All history as reconstruction of the past is of course myth

By THOMAS E. SKIDMORE

[You may view the article as PDF Religion and Slave Rebellion in Bahia]

History Department, Brown University, Providence, R. I. 02912, U.S.A. 28 vII 94

Slave Rebellion in Brazil: The Muslim Uprising of 1835 in Bahia. By Joåo José Reis. Translated by Arthur Brakel. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993. 28 I pp.

Slave Rebellion in Brazil is a major contribution to our knowledge of slavery, race relations, and the history of Africans in the Americas. The author, a leading Brazilian historian from the region about which he writes, is a pioneer in writing Brazilian social history. Translated and expanded from the Brazilian edition, the book focuses on “the most effective urban slave rebellion ever to occur on the American continent.” The rebels numbered in the hundreds, and some 500 were given punishments ranging from death to deportation. The uprising alarmed authorities throughout Brazil and led to draconian new legislation governing slaves.

The revolt has long fascinated historians because of its Muslim component. Its leaders were all African-born slaves or freedmen, and the target of their anger was the rest of the society of Bahia—whites and all others born in Bnazil, especially the mulattos who dominated the police force. The rebels were primarily Yorubas who had been converted to Islam, and it was their religion that had given them the sense of identity and dignity that facilitated the planning and execution of the conspiracy. Jewelry and documents found on the rebels confirmed that it was a truly Muslim-led movement which also swept up some discontented non-Muslim Africans. Reis argues vigorously that the revolt was not a “jihad” as some have claimed. Rather, he sees religion here as a means of bonding foreign-born slaves to resist the encircing society. The revolt did, however, serve to alert slaveholders to the need to verify the ethnic origins of any newly acquired slaves.

The picture presented here confirms the general view that slave rebellion was easier in urban settings, where slaves moved with greater ease than in the countryside. Furthermore, the Muslims were aided by their ability to use Arabic. Most interesting, the rebels not only did not seek to enlist Brazilian-born slaves but saw the latter as part of the enemy.

Rejs’s work also confirms that by the early 19th century the Brazilian elite was fixed on the idea of a “whiter” Brazil. This policy was evident in the justifications for repression and punishment after the revolt. Such an objective was ironic in view of the fact that Bahia was about 70% nonwhite at this time. The authorities came up with quaint language to describe the objects of their wrath. The rebellious Africans were termed “dangerous guests” and finally “treacherous guests.” It was surely a refiection of Brazilian elite culture to refer to slaves as “guests,” much in the tradition of Brazilian cordialidade.

Reis has produced a superb analysis of these important events that will be of interest to ethnohistorians and anyone interested in the development of modern race relations in the Americas.

Source: Current Anthropology Vol. 36, No. 2 (Apr., 1995), pp. 389-390