https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k Crowd-sourced and student-driven interactive guide to the history of the British Empire, 1763-1900. en-us 2021-10-04 07:37:11 UTC 2021-10-20 11:27:13 UTC hello@padlet.com emilymanktelow https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1788834505 It is probably fair to say that the British government didn't realise the seriousness of American discontent until it was too late. What might this tell us about ideologies of Empire in the eighteenth century?]]> 2021-10-04 07:44:15 UTC https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1788834505 sbmillgate https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1796102036 The use of ecological imperialism in the Americas by European settlers is shocking, but played a crucial part in the expansion of empire. The natives' lack of immunity to diseases such as smallpox likely increased support of the existing idea that the nomadic societies of the American continent were lesser than the agricultural and industrial ones found in Europe.]]> 2021-10-06 11:17:00 UTC https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1796102036 https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1796145582 The American colonies felt they were the new version of the old, corrupt British economy. Even though they felt free and had a thriving economy, it was controlled by the British for trade which essentially stripped away the profits the American colonies could have been making. Boston, Massachusetts was an important place in American history where many important events, like the Boston tea Party, took places. - Raffie Baker]]> 2021-10-06 11:39:59 UTC https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1796145582 https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1800860067 The America's, along with other colonies, were expected to fund Britain's success in the seven year war even during peace time. This was on top of the price they had already paid in terms of manpower and money. Possibly alludes to the unstable nature of empire at this time? Colonies were supposed to rely on the mother country but now the other way around? Further led to a fragile empire as it caused increased discontent within America and later led to the revolution.]]> 2021-10-07 20:08:41 UTC https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1800860067 https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1829990549 One of the central regions of the British Empire in the mid-19th century was India. Following the American Revolution, there can be observed a "Swing to the East". Whereas settler colonalism was just beginning in Australia and discoveries were just emerging in the Pacific, India had reached a state, through many grievances of all layers of society, where the Rebellion of 1857 broke out. As an aftermath, the Crown avowed to abandon the "civilizing mission", but failed to follow a non-interference policy in the future.]]> 2021-10-20 11:01:40 UTC https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1829990549 sbmillgate https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1830032788 The idea of 'Terra Nullius' was used to justify the settlement of Australia. This was because the British deemed Australia 'empty' so it could be settled with no legal or moral issues. However, this raises a variety of problems.

Firstly, Australia was by no means empty. Aboriginal Australians (while given one name are actually several distinct peoples) had over 40,000 years worth of history in Australia. The fact that the British still saw Australia as empty indicates that they did not see Aboriginal societies as being as valuable as European societies, therefore meaning the land could be settled with no moral issues.

Secondly, this suggests that had Britain viewed Australia as being inhabited they would not have settled. Personally, I find this hard to believe considering Britain's past relationship with establishing settler colonies in other locations.

The settlement of Australia (and Britain's activity throughout the rest of the Empire) shows how Britain would essentially do what they pleased in order to gain profit and expand their empire, even if they knew that their actions were morally dubious or blatantly wrong, as they would simply find a way to justify their behaviour. This could be done through asserting themselves as racially superior, stating that they had a moral duty, or simply denying the existence of native peoples. ]]> 2021-10-20 11:27:13 UTC https://padlet.com/emilymanktelow/9n9qqzy26bk1vi0k/wish/1830032788