Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Britain did more to abolish slavery than any other nation

By Graham Young - posted Friday, 4 August 2023


Accounts of sexual slavery are also documented in Australia amongst Aboriginal people.

No doubt as a result of American exceptionalism and cultural dominance, as well as Eurocentrism, Australians are fascinated by the Transatlantic Slave Trade more than any other.

This started when the Portuguese, the only Western European slave economy of the time, purchased Africans for sale and shipped them to Brazil in 1526.

Advertisement

Britain was not a slave economy in the 16th century, but prior to the Norman Conquest in 1066, 10 to 30 per cent of the population had been slaves. The Normans opposed slavery. William the Conqueror’s Ninth Law banned the export of slaves and in 1102 the Church Council in London condemned slavery. By 1200 it had died out.

Subsequent court cases affirmed that there was no status of slavery under the Common Law, so slaves could not exist in Great Britain and any slave brought there was free.

Nevertheless in 1562 John Hawkins, later an English Vice-Admiral and cousin of Francis Drake, embarked on a slave-trading expedition in three ships: the Salomon, Jonas and Swallow. This went so well that in 1564 he conducted another, persuading Queensland Elizabeth I to be an investor.

The return on this voyage was 60%, a high reward denoting a commensurately high risk, but attractive to speculators.

How culpable were the British for the slave trade? Well at this stage, as a nation, not at all. While British nationals were involved in it, including the Queen, they were doing so as individuals.

This was a very different world to today’s where private interests sometimes carved out international niches for themselves outside of what we think of as the norms of nations.

Advertisement

Although perhaps not so different.

Prigozhin and the Wagner group, as well as other mercenary outfits, operate very similarly to the Elizabethan privateers.

However, by 1663 Britain was indeed a slaving nation with the Royal African Company granted a royal monopoly over West Coast African slavery. Subsequently the East India Company was given a monopoly over the East Coast African slave trade.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

This article was first published by The Weekend Australian.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

21 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Graham Young is chief editor and the publisher of On Line Opinion. He is executive director of the Australian Institute for Progress, an Australian think tank based in Brisbane, and the publisher of On Line Opinion.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Graham Young

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Graham Young
Article Tools
Comment 21 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy