what led to the development of slave codes?

Open up access peer-reviewed affiliate

Slavery and Slave Codes in Overseas Empires

Submitted: February 12th, 2019 Reviewed: January 29th, 2020 Published: March third, 2020

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.91411

IntechOpen Downloads

708

Full Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Altmetric score

Overall attention for this chapters

Abstract

The paper proposed aims to analyze the slavery legislation built-in between the fifteenth and nineteenth centuries, the so-called Black Codes laws—enacted in all the greatest colonial powers of the Old Continent—which regulated life and transportation of slaves in the colonies. Kingdom of spain, Portugal, England and France, between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, created legislative codes dedicated to the slave's management in the colonies, which regulated all aspects of their life: from religion to wedlock, from cohabitation to imprisonment, from crimes to corporal punishment. Peculiarly widespread in the Caribbean colonies of the seventeenth century, these slave laws were soon in strength in near all American colonies of European monarchies, forming the legal basis on which the slave societies of the European empires were founded. In the wake of the Spanish, Portuguese, English and French slave codes, even states that had a marginal role in the process of overseas colonization enacted similar slave codes. It was the example, for case, of Denmark and Sweden that in the management of some of their ultramarine possessions adopted slave codes inspired by those of the greatest colonizing powers.

Keywords

• overseas empires
• Atlantic slavery
• slave laws
• colonization process
• America
• Caribbean

• Giuseppe Patisso*

  • Università del Salento, Lecce, Italia

• Fausto Ermete Carbone

  • Università del Salento, Lecce, Italy

*Address all correspondence to: giuseppe.patisso@unisalento.information technology

1. Introduction

Betwixt the fifteenth and nineteenth centuries, many European states tried to build their own overseas empire. The political, economic, social and anthropological implications of this long and complex process were innumerable. New lands were discovered and colonized, new systems of government were instituted, and new social models were created. Many of the institutions that had governed the societies of the Old World for centuries experienced substantial transformations, among which was slavery [1].

Before the flow of European colonial expansion, it cannot be said that slavery was an unknown phenomenon in European society [2, three, iv]. It was, nonetheless, an establishment profoundly different from the ane that gradually emerged in overseas colonies. Slaves were mainly employed as domestic servants or as laborers in artisan workshops, rarely as workforce in plantations or mines. The reduction to slavery, trafficking and exploitation of slave labor were certainly widespread practices throughout medieval Europe, but their importance—in demographic and socio-economic terms—was marginal when compared to that which Atlantic slavery would accept.

Earlier the period of European colonial expansion, in very few regions throughout the onetime continent, the number of slaves exceeds 10% of the entire population. Rarely was the employment of slaves crucial in the evolution of European economy. In other words, keeping in mind the distinction fatigued by Moses Finley, nosotros could say that medieval Europe was a mosaic of state entities classifiable every bit slave-owning societies [5]. In most of these realities, as we said, the institution of slavery was present and tolerated but non totally socially accepted. Information technology was considered as a practice originated and perpetuated past historical contingencies (conflicts, wars of religion, pillages and raids), but it was in opposition to natural law and morally deplorable. Several medieval legislative bodies defined slavery in these very terms. In this Code, inspired by Roman law [4, 6, 7, viii], the slave was defined as "res"—an object discipline to the will of his primary—just his condition was considered unjust, a transitional phase toward the regaining of freedom. As well for this reason, many laws defended to the discipline of slavery appeared as veiled with humanity and aimed to protect the slave from masterly abuse. A articulate case in this sense is represented by the Siete partidas (1265) by Alfonso X, 1 of the well-nigh consummate and all-encompassing legislative recompilations conceived in the Eye Ages.

This concept of slavery was going to exist completely transformed after the beginning phases of European expansion, between the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, when Spain and Portugal crossed the columns of Hercules and began to colonize some islands in the Atlantic (Canary Islands, Madeira, São Tomé) [nine, 10, 11]. The need to cultivate the conquered lands, together with the constant shortage of work force, fabricated the recourse to slave labor almost indispensable. It was in these islands that the Atlantic plantation economy originated, an economic system that would be adopted past the majority of the European colonies in the New World.

The lucrative speculation arising from extensive agronomical colonization angry the interest of nobles, bankers, investors, insurers, merchants and craftsmen, each of whom tried to cleave out his ain percentage of turn a profit. Many invested in transport, others in the purchase of products to resale onto the European marketplace, and some others began to invest in finding the chemical element without which the whole system could hardly survive: the slaves. Within a few decades, the recruitment and exploitation of the slave labor force became a major political and economical question. The more the revenue from this action increased, the more the number of plantations increased and, consequently, the demand for slaves that was necessary for cultivation. The enormous availability of latifundia in the Americas and the growing European demand for exotic products (saccharide, cocoa, coffee, tobacco, indigo, etc.) did the rest. The Atlantic slave trade was in its germination phase, but its profit-oriented and inhuman logic was already a reality.

With the experience gained in Madeira, São Tomé and the Canary Islands, when the Europeans crossed the Atlantic Bounding main and founded the first exploitation colonies in America, they were well aware that the land could be a source of income of dandy value, at least as much as gold, silver and gems. In fact, inside a short fourth dimension afterward their landing in the New World, the Spanish and the Portuguese attempted to replicate in their corresponding possessions the successful economic model experimented in the islands forth the west declension of Africa. As a issue, the number of slaves, first native and then African, in the Lusitanian and Spanish colonies grew steadily between the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries [1, 10, 12, 13].

Already during the sixteenth century, in the imperial territories of Spain and Portugal, there were areas where slaves represented the majority of the population. In these settlements, a modest number of colonists had to command an increasing number of enslaved people. The numerical disparity between free and subjugated forced the erstwhile to apply, more and more oftentimes, the atomic number 26 fist to maintain the control of the colonies. In such circumstances, violence and abuse were becoming a daily occurrence. This worsened the life of the slave, which was already a very painful one. He worked from dawn to dusk, and his daily life was marked past the sound of the scudiscus, which sometimes cut the air and snapped on his fatigued limbs, tearing him autonomously in body and spirit. This was, in the opinion of the colonists, the well-nigh effective way to properly exploit their country and their investments. Such harsh conditions frequently forced the slaves to disobey their masters, by escaping or revolting and killing their harassers [14]. The fright of the slave revolts became, in a curt time, a phobia with which the master class had to continuously live [15]. These kinds of situations were uncommon throughout the Sometime Continent. The rebellions, the runaways, and the heinous crimes committed by the slaves were rare events in modern Europe societies.

