Historians Argue: Explaining the New Imperialism

Historians have long disagreed about what caused the New Imperialism. Hobson and Lenin stressed economic forces, especially finance capital seeking profits abroad. In 1953 John Gallagher and Ronald Robinson argued that Britain preferred informal influence through trade, an 'imperialism of free trade', and annexed territory only when local crises threatened its interests; their 1961 book Africa and the Victorians stressed strategic worries about Egypt and the route to India.

Others emphasize nationalism and great-power rivalry, or the role of men on the spot, such as soldiers and company agents, who acted ahead of their governments. In 1978 Edward Said's Orientalism examined how European writing about the East supported domination, and later historians have explored the roles of culture, race and colonized peoples themselves. Most historians now see multiple interacting causes that varied by place, which is why studying specific cases matters.