# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
French Louisiana

New France-the North American territories claimed by France-once extended from Hudson Bay in present-day Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, and from the shores of the North Atlantic to the Great Plains.

In 1682, the French claimed what came to be known as the Louisiana Territory or "La Louisiane," an immense parcel of land named in honor of King Louis XIV.

Quickly recognizing the possibilities for shipping at the Mississippi Delta (where the Mississippi River meets the Gulf of Mexico), the early settlers from France founded the city of New Orleans 17 years later. Engineers designed 66 squares of a walled village, naming the streets after French royalty.

The streets they created-and named-comprise what is today known as the "French Quarter" section of New Orleans.

The city quickly grew into a rich port city, shipping timber, minerals, agricultural products and, perhaps most notably, high-quality furs from the Mississippi Valley and the interior of the still-unexplored continent, transported downriver to New Orleans for quick delivery to Europe.

Religious Differences, Cultural Differences

Unlike the Puritans who first settled in New England in the 17th century, the French colonists were Catholic and, though still religious, they had a flair for fine living and dining.

New Orleans quickly developed a unique, French-infused cuisine and, years later, it grew into a music mecca with a rich African American culture, spawning its own take on jazz and blues music in the 20th century.

The Crescent City, as it is now sometimes called, also became known for its festive spirit, culminating in Mardi Gras, which, in French, means "Fat Tuesday." Mardi Gras celebrates the beginning of Lent, a Catholic observance that serves as the lead-up to Easter.

The Treaty of Fontainebleau

In 1762, following the brutal French and Indian War, the government of France negotiated the Treaty of Fontainebleau with their counterparts in Spain. The treaty effectively ceded the territory of Louisiana and the island of Orleans-essentially what is now New Orleans-to the Spaniards.

The French saw the move as an inducement designed to persuade the Spanish to end the Seven-Years War. Ultimately, they feared the English would win the conflict, and French influence over New Orleans and the surrounding territory would come to an inglorious end.

The Treaty of Fontainebleau was kept secret for nearly a year, and once the French colonists learned of its existence, they revolted. Essentially, they didn't take kindly to the thought of Spanish rule.

With an already diverse population of French, Creole and Africans (both slaves and free settlers), the Spanish had a difficult time governing the colony. Although they afforded settlers there more freedom than they did those of their other colonies (in South America, for example), there were significant restrictions imposed on trade.

Their time in charge of the region was marked by armed uprisings, and strained relations between the governor's office and the citizenry.

New Orleans and the Louisiana Purchase

Less than 40 years later, perhaps weary of governing a troublesome colony, and feeling the threat of an ambitious French military leader, the brash young Napoleon Bonaparte, Spain relinquished the Louisiana Territory and New Orleans back to France via another secret treaty, the Treaty of San Ildefonso, in 1800.

However, faced with a slave uprising on the island of Saint Domingue (what is now the Dominican Republic and Haiti) and the specter of a war with Great Britain over control of Louisiana, Napoleon had a decision to make: Rather than send troops to defend New Orleans, which the British saw for its value as a port, and the surrounding territory, the military leader dispatched 20,000 soldiers to Saint Domingue to quell the slave revolt, leaving New Orleans and French Louisiana essentially defenseless in the event of a British attack.

Seeing an opportunity, Thomas Jefferson, President of the United States at the time, and his Secretary of State James Madison, decided to fashion an alliance of sorts with the French government. Part and parcel of this relationship was the future governance of Louisiana.

Eventually, they negotiated the Louisiana Purchase, a deal that included the huge 828,000 square mile-territory that includes New Orleans and the Mississippi River Valley, for $15 million.

French Influence in New Orleans Today

It may be more than 200 years since the French have controlled New Orleans, but their influence is obvious in the city to this day-in culture, cuisine, language and geography.

The French Market, an artist and farmer's market in the French Quarter, is a prime example-a European-style, open-air market with cafés selling French-style pastries (beignets) and other goods.

And, of course, there is the French Quarter itself, with its streets still bearing the names given them by the early French settlers and its French- and Spanish-influenced architecture.

French restaurants, with a decidedly Louisiana twist, also abound in New Orleans, including the famous Café du Monde (Café of the World).

Finally, there are the obvious links between the French and the Cajun and Creole cultures. Cajuns and Creoles are two distinct groups, with long histories as Louisianans, who can trace their roots to France and Quebec, though Creoles can also cite Spanish, African and Caribbean influences as well.

These two cultures have their own languages (Cajun closely resembles French), cuisine, music and traditions, and are part of what makes New Orleans a unique city today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New France-the North American territories claimed by France-once extended from Hudson Bay in present-day Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, and from the shores of the North Atlantic to the Great Plains. In 1682, the French claimed what came to be known as the Louisiana Territory or "La Louisiane," an immense parcel of land named in honor of King Louis XIV.

# data[].attributes.headline
Animated map of colonization over time...it's slow!  Be PATIENT

# data[].attributes.subject
Animated map of colonization over time...it's slow!  Be PATIENT

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Title: French Empire evolution Usage Terms: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 License Link: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Attribution Required?: Yes

# data[].attributes.body
**Also has a great table if you scroll down showing the countries and their population.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Africa makes up more than 70% of the world's total French speaking population.

In 2015, a total of 31 independent states around the world reported French as an official language. If territories are included, the total number increases to 42. Of this total, 21 states are located in Africa, which represents half of the world's French speaking states and territories. There are no French speaking territories in Africa, as most are located in the Americas, Oceania, and Europe.

French Speaking Countries in Africa

There are approximately 434 million people throughout the world who speak French. However, the country with highest French speaking population is not France. Instead, an African nation, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, tops the list with a total of more than 77 million people. France ranks second, with approximately 67 million people. Madagascar and Cameroon, with 24 million and 23 million people, respectively, rank fourth and fifth.

In the top five African states with the most French speakers, the Ivory Coast is fourth, after Cameroon, with an estimated 22 million speakers. Niger ranks fifth, with an estimated 19 million people. It is interesting to note that African countries dominate the world list by occupying positions four to 13 consecutively.

On the other end of the list, Seychelles has fewest French speakers in Africa, with an estimated 92,900 people. Also in the bottom five of Africa countries are the Comoros (788,474), Equatorial Guinea (845,060), Djibouti (887,861), and Gabon (1,725,300). Again, African nations dominate the world list by occupying consecutive positions from 19 to 25.

To put Africa's French speaking dominance into perspective, the Democratic Republic of the Congo alone makes up 17% of the total world's French speaking population. Additionally, Africa makes up more than 70% of the world's total French speaking population. The top five countries combine to make up more than 35% of the world's total population of French speakers. Furthermore, 17 of the total 21 African countries have populations of more than one million people that speak French.

