The Great Fear of 1852: Riots against Enslavement in the Brazilian Empire

Sidney Chalhoub
{"title":"The Great Fear of 1852: Riots against Enslavement in the Brazilian Empire","authors":"Sidney Chalhoub","doi":"10.1163/9789004386617_007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent studies on the history of slavery have often started off from the concept of Second Slavery, that is, the transformation of Atlantic slavery as part of the expansion of capitalism during the first decades of the nineteenth century, which resulted in “the opening of new zones of slave commodity production—most prominently the U.S. cotton zone, the Cuban sugar zone, and the Brazilian coffee zone—and the decline of older zones of slave production” (French and British Caribbean).1 There are several merits to the concept of Second Slavery, but I mention just two of them that are of special significance for this text. First, it draws attention to the fact that the first half of the nineteenth century did not involve the weakening of slavery in the Americas at all. Actually, there was a partial relocation of it; a persistence of slaveholding economies and societies that brings into sharp relief the indeterminacy of the historical process of slave emancipation. The concept of Second Slavery made it impossible to conceive the nineteenth century as the time of a linear transition from slavery to freedom, or from unfree to free forms of labor regimes. Second, it has made historians more aware of the interconnectedness and interdependence of the worlds of free and unfree labor. These two characteristics of the concept of Second Slavery seem to encapsulate an approach to labor history in capitalist societies that has been articulated by Marcel van der Linden in several of his works. According to him, the boundaries between free and unfree labor in capitalist societies tend to be “rather finely graded or vague”;","PeriodicalId":410938,"journal":{"name":"The Lifework of a Labor Historian: Essays in Honor of Marcel van der Linden","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Lifework of a Labor Historian: Essays in Honor of Marcel van der Linden","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004386617_007","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

Recent studies on the history of slavery have often started off from the concept of Second Slavery, that is, the transformation of Atlantic slavery as part of the expansion of capitalism during the first decades of the nineteenth century, which resulted in “the opening of new zones of slave commodity production—most prominently the U.S. cotton zone, the Cuban sugar zone, and the Brazilian coffee zone—and the decline of older zones of slave production” (French and British Caribbean).1 There are several merits to the concept of Second Slavery, but I mention just two of them that are of special significance for this text. First, it draws attention to the fact that the first half of the nineteenth century did not involve the weakening of slavery in the Americas at all. Actually, there was a partial relocation of it; a persistence of slaveholding economies and societies that brings into sharp relief the indeterminacy of the historical process of slave emancipation. The concept of Second Slavery made it impossible to conceive the nineteenth century as the time of a linear transition from slavery to freedom, or from unfree to free forms of labor regimes. Second, it has made historians more aware of the interconnectedness and interdependence of the worlds of free and unfree labor. These two characteristics of the concept of Second Slavery seem to encapsulate an approach to labor history in capitalist societies that has been articulated by Marcel van der Linden in several of his works. According to him, the boundaries between free and unfree labor in capitalist societies tend to be “rather finely graded or vague”;
1852年的大恐慌:巴西帝国反对奴隶制的暴动
最近对奴隶制历史的研究通常是从第二次奴隶制的概念开始的,也就是说,大西洋奴隶制的转变是19世纪头几十年资本主义扩张的一部分,这导致了“新的奴隶商品生产区的开放——最突出的是美国棉花区、古巴糖区和巴西咖啡区——以及旧的奴隶生产区的衰落”(法属和英属加勒比地区)第二次奴隶制的概念有几个优点,但我只提到其中两个对本文具有特殊意义。首先,它提请注意一个事实,即19世纪上半叶根本没有涉及美洲奴隶制的削弱。实际上,有一个部分的搬迁;蓄奴经济和蓄奴社会的持续存在,使奴隶解放历史进程的不确定性得到了明显的体现。第二次奴隶制的概念使人们无法将19世纪想象为从奴隶制到自由,或从不自由到自由形式的劳动制度的线性过渡的时代。其次,它使历史学家更加意识到自由和非自由劳动世界的相互联系和相互依存。第二次奴隶制概念的这两个特征似乎概括了马塞尔·范德林登在他的几部作品中阐述的资本主义社会劳工历史的一种方法。在他看来,资本主义社会中自由劳动和不自由劳动之间的界限往往是“相当精细或模糊的”;
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信