Irish slave trade

by cullen9

I saw the following text on a Facebook post by an Irish immigrant friend of mine, and was curious about the historical accuracy and if there was more info available.

The Irish slave trade began when 30,000 Irish prisoners were sold as slaves to the New World. The King James I Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves. Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.

From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Ireland’s population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless population of homeless women and children. Britain’s solution was to auction them off as well.

During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.

Many people today will avoid calling the Irish slaves what they truly were: Slaves. They’ll come up with terms like “Indentured Servants” to describe what occurred to the Irish. However, in most cases from the 17th and 18th centuries, Irish slaves were nothing more than human cattle.

As an example, the African slave trade was just beginning during this same period. It is well recorded that African slaves, not tainted with the stain of the hated Catholic theology and more expensive to purchase, were often treated far better than their Irish counterparts.

African slaves were very expensive during the late 1600s (50 Sterling). Irish slaves came cheap (no more than 5 Sterling). If a planter whipped or branded or beat an Irish slave to death, it was never a crime. A death was a monetary setback, but far cheaper than killing a more expensive African.

The English masters quickly began breeding the Irish women for both their own personal pleasure and for greater profit. Children of slaves were themselves slaves, which increased the size of the master’s free workforce. Even if an Irish woman somehow obtained her freedom, her kids would remain slaves of her master. Thus, Irish moms, even with this new found emancipation, would seldom abandon their kids and would remain in servitude.

In time, the English thought of a better way to use these women (in many cases, girls as young as 12) to increase their market share: The settlers began to breed Irish women and girls with African men to produce slaves with a distinct complexion. These new “mulatto” slaves brought a higher price than Irish livestock and, likewise, enabled the settlers to save money rather than purchase new African slaves. This practice of interbreeding Irish females with African men went on for several decades and was so widespread that, in 1681, legislation was passed “forbidding the practice of mating Irish slave women to African slave men for the purpose of producing slaves for sale.” In short, it was stopped only because it interfered with the profits of a large slave transport company. England continued to ship tens of thousands of Irish slaves for more than a century. Records state that, after the 1798 Irish Rebellion, thousands of Irish slaves were sold to both America and Australia. There were horrible abuses of both African and Irish captives. One British ship even dumped 1,302 slaves into the Atlantic Ocean so that the crew would have plenty of food to eat.

There is little question that the Irish experienced the horrors of slavery as much (if not more in the 17th Century) as the Africans did. There is, also, very little question that those brown, tanned faces you witness in your travels to the West Indies are very likely a combination of African and Irish ancestry. In 1839, Britain finally decided on its own to end its participation in Satan’s highway to hell and stopped transporting slaves. While their decision did not stop pirates from doing what they desired, the new law slowly concluded THIS chapter of nightmarish Irish misery.

But, if anyone, black or white, believes that slavery was only an African experience, then they’ve got it completely wrong.

Irish slavery is a subject worth remembering, not erasing from our memories.

But, where are our public (and PRIVATE) schools???? Where are the history books? Why is it so seldom discussed?

Do the memories of hundreds of thousands of Irish victims merit more than a mention from an unknown writer?

Or is their story to be one that their English pirates intended: To (unlike the African book) have the Irish story utterly and completely disappear as if it never happened.

None of the Irish victims ever made it back to their homeland to describe their ordeal. These are the lost slaves; the ones that time and biased history books conveniently forgot.

Superplaner

Okay, let's clarify something, what your friend is sharing is pure and undiluted American Neo-Nazi propaganda. This drivel started on Stormfront/infowars ages ago and it just. won't. die. It even includes the favourite right wing tropes about forced breeding of white women.

For the most part there are no sources cited in stuff like this, certainly no reputable sources, but when there are, they tend to lead to things like Michael A. Hoffman II (a holocaust denier) or books like White Cargo or To Hell or Barbados, both of which well, sort of deal with this topic. The problem is that both books are academically crap. They mix and match wildly in stating actual facts and preseting factually what was said at in the period the books revolve around. However, distinguishing between the two is sometimes impossible and a lot of room for interpretation is left to the reader. These are not scholary works.

Now, I can't provide source that prove that this didn't happen because that's not how sources work, however, I can tell you a little bit about what did happen. Were the Irish sold as slaves? Yes. Kind of. After the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland the act for the settlement of Ireland 1652 was passed. What it did was divide the Irish into several cathegories after how involved they were in the irish rebellion. Those who were judged to be directly involved were usually hanged but other classes had property confiscate and/or were subject to resettlement. For the most part this resettlement was done within Ireland but as many as 50 000 Irish may have been transported to the West Indies and North America.

However, this was by no means unique to the Irish. Indentured servitude/deportation as a punishment was a possibility for Englishmen and Irishmen alike ever since 1597, however it only became common after 1717 with the passing of the so called Piracy Act. It remained fairly common to transport criminals to the colonies in North America until 1776 when it became... impractical. After 1787 transportation to Australia became common, between -76 and -87 hard labour in Britain was usually used instead. The practice was usually to commute a sentence for a petty crime which would otherwise carry a prison sentence into a 7 year period as an indentured servant.

Now, these indentured serveants, whether they were Irish or English were certainly not worth less than a black slave, nor were they bred for pleasure or economic reasons, they had more rights than black slaves (not many, but black slaves had none).

If you want an actual good book about this I recommend Slaves and Englishmen: Human Bondage in the Early Modern Atlantic. by Michael Guasco (sp?).

JMBourguet

While waiting for a more in depth answer, I'll refer you to a previous discussion of a similar text.