Impact Of The Slave Trade
The flow of trade generally reversed between the early sixteenth and late seventeenth centuries as the impact of new sources of supply — from European traders on the coast — was felt. In another major change, by the middle of the 1600s the allegiance of the four Mani rulers to Cape Mount had ended, and in some areas the local Mani themselves were overthrown by their subjects. In the southern half of the county new, small divisions appeared or became exacerbated as local chiefs sought to control trade with the Europeans and to take and capture slaves, the dominant commodity in this new trade.
Slavery, both for domestic use and for exchange with the Sudanic empires, had always played a role in West African trade. Captives in war became slaves, and chiefs and kings also acquired slaves as a result of decisions of their courts; those convicted of serious crimes were frequently sentenced to enslavement. The list of crimes for which such a punishment could he imposed was long — including adultery and purported witchcraft — and provided grounds for a ruler to fill his needs for slaves quite freely.
Although such slavery was harsh, it did not wrench the Africans from their culture. Because there was no large-scale farming, there was little need for large numbers of slaves. Most were used as personal servants or as what amounted to tenant farmers. There was no great scope for mistreatment. Most of those who were convicts remained within their own communities, and many were able to win their freedom eventually. They and their children then frequently formed a lower caste in the society.
The exact impact of the Atlantic slave trade on the Sierra Leone region is a point of debate among historians and apologists. It clearly had the effect of multiplying the wrongs perpetrated by the traditional trade. In order to obtain the manufactured goods that the European traders offered, chiefs had to obtain much larger numbers of slaves, both by making the penalties imposed by their courts heavier and by winning more captives in war. This new harshness was reinforced by the new power the chiefs obtained through their monopoly over trade goods and their access to better arms.
The major point of discussion, however, is the impact of the slave trade on local warfare. Conflicts motivated by the need for slaves — to exchange for new goods — were added to the traditional reasons for war among and within the many petty states. Although it is clear that the period from the sixteenth through the eighteenth centuries was one of conflict and chaos in most of Sierra Leone, it is not clear whether the slave wars precipitat- ed or simply exacerbated this situation.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
