Abstract
This dissertation examines the multifaceted role of Barbary piracy in shaping British national identity and domestic politics during the Early Modern period, approximately 1580–1750. Through systematic literature synthesis, the study analyses how the persistent threat posed by North African corsairs influenced religious and cultural self-understanding, stimulated state-building processes, and provided moral justification for naval expansion and imperial ambitions. The research demonstrates that Barbary piracy constituted far more than a peripheral maritime nuisance; rather, it functioned as a structuring force in British political and cultural development. The enslavement of thousands of British subjects generated substantial parliamentary pressure, drove significant naval investment, and fostered a distinctive public discourse through captivity narratives, sermons, and periodical news. Furthermore, the encounter with Barbary states sharpened Protestant identity against a perceived Islamic threat while simultaneously revealing complex religious and ethnic boundaries that challenged simplistic East–West binaries. The findings indicate that Barbary piracy ultimately underwrote arguments for a powerful, morally justified maritime empire, establishing precedents for later humanitarian interventionism and consolidating Britain’s self-image as a civilising naval power.
Introduction
The encounter between Early Modern Britain and the Barbary states of North Africa represents one of the most consequential yet frequently overlooked chapters in the formation of British national identity and political institutions. Between the late sixteenth and mid-eighteenth centuries, corsairs operating from the ports of Algiers, Tunis, Tripoli, and the Moroccan coast captured thousands of British subjects, seized hundreds of vessels, and disrupted maritime commerce across the Mediterranean and Atlantic seaboards. This sustained confrontation with what contemporaries termed the “Barbary menace” profoundly shaped how Britons understood themselves as a people, their relationship with the state, and their place within broader religious and civilisational frameworks.
The academic significance of this topic extends across multiple disciplinary boundaries. Historians of state formation have increasingly recognised that external threats, particularly those requiring sustained naval and diplomatic responses, played crucial roles in developing administrative capacity and coercive infrastructure (Norton, 2014). Scholars of national identity have demonstrated that encounters with perceived religious and cultural “others” fundamentally shaped the imaginative boundaries of Englishness and, subsequently, Britishness (Matar, 2005). Meanwhile, literary historians have traced how captivity narratives and popular print culture created powerful templates for understanding difference, suffering, and redemption that persisted well into the imperial era (Parker, 2004).
The practical implications of this research remain relevant to contemporary debates concerning the construction of national identity through perceived external threats, the relationship between security concerns and state expansion, and the rhetorical deployment of humanitarian discourse to justify military intervention. Understanding how Early Modern Britons conceptualised and responded to the Barbary threat illuminates enduring patterns in the interplay between identity, politics, and international relations.
This dissertation argues that Barbary piracy served as a defining element in Early Modern British self-understanding, operating simultaneously across cultural, political, and ideological registers. It sharpened religious and proto-racial boundaries, generated mass print and popular mobilisation, exposed governmental limitations and prompted institutional responses, and ultimately provided foundational arguments for a powerful, morally justified maritime empire.
Aim and objectives
The primary aim of this dissertation is to critically evaluate the role of Barbary piracy in shaping British identity and domestic politics during the Early Modern period, demonstrating how this phenomenon operated as a structuring force across multiple dimensions of national life.
To achieve this aim, the following specific objectives guide the investigation:
1. To examine how encounters with Barbary corsairs influenced the construction of British religious and cultural identity, particularly regarding conceptions of Protestantism, Christianity, and perceived Islamic threats.
2. To analyse the political and policy responses generated by Barbary captivity, including parliamentary debates, ransom negotiations, and naval expeditions.
3. To assess the contribution of anti-corsair campaigns to English state-building processes, particularly regarding naval power and administrative capacity.
4. To evaluate the role of print culture, including captivity narratives, sermons, and periodical news, in shaping popular understanding of and responses to the Barbary threat.
5. To trace how the encounter with Barbary states provided moral and ideological foundations for later British imperial and humanitarian claims.
