Sparks Commentary: A review of “Queen Victoria's Empire” (PBS Empires)

“ ♪ Rule, Britannia!
Britannia, rule the waves.
And Britons never, never, never shall be slaves. ♪ ”

– “Rule, Britannia!” (1740), a British patriotic song written decades before Queen Victoria was born

At the height of the British Empire, it was the largest empire in the history of the world. Its geography was so widespread that people often commented that the sun “never set” on its borders. Actually, it is not the only empire in history to be described in this way, but it may still be the most prominent of them. The British Empire actually predates Queen Victoria's reign by some centuries, with its “first empire” going from 1583 to 1783 (the year that they lost America). The “second empire” went from 1783 to 1815, the year that the Napoleonic Wars ended. But a number of historians believe that Britain's “imperial century” was from 1815 to 1914, the year that World War One began. Queen Victoria reigned for more than half of this latter period, as it turns out, and was alive for an even larger share of it – part of which was before she assumed the throne in 1837. Thus, historians sometimes refer to this empire as “Queen Victoria's” empire, and to this era of British history as the “Victorian era.”

How does this film cover Queen Victoria herself?

This film does have some significant doses of biography, for people interested in Queen Victoria herself. Nonetheless, it is not really a biography of her; but rather, a story focused on the empire that she ruled. Nonetheless, some comments about her own personal life may be warranted here, as some brief background for this discussion. Queen Victoria married her first cousin Prince Albert, born in the German state of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld. She was the ruling monarch of Britain, but she delegated many of the daily tasks of running her empire to her husband Prince Albert, who thus had significant power. Victoria wanted to rule in her own right, and she still had the final say over all royal policies. But there was a problem, which was that she had little patience in dealing with the British Parliament. She wanted to rule on her own, but she found that British politics made this impossible for any monarch in her own time (or since). Ironically, it turned out that Prince Albert had much greater patience in dealing with Parliament, despite his being born in the German states, where constitutional limits on the monarchy were virtually unknown. He surprisingly had a great understanding of the British political system, and thus was a useful man for his wife to have around. He actually had total respect for his wife's crown nonetheless, but he had more power over royal policy than many since his time would thus realize. Parliament never officially granted him the title of “king” (perhaps partially because of his German origins), but he nonetheless had a much-resented status like that of kingship, and was a force to be reckoned with as a result.

Queen Victoria herself

Prince Albert, the husband of Queen Victoria

How does this film cover domestic affairs in the British Isles?

But the coverage of this documentary's title character is actually somewhat minimal; since as I said earlier, it is more focused on the empire as a whole than on her personally. There is coverage of domestic politics at home in Britain, such as the Corn Laws and the Irish potato famine of the 1840's. There is also some significant coverage of conflicts in the British Parliament, with still-famous names like Benjamin Disraeli and William Gladstone as sometime prime ministers. But one of the major themes in the first hour of the program is the Industrial Revolution, and its massive effects on Britain's economy. There is also some coverage of the railroads as part of this, and how the railways facilitated trade at home for them. As far as foreign affairs go, there is also some coverage of the Crimean War of 1853 to 1856, where Britain and its allies fought against the Russians. The documentary may not be as strong on things that are not directly related to the Empire, such as the scientific revolutions of this time. Nonetheless, this may actually be as good a coverage of Britain's “imperial century” as any that you're likely to find for television, particularly when it comes to the empire's expansion abroad.

“Charge of the Light Brigade,” a major event in the Crimean War, immortalized in a famous poem

How does this film cover the British rule in colonial India?