Geographically, a large chunk of French speaking countries come from West and Central Africa. This high number in West Africa is explained by the history of colonization in Africa. For example, France and Belgium controlled large parts of West Africa, and consequently those nations now have French as one of their official languages.

Wide Gap Between then Largest and Second Largest French Speaking Countries in Africa

There is a significant difference in population between the largest and second largest French speaking countries in Africa, which are the the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Madagascar, respectively. However, the population difference between the other French speaking countries in Africa is less significant.

1. Home

2. World Facts

3. French Speaking Countries in Africa

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2015, a total of 31 independent states around the world reported French as an official language. If territories are included, the total number increases to 42. Of this total, 21 states are located in Africa, which represents half of the world's French speaking states and territories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New Identities

Some Native people adopted the Christian beliefs taught by Jesuits and learned other French practices. For their part, many Frenchmen hunted alongside Algonquian peoples in the upper country. Such woodsmen often married Algonquian women. They and their children (called Métis) often became effective traders, translators, and diplomats.

Fur Trade

By 1700 France and England competed with each other to profit from the fur trade and win Native allies. Native peoples competed with one another to serve as intermediaries between rival powers. Gifts helped cement key agreements in these new systems of negotiation and alliance.

A Middle Ground

The upper country of the Great Lakes and beyond was neither fully French nor fully Algonquian. Neither group commanded enough power to make the other abide by its wishes. The area became a site of constant negotiation and compromise over such issues as prices, fairness in exchange, and the obligations of military alliance.

Marketing Moccasins in North America

Just as Native Americans adopted European goods, Europeans came to appreciate moccasins. Moccasins could withstand local conditions and be remade regularly using efficient design and readily available materials. European traders, farmers, and priests quickly adopted them. By the mid-1700s European settlers in Detroit were manufacturing them for sale in both French and English towns and cities to the east.

Canadian woman in moccasins, Native-style leggings, European skirt, and bodice. Artist unknown, Genre Studies of Habitants and Indians, around 1780

These two pairs of moccasins came from the Michilimackinac trading post in today's far northern Michigan. The unadorned pair may have been made for trade. The decorated pair, featuring porcupine quills, deer hair, and silk ribbons, may have been made for personal use or as a gift.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some Native people adopted the Christian beliefs taught by Jesuits and learned other French practices. For their part, many Frenchmen hunted alongside Algonquian peoples in the upper country. Such woodsmen often married Algonquian women. They and their children (called Métis) often became effective traders, translators, and diplomats.

# data[].attributes.headline
A deeper explanation of why Champlain was attracted to Quebec & how he had to convince France why it was a good idea

# data[].attributes.subject
A deeper explanation of why Champlain was attracted to Quebec & how he had to convince France why it was a good idea

# data[].attributes.body
**Also explain why the French outdid England in this area.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Here’s a guide to history in Quebec City - everything you need to know.

# data[].attributes.headline
SCROLL way down to section titled "History"

# data[].attributes.subject
SCROLL way down to section titled "History"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Quebec is the largest province in Canada. Its territory represents 15.5 per cent of the surface area of Canada and totals more than 1.5 million km2. Quebec shar…

# data[].attributes.headline
The 2nd paragraph explains what Louisiana would provide the French.

# data[].attributes.subject
The 2nd paragraph explains what Louisiana would provide the French.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Louisiana Purchase | Articles and Essays | Louisiana: European Explorations and the Louisiana Purchase | Digital Collections | Library of Congress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Napoleonic France Acquires Louisiana On October 1, 1800, within 24 hours of signing a peace settlement with the United States, First Consul of the Republic of France Napoleon Bonaparte, acquired Louisiana from Spain by the secret Treaty of San Ildefonso. To the distress of the United States, Napoleo…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
French Louisiana

In 1699, Pierre Le Moyne, Sieur d'Iberville and Jean-Baptiste Le Moyne, Sieur de Bienville started the first French settlements along the Gulf. They built a fort on Mobile Bay that was the capital of the French Louisiana colony when Los Adaes was established. This was years before New Orleans was settled. By 1710, the French Bourbons ruled Spain. As a result, French colonists were less concerned with conquering New Spain than they were with trading with their Spanish colonial "cousins." Crozat, a French businessman, wanted to trade with New Spain. France hoped to control trade in the Mississippi River Valley and to access the rich mines in what is now Mexico. The French governor of the Louisiana colony sent a ship with goods to Vera Cruz, but the effort to start a trade relationship failed. The Spanish seized the ship, took the merchandise, and then sent the ship back to Louisiana. Spain did not allow any foreign trade in the colonies.

Images

Learn More

St. Denis and Fort St. Jean Baptiste
In 1711, and again in 1712, a Spanish priest wrote letters to the Louisiana governor. The priest offered to help the French trade with the Spanish, if the French would support his mission efforts in the Province of Texas. Only one letter reached the French governor, and in 1713, he sent Louis Juchereau de St. Denis to set up a trading post among the Natchitoches Indians on the Red River. The post came to be called Fort St. Jean Baptiste aux Natchitoches, and that settlement grew into the town of Natchitoches. St. Denis went to find the Spanish priest, first among the Hasinai Indians in East Texas, and finally, in 1715, at Presidio San Juan Bautista on the Rio Grande. Although he was arrested there, he negotiated with the commander of the presidio. They worked out a trading relationship that altered the official Spanish policy that prevented the Spanish colonies from dealing directly with the French. St. Denis strengthened this agreement by marrying the step-granddaughter of the commander of Presidio San Juan Bautista.

Suggested Reading

Lemée, Patricia R. 1998 "Tios and Tantes: Familial and Political Relationships of Natchitoches and the Spanish Colonial Frontier" Southwestern Historical Quarterly 101(3):341-350.

Lemmon, Alfred E., Mahn T. Magill and Jason R. Wiese, editors. 2003 Charting Louisiana: Five Hundred Years of Maps. The Historic New Orleans Collection: New Orleans.

Usner, Daniel H. 1992 Indians, Settlers, & Slaves in a Frontier Exchange Economy: The Lower Mississippi Valley Before 1783. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

Fort St. Jean Baptiste State Historic Site http://www.lastateparks.com/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
French Louisiana In 1699, Pierre Le Moyne, Sieur d'Iberville and Jean-Baptiste Le Moyne, Sieur de Bienville started the first French settlements along the Gulf. They built a fort on Mobile Bay that was the capital of the French Louisiana colony when Los Adaes was established. This was years before New Orleans was settled.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scroll to "Colonial Policy of France" to find out why France colonized parts of Africa.

