Louis XIV passed the Code Noir

In 1685 King Louis XIV of France passed the Code Noir.
The Code Noir permitted slavery throughout the French colonies.
Suppose King Louis XIV did not pass the Code Noir. What happens then?
 
In 1685 King Louis XIV of France passed the Code Noir.
The Code Noir permitted slavery throughout the French colonies.
Suppose King Louis XIV did not pass the Code Noir. What happens then?

It not only permitted slavery but also put heavy restricted the activities of free Negroes, forbade the exercise of any religion other than Roman Catholicism (it included a provision that all slaves must be baptized and instructed in the Roman Catholic religion), and ordered all Jews out of France's colonies.

Without the Code Noir, we may have seen a higher number of African slaves, practising their own native religion rather then being forced to forget them and to accept the preachings of Catholicism.
 
Wouldn't change things much probably. The code doesn't seem to have been particularly enforced.

Which isn't necessarilly a good thing. The edict authorized slavery officially but it was already being practiced before that. Furthermore, there are parts of the Code Noir that were actually aimed at better regulation and better treatment of slaves. For examples, while the code authorized corporal punishment to punish fugitive slaves, there were also provisions that were basically asking masters to treat their slave well if they didn't want a fine or to see their slaves confiscated from them.
Jonathan said:
It not only permitted slavery but also put heavy restricted the activities of free Negroes
I think you are wrong there. I had a quick look at the Code Noir and I don't see anything specifically restricting activities of free slaves.

Furthermore, you have article 57, 58 and 59 of the Code. Article 57 consider free slaves to be French subject, while article 58 and 59 indicates they fall under the same rights as French Colonial Subjects. Seems to me more like a will to declare free slaves as equals as French Subjects.

That said, I'm not an expert on the Code Noir so I might have missed something.
Jonathan said:
Without the Code Noir, we may have seen a higher number of African slaves, practising their own native religion rather then being forced to forget them and to accept the preachings of Catholicism.
It's also possible that a greater number of slaves would be practicing syncretic religions like Vodoo.
 
Which isn't necessarilly a good thing. The edict authorized slavery officially but it was already being practiced before that. Furthermore, there are parts of the Code Noir that were actually aimed at better regulation and better treatment of slaves. For examples, while the code authorized corporal punishment to punish fugitive slaves, there were also provisions that were basically asking masters to treat their slave well if they didn't want a fine or to see their slaves confiscated from them.
I think you are wrong there. I had a quick look at the Code Noir and I don't see anything specifically restricting activities of free slaves.

Furthermore, you have article 57, 58 and 59 of the Code. Article 57 consider free slaves to be French subject, while article 58 and 59 indicates they fall under the same rights as French Colonial Subjects. Seems to me more like a will to declare free slaves as equals as French Subjects.

That said, I'm not an expert on the Code Noir so I might have missed something.
It's also possible that a greater number of slaves would be practicing syncretic religions like Vodoo.

Article XIII, "Slaves Belonging to different Masters are forbidden to gather, either day or night under any pretect especially on streets or in remote places, under pain of corporal punishment"

Although the Code Noir also places restrictions on the Master, to care for his slaves, so with out this document, the slaves may be treated worse then they already were.

At this point in time, I doubt that laws regarding slavery could be put off any longer.
 
Jonathan said:
Article XIII, "Slaves Belonging to different Masters are forbidden to gather, either day or night under any pretect especially on streets or in remote places, under pain of corporal punishment"
That article isn't about freed slaves. It forbids slaves belonging to different masters from gathering but freed slaves are no longer slaves.
 
Top