Reconsidering the Williams Thesis: Case Study of the French Slave Trade

By Jessica Kettner

Kettner 2

Reconsidering the Williams Thesis: Case Study of the French Slave Trade By: Jessica Kettner Introduction In September, 1996, many scholars met to commemorate the 50 year anniversary of Eric Williamss (1911-1981) work, Capitalism and Slavery.1 The arguments put forth in this book continue to be a powerful influence to researchers studying the topic of capitalism and slavery today. In this work Williams makes an argument that the profits of the Atlantic slave trade fueled the industrial revolution in England. Williams claimed that the triangular trade (meaning the trade in the Atlantic between Britain, Africa and the Caribbean colonies) gave a hefty stimulus to the British industry, and that without the income generated by the profits of this trade, the industry would not have had sufficient funds to grow and expand with the force that it did.2 He also states that:
An eighteenth century writer has estimated the sterling value of the 303,737 slaves carried in 878 Liverpool ships between 1783 and 1793 at over fifteen million pounds. Deducting commissions and other charges and the cost of the outfit of the ships and maintenance of the slaves, he concluded that the average annual profit was over thirty per cent.3

These two sentences have inspired entire articles addressing the profits of the Atlantic slave trade, a few of which I will discuss later in this paper. Williams also addresses the importance of the sugar industry in England during this period by quoting a statement made by Sir Dalby Thomas in 1745: The pleasure, glory and grandeur of England has been advanced more by sugar than by any

1 Cateau, H./ Carrington, S.H.H., Capitalism and Slavery fifty years later. Eric Eustace Williams- a reassessment of the man and his work (New York: 2000), 1. 2 Williams, Eric, Capitalism and Slavery (N.C.: Chapel Hill, 1944), 52. 3 Williams, Capitalism and Slavery, 36.

Kettner 3

other commodity, wool not excepted.4 This quotation demonstrates the importance of the production and consumption of sugar to England, which by default, relays the importance of slavery, as it was the only means of providing the labor that drove the sugar industry. Williamss thesis, that the profits of the Atlantic slave trade led to the economic growth and industrial development of England, has been taken up by other researchers in the field and debated with surprising consistency since its publishing in 1944. In this paper, I will outline the key arguments brought out by the discussion surrounding Capitalism and Slavery and discuss those arguments in relation to the French slave trade in the West Indies as a way of testing their validity.

Debate about The Williams Thesis In Capitalism and Slavery in the Exceedingly Long Run, Barbara Solow discusses the effects that slavery and practice of treating humans as capital had on the economic development of several locations across a very wide span of time. She states that Slavery plays a role in the development of capitalist forms of economic organization from their first appearance.5 Solow retraces the development of the institution of slavery starting with the Italians in the Mediterranean. From there, she outlines the slave-sugar complex as it spread its way across the European continent. In her examination of the use of slaves to produce sugar in Europe and its colonies, Solow deduces that It is neither necessary nor sufficient that this scenario lead to an industrial revolution.

4 Williams, Capitalism and Slavery, 55. Williams does not state the date of this quote in his book, but further research led me to site that did have the specific year in which Sir Dalby was quoted having said this: discoveringbristol.org.uk/slavery/routes/places-involved/bristol/growth/. 5 Solow, Barbara L., Capitalism and Slavery in the Exceedingly Long Run, in: Solow, Barbara L., and Stanley L. Engerman, British Capitalism and Caribbean Slavery: The Legacy of Eric Williams (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 55.

Kettner 4

Whether it did remains to be seen from the historical record.6 Simply put, she is arguing that the amount of research that has been done on the topic is adequate neither to solidly confirm nor deny that the Atlantic slave trade led to the Industrial Revolution. She spends the next 15 to 20 pages discussing the Atlantic trading network that stretched to several different areas (such as Africa, Brazil, Palestine, Crete, Madeira, the Caribbean) in order to attempt to answer the question of whether or not the slave trade did, or even could have, led to the Industrial Revolution. Solow ultimately concludes that Slavery did not cause the Industrial Revolution, but played an active role in its pattern and timing.7 Although this conclusion is not in complete agreement with the Williams thesis, it does support some of its aspects. Solows focus on the importance of the slave trade as a potential cause, but not the cause, of the Industrial Revolution serves as a compliment to the argument introduced by Williams, but recognizes the possibility that there might be multiple other factors that could also have had just as much, or even more, influence on the economic growth and industrial development of England. Like Solow, Stanley L. Engerman also grapples with the ideas put forth in Capitalism and Slavery in his article The Slave Trade and British Capital Formation in the Eighteenth Century: A comment on the Williams Thesis. This work by Engerman is one example of an article that was written specifically to address the two sentences in Williamss book that place the profit of slave trading at over thirty percent. One of the main concerns about Williamss work, or perhaps more about the ways in which his work has been interpreted, that Engerman voices at the start of his article is whether or not Williams was including the profits from the entire plantation economy system in his argument for slavery financing the Industrial Revolution. Although Engerman points out that he believes Williams did in fact intend to include the entire plantation economy
6 Solow and Engerman, British Capitalism and Caribbean Slavery, 57. 7 Solow and Engerman, British Capitalism and Caribbean Slavery, 72.

