British Antislavery and West Africa

P. Scanlan
{"title":"British Antislavery and West Africa","authors":"P. Scanlan","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190277734.013.742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Resistance to slavery within African societies was as complex and heterogeneous as slavery itself. For enslaved Africans and their descendants taken by force to Europe’s colonies in the Americas, antislavery was an existential struggle. Among European states, Britain was among the first imperial powers to pass laws abolishing its slave trade (in 1807) and slavery in its colonies (in 1833). Antislavery was a transnational phenomenon, but Britain made suppressing the Atlantic slave trade an element of its foreign policy, employing a Royal Navy squadron to search for slave ships, pressing African leaders to sign anti-slave-trade treaties as a condition of trade and coordinating an international network of anti-slave-trade courts. And yet, for many leading British abolitionists, “Africa” was an ideological sandbox—an imagined blank space for speculation and experiment on the development of human societies and the progress of “civilization.”\n In the 18th century, early British critics of the transatlantic slave trade argued that “Africa” presented an unparalleled commercial and imperial opportunity. Although the slave trade—and the plantations in the Americas that slave ships supplied with labor—were profitable, some argued that slave-trading regions could, with enough investment, produce goods and commodities that would be many times more lucrative. Moreover, if Britain were the first European power to abolish the slave trade, it might also be among the first to gain a territorial foothold on African soil. Over time, these arguments coalesced into the concept of “legitimate commerce.” A combination of Christian teaching, slave-trade suppression, and commercial incentives would persuade slave-trading polities to give up the practice and instead produce other goods. Legitimate commerce intertwined with a theory of civilization that held that any society that enslaved people was so degenerate in its social development that nearly any reform or intervention was justifiable. By the end of the 19th century, antislavery became a justification for European conquest.\n There were at least three broad reform projects launched by British officials and merchants in Africa in the name of antislavery. First, drawing on critiques of the slave trade from the 18th century that emphasized the commercial potential of legitimate commerce, antislavery activists and politicians argued for replacing the slave trade with new kinds of export-oriented commerce. Second, in two colonies, Sierra Leone and Liberia, Britain and the United States experimented with the possibility of using Black people from the African diaspora as settlers and missionaries. In Sierra Leone, more than seventy thousand people, usually known as “Liberated Africans,” were repatriated from slave ships into the small colony. Third, in the mid-19th century, as the transatlantic slave trade declined, Britain and other European powers invested heavily in African plantation agriculture, particularly in cotton and palm oil monocrops.","PeriodicalId":166397,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of African History","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of African History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277734.013.742","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Resistance to slavery within African societies was as complex and heterogeneous as slavery itself. For enslaved Africans and their descendants taken by force to Europe’s colonies in the Americas, antislavery was an existential struggle. Among European states, Britain was among the first imperial powers to pass laws abolishing its slave trade (in 1807) and slavery in its colonies (in 1833). Antislavery was a transnational phenomenon, but Britain made suppressing the Atlantic slave trade an element of its foreign policy, employing a Royal Navy squadron to search for slave ships, pressing African leaders to sign anti-slave-trade treaties as a condition of trade and coordinating an international network of anti-slave-trade courts. And yet, for many leading British abolitionists, “Africa” was an ideological sandbox—an imagined blank space for speculation and experiment on the development of human societies and the progress of “civilization.” In the 18th century, early British critics of the transatlantic slave trade argued that “Africa” presented an unparalleled commercial and imperial opportunity. Although the slave trade—and the plantations in the Americas that slave ships supplied with labor—were profitable, some argued that slave-trading regions could, with enough investment, produce goods and commodities that would be many times more lucrative. Moreover, if Britain were the first European power to abolish the slave trade, it might also be among the first to gain a territorial foothold on African soil. Over time, these arguments coalesced into the concept of “legitimate commerce.” A combination of Christian teaching, slave-trade suppression, and commercial incentives would persuade slave-trading polities to give up the practice and instead produce other goods. Legitimate commerce intertwined with a theory of civilization that held that any society that enslaved people was so degenerate in its social development that nearly any reform or intervention was justifiable. By the end of the 19th century, antislavery became a justification for European conquest. There were at least three broad reform projects launched by British officials and merchants in Africa in the name of antislavery. First, drawing on critiques of the slave trade from the 18th century that emphasized the commercial potential of legitimate commerce, antislavery activists and politicians argued for replacing the slave trade with new kinds of export-oriented commerce. Second, in two colonies, Sierra Leone and Liberia, Britain and the United States experimented with the possibility of using Black people from the African diaspora as settlers and missionaries. In Sierra Leone, more than seventy thousand people, usually known as “Liberated Africans,” were repatriated from slave ships into the small colony. Third, in the mid-19th century, as the transatlantic slave trade declined, Britain and other European powers invested heavily in African plantation agriculture, particularly in cotton and palm oil monocrops.
英国反奴隶制和西非
非洲社会内部对奴隶制的抵抗和奴隶制本身一样复杂而多样。对于被奴役的非洲人及其后裔来说,他们被强行带到欧洲在美洲的殖民地,反奴隶制是一场关乎生死存亡的斗争。在欧洲国家中,英国是最早通过法律废除奴隶贸易(1807年)和殖民地奴隶制(1833年)的列强之一。反奴隶制是一种跨国现象,但英国将镇压大西洋奴隶贸易作为其外交政策的一部分,动用皇家海军中队搜寻奴隶船,敦促非洲领导人签署反奴隶贸易条约,作为贸易的条件,并协调反奴隶贸易法庭的国际网络。然而,对于许多著名的英国废奴主义者来说,“非洲”是一个意识形态的沙盒——一个想象中的空白空间,用来推测和实验人类社会的发展和“文明”的进步。在18世纪,早期批评跨大西洋奴隶贸易的英国人认为,“非洲”提供了一个无与伦比的商业和帝国机会。虽然奴隶贸易和美洲的奴隶船提供劳动力的种植园是有利可图的,但一些人认为,如果有足够的投资,奴隶贸易地区可以生产出利润高出许多倍的商品。此外,如果英国是第一个废除奴隶贸易的欧洲大国,它也可能是第一个在非洲土地上获得领土立足点的国家之一。随着时间的推移,这些争论最终形成了“合法商业”的概念。基督教教义、奴隶贸易压制和商业激励的结合将说服奴隶贸易政策放弃这种做法,转而生产其他商品。合法的商业与一种文明理论交织在一起,这种理论认为,任何奴役人民的社会在其社会发展中都是如此堕落,几乎任何改革或干预都是合理的。到19世纪末,反奴隶制成为欧洲征服的理由。在非洲,英国官员和商人以反奴隶制的名义发起了至少三个广泛的改革项目。首先,利用18世纪对奴隶贸易的批评,强调合法贸易的商业潜力,反奴隶制活动家和政治家主张用新型的出口导向型商业取代奴隶贸易。其次,在塞拉利昂和利比里亚这两个殖民地,英国和美国尝试了使用散居海外的非洲黑人作为定居者和传教士的可能性。在塞拉利昂,7万多通常被称为“被解放的非洲人”从奴隶船上被遣返回这个小殖民地。第三,在19世纪中期,随着跨大西洋奴隶贸易的衰落,英国和其他欧洲大国在非洲种植园农业上投入了大量资金,尤其是棉花和棕榈油单一作物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信