The sixtieth anniversary of the accession of Queen Victoria was celebrated on Sunday, 20 June 1897, by special services at places of worship throughout her dominions. Two days later the Queen drove in state for three hours through the streets of her capital and was rapturously received by her loyal subjects. To spare the energies of the ageing sovereign no foreign monarchs were invited to share the celebrations. It was a family and a domestic occasion. But family was widely interpreted, and among those taking part were the prime ministers of all the self-governing colonies — all fifteen of them were sworn of the Privy Council at a ceremony at Windsor on 7 July — and colonial as well as Indian troops.


Foreign Affair External Affair Indian Affair Home Rule British Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    G. E. Buckle (ed.), The Letters of Queen Victoria, series 3, vol. III (1930), p. 181.Google Scholar
  2. 1.
    Quoted by F. R. Scott in P.-A. Crépeau and G. B. Macpherson (eds), The Future of Canadian Federalism (University of Toronto Press, 1965), p. 182.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. S. Eliot, ‘Rudyard Kipling’, in A Choice of Kipling’s Verse, ed. T. S. Eliot (London, Faber 1941),p. 16.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. I. M. Stewart, Eight Modern Writers (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1963), p. 286.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Charles Carrington, Rudyard Kipling (London, Macmillan, 1955), p. 274.Google Scholar
  6. 2.
    Lord Strang, Britain in World Affairs (1961), p. 222Google Scholar
  7. 3.
    It is not without interest that the most serious studies of the naval aspect of British policy from the latter part of the nineteenth century to the end of the first world war should be by an American historian, A. J. Marder. For the naval problems of the 1890s, see his British Naval Policy, 1880–1905 (London, Putnam, n.d. ? 1940).Google Scholar
  8. 1.
    See Elizabeth Pakenham (Countess of Longford), Jameson’s Raid (1960), pp. 259–332.Google Scholar
  9. 1.
    The point was made forcibly in G. N. (Lord) Curzon’s, Russia in Central Asia (1889), a description of his journey in the previous year along the new Trans-Caspian railway.Google Scholar
  10. 2.
    J. Steinberg, Yesterday’s Deterrent (London, Macdonald, 1965).Google Scholar
  11. E. L. Woodward, Great Britain and the German Navy (1935).Google Scholar
  12. 3.
    Lord Crewe, Lord Rosebery (London, John Murray, 1931), vol. 1, p. 283.Google Scholar
  13. 1.
    Eric Stokes, ‘Milnerism’, The Historical Journal (Cambridge), vol. V, 1962, p. 47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 1.
    C. Petrie, Life and Letters of Sir Austen Chamberlain (London, Cassell, 1939), vol. 1, p. 36.Google Scholar
  15. See J. C. Lockhart and G. M. Woodhouse, Rhodes (1963), pp. 168–9.Google Scholar
  16. 2.
    M. Cumpston, ‘The Discussion of Imperial Problems in the British Parliament, 1880–1885’, T.R.H.S. (1963), p. 39.Google Scholar
  17. 3.
    See M. Cumpston, ‘Some Early Indian Nationalists and Their Allies in the British Parliament, 1851–1906’, E.H.R., vol. LXXVI (1961), p. 286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 3.
    Correspondence of Goldwin Smith, ed. A. Hamilton (London, 1913), p. 447.Google Scholar
  19. See also, Elizabeth Wallace, Goldwin Smith: Victorian Liberal (Toronto, 1957), p. 92.Google Scholar
  20. 4.
    Donald C. Gordon, The Dominion Partnership in Imperial Defence, 1870–1914 (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins, 1965), p. 76.Google Scholar
  21. 2.
    S. Gopal, British Policy in India, 1858–1905 (Cambridge University Press, 1965), p. 176.Google Scholar
  22. 4.
    E. Monroe, Britain’ Moment in the Middle East (1963), p. 11.Google Scholar
  23. E. J. Hobsbawm, Industry and mpire (1968), p. 123.Google Scholar
  24. 1.
    M. and T. Zinkin, Britain and India (1964), pp. 62–3.Google Scholar
  25. 2.
    Quoted in C. H. Philips (ed.), The Evolution of India and Pakistan 1858–1947 (Select Documents) (London, Oxford University Press, 1962), pp. 56–60.Google Scholar
  26. 2.
    Quoted by J. A. S. Grenville, Lord Salisbury and Foreign Policy, the close of the nineteenth century (London, Athlone Press, 1964), pp. 295–6.Google Scholar
  27. cf. D. R. Gillard, ‘Salisbury and the Indian Defence problem’, in K. Bourne and D. C. Watt (ed.), Studies in International History (London, Longmans, 1967).Google Scholar
  28. 3.