Nearly one hour of the film is focused on British India, perhaps the most significant overseas territory of the British Empire at that time. It is also the most populous “overseas territory” that any empire has ever possessed. The British colonization of India actually goes back much further than Queen Victoria, though, beginning in the eighteenth century with the 1757 Battle of Plassey. Originally, the British colony of India was run by a private corporation known as the “British East India Company.” It was thus not run by the British Crown until the so-called “Indian Mutiny” of 1857, roughly a century after the first British incursions into India. It was during Queen Victoria's reign that this so-called “Indian Mutiny” happened, beginning over widespread dissatisfaction with the corrupt rule of the British East India Company. One of the incidents fomenting this rebellion was the British military's use of cartridges wrapped in paper greased with (forbidden) cow and pig fat. The cow fat was forbidden to the Hindus, while the pig fat was forbidden to the Muslims. When a regiment of the Bengal Native Infantry had to open these cartridges by mouth, it thus violated their religious sensibilities, and was enough to cause widespread rebellion throughout British India. It's not clear if this was really true, but it is clear that the natives believed this. Unfortunately, both sides committed horrendous atrocities in this war, and the British public was shocked by the atrocities of both sides at various times. For example, there was an initial upsurge in British support for the East India Company after the Cawnpore Massacre perpetrated by the rebels, but a loss of sympathy for it after terrible reprisals perpetrated by the company. The result was the eventual dissolution of the company, with its rule over India replaced by that of the British government in London in 1858, with the “Government of India Act 1858” passed by the British Parliament. This was a watershed in the history of colonial India, and in the story of Victoria's empire as a whole.

Cawnpore Massacre, 1857 – one of the most publicized events of the so-called “Indian Mutiny”

How does this film cover the British colonization of Africa at this time?

Nearly one hour of this film is focused on the European scramble for Africa in the nineteenth century, including the British colonies of that time. One interesting segment involves the French construction of the Suez Canal from 1859 to 1869. This would have a major effect on affairs in India, as it turned out, because it shortened the distance needed to travel from Britain to India. Before the Suez Canal, ships actually had to go around the tip of Africa to get from the one ocean to the other. Now, the Suez Canal would allow them to take a shortcut through Egypt, where the canal thus connected the Mediterranean Sea with the Red Sea. Among other things, this would allow quicker passage from Britain to India (and other places). This would have a major effect upon the commerce of the entire world, and so the documentary is thus right to cover it. But there were also European explorations into the interior of Africa, and the documentary also covers those as well. The continent was then known to Europeans as the “Dark Continent,” and one British explorer who went there was the Scotsman David Livingstone. There was a British presence in South Africa with the British South Africa Company, and a drive to expand northwards and exploit the native peoples. The conflicts in South Africa would eventually culminate in the Boer Wars, which were still going on when Queen Victoria died in 1901. Victoria had been reigning for 63 years at the time of her death, and so she had a profound effect upon her people and her empire. She would eventually assume the title of “Empress of India,” something that would have shocked and horrified her late husband Prince Albert. But the progressivism of her early reign would have a greater effect than the harsh imperialism of her later reign, and the film notes this in its closing summation – one of the few judgments that the documentary makes, in their rather abrupt closing.

Scorched earth tactics in the Second Boer War in South Africa

Conclusion: This documentary is a great introduction to Britain's “imperial century”

One of the film's greatest assets may be the narration of Canadian actor Donald Sutherland, who may be best known to modern audiences for his role as President Snow in the “Hunger Games” franchise. Like many other great actors, he also makes a great narrator; and adds much to the storytelling here. Despite its obviously low budget, the quality of filmmaking is still quite high, and helps to tell the story of Britain's “imperial century” in great detail. Interestingly, the BBC's television history of Modern Britain seems to pick up where this series left off, beginning at the death of Queen Victoria in 1901. Those who wish to follow British history to the present day would be well-advised to go to this latter film, which goes through contemporary times in 2007. It may thus be the definitive television coverage of British history in the twentieth century. But if it's the nineteenth century that you're interested in, “Queen Victoria's Empire” may be the best introduction to the subject for a television audience. Despite its occasionally steep price, the documentary is well worth having for true students of British history, and it belongs on the shelf of anyone interested in the world's great empires.