'At 11.00pm on 4 August 1914, King George V on the advice of his ministers formally declared war on Germany. He did so on behalf of the entire British empire.'This assumed it would take place in overseas territories in the British Empire also. This made it a world war. The declaration implied that the human and material resources of the British Empire may be drawn upon. The early indications showed that King George was not wrong about the loyalty of the empire. 'Imperial enthusiasts in Britain were gratified by the apparent warmth of response, which seemed to endorse their vision of a co operative and even centralised empire'. [2] The empire rallied around the British with support. The support of the empire was publicised greatly in Britain for example the Manchester guardian's weekly devoted space to the achievement of imperial troops.
The British Empire is an area of history that is unique. 'Tudor and Stuart England are fixed; by contrast the empire is not only an ungainly beast but one that constantly changes its size and shape. [3] It wasn't recognised as a proper field of historical study until the middle of the 19th century. Many historians compare imperial Britain to imperial Rome. Historian Bryce said, 'The British, like the Romans, were law-givers. The political empire might disintegrate, but the law remained'. [4] The importance of the empire in history has increased, as Europe counted for less, the empire counted for more. The empire reached its peak in the 1930's when it was still intact and at its greatest extent. Therefore world war one had not severely damaged it. But it had revealed the strengths and weaknesses of it.
Ronald Hyam, in Britain's imperial century 1815-1914 said that Britain's imperial century came to an end in 1915 in the mud of Flanders; this view shows that world war one brought about weaknesses to the empire and was slowly eroding away at it. The war can be seen as sharpening self consciousness of the nations and wearing away imperial unity. 'T.O. Lloyd, in the British empire 1558-1983, observes Soldiers went out to fight because Britain was at war, but they fought as Canadians or as Australians'. [5] Their own identity was becoming more important to them and world war one brought out this weakness. They were however volunteering showing that the empire had the strength to bring its colonies together.
The British Empire had a great contribution from colonies involving two and half million colonial troops. The colonies not only supply troops but materials and money. India's contribution was very valuable and provided free by India. Official statistics record that during the war 400,000 + Canadians served overseas, 50,000 were killed. 330,000 Australians went and 59,000 killed. Indian princes immediately offered their services and those of their troops, 1440,000 were gathered into the Indian army. Even the tiny West Indian also colonies contributed. [6] In Canada the conservative government endorsed it along with its liberal opposition. 'All over the empire young men volunteered because they felt that they were British and that Britain was in danger, but they were organised by their own governments and fought as Australians or Canadians'. [7] Therefore it would appear from the outside that the empire was strong and a united force. However conscription did cause tension in Canada and Australia. Canada introduced it in late 1917 whereas Australia held two referendums where the electorate rejected conscription. This is not to say they were rejecting the war they just did not want it to be compulsory. 'Seen from the inside, it was an alliance of six or seven governments working closely together for a common objective... with occasional moments of tension'. [8]
The First World War was a war between all the imperialist powers such as the British, French, Tsarist, Austro Hungarian, German and Ottoman Empires. Before the war the British Empire was facing competition from other empires, for example the German Empire. 'The rather relaxed, informal imperialism which the British had enjoyed had to die in these circumstances'. [9] Britain was not only having to prepare to fight but was preparing to hold on to what it had. The war was fought using the resources of the empires. For example India's contribution was very valuable and provided free. In order to get the resources of their empires they either used coercion or promised future improvements. However these promises were then often broken after world war one creating problems and weaknesses within the empire. 'The British Empire survived indeed expanded while others collapsed, but the costs were high both in terms of money and permanently altered imperial relationships'. [10]
In the Middle East the British made Egypt a protectorate, this antagonised nationals who wanted a reduced British role. Therefore Britain had to make promises to consider self government, in effect promising the Arab world independence after the war. This contradicted with its own ambitions, therefore in the immediate aftermath of the war many Arabs felt betrayed by Britain, they had risen up and were not getting what they had been promised. A similar problem occurred with the Jewish community. Britain wanted their support and wanted them to lobby their own governments to stay in the war so issued the Belfour deflation in 1917 promising to support the idea of a national home foe the Jews. This led to conflicting promises. Another example of promises that were made is in India. Britain needed India and so India was a major British concern it did not want to antagonise it and did not have the power to coerce it into action or force its will. Therefore in 1917 the secretary of state for India issue a famous Montague declaration, promising India self government within the British Empire and later followed this up with promises India would be involved in the process of governing India. Britain would have control of key issues. The war accelerated the pace of political change in India. But it is debateable whether or not Britain would have made political commitments to reform in India without the pressure of war.
