For hundreds of years, he was known only as “Jersey”, an enslaved boy of about 11 rendered in oil on canvas by the great 18th-century portrait painter Sir Joshua Reynolds.
But now the life of the youngster, believed to be Reynolds’ earliest depiction of a person of colour, has begun to emerge, thanks to a research project.
Details found in admiralty records and other archives have unearthed information about Jersey’s identity, his military service and even hint he may eventually have found freedom.
Erm, no. At least, I think no.
He was discharged from another ship in the summer of 1753 and then vanished from the records, not appearing on the musters of other ships Ourry served on. One theory is that he was sold on to someone else, another that he was given his freedom and joined another vessel.
David Olusoga, a historian, broadcaster and National Trust ambassador, said the research had helped bring Boston Jersey out of the shadows.
He said: “This project asks us to look more closely at a familiar past, revealing a life long obscured and reminding us that history is shaped as much by those rendered invisible as by those remembered.
“To tell Jersey’s story is to confront the silences within our history, and to recognise the individuals whose lives have too often been hidden from view.”
NAM Rodgers – a real historian – strongly suggesats, at lesat, that the Navy didn’t recognise slavery when it came to those who served. Obviously it did recognise the institution, slave ships and all that. But in terms of anyone who served it just didn’t recognise it. You couldn’t be a slave and a seaman, the one precluded the other.
Now, whether this applied, wholly and completely, to boy servants is a detail I don’t know. But it’s one of those things that I think is certainly possible. Be interesting to know in fact.