In our postcolonial age, there is a virtual consensus that
imperialism and colonialism were harmful for those conquered. Niall Ferguson
has attempted an ambitious undertaking. Empire endeavors to show that
aggression towards less developed nations was harmful; but tempers the story
with information discussing the benefits bestowed by an advanced industrialized
nation. Admittedly, these benefits pale in comparison to the abuses. But they
are part of the history nonetheless and a full examination of this period
requires their inclusion.
The author’s intended audience is not just fellow citizens
of the UK. His introduction underlines that current US power and influence is
analogous to that of 19th Century Britain. Throughout the book, US
citizens can hear echoes of the past in our current dilemmas. For example, after
the massacres of British civilians during the first Indian Mutiny, Charles Spurgeon
emphatically sermonizes “My friends, what crimes have they committed?” (Ferguson,
p. 126). One cannot read this without remembering so many US Citizens
exclaiming “Why do they hate us?” after the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001. Nineteenth
Century British subjects were no more knowledgeable concerning the brutal imperialism
of their nation than US citizens are today.
This historian exhibits a number of episodes where brutality
was perpetrated upon the empire’s victims. However, he also shows bright glints
of humanity within the dark clouds of imperialism rolling across conquered lands.
This is mostly accomplished in two chief ways. First is the presentation of
humane individuals: From Livingstone’s attempt to provide medical care among
the Empire’s victims, to Macaulay’s crusade against the slave trade, to Durham’s
fair parliamentary report which resulted in Canadian self-rule, Ferguson tells
numerous stories of personal compassion and integrity. Unfortunately, this tact
strikes one as a bit weak. These were, after all, individual acts of kindness occurring
alongside the empire-wide business of exploitation. Setting these examples next
to the Empires destructive legacy, says “Yes, the Empire pillaged many civilizations,
but here’s a nice guy who felt bad about it.”
The second way Ferguson exhibits the Empire’s brighter side
is by revealing the gifts showered upon underdeveloped nations by an advanced
and enlightened civilization. The British introduced efficient bureaucracy,
industrial technology, advanced medicine, scientific method and improved
infrastructure. Unfortunately, these qualities are never put into perspective
against the much larger story of slavery, racism, domination, exploitation and
military slaughter. Additionally, a common person living within a domain of the
Empire rarely benefited from these gifts.
It would be an unjust oversimplification to label Empire a conservative glance at the glory days of Great Britain. Ferguson is much too
complex and perceptive in his approach to his subject. Rather, he focuses more
upon the evolution and management of Britain’s empire and less (without
ignoring) on the negative impact of conquest. A postcolonial historian from
Africa might not take such an approach to a book on the British Empire. Some
current historians from conquering nations exhibit greater skill in examining
their country’s imperialist destruction. Compare Ferguson’s approach to James
Bradley’s in The Imperial Cruise: Bradley, who is also from an
imperialist nation, begins by describing Theodore Roosevelt’s Aryan philosophy, then applies this racist perspective to the damaging actions taken during
his presidency.
Empire’s “Conclusion” is a bewildering departure from
the rest of the book. Here, Ferguson abandons the restrained historical
analysis that had thus far served the reader. In its place is a breathtakingly
obtuse, Western-centric set of political pronouncements: 1) The Empire served
its unwilling subjects by giving them consistent government. 2) We need an
empire to police rogue states and terrorists. 3) The attack of “9/11” might not
have occurred if there had been an empire. 4) The US should accept the mantle
of empire. In brief counterpoint: 1) The unwilling subjects chose to trade
servitude under a consistent government
for self-determination. 2) Policing rogue states and terrorists is now more
difficult since they employ fourth-generation warfare. They don’t meet armies
head-on; they attack clandestinely. 3) The “9/11” attacks were a direct result
of imperialism. The terrorists were middle-class Saudis who resented the
imposition of western culture and economic influence. These Saudis attracted
the poor and angry from former British and French protectorates who also
resented the West. 4) Regarding Ferguson’s attempt to coronate the next World
Emperor, US citizens of all political stripes, (for reasons ranging from
morality to money) respectfully decline.
Empire is valuable for its examination of the workings
and evolution of this 19th Century behemoth. It is a finely written,
well-researched, exciting story. Ferguson has an excellent eye for illustrative
vignettes and humor. Describing Lord Kitchener’s marksmanship, the author
mentions that the aristocrat had named his three hunting dogs “Bang, Miss and
Damn” (Ferguson, p. 224). More attention to the subjugated would have created a
better balance. But this book has a great deal to recommend it.
Ferguson, Niall. Empire. New York: Basic Books, 2004.
For reviews on more books concerning British History, see:
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-peoples-history-of-london-by-german.html
which is a politically progressive history of London.
and
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2014/09/eminent-victorians-by-lytton-strachey.html
which is a classic set of biographies on British Victorians.