In order to regulate this organization, which aims to the roughshod exploitation of the labor force, the ancient laws on slavery—contemplated in the medieval codes—turned out to be totally inadequate. There was then the need for more stringent provisions to regulate a new type of slavery, which was now emerging in the Atlantic. Information technology was therefore in such contingencies that the need for a special legislation for slaves became more and more evident: a codification conceived to discipline every aspect of their existence: life, death, wedlock, religion, movements, food, clothing and all the procedures and practices for the regaining of freedom [16, 17, 18]. These normative bodies, also known as Black Codes, would not be adopted exclusively in the colonial possessions of the Iberian powers. Between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, when slave merchandise became a global phenomenon and several European states took role in the colonization of America and Africa, each of these states would promulgate its own slave codes.

Advert

2. New slaves, new codes: slavery legislation in the Castilian and Portuguese empires

The Spaniards and the Portuguese were the protagonists of the commencement stage of the colonization of the New Earth. When they arrived in America, they immediately realized the potential of the conquered lands. The resources seemed never to stop: silver, gold, precious stones, immense latifundia. The native populations were subdued with relative easiness, being enslaved. All the same, the enslavement of the natives did not bring the desired results to the Europeans. Their fragile constitution did not make them a workforce capable of satisfying the conquerors: thousands of them were employed in mines and plantations and soon died of hardship and fatigue. Moreover, the Indians were particularly susceptible to the diseases brought by the Europeans: the smallpox epidemics alone were responsible for several hundred yard deaths among the natives [12, xix, xx].

The high mortality rates amid the Amerindians soon forced the colonists to look for an alternative workforce. The choice fell, afterward some initial hesitation, on the African slaves who had been employed with practiced results in the colonies that the Spanish and the Portuguese had created in the Canaries, Madeira and São Tomé.

In the Spanish Empire, the massive import of slaves from the Blackness Continent began in 1518, when Charles V granted the asiento de negro to the Flemish nobleman Laurent de Gouvenot and the Portuguese merchant Jorge de Portugal. As Elliot wrote, the signature of these contracts implied the definitive opening of the Castilian Empire to the Atlantic merchandise [21]. The possessions of the Spanish Crown were shortly filled with African slaves. In his Historia de las Indias , Bartolomé de las Casas says that after the yr 1520 in the Due west Indies, about 100,000 slaves landed from the African declension, 30,000 of which landed on the island of Santo Domingo [22]. Probably the number of the imported subjects was lower than the ane indicated by the Dominican father [23], but their arrival had a meaning affect on the Castilian colonial society and in item on the Dominican i. The importation of African slave labor further worsened the already precarious living weather on the island. Food rations became more scarce and violence perpetrated against slaves became more frequent. The mistreatment and harassment suffered by the latter would before long lead them to turn against their oppressors.

Between 1519 and 1521, there were several slave revolts on Santo Domingo [13, 15]. One of these occurred in the plantations endemic past Viceroy Diego Colombo, the eldest son of the famous explorer, governor of the island. The slaves who rose on Christmas Day 1521 committed all sorts of heinous crimes, assaulting the owners' belongings and murdering "todos los cristianos que pudiesen" [24]. The rebels were about immediately defeated and killed by the Spanish armies, simply the ferocity with which they acted led Columbus to issue special regulations to control and discipline the blackness slaves who lived in the Dominican colony.

The ordinance that he promulgated on January 6, 1522, entitled Provisión del virrey Diego Colon [23], can be considered one of the first examples of Black Code in colonial America. In the provision, the governor paid attention to the behavior that the slave had to adopt in the public sphere, severely punishing the delinquent actions considered dangerous for the survival of the colony and especially the possession of weapons, rebellion, and the runaway of slaves. In gild to forestall any further turmoil, through the ordinance the governor constituted a sort of colonial constabulary that had the responsibility of constantly monitoring the slave population. With the same aim of enhancing the effectiveness of the control and to maintain public order, the viceroy ruled that the slaves should no longer have the freedom to move within the colony: every movement of the slaves should be approved, with a special permit, past the main. Very harsh were the punishments imposed on the subjects who held weapons: depending on the caste of violation committed, slaves could be punished past public flogging. Equally severe were the punishments of the and then-chosen cimarrones [25, 26], the slaves who ran away from their main: those who refused to return to work, within a maximum of 10 or twenty days, could also be sentenced to death by hanging ("incurra el dicho esclavo en pena de muerte, la cual le bounding main dada de horca") [23].

The Provisión can, in a sure sense, be considered the archetype of all the slave legislations that was promulgated betwixt the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries in the Spanish colonies. Some of the principles contained in it (the prohibition to comport weapons, the ferocious persecution of cimarronaje , and the establishment of law forces to ensure the monitoring of slaves) were included in each of the subsequent codes. For instance, Las Ordenanzas para la sujeción de los esclavos negros [27], issued past the Cabildo of Santo Domingo on October 12, 1528, and judged by Marcos Andrade Jaramillo the offset black code in America [28], were goose egg more than a careful revision and integration of what the Viceroy Provisión of 1522 had already established [15, 17, 18, 29, 30, 31].

The Ordenanzas issued on Santo Domingo constituted the legal basis of the great slave codes that appeared in Castilian America during the eighteenth century [32]. Amid these, co-ordinate to Manuel Lucena Salmoral, the most important were: the Ordenanzas dirigidas a establecer las más proporcionadas providencias así para ocurrir a la deserción de los negros esclavos como para la sujeción y asistencia de éstos , better known as Código de Santo Domingo (Apr 25, 1768) [33]; the Código de legislación para el gobierno moral, político y económico de los negros de la isla española , also known as Código Negro Carolino (December 14, 1784) [34]; and the Existent Cédula Instrucción round sobre la educación, trato y ocupaciones de los esclavos en todos sus dominios de Indias e islas Filipinas (May 31, 1789) [35]. Each of the above-mentioned codes, equally Sala-Molins has well pointed out, were re-elaborations of the slave laws enacted in the Spanish colonies between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries [32].

