Take the 2-minute tour ×
History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. It's 100% free, no registration required.

We know that South America was partitioned between Spain and Portugal in the early days of empire when Spain and Portugal were the major powers. Later, in the 19th century, when Spain and Portugal went into decline, the countries of South America gained independence.

Somewhere along the line the colonial powers which across the globe had generally superseded Spain and Portugal, namely Britain, France and the Netherlands, gained a foothold in South America in Guyana/Guiana/Surinam.

enter image description here

So why did Britain, France and the Netherlands take such a little bite of the North-East of the continent of South America? Why bother to seize any of it? Why not seize all of it?

share|improve this question
3  
Don't forget that they aren't really little bites: Guyana has an area of 215 km² which isn't much smaller than the territory of France. Also note that the Dutch were mostly interested in trading outposts (meaning coastlines) and had little interest in exploring or even conquering continental areas. Then again, I don't think they really could even if they wanted - at that point Brazil already existed and had enough power regardless of Portugal. –  Wladimir Palant Oct 12 '11 at 13:03
1  
@Wlad: this could be easily converted to an answer –  Lohoris Oct 12 '11 at 16:05
3  
The Netherlands never really superseded Spain/Portugal as a power. In fact they were one of the earlier powers, peaking slightly after Spain/Portugal, and being superseded by the French and English. –  Noldorin Oct 12 '11 at 16:22
    
@WladimirPalant: 215 km² is nearly the size of the UK, but it's a third the size of France (643 km²). –  mmyers Oct 12 '11 at 16:31
    
@mmyers: Oops, I seem to have checked the wrong number when I looked up the size of France. –  Wladimir Palant Oct 12 '11 at 19:05

5 Answers 5

up vote 5 down vote accepted

The main trade in the Caribbean in the 16th and 17th centuries was the sugar trade. Spain had gotten most of the islands, but Britain, the Netherlands and France managed to get a few, such as the Antilles. To supplement these footholds, they also carved out chunks of South America near the Caribbean. These were initially trading posts more than anything else, not real settlements.

share|improve this answer

The answer to your question is one of timing, power and the types of colonies.

There were 5 countries that were the main competitors in the global colonization game. The Spanish, Portuguese, English, French and Dutch.

Simply said the Spanish and Portuguese were about 100 years ahead of the rest, Also known as the Age of Discovery. Portugal and Spain, due to their geographic "isolated" location in Europe, made peace with each other in 1411 (Treaty of Ayllón). While the rest of Europe were in constant war-mode Portugal and Spain prospered and were able to explore. They had trade routes and outposts in Africa and Asia already, but they were looking for a shorter eastern route to India. They left most of North America alone and ended up in South America and the Caribbean. The Treaty of Tordesillas divided the world up in Spanish and Portuguese.

The Dutch, English and French came in action too late and had a different purely business economic interest in the area. The Portuguese and Spanish were in it for "Gold and God". The Portuguese and Spanish came as an army with mostly males. They married native and African women, creating the large mestizo and mullatos population we see in Latin America.

The Dutch and French tried and even managed to claim parts of South America. The largest colony was New Holland from 1630–1654, but lacking the military and population backup (and not mixing with the locals) they Portuguese took the area back again.

The Dutch, French and Englished focused more on the Caribbean with their sugar plantations, which were closer to Europe and made them not wanting Brazil back, because the economic necessity was not there.

Suriname was a Dutch Colony which they shared with the English called Guyana. They got total control over Suriname after a trade against New Amsterdam with the English. The other parts were called (British) Guyana. and French Guyana.

More useful information on The differences in colonization: British, French, Spanish, Portuguese, who drew his information from the source: The Great Migrations: From the Earliest Humans to the Age of Globalization (2008)

share|improve this answer

France and Britain didn't focus much on South America because it wasn't really valuable territory. they already had access to North America which was a much closer densely forested land in a more familiar climate. They really didn't stand to gain as much by creating a large presence in the area because they had other colonies providing many of the same goods. Managing and controlling colonies is a lot of work and takes a lot of investment especially when they get large, so it requires a massive benefit to be worthwhile, the benefit wasn't there for South America.

share|improve this answer
    
This is at variance with several wars fought by the British in Argentina, during the XIX century. –  MartyVal Feb 5 '13 at 8:17
    
@MartyVal not really, those wars were fought over very small amounts of land that were strategically valuable to Britain –  Ryathal Feb 5 '13 at 13:13
1  
Of course South America was valuable, but it was already taken by time they got there. You are right, that it got to costly to try to control every piece of land. At one point they had to draw lines in the sand. –  Hendrik Beenker Feb 5 '13 at 13:31

In the colonial era, sugar then was comparable to oil now - it was an extremely valuable commodity, and countries sought to produce as much of it as possible. The Guianas had a suitable climate for growing sugar and had been left unsettled by the Spanish/Portuguese, so it was not surprising that they would be eventually conquered by other European powers. Together with their holdings in the Caribbean, they were able to produce sufficient amounts of sugar. There was no need to expand further in South America.

share|improve this answer

The Netherlands mostly was active in the area to hurt the flow of gold and other riches to the coffers of their European enemies, the islands (and coastal forts) they took were a side effect of that more than anything.
In part the same can be said for a lot of what the French and British did in the Caribbean and South America, they were all at war with Spain, Portugal, and each other in various combinations of alliances for centuries and this was reflected in whose buccaneers and privateers attacked whose ships on the high seas, raided which islands and towns.
Later those privateers were largely drawn into the active armed forces of the nations involved, the towns being brought under the control of their respective governments rather than being run by private interests (like the Dutch and British West Indies Companies, and sometimes groups of pirates).
The Surinam was never conquered by the Dutch, it was acquired in trade with the British who sold it to the Dutch in payment for Manhattan Island (which they renamed from New Amsterdam to New York in the process).

share|improve this answer
    
Do you have any sources about the fact that the Dutch (and the others) were just acting like pirates? The Dutch once had a large section of South America called "New Holland". You think they put in all those resources and effort just to hurt the Portuguese and Spanish? –  Hendrik Beenker Feb 5 '13 at 14:38

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.