Book & Author
Caroline Elkins: Legacy of Violence — A History of The British Empire
By Dr Ahmed S. Khan
Chicago, IL
“Nineteenth-century colonialization of the African continent was in many respects the culmination of the Renaissance-initiated expansion of European dominion over the planet… The resistance of the black man to white colonial intrusion was crushed by the gun.”
During the 20 th century, the British Empire was the largest in human history — it spanned across a quarter of the world's landmass with over seven hundred million subjects. In Legacy of Violence — A History of The British Empire, Caroline Elkins, Pulitzer Prize–winning historian probes the use of institutionalized violence by the British Empire to control its colonies around the globe for a period covering more than 200 years.
Elkins, a professor of History at Harvard University, spent more than a decade doing research on four continents. Her findings and scholarship implicate all sides of Britain's political divide in the creation, execution, and cover-up of imperial violence. Her scholarship shows - how over time - the violence became systematically institutionalized; how the Imperial officers destroyed and hid the incriminating evidence of its violent policies and practices in the colonies; and how violence was the most salient factor of the British Empire that shaped today’s world.
After WWII, many African and Asian nations gained independence from colonial powers. But their aspirations of exercising complete independence and freedom have yet to materialize as their political and economic institutions are still being controlled by colonial masters: a case in point — in contrast to India where most of the colonial legacy has been shed, in Pakistan, the colonial legacy lives on — the peoples' will and mandate are continuously hijacked by the corrupt ruling elite — generals, judges, tycoons and feudal lords —the remnants of colonialism.
The book, in addition to an introduction and epilogue, has 14 chapters, divided into three parts, spanning over 875 pages that include more than 150 pages of notes and bibliography: Part-I An Imperial Nation (Chapter 1 Liberal Imperialism, Chapter 2 Wars Small and Great, Chapter 3 Legalized Lawlessness, Chapter 4 "I'm merely pro-British," Chapter 5 Imperial Convergence); Part-II Empire at War (Chapter 6 An Imperial War, Chapter 7 A War Of Ideas, Chapter 8 "Partnership," Chapter 9 Imperial Resurgence), and Part-III Trysts With Destiny (Chapter 10 Glass Houses, Chapter 11 Exit Palestine, Enter Malaya, Chapter 12 Small Places, Close to Home, Chapter 13 Systematized Violence, Chapter 14 Operation Legacy, and Epilogue: Empire Comes Home).
The book begins with an author's Note followed by an Introduction: “This book contains derogatory words and phrases, quoted from historical actors, that refer to racial, ethnic, and religious groups. They are offensive. I have chosen to use these words and phrases, in their original forms, because this language represents the attitudes of some historical actors during this period and encodes much of the state-directed violence that I discuss and analyze.”
Commenting on the reason she wrote the book, the author states: “I wrote this book because my previous work, Imperial Reckoning: The Untold Story of Britain's Gulag in Kenya, raised unanswered questions about violence in the British Empire. It documented the systematic violence that took place in Kenya's detention camps during the Mau Mau Emergency (1952-60). Imperial Reckoning's research was arduous because countless documents were missing from the official archives… Britain not only created civil conflicts through its divide-and-rule policies throughout the empire but also left such conflicts in its wake. With this book, I am telling a history of the British Empire. It is not one of constitutional reform, political economy, military policy, or comparative empires, even though these stories will make appearances from time to time.”
In the introduction, the author observes that during the COVID-19 epidemic, the UK's Black population’s disproportionate suffering led to demands for racial justice and equality. Demonstrations were held in many cities — statues of key imperialist figures like Churchill and Colston were defaced and toppled! On June 7, 2020, thousands of protesters flooded London's streets, and chanted "Churchill was a racist." In Bristol, the mob toppled the statue of Colston and launched it into River Avon. The author cites two differing viewpoints about the British empire: Bigger vs. Ferguson. Nigel Bigger, Regius Professor of Moral and Pastoral Theology at Oxford, admonished those who say domination is an intrinsically bad thing: "Sometimes the imposition of imperial rule, can have the salutary effect of imposing a unifying, pacific, and law-abiding order on peoples otherwise inclined to war among themselves…Not allowing our imperial history to be rubbished is important, because if indeed our imperial history was all that they say it was, namely a litany of atrocity, then the moral authority of the West is eroded."
In contrast to Biggar's concern with morality, Niall Ferguson's focus is on imperialism's systems and structures, as he observes in book Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World: "The British Empire acted as an agency for imposing free markets, the rule of law, investor protection and relatively incorrupt government on roughly a quarter of the world…The imagination reels from the counterfactual of modern history without the British Empire…There would be no Calcutta; no Bombay; no Madras. Indians may rename them as many times as they like, but these vast metropoles remain cities founded and built by the British… British ideals and institutions drove unprecedented socioeconomic, legal, and political transformations ushering much of the world into the modern era…There therefore seems to be a plausible case that the Empire enhanced global welfare—in other words, was a Good Thing.”
