How far would you agree that Sir Evelyn Baring’s work as Consul General was ineffective at
dealing with Egypt’s problems? [20/20 gained , TEACHER marked]
Sir Evelyn Baring, under the Dufferin Report, was appointed Consul General in 1883. He was
a Victorian imperialist who was a hard worker, paternalistic and an excellent administrator.
Egypt during this time was going through serious economic, political, and social issues such
as high debt, religious clashes and the Urabi Revolt. By “ineffective” we are arguing that
Baring’s aims of reform were unable to address Egypt’s problems, which is an inaccurate
assessment. Despite his imperialistic beliefs leading to inadequate investment in education
and a surge in nationalism, he did manage to address many of Egypt’s issues. He tackled the
severe financial crisis and made substantial investments in agriculture and infrastructure.
While his efforts did not fully resolve Egypt’s problems, they were certainly steps in the right
direction. Therefore, it would be inaccurate to label his efforts as ineffective, rather it would
be more accurate to argue that his work although not completely effective was substantial in
dealing with Egypt’s problems.
Egypt had major economic issues. The Khedives in Egypt had enjoyed a great deal of political
freedom from the Ottomans and from 1850s had increasingly taken on an over-leveraging
borrowing program. Egypt had borrowed £100 million from Britain and France in the 1860s
and 70s. This economic rashness bankrupted Egypt in 1876 and resulted in Egypt being
flooded with loans and investment from Britian and France. Despite the Suez Canal being
sold for £4 million the economy still went into terminal decline and bankruptcy in 1875-76
under huge debts. Evelyn Baring made significant changes to the economy of Egypt. He
secured loans of over £9 million under the London Convention 1885 and used £8 million of
that £9 million to stabilize the debt situation. Debt repayments was half of the money raised
in tax during Baring’s years. This shows him to be effective at handing Egypt problems as he
instituted stringent financial controls and cuts to public spending significantly improve the
budget deficit of Egypt. This resulted in the government returning to solvency by 1887.
However, it can be argued that Baring repayments of debts meant he was ineffective at
creating investment (domestic investment was low) and he created significant budgetary
constraints in the economy. The little money left over was spent in paying for military
projects such as the war in Sudan or towards irrigation and agriculture. Even still, it is not
valid to argue that Baring policies were ineffective in solving Egypt’s problems as during his
tenure he managed to solve Egypt’s biggest issue – its national debt. Baring put the
economy on a firmer footing and managed to make it solvent which was the stated objective
in the first place highlighting how Baring was highly successful in solving Egypt’s problems.
Baring agenda for Egypt was long term modernization through a British model, he wanted to
create fundamental change to Egypt weakness of poor agriculture and irrigation. This can be
seen through his significant program of irrigation and cleaning of the silted channels on the
Nile flood plain. This helped increase the fertility of the soil. He also focuses on instilling
proper drainage to improve the agricultural output with 8% of the revenue being devoted to
improving agriculture and hydraulic improvement under the Public Works Development.
Baring, with his limited budgetary constraints, spent significant proportions of his money, £1
million, on irrigation. This was significant as the cleaning up in agriculture helped increase
dealing with Egypt’s problems? [20/20 gained , TEACHER marked]
Sir Evelyn Baring, under the Dufferin Report, was appointed Consul General in 1883. He was
a Victorian imperialist who was a hard worker, paternalistic and an excellent administrator.
Egypt during this time was going through serious economic, political, and social issues such
as high debt, religious clashes and the Urabi Revolt. By “ineffective” we are arguing that
Baring’s aims of reform were unable to address Egypt’s problems, which is an inaccurate
assessment. Despite his imperialistic beliefs leading to inadequate investment in education
and a surge in nationalism, he did manage to address many of Egypt’s issues. He tackled the
severe financial crisis and made substantial investments in agriculture and infrastructure.
While his efforts did not fully resolve Egypt’s problems, they were certainly steps in the right
direction. Therefore, it would be inaccurate to label his efforts as ineffective, rather it would
be more accurate to argue that his work although not completely effective was substantial in
dealing with Egypt’s problems.
Egypt had major economic issues. The Khedives in Egypt had enjoyed a great deal of political
freedom from the Ottomans and from 1850s had increasingly taken on an over-leveraging
borrowing program. Egypt had borrowed £100 million from Britain and France in the 1860s
and 70s. This economic rashness bankrupted Egypt in 1876 and resulted in Egypt being
flooded with loans and investment from Britian and France. Despite the Suez Canal being
sold for £4 million the economy still went into terminal decline and bankruptcy in 1875-76
under huge debts. Evelyn Baring made significant changes to the economy of Egypt. He
secured loans of over £9 million under the London Convention 1885 and used £8 million of
that £9 million to stabilize the debt situation. Debt repayments was half of the money raised
in tax during Baring’s years. This shows him to be effective at handing Egypt problems as he
instituted stringent financial controls and cuts to public spending significantly improve the
budget deficit of Egypt. This resulted in the government returning to solvency by 1887.
However, it can be argued that Baring repayments of debts meant he was ineffective at
creating investment (domestic investment was low) and he created significant budgetary
constraints in the economy. The little money left over was spent in paying for military
projects such as the war in Sudan or towards irrigation and agriculture. Even still, it is not
valid to argue that Baring policies were ineffective in solving Egypt’s problems as during his
tenure he managed to solve Egypt’s biggest issue – its national debt. Baring put the
economy on a firmer footing and managed to make it solvent which was the stated objective
in the first place highlighting how Baring was highly successful in solving Egypt’s problems.
Baring agenda for Egypt was long term modernization through a British model, he wanted to
create fundamental change to Egypt weakness of poor agriculture and irrigation. This can be
seen through his significant program of irrigation and cleaning of the silted channels on the
Nile flood plain. This helped increase the fertility of the soil. He also focuses on instilling
proper drainage to improve the agricultural output with 8% of the revenue being devoted to
improving agriculture and hydraulic improvement under the Public Works Development.
Baring, with his limited budgetary constraints, spent significant proportions of his money, £1
million, on irrigation. This was significant as the cleaning up in agriculture helped increase
