The Great Imperial Hangover: How Empires Have Shaped the World

by Samir Puri

'An exceptional account.' Prospect
'Enlightening.' Spectator

For the first time in millennia we live without formal empires. But that doesn't mean we don't feel their presence rumbling through history. The Great Imperial Hangover examines how the world's imperial legacies are still shaping the thorniest issues we face today.

From Russia's incursions in the Ukraine to Brexit; from Trump's 'America-first' policy to China's forays into Africa; from Modi's India to the hotbed of the Middle East, Puri provides a bold new framework for understanding the world's complex rivalries and politics.

Organised by region, and covering vital topics such as security, foreign policy, national politics and commerce, The Great Imperial Hangover combines gripping history and astute analysis to explain why the history of empire affects us all in profound ways.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, World History, Political Science

384 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2020

Reviews

[Ali Hassan · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Great Imperial Hangover will let you know how some of the greatest anti-colonialist countries changed into colonial ones with the passage of time. The foremost example is the United States, a country that fought against British colonialism, which became the origin of neocolonialism, the worst form of colonialism. There are other examples given in the book as well that make clear the notion of liberty and freedom for humanity and the struggle for it by its proponents who became part of the same mindset they once opposed. If you love reading history and politics, you will definitely enjoy this book.

[Daniel Ward · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really exceptional. Thought provoking and a fascinating history lesson at the same time

[Thais Warren · Rating 4 out of 5]

Such a great book and one I feel I’m going to reread often. Written with such grace. Loved that it looks across the globe and spans such vast lengths of time seamlessly.

[George Curtis · Rating 4 out of 5]

The dominance of empires in our world’s history is pervasive, and even though these empires no longer formally exist, they inform how states’ and individuals alike act, and they are necessary to understand if we wish to comprehend the modern world. This is the essence of Samir Puri’s argument in The Great Imperial Hangover. The book spans continents and centuries, providing a whistle stop tour of how former empires operated and how they inform modern day politics. Puri takes a balanced approach to the concept of empire, neither accrediting all post-imperial tensions and crises to empire, whilst emphasizing how and where empires have caused unnecessary in the world.

The book itself is repetitive in structure. Taking eight countries/continents ranging from Britain to the Middle East and the USA to Africa, and assessing how their histories of empire and colonialism have formed their modern political realities. Each chapter spends a good deal of time sketching out a long durée history of the country or region. This contextualizes debates about European imperialism in Africa, the Middle East and India expertly. For instance, it enables Puri to provide the reader with knowledge of the Middle East’s internal differences which are essential to understand when assessing the causes of instability in the region itself. Demonstrating that it has been a historically religiously divided region (no different from Europe in that sense), but this then enables the reader to recognize that there is a tension between devastating European colonization in the region and long-held sectarian divisions. Therefore, knowledge of the historical makes the arguments about the legacy of imperialism more accessible.

There is another effect of this repetitive structure. It enables the reader to pre-empt the way in which Puri is going to deliver each chapter. As a reader you are not left thing ‘okay what is he trying to do here?’ You know that he is going to provide historical context to explain modern-day post-imperial realities.

One area which may be critiqued is the broadness of the book, which is really both a weakness and a strength. Delivering grand narratives of histories of whole regions as a subsection within a chapter inevitably results in a lack of nuance. However, what this highlights is that any one chapter could comfortably be developed into a book of its own. This is not necessarily a profound weakness because it means that this book provides a very digestible overview of the histories and their resulting imperial legacies and how they shape today’s world. The brevity is a pay-off between providing a global account at the expense of some historical nuance.

Overall, I would recommend this book. It presents a very balanced argument which seeks to uncover how empires have shaped the modern world, without being preoccupied with listing the virtues or vices of imperialism. The repetitive chapter structure provides a digestible consistency which makes it an accessible book for the reader and the global breadth of the book is an undoubted strength.

[Natasha Lock · Rating 5 out of 5]

Samir Puri’s incredible text is one that should be read by every person interested in how today’s world got to where it is. A fascinating overview of the world, its histories, and the present. It was so articulate and I was amazed at how he covered so much ground in one book.

For a better grasp of how Donald Trump came into power, read the chapter on US history. To understand how Xi Jinping uses echoes of the past to cement major narratives of China as a victim of today’s global system, read the chapter on China where it discusses the legacy of the Opium Wars.

