Slave buyers from the towns would travel to the African Slave Coast to obtain people to labor as slaves, and those people would then be moved to sugar fields in the Caribbean. This behavior was related to the industry’s involvement with slave traffic. While slaves were being forced to and traded at sugar estate sites, European nations exchanged their finished goods for slaves by selling labor for them. These towns gave unprocessed sugar to the metropolis, supplying refined sugar to those areas. The European nations would not have been able to amass wealth if this strategy had not been followed. In this manner, the mercantilism system’s requirements were fulfilled, emphasizing the importance of accumulating wealth through trade flows that helped states and their sectors at the cost of slavery and the work of those in sugar production.[1]. Both the sugar trade and enslavement met these criteria.
Mercantilism was an economic system that sought to improve a country’s wealth by having the government control all of the country’s business interests. This was done to optimize wealth for the country. The mercantilist economic system was based on the concepts of private property and the use of markets to organize basic economic activities. The structure emphasized the state’s self-interest over the self-interest of financial resource owners. Instead, the design prioritized the state’s self-interest. As a result, the main goal of the economic strategy was to aid the nation-state and further the goals it had set for itself. The government was mainly concerned with accumulating national wealth in the form of precious metals, but it kept strict control over production, trade, and spending. The mercantilist economic system emphasized valuable metals such as gold and silver as the foundation of wealth and power. As a result, the amassing of wealth should be the primary goal of all a country’s economic activities. The creation of territories ultimately led to the purchase of gold and silver via a trading system that favored exports over imports. This eventually led to the creation of additional regions.
European nations instituted mercantilist policies to safeguard the sugar trade. A third of Europe’s economy depended on sugar, making it the continent’s most valuable product. Due to the widespread availability of sugar-dependent beverages like cocoa, coffee, and tea, its usage skyrocketed in the 18th century.
Sugar was a staple in most European cuisines; from 1700 to 1850, the average Briton ingested twice as much sugar (4 pounds in 1700 to 50 pounds in 1850). Metal components used by industrial mills saw a rise in demand as sugar production increased. The result was the birth, continuation, and funding of the Industrial Revolution. There were a lot of sailors around because of the sugar business. In 1787, for instance, 689 ships hired 13,976 sailors.[2]. Manufacturing jobs were also created in the industry, for example, in the form of chains, locks, and iron bands used on sugar cane plantations. Because of their need for a variety of products, urban areas were able to support a thriving craft and maker community thanks to the sugar barons.
Since Europe lacked the appropriate climate for sugar cane cultivation, European nations set up settlements in areas with favorable circumstances for sugar cane cultivation to accumulate wealth. They responded by developing mercantilist policies to shield the sector. The shipping of sugar, for instance, brought in revenue for the refinery business, so the territories were forbidden to process their sugar. To keep the provinces from revolting and setting up their sugar factories, Metropolis also placed hefty taxes on pure sugar.
The production of sugar required a significant amount of effort. In the 15th century, the Portuguese and the Spanish established a model for sugar cane plantations that relied on the labor of African slaves. This model was founded on the use of indentured labor. The concept expanded to other areas and was replicated by the Dutch, French, and English forces all across the Caribbean. Sugar production required significant work, and slaves could only provide the lowest labor cost. Native Americans and Europeans formed the basis of earlier labor systems founded on enslavement. However, these methods were no longer adequate because of a higher demand for sugar.[3]. Throughout the history of the Mediterranean sugar business, enslaved Africans, Whites from the Balkans, and Russians all contributed their labor. Later on, due to their higher skill levels than other captives, African slaves were selected as the primary source of work.
In conclusion, the European states, particularly England, regarded Africans’ enslavement as an essential component of their treasuries due to the crucial role that sugar production played. Slaves provided the necessary labor to enhance sugar plantations and produce large quantities of sugar. This was made possible by their ownership of the plantations. The transportation of these massive quantities of sugar required many ships, which in turn necessitated the employment of many people, including those working in the manufacturing industry and those employed on the vessel. Therefore, many different businesses were kept alive by the practice of slavery. Thus, the primary reason why the sugar trade was advantageous to European states was due to the acceptance of enslavement and the development of mercantilist policies.
Bibliography
Baker, William. “William Wilberforce on the idea of Negro inferiority.” Journal of the History of Ideas 31, no. 3 (1970): 433-440.
Bennett, Melissa, and Kristy Warren. “Looking back and facing forwards: ten years of the London, Sugar & Slavery gallery.” Journal of Historical Geography 63 (2019): 94-99.
Clément, Alain. “English Mercantilist Thought and the Matter of Colonies from the 17th to the First Half of the 18th Century.” In Colonial Adventures: Commercial Law and Practice in the Making, pp. 127-164. Brill Nijhoff, 2020.
The Diary or Woodfall’s Register. The West Indies Lobby. British Library. (1989). https://www.bl.uk/learning/histcitizen/campaignforabolition/sources/proslavery/proslaveryarticle/proslaveryarticle.html
[1] Baker, William. “William Wilberforce on the idea of Negro inferiority.” Journal of the History of Ideas 31, no. 3 (1970): 433-440.
[2] Bennett, Melissa, and Kristy Warren. “Looking back and facing forwards: ten years of the London, Sugar & Slavery gallery.” Journal of Historical Geography 63 (2019): 94-99.
[3] Clément, Alain. “English Mercantilist Thought and the Matter of Colonies from the 17th to the First Half of the 18th Century.” In Colonial Adventures: Commercial Law and Practice in the Making, pp. 127-164. Brill Nijhoff, 2020.
write