By Gaggan Sabherwal
BBC South Asia Diaspora Reporter
A new report from UK’s National Trust shows a link between 93 of its properties and the slave trade. The study that was first published on Tuesday was commissioned by the charity in September 2019 as part of efforts to tell the history of colonialism and slavery at its historic places.
Dr. Tarnya Cooper, the National Trust's curatorial and collections director said - “The buildings in the care of the National Trust reflect many different periods and a range of British and global histories - social, industrial, political and cultural’’.
‘’A significant number of those in our care have links to the colonisation of different parts of the world, and some to historic slavery. Colonialism and slavery were central to the national economy from the 17th to the 19th centuries.”
From the merchants and employees of the East India Company who invested their colonial earnings from India in sprawling country homes to slave traders who bought up large properties in Britain also feature in this study. The report looks at the impact that the economic, social and political influence of East India Company employees and their families had on the British country house. Besides this the study also reflects their impact on politics and society more broadly from 1757, when Robert Clive effectively conquered much of India, up to the Indian Mutiny of 1857, also known as the First War of India’s Independence, which marked the end of the company's rule in India and the beginning of the British Raj.
The National Trust and the East India Company connection
For over 250 years, the East India Company led a complex global trading network for the British Empire and it was founded to develop trading opportunities in India, South East Asia and China and to compete with Dutch, and later French, East India companies. Overseen by directors based in London, it went on to become one of the most powerful companies ever to exist.
At least 229 estates were purchased in Britain by those who had made their fortune either as employees of the company or as independent merchants in India between 1700 and 1850. And among the properties now cared for by the National Trust, at least 50 have a connection to the East India Company and some of these are featured below:
Claremont Estate in Surrey
Robert Clive also known as ‘Clive of India’, one of the company’s most famous employee, is closely associated with two National Trust properties – Claremont Estate and Powis Castle. He worked for the East India Company between 1744 and 1767. At Claremont Estate purchased with the wealth Clive had made in India, he built a new house, intended to be his main residence and to display the treasures he had amassed.
Powis Castle and Garden in Wales
His son, Edward and his wife Lady Henrietta Herbert too amalgamated huge collections containing some 1,000 objects from about 1600 to the 1830’s which are now displayed at Powis Castle and includes ivories, textiles, statues of Hindu gods, ornamental silver and gold, weapons and ceremonial armour from India and East Asia.
Charlecote Park in Warwickshire
At some of the National Trust properties one can also find objects that were commissioned by the East India Company as well as items that were taken from India by it, such as the eighteenth-century silver dress sword and scabbard at Charlecote Park. The item is set with turquoise and garnet stones, its hilt shaped as a tiger’s head. Believed to have been taken following the siege of Lucknow in September 1857 by Major-General Charles Powlett Lane who went on to give this item to his mother-in-law.
The National Trust and the British Raj connection
Links to the period of the British Raj permeate through many properties in the National Trust’s care. They include a number of past owners and family members who held positions of political or administrative authority, or undertook military service in the country, adding objects to their homes acquired through these connections. Some of these properties are mentioned below :
Shugborough Estate in Staffordshire
In 1857, following a century of governance, large sections of the Indian population began to rebel against the East India Company. The events are referred to in India as the First War of Independence or Indian Rebellion, and otherwise as the Indian Mutiny of 1857. And Major-General George Anson who once owned Shugborough Estate, a property now under the National Trust was serving as Commander-in-Chief of India when the Indian Mutiny began in 1857.
Hughenden Manor in Buckinghamshire
Despite some opposition from politicians such as Benjamin Disraeli owner of Hughenden Manor another National Trust property, India was brought under direct British imperial rule with the 1858 Government of India Act, becoming known as the ‘British Raj’. Disraeli was also said to be Queen Victoria’s favourite Prime Minister.
Kedleston Hall in Derbyshire
George Nathaniel Curzon of Kedleston Hall which is also another National Trust property, served as Under-Secretary of State for India
in 1891 and as Viceroy from 1899 to 1905. Although Curzon made some positive reforms, he opposed demands from Indian nationalists for greater participation in government. A major famine also happened in 1899-1900 when Curzon was the Viceroy of India in which around one million people died and Curzon was criticised for allegedly having done little to fight the famine.
Chartwell in Kent
Sir Winston Churchill whose family home is Chartwell which is another National Trust property served as Secretary of State for the Colonies from 1921 to 1922. He was Prime Minister during the devastating Bengal Famine of 1943, the British response to which has been heavily criticised. He also had opposed independence of India.
In addition to these National Trust prope
rties they are also those with important cultural links to Britain's colonial history, such as writer Rudyard Kipling's home in Sussex which is also highlighted.
The report also documents National Trust properties belonging to people who were involved in the abolition movement or the fight against colonial oppression, and highlights the presence of African, Asian and Chinese people working on English and Welsh estates.
Professor Corinne Fowler from the University of Leicester who is also one of the co-authors of the report told the BBC that she had first pitched an idea to the National Trust, back in 2017, to organize a children-led project about its properties' colonial connections. She had got this idea when she was writing a chapter for a book on country houses called Green Unpleasant Land.
‘’ I was struck by the depth and range of country houses’ colonial links, which had been highlighted by research projects like the Legacies of British Slave-Ownership and the East India Company at Home projects’’.
