The transatlantic slave trade was like no other.



Transatlantic trade began around the end of the 15th century upon Portuguese conquest across the Atlantic Ocean, which was followed by the Spanish as well as Christopher Columbus’ Caribbean conquest.

However, the transatlantic slave trade was like no other, considering:

1.) its scale and duration,
2.) the victimization of slaves who were black African men, women, and children, and
3.) the “intellectual legitimization attempted on its behalf” consisting of an anti-black ideology and the legalization of such an organization.

Considered as the first “system of globalization” this particular slave trade covered Africa, the Americas, Europe, the Caribbean, and the Indian Ocean making it one of the largest deportations in history with significant world economic implications. Notwithstanding, it was also considered by many, such as French historian Jean-Michel Deveau, as one of “the greatest tragedies in the history of humanity in terms of scale and duration”.

 

In the American colonies, Great Britain regulated the trading of African slaves from the mid-17th century through the Navigation Act of 1660 that allowed only English ships to enter the colonial ports, additionally that same year the British government chartered the “Company of Royal Adventurers Trading to Africa”, a company that would be dissolved thanks to the war between Britain and the Netherlands but would again be revived in 1672 under the “Royal African Company” (RAC). The British government again granted special protection the RAC that would transport 5,000 captive slaves per year between 1680 – 1686. As demand for slaves grew the company lost its monopoly and in 1698 the average number of slaves imported by British ships grew to 20,000 per year and Britain became the world leader in trafficked captive slaves by the end of the 17th century.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Slavery’s impact on regional rates of economic growth, the workings of the interstate slave trade.

Image
Economists have done significant research into many other questions about American slavery not treated in this entry. These include slavery’s impact on regional rates of economic growth, the workings of the interstate slave trade , the demographics of the slave family, and slave health and nutrition. But focusing on slavery’s profitability and inefficiency exposes the true horror of this labor system. Slavery inflicted on African Americans tremendous pain, suffering, and sometimes death , along with other less brutal burdens such as lost income. This massive decline in welfare from output inefficiency did increase the South’s production of cotton and other goods, but classical inefficiency had the opposite effect on the South’s total output. The misallocation of African American labor through restrictions on manumission made non-slaveholding southern whites poorer as well, as did their burden from the enforcement inefficiency of mandatory slave patrols . The net effect on the Sou...
Read more

The New History of Capitalism.

By the twenty-first century,  the slavery debates among economists had become quiescent. One major subsequent contribution is Olmstead and Rhode’s “Biological Innovation and Productivity Growth in the Antebellum Cotton Economy” (2008). They found that average daily cotton-picking rates quadrupled between 1801 and 1862, mainly due to new cotton varieties. But among historians, those describing their own work as part of a “New History of Capitalism” now claim that slavery was the primary source of overall U.S. economic growth in the antebellum period. Two of their major works are Beckert’s Empire of Cotton (2014) and Baptist’s The Half Has Never Been Told (2014). While embracing the finding that slavery was productive, these historians otherwise largely ignore all previous work of economists. Yet the idea that slavery was essential for cotton production , which drove national growth, is belied by the fact that just five years after the Civil War’s end the physical amount of co...
Read more

Enforcement Inefficiency.

Slavery also necessitated enforcement costs beyond those entailed by free labor. This converted slavery’s enforcement into an added expense for the region. Without slavery, these resources would have been used in other endeavors. The most that can be said about this additional cost is that it was offset by the output it generated—so long as each individual planter covered his own security costs. Even this ceased to be true, however, if slaveholders could impose part of the costs on non–slaveholding whites. And that is what they did. The chief way that state and local governments externalized enforcement costs was the use of slave patrols . Loosely connected with the local militia, patrol duty was compulsory for most able–bodied white males. Exemption usually required the exempt person to pay a fine or hire a substitute. The slave patrols thereby affixed a tax-in-kind upon small slaveholders and poor whites who owned no slaves. As a result, coercion was now less expensive for l...
Read more