The Success of
Revolt and the 1791 Slave Insurrection:
A Study of Saint-Domingue's Caste-Based Society
and the
Inherent Exploitation
of Racial
Discrimination of Slavery in the Caribbean
In 1791, a second generation Creole slave named Toussaint Louverture led a successful slave revolt, which culminated years later in Haiti’s[1] independence as the first black national state. With the coming of the French Revolution and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen in 1789, new Enlightenment doctrines proposed claims to the rights of liberty and equality for all men. It was this claim, "liberte, egalite, fraternite," that eventually served as the impetus for the slave rebellion in Saint-Domingue, as well as marking a turning point in the history of slave revolts.[2] After the successful revolt of 1791, many whites living in Europe and the Americas wondered how a slave uprising could have been possible, especially during a time of such economic prosperity. In 1790, just a few months before the beginning of the insurrection, the French colonist La Barre remarked on the peaceful state of life in the tropics: "There is no movement among our Negros…. They don't even think of it. They are very tranquil and obedient. A revolt among them is impossible…. Freedom for Negros is a chimera."[3] Indeed, the notion that enslaved Africans could conceive of freedom, let alone formulate strategies for gaining and securing such freedom, was a worldview widely shared by whites in Europe and the Americas and by many non-white plantation owners as well.[4] Most of the grand blancs, unable to believe the black slaves could be self-motivated and led by one of their own, believed that it was the fault of the free mulattos, whose continued demands for citizenship had enticed the slaves. Another common scapegoat was the white, abolitionist organizations in France, such as the Societe des Amis des Noirs and the Jacobins, who were thought to have masterminded the entire revolt. This essay offers a different perspective; one where the inherent exploitation of racial discrimination of slavery created a divided society and a caste system based on ethnic categories. It was this slave-labor based society that alienated and exploited the black slave in order to sustain itself which eventually produced the intrinsic and extraneous variables which were key to the success of the revolution.
From Enlightenment To Revolution
Seventeen eighty-nine was a year of revolution in France. It has been said of the French Revolution that the ultimate explanation of what took place in its early years must be sought in the popular mentality, “in the profound and incurable distrust born in the soul of the people” in regard to the ruling classes of the Ancien Regime.[5] The rise of the bourgeoisie and the emergence of an Enlightenment critique of arbitrary, traditional authority had created in France a revolutionary spirit that manifested itself in the insurrections in Paris, the destruction of the Bastille, and the formation of the national guard. In Saint-Domingue, these happenings were welcomed with a “thrill of wild, tumultuous joy, and enkindled a flame of mad excitement that portended nothing but disaster to the colony.”[6] For the past few years the slaves of Saint-Domingue had witnessed the events, the agitation, the revolutionary and counter-revolutionary ferment that was throwing the colony into disarray. When news of the French Revolution reached the colony, slaves heard talk of liberty and equality, and they interpreted these ideals in their own way. They listened to their masters argue over independence. They traveled to France with masters who could not do without their servants. They were exposed to new ideas, to the principles upon which that revolution was being built, and they carried this experience back with them. In the ports, newly arrived French soldiers brought news of the recent events in France; sailors aboard the merchant ships did the same as they worked side by side with the slaves, loading and unloading cargo in the harbors.[7]
Until the publishing of the Rights of Man and Citizen in 1789 the free black population of Saint-Domingue had remained tranquil, and taken no part in the political excitement of the time. The natural operation of "the principles contained in that celebrated instrument, was to create an immediate desire among the free colored population of the colonies to participate in the rights guaranteed by its enactments.”[8] Soon a movement began as the mulattos petitioned for the enactment of their new rights, and demanded that they should be raised from their political degradation to full enfranchisement as citizens. At the same time, clubs and societies were being formed, both in Saint-Domingue and in France, which sought equality for the mulatto, as well as the abolition of slavery.[9] The Jacobin colonial policy threatened the basic foundation of economic life in the colonies, dependant as it was on the complete subjugation of the blacks and mulattoes; in the colonies, the Jacobin policy towards the white “aristocrats” often culminated in open rebellion. As the Jacobins gained strength in the mother country, other societies soon followed in the same tradition. In 1788 the Societe des Amis des Noirs was formed in Paris with the purpose of securing the abolition of the slave trade and the gradual emancipation of the slaves. Though the membership of this society does not seem to have been large, the Amis des Noirs spread its doctrines throughout the populace and gained popularity and a strong influence in French politics, mostly due to the leadership of such intellectuals as Brissot, Gregoire, La Fayette, and Robespierre. An abolitionist trend had begun and soon colonial legislation would begin to mirror this attitude.
