The history of the African slave trade into the America’s is one that is well-documented as well as largely taught in American schools today.
However, as John Martin of the Montreal-based Center for Research and Globalization points out in his article ‘The Irish Slave Trade - The Forgotten ‘White’ Slaves,’ it was not just Africans who were traded as slaves.
Indeed, the Irish have a gruesome history as being traded as slaves as well and subjected to similar and sometimes worse treatment than their African contemporaries of the time.
Strangely though, the history of Irish and ‘white’ slavery is by and large ignored in the American educational curriculum today.
In his article, John Martin writes “The Irish slave trade began when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His 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 percent of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.”
Read more articles on Irish history here
“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.”
Martin writes how at the hands of the British, the Irish population plummeted due to the slave trade of the 17th century.
“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, [Oliver] Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.”
Martin goes on to explain that for some reason, the Irish slaves are often remembered as ‘indentured servants.’ However, in most cases during the 17th and 18th centuries, they were no more than “human cattle.”
“...the African slave trade was just beginning during this same period,” writes Martin. “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.”
During the late 1600s, writes Martin, African slaves were far more expensive than their Irish counterparts - Africans would sell for around 50 sterling while Irish were often no more than 5 sterling.
Further, the treatment of Irish slaves was thought to be more cruel than that of African slaves. If an Irish slave was beaten by their owner, it wasn’t considered to be a crime.
The Irish were further exploited when the British began to “breed” Irish women - or girls, sometimes as young as 12 - with African males.
Read more: Our unusual Irish ancestors – the poets, madmen and scoundrels who hail from Ireland
“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.”
Martin concludes, “In 1839, Britain finally decided on it’s 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.”
Click here to read John Martin’s article ‘The Irish Slave Trade – The Forgotten “White” Slaves’ in its entirety.
66 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.Maureen Hawkins | Mar 12, 2013, 03:09 PM EDT
The reason that the Irish are often treated as indentured servants is because, when the practice of enslaving them prevailed, slavery, for Irish and African alike, was forced indenturement; one was a slave only for a set period (usually 7 years) & then was set free. Slavery wasn't for life, nor were one's children automatically born into slavery. That why there was a small population of free African-Americans in the American South; the earliest African slaves were freed after their period of slavery, & some went on to become slave-owners themselves. By the time perpetual slavery was introduced towards the end of the 18th century, the slave trade had shifted exclusively to Africans; as the article points out, they commanded a higher price.
darragh S | Feb 15, 2013, 08:21 PM EST
The Black death decimated the Normans in Ireland. The Dalcassian Tribes survived it because they did not trade with the Normans. What traces of Normans that remained after the Black Death mostly Joined the Irish. I dont see this as any different to what Cromwell pulled on the Irish. The Irish have adapted to it. The Irish Fought back and won most of the Irish Island back like it did against the Normans. Now it has the Highest birthrate in Europe and in Northern Ireland there could be a referendum triggered if Enough Irish Migrate North and the Birthrate stays on Track. The main problem though is that the British-Irish in the republic seem to be about 50000 and have a vote that could influence the referendum. What! I still think most of the people will vote in Favor of it once a majority rule is established in the Province. This is when the Likes of Oliver Cromwell will show up again in the History Books. It could be the same in Scotland. Nobody could stop the Anglo Sphere in Iraq or Afghanistan, so the Irish will have to adapt big time and be ready. Its a pity Defense is so GDP dependent. All those old British Empire links still remain and the Irish regularly get affected by this. Its still like Chess over there meanwhile we ponder Tsun Tzu and how it applies to us Dalcassians. We shall Return.
stanJames | Feb 10, 2013, 11:11 PM EST
lwts not forget how the cath group christian brotehrs enslaved children in orphanages and reform schools. A good day was a day without a beating or ibeing molested is how a victim summarized it. No woner the church in ireland3is all but dead. Everyone should drop off a bag of those cadaver eating bugs at teh church.
curtisjohnson | Feb 02, 2013, 06:36 PM EST
Thanks, WK.