Reflecting on the two viewpoints, the author observes: “Biggar and Ferguson are not alone in their views. Nearly 60 percent of the nation, when polled in 2014, believed that ‘the British Empire was something to be proud of’; more recently, over a quarter of Britons say they want empire back."
Reflecting on the past role and future aspirations of the British Empire, the author cites Prime Minister Johnson’s remarks during the 2016 Brexit polls: “'this country over the last two hundred years has directed the invasion or conquest of 178 countries—that is most of the members of the UN.' The Conservative Party's Brexit campaign declared a 'Global Britain' vision, an Empire 2.0. Pushing back his mop of hair and stammering with pride, Johnson reminded his nation that 'Churchill was right when he said that the empires of the future will be empires of the Mind and in expressing our values I believe that Global Britain is a soft power superpower and that we can be immensely proud of what we are achieving.'"
Commenting on the use of liberal imperialism by the British Empire, the author states: “The British Empire was born from conflict, and coming to terms with its history is no different. To study it is to unlock memory's gate using the key of historical inquiry. But once inside, history's fortress is bewildering. Chimeras abound, spawned hundreds of years ago when Britain began its march toward amassing the largest empire that the world has ever known. Unlike mythical fire-breathing monsters, however, the creatures inhabiting the annals of Britain's imperial past are not illusions. By the nineteenth century, they took fresh breath from a potent ideology of liberal imperialism and from new forms in the British Empire's structures and practices. These monstrosities inflicted untold suffering, though with a deftness that obscured their corrosive effects in images, real and imagined, of imperial reform. The question is, how and why did these enigmatic creatures emerge, develop, and endure? It is also the question behind this book, an account of violence in the British Empire, its origins, institutions, practices, and effects on hundreds of millions of people in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The story that unfolds is not the whole story of violence in the empire. This would be impossible to tell in a single account. Instead, my interest lies in British imperialism's entanglement of liberalism, violence, the law, and historical claim making and the ways in which state-directed violence in the British Empire have shaped large parts of the contemporary world."
Explaining the modus operandi of imperial expansion, the author observes: “When the American colonies revolted, Britain suffered a humiliating loss, though it found redemption in a turn to the East. There, in Britain's second empire, imperial ambitions were grandiose. By the nineteenth century, British global expansion and imperialism—or the extension of economic and political control over foreign lands through either informal or formal means—was a defining feature. In search of markets for its goods and capital, Britain preferred to keep the doors of free trade and investment open through informal mechanisms like treaties and the sheer force of its economic dominance. When necessary, however, it would annex a territory and exert formal political control, achieving economic supremacy through protectionist policies, which included tariffs, monopolies, and an accumulation of sterling reserves through a positive trade balance. Whether through informal or formal means, imperialism was a difference of degree, not of kind. Britain exported its investments, manufactured goods, people, language, and culture to the far reaches of the globe while importing raw materials for its factories, food for the nation, and profits for its 'gentlemanly capitalists,' or financiers, rentiers, and insurance agents who amassed invisible earnings. Through British loans, infrastructure Investments, and predatory banking, laissez-faire imperialism rendered places in Latin America as much a sphere of influence as South Africa's Cape of Good Hope or India—where, after 1857, formal annexation rind protectionist policies consolidated political control, extortive taxation, and a host of monopolies that included opium and salt.”
Describing how various conflicts affected maintenance of the British Empire, the author notes: “As the nineteenth century progressed, however, Britain's ability to maintain its empire through informal means diminished. Foreign competition forced British occupations and formal rule in far-flung territories like the Gold Coast, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Kowloon, Sierra Leone, Basutoland, Lagos, and Natal. Some British statesmen balked at further territorial acquisitions. Annexations, though deemed necessary to safeguard the nation's commercial and strategic interests, were expensive. Part of this expense lay in the violence necessary to wrest and maintain control. In the nineteenth century, there were over 250 separate confirmed conflicts in the British Empire, with at least one in any given year. Among them were revolts in Barbados, Demerara (British Guiana), Ceylon, St. Vincent, and Jamaica. They also included sustained efforts to conquer and dominate— or ‘pacify’ as Britain termed it—the Ashante in the Gold Coast; the Mahdists in Sudan; the Xhosa, Zulu, and Afrikaners in South Africa; the Afghans in Central Asia; and the Burmese in Asia. Rudyard Kipling called these conflicts the ‘savage wars of peace': some were short, others protracted and recurring. They became part of imperial life, consuming British manpower, lives, and taxpayer funds while devastating local populations.”