    For a description of the British arrangements for handling Indian affairs at this time, see ch. XI, ‘The Home Government 1858–1918’, by Sir H. Verney Lovett, in H. H. Dodwell (ed.), The Cambridge History of India (Cambridge University Press, 1932), vol. VI.Google Scholar
  29. 3.
    Quoted in S. R. Mehrotra, India and the Commonwealth, 1885–1929 (London, Allen & Unwin, 1965), p. 126.Google Scholar
  30. 1.
    See generally J. E. Tyler, ‘The Development of the Imperial Conference, 1887–1914’, which is chapter XI of E. A. Benians, Sir James Butler, and G. E. Garrington (eds), The Cambridge History of the British Empire, vol. III. (Cambridge University Press, 1959).Google Scholar
  31. 5.
    Ronald Robinson, John Gallagher, and Alice Denny, Africa and the Victorians (London, Macmillan, 1961), p. 464.Google Scholar
  32. 1.
    For a general account of Britain’s role in Egypt, see John Marlowe, Anglo-Egyptian Relations 1800–1953 (1954).Google Scholar
  33. 1.
    Randolph S. Churchill, Winston S. Churchill (London, 1967), Companion Volume 1, part 2, p. 751.Google Scholar
  34. 2.
    L. S. Amery, My Political Life (1953), pp. 87–8.Google Scholar
  35. 3.
    See C. A. Bodelsen, Studies in Mid-Victorian Imperialism (Copenhagen, 1924).Google Scholar
  36. 3.
    Quoted by B. Semmel in Imperialism and Social Reform: English Social-Imperial Thought 1895–1914 (London, Allen & Unwin, 1960), pp. 54–5.Google Scholar
  37. 1.
    Quoted in J. E. Wrench, Alfred, Lord Milner (London, Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1958), p. 104.Google Scholar
  38. 2.
    Sir Charles Wentworth Dilke (1843–1911) (second baronet) had been under-secretary at the Foreign Office 1880–2 and a member of Gladstone’s cabinet as president of the Local Government Board from 1882 to 1885. He had voted for the Home Rule Bill of 1886. Following upon divorce proceedings in 1885–6 he was out of public life for some years returning as liberal M.P. for the Forest of Dean in 1892, a seat he retained until his death. His principal work, Problems of Greater Britain, appeared in 1890.Google Scholar
  39. See Roy Jenkins, Sir Charles Dilke: A Victorian Tragedy (London, Collins, 1958).Google Scholar
  40. 3.
    Spenser Wilkinson, Thirty-Five Tears 1874–1909 (1933), pp. 127, 132.Google Scholar
  41. 1.
    J. E. Tyler, The Struggle for Imperial Unity (1938), pp. 77–8.Google Scholar
  42. 4.
    For the history of Rhodes’s wills, see Frank Aydelotte, The American Rhodes Scholarships (Princeton University Press, 1946), ch. 1.Google Scholar
  43. 1.
    Bryce Papers, English Correspondence, vol. 16 James Bryce (1838–1922) (first viscount Bryce, 1914) had published The American Commonwealth in 1888.Google Scholar
  44. 1.
    Does this mean more than that the Barings had money and that Rhodes needed to make it? See H. Arendt, The Burden of Our Time (London, Secker & Warburg, 1951), p. 212.Google Scholar
  45. 3.
    E. Digby Baltzell, The Protestant Establishment (London, Secker & Warburg, 1965), p. 11.Google Scholar
  46. 4.
    See ‘America and the British Foreign Policy-Making Élite, from Joseph Chamberlain to Anthony Eden, 1895–1956’, in Donald Watt, Personalities and Policies (London, Longmans, 1965).Google Scholar
  47. 1.
    On this and in particular on the ‘Souls’, the clique to which Balfour belonged, and on its influence on the whole imperialist tone, see Kenneth Young, Arthur James Balfour (London, Bell, 1963), pp. 141–5.Google Scholar
  48. 3.
    On Roosevelt’s ambivalent attitude to the British Empire, see ‘Theodore Roosevelt and the British Empire’, in Max Beloff, The Great Powers (London, Allen & Unwin, 1958).Google Scholar
  49. 3.
    For Chamberlain’s pronouncements on Anglo-American relations at this time, see J. L. Garvin, Life of Joseph Chamberlain (London, Macmillan, 1934), vol. 3, pp. 296–306.Google Scholar
  50. 1.
    Hewins, Apologia of an Imperialist (London, Constable, 1929), vol. 1, p. 284.Google Scholar
  51. 3.
    R. Koebner and H. D. Schmidt, Imperialism (Cambridge University Press, 1964), p. 196.Google Scholar
  52. 4.
