Slavery and Indentureship

Anand Moteelal   2013030872 CAS 130 Two of the most horrible historic happenings to occur in Caribbean histor are sla!er and indentureship" Sla!er# according to Merriam$%ebster# &201'(# is )the state of a person who is a chattel of another*" + e,tension# chattel sla!er# also called traditional sla!er# is so named  because people are treated as the chattel &personal propert( of an owner and are bought and sold as if the were commodities commodities &%i-imedia &%i-imedia .oundation# 201'(" /ndentureship# on the other hand# is the state or period of being a ser!ant bound to ser!ice for a specified time in return for passage to a colon &.arle,# 201'(" More specificall# ast /ndian /ndentureship refers to the arri!al of ast /ndians from /ndia to the Caribbean to replace African labour under a contract" The are usuall closel closel associ associate ated d becaus becausee when when descri describin bing g situat situation ionss in!ol! in!ol!ing ing these these two occurr occurrence ences# s# e,tremities of negati!it are alwas depicted and mistreatment such as e,ploitation of wor-ers#  poor ualit of life and sheer intensit of wor- seem to be their common theme" Conse Conseuent uentl l## because because of these these shared shared simila similarit rities ies## uesti uestions ons were were raised raised as to how conditions had changed and whether indentureship was indeed a disguised form of sla!er" /n addition# the fact that indentured labour immediatel followed sla!er meant that it was !iewed as a cheap alternati!e alternati!e to what had become illegal illegal labour" labour" The +ritish +ritish academic and historian historian ugh ugh Tin-e Tin-err &17'( &17'( postul postulate ated d this this notion notion in his boo- where where his position position re$enf re$enforc orced ed the abol abolit itio ionis nists ts44 !iew !iewss that that )dec )decept eptio ion# n# -idna -idnappi pping ng and and coer coerci cion on were were the the hall hallma marr-ss of  indentureship*" Also# more recentl# +rinsle Samaroo &2007( identified indentureship as 5ust another form of sla!er that ensla!ed the minds of /ndians# stole their identities and pro!o-ed them to act against their moral fibre &as cited in Mo-ool# 2007(" owe!er# there were critical differences between sla!er and indentureship mainl because of the former occurring for o!er  four centuries and encompassing horrors of unimaginable proportions" This factor distinguished

1

Anand Moteelal   2013030872 CAS 130 them as ha!ing !aring historical circumstances# therefore# it is important not to !iew indentured labour as a mere e,tension of sla!er as the two are fundamentall different" The most fundamental difference between the two sstems of labour was the most ob!ious one# namel the fact that sla!er was not a choice and indentureship was" Africans were captured from their nati!e homelands and forcefull ensla!ed as prisoners of war# pament of debt# !ictims of -idnappings and raids or as gifts gi!en to tribal owners and uropean sla!e traders ali-e &StudMode# 201'(" African sla!er was almost in!ariabl for life as sla!es had little chance of becoming free# e,cept b running awa or staging a successful rebellion" Moreo!er# the child of a sla!e was born a sla!e# and sla!es were usuall encouraged to ha!e children as it increased their number at little cost &+ristol# 2000(" /n contrast# indentureship was a deliberate choice# despite of how bad the economic situation was at home or how bad the conditions6contract might well ha!e been# those that did# did so because the had made a choice to and thus had the choice not to# an aspect of migrant wor-manship no sla!e e!er had access to &ames# 201'(" The contracted period was usuall fi!e ears and indentured /ndians could loo-  forward to an end of their lot and the possibilit of returning home at the termination of their  contract" /n addition# e,$indentured /ndians were legall free and their children# who came from /ndia and those locall born# were not indentured and had the right to repatriation &StudMode# 2013(" Another ma5or aspect which differentiated sla!er from indentureship was the discipline of  sla!es and the indentured /ndian labourers" The discipline of sla!es was legall left largel to the  5urisdiction of their owners# who made the rules and imposed and e,ecuted the penalties on sla!es whom the considered delinuent &Mcowan# 200(" 9ot surprisingl# such punishment was mar-ed b e,cessi!e cruelt# including incredible torture as the were regularl whipped# 2