As a postgrad student of Chinese history and international relations, I really think this is a book that should be on the core syllabus of any undergraduate / postgrad humanities degree. I have since recommended it to many friends, classmates and colleagues, and really look forward to reading more of his material in the future!

[Tomos · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book, and it gave a great historical overview and interesting perspective about the ongoing legacy of imperialism and colonialism. However, it was basic. It lacked real detail and attempted to cover so many imperial legacies in such a small space. The chapter on the EU was awful and full of sentences that used fancy words to say absolutely nothing. Very interested in the bibliography at the end - definitely some worthy and more specific reading to be done!

[Amos Tan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quite a heavy read that explores the enduring legacy of empires and colonialism.

Plus points: focus was not just on western imperialism but also on the legacy of the impact of governments around the world

[Charlie St-St · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a wonderfully crafted book about the impact of imperialism on world history. It took me a while to get through because I find it difficult to read non-fiction (especially historical) while in the teaching zone, but I did enjoy reading this book and learned so much about areas of history I haven't yet explored.
Yes, it does cover a lot of imperial legacies in a small space, but Puri's passion and knowledge come across so well in his writing that I felt I was being given the most important bits of information. I think this is an essential read for anyone remotely interested in history, geopolitics, or even the world.

[Paola Rubiano Buitrago · Rating 5 out of 5]

Samir carries you through a great geopolitical story but at every chapter leaves you right in the door of the present times. Slightly repetitive in some take-home points but that keeps you in perspective...His quotes and remarks on other non fiction writers are good additions when presenting how imperial legacies have been approached. Definitely a good read!

[Alex Kangaroo · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good book about the legacies different empires have left in their respective nations. Gives a different view on a lot of current and historical affairs. The analysis usually stay pretty general and the Imperial Legacy way of looking is just one of multiple ways to analyse our current affairs trough history.

[Chris Aylott · Rating 3 out of 5]

Puri surveys a wide swath of empires, exploring them from the perspectives of both conquerors and the conquered. The usual suspects are here -- Romans, Russians, British, Chinese, etc. -- but he also looks at "informal" empires such as the United States and the EU. What's impressive, and a little frightening, is how each empire's culture and history have interacted to produce a unique mix of beliefs and post-imperial effects. A strong entry in the "history and the world are even more complicated than you think" genre.

[Kiril · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fantastic read on imperialism and how it has shaped the world of today. This book is a mixture of history and geopolitics and gives a great insight of the various imperial legacies that are still in play. Exploring both formal and informal empires, the author presents perspectives of both the colonizers and the colonized. Without outright demonizing or excusing past and current imperial behavior, the author seeks to provide understanding. Only downsides are that there is quite a lot of details crammed in which makes it a bit difficult to read and that the Middle East and Africa were dedicated only a chapter each - I feel like they deserved some more attention.

[Xavier Ruiz Trullols · Rating 5 out of 5]

Embarking on a sweeping journey across time and geography, this book offers a riveting exploration of former empires and their enduring impact on contemporary politics. Puri deftly navigates the complexities of empire with a nuanced perspective, acknowledging their contributions to modern-day challenges while shedding light on the unnecessary conflicts they've stirred. With a balanced approach, he unveils the intricate web of imperial legacies, inviting readers to ponder the intricate interplay between past and present on the global stage.

[Anzig · Rating 4 out of 5]

At a glance, it seems like a light book, a cheesy one where you can have information elsewhere, or you've seen it on the news. But as the chapter evolved, it is a distilled one, consisting of countless research and reading.

The writing style also invites us to keep reading and curious.

And the conclusion of the book leaves me thrilled, where we go from here.

[Dinithi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really enjoyed this. It's refreshing to read about imperialism by an author reckoning with how they not only affect the world politically, but how they have affected him personally.

[Derek · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellently researched and written history of how countries have come to be where they are now and the influences that still exist today and continue to forge our world.

[Joe · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very insightful!