The eighteenth-century codes above mentioned, partly a result of Bourbon reformism [36], had the objective of drawing upwards a slave laws apparatus that would get in possible to improve the efficiency of the organisation of exploitation in the overseas colonies, imitating what had been done by another great colonizing power: French republic. The model was that of the French Black Codes promulgated in 1685 and 1724, which will be better discussed subsequently. The eighteenth-century Iberian Codes tried to regulate slavery past making information technology "more homo" and acceptable: the sovereignty of the main over the slave was largely express and placed nether the supervision of colonial and metropolitan governing bodies. The draconian punishments imparted to the slave were moderated, and some rights were granted to them (they had to be dressed, fed, and educated to the precepts of the Catholic religion and they could denounce any abuses suffered). The enactment of such measures provoked real upheavals in the colonial ruling classes: in the view of the slave owners, grant rights to the slaves could be very dangerous and could led to the destruction of the established system of exploitation, based essentially upon the abuse and social alienation of slave workforce [18, 20, 31, 37, 38].

An exception to this general trend is the Código de Luisiana (1769) [39], issued by the Castilian Governor Alejandro O'Reilly after the sale of the colony from France to Spain, which took place with the secret Treaty of Fontainebleau (1762). The text was essentially identical to the French Black Code issued in Louisiana in 1724. O'Reilly decided to adopt this code considering it was considered more efficient than the Spanish one, in terms of perpetuation of the slave arrangement born in the one-time French colony. During his mandate, the governor decided to include only few measures to implement the old lawmaking, ane of which concerned the correct granted to slaves to purchase their liberty, the and then-chosen derecho de coartación , which was not contemplated in the 1724 Lawmaking Noir [xl, 41, 42]. This concession alarmed the colonial ruling class, which tried in every way to obtain the revocation of this privilege. The protests, raised by the owners of the plantations, led to a new reformulation of the slave legislation in the colony. In 1777, King Charles III, who was quite disappointed by the discontent of the slave masters, agreed that the laws on slavery should be rewritten. Hence, the King charged the Governor Bernardo de Gálvez to go along with the drafting of a new code. Gálvez commissioned Francisco María de Reggio and Joseph Ducros, both loftier-ranking officials of the New Orleans Cabildo and owners of large plantations within the colony, to draw upwards the legislative torso. After a few months of study and research, the two officials presented to the Cabildo a text entitled Code noir ou Loi municipale, servant de règlement pour le gouvernement & l'administration de la justice, police, discipline & le commerce des esclaves négres, dans la province de la Louisianne [43]. In this text, de Reggio and Ducros affirmed the demand to exit all questions concerning the management of slaves to the volition of the master. In order to protect the interests of the ruling class, the code legitimized all sorts of abuses and oppressions: the master could torture, humiliate and hunger his slaves without suffering any consequences in the courts of law. In other words, the master'south will was above the law [44].

The precepts contained in the Code noir ou Loi municipale represented a fundamental legal source for all the other slave laws that were adopted in Louisiana between the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. When this possession was acquired by the U.s.a., in fact, the regulations of de Reggio and Ducros, together with the 1724 Code Noir , were the models for the get-go United states of america Black Codes issued in the colony [45]. Fifty-fifty in this, the ruling class had a sort of "accented power" over the slave workforce.

The question of the primary's sovereignty is an important element to keep in heed in order to understand the phenomenon of slave legislation in European colonial possessions. Even if in some cases the authorities tried to interfere with the authorization of the dominus , to moderate the mistreatment and to make the slave's status more acceptable, the master's will remains the only true code actually in force. Within his plantations, in his farms, the slave owner had no superior authority. The experience of slavery in the ultramarine empires was therefore, according to the contexts examined, fifty-fifty significantly harder than the one prescribed and contemplated by the law. Whatever slave owner, facing the possibility of losing his/her life or seeing his/her interests being severely damaged, would have no hesitation in violating or circumventing the existing laws. Although this fact was well known to colonial and metropolitan administrations, none of the states that took office in the colonial expansion renounced to the attempt to regulate the newborn overseas slave societies.

When the slave merchandise, between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, became a global phenomenon, almost all states with colonies in the New World adopted slave codes. Several of these were inspired past those already enacted in Spanish possessions during the sixteenth century. Portugal, for instance, during the menstruum in which the Portuguese and Spanish crowns were united (1580–1640), adopted Spain laws into its own legislation [45].

The Ordenações Filipinas [46], promulgated by Philip I in 1603, were the most important demonstration of the process described to a higher place. This body of laws is the about organic and structured instance of the slave code in force in Portuguese possessions until the nineteenth century. In Brazil, where the use of slave labor was central for the maintenance of the colony, the lawmaking remained in force until 1822, when the Brazilian possession gained independence from the mother country. Even after independence, many of the precepts independent in the Philippine corpus continued to stand for the legal basis for regulating the relations betwixt slave and main within the country, at least until 1888, when the slave organization was definitively abolished [46, 47].

The principles on slavery stated in the Philippine ordinances were very similar to those contained in the Spanish Codes issued between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: in that location were numerous articles aiming at sanctioning the prohibition of the possession of weapons, the restrictions on freedom of motility and, more generally, the absolute social breach of the slave. In substitution of the full control on his own workforce, the Philippine ordinances required from the master a certain moderation in his behavior: he should non punish the slave in an unmotivated style, and he should non either torture or physically abuse him. Even if in the Code the slave was non considered as a man but every bit a good, and as such had to exist inventoried, the Ordenações Filipinas tried to preserve his safety, past limiting the violence that he was ofttimes forced to suffer. Such conduct may perchance take been useful in avoiding the outbreak of riots and unrest, but it was more probable to exist conceived as a way to impose a limit on the sovereignty of the ruling form: through the constabulary the state and its organs had to supervise and terminate episodes of uncontrolled violence.

These attempts to circumscribe the power of the masters had very little impact on overseas slave societies. Equally Batista and Zaffaroni wrote, reflecting on the Brazilian colonial reality, at a local level, there was a sort of "poder punitivo doméstico" [48, 49], substantially based upon the master'due south arbitrariness. Batista and Zaffaroni's consideration can exist judged suitable non only for Brazil but also for all Lusitanian domains and, more by and large, for all European ultramarine possessions where an economic arrangement based upon the exploitation of slavery was created.

This failure to delimit the master'south arbitrariness had repercussions on the real effectiveness of the slave laws, which were—co-ordinate to necessity—ignored, reinterpreted or deceived. For this reason, for example, the authorities—both metropolitan and colonial—were often forced to reaffirm, remodel and strengthen through specific measures some precepts that had already been widely stated in the issued Codes. Regarding the Portuguese colonial experience, this operation was carried out through the then-called Legislação Extravagante , that is, series of ordinances, provisions and decrees enacted in gild to intervene on detail issues that arose in a particular possession [46, fifty, 51].

