Regency Reader Question
I enjoyed your post about people of colour in Regency England. I was thinking about Persuasion and wondering if there’s any reason the Wentworths could not have been Black or mixed race? Captain Wentworth and Mrs Croft present no obstacle, as the recently popularized statistic shows that one fifth of the navy was black. But I could find no similar statistics for the clergy. Could Reverend Wentworth have been Black? What is the history of non-whites in the clergy, especially curacies?
| Source of Question | Just curious |
| Additional comments | I only just found your website on Google, trying to get the answer to this question. But it looks amazing and I look forward to exploring it further! |
Thanks for the excellent questions, Malca and visiting the site! I am assuming this question is related to the recent casting announcement about the upcoming Persuasion adaptation and apparently some controversy given the presumed race of the actor set to play Wentworth. I don’t know much about that actor or the adaptation, but I am here for the history (and busting some wild myths I have heard rumors about) so I will do my amateur historian’s best.
You are correct in that there has been more research recently on Afro-British presence in the Navy and military, and I have included some references below for those who are interested in learning more. This is also a nice summary article on the topic for further reading.
While the British Army was “the largest single purchaser of enslaved Africans in the Caribbean” increasing their numbers by 6,376 people for military service between 1798-1806, the African-British presence in the military was not limited to slaves and servants (https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/portchester-castle/history-and-stories/black-people-in-late-18th-century-britain/). Many free men joined the Navy for opportunities, and there are some instances of African-British men rising beyond petty officers (https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/portchester-castle/history-and-stories/black-people-in-late-18th-century-britain/).
Unlike the army, men could not purchase an officer commission in the Navy, but they could train up ahead of enlisting at the Naval Academy which would give them advanced skills that could make them easily ready for quick promotion (https://www.wattpad.com/404805892-reading-the-regency-gentlemen%27s-occupations-army/page/2). In other words, the Naval Academy was a good proxy for purchasing a commission for well to do families. And, as we will see in the review of clergy, there were wealthy black or multiracial families who would have had the means to educate their progeny thusly.
On to the clergy issue. This, unfortunately, is woefully understudied to date. Part of the problem is that our main ways of learning about race come from either muster rolls or parish records, so without doing extensive genealogy of families we don’t readily know who may have entered the clergy. I have found the numbers/statistics of the clergy during the era generally to be elusive (Regency Reader Questions: Marriage Before University – Regency Reader (regrom.com)) so if anyone has any sources please share.
The end result is that most of what we have to rely on our standout families and people to stand as proxies.
I found a treasure of a letter to the editor in a publication called The Church Times which gave me some brilliant breadcrumbs to follow to answer this question of people of color in the 19th century clergy. The author tells us the first known clergy to have African descent was Bryan MacKay, the Vicar of Coates. I could not find more on Bryan MacKay, but the author tells us his clergy work would have been in the late Regency early Victorian period.
The author names a few more examples: Nathaniel Wells, a wealthy black landowner and justice of the peace in the late Georgian early Regency era had 20 kids, some who went on to serve in the clergy. Nathaniel Wells is an interesting character probably worthy of a post of his own…so stay tuned for that. In searching the Clergy Database for the rough time period, I came up with over 17,000 names of men who served in the clergy (https://theclergydatabase.org.uk/) and several with the last name Wells. I should think a clever genealogist could pull at some of the threads to figure out which Wells was related to Nathaniel. And I would also be willing to bet that if someone the time to research men on that list, we would find more diversity than people expect.
The author also gives a short list of other names from the Victorian era: Alexander Crummel (1819-1898), Edward Cragg Haynes (1821-1883), Robert Gordon, and Henry Armstrong Smyth.
I am grateful to this letter’s author, because after that the trail goes a bit cold. Are these examples enough to draw some conclusions, however? I think so.
The first conclusion is that it was possible to be a person of color within the clergy in the 19th Century. Particularly if that clergy member was from a well to do family like the children of Nathaniel Wells.
