British Empire in a 1000 years

[RichardD]

Spiritual_Beggar said:

...mess...

I don't agree with that statement though. It was capitalism / business / making profit.

At least it seemed honest and simple then.

Better than a "footwear" manufacturer spending billions of $ creating lifestyle brands and then outsourcing the manufacture to a company who outsources it who outsources it so it can be made in a factory in Asia somewhere complete with barbed wire, armed guards by teenage girls who sometimes stop work under their table to give birth before carrying on again...

But that's not slavery, its just a job benefitting from globalisation .

[Spiritual_Beggar]

RichardD said:

Spiritual_Beggar said:

...mess...

I don't agree with that statement though. It was capitalism / business / making profit.

At least it seemed honest and simple then.

Better than a "footwear" manufacturer spending billions of $ creating lifestyle brands and then outsourcing the manufacture to a company who outsources it who outsources it so it can be made in a factory in Asia somewhere complete with barbed wire, armed guards by teenage girls who sometimes stop work under their table to give birth before carrying on again...

But that's not slavery, its just a job benefitting from globalisation .

Hindsight allows me to call it a mess, because look at what the trade has left the world with!!!

A continent ruined by an Empires ravaging of it. The legal issues we have now, not to mention the events in America regarding the race riots, etc (we had a bit of that over here too).

I'd say it was a bit of a mess

Edited by Spiritual_Beggar on Tuesday 31st March 15:40

Edited by Spiritual_Beggar on Tuesday 31st March 15:41

[s2art]

Spiritual_Beggar said:

RichardD said:

Spiritual_Beggar said:

...mess...

I don't agree with that statement though. It was capitalism / business / making profit.

At least it seemed honest and simple then.

Better than a "footwear" manufacturer spending billions of $ creating lifestyle brands and then outsourcing the manufacture to a company who outsources it who outsources it so it can be made in a factory in Asia somewhere complete with barbed wire, armed guards by teenage girls who sometimes stop work under their table to give birth before carrying on again...

But that's not slavery, its just a job benefitting from globalisation .

Hindsight allows me to call it a mess, because look at what the trade has left the world with!!!

A continent ruined by an Empires ravaging of it. The legal issues we have now, not to mention the events in America regarding the race riots, etc (we had a bit of that over here too).

I'd say it was a bit of a mess

Edited by Spiritual_Beggar on Tuesday 31st March 15:40

Edited by Spiritual_Beggar on Tuesday 31st March 15:41

Compared to what?

[Bushmaster]

s2art said:

Bushmaster said:

I very much doubt the British Empire will be placed by history in the same league as the Greek and Roman empires. There are a few reasons for my opinion:

1. Longevity - the British Empire lasted for only a few decades, say from the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 to Indian independence in 1947. The Classical empires lasted for hundred of years.

2. Monuments - The Greeks and Romans left a legacy of huge monumental architecture in the places they conquered. We left a few railway lines.

3. Golden Ageism - The Classical empires were looked back on as a Golden Age, as the world reverted to the dark ages. There is little chance of anyone looking upon the BE as a Golden Age.

4. Great Ideas - The Classical Empires gave birth to new ideas about democracy, statehood, mathematics, philosophy, sciences, etc. The BE gave the world cheap cotton.

5. Safety - The Classical empires were completely demolished and left no real continuity and so the rest of the world could safely respect them as you can respect a dead enemy. The ghost of the BE will linger on as long as the UK remains independent and so the rest of the world is not in a position to respect the BE.

IMHO the British Empire will be seen as a time when the Industrial Revolution gave Britain a slight technological head-start over the rest of the world and they used this head-start to take advantage of less developed countries economically.

1) The British Empire spanned approx 500 years in one form or another.
2) You are joking. Take a look at the Imperial buildings and monuments in India.
3) Many African countries DO look at it as a golden age. Sierra Leone recently asked to come back.
4) Joking again. It was Britain that took democracy,science and industry to huge sections of the world. Not to mention the particular brand of pragmatic philosophy that Britain evolved.
5) Its already happening.