Kettner 5

system in his argument, Engerman focuses his study specifically on the profits of the slave trade itself. He states that:
There are two quite separable theses presented by Eric Williams, and these are clearly distinguished in his preface. The first, which shall be discussed here, concerns the economic study of the role of Negro slavery and the slave trade in providing the capital which financed the Industrial Revolution in England, and is amenable to economic analysis. The second, the role of mature industrial capitalism in destroying the slave system,.8

For this particular article, Engerman chooses to focus on the first thesis by attempting to estimate the profits of the slave trade and how those profits contributed to overall investments in Britain during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Engerman writes that:
The basic procedure used in this paper to estimate the magnitude of the contribution of the slave trade to financing the Industrial Revolution involves the use of four numbers. These are: (1) the number of slaves carried by the British from Africa to the New World; (2) the profits per slave; (3) the level of British national income; and (4) the ratio of investment to income.9

For the next several pages of this article Engerman goes through each of these four numbers and discusses exactly how they were found and computed. Once the methods behind the computations are discussed, he goes through and calculates the profits of the trade. Engerman concludes that even under some implausible assumptions, the aggregate contribution of slave trade profits to the financing of British capital formation in the eighteenth century could not be so large as to bear weight as the, or a, major contributing factor of the Industrial Revolution.10 He further stipulates
8 Engerman, Stanley L., The Slave Trade and British Capital Formation in the Eighteenth Century: A Comment on the Williams Thesis, The Business History Review 46, No. 4 (Winter, 1972): 431. Stanley L. Engerman is a professor of economics and history at the University of Rochester. The second thesis of Capitalism and Slavery mentioned in this quotation will not be discussed in this paper, but is an interesting part of Williamss work that deserves to at least be mentioned. 9 Engerman, The Slave Trade, 435. 10 Engerman, The Slave Trade, 441. For and interesting table depicting the contribution of slave trade profits to British national income see page 440 of this work. There is also a table on page 438 of this article that shows the estimated profit per

Kettner 6

that, It is rather clear that a basically static neo-classical model cannot provide a favorable outcome for arguments such as those of Eric Williams.11 This claim by Engerman, that basic models for calculating estimated profitability from the Atlantic slave trade in Britain will repeatedly disprove Williamss thesis, is upheld not only by this work, but also by the work of William Darity, Jr about a decade later. In 1985, similarly to Engerman ,William Darity Jr. wrote The Numbers Game and Profitability of the British Trade in Slaves to discuss Williamss claim that profits from the slave trade were over thirty percent. In the first paragraph of this article, Darity lays out three main questions that reflect the disputes about the Atlantic slave trade. He states that:
In particular, disputes continue to wax strong over the profitability of the Atlantic Slave trade, on three major dimensions: first, the degree of competition characteristic of the market in slaves; second, the typical magnitude of the rate of profit achieved by enterprises engaged in the peculiar industry; third, the status of Eric Williamss hypothesis on the contribution of the slave trade to European industrialization.12

Darity discusses each of these three questions by analyzing the work of Roger Anstey. Ansteys method of deducing the profitability of the slave trade was similar to that of Engermans discussed in the previous paragraph in that he uses a clear and concise mathematical equation to get at the profitability of the trade. However Ansteys assessment deals primarily with the latter half of the eighteenth century, whereas Engerman was looking at a broader time span (1650-1807), and the equation used for Ansteys calculations was much more complicated then Engermans simple four

slave in the British slave trade from 1650-1807, as well as a table showing the estimated number of slaves exported from Africa on British ships between the years of 1626-1807 on page 436. 11 Engerman, The Slave Trade, 442. 12 Darity Jr., William, The Numbers Game and the Profitability of the British Trade in Slaves, Journal of Economic History 45, no. 3 (1985): 693.

Kettner 7

number method.13 All of Ansteys calculations result in having the average price received per slave in the late eighteenth century being around 42, making the rate of profit around 16 percent, as opposed to Williamss 30 percent estimate.14 Ansteys overall conclusion, as stated by Darity, was that even with a profit rate as high as 30 percent the share of total profits from the slave trade in total British investment still would have been small.15 This argument supports Engermans conclusion; that strict mathematical interpretations of profit in the Atlantic slave trade provide contradictions to the claims made by Eric Williams in Capitalism and Slavery.

Connecting the Williams Thesis to the French Slave Trade Although Williamss study, and most of the secondary literature surrounding it, deal specifically with Britain, he writes in his conclusion that The title British Capitalism and Slavery, though pedantically more accurate, would nevertheless have been generically false. What was characteristic of British capitalism was typical also of capitalism in France.16 Drawing from this quotation it becomes quite clear that Williams believed his argument would stand true for other European nations as well. In order to determine whether this is true for the case of the French slave trade, it is necessary to first give a brief overview of the secondary literature discussing the history of the French slave trade from the period in question (1600-1750).
13 To view the equation that Anstey used for his calculations, see page 695 of Daritys work. Suggested reading for more information on this method : Anstey, Roger, The Volume and Profitability of the British Slave Trade, 1761-1807, in S.L. Engerman and E.D. Genovese, eds., Race and Slavery in the WEstern Hemisphere: Quantitative Studies (Princeton, 1975), pp. 3-31 AND Anstey, Roger, The Atlantic Slave Trade and British Abolition 1760-1810 (Atlantic Highlands, N.J., 1975). Although the study of Anstey begins and ends just outside of the period that this paper is most concerned about, it is still important to note due to the fact that it is in agreement with the conclusions of Engerman. It is also important in that it relates the conclusions of Ansteys research directly to the thesis of Eric Williams. 14 Darity, The Numbers Game, 701. 15 Darity, The Numbers Game, 702. 16 Williams, Capitalism and Slavery, 209.

