PC: Viable Climates for White Slavery

So there never was a problem with American diseases wiping out indentured servants and Africans were just more convenient?
Both white and black, free and slave where constantly wiped by disease in the tropical regions of America, it was like a meat grinder and it helps to explain why the US and more specifically New England + New York + Pennsylvania had a populational growth above all other places in the continent.
 
Maybe Ottomans set up colonies and import enslaved Eastern Europeans there ? Or maybe have North African Pirates conquer a Carribean Island and import enslaved Europeans there.

The problem is that MENA and European slaves weren’t used as agricultural slaves in the MENA region, they tended to be used as soldiers, administrators, house servant and concubines. Agricultural and mining slaves were mostly Africans.
 
If Mansa Musa and his successors were motivated they could have inundated the Sahel with white slaves, pretty pointless though esp. since chattel slavery was a very new world concept.
 
Either through mass indentured servitude or through a reverse slavery scenario, were there any places in the Americas (or anywhere in the world that can have plantation colonies for that matter) where white slavy can be practical without the majority dying of disease? I think northern Argentina might be a reasonable location but otherwise I'm not sure what all the factors put together is supposed to look like.
Not slavery, but some export of serfdom the temperate America could work. Something similar existed with Dutch Patroons and Quebec seigneurial system. Perhaps wank those two?
 
If by New World you mean the vast majority of human history, then yes. New World.
Slavery of course existed in every human civilization, with it's ending being one of the demands of the 1848 Hungarian revolution in Austria (only a decade before the ACW). But the systematic chattel slavery based on dehumanizing a specific ethnicity (white in the OP) was created in the New World, and that's the slavery most people refer to when they hear &/or visualize the word.
 
Given that there were a substantial number of European slaves held by the Ottomans, as well as earlier Muslim caliphates in the Mediterranean, that might be the answer: an Islamic colonization of the Americas, in whole or in part.
Nah, look at the use of slaves in the caliphates and the Ottoman Empire. In the caliphates especially the vast majority of agricultural slaves were from sub-Saharan Africa to the point there are a significant amount of Middle Easterners with sub-Saharan mitochondrial (female line) DNA. White slaves were used more often in households and armies, like janissaries. The Ottomans also thought of Europeans as clearly more civilized. No reason to think that would stop with colonization and even more tropical work.
 
But the systematic chattel slavery based on dehumanizing a specific ethnicity (white in the OP) was created in the New World, and that's the slavery most people refer to when they hear &/or visualize the word.
Chattel slavery is simply slavery in which one person has total ownership over another. That’s how slavery has worked in the vast majority of human history. Even what you talk about isn’t actually all that much different than how slavery was generally practiced. Slavery has always been a vile institution. It was little to no different in the new world or the old.
 
Boy, did I misunderstand the title of this thread. My first thought, before even reading Kaiser Tito's first post, was that white slavery was probably viable everywhere at any time, including the present.
White Slavery 3.4 to me, and I am old, has always historically meant making white women into prostitutes.

Live and learn.

Wikipedia 3.4 said:
In Anglophone countries in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the phrase "white slavery" was used to refer to sexual enslavement of white women. It was particularly associated with accounts of women enslaved in Middle Eastern harems, such as the so-called Circassian beauties. The phrase gradually came to be used as a euphemism for prostitution. The phrase was especially common in the context of the exploitation of minors, with the implication that children and young women in such circumstances were not free to decide their own fates.

In Victorian Britain, campaigning journalist William Thomas Stead, editor of the Pall Mall Gazette, procured a 13-year-old girl for £5, an amount then equal to a labourer's monthly wage (see the Eliza Armstrong case). Moral panic over the "traffic in women" rose to a peak in England in the 1880s. At the time, "white slavery" was a natural target for defenders of public morality and crusading journalists. The ensuing outcry led to the passage of antislavery legislation in Parliament. Parliament passed the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act, raising the age of consent from thirteen to sixteen in that year.

A subsequent scare occurred in the United States in the early twentieth century, peaking in 1910, when Chicago's U.S. attorney announced (without giving details) that an international crime ring was abducting young girls in Europe, importing them, and forcing them to work in Chicago brothels. These claims, and the panic they inflamed, led to the passage of the United States White-Slave Traffic Act of 1910, generally known as the "Mann Act". It also banned the interstate transport of females for immoral purposes. Its primary intent was to address prostitution and immorality.
 
Chattel slavery is simply slavery in which one person has total ownership over another. That’s how slavery has worked in the vast majority of human history. Even what you talk about isn’t actually all that much different than how slavery was generally practiced. Slavery has always been a vile institution. It was little to no different in the new world or the old.

True, but Chattel Slavery didn't discriminate racially before the Atlantic Slave Trade.

Slavery in West Africa which is what I'm most knowledgeable about could take many forms from War Captives and Military Slaves (Janissaries), Criminals, all the way to Court Slaves (Bureaucrats) each class being treated differently under the law with Chattel being an import to the coastal regions under European influence. A Slave in West Africa could rise to become a King, two of which happened during the late 18th and late 19th century with Ngolo Diarra and Samori Ture respectively, an impossible under chattel slavery where you're bred like cattle with zero hope for social mobility.
 
with zero hope for social mobility.
That is not exactly true, the system is more complicated than that, there were slaves that owned other slaves, there were slaves that bought their own freedom, former slaves that became rich, and sons of slaves that achieve nobility. So, there wasn't zero social mobility, even though the crushing majority would suffer their fate till the end of their days it isn't such an oddity when compared with Roman and Greek slavery for example.
 
Temperate and maybe subtropical climates could have white slavery. If, say, Morocco or Mali colonized Argentina, they may have imported white slaves captured from Southern Europe by Barbary pirates, albeit on a scale nowhere near OTL's Atlantic Slave Trade.
 
