“我们同情仍在继续的Pilfery矿山……”:《非洲在黄金海岸矿山的利益、保护黄金和立法政治》,1907–1948

IF 0.7 4区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY AFRICAN ECONOMIC HISTORY Pub Date : 2020-12-16 DOI:10.1353/aeh.2020.0009
E. Sewordor
{"title":"“我们同情仍在继续的Pilfery矿山……”:《非洲在黄金海岸矿山的利益、保护黄金和立法政治》,1907–1948","authors":"E. Sewordor","doi":"10.1353/aeh.2020.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:For decades, the British colonial establishment in the Gold Coast believed that setting its gaze on goldsmiths was pivotal to eliminating pilfery of gold from the mines. This assumption, commonly without concrete proof, hardened colonial paranoia and was shared with Ashanti Goldfields Corporation. Both entities thought that the continuous access to gold by goldsmiths, coupled with increasing gold theft were enough basis to surveil goldsmiths—the supposed pivotal actors in a fledging illicit trade in stolen mine gold. Yet, the problem remained. As this study shows, there was a paucity of successful prosecutions against persons caught in possession of stolen mine gold, and none against a goldsmith. Ultimately, it is argued that from 1907 to 1948, central colonial laws meant to regulate the growing gold mining industry and protect its finds in the Gold Coast reveal negotiations that more than realizing their primary principle(s), increasingly limited access to gold by many indigenes. While the latter sustained an emergent illicit market for pilfered gold from the mines, it simultaneously sparked a misplaced colonial state-led surveillance that targeted goldsmiths.","PeriodicalId":43935,"journal":{"name":"AFRICAN ECONOMIC HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/aeh.2020.0009","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"We Sympathise with the Mines for Pilfery That Goes on but …\\\": African Interests in Gold Coast Mines, Protecting Gold, and the Politics of Legislation, 1907–1948\",\"authors\":\"E. Sewordor\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/aeh.2020.0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT:For decades, the British colonial establishment in the Gold Coast believed that setting its gaze on goldsmiths was pivotal to eliminating pilfery of gold from the mines. This assumption, commonly without concrete proof, hardened colonial paranoia and was shared with Ashanti Goldfields Corporation. Both entities thought that the continuous access to gold by goldsmiths, coupled with increasing gold theft were enough basis to surveil goldsmiths—the supposed pivotal actors in a fledging illicit trade in stolen mine gold. Yet, the problem remained. As this study shows, there was a paucity of successful prosecutions against persons caught in possession of stolen mine gold, and none against a goldsmith. Ultimately, it is argued that from 1907 to 1948, central colonial laws meant to regulate the growing gold mining industry and protect its finds in the Gold Coast reveal negotiations that more than realizing their primary principle(s), increasingly limited access to gold by many indigenes. While the latter sustained an emergent illicit market for pilfered gold from the mines, it simultaneously sparked a misplaced colonial state-led surveillance that targeted goldsmiths.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43935,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AFRICAN ECONOMIC HISTORY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/aeh.2020.0009\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AFRICAN ECONOMIC HISTORY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/aeh.2020.0009\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AFRICAN ECONOMIC HISTORY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/aeh.2020.0009","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:几十年来,英国在黄金海岸的殖民地一直认为,将目光投向金匠是消除黄金盗窃的关键。这种假设,通常没有具体的证据,强化了殖民地的偏执狂,并与阿散蒂·戈尔德菲尔德公司分享。这两个实体都认为,金匠不断获取黄金,再加上日益增加的黄金盗窃,足以成为监视金匠的基础,而金匠被认为是刚刚起步的被盗金矿黄金非法贸易的关键参与者。然而,问题依然存在。正如这项研究所表明的那样,很少有人成功起诉持有被盗金矿的人,也没有人起诉金匠。最终,有人认为,从1907年到1948年,旨在监管不断增长的黄金开采业并保护其在黄金海岸发现的黄金的中央殖民法律揭示了谈判,这些谈判不仅实现了其主要原则,而且越来越限制了许多穷人获得黄金的机会。尽管后者维持了一个新出现的非法黄金市场,但同时也引发了一场由殖民国家领导的针对金匠的错位监视。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
"We Sympathise with the Mines for Pilfery That Goes on but …": African Interests in Gold Coast Mines, Protecting Gold, and the Politics of Legislation, 1907–1948
ABSTRACT:For decades, the British colonial establishment in the Gold Coast believed that setting its gaze on goldsmiths was pivotal to eliminating pilfery of gold from the mines. This assumption, commonly without concrete proof, hardened colonial paranoia and was shared with Ashanti Goldfields Corporation. Both entities thought that the continuous access to gold by goldsmiths, coupled with increasing gold theft were enough basis to surveil goldsmiths—the supposed pivotal actors in a fledging illicit trade in stolen mine gold. Yet, the problem remained. As this study shows, there was a paucity of successful prosecutions against persons caught in possession of stolen mine gold, and none against a goldsmith. Ultimately, it is argued that from 1907 to 1948, central colonial laws meant to regulate the growing gold mining industry and protect its finds in the Gold Coast reveal negotiations that more than realizing their primary principle(s), increasingly limited access to gold by many indigenes. While the latter sustained an emergent illicit market for pilfered gold from the mines, it simultaneously sparked a misplaced colonial state-led surveillance that targeted goldsmiths.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Gendered Labor Relations in Colonial and Post-Colonial Eritrea The "Global Collaboratory on the History of Labour Relations": Putting Women's Labor and Labor Relations in Sub-Saharan Africa in a Global Context Women's Labor Relations in Sub-Saharan Africa and The Global South Compared, 1800–2000 Introduction From Subsistence Farmers To Guardians of Food Security and Well-Being: Shifts and Continuities in Female Labor Relations in Tanzania (1800–2000)
×
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