WoundedKnee | Feb 02, 2013, 12:16 PM EST
Curtisjohnson: Not for the first time, you have made an interesting point. I had never mentally compared the grievances of Ireland in the late 18th century with those of the American colonies. But now that I think of it you are quite right--we had very little to complain about--a few unfair taxes etc-- compared to what the Irish, especially the Irish Catholics, were suffering. Good post.
curtisjohnson | Feb 01, 2013, 10:52 PM EST
What is remarkable is the consensus among terror state “historians” (and self-hating native quislings) that the indigenous people had no justification for rebellions. It’s hard to imagine what additional atrocities the terror state could have perpetrated throughout the centuries to legitimize all forms of resistance – ethnic and cultural cleansing, slavery, manufactured famines, the most brutal forms of torture, the rape and breeding of children, etc. Compare these to the relatively mild grievances which are commonly used to justify the American revolution and one can see the master race psychosis at the root of the anglo view of Irish history.
minaharker | Feb 01, 2013, 11:46 AM EST
There is one mistake. James VII/II was not born yet. The proclamation would have been signed by his great grandfather and namesake, James VI/I in 1625. Also the proclamation in question,, I believe was signed some years earlier. Irish were being shipped over to the New World as slaves as early as 1608 in the aftermath of the Flight of the Earls in November 1607and the beginning of the plantation system which systematically removed them from their property and given to English and Scottish Presbyterians. It was, nevertheless, another chapter in the long expanse of Ireland's ugly interaction with the English.
Joe Glackin | Feb 01, 2013, 07:15 AM EST
@DublinJoyrider. With all due respect Im not sure if your comment is sarcasm in comical terms. If its not, then your own words, fictional myth applies.Regarding Monserrat,its very disrespectful for any who apportion blame on the victims of British brutality.The white Irish slaves and their surrounding circumstances ,inflicted by Cromwell are not a myth.Britain have long tried to hide their shameful actions against all by censorship etc. Many of their atrocities against Ireland were blamed on the Irish or were justified as British working in our country,s best interest
Smyrnian | Feb 01, 2013, 04:31 AM EST
Dublin - you are incoherent.
curtisjohnson | Jan 31, 2013, 09:52 PM EST
The anglo-british terror state should have to pay reparations like their nazi cousins – only the anglo crimes span generation after generation
curtisjohnson | Jan 31, 2013, 09:33 PM EST
“Comparing what might have been done in 600 or 700 A.D. with what The English did in Ireland in the 1600's” Anglo slavery was by most measures more barbaric and sadistic than slavery in antiquity – particularly in comparison to the average life expectancy and lifestyle of a Roman slave. In addition to its supremacist bent, anglo slavery was focused on routine and sadistic torture often performed for entertainment of the anglo-planter sickos. Moreover, anglo slavery was done under the auspices of a purportedly Christian outlook which prohibited slavery on its own mainland (while at the same time the Anglican “Church” actually owned, bred, and branded slaves) – therefore sophistic arguments about temporal relativism ring hollow.
ancavker | Jan 31, 2013, 12:58 PM EST
Tom: Welll there you go again, always rationalizing it away. Comapring what might have been done in 600 or 700 A.D. with what The English did in Ireland in the 1600's. You point out one or two examples that may or may not have happened in those ancient times, and comapre it with Cromwell's attempts to wipe out the Irish people. Yep, you are Irish, but stil sniveling at the feet of the English.
ancavker | Jan 31, 2013, 12:58 PM EST
Tom: Welll there you go again, always rationalizing it away. Comapring what might have been done in 600 or 700 A.D. with what The English did in Ireland in the 1600's. You point out one or two examples that may or may not have happened in those ancient times, and comapre it with Cromwell's attempts to wipe out the Irish people. Yep, you are Irish, but stil sniveling at the feet of the English.