The provisions on slavery contained in the Legislação Extravagante tried to intervene on the most disparate aspects of the slave's life: from his treatment to his nourishment, from his transport to his employment inside the colonial realities. Reading these ordinances, information technology is easy to understand how almost all the royal laws or provisions, promulgated with the intention of restraining corruption, did not find any credence in the daily life of colonial life. Merely as an example, nosotros can mention the royal provisions issued by Afonso VI (September 23, 1664) [52] and Pedro Ii (March 18, 1684) [53] in social club to regulate the send of slaves taken from the African coasts. In these documents, attending was paid to the measures to exist taken in order to ensure that navigation was non fatal for the slaves on board; in item, the sovereigns established the minimum quantities of water and food that should be bachelor on the slave ships in club to avoid the numerous deaths—due to hunger and aridity—that sadly characterized the so-called centre passage. The royal prescriptions, as already mentioned, had a very small-scale impact on what were the behaviors of the Portuguese slave traders. Indeed, betwixt the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, due to the growing demand for workforce from the New World, the number of slaves deported increased significantly and the conditions in which they were transported worsened. Despite the provisions, information technology rarely happened that more than ii-thirds of the slaves loaded on the slave ships could see the colony of destination. Many of these deaths, recorded during the crossing, continued to exist attributable to a lack of water [54, 55].

What was said about the measures concerning the slave trade and transport can be extended to whatsoever other attribute that the slave legislation tried to regulate. Although the Philippine ordinances and the instructions given through the Legislação Extravagante categorically prohibited harassment and abuse, even in the nineteenth century (in the wake of the abolitionist era), the colonial ruling grade continued to torture, mutilate, brand and whip its slaves fifty-fifty for patently futile reasons, interim in total impunity [56].

Advertisement

3. The slave codes in British and French ultramarine possessions

Also other states that were involved in the colonization adopted, equally anticipated, special codes for slavery. At first, this need became particularly urgent in the Caribbean area colonies owned by England and French republic, where the carbohydrate revolution—which took place in the mid-seventeenth century—brought a pregnant increment of the number of slaves deported in these domains [18, 57, 58, 59].

Regarding the British colonial experience, the creation of a big system of sugarcane plantations proved to exist crucial for the emanation of the first exemplars of Black Codes [57]. The circumstances in which English colonial regime enacted the Act for the meliorate ordering and governing of Negroes (1661) [lx, 61], better known in historiography as Barbadian Lawmaking or Barbados Slave Code , are indicative in this sense.

When the colonization of Barbados began in the 2nd decade of the seventeenth century, the economic system of the estate was based upon the cultivation and commercialization of tobacco, trying to emulate the economic model born in Virginia. In these early stages, the core of the workforce on the island was fabricated up of indentured workers who were mainly recruited from the mother country [61]. Even so, this program of evolution failed to produce the expected results. The tobacco produced in Barbados could not compete in toll and quality with the arable Virginian product that already at the finish of the 1630s had wearied the demand of the London markets.

In these conditions, a large part of the plantations on the Caribbean island were then converted to cotton and indigo but without obtaining meliorate results [62]. In order to overcome a growing economical recession, several landowners in Barbados and so decided to experiment the extensive culture of sugarcane. As the cultivation of sugarcane spread over the isle, white workers were more often replaced by African slaves, considered more than suitable to support the difficult piece of work necessary to exploit the "white golden" plantations. The censuses of Barbados in the 1650s were the last in which the white population was larger than the black population. Between 1652 and 1661, when the number of black slaves grew significantly inside the colony, the African subjugates began to be perceived as a threat by the governing bodies of the island: considering of the harsh conditions in which they lived, riots and disorders were feared. The cosmos of special rules for slavery, designed with the aim of maintaining public order in the colony, became a necessity at this point [61]. It was for these reasons that the Barbadian Lawmaking was created [63]. In the preamble of the Code, this latter need was clearly expressed past the legislators.

The authors of the legislative body pointed out that the various colonial governments that followed over the years had produced some good laws on slavery, but these regulations proved to be incomplete and incapable to deal with the new social weather condition of the island. The ancient laws could not be applied to Atlantic slavery.

Like the other states that have been mentioned until now, England, at the time of the establishment of its ultramarine possessions, did not have a legal tradition in slave legislation. Notwithstanding this, the English who established in the get-go Atlantic colonies had within their legal background some jurisprudential categories that allowed them to organize the slave institution. Among these categories was the principle of absolute property. According to the Common Police force, for the English colonizers, the slave was, to all intents and purposes, a patrimonial property and therefore could be used by their primary as he or she wished [64, 65, 66].

The classification of the slave every bit a patrimonial adept was in fact sanctioned in the beginning lines of the preamble of the Barbadian Code together with the desire to protect, as holding, the work forcefulness from whatsoever violence committed by its owners ("protect them every bit we do many other goods and chattels") [61]. Beyond the statements in the prolog, the Barbadian Lawmaking was a very rigorous slave code, which was not intended to protect slave labor. It focused, instead, on the penalisation of the slaves, considered as a threat for the prophylactic of the white population of the isle. Reading the articles of the Code emerges that the British colonists considered the Africans as barbaric people ("brutish") [61]. "The barbarism of Africans"—as Rugemer stated—"precluded them from the possession of rights as the English understood them. Dissimilar contemporaneous Spanish American and Brazilian legislation based on the medieval Siete Partidas, or the French Code Noir that would follow in 1680, the 1661 Slave Human activity did not aspect any positive rights to slaves any" [64].

In short, the regulation of 1661 sanctioned almost all the prohibitions already present in the slave legislation discussed until now (prohibition to carry weapons, restrictions regarding the freedom of movement, etc.). However, different many of the slave codes promulgated past the other European powers, it did non provide any measure for the possible integration of the subjects within the society. There was a lack of articulate regulations on slave liberation and religious life. With the exception of the chief's obligation to provide article of clothing to the slaves at to the lowest degree in one case a twelvemonth, some of the fundamental rights of the slave that were recognized, at to the lowest degree formally, in the Castilian Ordenanzas and, as we will run into, in the 1685 French Code Noir were not enshrined in the 1661 text: that is to say, the correct to be freed and to be fed. What emerged from the manufactures of the Barbadian Code was, in conclusion, a arrangement of regulation of slavery designed to control the entire workforce, built on the conviction that primitives and barbarian Africans were naturally destined to be slaves because of their inferiority from a cultural and racial signal of view.