1. Not really. You are going back to Tudor times here and back then Spain was the dominant power by far. England was tiny in comparison.

2. But not more impressive than the TAj Mahal are they. Not awesome like Roman or Greek temples.

3. Great. When the USA, Australia, New Zealand and Oz ask to come back, you may be onto something.

4. But a better spinning jenny or a steam engine is not a Great Idea.

5. ?

[350GT]

Yes, I like to blame the Europeans for the mess Africa is in... They wanted self rule, and they got it... They can blame us all they want, but the fact remains that Africa is still killing each other YEARS after we left. It is their tribalism that is doing it, not the british.

[RichardD]

350GT said:

Yes, I like to blame the Europeans for the mess Africa is in... They wanted self rule, and they got it... They can blame us all they want, but the fact remains that Africa is still killing each other YEARS after we left. It is their tribalism that is doing it, not the british.

Rhodesia, hmm...
Zimbabwe + Mugabe, !!

I did listen to a documentary on the British Empire that implied the introduction of sport reduced tribal warfare in the colonies.

[Parrot of Doom]

Bushmaster said:

1. Not really. *** are going back to Tudor times here and back then Spain was the dominant power by far. England was tiny in comparison.

1583 onwards - first british empire:

http://books.google.com/books?id=eQHSivGzEEMC&...

The last major territory given over by the British was Hong Kong in 1997. I make that over 400 years of empire - much longer than your 'few decades'.

[s2art]

Bushmaster said:

s2art said:

Bushmaster said:

I very much doubt the British Empire will be placed by history in the same league as the Greek and Roman empires. There are a few reasons for my opinion:

1. Longevity - the British Empire lasted for only a few decades, say from the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 to Indian independence in 1947. The Classical empires lasted for hundred of years.

2. Monuments - The Greeks and Romans left a legacy of huge monumental architecture in the places they conquered. We left a few railway lines.

3. Golden Ageism - The Classical empires were looked back on as a Golden Age, as the world reverted to the dark ages. There is little chance of anyone looking upon the BE as a Golden Age.

4. Great Ideas - The Classical Empires gave birth to new ideas about democracy, statehood, mathematics, philosophy, sciences, etc. The BE gave the world cheap cotton.

5. Safety - The Classical empires were completely demolished and left no real continuity and so the rest of the world could safely respect them as you can respect a dead enemy. The ghost of the BE will linger on as long as the UK remains independent and so the rest of the world is not in a position to respect the BE.

IMHO the British Empire will be seen as a time when the Industrial Revolution gave Britain a slight technological head-start over the rest of the world and they used this head-start to take advantage of less developed countries economically.

1) The British Empire spanned approx 500 years in one form or another.
2) You are joking. Take a look at the Imperial buildings and monuments in India.
3) Many African countries DO look at it as a golden age. Sierra Leone recently asked to come back.
4) Joking again. It was Britain that took democracy,science and industry to huge sections of the world. Not to mention the particular brand of pragmatic philosophy that Britain evolved.
5) Its already happening.

1. Not really. You are going back to Tudor times here and back then Spain was the dominant power by far. England was tiny in comparison.

2. But not more impressive than the TAj Mahal are they. Not awesome like Roman or Greek temples.

3. Great. When the USA, Australia, New Zealand and Oz ask to come back, you may be onto something.

4. But a better spinning jenny or a steam engine is not a Great Idea.

5. ?

