• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Going Over The Top: The Death of Empires, Part 5 - The Mysterious End of the British Empire

I have to say I've never come across the argument that the Dominions did not fight whole heartedly in the war. Ever.


The only viewpoint I've ever seen expressed on the topic is that the Dominions gained a lot of self confidence from their contribution and found the realities of the thirties and forties put their national interests rather against that of the Metropolis which no longer had the resources or the will to meaningfully protect them.
 
Good article. You're absolutely right to point out that if WW1 is a milestone in colonial nationalism, it's because the colonies were so deeply committed to it.

One minor thing you might be interested in re: New Zealand. If you overlay a map of volunteers from the various iwi (tribes is the closest approximation) with a map of hotspots in the New Zealand Wars a generation before, those areas where the campaigns had been bitterest produced the least volunteers. Understandable, given that this was something within living memory in many cases, but it's also true in WWII.

'Bloody obvious,' you might say. But it's worth pointing out because it's a discrepancy that speaks to the truth of your wider story- the residual hostility to fighting for the Empire in, e.g, Taranaki was an exception. As early as the South African War fifteen years before the British Government had to repeatedly tell New Zealand that Maori soldiers would not be welcome- such was the enthusiasm to fight that Wellington ended up asking to send these troops again and again.

Now, were these 'loyalist' Iwis really fond of the Empire? Debatable. They certainly talked the talk. But it goes to show that it wasn't just the white settler colonies who were ready to fight overseas for the Crown. Even communities with no damn reason to support such a war could be surprisingly enthusiastic.
 
'Nein- I mean... No. It's... we're having a hoedown.'

'A hoedown?'

'Ja.'

'For 650, 000 people?'

'Right. Yes. It's... the patriotic festival of German-American folk music. Uncle Sam's Apple Strudel.'

'And all those Irishmen milling about outside?'

'They're... interested in cultural outreach?'

'...'

'Look, we'll pay cash.'

'Alright, I'll ring it all up....'
 
Critiscism of the contribution to Empire defence from the Dominions centres on peacetime military spending. Any comparison of the per capita spending of the UK and the Dominions makes the Dominions look as if they aren't pulling their weight. In many cases it was politically difficult to raise spending outside a crisis. The Dominions contained sizeable minorities who weren't that pleased about being British (Quebecois, Boers etc). This shortfall fell most heavily on the RN; ships took a longer time to build than an infantry division did to raise at 1913 levels of training.

Corelli Barnett makes the point that India, despite a vast population, was able to contribute only a handful of divisions of sufficiently high quality to the critical theatre of WW1 (The Western Front). Though the contribution of Indian troops to minor theatres (Iraq etc) was significant, the fact that it freed up UK troops to fight in France, underlined the point.
 
Corelli Barnett makes the point that India, despite a vast population, was able to contribute only a handful of divisions of sufficiently high quality to the critical theatre of WW1 (The Western Front). Though the contribution of Indian troops to minor theatres (Iraq etc) was significant, the fact that it freed up UK troops to fight in France, underlined the point.

I mean India wasn't exactly a dominion able to determine her own spending and governance patterns.
 
I have to say I've never come across the argument that the Dominions did not fight whole heartedly in the war. Ever.


The only viewpoint I've ever seen expressed on the topic is that the Dominions gained a lot of self confidence from their contribution and found the realities of the thirties and forties put their national interests rather against that of the Metropolis which no longer had the resources or the will to meaningfully protect them.

There was an armed rebellion in South Africa, although granted that's a particular case.
 
Back
Top