And following this, The National Trust commissioned this report in September 2019.
‘’A group of curators have worked alongside the University of Leicester to produce a series of essays about country houses and colonialism together with a gazetteer of properties which details their connections with the British Empire, a bit like a region-by-region A-Z’’.
‘’I was personally surprised when it dawned on me how widespread, varied and deep these links were. They are so varied, ranging from East India Company involvement, colonial administration, investments in the Royal African Company or the South Seas Company or to ownership of plantations worked by enslaved Africans’’, she added.
But Prof. Fowler "didn't anticipate the catalyst of Black Lives Matter" when she first pitched this idea to the National Trust three years ago.
In Britain, the Black Lives Matter protests fueled calls for statues honoring those with links to slavery and racism to be taken down, and one "degrading" statue of a black man outside the National Trust's Dunham Massey property in Greater Manchester was removed.
Reactions to the report
And on the back of the Black Lives Matter protests, the 115-page report has received huge backlash since its publication, with many accusing the National Trust of rewriting history. Some even said it was the organization’s job to conserve ‘our’ history and not vilify its heroes.
The National Trust’s decision to link Sir Winston Churchill’s home to slavery and colonialism has also been criticised by UK’s Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden who said the charity’s portrayal of the war-time leader in its audit of its historic properties would ‘surprise and disappoint people’. He called on the Trust to focus its efforts on ‘preserving and protecting’ our heritage.
Mr Dowden told the Daily Telegraph newspaper: ‘Churchill is one of Britain’s greatest heroes. He rallied the free world to defeat fascism. It will surprise and disappoint people that the National Trust appears to be making him a subject of criticism and controversy.’
Andrew Roberts, author of Churchill: Walking with Destiny, also commented on Twitter saying: 'The National Trust's latest excursion into wokery - the latest of many - is to draw up a blacklist of its properties that are connected to Colonialism and Slavery (mixing the two very separate things up) & putting Chartwell on it: Sad and wrong.'
A number of people have also threatened to cancel their subscriptions and even boycott the charity over claims it has become too politicised.
But not everyone has been critical of the report. Many such as acclaimed Scottish writer and historian William Dalrymple have welcomed the study and say it is about time Britain acknowledges its colonial past and the atrocities attached to it.
Speaking to the BBC Mr. Dalrymple said, ‘’the report by the National Trust was a very good move as Britain on reaching the end of the colonial period has quietly forgotten about the British Empire and even deliberately shoved it into their attics. They have removed it from their curriculums, it’s not taught in schools and pictures associated with it have been taken down from national museums and there is a huge amount of ignorance in the country about our colonial past. We have just forgotten the violence and the war crimes which brought so much wealth to this country. And the British just don’t know about it’’.
‘’And so, when I last went to Paris three years ago, the loot from Plassey was literally labelled as a gift from the Indian people. And that the people had come out to the streets and hung diamond necklaces over Robert Clive’s neck. Obviously, that’s not the case and we need to get real and recognise that pretty terrible things that happened and that a lot of the wealth in this country comes from dubious means and we need to teach our children. But it shouldn’t have to be up to the National Trust to do these things. People should come to the National Trust’s properties knowing what Robert Clive did’’.
Mr. Dalrymple also added – ‘’My worry is that I live in India and I see British people coming out to India thinking that the India loves them and that the British Raj was a wonderful thing. They just don’t know the stuff that went on and it is not that they are malicious o wrong- headed but they just don’t know. They are not taught it. I think it really matters especially in a post Brexit when we are looking for friends that we don’t go blundering around offending people by our ignorance’’.
But according to Dr. Tarnya Cooper, the National Trust's curatorial and collections director, ‘’ It was the National Trust's job, as a heritage charity, to research, to interpret and share full and up-to-date information about its properties. And this report is the fullest account to date of the links between places now in the care of the National Trust and colonialism and historic slavery’’.
She also added that,‘’ The report was not exhaustive and would be added to as more research is undertaken in the future. The research gathered has been used to update online information and will be used to help the Trust review visitor information and displays at properties’’.
And this is what Professor Corinne Fowler had to say about the reactions to the report, ‘’ Responses to the report are hard to gauge. A recent report by Policy Exchange showed that 72% of National Trust members surveyed thought that the organisation should talk about the colonial histories of places in their care. The chief objection seems to be that we should not talk about this history. And yet it is only responsible to speak about a history which is genuinely relevant to heritage sites’’.
‘’The evidence is there and we have a collective duty not to conceal it. Others make the spurious claim that history is being erased. Providing a rigorously researched report available is about providing information, not hiding it. I suspect that the history which people might fear is being erased is a more celebratory account of Britain’s past. This is to confuse historical evidence with public relations. It is not advisable to photoshop history’’.
She further said, ‘’It’s time to have a mature conversation about Britain’s past, a past which we share with India and many other formerly colonised nations. In a nation where 1 in 6 children growing up in the UK have family roots in formerly colonised countries to talk more expansively about a history which resonates with them and which expands our collective idea of Britain’s past. It is also fascinating to enrich our understanding of the past by learning new things about the heritage sites we thought we all knew. If we embrace our past – all of it – we can move more comfortably together into the future’’.
‘’Britain is a very divided place at the moment and it is my hope, certainly, that providing more pieces in this historical jigsaw will help us see how interconnected we are’’.
Comments