General Average, Human Jettison, and the Status of Slaves in Early Modern Europe

Jake Dyble
{"title":"General Average, Human Jettison, and the Status of Slaves in Early Modern Europe","authors":"Jake Dyble","doi":"10.1017/S0018246X22000103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article proposes a transition in Western European thinking on slavery by examining the legality of slave jettison and its indemnification in the seventeenth-century Christian Mediterranean and comparing this with the late eighteenth-century Atlantic. Under the law of general average (GA), a shipmaster may legally sacrifice cargo or parts of a vessel to save a maritime venture from peril. GA then mandates that the costs of this sacrifice be shared proportionally between all interested parties. However, the status of human cargo with respect to pre-modern GA remains unclear, beyond the well-known example of the eighteenth-century British slave ship, the Zong. A jettison, a moment of crisis, forces the slave's dual conception as person and property to be definitively resolved. This article uses historical GA records and early modern jurisprudence on human jettison to shed light on the legal conceptualization of the slave in the two contexts. It finds that seventeenth-century jurisprudence generally ruled against slave jettison and that such a jettison could not be indemnified. In some Mediterranean operational contexts, slaves were excluded from GA altogether. To a certain extent, this finding justifies the conceptual divide historians have placed between Atlantic bondage and earlier forms of slavery.","PeriodicalId":40620,"journal":{"name":"Ajalooline Ajakiri-The Estonian Historical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ajalooline Ajakiri-The Estonian Historical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X22000103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article proposes a transition in Western European thinking on slavery by examining the legality of slave jettison and its indemnification in the seventeenth-century Christian Mediterranean and comparing this with the late eighteenth-century Atlantic. Under the law of general average (GA), a shipmaster may legally sacrifice cargo or parts of a vessel to save a maritime venture from peril. GA then mandates that the costs of this sacrifice be shared proportionally between all interested parties. However, the status of human cargo with respect to pre-modern GA remains unclear, beyond the well-known example of the eighteenth-century British slave ship, the Zong. A jettison, a moment of crisis, forces the slave's dual conception as person and property to be definitively resolved. This article uses historical GA records and early modern jurisprudence on human jettison to shed light on the legal conceptualization of the slave in the two contexts. It finds that seventeenth-century jurisprudence generally ruled against slave jettison and that such a jettison could not be indemnified. In some Mediterranean operational contexts, slaves were excluded from GA altogether. To a certain extent, this finding justifies the conceptual divide historians have placed between Atlantic bondage and earlier forms of slavery.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
共同海损、人类遗弃与近代早期欧洲奴隶的地位
本文通过考察17世纪基督教地中海地区抛弃奴隶及其赔偿的合法性,并将其与18世纪晚期的大西洋地区进行比较,提出西欧奴隶制思想的转变。根据共同海损法,船长可以合法地牺牲船舶的货物或部分以拯救海上企业脱离危险。然后,GA要求所有相关方按比例分担这种牺牲的成本。然而,除了18世纪著名的英国奴隶船宗号之外,人类货物在前现代GA中的地位仍然不清楚。一次抛弃,一次危机,迫使奴隶作为人与财产的双重概念最终得到解决。本文运用GA的历史记载和近代早期关于弃人的法理学,对这两种语境下奴隶的法律概念进行了阐释。它发现,17世纪的法理学通常反对抛弃奴隶,而且这种抛弃不能得到赔偿。在一些地中海作战环境中,奴隶被完全排除在GA之外。在某种程度上,这一发现证明了历史学家在大西洋奴役和早期形式的奴隶制之间的概念分歧是正确的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: “Ajalooline Ajakiri. The Estonian Historical Journal” is peer-reviewed academic journal of the Institute of History and Archaeology, University of Tartu. It accepts articles in Estonian, English or German. It is open to submissions from all parts of the world and on all fields of history, but articles, reviews and communications on the history of the Baltic region are preferred.
期刊最新文献
English Travel Writers’ Representations of Freedom in the United Provinces, c. 1670–1795 Reassessing the Marginalization of Astrology in the Early Modern World Toll Disputes, Grain Marketing, and Economic Culture in England, c. 1550–1800 William Munro Tapp: Colonial Investor and Caius College Philanthropist, 1925–1937 Alsace in Algeria and the Notion of ‘Failure’ in Settler Political Culture, c. 1870–1960
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1