The Uncomfortable Legacy of Goldney House

By Katie Poyner, Third Year History

Goldney House is used by the University of Bristol as both student accommodation and as a venue to host meetings and formals. At present, the Goldney House memorialises the family, symbolising their importance to the university through the building’s name, grandeur and function. 

This building was given to the University of Bristol in 1953 by the Wills Family, and the name “appears to have been inherited, as the Goldney Family were previous owners of the property.”[1] As speculation continues to grow over the University’s links to slavery, the Goldneys have been conveniently missed out of investigations so far.

However, much like the Wills family, the Goldneys too have undeniable links to enslavement.

Thomas Goldney I (1620-1694) made the first significant contribution to the merchant community of Bristol, by creating a grocery business, after he became a freeman.[2]

His son, Thomas Goldney II (1664-1731) took over the family grocery business and married Martha Speed, the daughter of the Warden or the Chief officer of the Society of Merchant Venturers (1651-1652).[3] Thomas II, subsequently, began expanding his business and exploring new investment avenues.

One avenue was funding several voyages which trafficked enslaved Africans, such as the Duke and the Duchess, of which Goldney II was the principal shareholder. When the ships returned in 1711, Goldney II used the profits to help fund Abraham Darby, who was involved in brass and iron works in Bristol.[4] Darby moved to Coalbrookdale, where he created the technique of using coke to smelt iron ore, “the greatest single step in the industrial revolution”.[5]

Goldney II’s profit from his sea investments, which included the trafficking of enslaved Africans, enabled the extension of Goldney House in 1720s. In addition, Goldney II contributed towards the iron and brass works, which assisted in revolutionising Britain’s industry. Williams argued that the trafficking of enslaved Africans powered Britain’s commercial industry and the industrial revolution, which needs serious consideration and debate. Goldney II’s profits and investments demonstrate the validity of Eric Williams’ thesis and his argument over the intricate links between capitalism and slavery.

The legacy of investing was continued by Thomas Goldney III (1696-1768), as himself and his father (Goldney II) soon had controlling interests in Darby’s ironworks.[6] In this industry, brass objects and manillas (a form of money or decorative objects used in West Africa), were used by enslavers to trade for African enslaved people. Similarly, the cycle of profits from sea voyages and ironworks contributed to improvements in Goldney House , as Goldney III acquiring adjoining lands in 1730s and began designing his Grotto.

When Goldney III died, the property remained in Goldney hands for nearly another century until in 1864 when it was acquired by Lewis Fry, and then, the Wills family. These families made substantial donations to the University and are pictured on the crest and logo. They gifted Goldney House to the University in 1953, simply naming the building after its original owners. [7] The Goldney Family made no financial contribution to the University and is only symbolically connected to the University through this property handover.

Having discussed who the Goldneys were, we can see that their legacy has been tainted by their direct involvement in the trafficking of enslaved Africans. Profits from this immoral trade were used to fund extensions and improve Goldney House.

Therefore, this adds a complicated layer of meaning to the Goldney House. Olivette Otele created the term a ‘reluctant memory site’ through her powerful case study of the Colston Statue.[8] We can apply Otele’s term to Goldney House. It is a beautiful house with unique significant architectural designs. However, its history, as explored, implies that without Goldney family investments, partly funded through the trafficking of enslaved Africans, Goldney House would not look as it does today.

In conclusion, the Goldney family directly invested in and profited in the trafficking of enslaved Africans. The money contributed to their overall wealth and funded improvements at their House in Clifton and other investments such as in the iron industry. The Goldneys did not donate any money nor property to the University of Bristol. Instead, the House was given to the University by the Wills Family and the name was simply inherited by the previous owners.

[1] University of Bristol, Building Renaming Consultation and Engagement Report, 2023, p.20 <https://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/university/documents/anti-racism/building-renaming-consultation-engagement-report.pdf> [accessed 1/1/24]

[2] Alicia O’Grady, Legacies of Slavery Report, University of Bristol, 2023, pp.21-11 <https://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/university/documents/university-of-bristol-legacies-of-slavery-report.pdf> [accessed 2/1/23]

[3] The Peerage, Thomas Goldney, https://www.thepeerage.com/p74516.htm [accessed 4/1/23]

[4] Peegy Stembridge, ‘A Bristol-Coalbrookdale’, Bristol Industrial Archaeological Society Journal 19, 1986, 14-20 (pp.14-17) <https://b-i-a-s.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/BIAS_Journal_19_THE_GOLDNEYS.pdf>

[5] Robert Savage, ‘Natural History of the Goldney Garden Grotto, Clifton, Bristol’, Garden History 17.1, (1989),1-40 (p.1) <https://doi.org/10.2307/1586914>

[6] O’Grady, p.22

[7] Savage, p.2

[8] Olivette Otele, ‘The Guerilla Arts in Brexit Bristol’, in Embers of Empire in Brexit Britain, ed. by Stuart Ward and Astrid Rasch, (London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2019), pp.133-142, (p.134-138).