# data[].attributes.subject
Scroll to "Colonial Policy of France" to find out why France colonized parts of Africa.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
France is a country that has always been influential in Africa. Unlike other states, the relations of France, which started before colonialism, have continued without interruption in her pré carré (sphere of influence). France attempted to establish relations with all the countries in Africa. However, relations with countries in the middle of the continent (Sub-Saharan African Countries) were developed just for the purpose of avoiding conflict with other great powers of the time. In this article, French influence in Africa throughout the colonial period will be reviewed.
Period before Colonisation:
The continent served both as a source of slaves and a stop for ships of Europeans on the way to Asia. The French had a presence in West Africa dating back to the 1600s, most prominently in Senegal, which was a major point of embarkation for slaves to the New World ([1]). Initially, the Europeans that went there tried to be influential by using religion and language.
Colonial Policy of France:
The Industrial Revolution and the European countries' need for raw materials, manpower and markets, had led them to acquire colonies in Africa, especially since the beginning of the 19 th century. After the agreement of leading states on colonisation in the Berlin Conference (1884), everything changed very fast. As late as the 1870s, only 10% of the continent was under direct European control. And by 1900, Europeans ruled more than 90% of the African continent. As for the French side, French West Africa was colonized between 1890-1914 and French-Ecuadorian Africa between 1899-1922. ([2])

The colonial movements of France were Senegal centered in the west-east direction towards inner parts of Africa. From time to time, as France advanced in the direction of Niger River, she inevitably came across to the colonial sphere of England. These two states, which occasionally came to the point of conflict, have blocked each other with bilateral agreements.

The map on the left shows European territorial claims on the African continent in 1914 ([3]). Today, there are 16 African countries in the area of French African colonies.

During World War І, a big number of Africans were recruited to Europe as soldiers and war workers (Table-1).

Table-1: Recruitment of African Soldiers and Workers During World War І [4]

According to official figures, the casualty rate of colonial soldiers was around 20 %. But Africans' real casualty rate was considerably higher. Colonial officer Edouard de Martonne published a figure of 65,000 West Africans killed in action, which would equal a casualty rate of 48% ([5]).

In many sources, it is mentioned that soldiers and workers recruited from Africa were being assigned to dangerous missions and were working in harsh conditions.

Another striking example would be the process of the medical school in Dakar to understand what colonialism is. Senegalese government requested this school to be established as early as 1905. But it was founded by the French in 1918. The school did not open until many years later. At last, Senegalese political activists and war veterans demanded its opening to compensate for more than 30,000 Senegalese who fought and died for France in World War I. By 1934, the medical school had more than 400 graduates and it was seen as a success in terms of many levels. However, by the 1930s, France began to shift resources away from the medical school to low-quality rural primary schools so as to support agricultural production and other exports in the run-up to World War II([5]).

With the trend of democracy's rising after the World War II, African countries were given independence one by one. The independence of Cameroon in 1960 ([6]) had a domino effect and led to the independence of other countries.
Conclusion:
France, through the lands all over the world, is waving his flag over the oceans and on many continents. France is second in the world with 11 million km² of the exclusive economic zone after the USA and is also an important player on the international stage with its military strength, language, culture, and values. The African adventure of France started in the 17 th century. The need to resources made this relationship indispensable. During the colonial period, she never wanted to lose her superiority in the region.

The colonies made important contributions to France. After all, France lost them but did not want to waive its privileges in the context of political, cultural, economic and military relations. Therefore, France has continued to maintain an exceptional relationship, especially with Sub-Saharan African countries.
References:
[1] Bade, S. (2013). The British Aren't Coming: Why the French Intervene in their Former African Colonies and the British Do Not, Stanford Digital Repository.

[2] David, S. (2011). Slavery and the 'Scramble for Africa'. BBC-British History. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/abolition/scramble_for_africa_article_01.shtml

[3] The Scramble of Africa. Map for European territorial claims on the African continent in 1914. Retrieved from http://mycontinent.co/AfricaBorders.php

[4] Koller, C. (2008). The Recruitment of Colonial Troops in Africa and Asia and their Deployment in Europe during the First World War, Immigrants & Minorities, 26 (1/2). 111-133. University of Zurich.

[5] Max, R. (2009), The Décalage and Bricolage of Higher Education Policymaking in an Inter/National System The Unintended Consequences of Participation in the 1992 Senegalese CNES Reform, In: Vavrus, Frances and Bartlett, Lesley (Eds.) Critical Approaches to Comparative Education, Vertical Case Studies from Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and the Americas. 39-56. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

[6] Birmingham, D. (1995). The Decolonization of Africa, London: University College London Press. Retrieved from https://endbayeh.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/ebooksclub-org__the_decolonization_of_africa3.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
French Influence in Africa (Colonial Period) | Beyond the Horizon ISSG

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
France is a country that has always been influential in Africa. Unlike other states, the relations of France, which started before colonialism, have continued without interruption in her pré carré (sphere of influence). France attempted to establish relations with all the countries in Africa.

# data[].attributes.headline
Compares French & British Colonization of Africa.

# data[].attributes.subject
Compares French & British Colonization of Africa.

# data[].attributes.body
**Scroll down a bit to jump right to French colonization of Africa.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
European colonialism in Africa birthed the current political order in most African countries. Britain, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain and Italy were the major European powers that were involved in the complete colonization of Africa. However, the two nations that held the most colonies in Africa were France and Britain.

The difference between French and British colonialism in Africa is the focus of this article.

Before European colonialism in Africa, the continent had wider flexibility of movement as national borders were almost nonexistent. There was no structural form of government as large communities led to the formation of kingdoms, powerful empires and city-states.

This led to the formation of common languages, beliefs, traditions, cultures, value systems, art, lifestyle, and religious practices.

However, a global European process of reaching all the continents of the world led to the colonization of Africa and this process changed the world dramatically.

European countries fought to take over African countries mainly because of their natural resources. Their reasons ranged from economic, political and religious.

At that time, the European continent was faced with economic depression and countries were losing money. Apart from being out of harm's way, Africa had an abundance of raw materials.

Another reason for the colonialism in Africa was the need to use the African population which served as cheap labour for European industries.

The Scramble for Africa, which was the phrase used to describe the European colonialism in Africa, began during the New Imperialism between 1881 and 1914.

In 1884, at the request of Portugal, German Chancellor, Otto von Bismark, at the Conference of Berlin and British New Imperialism, called for an end to the confusion over the control of Africa. They met to discuss the division of Africa, without Africa being present. They shared Africa like a piece of cake.

The countries represented at the conference included Germany, Belgium, Italy, Great Britain, Russia, Spain, Austria-Hungary, the Netherlands, Denmark, France, Portugal, Sweden-Norway, Turkey, and the United States of America.

Great Britain, France, Portugal and Germany were the major players out of the 14 countries at the conference. They were controlling most of Africa at the time.

