Miranda Kaufmann
Find me on Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook and YouTube...
  • Home
  • Bio
  • Blog
  • Talks
  • History
  • Reviews
    • Book Reviews
    • Art and Theatre Reviews
  • Features
  • Food & Travel
  • Rugby
  • Contact

Elizabeth I and the 'Blackamoors': the Deportation that never was

28/8/2014

39 Comments

 
Photofrom the Guardian Black History Timeline
Today I am compelled to blog. There is a wrong I must right. The world simply cannot be allowed to continue to believe that Elizabeth I expelled Africans from her realm in 1596. 

This is perhaps the most oft-quoted (sometimes the only quoted) "fact" relating to the history of Africans in Tudor England. Recently, I have seen it repeated in the Guardian Black History timeline, the Medieval POC tumblr, and the New York Times.

It has also been peddled by historians, including the wonderful Peter Fryer, who wrote in his magisterial Staying Power in 1984: “The queen was soon expressing strong disapproval of the presence of black people…in the realm and indeed, ordering that ‘those kinde of people’ should be deported forthwith.” While Ania Loomba went so far as to assert in 1992 that “Elizabeth I's communique deporting blacks... [indicates that] the 'preservation' of the white race is seen to be at stake.” 

It's a prime example of how anything can become "fact" through repetition. and it is a particularly dangerous story to peddle in our immigration- obsessed times. It is all too easy to elide the centuries and imagine that Elizabeth I had an immigration policy that would have been approved of by Enoch Powell. 

The "fact" has made its way into the classroom. In 2009 year 7 pupils at St John Plessington Catholic College in the Wirral were to be taught: “To understand the reasons for Elizabeth I’s policy of expulsion”, while the BlackHistory4Schools website has a lesson plan which explicitly compares the Tudor rhetoric with modern newspaper headlines.

What makes this all worse, on a personal level, is that I wrote an article disproving this so-called "fact" some seven years ago. Clearly, academic articles are not as widely read as academics might like. And looking back, I can see it is a bit dense. Maybe "Caspar van Senden, Sir Thomas Sherley and the ‘Blackamoor’ Project" wasn't the most catchy title? 

Anyway, now I'm taking to my blog to explain the truth behind the myth once and for all, in plain terms (but still with some original quotes!).

So, What really happened? 

Well, on 18 July 1596, the Privy Council issued an open letter addressed “to the Lord Mayor of London and to all vice-admirals, Mayors and other public officers whatsoever to whom it may appertain.” The letter authorised a merchant of Lubeck named Caspar Van Senden to “take up…Blackamoores here in this Realm and to transport them into Spain and Portugal.” 

Crucially this required the "consent of their masters.” It was this requirement that made this a dead letter, as I learnt from reading the various petitions from a disappointed Van Senden amongst Robert Cecil’s papers. In an undated petition to the Queen, Van Senden asks for a far more powerful authorisation to take Africans out of the country, without the "interruption of their masters or any other persons." He complains that the 1596 Council warrant was not effective as he:

"together with a Pursivant [basically an enforcer] did travell at his great Charges into dyvers partes of your highness Realme for the said Blackamoores, But the masters of them, perceiving by the said warrant that your orator could not take the Blackamoores without the Master’s good will, would not suffer your Orator to have any one of them." 

Van Senden did not get what he wanted. Another document of 1601 has been quoted as a second Privy Council letter or proclamation, but in fact it was never promulgated, and only exists as a draft amongst Cecil’s papers. It might have been drafted by Van Senden himself, as it is more strongly worded that the 1596 letter. 

Ultimately Van Senden's schemes were unsuccessful. This was not a deportation, but rather a small-scale bargain with a persistent merchant, on an individual basis. Van Senden was supported by the bankrupt, probably Catholic, Sir Thom

Elizabeth I did not expel Africans from England. In fact, Africans, who had  been present in both England and Scotland from the earliest years of the sixteenth century, continued to live here for the rest of her reign, and beyond.  I have found evidence of over 360 African individuals living in these isles between 1500 and 1640. We no longer need to rely on the 1596 document to make the point that there were Africans in Tudor England. 


