Every schoolboy used to know that at the height of the empire, almost a quarter of the atlas was coloured pink, showing the extent of British rule.
But that oft recited fact dramatically understates the remarkable global reach achieved by this country.
A new study has found that at various times the British have invaded almost 90 per cent of the countries around the globe.
The analysis of the histories of the almost 200 countries in the world found only 22 which have never experienced an invasion by the British.
Among this select group of nations are far-off destinations such as Guatemala, Tajikistan and the Marshall Islands, as well some slightly closer to home, such as Luxembourg.
The analysis is contained in a new book, All the Countries We’ve Ever Invaded: And the Few We Never Got Round To.
Stuart Laycock, the author, has worked his way around the globe, through each country alphabetically, researching its history to establish whether, at any point, they have experienced an incursion by Britain.
Only a comparatively small proportion of the total in Mr Laycock’s list of invaded states actually formed an official part of the empire.
The remainder have been included because the British were found to have achieved some sort of military presence in the territory – however transitory – either through force, the threat of force, negotiation or payment.
Incursions by British pirates, privateers or armed explorers have also been included, provided they were operating with the approval of their government.
So, many countries which once formed part of the Spanish empire and seem to have little historical connection with the UK, such as Costa Rica, Ecuador and El Salvador, make the list because of the repeated raids they suffered from state-sanctioned British sailors.
Among some of the perhaps surprising entries on the list are:
* Cuba, where in 1741, a force under Admiral Edward Vernon stormed ashore at Guantánamo Bay. He renamed it Cumberland Bay, before being forced to withdraw in the face of hostile locals and an outbreak of disease among his men. Twenty one years later, Havana and a large part of the island fell to the British after a bloody siege, only to be handed back to the Spanish in 1763, along with another unlikely British possession, the Philippines, in exchange for Florida and Minorca.
*Iceland, invaded in 1940 by the British after the neutral nation refused to enter the war on the Allies side. The invasion force, of 745 marines, met with strong protest from the Iceland government, but no resistance.
* Vietnam, which has experienced repeated incursions by the British since the seventeenth century. The most recent – from 1945 to 1946 – saw the British fight a campaign for control of the country against communists, in a war that has been overshadowed by later conflicts involving first the French and then Americans.
It is thought to be the first time such a list has been compiled.
Mr Laycock, who has previously published books on Roman history, began the unusual quest after being asked by his 11-year-old son, Frederick, how many countries the British had invaded.
After almost two years of research he said he was shocked by the answer. “I was absolutely staggered when I reached the total. I like to think I have a relatively good general knowledge. But there are places where it hadn’t occurred to me that these things had ever happened. It shocked me.
“Other countries could write similar books – but they would be much shorter. I don’t think anyone could match this, although the Americans had a later start and have been working hard on it in the twentieth century.”
The only other nation which has achieved anything approaching the British total, Mr Laycock said, is France – which also holds the unfortunate record for having endured the most British invasions. “I realise people may argue with some of my reasons, but it is intended to prompt debate,” he added.
He believes the actual figure may well be higher and is inviting the public to get in touch to provide evidence of other invasions.
In the case of Mongolia, for instance – one of the 22 nations “not invaded”, according to the book – he believes it possible that there could have been a British invasion, but could find no direct proof.
The country was caught up in the turmoil following the Russian Revolution, in which the British and other powers intervened. Mr Laycock found evidence of a British military mission in Russia approximately 50 miles from the Mongolian border, but could not establish whether it got any closer.
The research lists countries based on their current national boundaries and names. Many of the invasions took place when these did not apply.
The research covered the 192 other UN member states as well as the Vatican City and Kosovo, which are not member states, but are recognised by the UK government as independent states.
The earliest invasion launched from these islands was an incursion into Gaul – now France – at the end of the second century. Clodius Albinus led an army, thought to include many Britons, across the Channel in an attempt to seize the imperial throne. The force was defeated in 197 at Lyon.
Mr Laycock added: “One one level, for the British, it is quite amazing and quite humbling, that this is all part of our history, but clearly there are parts of our history that we are less proud of. The book is not intended as any kind of moral judgment on our history or our empire. It is meant as a light-hearted bit of fun.”
The countries never invaded by the British:
Andorra
Belarus
Bolivia
Burundi
Central African Republic
Chad
Congo, Republic of
Guatemala
Ivory Coast
Kyrgyzstan
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Mali
Marshall Islands
Monaco
Mongolia
Paraguay
Sao Tome and Principe
Sweden
Tajikistan
Uzbekistan
Vatican City
(Source: espill)
Rebloggable by request
Yesyesyesssssssss
They tested birth control on Jamaican women in the 80s?!?!?!?
I read this a few years ago but from what i do remember— they sent birth control over to Jamaica to test if its safe before releasing it for use for public use on women or white British women because they also tested it on the Black women here by injecting without consent when they went to visit the GP and not telling them what they were doing. It don’t remember the book going into too much detail about this so that’s all i can say.
It was the depo provera injections i think they were testing
Yes yes yes I really want more discussion on racism in Europe. I completely agree with the OP; it’s seen as a mostly American problem and we think we’re completely innocent, or at least innocent compared to the US. And there’s so much racism going on that goes by unnoticed and without anyone calling out on it because that’s just the way it is, or some stupid reason like that.
Dame Helen Mirren. Fantastic.
I’d love to do a photoshoot like this one day
My partner started a sentence with “Yeah, for her age..” and I stopped him there. She’s gorgeous, age has nothing to do with it.
