Talk:Swedish slave trade
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Started this article today.... All of the info in it is taken from parts of an assignment I made in history a while ago, that is why it is written in such an "essay" form. I have just changed it a little. I know it is not good, that it isn't a good wikipedia article either. It really needs to be formatted and rewritten... but don't have time to do that just now... Hope to get some help to turn this article around...
Cheers... --Konstantin 23:27, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Thanks!
I see it has already been greatly improved. Wikipedia never stops to amaze me! :)
- Could you please cite your sources? Just make an External Links section at the bottom of the page, so we can do more fact checking. Thanks in advance. supadawg 03:06, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Fact checking
The article "Saint-Barthélemy" in the Swedish National Encyclopedia actually states that King Gustav III got the island as part of a "diplomatic deal" during his visit to Paris in 1784. In this Wikipedia article, it is said that he bought it in 1783. In the Wikipedia Saint-Barthélemy article, the Swedish period is said to start in 1785. Could you please give your sources for the 1783 date, to facilitate a fact check?
Also, I feel that the article ends in quite an abrupt way. No information about a definitive end to slavery is ever given in the text. The Swedish National Encyclopedia claims in the article "slavhandel" (Slave trade) that it wasn't until 1846-47 that the slaves on Saint Barthélemy were bought free, after funds had been allocated for this purpose by the Swedish parliament. Maybe I could work this into the article, but I find it difficult to connect this piece of information to the last paragraph of the current text, that seems to deal with the end of the 18th century. Suggestions, anyone? Alarm 13:17, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I think you are right about the way Gustav III got the island. I remember something like that from a book about Saint-Barthélemy, written by Göran Skytte. Gunnar Larsson 19:24, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Slavery outlawed?
At the top of the article, it states that slavery was outlawed in 1333, but the final line under "Viking and Pre-Viking Slavery" states that it was 1337 when slavery was made illegal. Which is correct? If both numbers are valid, further explanation is likely required. phrawzty 17:25, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Actually you can't tell wich is correct since almost all the documents about Swedish slave trade has whittered away of natural causes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.209.130.251 (talk) 00:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Does this still need to be on Cleanup?
If not, please remove it from WP:LO. Thanks!! JesseW 23:46, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Biography ?
Really good job Konstantin! as "the info in it is taken from parts of an assignment you made in history a while ago" would you please mention the biography for your study ? Thanx Doulcy 12:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Why did this article come into existence?
Swedish people were never big into slave trading so why does this article exist? There were more jews who were slave traders than swedish people so why is there not an article about jews and their slave trading?
[edit] WHY ?
very few is yet known about this story : no one can state that swedish people were never big into slave trading without any previous serious studies...and as well if you have a lot to tell about jews and their slave trading then go ahead and create your own page... [1] [2] [3] [4] (The above unsigned comment was added by User:Doulcy 21 May 2007.)
- I do not see any big value of this article.
- Is it possible that Sweden participated in slave trade?
- Yes, absolutely.
- Is there any proof that any single slave was traded by any Swedish organisation?
- I doubt it very much.
- Is it possible that no Swedish organisation ever was directly involved in slave trade?
- Yes, as far as I know.
- Is it possible that Sweden participated in slave trade?
- The sources quoted above are just members of the Swedish parliament who between 2001 and 2006 wrote what they thought. These are political documents written to get votes and political influence. They do not quote any sources, and for all we know they may all be wrong. Besides they are so vague that they do not confirm any slave trade. The only thing they do is propose research in the area. And as all potential documents probably are lost, future research will not be able to confirm anything either.
- Anyhow, I do not mind that the article stays. It states fairly clearly what is known and not known in the area, and I am sure some people may be interested in that. Mlewan 16:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)