Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T00:09:27.817Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Left Behind: Subjecthood, Nationality, and the Status of Jews after the Loss of English Surinam

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2015

Jacob Selwood
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Following the loss of Surinam to the Netherlands in 1667, the English Crown attempted to evacuate those of its subjects living in the colony under Dutch rule. In doing so, its representatives laid claim to members of the Jewish population, who Surinam's English governors had previously declared to be “considered as English-born.” In the resulting dispute between the English and Dutch over who could be removed, Crown officials embraced articulations of subjecthood forged in the colony that differed from metropolitan norms. In asserting that Surinam's Jews remained subjects of the king, and by implying that they would continue to do so once evacuated, the English delegation departed from the Crown's frequent rejection of the wider efficacy of colonial naturalization. Surinam's Dutch governor, meanwhile, dismissed the assertion that members of the “Hebrew nation” could be subjects of an English king, arguing that subjecthood and nationality were identical and that only those of the English nation could be removed. The dispute between the English and the Dutch over the status of Surinam's Jews reminds us that English subjecthood was shaped by colonial settings and by the contested status of groups who found themselves transferred between imperial powers.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , July 2015 , pp. 578 - 601
Copyright
Copyright © The North American Conference on British Studies 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 National Archives, London (hereafter TNA), CO 278/3, 150. For an earlier discussion of the status of Jews in Surinam that focuses on English toleration in the Atlantic world, see Selwood, Jacob, “Present at the Creation: Diaspora, Hybridity and the Place of Jews in the History of English Toleration,” in Religious Tolerance in the Atlantic World: Early Modern and Contemporary Perspectives, ed. Glaser, Eliane (Basingstoke, 2014), 193–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 198–203. For the most comprehensive narrative of the position of Jews in English Surinam and the consequences of its loss to the Dutch, see Rens, L. L. E., “Analysis of Annals Relating to Early Jewish Settlement in Surinam,” in The Jewish Nation in Surinam: Historical Essays, ed. , RobertCohen (Amsterdam, 1982), 29–46Google Scholar. Alison Games's recent work discusses Anglo-Dutch cohabitation in Surinam and the implications of its failure, and includes a treatment of the Crown's attempt to evacuate English subjects. See Alison Games, “Cohabitation, Suriname Style: English Inhabitants in Dutch Suriname after 1667,” William and Mary Quarterly, 72, no. 2 (April 2015): 195–242. I am grateful to her for sending me an early draft of her article and for generously sharing sources and advice relating to Surinam. When quoting from early modern sources, I have modernized all spelling, capitalization, and punctuation and have extended all abbreviations. All translations from Dutch sources are my own, unless otherwise noted. Dates from English sources are in Old Style, with the exception that the year is taken to have begun on January 1. When a date from an original source is within quotation marks, however, I have not altered the beginning of the year. Dates from Dutch sources are in New Style. I have opted to use the English spelling of Surinam (rather than the Dutch Suriname) throughout.

2 “Grant of Privileges by the Governor, Council, and Assembly of Surinam, to the Jews,” 17 August 1665, reproduced in Oppenheim, Samuel, “An Early Jewish Colony in Western Guiana,” Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society 16 (1907): 95–186Google Scholar, at 179–80.

3 For the Crown's attitude towards colonial naturalization in the seventeenth century and the ambiguities of colonial practice, see Kettner, James H., The Development of American Citizenship, 1608–1870 (Chapel Hill, NC, 1978), 78–80Google Scholar, 94.

4 Weiss Muller, Hannah, “Bonds of Belonging: Subjecthood and the British Empire,” Journal of British Studies 53, no. 1 (January 2014): 29–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Calvin's Case, brought to the Court of King's Bench in 1608, see Calvin v. Smith in English Reports, ed. Alexander Wood Renton et al. (London, 1900–30), 77:377; State Trials or a Collection of the Most Interesting Trials prior to the Revolution of 1688, ed. Samuel March Phillipps (London, 1886), 2:559.

5 See Haefeli, Evan, New Netherland and the Dutch Origins of American Religious Liberty (Philadelphia, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thompson, Mark L., The Contest for the Delaware Valley: Allegiance, Identity, and Empire in the Seventeenth Century (Baton Rouge, 2013)Google Scholar; Hale Pulsipher, Jenny, Subjects unto the Same King: Indians, English, and the Contest for Authority in Colonial New England (Philadelphia, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 On failed colonies, see chapter six of Games, Alison, The Web of Empire: English Cosmopolitans in an Age of Expansion, 1560–1660 (Oxford, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 TNA, CO 278/3, 151–52.

