Unfinished Empire: The Global Expansion of Britain

John Darwin has presented a good work concerning the creation and demise of the British Empire.
This very readable account shows that this creation of an empire was certainly not a national scheme, but rather a result of the entrepot doctrine of trade, and kleptocracy in some parts of the world attracted those who looked for personal gain at the expense of the governed.

The German imperialist Frederick Nauman noted the unsystematic character of English Imperalism, especially their preference for working methods rather than rigid principles, along with an instinctive calm among their leading men, combined with an unshakable self-confidence.

There was success and failure along the way, most notably the loss of the American colonies over the reasonable need of England to generate some revenue through taxes to help pay for the long and expensive French and Indian War.
One observation was made that the most troublesome colonies were the ones occupied by white settlers. The British learned from the American experience and were successful in their efforts in Canada, even after resistance by both English and French speaking citizens. While the author did discuss both Boer Wars, it was in the second South African war that the British struggled against mobile Boer commandoes, where every farm could be used as a base. He goes on to state that only the ruthless clearing and concentration of the civilian community secured an ambigious victory in May 1902. What he does not elaborate on is the fact that the British, in this campaign, set up the first concentration camps, where women, children, and old men, died by the thousands through lack of nutrition and medical care. It is estimated that as many as 40,000 perished. There were even relief agencies set up in England in an attempt to stem the deaths of so many. The reader can also see [[ASIN:1844670678 Britain's Empire: Resistance, Repression and Revolt]] although this author goes very much over the top in comparing Britain's colonial experiences the equivalent of the Nazi terror, which is, essentially, rubbish.

While there was no single pattern of rule, and most of this was based on free trade and capitalism, it contributed to the growth of the empire as British "policy" was to accept wide local variations and leave much to the discretion of the men on the spot.

All of this was nurtured by the British navy and merchant marine, and it was all based on bringing wealth back to the island nation.

A large part of this story involves India. From 1757-1857, the British in India were a conquering force and the East India Compnay a garrison state, organized mainly for war. They were able to annex or defeat every significant regional power in the sub-continent, having more than 300,000 soldiers at the peak of their army. The British were successful in India because they inherited the method of taxing the land from the previous rulers, and the establishment of the Raj brought a certain order into their society.

I am a bit surprised that there was no mention of Afghanistan in the book. While this region offered little in the way of trade, it became an obsession with the British in the 1830s because of their fear of Russian movement into the area to threaten India. It was through the British East India Company that Shah Shuja, after three failed attempts to reclaim his throne as King of Afghanistan, was finally reinstated with the backing of an army that placed him back in Kabul in 1839. It was classic blunder by the British as they backed an unpopular man and eventually the tribes united and decimated the entire force with the exception of one man when they unwisely tried to leave during the winter, 1842. For more information on this, see [[ASIN:0802779824 The Dark Defile: Britain's Catastrophic Invasion of Afghanistan, 1838-1842]] as well as the more recent [[ASIN:0307958280 Return of a King: The Battle for Afghanistan, 1839-42]].

By 1913, there were more than one hundred separate political units that owed allegiance to the British Crown.
By the end of the Great War, many of these alliances were no longer profitable and England could ill afford to maintain an army to keep order. This was especially true in the Middle East. See [[ASIN:0393344258 A Line in the Sand: The Anglo-French Struggle for the Middle East, 1914-1948]]for more information of this very expensive and unsuccessful venture by Britain into the area.

By the end of the second world war, the thing imploded and it was gone in a few years what had taken hundreds of years to build.

The author makes good points in this work, and I felt was fair to all in his rendering of this story.

For the non-academic reader, any history book has to be first and foremost readable and this one most certainly is. Darwin has taken the huge subject of the British Empire and broken it down into a series of themed chapters that makes it accessible and enjoyable reading. For example, one chapter is devoted to Traffic and Trade, while another discusses Ruling Methods. This method allows Darwin to show how similarities and differences in the approach to controlling the empire depended on local circumstances; and to give a very clear picture of the global and historical context, placing the British Empire as one of a line of empires that have risen and fallen throughout history. In fact, while obviously the book is primarily about the British Empire, its scope and clarity of presentation made me feel almost as if I were reading a history of the world over the last 500 years.

Darwin tries successfully on the whole to maintain a neutral stance on the ethics of empire; if he is taking a position at all, it is that the empire was so differentiated and came about for such complex historical reasons that to argue that it was in some way an evil aberration is overly simplistic. Instead he shows, with great lucidity and considerable depth, the who, why, where, when and how; and then leaves the reader, armed with that information, to consider whether the effects were all bad, all good or somewhere in-between.

If I had any criticism, it would be that at points I wanted maps as a visual prompt to show the reach of both the formal and informal areas of influence at different points in history – the maps included were interesting, but concentrated more on specifics, like shipping routes or distribution of military resources. Darwin suggests that looking at the bright red zones on maps gives a misleading picture of the empire and he has persuaded me of that, but for those of us who can never quite remember where, say, Borneo actually is, they do help! However that is a very small criticism of what is an excellent book, thoroughly enjoyable and immensely edifying, that has left me very much better informed about the political and historical context, the rise and decline, and the global impact of and on the empire – highly recommended.

