Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:42:05.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Import of Firearms into West Africa in the Eighteenth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2009

W. A. Richards
W. A. Richards
Affiliation:
North Worcestershire College, Bromsgrove
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The records of probably the biggest Birmingham gun-making firm specializing in the African trade and records of the Dutch West India Company are used in this article to throw more light on the quantities, types and quality of the guns imported into West Africa and on their effects in the eighteenth century. Inikori's estimate of 45 per cent as the proportion of English firearms in the total annual West African import of between 283,000 and 394,000 guns per annum is probably an underestimate because of the unknown quantities of English guns which were re-exported from Continental ports to West Africa. It is estimated tentatively that 180,000 guns per annum were being imported into the Gold and Slave Coasts by 1730, and that some of the most dramatic effects of the import of guns occurred between 1658 and 1730. A revolution in warfare began in the 1690s in the Senegambian coastal areas and along the Gold and Slave Coasts. The trebling of slave prices and the sharp reduction in gun prices between 1680 and 1720 enabled large militarized slave-exporting states to develop along the Gold and Slave Coasts. There was a strong demand for well-finished and well-proved guns as well as for the cheapest unproved guns, and the dangerous state of many of the guns imported into West Africa has been exaggerated. The reputations of European nations for the quality of their guns fluctuated. There was probably no steady deterioration in the quality of English guns imported between 1750 and 1807, but the quality of the cheapest guns deteriorated during periods of intense competition.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of African History , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , January 1980 , pp. 43 - 59
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The studies undertaken at the University of London appeared in J. Afr. Hist., xii, nos 2 and 4 (1971)Google Scholar. The more recent research is by Inikori, J. E., ‘The Import of firearms into West Africa 1750–1807’, J. Afr. Hist., xviii, 2 (1977)Google Scholar, and Kea, R. A., ‘Trade, State Formation and Warfare on the Gold Coast, 1600–1826’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1973).Google Scholar

2 These letter books are to be found in the Galton Papers (G.P. hereafter), in the Birmingham Reference Library, with catalogue numbers 405/1 for letters between 1755 and 1757, and 408 for letters between 1748 and 1760. These are the most valuable private records yet discovered which reveal the organization, the fierce competition and the quality of the English gun trade with West Africa in the eighteenth century. Farmer and Galton was probably the largest Birmingham gunmaking firm specializing in the African trade in the eighteenth century, and was the main supplier of arms to the Committee of the Company of Merchants Trading to Africa in the 1750s. For a history of the firm and its connection with the slave trade see Richards, W. A., ‘The Birmingham Gun Manufactory of Farmer and Galton and the Slave Trade’ (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Birmingham, 1972)Google Scholar. For Birmingham's gun industry see Nie, D. A. and Bailey, D. W., English Gunmakers: The Birmingham and Provincial Gun Trade in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries (London, 1978).Google Scholar

3 The Dutch West India Company's records are contained in two volumes of translations from the Dutch archives, ‘Dutch Documents relating to the Gold Coast and the Slave Coast 1680–1740. Translations of letters and papers collected in the State Archives of the Netherlands at the Hague’, by Van Dantzig, A., University of Legon, 1971Google Scholar. These Dutch Documents will be referred to as D.D. hereafter.

4 The firm's agent in Lisbon was Samuel Montaigut in the 1750's. G.P., 405/1, letter dated 22 March 1755Google Scholar. Birmingham's trade with Lisbon was extensive by 1755, judging by the alarm expressed by Birmingham's manufacturers when news of the destruction of Lisbon by earthquake reached Britain. S. Galton wrote, ‘The dreadful earthquake at Lisbon hath very affectingly alarmed the inhabitants of this town, a great quantity of our manufactory being sold there. We have been suspended between hope and fear for some time.’ G.P., 405/2, letter dated 15 December 1755.

