INDENTURED LABOUR AND DOMESTIC SLAVERY

To the average reader it may appear accidental that both the heroes of the typical life stories we discussed in the beginning (I.1.), had been acculturated in structurally similar areas of the New World: Kunta Kinte had been sold to a small Virginian estate where he lived most of his life; Equiano was first brought to Barbados and from there went to Virginia, to a place which we easily recognise as Chesapeake Bay:

“a river a good way from the sea, about Virginia county, where we saw few of our native Africans, and not one soul who could talk to me” (Equiano 1789:

38/39).

Kunta Kinte had the same experience of sudden isolation: He hardly ever encountered an African - born slave and none who ever spoke his own language. Thus his

linguistic acculturation was very rapid, though he remained reluctant⁴⁷. The largest part of Equiano’s acculturation occurred when he went as a sailor to England and other European ports: He eagerly grasped any kind of knowledge or skill he could acquire and even began to learn to read and write. He now compares the foreign ways of life positively to his native customs:

“ [...] in seeing that these white people did not sell one another as we did, I was much pleased. I was astonished at the wisdom of whites in all things which I beheld” (Equiano 1789: 43)

Equiano’s and Kinte’s fates were exceptional. In the late 18th century, when they were captured, there was a very high probability, that they would, like most African - born slaves, become field hands in a sugar plantation and end their miserable lives within a few years, leaving no known descendants or anything else to be remembered by. Both our heroes learned a trade, Equiano as a sailor, Kunte Kinte that of a buggy driver; their value increased, they lived close to white people and this was a certain guarantee of good treatment and personal security.

Is there any explanation for this exceptional destiny? Michael Mullin, in his excellent study on acculturation and resistance in American slave societies chooses Virginia, particularly the Chesapeake Bay, and the Island of Barbados in order to illustrate a type of slave economy which he contrasts with two other examples: Jamaica and South Carolina, which he considers as mature plantation societies. Virginia and Barbados had, for geographical or historic reasons, been settled early by relatively large white populations:

“Not only was the average slaveholding much smaller in the Chesapeake Bay region than in the Caribbean and along the rice coast (and so new Negroes were less likely to encounter other countrymen), but tobacco cultivation also extended far inland. Small buyers carried new Negroes to farms located well off the major river highways.... Even if they were purchased by wealthy slaveholders ... the effect was still the same: new Negros were isolated. The rich sprinkled them among people - usually Creoles well entrenched and protective of the same - who lived on small and remote satellite plantations, called quarters. These circumstances, which channelled their social life in ways unknown to slaves in the other regions, made Africans in the Chepaseake Bay region more susceptible to rapid and thorough deculturation than they were elsewhere” (Mullin 1994: 19).

The main variables which conditioned this type of slave economy were: a relatively balanced ratio of free whites and black slaves; a diversified economy which included various types of skilled crafts; the corresponding existence of a market town and some urbanisation; the comparatively small size of the average holding; a balanced ratio of male and female slaves which again is part of another important indicator: the self - reproduction of the slave population (cf. also Williams 1944: 26).

All these factors were not very likely to be found in most of the Caribbean Islands and the sugar growing areas of Brazil: African slaves had to be imported in an increasing number to replace those wasted in field labour. Equiano who had been sold for three years to a plantation on the Island of Montserrat and who is a keen observer, notes this wilful

47 “His learning to speak the toubob tongue, he realized, had played a big part [...]. In his everyday talking, he seldom even thought of Mandinka words any more, excepting those few that for some reasons his mind still clung to. Indeed, by now - Kunta grimly faced it - he even thought in the toubab tongue. In countless things he did as well as said and thought, his Mandinka ways had slowly been replaced by those of the blacks he had been among” (Haley 1974: 328)

waste of human resources, when he compares the dreadful working situation in Montserrat⁴⁸ to the still relatively benign slavery on Barbados:

“Even in Barbados, notwithstanding those human exceptions which I have mentioned and others with which I am acquainted that justly make it quoted as a place where slaves meet with best treatment, and need fewest recruits of any in the West Indies; yet this island (Montserrat) requires 1000 negroes annually to keep up the original stock, which is only 80 000. So that the whole term of a negro’s life may be said to be there, but 16 years” (1798: 76).

