Hello there, I was curious about India nd it's relationship with Great Britain or the British Empire in the respect. Occasionally, I'd see Indian paramilitaries or Indian soldiers fighting under the British Flag or British Imperial Flag. The 2nd Great War included more then a 1 million Indian's *volunteering*. I wanted to ask, did the British Indians fight of the British Empire out of loyalty to the Crown or was it something else? I mean, those are quite a lot of Indians fighting for the British Empire. . . so what was it? Loyalty or was it an obligation/Ordered to do it?.
Thanks for your time.
For example, how long would it take for a letter to get to Britain from a smaller South African colony? a South Atlantic island territory? A larger colony such as India?
So, while I take a break from writing an essay, I'm going pose a question to all the scholars on r/KnowingBetter. Was the expansion of the British empire more akin to the protection of trade routes and territory than malicious subjugation. I acknowledge that the expansion of any empire, especially in the 18th through 19th centuries was also facilitated by inter-power rivalries in Europe, but looking at some of these conquests, it seems that it was more of a matter of England trying to protect its very lucrative trade routes or territory that it already held.
One example of this is Lord Lugard's expedition into Northern Nigeria to combat slave raids by the Sokoto Caliphate. It is important to understand at this point in time, many muslim nations still legally allowed slavery within their territories and the Sokoto Caliphate was no different. They frequently raided neighboring territories for slaves and according to Paul Lovejoy, Sokoto was one of the largest slave societies in Africa. Once the Sokoto were subjugated; Lugard said this:"The Fulani in old times […] conquered this country. They took the right to rule over it, to levy taxes, to depose kings and to create kings. They in turn have by defeat lost their rule which has come into the hands of the British. All these things which I have said the Fulani by conquest took the right to do now pass to the British. Every Sultan and Emir and the principal officers of state will be appointed by the high Commissioner throughout all this country. The High Commissioner will be guided by all the usual laws of succession and the wishes of the people and chief, but will set them aside if he desires for good cause to do so. The Emirs and chiefs who are appointed will rule over the people as of old time and take such taxes as are approved by the High Commissioner, but they will obey the laws of the Governor and will act in accordance with the advice of the Resident."
This, in all essentiality, ended the legal trade of slaves in Nigeria. Knowing this, how does this change your view on the expansion of the British Empire?
P.S. I apologize I don't have time to pour more research into this, I'm currently working on a four-page essay on Khedival Egyptian society and needed a little break before I burnt myself out. I know that there is still pertinent information that needs to be found and explained so I will be frequently checking the comments section of this post for information that I missed and other
... keep reading on reddit ➡
My first 4000+ words on Demerara Distillers Ltd., makers of El Dorado and many other rums.
https://cocktailwonk.com/2020/02/demerara-distillers-part-one.html
In my Spanish class, we were reading a radio broadcast which claimed that the War of the Triple Alliance was an invention by the British Empire to open up Paraguay's economy under the influence of British businessmen. Most English sources I read online do not mention this idea, but it is parroted a lot by the Spanish sources. Can anyone tell me if this is actually true or not?
Source below(in Spanish): https://radioteca.net/audio/500-eng-anos-9-como-se-fabrica-una-guerra/
The Sith remained in exile, only two members existing at any one time, because 1000 years before The Phantom Menace, the Jedi wiped almost all of them out. They were forced to go into hiding.
However, Sidious had won, the Jedi, most of them anyway, were dead. Why didn't he and Vader try to restore the Sith to their former glory? After all, the Sith once commanded an Empire thousands of years ago. By the time of A New Hope, 20 years after Order 66, Sidious and Vader are still the only Sith in existence.
Now, I know that the Inquisitors existed, and they were sort-of Sith, but they were a temporary measure to hunt down any Jedi who survived Order 66, they were eventually disbanded.
The only explanation I can think of is selfishness, Sidious didn't want any Sith rivals who would threaten him. This explanation makes sense, but, in hindsight, it was kind of a dumb decision as all it took was to defeat Sidious and Vader to wipe out the Sith for good.
Was this ever expanded on in canon? Do you guys have any alternate explanations?