Meanolgrouch | Jan 31, 2013, 10:08 AM EST
Curtis, Bad as things are today, the past was even worse. I'm optimistic largely courtesy of that long arc of history bending toward justice. In the cosmic view of things, each individual who weathers the storm and manages to place even one grain of sand on the beach has won his/her part of the battle. Alone we are weak; together we can overcome. As Michael Moore is fond of reminding the world, there are far more of us than there are of them. The Occupy movement overall shows promise, especially OccupyMarines. Good grief, I even know lifelong diehard pacifists increasingly ready to pick up a stone. That's why I'm so in favor of political means when possible, because a conflagration once set is impossible to contain. Violent revolution, while historically almost inevitable at a certain tipping point, always 'eats its children'.
curtisjohnson | Jan 30, 2013, 09:35 PM EST
Sorry - accidental repost. I agree Meanolgrouch but I am less optimistic than you because some many are blind to the nature of the regimes they live in.
curtisjohnson | Jan 30, 2013, 09:28 PM EST
Meanolgrouch, I agree but in the end Lizzie is really just another pawn of the commercial oligarchs that have run the british terror state since the importation of bill the orange (they gained real power under cromwell).
Meanolgrouch | Jan 30, 2013, 06:17 PM EST
Curtis, the oligarchs really rule worldwide. But we're chipping away faster all the time. Some people say, you'll never reach the top. Revolutionary rule of thumb: You don't need to reach the top. Just keep chipping away at ground floor until the structure topples. Personally I hope horse-faced Charles and his honey tampon wet their pants a few years ago when the crowd almost overturned their limo.
curtisjohnson | Jan 30, 2013, 03:21 PM EST
Meanolgrouch, I agree but in the end Lizzie is really just another pawn of the commercial oligarchs that have run the british terror state since the importation of bill the orange (they gained real power under cromwell).
Curitiba | Jan 30, 2013, 02:19 PM EST
A very good article about a forgotten part of history. Also, another part of history that is forgotten today is the fact that Barbary pirates terrorised European coastlines between 1580 and 1830 and captured between 1-1.25 million European slaves from parts of Europe as far away as Iceland. Many Irish were captured and sold as slaves in Algiers.
Meanolgrouch | Jan 30, 2013, 10:14 AM EST
CurtisJohnson: "Never Again." You're right. Ignorance and forgetfulness play into the slave owner's hand. It really churns my stomach when people fawn all over Lizzy the Hun and her ilk. Now I specifically exempt Martin McGuiness because he was NOT 'fawning' when he simply spoke to her. That was a matter of facilitating political gain for his people.
Smyrnian | Jan 30, 2013, 06:07 AM EST
Some folks on here need to grow up. Please do so; you are embarrassing yourself and boring the rest of us!
curtisjohnson | Jan 30, 2013, 01:04 AM EST
whatever you say, nutzi
anglo-norman | Jan 29, 2013, 11:42 PM EST
warrenpointless- likewise son
anglo-norman | Jan 29, 2013, 11:40 PM EST
curtis- Get over yourself son
warrenpoint00 | Jan 29, 2013, 11:39 PM EST
Anglo-norman old chap,not a lot of humour or intelligence in the vicinity of that stiff upper lip of yours,I dare say old boy.Eh
curtisjohnson | Jan 29, 2013, 08:21 PM EST
The abduction and sexual enslavement/breeding of children, forced labor and torture, the decimation of half of a country’s population – you’re right anglo-nut zi – funny stuff!!
anglo-norman | Jan 29, 2013, 05:50 PM EST
curtisjohnson- a sense of humour & I dare say some intelligence will not go astray with you son
bob mcbride | Jan 29, 2013, 04:22 PM EST
Part true maybe, not one shoe fits all!
bob mcbride | Jan 29, 2013, 04:18 PM EST
The Quenn should try some slave chores! She isn't british either so who cares what she thinks!
Willie Frazer | Jan 29, 2013, 03:11 PM EST
I have read this story before and I believe it to be true.My grand father who was of Scottish origin told me that the English monarch at the time had contemplated selling the Scottish presbyterians to these far off countries as well, but they opted to send our people to the land that these Irish people once owned.Now you can imagine that a lot of our ancestors were not too happy about taking land that we did not own and there were some Scottish people who refused to take it , point blank.The King was not happy with those people refusing his kind offer so he imported thos people to Wales I think they were starting a British colony there around that time as well.
