Samuel Smiles' popular book Self-Help (1859) is usually cited as a convenient example of mid-Victorian individualism and middle class values. Yet the source and meaning of the self-help ideal is not to be found in the 1850's. Instead, the historian must first turn to eighteenth century values.

The article will therefore trace the intellectual origins of Smiles' ideal of self-help, and show that it was strongly influenced by Enlightenment concepts. Secondly, and a central theme of the article, it will be argued that Smiles' ideal of self-help in fact consisted of two avenues to reform-one active and one passive-and that these avenues to reform can only be understood in the context of the intellectual origins of the self-help ideal. Thirdly, the paper will analyse the continuing relationship between the active and passive components of Smiles' avenues to reform, and will contend that between the 1830's and the publication of Self-Help, Smiles' ideal of self-help as two modes of reform remained consistent. In order to support these claims the article will trace the development of Smiles' thought, concentrating firstly on Smiles' earliest book, Physical Education (1838), then on his time as editor of the reforming Leeds Times (1839-1845), and finally on his place in the health and education reform movements of the late 1840's and early 1850's leading into the writing of Self-Help (1859).

One of the most important consequences of the granting of colonial self-government in the British Empire in the early and mid-Victorian period was that it created complex problems for the Colonial Office concerning the future of native populations. In the nineteenth century this imperial dilemma was termed the “native question.” Natives were regarded as a lower class, like the Irish or the poor in Britain, and British liberals sought to better the material condition of these people by means of the panaceas of education and religion. Their object was humanitarian and their methods were usually paternalistic. Herman Merivale, in his role as a commentator on the native question, was both naive and at times Utopian in his attempts to find a solution. As an imperial administrator he was involved in the ineffectual attempts to implement the schemes of “amalgamation” (gradual union leading to assimilation) and “insulation” (reservations). British native policies failed largely because of resistance by native peoples and the weaknesses of imperial administration rather than British racial attitudes.

For Merivale “race” was a cultural idea derived from early nineteenth century ethnography, not a pseudo-scientific rationale which determined that native peoples were physically and, therefore, intellectually and materially inferior. Until the 1860's, at least, his ideas on this subject were not very different from those of his British contemporaries and were derived from a wide variety of written sources rather than direct observation.

In the West, sexuality has always been viewed with suspicion and sexual acts which, on the surface, seem harmless have represented attacks of a most profound sort on society. At least until the nineteenth century, when masturbation moved to center stage, sodomy was probably the major taboo. The reasons for this fear are complex. On the symbolic level, sodomy was linked with death and evil. The sodomite was wedded to the bowels and thus to the bowels of the earth where men rotted and decayed. Further, because of the enormous power of the Sodom and Gommorah story in the Old Testament, few doubted that sexual acts had social repercussions. The sodomite was dangerous. Once before in history, sodomites had caused the destruction of two cities by defying the moral code of the Lord. While fear of fire and brimstone may have faded, there were innumerable other catastrophes which the Lord might visit on those who sinned. In the pre-nineteenth century world, where the idea of mastering nature was tempered by respect for its power, sodomy was a cause of grave concern. Sodomites were often executed because to allow them to live was to court disaster.

When disaster did strike, it was common for clergymen and other societal spokesmen to blame licentiousness and specifically homosexuality. After the relatively mild earthquakes that shook London in 1750, the Bishop of London stressed that “Blasphemous language was used openly in the streets. Lewd pictures illustrated all the abominations of the public stews, and were tolerated. There was much homosexuality.” A poet compared the London quakes with a similar disaster in Jamaica.