Richardson describes the
Atlantic slave trade as one of many types of involuntary migration in which he
elaborates on Old World traditions of indentured servitude, serfdom, and even
slavery. The Atlantic slave trade,
however, was distinct from Old World forms of involuntary migrations because of
its scale, mortality, and obvious racial bias (Richardson, 581). Before the advent of sugar plantations in the
New World, the economic situation in British North America and Spanish South
America were quite different. At the
start of the Age of Discovery, Spain was able to mine for gold and silver in
South America while the British struggled to find a major export to sell to
Europe (Elliot, 92). It is also
important to note that those that migrated to South America done so in search
of profit from the supposed riches in the New World while the majority of those
that populated North America done so to settle and form a new home.
In the 16th century, once the “sugar revolution” in the New World began, the economic
situation in the Americas changed with labor in high demand to work the
expanding sugar plantations in the Caribbean.
There was a large population of indigenous peoples in South America –
which led to Spain experimenting with the ideal that the natives would be the
laborers at the mines and on the sugar plantations. This proved ineffective as many of the
natives were killed by disease. In 1542, the Spanish Crown had ruled that the
indigenous peoples were not to be enslaved since they were by extension
subjects of the Spanish Crown. Other
attempts were made to accommodate the growing demand for labor on the sugar
plantations – but none were satisfactory.
British North America invested in tobacco and sugar plantations in the
Caribbean as well – but due to a low native population in comparison to South
America, it needed a sustainable labor supply as well (Elliot, 104).
As noted by Richardson,
slavery was already a long established practice in the Old World - so to expand
slavery to the Caribbean seemed to be a natural progression. “In the Old World, plantations of sugar
were often identified with African slavery especially in the Middle East and
Mediterranean, until it moved to Brazil and the Caribbean Islands” (Richardson,
571).
Africa had a history of
enslavement often after war raids in which it was an accepted form of
international commerce whether it was for economic or political gains
(Richardson, 572). After 1700, Europe began
to discredit the idea of enslaving its own people while supporting the use of
African labor on the sugar plantations. At
the time, African slavery appeared to be the most logical and obvious choice to
supply labor to the sugar plantations in the Caribbean. The Atlantic slave trade proved to be
devastating to many African societies, while for others it was a profitable
venture to supply slaves for the sugar plantations in the Americas.
According to Richardson,
the need for slaves never went away even in the Old World, “The pace of
involuntary displacement of people did not apparently slow down, therefore,
though its location and direction evidently changed” (Richardson, 571). According to Richardson an estimated 80% of the
slaves in Africa in the Atlantic slave trade from 1500-1800 were sent to work
on the sugar plantations (Richardson, 580). As the sugar plantations expanded, the demand for
replacement slaves was even higher as the life expectancy for the slaves was
dim. It was believed by the West Indian
planters that buying a new slave or replacement slave from Africa would be
cheaper than producing them locally (Curtin, 117). Even though Richardson is able to draw
parallels to the Atlantic slave trade in the Old World, the severity, scale,
and high mortality makes it distinctive to its comparisons. The sugar plantations and African slavery in
the New World provided an environment in which the African slave was seen as
disposable and replaceable, while in the Old World slavery was a constant
practice. Overall, the “sugar
revolution” brought an extraordinary demand for labor in which the native
population of the Americas was unable to meet – which led to the expansion of
African slavery in the New World which took a distinctive nature that even
today Africa appears to be feeling the effects of.
Spot on. I can not find much to say other then, i agree.
ReplyDeleteYou have written a really good essay here. I would like to expand, however, on your thought that "after 1700, Europe began to discredit the idea of enslaving its own people while supporting the use of African labor on the sugar plantations."
ReplyDeleteIn the latter part of the 18th century Britain began using convicts to colonize Australia, most of whom were transported essentially for the crime of being poor. Given the treatment of these convicts, their terrible working conditions, and the 1/3 mortality rate of those transported, these convicts were essentially slaves.[1] Eighteenth century sailors were also were instantly recognizeable as such, as they had a characteristic rolling gait and manner of speech. Sailors of that era were thought to have the bodies of adults but the minds of children, and to therefore be unworthy of real freedom. In the 1790s, however, British sailors launched a campaign for naval reform in which they equated white skin and being British with 'exquisite' emotions, and argued that Britons should therefore not be punished like African slaves. In response to this agitation, all forms of flogging aboard ship were eventually discontinued. Shortly thereafter the abolitionists extended this argument from sailors to Africans with abolition of slavery in Britain eventually being the result.[2] However, by this time the major practical advantages to using African forced labor in the Americas --Africans didn't speak the language, were unfamiliar with the local terrain, were readily identifiable as slaves and so were less able than white or indigenous forced labor to escape into the general population - were losing their relative advantage from interbreeding. I don't see this as so much Europe turning away from enslaving its own to preferentially enslaving others, as I see it as Europe turning to a different model slavery - debt or convict peonage - because the old model had become unprofitable.
------------------------------------------
[1] Perth Dead Person's Society: Convicts to Australia, http://www.convictcentral.com (accessed 6/8/2012.)
[2] Isaac Land, "Customs of the Sea: Flogging, Empire and the 'True British Seaman' 1770 to 1870" Interventions: International Journal of Postcolonial Studies, 3, no.2, (2001): 169, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13698010120059591 (accessed 6/8/2012.)
Your blog post does a good job of showing how slavery transitioned into the Caribbean, as opposed to being just an ad-hoc solution to the then-present need for labor. Slavery is a staple of history; one that society has, at least on a legal level, entirely outlawed and criminalized in modern times. But at the time of the New World’s development, slavery was still a common practice. As you pointed out, the African slave trade simply found a new, more profitable outlet for its “product” by shipping its supply to the sugar plantations where the need was growing. The need for slaves was fueled by the world’s demand for sugar, which created an economic cycle of slave, to sugar, to customer. The incredible rate of demand left profiteering plantation owners in a struggle to fill supply lines, and the African slaves became an inhuman element of the cycle to them. Our studies thus far have not focused much on the “humanity” attributed by slave-owners to their slaves in the European environment. It would be interesting to find out to what level their humanity was respected, and in turn, to investigate how that humanity was stripped and their labor commoditized by the expansion of sugar plantations. Your post, while being very informative, also left much room for further thought and discussion.
ReplyDelete