8 It is unclear whether English settlement first occurred in 1650 or 1651. For evidence supporting 1650 see “The Description of Guyana,” in Colonising Expeditions to the West Indies and Guiana, 1623–1667, ed. Harlow, Vincent T. (London, 1925), 132–48Google Scholar, at 142. The colony's 1663 grant of proprietorship confirms this year as the date of departure for the first English vessel. See Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, America and West Indies (hereafter CSP Colonial), vol. 5 (1661–1668), ed. W. Noel Sainsbury (London, 1880), 6 May 1663 (no. 451). I am grateful to Natalie Zemon Davis for pointing me to the unabridged text. See Jacob Hartsinck, Jan, Beschryving Van Guiana, of De Wilde Kust, in Zuid-America (Amsterdam, 1770), 522–58Google Scholar. Correspondence from Willoughby suggests that colonization did not occur until 1651. See Alexander Williamson, James, English Colonies in Guiana and on the Amazon, 1604–1668 (Oxford, 1923)Google Scholar, 153.

9 See Williamson, English Colonies, 155–57; Michael A. LaCombe, “Willoughby, Francis, fifth Baron Willoughby of Parham (bap. 1614, d. 1666),” Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (Oxford, 2004), http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/29597 (accessed 20 February 2015). For Willoughby's Caribbean career and factionalism in Surinam under his proprietorship, see Barber, Sarah, “Power in the English Caribbean: The Proprietorship of Lord Willoughby of Parham,” in Constructing Early Modern Empires: Proprietary Ventures in the Atlantic World, 1500–1750, ed. , Louis H.Roper et al. (Leiden, 2007), 189–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Hartsinck, Beschryving Van Guiana, 527–28. The patent is summarized in CSP Colonial, vol. 5 (1661–1668), 6 May 1663 (no. 451).

11 Hartsinck, Beschryving Van Guiana, 531–32.

12 Ibid., 550.

13 For the specific and general uses of the term “denizen,” see Coke, Edward, The first part of the Institutes of the lawes of England. Or, A commentarie vpon Littleton, not the name of a lawyer onely, but of the law it selfe (London, 1628)Google Scholar, 129r. This reference is also cited in “denizen, n. and adj.,” OED Online, entry 49985, http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/49985?rskey=glCnbo&result=1 (accessed 20 February 2015).

14 James Kettner notes the “same common law principles that made subjects of the Scottish postnati applied equally well to persons born in America.” Kettner, Development of American Citizenship, 65.

15 Strangers becoming denizens by letters patent gained the right to purchase land and initiate lawsuits. However, they remained aliens by birth, so were unable to inherit land or bequeath it to children born before their date of denization. They generally continued to pay aliens’ taxes and customs. See Selwood, Jacob, Diversity and Difference in Early Modern London (Farnham, UK, 2010)Google Scholar, 39n97, 49; Kettner, Development of American Citizenship, 31–32.

16 Hartsinck, Beschryving Van Guiana, 533–36.

17 Ibid., 533.

18 Kettner, Development of American Citizenship, 79 (for strangers becoming subjects); 83 (on naturalization by assemblies); 74–75, 80 (on the local efficacy of colonial naturalization and the 1740 Act); and 79–80 (for clauses implying imperial efficacy). The Crown's rejection of the wider validity of colonial naturalization appears definitive by the 1680s. Ibid., 94.

19 Warren, George, An Impartial Description of Surinam (London, 1667)Google Scholar, 17. Warren describes his observations as “a present of three years collection.” A2r.

20 CSP Colonial, vol. 5 (1661–1668), 7 May 1661 (no. 83); ibid., 1 November 1663 (no. 577).

21 A fact noted in Williamson, English Colonies, 163–64, which also uses these sources to describe the colony's growing population.

22 Sloane MSS 3662, fol. 27r, British Library (hereafter BL). See also Williamson, English Colonies, 164. A slightly different version of Byam's journal, from Ashmolean MSS 842, fols. 109–22, Bodleian Library, is printed in Harlow, ed., Colonising Expeditions, 199–222.

23 Scott, “Description of Guyana,” in Harlow, ed., Colonising Expeditions, 144.

24 William Byam, “An Exact Narrative of the State of Guyana,” in Harlow, ed., Colonising Expeditions, 199–222, at 203. Williamson, quoting elsewhere in Byam's journal, gives a figure of five hundred men able to defend the colony that year. See Williamson, English Colonies, 164.