1) from http://www.britishempire.co.uk/

Defining the start and finish for the dates of the British Empire has not been an easy task. It is generally divided into two distinct Empires. The First Empire revolved primarily, but not exclusively, around the settler colonies of the Americas. These would be termed the Thirteen Colonies and would gain their independence from Britain in 1783. The Second Empire then developed from the remnants of the First - particularly India - and were added to during the Napoleonic Wars and then throughout the nineteenth century and even into the beginning of the twentieth century. It is this Second, predominantly Victorian, Empire that most people associate with the British Empire. This site actually covers both - but it is useful to be able to separate the two entities. I tend to use the convenient bookends of 1497 to 1997. It makes for a pleasing five hundred year synchronicity. The first date marks the very first overseas British colony of Newfoundland claimed as a way of trying to guard access to the rich fisheries discovered near there. The 1997 date represents the British withdrawing from their last significant colony of Hong Kong. This date is a little more arbitrary in that there are just over a dozen territories still directly governed by Britain scattered across the globe. I suppose the Falkland Islands represent the biggest of these remaining colonies. It is actually said that the British territories are still scattered enough around the world that the sun still does not technically set on the British Empire. I believe that Pitcairn Island just about allows the sun to track over the Pacific Ocean and still be shining directly on administered British territory. Of course the sun never sets on the Empire on this website.

2) Take a look at some of them in India.

3) What has that got to do with anything? The fact that Canada, Australia and NZ still have the Queen says a lot. What about all those people from all those countries that chose to join Britain in WW2?

4)Very, Very wrong!

[s2art]

BTW just thought this example of the Empire and its Rolls-Royce civil service in action might be amusing;

An Official Correspondence: 1916

January 1st. F.O. to Cairo
101. Greek Prime Minister wishes to import grain. Can you do this?
January 4th. Cairo to F.O.
416. Your 101 not understood. Where does he want to import? Is it into Egypt?
January 8th. F.O. to Cairo
103. Greek Prime Minister wishes to import grain into Greece. Can you do this?
January 11th. Cairo to F.O.
420. Your 103. We have done it several times.
January 12th. F.O. to Cairo
108. Regret copy mislaid. What is gist of my 103? If possible, repeat.
January 14th. Cairo to F.O.
Regret copy to your 103 mislaid here. Believe it concerned Greek Prime Minister.
January 16th. F.O. to Cairo
108. Greek Prime Minister wishes to import grain into Greece. Can you do this?
January 19th. Cairo to F.O.
428. Your 108. We have imported grain into Greece several times. It was believed to go to the German Army.
January 22nd. F.O. to Cairo
112. Your 428. If you import grain to Greek Prime Minister, can you suggest measures to prevent its reaching the German Army? Would Prime Minister's personal guarantee be sufficient?
January 24th. Cairo to F.O.
430. Your 112. Which Prime Minister's guarantee do you suggest? Prefer M. Briand, if still in office.
January 27th. F.O. to Cairo
114. Your 430. We alluded to Greek Prime Minister. Please let me have your views as soon as possible, as matter is urgent and delay to be avoided.
February 8th. Cairo to F.O.
435. Your 114. To avoid delay, suggest the personal guarantee in writing of Greek Prime Minister countersigned by British Consul at Piraeus, with documentary assent of British Government and approval of Director General Customs Administration, Alexandria.
February 10th. F.O. to Cairo
118. Your 435. Have agreed to accept joint and several guarantee of King of Greece, Archimandrite and Greek Prime Minister, countersigned by leading British merchant at Piraeus, Mr Carl Sonnenschein. How much can you send?
February 13th. Cairo to F.O.
440. Your 118. Will reply as soon as possible, but some delay inevitable, as uncertain what Department of the Egyptian Government deals with these questions. Have so far unsuccessfully inquired of Main Drainage, Public Instruction, War Office, Agriculture, Public Works and Wakf. Will wire again later.
March 23rd. Cairo to F.O.
150. Regret delay answering your 118. Matter very complicated. Your 487. Naval authorities object export of seed, as many seeds contain oil suitable for submarines. Can you arrange with Admiralty.
March 26th. F.O. to Cairo
495. Your 150. Have arranged with Admiralty. Seed will be escorted by two destroyers.
March 28th. F.O. to Cairo
499. My 495. Have ascertained seed question less important than at first considered. Greek Prime Minister has written explaining seed is needed for his favourite parrot, who is of great age and delicate. Two pounds of selected will be sufficient. Please obtain and send. Admiralty consider escort unnecessary under circumstances.
March 31st. Cairo to F.O.
161. Your 499. Am obtaining seed at once. Can you inform me of approximate size of parrot, as understand from inquiries that there is a direct relation between size of birds and size of food seeds.
April 7th. F.O. to Cairo
506. Your 161. Stop seed.
April 8th. Cairo to F.O.
165. Your 506. Seed stopped
April 12th. F.O. to Cairo
510. Your 165. As information has reached me that the Greek Prime Minister's parrot died last week of indegestion, no further action in matter is necessary.