[Iain Hawkes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely one of the best non-fiction books I've read this year. I'm going to try and sum up its arguments as best I can, and interject where I feel it's appropriate. So on that note:

GENERAL

-We're living in a strange time in world history, in that empires are a thing of the past, at least hypothetically. Go back hundreds, even thousands of years, and you wouldn't find many people who questioned the logic of empire. However, the 21st century is bizzare in comparison, in that not only are empires shunned, but that the nation-state has taken over as the de facto method of organizing societies.

-There's a myopia among historians on European empires (at least in the West). This isn't to discount their relevance to world history, but you cannot understand global history by casting all other empires to the side, nor can you claim that their legacies don't exist. This has led to a stunted understanding of global history.

-The author doesn't outright state this, but given how language is used, it more or less distinguishes colonialism from imperialism as simply being an empire that doesn't share one cohesive landmass. So for instance, the two largest empires in history (British Empire, Mongol Empire) are both empires whose legacies resonate today, but the British Empire is colonial due to it being maritime, while the Mongol Empire isn't colonial, because it's one cohesive landmass. Speaking personally, I think this is the best distinction I've seen, because otherwise, I've seen people go into knots trying to draw a distinction.

-The world's imperial powers tend to have been on the receiving end of imperial powers.

The book then goes to look at a number of areas. Some of these aspects I found more interesting than others, and I can't sum up all the ideas, but I'll do my best to present them.

UNITED STATES

-There's a question as to whether the US should be considered an empire or not. Personally, I think there's a good argument for the US being an empire (at the very least, its territories aren't all continguous), but that aside, the author highlights how the US is a potential example of an empire that doesn't see itself as an empire, or at least, makes pains to present itself as not being an empire, because this is an era where empire is a dirty word.

-The US is an example of the author's idea that imperialists are often those who were once part of empires, who end up repeating the same patterns. As in, the Founding Fathers explicitly broke away from the British Empire, and declared that all men were created equal, but the country then steadily expanded its territory by force. The Munroe Doctrine was simultaniously anti-imperialistic (in that it didn't want "the Old World" interfering with "the New World"), but also imperialistic, in that it made the Western Hemisphere the US's backyard.

-The section raises the issue as to whether US hegemony has been a net positive or negative for the world in the context of the 20th century. It doesn't pick a side here. Speaking personally, I really can't answer that. There'd be a time where I'd have easily answered negative, but in light of recent events (*cough*Russia*cough), it's easy to see how awful the alternatives can be.

UNITED KINGDOM

I'm not sure why the author focuses specifically on the UK (granted, he's a Singaporean who lives in the UK, so it's his 'home turf' so to speak) as opposed to European empires in general, but considering that the British Empire was the largest empire in history, then it makes sense to include it. So on that note:

-The British Empire's legacy is hotly debated, and insanely polarized. I don't know how true this is, but the author claims that there's basically two camps that go to both extremes, with little discussion in the middle. He cities Nial Fergusson and Sharshi Tharoor, with their books "Empire" and "Inglorious Empire" respectively as examples of the two extremes.

-The British Empire is a weirdo in the history of empires, in that it spread in a hodge-podge manner, beginning with trading ports and growing from there (couldn't you say the same about the Portugese though?) There's no great rolling frontier like you'd find in land-based empires, but even that aside, the British Empire grew up haphazardly, from place to place, and that consequently, there's no single event in British memory that can be called THE point where the empire collapsed (by way of contrast, the author uses Algeria and Indochina as a case of France trying to hold onto its territory).

-The author doesn't say this directly, but Britain does arguably fit into his thesis of "imperialized become imperialists," in that he points out how Britain has experienced waves of invaders over its history, before becoming the heart of an empire rather than the periphery of one (e.g. the Roman Empire).

-Britain's also a case of what the book might call "an imperial hangover," in that it's navigating its place in the world where its status is grossly diminished. Not economically, but more in terms of military prowess - in this sense, Britain invading Iraq is a case of Britain thinking it's more powerful than it really is, with the Suez Canal Crisis being another example. This also (partly) explains Brexit, with Britain seeing itself apart from Europe, and having more of a role in the wider world, regardless as to whether this is actually the truth.