Kettner 8

There is very little secondary literature available in English that discusses the history of the French slave trade in any period, but resources are especially limited when looking at the trade in the period before 1700. The Black ordeal of Slavery and Slave Trading in the French West Indies 1625-1715 by Clarence Munford is a three volume set that includes a variety of information about the history of the French slave trade in the West Indies.17 Chapter four of volume one begins the discussion of the genesis of the European slave trade. The author lays out five main considerations and circumstances that governed European slave trading activity in Africa during this time period and determined its historic outcome: 1.) Beginning about 1619 in the Netherlands and swelling to full maturity around 1630, an economic depression spread through Europe; 2.) Whenever the major maritime powers went to war, the frequency of slaving voyages outbound from Europe to Africa declined dramatically; 3.) Following the Portuguese lead, Dutch, English and French slave traders supplied Americas spreading plantations with African slaves who were taken specifically because they were already skilled in tropical agriculture; 4.) The dehumanization that began with this trade continued and worsened, laying a firm foundation for the racist fury which has stained the pages of history for centuries; 5.) Before the eighteenth century, European loading of captives was so chaotic and sporadic that it is practically impossible to discern with accuracy how many were taken.18 These points are important because they outline the context of the economy of France during the time that this trade was developing. Munford also states that, France in particular was at war during most of this period, which is important to keep in mind when considering the comparison of French capital gains from the slave trade to the gains of the English in relation to the Williams thesis. From these very broad, overarching themes of European
17 Munford, Clarence J., The Black Ordeal of Slavery and Slave Trading in the French West Indies 16251715 (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1991). This source provides a wealth of information about the French involvement in the West Indies outside the realm of my research. Those interested in slave resistance or every day life would also find valuable information in volume three of this set. 18 Munford, The Black Ordeal, 126-129.

Kettner 9

involvement in the slave trade, Munford moves to a more specific study of the development of the French trade in Africa and the West Indies. The first permanent French way-station in Africa was at Bieurt in 1638, and was called St. Louis.19 The strong foothold at Bieurt attracted other French traders to the area; however it was not reinforced by soldiers or naval support from France, and in 1642, the relationship between the traders at the fort and the surrounding kingdoms deteriorated, resulting in an attack that virtually destroyed the station for about fifteen years.20 Several more unsuccessful attempts were made to establish a permanent foothold in the area, until about 1671 when the enterprise moved to Whydah.21 This foothold finally allowed the French to get more involved in the slave trade, and they began to become more prominent in the network. Munford goes on to discuss numerous instances of French trading posts that popped up along the trading coasts and how they progressed throughout history. In chapter eleven, Munford writes that The enslavement of Black laborers in the Caribbean figured vitally in the long crisis of Frances transition to capitalism from the feudal mode of production.22 This links French involvement in the slave trade to its economic development, although not through the profits of the trade itself, as Williams would suggest. Although this source does not directly address the profits made by the French in the slave trade, it is not hard to deduce from the other events mentioned how the author viewed the period. Chapter twelve discusses how the French continued to experience difficult economic times during the sixteen and seventeen hundreds, indicating that if there were profits made

19 Munford, The Black Ordeal, 155. 20 Munford, The Black Ordeal, 156. 21 Munford, The Black Ordeal, 159. Whydah was the premier entrepot during this period, and the English were already located in this area. The French ended up building a factory near the lagoons of the area, according to Munford. This move not only allowed the French to increase their trading, but it also gave this port another boost when competing with surrounding kingdoms for the business of the European traders. 22 Munford, The Black Ordeal, 361.

Kettner 10

in the slave trade, they were not substantial enough to pull France out of the economic slumps that were occurring, (possibly due to the high frequency of wars mentioned earlier). France and the American Tropics to 1700: Tropics of Discontent by Philip P. Boucher is the most recent study of the French slave trade that I have found in my research. Although it does not have a lot of material on the actual trading of the slaves (such as numbers, prices, etc.), it is the only source that I found that discussed French involvement in the Caribbean before 1625. This book also discusses the hard times that France was experiencing throughout the period of 1600-1750, in terms of economics as well as the many wars in which it was involved. Chapter four discusses the transition of the French colonies from small farms to the all-consuming sugar and slave regime.23 This is significant because it represents a turning point for the French colonies, from being simply participators in the slave trade, to being consumers dependent on the commodities that the trade brings. Boucher then goes on to discuss the different companies under which trade was conducted. One such company was the Compagnie de la France quinoctiale, which was dedicated to the religious duty to implant Christianity among the sauvages as their principal reason for involvement.24 He discusses a few other French trading companies, but does not go into great detail about any of their actions or profits. In chapter six Boucher states that Larger-scale agriculture and African slavery became more significant in the later 1650s.25 This was because the French islands were beginning to produce more sugar due to the Dutch loss of Pernambuco in 1654, which was one of their main suppliers of sugar.26 Although this does show an increase in French use of slaves, it does not show that French profits from trading slaves either increased or decreased, nor does it show whether or not
23 Boucher, Philip, France and the American Tropics to 1700: Tropics of Discontent? (Maryland: John Hopkins University Press, 2008), 91. 24 Boucher, France and the American Tropics to 1700, 95. 25 Boucher, France and the American Tropics to 1700, 157. 26 Boucher, France and the American Tropics to 1700, 157.