The ideology of
the French Revolution certainly had an impact upon the unfolding and
development of the revolution in Saint-Domingue, but even so, if ideas play a
role in the emergence of revolutionary events, they cannot in themselves
produce those events.[10] Ultimately,
if the material conditions and stage of development had not been what they were
in Saint-Domingue by the end of the eighteenth century, the French
revolutionary ideology may not necessarily have propelled or provoked the
course of events in the colony.[11] The
phenomenal economic and demographic growth that Saint-Domingue underwent during
the eighteenth century may be more telling of the explanation why a revolution
occurred here and not elsewhere in the Caribbean.
"La perla des Antilles"
To fully comprehend the circumstances in which the revolt of 1791 took place, it is of utmost importance to look at the historical background of the economic, political, and social status of France’s most prosperous and wealthy colony. By the late eighteenth century “la perla des Antilles” was exporting great quantities of coffee, indigo, cotton, cocoa, and sugar, with this last commodity reigning supreme. According to official government statistics for 1789, the value of colonial imports to France, primarily sugar and coffee, had soared to roughly 218 million livres. Although exports from France to the colonies, such as flour, meat, wine, and textiles, totaled 78 million livres by comparison, still, a full two-thirds of the 218 million livres were reexported to the markets of Europe, either in bulk or as refined goods.[12] The plantations were responsible for about two-fifths of the world’s sugar; the mountainous interior was responsible for over half the world’s coffee.[13] Accounting for some forty per cent of France’s foreign trade, by 1790 Saint-Domingue was also absorbing ten to fifteen per cent of United States exports’ and had important commercial links with the British and Spanish West Indies as well.
Sugar plantations in particular produced great fortunes for both grand blanc slaveholders in Saint-Domingue and the commercial bourgeoisie in France. By 1789, Saint-Domingue had in excess of 8,000 plantations; over three thousand in indigo, twenty-five hundred in coffee, eight hundred in cocoa, but the cornerstone of her economy and the key to her rapid expansion was sugar.[14] By mid-century, the number of sugar plantations had increased to six hundred and reached its peak at nearly eight hundred on the eve of the revolution. The cultivation of cane and the multi-stage process of producing sugar necessitated both a large and a highly diversified labor force; this inevitably brought about dramatic increases in the number of slaves imported and provided perhaps the greatest impetus to the expansion of the French slave trade in the eighteenth century. In order to sustain this system of plantation agriculture, it was necessary to import twenty-thousand West African slaves annually, to keep up with the increasing sugar production as well as to replenish the slave labor pool, which had decreased due to suicide, infanticide, abortion, starvation, neglect, overwork, and murder. Over one-third of the Africans brought to Saint-Domingue died off within the first few years. Such an excessive mortality rate among the newly arrived slaves was due as much to the psychological shock of becoming a slave, to moral despondency and an inability to rapidly adapt and physically resist the rigors of slavery, as it was to the grossly inhuman conditions aboard the slave ships and the resulting sicknesses such as scurvy.[15] Once sold and introduced into the plantation system, infanticide and suicide among the slaves were not uncommon. Death was seen not only as a liberation from the extreme conditions of slavery but, according to African beliefs, as a means of escape permitting the dead to return to their native land. As well, as a means of resistance, suicide was also seen as an offensive measure aimed at the economic base of the slaveholder. Slave women often resorted to abortion and even infanticide as a form of resistance rather than permit their children to grow up under the cruelty of slavery and, at the same time, as a way to decimate the potential work force.[16] The fact was that the slave population of Saint-Domingue never reproduced itself, with the reasons being inherent in the conditions and economic relations of slavery itself. The working life of an average plantation slave who was born in the colony was little more than fifteen years, and it was certainly no longer than that for creolized Africans who had survived the initial years.[17]
By far the most
intense utilization of slave labor was on the sugar plantation, where, during
the harvest and grinding season, an ordinary workday could easily average
eighteen to twenty hours; because of the nature of sugar production, work on
the plantations was virtually nonstop and followed a nearly complete twenty-four
hour schedule.[18] Because of the nature of slavery on the
plantation, most slaveholders regarded their slaves as economic property,
chattel, and thus treated them as such.[19] Slaves were literally worked to death
because they were the units of production and, as such, represented an