The political and economic model established on Barbados was very successful, and the profits made from the sugar trade during the seventeenth century were enormous [67]. In part, this exploit was attributed to the effectiveness of the slave legislation in force on the island [65, 66]. As a issue, the Barbadian Code was speedily exported both to the other colonies owned by the British in the Caribbean and to those located in North America. The principles in this statute, a bit similar the provision of Columbus in the Spanish domains, will be a cardinal reference for every slave lawmaking built-in in the colonies of England and in the The states [65, 68, 69].

More than 20 years after the promulgation of the Barbadian Code , one of the all-time-known and nigh studied slave codes, the then-called Lawmaking noir Louis was issued in France (1685) [lxx]. The legislative body was drawn up at the behest of Male monarch Louis XIV and Jean-Baptiste Colbert, government minister of the King of French republic and potent supporter of the importance of the colonies as an economic resource for continental France. In order to fully exploit the potentialities of the conquered territories, both the sovereign and the government minister considered information technology central to rationalize the employment of the slave workforce. That rationalization was crucial to back up the economic system of some of the richest and nearly productive colonies of the French Empire. The creation of a regulation that intervened in an exhaustive fashion on these aspects became soon a diriment political result [sixteen, 70, 71]. The complex and articulated slave lawmaking issued in 1685 was the result of this no longer delayable necessity. Its 60 manufactures examined in depth all practical aspects of the slave'southward life within the colonies: from religion to matrimony, from concubinage to imprisonment, from crimes to corporal punishment and pecuniary sanctions, and fifty-fifty the ways in which the slave achieved freedom.

Most of its provisions focused, every bit in the other examples of slave codes already mentioned, on questions of public order. To ensure security, the Louis regulation roughly imposed the well-known bans on the possession of weapons and on freedom of motion, which had already been widely discussed. Although punishments and deprivations are a primal part of the legislative body, this seems to open up—more than other previous and gimmicky exemplars—to the integration of African slaves in the French colonial society. The baptism and conversion of slaves to Catholicism, their participation in religious celebrations and their abstention from piece of work on feast days were all measures conceived, maybe, with the intention of edifice a more cohesive and less conflictual colonial customs.

1 of the most innovative aspects of the Code was undoubtedly the various regulations protecting the slave workforce. The legislator seemed to take a clear idea of the poor condition in which the slaves lived: submitted to the master's will, they could be killed, tortured or left to die of hunger and thirst. Beingness enlightened of what was happening in the colonies, the editors of the Edict tried to impose a limit on the authorisation of the masters, by placing it under the control of the country. For the Lawmaking, slaves were movable good, an extension of the legal personality of its owner, but the supreme authorities over them was a prerogative of the state potency.

The Louis regulations also contain provisions obliging the master to provide nutrient and article of clothing for his slave workforce. By imposing such obligation, the legislators believed to reduce the per centum of slaves who die for hunger or who escape because of the lack of supplies.

Many of the measures enshrined in the 1685 Code Noir , like that issued in other slave code already mentioned, remained almost a dead alphabetic character. The paternalistic view of slavery that characterized several of its dispositions never rooted in French ultramarine possessions. The concessions made past the Code to slaves were considered past the ruling class to be too damaging for their own interests.

The reasons behind the non-awarding of many of the precepts contained in the Edict were non only economic. At that place were as well racial prejudices: the conviction that blacks were inferior to whites was quite widespread in the colonies. There is no constabulary that had the ability to alter that belief [72]. Hence, despite the expressed prohibition imposed by the regal legislation, the slaves continued to be mutilated, massacred, killed or left to starve. Their lives in the colonies continued for many decades to be marked past abuse and masterly arbitrariness, most frequently in the substantial indifference of the authorities. This state of affairs will not change in a tangible way until the corking revolution of Haiti [73, 74].

Despite resistance displayed by the ruling form and its limited application, the Lawmaking was nevertheless a fundamental model for all the French slave legislation enacted between the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Although it was created to regulate slavery in the Caribbean possessions of French republic, the Code noir Louis became the principal legal reference in the field of slavery besides in other French domains, in North America (Louisiana) and in Africa (Mascarene), where the plantation economy was experimented. In these colonies, the precepts of the regulation issued in 1685 continued to exert their influence even when specific legislative bodies were promulgated for each of these colonial realities. The Codes issued in Louisiana (1724) and in the Mascarene Islands (1723) were, in fact, nothing more than a revision, or rather an accommodation to the characteristics of each colony, of the famous Code Noir promulgated at the end of the seventeenth century [75].

Advertisement

four. The slave codes in Denmark and Sweden

When the colonization process undertaken by European states was on the edge and involved a great number of actors, it was a common belief that adopting special slave codes would help to have more control over possessions, avoiding revolts in them. The prescriptions of the Codes, in the optics of the colonial administrators, were useful to reduce the conflict between the slaves and the masters. At the aforementioned time, slave laws linked the slave to his status of slavery almost in an inextricable way.

These provisions aimed to preserve public order, and therefore the system of exploitation built past the colonists, not only past disposing the deprivations of the liberties of enslaved individuals just also by justifying these deprivations on the pretext of the ethnic and cultural inferiority of the slaves. The clear purpose of the Codes was to protect pocket-sized white communities from possible assaults by black multitudes. All the same, in order to do this, information technology was non plenty to prohibit the use of weapons, but information technology was necessary to instill the principle of superiority of the white race. The whites were to exist considered by Africans as untouchable individuals whose bodies and physical integrity could not be violated by a blackness paw. For this reason, in many Codes, even the intention to strike a white man could be punished severely. For the aforementioned reason, unions or marriages between whites and blacks, when not expressly forbidden, were seen as a contamination, a sort of perversion of the natural order of things [75].

The provisions concerning the physical protection of whites were frequently accompanied by precepts that tended to discourage or prohibit manifestations of the slave culture. Religious rites, dances and African community were considered dangerous in the Codes, because they could upset white people and be a bond between the ranks of slaves present in the colonies. The subjugated could not have their ain culture because it constituted a manifestation of human being nature and the slaves were not considered men. Their role was to work, to serve the main and to submissively follow his orders. He existed in role of his master and for nothing else.

These were the cardinal concepts that were laid downwards in all the major slave codes issued in the overseas colonies during the seventeenth century. These legal precepts were considered as the substratum necessary to ensure the functioning of an exploitation colony. Whatsoever was the size of its slave population, a slave social club had to take laws that specifically dealt with slavery. This may help to understand why the instrument of the slave lawmaking was adopted even in small realities and by states that played a very marginal role in the process of colonization of the Americas.