​Since writing this blog, an excellent new article has been published on the subject by Emily Weissbourd. Read it here.

39 Comments
John Thornton
28/8/2014 02:17:07 am

Just goes to show that publishing an academic article often doesn't have an impact, even within the academy, no matter how carefully argued or documented. But then again, often it does, it just takes a delay. It is also a case for publishing several times in different venues, not just to pad a CV, but to get your work to varied and specialized audiences. And if I must continue, we should all think about how to SEO our work, so it gets a high score on the algorithms that drive Google Scholar!

Reply
Ilona Aronovsky link
28/8/2014 02:31:01 am

One of the problems is that many who write, publish or produce teaching resources for schools do not consult original research at all, or sometimes dont check recent research for many reasons. This is complicated by the availability of so much secondary source summary type articles on the web. Even if they are reasonably up to date they may reflect the bias of some academics who have a tendency to dismiss others. Sometimes commercial publishers recycle or reversion with or without permission teaching packs which were based on using original research, but the reversions didnt and incorporate ghastly mistakes. The Indus Valley Civilisation is a case in point. It would be a bit boring to go on about this ad infinitum which I could. I've seen a beautifully produced kids encyclopaedia where the interpretation of a particular building excavated in the 20's was presented as a fact, even though it was superseded by another influential theory which in turn was challenged by the latest ones...

Reply
Newton Key link
28/8/2014 05:14:20 am

Good post. I will say that the text of the Guardian timeline seems to have it more right than their headline. Seems like it would be an easy fix for them.

Reply
Michael Ohajuru link
28/8/2014 06:48:26 pm

Here,Here!!

Well put exactly, what the subject needs - some plain, clear writing. Sadly many writing on the Black African presence in early modern Europe write with far too many academic assumptions and expectations rather than with that common touch and intuition which engages making that history interesting and relevant - making the connection between then and now - exactly what you've done here.

I trust the compulsion that led you to write the piece this way will be maintained in your forthcoming book.

Reply
Rita Lamb
4/9/2014 08:38:07 pm

It shows that any nuanced historical topic, like the African presence in early modern Britain, usually gets reduced to a few basic "known facts" which, on closer inspection, turn out to be exaggerated or simply wrong.

And isn't that par for the course? Sellar and Yeatman wrote a funny book based entirely on our tendency to recall centuries of history as a string of garbled sound bites.

Reply
Reverend Cailen Cambeul link
2/4/2016 05:47:01 am

While you are probably correct, the libtards of today would rather show White history as that of the eternal colonial oppressor of the poor black.

Being a poor White, I wish Liz 1 and her heirs had expelled the blackamoor, and would (figuratively speaking) again today. Living on the poverty line is no fun at all, and it only becomes harder when you are surrounded by other races demanding extra attention and getting it, because it's racist not to give them what they want.

Reply
Ahmad Otler
17/8/2016 06:19:37 pm

If you look at the advantages of the being white (in anytime) I would say expelling them would still put them next to some less fortunate whites. England has been colonizing for centuries. If whites were to be expelled from other people's countries, then well we know what would happen. When the Mau Mau rebelled in Kenya a few decades ago, whites cried about THEIR rights in someone else's home. Yet you're a guest. Thank the slave masters of the time that kept them from being expelled. The reply is all over the place but you get the picture I'm sure.

Reply
Rufus
4/12/2016 09:42:47 pm

Well it's probably your own fault you're poor. Stop blaming the success of other races for your ineptitude.

Reply
P. Lewis link
5/4/2017 04:06:05 pm

Ladies and gentlemen, please ignore the idiotic remarks of these Trumpistanis. Intellectual achievement is not in the card for the likes of them.

NickG
28/2/2017 01:38:41 pm

To Reverend Cailen Cambeul:
Having suffered the misfortune of clicking through your name to your so-called "Church of Creativity" website -- aka some poorly named front for White Supremacist propaganda -- I can only imagine the fear and paranoia you view any non-white peoples. Imagine yourself sitting in a room with Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Gandhi or even P Diddy and compare yourself to them. Does their race make still them inferior to you? I would suggest their vast life experience might give them the compassion to accept all people, including yourself, as created equal. By contrast, if you cannot recognise brilliance in anyone but yourself or your fair-skinned kin, your experience of the world must be equal in scope to that of a tadpole.

