By Henry Srebrnik, [Summerside, PEI] Journal Pioneer
It is hard for 21st century
people to comprehend a geographic institution so huge and
long-lasting that at one time it was assumed that the sun
would never set upon it.
Today, the sun can’t even find it – but its
legacy, in terms of language, laws, international
organizations, and models of governance, are with us still.
At its height, the British Empire, which
lasted half a millennium, spanned the world, from the Arctic
shores of northern Canada and the deserts of Australia to the
humid tropics of India and the beaches of Fiji. A quarter of
the globe was coloured pink on maps.
By 1921, it contained a population of some
460 million people, then approximately one-quarter of the
world's population. It covered more than 35 million square
kilometres.
The empire was decentralized, as there had
never been a master plan of conquest. It wasn’t governed from
an imperial centre, as others, like the French or Spanish
ones, were.
Much of it was created piecemeal, and
happenstance and chance were often involved in the absorption
of all of the bodies of land on every continent and the
numerous islands throughout all the world’s oceans that
eventually comprised the empire.
Britain frequently found itself
unintentionally the owner of new territories through the
actions of individuals whose policies had either not been
thought through in London or even sanctioned.
Indeed, much of its most important
possession, India, was initially the property of a private
enterprise, the East India Company, which expanded its
holdings on the subcontinent over the decades. Other regions,
too, were originally owned by firms such as the Hudson’s Bay
Company and the British South Africa Company.
“The British Empire was nothing more than a
series of improvisations conducted by men who shared a common
culture but often had very different ideas about government
and administration,” concludes Kwasi Kwarteng in his 2011 book
Ghosts of Empire: Britain’s Legacies in the Modern World.
“There is very little unifying ideology in the story of
Britain’s empire.”
Kwarteng agrees that it was created, as the
famous phrase has it, “in a fit of absence of mind.”
Bernard Porter, in British Imperial: What
the Empire Wasn’t, and Empire Ways: Aspects of British
Imperialism, both published in 2016, concurs with this
assessment.
He maintains that Britain was “a less
imperial society than is often assumed.” The empire was
neither monolithic nor guided by an overarching vision that
defined its function and objectives.
British possessions had little in common
with each other beyond the fact that the Union Jack flew over
them.
This pragmatic approach enabled powerful
colonial officials, often described as “men on the spot,” to
direct policy in each jurisdiction with little supervision
from London.
Such individualistic behaviour meant that
procedures developed over the years by one governor could
simply be reversed as a new one took his place. They were
elitists who sought to wield power without much oversight.
Nonetheless, while the empire-building
enterprise involved colonial settlement, missionary activity,
and administration, the primary goal was usually to make huge
amounts of money through trade.
Profits from all these far-flung outposts,
especially India, ultimately found their way back to enrich
the centre.
Most shameful of all was the purchase and
sale of people. More than three million Africans were
transported across the Atlantic to toil in Britain’s American,
Caribbean and Indian Ocean colonies for more than two
centuries.
Slavery on an industrial scale was a major
source of the wealth, based upon the West Indies sugar trade
and cotton crop in North America was based. Slavery was
finally abolished in Britain's colonies in 1833.
The empire began to be wound down not long
after the Second World War; Britain could no longer sustain
it. And while decolonization was sometimes a brutal affair, as
in Aden, Cyprus or Kenya, it was mostly a fairly orderly
process.
But in places with deep-seated religious
rivalries, such as India and Palestine, both destined to be
partitioned, the British simply lost control.
Even toward the end of empire mainstream
opinion in Britain retained an unshakable confidence in the
endurance of its values and centrality to world affairs.
Perhaps this was understandable. After so
many centuries as the world’s pre-eminent nation, it took a
long time for the British to come to terms with the fact that
they were no longer a superpower.
No comments:
Post a Comment