‘Not always logical’: binational/biracial marriages in Britain, 1900–1940

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis essay explores the intersection of race, religion, and nationality in marriage by concentrating on unions between Britons and ‘Arabs’ (those from North Africa and the Middle East) in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. Focusing on this area, most of which was not in the British Empire, allows an analysis of the intersection between the empire and the larger world. Marriage was a nexus in the intertwined prejudices of race, empire, class, and religion. Though the British primarily blamed polygamy for any marital problems, their own gendered law of nationality was equally at fault. Indeed, the centrality of gender was clearest in three circumstances. First, many women refused to be ‘white women in peril,’ instead exercising agency in their relationships. Second, British men who moved to the Middle East, converted to Islam, and married Muslim women, became legal hybrids who struggled to pass on British nationality to their wives and children. Third, British-born women married to Middle Eastern Christians faced similar problems, despite marrying other monogamists. In the 1930s, the British government formed a committee to address these issues, but the committee failed to find solutions, in part because the members, like the British state, supported racial/national coverture for women and thus refused to consider granting women equal rights in nationality. As a result, women married to men of different races and nations remained vulnerable to desertion and divorce in the interwar period. Such issues both confirmed the importance of an imperial frame of mind, but also the fact that the dilemmas went well beyond the formal empire.