The British Empire

[thisispete]

I've just come across a great documentary series on the British Empire on BBC radio. It's charting the rise and fall. Shows of fifteen minutes in length are being broadcast every weekday and you can listen to them here. There are 90 episodes. They are only available online for a week after broadcast, but I've got this link bookmarked and it's something I shall follow with keen interest.

 

[Rambuchan]

This looks like a noble endeavour by the BBC. However, I have a real problem with these endeavours. At least, the way they have been done so far and the way this one seems to be also. That is - they present British greatness quite out of context with the rest of the world. And without context and comparison how can you truly say they were great or innovative or mould breaking?

Read the 'Historical Figure' entry for Francis Drake. ''He is the first Englishman to circumnavigate the world''. Great. The accuracy of fact is fine. But there is no context to it at all. So you get no idea quite how far behind Britain (still England then) were behind the rest of Europe, India, China and the Arabs in terms of global exploration.

So this stuff gets pumped into kids' heads and they go off thinking what an impressive, innovative and brave adventurer Drake was (consuming all the intended messages of British superiority in the process) and all the while he was some pirate who followed in the footsteps of other people's achievements, often some 100-150 years after others had done them.

Of course they never tell you what everyone else was up to, because it would have ashamed all those men we look to when declaring Britain's greatness.

I long for the day when we can separate national pride from our histories.

 

[thisispete]

I don't think it's taking a whiggish approach to history. The first episode notes that financial gain was the driving force of the growth of the empire and that colonies often sprang up due to factors such as famine in Britain, religious persecution and economic opportunism. History today is no longer the glorification of the past, but a social science, with historians trying to be as objective as possible. Whether total objectivity is possible is a matter for debate.

However, I don't think the BBC can today be regarded as an apologist for the seedy side of British history. Look at Simon Schama's BBC-produced television series, A History of Britain, he was scathing about the British raj in India and Burma and looked at it through the eperiences of George Orwell. Don't write this project off just yet.

 

[Rambuchan]

No I shouldn't you're right. I just get into rant mode about these things too easily.

 

[thisispete]

Don't worry about it. This kind of debate was why I posted the link here in the first place.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

Read the 'Historical Figure' entry for Francis Drake. ''He is the first Englishman to circumnavigate the world''. Great. The accuracy of fact is fine. But there is no context to it at all. So you get no idea quite how far behind Britain (still England then) were behind the rest of Europe, India, China and the Arabs in terms of global exploration.

If that link is biased towards Drake, you are certainly biased against him.

India, China, and the Arabs had not circumnavigated the globe at that time, and would not in any meaningful sense for centuries. The first Indian, Chinese, or Arab ship to circumnavigate the globe was probably some long-forgotten merchent vessel that did so centuries after Drake.

Francis Drake led, in many ways, the first successful circumnavigation of the world. He did not die while doing it, and he actually managed to achieve some non-exploration goals (i.e., attacking the Spaniard) while on route.

 

[Rambuchan]

If that link is biased towards Drake, you are certainly biased against him.

India, China, and the Arabs had not circumnavigated the globe at that time, and would not in any meaningful sense for centuries. The first Indian, Chinese, or Arab ship to circumnavigate the globe was probably some long-forgotten merchent vessel that did so centuries after Drake.

Francis Drake led, in many ways, the first successful circumnavigation of the world. He did not die while doing it, and he actually managed to achieve some non-exploration goals (i.e., attacking the Spaniard) while on route.

So we sit on either side of the same fence. Your telling above sounds like fiction to me, or at least a gapping omission.

http://www.1421.tv/gallery.asp?Section=Shipwrecks

 

[SeleucusNicator]

So we sit on either side of the same fence. Your telling above sounds like fiction to me, or at least a gapping omission.

http://www.1421.tv/gallery.asp?Section=Shipwrecks

When I first saw that link, I thought it was going to be about Drake's several shipwrecks during the circumnavigation; I conceede that those happened, but, again, they didn't impact the success of the circumnavigation.

Now that I see its about the China 1421 theory, I might as well go ahead and say that I reject it, as do most mainstream historians. However, EVEN IF it did happen, it was of no strategic importance, because it ultimately had no effect on anything. China, if it did visit the New World, left no impact there, nor were those voyages a set-up for Chinese domination of the seas. It wasn't even a set-up for expanded Chinese presence on the seas.

Drake's voyage did have long-term strategic implications, and it was a set-up for British dominance of the seas.