The conference lasted for three months and it saw the European countries bargaining over geometric boundaries which led to the division of the continent of Africa into 50 irregular countries and the beginning of colonialism in Africa.

The rivalry between Britain and France in the quest for colonialism in Africa also saw them fighting over the acquisition of the continent's territories. By 1900, the majority of Africa had been colonised by seven European powers, Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, and Italy.

These powers established colonial state systems, which were authoritarian and bureaucratic, and were the machinery of administrative domination to facilitate effective control and exploitation of the colonised societies.

However, these European countries were successful in colonising Africa rapidly mainly because of the rivalries between African leaders.

Kings and Chiefs were competing with themselves over who was the wealthiest and most powerful and the Europeans took advantage of this by luring some leaders to their sides to join forces with them to fight their rivals.

Also, the sophisticated weapons which the Europeans possessed and the Africans lacked, made the continent vulnerable to their domination. They took control of colonies using force and violence.

Some natural disasters equally played a large part in the rapid colonialism in Africa. Drought in 1895 led to a food shortage which caused the death of both man and animals and also weakened the population. There was also a plague of locusts which destroyed the few crops grown. Cattle plague also broke out leading to the death of cattle, sheep and goats.

All these incidents worked against the African continent and made them prey for the Europeans.

The British and French colonised more than 95% of the African continent. While Britain colonised 22 African states, France colonised 20.

France retained control of the Northern, Western and parts of Central Africa while Britain had control of Eastern and Southern Africa.

The entry of the Europeans into Africa led to the spread of their culture, religion, and most especially, language. Today, most African countries use either French or English as their major or second language.

The French had been in Africa as early as the 1600s but this changed during the Industrial Revolution when European countries had a need for raw materials and manpower, thereby seeing Africa as their "go-to".

After the Berlin Conference in 1884, where an agreement was made concerning the colonialism in Africa, France colonised West Africa between 1890 and 1914.

The French established its first African colony in 1830 after seizing Algeria.

Some other African countries colonised by France include Senegal, Gambia, Chad, Mali, Benin Republic, Sudan, Gabon, Tunisia, Niger, Republic of Congo, Cameroon, and Cote d'Ivoire.

France colonised more countries in West Africa compared to other parts of Africa. All its colonies there were constituted into a loose federation with its headquarters in Dakar, the present-day capital of Senegal.

The system of administration adopted was known as the policy of assimilation whose aim was to assimilate and transform all Africans in their colonies into French men and women.

In other words, it was the imposition of the French culture, language, religion, law, traditions, lifestyle, and art on the West African culture.

Due to the failure of the policy of assimilation, mainly because of widespread criticism, France abolished the policy and introduced the policy of association which is akin to indirect rule.

The policy of association respected the African people's culture and their political institutions were recognised.

For a long time, Britain was only interested in having a few outposts in West Africa for the slave trade business. However, British abolitionists succeeded in outlawing the slave trade in 1807.

It wasn't until the latter part of the 19th century that Britain's interest in colonising Africa was aroused and the Scramble for Africa led the British to aggressively expand and defend their colonies.

The Berlin Conference, which kickstarted colonialism in Africa that carved up the continent, saw the British get the Southern and Northeastern parts of the continent, thus leading Britain to spread its tentacles across the continent of Africa. It included lands in North Africa, much of West Africa and a whole lot of territories in Eastern and Southern Africa.

Some African countries affected by the British colonialism in Africa include South Africa, Zimbabwe, Ghana, Malawi, Nigeria, Kenya, and Uganda.

One notable Briton who justified the colonisation of Africa was David Livingstone. He was an explorer who went around much of Africa's interior. Livingstone reported back home that Britain had a duty to introduce the Three Cs, that is Christianity, Commerce, and Civilisation, to Africa.

It was thought that Christianity would provide the moral principles that would guide Africans while commerce and civilisation would encourage them to produce their own goods.

Therefore, it is no secret that British colonialism in Africa had a significant impact on the lives and economy of Africans.

Ruling in Egypt, the main interest of the British was to have control of the trade route starting from Egypt to the Red Sea all the way to India. The Egyptians were receptive to the British and even sent their children to school in Britain. Britain in return did not interfere with their Islamic beliefs and even assisted in building some mosques.

Meanwhile in West Africa, the British were more heavily involved with the leaders of these nations, allowing them to rule their people any way they deemed fit but they still paid their taxes to Britain. They adopted the British language, dressing, lifestyle, and religion, were educated in Britain, and took up positions in the civil service.

However, in South Africa, a different scenario played out. There was a mixture of the British, Boers (who were descendants of Dutch settlers from the 1600s), and native Africans such as the Xhosa, the Zulu and the Matabele.

The Boers disliked the British colonialism in Africa because they saw the native Africans as inferior to them and treated them as slaves while the British insisted that they have rights. Tensions between them eventually led to the Boer War, from 1899 to 1902, which ended with a British victory and peace terms were drawn.

Thus, with these variations, it is difficult to make a conclusive judgement about British colonialism in Africa. Their arrival on the African continent definitely disrupted the traditional African culture and traditions and widened the gap between the people and their Chiefs but it also brought about a change in the economy of the countries, development in terms of infrastructure, education and enlightenment, and medical solutions that were otherwise unknown.

It also saw the end and abolishment of some archaic traditions and cultures that were in times past done out of ignorance. For example, the killing of twins.

Compared to other European invaders and their colonialism in Africa, the British were tolerant of the religious beliefs and practices of the people. They were also aggressive and intentional in their fight to end the slave trade.

The Difference the French and British Colonialism in Africa

There are so many dissimilarities between the administration of the French and that of the British during their colonialism in Africa.

While Britain practised the indirect rule system of government, France adopted a direct rule system of government.

The indirect rule system of government utilises the traditional political institutions of the people to govern them which gives each colony the opportunity to administer their area as long as the indigenous leaders agreed to do whatever the colonial masters ordered.

On the contrary, a direct rule system of government is when central authority dominates and takes direct control over the rule and administration of a territory that had been largely self-governing.

Thus, the British respected traditional rulers while France was in contempt for local languages, traditions, and culture.

Indirect rule was the brainchild of the British colonial administrator, Frederick Lugard and was the main system used by the British in overseeing their colonies compared to other systems of government they had in operation. They used African leaders to work on their behalf and imposed obedience on their fellow Africans.

Lugard first experimented with the indirect rule in Northern Nigeria which worked with the Emirs and the Sokoto Caliphate in charge but this rule failed in the Southern part of Nigeria. In the North where indirect rule seemingly worked, the Fulani Emirs were autocratic and corrupt which led to riots from non-Fulanis and non-Muslims protesting their misrule.

In his book, The Dual Mandate in British Colonial Africa, Lugard theorised the system of administration that he established in Northern Nigeria, where he preserved the judiciary, administrative, and religious structure of the Sokoto Caliphate.