Most of us tend to think that black people came to Britain after the war - Caribbeans on the Empire Windrush in 1948, Bangladeshis after the 1971 war and Ugandan Asians after Idi Amin’s expulsion in 1972.
But, back in Shakespeare’s day, you could have met people from west Africa and even Bengal in the same London streets.
Of course, there were fewer, and they drew antipathy as well as fascination from the Tudor inhabitants, who had never seen black people before. But we know they lived, worked and intermarried, so it is fair to say that Britain’s first black community starts here.
There had been black people in Britain in Roman times, and they are found as musicians in the early Tudor period in England and Scotland.
So, tell me again that it’s not historically accurate to include POC in media set in Europe before slavery. Go on, reality & I will be here mocking you.
And the first Black community in England (reminder to Americans that England isn’t only London) was 1700 years earlier.
paging Mr. Gaider
Same goes for the UK. So many people think it’s all in the past. It really isn’t.
David Cameron and the coalition government target vulnerable LGBT youth with latest austerity measures.
TPB gets censored in the UK
The Western countries of the world all complaints about the censorship in Iran, China, Saudi Arabia and so on. But they are really the worst culprits themselves, having double morals in doing an even worse thing themselves.
Today news was out that the UK high court has decided that TPB is “massively infringing on copyright”. The facts that no copyright is being infringed upon here at the site was not a welcome fact, so that was ignored apparantly.
Noone from TPB was invited to the court case, which would be normal to do in a democracy. This is not the first time this happens, it’s been the same in most countries we’re censored in. We have no right to speak since we’re not rich.
Five ISPs got sued by the record companies to force them to block us. This is particularily interesting since music released and promoted exclusively here on TPB is currently in the brittish top charts. We are simply competitors that they just managed to squeeze out of their market, in a maffiesque way.
As usual there are easy ways to circumvent the block. Use a VPN service to be anonymous and get an uncensored internet access, you should do this anyhow. Or useTOR, I2P or some other darknet with access to the internets. Change your DNS settings with OpenDNS. Or use googles DNS servers… we could go on…
But don’t forget that we can’t allow this shit to happen. Next time they’re coming for something else. And yes, there will be a next time if we don’t stop them. Write to your ISP and tell them to appeal the case. Write to your local MPs and tell them that this is not allowed. Make sure your voice is heard. Remember, we’re all the pirate bay, and we must stand united against the censorship from our opponents!
(Source: officialdarknightscitylights)
So. British government is actively censoring its citizens. Nice. cool. lovely.
more about it:
British web providers begin blocking Pirate Bay
Pirate Bay hits out over High Court blocking order
Is the UK’s Love Affair With the Internet at Risk?
Also read the TorrentFreak article on the matter, which includes a proxy link. Fuck Internet censorship!
(Source: howllor)
The charity SurvivorsUK is undertaking a major advertising campaign after Metropolitan Police figures revealed that one man every hour in London is the victim of sexual crime.
Official government estimates state that at most 11% of male victims report their crimes. With new Met Police figures showing that in 2009/10 a total of 945 sexual assaults against men were reported, the true figure is closer to 10,000 in the capital alone.
The campaign featuring a rugby ball pierced by a nail and the message “Real Men Get Raped and Talking About It Takes Real Strength”, will be featured on 140 escalator panels in central London Tube stations from February 20th during the Six Nations rugby tournament. The adverts will also feature on two 48 Sheet billboards at Clapham Junction train station and on big screens at Waterloo station on 25th February and 17th March, when England are playing at home in the tournament.
Awareness and prevention measures must be taken. But is this ad headline the right way to go? “Real Men” and “Not Real Men”? My opinion, the campaign should appeal to all men who had this terrible experience, … should be inclusive of all male rape victims, regardless of how their masculinity manifests.
Michael May of Survivors UK said: “We’ve chosen to use an alpha male sport in our advertising to challenge assumptions about the type of men who get raped. It’s just as likely to be a rugby player as a librarian, a suited city banker as a hooded gang member. And we hope that by challenging our innate assumptions about the identity of male victims, we can make it even fractionally easier for a male rape victim to ask for help.”
Professor Kim Etherington, University of Bristol and Fellow of BACP said: “Males are taught from a very early age that they should be ‘strong’ and ‘in-charge’. To be successfully masculine is to be sexually potent, competitive with other males in sexual matters, and dominant with sexual interactions. Being raped challenges and negates all these pre-conceptions.”
Baroness Stern’s 2011 rape report acknowledged that the vast majority of male victims of sexual violence do not report their crimes because of the common view that men “should be able to fight off an attacker”. The review recognised that men do not come forward for fear of being ridiculed or not believed, fear they may be seen as gay. And centrally they do not want to be regarded as less of a man. Hence a campaign strives to demystify what it takes to be a man.
SurvivorsUK is the London based specialist male sexual violence support charity, offering counselling and emotional support to male victims of sexual crime and those who care for them.
Saw this on the tube yesterday and it really caught my eye. I think the headline is potentially problematic (I usually cringe at anything like “real men” or “real women”, but I feel it is also challenging that idea of “real men”, by saying they can also be vulnerable, they can also be attacked, they are not invincible. So yes it is using a hurtful stereotype but I personally can’t help but feel it’s breaking that stereotype too. No?
Though I do think that to include all men they could’ve said “Real men get raped too” or something like that.. either way, I hope it opens up for a lot of discussion on this subject!