Reply
P. Lewis
5/4/2017 04:07:33 pm

WTOTC? You mean the Wascally Wabbit crew?

Reply
Mark Francis link
21/8/2017 03:27:22 am

Thing is - most if not all, black people in UK today are descendants from people who came to Britain post WW2. Historic black populations were predominantly male and thus the majority married white women. Once their descendants intermarried ( & it seems, amongst the working class at least there was surprisingly little prejudice against "miscegenation") their descendants will have merged within the general population. If we go back as far as the 16th century this means they will be related to the majority of the "native" English population. If the expulsion had succeeded then they could have been your ancestors or mine.

Reply
Shelton Tucker
22/2/2017 03:54:00 pm

I think Ms Kaufmanns article is lacking the direct quote from QEI. She specifically declared that there were to many in the realm. She an made reference to their religion beliefs as well. Nice try. But this article misses the mark in terms of providing adequate documentation to prove the hypothesis.

Reply
Miranda Kaufmann link
10/4/2017 03:29:45 am

Dear Mr. Tucker,

The documentation is in my longer article: http://www.mirandakaufmann.com/caspanvansenden.html -which I link to in this blog. The documents you're thinking of are in fact Privy Council letters produced at meetings where the Queen was not present, so are not, as you state, a 'direct quote' from her.

Thanks for reading my blog!

Miranda.

Reply
jesus christ
30/4/2017 08:58:09 am

QE1: You are completely wrong and driven by discrimination against us true Britons
Her proclamation of 1601 claimed that Black people were ‘fostered and relieved here to the great annoyance of [the queen’s] own liege people, that want the relief, which those people consume’. The proclamation also stated that ‘most of them are infidels, having no understanding of Christ or his Gospel’.

You are obviously racist

Reply
Shawn Brown
4/8/2017 03:11:41 am

Whether the Queen directly requested their removal or not is irrelevant. Their mere presence in Tudor England upset and was a cause for concern for certain sections (if not all) of society. The same could be said of today. Once the novelty of their exotic appearence had worn off and enthusiasm had died for their entertainment they were viewed as disposable as the popular percetion at the time was that they were inferior beings (savages, uncivilised and without God). Indeed such views perservere today. The question you must ask yourself bearing this in mind is whether it is inconcievable that she would make such a request? If yes, then please state the rational basis of your argument. If no then i rest my case.

Reply
Elizabeth Obisanya
1/9/2017 01:45:40 am

Most of our forefathers were free men and not slaves actually , that was untill the maddness of Mystery Babylon mother of all harlots and abominations of the Earth Rev 17 & 18 hit all -black and white. Pope Nicolas 5 issued the Dum Diversas papal bewtichment /decree which saw fit to make our forefathers slaves and place them in perpetual servitude. Thanks be unto the Lord Jesus who broke the Curse via the Reformation which Called His people black white etc out of Mystery babylon,,white oppressive nations were no longer to do satans bidding....some still do tho

Reply
Elizabeth Obisanya
1/9/2017 02:17:34 am

Early in the 16th century Africans arrived in London when Catherine of Aragon travelled to London and brought a group of her African attendants with her[citation needed]. Around the same time African named trumpeters, who served Henry VII and Henry VIII, came to London, when trade lines began to open between London and West Africa. The first record of an African in London was in 1593. His name was Cornelius. London’s residents started to become fearful of the increased black population. At this time Elizabeth I declared that black "Negroes and black Moors" were to be arrested and expelled from her kingdom, although this did not lead to actual legislation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_African_immigrants_in_London

Reply
Abd el-Karim Tariq Ali
6/1/2018 07:41:53 pm

Islam for the post! It is wonderful to see that of Truth, Justice, Peace, Freedom, and Love always be the victor. Especially in a time where change is needed, before we are deceased due corporation interest. To follow up, it is also notable to highlight the fact that King of Europa (Italy and Germany), and The HOLY Roman Emporor, Henry II (972-1024), Henry VIII, King James I and IV of England and Scotland, Nicephorus III Roman Emporer, Charlemagne. The list grows, the more awake our global royal family is becoming. We invented the arts of civilisation? Philosophy is the study of thought, how could we have possibilly forgetten the Truth? We are the Truth.

