Nigel Biggar’s Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning must rank as one of the most controversial books published this year. So contentious that its existence was temporarily uncertain after Biggar’s original publisher cancelled his contract, citing unfavourable “public feeling”. The greater controversy should be why a book by an Oxford theologian, which is at once reasonable, balanced and respectful, should have proven so provocative.
Biggar’s book is not a chronological history of the British Empire but a moral assessment in response to the pervasive anti-colonialist rhetoric of modern times. Each of the eight chapters addresses essential ethical and philosophical questions that have never been timelier in facilitating an accurate understanding of Britain’s imperial past. His analysis encompasses questions of imperial motivation and legitimacy, slavery and allegations of excessive violence and genocide. While acknowledging the natural inclination to judge the past by modern standards, he reminds us that humans are constantly evolving morally and that good historical judgement should consider the different world our ancestors inhabited.
One senses that Biggar’s entirely reasonable assessment of Britain’s imperial record will come as little surprise to the silent majority who have an intuitive understanding of the universality of human nature at its most fundamental level. Imperialism has existed in all corners of the world for thousands of years. The British were not the only people who considered themselves the yardstick of human progress. Slavery, violence and prejudice have been equally pervasive. Moreover, he reminds us that the empire developed piecemeal over centuries for various economic, strategic and humanitarian reasons, effectively lacking centralised control or a coherent ideology. Fairly judged, it is a history of conflict and collaboration, destruction and innovation, exploitation and humanitarianism. Biggar’s book is not an apologia for imperialism; instead, it is a valuable reminder that, in his words, there is “a more historically accurate, fairer, more positive story to be told about the British Empire than the anti-colonialists want us to hear”.
Balance-sheet assessments of the empire, though rare, are not unique. Once in a while, an academic, too senior to be cancelled and enjoying more latitude than his colleagues, will remind us that it wasn’t all bad. Twenty years have passed since Niall Ferguson’s Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World. The academic establishment has since grown increasingly politicised and intolerant of dissenting views. The value of Biggar’s work is that it places the defence of Britain’s imperial record in the context of the present assault upon the culture. It confronts these developments directly, challenging and, where appropriate, refuting anti-colonialist allegations.
While acknowledging the historian’s duty to highlight abuses where they occurred, Biggar argues that in their manipulation of the evidence, too often they have exceeded the reasonable limits of personal interpretation and strayed into the realms of “politically charged inaccuracy”. Depressingly familiar tactics, he explains, include the omission of vital context, the manipulation of data, such as the inflation of casualties, and flagrant double standards, noting the tendency of academics to be “morally neutral and infinitely indulgent” regarding non-Western cultures and “morally absolutist and infinitely unforgiving with regard to Western, British culture”.
History as a discipline evolved in the 19th century alongside the rise of European nationalism and served to reinforce a sense of shared heritage. Although eager to critique patriotic myth-making, modern historians are often oblivious to their biases towards globalisation and egalitarianism and have reversed the process to effect the demoralisation of European peoples. As Biggar explains, aside from its intellectual dishonesty, it has damaging real-world consequences. Proselytising students with imbalanced interpretations of the past has heightened racial animosity and undermined faith in western values, as reflected in the actions of the righteously indignant to tear down statues and denigrate their heritage. Biggar implores a plurality of views grounded in historical truth, promoting open-mindedness and respect while warning that dogmatism fosters a culture of intolerance.
Critics may accuse Biggar of adopting a Eurocentric concept of linear cultural progression in his assessment of the empire, confusing rhetoric with reality and understating abuses. However, the book testifies to the fact that there is another interpretation of Britain’s imperial past, which in a free society must be heard and countered through further debate. Many will welcome it as a retort to academic orthodoxy and a clarion call for intellectual integrity and the judgement of historical scholarship by its approximation to the truth, rather than its service to a political narrative.
Areas of Catholic Herald business are still recovering post-pandemic.
However, we are reaching out to the Catholic community and readership, that has been so loyal to the Catholic Herald. Please join us on our 135 year mission by supporting us.
We are raising £250,000 to safeguard the Herald as a world-leading voice in Catholic journalism and teaching.
We have been a bold and influential voice in the church since 1888, standing up for traditional Catholic culture and values. Please consider donating.