1J - Attitudes towards imperialism in Britain
Empire became a powerful language of national pride and party conflict between c1857 and c1890, but British opinion was never uniform. Learn why imperialism appealed to different audiences, how Disraeli and Gladstone used imperial issues, and why their actions resist a simple expansionist-versus-anti-imperialist division.
Pride, duty and material interests
Support for empire could rest on several beliefs at once. Possessions overseas demonstrated Britain's status as a great power. Naval strength and victories appeared to confirm national ability. Merchants could see empire as a source of markets and resources; others associated it with mission work, opposition to slavery or a duty to spread institutions they regarded as superior.
Imperialism was the advocacy or practice of extending power over other societies. A person could support retaining existing possessions while opposing a new war, or favour self-government for settlers while denying it to colonised peoples. Attitudes therefore need to be attached to a particular issue rather than reduced to a single yes-or-no label.
Ideas of racial and cultural hierarchy commonly supported imperial claims. Representing Britons as uniquely capable of good government justified foreign rule and made resistance appear irrational or ungrateful. These were claims made by imperial supporters, not neutral descriptions of the peoples governed. The survival of African states, Indian political organisations and sophisticated commercial networks challenges any assumption that British intervention introduced all political or economic organisation.
Material interests also differed. A merchant seeking secure trade, a missionary demanding protection and a taxpayer concerned about military expenditure could reach different judgements about the same expedition. Explaining support requires showing how a development served an audience's interests or beliefs.
Popular culture and its audiences
Newspapers, illustrated publications, adventure stories, lectures and music-hall performances carried images of empire to British audiences. Accounts of exploration and military heroism gave distant events recognisable protagonists. They could celebrate courage while leaving the aims and suffering of colonised peoples less visible.
The patriotic music-hall song associated with the word jingoism became popular during the Eastern Crisis of 1877–78. Jingoism meant aggressive patriotic enthusiasm, particularly readiness to assert national power against rivals. The crisis concerned Britain's position towards Russia and the Ottoman Empire, but its language of strength connected European diplomacy with the defence of imperial interests.
The Colonial and Indian Exhibition of 1886 displayed products, crafts and representations of imperial societies. It linked commercial potential with royal patronage and national prestige. Victoria's Golden Jubilee in 1887 likewise made imperial connections visible through ceremony. The exhibition's own guide presented visitors with commercial products and displays; it is evidence of the organisers' message, not a survey of what every visitor thought. 1886 official guide, Wellcome Collection.
Publicity had limits. Readers could admire a soldier without endorsing every war, and an exhibition visitor could attend out of curiosity. Class, religion, political allegiance and personal experience shaped responses. A successful performance or crowded ceremony demonstrates circulation and participation; universal imperial commitment requires additional evidence.
Disraeli and imperial Conservatism
Benjamin Disraeli associated Conservatism with defence of the monarchy, national greatness and empire. His Crystal Palace speech in 1872 presented the maintenance of empire as an important Conservative purpose. This made overseas power a language through which the party could claim to represent national interests rather than only particular social groups.
As prime minister from 1874 to 1880, Disraeli acquired the khedive's Suez Canal Company shares in 1875 and secured the Royal Titles Act in 1876, enabling Victoria to become Empress of India. The share purchase offered a conspicuous assertion of British interest in a strategic route. The title joined monarchy and imperial status, but added no new territory by itself.
The title also produced criticism. Opponents questioned its constitutional meaning and whether an imperial style associated with despotic rule suited Britain. The parliamentary debates show that disagreement concerned how the title would be used as well as its impact in India. Royal Titles debate, 20 March 1876.
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account