Denmark, for case, after taking possession of the Virgin Islands (between the end of the seventeenth century and the kickoff of the eighteenth), adopted the so-called Gardelin Code (1733) in its colonies. The legal text, named later its editor—Philip Gardelin, governor of the island of Saint-Thomas—was 1 of the most rigid slave codes in the European colonial panorama [76]. With its adoption, the Danish administrators hoped to keep under control the huge mass of slaves employed in the sugarcane plantations built-in in their domains. However, as the slave revolt on Saint-John (1733) demonstrated, deprivation and oppression were not always a valid solution to the problems of public order inside the colonies.

Sweden too, in the colony of Saint-Barthélemy—bought past the French at the finish of the eighteenth century in commutation of some commercial privileges in the port of Gothenburg—adopted its own slave lawmaking: the Code von Rosenstein (1787). Similar the Danish one, the Swedish text was thus named because of its editor, Pehr Herman Von Rosenstein, governor of the island from 1787 to 1790 [76]. Information technology was a code inspired past French slave legislation, in particular by an ordinance on the handling of slaves issued in Martinique in 1783. The legislative body was a kind of summary in which the tradition of European Slave laws was collected. In the norms established by Rosenstein, the African slaves were considered every bit treacherous and evil, non deserving to be considered human. They were not allowed to gather, to profess their beliefs, or even to ride a horse. The normative text configured itself as an musical instrument for the control of the entire black population: in fact, numerous manufactures were dedicated exclusively to the regulation of the life of the freed slaves. It was in this regard that nosotros noted the merely real innovation of the von Rosenstein Code compared to the French legislation to which, as we said, it is inspired.

Advertisement

five. Conclusions

The political and economic reasons that led to the creation of the slave codes are very articulate. They were considered necessary to maintain public club in the colonies, avoiding the outbreak of riots and thus allowing the slave exploitation system to role more efficiently. In social club to reach these objectives, the codes could provide both strictly punitive rules, designed to create terror in the slave labor forcefulness, and paternalistic rules, designed to brand the biting life of the slave more bearable. The final-mentioned rules, however, should not be understood as a partial recognition of the slave's rights: they represented only concessions made in order to prevent the inevitable outbreak of riots and unrest. In fact, very few masters were tried for breaking the rules laid downwards in the codes: the mistreatment and abuse committed against slaves remained a abiding and the authorities did non bear witness a marked perseverance in prosecuting these crimes. This indicates that, apart from formal recognition, the rights granted to slaves, except in rare cases, remained a political expedient rather than a reality. The aforementioned helps to understand why in the colonial daily life many of the prescriptions contained in the codes remained substantially inapplicable. The ruling class oftentimes judged the norms of the codes to be too permissive and paternalistic: they appreciated their punitive and persecutory measures, circumventing about of the laws that attempted to limit their sovereignty. Analyzing all these elements, it seems evident that the impact of slave codification on the assistants of slave workforce was relatively marginal: the will of the main remained the only truthful law to which slaves should accept obeyed. No police, in fact, would have succeeded in undermining, containing or reducing the master's sovereignty. But the codes were not merely a political instrument merely also a cultural product of the slave social club and are important because by studying them it is possible to analyze the characteristics of the discriminatory and segregationist system constituted in the European colonies of exploitation. One of the fundamental tasks of the codes was to endeavour to eternalize the existing slave system, not only from an authoritative and legal indicate of view just also from a cultural and moral point of view. Information technology was above all in this latter perspective that the impact of the codes was meaning: not only did the slave codes attempt to discipline the many aspects of the life of the slaves in the colonies only also contributed to further dehumanizing the African workforce. The whips, the mutilations and the callous punitions contributed to invalidating in some way all the regulatory instruments that the same codes provided for the slave'southward protection. Slaves had no human dignity according to the police force and therefore, in the eyes of the landowner class—who was already not very disposed to tolerate external intrusions—they did not deserve to exist safeguarded.

While the application of the codes was therefore desultory and arbitrary, much more than of import was the cultural bear on that the slavery laws had on the societies in which they were adopted. This impact conditioned the perception of the slave establishment and became the foundation of the European exploitation colonies. The idea of slave as a cistron of production, every bit an object, is deeply rooted in all the societies that adopted slave legislation. That is why the idea of the slave (and the African slave in item) as an inferior human resisted fifty-fifty after slavery was abolished. From this point of view, the slave legislation has certainly achieved one of the objectives it aimed to pursue: the perpetuation of the economic and cultural patterns that prevarication behind the slave arrangement.