 

[Rambuchan]

Why do you reject the theory? Perhaps we should start another thread? I could go on for a while about the impact they did have. Both on S. America AND European exploration. Strategic implications for all the world abound.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

Why do you reject the theory? Perhaps we should start another thread? I could go on for a while about the impact they did have. Both on S. America AND European exploration. Strategic implications for all the world abound.

Let's go.

Let's also go send the 10 character limit to the bottom of the jolly roger while we're at it.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

However, EVEN IF it did happen, it was of no strategic importance, because it ultimately had no effect on anything. China, if it did visit the New World, left no impact there, nor were those voyages a set-up for Chinese domination of the seas. It wasn't even a set-up for expanded Chinese presence on the seas.

No argument there.

Drake's voyage did have long-term strategic implications, and it was a set-up for British dominance of the seas.

Yeah, but it's a dominance that didn't last.

 

[DAv2003]

It was still dominance though. And we kicked all types of arse with it

 

[Rambuchan]

It was still dominance though. And we kicked all types of arse with it

That's the kind of fine historical detail and referencing which really makes me believe you . This comment proves what I was trying to say at the beginning. These projects about the British Empire leave people with a sense of "British butt kicking" (not all but a lot) and kids remember those aspects and produce stupid sentences like "Yeah the British Empire was badass - we kicked all kinds of arse."

Which arses? With whose boot? Where and when? Did anyone kick back?

The discussion so far was about Francis Drake. That's a heads up for you.

 

[Verbose]

I've just come across a great documentary series on the British Empire on BBC radio. It's charting the rise and fall. Shows of fifteen minutes in length are being broadcast every weekday and you can listen to them here. There are 90 episodes. They are only available online for a week after broadcast, but I've got this link bookmarked and it's something I shall follow with keen interest.

There's a great series of books published back in the 70's (reprinted paperbacks in the 90's) based on BBC interviewes with the surviving people who ran the Empire. (Someone at the BBC realised they'd be dead soon and they better get someone with a microfone to pay these people a visit.)

It became a radio series and three books: "Plain Tales from the Raj", "Plain Tales from the Dark Continent" and "Plain Tales from the South China Seas".
Very interesting if biased since they chronicle the experience and viewpoint of the people who ran the empire.

 

[Rambuchan]

Trivial aside: "Plain Tales from XXXX" coming from Rudyard Kipling's "Plain Tales From the Hills".

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Francis Drake led, in many ways, the first successful circumnavigation of the world. He did not die while doing it, and he actually managed to achieve some non-exploration goals

Speaking about turning the worl around... For the records, dont know if this has some relevance: Maguellan died but Elcano didnt. About strategic objetives in that voyague for instance Filipinas were annexed for the next 400 years. However that is not a very long term implications, i know.

 

[DAv2003]

Which arses? With whose boot? Where and when? Did anyone kick back?

In no real order, America, Africa, China, France, Spain, India and the Ottoman Empire. I can't remember when all of them took place but it was generall during the 19th century. And while some did kick back, we kicked back even harder.

 

[Rambuchan]

In no real order, America, Africa, China, France, Spain, India and the Ottoman Empire. I can't remember when all of them took place but it was generall during the 19th century. And while some did kick back, we kicked back even harder.

Congratulations. I'm so happy for you and your specifics.With all that buttkicking experience I guess us Brits might as well carry on butt kicking!

 

[DAv2003]

Damn straight Seriously though, the British Empire did go to war with those countries and we did beat them. For dates I've got the war of 1812 for America, the Napoleonic wars for France and Spain, the Indian mutiny of 1857 for um India, the whole partition of most of south and east Africa and the liberation of Greece for the Ottoman Empire.

 

[Rambuchan]

I am not saying they did not defeat plenty of mighty empires. I am saying that the 'all conquering' image is one that isn't exactly the best to pass on to the next generation.

What about the fact that the British Empire presided over the greatest period of Free Trade that the world has ever seen? Or how about the fact they laid railways, telegraphs, telephone lines throughout much of the world, bringing us closer to each other? Or how about the fact the British Empire drew the world closer towards a single economic system (the gold standard)?

This is what I am banging on about. Viceroys, Generals, blood, guts, Maxim Guns and Slaughtered Natives are the areas of British Imperial power which get advertised and dramatised above all else. Whereas the British gave to the world many fine things we take for granted. Far more interesting and useful than some wanton butt kicking no?