<p>This is a dissertation about identity and governance, and how they are mutually constituted. Between 1838 and 1917, the British brought approximately half a million East Indian laborers to the Atlantic to work on sugar plantations. The dissertation argues that contrary to previous historiographical assumptions, indentured East Indians were an amorphous mass of people drawn from various regions of British India. They were brought together not by their innate "Indian-ness" upon their arrival in the Caribbean, but by the common experience of indenture recruitment, transportation and plantation life. Ideas of innate "Indian-ness" were products of an imperial discourse that emerged from and shaped official approaches to governing East Indians in the Atlantic. Government officials and planters promoted visions of East Indians as "primitive" subjects who engaged in child marriage and wife murder. Officials mobilized ideas about gender to sustain racialized stereotypes of East Indian subjects. East Indian women were thought to be promiscuous, and East Indian men were violent and depraved (especially in response to East Indian women's promiscuity). By pointing to these stereotypes about East Indians, government officials and planters could highlight the promise of indenture as a civilizing mechanism. This dissertation links the study of governance and subject formation to complicate ideas of colonial rule as static. It uncovers how colonial processes evolved to handle the challenges posed by migrant populations.</p><p>The primary architects of indenture, Caribbean governments, the British Colonial Office, and planters hoped that East Indian indentured laborers would form a stable and easily-governed labor force. They anticipated that the presence of these laborers would undermine the demands of Afro-Creole workers for higher wages and shorter working hours. Indenture, however, was controversial among British liberals who saw it as potentially hindering the creation of a free labor market, and abolitionists who also feared that indenture was a new form of slavery. Using court records, newspapers, legislative documents, bureaucratic correspondence, memoirs, novels, and travel accounts from archives and libraries in Britain, Guyana, and Trinidad and Tobago, this dissertation explores how indenture was envisioned and constantly re-envisioned in response to its critics. It chronicles how the struggles between the planter class and the colonial state for authority over indentured laborers affected the way that indenture functioned in the British Atlantic. In addition to focusing on indenture's official origins, this dissertation examines the actions of East Indian indentured subjects as they are recorded in the imperial archive to explore how these people experienced indenture.</p><p>Indenture contracts were central to the justification of indenture and to the creation of a pliable labor force in the Atlantic. According to English common law, only free parties could enter into contracts. Indenture contracts limited the period of indenture and affirmed that laborers would be remunerated for their labor. While the architects of indenture pointed to contracts as evidence that indenture was not slavery, contracts in reality prevented laborers from participating in the free labor market and kept the wages of indentured laborers low. Further, in late nineteenth-century Britain, contracts were civil matters. In the British Atlantic, indentured laborers who violated the terms of their contracts faced criminal trials and their associated punishments such as imprisonment and hard labor. Officials used indenture contracts to exploit the labor and limit the mobility of indentured laborers in a manner that was reminiscent of slavery but that instead established indentured laborers as subjects with limited rights. The dissertation chronicles how indenture contracts spawned a complex inter-imperial bureaucracy in British India, Britain, and the Caribbean that was responsible for the transportation and governance of East Indian indentured laborers overseas.</p> / Dissertation

