How Not to Possess an Island: Pitcairn and the Legal Circuits of British Empire in the Pacific World
Abstracts Historians have been remarkably incurious about the legal dimensions of “informal empire.” This article shows that legal practices in fact created and sustained sovereign indeterminacy. Our focus is Pitcairn, a small, remote island in the Pacific settled in 1789 by a handful of Britons and Tahitians after the mutiny on the Bounty . British officials, legal professionals, island sojourners, and historians have advanced a jumble of claims, each attached to a particular timeline, about how Pitcairn became British. One prominent view is that a single British navy captain took possession of the island in 1838. We challenge this and other prevailing accounts by showing how repeated reconfigurations of island-imperial connections kept Pitcairn from being either enfolded into the empire or established as an independent entity. Intermittent visits by British naval officers gradually constituted a makeshift legal system, while rival factions of islanders steered imperial agents to support local schemes, including bids for island rule. For a century and a half, these processes held Pitcairn on the threshold of the empire. The significance of the narrative recounted here extends beyond one small island. This microhistory illustrates broad processes of interpolity ordering and locates the origins of sovereign indeterminacy in the “legal circuitry” of nineteenth-century empire.
Authors
- Adam Clulow (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4169-1656)
- Lauren A. Benton
Institutions
- Yale University (US)
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Annales Histoire Sciences Sociales (English edition)
- Published
- 2025-04-29
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1017/ahsse.2024.21
- Primary Topic
- Island Studies and Pacific Affairs
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00