Neglected Histories
Introductory Questions
Credits to my excellent teammate, Caitlin for completing some parts of this resource!
Investigate historical debates on what it means to be a child
The Homemakers
Credits to my excellent teammate, Caitlin for completing some parts of this resource!
- What is the difference between history, prehistory, and historiography?
- History refers to the study of past events, people and societies through the investigation of real evidence and writing. Prehistory is the study of humans and other lifeforms before civilizations and writing (dating back to the use of the first stone tools, circa 3.3 million years ago). Historiography is the study of historical writings in an attempt to uncover how they interpreted history and impacted our modern understanding of them. Here’s a practical example: if you’re studying the Greek civilization from their writings, you’re studying history. If you’re studying the stone tools first use by our ancestors, then that’s prehistory. If however, you’re studying the methods used by Greek historians in their documentation of history, then that’s historiography.
- Who decides what history is taught in school?
- It depends on the school and what system it adheres to. For many public schools (especially in the US and UK), the history being taught there is national history. This is because the government has a large role in the educational system, dictating which events of the US past to glorify and which ones to shy away from. As a result of this, many US school children can recite every victory won by the Americans during the War of Independence, while they struggle to recall America’s messy and dodgy South American activities during the Cold War. For private and international schools, the curriculum they follow is the one that dictates what the students learn. In the IB for example, history is more focused around the exploration of concepts, such as conflict or geographical conditions. As such, an IB student can easily bring up a historical event to support an argument, yet will struggle to recall the specific details of that event.
- Do all history books tell the same story? If not, what leads them to tell different stories? Do these stories ever contradict one another?
- History books tend to tell the same story. Ever since historical bias and revisionism appeared in the early 20th century, school systems have tried their best to publish books with a wholly objective interpretation of history. No details are censored due to national pride, likewise no victories are overrepresented due to over inflating national pride. Of course, history books with different authors tend to differ slightly based on the author’s own research and education. For example, if you were to read a book about the final months of WW2 from the Soviet side, chances are that book will be filled with the victories and lessons the soviets gained. On the flip side, if that book was from the German perspective, chances are that book will focus more on the brutality of the soviets and the glorious defense of the German people. Historically, there have been texts that contradict each other based on history itself. During the Cold War for example, Americans were taught that the history of the Soviet Union was one of mass genocides and failure (and that their own history was one of glorious independence and rights), whilst those in the Soviet Union were taught that their history was one of glorious revolution and equality for all (and that the American history was one of capitalist inequality as well as human rights failures).
- Do you learn the same history that your parents learned in school? If not, why and how has it changed?
- I certainly did not learn the same history that my parents learned at school. Since my parents took a public education in Indonesia, their history lessons mostly focused on the history of their country and its interactions with others. I on the other hand, am learning about global history, from the 1800s to the 20th century to even recent events. The main difference is of course, the school system. Since I take an international, private education, the curriculum is far broader and varied than what my parents had. This is a common example of how history classes change based on school type and location.
- Along these lines, explore the concept of historical revisionism. Discuss with your team: are some reasons for “revising” history better than others? What are common criticisms of revisionism?
- Firstly, let’s define this interesting (albeit complex) concept. Historical revisionism is essentially when historians or scholars need to revise historical works and the understanding of them due to new evidence about history. This revisionist lens often comes in three different formats: the social/theoretical perspective, the fact-checking perspective and the negative perspective. Often it is this practice that leads us to question judgements based on historical facts, or even the reliability of the historical sources we listened to in the first place. To get a better understanding of the three different lens, I’ll use an example from the website linked in the prompt. Thomas Jefferson is widely regarded as a hero for the United States, after all he penned the Declaration of Independence and served as the Third President of the US. However, a recent DNA study has confirmed the (uncomfortable) biographical fact that he had a slave mistress by the name of Sally Hemings, and the two had children together. For revisionist, this could’ve been viewed through the lens in three different ways.
- The social/theoretical lens allowed historians specializing in African-American history to explore the earliest interactions between the two races in the United States.
- The fact-checking lens meant that evidence of the affair and child were enough to spur authors to explore this relationship further in more recent biographical works about Thomas Jefferson.
- The negative lens skeptics claimed that before evidence of this affair, the rumour was simply a falsehood meant to undermine the reputation of Jefferson.
- Some reasons for revising history are slightly better than others. For example, if we find that an entire nation or organization did things they claimed not to have done (or vice versa), then clearly for the benefit of people who might’ve been impacted by the event it is best to revise the history. Yet that’s where we run into some complications, when the descendants or modern incarnations of the wrong (or good) doer get involved. A common (and often memed) example is the sensitive topic of the Armenian Genocide. Between 1915 and 1917, the Ottoman Empire (modern day Turkey) was undergoing a horrific event known as the Armenian Genocide. More than 1.5 million were believed to have died during this time, yet the Turkish government continues to deny any allegations of the event. Revisionists have included it in most historical works, but Turkish schools never cover the event.
- Firstly, let’s define this interesting (albeit complex) concept. Historical revisionism is essentially when historians or scholars need to revise historical works and the understanding of them due to new evidence about history. This revisionist lens often comes in three different formats: the social/theoretical perspective, the fact-checking perspective and the negative perspective. Often it is this practice that leads us to question judgements based on historical facts, or even the reliability of the historical sources we listened to in the first place. To get a better understanding of the three different lens, I’ll use an example from the website linked in the prompt. Thomas Jefferson is widely regarded as a hero for the United States, after all he penned the Declaration of Independence and served as the Third President of the US. However, a recent DNA study has confirmed the (uncomfortable) biographical fact that he had a slave mistress by the name of Sally Hemings, and the two had children together. For revisionist, this could’ve been viewed through the lens in three different ways.
- Are there episodes in your country’s past that are not frequently taught?
- Unfortunately, there are several episodes in my country’s past that are not frequently taught. We tend to shy away from the Suharto dictatorship that ruled over Indonesia for 30 years from the 60s to the 90s. We also almost never mention the “Killing Season” between 1965 and 1966, when millions were killed under the allegations of leftist sympathizers or racial bias. There are many other examples of history not being fully covered in countries. Turkish students never hear of the Armenian Genocide, Japanese students tend to not discuss the Rape of Nanking, whilst Russian students might not be aware of the Holodomor Famine.
- Are there episodes in your country’s past that you would prefer not be taught, or that you believe should be taught differently?
- If a country is to commit themselves to the teaching of history, then it is necessary to cover every single part of the country’s history. The study of history aims to be as completely objective as possible, devoid of censorships or partial biases.
- Is the idea of “history” biased against cultures and groups of people that keep fewer written records? If so, how can historians tell their stories?
- History attempts to be wholly objective in its pursuit of the factual. Yet of course, the existence of historical records often relates to how in-depth we explore the past of a culture and group. Of course, we know little about the Incas, Mayans and Aztecs because their culture did not have such an advanced writing system (unlike those of the Sumerians, Greeks and Romans). Historians tell their stories through other evidence, mainly the archaeological ruins of their cities that we find some proof of their lives. In other cases, we rely on the descriptions provided by other written records, for example from the Egyptian hieroglyphs we were able to discover the civilization of Punt.
- What matters more: the history of people who needed help, or the history of the people who helped them?
- Both are equally important, people who need help often are important to investigate because of why they need help. To understand their pleas for assistance in the first place, we need to understand the events or situations leading up to the current situation. As for the people who helped them, we need to regard their own history with equal importance. How did they gain the resources or the motivation to help out those who needed it?
- What do you think historians will write about the year 2019 a hundred years from now? Are there groups of people you think they will neglect?
- Historians will likely write much about the year 2019. They will likely address the geopolitical, regional and economical problems that were encountered. Brexit will likely be a big deal, along with the situation in North Korea. As for the more social aspects of this year, it is likely that they write about the many rallys, campaigns and movements dedicated to minorities and other social groups (i.e sexuality, gender, race). I certainly hope that the written records of this year will not neglect any certain groups, though if I had to choose 1 it would likely be the environmentalists (history doesn’t do very well with them). However, the greater concern is whether they will be able to write anything about us in the first place. If you were around for the Science last year, you might recall something known as the “Digital Dark Age”. This is the fear that our digital data on every event will soon not be readable or indeed findable by the technology of the 22nd century.
- When everyone around you chooses to believe in a story that contradicts what you have learned about the past, should you contradict them, stay quiet, or do your best to find common ground? What if “everyone” includes your history teacher—or your parents?
- Firstly, we need to ensure that the term “story” is being used appropriately here. There is no right or wrong in history, since it is open to interpretation by whomever reads or studies it. Instead, we should try to view history from all perspectives involved. For example, instead of viewing World War 2 as an “attack on the American country” and a campaign to “drive back the Japanese colonialists”, we need to also recognise that the “enemies” we refer to had their own reasons for going to war. Often, the contradictions occur whenever it comes to reasons, consequences or exact numbers. The most common occurrence is that one person will deny any event from happening, while another insists that it did. When this happens, the one who has the most evidence on their side (hey, just like a debate) should probably speak up in order to ensure that a “false” history with no evidence to back it up does not spread.
- Is it more important to study the history of one person who made decisions that affected a million people—or of the million people whom those decisions affected?
- Again, both. History does not tend to favor one or the other. We do not put more emphasis on studying Hitler because he sentenced millions to death in his “Final Solution”, nor do we put less emphasis on studying the Jews due to their suffering at the hands of multiple groups throughout history. We should place equal importance in both, for if we cannot grasp a full understanding then we have no true understanding at all.
Investigate historical debates on what it means to be a child
- A question to consider: are children omitted from so many histories because they did not matter as much as adults—or because they did not have the chance to speak as loudly?
- Children are often omitted from so many histories because of the latter reason. History tends to highlight those who mattered in events and children are often included in some narratives. Generally if those children grew up into famous adults (i.e practically every single ruler throughout history) then history tends to go more in-depth with their history. Other times, we find that children are remembered for how their small voices managed to stand out in a crowd of millions. Anne Frank, Samantha Smith and Hector Pieterson are famous for how they defied conventions that adults had set up and for the legacy they left.
- “Being” versus “Becoming”: Explore the thoughts of Aristotle, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau on the nature of childhood. Which philosopher do you think has had the most impact on how we think about childhood today?
- I shall leave this question to you dear scholar, to explore for your own.
- Consider the work of Philippe Aries, who argued in Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life that the modern notion of childhood was “invented” in the 17th century. What evidence does he use to back his claims, and what are some criticisms of his work? Discuss with your team: does childhood need to be reinvented in the 21st century?
- Within the book mentioned, Phillipe Aries discusses how the concept of childhood never emerged until the late 17th century. Apparently, in the Middle Ages children were instead considered as young adults, meant to do the same work and duties as their parents. The evidence used to back up his work is school curricula, social circles within families and even medieval paintings. The book received praise but also criticism from many groups. In 1998, Hugh Cunningham of the American Historical Review stated that the book had an influence that “remains profound” and added that the persuasion Aries employed was successful. However, the other side often had harsh judgement of the book, with famed historian Geoffrey Elton even calling it out for using medieval paintings as a form of reliable evidence. I’ll leave you with this 4-part criticism of the piece by Harry Hendrick; published in the 1992 edition of the Journal of the Economic History Society:
- "Firstly that his data are either unrepresentative or unreliable. Secondly that he takes evidence out of context, confuses prescription with practice, and uses atypical examples. Thirdly, that he implicitly denies the immutability of the special needs of children, for food, clothing, shelter, affection and conversation. Fourthly, that he puts undue emphasis on the work of moralists and educationalists while saying little of economic and political factors."
- Within the book mentioned, Phillipe Aries discusses how the concept of childhood never emerged until the late 17th century. Apparently, in the Middle Ages children were instead considered as young adults, meant to do the same work and duties as their parents. The evidence used to back up his work is school curricula, social circles within families and even medieval paintings. The book received praise but also criticism from many groups. In 1998, Hugh Cunningham of the American Historical Review stated that the book had an influence that “remains profound” and added that the persuasion Aries employed was successful. However, the other side often had harsh judgement of the book, with famed historian Geoffrey Elton even calling it out for using medieval paintings as a form of reliable evidence. I’ll leave you with this 4-part criticism of the piece by Harry Hendrick; published in the 1992 edition of the Journal of the Economic History Society:
- The idea of “teenagers” as a special group between children and adults emerged at the beginning of the twentieth century. Discuss with your team: is the concept of teenagers one that took too long to come about? Is it already outdated? Would you agree, as this article suggests, that the United States invented teenagers?
- The idea of “teenagers” as a social construct rather than a biological concept is rather interesting and beggars some historical context. The first and second article suggest that the United States invented teenagers (typical, considering the US invented many things during that time period). The first is slightly more in-depth, attributing the phenomenon and popularization of the term to three specific events. The first was the transformation of the American society in the late 1800s and early 1900s. With the US Civil War over and the nation rebuilding itself as an industrial powerhouse, the shift from a localized agrarian society to a centralized industrial one left many families with children who had no choice but to work in the factories as well. It was not uncommon in the 1900s or even 1910s to see a 16 year old toiling on the assembly line next to their father and brother. Yet with the rise of unions and workers societies, compulsory education was introduced in order to ensure higher wages for the workers. It was during this time in high school that teenagers were able to develop their own social rules and customs with no adults around to dictate their actions. This kickstarter most of the other changes, with a postwar economic boom allowing teenagers to gain more money (allowance) from their parents to spend it on whatnot. Finally, the invention of the automobile allowed teenagers to explore their adventurous spirits and bust out of the normal conventions of staying put for life. Perhaps America did invent the concept of teenagers, a group between adulthood and childhood that broke many social norms and continues to break them in the name of social exploration and interaction today.
- Ancient Egypt | medieval Europe | colonial America | 19th century England
- Ancient Egypt: In Ancient Egypt, the beacon of civilization shone brightly upon the children birthed in the presence of the Nile river. Children were looked after to great extent, with mothers often staying by their side until they were able to walk on their own two legs. In terms of education, schooling was often provided by local village institutions attached to a temple or government building. From the ages of 4 to 14, males were to attend schools with subjects being varied for the time (common disciplines included History, Geography, Mathematics, Science and Medicine). After that, the children were often expected to help out their fathers in whatever profession they were involved in. As such, many in the towns took up jobs in the fields or trading with their fathers. In some major cities like Alexandria or Thebes, higher education was offered (albeit with limited choices) to those who wished to take it. Often those who graduated from these schools became priests, architects or even doctors. Unfortunately, girls were not allowed to attend school. They were to stay at home and learn how to become good wives by their mothers. This is what a child in Ancient Egypt would’ve likely experienced.
- Medieval Europe: The life of a child in Medieval Europe often depended heavily on gender and hierarchy within society. Children born into common families would often be looked after greatly by their mothers, whilst those born into noble ones would have a team of servants dedicated to overseeing their daily activities. It was believed that nursing would reduce fertility, so noble wives rarely nursed their children. Logical given that only 50% of those born would survive until the age of 1. At the age of about 6 or 7, children would begin to attend school. This of course, depended on their aptitude and parental preferences. Grammar school was where the children learned latin grammar, rhetoric as well as logic. Science and the mathematics were often shunned in this time, following the Roman example of education. Monastic schools were often popular with children of the lower class, who donned black robes to show that they were now scholars of theology. Whatever the case, by the age of 14 schooling would finish for many and then it was off to get a job. Girls once again stayed at home and learned how to become good midwives and partners, whilst boys could enter into a wide array of jobs. Often though, it was the business of their father that the boy entered into. However, had they taken up an apprenticeship from another fellow (usually this included craftsmiths, painters, potters and metal workers), then they would likely remain in that business until they were able to go their own way in the world. With the wars that often erupted between nations, it was not uncommon for children as young as 16 to sign up for the army and take arms against a foreign power in a foreign land.
- Colonial America: When England established the 13 colonies in the 1600s, the children had a rather interesting time over there. Common garb in the period was frock coats and dresses for both males and females until they were about 6 or 7 (even later for females who weren’t yet “independent”). Boys would often go the Grammar school at the age of 8 and remain there until they were 12. It was here that basic arithmetic and language was taught, not much effort was put on the other subjects. Once again, girls were not often seen at school, they were at home learning the ropes of how to become good wives. After the ending of their education, boys would return home to help fathers in whatever profession they were invested in.
- 19th Century England: Ah Victorian England, what a lovely (or dreary) place to be. The Industrial Revolution is reaching its peak, the British Empire is expanding ever further and the overall quality of life is slowly yet surely improving. But at the beginning of this age, the life of a child was one filled with danger and death at every turn. Many children from lower-class families (practically 8/10s of the entire population) would never set foot in a classroom. They would spend their days (even from the age of 6!) in factories, fields and mines. Those working in factories were often called upon to fit into tight spaces between machinery and make repairs (a dangerous job that left many without some fingers), those in the field were often better of, but those in the mines had the worst of the pick (the fumes could pollute their lungs, the explosions could kill them). Later in the 1833 Factory Act and 1847, the government banned the employment of children under the ages of 9 in textile factories and the age of 12 in coal mines. As the era progressed, more acts and reforms were passed to improve working conditions for children, from their pay to their hours. In the 1840s and 50s however, a new trend began to emerge: ragged school. These were independent charity schools run by people who charged no fee for educating those who couldn’t afford the church-offered schools. In 1870, the Elementary Education Act set up government intervention in schooling for the first time. In 1880, the government made schooling to the age of 10 (and later 11) mandatory, whilst the 1891 act made all board and church schools free of charge. It was at these schools that children focused on the three R’s (sort of): Reading, Writing, Arithmetic. The subjects were later expanded on in higher institutions, such as Eton or Harrow.
- Dynastic China | the !Kung | the Yanomami
- Dynastic China: Dynastic China was made up of many dynasties (duh) and during these dynasties, many similarities existed between the educational systems and the philosophies for what children were supposed to do. For many, children would spend their early years in the company of their entire family (yes, the entire extended family in one household, common even nowadays). Only the rich were able to afford basic education for their children and that came in the form of personal tutors. One such teacher was Confucius, whose teachings all of China would follow for centuries to come. It was he who first spread the idea that it was necessary for boys to learn (of course, girls were never included in that thought process). Boys from poorer families would often learn from their father (or grandfather) and take up whatever business they got into. Peasant boys could often find themselves drafted into the military if there was a war on (or the emperor was particularly paranoid about his border safety). It was only during the Han period that schooling was provided for free (for boys), girls were still sentenced to home labor in order to learn what being a good wife meant.