Methodology
This dissertation employs a systematic literature synthesis methodology, drawing upon peer-reviewed scholarship, monographs, and primary source analyses to construct a comprehensive interpretation of the relationship between Barbary piracy and Early Modern British identity and politics. Literature synthesis represents an established approach within historical scholarship for integrating diverse secondary sources and identifying patterns, debates, and lacunae within existing historiography (Cronin, Ryan and Coughlan, 2008).
The research process involved systematic identification and evaluation of relevant academic literature, prioritising peer-reviewed journal articles, scholarly monographs published by university presses, and edited collections produced by recognised authorities in the field. Sources were selected based on their direct relevance to the research questions, scholarly rigour, and contribution to understanding the cultural, political, and ideological dimensions of the Barbary encounter.
The analytical framework employed a thematic approach, organising findings according to the key dimensions identified in the objectives: identity formation, political and policy responses, state-building, print culture, and imperial ideology. This structure enabled systematic comparison of scholarly interpretations and identification of areas of consensus and disagreement within the historiography.
The synthesis necessarily privileges secondary interpretation over primary source analysis, though extensive reference is made to scholarly discussions of key primary materials, including captivity narratives, parliamentary records, diplomatic correspondence, and printed ephemera. This approach is appropriate for a dissertation-length study seeking to provide a comprehensive overview of a complex historiographical field.
Literature review
The scope and scale of Barbary captivity
Scholarly consensus establishes that Barbary corsairs captured substantial numbers of British subjects during the Early Modern period, creating what Capp (2022) terms one of the most significant if underappreciated crises facing early Stuart and later governments. Estimates suggest that approximately 8,000 English and Scottish captives were held in North African ports during the peak decades of corsair activity, with hundreds of vessels lost to capture and ransom demands placing considerable strain on both private resources and public finances (Hebb, 2016). These figures, while necessarily approximate given the fragmentary nature of surviving records, indicate that Barbary captivity represented a genuine and sustained threat affecting coastal communities, maritime trades, and commercial interests across the British Atlantic world.
The geographical scope of corsair operations expanded significantly during the early seventeenth century. While Mediterranean piracy had long threatened shipping in southern European waters, the adoption of Atlantic-capable vessels and sailing techniques enabled Barbary raiders to operate along the coasts of Ireland, Cornwall, and even, on occasion, the shores of Iceland (Matar, 2005). This expansion brought the threat of captivity into immediate proximity for fishing communities and coastal populations who had previously considered themselves secure from Mediterranean hazards.
Religious identity and the Christian-Muslim frontier
The encounter with Barbary corsairs profoundly influenced English and British religious self-understanding. Matar (2005) demonstrates that North Africa constituted a “powerful and threatening presence” in English literature and politics, becoming central to ideas of a Christian England confronted by Islam and slavery. This confrontation occurred at a moment of heightened Protestant consciousness, when English national identity was increasingly defined through opposition to Catholic powers, particularly Spain. The Barbary threat added an additional dimension to this religiously-inflected self-understanding, positioning England within a broader struggle between Christianity and Islam.
Captivity narratives and redemption sermons popularised imagery of “cruel infidels” subjecting innocent Protestant mariners to brutal enslavement. Parker (2004) traces how these texts constructed North Africa as a space of religious danger where Christian faith faced constant testing through physical suffering, forced labour, and pressure to convert. The figure of the suffering captive became a potent symbol of Protestant endurance, with successful resistance to apostasy celebrated as evidence of divine providence and English spiritual fortitude.
However, recent scholarship has complicated these binary frameworks. Spindler (2020) demonstrates that captivity narratives frequently revealed religious and ethnic complexity that challenged simple East–West, Christian–Muslim oppositions. The figure of the “renegado”—the European who converted to Islam and often participated in corsair activities—proved particularly troubling, suggesting that religious boundaries remained permeable and that European Christians could choose to cross civilisational frontiers. Similarly, accounts of benevolent Muslim masters and relatively humane treatment disrupted straightforward narratives of Islamic cruelty, creating space for more nuanced understandings of North African societies.