The living conditions of slaves varied widely according to historical and geographic conditions, to the size of the colony and to the crops it produced; but most scholars agree that the question of whether and to what extent a slave population was able to reproduce itself is an important indicator which generally divides slave societies into two groups:

those, obviously a majority, where the slave population did so and the rest which were entirely dependent on the continuous importation of new slaves. This difference highlights two types of colonial exploitation which allow entirely different answers to a central question: To what extent were slaves able to lead a “normal” life which included the maintenance of their physical and mental health, a minimal amount of social life and of communication within the society where they lived, and the possibility of creating a family and to reproduce their kind? One statistic which may indicate the differences in living conditions, is the percentage of slaves shipped to the different areas of the New World during the years of slavery: 48 % of the total number went to the Caribbean, 38 % went to Brazil, 10 % to the rest of Latin America and only 4 % to North America (Curtin, quoted by Mörner 1981:17). Given this information it is not difficult to see, where the hardcore, slave - consuming plantation societies are to be found: Brazil, where the Portuguese plantation system had been installed to, but also the comparatively small Caribbean area - exclusively the non - Spanish possessions. Another way of computing survival and reproduction rates is to calculate the total number of slaves imported to an area and to compare it with the number of slaves still surviving on the day of abolition; in the Caribbean it was only 1/3 of the total number of persons imported and this compares unfavourably to the United States were, during the same period, the number of black slaves multiplied by eleven (Lowenthal 1972: 43). These statistics explain, why Equiano tried by all means to leave the Caribbean and its destructive form of plantation economy.

The distinctions between “tough” and “lenient” slave societies are a delicate subject, because there has always been a tendency towards their being either underestimated or over - interpreted. Underestimation of differences may, for instance, be the consequence of particular and recurrent approaches which define the classical 17th century sugar plantation colony as the final and “mature” form of colonial exploitation. Most interpretations of Plantation America focus on the plantation at a “mature” stage as the most conspicuous phenomenon: large latifundias with at least 200 to 300 slaves, the majority of them bossales from Africa; a low life expectancy among the slaves and the correspondent necessity for importation; and finally a high degree of social tension and a corresponding level of repression. It is obvious that this culminative phase of the plantation system was limited both historically - mainly to the 18th century - and geographically - to a few tropical islands.

Alternative examples, such as that of Virginia, would therefore appear, in relation to this

48 The Island, in the late 18th century, was divided up into 42 estates with 9000 slaves and (1788) 434 whites (Mullin 1994: 219). This makes a ratio of roughly 20:1, which is nearly as bad as that of Saint- Domingue at the beginning of the Revolution (cf. p.290f). It is therefore not surprising that the island experienced one of the major slave rebellions in 1768.

one - dimensional level, to be transitional, even if Virginia, like many other regions, never became a sugar producer.

It is, in fact, very tempting to suppose an evolutionary process which leads from the domestic slavery in Spain towards similar institutions in the New World, upon which the

“mature” capitalist forms of plantation economy were grafted. Though this evolutionary model is important for some human sciences, it very often does not coincide with the concrete data: in large parts of the North - American South and the Latin American mainland slave labour continued to be used on a domestic or feudal level; even the North East of Brazil with its large sugar production appears, in some respects, as an intermediate case, as the Brazilian plantation economy continued to depend on exchanges with a subsistence farming and cattle - breeding interior. As we will see in the next chapter, it even seems doubtful whether plantation economy of the “pure” or “mature” type could thrive elsewhere than on islands and in island - like areas. On the other hand, the case of Santo Domingo will indicate (II,4) that Spanish colonies also could rush into a fully fledged plantation economy with all its negative aspects which rapidly declined, thus demonstrating an “evolution” in the opposite sense. The rise and fall of plantation economies did not depend exclusively on cultural matrices and their internal dynamics, but also on a number of external factors, such as international markets and political crises.