- Later on, education was refined to teach Chinese students how to become good civil servants. This included scribes, officials and court envoys who would serve the Emperor with unfettering loyalty. Emperor Yang of the Sui Dynasty established the civil service examination, with further reformations and adjustments by Emperor Taizong of the Tang Dynasty. This mainstay of Chinese education would remain until Yuan Shikai of the Qing dynasty dismantled it in the 20th century (the beginning of a Chinese democratic and then communist government).
- Over the next centuries, many dynasties and emperors would come and go. Each would leave their mark on the educational system, some would refine it for the better, others would dub it down to ensure they could control the populace. For more explanations, I recommend visiting this link.
- The !Kung: Firstly, let’s break down the interesting group of people this prompt refers to. The !Kung people are a sub-sect of the San, hunter-gatherer tribes that have populated the sparse lands of the Kalahari desert (spanning Botswana, Namibia and even South Africa). Though they may seem fairly primitive in their ways, the !Kung have adapted to the modern age quite well. By “quite well” I mean that they have managed to keep their traditions intact without submitting to the wonders of our modern world. The !Kung refer to themselves as the Jul’hoansi and speak Ju, a clicking language similar to the Khoisan group. Since their lifestyles are often more nomadic than ours, the education in the !Kung society relies on “learning through experiencing”. From a young age, the boys were often taken on hunting trips with their fathers to learn the tricks of this survival trade. The girls were also brought outside of the village, where the women taught them how to find edible plants that could be cooked alongside the meat the males brought back with them. In more recent years, Western culture has permeated the education, with several children being sent to local schools for basic primary education. Yet the most entertaining source of knowledge for !Kung youngsters were the elders, who could retell stories and myths of their tribe around the fireplace at night (probably not a fireplace, but hey it's a nice image).
- The Yanomami: If you thought the !Kung were isolated, think again. The Yanomami people are a group of about 35,000 individuals from 200-250 different tribes occupying an area more than twice the size of Switzerland in the Amazon rainforest. They occupy some of Southern Venezuela and Brazil where the forest lies, living in fairly isolated villages miles from the nearest town. They are the largest isolated tribe in South America and are proud of it. The Yanomami learn to live off the land and learn as well through experience. Youngsters are sent into the woods (regardless of gender) to learn how to hunt, find edible plants and even build shelters if necessary. Since the tribal rituals are often very closely-knit, the Yanomami children are taught the lessons of the past from their elders. Yet with the threat of deforestation and gold mining ever apparent, the Yanomami have received help from multiple NGOs hoping to introduce more formal and varied education to the next generation.
- Dynastic China: Dynastic China was made up of many dynasties (duh) and during these dynasties, many similarities existed between the educational systems and the philosophies for what children were supposed to do. For many, children would spend their early years in the company of their entire family (yes, the entire extended family in one household, common even nowadays). Only the rich were able to afford basic education for their children and that came in the form of personal tutors. One such teacher was Confucius, whose teachings all of China would follow for centuries to come. It was he who first spread the idea that it was necessary for boys to learn (of course, girls were never included in that thought process). Boys from poorer families would often learn from their father (or grandfather) and take up whatever business they got into. Peasant boys could often find themselves drafted into the military if there was a war on (or the emperor was particularly paranoid about his border safety). It was only during the Han period that schooling was provided for free (for boys), girls were still sentenced to home labor in order to learn what being a good wife meant.
- Where and when did the first schools dedicated to the education of children come about in different parts of the world?
- This is actually a very interesting topic and I wholeheartedly recommend that you delve into the specifics of it here. While it is somewhat difficult to pinpoint the exact location and years, the general consensus gives the award of the first formal school to Ancient Egypt (surprise surprise). It was in the Middle Kingdom under the direction of Kheti (treasurer to Pharaoh Mentuhotep II) that the first “schools” were set up. Evidence also shows that Mesopotamia, Sumeria and other middle-eastern kingdoms also offered education for those from certain background around the same time (3000 BC). Next to follow would be China, with the Zhou Dynasty (1045 - 256 BC) establishing schools in the capital city. These schools focused on the Six Arts: archery, calligraphy, charioteering, music, rites and mathematics. The great civilizations of Greece and Rome were soon to follow. It was in Greece that private education began to evolve further, anyone with enough money could set up a school and decide the curriculum for themselves. Later on, Aristotle and Plato (along with many other notable philosophers) would setup the first institutions of higher education: the Lyceum and Platonic Academy. The only exception was the citystate of Sparta, where boys from the age of 7 were taken away to military barracks to learn how to become the legendary warriors that distinguished the city. By the middle of the 4th century, Rome soon followed, with similar results (private schools by individuals and later state-sponsored schools).
- By the Middle Ages, education had evolved. No longer were schools set up in purposefully created buildings, instead the monasteries and churches of the Roman Catholics became hubs of learning. It was during the 11th and 12th century in Italy, England and France that the first universities appeared (most notably Oxford and Cambridge). However, even these impressive places of higher learning could not compare with the University of al-Qarawiyyin in Fes, Morocco. Established in the 9th century, it remains open and holds the Guiness World Record for the oldest school in the world.
- In terms of the west, America would only get its school in 1635, with the Boston Latin School forming the foundation of other educational institutions. The British formal education was fully established by 1890, by which time education had become free (at least before college) and mandatory for all until the age of 11.
- This is actually a very interesting topic and I wholeheartedly recommend that you delve into the specifics of it here. While it is somewhat difficult to pinpoint the exact location and years, the general consensus gives the award of the first formal school to Ancient Egypt (surprise surprise). It was in the Middle Kingdom under the direction of Kheti (treasurer to Pharaoh Mentuhotep II) that the first “schools” were set up. Evidence also shows that Mesopotamia, Sumeria and other middle-eastern kingdoms also offered education for those from certain background around the same time (3000 BC). Next to follow would be China, with the Zhou Dynasty (1045 - 256 BC) establishing schools in the capital city. These schools focused on the Six Arts: archery, calligraphy, charioteering, music, rites and mathematics. The great civilizations of Greece and Rome were soon to follow. It was in Greece that private education began to evolve further, anyone with enough money could set up a school and decide the curriculum for themselves. Later on, Aristotle and Plato (along with many other notable philosophers) would setup the first institutions of higher education: the Lyceum and Platonic Academy. The only exception was the citystate of Sparta, where boys from the age of 7 were taken away to military barracks to learn how to become the legendary warriors that distinguished the city. By the middle of the 4th century, Rome soon followed, with similar results (private schools by individuals and later state-sponsored schools).
- Where and when did governments first offer public education?
- America gets the right to claim this prize. In 1635 the opening of the Boston Latin School signified a new age in education’s evolution. The school was open to the public and all classes could come and learn here (except females, they still had about 200 years of prejudice in education). In Britain, the public education system was reformed in the Victorian period. The Elementary Education Act of 1870 introduced state-funded and organized schooling for youngsters. Many other European and Asian countries would soon follow the examples of these two (most notably Japan in the East and Germany in the West).
- When did the first “boarding” schools emerge?
- Ever since the medieval ages, Britain began sending its sons (but not daughters) to boarding schools in Benedictine monasteries and churches. In the 12th century, the Pope decreed that all Benedictine monasteries provide charity schools. Later on, these schools formed the first “public schools” when paying parents were attracted. In America, the first boarding schools emerged in the 1700s and 1800s, the Fay School in Massachusetts is the oldest junior boarding school (established 1866), whilst the oldest high-school boarding institution is the West Nottingham Academy (established 1744).
- Explore historical alternatives to schools, including tutors and apprenticeships. Discuss with your team: do these alternatives still have a place in the world today? If a child asked to become an apprentice to a computer programmer rather than attend school, would that be okay?
- Tutors and apprenticeships, it can be argued, actually were the schools; whilst formal education became the alternative later on. Ever since the establishment of stationary kingdoms, civilizations and empires (each with a vast multitude of cities and craftsmen), children have been sent off to learn a new trade under the guidance of an experienced master. It was not uncommon for parents to not see their child until they had completed their apprenticeship 5-10 years later (possibly longer depending on the trade). In fact, future US founding father Benjamin Franklin became an apprentice at a printing business led by his brother James (he was bound to the job as an indentured worker from the age of 12 to 21). Nowadays, apprenticeships are still popular, with many students opting to experience professional (often blue-collar) jobs with on-site training and sometimes classroom learning. This very much still has a place in the world, as families with lower income have a chance to see their child earn a living without emptying their wallets.
- As for tutors, well they’ve been around even longer. Some of the most famous philosophers and thinkers in Ancient History (read: Confucius and Aristotle) were tutors who taught higher-class families. It was much easier for a family (if they had the capital) to pay for a regular one-on-one teacher than to send their child off to learn with others. In a way, tutoring has evolved to become a more complementary form of education. Instead of relying solely on the tutor, children consult them on certain subjects where they might require more assistance or when homework is particularly troubling. Perhaps more interesting is the rise of “super-tutors”, companies and individuals who are paid thousands to prepare children for important exams (i.e the Chinese Gaokao or South Korean Suneung). Tutoring may soon play a larger role than public education, with parents preferring a personalized education than a collectivist one. Read this article for more details. In a way, by looking at this website you are being tutored in a slightly more general way, though perhaps the practice debate option offered here better encapsulates tutoring rise (too bad I’m not paid thousands for this, but I find the appreciation from scholars more worth it).
- Where and when were the earliest academic competitions? Is the concept of “extracurriculars” something that only came about in the 20th century?
- This is honestly pretty hard. We don’t have any evidence of “academic competitions” from Ancient record (supposedly students saw no point in incentivising their work). Certainly the first academic competitions were held within schools, with classes competing to see which one could outdo the other (this likely emerged around the 19th and 20th century). Inter-school events such as the US quiz bowl or UK mathematics competitions later appeared in the 1970s and 80s. Ever since then the curriculum for academic competitions has expanded, from the formal halls of a Model United Nations committee to our own Alpaca-filled World Scholar’s Cup.
- The concept of extracurriculars was indeed something that only came about in the 20th century, when formal public education was widespread in the western world. Children often found themselves with nothing to do after school (homework was still light back then, lucky buggers). So the schools or even external partner organizations would set up activities to partake in. Initially this was simple a more formal time to play, with sports often occurring after school. Later on the academics were expanded to include extracurriculars of all calibres.
- Explore the historical treatment of orphans around the world, from ancient Greece to the 21st century. Discuss with your team: if you had to be an orphan in the past, where and when would you most want to be? Least?
- The historical treatment of orphans has generally improved over the past few centuries. In Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, society was particularly harsh on orphans. Many parents (especially from lower-class families) actually chose to leave their children in the marketplace as “orphans”. The goal was that a rich family would adopt the child as a “toy” of some sorts for their own children, allowing the parents to benefit from the income of this child. More often than not however, orphans were either left to die on the streets or were sought for more... nefarious purposes. Over the centuries, orphans in the Middle Ages and even up to the 1600s were treated as such, with adoption being the intended result but child mortality often prevented that from being a reality. However, the responsibility of looking after orphans during those time periods often fell upon the church or distant relative. Interestingly, Ancient Greece and Rome had their own orphanages but these were more like schools and hospitals for the homeless children and were often only secured under certain circumstances. It was only in 1729 in Mississippi that the first private orphanage opened. After that, the number of institutes would continue to skyrocket until today.
- If I had to be an orphan, I’d probably be find with an orphanage in the Scandinavian countries (given their quality of life index). I can’t imagine surviving as an orphan in Ancient Greece, Rome or Egypt however.
- Consider the Nigerian proverb “It takes a village to raise a child”. Are there societies in which children are routinely raised in group settings? Discuss with your team: does mainstream society overemphasize the importance of parents raising their own children?
- There are indeed many societies in which children are routinely raised in group settings. Many African cultures (such as the Yoruba, Igbo, Sukuma and Swahili) reflect this belief, with some having their own versions of the proverb (i.e “one knee does not bring up a child”). Outside of Africa, I’m sure many South American and even Native American tribes put a large emphasis on raising their children thorough communal methods as well. In fact western culture may be an anomaly in that they don’t find much benefit in raising children as an extended family. I certainly think mainstream society overemphasizes and overburdens the importance of parents raising their own children. Many scientific investigations and indeed social studies have shown that communal raising is far more beneficial than parents having done so.
- Some orphans still have one or two living parents. Discuss with your team: under what circumstances would it be appropriate to separate a child from his or her parents? Do different societies answer this question differently?
- The main answer that societies have resolved to resort to in this circumstance is that the parents simply cannot support the upbringing of a child. Either their economic situation is nowhere near the level it should be to support a family, or their actual geographical situation (i.e refugees or oppressed minorities) would attract unwanted harm to the child. These circumstances are mainly appropriate, it just goes to show how much love the parent has for their child. “The greatest sign of your love is the ability to let those who you love go”.
- Research “the Stolen Generations”—a time in Australian history when indigenous children were taken from their families to assimilate them into “white” culture. Australia’s government has apologized for these policies. The Canadian government has issued a similar apology for a similar policy. Discuss with your team: is it ever possible to make adequate amends for the mistakes of past generations? Are there other countries that have followed similar policies but have yet to apologize—and does it matter if the policies were official or unofficial?
- The “Stolen Generations” is one of the darker periods of Australian history that not many people are comfortably with. Between 1910 and 1970, Australia embarked on a harsh and often unjust journey of “assimilation”. This policy meant taking away aboriginal children and forcing them to forget or even reject their traditional values/cultures in order to appreciate white cultures. The basis of racism and the idea of “white supremacy” fueled much of this. It can at times be possible to made adequate amends for the mistakes of the past, the first is (like Australia has done) to apologize for the event and then work to right what was wronged.
- There are many countries that have attempted to follow similar policies but failed to even apologize. Japan has yet to acknowledge or apologize for the Nanking (Nanjing) Massacre (in which more than 300,000 Chinese civilians and soldiers were raped or mutilated), Turkey has yet to apologize for the Ottoman Empire’s campaign of the Armenian Genocide and Russia has yet to even start amending with Ukraine for the Holodomor famine.
- Many people assume orphanages are bad, but others argue that they are the best solution for children in need. Skim this positive perspective on orphanages, then discuss with your team: what would the perfect modern orphanage look like?
- The perfect modern orphanage would likely be one where all children are given the necessary facilities and equipment to explore the world around them and let their playful nature escape. It is most certainly not a place to discipline youngsters or attempt to get rid of them quickly. A good orphanage is one that makes its children sad to leave when a family does decide to adopt them. The responsibility of an orphanage nowadays is not so much to find new families for the children, but to serve as a family in itself.
- Learn more about the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. What led to its passage, and is it being upheld in your own country? Are there other UN Conventions that you believe still need to be created and signed—for instance, a UN Convention on the Rights of Online Gamers?
- If you wish to truly learn about this Convention, please be my guest and read the entire UN document here
- The passage of the convention itself was more the UN Human Rights Agency attempting to cover the massive area of childcare, especially those children who no longer have a family due to conflict or were orphaned at birth. On the 20th of November 1989, the passage was opened for signing and was ratified on the 2nd of September 1990. All members of the UN are party to it, except (perhaps most ironically) the United States. Indonesia is doing a fairly good job at upholding the convention and Thailand isn’t doing too bad as well.
- YES, a UN Convention on the Rights of Online Gamers must be signed for the protection and recognition of Online Gamer rights all over the world (except those who call themselves “gamers” because they play Fortnite).
- Explore different rites of passage for children to adulthood, today and in the past. How different are they across cultures and across history? Are they less important today than they used to be?
- Ah the rite of passage. Something that we currently take for granted and don’t quite realize was much harsher in the past. For many social groups and cultures, the rite of passage marked an end and a beginning. Children become adults, boys become men and girls become woman. The rite was often designed to test the abilities of those who underwent it in order to see whether or not they were ready for the next stage of their life. The only exceptions to this were birth and death rites (but for the sake of simplicity and specificity, we’ll keep this to adulthood rites). Historically, these rites were far more tough and varied. The Maasai tribespeople in Africa for example, would send those about to reach adulthood to go hunt a lion alone (yes, a real African lion) in order to prove their strength and skills. Aboriginals and Native Americans were known to send their children off into the wilderness for days on end, fasting and searching for a direction to their adulthood.
- Today, rites of passage are not as widespread or indeed as popularized in Western culture as it was once. Indeed our interconnected (or should I say, entangled?) world has done away with the need for “life-searching” passages and “trials of manhood”. There are still many however, who persist in carrying on the rites of passage their ancestors once undertook.
- Rites to research (examples):
- kahs-wan | sweet sixteens | krypteia | quinceañera
- Kahs-wan: Oh how I deplore having to write about Star Trek. Essentially, the Kahs-wan was a coming of age ritual that adolescent Vulcans (the species Spock was a part of) undertook. It required them to spend 10 days in the Vulcan Forge (a desert on their home planet Vulcan) without food, water or weapons. The origins of this passage came from Ancient Vulcan times, where warriors who turned to logic reasoned that they needed to maintain the tests of their courage and strength, lest pure logic make them weak and helpless. For Vulcans, failing the kahs-wan the first time was not a disgrace. Captain Spock undertook his Kahs-wan early (it was initially scheduled for the 20th day of the Tasmeen month in the year 8877) and survived, though his pet sehlat died after a bite from the poisonous le-matya.
- Sweet Sixteens: Perhaps the most mysterious celebration that I shall never understand (why is this a thing?). A “sweet sixteen” is usually celebrated when a teenage girl reaches the age of 16 (otherwise it would be even more illogical). In the Victorian era (1800s Britain), these were referred to as “debutante” parties, where girls were presented to society in the hopes that they would find a husband among the visitors. Commonly, the sweet sixteen still retains a few traditions. The “sixteen candles” on the cake or other treat often signify the 16 most important people in the celebrant’s life (it is they who light a candle and the celebrant says one nice thing about them). The father-daughter dance is also common, to signify the coming of age of their little girls. Another event that often occurs is the inheritance of a family heirloom from the previous owner, to show that the young woman has achieved the maturity and responsibility necessary to look after it. The final popular event is the shoe ceremony, whereby the significant male figure in the female’s life presents them with high-heeled shoes (along with helping them take off their flat ones and slip on the new ones). Other times, the mother will put a tiara on the girl’s head to finish the transition into adulthood.
- Krypteia: Ah finally, a more brutal rite of passage. The Krypteia refers to a Spartan rite otherwise known as “Helot Killing”. At the age of 7, spartan children were taken away from their families and sent to military training camps also known as Krypteia. After 11 years of rigorous and often painful military training (during which many perished), the Krypteia began. Boys 18 years old were sent into the countryside with nothing but a knife and were told to kill as many helots (state-owned slaves) as possible, all without being detected. If they showed up back at camp in one piece and no slaves were reported missing, then the rite was passed and the boy had become a man.