Political pressure and governmental responses
The loss of subjects and vessels to Barbary corsairs created what Hebb (2016) characterises as “significant political problems” for early Stuart governments. Parliamentary debates repeatedly addressed the captivity crisis, with members pressing the crown to provide military protection for shipping, fund ransom expeditions, or negotiate comprehensive peace treaties with the Barbary states. These demands placed considerable pressure on governments whose financial resources remained limited and whose naval capacity proved insufficient for comprehensive anti-corsair operations.
Hebb’s (2016) comprehensive study of piracy and English government during 1616–1642 demonstrates the extent to which Barbary concerns penetrated policy-making processes. The crown faced persistent tension between the costs of military action, the diplomatic complexities of treating with Muslim powers, and public expectations of protection for subjects engaged in legitimate maritime commerce. Various expedients were attempted, including licensing private redemption efforts, authorising retaliatory naval expeditions, and pursuing diplomatic negotiations, yet none provided lasting solutions to a problem rooted in the structural dynamics of Mediterranean politics and economics.
The political dimension of Barbary captivity extended beyond formal governmental responses. Moore (2023) and Macfarlane (2020) trace how printed appeals for ransom funds mobilised public opinion and created pressure for governmental action. Collections in parish churches, published accounts of captive sufferings, and petitions from affected families maintained the captivity crisis as a matter of public concern, ensuring that governments could not simply ignore the issue without political cost.
State formation and naval power
Several scholars have positioned the Barbary encounter within broader narratives of English and British state formation. Norton (2014) argues that the campaign to suppress piracy—including Barbary corsairs—drove significant investment in naval capacity and coercive infrastructure, embedding anti-piracy efforts within the longer story of English state-building. The need to protect maritime commerce and rescue captive subjects provided compelling justifications for expanding naval forces beyond levels that purely defensive or even aggressive European rivalries might have warranted.
Capp (2022) reinforces this interpretation, demonstrating how gunboat diplomacy and anti-corsair campaigns pushed successive governments toward greater investment in permanent naval establishments. The requirement for vessels capable of projecting power into the Mediterranean, maintaining sustained blockades, and negotiating from positions of credible military strength accelerated naval professionalisation and institutional development. In this reading, the Barbary threat contributed materially to the emergence of the naval power that would subsequently underpin British commercial and imperial expansion.
This state-building dynamic operated through multiple mechanisms. Direct military expenditure represented only one dimension; the need for reliable intelligence about Barbary activities, diplomatic representation in North African courts, and coordination of ransom and redemption efforts also required administrative capacity and expertise that contributed to governmental development more broadly.
Print culture and public discourse
The Barbary encounter proved extraordinarily productive of printed materials, generating captivity narratives, sermons, ballads, plays, pamphlets, and, eventually, periodical news coverage. This profusion of texts shaped popular understanding of North Africa and its inhabitants while creating distinctive templates for representing cultural and religious difference.
Cutter (2019) analyses the treatment of Maghrebi states in English periodical news between 1622 and 1714, revealing a more complex picture than straightforward hostility. While fear and condemnation certainly featured prominently, news coverage also acknowledged trade relationships, diplomatic negotiations, and pragmatic accommodations that disrupted simple enmity narratives. The periodical press presented readers with ongoing accounts of Mediterranean affairs that balanced sensationalist coverage of corsair depredations with recognition of commercial and political realities.
Macfarlane (2020) examines the role of popular print in both making and unmaking pirate figures, demonstrating how cultural representations shifted over time in response to changing political and commercial contexts. Pirates, including Barbary corsairs, could be portrayed as monstrous threats to civilised order or as romantic adventurers operating beyond conventional social constraints, depending upon the ideological purposes such representations served. This flexibility in cultural meaning indicates that the Barbary encounter was not simply interpreted through fixed frameworks but actively constructed through ongoing textual negotiation.
