Why did African slaves replace indentured servants as the primary source of plantation labor?

Answer 1

well that doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out now does it?! Indentured servants, volenteered to be a servant fro a time, then when there passage to the colonies was paid in full by the terms of the agreement he and or she,where free to go. there where not thousands looking to do this extreme measure to get to the Colonies, if fact the numbers where lesser and lesser each year. and in the meantime the plantations where getting bigger and bigger, more gentry class people where moving to the colonies, as lands opened up and where found fertile for agriculture on larger scale as each area became available and so with many more land owners expanding there size of there farms to what is known as a plantation, and more plantations nearly doubling every 120 yrs, they had a serious labor shortage, and needed cheap labor quick, the Dutch answered the call with the slave trade, which had be lucrative in the Caribbean for decades before coming to the colonies in the late 1600s. just a simple math proplem for a messed up solution.

Answer 2

~Duh. Economics. Indentured servants were slaves for a period of years. Serve the time, pay off the transport charges and the fines and they were gone. Slaves, on the other hand, were property. There was no magic number of years that one could work them for and then they were gone. Buy one and, like a mule or a hoe, it was one's for life. But the best part is that they would breed. Buy one and you could end up with 10 or 20. The breeding part was such good business that failed farmers set up plantations whose only crop was slaves. Indentured servants continued as long as Britain maintained debtor's prisons and penal colonies but the farmer never did get to own their kids. As a businessman, what would you do. Does it make any sense to rent a strong back and a weak mind if you can own several generations of both?

However, slavery was an economically stupid exploit after the invention of the cotton gin and mechanized farm equipment. Had it not been for the civil war, the Southern plantation owners would have had to figure out what to do with the obsolete slaves they were stuck with feeding and housing. By 1860, slavery made no economic sense to all but a very few and it was on its way out. One can only speculate whether the war expedited or retarded the process. One thing that is sure is that the Reconstruction Congress guaranteed that the freed slaves and their children and grandchildren would be looked upon as subhuman rather than as free and equal citizens. So it goes. It took LBJ and the Civil Rights Act to at least give lip service to the equality myth, and in another generation or two, maybe the myth will become reality. Given the the comments you're getting about "Cheaper" Stronger" and "They could take the heat", though, I see ignorance still prevails and I'm not holding my breath.

Answer 3

E) white indentured servants A) is wrong because the early Chesapeake colonists benefited more by importing white indentured servants. Slaves from Africa were not a big trade yet and bringing servants over was much cheaper. It wasn't until Bacon's Rebellion that colonists began to take a big interest in African Slaves for labor for fear of another rebellion (like Bacon's) by indentured servants.

Answer 4

The primary reason they began using Africans is they could work harder in the heat. In the beginning, they were indentured servants and not slaves. The first actual slave was the result of a legal decision by a judge. An indentured servant had run away and caused so much trouble so often that the judge ruled that he could not work off his indenture in his lifetime.

By the way, both the slave AND the owner were African in that decision. The judge was white.

Answer 5

Greetings! Slavery replaced indentured servants for the sole reason that slave owners didn't have to repay or let go of their slaves. Indentured servants, if they survived their allotted time was paid a pittance and freed. Once a slave was bought, the slave was the master's property from that point forward and they only had to make very basic payment coverage...for food, clothing and a roof.

Hope this helps you.

Answer 6

To put it basic, they were cheaper. They didn't have to be paid, as they were 'owned'. They didn't need anything except for shelter, food and water...And punishment, but that wasn't a necessity. Anyway, long story short, they cost less. =D

Answer 7

They were cheaper, ie., no wages to pay. They were stronger.

Answer 8

cheaper