- Quinceañera: The mesoamerican version of the sweet sixteen takes place a year earlier. The quinceanera refers to the 15th birthday of a female, the age when in Aztec and other South American cultures, she has transitioned into the age of adulthood. Similar to sweet sixteens, the parties are elaborate, the girl dresses up in lavish gowns and the entire village or town is often invited. Historically, there were men and women (dames or chambelanes) who performed special dances alongside the lucky 15 year old. It was the Shoe change ceremony that sweet sixteens often inherited from this celebration. Once again the purpose is very similar, present young women to possible suitors (it is not uncommon for families and potential husbands to present dowries or payments for the girl’s hand in marriage.)
- guan li/ji li | seijin shiki | chudakarana | “vision quests”
- Guan li, Ji li (Caitlin): The Guan Li (冠礼) is a Confucian coming of age ceremony for males, the ceremony is conducted when the participant has reached the age of 20. The participant's father would give a small speech and the participant would greet guests. The ceremony master would wash their hands and place a fu tou (襆頭) on the participant’s head , the participant would then change into a dark outfit which matches the fu tou. After saluting the guests the participant would becoming a man. The participant of the Guan Li will receive a style/courtesy name (表字), this name is representative of the adulthood of the participant and the courtesy name is used by members of the participant’s generation to address the participant. The Ji Li (笄礼) or the hair pinning ceremony is the female counterpart of the Guan Li (冠礼). The ceremony is held when the participant turns 15 years old, the 笄 character refers to the bamboo hair pin (as can be seen from the 竹 部首). The participant would tie her hair in a top bun, during the ceremony a master (highly respected married woman) would put the hairpin on the participant’s bun to signify that she was now an adult.
- Seijin shiki: Ah Japan, even your coming of age ceremonies are labelled with your signature trademarks. Seijin Shiki refers to coming of age ceremonies, yet these are all celebrated on Seijin no Hi, otherwise known as coming of age day. Occurring on the second Monday of January, the public holiday celebrates those who have or will reach the age of majority (recently changed from 20 to 18) since April 2nd of the previous year and April 1st of the current one. The ceremony is often rooted deeply with traditional and cultural values; while celebrating the newfound liberties the adult can have, it also reminds them of the newfound responsibilities and duties they must undertake. During this day, most women and men dress up, either in traditional kimonos and hakamas (for women and men respectively) or more contemporary western dresses and suits. The day is often marked by speeches at temples, invitations from prefectural offices and evening parties by the new adults.
- Chudakarana: Otherwise known as Mundan, the Chudakarana is one of several Sanskara, rites of passage in Indian philosophies (first described in Sanskrit texts). The Chudakarana refers to the first hair cut of the baby, usually taking place between the age of 1 and 3. The entire head of the baby is shaved or cut off, leaving only the Chuda or Shikha, the tuft at the top of the head. The shaved hair is often offered to the gods at a local temple or given to the holy Ganges river. Traditions vary depending on the region, with several additions (including the specific treatments of the head before and after the rite of passage) being unique to a state. However the objective of the ritual remains the same, shave off the hair that represents undesirable traits from a past life and start anew with this new life.
- “Vision quests”: perhaps the most stereotypical version of a rite of passage; vision quests refer to an umbrella term of a group of rites that many in Native American and even South American tribes undertake. Though the specifics of the quest may vary, the general consensus is that this is when teenagers about to reach adulthood find their purpose in life and their direction within the community. After rituals in the village by the Elders, the person will go to a prescribed spot in the wilderness, where he/she (more often the former) will remain for several days without food or water. During this time, they remain vigilant for a vision. This comes either in the form of animals acting strangely, objects shaped like deities or animals and even hallucinogenic dreams of great visions. After experiencing this, they return to the village in order to seek interpretation from the elders.
- okuyi | bar/bat mitzvah | first car | walkabout
- Okuyi: An interesting rite of passage indeed. Instead of being some sort of individual test where the risk of failure is evident, an Okuyi (otherwise known as Ukuyi or Mekuyo) is performed by Bantu ethnic groups in Equatorial Guinea, Cameroon and Gabon. It is often performed at a funeral, birth, when a baby reaches 4 months or at the transition to adolescence. During the ritual, the entire village gathers around as a costumed main dancer and several support dancers dance and sing. The celebrant is often seated at the center of the circle of villagers, with the Ukuyi (the main dancer in costume) coming close to bless them.
- Bar/bat mitzvah: Perhaps one of the more religiously-cemented rites of passage, the Jewish Bar mitzvah (“sons of commandment”) or Bat mitzvah (“daughters of commandment”) are key celebrations and ceremonies in the religion. They signify that the son or daughter is now fully responsible for all their actions, their parents are no longer held accountable for their sins. In doing so, they attain some more responsibilities: please see the following links for more information.
- First car: Perhaps one of the more contemporary rites of passage out there, the first car is a symbol of western teenagers moving on into adulthood. No longer are they shackled to remain stationary and rely on their parents, they now have the means to be free and explore the world in their own way. Appearing around the 1950s and 60s, it was common for middle and higher class families to give ownership of a new (or slightly used) car to their sons and daughters when they turned 18 (even younger in some countries). The handing over of the keys signifies the parents letting go of their child and giving them their permission to go out and make their own way in the world.
- Walkabout: Firstly, let’s call this rite of passage by a far nicer name: “temporary mobility”. Walkabout refers to a rite of passage into adolescence by Aboriginals undertaken between the age of 10 to 16. During this time, young boys and girls are sent out into the wilderness to live on their own for 6 months (and you thought the Native American rite was long). During this time, they need to make their own shelter and find their own food (not to mention survive the 196849 species of animals that want to kill them). They also need to find their own way back at the end of the rite, through spiritual “song-lines” that call out to the gods for guidance. A journey of the land and a journey of mind if ever there was one.
- kahs-wan | sweet sixteens | krypteia | quinceañera
- Discuss with your team: do rites of passage create an artificial divide between childhood and adulthood, or are they important for helping children find their place in the adult world?
- Rites of passage can do both. While in more contemporary times with “sweet sixteens and first cars”, they can create a materialistic and artificial divide between childhood and adulthood. When one becomes the latter, they cannot go back to the former. Yet for the more cultural and historical rites, it is indeed a matter of helping children find their place in the world. Through some rigorous and mentally challenging struggle, they are enlightened (either through practical experience or spiritual intervention) as to what their destiny is to be.
- If you could design a rite of passage for our world today, what would it be?
- Spend a month with no technological devices.
- How does a child’s gender, race, nationality, or class affect his or her experience of childhood? Are there some cases in which it is good for children to mature quickly and to skip ahead to adolescence and adulthood?
- A child’s gender, race, nationality and class affect their childhood in many different ways. Gender is not so much an issue as it was back in the 1800s or even 1900s, but it still continues to prove troublesome in some countries. Most notably, in Saudi Arabia and India girls are often given very few rights and privileges when compared to boys (notoriously, Saudi girls are not allowed to meet with Saudi boys after school). Race tends to be a problem in the western world, with colored children often receiving more prejudice and harm from their peers who believe that they are superior to them. Nationality is extremely important. A child in Kenya will likely be able to connect to the internet albeit with limited speed, whilst a child in the Netherlands will likely be able to surf the internet unrestricted by the limits of bandwidth or speed. Class is more of an impact on how childhood evolves in the materialistic sense. A lower class family in China will likely have their children work the fields in the countryside and get little to no pocket money; whilst an upper class family in Saudi Arabia will likely have more than 1 servant tend to their child.
- There aren’t many cases in which skipping adolescence is a good idea. During the initial 5-8 years of puberty, teenagers often require the time to adjust to their biological changes and then cope with the steady increase in responsibilities with their power.
- For much of history and even today in many places, poor and working-class children have been expected to work. Discuss with your team: should children be economic assets for their families? Do they have a debt to their parents—and, if so, is that debt different now than it would have been a hundred years ago? Is it child labor if kids become famous on YouTube or other social media platforms?
- It is perhaps one of the most notable failures of our species that we expected (and still do expect) children to work for us. The argument used throughout history is that because the parents were kind enough to foster the child, they must pay back their debt by being an economic asset. Such a debt does not exist, how can we justify having children work by saying that its an economic matter? Children have the right to grow up and explore their world before even considering becoming an economic asset for their parents. If however it is a debt, then it most certainly is different than it was 100 years ago. Back then, children from as small as 6 could work in dirty factories or farms, constantly facing danger whenever work placed them in a polluted or hazardous areas. Nowadays human rights agencies and child protection laws in many countries have prevented such debt repayment methods.
- A child becoming a Youtube star and then giving some of the money generated to their parents is not child labor. The child is willingly going on Youtube or whatever social media in order to share their discoveries, promote their thoughts or showcase their achievements. It is however, child labor if the parent has demanded that the child set up the channel in the first place and then give 90% of the proceeds to them.
- Should histories of childhood (and thinking about childhood in general) focus more on unconventional childhoods—for instance, the experience of those with physical disabilities or developmental differences?
- Not at all. While we should give special mentions to these children for overcoming their biological hurdles before society accepted them, normal children who did extraordinary things also deserve their own sections in the history books. We do not focus American history on the unconventional presidents, instead we focus on all presidents but give special honors or mentions to those who truly did extraordinary things (no place for Donald Trump there, unless you count “president who f**ked up the most in his term”).
- Research the modern use of the word “adulting”. Discuss with your team: what does it suggest about childhood and adulthood today?
- Adulting refers to the “practice of behaving in a way characteristic of adults, often associated with the completion of mundane but necessary tasks”. Used more by teenagers and pre-adults than actual adults themselves, the term signifies how much society has progressed in the modern era. Children nowadays are often striving to complete tasks that make them seem adult-like, whilst teenagers absolutely ahorr having to act like adults until they reach the age of adulthood.
- Every so often, a child has found himself or herself in a position of great power: King Tut, Joffrey, Puyi, Ivan the Terrible, King Oyo, and many others. Have such children shown themselves to be resilient in the face of the challenges of leadership? Have they been subject to exploitation?
- First, to satisfy the “historical” side of this question, it is necessary to give a profile on some on some of the names mentioned there (their images will be included in the slideshow below for viewing purposes). King Tut (otherwise known as Tutankhamun), was the “boy-pharaoh” of Egypt who reigned at the tender age of 8 or 9 from 1332 BC to 1323 (dying at the age of 18 or 19). Not much occurred during his reign and he was often a puppet for the adult members of his counsel or advisory panel. He is rather sadly, most remembered for his tomb. It was in 1922 that Lord Howard Carter and a team of British archaeologists discovered his tomb almost entirely intact (seems the grave robbers took pity on this child mummy). It was a mysterious series of deaths and occurrences after the tomb was opened (along with an ominous inscription on the wall) that led to the association of the “Pharaoh’s Curse” with this boy king (seems he did wield some divine power after all, just needed some time to get out of his body).
- Aisin Gioro Puyi was the last Emperor of China, given the throne at the age of 2 by his mother, Empress Dowager Cixi. In 1912 he was forced to abdicate the throne (well, we say forced in the sense that he was only 6 when he did this) due to the Xinhai rebellion (China’s first steps toward a democracy and then a communist state). He would live in exile in Manchuria, later becoming the head of state there as a Japanese puppet emperor (apparently there were plans to bring him back onto the Chinese throne had Japan defeated the country in the Second Sino-Japanese War). However with the defeat of Japan and the return of Manchuria to the Chinese, Mao Tse Tung and his communist comrades sentenced the now adult Puyi to almost a decade in prison. It was only in 1959 that he was pardoned and lived the rest of his life as a humble gardener.
- King Oyo is lesser among the 4 people mentioned and with some justification. He is the current Omukama of Tooro, one of 5 kingdoms within Uganda. Given the throne at the age of three, the ruler still attended school (albeit in the presence of a bodyguard) and even had playmates in his royal cabinet. He is currently 27 years old and continues to reign with a steady hand despite having ascended to the throne at a period of turmoil in Uganda.
- Ivan the Terrible was rather terrible when it came to being kind (obviously). Yet before this First Tsar of All Rus (later Russia) came to be, he was the Grand Prince of Moscow at the age of three and later crowned as the Tsar (the post where he would expand Russia into what it is today and gain a notorious reputation in the process) at the age of 17. His remarkable reign saw the expansion of the Russian lands into an empire encompassing 2 continents and dozens of ethnicity groups (about 4,050,000 square kilometers of land in total). Despite having gained the throne at such a young age (well not that young compared to the other leaders but hey it was young back then), Ivan the IV came to make all around him either fear or respect him (otherwise it’d be a brutal execution for you).
The Homemakers
- Adam Smith is one of the most important economists of all time. But who was cooking his dinner? Henry David Thoreau retreated to Walden to become self-sufficient—but his mother still did his laundry. Batman has had myriad Robins, but only one Pennyworth. To what degree should we study those individuals (frequently women) who supported the individuals (frequently men) most featured in our textbooks?
- History has been flawed in that it studies only the people who made a change to our world. Instead, history should also focused on those who helped the people make a change in the first place. Even if those people are no longer mentioned or have faded into the past, they must be remembered for how they contributed to the person contributing to the world. Adam Smith’s mother for her ability to sustain her son whilst he toiled away on The Wealth of Nations or Thoreau mother who looked after his dirty clothes in exchange for job opportunities whilst in Walden. We should study these individuals to the best of our ability in order to understand how those whom they made an impact on changed society for the better.
- Explore the history of domestic labor in (examples)…
- Colonial India | Latin America | Pre- and Post-World War Britain
- Colonial India: Domestic workers in Colonial India were often slaves or lower-class families who were brought into the service of their British masters. These workers were often given poor treatment, with punishment being common if failure was consistent. Later on, as the British began to soften their grip on the “Jewel in the crown of the empire”, the domestic servants were given better rights and could even achieve their own freedom if their masters decided that their service had been exemplary.
- Latin America: Getting slightly more modern with our time period here, Latin America has had significant problems in protecting domestic labor rights in its countries. The ILO (International Labor Organization), notes that more than 18 million domestic workers are employed in the region, with almost 80% percent of them being subjected to informalities in their labor (i.e no official pay is decided upon and conditions for them are often very squalid). Majority of these people (about 93% in fact) are women and it's often difficult to get any change implemented because society often accepts that this is the way it needs to be as it is the way it has been for centuries.
- Pre and Post-world war Britain: Perhaps the very image of domestic labor in pre-world war Britain was a typical upper-class Victorian household. The family would have a butler to oversee the team of domestic laborers, with maids, cooks, housekeepers and even nannies making up the domestic force in a single household. In the 1800s and early 1900s, this was how Britain looked like in domestic labor. Yet at the turn of the century, the Industrial Revolution had left a growing middle class. Though the demand for household servants grew, the actual supply of them dwindled (many having paid for their servitude or retired to make their own lives). Interestingly (or rather unfortunately), it was uncommon to see orphans being “liberated” from their positions to become servants (this counted as child labor). After the 1st and 2nd world war, domestic labor in Britain took a severe downturn. While the men went off to fight overseas, the women who often dominated the domestic services transitioned to new jobs in fields and factories (or even as support roles in the armed services), ensuring that the men could carry on fighting to the bitter end. After the war, this empowerment of women meant that many did not return to their domestic labor positions before the war broke out.
- South Africa | the United States | Indonesia
- South Africa: South Africa’s history with domestic labor is similar to those who faced colonization under British rule. When South Africa became a British possession, it was not uncommon for “white masters” to employ “colored servants” in their households. However this was soon not the case, as South Africa also possessed a large native population of Boer and Afrikaner people; meaning that the territory was often at war with itself. After the Second Boer war in 1902, domestic labor was less popular, considering that much of the population did not possess the economic power to afford a servant (or even a team of them). In the later years as South Africa faced apartheid, the embodiment of any white South African (either of European, American or western origin) was the exploitation of a colored or native person for domestic labor. After apartheid ended this number still remains, with about 1.1 million (possibly more) South Africans being employed in the Domestic labor service, unfortunately out of that many people, 54,000 are under the age of 15 (child labor once more).
- The United States: The history of domestic service in the United States is often one filled with issues and regrettable decisions, but the history still stands. Prior to 1865, slavery was often the main form of domestic service, with many households in the South (where majority of the agricultural households were) often having entire “slave communities” on their plantations. After the civil war, slavery was banished from the country but domestic service still reared its ugly head. Many households still employed black servants, albeit this time they were paid. In fact majority of the black women in the United States during the 20th century were domestic servants, since their ancestors didn’t have the education or experience to try out other jobs. During the 1950s, 60s and 70s the civil rights movement meant that many domestic servants could find their voice simply by refusing to work or not living in the same household as their employers.
- Indonesia: Great, now I’ve got to go and research domestic workers and their mistreatment in my own country. Totally won’t be any bias here whatsoever. So let’s get started.
- Since Indonesia has a population of roughly 264 million (a statistic we are very proud of I assure you), it should be logical to expected a fair amount of that number to be employed in the domestic services. In fact, the International Labour Organisation puts the number at roughly 4.5 million within Indonesia alone, with another 4.5 million being sent abroad. Of this number, 80% of all domestic servants in the country are females. Domestic service provides a large amount of money to the economy, both in terms of the direct payments these servants get as well as the money produced by their employers (who now find more time to contribute to economically productive activities). However, there have been multiple movements in the country to give these workers better rights in multiple aspects. Firstly their wages; Indonesian domestic servants earn only about 1-1.5 million rupiah (60-80 dollars) a month, in some areas that’s less than 30% of the provincial minimum. Another problem is their working hours, many domestic servants work at least 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, as opposed to the 40 hour per week guideline set by the ILO. Third is their mistreatment. Many workers are given inadequate living spaces at their employer’s house, abused and punished for poor jobs and most notoriously, executed for disobeying their employers. The latter is slightly more common abroad, especially in countries such as the Middle East, where majority of Indonesian servants find themselves if they go out of the country. The problem is mainly due to the informality of the contracts; many domestic servants aren’t even recognised as such because they operate in the grey economy. Their earnings and agreements are not monitored by government agencies nor reported by their employers.