investment that once dead had already yielded its profits and were subsequently
replaced by additional investments in new slaves.[20]
Social and Environmental Factors Contributing to the 1791 Revolt in
Saint-Domingue
Though the blancs in Saint-Domingue held almost all political and economic power, they were outnumbered by blacks almost ten to one. This was, in part, because Saint-Domingue was not thought of as a place to settle permanently. Instead, one would stay only long enough to make a quick fortune and, after doing so, would plan on returning to France. As well, the black population experienced an explosion in the latter part of the eighteenth century. In 1789 there were forty thousand blancs, thirty thousand free blacks and mulattos or affranchis, and some four hundred and fifty thousand black slaves. Due to the widespread practice of concubinage by the slaveholders with their female slaves, followed by eventual grants of freedom to the offspring of such unions, a free black population emerged at the beginning of the eighteenth century and, by 1789, had increased over fiftyfold to a near equal balance with the blanc population. The most dramatic rate of increase occurred in the last two decades of the colonial regime, when the free black population jumped from six thousand in 1770 to nearly twenty-eight thousand in 1789, nearly twice the increase of the blanc population for the same period.[21]
Besides being greatly outnumbered, the blancs themselves were deeply divided by bitter class and political antagonisms. The grand blanc landowners, an upper class made up of conservatives and royalists, were at odds with the French Revolution and its supporters. They came to identify themselves in the colony by wearing a white cockade and were therefore sometimes known as Pompons Blancs. Meanwhile, there existed a lower class of blancs, who included overseers, managers, artisans, merchants, and adventurers, as well as vagabonds, petty criminals, debtors, and others from the classes dangereuses of Europe. These petit blancs, who embraced French revolutionary ideas, came to form a sort of middle-class in Saint-Domingue; they distinguished themselves by wearing a red cockade and were known for this reason as Pompons Rouges.[22] These petit blancs were at odds with the grand blanc landowners, and between 1789 and 1791 the struggle between these two groups for political control of the colony sometimes came to violence. With the expansion of the sugar economy, the petit blancs witnessed the progressive closing off of their chances for property ownership, “the one criterion that would guarantee their social integration and satisfy their frustrated aspirations.[23] Similarly, relations between the plantation owners and the French merchant bourgeoisie were marked by deep hostilities on both sides: if the merchants saw the colonial planters as a vile and deceiving race of profiteers, the planters hated the merchants for the unfair privileges bestowed upon them by French mercantile policy.[24] The mercantile policy of the Crown both encouraged and sustained the economic growth of the bourgeoisie while leaving the Saint-Domingue planter virtually in a state of political and economic dependence upon the metropolis.[25]
It would be an oversimplification, however, to argue that despite the social and economic differences that separated the blancs, these differences were of relatively minor importance since they were subsumed under the one unifying factor of race prejudice.[26] Race prejudice was undeniably practiced by blanc society against the mulattos and the blacks, and by virtue of the common bond of superiority as blancs, the various categories of blancs formed a distinct and privileged social caste. Their superiority extended over the affranchis population as well, and although the Code Noir of 1685 had granted the free blacks equal rights with blancs, it had never reflected the colonial reality.[27] Even with the racist prejudices and restrictions, the affranchis still competed successfully in the arts and crafts, as well as being farmers, shopkeepers, overseers, and slaveowners. “If at first the affranchis provided competition with the petit blancs for jobs in the specialized trades on the plantations, by mid-century, many had become plantation owners themselves as the expansion of coffee production brought much of the mountainous lands under cultivation and ownership by the affranchis.[28] By early 1789, the affranchis owned one-third of the plantation property, one-quarter of the slaves, and one-quarter of the real estate property in Saint-Domingue. Not only did their situation pose a potential threat to the political hegemony of the blancs, but “because of their color and their free status, the blancs saw them as a threat to racial hegemony in the colony and, from there, to the maintenance of slavery itself.”[29] Although restrictions against the social advancement of the affranchis date back to the early 1720s, the turning point in colonial legislation came after 1763. By strictly forbidding free blacks to hold any public office in the colony, to practice law, medicine, pharmacy, or other privileged trades, the blancs sought to establish insurmountable barriers to frustrate the social and political aspirations of the free blacks. As well, they were forbidden to wear European dress and play European games; compelled to sit separately at church and at the theatre; and to seek permission to visit France.[30] Yet, at the same time, the affranchis were required to participate in the defense of the colony, as an ordinance of 1768 made militia duty compulsory for all affranchis between the ages of fifteen and fifty-five.[31] It was these very circumstances that fostered the failed uprisings led by Vincent Oge in 1790, and which began a switch in political, economic, and social ideology for both the black and white population.[32]
