British Empire Of The Nineeenth Century Revision Notes

The British Empire in the Nineteenth Century

What was the ‘imperial ethos’ at home supposed to be?

• Patriotism

• Excitement, adventure

• Military values

• Reverence for monarchy

• Quasi-religious approach to being a world power

Professed benefits of Empire

• Provided glamorous, profitable, cheap imports

• Provided foreign markets for exports at high rates

• Supported safe and unusually profitable outlets for British capital.

• Created a network of ports in Gibraltar, Malta, Singapore, Bermuda, Hong Kong and Alexandria as mercantile shipping routes and naval cruisers.

Sir John Bowring, governor of Hong Kong to Lord Clarendon: ‘It is no unusual characteristic of the Anglo-Saxon race that they begin by trading and end in governing’

Andrew Porter, Oxford History of the British Empire (xx).

• India

  • Conquest of the Sind, Punjab (1840s), Burma (1852-5).

• Hong Kong

  • Acquired in 1842 and extended in 1898.

  • Soon Singapore, Malayan mainland and parts of Borneo fall too.

• Africa

  • By 1911, Britain owns 2.8 million square miles of Africa though trade only brings in around 3.8%!

• Different degrees of empire.

  • Formal Empire

  • Informal Empire

Andrew Porter ‘The empire and the world’, pp. 135-160, ed. CHG Matthew, The Nineteenth Century: the British Isles: 1815-1901 (Oxford, 2000).

• What does the British Empire look like in 1815?

  • India

  • South Africa

  • Canada

  • West Indies: Jamaica and Barbados

  • Islands: Trinidad, Sri Lanka, Mauritius, Demerara

  • Africa: Gambia, Gold Coast.

• By 1900 we see the expansions below and:

  • Hong Kong (1842)

  • Singapore

  • Borneo

• Pattern of Expansion:

  • The period sees formal expansion of the empire.

    • Canada provinces extended westwards through Alberta and British Columbia on the Pacific Coast incorporated into a federation enshrined in the British North America Act (1867).

    • The Commonwealth of Australia (1901).

    • Expansion in South Africa led to the final British occupation of cape Town in 1806.

  • “Sub-imperialisms” was gaining importance too.

    • The supplanting of native practices for colonial government.

    • White settler population is 550,000 (1815) 11.5 million (1901) with trade valued at 118 million!

      • Accounts for 13.6% of Britain’s total overseas trade!

    • Though other parts of empire don’t flourish:

      • British Guiana goes from being worth 17.6% of British trade (1815) 0.57% (1901)

        • The impact of free trade, slave emancipation.

    • India retains central importance [we are told]:

      • By 1870, India was central to balancing Britain’s international trade fdsfsd

    • Growth in Africa in the late 19^th C:

      • 1901 British Africa was 2.8 million square miles and had a population of 40 million, but their trade with Africa was only 3.7% of British overseas trade.

Patrick O’Brien, ‘The Costs and Benefits of British Imperialism 1846-1914’, Past & Present (August 1988), pp. 163-200.

• Levels of British influence in 1914

  • Formal Empire

    • India (322 million, 2 million sq miles)

  • Dependant Colonies:

    • 60 of these (5.2 million natives)

  • Jurisdictional and political influence:

    • 5 dominions (24 million citizens, 7.6 million sq miles)

• Did this supranational goliath have any benefits?

  • Marxists

    • Exaggerate the economic gains of empire.

    • Assume industrialisation was fed through mercantilism in foreign economies.

  • Smith

    • Colonies are bad

      • Impose heavy, unfair burdens on British taxpayers

      • Increased threat of war

      • Probability of political corruption at home.

  • Radicals

    • Their debates are over:

      • Emigration of British overseas labour

      • Profitability of investing money to support capital formation in the empire

      • Potential gains from political ties to colonies and dominions.

  • Conservatives

    • Wakefield, Giffen, Ashley, Cunningham

      • Empire provided outlets for ‘surplus’ population, capital and commodities.

  • Hobson

    • Empire

      • Costly and ineffective alternative to social reform

      • An obstacle to the structural changes required for the future vitality of the British economy.

  • Modern economic historians:

    • Argue:

      • Britain would have been commercially involved in the same polities, even if they hadn’t had a Colonial Office and formally ruled them.

      • Thus,

        • What incremental costs and extra benefits did empire provide?

• Commodity Trade

• British economy is obviously related to international commerce.

  • Dependant

    • On foreign markets to sell British manufacturing goods

    • Re-export manufactured exports

    • Rely on foreign and imperial foodstuffs supply.

  • Except coal, by 1913, a staggering 90% of raw materials for domestic industry came from abroad.

    • But how much of this was from empire?

• Empire’s contribution

  • Really quite limited

    • Imports

      • In 1860, only 1/5^th of imports emanated from empire, by 1914, this rose to just 1/4.

      • No imperial commodities were exclusive

        • Competitive prices would be paid regardless of origins.

    • Exports

      • To Empire

        • Fluctuate between and 1/3 [peak of 39% in 1902).

          • Significant but not overwhelming.

    • Gains in 1880-1900 of formal empire

      • Aren’t really reflected in the profits.

  • Without empire?

    • Magnitude of loss on commodity trade from dismantling empire was 1.1% of Britain’s GDP in 1913 [Edelstein)

    • Even if such countries didn’t trade with GB, there were other markets.

• Migration of Capital and Labour

• Did British citizens or capitalists really invest in empire?

  • In 1914

    • ‘Direct’ investment constituted around 35% of British capitalists’ asset value.

      • Nowhere near amount invested directly into the home economy.

  • Though, much of trade was ‘portfolio’ investment that did not travel directly through the metropolis.

• Where is money placed?

  • Foreign Assets

    • More attractive than shares sold for imperial government or imperial enterprises.

  • Securities

    • Shares, Bonds from ‘white dominions’ far more appealing than shares in Indian or colonial enterprises.

• Emigration

  • 1853-1910

    • 2/3rds of people leaving UK left for destinations outside the empire.

• Returns on Investment

• Lenin

  • Makes empire out to be a haven for Britain’s surplus which staved off...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our British History VI: 1815-1924 Notes.