![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
In the aftermath of the Hanslope Park disclosure and the release of the ‘migrated archives,’ the United Kingdom’s (UK) Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) had to supply a reason for how it came to pass those tens of thousands of classified records documenting Britain’s colonial administrations were stored in secret for half a century. Officially, the FCO responded that its own accidental neglect had resulted in the scandal. This article, by using archival materials released as part of the ‘migrated archives’ and research conducted at the Kenyan National Archive, argues that the contrary was true. In response to growing pressures from former colonies and international organisations, the FCO intentionally concealed ‘embarrassing’ colonial administrative files from public view as a strategy to preserve the UK’s diplomatic standing and political prowess amidst the geopolitical shifts caused by decolonisation and the Cold War. The article describes this strategy in the context of colonial fragility, or the cosmetic interest in protecting the UK’s reputation as a ‘good’ state, which in turn propagated harm along racialised lines by dislocating evidence of the colonial past.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by a scholarship from the International Centre for the Study of Culture at Justus Liebig University, research grants from the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) and the German Historical Institute in London. I am grateful to David Anderson, Katherine Bruce-Lockhart, Tom Kaufmann, Bettina Severin-Barboutie, Katharina Stornig, Sahra Rausch and Sarah Thompson for reading through and commenting on previous versions of this article. I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers who greatly improved the precision of and ideas within this article. Finally, I am grateful to the archival staff at the National Archives in both London and Kenya for their assistance.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Declaration of interest
I am not currently employed by or otherwise engaged with any activities that would influence this research. However, I was briefly employed in 2015 by the British Library as a cataloguer working with the India Office Records. I conducted the research for this article after that period of employment.
Notes
1 Kariuki, ‘Mau Mau’ Detainee, 215; Kumar, Visions of Empire, 321; Batchelor-Hunt, tweet on June 4, 2020.
2 International Churchill Society, ‘VE Day.’
3 Roediger III, et al., ‘Competing memories of WWII,’ 16681.
4 Henderson, The Hunt for Kimathi, 18.
5 Gilroy, After Empire.
6 Wilson, ‘Niall Ferguson’s Imperial Passion,’ 175.
7 Anderson, ‘’Lost’ British Empire Archives’, 700.
8 Musembi, Archives: the Kenyan Experience, 17.
9 UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office and Cary, ‘Cary Report.’
10 Ibid, 17.
11 Badger, ‘A Legacy of Suspicion,’ 230.
12 Anderson, “‘Lost’ British Empire Archives,’ 710.
13 Saad, Me and White Supremacy, 43.
14 Wiener, ‘‘Colonial Legacy,’’ 1.
15 Owens, Economy of Force.
16 Berman and Lonsdale, Unhappy Valley Book Two, 253.
17 See especially Anderson (Citation2005); Elkins (Citation2005); Bennett (Citation2012).
18 See for example, Brockway, Why Mau Mau? (1953); Padmore, Behind the Mau Mau (1953); Koinange, The People of Kenya Speak (1955); Fletcher, Truth about Kenya (1956).
19 FCO 141/6576, R Turnbull, Memorandum ‘Enquiry into the Origin, Methods and Growth of Mau Mau’, to Council of Ministers, 18 June 1957.
20 FCO 141/6998, Memorandum ‘Basic standards of material security protection for classified information in government offices’, n.d.
21 FCO 141/6576, Turnbull, 1957.
22 Ibid.
23 FCO 141/6540, Kenya Legislative Council Debate on the Corfield Report, 10 Jun 1960.
24 Operation Legacy was a campaign to destroy and/or hide files in colonies upon independence so that successor regimes could not access them as well as to select those that should remain in independent administrations to preserve certain structures and functions of governance. See Anderson, 2015; Banton, Citation2012; Sato, Citation2017.
25 CO 822/3199 M MacDonald, Savingram, to D Sandys, 11 September 1963.
26 CO 822/3199 M MacDonald, Savingram ‘Transfer of Documents, to D Sandys, 4 November 1963.
27 CO 822/3199 M MacDonald, Telegram, to Colchester, 2 December 1963.
28 CO 822/3199 M MacDonald, Telegram, to Colchester, 29 November 1963.
29 CO 822/2935 I Macleod, Memorandum, to East African dependencies, 3 May 1961.
30 FCO 141/6576, F D Corfield, letter, to W F Coutts, 21 November 1958.
31 Rawlings, ‘Lost Files, Forgotten Papers,’ 190.
32 Eddo-Lodge, White People, 26.
33 HO 344/14, Report ‘Working party to report on the social and economic problems arising from the growing influx into the United Kingdom of coloured workers from other Commonwealth countries’, to Ministerial Committee, July 1961. As quoted by Bivins, Citation2008.
34 CO 822/3199, W T Wright, letter, to E H Jones, 11 November 1963.
35 FCO 12/357, report ‘Kenya: Migrated Records‘, Library and Records Department, 7 July 1982.
36 ARC (CGO) 1/61/1, Kenya National Archives, report ‘The Kenya National Archives: A Plan for Development and Progress, to Committee for Archival Development of the International Council on Archival [sic], April 1974.