Kettner 11

the French began to trade more slaves in this time period. Boucher goes on in the rest of the book to discuss the ways that the structures of the societies in the French colonies progressed throughout the seventeenth century, with little attention paid to the slave trade and/or profits that were made from it. Boucher and Munfords books provide a fairly thorough history of the French slave trade (in the Caribbean) through about 1715. For the remaining thirty five years that are included in the time frame between 1600-1750, I will draw from The French Slave Trade In the Eighteenth Century: An Old Regime Business by Robert L. Stein. This source offers a little bit more insight into the profits (or at least what the merchants perceived the profits to be) of the slave trade to the French merchants. According to Stein, the French slave trade developed in order to fulfill the needs of an expanding economy and to overcome the losses resulting from an appalling death rate.27 Stein writes that French merchants clearly thought highly of the trade, for they outfitted an average of seventeen ships per year in the three years following the treatys signing; this was far more per year than the companies had achieved before 1713.28 Stein goes on to outline the increase in the number of merchants participating in the slave trade throughout the next few decades, in which more than doubled in the late 1730s. He states that these there were, in reality two French slave trades in the seventeenth century, one supplying the French colonies, the other the Spanish colonies.29 This period of intense trading came to a close, however, in 1744

27 Stein, Robert L., The French Slave Trade in the Eighteenth Century: An Old Regime Business (Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1979), 10. 28 Stein, Robert L., The French Slave Trade, 13. The treaty mentioned in this quote is the Treaty of Utrecht which was signed in 1713, and allowed independent traders into the trade and limited the dominance of the companies of France (Compagnie du Senegal and the Compagnie de Guinee). 29 Stein, Robert L., The French Slave Trade, 11.

Kettner 12

when the French engaged in war with Britain (which given main point number two in Munfords work, would lead to the natural decline in resources for slaving).30 These three works on the French slave trade focus mainly on the trade in the Caribbean, and have little information about the actual prices or profits from the trade itself. To supplement for this lack of information, a brief overview of the French economy during this time period is necessary. For this information I will turn to Revolutionary Commerce: Globalization and the French Monarchy by Paul Cheney. In this book Cheney states that:
A group of new institutionalist economic historians has recently argued the importance of Atlantic exchanges to long-term growth and industrialization, while an econometric study affirmed the proposition that foreign trade acted as a motor of growth for the entire French economy.31

Although he does not specifically state which overseas trade is being discussed here, he states in a later paragraph that, The Atlantic economy played a key role in these advances, but it too had structural problems, indicating the Atlantic trade as one of the most important foreign trades to the French economy.32 Although many historians that research the French economy seem to focus more on the downside linked to the many wars that the nation participated in, Cheney describes the French economy in the early eighteenth century as prosperous and dynamic.33 This description coincides with the years of high involvement in the Atlantic trade following the treaty of Utrecht that Stein discussed in his work. The idea of French prosperity is carried throughout Cheneys entire work, linking the growth of the economy to the profits made from foreign trade. Another im30 Stein, The French Slave Trade, 23. 31 Cheney, Paul, Revolutionary Commerce: Globalization and the French Monarchy (Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2010), 14. This source provides a somewhat untraditional review of the French economy, focusing specifically on the global aspects of its development. It is especially interesting to my research, as many of the connections that it discusses between the different economies during this time period show how the countries of the world were being linked together through the network of the Atlantic trade. 32 Cheney, Revolutionary Commerce, 15. 33 Cheney, Revolutionary Commerce, 22.

Kettner 13

portant factor to note about the French economy during this time period, is that there was a dispute among the leaders of economic thought as to how the economy should be run. The increasing amount of commercial trading that the members of the French economy were engaging in was causing a rift in political/economic thought on how best to govern or control the commerce.34 This is important to note because it seems as though the amount of capital that the Atlantic trade was bringing in for France was enough to shift the focus of the leaders of the country from acquiring more land, to acquiring more capital through trade. The works of Munford, Boucher, and Cheney discussed above focus solely on the French trade and economy without much consideration or comparison of other trades. The Making of New World Slavery: From the Baroque to the Modern 1492-1800 by Robin Blackburn, however, devotes a section to an account of the French slave trade in the West Indies in comparison to the trade of the British. This assessment is especially helpful to my research as it directly compares different aspects of the French and British trades and sugar productions. Blackburn states that:
Paradoxically, while the French plantation colonies were more productive and competitive than those of Britain, the latters orientation to Atlantic trade was more favourable to metropolitan economic growth.35

