Even after more than 200 years since Jane Austen passed in 1817, her fans remain curious about what she might have thought about major issues of her time, like race, colonialism, and slavery. Given her family’s involvement in the movement to abolish slavery, this curiosity seems to be getting some answers. After sifting through newspapers and archives from the 19th century, I’ve uncovered that three of Austen’s brothers took part in the abolition movement after she died.
One brother’s efforts, which haven’t been highlighted before, will be featured in my upcoming book, “Wild for Austen,” set for release in 2025. Many believe Austen was critical of the brutality of colonial slavery, but nobody can quite agree. In her stories, like “Pride and Prejudice,” she used the terms “slave” and “slavery” multiple times. For instance, her unfinished novel “Sanditon” features a mixed-race character from the West Indies. Similarly, in “Mansfield Park,” the main character asks her uncle about the slave trade, but the conversation is cut short with a telling silence. In “Emma,” Jane Fairfax provocatively compares working as a governess to slavery, referring to both as “victims.”
Experts are split on whether these examples reflect Austen’s criticism or acceptance of slavery. Historically, beginning in the 1660s, Great Britain forcibly transported millions of Africans across the Atlantic, causing immense suffering. It took decades of campaigning and advocacy for Britain to abolish the slave trade in 1807, and slavery itself in most colonies in 1833, years before the U.S. did the same.
Though Austen died before these changes, she lived during significant antislavery efforts. Her writings offer few hints about her political stances, but she mentioned her admiration for Thomas Clarkson, a known abolitionist. However, there’s no evidence she actively participated in antislavery activities.
Some of Austen’s family did have financial ties to slavery, notably her aunt Jane Leigh Perrot, who had connections to enslaver families in Barbados. Misunderstandings about these ties, particularly regarding her father’s alleged involvement with an Antigua plantation, have been clarified recently. My own digging pointed out that her father’s supposed role had been overstated and misrepresented.
What’s been discovered lately is that three of Jane’s brothers played roles in the fight against slavery. Charles John Austen, as a Royal Navy officer, supervised the illegal slave trade in the West Indies and once captured a slave ship. Henry Thomas Austen, another brother, was involved in the World Anti-Slavery Convention by going under a different name.
And now, we’ve learned that Francis “Frank” William Austen was an outspoken local abolitionist before the 1833 Slavery Abolition Act was passed. In 1826, he took a leadership role petitioning against slavery in the West Indies at a meeting in Hampshire, a fact previously overlooked. This adds to the portrait of the Austen family’s involvement in social movements.
The Jane Austen House Museum recently showcased Frank’s legacy and acquired his unpublished memoir and sketchbook, which could offer more insights into his and perhaps Jane’s thoughts on these serious topics. As researchers dig deeper and scholars speculate on unmapped parts of her life, Austen’s upcoming 250th birth anniversary is pushing us to rethink her legacy yet again. The rediscovered activism of her brothers suggests that toward the end of her life, Austen herself might have been edging closer to becoming an active advocate for abolition.