Slavery Was “Only 45 Years”?
- Nadia Renata
- 2 days ago
- 5 min read
Over the weekend, I had a conversation with someone who stated that slavery in Trinidad and Tobago lasted “only 45 years.” I paused because I knew that to be untrue, but the person insisted. I asked around and discovered that it is often said casually - sometimes to downplay the severity of slavery and sometimes because it is genuinely believed.
The problem is not always bad intent. The problem is oversimplification.
This article is not about blame or politics. It is about clarity and why compressed timelines quietly distort how we understand our society today.
Where the “45 Years” Idea Comes From
The claim usually comes from counting the period 1783 to 1834.
1783: The Cedula de Población encouraged French planters to settle in Trinidad, bringing enslaved Africans and rapidly expanding plantation agriculture.
1834: Slavery was legally abolished under British rule (with apprenticeship following until 1838).
That span is closer to 50 years, not 45 but even more importantly, it represents only one phase of a much longer and more complex system.
Starting the clock here creates a misleading impression that slavery was brief, limited and neatly contained.
It was none of those things.
Why “Only 45 Years” Is a Misleading Measure
Even if we accepted the narrowest possible timeline, roughly 1783 to 1834, calling that period “short” misunderstands how slavery actually functioned.
Slavery was not an event. It was a total system of control, operating every day, over entire lifetimes.
A person born enslaved in the late 1700s could:
Be born into bondage
Work under forced labour from childhood
Experience punishment, surveillance and deprivation daily
Die enslaved before abolition ever arrived
Within that so-called “short” period:
Multiple generations were born enslaved
Families were formed and broken under coercion
Violence was routine, not exceptional
Fifty years is long enough to shape language, labour culture, family structures and survival behaviour - especially when those years are defined by absolute power over another human being.
Calling that “brief” only makes sense if we reduce slavery to a date range instead of lived reality.
What That Timeline Leaves Out
Focusing only on the period between 1783 and 1834 narrows the story in ways that quietly erase entire groups and experiences. It creates the impression that slavery arrived suddenly, operated briefly and ended cleanly.
None of that is true.
That timeline excludes what came before and what followed and in doing so, it distorts how systems of control were established, expanded and maintained over time.
Indigenous Enslavement and Forced Labour - Long before plantation slavery expanded, Indigenous peoples of what is now Trinidad and Tobago were subjected to:
Forced labour
Mission systems
Displacement
Population collapse
When history begins in 1783, this entire reality disappears from the story. That erasure matters.
Early African Slavery Before 1783 - Africans were enslaved in Trinidad during Spanish rule, even if on a smaller scale at first. Slavery did not suddenly appear with the Cedula de Población; it expanded, intensified and became more profitable. Expansion is not the same as origin.
Apprenticeship After “Abolition” - In 1834, slavery ended legally - but not practically. The apprenticeship system forced formerly enslaved people to continue working without real freedom or autonomy until 1838. Control did not vanish overnight; it simply changed its name. When we treat 1834 as a clean ending, we misunderstand how power actually transitioned.
What “Brutal” Actually Looked Like
Brutality in slavery was not limited to extreme punishment, though punishment was real and documented. It was also embedded in everyday life.
Enslaved people:
Had no legal control over their bodies, labour, or movement
Could not refuse work, regardless of illness or exhaustion
Lived under constant surveillance and threat of punishment
Had families that could be separated at will
Worked long hours in physically destructive conditions
This was not incidental cruelty. It was designed discipline, enforced to maximise output and obedience.
When apprenticeship followed abolition, many of these controls remained in place. Labour was still coerced. Autonomy was still restricted. Freedom was partial and conditional.
The system did not disappear. It reconfigured.
Why This Distortion Matters Today
This is not just a historical detail. It shapes how we think about:
Inequality
Labour culture
Land ownership
Silence around authority
The idea that people should be “grateful” rather than entitled to rights
When slavery is framed as short-lived, its long-term effects are easier to dismiss. When harm is minimised, responsibility feels unnecessary.
History doesn’t disappear because a calendar page turns. Systems leave echoes.
This Is About Context, Not Accusation
Clarifying timelines is not about reopening wounds or assigning guilt. It is about understanding how societies are shaped and why certain patterns persist. When history is flattened:
Frustration turns inward
Communities turn on each other
Present-day problems lose their roots
Context does the opposite. It steadies the conversation.
A More Honest Way to Say It
Instead of saying slavery was “only 45 years,” a more accurate framing would be:
“Plantation slavery expanded rapidly after 1783, but systems of enslavement, forced labour and control existed long before and continued in different forms even after abolition.”
That statement is not inflammatory. It is simply complete.
Why This Isn’t a Small Detail
This is not about reopening old wounds or assigning modern blame. It is about understanding how societies are shaped and why certain patterns persist long after the laws change.
When slavery is reduced to a narrow window of time, its long-term effects become easier to dismiss. When harm is minimised, responsibility feels unnecessary.
This article is not a final word. It is a starting point; one that asks for accuracy, context and care in how we talk about our past and its influence on the present.
When we understand our history more clearly, we are less likely to weaponise it, and more likely to use it to understand one another.
That matters now.
This article is part of the Audacious Evolution Community series, which explores Caribbean history, civic understanding and cultural context. These articles are not written for partisanship or blame, but to add clarity, reduce distortion and support more informed conversation. The focus is on understanding how context shapes behaviour and how we engage both our past and present.
Enjoyed reading this and want more from Audacious Evolution?
Discover reflections, insights and inspiration across Body, Mind, Spirit and Community.
Follow Audacious Evolution on your favourite social media platform -
Comments