Domestic, Oxford English Dictionary informs, means or pertaining to one's own country or nation; not foreign, internal, inland, 'home.' But what becomes of this deÞ nition when that which pertain(s) to one's own country or nation is inextricably, dependently intertwined with sites— nations, colonies, protectorates—abroad; when, like England in 1799, 1848, and 1868 (the years, respectively, of opening scene of The Moonstone, its principal action, and its publication), foreign shapes domestic: empire deÞ ning (though not equivalent to) nation? To English in nineteenth century was to be of, and hence constituted by, (the British) em- pire, to claim summary position not only of Britishness but of empire itself. English identity was superincumbent, pressing down on that which simultaneously held up: subject races, colonized countries, foreign. Mutually constitutive of what meant to be English, domestic and foreign were false binaries, ideologically and discursively produced and consumed, enabling great white illusion of imperial necessity and generosity, and refutation of lack that underscored unidirectional and utterly false logic of imperialism: we are doing them a service. 2 Wilkie Collins challenges this factitious binary in The Moonstone by constructing a private, domestic history as simultaneously imperial, collapsing not only home and away, but also private and public, and family and empire, and he does so through an archive—of family, by family, for family—that belies its own intent. Collected by family's new patriarch, Franklin Blake, in order to remove suspicion under which the characters of innocent people have suffered (Collins, 17) and may suffer in future, his ar- chive—that is, in fact, The Moonstone—actually documents not innocence, but collusion with imperial project, enacted and perpetuated by a fam- ily collectively unable to identify imperial assault as a crime (that) brings its own fatality with it (16). 3 In failing to recognize their part in very guilt to which they attest, voices that produce archive do not merely bear witness; they actively participate in familial responsibility for imperial depredation through their denial of it. They inherit, in effect, that which they refuse to own, and in trying to distinguish domestic from foreign, demonstrate not their inevitable but their manifest inextricability.