According to Miller, whipping was a means to control slaves during the first few days at sea because slaves were the most apt to rebel during that time (Miller, 409). During slave rebellions, slaves would attempt to take control of the ship and steer themselves home. Thus, to protect their investment, slavers did not allow slaves up from the hold during the first few days at sea and refused to release them from their bindings. Furthermore, physical violence was often used to force slaves to eat. Slavers forced slaves to eat with various means such as being poked and prodded with hot iron or in extreme cases having molten lead poured on them. (Falconbridge). In his memoir, James Barbot, an agent for the French Royal African Company, mentioned that he had “been necessitated sometimes to cause the teeth of those [slaves] to be broken, because they would not open their mouths, or be prevailed upon by any entreaties to feed themselves; and thus have forced some sustenance into their throats”. An argument that could be made on the perspective of the slave traders like Barbot is that they felt they were justified in punishing slaves for not eating. African slaves were considered a valuable commodity and investment for European countries that depended on slave labor on plantations. If traders did not get enough slaves to the their buyers, it was not simply their own livelihood that was being affected but their countries. . Further, traders saw their actions as saving the slaves. They were feeding them, letting them exercise, and providing medicinal aids but slaves continued to disobey. Thus, slavers believed they were justified to use violent discipline against
According to Miller, whipping was a means to control slaves during the first few days at sea because slaves were the most apt to rebel during that time (Miller, 409). During slave rebellions, slaves would attempt to take control of the ship and steer themselves home. Thus, to protect their investment, slavers did not allow slaves up from the hold during the first few days at sea and refused to release them from their bindings. Furthermore, physical violence was often used to force slaves to eat. Slavers forced slaves to eat with various means such as being poked and prodded with hot iron or in extreme cases having molten lead poured on them. (Falconbridge). In his memoir, James Barbot, an agent for the French Royal African Company, mentioned that he had “been necessitated sometimes to cause the teeth of those [slaves] to be broken, because they would not open their mouths, or be prevailed upon by any entreaties to feed themselves; and thus have forced some sustenance into their throats”. An argument that could be made on the perspective of the slave traders like Barbot is that they felt they were justified in punishing slaves for not eating. African slaves were considered a valuable commodity and investment for European countries that depended on slave labor on plantations. If traders did not get enough slaves to the their buyers, it was not simply their own livelihood that was being affected but their countries. . Further, traders saw their actions as saving the slaves. They were feeding them, letting them exercise, and providing medicinal aids but slaves continued to disobey. Thus, slavers believed they were justified to use violent discipline against