Notes Introduction: the missionary movement, the local and the global 1. Kathryn Sutherland, ‘Hannah More’s counter-revolutionary femi- nism’, in Kelvin Everest (ed.), Revolution in Writing: British Literary Responses to the French Revolution (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1991), p. 40. 2. Reverend Arthur Roberts (ed.), Mendip Annals, or, A Narrative of the Charitable Labours of Hannah and Martha More in their Neighbourhood, 3rd edition (London: James Nisbet, 1839 [1834]), p. 28. 3. Hannah More to Elizabeth Montagu, 10 October 1789, quoted in Anne Stott, Hannah More: The First Victorian (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), p. 110. 4. Hannah More to Zachary Macaulay, January 1796, about the pros- perity of the new school (‘Which you remember we used to call “Botany Bay” ’). A. Roberts (ed.), Letters of Hannah More to Zachary Macaulay (London: James Nisbet, 1860), p. 10. 5. Roberts (ed.), Mendip Annals,p.43. 6. See also: Hannah More to William Wilberforce, 14 October 1795, in W. Roberts (ed.), Memoirs of the Life and Correspondence of Mrs Hannah More (London: Seeley and Burnside, 1839), p. 244; M. G. Jones, Hannah More (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1952), p. 165. 7. Extract from an account of the Mendip Schools, Society for Better- ing the Condition of the Poor, The Reports of the Society for Bettering the Condition and Increasing the Comforts of the Poor, 4th edition, vol. 1 (London, 1805), p. 297. 8. The Sierra Leone project, which originated in the search for an alter- native destination for convicts following the ‘closure’ of America to such purposes, aimed to promote legitimate commerce and agricul- ture and to provide a solution to the ‘problem’ of London’s Black poor. See Philip D. Curtin, The Image of Africa. British Ideas and Action, 1780–1850, vol. 1 (London: University of Wisconsin Press, 1964), pp. 95–102, 105–119 and 123–139; Stephen J. Braidwood, Black Poor and White Philanthropists: London’s Blacks and the Foun- dation of the Sierra Leone Settlement 1786–1791 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1994); Christopher Fyfe, ‘Freed slave colonies in West Africa’, in John Flint (ed.), The Cambridge History of Africa, 220 Notes 221 Volume 5, from c 1790 to c 1870 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), pp. 170–199. 9. Sutherland, ‘Hannah More’s counter-revolutionary feminism’, pp. 54–61; Jones, Hannah More, p. 62. More’s poem Slavery indicates she was well-acquainted with Enlightenment arguments concern- ing biological and cultural bases for human difference. Slavery, A Poem (London: T. Cadell, 1788), pp. 16–17. 10. Whereas the auxiliaries of the BMS, LMS and CMS followed the formation of the national societies, the formation of the Leeds- based Methodist Missionary Society (1813) stimulated the formal organisation of the WMMS in 1819. 11. Anne Summers, ‘A home from home – women’s philanthropic work in the nineteenth century’, in Sandra Burman (ed.), Fit Work for Women (London: Croom Helm, 1979); F. K. Prochaska, Women and Philanthropy in Nineteenth Century England (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980). 12. This book is about middle-class formation. It is not my intention to downplay working-class evangelicalism but it is not my focus here. 13. For late-eighteenth-century revivalism, see David Bebbington, Evan- gelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s (London: Unwin Hyman, 1989). 14. G. M. Ditchfield, ‘English rational dissent and philanthropy, c.1760–c. 1810’, in Hugh Cunningham and Joanna Innes (eds), Charity, Philanthropy and Reform from the 1690s to 1850 (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1998), pp. 193–207; Helen Plant, ‘Gender and the Aris- tocracy of Dissent: A Comparative Study of the Beliefs, Status and Roles of Women in Quaker and Unitarian communities, 1770– 1830, with Particular Reference to Yorkshire’ (University of York: unpublished PhD thesis, 2000). 15. R. J. Morris, ‘Voluntary societies and British urban elites, 1780–1850: an analysis’, The Historical Journal, vol. 26, no. 1 (1983), 95–118; Class, Sect and Party: The Making of the British Middle Class: Leeds 1820–1850 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1990). 16. Leonore Davidoff and Catherine Hall, Family Fortunes: Men and Women of the English Middle Class, 1780–1850 (London: Hutchinson, 1987). 17. Davidoff and Hall argue that philanthropy enabled the extension of women’s sphere, but underplay women’s involvement in public societies. Family Fortunes, pp. 429–436. 18. Susan Thorne’s point that overseas missions of the 1790s were pro- moted because of obstacles to work at home is important, but that they were a natural outcome of eighteenth-century shifts in theol- ogy and new access to heathen peoples should not be overlooked. See Congregational Missions and the Making of an Imperial Culture in 222 Notes 19th Century England (California: Stanford University Press, 1999), pp. 44–51. 