This sets the stage for Blackburns comparison of the trading patterns and production output of the two nations. Blackburn writes that the difference in performance between the French and British sugar colonies comes from the variance in their economic systems at large. He discusses how the
34 In Cheneys book he discusses the Physiocrats, who believed that the real wealth of France (or any nation) was its arable land source for providing food for the inhabitants. This fueled the rival between the physiocrats and the French monarchy, who were beginning to see that the amount of wealth that a nation controlled (mainly through the commerce of trading overseas) was becoming the more dominant factor over how much land mass they controlled. 35 Robin Blackburn, The making of New World slavery: from the Baroque to the modern, 1492-1800 (New York: Verso, 1997): pg. 443-444.

Kettner 14

France, even though it had approximately three times the population of Britain, consumed only half the amount of sugar and had a smaller internal market than Britain.36 Blackburn also argues that:
The British plantations had to compete for funds with investments in British agriculture, manufacturing, commerce, and public bonds. The evidence cited above on the profitability of British plantations suggests profit-taking as well as profit-making, in so far as the calculated rate of return was net of new investment in the plantation. Of course there were phases of plantation expansion in the British colonies when profits were ploughed back into them, but the tariff protecting the British market gave British planters premium profits which they saw no reason to reinvest in the plantations.37

This assessment of the system by which the British built and maintained their sugar colonies is then put into comparison with the French pattern of colonial development. Blackburn states that the French system consisted of merchants directly sponsoring plantation development. He writes So-called liens dhabitation and affirmage agreements led to mercantile capital being deployed in the construction or enlargement of estates.38 He also states that these investments were not always voluntary, seeing as many merchants were simply paying planters debts in order to sustain the prosperity of the colony. After comparing the two countries plantations, Blackburn shifts to a discussion of the Williams thesis. He writes that:
Of course, the Industrial Revolution itself took place against the highly unusual and propitious background of a prior capitalist development and dramatic advances in several sectors, many linked to the slave-based economy of the Atlantic.39

36 Blackburn, The making, 445. 37 Blackburn, The making, 444. 38 Blackburn, The making, 444. 39 Blackburn, The making, 518.

Kettner 15

This quote suggests that the slave trade along with the other factors of the economy that came with it, at the very least, played a role in the economic growth and Industrial Revolution in Britain.

Another Look at the Williams Thesis: Case Study of the French Slave Trade Heretofore, this paper has discussed a basic understanding of what is known of the history of the French slave trade as well as a very brief idea of the economic structure of France during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. It is now possible to use the French slave trade as a case study in order to discuss the debates centered around the Williams thesis. As was stated previously, the scholars that have taken up the discussion of the Williams thesis have done so exclusively for the case of British economic growth and industrial development, excluding other European nations, such as France. However, Williamss statement in the conclusion of Capitalism and Slavery asserts that what was characteristic of British capitalism was typical also of capitalism in France, meaning that the majority of arguments made by Williams (and his supporters/critics) about the British trade should also be applicable to the French trade in the Atlantic. 40 This means that if we assume the Williams thesis to be true, then we should be able to see some link between the French slave trade and the economic growth and industrial development of France. This section of the paper will introduce primary source materials as evidence for (or against) profitability in the French slave trade and its investment (or lack there of) in industrial development. As stated earlier, Stein wrote that French merchants began outfitting more ships after the Utrecht treaty in 1713, but that the trade dropped off early in 1744 due to the countries involvement in war with England.41 Taking into account the second main point in Munfords work, i.e.,the
40 Williams, Capitalism and Slavery, 209. 41 Stein, The French Slave Trade, 13 & 23.

Kettner 16

idea that as a nation becomes more involved in wars, it becomes less invested in trading endeavors, this argument made more sense. As I continued my research into the French slave trade, however, I found a primary source that contradicts this claim. In an issue of the London Gazette published in August of 1744, there is a chart that depicts several French trading ships in the Leeward Islands. Recorded on this chart are twenty-one French ships heading towards various locations, such as Bourdeaux, Martinique, Guadaloupe, and Cruizing.42 Also included in this chart is a column containing a brief record of the cargo in each ship. The contents were extremely varied with everything from flowers to slaves being included. One of the ships in particular was said to be carrying 650 Negroes, with another of the ships said to have been carrying 400 Negroes.43 Along with the ships that were carrying slaves, six other vessels reported carrying sugar, which was also linked to the economy of the slave trade.44 Given the number of French ships reported in this chart, it seems to suggest that French merchants were still very active in trading during mid to late 1744, regardless of the war with England. Although the discrepancy between this primary source and the secondary literature on the French trade does not specifically relate to the arguments surrounding the Williams thesis, it seemed important to note that there is evidence to suggest that the French were still active in trading after the beginning of the war with England in 1744, contrary to the claims of some of the scholars mentioned earlier. The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database also provides a wealth of information concerning the different ships that were trading for France, were they went, and what they carried. This data-

42 The London Gazette, August 4th, 1744, Issue #8351, 8. 43 The London Gazette, Issue #8351, 8. An interesting note, the ship said to be carrying 400 negroes was also carrying 116 elephants teeth, which brings several questions to mind: Was there a large market for these items in the eighteenth century? How large was the ship, did the added cargo of the elephants teeth add to what scholars agree were already crowded conditions for slaves among the ships? 44 The London Gazette, Issue #8351, 8.