[Bushmaster]

Missing the point. It is not the facts of the BE that will earn it a place alongside the classical empires, it is the perception of the rest of the world.

[s2art]

Bushmaster said:

Missing the point. It is not the facts of the BE that will earn it a place alongside the classical empires, it is the perception of the rest of the world.

Which is changing.

[350GT]

In a thousand years, who knows what the perception will be.

[Bushmaster]

350GT said:

In a thousand years, who knows what the perception will be.

I think this is the OP's original question!

IMHO, the British Empire will be seen as a mere precursor to the American Empire.

The British/American Empire.

Edited by Bushmaster on Tuesday 31st March 17:29

[s2art]

Bushmaster said:

350GT said:

In a thousand years, who knows what the perception will be.

I think this is the OP's original question!

IMHO, the British Empire will be seen as a mere precursor to the American Empire.

The British/American Empire.

Edited by Bushmaster on Tuesday 31st March 17:29

Cant see it. No doubt links will be made between the fall of the British Empire and the rise of the American superpower, but they are rather different entities.

[Bushmaster]

s2art said:

Bushmaster said:

350GT said:

In a thousand years, who knows what the perception will be.

I think this is the OP's original question!

IMHO, the British Empire will be seen as a mere precursor to the American Empire.

The British/American Empire.

Edited by Bushmaster on Tuesday 31st March 17:29

Cant see it. No doubt links will be made between the fall of the British Empire and the rise of the American superpower, but they are rather different entities.

That share a common language, ethos and culture.

[350GT]

But the US is not part of the British Empire. It is its own entity. It emerged from the BE, but is not part of it, if you know what I mean? Still, it took the empire to actually get that land, as well as that of Australia, India, etc, and it did transform the world.

[drivin_me_nuts]

As a nation, what are we actually leaving behind as our legacy. Invasion and the like are all very well, but the Romans did it harder, Ghengis et all did it more brutally, the Greeks and the Persian with a little more style...

What is the legacy. It's not stuff tangible stuff. Building and the like are memorable to a point. The buildings in India are a good example - pretty yes, but every once invading and now settled Mogul Prince had his own temple and monument. The history of places like India is the history of invasions and the British invasion is little more than an abreviated punctuation mark.

No, it's not these things at all. It's something else more intangable, but at the same time more substantial and subtle. Perhaps the greatest British Empire skill was to know when to rule with guns and to know when to rule by colloboration. Africa and India are two good examples of that.

[s2art]

drivin_me_nuts said:

As a nation, what are we actually leaving behind as our legacy. Invasion and the like are all very well, but the Romans did it harder, Ghengis et all did it more brutally, the Greeks and the Persian with a little more style...

What is the legacy. It's not stuff tangible stuff. Building and the like are memorable to a point. The buildings in India are a good example - pretty yes, but every once invading and now settled Mogul Prince had his own temple and monument. The history of places like India is the history of invasions and the British invasion is little more than an abreviated punctuation mark.

No, it's not these things at all. It's something else more intangable, but at the same time more substantial and subtle. Perhaps the greatest British Empire skill was to know when to rule with guns and to know when to rule by colloboration. Africa and India are two good examples of that.

And Cricket.

[Martial Arts Man]

Bushmaster said:

s2art said:

Bushmaster said:

I very much doubt the British Empire will be placed by history in the same league as the Greek and Roman empires. There are a few reasons for my opinion:

1. Longevity - the British Empire lasted for only a few decades, say from the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 to Indian independence in 1947. The Classical empires lasted for hundred of years.

2. Monuments - The Greeks and Romans left a legacy of huge monumental architecture in the places they conquered. We left a few railway lines.