- Colonial India | Latin America | Pre- and Post-World War Britain
- Historical and Modern Institutions (examples):
- au pairs | nannies | butlers | amahs
- Au pairs: Derived from French, au pair roughly translates to “at par” or “equal to”. This indicates that the au pair is meant to become a temporary member of their host family, not a subservient outsider like domestic servants. Au pairs are almost always foreign workers who live and work for a host family in another country. Au pairs often take on shared responsibility for household maintenance and childcare, with a monetary allowance being given for their own use. Au pair arrangements are often subjected to strict government restrictions, which limit the age range of au pairs as well as their working hours. In Europe and North America, these agreements often define the age range as between 16 and 24, along with the necessity that they work part-time and study the language of the country they work in. In fact the 1969 European Agreement on Au Pair Placement defines all these guidelines per country. The concept of an au pair emerged after the Second World War, when taxes and the economy prevented many middle class families from gaining their own domestic workers. Below are some common duties of au pairs:
- Waking up children
- Taking the kids to school
- Helping the children with their homework
- Doing the children’s laundry
- Making up the children’s beds
- Cooking light meals for the children to take to school
- Helping parents with house chores from time to time
- Nannies: Commonly associated with childcare in a domestic household is the nanny. A concept that has existed since the age of empires in the 18th century, the nanny is usually a women who remains in the service of their employing family for decades (often for several generations in some cases). The nanny is responsible for looking after the children of the family when the parents are either out of the house or not yet awake. Nannies often report to the lady of the house on any development with the children, though they can at times even be considered a part of the family after some time. In colonial history, nannies were often in the employ of colonial administrators (especially in British India, the Dutch East Indies and French Africa). Many nannies would remain with their families from birth to death, with the family taking them along on family vacations or moving trips.
- Butlers: When we think of a household staff, the image of a sharply dressed (sometimes elderly) man with impeccable manners and a seemingly all-encompassing retinue of skills likely comes to mind. This is the butler, the head servant of a household and often responsible for the duties of the other servants. In Victorian, Elizabethan and Ancient Times, the butler would oversee the housekeeping, cooking and even childcare staff and make sure the entire household functioned as an efficient, punctual unit. Butlers often reported directly to their employers on any complications, news or progress. Modern butlers are still employed in that sense, being huge stores of information about upcoming family events and even having schools dedicated to their training. Butlers are often paid lucrative amounts nowadays (anywhere from $50,000 - $150,000 annually) and often live on the household in their own separate quarters.
- Amahs: Amahs were Chinese nannies or servants who often left the rural countryside and went to go work in wealthy households in big cities (i.e Beijing or Shanghai) and possibly Hong Kong. Amahs were also referred to by Portuguese as maids and nannies who worked for colonial administrators back when Portugal had an empire. The etymology of the word is still disputed, some linguists believe it came from the Portuguese word ama meaning “nurse”. Others argue that it came from the English translation of the Chinese ah mah (ah being a common prefix and mah meaning “little mother”). In modern terms it’s more politically-correct (something I hope to never need to type again) to refer to these people as helpers rather than servants.
- Au pairs: Derived from French, au pair roughly translates to “at par” or “equal to”. This indicates that the au pair is meant to become a temporary member of their host family, not a subservient outsider like domestic servants. Au pairs are almost always foreign workers who live and work for a host family in another country. Au pairs often take on shared responsibility for household maintenance and childcare, with a monetary allowance being given for their own use. Au pair arrangements are often subjected to strict government restrictions, which limit the age range of au pairs as well as their working hours. In Europe and North America, these agreements often define the age range as between 16 and 24, along with the necessity that they work part-time and study the language of the country they work in. In fact the 1969 European Agreement on Au Pair Placement defines all these guidelines per country. The concept of an au pair emerged after the Second World War, when taxes and the economy prevented many middle class families from gaining their own domestic workers. Below are some common duties of au pairs:
- ayahs | governesses | house girls
- Ayahs: Ayahs were simply another name for domestic servants and housekeepers (as well as nannies or butlers) that looked after European families in South Asia (this included British India and the Dutch East Indies). The word is likely to have originated from Portuguese and you’d be better off not saying it in Indonesia, as ayah actually means “father” or “dad” in Bahasa.
- Governesses: Of all the positions in this list, the governess is one of if not the most awkward. Originating in the Victorian Era and persisting until Post WW1 Europe, governesses were middle-class women with a decent education who were given the post of teaching the children in a household. In those times, it was much more preferable for aristocracy and other nobility to hire a governess than send their children to boarding schools for months. In this way, governesses could tailor teaching material to the children’s own needs and gain a fairly substantial income. Traditionally, governesses taught the “Three R’s” to their charges (reading,writing, arithmetic), thought they could also teach the girl how to specialise in certain “desirable” skills (i.e playing the piano, painting or poetry). The governess was often isolated in their own employer’s household, eating in isolation and keeping away from other servants. By definition, she wasn’t a member of the staff nor a member of the host family; so she often kept to herself and didn’t help the children with their actual physical needs (that job fell to the nannies and maids who looked after them).
- House Girls: A girl or young woman often employed in a household with some of their own responsibilities. She could be the only female member of the staff or part of a team that oversaw the cleaning and maintenance of the household.
- house elves | housewife vs. stay-at-home mother
- House elves: Of course the WSC decides to drop another fictional reference in its history curriculum. If you’ve ever watched Harry Potter, you’ll likely remember one particular character who first popped up in the Chamber of Secrets and met his most unfortunate (and tear-jerking) end in The Deathly Hallows. I am of course, referring to Dobby, house elf to the Malfoys until Harry Potter freed him. Along with Kreacher (house elf for the Blacks), house elves were a common recurring appearance in the Harry Potter universe. Often mistreated and even abused by their owners, house elves are held by law and duty to punish themselves for disobeying any direct orders from their masters. They are however, able to find loopholes in their master’s orders and utilise them from time to time. House elves actually find it fitting if they are punished for not doing their duties and even the notion of being paid or being granted vacations makes them feel absolutely disgraced (Dobby being the main exception). House elves were able to be freed if their masters provided them with a piece of clothing, Dobby was freed in this manner when Harry presented a sock to him. House elves don’t rely on their magic very often, but sometimes the unique ability to apparate where normal wizards and witches cannot comes in handy (especially if Dobby needs to discreetly visit Harry Potter to warm him about attending Hogwarts for the second year).
- Housewife vs. stay-at-home mother: The key difference here (and there’s not much else beyond it) is that housewives do not need to have children to be considered a housewife. They simply need to choose not to take an active job and instead spent their days at home, tending to the household and looking after the elders if they live in the same house. Stay-at-home mothers on the other hand, are staying at home to take care of children in addition to looking after the house and managing the shopping. Stay-at-home mothers often remain at home until their child goes off to school, by which point they can either resume their previous jobs or continue to be a stay-at-home mother and housewife. I’ll leave this article here for you to read about the benefits and opinions on these two positions.
- au pairs | nannies | butlers | amahs
- Discussion Questions
- In a 2011 speech, American comedian Amy Poehler thanked the nannies who care for her children and those of other working women. Discuss with your team: is domestic help common in your country? If so, is it a sufficiently regulated industry?
- I will refer to my points on the Indonesia prompt for this one.
- In many countries, domestic workers are migrants from poorer countries. Does this migration represent an economic opportunity for the migrant workers, or are they being misled into jobs that shortchange them?
- Historically speaking, the former may have been expected and even preferred. There were migrants from China, Latin America and even Ireland flocking to America in the thousands to find a better life, lured by the promise of the “American Dream”. Though these people were hoping for a job in a high-rise office with pay beyond their belief, they were more likely expecting a decent job with heavy manual labor which would allow them to then pay for the education to move up the ranks. Nowadays however, many migrant workers are being caught in the trap of domestic service and begging. Refugees from Syria, Iraq and even North Africa can come to places like Italy and Greece expecting some rights and a good job. Yet more likely than not, these migrants will find themselves in a household serving as domestic servants, with nowhere near enough income to allow them to rent an apartment or leave for better positions.
- In the 1970s, some feminists around the world argued that women should be paid for housework. Explore the history of the “Wages for Housework” campaign. Discuss with your team: should homemakers be paid—and, if so, by whom?
- In the hopes of not angering any feminists reading this page, I will redirect you to this Wikipedia page and this News Article about the campaign referred to in the prompt. Personally I find it the responsibility of the employers to pay the homemakers, after all it was they who hired them in the first place and provided them with the duties for their day-to-day activities. It should however, be an increasingly government or organisational role to look after the rights of these homemakers, not every employer can be trusted with the proper payment and care of their domestic household workers. Governments should monitor and regulate the terms and conditions by which household employees can work.
- Read this article about a school for butlers and discuss with your team: would butlers in modern society play a different role than in the past? If so, does the same apply to other kinds of domestic help? Was there a “golden age” for servants?
- I shall let you read the article in your own time and learn about this most interesting academy for butlers. Modern butlers are rather rare, in an age of technology and DIY households, we see little need to pay a person to look after our apartments and condominiums. The only main place where butlers have a place is in institutions of power (i.e Buckingham Palace, White House, Saudi Royal Palace). Butlers are still present for the super rich however, especially for many upper class families in the Middle East. In fact most butlers find service with Saudi, Omani, Emirati and Qatari households. Their role has certainly changed. They no longer look after their own team of staff, instead they themselves must be the “do-all” man (or woman) who looks after every need and whim of each family member. The golden age of servants was likely during the Victorian era up until the end of World War 2. During this time, domestic servitude was a decent industry with acceptable wages and much better living conditions than many domestic workers find themselves in now. Butlers back then were paid thousands of dollars for the management of their teams.
- In a 2011 speech, American comedian Amy Poehler thanked the nannies who care for her children and those of other working women. Discuss with your team: is domestic help common in your country? If so, is it a sufficiently regulated industry?
- Explore the history of slavery around the world. Questions to consider: how and when did the institution of slavery begin in each of these regions? When, why, and how did it end—or did it?
- the Americas | sub-Saharan Africa | the Russian Empire
- The Americas: 1619, the New World. A Dutch ship makes port at the colony town of Jamestown, Virginia. Onboard are supplies from Europe and a new type of cargo. 20 African men disembark from the vessel, in chains they walk towards their new masters. The age of slavery in America has begun. Over the next 2 centuries, great European powers would contest their dominance over the Slave trade, a lucrative business that brought in millions every year (but don’t take my word for it, take this TEDed talk instead). Spain, Britain, Portugal, France and even The Netherlands would compete to see who could ship the most slaves out of Africa to their colonies abroad. Slavery in the Americas was mostly controlled by Spain, who brought millions from Africa to their colonies in the Caribbean (Haiti, Cuba and Puerto Rico) to work on the tobacco, cotton and sugarcane plantations that were then sent back to Europe to be traded in the thousands of tonnes. In America, slavery gained its roots when European settler (mainly those from Spain and also Britain), shipped their own slaves from Africa. The journey was harsh, with “slave-ships” being notorious for their cramped conditions and horrible treatment of this “cargo”. The northern states weren’t as involved in slavery as the southern states, with many cotton gin plantations there having anywhere from 10-50 slaves working on the premises. It would continue this way for many decades, with the occasional rebellion, congress act and other legal actions slowly granting rights to the slaves. The final act would come in the US Civil War, when Abraham Lincoln gave the “Emancipation Proclamation” in 1863, declaring that all slaves were now free men and no longer served their white masters. For the next two years however, many former slaves died on the battlefields of the US Civil War trying to gain their freedom. With the Union states victorious, slavery was abolished in the US and black men were now able to gain some freedom. I’ll let this History channel link explain more.
- Sub-Saharan Africa: Slavery in Africa was somewhat similar to how the European then came along and took slaves from them (it’s rewind time!). Starting from the time of African empires (such as the Mali empire in the East and the Ethiopian Empire around the Horn of Africa), there have been reports of slaves being used and abused by their masters. African slave trade was also a lucrative business, with caravans of slaves being auctioned off in cities some hundreds of kilometers from their families. In many cases, entire families were brought under the servitude of their masters. After the “Scramble for Africa” by European nations (read: Britain, France, Belgium, Germany) in the late 19th and early 20th century, slavery in all forms was abolished by the European overlords (Britain was actually the first of those nations to abolish slavery in the Slave Trade Act of 1807). Some pursued the eradication of slavery with slightly more vigor and commitment than others. The French allowed Moroccans and Algerians to continue possessing slaves until 1848, whilst the Spanish and Belgians continued to oppress slaves until the turn of the 20th century. The British should probably be commemorated for their services in attempting to halt Sub-Saharan African slavery. In 1808, after passing the Slave Trade Act, the British Navy created the West Africa Squadron, a fleet of warships specifically tasked with patrolling the West Coast of Africa and intercepting any European or African ships attempting to cross the Atlantic with slaves on board. In the modern age, slavery in sub-saharan Africa could very well still exist, with countries like Somalia and South Sudan being prime areas for slave traders to operate underground.
- The Russian Empire: Ah the Russian Empire. The old Imperialist white forces that dared to oppress millions and ignore their cries for freedom. Thank goodness the rise of the Bolsheviks and the liberation of the people occurred. Slavery was not a concept the glorious and powerful Soviet Union entertained.
- (Throat clearing noise). Nevermind that patriotic Communist tirade, allow me to delve into the interesting history of slavery in the Russian Empire. Russia was actually one of the first countries to transition from slavery to a slightly more fortunate term, known as serfdom. Before Russia was fully united under Ivan the Terrible, slavery was practised in the Kievan Rus and Muscovy. Back then, slaves were referred to in legal terms as kholopy. Their masters had complete control over their lives. They could kill them, sell them off or even use them to pay debts. One could become a kholop as a result of capture, criminal offenses, selling themselves off or even marrying a kholop. Interestingly however, the master took responsibility in front of the law for any of the kholop’s actions, so if a kholop committed a crime his master could be the one punished for being unable to control their slave (unlike other legal systems, where the slaves went to court or were often executed where they stood). From the 10th century to the 17th century, Russia became a major involuntary exporter of slaves to outside countries. This included Mongols when they came knocking in 1382 (the only group to have ever successfully invaded Russia in the winter!), Germans, Lithuanians and even Romans. After the unification of Russia and the reign of Peter the Great, slavery was officially abolished in 1723. Afterwards, Russia would rely on serfs for its manual labour.
- ancient Greece and Rome | the ancient Near East and Egypt
- Ancient Greece: How odd that some great Greek writers like Aristotle, who pioneered the idea of nation-states, also wrote that slavery was natural and even necessary to the success of a civilisation. Anyways, like the other great civilisations of ancient times, slavery was practised in Ancient Greece. The civilisation actually had many different categories of slaves (explored later on) and each was given their own set of duties and rights. Slaves in Ancient Greece were actually nowhere near as shunned as they were in much later civilisations. Slaves in partake in practically every activity except politics, which was the duty of citizens. Most Greek slaves were located on agricultural plantations, especially in Athens or Sparta (the latter being infamous for its helot system of slave-soldiers). These slaves often belonged in the dozens to a single family. Slaves were also common in mines, spending hours digging out marble and other precious rocks for Greek construction projects. Domestic slaves were also common, with many rich families in Athens possessing at least 2 by the 5th century BCE.
- Ancient Rome: Whilst the Greeks were treating their slaves with dignity and some respect, the Romans were not exactly doing that. It’s true that Roman slavery was different to colonial slavery in that slaves were not based on race. Rome never actually practised the trade of slavery, preferring to source its slaves from prisoners of war, pirates and bandits as well as incoming slave merchants from Turkey and Greece. However, in a cruel twist of fate, desperate lower-class Roman families were known to simply orphan their children or sell them off as slaves. As a slave, life was harsh. Masters could beat, brand, punish and even kill you for the simplest offense. Slavery was actually accepted as the norm and the slaves themselves were often put to work in all sorts of industries. From the agricultural fields of the countryside to the great constructions sites of Roman aqueducts and roads. Slaves were so commonplace that they merged well with the population, to the point where the Senate considered forcing them to wear specific clothing to identify themselves (this plan was later scrapped over fear that slaves could then rebel en masse). Another main difference between modern slaves and those of the Romans was the presence of manumission, the ability of slaves to earn their freedom. Roman slave owners freed their slaves in the hundreds at times, especially if they felt that their services to them had been repaid. More common was the ability of slaves to buy their freedom through years of work, ensuring obedience and general work efficiency. Formal manumission was done through a magistrate and the freed slave was given full Roman citizenship and rights (except the ability to hold office, though their children could do this when they reached the age).
- Perhaps more legendary however, are the warrior slaves who earned their freedom through years performing for the entertainment of the public. The most famous of these slaves (otherwise known as gladiators) was Spartacus, who led a gladiator and slave uprising (I’ll let this TedEd video explain it in slightly more detail). Gladiators were similar to normal slaves, though their duties were just a tad bit more... lethal (you know fighting lions and battling to the death everyday is just ever so slightly more dangerous than working with huge bricks and confounding logistics at an aqueduct site).
- Near East: For the purpose of this analysis and explanation, I’m going to narrow the “Near East” to more of the “Middle East”. Specifically I’m going to focus more on the slavery of the Ottoman Empire. Since the empire’s founding, slavery constituted a large portion of the economy and population. In fact, slavery was so important that expeditions were specifically launched with the purpose of finding slaves (these were known as organized enslavement operations). Because the Ottoman Empire connected Europe and Asia, it served as a global trading hub for many goods, including slaves. Eastern European prisoners of war could find themselves becoming slaves to North African Arab masters. In Constantinople (modern day Istanbul), a fifth of the population was slaves. However, Ottoman slaves were different in that they were mostly at the forefront of politics and could even occupy positions of great power. Castrated harem guards and the elite janissary corps were often made up of captured slaves that were then freed and retrained in Ottoman ways. Officials in the Ottoman Empire were actually also slaves, bought from other traders and then educated for their fanatical loyalty to the Sultan and the empire.
- Egypt: And so we round out our trio of “great ancient civilisations” by focusing on Egypt. This one is slightly more complicated, because the Egyptians referred to slaves not as a single group, but based on their own positions and archetypes that they were in. I’ll talk more about these Egyptian examples down below, but for now we’ll focus on the most common and probably the most stereotyped form of Egyptian slavery: forced labour. Whenever the government required a large manual labour force, be it for construction projects (those pyramids didn’t build themselves), expeditions or war campaigns. Local villages and towns were often called upon to provide a certain quota of able-bodied men, not just common farmers and sculptors but any possible skilled workmen as well (women were forbidden from working in such disciplines back then). Rather than answering and being owned by an individual, these “slave laborers” were expected to do their duty as a contribution to the state.
- Dynastic China | the ancient Middle East | Haiti
- Dynastic China: Dear god this is going to be long. I know Caitlin was likely going to do this so I’ll leave this section with a Wikipedia link since the history of slavery in Dynastic China changes with every dynasty (read: A LOT OF CHANGES).
- Ancient Middle East: The oldest records of slavery in these region date back to the 18th century BCE, with Babylonian masters having several slaves at their beck and call. Unlike more contemporary forms of slavery however, these slaves were granted the right to own property if they could afford it, merely offering their services to others if they had debts to pay or were simply unable to find other jobs. Interestingly, in Mesopotamia female slaves were more common than male slaves when it came to working in temples and domestic households (uncommon at the time). Again however, like Egypt many slaves were simply at the beck and call of the royal household. These laborers were often the spoils of war or former criminals sentenced to servitude and they often helped build the infrastructure and cities of that day and age. Slave policies back then were still pretty harsh, they could be punished for disobedience or attempting to escape. They could however, also earn their freedom through paying for it.
