View - eTheses Repository - University of Birmingham

Although, the third volume certainly included regions outside England, such as the Irish
Potato Famine and the Empire, it is difficult to escape the view that this was a history
predominantly viewed from the centre rather than the periphery.
If the balance in Schama’s story suffered from ‘sins of omission’, more serious charges can be
placed against Ferguson’s (2003) book and television series. Empire: How Britain made the
Modern World was the most widely purchased hardback history textbook, with sales totalling
17,682 (Bookseller, 2003b). In the week ending 24 th January 2003, Ferguson had managed to
rank fortieth in the composite list of all paperback and hardback sales (Bookseller, 2003a).
Ferguson acknowledged the ruthlessness of the British Empire but stressed how it
demonstrated Britain’s overwhelming contribution to the world:
Without the spread of British rule around the world, it is hard to believe that structure
of liberal capitalism would have been so successfully established in so many different
countries around the world… It spread the rule of law over vast areas. Though it
fought many wars, the Empire maintained a global peace unmatched before or since.
(Ferguson, 2003 pp.358-59)
His references to Ireland amounted to reasons for 16 th century conquest and problems
associated with it, together with moves towards home rule and radicalism leading to the
Easter Rising. This examination of the imperialism of Ireland was written from an Anglocentric
perspective. Ferguson’s references to Ireland were a minor part of a wider global
discourse in which he saw America taking over Britain’s mantle to uphold a new defensive
empire in the 21st century. The alarming implications of this approach were highlighted by
Wilson’s review in The Guardian, 8 th February 2003:
With its swashbuckling heroes and glamorous locations, his series Empire lends fake
historical legitimacy to his new imperial enterprise… by using Britain’s imperial past
to justify America’s imperial future, Ferguson’s arguments are misleading. Worst of
all they encourage policy based on a version of the history of empire that is simply
wrong… Based on a version of history last taught over a century ago, these kinds of
arguments are not taken seriously by historians today. Until recently, it seemed that