JimmieM | Jan 29, 2013, 10:56 AM EST
The first I have heard of it?...and I have read quite a bit of Irish history...but that is the way of it, had England remained an enemy the government would work to keep the hate alive... governments like to believe that only they can be in possession of certain facts and they don't want us little ones to know unless they deem it so.
uRsSG7uy | Jan 29, 2013, 08:11 AM EST
This sounds like a job for Ronit Lentin: Ronit Lentin✡ (neé Salzberger; born 25 October 1944) is a communist Jewess and critical race theory propagandist, best known as a fanatical enemy of the Gaelic Irish people. She decided to invade and colonise Ireland in 1969 to wage a war of race-replacement against the people. As founder of the Trinity Immigration Initiative, she is best known as advocating the demographic genocide of Irish people through third-world immigration, particularly Black Africans.
curtisjohnson | Jan 28, 2013, 10:26 PM EST
" Whatever happened then may cause outrage now, but it is high time to move on" False - the british terror state is a long continuum of moral degeneracy in contrast to its constant and vulgar displays of self serving righteousness. It must be exposed at every opportunity.
cillowen | Jan 28, 2013, 10:10 PM EST
Many of the 25,000 Irish slaves on Saint. Kitt's isle died from tropical heat, disease, or overwork. Any Irish caught trying to escape was branded FT for Fugitive Traitor on their forehead.
cillowen | Jan 28, 2013, 10:08 PM EST
Many of the 25,000 Irish slaves on St. Kitts died from tropical heat, disease, or overwork. Any Irish caught trying to escape was branded FT for Fugitive Traitor on their forehead. Other slaves were whipped, hung by their hands and set on fire, or beaten over the head until bloody for anything the English considered provocation.
cillowen | Jan 28, 2013, 10:06 PM EST
By 1650 during Cromwell's unfathomable reign of terror in Ireland the numbers of Irish sent into slavery were unlike anything previously experienced. Remember that in 1641 Ireland had a population of 1,466,000 and by 1652 the population was down to only 616,000. According to Sir William. Petty, ``850,000 were wasted by the sword, plague, famine, banishment during the Confederation War 1641-1652.'' By the end of the war estimates vary from 80,000 to 130,000 of Irish men, women and children captured for sale as slaves to labour in England's expanding empire. The English were quite proud of these accomplishments as can be noted in Prendergast,
curtisjohnson | Jan 28, 2013, 08:49 PM EST
Parenthetically, multiple sources note that a large percentage of the Irish slaves had a significant literacy/education level and many were beyond the degenerate anglo planters in these terms. This was despite decades of brutal warfare and economic disruption.
curtisjohnson | Jan 28, 2013, 08:38 PM EST
“During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves” The british terror and crime syndicate really has no moral bottom. This was done after a supposed “peace” was declared and efforts were made by the terror state government to draw people who had fled back to populations centers. The penal laws were also imposed in short order. Based on the lack of fidelity in the anglo character, it has been said that times of “peace” usually exceed times of open warfare.
curtisjohnson | Jan 28, 2013, 08:33 PM EST
@anglo-nut zi - "at least they had work." So you support the forced rape and breeding of children and placing people in an environment with up to a 90% mortality rate? It was obvious you're supremacist filth but I think you've topped yourself here. Do you joke about the holocaust too, sicko?
curtisjohnson | Jan 28, 2013, 08:31 PM EST
@anglo-nutzi - "at least they had work." So you support the forced rape and breeding of children and placing people in an environment with up to a 90% mortality rate? It was obvious you're supremacist filth but I think you've topped yourself here. Do you joke about the holocaust too, sicko?
joan1954 | Jan 28, 2013, 08:31 PM EST
The Irish built the New Basin Canal in New Orleans because they weren't property and therefore expendible because of malaria and other diseases.
curtisjohnson | Jan 28, 2013, 08:30 PM EST
@anglo-nutzi - "at least they had work." So you support the forced rape and breeding of children and placing people in an environment with up to a 90% mortality rate? It was obvious you're supremacist filth but I think you've topped yourself here. Do you joke about the holocaust too, sicko?