5 G.P., 408, 14 October 1748.Google Scholar

6 G.P., 405/2, 8 June 1755.Google Scholar

7 Davies, K. G., The Royal African Company (London, 1957), 174.Google Scholar

8 Ibid., 175.

9 Curtin, P. D., Economic Change in Precolonial Africa (Wisconsin, 1975), 324.Google Scholar

10 Kea, , ‘Trade, State Formation and Warfare’, 307.Google Scholar

11 Curtin, , Economic Change, 324.Google Scholar

12 Greener, W. W., The Gun and its Development (Birmingham, 1910), 214.Google Scholar

13 The Office of Ordnance collected figures on the production and chief markets of Birmingham gunmakers before each of the major wars of the eighteenth century. In 1755, for example, the Office of Ordnance sent Mr Bennett, to Birmingham, in order to collect these figures. G.P., 405/2, 27 November 1755Google Scholar. These figures are probably contained in the Minute Books of the Board of Ordnance in the Public Record Office.

14 G.P., 405/1, 9 December 1754.Google Scholar

15 Gemery, H. A. and Hogendorn, J. S., ‘Technological Change, Slavery and the Slave Trade’, in Dewey, C. and Hopkins, A.G., eds., The Imperial Impact: Studies in the Economic History of Africa and India (London, 1978), 247.Google Scholar

16 D.D., Rademacher Arch. No. 587, Abramsz, H. to Assembly of Ten, 23 November 1679, 6.Google Scholar

17 Daaku, K. Y., Trade and Politics on the Gold Coast, 1600–1720 (Oxford, 1970), 150.Google Scholar

18 D.D., Rademacher Arch. No. 596, Short Memoir 1730, 157.Google Scholar

19 D.D., N.B.K.G. 82, Elmina Journal, 17 October 1715, 123.Google Scholar

20 D.D., W.I.C. 124, Elmina, 8 April 1717, 125.Google Scholar

21 Inikori, , ‘Firearms’, 198.Google Scholar

22 Richards, , ‘Farmer and Galton’, 112.Google Scholar

23 D.D., Rademacher Arch. No 596, Short Memoir, 1730, 157.Google Scholar

24 D.D., W.I.C. 484, Elmina, 31 August 1704, 66.Google Scholar

25 D.D., W.I.C. 98, Elmina, 5 September 1705, 67.Google Scholar

26 D.D., W.I.C. 97, Elmina, 21 June 1700, 46.Google Scholar

27 Op. cit. The Dutch Director-General reported in this letter: ‘There are no goods more current than firearms. Other goods are little in demand.’

28 Kea, R. A., ‘Firearms on the Gold and Slave Coasts from the Sixteenth Century to the Seventeenth Century’, J. Afr. Hist., xii (1971), 194.Google Scholar

29 D.D., W.I.C. 98, Elmina, 10 October 1703, 57.Google Scholar

30 D.D., W.I.C. 484, Elmina, 31 August 1704, 66.Google Scholar

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid.

33 D.D., N.B.K.G. 81, Elmina Journal, 24 October 1709, 97.Google Scholar

34 D.D., N.B.K.G. 83, Axim, 27 May 1716, 24.Google Scholar

35 D.D., N.B.K.G. 84, Axim, 19 September 1718, 140.Google Scholar

36 D.D., W.I.C. 98, Elmina, 26 June 1702, 49.Google Scholar

37 D.D., N.B.K.G. 98, Circular, 2 April 1732, 183.Google Scholar

38 D.D., N.B.K.G. 8, Elmina, 17 May 1736, 216.Google Scholar

39 D.D., N.B.K.G. 105, Accra, 27 July 1741, 245.Google Scholar

40 D.D., W.I.C. 124, Whydah, 7 November 1713, 113.Google Scholar

41 D.D., N.B.K.G. 106, 15 May 1742, and 23 May 1742, 248.Google Scholar

42 Kea, , ‘Trade, State Formation and Warfare’, 361.Google Scholar

43 Ibid.

44 Ibid. 362.

45 Atkins, J., A Voyage to Guinea, Brazil, and the West Indies (London, 1735), 159.Google Scholar

46 Richardson, D., ‘West African Consumption Patterns and their Influence on the Eighteenth Century English Slave Trade’, in Hogendorn, J. S. and Gemery, H. A., eds., The Uncommon Market. Essays in the Economic History of the Atlantic Slave Trade (New York, 1979), 312.Google Scholar