EUROPEAN UNION

Honestly, I found this section the iffiest, and therefore, don't have much to say. Basically, there's the idea of the EU being both an empire and a post-imperial super-state...or something. Honestly, I didn't really follow this train of thought much. If you want my view on things, I don't think the EU can really call itself an empire, nor do I think the EU could be an empire even if it wanted to. By any measure that I've seen, Europe's in no position to be a military superpower given its ageing population, and as some have argued, cultural malaise), but that aside, yeah. I think in the scope of European history, the EU is a net positive, but I don't think it really belongs in a discussion about empire per se.

RUSSIA

-Russia is a classic example of imperialized people becoming imperialists themselves. The author points how the Rus were terrorized by the Mongols, before eventually becoming one of the largest empires in history. It was actually a bit striking to me how you could draw parallels between the UK and Russia - both start off as backwaters, both are subject to waves of invasion, both eventually spread out and dominate large sections of the world, and both suffer what the author calls "imperial hangover," dealing with a reduced presence in the world.

-The author explicitly calls the USSR an empire, and it's a case of paradox/hypocrisy, simultaniously pushing for decolonization of the third world, while also clamping down on its satellite states (though being fair, I'd argue hypocrisy is bread and butter in general, so I wouldn't single the USSR out in this particular case). By extension, the collapse of the USSR marks the end of formal empires in the author's point of view, and what you're left with are either nation states, or empires that don't see themselves as empires (e.g. the United States).

-Russia's actions in Crimea are a case in point of Russia's "imperial hangover" and trying to reclaim lost glory. Bear in mind that this was written before the recent invasion of Ukraine (the breakaway regions notwithstanding), and it's eerile prescient how well the author captures Putin's state of mind).

-Russia is cozying up to China, but it isn't an equal relationship. China has a population of over 1 billion, Russia's population is but a fraction, and incredibly sparse. Overall, the future for Russia doesn't look good.

CHINA

-China's a weird one. It's arguably a case of an empire that became a nation state with its borders fully intact. As in, China the empire and China the country are one and the same.

-China simultaniously calls itself the victim of imperialism (which it was), while also drawing on its own imperial past (which it was). The claim that "China has never attacked another country" is an exercise in semantics, because it's like saying "the Mongols never attacked COUNTRIES" for instance. The author regards this as a toxic combination of nationalism, with China simultaniously playing the role of victim, while also celebrating its imperial legacies.

-Heavy reference is drawn to the Mongol Empire, and how both China and the Mongols have effectively colonized each other over the course of history, with their fortunes changing.

-China and the West (or more specifically, the US) are fundamentally at odds with each other. The author explains it better than I ever could, but basically, the entire conceptions of democracy, and the prioritization of the individual vs. the group are irreconciable.

INDIA

-India has experienced waves of invasions over its history, which have bequeathed their legacies, good and ill.

-Most of the time is spent on examing the Mughal Empire and the British Raj. Time is spent accomodating different viewpoints as to whether the Raj should be considered distinct from India's prior empires or not.

-You're probably aware of the Hinduvata movement in India. The book goes into some detail, kind of claiming that the idea of a 'pure' Hindu India is ahistoric, since India's has had waves of invasions over its history (note that when I say India, I'm referring to the overall landmass, India the country is a new construct).

-Not that the author says this, but India kind of strikes me as an outlier to the theory of "those who are imperialized become imperialists," in that India's experienced waves of invasions, and has had empires rise and fall within its own borders (Sikh Empire, Maratha Empire, etc.), but doesn't seem to have projected its own might out that much. I could be wrong, I think at least one Indian empire spread pretty far south, but meh.

MIDDLE EAST

-The Middle East is dealing with the legacies of both internal and external empires. Internal, in the sense that the ME has had countless empires rise and fall. External, in the context of European colonial empires, which have left artificial borders. Both of these legacies have their own issues with them - for instance, ISIS made a point of demolishing the border between Iraq and Iran, but was also trying to claim a linneage of the Islamic caliphates.

-Quite a bit of time is spent on the Ottoman Empire. The author seems fairly approving of its record, such as the millet system, though doesn't ignore the Armenian Genocide. The basic undercurrent seems to be that empires are (or were) better than nation-states of accomodating different ethnic groups. That may be true, but I'm not sure if that should be used as a case for bringing back empires (not that the author is making that claim).

-Time is spent on the Iran-Saudi rivalry. These two bodies aren't necessarily empires, but are drawing on history for their competing claims over the ME.