References

1. 1. Solow BL. Capitalism and slavery in the exceedingly long run. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 1987;17(4):711-737
2. 2. Verlinden C. 50'esclavage dans 50'Europe médiévale. Vol. 119. Bruges: De Tempel; 1955
3. 3. Verlinden C. L'esclavage dans fifty'europe médiévale. 2. Italie-Colonies italiennes du Levant; Levant latin-Empire byzantin. Gent: Rijksuniversiteit; 1977
4. four. Rotman Y. Les esclaves et l'esclavage: De la Méditerranée antique à la Méditerranée médiévale. París, Les Belles Lettres: VIe-XIe siècles; 2004
5. five. Finley MI, Shaw BD. Ancient Slavery and Modernistic Ideology. London: Chatto & Windus; 1980
6. 6. Fiume G. La schiavitù mediterranea tra medioevo e età moderna. Una proposta bibliografica. ESTUDIS. 2015;41:267-318
7. 7. Phillips WD. Slavery from Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade. Manchester: Manchester Academy Press; 1985. p. 312
8. viii. Inikori JE. Slaves or serfs? A comparative study of slavery and serfdom in Europe and Africa. In: Okpewho I et al., editors. The African Diaspora: African Origins and New Earth Identities. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana Academy Press; 2001:49-75
9. nine. Phillips WD Jr. Slavery in the Atlantic Islands and the Early on Modern Castilian Atlantic World. The Cambridge World History of Slavery Vol Three: Advertizing 1420-AD 18042011. pp. 325-349
10. 10. Greenfield SM. Madeira and the ancestry of new world carbohydrate culti and plantation slavery: A written report in institution edifice. Register of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1977;292(i):536-552
11. 11. Higginbottom A. Enslaved African Labour in the Americas: From primitive accumulation to manufacture with racial violence. Revista de Estudos east Pesquisas sobre as Américas. 2018;12(ane):22-46
12. 12. Stone EW. America's offset slave revolt: Indians and African slaves in Española, 1500-1534. Ethnohistory. 2013;threescore(two):195-217
13. 13. Patisso G. Schiavitù nera e legislazione schiavista nella prima fase di colonizzazione di la Espanola: La provisión del viceré Diego Colombo (6 gennaio 1522). Mediterrán Tanulmányok, Études sur la Région Méditerranéenne. 2017;26:five-25
14. 14. Elliott JH. The Hispanic World: Civilisation and Empire, Europe and the Americas, Past and Present. New York: Harry N Abrams Inc; 1991
15. fifteen. Patisso Thou. Droit des Esclaves - I Codici neri del 1685 e del 1724 nei Territori della Nuova Francia. Giornale di Storia Costituzionale. 2007;fourteen:43
16. sixteen. Patisso Thou. Dall'asiento ai codes noirs: I tentativi di normativizzazione della schiavitù (sec. XV-Eighteen). Eunomia Rivista Semestrale di Storia e Politica Internazionali. 2012;ane(1):65-84
17. 17. Patisso G. Las amargas reglas del azúcar. Legislación esclavista francesa y española en la América Colonial. Dialéctica Libertadora. 2015;0(vii):143-156
18. 18. Bacci ML. Conquista: La distruzione degli indios americani. Il Mulino: Bologna; 2005
19. xix. Mateo VM, Vivas FJM. La esclavitud en Hispanoamérica: Consecuencias en el desarrollo económico de las colonias españolas en el Nuevo Mundo. Isla de Arriarán: Revista Cultural y Científica. 2000;16:141-164
20. 20. Elliot JH. Empires of the Atlantic World: United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland and Espana, 1492-1830. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press; 2006
21. 21. Casas BDL. Historia De Las Indias - Tomo 3 - Edicion, prologo, notas y cronologia Andre Saint-Lu. Volumen 110 De La Coleccion. 1st ed. Caracas: Biblioteca Ayacucho; 1986
22. 22. Dipp HT. Raza e historia en Santo Domingo. Santo Domingo: Editora de la Universidad Autónoma de Santo Domingo; 1974. p. 252
23. 23. Colon D. Provisión del virrey Diego Colon, vi de enero de 1522.agi, Patronato, 295, 92, 104
24. 24. Arrom JJ. Cimarrón: Apuntes sobre sus primeras documentaciones y su probable origen. Revista Española de Antropología Americana. 1986;13:fifteen-30
25. 25. Andrade Grand. La legislación afrocolonial en el Caribe (siglos XVI-18). In: 49 Congreso Internacional de Americanistas. Quito. 1997
26. 26. Salmoral ML. Regulación de la esclavitud negra en las colonias de América española (1503-1886): Documentos para su estudio. Vol. half dozen. Editum; 2005
27. 27. Deive CE. Los guerrilleros negros: Esclavos fugitivos y cimarrones en Santo Domingo. Fundacion cultural dominicana; 1989
28. 28. Domingo CS. Las Ordenanzas para la sujeción de los esclavos negros. 12 octubre1528. agi, Estado, 7, 3, ff. 26-45
29. 29. Peñuela CG-G. Sobre el ordenamiento jurídico de la esclavitud en las Indias españolas. Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español. 1980;50:1005-1038
30. 30. Lucena SM. Los códigos negros de la América española. Alcalá: Universidad de Alcalá; 1996. p. 75
31. 31. Molins LS. Fifty'Afrique aux Amériques: Le Code Noir espagnol. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France—PUF; 1992. p. 200
32. 32. Domingo CS. Ordenanzas dirigidas a establecer las más proporcionadas providencias así para ocurrir a la deserción de los negros esclavos como para la sujeción y asistencia de éstos. AGI; 1768:1034
33. 33. Código de legislación para el gobierno moral, político y económico de los negros de la Isla Española. Santo Domingo: AGI; 1784. p. 1034
34. 34. Real Cédula Instrucción circular sobre la educación, trato y ocupaciones de los esclavos en todos sus dominios de Indias e islas Filipinas. Biblioteca Nacional (Madrid); 1789. Manuscritos, 8834, ff. 1-8v
35. 35. Postigo JLB. Las dos caras de una misma moneda. Reformismo y esclavitud en Santo Domingo a fines del periodo colonial. Revista de Indias. 2014;74(261):453-482
36. 36. Maldonado MEC. Paternalismo, iluminismo y libertad. La vigencia de la Instrucción esclavista de 1789 y su impacto en la sociedad colonial. Historia y Sociedad. 2011;21:61-93
37. 37. Bando del Gobernador de Luisiana O'Reilly sobre aplicación del Código Negro para el comercio de esclavos en la Colonia. Biblioteca Nacional (Madrid), Inventario General de Manuscritos, Manuscritos de Amèrica; 1769. 19246, 24
38. 38. Baade HW. The Gens De Couleur of Louisiana: Comparative slave police in microcosm. Cardozo Law Review. 1997;18:535
39. 39. Lucena Salmoral M. La instrucción sobre educación, trato y ocupaciones de los esclavos de 1789: Una prueba del poder de los amos de esclavos frente a la debilidad de la corona española. 1996
40. twoscore. Din GC. Spaniards, Planters, and Slaves: The Spanish Regulation of Slavery in Louisiana, 1763-1803. 1st ed. Higher Station: Texas A&M Academy Printing; 1999
41. 41. Gross AJ. Legal Transplants: Slavery and the Ceremonious Law in Louisiana. Written report No.: ID 1403422. Rochester, NY; 2009