NB This book was provided for review by Amazon Vine UK.

John Darwin titled his masterly history Unfinished Empire to emphasize the haphazard process by which Great Britain came to possess a huge imperium. I chose to title my review The Accidental Empire because after reading it through it seemed to me that at times the British came into possession of their empire through incident and happenstance rather than any master plan or organization.

Unfinished Empire is an erudite but very accessible and entertaining work. Rather than attempting a purely chronological approach (which would have probably required several volumes to complete) Darwin chose a more comparative approach in which he analyzed the processes of contacting, taking possession of, and settling new areas of territory. He then moved on to the details of how the different colonies were governed, protected, forced into submission or eventually allowed to regain independence, and made part of a growing international economy. This approach works well, although Americans will find the less prominent place it allows the sections dealing with the thirteen Atlantic colonies and the American Revolution somewhat surprising. Throughout the book Darwin emphasizes that the British never went after an empire in the way the French, Spanish, and Portuguese did: as an organized and centrally directed enterprise. Instead, Britain's pluralistic society, growing economy based on private enterprise, early industrialization, and control of trade routes and shipping all combined with a world power vaccuum in the 18th and 19th centuries to create an empire. Once the British had power in a region like India they were determined to keep control of it, using their superior armed forces and weaponry and skillfully working to co-opt any possible areas of resistance.

There are many fascinating stories in Unfinished Empire: the details by which the British East India Company managed to weaken and replace the Mughals in India, or the process by which China was forced to open itself up to British trade, or the devious efforts of men like Cecil Rhodes to establish themselves in Africa and Asia, becoming personally wealthy and making their motherland's empire even larger. Just as fascinating are the stories of how the British Empire came to an end in the twentieth century as a result of catastrophic world war and economic exhaustion. Unlike some historians of Empire Darwin gives plenty of attention to the indigenous peoples who came under British domination and either suffered for it (like most Indians and Africans) or managed to maintain some independence and cultural autonomy (most notably the Maoris of New Zealand.)

Unfinished Empire is a balanced work which both the British and their former subject peoples can enjoy. It is highly scholarly and scrupulously referenced, but it is also a lively and entertaining read that does much to explain how a small island off the northwestern shores of Europe became a world power, and how the cpmsequences of that accomplishment still affects the world today.

I am having a hard time reading it. I find it very dull to read and am not sure I'm going to finish it.

"Unfinished Empire" is a meticulously researched tale of the growth, ascendency and ultimate decline of the British Empire. Author Darwin leaves few stones unturned here. There are 53 pages of footnotes and end notes to support the text.

Darwin squarely calls it late in the text when he points out that England's chance for such supremacy was "created by one of history's unpredicted conjunctures-when conditions in both Europe and East Asia were simultaneously favorable. ....a Europe precariously in balance between its great rival states, combined with an introverted America....provided the perfect conditions for British expansion". Once she had her colonies in place "a constant attention to the unpredictable impact of geopolitical change and a constant reshuffling of plans and priorities..." kept the Empire functioning. Those two succinct statements summate matters perfectly.

There are, however two egregiously provocative statements that were decidedly uncalled for. The first defines the Irish Revolution of 1919-1921 as "partially successful". That "insurrection", Mr. Darwin, led to the freedom of 26 of the 32 counties on the island of Ireland. That was a grand accomplishment after centuries of British rule, which some would call tyranny. And then there is the "settler rebellion of 1775-1783... later grandly retitled as the American Revolution". That's because it WAS the American Revolution! And we know who lost, don't we? It seems the author has yet to deal with the Empire's forfeiture of those two colonies. They are gone forever and not coming back into the fold. Terminology and choices of words are very sensitive issues especially to Americans of Irish extraction. It reminds this reviewer of Ross Perot addressing an NAACP convention with "you people". Tone matters.
There are also some mysterious sentences explaining England's economic decline after WW2. Darwin writes "there was a fire sale of assets to buy American goods" and "the economic profits of war had crossed the Atlantic". What was the meaning there? Don't we get some credit for intervening in WW2? Was that downtrend the fault of the U.S.? Once again, choices of words are critical to avoid misunderstanding.

On the whole, however "Unfinished Empire" is a serious and scholarly work. It is anything but light reading. Those with a thirst for knowledge about the development of England's vast empire will be pleased with their purchase. One could make a serious case that UE is a tad too long. That proverbial "stern author with a sharp blue pencil" could have been put to work here. Yet how many such editors are still on a payroll? It appears that publishers fail to monitor book length anymore. The author is not at fault on that account. "Unfinished Empire" is a safe choice for the serious reader of history.

An interesting book that takes an overall look at the British empire's rise and fall from an author who clearly is an expert in the area. It is written from a surprisingly anti-British view point. The analysis of how the various "colonies" developed is well done. It does become a little tedious since it was clearly written chapter by chapter and the editor did not weed out repetition.

