Slaves for what? That's important to know.Following the French conquest of Algeria, Could a large portion of the Algerian population be taken as slaves
How would this impact French abolitionist movements
Agriculture, housework , etc ...Slaves for what? That's important to know.
In Algeria or in France?Agriculture, housework , etc ...
Following the French conquest of Algeria, Could a large portion of the Algerian population be taken as slaves
How would this impact French abolitionist movements
Yes, slavery was still allowed. "Rebelious elements" could be enslaved en-masse and sent to the killing fields of the sugar plantations in the Carribbean or Reunion. Or exported to Brazil, maybe to Dutch and Spanish holdings. British reaction? Depends on how the French spin it - they can truthfully claim that they are NOT involved in "Negro slave traffic".
Any slaves the French ship to the Americas would be snapped up like hot buns from Baltimore down to Porto Alegre.At this point in time the French would have no one to sell them to. And if you try shipping them far away I am betting their are enough people trained in sailing ships that they overtake their captors and hijack the ship.
Any slaves the French ship to the Americas would be snapped up like hot buns from Baltimore down to Porto Alegre.
I'd not be that optimistic about slave revolts onboard - the slavers were not born yesterday ...
All the Spanish had left was Puerto Rico and Cuba and I highly doubt they would want a swarm of Muslims dumped there. I doubt Brazil would want them as well, especially given how they would likely have reputations as being vicious or basically looking the same as Spaniards and Portuguese if they were clean shaven. Plus the moment the French sell them the Algerians move from being conscripted laborers or a group resettled far from Europe and become slaves. And given how many Algerians they would need to move in a short amount of time? It would basically be cramming people into ships.Yes, slavery was still allowed. "Rebelious elements" could be enslaved en-masse and sent to the killing fields of the sugar plantations in the Carribbean or Reunion. Or exported to Brazil, maybe to Dutch and Spanish holdings. British reaction? Depends on how the French spin it - they can truthfully claim that they are NOT involved in "Negro slave traffic".
The importation of slaves was banned in the United States starting in 1808. Besides, they would be far too light skinned and far too united.Any slaves the French ship to the Americas would be snapped up like hot buns from Baltimore down to Porto Alegre.
I'd not be that optimistic about slave revolts onboard - the slavers were not born yesterday ...
All the Spanish had left was Puerto Rico and Cuba and I highly doubt they would want a swarm of Muslims dumped there. I doubt Brazil would want them as well, especially given how they would likely have reputations as being vicious or basically looking the same as Spaniards and Portuguese if they were clean shaven. Plus the moment the French sell them the Algerians move from being conscripted laborers or a group resettled far from Europe and become slaves. And given how many Algerians they would need to move in a short amount of time? It would basically be cramming people into ships.
Smuggling continued up to the ACW, with sales advertised in local media ...The importation of slaves was banned in the United States starting in 1808. Besides, they would be far too light skinned and far too united.
Indeed, indeed. If we don't just count chattel slavery, as the OP with mentoin of the abolition movement and the locals being taken as slaves, then we open up a variety of forms of Less Than Volunary Labor. I think one of the problems here is going to be who the French manage to capture, and what their actual goal is. The warriors and rebels may fight to the death, especially if their fate is known, while the women and children... yah, this thing opens up a lot fo questions.I doubt the French would enslave the Algerians, however rebels and other people deemed troublesome to the French authorities (such as Islamic Qadi's or Judges who challenged French authority) could have been sentenced to transportation most likely to other French Colonies and used as bonded labour.
The Dutch East Indian company deported Qadi's in Java who challenged their authority to the Cape Colony in OTL.
Going to be pretty hard to pass up Arabs and Berbers as slaves, especially if shipping them directly in Baltimore. They tended to ship people in from Cuba, pretending they got lost and where moving slaves between states.You could carry 400-600 slaves per ship. Ten ships, two journeys per year, that's ten thousand people already ...
Smuggling continued up to the ACW, with sales advertised in local media ...
Indeed, indeed. If we don't just count chattel slavery, as the OP with mention of the abolition movement and the locals being taken as slaves, then we open up a variety of forms of Less Than Voluntary Labor. I think one of the problems here is going to be who the French manage to capture, and what their actual goal is. The warriors and rebels may fight to the death, especially if their fate is known, while the women and children... yah, this thing opens up a lot of questions.
The French could just adopted the institution of 'transportation' as a sentence which the British used in Australia and thereby use Algerian rebels as bonded labour in the plantations of the Carribbean and Reunion![]()
The French did have a "transportation" (déportation in French) as a sentence, but, prior to 1848, they not did use them, as there was no convenient colonial prison. After 1848, they used Algeria, New Caledonia and Guyana. during the Algerian conquest, they did not bother with legal sentences : until 1870, Algeria was under military administration. The first official transportations of Algerians to New Caledonia was in 1867 and the last in 1921, with a total of 2,166 transportations. The French did target the leaders, with no idea of massive transportations ; even the wife and children were not transported with the condemned.
It is rather less effective to remove the leadership of groups who ar snot loyal to you if you also send tens or hundreds of thousands of their countrymen with them. I feel we need to look over share-croppin and serfdom and see if we can consider that as light slavery for the question of this. It is rather easier to do the stuff with slavery in Sub-Saharan African due to them having different property laws, different economies, and how it was often prisoners and captives brought in from far, far away away that were being traded. Going to be impossible to find collaborators for the French here. On that note, Egypt and Morocco will not give a single inch of influence if they think the French are trying to come after them. I see the Egyptians mvoign much closer to the ottomans, while Morocco might try to get in bed with the British. If the French want to seem better in the eyes of Europeans (not saying this is makes any of this good, but they might spin it with propaganda) but they might try claiming they are converting hundreds of thousands of people or trading the Algerians with other states to get Christian hostages. Not going to work of course and just going to inflame tensions but- huh. I just thought of something. Maybe a populatoin exchange with the Ottomans?I did not know that, all the French would need to do is to implement it on a much more massive scale.