Parker (2004) traces an important transition in representations of Moors across the Early Modern period. Where earlier texts positioned North Africans as feared military and religious adversaries requiring vigilance and resistance, later representations increasingly depicted them as exotic figures available for aesthetic contemplation and imaginative appropriation. This shift from threat to spectacle anticipated the Orientalist frameworks that would characterise later British engagement with the Islamic world, suggesting that the Barbary encounter contributed to longer-term cultural developments extending well beyond the immediate period.
Moral claims and imperial ideology
The encounter with Barbary slavery ultimately provided important resources for British imperial self-understanding and humanitarian claims. Löwenheim (2003) demonstrates how British action against Barbary slavery during the early nineteenth century was framed explicitly in terms of “moral prestige” and humanitarian obligation. The final military suppression of corsair activity, culminating in the 1816 bombardment of Algiers, was presented as disinterested action on behalf of enslaved humanity, establishing precedents for later humanitarian interventionism.
This framing obscured the extent to which British involvement in Atlantic slavery vastly exceeded anything practised by Barbary states, creating what Löwenheim terms a “moral double standard” whereby British actions against relatively small-scale Mediterranean slavery enhanced national reputation while far larger British slave-trading operations continued relatively unexamined. The Barbary context thus provided moral cover for imperial expansion, positioning Britain as a civilising force opposing slavery while simultaneously profiting enormously from the Atlantic slave trade.
Capp (2022) extends this analysis, showing how the memory of British captivity in North Africa was mobilised to construct national identity around images of victimisation and righteous vengeance. The suffering of British captives legitimated naval power and justified intervention in distant regions, establishing templates for humanitarian discourse that persisted throughout the imperial era. The Barbary encounter thus contributed not merely to immediate political responses but to longer-term ideological frameworks shaping British engagement with the wider world.
Discussion
The synthesis of existing scholarship reveals that Barbary piracy operated as a multidimensional structuring force in Early Modern British identity and politics, achieving significance across cultural, institutional, and ideological registers that extended far beyond its immediate material impacts. This discussion addresses how the evidence meets the stated objectives while critically analysing the implications and limitations of current understanding.
Identity formation and religious boundaries
The evidence strongly supports the conclusion that encounters with Barbary corsairs sharpened Protestant and Christian identity, positioning Britain within imagined frontiers of civilisational and religious conflict. The proliferation of captivity narratives, redemption sermons, and popular print materials constructed a powerful framework for understanding British identity through opposition to Islamic “Barbary.” This framework reinforced Protestant self-understanding while creating emotional and imaginative resources for national solidarity around shared vulnerability and suffering.
However, the scholarship also reveals important complexities that challenge oversimplified interpretations. The presence of renegades, the acknowledgment of humane treatment by some captors, and the pragmatic pursuit of trade and diplomacy all indicate that religious boundaries remained more permeable and attitudes more ambivalent than straightforward hostility narratives suggest. Spindler’s (2020) analysis of “relativizing portrayals” in captivity narratives demonstrates that even texts ostensibly condemning Islamic cruelty frequently contained elements that complicated such judgments.
This complexity raises important questions about the relationship between elite textual production and popular understanding. While scholars can trace sophisticated negotiations of difference in surviving printed materials, the reception of such texts by ordinary readers remains more difficult to assess. Future research might productively examine marginal annotations, reading practices, and oral traditions to understand how printed representations of Barbary were interpreted and adapted by diverse audiences.
Political and policy dimensions
The political pressures generated by Barbary captivity are well-documented in the literature, confirming that this issue penetrated to the highest levels of governmental concern. Hebb’s (2016) detailed analysis of policy-making under the early Stuarts demonstrates sustained engagement with the captivity crisis, revealing both the seriousness with which governments approached the problem and the inadequacy of available responses. The tension between public expectations and governmental capacity created persistent political difficulties that shaped parliamentary debates, diplomatic initiatives, and naval planning.