25 Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 31.

26 Israel, Jonathan I., Diasporas within a Diaspora: Jews, Crypto-Jews, and the World of Maritime Empires (1540–1740) (Boston, 2002)Google Scholar, 396, 403, 407.

27 For the events of the readmission, see Katz, David S., Philo-Semitism and the Readmission of the Jews to England, 1603–1655 (Oxford, 1982), 190–244Google Scholar; Israel, Diasporas, 407–20. James Shapiro and Eliane Glaser have both questioned the readmission's watershed status. See Shapiro, James, Shakespeare and the Jews (New York, 1996), 55–62Google Scholar; Glaser, Eliane, “Commemorating a Myth,” History Today 56, no. 3 (March 2006)Google Scholar: 45–47.

28 TNA, SP 44/18, 78–79. See also Katz, Philo-Semitism, 243.

29 Katz, David S., “The Jews of England and 1688,” in From Persecution to Toleration: The Glorious Revolution and Religion in England, ed. Grell, Peter, Irvine Israel, Jonathan, and Tyacke, Nicholas (Oxford, 1991), 217–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 236, 248; Ross, J. M., “Naturalisation of Jews in England,” Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England 24 (1975): 59–72Google Scholar, at 62.

30 Newman, Aubrey, “The Sephardim of the Caribbean,” in The Sephardi Heritage, vol. 2, The Western Sephardim, ed. Schwab, W. M. and Barnett, R. D. (Grendon, UK, 1989), 445–73Google Scholar, at 451–52.

31 For the Bridgetown population, see Samuel, Wilfred S., “Review of the Jewish Colonists in Barbados, 1680,” Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England 13 (1936): 1–47Google Scholar, at 8; for the total Jewish population, see Israel, Diasporas, 522; the total for the white population comes from the 1679–80 Barbados census, cited in Samuel, “Jewish Colonists,” 3. For anti-Jewish complaints see TNA, CO 1/47, no. 6; CSP Colonial, vol. 11 (1681–1685), ed. J. W. Fortescue (London, 1898), 9 June 1681 (no. 134); Israel, Diasporas, 397–98, 523–25.

32 Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 33–34, 36; Israel, Diasporas, 527.

33 For suggestions of a Jewish presence before the 1660s, see Williamson, English Colonies, 154; Oppenheim, “Early Jewish Colony,” 97; Wolf, Lucien, “American Elements in the Resettlement,” Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England 3 (1896–1898): 76–100Google Scholar, at 80; Barber, “English Caribbean,” 204. For scholarship questioning this early presence, see Cohen, Robert, “The Misdated Ketubah: A Note on the Beginnings of the Surinam Jewish Community,” American Jewish Archives 36, no. 1 (April 1984): 12–15Google Scholar; Cohen, Robert, “The Egerton Manuscript,” American Jewish Historical Quarterly 62, no. 4 (June 1973): 333–47Google Scholar; Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 29–31.

34 TNA, CO 1/15, no. 31, fols. 59v–60r. See CSP Colonial, vol. 5 (1661–1668), 8 April 1661 (no. 65). Here “Henry Benjamin de Caseres” is transcribed as “Henry Bernard de Caseres.”

35 TNA, CO 1/15, no. 75, fol. 143r–v. See CSP Colonial, vol. 5 (1661–1668), 24 July 1661 (no. 140).

36 TNA, CO 1/15, no. 75, fol. 143r–v.

37 Ibid.

38 Ibid.

39 Sanford, Robert, Surinam Justice (London, 1662), 40–41Google Scholar (“The deposition of John Venman aged twenty-eight years or thereabouts”). The deposition of James Maxwel [sic] provides almost identical wording. For a discussion of these examples, see Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 30, 43n6.

40 Sanford, Surinam Justice, 36. For more on Sanford, including his accusations against Byam, see Barber, “English Caribbean,” 207–10.

41 Sanford, Surinam Justice, 36–37.

42 Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 30, 36.

43 Israel, Diasporas, 401–2; Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 34–36; Williamson, English Colonies, 178–79. Rens locates the arrival of Jewish settlers from Cayenne “in the second half of 1665,” while also leaving open the possibility of settlement the following year, emphasizing that their arrival occurred after the authorities issued the 1665 “Grant of Privileges.” Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 34, 36.