The British Empire existed for hundreds of years and encompassed a large number of peoples, cultures, and religions. To do it full justice you would need to read all 5 volumes of the Oxford History of the British Empire. Darwin does an excellent job of not just laying out the facts, but helps put a narrative while still remaining scholarly. He also doesn’t pick and chose sides. After reading his passages on the Boer war, you could easily argue for or against it. I also like that he doesn’t cover everything in a chronological order, but instead a “theme” order. For example, you will said African Colonization spread out throughout the book when discussing slave trade, missionaries, humanitarianism, war, and “informal empire”. This better allows you to view the evolution of the British Empire instead of siloed perspectives. It’s also good to supplement this book with the penguin atlas of the British Empire and Ashley Jackson’s short introduction to the British empire.

A thorough historical work, albeit with more detail than I think is needed. Imperial Britain has been done and redone. This book offers some new insights but the author doesn't sufficiently discriminate between the vital, the interesting, and the unimportant. In these kinds of histories, the ability NOT to report every single note made or situation unearthed is far more helpful than an eruption of information.

Good product.

This is an excellent history, told in a different way, of the history of the British Empire; how it got it's beginnings, how it reach it's zenith, and finally, how it fell, and the legacy it leaves behind. Darwin does not tell it in a traditional manner, in the form of a timeline, but on different subjects, each told separately, and how they all go together. This would be good reading for both amateur and professional historians, as we as any Anglophile, along with anyone else interested in how this largest of all empire came into being.
Each chapter covers a different subject from the beginning, and can be covered separately, in their own right. What is covered are the merchants, and how they really established the empire, not the crown, how the military would come in to protect these merchants, and later settlers, how the British ruled, and they ruled each colony differently, how many of the natives of these colonies, and settlers rebelled, and how they were put down, or in America's sense, how they achieved independence, all the different cultures the empire covered, each one very different from the other, works of missionaries attempting to convert them to Christianity, how the empire was defended from both without and within, and finally, how it fell.
That is a lot to cover, but when you look at them separately, you can get a more precise understanding of it. Also, there are tidbits of little known facts. Many former colonists feel that the British were always tyrannical, everywhere, but that wasn't necessarily the case. In cases like India and Africa, many of the tribes/cultures were allowed to flourish, and had a certain degree of autonomy. Their own people ruled themselves in many cases, as long as the chief/head/leader would pay homage to the crown and when war came, have them join the British Army to fight, or to put down rebellions of other peoples. The Chinese in Indonesia paid homage, but none of these people were puppets, nor fools. They knew that the British could protect them and their interests better than others around them, so they took advantage.
The types of colonies varied. There were settler colonies, such as America (which later broke off), Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and to a certain extent, South Africa. These where a total of 19 million people from the British Isles settled, where they eventually established their own countries.
How the empire began was not with the crown, but merchants. From the early 1600s on, many individuals or groups, called companies (East India, Virginia, African, etc) started out to other land for trade goods, be it tea, spices, silks, fish, porcelain, tobacco, furs, sugar, slaves and many other rare goods from different parts of the world to sell back to England, later Britain, and all of Europe. Posts were established, more people came in looking for work, eventually settling that land, and those colonies grew. The military had to come in to protect these settlers from natives and other competing powers like France, Spain, Portugal, and Holland. As time went on, The Brits conflicted with other Europeans, and won, with their lands as a prize. This grew all over the world, and one way the British kept their empire was to allow free trade.
Some little know facts are told here. From the British viewpoint, our American Revolution to them was the American War of Independence. What really happened was that the American colonies, for a century were neglected but to their own benefit. After the French and Indian, which the British won Canada and all lands east of the Mississippi, for the colonists, I might add, the British found themselves deep in debt, which had to be paid. The only way they could do this was to tax the colonist. What isn't knows was that ALL British subjects had to be taxed everywhere, including their own countries in the British Isles. The colonists only had to pay their fair share, nothing more. The British closed off the new lands because they could not afford to send in troops for their protection. The colonists were mad, didn't want to pay taxes, but wanted all the benefits. They rebelled and drove out the British. In other words, they wanted to have their cake and eat it too.
America, though, was the black sheep of the empire (emphasis mine). Other colonies willingly cooperated, to a certain extent. Criminals were sent to Australia, but established a colony. There was rebellion in India, Africa, even French Canada, and they were quashed.
There were also atrocities, and in places like Africa and Ireland, the British were tyrannical.
In the end, after the Second World War, the colonies, one by one, broke off. Up to the 1960s, the British tried to hold onto Africa with an iron grip, but that too broke away.
There are still islands left in the Atlantic, Pacific, and the Caribbean, and Canada, Australia, and New Zealand continue to be part of the Commonwealth.
I attempted to write a brief summary here of the history of the British Empire, but read the book. You will have a clear understanding of it, and how it helped to shape the world of today. In one aspect, the English language remains THE universal language of the Earth, with no competition.