Kettner 17

base has literally thousands of recordings of slave vessels from various countries trading from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries. I was able to track down several French vessels that were trading in the period between 1600 and 1750. One example was a French ship named the Esprance, which set out from Nantes for the Windward and Ivory Coasts in December of 1713.45 The site lists that the ship carried 183 slaves, ninety-seven of them surviving to reach the final destination in France. Another French ship that I found record of on this site was the Jupiter, which left port at Bordeaux in September of 1743 destined for West Central Africa.46 According to the record for this ship, the Jupiter purchased 314 slaves, 286 of them reaching their final destination (not filled in on the chart). Each of these voyages lasted approximately one year, however, the Esprance lost approximately half of their slaves (47%) compared to an 8% loss on the Jupiter.47 This comparison shows the extreme variability of the middle passage, which was a large factor in determining the profits of the trade. Unfortunately, this source does not provide information concerning the purchase or sale price of the slaves. Also discussed in Steins work was the perception that the merchants of the time had about the profitability of the slave trade. This can be seen even earlier than the eighteenth century in The history of the government of France, under the administration of the great Armand Du Plessis, Cardinall and duke of Richlieu, and chief minister of state in that kingdome. Wherein occur many important negotiations, relating to most part of Christendome in his time. With politique observations upon the chapters by Charles Vialart. In this book, Vialart discusses the importance of foreign trade to France in the seventeenth century. He writes that:
45 The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database, Emory University, Accessed May 9th, 2012, www.slavevoyages.org/tast/index.faces 46 The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database 47 The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database

Kettner 18 Now Commerce at Sea, being one of the chief Fountains of a Nations riches, he made it his first care to settle that in a safe course, which his Majesty having assented to, he gave notice of it to the Undertakers, and that he should be glad to see them enter into Companies and Partnerships; assuring them, that the should have all possible assistance from him.48

It is clear by this quote that overseas trading was perceived to be very profitable and of vital importance to the economy of the country during this time. This source also expands on Steins work, as it is the ruling class of France that is discussing the profitability of the trade, not just the merchants themselves. This would suggest that the wealth and profits of the trade were far reaching enough for the crown to consider it an important factor of the economy of the country. Although this source mainly deals with commerce outside the realm of the slave trade, such as grains and other commodities, it is important to see the emphasis that Armand Du Plessis put on overseas trade for the growth of the economy of France. It is also important to note the date that this source was written (1657) because as the secondary literature has shown, the French involvement in the slave trade really began to take off after the signing of the treaty of Utrecht, which was not until 1713. In any case, this source shows that the French economy was dependent on overseas commerce for stability (at least in the eyes of its ruler at the time) during the mid-seventeenth century, setting a precedent for future dependence on overseas trade, which starting in the eighteenth century included the slave trade.
48 Vialart, Charles, The history of the government of France, under the administration of the great Armand Du Plessis, Cardinall and duke of Richlieu, and chief minister of state in that kingdome. Wherein occur many important negotiations, relating to most part of Christendome in his time. With politique observations upon the chapters (London: 1657), 146. This source provides a very long and detailed account of several aspects of French history during under Armand Du Plessis (which is the he that Vialart is referring to in this quote). I was unable to find information about this author, so I cannot say with certainty where his perspective is coming from (in other words whether this is a French perspective on the history of France, or perhaps an English perspective), but the language of the document would suggest to me that the author was French. Also, the original document was written in French, so if the author was not originally from France, he was at least a French speaker.

Kettner 19

The French involvement in the slave trade along the coast of Guinea is discussed in a series of letters by Willem Bosman published in 1721. In one letter he writes that The remaining Trade of these People consists in Slaves; which are also bought up by the mentioned Negroes: But most of them are transported hence by the English, French, and Portugueze Ships.49 Throughout the rest of this letter, Bosman repeatedly refers to the English and the French in regards to the slave trade, which could lead one to conclude that France and Britain were the primary traders in the region. Although the repeated mention of the French involvement in the slave trade off the Guinea cost does prove that they were actively trading there, it does not prove that the trade was profitable for those involved. In fact, a few statements made in Bosmans letters seem to indicate the opposite. For example, he writes that:
In short, not to exclude any Body in the whole Country, as I have before hinted, they are such expert Thieves, that they obliged a French Merchant to say of them, That they understood the Art of Thievery better than the Cut-purses and Pick-pockets of Paris.50

