The British Empire and Commonwealth in Recent Historiography

Abstract

OF the areas and subdivisions falling under the heading History of Britain and the British Empire, the field of Imperial history holds a position that is both unique and unenviable.' Other fields, like Tudor and Stuart England, are fixed forever in time and space. By contrast, the Empire is not only an ungainly beast, but one that constantly changes its size and shape with the passing of the years. Until the middle of the nineteenth century it was hardly recognized as a proper field of historical study. And when, early in the twentieth century, it achieved both status and a reasonable following of students and researchers, the Empire began to transform itself into the Commonwealth, and some segments even left the Commonwealth.2 The result has been a paradox. The importance of the field has been increasingly recognized as its nature and scope have been constantly changing. From the time of Seeley onward, Imperial history has come into its own as the Europe-centered view of history has given way to a broader view of world history. The rise of Russia and the United States, the increased importance of the new non-Western nations, and the relative decline of Europe have all contributed something. As Europe counted for less, the Empire counted for more, and a kind of peak was reached in the I930's when the Empire was still intact and at its greatest extent. Then, all of it could be taken as the proper field for Imperial history, and an enormous field it was-inhabitants in the hundreds of millions, hundreds of different cultures and subcultures represented, plural societies of every conceivable kind, and scores of constitutional units to serve as the political framework for as many societies, both large and small. But with the war and the postwar period, the same wheel that brought