Reply
Andrew AtLarge
22/3/2018 08:55:17 am

Years later after your original post ... Now there is Cheddar Man ... Surely folks like you are cringing at the mere thought and reality of it all.

The operative words are "Negroes and blackamoors" ... Where there "Whiteamoors" that were exempt, or was it just all so-called "Moors" ?

Or maybe we should all expend the required and sufficient mental energy to try more deeply comprehend the reality and etymology and origins of the words "Negro" and "Blackamoors" ?

Reply
Alan Beresford B'stard M P
24/7/2018 12:52:15 am

I doubt the existence of these blacks in the UK without evidence

Reply
Joe Blow
18/9/2018 04:11:17 pm

Thing is most blackamoores had no masters. They were artisans, merchants, and some were even royalty. The Moors ruled most of Europe from 711 to 1492. The so called Dark Ages. Historical racism. Elizabeth I was following a trend that took place all over Europe after Granada fell. Nice try lady but you are totally incorrect.

Reply
TheyCan'tStopLying
22/9/2018 07:44:37 am

The hard fact is that pale skin peoples with Albion features were not the original people's of Europe. They we're not the original people of Ancient Rome or even Ancient Greece. They we're not the original Latians, Egyptians, etc. Until the leadership of these people openly admit there true origin, discussing history with most of it's members will always be a ball of confusion because there is an ulterior motive. This so-called true in this article has serious flaws, but is not worth outlining unto the true origin of the Albion is made clear to the average so-called white man/women.

Reply
Yasura Amun Belmon Bey
29/9/2018 09:25:04 am

These comments speaking about little presence of melanin rich people in Europe is outrageous. Some of you must fail to realize that Europe went through a reconstruction period which attempt was to wipe away all evidence of Moorish Nobility in Europe to continue to usurp the inheritance of the true heirs today. Fearing persecution and losing their true identity over time many of the true European Nobility are actually Moors who had to travel to the Americas to seek Religious Asylum as Refugees. The term Refugee was coined after the Huguenots who with further research you will see were Moors who left Spain earlier to settle in France and England. We were already in these places that's why we felt like we were home when we came back.

Reply
ajp
12/12/2018 08:04:18 am

Amazing how your response to the blackamoor deportation by Elizabeth gets a top billing on google. It's almost as if...

I mean it did happen and is well documented. It also happened about a century before your racial brethren were allowed back in the country. Wasn't it Edward 1 who with such foresight deported all jews because of their clipping of the crown's coin and other nefarious actions. Blood libel and whatnot. Jews trying to debase the currency. George Soros anyone.

It is kind of ironic though. Jews after all were dominant in the transatlantic slave trade and the white slave trade but in modern times you appear to have controlled the dissemination of such valuable information. I do hope you're brave enough to put this post up. Either way what a glorious opportunity to educate you.

Reply
Qualis_Rex
19/11/2019 01:53:56 pm

LOL...so you're getting your proverbial knickers in a bunch because the racist (and genocidal) queen lizzie I ORDERED the expulsion of people with African ancestry but had no power to carry it out? In other words, you want to gloss-over her racist intent by underscoring the outcome? A policy is still a policy...whether it was enacted to its fullest capacity or not.

Reply
Qualis_Rex
19/11/2019 01:56:55 pm

Wait...I just looked at the NYT link you provided, and all it says is; "Even in 1596 their presence was so noticeable that Queen Elizabeth I ordered them to be expelled." How is this inaccurate? It doesn't say they WERE expelled...but ordered to be expelled. Why are you deliberately trying to distort history here?

Reply
Chay Yehuda
6/1/2020 09:07:53 am

If this historical documented event never happened, then is it fair to assume the holocaust never happened?

Reply
Chavez Moore
10/4/2020 07:07:47 am

If you don't mind could you possibly give us some of their surnames?