The role of print culture in generating and sustaining political pressure emerges as particularly significant. The public nature of the captivity crisis, maintained through printed appeals, parish collections, and periodical news coverage, ensured that governments could not address the issue quietly through diplomatic channels alone. Popular mobilisation around captive redemption created expectations of governmental action while providing moral frameworks through which official responses were evaluated. This dynamic suggests that Barbary captivity contributed to broader developments in English and British political culture, including the expansion of informed public opinion and expectations of governmental responsibility for subjects’ welfare.
State-building and naval development
The connection between anti-corsair campaigns and state-building processes represents one of the most significant findings of recent scholarship. Norton’s (2014) positioning of piracy suppression within narratives of English state formation, reinforced by Capp’s (2022) analysis of naval development, demonstrates that the Barbary threat contributed materially to the emergence of British maritime power. The requirement for sustained naval capability to protect commerce, rescue captives, and negotiate effectively with North African powers provided compelling justifications for institutional development that might otherwise have faced greater political resistance.
This interpretation requires some qualification. Naval development occurred in response to multiple pressures, including European rivalries, commercial expansion, and domestic political considerations, and isolating the specific contribution of Barbary concerns proves methodologically challenging. Nevertheless, the evidence suggests that anti-corsair campaigns provided particularly useful justifications for naval expenditure, framing such spending in terms of subject protection and national honour rather than aggressive expansionism. The rhetorical utility of the Barbary threat may have been as significant as its material impacts in driving state-building processes.
The transition to imperial ideology
Perhaps the most provocative finding concerns the contribution of the Barbary encounter to later British imperial and humanitarian claims. Löwenheim’s (2003) analysis of the moral discourse surrounding British action against Barbary slavery reveals how this historical experience was mobilised to construct national identity around humanitarian values while obscuring British participation in far larger Atlantic slavery operations. This “moral double standard” suggests that the Barbary encounter contributed not merely to immediate identity formation but to longer-term ideological frameworks that legitimated imperial expansion.
The transition from Moors as feared adversaries to exotic spectacles, traced by Parker (2004) and Matar (2005), similarly indicates that the Barbary encounter contributed to Orientalist frameworks that would characterise later British engagement with the Islamic world. The cultural processing of the Barbary threat created templates for representing difference that persisted well beyond the immediate period, shaping how later generations conceptualised and justified relations with non-European peoples.
Limitations and areas for further research
Several limitations of current scholarship merit acknowledgment. Most existing studies focus primarily on English rather than broader British experiences, leaving Scottish, Welsh, and Irish dimensions relatively underexplored. Given the distinctive political and religious contexts of these constituent nations, research specifically addressing their encounters with Barbary would enrich understanding of how the corsair threat operated across different British contexts.
Additionally, comparative approaches remain underdeveloped. While scholars have examined English and British responses to Barbary in considerable detail, systematic comparison with French, Dutch, Spanish, and other European experiences would illuminate what was distinctive about British patterns and what reflected broader European dynamics. Such comparative work might reveal whether the identity-forming and state-building effects identified in British contexts operated similarly elsewhere or represented specifically British developments.
Finally, the economic dimensions of the Barbary encounter warrant additional attention. While the costs of captivity, ransom, and naval operations feature in existing scholarship, comprehensive assessment of the economic impacts on affected trades, regions, and social groups remains incomplete. Quantitative approaches might complement the predominantly qualitative methods that have characterised scholarship to date.
Conclusions
This dissertation has demonstrated that Barbary piracy constituted a structuring force in Early Modern British identity and domestic politics, operating across cultural, institutional, and ideological dimensions with consequences extending well beyond the immediate period. The synthesis of existing scholarship confirms that the corsair threat shaped British self-understanding, drove political and policy responses, contributed to state-building processes, and provided resources for later imperial claims.
Regarding the first objective, the evidence establishes that encounters with Barbary corsairs significantly influenced British religious and cultural identity. The construction of Protestant Englishness and later Britishness occurred partly through opposition to an imagined Islamic threat, with captivity narratives and popular print materials creating powerful frameworks for understanding national distinctiveness. However, this process proved more complex than simple binary opposition, with renegades, diplomatic pragmatism, and acknowledgments of Muslim humanity complicating straightforward enmity narratives.