Also, while France federated her colonies in West Africa, Britain did not. France operated a federal system where all the territories in West Africa were administered as a whole from the centre in Dakar, while the British allowed each territory to operate as a separate entity and Governors had room to act based on what the situation demanded.

Britain permitted the function of political associations and allowed the development of parliaments and assemblies while France withstood the formation of such.

During their colonialism in Africa, Britain did not practice the assimilation policies of the French and as such, did not attempt to make English persons out of the Africans.

French officials were also frequently transferred from one station to another to prevent them from planting their influence there while the British allowed their officials to stay for a long time at a place and familiarise themselves with the people and their customs. As a matter of fact, it was incumbent on any British administrator to be fluent in the local language of his domain.

Another major difference between British and French colonialism in Africa is education.

Education was mainly undertaken by religious missionaries and partly financed by public funding in British colonies but the French were more attuned to public schools in their colonies.

Mission schools which had more African teachers teaching in their local languages were more efficient at educating a large number of children and primary school enrolment was on the high side in British colonies. Cooperation between the missionaries and the colonial government cannot be undermined as this played a huge role in the success of academic pursuit.

One other aspect of opposition between British and French rule concerns civil liberties.

Restriction of civil liberties was harsher on the French side than on the British side. In terms of forced labour, French colonies took the form of both labour tax and the use of military conscription for public works. Labour tax required Africans to work for a specified number of days every year on local public work projects while military conscripts were used for longer periods of time on larger-scale projects.

The British, on the other hand, abandoned forced labour in their colonies by ratifying the 1930 International Labour Office Forced Labour Convention.

In terms of hierarchical administrative structure, under the French, there was a Colonial Master based in France who had a subordinate, Governor-General, based in Dakar. This was followed by a Lieutenant-Governor located in each of the territories and the territories were divided into Cercles which were headed by a Commandant du Cercle. The next in rank were the African Chiefs.

This was also similar to the British hierarchy having a Secretary of State for the colonies in London appointed by the British crown. Next is the Governor stationed in the colony; and under the Governor were the Regional and District Commissioners and then, the local chiefs.

British laws differed from colony to colony but the French had unifying laws across their colonies.

Colonialism can be said to be a direct form of imperialism but it is often said that all colonialism is imperialism but not all imperialism is colonialism.

How far has colonialism been said to have impacted Africa? Or should the question be, how much has Africa allowed colonialism to affect it as a continent in all ramifications?

One major impact of colonialism in Africa is that it brought about underdevelopment in the continent in different ways. Despite the fact that colonialism in Africa brought education, enlightenment, and some form of civilisation, it is partially responsible for its underdevelopment.

Not being rooted in African culture, colonial education was essentially literary and had no organic linkage to the African environment. There was no technological base and was, therefore, in opposition to real or industrial development.

Colonial education set out to train clerks, artisans, and interpreters who would serve them in their exploitation of the continent's rich resources and was not aimed at industrialisation or technological development.

The introduction of colonial education made Africans abandon their arts and crafts which were sculpting, cloth weaving, carving, and mining but instead settle for just reading and writing.

Colonialism in Africa also distorted the pattern of economic growth and development in the continent. There was disarticulation in the provision of social amenities, transportation, production of goods, and pattern of urbanisation.

Africans were not allowed to go into manufacturing but rather relegated to exporting raw materials and importing finished products. Even food is being imported which has led to food shortage and escalation in the prices of foods that can be otherwise grown locally.

Road networks are not left out. The colonial masters focused on building rail tracks and roads that would facilitate their export of raw materials found in Africa and were not interested in building a transport network to link rural areas which would bring about economic growth and development.

Another problem colonialism in Africa caused was the concentration in only a particular area. Most of the social amenities provided were focused on major cities and minor towns and villages were ignored. The urbanisation pattern was disjointed. This led to rapid rural-urban migration, overcrowding in major cities, poor hygienic conditions of living, a rise in social vices, and tribal and ethnic conflicts.

In conclusion, colonialism in Africa brought devastating consequences to the continent that it is yet to recover from. It came to ensure that the African continent would always be dependent on their European colonial masters and will not be self-sufficient. It is indeed a sad story.

We always have more stories to tell. So, make sure you are subscribed to our YouTube Channel and have pressed the bell button to receive notifications for interesting historical videos. Also, don't hesitate to follow us on all our social media handles and to as well share this article with your friends.

Carroll, E. (2022, January 15). British Colonies in Africa: History & Map - Early Colonial Efforts in Africa. Study.com. Retrieved from https://study.com/academy/lesson/british-colonies-in-africa-history-map.html

Cogneau, D., Dupraz, Y., Mesple-Somps, S. (2018, June 21). African States and Development in Historical Perspective: Colonial Public Finances in British and French West. Retrieved from https://halshs.archivesouvertes.fr/halshs-01820209/document

Morton, C. (2016, September 6). The Similarities and Differences between the British and French Colonial Administration. The Similarities and Differences between the British and French Colonial Administration. Virtual Kollage. Retrieved from https://www.virtyalkollage.com/2016/09/similaritiesand-differences-between-the-british-and-french-system-of-colonial-administration.html

Ocheni, S. and Nwankwo, B. (2012). Analysis of Colonialism and its Impact in Africa. Cross-Cultural Communication. Vol 8(3) pp. 51-53

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Difference Between French and British Colonialism in Africa - HistoryVille

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
European colonialism in Africa birthed the current political order in most African countries. Britain, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain and Italy were the major European powers that were involved in the complete colonization of Africa. However, the two nations that held the most colonies in Africa were France and Britain.

# data[].attributes.headline
This explains in general why European Countries wanted to colonize France.

# data[].attributes.subject
This explains in general why European Countries wanted to colonize France.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Colonialism and Africa's Integration into the Global Economy

Module Six: Africa and its Geography and Module Seven B: African History introduced the topic of colonialism in Africa. You learned that at the end of the 19th century, European powers colonized all of Africa with the exception of Liberia and Ethiopia.

As emphasized in Modules Six and Seven B, European states colonized Africa for a number of reasons. In Module Ten: African Politics, political reasons for colonization will be addressed. In this lesson, the economic reasons for and the economic consequences of colonialism will be discussed.
Economic Reasons for Colonialism.
Economic historians of Africa point to a number of economic related reasons why European countries colonized Africa.