44 “Grant of Privileges,” in Oppenheim, “Early Jewish Colony,” 179–80. In this section I draw upon a previous discussion of the 1665 grant in Selwood, “Present at the Creation,” 198–201. The earliest surviving version of the grant appears to be the Dutch copy printed in David de Isaac Cohen Nassy's Essai Historique sur la Colonie de Surinam (Paramaribo, Surinam, 1788), 2:122–25. For an English translation of Nassy's history, see Marcus, Jacob R. and Chyet, Stanley F., eds., Historical Essay on the Colony of Surinam, 1788, trans. Cohen, Simon (Cincinnati, 1974)Google Scholar. According to Williamson, “[t]here is no record of this grant in English archives, but a Dutch copy is preserved at Paramaribo.” See Williamson, English Colonies, 165n4. Williamson cites J. S. Roos, rabbi of the Dutch congregation in Paramaribo, who refers to an “official Dutch translation (Col. Arch.)” without providing further details. See Roos, J. S., “Additional Notes on the History of the Jews in Surinam,” American Jewish Historical Quarterly 13 (1905): 127–38Google Scholar, at 130. No manuscript copy survives in the National Archives of Suriname, although it is possible that one might be preserved in the archives of the Jewish community in Paramaribo, or in the National Archives of the Netherlands. I am grateful to Jonathan Israel, Natalie Zemon Davis, Laura Liebman, and the National Archives of Suriname for advice about the grant's provenance.

45 “Grant of Privileges,” in Oppenheim, “Early Jewish Colony,” 179–80.

46 TNA, SP 44/18, 78–79, also discussed in Katz, Philo-Semitism, 243. The expansive nature of the 1665 grant led Lucien Wolf to claim that “the honor of first practicing Jewish emancipation belongs to British America.” Wolf, “American Elements,” 86.

47 This was the case in Jamaica. See CSP Colonial, vol. 7 (1669–1674), ed. W. Noel Sainsbury (London, 1889), 31 December 1670 (no. 367). Jews in Rhode Island received a statement of protection from the colony's assembly in 1684, but this was offered to them in their capacity as strangers. See Smith, Ellen and Sarna, Jonathan D., introduction to The Jews of Rhode Island, ed. Goodwin, George M. and Smith, Ellen (Waltham, MA, 2004), 1–10Google Scholar, at 2.

48 See Cohen, “Egerton Manuscript,” 339–40; Israel, Diasporas, 401. Lucien Wolf, writing in 1897, mistook a translation of these proposals for original “privileges … granted by the Commonwealth to the Brazilian Jews who settled in Surinam in 1654” (Wolf, “American Elements,” 85). Wolf's suggestion that rights were extended this early has been convincingly refuted. See Oppenheim, “Early Jewish Colony,” 161; Cohen, “Egerton Manuscript,” 340.

49 Haefeli, New Netherland, 83.

50 Hartsinck, Beschryving Van Guiana, 533–35.

51 “Grant of Privileges,” in Oppenheim, “Early Jewish Colony,” 179.

52 Kettner, Development of American Citizenship, 83–86. General naturalization did not become a reality in England until the early eighteenth century, and then only briefly, although unsuccessful proposals had arisen as early as the 1660s. See Selwood, Diversity and Difference, 122–24.

53 Kettner, Development of American Citizenship, 33, 93–96; Snyder, Holly, “Rules, Rights and Redemption: The Negotiation of Jewish Status in British Atlantic Port Towns, 1740–1831,” Jewish History 20, no. 2 (June 2006): 147–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 152–53.

54 TNA, CO 1/21, no. 21, fols. 42r–43r (the passage quoted is on fol. 42v).

55 “Exact Narrative,” in Harlow, ed., Colonising Expeditions, 216.

56 There is some ambiguity to this date. The report in TNA, CO 1/21, no. 21, fol. 44r lists the date of the articles as concluded on “the 16th of March stilo novo” (and thus 6 March, old style). However, the copy of Byam's account printed in Harlow gives the date as “6 of March stylo novo 1667” (“Exact Narrative,” in Harlow, ed., Colonising Expeditions, 219).

57 “Articles Concluded Between Commander Abraham Crynsens … & Colonel William Byam,” printed in Harlow, ed., Colonising Expeditions, 217 (the full articles at 216–19). For the colony's English and Jewish population by 1667, see Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 31, 36.

58 “Articles,” in Harlow, ed., Colonising Expeditions, 218.