- Haiti: On August 22nd, the small French colony of Saint-Dominique bore witness to one of the greatest spectacles in human history. That night, slaves from all over the island gathered together in the Haitian slave revolt. Caught unaware and unable to fight back, the French masters were either killed or forced to retreat back home. 12 years later, the island of Haiti won its independence from France. This is the first and only time a slave revolt succeeded in gaining the independence of a nation and it is legendary among many historians who specialise in the Atlantic slave trade study. This freedom from slavery was well-earned, with Haiti becoming the first black-run republic with no slavery at all. Its founders decided on the Declaration of Independence to simply state “We have dared to be free, let us be thus by ourselves and for ourselves.” Prior to this historical event, the island had been devastated by the slave trade, with the local populace all but wiped out after Columbus and the Spanish came knocking in the 15th and 16th century. The subsequent French colonisation wasn’t much better, with the Atlantic slave trade booming and bringing hundreds more servants to this small island.
- the Americas | sub-Saharan Africa | the Russian Empire
- Types of Slavery
- chattel slavery | indentured servitude | debt bondage
- Chattel Slavery: Perhaps the more common and more recognised form of slavery, chattel slavery is where slaves are property forever. There is no legal way for these slaves to gain their freedom, their children and grandchildren will be automatically enslaved the moment they are born and they can be sold or purchased at the whim of their masters. European courts often encourage and propagated this type of slavery, with remnants of it appearing in North America and the Caribbean. Often it was a shock to society if a master suddenly decided to free his slaves from their servitude, not to much benefit though (these slaves would never become full citizens or gain the rights of others around them). In Ancient Egypt, chattel slaves were common amongst the royal households and higher-class families, but they could earn their freedom if their owners decided that their service had been commemorable.
- Indentured Servitude: If you’ve been around for the WSC since last year, you likely studied contracts in the Social Studies area. Had you dug deep enough, you would’ve discovered indentured servitude as a darker form of forced contracts. During the early age of the American colonies, many found themselves unable to gain passage to the interior of the nation and required money to start a business or purchase lodgings. So they simply entered into an indentured servitude contract, whereby the person promised to serve the employer for a set period of time (usually 4-10 years) in certain duties in exchange for food, shelter and any other basic needs. Once the contract expired, the indentured servant was freed and could even earn plots of land if their service had been notable. As of today, indentured servitude is forbidden in majority of nations and is banned under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a form of slavery.
- Debt Bondage: The most modern incarnation of slavery, debt bondage is a sort of “safeguard slavery” in the sense that it is pledge of a person’s services with no payment as the repayment of a debt or other obligation. Within this contract however, the terms of the debt and the period of servitude is often left very vague, meaning that the employer could very well ask for indefinite servitude. This type of slavery was common in ancient civilisation, especially Ancient Rome and Egypt, where masters could simply ask their slaves to work longer under the reasoning that their “debt” hadn’t been fully repaid.
- forced labor | pawnship | slaves vs. enslaved people
- Forced labor: Perhaps more common now than any other form of slavery, forced labor is what it says on the tin. The forced extraction of services from an individual who has either been threatened with a penalty without voluntarily giving their services to the employing party. In ancient times, especially Rome, Greece and Egypt, this meant calling upon the local populace to provide workers for huge national projects (construction, war, expedition). This continued to persist into history, with the government taking a more active role in forced labour workforces. As late as the 20th century, the Soviet government was known for using millions of “forced laborers” to toil for hours in wartime factories in the harsh urals (no mention of the gulags that these people found themselves it, I’m trying to restrain my communist side). The most common form of forced labour was for military service; conscription. In the later stages of history (and especially during wartime), it was not uncommon for governments to force thousands into the armed forces or threaten them at gunpoint (ironic, recruit people against their will to shoot a gun at others by holding a gun to their head).
- Pawnship: Otherwise known as Panyarring, pawnship was the practice of seizing and holding persons until the repayment of a debt or a resolution of a dispute. This was another form of taking humans as "collateral" in the case of an economic or social conflict. The practice originated in the 18th and 19th century from West Africa, where families were often forced to give over their own members as "collateral" for a debt that had been unpaid.
- Slaves vs. enslaved people: Very similar words. Slaves is used to describe the actual people who are forced to work for nothing for practically their entire lives; whilst enslaved people are used to refer to those who have been forced into the slave labour either through indentured servitude, forced labour or other forms.
- domestic slavery | military slavery
- Domestic slavery: Basically the use of slaves in domestic households as unpaid servants. Common during the colonial era, African empire era and Americas during the Spanish/French rule.
- Military slavery: Otherwise known as conscription, military slavery has dated back to Mesopotamia and continues to this day (albeit with a lot more formalities and policies). Often times, governments call upon a sizeable amount of their population to sign up for the armed services and be in that service branch for a specific amount of time. Conscription began universally in 1790 during the French Revolution, when the revolutionaries realised that they needed more coercive ways to raise a standing army to defend from foreign threats. More common nowadays is the civil service form of military slavery, whereby governments force people of a certain age (usually manhood in many countries) to undergo military training. Thailand for example, has the notorious ror dor training camp, in which students between the ages of 16-18 are conscripted for military training on Saturdays.
- chattel slavery | indentured servitude | debt bondage
- Research enslaved people who rose to fame and/or power. Below are some examples. Did they find their way to success despite their subjugated origins, or because of them?
- Harriet Tubman | Aesop | Bilal ibn Rabah | Epictetus | Jean-Jacques Dessalines
- Harriet Tubman: One of the most famous slave stories in history, Harriet Tubman was an African-American slave during the 1800s in America. Born on a plantation in Maryland in 1820, young Araminta Ross (as her parents named her) spent much of her younger years tending to the fields or helping out indoors (though she much rather preferred heavy manual labour in agriculture than domestic service). At age 12, Harriet was injured gravely when a supervisor threw a heavy weight at her head, after she stepped in to protect a fugitive slave. The injury later rendered her with headaches and narcolepsy (the inability to control sleep). After meeting a free black slave named John Tubman, Harriet changed her last name but was still not recognised as a free woman (despite her former owner having stated that her entire family would be free after his death, which had already passed). On September 17th 1849, along with her brothers (who later bailed out), Harriet rode the Underground Railway to safety in Pennsylvania. Yet despite her newfound freedom, she still felt as if though it were her duty to free the rest of her brethren. So from then on until the beginning of the civil war, Harriet Tubman was a conductor on the Underground Railway, guiding some 70 (possibly more) slaves to freedom. While seen as a guiding figure, she was also feared as a conductor. She was known to carry a gun, both to provide protection and “convince” her passengers who might be doubting themselves. She was even known to drug babies and young kids to prevent them from alerting nearby catchers with their cries. At the outbreak of the civil war, Harriet Tubman also became the head of an espionage network for the Union. She spent the war relaying information about Confederate troop movements and supplies, as well as freeing black slave soldiers from Confederate forces to form black Union regiments.
- Aesop: Here’s a good puzzle. What do The Hanging Gardens of Babylon and a famous Greek slave whose stories were the stuff of myths have in common? Well, we don’t know if either of them actually existed. Aesop was (if he ever lived) a Greek fabulist and storywriter who is most well-known for his fables which send morales in the space of a few hundred words. The problem is whether or not he actually wrote these tales or simply passed them on through speech. From Greek writings (namely those of the historian Herodotus and philosopher Aristotle), we know that Aesop was born in 620 BCE on the Black Sea Coast (then known as a province called Thrace). He was a slave on the island of Samos, where it is said that he earned his freedom through great storytelling and literacy (a value highly sought and considered a social status in Ancient Greece). Apparently he would also free himself by telling tales to his masters (assuming he passed through several owners) about the ironics of their employment of him. Even more mysterious is how he managed to secure positions of power, serving as advisors to some kings and even being the right-hand man to the councils of kingdom. Apparently in 564 BCE the poor fellow met his end when he insulted the Delphians whilst on a diplomatic mission (not exactly a model diplomat are we?). Enraged, the Delphi court made some trumped-up charge of temple theft and threw the former slave off a cliff to his end (it is said that this act caused the Delphians to have a famine).
- Bilal Ibn Rabah: One of the more religious-centred explanations on this list, Bilal Ibn Rabah was one of the most trusted and loyal compatriots (or Sahabah) of the prophet Muhammad. Born in the holy city of Mecca, he was considered the first muezzin and chosen by Muhammad himself to give the call to prayer because of his beautiful voice. Born in 580 AD, Rabah was the son of an Arab slave from the Banu Jumah tribe, yet also the son of a former princess of Abyssinia (Ethiopia). His master, Umayyah ibn Khallaf, recognised the young slave’s obedience and efficiency and was even entrusted the keys to the Idols of Arabia (the statues and other figures of paganistic worship that were kept in the Ka’bah). When Muhammad first preached Islam to the populace, Rabah was one of the few who would denounce pagan worship and convert to the religion. His master was furious and the tribe subjected him to forms of torture beyond description (if you’ve just eaten or are about to, I shall spare you the picture). Word of his devotion to Islam and Allah despite such cruelty reached some of Muhammad’s companions, Muhammad then sent Abu Bakr (his father-in-law) to negotiate for the release of Rabah, succeeding by trading 3 pagan slaves in exchange. Rabah would then continue to accompany Muhammad in his travels, even being present to fight for Islam at the Battle of Badr.
- Epictetus: If you believe in the concept of “fate” and that life is already laid out for us, beyond our control and naturally accept that; then there’s a high chance you believe in the teaching of Epictetus. A Greek stoic philosopher born as a slave in Hierapolis (Turkey) and living in Rome until his banishment. Born in 55 A.D, Epictetus would serve as a slave in Rome to Epaphroditus, secretary to the notorious emperor Nero (who supposedly fiddled while Rome burned). Early in life, he gained a passion for philosophy and earned the permission of his master to study Stoic philosophy, sometime during this period he also became crippled (reasons vary with source, some claim his leg was broken by his master, others say he was born with it). In 68 A.D, Epictetus was freed after the death of Nero and began teaching philosophy in the capital. Yet 25 years later, emperor Domitian banished all philosophers from the city and caused Epictetus to move to Greece. He would spend the rest of his life here, teaching his beliefs and propagating Stoic philosophy.
- Jean-Jacques Dessalines: Throughout history there have been many rulers with unlikely origin stories. Empress Catherine of Russia was a Prussian noble at birth, Toyotomi Hideyoshi a sandal-bearer, Jacques Dessalines a slave. Born in 1758 to a slave family on the island of Haiti to parents of unknown name or origin, Jacques Dessalines would take part in the slave uprising of 1791. Leading the charge against French troops and plantation owners, Dessalines would see his colonial masters ousted from their territory. It would be he who proclaimed the Haitian Declaration of Independence and become the first emperor of Haiti (known as Emperor Jacques I). Yet after just a year of his rule, he was brutally assassinated while on the way to stomp out some rebellions.
- Juan Latino | Leo Africanus | Miguel de Cervantes | Ng Akew | Qutb-ud-din
- Juan Latino: Spanish black university professor and once a former slave.
- Leo Africanus: In the early 16th century, there was one name that any scholar of the European world was familiarized with. Though you’d be forgiven for not knowing that name. Sir Isaac Newton had yet to be born and have an apple fall on his head, whilst it would be another 30 years until Galileo Galilei told the world that the sun was the centre of the solar system. This scholar is somewhat notable from other members on this list because his slavery was very brief and he wasn’t actually born a slave. In fact, when Leo Africanus was captured by Spanish Berbers (pirates who operated in the Mediterranean, near the island of Djerba and Crete) in 1518; he was already 24 years of age and well-versed in the academia of the time. Born in Granada sometime in 1494, the young Leo would study at the great University of al-Qarawiyyin in Fez, Egypt (the oldest continually operating university in the world). He would travel through much of North Africa, or Maghreb as it was known back then. He would accompany his uncle on a diplomatic trip to Timbuktu, find himself in Istanbul on another such trip and later wind up in Rosetta whilst the Ottomans were laying siege to the Egyptian state. After his capture in 1518, Leo was imprisoned on the island of Rhodes, before being brought before Pope Leo X (name buddies!) in Castel Sant'Angelo in Rome. It is said that his captors recognised his intelligence and spared him from the usual sentence Muslim captors without a ransom had (slavery on Christian galleys). Later freed and given pension as a persuasion to stay, Leo was baptized in 1520. After a few more years travelling around North Africa and Arabia, Leo Africanus sent his manuscript for his masterpiece, e Della descrittione dell’Africa et delle cose notabili che iui sono (Description of Africa). It was for this work that he was most well remembered, with many European institutes using it as a resource for African history and geography in the later years. In an era before empires even looked to the African continent, Leo Africanus charted part of their maps and information for them. His later life is actually a mystery, we don’t quite know whether he died in Rome, Tunis or returned to his family in Granada for the final years of his life.
- Miguel de Cervantes: For those book-lovers amongst you, this name might ring a bell. Miguel de Cervantes is credited with one of the most famous works in Western literature, forming part of the canon for many school curriculums until today. I am of course, referring to his masterpiece, Don Quixote. After the Bible, Don Quixote is the most-translated book in the world and Cervantes is credited as having an impact on the Spanish language almost as much as Shakespeare had one on the English language. Yet before his rise to fame in the ranks of authors and schoolchildren, Miguel de Cervantes served in the Spanish Navy infantry (the equivalent of modern day Marines), worked as a purchasing agent for the Spanish Armada (basically buying ships and guns for war) and landed himself in jail for 3 years thanks to tax discrepancies (what a coloured life he lived). Yet more interesting perhaps, and more relevant to this section, is the fact that Miguel de Cervantes actually became a slave for 5 years after being captured by Barbary pirates (the same forces that captured Leo Africanus, though this time his intelligence didn’t impress them like Leo’s did). According to baptism records, young Miguel was born in a small city just north of Madrid in September 1547. It is unknown why the young student was exiled from Spain entirely in 1569, though we do know that he headed for Rome shortly thereafter (common for aspiring young renaissance men of the time). After a short stint as an artist in Italy and study of Italian literature, Miguel returned to Spain (sort of) in 1570, signing up for the Spanish Navy Marines on the island of Naples (then a possession of the Spanish crown). The next year Miguel saw active combat at the Battle of Lepanto, a famous naval battle that saw the Galley Fleet of the Holy League (a coalition of Spanish and Italian city-states) defeat the Ottoman fleet. Miguel was actually wounded severely in the battle, receiving two gunshot wounds to the chest and one that rendered his left arm useless. After 6 months in hospital to heal up, Miguel returned to the field for the next 4 years, witnessing battles and partaking in expedition. On 6th September 1575, Miguel boarded a Spanish galley, the Sol, bound for Barcelona from Naples. On the 26th of September, within sight of the Catalan coast, Ottoman pirates attacked the Sol and captured Miguel de Cervantes. Taken to Algiers, then a major cosmopolitan hub of the Ottoman Empire, Miguel would serve as a slave for 5 years. Despite making 4 unsuccessful escape attempts, the author would finally receive his freedom in 1580 after his parents and the Trinitarians (an order of believers in the Holy Trinity) paid a ransom. Miguel would go on to use his experience as a slave in his literary works, most notably the Captive’s tale in Don Quixote, as well as two plays set in Algiers.
- Ng Akew: Slightly less famous in history, though a very captivating story nonetheless, the story of Ng Akew takes place during the 1800s, a period of tumultuous political and geographical struggles in China (known as the “Century of Humiliation”). Once part of the Tanka ethnic group in China (a group that was characterised by living in junks on the coastal towns of China), Ng Akew was a slave to British opium smuggler James Bridget Endicott, operating from Hong Kong. I could go into why the British had opium smugglers in China in the first place, but that could easily take a 1000 word essay. In short, the First Opium War that had occurred just 10 years earlier (in 1839) was due to Chinese aggression over illegal British trade operations with the infamous drug (apparently millions of tonnes were smuggled in every year during that time). Even after the war, the Chinese authorities refused to accept opium legally within their lands, so the British simply resorted to funding smugglers in order to get rich from the profits (the Chinese armed forces were no match for the fast ships of the smugglers). In 1849, Ng was given a share of Endicott’s cargo, which she sold along the coast with her own boat (having used the experience as a Tanka child). However, it was was occurred during this time that made her an international controversy. During her stint as a smuggler, pirates captured both her cargo and boat. Undeterred, Ng went directly to the pirate base and negotiated for her compensation. Shortly after this, an American merchant ship was attacked by those pirates (along with Ng Akew onboard) and its cargo stolen. When that cargo was later discovered in the hold of Ng Akew’s ship, it was assumed that this was the “compensation” the she’d demanded from the pirates. Since she could not be proven guilty of assisting them in the theft, she was freed and returned to her master. Endicott later gave Ng a plot of land in Hong Kong, letting her become a free and wealthy homeowner (while he himself retired to Macau). Ng Akew’s case would cause great controversy in the world, here was a slave who had escaped the net of justice, unthinkable at the time.
- Qutb-ud-din: Certainly one of the older figures on this list, Qutb-ud-din returns to the category of slaves who assumed a great position of power later on in their life. Born in 1150 to Turkic parents in Turkistan, Qutb (otherwise known as Aibak) was sold as a slave and raised in Persia, where he was under the servitude of a local Qazi (a sort of judge in Sharia court). After this master died, he was sold off to another, this time Muhammad of Ghor, Sultan of the Ghurid empire (sort of a job promotion). During this time, he was promoted to become the “Amir-i-Akhur”, “Master of Slave”. After being promoted to military command and even serving as an able general of Muhammad of Ghor, his master entrusted the conquest of northwest India to him in 1193. He would go on to conquer the region between the Ganges and Yamuna rivers, before turning his attention to the resilient Rajputs. In 1206, with the assassination of his master, Aibak was the only successor to the throne (rather surprising that a former slave becomes the Sultan of an entire empire). For the next 4 years, Aibak would go on to rebuild and construct new mosques in Delhi and Ajmer. Though perhaps his most famous project was the planning and initial overseeing of the construction of the Qutb Minar, a minaret that is also UNESCO world heritage site in Delhi. In 1210, the ruler would meet his end after injuries sustained during a polo match (apparently he fell off his horse). Buried in Lahore, Qutb would be known as the first Sultan of the Mamluk dynasty (literally, “slave” dynasty) and the first ruler of the Delhi Sultanate.