Anand Moteelal   2013030872 CAS 130  beaten and sometimes e!en -illed &%i-imedia .oundation# /nc"# 201'(" /n contrast# the discipline of indentured labourers# was entrusted to the magistrate courts where decisions were guided b !arious ordinances passed b the local go!ernment to regulate relations between masters and indentured wor-ers" These laws imposed fines and imprisonment if labourers failed to complete their tas-s or refused to wor-" /n addition# labourers4 contract could be e,tended to twice the  period while the were in 5ail" Though the sstem weighed hea!il against the indentured immigrants# the penalties to which the were sub5ected were far less onerous than those e,perienced b sla!es# especiall in terms of phsical brutalit &Mcowan# 200(" :ife on the plantation was another difference between the sla!es and the indentured /ndians" .or the sla!es it was a life of endless labour" The wor-ed up to 18 hours a da# sometimes longer at bus periods such as har!est" There were no wee-ends or rest das" Sla!e women were routinel raped and some were e!en forced to use se,ual fa!ours simpl to sur!i!e or to obtain  better conditions# e!en freedom# for themsel!es or their children &+ristol# 2000(" ;n the other  hand# the /ndian indentured labourers did not wor- as man hours as the sla!e and were reuired to wor- onl 280 das per ear &9antambu# 2013(" owe!er# being phsicall wea-er in comparison to the African sla!e# could not complete these tas-s and were liable for punishment &
Anand Moteelal   2013030872 CAS 130 his 5ournal# in 17>'# that the African men were pac-ed together below dec- and were secured b leg irons" The space was so cramped the were forced to crouch or lie down" %omen and children were -ept in separate uarters# sometimes on dec-# allowing them limited freedom of  mo!ement# but this also e,posed them to !iolence and se,ual abuse from the crew &as cited in  9ational Museums :i!erpool# 201'(" owe!er# this was totall different in the case of the indentured /ndians"

The ships had separate compartments for single persons and married

couples" owe!er# to ensure some form of discipline# the emigrants were di!ided into group of  twent fi!e and were placed directl under super!ision &1? but the !ast ma5orit of their descendants now carr uro$centric names" /ndians also came with their original# ancestral /ndian names in 18'># howe!er# in some cases# their  descendants still carr those names at present" &9antambu# 2013(" @ltimatel both sla!er and indentureship were sstems of human e,ploitation and manipulation" The indentured immigrants# li-e the capti!e Africans# found themsel!es in an intolerable situation for the were sub5ect to laws of which the had no sa and o!er the application of which the had no control" As such# it was implied that indentureship shared some features that characteried sla!er and it e,hibited man of the same reactions in the indentured ser!ants as sla!er did in sla!es" Tin-er &17'( notes that )indentureship incorporated man of  the repressi!e features of the sla!e sstem and induced in /ndians# man of the responses of the African brothers in bondage"* Also# indentureship was compared to sla!er since labour became a commodit to be bought and sold# probabl because the indi!idual personification of the labour  was of little rele!ance to the plantocrac and the merchants# in !er much the same wa in which the indi!idual personification of sla!es was immaterial to the masters &Bowlasar# 200("

4

Anand Moteelal   2013030872 CAS 130 owe!er# it must be emphasied that significant distinctions between indentureship and sla!er do e,ist such as the snatching of children from their mother4s arms at birth# selling indi!iduals as chattels# the destruction and dispossession of their cultural and religious roots and conditions6treatment on the plantations masters &Bowlasar# 200(" Sla!es unli-e indentured /ndians were forced to wor- and li!e a decaing lifestle# were stripped of their identit and forced to e,ist as propert" Although the indentured /ndians were e,ploited somewhat# faced treatment# pa and accommodation far below what the e,pected# the had howe!er made a conscious decision to underta-e a wor- contract" /ndentured labourers on the most part preser!ed a sense of dignit and =self4 which# regardless of the decrepit li!ing conditions and labour ship e,ploitation# was a sense of identit stripped from sla!es from the moment the became  possessed" As such# although the two are comparable# the will alwas be fundamentall different"

Word Count - 1453

5