37 KNA 34/72, B M Khasenye, report ‘Private Collections’, to Chief Archivist, n.d.
38 FCO 12/357, report ‘Kenya: Migrated Records‘, Library and Records Department, 7 July 1982.
39 Rieger, ‘The VIIth Archives Congress,’ 502.
40 As quoted by Banton, ‘Displaced Archives in the United Kingdom,’ 52.
41 See note 38 above.
42 FCO 141/19934, Library and Records Department, ‘Migrated Records General Summary: International Interest in Colonial and Imperial Archives’, January 1981.
43 Ibid.
44 Resolutions include: 3206 (1972); 3148 (1973); 3187 (1973); 3391 (1975); 31/40 (1976). FCO 141/19934, Library and Records Department, ‘Migrated Records General Summary: International Interest in Colonial and Imperial Archives’, January 1981.
45 Ibid.
46 KNA 34/87, A M’Bow, letter, to Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Housing & Social Services and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 27 November 1975. (emphasis added)
47 KNA 34/87, M D Kagombe, letter, to PS, Ministry of Housing and Social Services, 31 January 1976.
48 Others participated in the working group but the mentioned individuals were those listed as responsible for drafting the report.
49 FCO 12/195, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, final report ‘on the Possibility of Transferring Documents from Archives Constituted within the Territory of Other Countries’, 1 April 1976.
50 Kecskeméti, ‘Archive Seizures,’ 14.
51 FCO 12/195 A W Mabbs, letter, to Bernard Cheeseman, 3 May 1976.
52 LRR 331/10, B C Bloomfield, letter ‘IOLR Transfer to the British Library’, to Mr. Thorpe, 1 February 1982.
53 FCO 12/195, J Lancaster, memorandum, to Sir Francis Vallat, 11 May 1977.
54 FCO 12/195, J Lancaster, memorandum ‘The ILC Draft Report, Article 13’, 21 January 1977.
55 FCO 12/195, J Lancaster, memorandum, to Sir Francis Vallat, 11 May 1977.
56 Duchein, ‘Theoretical Principles,’ 64.
57 Banton, ‘Destroy? ‘Migrate’? Conceal?’ 331.
58 FCO 12/195, I K Mathers, letter, Mr. Anderson, 12 October 1976.
59 FCO 12/195, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, final report ‘on the Possibility of Transferring Documents from Archives Constituted within the Territory of Other Countries’, 1 April 1976.
60 LRR 331/10, R N Dales, ‘Transfer of the IOLR’, 20 January 1982.
61 LRR 331/10, J G Veitch, letter, to Mr. Smyth, 11 February 1982.
62 LRR 331/10, B C Bloomfield, ‘India Office Library and Records (IOLR): Future Links with the FCO After the Transfer to the British Library, 22 March 1982.
63 LRR 331/10, Bloomfield, 1982.
64 LRR 331/10, Administration-in-Confidence, ‘Transfer of the India Office Library and Records’, n.d.
65 Ibid.
66 For further discussion on legal question of ‘migrated archives’ ownership, see Banton, Citation2017.
67 FCO 141/19933, T S Legg, letter, to A W Mabbs, 8 March 1976.
68 FCO 141/19933, R R M Hollas, letter, to Mrs. Yasamee and Mr. Bone, 1 February 1995.
69 LRR 331/10, B C Bloomfield, letter, to Mr. Donald, 22 March 1982.
70 FCO 12/357, W N Wenban-Smith, letter, to Mr. Williams 22 June 1982.
71 Cullen, Kenya and Britain.
72 FCO 12/357, A E Huckle, letter, to E C Blayney, 24 Jun 1982.
73 FCO 12/357, J H Smyth, letter, to E C Blayney, 7 July 1982.
74 FCO 12/357, I Sinclair, letter, unaddressed, n.d.
75 FCO 12/357, E C Blayney, letter, to Mr. Streeton, 28 July 1982.
76 FCO 12/357, E C Blayney, letter, to Mr. Streeton, 28 July 1982.
77 Frey, ‘Konferenzplatz Wien,’ 150.
78 United Nations Treaty Collection, 2020.
79 Shorske, Thinking with History, 113.
80 See Displaced Archives, especially introduction by James Lowry and Charles Kecskeméti’s chapter for overview of international development leading up to the convention and analysis of its shortcomings.
81 Kecskeméti, ‘Archive Seizures,’ 14.
82 FCO 141/19912, International Council on Archives Working Group, Professional Advice on the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of State Property, Archives and Debts, Part III, State Archives (Art. 19 to 31), n.d.
83 Ireland and Schofield, ‘Introduction,’ 4.
84 Chopra, ‘Archives of Violence,’ 62.
85 Gordon, ‘From Militancy to History.’
86 Shepherd, ‘The Algeria-France ‘Dispute.’’
87 Ibid.
88 Kecskeméti, ‘Archive Seizures,’ 16.
89 KNA AR/15/5, Report on Vienna Convention on Succession of States, 22 April 1983.
90 Kecskeméti, ‘Archive Seizures,’ 18.
91 Pandžić, ‘Succession of the State.’
92 UNESCO and Auer, ‘Disputed archival claims,’ 1.
93 Sigurðsson, ‘Shared Archival Heritage,’ slide 3.
94 Eddo-Lodge, White People, 2.
95 Yapp, ‘Define Mutual,’ 68.
96 Hiribarren, ‘Hiding the Colonial Past?’
97 Anderson, ‘Lost British Empire Archives,’ 706.