Ottoman Algeria in Western Diplomatic History with ... - Bibliothèque

decided it zealously. The colonies were not an enemy for Algiers; they were
but one word in all the treaties concluded between Algiers and Great Britain. 85
And even when “Her Majesty’s plantations in America” had been specifically
mentioned in the treaty of 1703, it was for giving them exclusive privileges like
the right to make prizes of the Algerian corsairs without even having to show a
passport; instead, a plain certificate in handwriting was sufficient. 86
Undoubtedly, Algiers had no specific knowledge about those far-away colonies
as testified by Americans who came into contact with Algiers for long years:
“the Algerines … have very little Idea about America” and “do not expect to
derive any great advantage by being at war with the Americans, our country
being so far situated from them….” 87
Probably also Algiers did not seek to
know about that as long as a treaty of peace existed with Great Britain and the
colonials flied the Union Jack. The British colonies were neither one of
Algiers’ immediate geopolitical concerns nor did Algiers have any colonial
ambitions; therefore, no attitude whatsoever, negative or positive, could
possibly have existed, let alone animosity. What is most evident, however, is
the animosity and prejudices the Americans nourished towards Algiers and the
Muslims in general long before they came to enter into contact with them as it
85 For all the treaties between Algiers and Great Britain see Hertslet, Collection of Treaties and
Conventions, pp. 58-88.
86 Hertslet, Collection of Treaties and Conventions, Treaty between Great Britain and Algiers, 1682,
Article XVI, p. 74-75.
87 The Emerging Nation: A Documentary History of the Foreign Relations of the United States under
the Articles of Confederation, 1780-1789, edited by Mary A. Giunta (Washington, D.C.: National
Historical Publications and Records Commission, 1996), 3:195, Richard O’Bryen, Zaccheus Coffin and
Isaac Stephens to Thomas Jefferson, June 8, 1786. (Hereafter cited as EN). This letter was not
published in American state papers series until 1996.
187