19. The exceptions are: Thorne, Congregational Missions; David Turley, The Culture of English Antislavery, 1780–1860 (London: Routledge, 1991); and ‘British antislavery reassessed’, in Arthur Burns and Joanna Innes (eds), Rethinking the Age of Reform: Britain 1780–1850 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). 20. Denise Riley, Am I That Name? Feminism and the Category of ‘Women’ in History (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1989); Mary Poovey, Making a Social Body: British Cultural Formation 1830–1864 (London: Chicago University Press, 1995); Eileen Janes Yeo, The Contest for Social Science: Relations and Representations of Gender and Class (London: Rivers Oram Press, 1996). 21. Anne Summers, Female Lives, Moral States: Women, Religion and Public Life in Britain 1800–1930 (Berks: Threshold Press, 2000); Catherine Hall, Civilising Subjects, Metropole and Colony in the English Imagination 1830–1867 (Cambridge: Polity, 2002); M. J. D. Roberts, Making English Morals. Voluntary Association and Moral Reform in Eng- land, 1787–1886 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). 22. Jurgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trns. by T. Burger and F. Lawrence (Oxford: Polity Press, 1989). For qualifications, see Craig Calhoun (ed.), Habermas and the Public Sphere (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992); Jane Rendall, ‘Women and the public sphere’, Gender & History, vol. 11, no. 3 (November 1999), pp. 475–488. 23. For critiques of the over-privatisation of the domestic, see ‘ “Our Several Spheres”; middle class women and the feminisms of early Victorian radical politics’, in K. Gleadle and S. Richardson (eds) Women in British Politics, 1760–1860: The Power of the Petticoat (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2000); Lawrence E. Klein, ‘Gender and the public/private distinction in the eighteenth century: some ques- tions about evidence and analytic procedure’, Eighteenth-Century Studies, vol. 29, no. 1 (Fall 1995), pp. 97–109. 24. For ‘missionary domesticity’ see chapter three. 25. Hall, Civilising Subjects. See also Andrew Porter, Religion ver- sus Empire? British Protestant Missionaries and Overseas Expansion, 1700–1914 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004). 26. For missions as a ‘contact zone’, see Mary Louise Pratt, Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation (New York: Routledge, 1992). 27. Peter Mandler, ‘Poverty and charity in the nineteenth-century metropolis’, The Uses of Charity: The Poor on Relief in the Nineteenth- Century Metropolis (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990), pp. 1–37. Notes 223 28. Frederick Cooper and Ann Laura Stoler, ‘Between metropole and colony: rethinking a research agenda’, Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World (London: University of California Press, 1997). For a recent contribution in this field, see Catherine Hall and Sonya O. Rose (eds), At Home with the Empire: Metropolitan Culture and the Imperial World (Cambridge: CUP, 2006). 29. For the sati campaigns, see Clare Midgley, ‘From supporting missions to petitioning Parliament: English women and the evan- gelical campaign against “sati” (widow-burning) in India, 1813– 1830’, in Gleadle and Richardson (eds), Women in British Politics, pp. 74–92. 30. Prochaska, Women and Philanthropy, pp. 5, 11; R. H. Martin, Evangel- icals United: Ecumenical Stirrings in Pre-Victorian Britain, 1795–1830 (London: Scarecrow Press, 1983), p. 115. For a discussion of the complexity of charitable ‘giving’, see Colin Jones, ‘Some recent trends in the history of charity’, in M. Daunton, Charity, Self-Interest and Welfare in the English Past (London: UCL Press, 1996), pp. 51–63. 31. See Antoinette Burton, Burdens of History: British Feminists, Indian Women, and Imperial Culture, 1865–1915 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1994). 32. Valentine Cunningham. ‘ “God and nature intended you for a mis- sionary’s wife”: Mary Hill, Jane Eyre and other missionary women’, in Fiona Bowie, Deborah Kirkwood, and Shirley Ardener (eds), Women and Missions: Past and Present. Anthropological and Histor- ical Perceptions (Oxford: Berg Publishers, 1993), p. 89. See also: Sean Gill, ‘Heroines of missionary adventure: the portrayal of Victorian women missionaries in popular fiction and biography’, in A. Hogan and A. Bradstock (eds), Women of Faith in Victorian Culture. Reassessing the Angel in the House (Basingstoke: Macmillan 1998), pp. 172–185; Judith Rowbotham, ‘ “Hear an Indian sister’s plea”: reporting the work of nineteenth century British female mis- sionaries’, Women’s Studies International Forum vol. 21, no. 3 (1998), pp. 247–262; and ‘Ministering angels, not ministers: women’s