curtisjohnson | Jan 28, 2013, 08:30 PM EST
@anglo-nutzi - "at least they had work." So you support the forced rape and breeding of children and placing people in an environment with up to a 90% mortality rate? It was obvious you're supremacist filth but I think you've topped yourself here. Do you joke about the holocaust too, sicko?
katiemac | Jan 28, 2013, 08:14 PM EST
It wasn't just the Irish. In the South after slavery planters hired agents to recruit peasants in Germany and Poland to come and work in an indenture type of arrangement. Considering the poverty in Ireland and Europe in the post-Napoleanic period, all parties benefited.
Seanmor | Jan 28, 2013, 08:00 PM EST
Speaking od indentured servants, I know a Mayo woman who came here from England in the 70s as an 'indentured' servant to become a housekeeper for a family in Westchester County for one year. Next she she found a job as a waitress in NYC, where she paid taxes to the IRS, N.Y State, NYC (where she worked), Yonkers (where she lived), and also paid S.S. taxesd. When she applied for a driver's license in the '80s, she was required to prove that she was a legal resident and not violating any laws. Now many of our politicians are eager to reward 11 millions ILLEGAL aliens who have openly broken our immigration laws. Why is it that the law-abiding, tax-paying Irish immigrant was treated as a slave or at least as a potential criminal, but the illegal aliens are to be rewarded for their obvious violations of out laws?
Searlit | Jan 28, 2013, 07:36 PM EST
It's like the "famine". Nobody wants to talk about the history of Irish slaves because the British have been in denial about what they have done to The Irish, over and over, again. I hoped it would change by now...
Searlit | Jan 28, 2013, 07:36 PM EST
It's like the "famine". Nobody wants to talk about the history of Irish slaves because the British have been in denial about what they have done to The Irish, over and over, again. I hoped it would change by now...
Searlit | Jan 28, 2013, 07:36 PM EST
It's like the "famine". Nobody wants to talk about the history of Irish slaves because the British have been in denial about what they have done to The Irish, over and over, again. I hoped it would change by now...
warrenpoint00 | Jan 28, 2013, 06:36 PM EST
Really, TomSwineford. "indentured servants" you are killing us Tom with your kind words for slavery.Are you suggesting that 100,000 children sold into slavery by English marauders that pillaged and raped Ireland in 1650, that those children were all criminals, and this was inhumane but ok because the poor English marauding gentry had somehow to make a profit. Jees Tom you sure, you are not English.
warrenpoint00 | Jan 28, 2013, 06:04 PM EST
It is undeniably true that the English judicial/penal system "transported" many Irish men and women to the colonies as indentured servants, in effect slavery by another name. For those convicted of crimes that would otherwise result in execution, the indentured term was for life. Others could in time work off their sentence if they could survive it. Some might serve a part of their sentence and apply for a "ticket of leave," sort of getting out early for good behavior. Yes, it was inhuman but lest we forget slavery or near slavery was a very profitable business for all kinds of folks, including the Irish who were masters at it - pun intended. Remember, we stole wee Patrick and enslaved the lad for years. We also stole St. Bridgit's Dad from the Picts in Scotland and enslaved him too. Fact is we did an awful lot of kidnapping and enslaving. Of course we made sure it was all nice and legal, properly accounting for it in Ireland's ancient law, the Brehon Code. Sure in time Dublin became one of the great slave trading centers in Europe. And finally, the English transported many of their own "criminals" too and a lot of Scots and Welsh to boot.
anglo-norman | Jan 28, 2013, 05:39 PM EST
at least they had work
Smyrnian | Jan 28, 2013, 05:11 PM EST
Check out the flag of Montserrat; it is full of Irish symbolism. Very interesting.
Smyrnian | Jan 28, 2013, 05:01 PM EST
Very true article about a subject matter not many people knew about. I have travelled extensively around the Caribbean and did find a surprising Irish influence in several places even today. Good history lesson.