59 For the draft proposals, see Sloane MSS 3662, fols. 33v–34v, BL.

60 Instructie Engelse Kroon aan Willoughby, 14 February 1668, 2035–87, Zeeuws Archief (Zeeland Archives, hereafter ZA). The date of this source, an English-language copy in the Zeeland archives, is ambiguous. While the date on the manuscript is 14 February 1668, it is listed in the archives as 4 February 1668, a reversal of correct Old/New Style conversion. I have been unable to find a reference to this source in the Calendar of State Papers. Material from the Zeeland Archives relating to Surinam has been digitized and is available at www.archieven.nl. Much of the outgoing correspondence from the colony has been fully transcribed. See http://files.archieven.nl/239/f/GIDS102/2035-transcripties.pdf. I am grateful to Alison Games for bringing these sources to my attention.

61 Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 37. The English had briefly recaptured the colony in October 1667; it returned to Dutch hands by April 1668. For a Dutch account of the English recapture and occupation of the colony, see Johan Tressry, 13 January 1668, 2035–007, ZA.

62 Julius Lichtenbergh, 30 April 1670, 2035–216, ZA.

63 For a concise summary of both missions, see Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 38–40. For documents relating to the 1671 mission see TNA, CO 278/2, 33–56. For memoranda for the second mission following the Treaty of Westminster, see TNA, CO 278/2, 61–75. Documents relating to the 1675 mission can be found in TNA, CO 278/3.

64 Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 37–38.

65 See TNA, CO 278/2, 46–47.

66 CSP Colonial, vol. 7 (1669–1674), 16 January 1672 (no. 734). As Rens notes, there is no evidence that Jews were present among the 517 colonists evacuated. He suggests that during the first mission “the Dutch were guarding carefully against anyone but born Englishmen—the Scotch and Irish included—leaving the colony” (Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 39).

67 TNA, CO 278/2, 53. The precise date of departure is unclear from Bannister's narrative, but occurred soon after the delegation delivered a list of grievances to the governor on 6 March. Bannister reported his arrival in Port Royal Bay, Jamaica, on 12 March 1671. See TNA, CO 278/2, 54.

68 TNA, CO 278/2, 57–58. See also Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 39.

69 TNA, CO 278/2, 58–60.

70 Petitie Inwoners, 11 March 1671, 2035–225, ZA. One of the signatories, Marcus Brandt, served as one of the three commissioners appointed by the Crown to evacuate the English in 1675. See, for example, TNA, CO 278/3, 97. He also appears as “Mark Brent” in English sources and is discussed as such below.

71 TNA, CO 278/2, 60.

72 Article five, “Treaty of Westminster,” in English Historical Documents, vol. 8, 1660–1714, ed. Andrew Browning, 2nd ed. (London, 1953), 880–81.

73 TNA, CO 278/2, 62, 67. The inhabitants’ 1671 petition to the Zeeland States had described the colony as consisting of a total of five hundred white settlers, twenty-five hundred black inhabitants and five hundred Indian slaves, with fifty-two plantations possessing sugar mills. See Petitie Inwoners, 11 March 1671, 2035–225, ZA.

74 TNA, CO 278/2, 74.

75 Pieter Versterre, 16 December 1675, 2035–271, ZA.

76 TNA, CO 278/3, 151.

77 Ibid., 7–9. The full text of the letter is on fols. 5–9. Mark Brent also appears as Marcus Brandt in both English and Dutch sources. See, for example, TNA, CO 278/3, 97; Pieter Versterre, 16 December 1675, 2035–271, ZA.

78 TNA, CO 278/3, 21.

79 Pieter Versterre, 8 May 1675, 2035–257, ZA.

80 TNA, CO 278/3, 148.

81 Ibid., 148–49.

82 Ibid., 150. The full letter is on 149–50.

83 Ibid., 149–50. The Dutch also compiled their own lists, both of departing English and the remaining Dutch and Jewish inhabitants, which Versterre included in a 4 July 1675 letter (24 June, Old Style). See Pieter Versterre, 4 July 1675, 2035–260, ZA. The lists of the Jewish, Dutch, and English can be found in 2035–261, 2035–262, and 2035–263, ZA, respectively.

84 TNA, CO 278/3, 151.

85 Ibid., 151–52. I have previously discussed this episode and the events of the 1675 evacuation in Selwood, “Present at the Creation,” 201–2. That subjecthood transcended nationality was an implication of Calvin's Case (1608), in which Scots born after the accession of James VI of Scotland to the throne of England were deemed to be subjects in England. This principle also applied in the colonies. See Kettner, Development of American Citizenship, 16–28, 65.