1. Demand for Raw Materials: As you may have learned from your studying Europe, in the 19th century, Europe experienced the industrial revolution. Industrial production, like all modes of production, requires human resources, capital resources, and natural resources. There was no shortage of labor in Europe. Two centuries of trade with Asia, the Americas, and Africa (including the Atlantic Slave Trade) had brought great profits to European traders. These profits provided the capital necessary to finance the industrial revolution. However, most of Europe was resource poor. Consequently, European industries were dependent on raw materials from Asia, the Americas, and Africa. For example, one of the earliest industries in Europe was the cotton textile industry, which helped stimulate the industrial revolution. This industry was completely dependent on imported cotton.
As industrialization grew and spread throughout Europe, competition for raw materials increased. Consequently, some European industrialists encouraged their governments to colonize African countries as a method of guaranteeing sources of raw materials.

2. Need for Markets: By the late 19th century, the industries in Europe were producing more industrial goods than Europeans could consume. Consequently, industrialists sought markets for their goods around the world. As competition between industries for markets grew, industrialists encouraged their governments to undertake colonization of Africa in order to protect markets for their industrial goods.

3. Commerce, Christianity, Civilization: Some historians argue that one of the most important economic reasons for colonization was the belief by some Europeans, particularly missionaries, that the development of trade and commerce in Africa was an essential component to the restitution of "civilization" in Africa. Today, historians reject this ethnocentric conception of civilization, but many Europeans of the period felt that Africa was not "civilized". They believed that trade and commerce, along with introduction of Christianity, were key to development in Africa. Christian mission societies and other advocates of this position pushed European governments to colonize Africa and thereby provide a supportive environment for the expansion of commerce.

COLONIAL ECONOMIC CONNECTION BETWEEN EUROPE AND AFRICA

The Scramble for Africa took place between 1886 and 1914. During this time, European countries colonized all of Africa, with the exception of Ethiopia and Liberia. As is shown the following map, Britain, France, and Portugal were the main colonial powers in Africa, but Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Spain also had colonies.

Establishing political control, or sovereignty, over their colonies was the primary objective of the colonial powers in the early years of colonialism. The colonial powers used a combination of warfare, threat of force, and treaty making with African rulers in their efforts to gain political control of African colonies. Once political control was realized and institutions of governance were in place, economics became the main concern of the colonial governments.

Europe experienced an economic depression at the end of the 19th century; consequently, the colonial powers felt that they had no money to spend on political administration, social programs, or economic development in their colonies. They were adamant that the colonies should pay for themselves. The colonial administration in each colony was charged with raising the revenue necessary to pay for all expenses, including the colonial army and police force.

Given the great geographic diversity of Africa in terms of natural resources, climate, vegetation, topography, and precipitation, there was no uniform model that the colonial powers used to raise revenue throughout Africa. In the same way that economic activity in the early 20th century varied throughout Europe and in the United States, economic activity in Africa was just as diverse. Within this diversity, economic historians of Africa have identified five modes of economic activity and revenue generation in colonial Africa

1. Mineral Exploitation: Africa is a continent rich in mineral resources. In colonies where there were large deposits of minerals, colonial governments encouraged the exploitation of the minerals. Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) and the Belgian Congo (Congo) are examples of colonies whose economies were dominated by copper production. In these colonies, colonial governments initiated policies that forced some African farmers to leave their homes to become mine workers.

2. Large Scale Agricultural Production: In colonies in East and Southern Africa that had climates attractive to European settlers, the primary colonial economic activity and revenue generation was large scale farms owned by Europeans. Examples include Angola (coffee), Kenya (coffee, tea), and Southern Rhodesia/Zimbabwe (tobacco, beef). In this system, European settler farmers needed land and labor. To meet these needs, the colonial governments instituted unpopular policies that removed good farm land from the local population and forced some local men to work as laborers on European controlled farms.

3. Small Scale Agricultural Production: Most African colonies had neither large deposits of minerals, nor the environment to encourage European settlement. In these colonies, the colonial governments actively encouraged farmers to grow special cash crops that would be exported to raise revenues. Cash crops included food crops such as groundnuts/peanuts (Senegal, Nigeria), coffee (Tanganyika, Rwanda, Uganda), cocoa (Ghana, Togo, Cote D'Ivoire) and non-food crops, such as cotton (Mali, Niger, Sudan) and tobacco (Malawi).

4. Supply of Labor: Parts of some African colonies were poor in natural resources. In these situations, the colonial regimes instituted policies that strongly encouraged able bodied men to leave their homes and migrate either to distant areas within the same colony or to neighboring colonies where they worked in mines or on large farms. Mine owners and commercial farmers paid a recruitment fee to the colonial government of the worker's home country. For example, in Southern Africa the colonies of Bechuanaland (Botswana), Basotholand (Lesotho) , Swaziland, and parts of Mozambique and Malawi became labor reservoirs for the mines and large farms of Northern Rhodesia, Southern Rhodesia, and South Africa.

5. Mixed Economies: Most colonial economies in Africa are called mono-economies by economists. This indicates that the colonial economies were dependent on mining, settler agriculture, or the small scale production of a single cash crop. There were a few exceptions to this trend. By the end of colonialism in South Africa (1994), the country had a very vibrant and diversified economy boasting mineral, agricultural, and manufacturing industries, and an advanced commerce sector. Another example of a mixed economy is Nigeria. In the 1950s, the last decade before independence, the discovery of large reserve of petroleum helped diversify an agriculturally based economy.

Primary Revenue Generating Products During Colonial Era
Go on to Activity Five or go to one of the other activities in this module

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Module Six: Africa and its Geography and Module Seven B: African History introduced the topic of colonialism in Africa. You learned that at the end of the 19th century, European powers colonized all of Africa with the exception of Liberia and Ethiopia.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why did the French colonize Caribbean countries?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why did the French colonize Caribbean countries?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Slavery in the French Caribbean, 1635-1804 (Chapter 17) - The Cambridge World History of Slavery

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Cambridge World History of Slavery - July 2011

# data[].attributes.headline
Scroll down quite a bit to "Genocide and the “Noble Savage” in the Caribbean."

# data[].attributes.subject
Scroll down quite a bit to "Genocide and the “Noble Savage” in the Caribbean."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Translations of French documents coming soon!

Introduction

At its height in the middle of the eighteenth century, the French empire stretched from Illinois to the coast of Africa. Iconic American cities such as New Orleans, Saint Louis, and Chicago grew out of its networks of trade and communication, along with Montreal, Quebec, and Port-au-Prince. Its missionaries, colonists, merchants, and soldiers explored the Mississippi, traded across the Atlantic, and made alliances with American Indian and African powers. They also wiped out entire communities and kept millions of people in slavery. The following collection of documents survey the many parts of the world swept up in French imperialism during the early modern period (1500-1800), and the many ways the French empire influenced their histories.

Essential Questions:

What were the motivations behind France's presence in different parts of the world? How did French motives change from place to place, and over time?

How did French colonists see native peoples in North America, the Caribbean, and Africa? How did these peoples interact with the French?

How did the pieces of France's empire fit together? Were they a single, coherent system?