3. Golden Ageism - The Classical empires were looked back on as a Golden Age, as the world reverted to the dark ages. There is little chance of anyone looking upon the BE as a Golden Age.

4. Great Ideas - The Classical Empires gave birth to new ideas about democracy, statehood, mathematics, philosophy, sciences, etc. The BE gave the world cheap cotton.

5. Safety - The Classical empires were completely demolished and left no real continuity and so the rest of the world could safely respect them as you can respect a dead enemy. The ghost of the BE will linger on as long as the UK remains independent and so the rest of the world is not in a position to respect the BE.

IMHO the British Empire will be seen as a time when the Industrial Revolution gave Britain a slight technological head-start over the rest of the world and they used this head-start to take advantage of less developed countries economically.

1) The British Empire spanned approx 500 years in one form or another.
2) You are joking. Take a look at the Imperial buildings and monuments in India.
3) Many African countries DO look at it as a golden age. Sierra Leone recently asked to come back.
4) Joking again. It was Britain that took democracy,science and industry to huge sections of the world. Not to mention the particular brand of pragmatic philosophy that Britain evolved.
5) Its already happening.

1. Not really. You are going back to Tudor times here and back then Spain was the dominant power by far. England was tiny in comparison.

2. But not more impressive than the TAj Mahal are they. Not awesome like Roman or Greek temples.

3. Great. When the USA, Australia, New Zealand and Oz ask to come back, you may be onto something.

4. But a better spinning jenny or a steam engine is not a Great Idea.

5. ?

OP, I'm not sure you're right about all this....

1) Spain's decline began 1588 with the Amarda. This event also allowed the rise of the British Empire as a direct consequence. The Tudor dynasty revolutionised England and paved the way.

2) Perhaps you only see those classical buildings as better because they are exactly that, classical. In 1000 years, BE buildings will be few and far between. In terms of volume, the BE built many many times more impressive architectural constructions than the Romans, for instance.

3) How do you know? Can you say for sure that in 500 years we will not be in a relative dark age?

4) I think to suggest that the BE contributed nothing in the way of technology is a point not worth answering.

5) Are you aware of an empire called "The Holy Roman Empire"? I don't fully understand this point, in truth.


You clearly have some ideological issues with this subject as your arguments aren't really supported by good history.

May I ask what really annoys you about the BE?

[XXVIII]

Surely, it's a cultural thing - many elements of Greek and Roman culture still remain (and Persian and Egyptian cultures as well, and many others come to that) and there remain more examples of the better 'qualities' of each than examples of the 'undesirable' aspects of any.

The small matter of how information was kept or conveyed is the crucial thing. Given the onward march of technology, I'd say the British Empire's legacy will be to actually be better remembered than many of the others.

It's certainly far more likely to survive the ravages of time than the Babylonian and Mesopotamian cultures ever did - who (apart from the more determined history reader) knows anything about the Hittite culture or the earlier cultures in India pre- Alexander of Macedonia or indeed much about south east Asian culture before the 14th century? Who has ever much studied the almost completely lost ancient African empires or those of South America... It's a testament (pun intended) to the legacy of Judaism that so much of Jewish culture has survived despite the endless testing centuries; records and recording counts - much of the data survives!


apropos now't much - the preferred written language of the Roman Empire was, of course, Greek. Certainly the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, (the greatest Roman Emperor in my opinion...) were written in Greek, his first and chosen language, he said.

My sister-in-law is a second generation UK citizen, her parents came to the UK from Jamaica in the 1950's on Windrush.

She is quite clear in her assessment of 'who' made the slave generations, at least in Jamaica. She has kept her surname, despite it being the name of whichever Scottish merchant 'owned' her forefathers and knows that many people from Africa (well, at least those who pay any attention to this sort of thing) wouldn't like to answer a query as to why people like her ancestors found themselves crammed into ships. She has said that "someone didn't just buy 'us' - 'we' were also sold"...


The British Empire also made sure we could get a great cuppa tea almost anytime we wanted one - I could use a brew right now for sure! Few things are more wonderfully simple and there can't be a greater legacy than that!