Another reason for simplification may be ethical: it seems inproper to differentiate between “good” slave societies and “bad” ones, especially if such an a priori evaluation serves to condemn certain societies - the French and the English - and to exonerate others as the Tannenbaum argument did. Furthermore we may have the problem that the discussion of mild forms of slavery under “good masters” easily slips into dubious connotations: scarce historical facts and their literary or ideological interpretation form an inextricable mixture. Particularly this aspect makes it advisable to stay away from generalisation and to focus the following discussion on a very limited, though significant range: the Caribbean areas under non - Iberian domination during the 17th and partly 18th century, before they were invaded by the sugar industry and thus became, in a true mercantilist sense, “ideal colonies”.

As the Caribbean islands were, like the entire American continent, a Spanish claim, the first British and French landfall in 1615 was rather unobtrusive: Companies of both nations landed a handful of humble white settlers on the island of St. Kitts; it was followed by the subsequent colonisation of most islands of the Lesser Antilles and the later acquisition of larger territories: Jamaica, conquered by a British expedition in 1655 and the Western part of Santo Domingo (St. Domingue) ceded in 1697 by Spain to France, according to the Treaty of Rijswijk. All these acquisitions were colonised by private societies, the respective mercantile “Companies”; certainly, these companies were financially and politically very close to the state interests, but the governments preferred, for various reasons, to keep a low profile: first, they wanted to avoid the accusation of encroaching upon Spanish territories and interests; second, the companies represented the growing independence of the “national” economies from traditional and religious concepts of statehood; third, private companies had, unlike Spain, less difficulty pursuing a policy of settlement and economic exploitation which was determined exclusively by the principles of utility.

In reality, however, the beginnings of French and British colonisation were not particularly rational. The chartered companies lacked previous experience in colonisation and, moreover, had to cope with an already existing population, albeit floating and marginal. Reports of the French Governors of Saint Domingue give an eloquent picture of early colonial society as a rather unsteady and heterogeneous phenomenon:

“Cette colonie est composé de trois sortes de gens. Il y a des Habitants, des flibustiers ou Corsaire, et des Boucaniers.

Les premiers sont en plus grand nombre. Ils se sont fixés et resident actuellement pour cultiver la terre.

Les seconds qui sont les flibustiers font tous les ans des courses sur l’estranger et rapportent leur butin qui se consomme parmy lesquels ils vivent pendant le temps qu’ils ne prennent pas estre en mer.

Les troisièmes qui sont les Boucaniers en résidence de mesme après qu’ils ont esté faire leur challet dans les bois.

Il peut y avoir mille et douze cent habitants dans les Cul de Sac de St.

Domingue, cinq à six cent flibustiers et environ cent boucanniers qui sont tous gens très fort libertins accoustumés a la debauche et a vivre independans sans reconnoistre aucun chef parmy eux”⁴⁹.

The Flibustiers are the remnants of the former mighty “Brotherhood” of Pirates, who were particularly numerous in Saint-Domingue, but also travelled and lived in other parts of the tortuous shorelines and islands of Central America and the Caribbean; Boucaniers were their allies and counterparts on shore, often retired or disabled pirates who, by means of subsistence cropping and hunting of cattle, provided seafaring pirates with food, in exchange for gunpowder and other manufactured goods. Another partner of these

“anarchic” communities (Sander/Steger 1973: 186) were the last Carib Indians and the first fugitive slaves. All these groups added up to an often exploited romantic picture of a good life in early times, when a man was able to live an adventurous life in freedom, within a lush natural environment, far away from constraining authorities, hard work and moral restrictions.