Furs and a Fortress in New France

In 1534, following the lead of Christopher Columbus and other explorers, the French voyager Jacques Cartier landed on what is now the eastern coast of Canada and claimed it as French territory, calling it "New France." Over the next 230 years, New France would expand westward from the coast, through the modern Canadian provinces of Quebec, Ontario, and Manitoba, as well as southward into what are now the states of the American Midwest. After the port of New Orleans was founded in 1718, French colonists also travelled northward, up the Mississippi, planting settlements in Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Missouri. The Chicago River, which connected the Great Lakes region to the Mississippi River, was at the center of the enormous crescent of French territory stretching from the eastern shore of Canada to the Louisiana Delta.

The city of Chicago was not directly founded by the French government, but it could never have existed without the trade connections that French settlers developed in the region. In 1779 Jean-Baptiste Pointe du Sable, the son of a French father and an enslaved African woman, arrived in what is now Chicago after travelling north from New Orleans along the Mississippi and then overland through the town of Peoria, Illinois (founded by French explorers in 1680). Moving northeast from there, Du Sable built a house and trading post at the mouth of the Chicago River. For over 100 years, French traders had come to this place from Montreal and Quebec in Canada. They would meet there with fur trappers who hunted all over the Great Lakes region. Even before Du Sable built his full-time trading post, these meetings were big operations.

A contract from 1692 gives a sense of their scale. In Montreal, the business center of French Canada, Magdeleine Saint Jean (on behalf of her husband François Francoeur) made a deal with Simon Guillory and Jean-Baptiste Taury, who agreed to travel to the mouth of the Chicago River. Magdeleine loaned them the money and goods that they would need to purchase furs there. In return, she expected a hefty 500 pounds of beaver fur when they returned.

Unlike the British colonies that eventually became the United States, New France never received many settlers from Europe. Its borders did not expand so quickly because of a rising number of colonists, but because of a declining number of fur-bearing animals. Trappers started hunting along the coast of Canada in the early sixteenth century, but soon had killed too many of the large animals in that area. They had to travel further and further away from the eastern seaboard, founding new settlements along the way. By the late seventeenth century, 150 years after Cartier's arrival, they already needed to go as far as Illinois.

French officials wondered if the fur trade was sustainable in the long term. What would happen to the economy of New France if trappers could no longer find beaver and other fur-bearing animals? Officials also worried that the settlements founded to support the fur trade were too far apart and had too few people to defend themselves from an attack by Great Britain. France and Britain went to war almost every decade from 1660 to 1815, and Britain tended to have the upper hand in these conflicts. France's colonies in North America were especially vulnerable to British attack. In 1710 Britain conquered some of France's territory on the Canadian coast (what is now the province of Nova Scotia), and it seemed like the rest of New France might be next.

Thinking that he could kill two birds with one stone, colonial officer Antoine-Denis Raudot proposed several times throughout the 1700s and 1710s that the French government build an enormous fortress at Louisbourg on Cape Breton island. He claimed that an island fortress would protect Canada from another British invasion, and also promote the fishing industry, which would make the economy of New France less dependent on the fur trade. In 1716, hoping to make his case more convincing, he commissioned the following map of what the fortress might look like. The French government accepted Raudot's proposal and spent 20 years (1720-1740) building a huge, expensive base at Louisbourg. The investment did not pay off. Louisbourg was captured in 1745, returned in 1748, and then captured again (this time for good) in 1758, during the Seven Year's War (1756-1763). By the end of the war, the British had conquered all of New France, from Canada to New Orleans, leaving the French in control of only a few small islands in the Caribbean. But those colonies, one hundredth the size of New France, were the most valuable parts of France's transatlantic empire, far more profitable than the vast North American territories.

Questions to Consider:

1. What was the role of the fur trade in the history of New France? Of Chicago?

2. What were the weaknesses of the French model of colonization?

3. What does this contract tell us about the role of women in New France's economy and society?

4. What information does this map convey? How does it make building a fortress at Louisbourg seem like a good idea?

[Key to Louisbourg Map: A-D Gun batteries; E Magazines; F Place to disembark on the island; G Bridge; H-I Rocks and pieces of land that appear at low tide]

Soldiers and Priests in North America

Britain was not the only country the French needed to worry about. During its 250 years of history, the French empire in North America had complicated relationships with a number of American Indian communities. Sometimes these were allies of the French, like the Huron Confederacy in present-day Quebec, which signed an official treaty with the French government in 1614. But others, such as the Iroquois of what is now upstate New York, and the Natchez of what is now Mississippi, could be bitter enemies. Lieutenant Dumont de Montigny recorded France's many battles with the Natchez in a manuscript he wrote after his retirement in 1747. In the introduction to this manuscript, de Montigny says that he had originally written his story in an epic poem, full of battles and adventures. After thinking it over, however, he decided that it would be better just to tell what happened in a straightforward way. His revised manuscript in prose was translated into English in 2007 as A French Soldier in Louisiana: The Memoir of Dumont de Montigny.

One of the most important features of French relations with American Indians was the influence of Catholic missionaries, who left France to convert different groups in Canada and elsewhere. The most famous of these missionaries is Jacques Marquette, a Jesuit priest who travelled down the Mississippi with fur-trader Louis Jolliet in 1673. Jean-Claude Mathevet is less well known today, but he was also a kind of pioneer. He lived for many years among the Nipissing, a small community living around Lake Nipissing in present-day Ontario, hundreds of miles from the main French settlements of Montreal and Quebec. Mathevet tried to learn their language so that he and other priests would be able to preach to them in the future. But the notes he took suggest that he was having a good deal of trouble. He wrote down phrases he would need to remember, including "I'm tired of talking" ( je suis las de parler) and "let's speak French" ( parlons français)! Nevertheless, his persistence eventually paid off, and Mathevet was able to write the Gospels, the lives of saints, and the Catholic liturgy in Nipissing. Today his writings provide valuable data for historians and linguists and can offer hope to anyone who has ever struggled with a foreign language.

The middle column of the top of the first page of Mathevet's notes reveals some of the words he felt he would need most often: passion, resurrection, divers moyens pour se bien comporter, regrets d'un incroyant à la veille de son départ, enfer, patience [passion, resurrection, various ways of behaving well, the regrets of an unbeliever on the verge of his departure, Hell, patience].

Questions to Consider:

1. What expressions did Mathevet think were most important? What does this tell us about him and his mission?

2. Identify the elements that are included in the coat of arms De Montigny drew. Why do you think he chose these elements?