- Aybak | Spartacus | Toussaint L’Ouverture | Olaudah Equiano
- Aybak: One of the less frightening stories on this list, the story of Izz al-Din Aybak is not a conventional slave story. Similar to Qutb, Aybak was a Mamluk slave (a word used by Arabs to refer to any slave soldiers and rulers of slave origins) who served the court of Ayyubid sultan as-Salih Ayyub in 1240. Raising himself to the position of Emir (commander) as well as working as a Jashkinir (taster of the Sultan’s food and drink as well as cupbearer), Aybak would develop a notorious reputation amongst the people of Egypt for his cunning and cruelty. In 1249, his master met his end during the Frankish invasion of Damietta, whilst the heir apparent to the throne (his son, Turanshah), was assassinated the year afterwards. With no one to carry on the Ayyubid dynasty, the Mamluks seized control of the throne and Ayabk was appointed as Atabeg, commander in chief of the armed forces (then second only to the Sultan). Over the next 4 years, political turmoil within the kingdom itself would see Aybak crush multiple rebellions and lead campaigns against other usurpers. Interestingly, the sultana of Egypt would marry Aybak and then abdicate the throne to him in July 1250. He would only rule for 5 days, before a 6 year old from the Syrian branch of the Ayyubid family was placed on the throne to quell rebellious voices in Baghdad and Syria. In 1254, he would lead an effort to assume the throne, before kicking out his former Mamluk allies. In 1257 he would meet his end after he was murdered due to wife jealousy (yeah, of all the reasons he could’ve been killed, some scandal raises the most controversy).
- Spartacus: 73 BC, Capua, Italy. A group of gladiators and slaves rebel against their masters. Seizing kitchen utensils, the warriors freed their way out of their school and seized several wagons filled with gladiatorial weapons and armor. Though the city garrison was deployed, the experienced warriors easily cut through them, plundering Capua and the surrounding region, slowly growing in number as more were convinced to break their chains and join the ranks. On Mount Vesuvius, these slaves chose their leaders. Gallics Crixus and Oenomaus, along with one other that would descend into the annals of historical legend and myth: Spartacus. Over the centuries, hundreds of books, plays, TV shows and even movies have been directed about the life of this infamous former slave. Yet little is actually known about his early life. We do know that Spartacus was born in 111 B.C, somewhere along the Strymon river in modern-day Bulgaria. Greek essayist Plutarch described him as a “Thracian of nomadic stock”, whilst historian Appian described him as “a Thracian by birth, who had once served with the Romans, but had since been a prisoner and sold for a gladiator”. We don’t actually know what Spartacus did in order to be enslaved, some say he deserted the Roman army, others say that Roman legions hunted him down after he committed a crime. Whatever the case, Spartacus would train as a gladiator in the school (or ludus) to perform in front of thousands to the death (either against other gladiators of vicious animals). Yet after he led the small rebellion in Capua, Spartacus would go on to symbolise the word “freedom”. At the time of the rebellion, the senate in Rome was unconcerned with a minor conflict, they were still tangled up with wars in Spain and the Pontic empire in modern-day Turkey. Yet praetor Claudius Gaber was dispatched with 3000 men to surround and siege the rebel’s camp on Mount Vesuvius. In a great feat of tactical ingenuity, the slaves outmaneuvered the much larger Roman force, flanking them by climbing down the volcano with ropes of vine. Later a second expedition led by Praetor Varinius was ambushed by Spartacus’ guerillas, steadily growing in number after bands of slaves heard news of this “army of freedom”. In the summer of 72 BC, the Roman senate, concerned over the successes and growing numbers of Spartacus’ force, dispatched 2 legions (almost 10,000 men in total) to eliminate this threat once and for all. Yet in the ensuing battle, Spartacus’ force was victorious, albeit with some losses. Crixus, one of the leaders and lieutenants of the force, was slain during the battle. To honor him, Spartacus forced the Roman prisoners captured to partake in funeral games, the same games he and his men had once partaken in when they were slaves. But after his movement gained over 120,000 followers, Spartacus began to have logistical problems managing such a huge force. In 71 BC, the richest Roman citizen, Marcus Licinius Crassus, was charged with directing the war against these former slaves (later known as the Third Servile War). Leading 8 legions of almost 40,000 men to trap the slaves in the toe of Italy. After being betrayed by pirates and failing to build their own rafts, Spartacus’ remaining men met Crassus on the battlefield. Spartacus himself was last seen attempting to slay Crassus before a centurion ran a sword through him (though historian Appian says his body was never recovered). In the end, Crassus was victorious, with the Roman authority showing its nasty side: 6,000 prisoners were crucified along the Appian way, a road from Rome to Brindisi, passing along Capua; the former home of Spartacus.
- Historians are still debating what Spartacus was actually attempting to do when he turned his army South. The alps were wide open for him, he could’ve simply marched over the mountains to Gaul and let his men disperse as free people. Yet many within his army wanted to continue plundering, as revenge for all the wrongs that had been wrought upon them. Many still dreamt of marching on Rome itself, taking the capital and assuming leadership over the entire empire, allowing all slaves to break their chains. Whatever the case, we do know that Spartacus was probably not aiming to abolish slavery entirely in Rome, rather he was simply trying to escape and earn his freedom. Yet the warrior slave who’d fought for his right to be free and those of hundreds of thousands of others, continues to be immortalised for his deeds.
- Toussaint L’Ouverture: If you cast your mind back to the beginning of this section (or simply scroll up to it), you might remember Jean-Jacques Dessalines. An african slave in Haiti who would become the country’s first emperor after its successful slave rebellion. Well, here’s another fellow whom Dessalines actually knew and fought alongside with. Toussaint L’Ouverture was born a slave on the Caribbean island of Saint-Domingue (then the name for Haiti) in 1743. During his education, his free godfather apparently tutored him in philosophy (he had a passion for Epictetus, another slave on this list), Creole, French and other basic subjects of the time. Initially, historians believed that he was slave until the rebellion in 1791, yet documents reveal he was actually freed by his former master in 1776 due to his skill and managerial prowess. He actually had his own slaves, working a coffee plantation he owned on behalf of his former master (an ironic twist if ever I’ve heard one). In fact, when the rebellion broke out in 1791, Toussaint was already 50 years of age (incredibly old for slave at that time) and not willing to join the rebels. Yet when the fighting spread to his corner of the island, he decided to take up the cause, echoing the beliefs of those philosophers whose thoughts on equal rights of man he believed in (John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau). Joining the rebels under Georges Biassou, Toussaint set to work as a medical doctor to the troops. After gaining a reputation for saving the lives of his men, he was given command of 600 black soldiers, which later grew to almost 4,000 loyal followers. Among them was Jean-Jacques Dessalines, who’d become an able lieutenant alongside Toussaint. During this time, Spain and Britain sought an opportunity to harass the French and force them to give up their precious Caribbean colonies; so that their own empires might grow. The Spanish actually supported the slave revolt and the British sent their own troops to corner the French on the island. In 1794, after France agreed to free all slaves, Toussaint switches sides and began fighting against his former black commanders. The Spanish were driven back to their former side of the island and the British troops were forced to withdraw after overwhelming casualties. After that, relative peace came to the island, with Toussaint taking command of the entire government. He was loved amongst all people there, for his decision to allow emigre plantation owners to return stimulated the economy. Military discipline was used to convince former slaves to work, but instead of being beaten they were given equal shares in the profits from their plantations. In 1802 however, Napoleon Bonaparte was growing nervous about Toussaint, who might at any time cast off the French chains preventing him from making Haiti truly independent. So he ordered a colonial governor on the island to invite Toussaint for a parley, only for him to be captured and sent to France a prisoner. He would die in prison the following year, having been interrogated for alleged details about an upcoming black revolt. His legacy for freeing slaves and equal rights for all rings through the ages, with his work allowing Haiti to become the first free colony thanks to a slave revolt.
- Olaudah: 10 years before Toussaint gained his freedom, Olaudah Equiano (then known as Gustavus Vassa) earned his own through intelligent trading and careful saving. Born in 1745 to farmers in Igboland, Nigeria, Olaudah was captured and taken to the Caribbean (as most African children were at the time) before being sold as a slave to work in the Royal Navy. He then transferred servitude to a Quaker trader, before earning his freedom in 1766. After moving to London, Olaudah would begin to make a name for himself as one of the great abolitionists of the time. He joined the abolitionist group Sons of Africa, made up of well-known former African slaves who were living in Britain. Throughout his time he would write his masterpiece and legacy, The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, published in 1789. Its depiction of the horrors of slavery made great contributions for parliament to approve the Slave Trade Act of 1807, abolishing slavery in all British African colonies. Though Olaudah was dead a decade before the historic government act passed, his name was remembered as one of the key abolitionists who helped set millions of his brothers free.
- Harriet Tubman | Aesop | Bilal ibn Rabah | Epictetus | Jean-Jacques Dessalines
- Discussion Questions
- Historically, many industrial workers lived in “factory villages” which kept them close to their work and in which they might even be pressured to spend their earnings at company-operated shops. Discuss with your team: would this situation be comparable to slavery, or would such a comparison be going a step too far? How about the lives of workers who live in modern-day factory towns, or who work in industrial agriculture? How about cruise ship workers?
- This isn’t exactly a form of slavery, as by definition slavery is the “application of property laws upon people”. These workers are not considered property, merely they are being treated poorly and their free will/rights oppressed. They took the job without involuntarily being forced to do so and were probably aware of the possible job conditions at the time of recruitment. Again, the three examples shown are not slavery examples. These workers are free to leave their job if they wish to do so and were voluntarily signed up in the first place. Granted their conditions are very similar to those of slaves, but at least they are given some pay and are not subject to the level of brutality that many slaves faced for disobedience.
- Should countries make reparations to the descendants of past slaves? If so, should future generations similarly compensate the descendants of other groups who have faced systematic socioeconomic limitations—such as women who were underpaid?
- For the first question I certainly think that reparations are in order. Slavery was worldwide for much of recent history and it was thanks to colonial slavery by Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, The Netherlands and other European powers that Africa had its male population significantly reduced. While these millions of slaves toiled under the sun in horrible conditions with no pay for the profit of their overseers, back home their countries were not going anywhere in terms of development. The reason why Africa is the most underdeveloped continent today is because for much of its recent history, its resources were used by the west and not by the regional colonial governments who could’ve used it to improve their quality of life. Even in Asia and South America this is the case, though slightly less evident in those areas due to the lesser extent of colonialism that arrived on its shores. Nowadays it seems very important to give reparations, after all in a way these white masters were responsible for the world in which the descendants of the slaves find themselves in.
- Brazil was the last country in the Americas to abolish slavery. Why do you think it took longer than its neighbors? Was the pressure to end slavery gradual or sudden, and internal or external? How did society adjust afterward? Discuss with your team: what can we learn from the experience of Brazil about the government’s role in changing long-time institutions?
- In 1888, Brazil became the last country in the Americas to finally abolish slavery, with the “Golden Act” promulgated on May 13th by Princess Isabel. The reason why Brazil took so long compared to other nations, who’d outlawed slavery in the decades before, is due to a multitude of reasons. Brazil was the last major colony of the Portuguese Empire at the time and it was one of the most precious in terms of resources. Cotton, Tobacco, precious minerals, wood, sugarcane and a slew of other goods made Portugal a formidable trade partner. As such, Brazil was more dependent on slaves than other colonies around it, because the machinery needed to capitalise on this market was not within the affordability of the Portuguese, who were looked down upon by other empires (read: Britain, France). Furthermore, since Brazil’s economy and leadership was practically an oligarchy, made up of powerful economic elites who controlled swathes of land and oversaw the trade business; they preferred slow and steady change to rapid reform. They didn’t want to risk antagonising the population, for fear of retaliation or even rebellion. In 1845 the actual process to abolishment began with the Aberdeen act, with slow reforms coming in the following years. Yet another interesting fact was the external pressure from the home country itself, Portugal. In 1808 Napoleon Bonaparte and the French Army were at the gates of Lisbon and the Royal Family feared for their lives. So they fled to their colony in Brazil, with Rio De Janeiro becoming the beacon of Portuguese civilisation for a while. As such, the slaves were paramount in the rapid construction and development of this once backwater city with limited quality of life. Even after the royal family returned in 1820 (leaving behind Pedro I to declare independence 2 years later). So a mix of internal and external pressure caused the delay of abolishment in Brazil.
- In some parts of the world, slaves were treated as low-ranking family members or could earn their freedom after a set period. People could sometimes even enter slavery by choice. Discuss with your team: under what circumstances might someone choose to be enslaved? Should people be allowed to enslave themselves?
- There are very few circumstances in which one might choose to be enslaved. Perhaps someone wishing to escape their current life and find a new home might take the prospect of slavery as a gateway to a new world in which they could build themselves a nice life. People should no longer be allowed to enslave themselves because of the conditions and horrible threats they can face while on the job. Slavery is a dark mark on humanity’s history, and it should no longer be allowed to rear its ugly head.
- Historically, many industrial workers lived in “factory villages” which kept them close to their work and in which they might even be pressured to spend their earnings at company-operated shops. Discuss with your team: would this situation be comparable to slavery, or would such a comparison be going a step too far? How about the lives of workers who live in modern-day factory towns, or who work in industrial agriculture? How about cruise ship workers?
- A question to consider: what does it mean to be poor? Do we use the term too loosely, and has its meaning changed over time?
- The term “poor” is now used in a more materialistic sense. Poor is used to refer to the lack of money required to live at a reasonable standard as set within different societies. We often associate being “poor” with being in a state of poverty, someone can’t afford the basic needs to life and therefore is likely not going to have a great time on this planet. For much of human history, the strict guidelines on what was considered “poor” has shifted over depending on civilisations, but generally being “poor” never really meant being unable to afford the basic needs of life. In Industrial Revolution Europe, being “poor” meant that while you could still afford a room and food, it wasn’t the greatest room or the most delicious food. In fact many people during that time were considered “poor” simply because they were in the lower classes of society, not because they were in absolute poverty. We don’t use the term too loosely now, we tend to analyse the situation demographically and then determine which part of the world is “poor”.
- Explore the difference between relative and absolute poverty. Discuss with your team: If you live in a society in which everyone has a smartphone and you can only afford a flip phone, are you poor?
- As the name likely suggests, relative poverty is where a person cannot earn enough income to maintain the average living standard in their country/society. This is often used in demographics for more regional statistics, whilst absolute poverty is more favoured in terms of global trend analysis. Absolute poverty was defined by the UN in 1995 as “"a condition characterized by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information.”
- If we lived in a society in which everyone had a smartphone and my team could only afford flip phones, then in terms of relative poverty we are poor in terms of our access to information. We might not be able to surf the web like all the other people can, but we still have access to the other parts of life that allow us to have a standard quality of living. If however, we only had a flip phone and nothing else, then that would suggest both relative and absolute poverty.
- Consider the commonly repeated trope that poor people lead happier, simpler lives. Discuss with your team: is this just a myth? If so, what purpose does it serve? If not, should more people try to be poor?
- The myth of “less is more” is one that doesn’t tend to follow the numbers in today’s world. The article linked actually refers to the 2016 World Happiness Report, where it was discovered that none of the top 20 countries were those with high levels of poverty, instead most of those countries were found towards the bottom of the list. The main purpose it serves is more philosophical and rooted in a time where “poor” meant you couldn’t afford the modern tools of the time. This was more of the 1800s and 1900s, where people with the basic needs were still considered poor because the rest of society had radios and televisions. The main purpose was to show how leaving a less materialistic life can lead you to realising the true value of those moments where happiness can come from natural things. More people shouldn’t try to be poor because of how happy it might make them, indeed nowadays poverty is often attached with other things. Most countries with high rates of poverty have poor life expectancy, are marred by political and geographical conflict and do not possess the rights necessary for people to speak their mind.
- Industrialization is commonly seen as a path to economic development, but many historians argue that it can create a new class of urban poor. What has been the impact of industrialization on poverty and wealth in your own country?
- Indonesia has an interesting story with industrialization. As a former colony of the Dutch for almost 350 years, Indonesia was never really one to industrialize its economy. The Dutch mainly subsisted off our rubber, spice and tin trade through forced labour or even slavery. It wasn’t until we won our independence in 1945 (1947 according to the Dutch), that our government began to slowly address the issue of industrialization. In the 1950s and 60s we began rapidly undertaking this process, attempting to orchestrate an export-oriented economy similar to that of Thailand or India at the time. The Asian Financial Crisis in the mid 1990s halted our modernization and the decrease in value of the Indonesian rupiah meant that many would go underneath the poverty line. Nowadays Indonesia is slowly improving, with more and more people slowly escaping the poverty line each year. In 2018 the government announced that 9.82% of the country’s 255 million strong population was under the poverty line, rapid decrease from the 49% at the beginning of the 1990s. Yet after closer investigation it was revealed that the “poverty line” was actually just 11,000 rupiah a day ($0.76USD).
- Consider the historical factors affecting poverty. Of the following, which do you think have the greatest impact?
- climate | health and disease | agriculture | natural resources
- Climate: Climate is one of the biggest “starting” factors of poverty. Generally speaking a climate in history would’ve determined what your country could do with its economy. America wouldn’t have been able to grow crops like sugarcane in most of its states because the crop requires a tropical climate to grow in. Likewise, African states can’t invest in massive infrastructure efforts to reduce poverty because their huge deserts and sprawling savannahs limit their ability to construct roads. Climate also plays a large part in the majority of jobs that your people will take. A colder climate often means more people will seek white-collar jobs to avoid staying outside too much, whilst a country with tropical climates won’t mind an economy based on farming.
- Health and Disease: Obviously this is also a largely important factor of poverty. If your people are constantly wracked by disease and are unable to move from their homes, then they cannot contribute to the economy and they themselves cannot earn enough to sustain a standard of living acceptable for that society. Another consequence of this economic stagnancy is that then the government can’t invest in better healthcare, so the cycle repeats itself endlessly until either enough money is made to improve the healthcare or the country is commonly hit by disease.
- Agriculture: Agriculture within the poverty sense is rather important. You’d be surprised if I told you that agriculture both possess the ability to create more poverty and also solve the same amount, but I’ll let this article explain that economic concept to you. Agriculture in general is a great indicator of why a country has poverty, but it isn’t necessarily a predictor of whether a country might suffer from high rates of poverty in the future. This is because agriculture is a fairly nature-reliant job. Succeeding as a farmer depends on a good harvest, a drought or famine could easily bring about poverty to your household. Even if there is a good harvest, market rates for crops you grow might not be in your favour, depending on the supply and demand of them. Agriculture however, if used correctly, can drag millions out of the poverty line because of how little education is required to participate in it but also because of how profitable it can be if all the factors align.
