Even Though the way Europeans treated the native populations were similar in their enslavement and taking advantage of them, these two periods differed since the 19th century was motivated by market and influence instead of gold as well as a new process of taking over by assimilation rather than conquering demonstrating that the 19th century was, in fact, a turning point. Both the time periods of the 19th century and the 17th/16th centuries were similar in how poorly Europeans treated native peoples. In the period of the 17th and 16th century, Europeans, namely Spain, enslaved the entire native

In the period of the 17th and 16th centuries, the Spanish sought out to discover new lands and gold deposits in the New World. The system of mercantilism, where acquiring the most land meant the most power, motivated Spain to establish colonies throughout central and South America. El Dorado, a mythical “City of Gold”, inspired many Spanish settlers to continue inland in search of this fortune. However, these motivations were very different than the motivations of Europeans in the 19th century. In the 19th century, Europeans exhibited imperialism in the Eastern Hemisphere in order to expand their markets and acquire items to sell back in Europe. India and China were home to millions of people and possible customers for the industrialized Europe. The British established key port cities such as Singapore and Hong Kong in order to import their products for sale in these new markets. Furthermore, the desire for new markets marked a turning point in expansion from the previous search of just