Genocide and the "Noble Savage" in the Caribbean

France's defeat in the Seven Year's War meant the loss of an enormous territory. But French officials and merchants were much less upset about the loss of New France than they were relieved that France could still keep its Caribbean colonies of Martinique, Guadeloupe, and Saint-Domingue (now Haiti). These sugar-producing islands were much smaller than New France, but had a larger population (well over half a million by the end of the eighteenth century, compared to the 50,000 in New France), and made far more money for the business community back in France. Christopher Columbus had claimed all these places for Spain in 1492, but the Spanish government never colonized the islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe. It did briefly colonize Saint-Domingue, which lies on the western side of the island of Hispaniola, but Spain soon abandoned that area to concentrate settlement on the eastern side (now the Dominican Republic). Pirates took over the western coast, before being driven out by the French government in the late seventeenth century.

When French settlers came to Martinique and Guadeloupe in 1635, the islands were still inhabited by the Carib people who had lived there for centuries. Some people in France hoped to convert them to Catholicism. But Jacques Bouton, a member of the Jesuit order of missionaries, felt that this would not be possible. In his 1640 Relation of the Establishment of the French since 1635 in the Island of Martinique, Bouton claimed that the Caribs were too wicked and ignorant to ever become Christians. Responding in part to such ideas, French settlers massacred almost all of the Caribs by the end of the seventeenth century. This act of genocide allowed the French to transform their Caribbean colonies into plantation societies, where the heavy work of growing sugar cane and transforming it into refined sugar done by hundreds of thousands of slaves taken from Africa.

By the time that the Marquis de Lambertye wrote a far more positive description of the Caribs in his 1760 travel memoirs, there were only a few surviving members of the original inhabitants of the Martinique and Guadeloupe. Lambertye's History of the Caribs is a classic example of the idea of the "noble savage" popular in eighteenth-century France. Native peoples under French rule were now presented as innocent, naïve, and good, instead of as evil and ignorant. But this change in French thinking did not make much difference to the Caribs.

Questions to Consider:

1. Why might French relations with the Caribs have differed from France's treatment of North American peoples? What role could economic factors have played?

2. On what points do the two descriptions of the Caribs agree? How might this be significant?

The Slave Trade

African slaves were brought to France's Caribbean colonies (and, in some cases, to Canada and the Midwest), through the routes of what historians today call the Triangular Trade. The three sides of this triangle were ports in Western Europe, trading posts on the coast of West Africa (then known generally as Guinea), and European colonies in the New World. European products like guns and textiles were given to African merchants in exchange for slaves, who were then transported across the Atlantic in crowded ships. Many did not survive the journey. Most of the survivors were sold to sugar-producing plantations in the Caribbean, where working conditions were worse than almost anywhere else in the Americas. Theoretically, the French king Louis XIV gave basic protections for slaves in his 1685 Black Node (Code Noir). This law required masters to provide slaves with enough food, clothing, and shelter. But it was rarely enforced. Slaves on the French colonies of Martinique, Guadeloupe, and Saint-Domingue (now Haiti) were usually worked to death within five to ten years of their arrival.

The French, by and large, treated African slaves in their Caribbean colonies brutally. Their relationships with the African traders and political leaders who were their partners in the slave trade, however, were very different. During the seventeenth and eighteenth century, the French government was in no position to force African countries to do what it wanted. Instead, the French set up small coastal forts and trading posts, and then tried to find strong African allies who could supply them with slaves. But first they had to convince African rulers that it was worth siding with them.

During the seventeenth century, the French were especially interested in the West African kingdom of Allada (in what is today the country of Benin). The Chevalier des Guines, whose memoirs were ghost-written by author Jean-Baptiste Labat, went to buy slaves in Allada in 1725, just two years before the kingdom was conquered by an army from the neighboring country of Dahomey. While telling the story of the chevalier's visit, Labat remarked that Allada had once been much more powerful, so powerful that in 1670, French officials asked the king of Allada for an alliance. The king had answered that before he could make up his mind he would need to send an ambassador to see if France was a strong enough country to be Allada's ally. So he sent his interpreter, Matteo Lopes, to travel with a French ship (and the six hundred slaves it was carrying) first to the Caribbean, and then back to France to meet Louis XIV, which he did the following year.

Allada's ambassador had learned fluent Portuguese, studied Christianity, and changed his name to Matteo so that he could deal more easily with Europeans. Labat was clearly fascinated and impressed by him. Neither Matteo nor his French counterparts seem to have been troubled by the fact that Allada's ambassador to France was traveling on a ship filled with African slaves.

Matteo Lopes may have been treated "respectfully" on board The Concord, but for the twelve million slaves sent from Africa to the New World from the sixteenth through the early nineteenth century, the voyage across the Atlantic was agonizing and often fatal. Their journey began in places like the island of Gorée, off the coast of the modern-day country of Senegal. In such fortified outposts, European traders would gather slaves purchased from African kingdoms like Allada. Gorée was first colonized the Portuguese in 1444, before coming under French control in 1677. It was not one of the major centers of the slave trade, sending "only" a few hundred slaves to the Americas each year. But Gorée is an important place in the history of slavery, because it is home to one of the first museums and memorials of the slave trade, founded in 1962. The map below shows a French plan from 1716 (the same year as the map of Louisbourg) for new construction on the island.

Questions to Consider:

1. How can we make sense of the fact that an African ambassador was apparently treated with dignity while travelling on a slave ship?

2. Both Gorée and Louisbourg were fortified islands. Do the maps of the two forts show more differences or similarities between them? What do they show about the purpose of the fortifications?

Slavery in Saint-Domingue

The largest of France's Caribbean colonies, and the main destination for slaves, was Saint-Domingue, today Haiti. By 1789, on the eve of the French Revolution, over 500,000 African slaves lived on the island, along with a population of 100,000 whites and free people of color. In 1791, the slaves revolted, taking the opportunity provided by the revolution in France. They won their freedom in 1793, when the French government abolished slavery. But ten years later, it seemed like the French government was about to restore slavery to the island, and revolt broke out again in Saint-Domingue. This second rebellion soon turned into a war of independence, and the colony of Saint-Domingue became the free Republic of Haiti on January 1, 1804.

Long before 1791, slaves on the island found ways to resist their masters, either by fleeing into the hills of the island (becoming so-called "maroons") or by using more subtle methods. The following letter, written by an anonymous plantation-owner, describes an episode that took place in Saint-Domingue in 1758. It shows examples of both open and covert forms of resistance, and also reveals the extreme violence slaveholders used to punish resistance.

Questions to Consider:

1. How did the white community try to use François Macandal's execution to send a warning to slaves?

2. How did the slaves interpret what was happening?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Translations of French documents coming soon! Introduction At its height in the middle of the eighteenth century, the French empire stretched from Illinois to the coast of Africa. Iconic American cities such as New Orleans, Saint Louis, and Chicago grew out of its networks of trade and communication, along with Montreal, Quebec, and Port-au-Prince.