Reply
Miranda Kaufmann link
13/4/2020 05:24:44 am

Sure:

Bull
Ivye
Cappervert
Mandula
Anthony
Carbew
Blackman
Blacke
Pearis
Valencia
Mori
And
Marley
Harris
Mingus
Ferdinando
Davies
Smyth
Mauri
Harwoode
Matthewes
Fernando
Peeters
Antonie
Vause
Carreo
Morisco
Daniell
Mauri
Peters
Claun

Reply
Chavez Moore
25/12/2020 05:15:11 pm

Thank you and apologies for the late response. I'd love to discuss a few things I discovered researching the history of surnames in Brition. It's quite fascinating what I learned about the surname "Moore".

Is there anyway possible we can have a private chat maybe on FB or something?

Brian Philmore
27/5/2020 02:04:44 pm

Elizabeth I specifically made her racially motivated instructions to the Mayor of London - against the large sized community of Moorish-background merchants operating there. As such your conclusions are off-base; you have mistranslated the racist proclamation to mean nationwide when the referral was to London's community of Moors, and secondly you have made the claim that these Moors were all slaves when in fact the Moors Elizabeth referred too were merchants -entrepreneurs; not slaves. Get your facts straight instead of twisting up the real story.

Reply
QualisRex
24/6/2020 01:52:45 am

Amen. This is like historical revisionism revised. This blogger has just doomed herself to obscurity.

Reply
Kevin Vanildo Neto link
7/7/2020 11:44:26 am

making a speech about her plans to expel black people

Reply
Kevin Vanildo Neto link
8/7/2020 04:57:53 am

READ IT

Reply
Michele G.
27/9/2020 05:19:01 pm

If what Miranda says is true, We will never know for show. What does it prove? That the Queen didn't send away black people because she liked them??? No. She got free labor from them. They served a purpose for her and her economy. They were slaves. Why would she send them away when she benefitted from their blood, sweat and tears?. Believe me, that is the only reason why. Why didn't she abolish slavery?

Reply
Mark Francis
28/9/2020 02:29:13 am

Slavery in England was officially abolished in 1101 by the Statute of Westminster. There were several court cases confirming this - particularly Cartwrights case in which a Russian merchant claimed to own a slave in London which was found to be illegal. Obviously English Law did not apply overseas & people may have been held as slaves illegally happens even now. Until the time of Cromwell, English fishermen & West Country villagers were often kidnapped as slaves by the barbary Corsairs - which is the origin of this proposed deal. Cromwell sent the Fleet under Blake to aggressively negotiate upon the matter & it stopped.
To assume that anyone in England in the 16th century who was a "blackamoor" is racial stereotyping for which there is no evidence. Furthermore, Europeans did not enslave Africans - they bought them from other Africans.

Reply
L_Baybieee
6/10/2020 09:43:22 am

hi ,, very nice blog helped with my homework lol.

Reply
Haley link
14/1/2021 04:24:28 am

Nice bloog thanks for posting

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Author

    Miranda Kaufmann is a historian and freelance journalist living in North Wales. You can read a fuller bio here, and contact her here.

    Related Blogs/Sites

    Michael Ohajuru's Black Africans in Renaissance Europe blog

    Temi Odumosu's The Image of Black website

    The UCL Legacies of British Slave-ownership project Database and blog

    The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database

    The Black Presence in Britain

    Jeffrey Green's website, on Africans in 19th and early 20th Century Britain
     
    Untold Theatre 

    Categories

    All
    Africans In British Art
    Africans In Early Modern London
    Africans In Eighteenth Century England
    Africans In Renaissance Scotland
    Africans In Stuart England
    Africans In Tudor England
    Archives
    Black History
    Black History Month
    Early Modern England
    Exhibitions
    Heritage
    History
    Inclusive Curriculum
    Journalism
    Legal History
    Medical History
    National Curriculum
    Podcasts
    Politics
    Public History
    Radio History
    Research
    School History
    Shakespeare
    Slavery & Abolition
    Talks
    Travel
    Tv History

    Archives

    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    October 2019
    July 2019
    April 2019
    February 2019
    December 2018
    October 2018
    July 2018
    April 2018
    February 2018
    October 2017
    April 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    September 2016
    June 2016
    March 2016
    January 2016
    October 2015
    July 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    April 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    June 2013
    March 2013
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.