Outline of Events

It is natural to assume that the rivalry between William Gladstone and Benjamin Disraeli reflected not merely a dissonance of personality but also a fundamental divergence in political ideology. To assess this proposition it is first necessary to establish just what, precisely, were the basic political principles of the two men. Predictably, however, there is extensive disagreement as to what Gladstone and Disraeli actually stood for – and indeed, whether either actually stood for anything. The latter possibility is touted much more readily in the case of Disraeli. This, in itself, is somewhat paradoxical, for Disraeli cut his political teeth in the 1840s by championing his Young England brand of true Tory values in contradistinction to Robert Peel's supposedly liberal latitudinarianism, and for most of his life he spoke a recurring language of national unity, patriotism, aristocratic leadership and allegiance to historic institutions. However, contemporary critics and the bulk of subsequent historians have seen Disraeli's rhetoric and practice as two very different things. While Disraeli recognized the importance of ideas, and relished using words and images to convey a political effect, in action he is seen as behaving opportunistically, seizing upon whatever a situation offered to score an advantage. Thus, in each of the major initiatives of his career, from his defence of the Corn Laws in the 1840s to his support for electoral reform in 1867 to his embracing of social reform in the 1870s, Disraeli is portrayed as acting strategically not ideologically. Gladstone, by contrast, is depicted as the conviction politician par excellence, and each of the milestones in his career is regarded as the product of an intense period of internal reflection: if Gladstone advocated a laissez-faire economic policy or the extension of the franchise or Irish Home Rule, he did so because he was convinced that it was the right thing to do – so right, indeed, that it was almost certainly God's will.

Where debate has chiefly arisen has been with respect to what principle guided his behaviour. Was Gladstone guided by a profound liberal instinct? Or was he always really a Conservative, and more particularly a Peelite? Or perhaps he is best seen as an Evangelical struggling against the forces of sin?