D’Orgeron’s report seems to confirm this image, but, at the same time demonstrates the low esteem in which Flibustiers and Boucaniers were held; in fact their days of liberty were numbered, as, from the end of the century onwards, the main powers controlling the Caribbean, became more interested in the area’s stability. Accordingly, the governors continuously pleaded with the colonial authorities at home to send more “habitants”, white peasants. Another indication of these endeavours to overcome the demographic and social instability of the new colonies, are the frequent pleas to send more women:

“Il seroit à propos de faire passer les filles à la coste, a fin d’y attirer des habitans, et d’y attacher des ménages, mais il n’en faut point de débordées, elles ruinent la santé des hommes [...]”⁵⁰

In the same report the Governor asks for other attributes of a civilised society:

honourable priests, for the few available are “des apostats, sortis de leurs convents par libertinage, et l’on a peu de respect pour eux” (ibid.); or a small detachment of 25 (!) soldiers to be able to arrest drunkards and petty thieves, for the colonial inhabitants would not collaborate with the authorities.

The only guarantee of a prosperous future for the colonies was the presence of the

“habitants”, the white settlers. What kind of people were they? The companies had

49 D’Orgeron, Memoire sur l’Etat de la Colonie de Saint-Domingue, Ms, Archive d’Outre - Mer, Aix - en - Provence

50 Memoire du Sr. Poüancay concernant la Colonie de ‘Isle de la Tortue, et Coste de St. Domingue... , 1681, Archive d’Outre - Mer, Aix en Provence.

recruited the first generation of them amongst the landless peasants, had brought them to the colonies and assigned to them the task of trying to cultivate various colonial products, through “trial and error of individual groups who had to make decisions for themselves”

(Augier, Gordon, Hall 1960: 38). Some of the products succeeded - especially tobacco, indigo and coffee - and brought some profit, others failed. To live without friends and women, to clear tropical forests and to plant unknown and incalculable crops, was not the paradise the new settlers had imagined. Some of them defected, others, the seasoned and experienced craftsmen, were sent to other islands, where new colonies were to founded and where they had to begin all over again (Chaudenson 1992: 56f). Thus, the demand for settlers and field hands never ceased and the companies, which themselves were always close to insolvency, had to find inexpensive ways to recruit and bring them across the ocean. The answer to their dilemma was a class of new immigrants, whom the British called Indentured Servants and the French Engagés: poor peasants without land property or vagrant persons who were granted free passage against a contract which obliged them to work for a determined period (usually three years). At the end of their serfdom they were granted a piece of land and sometimes a limited money subsidy which was intended to enable them to begin a new life as independent peasants⁵¹.

In the beginning this scheme worked well and effectively. An already established settler would call upon poor relatives, neighbours or other people he knew from the home country. These would travel to one of the known ports, sign the contract and, upon arrival in the colony join their employers who had paid for the passage. Usually both the employer and the servant came from the same region and the same walk of life, and often knew each other. This was the basis of mutual trust and protected the servant; personal relations gave birth to relatively egalitarian regional communities in the New World which left its traces in the development of local Creole languages (cf VI.2).

The detailed researches of Debien (1974) show also how this system deteriorated very rapidly due to the “natural” development of various interests: the colonial governors would pressure the home government to send more labour; the authorities at home would seize the opportunity to clean their cities of vagrants and other undesirable persons; and, most important, the captains could fill every available space in their ships with servants acquired by dubious means and “sell” them to future employers. Williams (1944: 10ff) provided impressive documentation on these new practices:

“The merchants and justices were in the habit of straining the law to increase the number of felons who could be transported to the sugar plantations they own in the West Indies. They would terrify petty offenders with the prospects of hanging and then induce them to plead for transportation” (ibid.: 15).

Notorious also were the strategies of professional agents who would hang around the harbour inns, offering some money and plenty of liquor to some miserable fellow who, when waking up from his alcoholic haze, found himself on ship with a dubious contract in

51 See the description of Pelleprat (1655: 20/21): “Les Engagés sont des Européens qu’on transporte aux Isles pour y servir les habitants; on les appelle Engagés, parce qu’ils sont obligez de servir pendant trois ans ceux qui ont fait les frais de leur voyage qui peuvent ceder ou vendre à d’autres le droit qu’ils ont sur leur personne, et sur leur liberté pendant ces trois années, lesquels estant expirées ils reçoivent pour salaire de leurs services cent livres de Petun (= Tabacco); & et demeurent en liberté de retourner en Europe, ou de travailler à y etablir leur petite fortune”