A groundbreaking new study from the University of Cambridge unveils a complex and largely obscured chapter in the life of Samuel Pepys, the renowned 17th-century naval administrator and diarist. Recent archival research reveals that Pepys was deeply entwined with the institutions of slavery, a fact that challenges the sanitized narratives commonly associated with his legacy. This investigation exposes how Pepys strategically managed his personal and official correspondence to conceal and reveal aspects of his involvement with slavery, motivated largely by fear of political corruption allegations.
Samuel Pepys, long celebrated for his detailed diaries chronicling English life during the Restoration period, was also a slave owner. Archival evidence, including personal letters and official documents, discloses his ownership of at least two enslaved individuals residing in London. These documents shed light on a dark facet of Pepys’s personal affairs and broader social milieu, where the ownership and trade of enslaved people were not uncommon among the English elite.
Historians have long speculated about the extent of Pepys’s involvement in the commerce and politics of slavery, but the meticulous research led by Dr. Michael Edwards from Jesus College, Cambridge, breaks new ground by delving into Pepys’s curated archival writings. Dr. Edwards’s research reveals that Pepys and his clerks purposefully edited and arranged his correspondence to preserve a favorable public image while minimizing incriminating details about his slave dealings.
One of the most revealing episodes involves Pepys’s association with the Royal African Company and the Royal Navy, two institutions instrumental in the transatlantic slave trade. In 1674, Pepys arranged for the navy ship Phoenix to be loaned to the Royal African Company to facilitate the transport of enslaved people from West Africa to the Caribbean plantation economies. The ship’s logs grimly record that 19 enslaved individuals died and were thrown overboard during the voyage, underscoring the brutal realities of the slave trade directly linked to Pepys’s naval oversight.
The subsequent events surrounding the ship’s commandership provide critical insight into the moral and political struggles Pepys faced. Following the death of the ship’s captain, a naval officer named John Howe sought to regain command. Howe attempted to curry favor by offering Pepys an enslaved boy as a “present,” a clear instance of bribery embedded within the business of human trafficking. Although biographers had assumed Pepys accepted the boy, newly analyzed correspondence reveals that Pepys formally rejected this offer, signaling a strategic decision to maintain his reputation amidst accusations of corruption.
This unprecedented correspondence highlights Pepys’s acute awareness of the political risks associated with entanglements in slavery and bribery. Having taken a seat in Parliament in 1673, Pepys faced scrutiny and attacks relating to alleged Catholic sympathies and corrupt practices. His rejection of Howe’s gift served as an attempt to publicly demonstrate probity while carefully minimizing evidence of his involvement in slavery within official archives.
Dr. Edwards’s study highlights the significant role of Pepys’s clerk, William Hewer, in indexing and organizing correspondence to shape the historical record. By excising references to the enslaved boy and emphasizing Pepys’s honorable conduct, they constructed a curated archive that obscures the full extent of Pepys’s participation in the mechanisms of slavery. This editorial intervention signals a sophisticated early modern understanding of archival power and reputation management.
Despite Pepys’s Rejection of the bribe, it is evident from other documents that he did participate in owning and selling enslaved individuals. Following his release from imprisonment in the Tower of London in 1679, Pepys arranged through a naval contact to sell a male slave in Tangier. His personal letter to Captain John Wyborne reveals a candid acceptance of this transaction, reflecting the commonplace nature of slavery among his social circle and its integration into his personal economic affairs.
Pepys’s complex position—both as a participant in slavery and a public figure obsessed with reputation—reflects wider tensions in Restoration England, where wealth, politics, and the brutal realities of empire collided. His case illustrates how slavery was embedded in the infrastructure of naval power, commerce, and governance, with officials like Pepys navigating these treacherous waters with an eye on social and political survival rather than moral considerations.
The new research brings into sharp focus the role of archival curation in shaping historical memory. Pepys’s archival legacy, often prized for its richness and candor, is now understood to be a construction designed not only to preserve facts but to manipulate what future generations could learn about his dealings with slavery and corruption. This challenges historians to reconsider how other historical archives may have been similarly censored or edited to protect reputations.
Dr Edwards reflects on the contemporary resonance of this story, noting that Pepys’s concerns about image and power echo through centuries. Understanding the interplay of corruption, slavery, and reputation in Pepys’s life offers a nuanced lens on the moral compromises underpinning early modern British imperial expansion. It also prompts a reevaluation of historically celebrated figures whose legacies intersect with systemic oppression.
In conclusion, this seminal study published in The Historical Journal not only revises the biography of a key Restoration figure but also deepens our understanding of the political economies of slavery in 17th-century England. It illuminates the ways in which archival silences and erasures have long shaped the narratives of power, morality, and imperial history. As scholars continue to uncover such hidden layers, the story of Samuel Pepys stands as a cautionary tale about the enduring complexities of history and memory.
Subject of Research: Samuel Pepys’s involvement with the African Companies, the Royal Navy, and slavery in 17th-century England.
Article Title: Samuel Pepys, the African Companies, and the Archives of Slavery, 1660-1689
News Publication Date: 26 March 2026
Web References:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X26101435
References:
M. Edwards, ‘Samuel Pepys, the African Companies, and the Archives of Slavery, 1660-1689’, The Historical Journal (Cambridge University Press, 2026). DOI: 10.1017/S0018246X26101435
Image Credits:
The Pepys Library at Magdalene College, Cambridge
Keywords:
Samuel Pepys, slavery, Royal Navy, Royal African Company, 17th century, British history, archives, corruption, Restoration England, archival curation, historical memory, transatlantic slave trade