- Natural resources: One of the more historically important factors of poverty was natural resources. One big reason why European nations were vying to expand their borders overseas was because of the host of natural resources that could be sourced from that land. If that natural resource was rare, then all the better for the colonizer. The Dutch established a monopoly on the spice trade when they colonised the Dutch East Indies (modern-day Indonesia), the Spanish gained a monopoly on cotton and sugarcane with their plantation islands in the Caribbean, whilst the British established monopolies on opium and tea from India. As a result of this, many nations were left with natural resources that they didn’t have the capital to harvest, allowing them to continue being exploited by foreign investors with the machinery and local manpower to do so. That’s one of the biggest problems facing Africa now, with Asian and European companies playing a dominating role in many of the mining and construction sectors of the economy. Natural resources can lead to poverty if a country cannot utilise them properly and lets others use them.
- access to food and water | education | poverty cycle | geography
- Access to food and water: Obviously as two of the key indicators of poverty, food and water are the most important necessities of life. Being unable to obtain a sustainable and year-round source of either would indicate that a country has a much higher population living below the poverty line (in absolute poverty actually). Many sub-saharan African countries such as Sudan and the Congo rely on seasonal supplies of water and drought in these areas can wreak havoc on the populace. Food is slightly more complicated, because its mass production and our ability to chemically create it doesn’t necessarily mean that a country with no farmers will starve and find themselves in poverty. Rather, countries that do not possess the economy to import foodstuffs and rely instead on their local agricultural production are at higher risk of poverty becoming widespread.
- Education: Slightly less important now than it was in the past, education is one of the indicators that might suggest why a country has such a poor economy and likewise high poverty rates. Nowadays, people without education can still find a decent job with enough pay to sustain themselves, but that also depends on the work opportunities and industries of the country. Generally speaking, the greater the access to higher education, the more people able to find a successful job, the less likely those people are to fall into poverty. Students in the western world can easily obtain higher education, whilst those in Africa struggle to go beyond even high school at times.
- Poverty cycle: A term used in economics, the poverty cycle refers to how those trapped in poverty are unlikely to escape it through their own means unless an external force or intervention lifts them out of poverty. A family in poverty will not be able to afford the capital or resources to lift them out, so they’ll probably sink even lower into poverty.
- Geography: This is actually a very interesting concept. The geography of a country is one of those “natural” factors that humans have no effect on. This usually dictates the direction of the economy and the likelihood of poverty. Most of the poorest countries in the world are landlocked African and South American countries, since their nonexistent access to the sea prevents them from taking part in international trade (and they do not possess the capital to ship their cargo by air). Generally, speaking the more access a country has to a body of water, the better it will fare in international economics and thus prevent mass poverty rates. However, landlocked countries can also do pretty well if they know how to manage their trade properly. Switzerland, Austria and Kazakhstan are three of the most notable examples of successful landlocked countries whose trading policies have allowed them to avoid poverty.
- climate | health and disease | agriculture | natural resources
- Explore the history of poverty in each of the following countries. Which of these countries has seen the great reduction in poverty—and is it a model that other countries could follow? Which ones are the poorest countries in their regions?
- Nigeria | the Congo | India | China | the United States
- Nigeria: You’d think that Nigeria is actually not that bad compared to its neighbors in terms of poverty. Indeed it is the largest African economy with the greatest growth annually (about 1-2% every year). However, the greatest shock is that Nigeria is the country with the highest number of people in extreme poverty worldwide. A 2018 report by The World Clock estimates that 86.9 million people live below the extreme poverty line, that’s almost 50% of the entire population. Poverty is only rising in the country, with the governments of the past mishandling the rich oil reserves found in the country. The wealth distribution is insanely unequal. The five richest men in the country are worth 29.9 billion dollars, enough to put the entire nation out of poverty. Yet the main source of the problem is within the government. Subsequent parties and leaders have been unable to connect with their citizens, the political elite almost squander the Nigerian resources for their own gain. To put it into perspective, between 1960 (independence) and 2005, 20 trillion dollars were stolen from the national treasury by public office holders, that’s more than the entire GDP of the United States in 2012.
- The Congo: When one searches up “The Congo”, the first results show for the Democratic Republic of The Congo (which is not at all democratic but hey hey neither is “The People’s Democratic Republic of Korea”). Thus I shall be focusing on that particular nation. The Congo isn’t doing well to be frank. Much like Nigeria, the government has been unable to capitalise on the rich resources hidden underneath the soil of the land, an estimated $29 billion worth of mineral ores and precious gems could be earned from mining the countryside. Yet much of that activity is ruled by foreign investment, the west exploits The Congo by signing million dollar deals to gain practically everything from its mines. As a result, the government puts most of the money into the military and its own profits, not caring about the fact that there are hardly any paved roads in the country. Since the main industry for the population is farming, with antiquated tools and methods, the poverty rate is overwhelmingly high. About half of the 77 million people live in extreme poverty (less than $1 a day), with a large amount of the populace falling ill to epidemics of malaria, dengue fever, AIDS and HIV.
- India: For much of its independent history, India has claimed the uneasy title of “country with highest amount of people in poverty.” Yet just last year, Nigeria overtook the massive Asian subcontinent for that title. Keep in mind that, while India apparently only has 5% of people in extreme poverty, in a land where 1.4 billion people live, that translates to roughly 70 million people. Luckily however, the creation of new jobs and modernization across rural areas has allowed for the country to reverse its fortunes (quite literally). Whereas in Nigeria the population outgrows the economy, causing even more poverty, in India the opposite is true. World Bank experts predict that by 2021, fewer than 3% of Indians will live in extreme poverty, something of a monumental event for the country. The main problem lies not in the poor economic management of the country, rather the bulging populace. With so many mouths to feed, children to teach and bodies to take care of, India has a long way to go before it can safely say that it’s avoided the poverty trap that has haunted it for much of the 1900s.
- China: The story of Chinese poverty is one of heroic growth and amazing work. Would it boggle your mind if I told you that just 41 years ago, 9 out of 10 people out of the billion-strong population lived underneath the $2 a day income line? Yet now, The World Bank estimates that less than 1% of persons live underneath the absolute poverty ratio. Statistics differ depending on what measure of poverty you use and who you ask, but the general consensus is that China has done a “Great Leap Forward” (sorry for the Maoist pun) in reducing poverty. Urban poverty has been all but eliminated, the main problem now lies in tackling rural poverty. In the rural provinces of China, agriculture is the main business and poor infrastructure prevents companies from building factories or other workplaces where thousands can be employed to pull themselves out of poverty. As of now, the Communist Party of China is attempting to lift millions more out of poverty, aiming to decrease the poverty headcount to 0 by 2020. Massive infrastructure and industrial investments in the rural countryside are underway, but the specifics are still being debated by the politburo and Xi Jinping.
- The United States: I will not speak about such a capitalist country that claims itself to be the ideal model for poverty reduction. If you wish, please read the following website about the demographics of poverty in the United States.
- Mexico | Norway | Ireland | Haiti | the Soviet Union
- Mexico: Mexico is the poorest country in North America, with poverty rates estimated to be about 42% overall. That includes the 9% of the population living in extreme poverty, whilst the remaining 33% live in moderate poverty. The main problem hampering Mexico’s economic ability to aid those in poverty is its industry. Mexico is highly dependent on the manufacturing of commodities in order to produce income. The government is also facing another internal threat to poverty; the gangs that rule Mexican suburbs and cities. These gangs often extort a large amount of money and detract from the national income due to their sale of illicit drugs or other goods. Mexico needs to first tackle this political and factional instability before it can get to the main problem of economic growth. It is these people and government officials who own most of the wealth, similar to Nigeria in wealth disparity.
- Norway: A shining beacon of development in economic and social policies, Norway can claim itself to have practically no poverty. Not a single person in Norway lives in absolute poverty, with even homeless refugees being able to make more than $1.9 a day. The main reason for this is Norway’s huge economy. The nation is reported to have the largest sovereign wealth fund, with well over 800 billion dollars stockpiled (4% of which makes up the annual budget of the government). As such, Norway has been able to fund many social welfare programs that allow for individuals to earn more money without having to spend money on healthcare or education. This is the result of a largely oil-based economy, yet Norway faces more challenges on the horizon. About 4 out of 10 immigrants in Norway live in moderate poverty according to the UN, with about 27,000 immigrants residing in the scandinavian country (and growing in the future). The government also needs to be aware of the declining value of oil, with sustainable energy dominating the industries of Europe nowadays. Somehow Norway must learn to rely on other things than oil if it wishes to continue being one of the lowest poverty infested countries.
- Ireland: For fear of angering my teammate Caitlin at accusing her country of being lower than it actually is, here is a great article that explains the situation.
- Haiti: On the list, Haiti takes the spot of poorest country in the western hemisphere. An ominous title indeed, but one that has staggering statistics to justify it. According to the United Nations Development Program, 59% of Haitians (equivalent to roughly 6 million of the 10.4 million strong populace) live under $2 a day, whilst 24.7% of Haitians in 2013 lived in extreme poverty (equivalent to 2.5 million back then). The wealth disparity is horrible unequal, as expected. The CIA World Factbook ranks Haiti 4th on the Gini coefficient (basically a measure for the distribution of wealth in the country), with 20% of the households earning 64% of the wealth. There are many more interesting facts I could list here, but this demographics site has a good list for you to read. Haiti’s problems are threefold, quite unlike any other country on this list. Firstly, Haiti is prone to be the victim of natural disaster. From the disastrous earthquake and tsunami in 2010 to devastating Hurricane Matthew in 2016, the country has been battered by its geographical and meteorological status. Constantly having to poor millions into disaster relief means the government can’t direct funding where its needed, such as public services or infrastructure development. Secondly, the lack of international funding has crippled the local economy. Venezuela, once a provider of loans and subsidies, is no longer able to sustain that activity (thanks Maduro) and as such Haiti finds itself unable to grow its economy as fast as other countries in the region. Finally, a line of poor governments ever since it gained independence means that when Haiti did have the chance to reduce poverty, greed never allowed it to actually happen. Haiti’s got a longer way than many other nations to go before it can even consider lifting itself beyond the extreme poverty line.
- The Soviet Union: HOW DARE THE WORLD SCHOLAR’S CUP EVEN ACCUSE THE GLORIOUS MOTHERLAND OF BEING PLAGUED BY SUCH A CAPITALIST DISEASE. WE WILL NOT TOLERATE THIS KIND OF ACCUSATION.
- (throat clearing noise). Apologies for that short outburst, I let my communist side get the better of me. The Soviet Union is on a whole other level of investigation to the other countries on this list, as the government structure of the country meant that its economic policies and distribution of wealth allowed for interesting results. Prior to WW2, the leadership of the Soviet Union was still struggling to transform a backwards agrarian economy into a modern industrial power, millions died in famines and there was still a high rate of poverty at the time. After World War 2 however, with the reduction of the population thanks to war casualties and the massive infrastructure development efforts undertaken, the government slowly but surely removed extreme poverty from the nation. People still had access to food, water and shelter, but their incomes weren’t exactly allowing them to move on up in life. It was only in a 1989 report by the newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda that revealed the true extent of poverty in the Soviet Union. About 20% of the population (compared to 14% in the United States) lived in moderate poverty, unable to make more than 75 rubles a month ($1.14). The main reason why poverty was disguised in the first place is the government welfare programs. Soviet citizens didn’t need to pay for housing or education or healthcare, but their limited wages and high working hours meant that many couldn’t afford food. To put that into perspective, the average Soviet worker works 10 times more than an American one to earn a pound of meat, 4.5 times more to earn a quart of milk and three times longer for a pound of potatoes. The government at the time wasn’t planning on any nation-wide initiatives to reduce poverty, though pension laws may increase allowances to help raise some of the 4-5 million people out of poverty.
- Nigeria | the Congo | India | China | the United States
- Consider some of the following strategies for battling poverty in different parts of the world. Have some proven more effective than others?
- population control | welfare | dole
- Population control: One of the most important factors in deciding whether or not a country can suffer from poverty, the amount of people a nation needs to provide jobs and basic necessities for can lead the nation to deprivation of wealth. Population control is often one of the last-resort options for governments, something they won’t consider unless absolutely necessary. The most well-known form of population control is that of China, with its one-child policy having been relaxed to a two-child policy in 2016. Set up in 1979, the one child policy was a way for the government to halt population growth while allowing the economy to catch up with the populace. As of now, no other major countries have established population control, though in the future major nations such as India and the United States might consider the option to avoid their population outgrowing their economy.
- Welfare: Welfare is one of the more commonly utilised methods of alleviating poverty, but it can be very hard to maintain and initiate in the first place. Welfare programs basically refer to any government or organisation funded program for the masses that grant social services to protect citizens from the insecurities of economic life and the risks of a capitalist society. The most notable countries who utilise social welfare programs are the Scandinavian nations (Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway). Welfare can help a lot in alleviating poverty in countries, but it is often the most expensive and complicated program to set up.
- Dole: No not the food company. Dole refers to the practise of governments giving state benefits to the unemployed. The reason you’ve probably not heard of the term is because it is uniquely British in origin and use. The term “on the Dole” was used in WW1 to refer to “doling out”, the handing out of charitable amounts of food or money, common during that time to help the unemployed survive. Nowadays most governments provide social welfare rights and benefits to the unemployed in developed countries, with workers who are unable to find jobs receiving enough money from the national treasury each month to sustain themselves, while also receiving other benefits to ensure they can find jobs.
- minimum wage laws | food stamps
- Minimum wage laws: This topic is slightly more complicated and is currently being debated in terms of its effectiveness. The basic concept of minimum wage is that the government sets a law on how much businesses need to pay their employees for a certain amount of work. While effective in the past, avoiding companies paying far too little in order to alleviate poverty. As of now however, minimum is under flak, as the amount of money set is often a reflection of the nation’s economy. More developed nations have higher minimum wages, whilst the lower developed countries struggle to provide a good working amount for their people. I’ll let you explore the controversies and arguments for and against minimum wage on your own, but as of now the policy isn’t that great compared to how it was in the past.
- Food stamps: This is somewhat of a relic of the past type program. Yet in America it is still being used (though first, let’s break down the basic concept). Food stamps are what they say on the tin (or should I say, paper?). They are essentially pieces of government-issued stamps that are handed out to people in poverty or those without the means to purchase their own food (i.e elderly, retired, injured war veterans etc.). Households who receive the stamps can use it to purchase food or other commodities, depending on how much the food stamp represents. The food stamp is a great way to alleviate poverty, since the family no longer needs to spend so much on the foods that they will survive on.
- America is the only nation now that has such a program. Known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the food stamp program in the US helps low and no income people who cannot afford the prices of commercialized goods at a supermarket. First begun in 1939 under the leadership of Henry A. Wallace (Secretary of Agriculture), the food stamp program aimed to equal out the amount of hungry people and those who could afford their food. Initially, only goods in surplus could be purchased by the stamps, with the Department of Agriculture determining what was on sale at a certain period of time. Over the next 4 years, the FSP (Food Stamp Program as it was known back then) reached over 20 million Americans, suffering from the knockback of the Great Depression. Over the next couple of decades, subsequent presidents would reform the food stamp to become more formal and wide-reaching to the masses.
- donation | tithe | alms | zakat | harambee
- Donation: Simply put, a donation is any sort of giving act that transfers commodities or capital to other people. Donations are the most stereotypical form of assisting those who are less fortunate than us, but in reality it isn’t that effective. Give someone $100 and they’ll still come back to you the next day with nothing in their pockets. Large-scale donations by human rights and aid organisation (such as the Red Cross or UNHCR) are slightly more effective, since they also provide more goods that will last for slightly longer than other ones.
- Tithe: In slightly older use, a “tithe” refers to one-tenth of something, usually paid as part of contributions to a religious organisation or compulsory tax to the government (a more primitive form of the progressive tax, where those with more money pay more taxes). In the modern day and age, the government has been known to take some of these tithes from the religious institutes (a tithe of a tithe, if you will) and use it to fund their own poverty-relief programs. I highly suggest you take a look at these countries in the Wikipedia link as a basis for further research.
- Alms: A general umbrella term used more in religious than economical circles, alms refer to the act of giving to others as an act of virtue. It can be done through materialistic aims (i.e giving someone food, shelter, or money) or through skills (i.e teaching someone a particular life skill). This is usually a more individually encouraged and motivated activity than an organised government effort, but there are examples of governments forcing those capable of doing so to pay alms in order to alleviate the suffering of those in poverty and level out the wealth disparity.
- Zakat: The Islamic version of alms, Zakat is one of the five key pillars of Islam and it calls for all capable muslims to give a part of their income/wealth to charity. In the Quran, it is regarded as a type of worship and self-purification, allowing yourself to give part of your earnings to help others live a healthy and prosperous life as well. In the past, Zakat was simply given directly to the families who required it, using a calculation system that was actually pretty advanced for the time (see details here). Nowadays. Many muslim-majority countries have their governments organise specific Zakat giving events, where Zakat collectors can take inventory of those profits given in and distribute it among those who need it.
- Harambee: If you didn’t think about the deceased gorilla who died tragically in 2016 after dragging a toddler into their zoo home, I commend you for being mature. Harambee is not a relative of Harambe, though both originated from the same continent and possibly the same region. Harambee refers to the Kenyan tradition of “self-help events”, whereby entire village communities get together to help each other out through donations and activities. The term itself actually mean “put all together” in Swahili and is the country’s official motto, appearing on its coat of arms.
- dāna | ukusisa & ukwenana | tzedaka
- Dana: Yet another religious word on this list, the “Dana” is a Sanskrit and Pali word that essentially describes generosity, charity and the giving of alms in Indian philosophies. This word is more commonly found in Hindu, Buddhist, Jainism and Sikhism texts and often takes the form of giving to an individual in distress or need. In Hinduism, the word refers to the act of relinquishing ownership of something and giving it to someone without expecting anything in return. While typically practised at the individual level, charity for public benefit is also discussed (using the word utsarga). This often means donations for larger projects that benefit more people, examples include the construction of public facilities or improvement of the environmental situation. In Buddhism, the action is usually directed specifically at monastic or spiritually-enlightened people and those who perform it are cleansing and purifying the mind (letting go of materialistic attachments in the interest of spiritual wealth).
- Ukusisa and Ukwenana: A very interesting tradition more than an economic policy, Ukusisa is native to South African indigenous people. If someone from outside the community comes to live with them for some period of time, they will be provided with a cow and be informed that the milk from this cow will be for them. If the visiting person accepts the cow, they are then bound to ensure that any future offsprings of that cow (female calves in particular) will be given to the village. This also tells the community that you won’t be leaving anytime soon and open the floodgates for more donations. A plot of land, a husband (or wife depending on who’s visiting) and integration into the community will follow. Ukusisa embodies giving something in a way that brings a person into the community.