    S. B. Saul, ‘The Economic Significance of Constructive Imperialism’, Journal of Economic History, vol. XVII (1957).Google Scholar
  53. 2.
    Strachey was the very influential editor of the Spectator from 1898 to 1925 and father of the future labour minister, John Strachey (1901–63), author inter alia of The End of Empire.Google Scholar
  54. 1.
    On the limitations of this protection, see D. C. M. Platt, Finance, Trade and Politics in British Foreign Policy 1815–1914 (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1968), part III, ch. 6.Google Scholar
  55. 1.
    Quoted in Kenneth Young, Arthur James Balfour (London, Bell, 1963), p. 193.Google Scholar
  56. 2.
    For a famous description by an envious admirer of the ability of the British governmental system to put up an unbreakable front, see Charles de Gaulle, Memoires de Guerre (Paris, Plon, 1954) vol. 1, pp. 138–40.Google Scholar
  57. 1.
    A. M. Gollin, The Observer and J. L. Garvin (Oxford University Press, 1960) is a pioneer work which suggests what might still be done in this field.Google Scholar
  58. 2.
    Barbara W. Tuchman, The Proud Tower (London, Hamish Hamilton, 1966), p. 3.Google Scholar
  59. 3.
    W. L. Burn, The Age of Equipoise (1964).Google Scholar
  60. 4.
    On this subject, see C. H. D. Howard, Splendid Isolation (New York, 1967).Google Scholar
  61. 5.
    See the genealogical table appended to Elizabeth Longford, Queen Victoria (1964).Google Scholar
  62. 6.
    See Philip Magnus, King Edward the Seventh (1964).Google Scholar
  63. 1.
    See Lord Newton, Lord Lansdowne (1929).Google Scholar
  64. 1.
    Zara Steiner, ‘The Last Years of the Old Foreign Office 1898–1905’, The Historical Journal, vol. VI (1963), P. 59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 1.
    Robert Heussler, Yesterday’s Rulers, The Making of the British Colonial Service (Syracuse University Press; London, Oxford University Press, 1963), pp. 7–8.Google Scholar
  66. 2.
    Richard Symonds, The British and Their Successors (1966), pp. 126–7.Google Scholar
  67. 2.
    Lord Hardinge of Penshurst, My Indian Tears, 1910–1916 (London, John Murray, 1948), p. 2.Google Scholar
  68. 2.
    On Britain’s share in the modernization of the Japanese navy, see Ian H. Nish, The Anglo-Japanese Alliance (London, Athlone Press, 1966), p. 8.Google Scholar
  69. 1.
    M. V. Brett (ed.), Journals and Letters of Reginald Viscount Esher (London, Ivor Nicholson & Watson, 1934), vol. 1, p. 397.Google Scholar
  70. 2.
    See Peter G. Richards, Parliament and Foreign Affairs (1967), pp. 20–3.Google Scholar
  71. 1.
    Donald G. Bishop, The Administration of British Foreign Relations (Syracuse University Press, 1961), p. 206.Google Scholar
  72. 2.
    Lord Strang, The Diplomatic Career (1962), p. 34.Google Scholar
  73. 3.
    Lady Victoria Hicks Beach, Life of Sir Michael Hicks Beach (London, Macmillan, 1932), p. 152.Google Scholar
  74. J. A. Thomas, The House of Commons 1832–1901 (Cardiff, 1939), pp. 14–17.Google Scholar
  75. R. C. K. Ensor, England 1870–1914 (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1936), pp. 312–15.Google Scholar
  76. 4.
    See N. Penlington, Canada and Imperialism 1896–9 (University of Toronto Press, 1965).Google Scholar
  77. 5.
    For the particular attitudes of the different colonies, see J. E. Tyler, The Struggle for Imperial Unity (1938).Google Scholar
  78. 2.
    Quoted from Mackenzie King’s diary in R. M. Dawson, William Lyon Mackenzie King, Vol. I, 1874–1923 (London, Methuen, 1959), p. 168.Google Scholar
  79. 1.
    For New Zealand, see B. K. Gordon, New Zealand becomes a Pacific Power (University of Chicago, 1960), chs. 1, 2.Google Scholar
  80. 2.
    R. A. Preston, Canada and ‘Imperial Defence’ (Durham, N.C., Duke University Press, 1967), p. 187.Google Scholar
  81. 1.
    Donald C. Gordon, The Dominion Partnership in Imperial Defence, 1870–1914 (Baltimore, John Hopkins Press, 1965), pp. 134–5.Google Scholar
  82. 3.
    Joseph Schull, Laurier, the First Canadian (Toronto, 1965), p. 391.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Max Beloff 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Max Beloff
    • 1
  1. 1.University of OxfordUK

Personalised recommendations