The Great Defiance: How the world took on the British Empire

Product Information

The writers aim was to tell the story of those who were colonised by Britain, the regions and nations and peoples who became part of its empire, and how they resisted their incorporation into this world. He succeeds comprehensively in this aim. It’s a subtle enough idea; there are plenty of histories setting out Britain’s inevitable rise to power, some even portraying this as a good thing, and in parallel there are plenty of works detailing the crimes of British and other colonialists/imperialists. While the latter is a worthwhile thing to aim for, it does have a common fault of presenting these subjects of colonialism as passive victims; this book emphatically adresses that deficit. Veevers, D., 2017, The East India Company, 1600-1857: Essays on Anglo-Indian connection. Pettigrew, W. & Gopalan, M. (eds.). Routledge, p. 175-192 17 p. The methodology and perspective that Veevers has adopted means that the book is not comprehensive. It proceeds through the first 300 years of British (technically English, then British) expansion chronologically, but not exhaustively. Most of these areas have been well researched and documented before, and Veevers gives full credit to the historians concerned. The English, and then the British, would go on to conquer many more nations in the subsequent centuries, using military and economic might to establish a global empire. That history is often told from the perspective of British success, of “progress” and “modernity”, a “great divergence” in which Britain became the most advanced and dominant power on Earth. But as David Veevers writes in his provocative new history of the empire’s first centuries, it is just as important to remember that everywhere they went the British found advanced societies offering fierce resistance to their colonisation. The history of the early modern world, he argues, looks very different from their perspective.

Veevers announces his bête noire in the introduction: it is those ‘bestselling books that crowd the shelves of history sections today, proclaiming how “Britain Made the Modern World”. He repeats this in the conclusion, excoriating those ‘histories that grace bookshops proclaiming how Britain “Made the Modern World”. The final words of the book flip that formula: actually, he tells us, Britain unmade the world. The concluding salvo of The Great Defiance strives to offer us an alternative to this (apparently ubiquitous) way of explaining the emergence of the modern world.A big plus here is the book’s entertainment value. The style is lively, the subjects and locations wide-ranging. There is a lot to learn about the cultures the British encountered, their histories and motivations. A good example would be the Maratha empire in north-central India and its struggle with the longer established Mughals. This is context for explaining the importance and success of the Marathas in resisting British ambitions, but it also serves as a taster for anyone unfamiliar with this aspect of Indian history. However, the author writes with the single formula: "Natives good, Europe bad". The book could have told a stunning narrative that humanity, no matter which continent it was birthed, is neither good nor bad. They all fought for conquest, they all tried to build empires (however they might have looked or been called) and all engaged in acts that could be considered immoral. A fascinating new history of the early days of the British Empire, told through the stories of the forgotten international powerhouses who aided, abetted and resisted the march of the British, by the award-winning historian David Veevers.

The many atrocities of the era are described in the most purple of prose, but they are only condemned when committed by Europeans. In a striking passage, Veevers patiently explains that when the English cut off the heads of their enemies, it was for “humiliation” and “deterrence”. When the Dahomians did it, it is matter-of-factly justified as “expressing the king’s spiritual power over the people”.

Customer reviews

Published The Contested-State: Political Authority and the Decentred Foundations of the Early Modern Colonial State in Asia It is also the case that a lot of these engagements are small-scale and little-covered in mainstream military history. For that, they will make interesting, colourful, and often surprising reading for those with a broad interest in the subject. But it's Veevers' extreme self-hating liberalism that truly steals the show. He goes above and beyond to apologize for Britain's past, as if he personally carried out every misdeed himself. He's like a guilt-ridden puppy, wagging his tail in perpetual remorse for historical actions that he had absolutely no control over. It's a hilarious sight to behold, as Veevers contorts himself into a pretzel of guilt, trying to outdo every other liberal in the race to win the title of "Most Guilt-Ridden Human Ever." In Chapter 5 and Chapter 6, for example, we read about the extremely violent series of raids and counter-raids that characterised much of the intercourse between the British, French, and indigenous Kalinago people in the 17th-century Lesser Antilles. Larger-than-life personalities, treachery, and innovative tactics make for a fascinating account. On a much bigger scale, the sophisticated military cultures that developed in Mughal and Maratha India are well described, as are some of the major clashes they produced.