Historically Speaking · May/June 2007 Loving Your Enemy Robert Tombs May/June 2007 Historically Speaking The 18th-century conflict caused a great divergence between Britain and France. The consequences are still with us. his army at Boulogne: "The Channel is a ditch," he said, "which will be crossed when someone has the boldness to try." But even Napoleon did not quite muster the boldness. So France did not achieve the world hegemony that in many ways it was better fitted than Britain to exercise. The economic consequences of the conflict were no less momentous. Between 1688 and 1815 Britain stood up to France—a country with twice its territory, twice its Gross National Product even in 1788, and three times its population—in six of the twelve greatest wars in history. It did so by raising taxes by 1 ,600% and increasing borrowing by 24,000%. The need for unprecedented sums of money led to the creation of the Bank of England (1694) and the transformation of the City of London , which funded the struggle, into the world's financial center. Three centuries later it is still described as the greatest concentration of brain and computing power on the planet and remainsthe bedrock of the British economy, making it the world's second largest exporter of services. The wars against France during the 18th century also permitted Britain to gain the lion's share of Europe's trade with the outside world. This trade was the dynamo of the Industrial Revolution. "Britain's economic progress cannot be separated from the establishment of its military hegemony," concludes a recent economic study. "Without the control of the seas the growth of the economy would have been limited and some other European power possibly become dominant." That "other European power," of course, was France. After Waterloo, the British had by far the highest per capita income in Europe: as with the United States in the 20th century , victory paid. France, too, was transformed by the gruelling struggle that began in 1688. Almost exactly one hundred years later, it, too, had its revolution. That revolution was linked with Britain in two ways. First, and most evidently, in its outbreak. The fall of the Bourbon monarchy was due to the unprecedented cost of the conflict with Britain, and especially the two global wars: the Seven Years War and the American War of Independence. The financial and political strain was more than the monarchy could bear. It could not raise taxes without political outcry, and it had reached the limit of its credit. By 1788 it was bankrupt. The absolutist monarchy had to appeal to its subjects to bail it out and summoned an Estates-General in 1789. This began an uncontrollable revolutionary process, which was connected with Britain in a second way. The nationalism of the revolutionaries became increasingly an Anglophobic nationalism. The Revolutionarywars, and those that followed under Napoleon, became increasingly what Napoleon called a "duel with England." It was war that created many of the horrors of the Revolution, and which also brought it to an end. But war also created the enduring patriotic vision of the People in Arms, so memorably expressed in the Marseillaise, whose words, including the great refrain "Aux armes, Citoyens! Formez vos bataillons!" were taken from anti-British patriotic poetry written a generation earlier. The "sang impur" that was to "abreuver nos sillons" was originally not that of the Prussians and Austrians in 1793, but that of Perfidious Albion in 1757. French patriots increasingly saw their own virtues as defined in contrast to the iniquities of the British (or rather lesAnglais). The idea of England as a new Carthage, a predatory mercantile state motivated only by greed, and which France had to resist in the name of higher values, became a staple of propaganda for generations and was still being used in the Second World War.Victor Hugo, writing in the 1840s, put it pithily:"If France overcomes, the world will be governed by the twenty-six letters of the alphabet; if England prevails, it will be tyrannized by the ten figures of arithmetic. Thinking or counting; those are the alternative futures." Has this idea entirely disappeared ? Does...