-Again, interjecting, I think the ME is a case where it's too simple to say "the imperialized become imperialists," because not only is the ME a broad swathe of land, but there's no distinct chronology. The ME has birthed empires that have spread from beyond the region (Ummayad Caliphate, Ottoman Empire, etc.), but has also been the subject of empires coming 'into' it (Alexander's empire, the Mongols, European empires, etc.)

AFRICA

-Brief mention is given to the Ghana, Mali, and Songhai Empires, as well as Great Zimbabwe (does that count as an empire?) Honestly, the first three are examples of repeatedly observed phenomena in history, of empires rising and falling over the same patch of land.

-The author makes specific reference to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade as being unique due to depopulating West Africa. Personally, if you want to call the TSA unique, this seems like the weakest of differentials, because if depopulation is the only issue, then that's fairly common in slaving, ranging from Easter Island to the so-called Harvesting of the Steppe of eastern Europe.

-If you want to ask why Africa is the way it is, and you say "colonialism" or "tribalism," then the author takes the view that the answer is "both," and that neither extreme can generate a full picture. On one hand, Africa has the legacy of artificial borders and weak national identity, but on the other, that doesn't excuse the actions of African elites, nor does it deal with tribal rivalries hindering development. Personally, I think this section is ill-served by not even mentioning Ethiopia, since it never came under European control in any real sense.

-If you're looking for an optimistic outlook on Africa here, you won't find it in the book. It does make me wonder, again, hypothetically, if Africa is another break from the whole "imperialized become imperialists" thesis, because as of typing this, there's no real chance of that happening. The continent is fractured, the AU is limp, Pan-Africanism is dead, and even if you factor out all the social issues, sub-Saharan Africa has a number of disadvantages. Not all of these claims are the author's own, but basically, the prognosis is the same. And that's not even factoring issues such as climate change. :(

CONCLUSION

Overall, the book was a solid read. There's a chance I've mischaracterized some of the author's arguments, and obviously I don't agree with everything, but overall, it's solid writing.

[Dominique · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’m glad I stuck with this one! Initially I thought it read like a bunch of Economist articles back to back but the chapters on India, the Middle East and Africa really brought out the best in Puri’s thesis. The author grew up in the UK, is of Indian heritage but his family migrated from East Africa. He’s also worked in the Foreign Office and lectures at universities. The book examines the ongoing legacy and impact of empires on countries that were once empires and those that were colonised. The thesis falls apart a little when he skips over Austria (lol) but really comes into its own in the chapter on the Middle East especially. Written before the pandemic so it would be really interesting to see this republished with an updated introduction. Also this is the only book that has adequately explained to me the structure of the EU, so it succeeded where two years of postgraduate study couldn’t, so big thumbs up for that.

[Lotus Flower · Rating 5 out of 5]

This timely book pieces together interconnected and often contradictory world histories that contribute to differing post-colonial views of the world today. I learnt a lot about myself and my own mixed heritages, and was forced to rethink some of the difficult biases that I hold. The Great Imperial Hangover has made me think differently about the problems that States face when entering into negotiations, and the colonial legacies that are the elephant in most rooms. A fantastic and accessible read for anyone interested in politics, history, and the many global issues we face in today’s world. Highly recommend.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wide ranging and insightful, but sometimes I felt the summaries were more descriptive than analytical. Then again for 30 or so pages per continent or region, this is quite the accomplishment. Those who have less historical background and find the barrage of news about instability here or there disorienting would benefit from the longer range perspectives which Puri presents. Now that another war in Ukraine is raging, the chapters on the EU and Russia feel weightier.

[Evan France · Rating 3 out of 5]

The great imperial hangover is a really nuanced view on how colonialism and imperialism has shaped the world we live in today.

While I find some chapters to be really drawn out and maybe quite information heavy it is still well worth the read for those who want to dive deeper into that side of history.

[Joey McQuade · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book 👌 nice introduction into a wide array of history. Some of the idea I don’t think are fleshed out as well as they could be but some thought provoking outlooks provided on how imperialism continues to impact the world

[Reading · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well researched and considered

[Saksham · Rating 4 out of 5]

I liked this book but some chapters (like the one on the EU) are definitely better than others.

[Raudh Zilal · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eye opening book that allows you to see the modern world in a new light