- As for the Ukwenana (apologies for misspelling it earlier), this is a slightly less complex concept. It originates from the Zulu tribes which once controlled sub-saharan Africa (before the British, French and Dutch came knocking). This concept basically means giving a gift without expecting anything in return (I'm also confused, seeing as a gift entails not expecting anything but alright then). These were often made as a sort of alms or donation to Zulu tribe members who hadn't been so fortunate in their lives.
- Tzedakah: We’ve come full circle with our religious poverty-alleviating measures here. Tzedakah is a Jewish concept that refers to the obligation to do what is right, essentially every Jewish person’s duty to uphold justice and seek out the right course of action. Derived from the Hebrew word tzedek meaning “justice”, historical Jewish communities would impose tzedaka in much the same way governments today impose taxes. In the Torah, the initial statement was that Jews would give 10% of their earnings to the poor every 3 years, with a further percentage of their annual income every year. Differing from other religious charity concepts, Tzedakah is often looked upon as an obligation that any Jew must undertake, regardless of their economic standing. Maimonides (a medieval Jewish philosopher) thought up an eight-level hierarchy of Tzedaka, the highest form of which meant giving a recipient something that would allow them to become self-sufficient (i.e a partnership, life skill, loan). Donations were the second highest view and are more common nowadays as part of Jewish society.
- population control | welfare | dole
- Look into the English Poor Laws. What inspired them, and were they effective? Do you and your team find any aspects of them objectionable - and is there anything in them that you would want to see implemented more widely today?
- Long before the emergence of the welfare state concept, individual country governments were either not concerning themselves with the poor or were leaving those affairs to the church and other members of society. Yet in the late 16th century, Britain began enacting and codifying laws that would be updated and revisited several times for the next 300 years (up until the end of World War 2). These would become known as the “Poor Laws”, government actions meant to alleviate poverty and end the plights of poor people in England and Wales. The earliest Poor Laws came in Medieval times, with Edward III enacting them on June 18th 1349. The first ones came in response to the Black Death, then ravaging its way through Europe. With workers dying all around them, the British employers needed to find people willing to work on the fields and produce goods. As manual labour became more precious, wages for workers rose significantly, causing many goods to skyrocket in cost. The first laws mandated that any workers fit to serve were to be in the employ of a landowner and that wages would return to pre-plague levels immediately, regardless of how many workers remained (harsh, I know).
- The next set of Poor Laws were enacted during the reign of a very famous English king, one known for both his imposing physique and tendency to behead his wives: Henry VIII. After the dissolution of the Monasteries in the early 1500s, any existing poor relief in the country disappeared. So Henry the 8th’s father, Henry VII, enacted the first set of Tudor Poor Laws in 1495; known as the “Beggars and Vagabonds Act”. It essentially mandated the same things as the previous Poor laws: that all able-bodied beggars and vagabonds be put to work with normal wages and that any caught without jobs were to be punished (the specific treatment concerned stocks and starvation). While this set of laws did little to actually solve poverty, it did at least prevent it from building up in one area, as most beggars were relocated to their province of origin.
- The evolution of the Poor Laws would continue over the next lines of Kings and Queens to rule England (and later expand to include the British Empire). It would try to eliminate widespread poverty by ensuring idle workers were given jobs with decent pay ASAP. In 1948 the laws would be put down, with the emergence of government-funded welfare programs taking control of the poverty-alleviating measures.
- There are some aspects of the poor laws that I myself find very questionable. The use of liberal punishments on idle slaves and beggars is the biggest one, indeed the use of whipping and stocks to dissuade beggars from not being employed didn’t do much to help remove poverty. Indeed the forced employment of peasants, beggars and vagrants might as well have been considered an early form of slavery in Britain (a sign of things to come in the world). There aren’t many concepts of the Poor Laws that would work in today’s world, with most of the situational and sociopolitical factors having changed a lot since the time of Edward III.
- Consider the common saying, “Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.” Discuss with your team: how true is this statement? Does it make too many assumptions about the supply of fish?
- The first time I heard that saying, I was in awe at how wise and smart the person who said it must have been (admittedly back then I also thought that the world used to be black and white because the concept of color film was new to me). This statement is generally true. Giving someone the fruit of your efforts will result in them eating that fruit. Teaching someone how to harvest their own fruits will result in them being able to eat the harvest of their own efforts (my own twist on this saying!). I think the WSC is deviating away from the point of the saying by asking us to think about the supply of fish. If you will allow me one pun (and I will likely not ask this kindly again every other time), that aspect doesn’t hold water when it comes to the materialistic representation of a charitable object.
- Along the lines, the poor are especially susceptible to the consequences of drought and famine. Consider the circumstances of some of the deadliest famines in recorded history, then discuss with your team: if you had to choose between teaching people how to fish and teaching them how to read, which would make the most sense?
- Firstly, to once again (and certainly not the last time!) satisfy my lust for historical knowledge and sharing it; we shall delve quickly into the history of famines.
- Some of the most famous famines in human history include the Great Famine of 1845 in Ireland, when a potato disease coupled with political suppression from Britain caused the deaths of 1.5 Irish civilians. The Russian Famine of 1921 was even more disastrous, clocking in at an estimated 5 million deaths. The cause was due to political turmoil, Russia was in the midst of a revolutionary war that saw the White Imperialists on one side and the Red Bolsheviks on the other. Bolshevik soldiers often forced peasants at gunpoint to surrender their stocks of food, meaning that many refused to grow any knowing that they could literally not eat the fruit of their harvest. A decade later, another famine would come to haunt Russia. Otherwise known as the Holodomor, this largely Ukrainian based disaster caused the deaths of at least 10 million, the byproduct of collectivisation and land redistribution.
- In this day and age, the choice between teaching children the skills they might need to survive in manual labour compared to teaching them the skills they need to further their life is one not easily made. I’d have to say that it depends where these children and people are. If they live in an African country whose economy is reliant on agriculture or fisheries, then perhaps teaching them to join their fellow citizens with line and hook is better. If however, these people live in an area where fishing or other manual labour is already taken care of, then perhaps allowing them access to the wealth of knowledge and information stored in words will allow them to further progress their society.
- One historian at Duke University has argued that the experience of the Ottoman Empire teaches us that when the courts protect a group of individuals from the consequences of business mistakes—whether the elite or the poor—that group’s economic prospects can suffer, because no one will want to loan them money. Discuss with your team: do you agree with this argument? Should there be special protections for anyone in an economy, or do they inevitably backfire?
- The professor in question is one whose findings are very interesting indeed. Simply put, in the 17th and 18th century, Ottoman courts were notorious for favouring Muslims, men and elites when it came to business mistakes. They didn’t charge these groups nearly as much as women, non-muslims and commoners. As a result, money lenders and businesses charged the first group more interest in order to make up for the risk of losing their money. Since the courts gave them an incentive to break contracts, the businesses had to counteract it with a greater consequence if they did. The argument put is that our modern bankruptcy laws backfire because of the same reasons the Ottoman courts did, instead of protecting their desired group (the poor) they actually do more harm against them. Economy is one of those fickle things that tend to do as it pleases and at times it can go against people (sort of sounds like Donald Trump!). The risk of these policies backfiring however, is personally too much to risk implementing them in the first place.
- Some people believe that governments should help the poor; others argue that we should turn to philanthropy and private charity. Discuss with your team: who is most responsible for looking out for the well-being of those in need?
- This argument has been going on for a while and it really shifts depending on where you are in the world. For some, the government (being the “voice of the people” and “leaders of the nation”) have it as one of their duties to see all citizens of their country lifted out of poverty and become as equal as possible (Communism for the win uraaah!). However, there are others who say that more common-folk, such as those making up philanthropy-related organisations are more effective. I personally would like to see a program in a nation where the two cooperate more closely and then make my judgement as to which is more important from there.
- Consider some of the world’s best-known historical philanthropists, from Andrew Carnegie to Cornelius Vanderbilt. Critics would argue that their philanthropy, like that of individuals such as Bill and Melinda Gates today, is inherently undemocratic, as it over-empowers wealthy individuals who can invest huge resources to pursue their own agendas. Discuss with your team: should the government (or a coalition of governments) take a more active role in administering privately funded charities?
- Considering the philanthropic activities of historical figures, who have caused their fair share of controversy at simply donating a large amount of their earnings to “charitable organisations” who might in fact simply be pursuing their own agendas; it seems likely that government intervention might be needed here. Indeed every now and then we hear news of some scandal or scam where a reputable person of considerable net worth has been donating money to their own causes instead of directing it towards the improvement of welfare as they stated they would. I wouldn’t go so far as to call it undemocratic (after all does a democracy not stand for the rights of individuals and their impact on the larger public as a whole?) but perhaps a worldwide organisation should cooperate closely with all privately funded charities to make sure that money is where the philanthropist’s mouth is.
- Check out the Free Rice initiative, then discuss with your team: is adding a game-playing element to this donation program a good strategy for increasing engagement, or should the United Nations Food Program simply be donating all the rice they can at any given time?
- What a most interesting program indeed. The Free Rice Initiative is part of the United Nations Food Program whereby participants answer questions on basic grammar and vocabulary. For every correct answer, 10 grains of rice are donated through the UNFD to end world hunger. While I do applaud their genius in adding a game-playing element to this donation program, engaging more people and inciting curiosity about world hunger (hopefully resulting in even more involvement later on), it might suffer later on in its use from limited usership and eventually be completely forgotten. I think that gamifying any process of donation should be done to complement pre-existing efforts, as a way to get public minds focused on the topic and getting more support for the program.
- Four Americans were recently sentenced to prison as a result of their leaving food and water for migrants in a protected wildlife refuge. Discuss with your team: should they have been allowed to go free because of their motives? Should the laws ever limit or regulate charitable giving?
- The 4 aid workers should probably have been given some sort of warning and then told to work under supervision, but not something so harsh as to sentence them to prison perhaps (America’s justice system can be underwhelmingly stupid and overwhelmingly harsh at the same time). Laws should not need to limit or regulate charity giving nowadays, with most charities turning from giving fish to teaching people how to fish (god I love that saying).
- Does the value of a charitable act or donation depend on the motive of the person (or persons) behind it? Are anonymous donations more virtuous than those for which people take credit? Explore some of the many writings on this topic, including the linked piece by the ethicist Peter Singer, and then decide with your team: would you turn down a donation from someone who had earned their money in ethically questionable ways? If so, would you refuse to accept an anonymous donation unless you knew its source?
- Ehem, I apologise on behalf of the WSC for the lack of a linked piece, either this got lost in the resource preparation packet or technology decided to block our learning. Regardless, I think the value of a donation should have no change depending on the motive of the person most of the time. If this person was simply doing so for PR or recognition, then perhaps it could be slightly devalued but in no way should the donation be turned down or wasted. I probably would turn down a donation from someone who’d performed shady actions to gain the donation in the first place, but I wouldn’t refuse to accept an anonymous donation since it still helps me out.
- Who lives, who dies, who rewrites the story? Spend time with your team researching instances when some would argue that history has been (or should be) "rewritten" to erase - or promote - the struggles and achievements of certain people or peoples. Are some reasons for rewriting history better than others? In looking at the past, who should be the ultimate arbiter of what really happened and who really mattered? Below are some examples to help launch your exploration.
- Deleting the Holodomor
- Revisionism in Malaysia
- Hindu Nationalism
- History Classes in Texas
- Christopher Columbus
- These couple of instances are very interesting and I wholeheartedly suggest that you explore them on your own, as those websites do a much better job of explaining concepts than I can do concisely. Anyways moving on:
- History is one of those subjects whose interpretation and education is not exactly “uniform”. Many different countries, regions and even cities have varying historical curriculums based on the connotations they associate with figures and events. For example, Russian students never learn about the Holodomor because it negatively showers their history, whilst Turkish students actually believe that it was the Ottomans who were the victims of the Armenian Genocide (contrary to the actual statistics). The ultimate arbiter of what we learn in History class should probably be some sort of universal governing body of historians, professors, teachers and government liaisons that compromise little when it comes to sensitive historical matters. A history book must be as all-encompassing and as close to truth as a math or science book is, showing humanity at its best and worst throughout the centuries.
- The simple story is that Rome fell to the "barbarians". But who were the "barbarians" - why were they named that, and by whom? Is it what they called themselves - and, if not, what did they call themselves? Can you think of any times when a group has embraced a label you might have expected it to reject?
- The term “barbarians” was actually used by the Romans themselves in justifying and describing their “righteous conquests”. For much of its history, Roman generals and even future emperors would lead the troops of the empire to attack Germanic, Frankish and even Celts in the interests of expanding the borders of S.P.Q.R to the four corners of the known world (which at that time was just Europe, Africa and Asia). Yet after much internal strife and economic crises, the Romans finally buckled under the repeated raids and attacks by their enemies. In the 300s however, Rome was no longer the glory of civilisation it had once been. A successful series of raids and pillages reduced “the Eternal City” to a shadow of its former self. In 410 the Visigoth King Alaric sacked the city, followed in 455 by the Vandals. Many put the third strike, the final death blow, the final act of the Roman empire to be in 476, when Germanic leader Odoacer staged a revolt that deposed then emperor Romulus Augustulus. The barbarians likely referred to themselves as their own names, Visigoths and Ostrogoths or other ethnic groups at the time. I actually can’t quite find mention of a group of people who embraced their names from other cultures, mostly because those names were either never heard or were agreed with.
- Published in 1980, Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States retold American history through the lens of those whose voices had been left out of standard textbooks: indigenous populations, women, enslaved people, and immigrants. Research the history of this book to understand what has made it so controversial. Then, discuss with your team: does your nation’s history need a similar retelling? Is it possible for such efforts to go too far?
- Efforts like these can’t go too far, since every member of a nation’s history should get their say in the actual perspective and interpretation of events. I think Indonesian history is encompassing enough as of now, I certainly haven’t heard of any perspectives that have been overruled or shadowed by more popular ones.
- Sometimes, a large event can be lost in the shadow of even larger one. Such was the case of the Spanish Flu, which occurred after World War I and may have killed even more people. Are our methods of recording history to blame for this mass forgetting? Can you imagine any overlooked events today gaining more recognition over time?
- Let’s take a moment to talk about the Spanish Flu, or rather the 1918 Influenza Pandemic. November 1918, the guns on the Western front fall silent. World War 1 has come to an end. Yet even as the church bells of Europe rang in celebration and the streets of cities were filled with cheering woman and children, an unseen terror was plaguing Europe and America. Spurred on by the horrid conditions of war, clustered living spaces and nightmarish sanitation, the Spanish Flu is estimated to have wiped out 50-100 million people, more than 3 times the number of dead in the war that had come before it. Our methods of recording history were indeed to blame for this mass-forgetting. Our newspapers, books and even records downplayed the reports of pandemics for fear that they would corrupt the political and social victories that had been won in the past 4 years (as if). There are many overlooked events of the past that are slowly gaining more recognition today. The Holodomor, Irish Potato Famine, Calcutta Black Hole and Katyn Massacre are just a few overshadowed events that happened in an ever-changing world and were unlucky in not being recorded.
- In recent decades, there has been a backlash in some regions against what critics call “politically correct” language. Explore the history of this phrase, then discuss with your team: is it ever all right to use language that might demean or offend groups of people? If so, what should the standard be for acceptable versus unacceptable language?
- I refuse to get involved in something so deeply mired in controversy and activism. Investigate this sad necessity of humanity for yourself scholars.
- Consider the story of someone who may have helped prevent the end of the world. What leads some important people (and moments in history) to be less widely known than others?
- September 26th, 1983; Moscow, Soviet Union. Early warning systems of the Soviet missile defense mechanism trigger, a red screen with the words “LAUNCH” informs lieutenant colonel Stanislav Petrov that the United States has just launched a ballistic missile with a nuclear warhead. As the minutes go by the warning systems trigger again, until a total of 5 minuteman ICBMs have been confirmed as airborne and incoming. Stanislav is faced with a decision that could end humanity, or save it. His training tells him that he must get on the line to the Kremlin, informing Soviet leaders of the inbound nuclear strike. Their next response is certain; a full on Soviet nuclear retaliation against targets in western Europe and the United States itself. US President Ronald Reagan had been known for his hardline policies against the USSR during the Cold War, but Stanislav could never have foreseen it escalating to an actual missile strike. Yet he and his staff defy orders and risk their lives in doing so. They conclude that the warning system is malfunctioning and that no such strike is on the way. They are later proven correct; the system mistook the reflection of the sun off clouds as ICBMs (three cheers for Soviet engineering). Even though Stanislav is believed to have prevented the deaths of millions (or even billions) from the nuclear fallout that would’ve certainly followed had he phoned his superiors, he was never rewarded for it by his nation. After the decision, he was interrogated relentlessly and never given any recognition for his world-saving efforts. But after the Soviet Union fell and the Iron Curtain along with it, Stanislav was made an international hero. The United Nations honored him, the Dresden Peace Prize was given to him and Petrov Day was made to commemorate his small yet apocalypse-preventing decision. Stanislav is actually the most well-known of three people who saved the world from destruction in the late 1900s (surprisingly, they are all Russian and of Soviet birth. Take that America!). Just over 20 years before Stanislav’s time, navy officer Vasili Arkhipov prevented his submarine crew from firing a nuclear torpedo at American warships who were depth-charging his vessel just off the Cuban coast (Arkhipov’s submarine was part of a secret mission to resupply the Cuban military with Soviet weapons). 12 years after Stanislav decided not to pick up the phone, Russian president Boris Yeltsin was given a briefcase with instructions for launching a first strike against the United States, which had apparently launched its own missile strike against Russia. Once again, Yeltsin declined to engage nuclear forces, with the false alarm turning out to be a joint US-Norwegian research rocket studying the Aurora Borealis (at least this time the Soviet early warning system picked up a rocket projectile and not sunbeams, that’s an improvement!).
- These three men are now being given their due credit, but the main reason why they remained unknown to the world was because of the time in which they performed their actions. No one outside the Soviet Union knew that Vasili Arkhipov had prevented a T-5 Nuclear torpedo from claiming an American fleet, no one outside the Soviet Union knew that Stanislav Petrov had decided not to call his superiors and no one outside Russia knew that Boris Yeltsin declined the option to launch a nuclear strike. The press never picked up these stories because the Cold War prevented them from doing so (that, and the fact that top-secret military actions aren’t exactly public knowledge). It all depends who writes history at the time and whether they decide to include the people and events that changed our world.