Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:13:43.441Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Locating the Age of Imperialism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2010

Thomas August
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The publication of Africa and the Victorians in 1961 challenged the prevaling orthodoxy regarding the European scramble for territory during the last decades of the nineteenth century. In it, Ronald Robinson and John Gallagher argued that what had been traditionally viewed as qualitatively new was merely a difference ol degree and not kind. Subsequent studies, especially the work of David Fieldhouse, effectively laid to rest the assumption that new developments in Europe were the cause of the rush for colonies after 1880. And yet historians generally have been reluctant to abandon the ‘age of imperialism’ as an appropriate epithet for late-Victorian Europe. The sheer amount of territory conquered by Europeans in so short a span ol time seemingly compels teachers ol modern history survey courses to view the period 1880–1914 from a traditional perspective and with resort to established nomenclature. Does the historical rubric, ‘age of imperialism’, still have pedagogic value? The answer is a qualified affirmative, provided that its chronological moorings are anchored elsewhere.

Type
Modern imperialism and decolonisation
Information
Itinerario , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , July 1986 , pp. 85 - 98
Copyright
Copyright © Research Institute for History, Leiden University 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 Barratt-Brown, Michael, After Imperialism (London 1963) 111. Between 1870 and 1913 the proportionate share of the empire as placements for capital export hovered between 40% and 50% of the total volume.Google Scholar

2 Sauvy, Alfred, Histoire économique de la France entre les deux guerres, vol. 2 (Paris 1967) 453.cf. alsoGoogle ScholarThobie, Jacques, La France impériale, 1880–1914 (Paris 1982) 64Google Scholar.

3 Pollard, Sidney, The Development of the British Economy 1914–1950 (London 1962) 193.Google Scholar

4 Barratt-Brown, Michael, After Imperialism, 111.Google Scholar

5 Hobsbawm, Eric, Industry and Empire (London 1969) 175.Google Scholar

6 Kindleberger, Charles P., Economic Growth in Britain and France 1851–1950 (Cambridge 1964) 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Michael Barratt-Brown, After Imperialism, 11. The only.other period in English history when colonial commerce comprised so high a percentage of total foreign trade was the second half of the eighteenth century. R.B. Jones estimates that by 1760, 40% of British overseas trade was colonial and that this figure likely increased thereafter. It should be noted how, ever that the volume and value of British overseas trade at this time was miniscule compared t o the ‘take-off’ period after 1780. (Cf. Jones, R.B., Economic and Social History of England 1770–1977 (London 1979) 12Google Scholar.

8 Percentages of various trading partners are based upon figures provided by Mitchell, B.R., European Historical Statistics 1750–1970 (New York 1975)497,573-574CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Sauvy, Alfred, Histoire économique de la France, 453.Google Scholar

10 Ibidem. Cf. also Cornevin, Robert, ‘La France d' outre-mer’ in: Sauvy, Alfred ed., Histoire économique de la France entre les deux guerres, vol. 3 (Paris 1972) 294. As in the case of Britain, the eighteenth century was a time when colonial commerce constituted a large percentage of the foreign trade of France, perhaps as high as 2/3 of total traffic on the eve of the revolution. (Cf.Google ScholarLough, J., An Introduction to Eighteenth Century France (London 1960) 71–73; cited byGoogle ScholarAnderson, Perry, Lineages of the Absolutist State (London 1979) 110.)Google Scholar

11 Cf. Mitchell, B.R., European Historical Statistics, 524.Google Scholar

12 In actuality, the Leninist model of cartelization, protectionism, and conflict among the leading capitalist states most clearly corresponds to the interwar period, especially the 1930s. (Cf. Arrighi, Giovanni, The Geometry of Imperialism. The Limits of Hobson's Paradigm (London 1978)Google Scholar.

13 Hopkins, A.G., An Economic History of West Africa (London 1973) 198–199.Google Scholar

14 Coquery-Vidrovitch, C., ‘La mise en dépendence de l'Afrique noire. Essai de périodisation, 1800–1970’, Cahiers d' études africaines 16, 1–2, cahiers 61–62 (1976). Coquery-Vidrovitch regards the depression as the prelude to the age of ‘colonial imperialism’, the period 1936–52. Cf. also the articles byCrossRefGoogle ScholarCoquery-Vidrovitch, J. Bouvier and Gallisot, R., along with other papers presented at a conference at the University of Paris VII in April of 1976, published under the title ‘L'Afrique et la cerise de 1930 (1924–1938)’, Revue française d'histoire d'outre-mer 63, 232–233 (1976)Google Scholar.

15 Amery, L.C.M.S., National and Imperial Economics (London 1924).Google Scholar

16 Drummed, Ian, British Economic Policy and the Empire 1919–1939 (London 1972)86.Google Scholar

17 Cabinet papers GT 6887, meeting of February 25, 1919; cited by Brett, E.A., Colonialism and Underdevelopment in East Africa. The Politics of Change 1919–1939 (London 1973) 18Google Scholar.

18 Abbott, George C., ‘British Colonial Aid Policy during the 1930s, Journal of Canadian History 5 (1970) 74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 Morgan, D.J., The Documentary History of Colonial Development, vol. 1 (London 1980)57.Google Scholar

20 Eleventh Report of the Colonial Development Advisory Committee; cited by Wicker, E.R., ‘colonial Development and Welfare’, Social and Economic Studies 7, 4 (1958) 173Google Scholar.

21 Cmd. 4175, Imperial Economic Conference - Ottawa 1932 (London 1932) 74Google Scholar.

22 Sarraut, Albert, La mise en valeur des colonies françaises (Paris 1923) 20.Google Scholar

23 Lyautey, Pierre, L'empire colonial français (Paris 1931) 296.Google Scholar

24 Conseil national économique, Les relations économiques entre la France el ses colonies, by Dayras, Georges (Paris 1934)Google Scholar.

25 Schweitzer, Thomas A., ‘The French Colonialist Lobby in the 1930's. The Economic Foundations of Imperialism’(Ph.D. Madison 1971)302.Google Scholar

26 In addition to the active involvement of the state in colonial development programs, private investors in the United Kingdom were turning increasingly to the empire as placements for capital and at a time when total overseas investment was declining. By the late 1920s the empire attracted 59% of all British foreign investment, compared to the previous high of 47% before World War I. (Cf. Barratt-Brown, Michael, After Imperialism, 111.) The shift toward imperial investment is even more marked in the case of France. Thobie makes the interesting point that before World War I the French version of imperialism (in the Leninist sense of capital export) existed outside the colonial empire: Russia, the Ottoman Empire, Latin America, etc. (Google ScholarThobie, Jacques, La France impériale, 1880–1914, 99). In 1914 French foreign capital in the colonies amounted to a mere four billion gold francs: by 1940 the total had increased over fourfold to 17.5 billion gold francs. The colonial percentage of French foreign investment significantly rose during the same period, from 9% in 1914 to 45% in 1940. (Google ScholarMarseille, Jacques, ‘L'investissement français dans I'mpire colonial. L'enquête du gouvernement de Vichy (1943)’, Revue historique 1974 (no. 512)415–418Google Scholar.