Seanmor | Jan 28, 2013, 03:45 PM EST
True, successive English governments brutally treated the Irish for several centuries. However, governments in London do NOT have a monopoly in mistreating Irish Nationalists. For about 3/4 of a century after the Irish Free State was established, its various giovernments usually turned a blind eye to discrimination against orthern Nationalists al the hands of Westimimnister and Stormount.
Jcs | Jan 28, 2013, 03:24 PM EST
It probably a very bitter pill to swallow for some of our English posters but the reality is that this happened.It happened under the brutal English reign of all English monarchs that ruled in Ireland, but especially under the reign of James1, James 11 and Charles1.You cannot argue with the facts of history, the English introduced the slave trade ,both black and Irish to the America,s.The shame is all English ,so swallow it.
WoundedKnee | Jan 28, 2013, 02:30 PM EST
johnshiel: "oh those rascally english..." ---Was that really worth posting? It's four words of nonsense.
CelticJammer | Jan 28, 2013, 01:14 PM EST
Young Irish women were forced to interbreed with black slaves in the Caribbean in order to build a race that was more adaptable to the sun due to the Irish skin burning easily during field work. The only reason white slavery ended in the Americas is because it became outlawed in Europe while African nations continued to be major traders in slaves.
Seanmor | Jan 28, 2013, 10:41 AM EST
In the history I learned in the Irish primary school, there was one ONE LINE about Irish people who were sold as slaves by the English. In late August of '71 I arrived in Ireland for a 5-wewek's vacation, only 2 weeks after 9 Nationalists were shot dead by British Paras in Belfast. The victims included Fr. Hugh Mullan, Joan Connolly, mother of 9 children, and 7 others. Yet, the media of the Southern Irish state was TOTALLY silent about these 9 killings, but if so much as a telephone box was damaged by the fledging Provos, the same media were filled with righteous indignatiomn. Therefore we should NOT blame historians for completely ignoring the countless thousands Irish who were sold as slaves.
iriishgirl | Jan 28, 2013, 10:38 AM EST
Agree with McNamara31. And as far as "moving on" per handsome68, I think the real point of this article and book is to get the story straight and not forget what really happened, and let those learning history know the truth.
bunkerisland | Jan 28, 2013, 10:37 AM EST
Read "To Hell and Barbados"
ray bass | Jan 28, 2013, 10:26 AM EST
Martin conveniently forgets that until the conclusion of the American Revolutionary War in 1783, the Slave Trade (in the Colonies) WAS BRITISH, not American. American Slavery dates from 1783-1865, less than 100 years and Jim Crow roughly the 100 (1865-1965). As far as the Irish being treated worse than African slaves, that certainly occurred but to argue that that describes the overall character of slavery in America is simply nonsense. We Irish have enough to complain about without this rubbish.
motyrrab | Jan 28, 2013, 10:25 AM EST
The English monarch in 1625 would have been James I not James II. The latter was the Catholic who reigned briefly from 1685-1688 and was defeated at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690. While he fled to France and abandoned his Irish allies, he probably didn't sell any Irish into slavery.
handsome68 | Jan 28, 2013, 10:11 AM EST
Whatever happened then may cause outrage now, but it is high time to move on. Otherwise one has yet another excuse to rage in one's cups about those perfidious "others", be they the Brits, the citizens or non-citizens of the country in which one is working, the wife or the husband, the baby who came as a surprise anyway. I repeat, it's time to let go of all that stuff.
McNamara31 | Jan 28, 2013, 09:59 AM EST
We were called the "Redlegs", and anyone who has done Irish genealogy will find many Irish family names in the plantation records. Many Irish slaves only lived a few years because of the extreme sun and heat and were often given the poorest quality of food because the slave owners didn't want to "waste it on the frail Irish". The plantation records will also detail many Irish slave families intermarried with other slaves, and their children were then owned by the plantation owner as well.
johnshiel | Jan 28, 2013, 09:47 AM EST
oh those rascally english...
Domer80 | Jan 28, 2013, 08:51 AM EST
This story is no surprise to anyone who has read Sean O Callaghan's excellent book: To Hell or Barbados.