86 Pieter Versterre, 16 December 1675, 2035–271, ZA. I have found no other references to Scottish and Irish settlers in Surinam during this period, suggesting, perhaps, that their inclusion in these discussions is largely theoretical.

87 TNA, CO 278/3, 152.

88 Ibid, 153. Signor Aaron de Silvis was also known as Aron da Silva and the overseer appears to be one Isaac de la Parr. See Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 40–41. The reference to naturalization by act of parliament is ambiguously worded (and curious, given the sacramental restrictions barring Jews). Israel, Diasporas, 526–27, interprets this to mean that it was da Silva who had been naturalized rather than de la Parr.

89 TNA, CO 278/3, 155–57.

90 Pieter Versterre, 16 December 1675, 2035–271, ZA. The enslavement of Indians appears common, one 1671 source reporting five hundred Indian slaves in the colony. See Petitie Inwoners, 11 March 1671, 2035–225, ZA. It is unclear how many worked for English masters.

91 TNA, CO 278/3, 158–59. A copy of the English protest note also exists in the Zeeland archives. See Protestnota Engelse Commissarisen, 2035–273, ZA.

92 TNA, CO 278/3, 160.

93 Ibid.

94 Ibid., 161. The full petition is on 160–61.

95 Ibid., 164–65. The Henry and Sarah had arrived in Surinam before Cranfield's ships, making landfall on 7 April 1675 (NS). See Pieter Versterre's letter (presumably to the Zeeland States), 8 May 1675, 2035–257, ZA.

96 The evacuation numbers are contained in a report written on 30 May 1676 and presented to the Privy Council on 31 January 1677. See TNA, CO 278/3, 166–68 (the passenger figures appear on 167). According to Rens the two Jews on board were Isaac de la Parr, the overseer mentioned above, and one Gabriell de Solis, about whom nothing is known (Rens's assumption that he is Jewish is based entirely on his name). See Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 40–41; TNA, CO 278/3, 153.

97 TNA, CO 278/3, 164.

98 Israel, Diasporas, 527; Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 40. According to the English commissioners, one Dutch source reported 130 Dutch colonists, with an additional garrison of 140 troops. See Hollander, J. H., “Documents Related to the Attempted Departure of the Jews from Surinam in 1675,” Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society 6 (1897): 9–29Google Scholar, at 13.

99 TNA, CO 278/3, 151.

100 Discussed in Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 41, who states that the document was included with Cranfield's passenger lists (citing a printed version in Hollander, “Documents,” 17). For more on da Silva's wealth see Israel, Diasporas, 526–27.

101 TNA, PC 2/65, 120, 128. The petitioners described themselves as “his Majesty's subjects being made free denizens by letters patents under the Great Seal,” an interesting assertion given that, if in Surinam in 1665, they would have been English subjects by virtue of the “Grant of Privileges” (ibid., 120). Aviva Ben-Ur and Rachel Frankel have recently suggested that the ten Jewish families petitioning for departure successfully left Surinam in 1677, basing this claim on Nassy's Essai Historique. See Ben-Ur, Aviva and Frankel, Rachel, Remnant Stones: The Jewish Cemeteries and Synagogues of Suriname: Essays (Cincinnati, 2012)Google Scholar, 28. Rens critiques Nassy's reliability, arguing that the petitioners probably remained in the colony. See Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 41–43.

102 Governor Sir William Stapleton to Lords of Trade and Plantations, Nevis, 7 February 1680. CSP Colonial, vol. 10 (1677–1680), ed. W. Noel Sainsbury and J. W. Fortescue (London, 1896), 7 February 1680 (no. 1291).

103 Ibid., 23 January 1680 (no. 1281 i); Rens, “Analysis of Annals,” 42. The Jewish population of Surinam would, however, thrive. See Vink, Wieke, Creole Jews: Negotiating Community in Colonial Suriname (Leiden, 2010), 26–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

104 TNA, CO 278/3, 153.

105 Haefeli, New Netherland, 83; Israel, Diasporas, 401.

106 I owe this observation to one of this article's anonymous referees.

107 TNA, CO 278/3, 153.

108 Coke, The first part of the Institutes, 129r.

109 Kettner, Development of American Citizenship, 78–79; 90–92; 300–1.