42. 42. Lawmaking noir ou Loi municipale: Servant de reglement pour le gouvernement & l'assistants de la justice, police force, subject area & le commerce des esclaves négres, dans la province de la Louisianne : Entreprit par délidération [sic] du Cabildo en vertu des ordres du Roi, que Dieu garde, consignés dans sa lettre faite à Arnjuez le 14 de mai 1777. A la Nlle. Orléans: De l'imprimerie d'Antoine Boudousquié imprimeur du Roi, & du Cabildo; 1778
43. 43. Ingersoll TN. Slave codes and judicial exercise in New Orleans, 1718-1807. Law and History Review. 1995;thirteen(1):23-62
44. 44. Territory of Orleans. Acts passed at the first session of the showtime Legislature of the Territory of Orleans: Begun and held in the City of New Orleans, on the 25th day of January, in the twelvemonth of our Lord i chiliad eight hundred and six, and of the independence of the United states of America the thirtieth. New Orleans: Bradford & Anderson, Printers to the Territory; 1807. x, p. 221 (Binder's championship: Louisiana, Territory of Orleans)
45. 45. Lara SH. Legislação sobre escravos africanos na América portuguesa. Madrid: Fundación Histórica Tavera/Digibis/Fundación Hernando de Larramendi; 2000
46. 46. Portugal. Código filipino, ou, ordenações e leis, practice Reino de Portugal: Recompiladas por mandado d'el-rey d. filipe I. Brasília: Senado Federal, Conselho Editorial; 2004
47. 47. Peabody S, Grinberg K. Slavery, Freedom, and the Law in the Atlantic World: A Brief History with Documents. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins; 2007
48. 48. Batista North, Zafaronni RC. Direito Penal Brasileiro. Vol. I. Rio de Janeiro: Revan; 2004
49. 49. da Silva FR. Linhas de força da legislação ultramarina portuguesa no século XVII (1640-1699). Revista de Ciências Históricas. 1991;6:187-210
50. 50. Wehling A, Wehling MJ. O escravo na justiça do Antigo Regime: O Tribunal da Relação practise Rio de Janeiro. ARQUIPÉLAGO-Revista da Universidade dos Açores. 1999;3:119-137
51. 51. de Andrade Silva J. Provisão de 23 de setembro de 1664, Collecção chronologica da legislação portuguesa. Lisboa: Impr. de J.J.A. Silva. p. 1854
52. 52. de Andrade Silva J. Provisão de eighteen de março de 1684. In: Collecção Chronologica da Legislação Portuguesa. Lisboa: Impr. de J.J.A. Silva. p. 1854
53. 53. Osório I. Políticas régias sobre o tráfico de escravos: Análise da legislação produzida entre 1640 due east 1706. In: Machado A et al., editors. Omni Tempore. Encontros da Primavera 2014-2015. Porto: Universidade practice Porto, Faculdade de Letras, Biblioteca Digital; 2017:287-322
54. 54. Eltis D, Richardson D. Routes to Slavery: Management, Ethnicity and Mortality in the Transatlantic Slave Trade. London, New York: Routledge; 2013
55. 55. Martins RB. A obsessão com o tráfico, a legislação escravista due east bone códigos negreiros portugueses. In: Niterói: Associação brasileira de pesquisadores em história econômica. 2017. pp. i-21
56. 56. Sheridan RB. Sugar and Slavery: An Economic History of the British Due west Indies, 1623-1775. Barbados, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago: Canoe Press; 1994. p. 558
57. 57. Knight FW. The Caribbean area saccharide industry and slavery. Hagelberg GB, Kiple KF, Fraginals MM, editors. Latin American Research Review. 1983;18(ii):219-229
58. 58. Higman BW. The saccharide revolution. The Economic History Review. 2000;53(2):213-236
59. 59. Menard RR. Sugariness Negotiations: Sugar, Slavery, and Plantation Agriculture in Early on Barbados. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press; 2006. p. 220
60. lx. An Deed for the better ordering and governing of Negroes. 1661
61. 61. Gragg LD, Gragg P. Englishmen Transplanted: The English Colonization of Barbados, 1627-1660. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003. p. 254
62. 62. Beckles HMD, Downes A. The economics of transition to the Black labor organisation in Barbados, 1630-1680. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 1987;eighteen(2):225-247
63. 63. Rugemer EB. The development of mastery and race in the comprehensive slave codes of the greater Caribbean during the seventeenth century. The William and Mary Quarterly. 2013;70(3):429-458
64. 64. Tomlins C. Transplants and timing: Passages in the cosmos of an Anglo-American law of slavery. Theoretical Inquiries in Law. 2009;ten(2):389-421
65. 65. Nicholson BJ. Legal borrowing and the origins of slave police in the British colonies. American Journal of Legal History. 1994;38:38-54
66. 66. Dunn RS. The English language Sugar Islands and the founding of South Carolina. The South Carolina Historical Magazine. 2000;101(two):142-154
67. 67. Tomlins C. Freedom Bound: Law, Labor, and Civic Identity in Colonizing English America, 1580-1865. Cambridge: Cambridge Academy Press; 2010. p. 641
68. 68. Debe DD, Menard RR. The transition to African slavery in Maryland: A annotation on the Barbados connectedness. Slavery & Abolition. 2011;32(one):129-141
69. 69. Édit du roi ou Code Noir réglementant le statut des esclaves dans les îles Françaises d'Amérique mars 1685. FR ANOM, COL, Série B xi, 129
70. 70. Palmer Five. Essai sur les origines et les auteurs du Code Noir. Revue Internationale de Droit Comparé. 1998;50-51:111-140
71. 71. Niort J-F. Le problème de l'humanité de l'esclave dans le Code Noir de 1685 et la législation postérieure: Pour une approche nouvelle. Cahiers aixois d'histoire des droits de 50'outre-mer français (PUAM). 2008;(4):ane-29
72. 72. Rogers D. Sguardi divergenti sull'assimilazione dei liberi di colore negli archivi del siniscalcato del Petit-Goâve, parte francese di Santo Domingo (1778-1786). QS. 2015;(1/2015)
73. 73. Ghachem MW. Prosecuting torture: The strategic ethics of slavery in pre-revolutionary saint-Domingue (Republic of haiti). Law and History Review. 2011;29(four):985-1029
74. 74. Patisso 1000. Codici neri. Carocci: Roma; 2019
75. 75. Patisso One thousand. Gli schiavi della Croce bianca. Colonizzazione, legislazione repressiva e rivolte nelle Indie Occidentali danesi (1663-1733). Studi Storici: Rivista Trimestrale dell'Istituto Gramsci. 2017;58(2):369-400
76. 76. Patisso G. Gli svedesi a Saint-Barthélemy tra economia schiavista e Codice nero von Rosenstein (sec. XVIII-XIX). Studi Storici: Rivista Trimestrale dell'Istituto Gramsci. 2016;57(2):361-388

Written By

Giuseppe Patisso and Fausto Ermete Carbone

Submitted: February 12th, 2019 Reviewed: January 29th, 2020 Published: March tertiary, 2020

© 2020 The Author(southward). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed nether the terms of the Artistic Commons Attribution 3.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

boswelluntwom.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/71313

Share this post