The second conclusion is that as the 19th Century marched on, it became more common, but it wouldn’t have been remarkable. Diversity in the Church of England is still a problem today: Church of England appoints first black female bishop – BBC News
It sounds as if the author to the letter had some in depth knowledge of this subject, and his proclamation of Bryan MacKay as the first clergy member of African descent is not something I have found evidence to combat…although I do wonder because of the established community of black Britons in the Tudor era if there weren’t clergy members of color within that insular space. English Heritage tells us of at least one black church in Whitechapel, and that “black preachers abounded” (https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/portchester-castle/history-and-stories/black-people-in-late-18th-century-britain/). Although I am not sure what the author intended by the word “preacher”, I am inferring from it that there may have been numerous curate or pastors (non-Church of England) of color, while the higher status of Vicar was more rare.
I admit to finding the particulars of the structure/jobs within the clergy to be a daunting topic. Here is a hierarchy to show where curates fall.
I also found this brilliant post that provides distinctions between rector, victor, and curate very helpful. The post also tells us there were roughly 11,500 livings in England and Wales related to the clergy by the end of the 18th century. This didn’t necessarily mean there were 11,500 clergymen running around…it sounds like it was more likely to be around half that number. By the Victorian era, that number would jump dramatically (Victorians: Religion | English Heritage (english-heritage.org.uk)).
However, my research from the Clergy Database does suggest that in and around the Regency period there were over 17,000 individuals who at one time served the Church of England in some capacity. So at one time there may have been about 6,000 clergymen turnover means that the pool of those 6,000 clergymen at one time came from about 17,000 people. My educated guess would be that the number of people of color in that pool was probably statistically low but even 1% would equal 170 people.
I am certainly no expert on Persuasion and we don’t know a lot of details of the Wentworth family history, just that they were at least of the class to chose military or clergy careers rather than work as laborers. But they were not so well connected or wealthy as to recommend Wentworth for marriage when he first meets Anne.
Nathaniel Wells’ parents were a wealthy slave owner and a house slave. His father sent him to be educated in England by age 10, and eventually he would inherit as large sum. This scenario wouldn’t perfectly fit a history for the Wentworth family, but it could hint at possibilities; the Wentworths could have been a more impoverished branch of family of color that still had enough funds to send both male children to be educated (the Reverend at Oxbridge and the Captain at the Naval Academy), securing their futures in gentleman professions.
So could Reverend and Captain Wentworth been black or mixed race? I don’t have enough data to answer the statistical likelihood and I am not a Jane Austen scholar enough that I may try to divine her intent. But what I can say, with certainty, is that it was not an impossibility. The historical record available bears that out. What is possible may not be probable, but I don’t know that probability is really at the heart of the question. I will say more about that in a minute.
I want to pause and take this opportunity to remind readers of my clearly stated position that race as a social construct was still in its infancy in the early 19th century, so that attitudes towards people of color were not as coded or baked in to culture as they are today. So that looking for coded clues in Austen is an exercise in projection, in my opinion.
But I do think that adaptations tell us more about our current culture than the culture the adaptation is retelling, anyway. And that is where I think the discomfort lies. I think that is why we split hairs over probability and possibility and historical accuracy. Does historical accuracy mean probable or possible? And what, exactly, constitutes probability? Is closer to average? Mathematically speaking, it means somewhere between 0 and 1, where zero is impossible and one is certainty. In the middle. Average. Are we asking that every adaptation of Jane Austen follow some invisible rule of average? If that is the rule, then I would have to say that it wasn’t probable Austen meant to for the Wentworths to be of African heritage. But it would also mean that we have to examine lots of other aspects, beyond race, of the adaptations and banish the improbable (including actors that differ in ages from the role, hair color, eye color, quality of hygiene, general fashionable looks compared to the Regency, etc).