47 Ibid. 313–14; and Inikori, ‘Firearms’, 2.

48 Richardson, , ‘West African Consumption Patterns’, 313.Google Scholar

49 Ibid. 314.

50 Curtin, , Economic Change, 321.Google Scholar

51 Ibid. 325.

52 Daaku, , Trade and Politics, and Kea, ‘Trade, State Formation and Warfare’.Google Scholar

53 Donnan, E., Documents Illustrative of the Slave Trade, Documents Illustrative of the Slave Trade (Washington, 1931), 205.Google Scholar

54 D.D., W.I.C. 98Google Scholar, Elmina, , 10 October 1703, 56.Google Scholar

55 In 1682 Dutch long muskets were reduced from 8 to 7 angels each. One male slave cost 35 guilders in 1682, which was equivalent to 14 angels of gold or to £3. 10s. One slave could therefore be bought for two muskets selling at 7 angels each. D.D., W.I.C. 124, 3 December 1682, 23Google Scholar and W.I.C. 104, May 1718, 139Google Scholar. Unfortunately there is no information on the types of guns in the examples given, but no references to an exchange rate of one slave for twenty-four to thirty-two guns have been found before 1700.

56 D.D., W.I.C. 124, 3 December 1682, 23.Google Scholar

57 D.D., W.I.C. 124, 8 November 1682, 22.Google Scholar

58 D.D., W.I.C. 180, 7 August 1691, 22.Google Scholar

59 D.D., W.I.C. 98, Elmina, August 1704, 66Google Scholar and W.I.C. 180, 6 September 1709, 94.Google Scholar

60 D.D., W.I.C. 104Google Scholar, Diary kept by Eytzen, , April to May 1718, 139.Google Scholar

61 D.D., W.I.C. 124, 3 December 1682, 23Google Scholar and W.I.C. 104 May 1718, 139Google Scholar. Curtin has also traced a shift in the terms of trade in Senegambia's favour, starting in the 1680s and continuing throughout the eighteenth century, and which was carried by the rising price of slaves. Curtin, , Economic Change, 340.Google Scholar

62 Donnan, E., Documents, 11, 531 and 550.Google Scholar

63 G.P., 408, 3 January 1748.Google Scholar

64 Wadsworth, A. P. and Mann, L., The Cotton Trade and Industrial Lancashire, 1600–1780 (Manchester, 1931), 92.Google Scholar

65 Richardson, , ‘West African Consumption Patterns’, 302.Google Scholar

66 G.P., 405/2, September 1756.Google Scholar

67 G.P., 405/2, 19 October 1756.Google Scholar

68 Richardson, , ‘West African Consumption Patterns’, 302.Google Scholar

69 Williams, G., History of Liverpool Privateers with an Account of the Liverpool Slave Trade (Liverpool, 1897), 678.Google Scholar

70 G.P., 421, 21 August 1780 and 24 August 1780.Google Scholar

71 See Appendix.

72 G.P., 405/2, January 1757.Google Scholar

73 Curtin, , Economic Change, 324.Google Scholar

74 G.P., 405/1, 2 November 1751.Google Scholar

75 G.P., 405/2, 29 October 1756.Google Scholar

76 G.P., 408, 23 August 1748.Google Scholar

77 G.P., 405/2, September 1756.Google Scholar

78 G.P., 405/1, 20 February 1754Google Scholar, and see Appendix.

79 G.P., 405/1, 14 June 1752Google Scholar, and see Appendix. In the normal process of drawing barrels it was difficult to remove the metal from that part of the barrel nearest the muzzle. Boring guns at the noses got rid of this surplus metal which could affect the velocity and accuracy of the shot.