That is not exactly true, the system is more complicated than that, there were slaves that owned other slaves, there were slaves that bought their own freedom, former slaves that became rich, and sons of slaves that achieve nobility. So, there wasn't zero social mobility, even though the crushing majority would suffer their fate till the end of their days it isn't such an oddity when compared with Roman and Greek slavery for example.
Say What? Where? How? Seriously, this is the first time I heard this. BTW I mean the Atlantic/Americas, I'm aware classical slavery was also diverse.
 
Last edited:
European slavery in antiquity and early Middle Ages was very much like African slavery. Countless people were bought and sold. Peter Frankopan’s Silk Roads even goes into how the Venetians pulled themselves out of the Dark Ages selling Slavic slaves around the Mediterranean, how Prague was a massive slave market. The main difference between the European and African slave trade was no advanced foreign civilization with a thousand year lead arrived to exploit the European slave trade when it was at it’s peak. European slavery was so long ago people forgot about it. The Russians might still have Harvesting the Steppe in their national memory, but it’s nothing like African slavery which is so recent it lasted into the age of photography.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that MENA and European slaves weren’t used as agricultural slaves in the MENA region, they tended to be used as soldiers, administrators, house servant and concubines. Agricultural and mining slaves were mostly Africans.
That's not really true, MENA slaves were used in mediterranean or Macaronesian sugar plantations.
 
True, but Chattel Slavery didn't discriminate racially before the Atlantic Slave Trade.
Not as we would see race, but there’s a reason slave as a word descended from the word Slav.


Slavery in West Africa which is what I'm most knowledgeable about could take many forms from War Captives and Military Slaves (Janissaries), Criminals, all the way to Court Slaves (Bureaucrats) each class being treated differently under the law with Chattel being an import to the coastal regions under European influence. A Slave in West Africa could rise to become a King, two of which happened during the late 18th and late 19th century with Ngolo Diarra and Samori Ture respectively, an impossible under chattel slavery where you're bred like cattle with zero hope for social mobility.
Except there absolutely could be social mobility. One of the underlying tensions within Haiti while it was a colony was between the free colorleds and the White French, because the free coloreds were often the wealthiest people on the island, more even than the wealthy whites (because the whites would come from France to make a fortune, and then leave, while the coloreds built up their wealth on Haiti). The free coloreds were all either freed slaves or their descendants. This also led to interracial marriage as poor white (men) would marry free colored (women) so that the children of the colored woman would gain additional status under the law from having a French father, while the white man would gain access to his wife’s wealth.

You can also see similar dynamics in say New Orleans, where black slaveownets existed all the way to the ACW.

So, there wasn't zero social mobility, even though the crushing majority would suffer their fate till the end of their days
Which to be clear this was always the case.
 
True, but Chattel Slavery didn't discriminate racially before the Atlantic Slave Trade.

Slavery in West Africa which is what I'm most knowledgeable about could take many forms from War Captives and Military Slaves (Janissaries), Criminals, all the way to Court Slaves (Bureaucrats) each class being treated differently under the law with Chattel being an import to the coastal regions under European influence. A Slave in West Africa could rise to become a King, two of which happened during the late 18th and late 19th century with Ngolo Diarra and Samori Ture respectively, an impossible under chattel slavery where you're bred like cattle with zero hope for social mobility.
Didn't discriminate racially, really? Not the Balkan and Armenian and Georgian slaves of the Ottomans, the Chinese and Japanese and Korean sailors the Vietnamese castrated and enslaved, not the black slaves taken for field work or castration by the caliphates and Ottomans, Greeks enslaved en masse in southern Italy and Sicily for field work by the Romans who kept them chained together and underfed day and night because they were easily replaceable, Slavs raided and captured to the point the ethnonym becomes the etymology for the word slave...need I go on?
Yeah it's pretty obvious you're most knowledgeable of slavery in West Africa.
 
The problem is that MENA and European slaves weren’t used as agricultural slaves in the MENA region, they tended to be used as soldiers, administrators, house servant and concubines. Agricultural and mining slaves were mostly Africans.
Citation please.

What time period are you talking about, what countries are you talking about, and what social strata of slaveowner?
 
True, but Chattel Slavery didn't discriminate racially before the Atlantic Slave Trade.
While I can't think of any exceptions off the top of my head, I believe every slave society ever had preferences as to which group they enslaved which we can tell from 19th/20th century anthropological accounts of various indigenous groups or from the Bible where the rules for Israelite slavery are recorded that make distinctions between Jews and non-Jews. This is reflected historically, where Europeans made distinctions between various African groups in terms of how viable they were as slaves. This was usually made in extremely crude terms (presumably targeted at slave merchants and people wanting to buy slaves) that described some African groups as generally obedient and hardworking, others as "lazy" or "rebellious", or various other stereotypes. This affected how Europeans dealt with sub-Saharan Africa given the genetics of African-descended people in the Americas.
 
Didn't discriminate racially, really? Not the Balkan and Armenian and Georgian slaves of the Ottomans, the Chinese and Japanese and Korean sailors the Vietnamese castrated and enslaved, not the black slaves taken for field work or castration by the caliphates and Ottomans, Greeks enslaved en masse in southern Italy and Sicily for field work by the Romans who kept them chained together and underfed day and night because they were easily replaceable, Slavs raided and captured to the point the ethnonym becomes the etymology for the word slave...need I go on?
Yeah it's pretty obvious you're most knowledgeable of slavery in West Africa.
Wow! What vitriol.
Also maybe try to not mix up race with culture/nationality? Different definitions and all.

Good day to you.
 
Top