That conflicting thing called 'Abroad'

In projecting what Raymond William calls a 'knowable community' of Englishmen and women, Jane Austen, Gorge Eliot and Mrs Gaskel shaped the idea of England in such a way as to give it identity, presence and ways of reusable articulation. And part of this idea was the relationship between "home" and "abroad". Thus England was surveyed, evaluated, made known, whereas "abroad" was only referred to or shown briefly without the kind of presence or immediacy lavished on London, the countryside or northern industrial centres such as Manchester or Birmingham.
(Culture and Imperialism, Edward Said)
There's this painting of queen Elizabeth I(on the right) in which she has her hand lightly resting on the globe, not furiously clutching or anxiously holding on to it, rather the hand is delicately put on the globe as if recognizing it's presence and her ownership of  it. I couldn't help but think that it was exactly in line with the idea of "abroad" represented in the Eighteenth century British novel. Novelists don't hold on to "abroad" like their story depends on it rather "abroad" like a ghost hovers in the air, recognised and mentioned in passing a couple of times. This ghost in a way assists to establish the reality of "home" which becomes all the more real due to the presence of the unreal ghost.
This idea is affirmed by Said in the argument in the quoted passage above. Said rightly asserts that the "immediacy" of the reality of home is made all the more striking due to the presence of abroad "which is only referred to". This argument applies well to Mansfield Park. Though Antigua, Sir Thomas's estate, is the place which provides "identity" and "presence" to Mansfield Park but it is only shown in the slightest of ways to the point that we, as readers, hear of Sir Thomas's letters home but are never presented with evidence of those letters because of their connection with "abroad".
 But with regard to Said's argument, I felt that there's a salient nuance in the relationship of "abroad" and "home" which has been missed, that is, the idea that abroad is a natural extension of home. This same idea would propel a monarch of England to show ownership of the globe because the monarch- by extension then, becomes an authority for abroad as well; England becomes the Great Empire. Abroad then in a sense is not that which is non-home but that which is in a twisted way, is under the ownership of the home, is important for the economic betterment of home; yet in the imagination of the residents of home it is a far flung reality. Maybe that's reading too much into it. But then abroad is a conflated entity, lurking somewhere between the home and non-home- at least in the British colonial sensibility.