By 1789 the whole social fabric of the colonial regime and the economic basis of its relationship to the metropolis were rapidly disintegrating, providing fertile ground in which revolutionary movements could take root. Each social group involved in Saint-Domingue had claims of its own, and each represented particular and generally opposing interests that arose out of the contradictions of class and caste, and the politics of race. And so it is important to remember that the Saint-Domingue revolution began with the breakup of its ruling class, and not with a slave rebellion. The organized slave revolt of 1791, with long-term antecedents, became inscribed in a process of revolution that had been in motion for several years.[33] But once the revolution began, it was not the colonial planters, but the great mass of black slaves themselves, who would deliver the decisive deathblow. The year 1791 marked the climax of a long and deep-rooted tradition of slave resistance. In conjunction with the French Revolution, which provided the historical conditions for the emergence of a full-scale revolution in Saint-Domingue, the more "limited scope of traditional slave resistance was thrown wide open.”[34] New avenues and alternatives for achieving goals were now possible; through the obtrusive intervention of their own efforts, initiative and activities into the political and social events of the colony, the slaves won their own freedom and finally became a politically independent nation.
Negative connotations linked to skin color increasingly regrouped as "black" had first appeared in Christendom in the late Middle Ages. Soon after, anti-black racism became the central element of planter ideology in the Caribbean, as the place of blacks was now guaranteed at the bottom of the Western nomenclature.[35] By the middle of the eighteenth century, the arguments justifying slavery in the Antilles and North America relocated in Europe where they blended with the racist strain inherent in eighteenth-century rationalist thought.[36] In the Caribbean, sixty-four different colors had been identified and named among the mulattos of Haiti, with social rank predicated upon lightness of shade. Some of these terms, used to identify a mulatto, included griffe, a combination of black and mulatto blood, sacatra, a mix of black and griffe blood, and quarteronne, an admixture of European and mamelouque blood. Economically, the mulattos were a powerful group, but with no political rights; they could neither vote nor hold office. These unbalanced relationships created a special animosity between the mulattos, who had wealth and no political rights, and the petit blancs, who had rights but little money. Besides the mulattos, the petit blancs were also at odds with the grand blancs, as well as the black slave population. There were also intense divisions within the black slave population, between the Creoles, born in Saint-Domingue or elsewhere in the Caribbean, and the bossals born in Africa, who were believed to be inherently more alienated and rebellious. Yet, it was the unification of these two black groups which led to the beginnings of the Haitian Revolution.
By 1791, the idea of revolution was preached by many organizations such as the Jacobins. The society Amis des Noirs advocated mulatto equality, along with the gradual abolition of slavery. Besides these French-based societies, called maroons, fugitive slaves who took refuge in the in the mountains, also contributed to the uprisings in Saint-Domingue, liberating slave women and burning cane fields. These maroons were so successful that in 1784 the government agreed not to pursue them if they refrained from attacks. Along with the Creoles, these primarily bossal maroons broke the traditional hierarchies and alliances in order to exterminate their common oppressors. “Ethnicity had given way to crosscutting ties of ethnic unity, which in turn created a basis by which to move a more innovative and universal stratagem of resistance fostered by an enlargement of scale.”[37] The slave revolt ignited by a Creole general named Boukman at Limbe on August 21, 1791 was thus almost anticlimactic. All the conditions necessary for a revolt were in place for some time now in Saint-Domingue. First, the leadership circle was dominated by highly skilled slaves in positions of leadership on the many plantations. Second, divisions between the blancs, who could not agree as to an appropriate approach to the slave majority and the mulatto property holders, increased at the same time that powerful, pro-revolutionary alliances were being formed.
