By Charlotte Becker ’26

Major: English

Contributor Biography: Charlotte Becker is an international student from Germany who is studying at Washington College for the academic year of 2025-26. Outside of the classroom, she is a staff writer for The Elm, the German TA, and a dancer for DancEscape.  

Brief Description: This essay explores how Mary Prince strategically applies her religious belief in her slave narrative to simultaneously criticize and moralize the English society to the religious English society.  

The following was written for ENG 394: Women Writers Post-1800 

Mary Prince told her personal enslavement narrative to English writer Susannah Strickland, who wrote down Prince’s story and was assisted by Joseph Phillips in editing, or ‘pruning,’ The History of Mary Prince: A West Indian Slave. Prince’s illiteracy as a formerly enslaved woman hinders the establishment of the narrative’s complete trustworthiness because it is not possible to prove the extent to which her story was influenced and altered by publishers’ biases and prejudices. In the supplement to the text, the editor explains that Prince intended her account to serve as an informational source for the influential English upper class, for government representatives, and for the king about the crimes their fellow citizens were committing in English colonies, intending to thereby bring the religious English to condemn the cruelties and ultimately abolish slavery (Prince 38). Prince strategically applies her Christian faith in relation to her inhumane situation as a slave in order to simultaneously appeal to the intended English religious audience and to raise awareness for slavery’s transgression of moral boundaries that contrasts with the beliefs of the Church of England.  

Prince’s integration of her religious belief serves as a common ground for appealing to the influential, religious English government officials. When describing her separation from her mother, Prince states that “[t]he great God above alone knows the thoughts of the poor slave’s heart, and the bitter pains which follow such separations as these” (10). By referring to the omniscience of God, Prince establishes a common ground between herself as a religious woman who is enslaved and her audience, the English government representatives, who belong to the Church of England. Since both Mary Prince and the English society believe in God, they share the common belief in God’s charity and justice. By referring to God instead of focusing only on her own feelings in her situation of loss, she allows the English readers to put themselves in her position because she integrates their common faith in God’s goodness. Therefore, she attempts to influence the English society’s view of slavery by establishing common moral grounds and allowing English readers to identify with her and empathize with her experiences. 

The strategic incorporation of Prince’s belief serves as an indirect allegation that the English society is not aware of the prevailing cruelty which English slaveholders exercise. By including the word “alone” (Prince 10), Prince represents God as the only entity who is informed about the inhumane conditions which enslaved people have to endure. Prince reserves the knowledge of the slaves’ thoughts only to God to emphasize that the abnormality of these cruel circumstances has been shifted to normality in society. Thus, Prince underscores God’s omniscience to raise awareness of the ignorance of the English society, particularly the upper classes, concerning the cruelty of slavery. Prince highlights the upper classes’ simultaneous ecclesiastical fidelity and disregard for the moral values which are associated with their religious belief without directly calling out their hypocrisy. 

Over the course of the narrative, Prince utilizes her religious beliefs to reinforce her connection to her targeted readers and to remind them of their common grounds of religious belief. For instance, Mary Prince demonstrates her faith by stating she believes that “the hand of that God whom then [she] knew not, was stretched over [her]” (16). Prince emphasizes the omnipresence of God in times when she had not yet found faith. She repeatedly raises awareness for her “trust in God” (37), God’s guidance, and divine predetermination when she argues that “[i]t was ordained to be … God led me there” (25). By portraying her deep trust, she presents God as a leading and supporting force in her enslaved life. Prince finds common moral grounds with her English audience in their shared faith in God, especially in times of adversity and hardship. Hence, Prince continuously reaches her audience through their common belief because the topic becomes more tangible for the readers by sharing a commonality. Prince’s faith enables her to influence the English religious government representatives to become empathetic to her slave narrative through collective moral values. 

Prince also influences her readers through the deliberate allusion to the natural phenomenon of an earthquake in order to scare English society members into viewing the natural event as a punishment from God. Prince’s choice to include an earthquake directly after being violently wronged can be interpreted as a religious sign of rebellion by God who wants to show his anger at the English slaveholders cruel treatment of Prince and other enslaved people. Integrating this apparently intentional natural phenomenon in her narrative alludes to a subtle divine judgement of her master’s harsh treatment. The event of an earthquake moralizes the religious readers to encourage them to understand God’s indignation over the lack of humanity in slavery. Prince strategically entangles the natural phenomenon of an earthquake with a critique on the inhumane conditions of slavery that contradict the morality of Christianity. Thus, the earthquake serves as a tool of persuasion for the English religious audience who might interpret this natural experience as a sign of God against cruelty and slavery. The apparent visibility of God’s wrath influences religious readers in their opinion on the legitimacy of cruelty to slaves, as the English audience believes in the omnipotence and the justice of God. 

The integration of Prince’s belief underlines God’s function as the highest judge upon the cruelties of slave masters to enhance English readers’ understanding of and empathy towards the moral wrongness of slavery. By judging upon Prince’s violent master with the words that “[h]e had no heart – no fear of God” (22), Prince bypasses the straightforward accusation from her inferior position as a slave and presents her master as ignorant of God’s judgement and power. Similarly, by drawing attention to his lack of “fear of God” (22), she accentuates the cruelty of mankind, which God condemns as a violation of the divine laws with regard to the recognition of the rights of all human beings. Although Prince stops short of accusing the English governmental officials and the King of England, who could majorly influence the abolition of slavery, she criticizes the English slave traders and masters in the Caribbean in the supplement by stating that “they forget God and all feeling of shame … since they can see and do such things” (37–38). By including their act of forgetting God, Prince alludes to her belief in the good manners of faithful people. Hence, Prince mentions God in the slave narrative to appeal to the readers’ moral virtues and the values which are linked to the faith of the Church of England. The presentation of God as the judge upon the master’s cruel behavior enables Prince to reach her religious readers because they also believe in God’s judgment of immorality, particularly in her master’s recklessness. 

Prince includes her faith to appeal to the King of England and the English government with increasing directness throughout the narrative by applying the act of praying to God as an indirect act of protest against slavery. She states her hope that the English people “will never leave off to pray to God” (38) after she had “let [the] English people know the truth” (38). Therefore, Prince believes that educating the English government officials will lead to the abolishment of slavery because she believes that “the truth will make [her] free” (37). By including her hopefulness for the people’s prayers to God, she strengthens her credibility as a faithful woman in praying to the divine entity of justice that will have an impact on the English government officials to end slavery. Since she refers to the “great King of England” (38), who received his power to govern from God, she hopes that the prayers will lead God to influence the King. Thus, Prince recommends praying as an indirect form of protest against slavery. Since she refers to God, who will be the force who will lead enslaved people to freedom (37), she completely bypasses the accusation of the English government and only appeals to their religious virtues. Therefore, Prince inspires empathy for her enslaved situation by implicitly asking people to remember their religious values in prayer. 

In conclusion, Prince applies her religious faith, references to God, and religious values in order to appeal to the faith of the English society and the King of England. By incorporating their shared faith, Prince builds common moral grounds with the influential English society to induce empathy for her inhumane situation and to influence readers to condemn slavery. Since she only judges upon slavery by referring to God as the highest judge, she establishes the religious values of the English population as a moral measuring scale so that they will condemn the acts of cruelty as well. Prince strategically and authentically integrates the Christian faith to simultaneously criticize and moralize the English society with the aim of convincing them of the immorality of slavery through their own religious values. 

Photo by John-Mark Smith on Pexels.com

Works Cited 

Prince, Mary. The History of Mary Prince: A West Indian Slave. Edited by Sarah Salih, Penguin Books, 2000.