In this quote, Bosman is referring to the leaders of the kingdoms of the Guinea coast and how they are able to more or less trick the European traders into deals that are more beneficial for them. In a later letter, Bosman writes about how the Dutch would brand their slaves, in order to keep them separate from the French and English slaves so that the traders of Guinea could not attempt to exchange them for worse, at which they have a good Hand, showing just one example of the ways that the indigenous traders attempted to trick the European traders.51 Given that the first quote was
49 Bosman, Willem, A New and accurate description of the coast of Guinea, divided into the Gold, the Slave, and the Ivory Coasts. Containing a geographical, political and natural history of the kingdoms and countries: with a particular account of the rife, progress, and present condition of all the European settlements upon that coast; and the just measures for improving the several branches of the Guinea trade. Illustrated with several cuts. Written originally in Dutch by William Bosman, chief factor for the Dutch at the Castle of St. George dElmina. And now faithfully done into English. To which is prefixsd, an exact map of the whole coast of Guinea that was not in the original (London: 1721), 304. 50 Bosman, A New and accurate description of the coast of Guinea, 324. 51 Bosman, A new and accurate description of the coast of Guinea, 341.

Kettner 20

made by a Frenchman, it is safe to assume that this type of trickery occurred to at least some of the French traders that participated in the Guinea coast, taking away from their profitability. Bosman also writes that It sometimes happens that when the Inland Countries are at Peace, here are no Slaves to be got: So that the Trade of this Place is utterly uncertain, adding yet another complexity that might cut into the profitability of the trade for the French merchants.52 Another source published just one year after the letters of Bosman also points to English and French domination in trade at sea. In A survey of trade. In four parts. Together with considerations on our money and bullion William Wood states that the French by name, who are now become our greatest and most dangerous Rivals in Trade,.53 This source is discussing trade in a much more broad sense than Bosmans letters, discussing the French trade in places such as the East-India shores, the coast of Africa and the Brazills, as well as the West Indies.54 Wood documents an Anglo-French rivalry in overseas trade. He writes that:
By this trade France has not only intercepted great sums of money from coming to Spain directly, and so into England, and gaind vastly annually, and been thereby enabled to answer and maintain the charge of such armies as it had the last war, and the other vast expences the war consequently put France to; but in a great measure prevents and considerably lessens our trade, as well to old Spain, as the Spanish West-Indies, to our vast loss.55

This quote contains information that is relevant to several different arguments that have been made or discussed in this paper. First, it points to the profits that the French made through their overseas trading, much like was pointed out in Vialarts writing. This portion of the quote provides evidence that English traders in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, much like the French mer52 Bosman, A new and accurate description of the coast of Guinea, 304. 53 William Wood, A survey of trade. In four parts. Together with considerations on our money and bullion (London: 1722), 113. 54 Wood, A survey of trade, 318. 55 Wood, A survey of trade, 209.

Kettner 21

chants discussed in Steins book, saw great profitability for French merchants involved in overseas trade. Second, the last part of the quote shows the concern of Wood over the loss of English profit in the trade, which supports many of the arguments made by other authors discussed in this paper about the importance of trade revenues to England. Last, and most important to my argument, this quote discusses how the profits that France acquired in this trade were invested. Woods claim that the profits of the French trade with the Spanish directly funded their war efforts. Although Wood does not state what the commodities being traded were, it is possible to use Steins work to find a probable answer to this question. As stated previously, Stein wrote that there were in reality two French slave trades in the seventeenth century, one supplying the French colonies, the other the Spanish colonies, which could lead one to infer that the profitable trade with Spain discussed by Wood was this same slave trade.56 This rivalry between England and France can also be seen in a letter that was written two years before Woods book was published. In 1718 the South Sea Company wrote a letter to the directors of the French Assiento Company. This letter was in response to a letter written previously discussing the prosecution against a French trader named Mr. Touchee.57 The letter states that Our Factor upon his first Arrival at the Havanah finding that Your Said Agent Went on in Introducing Negros and Selling them at Low prices to the Great Prejudice of our Market.58 This quote actually serves two purposes for this paper. The first is that it shows that the French merchant in this case was selling his slaves at a lower rate than the British, leading to the question of whether or not all French merchants sold their
56 Stein, Robert L., The French Slave Trade, 11. 57 South Sea Company, The South Sea Company to the Directors of the French Assiento Company (1718), IN: Donnan, E., ed., Documents Illustrative of the History of the Slave Trade to America (Washington: 1930-1935), 235. The South Sea Company was a British trading company that dealt with the slave trade in South America in the eighteenth century. 58 South Sea Company, The South Sea Company, 235.

Kettner 22

slaves at lower rates than their British counterparts, making it more complicated to compare the two trades. The second purpose that this quote serves is to show that the South Sea Company was concerned about the French underselling them in the area, showing that the profits they were receiving were important enough to their trade that the loss of business to the French was worth the hassle of prosecuting the French merchant. This situation could lead one to infer that the French traders, at least in Havanah, were selling their slaves for a lower price, meaning less profit for them than the British would receive for their slaves. Although it is possible that the lower price offered by the French allowed them to sell a higher quantity of slaves, primary sources do not support such an argument.