The second and third objectives are addressed through demonstration of the substantial political pressures generated by captivity and the contribution of anti-corsair campaigns to naval and administrative development. Barbary concerns penetrated parliamentary debates, shaped diplomatic initiatives, and provided compelling justifications for naval expenditure that contributed to longer-term state-building processes. The requirement to protect subjects, rescue captives, and maintain national honour created expectations of governmental capacity that drove institutional development.
The fourth objective is satisfied through analysis of the extensive print culture generated by the Barbary encounter. Captivity narratives, redemption sermons, periodical news, and popular entertainment created and sustained public discourse about North Africa and its inhabitants, shaping popular understanding while generating political pressure for governmental action.
Finally, the fifth objective is addressed through examination of how the Barbary experience contributed to later British imperial and humanitarian ideology. The memory of British captivity and the rhetoric of action against Barbary slavery provided moral resources for imperial expansion, positioning Britain as a civilising naval power while obscuring its far greater involvement in Atlantic slavery.
The significance of these findings extends beyond historical understanding. The processes identified—identity formation through opposition to perceived threats, the rhetorical deployment of victimhood to justify state expansion, and the mobilisation of humanitarian discourse to legitimate intervention—remain relevant to contemporary debates about national identity, security, and international relations. Understanding how Early Modern Britons conceptualised and responded to the Barbary threat illuminates enduring patterns that continue to shape political discourse and practice.
Future research should address the limitations identified in this analysis, including the need for more comprehensive attention to Scottish, Welsh, and Irish experiences; systematic comparative approaches incorporating other European cases; and quantitative assessment of economic impacts. Additionally, research examining the reception and adaptation of printed materials by diverse audiences would enrich understanding of how cultural representations were interpreted across different social contexts. The Barbary encounter remains a productive field for scholarship addressing questions of identity, politics, and cultural exchange that retain contemporary significance.
References
Capp, B., 2022. *British slaves and Barbary corsairs, 1580-1750*. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192857378.001.0001
Cronin, P., Ryan, F. and Coughlan, M., 2008. Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. *British Journal of Nursing*, 17(1), pp.38-43.
Cutter, N., 2019. Peace with pirates? Maghrebi maritime combat, diplomacy, and trade in English periodical news, 1622–1714. *Humanities*, 8(4), p.179. https://doi.org/10.3390/h8040179
Hebb, D., 2016. *Piracy and the English government 1616–1642: policy-making under the early Stuarts*. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315246789
Löwenheim, O., 2003. “Do ourselves credit and render a lasting service to mankind”: British moral prestige, humanitarian intervention, and the Barbary pirates. *International Studies Quarterly*, 47(1), pp.23-48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2478.4701002
Macfarlane, C., 2020. Pirates and publicity: the making and unmaking of early modern pirates in English and Scottish popular print. *Humanities*, 9(1), p.14. https://doi.org/10.3390/h9010014
Matar, N., 2005. *Britain and Barbary, 1589-1689*. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. https://doi.org/10.33137/rr.v30i3.9115
Moore, G., 2023. British slaves and Barbary corsairs, 1580-1750. *Cultural and Social History*, 20(4), pp.597-598. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780038.2023.2241736
Norton, M., 2014. Classification and coercion: the destruction of piracy in the English maritime system. *American Journal of Sociology*, 119(6), pp.1537-1575. https://doi.org/10.1086/676041
Parker, K., 2004. Reading ‘Barbary’ in early modern England, 1550–1685. *The Seventeenth Century*, 19(1), pp.87-115. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268117x.2004.10555537
Spindler, R., 2020. Benevolent masters, despicable renegados: relativizing portrayals of Muslims in British Barbary captivity narratives, 1595-1739. PhD dissertation. University of Freiburg.
