Therefore I believe Lord Curzon was indeed a successful viceroy. Of the Sources, source two is intended to convey Lord Curzon’s tenure as Viceroy in the most positive manner .It lists his positive qualities that made him “India’s best ruler under the raj” . However given the nature of the British Empire in countries such as India the main priority is not always the well fair of the country. For instance many believe Britain was draining India of its wealth rather than helping develop the country, Dadabhai Naoroji's created this “drain theory”. Britain had used combination of force as well as divides and conquers to control India Up until this point.
However, England had to invest a lot of money in the improvement and modernization of India. The British “develop[ed] the territory by building roads, canals, railways”(Document 1) and “establish[ed] schools and newspapers”(Document 1) which isn’t cheap—especially if they have two countries to take care of. In addition, India was even more affected by imperialism. Changes in the Indian society due to English imperialism were necessary and significant, but not worth getting governmental power and independence stripped away from them. The British gave the Indians “the benefit of…blessings of civilization which they did not have the means of creating themselves”.
Their main reason, among others, for wanting to be there was because of economics. In order to gain their trust, Englishmen adopt and adapted to Indian culture. The most intriguing fact in this tale of events is how overtime British attitudes change from eagerly wanting to be apart of this specific culture to not wanting to be associated with them at all. The details of how and why this happens gradually unfold and develop in Dalrymple’s novel White Mughals-Love and Betrayal in Eighteenth Century India. In the beginning of the English-Indian relationship, things flowed very easily.
All payments went towards the king, this would've also made the Earls not feel powerful enough, especially Harold Godwin who was seen as the most powerful man in England, but theoretically he wasn’t. However the Economy was well governed because the trade increased, which encouraged both the growth of towns and foreign contacts, this demonstrates that England were still involved in trade, which was good for the economy. However the economy was not very well developed especially compared to the Byzantine Empire and Muslim world. Those economies were massive, especially when compared to England’s. Overall I believe that the economy for pre-Conquest England as well- governed to an extent as the King did have large control, he did control this well, but he may have been seen as too powerful where the government is concerned.
A Fight for Freedom (The Colonialization of Kenya) In the nineteenth century, Kenya was taken over by the British government using the process known as colonialization, which is defined as one nation gaining control of the other. When Europe took over, there were fewer good than bad consequences. Although becoming acquainted with those of Britain came in useful to those with multiple enemies who wanted an advantage over the other civilians, there were many disadvantages that came along as well. For example, land was taken away from farmers which only made the Kenyans even more angry and bitter against the British. There were three main ways that colonialism affected Kenya, including socialism, religious and political.
This corresponds to source 15 which mentions the “machinery of British rule” this agrees with the idea of the concessions only being made to allow further British control because there is a set of cogs that all need to work and India needs to be running smoothly in the British eyes to allow maximum profit from the ventures. India was the home of the cotton industry and tea and indigo was taken and sold by the British from India to keep Britain which allowed Britain to remain at highest economic prosperity. The cotton industry in England relied heavily on that in India not only was the economy at risk in Britain so was work. Without control in India this would have been lost so the reforms that were made such as the Morley Minto were aimed at keeping India under British control. These were not
British Imperialism- CEW Imperialism is a policy in which a strong nation (Great Britain) seeks to dominate weaker countries (India) politically, economically, and socially. Around the 1700’s, the British came to India due to economic interests in India. Before the arrival of British, the Mughal Empire had started to collapse. This made the arrival of British to India easier. During the occupation of British in India, they made a lot of profits due to the abundant resources in India.
In addition, imperialism "also brought jobs and industry to the colonies [and it] introduced the ideas of constitutional government to the Africans," (pg 578 AGS World History). Imperialism caused major negative aspects in Africa. In this case, Africans felt "they that Europeans got more of imperialism than they did," which suggests labors were treated as slaves. " The first step towards whiteness" (History Alive), this is a racist comment from an advertisement. The Europeans saw themselves as superiors over those who are not civilized.
The main reason the British practiced imperialism in Africa was to bring forth Christianity and many European civilizations to African countries. Britain’s economy fed on trade, and they did not want the West Coast of Africa for its palm oil. They believed it was too unstable for good commerce without their control. Their main objective was to protect their high paying countries; India and the Caribbean. Since the slave trade in the 1830’s, Africa didn’t impress the British.
They, like other nations that imperialized there, new it had much needed resources that other places did not have. They also believed colonizing there would help gain back their power and superiority that was lost at the end of the French Revolution. With these reasons in mind, France tried and succeeded in gaining many huge parts of Africa. However, their accomplishments did come at a price. While trying to conquer Algeria in North Africa, France fought with the people living there.