And why? Why does Jane Austen have to be an exclusive space? Surely, Jane Austen herself was interested in equity and inclusivity, at least insomuch as these were real issues she saw her contemporaries grappling with and then chose to have her characters live these things out, both with comedic and dramatic consequences.
So, in that respect, its very true to the spirit of Austen (and tells us a lot about our current culture) that there is more of an interest in inclusive casting. And if we like to tell the same stories over and over in new ways, it must mean that fundamentally its the tropes rather than the details of the story that are important. I have waxed and waned a lot, for instance, on Beauty and the Beast as an example of a retold story that people would try to gatekeep without really understanding the true historical context.
I like the history, because I think it can help us challenge or at least understand the baked in assumptions (the projections) but most people aren’t reading/watching from a critical theory perspective, they are reading/watching for entertainment. The cultural stuff is just absorbed, and I think most of the time subconsciously. The problem sneaks in when we try to treat these cultural artifacts (movies, novels) as gospel or objective truths.
I always think about Buffy the Vampire Slayer show, in these instances, because of their way of using the supernatural to tell stories about real things facing real teens, but in a way that was removed enough to feel comfortable and approachable. The episode I vaguely remember the most is the abusive boyfriend who basically Jekyll/Hydes it up. The messages were there but subtle…tell someone, get help, its not your fault you’re being abused.
Historical adaptations are the same thing. Using something removed by history to make it feel comfortable enough to talk tough stuff.
And a retelling doesn’t negate the versions that worked for you as an individual. I see a lot of online conversations about the “best” Pride and Prejudice adaptation. I have never understood ranking them, because as a text they are actually about very different things (periods in time, values, cultures, etc). And usually that is true in the method of ranking; most favorites are expressly chosen because those were the versions that came out during the person’s most impressionable period of their life; the justifications I usually see are along the lines of “Colin Firth forever, because it came out when I was in my 20s” or “Matthew MacFadyen…because that hand flex hit me when I was a teen.”
But let’s get real. 2020 Emma is COMPLETELY different textually than the Gwyneth Paltrow version or the 2009 BBC version (Let me know if you would like me to put on my former film theory nerd hat and talk about that).
Similarly, I was hoping someone would give us a mash up of Northanger Abbey during the Twilight craze (see my contribution in Bad Austen). But it would have been a commentary on vampire fandom more than Jane Austen. The 2008 film was chef’s kiss, but it seemed to be telling a story more about gothic novels and sexual awakening.
So maybe this new adaptation of Persuasion is about now. Not changing the past, or remaking it to “make people feel better”, but using what was possible to tell stories about people that still resonate today. Inclusive stories. I think that is pretty cool. And if I were Jane Austen, I would be overjoyed that elements of my work still could be adapted to make sense over a hundred years later.
I hope I answered your very interesting question, Malca, and I hope we can have a broad conversation, Regency Readers, about these issues.
Do you have a question about the Regency era, people, places and things? Ask us here.
Enjoy our content? Buy us a coffee!
Learn more:
COSTELLO, R. (2012). Black Salt: Seafarers of African Descent on British Ships. Liverpool University Press. Retrieved January 28, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt18mbbzj
Leone, Sierra, and William Wilberforce. “Wayne Ackerson.” Encyclopedia of Emancipation and Abolition in the Transatlantic World (2015): 156.
Montgomery, S. (2007). Currents of Liberty, Seas of Change: Black Sailors as Subversive Agents of Freedom in the Early Republic. The Gettysburg Historical Journal, 6(1), 3.
Rankin, J. (2014). Nineteenth-Century Royal Navy Sailors from Africa and the African Diaspora: Research Methodology. African Diaspora, 6(2), 179-195.
There is another geneology based site that provides some more information about the clergy that is helpful: Clergy of Church of England (in England) • FamilySearch
I also like this wiki for some details and fast facts: Clergy in the Regency – LLWiki (thelondonliferpg.com)