Weaknesses in the empire were therefore becoming apparent although it was at its peak the largest empire the world had ever known having power and influence stretch across the world, the war tested its power, it had to make promises to benefit from them; this is not evidence of a strong empire able to depend on its colonies. It had consequences. Therefore the war brought the British Empire together but also brought about weaknesses. At the end moral and capital was both reduced. After the war had finished Britain faced many troubles that can be attributed to the war. It faced problems in India, the Middle East and Ireland. But it cannot all be blamed on the war but also on a long term trend which was her political and economic decline in the world. 'Since the 1870s this decline had been apparent, though at that time not very worrying because she had some way to decline before her lead was taken from her'. [11] The empire was faced by challenges of industrially young countries like Germany, Russia and the US. The war had helped keep them at bay but even with Germany wounded Britain was not strong enough to capitalise on it after the war. So this showed a weakness in the British Empire. 'As it turned out the war had weakened her permanently'. [12]
There were also various uprisings but none to cause too much concern. Robert Holland argues that the war did not cause these it just created the right time for them to complain about colonial rule. So this could be said to be bringing out pre existing weaknesses within the empire. For example in South Africa there was a minor Afrikaner revolt, but the government easily suppressed it. However the domestic impact of the First World War had therefore left the South African party even more in danger of being outflanked by militant Afrikaner nationalists hostile to British Empire. Their involvement brought about a growing sense of dominion nationalism which is a weakness for the empire. There were those who felt more sympathy for the German cause, the election showed that half the African population opposed fighting the war on the British side. There was political pressure growing even before the war in India and Ireland, and dominions were demanding autonomy within the empire. This could be said to exacerbate and to accelerate. The official response was united but was not universally welcomed in reality. Effort to get resources often deepened pre existing tensions and divisions. The territories therefore varied widely in their cultures, their resources and their independence. The First World War had therefore affected this variegated empire to different degrees. There were immediate post war crises in Egypt, India and Ireland. But even with the war the British people were still committed to the empire and it would be incorrect to assume otherwise. Victory in war was often interpreted as an achievement of empire. But it did show a definite weakness, Britain would have to give away concessions and greater self government if the empire was to survive in the future. 'The adherence of empire peoples to the empire connection was not unchallenged or unconditional'. [13]
War brought out strengths and weaknesses of the British navy. With colonies all over the world Britain can ensure its safety. Great Britain had a vastly superior naval presence; not only in terms of numbers, but also the strength of individual ships. Financial contributions from the empire to Britain's war effort were also much needed and often generously given though sometimes forcefully obtained. Britain also received money from the colonies as the greatest trade nation so could afford more ships. For example the raj government presented 100 million, raw materials and other supplies were also given, purchased or taken for the empires cause. Plus all the money they would get from these colonies would increase their treasury for more ships without the navy; Britain could not have stayed in the war. Although it fought only one fleet action, at Jutland on 31 May 1916, it prevented the German navy from breaking out of the confines of the North Sea. [14] However, the British Empire was entirely unprepared for modern warfare such as trench warfare.
The Great War also showed a weakness in the empire that was that Germany and not Britain was the fastest growing economic power. It had become highly industrialised allowing it to easily supply mass armies. The British Empire was in danger of being over taken. World war one showed that the British Empire was not as strong as it had believed. It had not been easy to defeat Germany. The home of the industrial revolution was Britain. Britain had a period of calm confidence. This was known as pax Britannia. But this could not last forever and spurred the other nations to catch up. World war one showed they had considerably. [15] The British had suffered millions of casualties and liquidated assets at an alarming rate, which led to debt accumulation, upending of capital markets and manpower deficiencies in the staffing of far-flung imperial posts in Asia and the African colonies. The colonies proved their power in the war. Many of Britain's resources lay in her colonies. But even with this, Britain's resources were being stretched more than they ever had before. The empires resources still had not been enough for Britain to win the war comfortably.
It did however show British strength at coming together as one united force, despite the great distances between colonies and mandates and the size of the empire. However there had now been two important conflicts, the South African war and the First World War, the Second World War was to come and test the empire to the limits. Britain had in the short term survived the war and expanded which shows strength of the empire but for how long was the question. The heavy costs of the war undermined its capacity to maintain the vast empire. Nationalist sentiment grew in both old and new Imperial territories, fuelled by pride at Empire troops' participation in the war. Colonies began to want more independence. The war had created the illusion of imperial unity on the surface but cracks had opened up. It exacerbated tensions that had existed before the war. Self governing dominions were now more conscious of their nationhood and of asserting this. So the empire as it once stood now needed further negotiations if it was to maintain itself. However this can be said to just be a fact of empire, problems are always going to arise regardless of the war. Given Britain's weakened condition it was still able to maintain an expanded global system, with a growing awareness that the empire should bear some of the burden for maintaining the imperial system.
Overall, at the start of world war one Britain controlled more of the globe than anywhere else but it emerged from world war one struggling economically and having made promises it could not honour. Therefore reveaing wekanesses of the empire. However it did manage to continue to keep an empire together and consolidate which is a strength. By the end of the war Britain emerged as the dominant power within the entire Islam world. Britain had always assumed the empire was an esstential and in national interest. However the weaknesses that were beginning to show would soon lead to the break up of the empire but for the time being after world war one it still remained a united but slightly weakened force.
Word count 2,500
