Customer Reviews
highly entertaining, though seriously flawed - By: another reader, 03 Jul 2008 
There are, however, some serious factual errors. The British empire alllowed famines in India that killed millions of people even while food was exported from that country. Preferential tariffs seriously impaired the textile industry in India so that British textile imports to the subcontinent could flourish.
And Ferguson's assertion that Britain willingly sacrificed its empire to preserve democracy at home is pure fantasy. The UK's anti-insurgency campaigns in Kenya & Malaya in the postwar period do not fit the model of noble sacrifice of empire, so he simply ignores these wars.
Ferguson writes well & vividly, but his love of British imperialism impels him to some strange positions. For a thorough critique of this book, see Chalmers Johnson, Nemesis, chapt two.
A rebuttal to Grateful's earlier "review"! - By: Darren O'Connell, 03 Jul 2008 
In appears that Grateful has neither read the book properly or is blinded by past biases. All six comments are either fabricated or out of balance with the historical record, but I'll deal with the worst abuses here. For example:
Point 2: The British were not the first to use concentration camps. As per Ferguson (2002, p. 280) "These were not the first concentration camps in history - Spanish forces had used similar tactics in Cuba in 1896". This fact can be effortlessly verified from numourous sources including the internet.
Point 3: The British did not invent the modern slave trade, this dubious honour goes to the Spanish & Portugeuse. For example, in 1452, Pope Nicholas V issued the papal bull Dum Diversas, granting Afonso V of Portugal the right to reduce any "Saracens, pagans & any other unbelievers" to hereditary slavery which legitimated slave trade under catholic beliefs of that time. The British certainly were involved significantly in the slave trade but not until the 17th century therefore cannot claim to have invented this practice. In addition, this "reviewer" has failed to acknowledge the fact the Britain was the first to end the trade & enfore the prohibition with its navy. Also the "reviewer's" assertion that Britain slaving practices were worse that the Romans, Ottomans & Turks is clearly incorrect & is not backed up by any empirical evidence.
Point 4: The British did not "cause" the famines in Ireland or India, I would assert Mother Nature's involvement here (e.g. the late blight in Ireland was caused by the pathogen infestans, which originated in South America) but was certainly exacerbated by a host of political, social & economic factors which remain the subject of historical debate some of which can be attributed to British intransigence.
Point 5: The British did not invent the modern monopoly practices or asset stripping - this achievement goes to the Spanish, Portugeuse & French, whose systems of commerce were based on absolutist monarchy & benefited the guild institutions only rather than wider society. In addition, the Ducth were accomplished asset-strippers themselves, see Indonesia. True Britain did its fair share, but it also invested vast sums of money into the developing nations of its empire including Africa & India (i.e. railways) more then than is invested by the combined first world nations today. As a result, the British can lay claim to "inventing" the market system which now forms the basis of global capitalism, the system of choice throughout the globe. The other assertions that the IR was the result of Clive's looting of Bengal are simply preposterous & not worth the effort of rebuttal (but see Harvey's work on Clive or James' work on India for a more accurate version of events).
Point 6: Not Britain's finest hour in terms of its involvement in the Middle East granted but the situation is entirely more complex than Grateful gives credit & to be honest, the strife in the ME is as much the fault of evolutional disabilities, religious hatred, bigotry & inherent cultural differences as colonial mistakes. Clearly Grateful has a handle on none of these complex interrelationships as well as little grasp of historical reality.
BTW, Ferguson's book Empire is a first rate analysis of the British colonialism & an interesting counterpoint to some of the latter day obilquy. Elegantly written with an exciting fresh narrative & much scholarly research. I think it only right for Britons & their Commonwealth cousins to "wrap" themselves "in the Union Jack" every now & again!
great book! - By: Lindy May Mehven, 04 Jun 2008 gives a very good overview of the british empire an the economic stages of development, i read it mainly for the territorial gains acquired by the british empire, very good book in the end.
popular history at its best - By: Didier, 30 Apr 2008 Apart from some isolated facts, I knew next to nothing about the British Empire before having read this book. Now I have done so I can honestly say that I at least feel to have (more than) a grasp of the basic facts, & a very good general overview of the biggest empire ever: how it came about, how it evolved, & how it came to end. And what's more, Ferguson tells this incredible tale in a most engaging & lucid style. Never a dull moment!
A breath of fresh air - By: J. Duducu, 21 Apr 2008 The main issue with alll of Nialll Ferguson's books are do you go along with the main thesis. He's never one to sit on the fence & I think with "Empire" he does a superb job reacting to the fact that the British Empire has for too long been hijacked by many organisations to brow beat us into guilt for alll manner of things. It's got to the point where the red coats are seen as some form of proto-Nazi.
Thinking about other countries, they get very misty eyed over past imperial glory- The Indians with the Mughals, the Italians with the Romans & the Turks with the Ottomans. Each one of these countries neatly glosses over the torture, slavery, extortion & war mongering & instead points to the philosophies or architecture born of their nation- the Brits don't do that. We much prefer feeling faintly embarrassed when visiting an ex-colony.
Now that's not to say that evil wasn't perpetrated under various British regimes, but these instances are far better documented than the successes of empire. This book is a great chance to reassess our impact on the world, because good & bad, like it or not it's a fair point that the world today has been shaped in a major way by Britain.
So it's nice that Nialll does a very good job of pointing out the good after we've had endless opinion about the bad. It is written with great energy & dry humour & uncovers fascinating facts- the map showing the length of the telegraph cables laid by Britain virtuallly circling the world I think will always be there in the back of my mind. This isn't jingoistic it's just a chance to redress the balance.