Slave resistance had spanned several centuries and was expressed or carried out by the slaves in many ways. If undercurrents of a consciousness harboring the eventual destruction of slavery had become evident in the half-decade before the revolution, it was not until 1791 that this consciousness became substantively collective, when, beginning in the north, entire plantations of slaves deserted in rapid succession to join what had become a massive revolutionary army.[38] What was so unique about this slave revolt, in addition to its highly disciplined and broadly based organization, was the widespread extent of popular participation and support. For nearly three years, between 1789 and 1791, the slaves of Saint-Domingue witnessed the revolts of the higher classes. The blanc colonists began by claiming their rights and calling for the abolition of the economic and commercial restrictions laid upon them by the Ancien Regime. They were followed by the affranchis, who demanded an equal footing with the blancs. Talk of “liberty, equality, and fraternity” fell upon the ears of domestic slaves, who interpreted these slogans in their own way.
Conclusion
These strengthening tensions and fears, coupled with the astounding white to black ratio, caused extreme, anti-black reactions from the white colonists. Permeating the thought of every slaveholder was the fear of being vastly outnumbered in surroundings where more and more slaves were gathering in dangerous-looking clusters. Back in France, the Amis des Noirs, with their Enlightenment doctrine, threatened to abolish slavery. “Like a contagion, fear of slave revolt spread, sparking chain-reaction happenings in specific locations over the two years from 1789 to1791.”[39] In order to suppress the uprisings, slaveholders were now being transformed into counter-revolutionary militants. Desperate to protect their privileges and human property, most blancs perpetuated an environment of tension and fear, which acted as a counterweight in bringing down their world around them.
Nourished by the murmurings and discontent of mulattos and free blacks, the great slave revolt of 1791 was thus proceeded by a large spell of simmering agitation, a time of growing insolence, nervous tension, maroon activity, and every form of organized resistance from sabotage to arson. The success of the revolution, no doubt, was due to the intrinsic and extraneous factors within Saint-Domingue. Slavery’s exploitation and discrimination of blacks created a divided, unstable society whose economic and political hierarchies were defined by a European notion of ethnicity. It was these circumstances, which fostered rifts between blancs and alliances between blacks, that eventually culminated in rebellion, revolution, and, finally, independence. Thus, the successful revolt of 1791 in Saint-Domingue, led by Toussaint Louverture changed the course of history forever. The Trans-Atlantic trade in slaves would shortly end officially as a result of the revolution; the abolitionists’ cause was strengthened throughout the world; and in the wake of the revolution, the dream of a French empire came crashing down. The process of revolution had reached its potential, in this case, of black nationalism, and the name Toussaint Louverture became a harbinger of hope, humility, and freedom; of liberte, egalite, fraternite.
Juanguillermo Amezcua is a graduate
student in the Master of Arts program at San Francisco State University. He served as the Vice President of the
History Students Association. That same
year he served as the President the Kappa Phi Chapter of Phi Alpha Theta, the national history honor society. His research interests lie in Latin American
intellectual history with an emphasis on Mexico and California. Juanguillermo received his B.A. from the
University of California, Davis, in History and Spanish, and in keeping with
the apprenticeship tradition, will be applying to post-graduate programs in the
Fall.
[1] For the purposes of this essay, when speaking of Haiti prior to independence, I will refer to it by its original French appellation, Saint-Domingue.
[2] Eugene Genovese. From Rebellion to Revolt: Afro-American Slave Revolts in the Modern World (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1979), xix.
[3] Quoted by Roger Dorinville in Toussaint Louverture ou La vocation de la Liberte (Paris: Julliard, 1965).
[4] Michel-Rolph Trouillot. Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History (Boston: Beacon Press, 1995), 73.
[5] Georges Lefebvre, Les Cours de Sorbonne, 6 vols. Centre de Documentation Universitaire (Paris: Tournier et Constants, 1946-47).
[6] Jonathan Brown, The History and Present Condition of St. Domingo, vol. 1 (London: Frank Cass and Company Limited, 1837), 136.
[7] Felix Carteau, Soirees bermudiennes (Bordeaux: 1802), 77.
[8] Brown, History and Present Condition, vol. 1, 139.
[9] During this epoch there existed in France a strong prejudice against the West India colonies on the account of the existence of slavery in them. Ibid., 140.