80 Hadley, Thomas proposed a 2½ per cent reduction in the prices of the cheapest African guns in 1752Google Scholar, and also an increase of 2 per cent in the discounts being offered to slave trading merchants for prompt payments. G.P., 405/1, 22 March 1752Google Scholar. See Appendix for S. Galton's calculation of losses on the cheapest African guns if Farmer and Galton made the same reductions.

81 G.P., 405/1, 15 March 1752.Google Scholar

82 G.P., 405/1, 22 March 1752.Google Scholar

83 G.P., 405/1, 20 February 1754.Google Scholar

84 G.P., 405/2, 31 July 1756Google Scholar. A gun was proved by firing an explosive charge in the barrel, and the barrel was then inspected for bulges or cracks which might be remedied, though the weakest barrels burst at proof. Greener, W. W., The Gun and its Development (Birmingham, 1910), 304–6Google Scholar. Farmer and Galton probably had their own proof house in Birmingham, but Birmingham's gunmakers had to send their guns to London to be proved if they wanted London proofmarks. Birmingham's proofmarks were an embarrassment throughout the eighteenth century on account of Birmingham's reputation for producing so many cheap guns. The Committee of the Company of Merchants Trading to Africa often requested Farmer and Galton to put London proofmarks on guns made for the Committee in Birmingham, and Farmer and Galton had an agent, warehouse and setting-up organization in London: P.R.O. T70/143, Minutes of the Committee dated 18 December 1750. As late as 1813 many of Birmingham's gunmakers opposed a Bill which would have obliged every gunmaker to mark his guns with his name and town, because Birmingham supplied the majority of the gun parts which were assembled in London and which were soldas London guns: Smith, B. M. D., ‘The Galtons of Birmingham,’ in Business History, ix, 2 (1967), 139–40.Google Scholar

85 G.P., 405/1, 30 May 1754.Google Scholar

86 G.P., 405/1, 15 March 1752Google Scholar and 9 December 1754.

87 G.P., 405/1, 27 April 1752.Google Scholar

88 G.P., 408, 23 August 1748.Google Scholar

89 G.P., 408, 10 September 1754.Google Scholar

90 G.P., 405/1, 19 May 1752.Google Scholar

91 Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond, Life of William, Earl Shelburne (1875), 1, 400 and 404.Google Scholar

92 White, G., ‘Firearms in Africa’, J. Afr. Hist., xii (1971), 175.Google Scholar

93 Kea, , ‘Trade, State Formation and Warfare’, 336.Google Scholar

94 Ibid. 337.

95 Gemery, and Hogendorn, , ‘Technological Change’, 249.Google Scholar

96 Ibid. 248–9. Even the best gun barrels often burst at proof, but they were more often bulged, and then the bulges were knocked down by the maker and the barrels were reproved until they either burst again or stood proof. Greener cites a case of a barrel being proved and bulging eight times, and finally standing proof on the ninth proving. Greener, , The Gun, 306.Google Scholar

97 G.P., 408, 3 January 1749.Google Scholar

98 D.D., W.I.C. 98, 26 June 1702, 50.Google Scholar

99 Op. cit.

100 D.D., W.I.C. 484, 31 August 1704, 66.Google Scholar

101 D.D., W.I.C. 104, Diary 1718, 139.Google Scholar

102 D.D., W.I.C. 3, 20 November 1711, 104.Google Scholar

103 Akwamu was able to mobilize an army of 12,000 musketeers in the early eighteenth century. Kea, , ‘Trade, State Formation and Warfare’, 333.Google Scholar

104 Gemery, H. A. and Hogendorn, J. S., ‘The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Tentative Economic Model’, J. Afr. Hist., xv (1974).Google Scholar