Reflecting on the arrival of East India Company in India and the violence it unleashed viz a viz the infamous “Black Hole,” the author observes: “The Black Hole's significance extends well beyond rhetorical power in Britain's language and culture. The cascading effects of this mythologized event would help shape the course of the British Empire for centuries to come. Britain's checkered history in Bengal began with the East India Company's royal charter in 1600, though it wasn't until the Black Hole that imperial ventures in the East led to the eventual consolidation of British power throughout India. The company, an arm's-length proxy for British political interests and a cash cow for the private economic gain of its shareholders, many of whom were MPs in London, was responsible for forging treaties, negotiating trading rights, levying taxes, and deploying a standing army. In the early 1700s, the Mughal ruler granted the company lucrative customs-free trading rights for a host of items. When war broke out between France and Britain in 1756, the company ignored the orders issued by the ruler of Bengal, the nawab, Siraj-ud-daula, and fortified its trading post in Calcutta for fear of French attack. In response, the Nawab sought to drive the British out of Bengal by extending his reach to Calcutta, taking the British fort, and imprisoning all remaining Europeans. What happened next became not only the stuff of future nationalist legend but also evidence of purported native savagery. The Black Hole of Calcutta was the justification needed for Britain's conquest of Bengal. The Battle of Plassey in 1757 reversed Britain's defeat and avenged the prisoners' fates. Though less a military victory than a negotiated settlement, it firmly placed Britain's imperial stake into the ground. It so buttressed the future reputation of then Lieutenant Colonel Robert Clive as a military genius and the founder of the empire. In the battle's aftermath, Clive ensured that Bengal was beholden to the company, and massive profits continued to flow to it.”
Commenting on the current status of liberal Imperialism, the author notes: "Today liberal imperialism continues to hold sway, though the British government's configuration of white power clearly jettisons prospects or a federation of Western states. With the 2016 Brexit vote, the Conservatives, preferring to go it alone, prevailed by holding up Britain's mythologized past and targeting the forces undermining the nation's unique values and, with them, its glories and identity. 'Take Back Control' was Brexit's enduring slogan, a control that Britain ostensibly lost when it integrated with Europe and opened its doors to the continent's immigrants, who further 'polluted' the nation. Britain's Foreign and Commonwealth Office peddled 'Empire 2.0' alongside Theresa May's delusions of a 'Global Britain' conjured from the embers of the empire’s postwar demise, But old lessons die hard, if they are ever learned at all. When the international trade minister Liam Fox spoke of the Commonwealth as the panacea for a post-Brexit trade boost, he reflected the nation casting its fate, yet again, in the lair of imperial sentiments and Euroskepticism as opposed to economic empiricism. The same kind of control, and the dog whistles of populist racialized power that beckon it, have unfolded across the globe in various forms, whether they be in demands to go it alone, to privilege racial, ethnic, and religious majorities, or to Make America Great Again."
The author concludes the book by making observations about impediments in promoting universal dignity and equality: “Those holding the keys to power rarely end systemic discrimination, enforce civil rights laws, or ensure equal opportunities. When these gatekeepers do yield, they dole out reform measures haltingly to those perceived as still ‘not yet’ ready to stand on their own, while deportations, crackdowns, and incarcerations continue to punish society's alleged pollutants who threaten the natural order of things. As history has borne out over and over, those who have lived the experiences of liberalism's ‘inhuman totality’ must demand universal rights and unfettered inclusion, sometimes peacefully and other times forcefully. Even then, that totality's ability to rear its head again, reinvented under another banner of reform, is an enduring feature of liberal states, as are demands."
Legacy of Violence — A History of The British Empire is the outcome of 10 years of research conducted on four continents by Caroline Elkins, historian and professor of history at Harvard University. The author sheds light on the dark side of the British Empire — the systematic and institutionalized use of violence coupled with liberal ideology which justified conquest and repression viz a viz “legalized lawlessness.” The book has few shortcomings: the author fails to describe the details of brutal violence the British Empire unleashed on the freedom fighters in India during the 1857 War of Independence aka Mutiny of 1857; excessive details and segmentation of quotes attenuate the readability of the narrative. Despite these shortcomings, the book is essential reading for students of history and general readers. It could also be used as a reference book for undergraduate and graduate courses in world history.
(Dr Ahmed S. Khan — dr.a.s.khan@ieee.org — is a Fulbright Specialist Scholar)
Back to Pakistanlink Homepage