[10] See Theda Skocpol, States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China, (London: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 9-15.
[11] Carolyn E. Fick, The Making of Haiti: The Saint-Domingue Revolution from Below, (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1990), 238.
[12] Robert L. Stein, The French Slave Trade in the Eighteenth Century: An Old Regime Business, (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1979), 116-8.
[13] David Patrick Geggus, Slavery, War, and Revolution: The British Occupation of Saint-Domingue 1793-1798, (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1982), Appendix E, 402.
[14] If prior to 1690 the colony had not one sugar plantation, within fifteen years there were already 120, more than 100 of these being established over a mere four-year period from 1700-1704. Fick, The Making of Haiti, 22.
[15] Through his extensive research of plantation papers and colonial correspondence for eighteenth century Saint-Domingue, Gabriel Debien (Les colons de Saint-Domingue et la revolution, 1953) has found that the mortality rates of newly purchased slaves during the first three to eight years of their induction could be generally evaluated at fifty per cent. Fick, The Making of Haiti, 26.
[16] Some masters probably approved of such practices, finding pregnancy and child-rearing uneconomic. Geggus, Slavery, War, and Revolution, 24.
[17] Fick, The Making of Haiti, 27.
[18] While the sugar plantations were by far the most labor-intensive, on the coffee plantations, work was no less arduous and the hours just as long. These estates were situated on the mountainous slopes where the climate was far cooler and the rains more frequent. Yet this hardly made for healthier living or working conditions for the slaves. Ill-protected against the evening and night chill with inadequate clothing, ill-fed, undernourished, and overworked, the slaves on the coffee plantations suffered a mortality rate that was exceedingly high (Debien, Les colons de Saint-Domingue et la revolution, 1959, 27). Stein, The French Slave Trade, 7-8.
[19] An example of the severity in which the slaveowners treated their slaves can be found in the many accounts of direct mutilation. Slaveowners would hang a slave by the ears, mutilate a leg, pull teeth out, gash open one’s side and pour melted lard into the incision, or mutilate genital organs. Still others would have a slave buried up to his neck and the head coated with sugar, leaving it to be devoured by flies. Those slaves who dared run away faced having a foot cut off or being whipped to death when caught and returned. C. L. R. James, The Black Jacobins: Toussaint Louverture and the San Domingo Revolution, (London: Allison and Busby, 1938), 12-14.
[20] Indicative of this pattern was the age distribution of slaves on most plantations: that of somewhere between seventeen and thirty-five.
[21] From the official census records for Saint-Domingue.
[22] The slaves even had a vocabulary to describe the various categories of blancs: only the grand blancs, the great sugar planters, were the real blancs, the Blancs-blancs, while the petit blanc was known as a faux blanc or even a Negre-blanc.
[23] Fick, The Making of Haiti, 18.
[24] According to the policy known as the Exclusive, the colonies are founded by and for the Metropolis. To assure maximum economic benefits for the mother country, all manufactured goods consumed by the colonists were imported from France. By the same token, all exports of raw materials from the colony were to be sold exclusively to France and to be carried exclusively aboard French ships. Ibid., 24.
[25] Ibid., 25.
[26] Ibid., 17.
[27] Geggus, Slavery, War , and Revolution, 20.
[28] Fick, The Making of Haiti, 19.
[29] Ibid., 20.
[30] Geggus, Slavery, War, and Revolution, 21.
[31] In addition, a local law-enforcing body, the marechaussee, had been created for the chief purpose of hunting down and capturing runaway slaves, or maroons. By making the composition of the marechaussee exclusively affranchis, the blancs could incidentally reinforce the contempt of the affranchis for his own black origins.
[32] For more information on Oge’s revolt see Carolyn Fick, The Making of Haiti, 82-84 and Barskett, History of the Island of St. Domingo, 75-77.
[33] Fick, The Making of Haiti, 239.
[34] Ibid., 25.
[35] Trouillot, Silencing the Past, 77.
[36] Ibid., 77.
[37] Williams-Myers, Theses of Genovese and Others, 1996, 394.
[38] Fick, The Making of Haiti, 75.
[39] Munford-Zeuske, Black Slavery in St. Domingue and Cuba: 1785-1795, 1995, 24.
Return
to the Ex Post Facto Homepage
Visit the History Students Association
Homepage