Conclusion The primary sources discussed above provide strong evidence that the French merchants were very active in the slave trade during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The chart in the London Gazette article alone depicts twenty-one separate French vessels that were trading, some of them carrying slaves, and many of them carrying sugar and other commodities that were only produced through the powers of slave labor.59 Similarly, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database shows record of several ships trading for France between 1600 and 1750. Unfortunately, I did not have sufficient time to sort through all the sources that this site had to offer. Had I had more time, I would have liked to attempt to take the numbers of slaves on each voyage and use an average price per slave (if one could be found) for the year of the voyage to try and determine the
59 The London Gazette, Issue #8351, 8.

Kettner 23

amount each ship was likely to have received for its slave cargo. The primary sources that I have, while showing that the French were very active in slave trading during this period, are not enough to make a solid argument that the French slave trade was profitable at all, let alone profitable enough to foster economic growth or fund the industrial development in the country as Williams suggested. Although the source by Wood does offer at least one view of how the profits of the French trade were invested, more evidence of actual numbers and profits that were realized, as well as how those profits were invested in the nations economy, is needed to determine whether slave trade was a factor in the economic growth and industrial development of France. Also, given more time, I would have liked to have found some translations for the few secondary sources written in French that concern the slave trade. Although these sources would be unlikely to provide a clear link between possible profits of the trade and the growth of the economy, it would be beneficial to access how scholars in France discussed the history of the slave trade in comparison to scholars of other countries. I would also have liked to dig a little deeper into the issue of whether or not Williams was addressing the entire plantation economy system, as Engerman suggested. If I had found that Williams was in fact considering the entire system in his work, this would have made a huge difference in the types of sources that could be used as evidence, because I would then be able to take into account the profits made in the French sugar islands, which were very lucrative to the country. I would also have been able to take into account the amount of money saved simply by using slaves instead of hired labor, which would have increased the amount of capital available for investment. For the purposes of this paper, however, I was limited to finding a link between the profits of the French slave trade itself and the economic growth and industrialization of the coun-

Kettner 24

try. Unfortunately, the secondary and primary sources on the slave trade that I analyzed in my research were not sufficient to support Williamss argument, and in fact most of the evidence points to there being little or no profit in the French slave trade, making it very unlikely that it was connected to the economic growth or industrial development of the nation.

Bibliography Bosman, Willem, A new and accurate description of the coast of Guinea, divided into the Gold, the Slave, and the Ivory Coasts. Containing a geographical, political and natural history of the kingdoms and countries: with a particular account of the rife, progress, and present condition of all the European settlements upon that coast; and the just measures for improving the several branches of the Guinea trade. Illustrated with several cuts. Written originally in Dutch by William Bosman, chief factor for the Dutch at the Castle of St. George d'Elmina. And now faithfully done into English. To which is prefix'd, an exact map of the whole coast of Guinea, that was not in the original (London: 1721). Boucher, Philip, France and the American Tropics to 1700: Tropics of Discontent? (Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008). Cateau, H./ Carrington, S.H.H., Capitalism and Slavery fifty years later. Eric Eustace Williams- a reassessment of the man and his work (New York: 2000).

Kettner 25

Cheney, Paul, Revolutionary Commerce: Globalization and the French Monarchy (Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2010). Darity Jr., William, The Numbers Game and the Profitability of the British Trade in Slaves, Journal of Economic History 45, no. 3 (1985): 693-704. Engerman, Stanley L., The Slave Trade and British Capital Formation in the Eighteenth Century: A Comment on the Williams Thesis, The Business History Review 46, No. 4 (Winter, 1972): 430-443. The London Gazette, issue #8351, August 4th, 1744, p.8. Munford, Clarence J., The Black Ordeal of Slavery and Slave Trading in the French West Indies 1625-1715 (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1991). Smith, William, A new voyage to Guinea: describing the customs, manners, soil, Climate, Habits, Buildings, Education, Manual Arts, Agriculture, Trade, Employments, Languages, Ranks of Distinction, Habitations, Diversions, Marriages, and whatever else is memorable among the Inhabitants. Likewise, an account of their animals, minerals, &c. With great Variety of entertaining Incidents, worthy of Observation, that happen'd during the Author's Travels in that large Country. Illustrated with Cutts, engrav'd from Drawings taken from the Life. With an alphabetical index. By William Smith, Esq; Appointed by the Royal African Company to survey their Settlements, make Discoveries, &c. (London: 1745). Solow, Barbara L., Capitalism and Slavery in the Exceedingly Long Run, Journal of Interdisciplinary History 17, no. 4 (1987): 711-737. South Sea Company, The South Sea Company to the Directors of the French Assiento Company (1718), IN: Donnan, E., ed. Documents Illustrative of the History of the Slave Trade to America (Washington: 1930-1935): 235. Stein, Robert, The French Slave Trade in the Eighteenth Century: An Old Regime Business (Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1979). The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database, accessed May 9th, 2012, http://www.slavevoyages.org/tast/index.faces. Vialart, Charles, The history of the government of France, under the administration of the great Armand Du Plessis, Cardinall and duke of Richlieu, and chief minister of state in that kingdome. Wherein occur many important negotiations, relating to most part of Christendome in his time. With politique observations upon the chapters (London: 1657). Williams, Eric, Capitalism and Slavery (N.C.: Chapel Hill, 1944).

Kettner 26

Wood, William, A survey of trade. In four parts. Together with considerations on our money and bullion (London: 1722).