The governance and administration of the Empire
Key issue(s)
Economic explanations (overseas investment, crisis of capitalism, gentlemanly capitalism)
Economic explanations (overseas investment, crisis of capitalism, gentlemanly capitalism)
This refers back to the debates on free trade (section: 1857), the shift to New Imperialism (section: growth), and changes in the world economy. Key debates to bring forward in the breadth study would include discussion of:
A. The introduction of tariffs on goods that were imported and what this revealed of Britain’s new economic relationship with Empire – by 1875, it had become a low tariff country except for some ‘luxury’ goods but by 1913 tariffs were high in most other ‘developed’ countries and free trade had been reversed.
Internet Resources
Some of the key debates that have emerged to critique this in recent years, however, are cited in the previous section (Cain and Hopkins in particular are known for their development of the term ‘gentlemanly capitalists’).
There is a useful short article outlining some key economic issues by Peter Cain here.
Core issues include – that for much of the 19th century there was a loose connection between trade and empire: markets were sought and developed where they were likely to be most profitable.
Question 1) – in what ways did trade actually drive imperial expansion, therefore?
Question 2) – was there a link between High Imperialism at the end of the 19th C and the increasing protectionism shown by other powers at this time?
Question 3) – in what ways did people ‘on the ground’ influence these developments and was there a dramatic shift in policy or just a continuation/continuum of previously established practices/ideas/policies?
Some of the key debates that have emerged to critique this in recent years, however, are cited in the previous section (Cain and Hopkins in particular are known for their development of the term ‘gentlemanly capitalists’).
There is a useful short article outlining some key economic issues by Peter Cain here.
Core issues include – that for much of the 19th century there was a loose connection between trade and empire: markets were sought and developed where they were likely to be most profitable.
Question 1) – in what ways did trade actually drive imperial expansion, therefore?
Question 2) – was there a link between High Imperialism at the end of the 19th C and the increasing protectionism shown by other powers at this time?
Question 3) – in what ways did people ‘on the ground’ influence these developments and was there a dramatic shift in policy or just a continuation/continuum of previously established practices/ideas/policies?
B. Trade – balance of imports and exports within intra-imperial networks and outside. Comparison of exports and imports is especially important (Europe remained largest source of GB imports; India imported most from Britain) – free trade continued to serve GB interests well even by 1914 – also balance of payments remained favourable.
Internet Resources
Increasing emphasis on the supposed ‘balance sheet’ of empire: what were its economic costs and benefits and how might these be set against other costs and benefits. This line of thinking/argument has been particularly significant in discussing the period of High Imperialism and the period from 1870-1914 in particular. See sample figures, and a data visualisation of the East India Company.
These arguments can go both ways – the costs and benefits for colonised countries (for these debates, see Depth Studies) and costs and benefits for Britain. See: ‘Costs and Benefits, Prosperity, and Security, 1870–1914’ by Avner Offer in The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century (OUP, 1999) (ed.) Andrew Porter.
A well known and controversial counter-position has been put forward by Niall Ferguson. His book How Britain Made the Modern World is well known and has produced numerous debates and reviews, which are easily located in any google search.
There are also episodes of Ferguson’s series on the British Empire in India.
Increasing emphasis on the supposed ‘balance sheet’ of empire: what were its economic costs and benefits and how might these be set against other costs and benefits. This line of thinking/argument has been particularly significant in discussing the period of High Imperialism and the period from 1870-1914 in particular. See sample figures, and a data visualisation of the East India Company.
These arguments can go both ways – the costs and benefits for colonised countries (for these debates, see Depth Studies) and costs and benefits for Britain. See: ‘Costs and Benefits, Prosperity, and Security, 1870–1914’ by Avner Offer in The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century (OUP, 1999) (ed.) Andrew Porter.
A well known and controversial counter-position has been put forward by Niall Ferguson. His book How Britain Made the Modern World is well known and has produced numerous debates and reviews, which are easily located in any google search.
There are also episodes of Ferguson’s series on the British Empire in India.
Internet Resources
|