Submitted by Elesbão Santiago Neto (neto10uepb@cche.uepb.edu.br) on 2016-08-31T12:07:04Z No. of bitstreams: 1 PDF - Hugo Gabriel Lima Nascimento.pdf: 1456144 bytes, checksum: 57228f46a420855fbf505c099a77fff7 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-08-31T12:07:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 PDF - Hugo Gabriel Lima Nascimento.pdf: 1456144 bytes, checksum: 57228f46a420855fbf505c099a77fff7 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-06-03 / Capes / International relations between Brazil and France, with regard to the border region, have been outlined during the 1990s, having greater intensification in 1996, due to the signing of the framework agreement, which was attended by state representatives of the countries mentioned above. That agreement led to the emergence of several initiatives in the field of cross-border cooperation, such as the proposed construction of a binational bridge over the Oiapoqueriver, Amapá (Brazil), linking French Guiana (France). Thus, the present study aims to investigate the role represented by the binational bridge on a new dynamic setting of cross-border cooperation between Brazil and France". The bridge is situated on the Oiapoqueriver, in Amazonian border region, between the cities Oiapoque, Amapá, and Saint Georges de L'oyapock, French Guiana. In terms of research methodology, this bibliographic study, which was conducted survey of official documents (reports, agreements, presidential speeches, interviews, among others) from France and Brazil related to border area in focus. The relevance of this work lies in the fact that allow reflection on the Amazon, seen as strategic political and diplomatic relations between Brazil and France, on the South American scenario. The survey results indicate that the bridge, completed in 2011, has not yet opened, favored the emergence of new possibilities of interaction and physical union in the southern cone countries, which in turn can enable the consolidation of relations between both countries, bringing development to the border area. / As relações internacionais entre Brasil e França, no que se refere à cooperação trasnfronteiriça, foram delineadas ao longo da década de 1990, tendo maior intensificação em 1996, devido à assinatura do Acordo-Quadro, que contou com representantes de Estado dos países supramencionados. Esse acordo propiciou o surgimento de várias iniciativas, como a proposta de construção de uma ponte binacional sobre o rio Oiapoque, ligando o Amapá (Brasil) à Guiana Francesa (França). Assim, o presente trabalho tem como objetivo geral investigar o papel representado pela ponte binacional, resultante da nova dinâmica de cooperação transfronteiriça entre Brasil e França. A referida ponte está situada sobre o rio Oiapoque, na região amazônica, entre as cidades Oiapoque, no Amapá, e Saint Georges de l’Oyapock, na Guiana Francesa. No que tange à metodologia da pesquisa, trata-se de estudo bibliográfico, por meio do qual foi realizado levantamento de documentos oficiais (relatórios, acordos, discurso presidencial, entrevistas, entre outros) da França e do Brasil relacionados à área em foco. A relevância deste trabalho reside no fato de permitir a reflexão sobre a Amazônia, vista como espaço estratégico das relações políticas e diplomáticas do Brasil e da França, no cenário sul-americano. Os resultados da pesquisa indicam que a ponte, concluída em 2011, mas ainda não inaugurada, favoreceu o surgimento de novas perspectivas de interação e união física no cone sul, que, por sua vez, podem permitir a consolidação das relações entre ambos os países, trazendo desenvolvimento para a zona fronteiriça.

In the 1700s, French colonies in the Caribbean produced massive amounts of sugar cane for shipment exclusively to France. The French Revolution of 1789 precipitated long years of economic conflict between England and France, during which French scientists and entrepreneurs worked to develop technology and capital investment to produce sugar on the French mainland from European-grown beets. Economic and agricultural viability of mass production of beet sugar was established by 1812 and used to promote French autarky (self-sufficiency) in emerging ideologies of economic nationalism. Beet sugar's equivalence to cane sugar meant direct competition with colonial cane, marking a period of "conjunction," when questions of colonial belonging and rights to participation in markets were actively contested in Paris as debates over tariff and bounty legislation. New forms of symbolic inclusion and exclusion of French colonies were produced—with important results for the cane sugar complex, colonial producers, and the system of French trade relations. Guyane Française (French Guiana) provides the prime illustrative case of colonial changes due to the sugar conjunction. A colony in northeastern South America, Guyane had been claimed by France since the early seventeenth century, but remained sparsely populated and experienced relatively weak development of the cane sugar complex. Thus, during and following the sugar conjunction, the French moved to make the colony a place for exile of state prisoners, rather than continue to develop it for cane cultivation and sugar production. The first shipment of convicts—stripped of their French citizenship before departure—arrived in Guyane in 1852 as the first prisoners in the penal colony that would be come to be known around the world as Devil's Island.

No description available.

No description available.

A questão Essequibo tem sido assunto de pauta na política externa da Venezuela, desde o séc. XIX, quando foi assinado o Laudo de Paris, em 1899, por aquele país e pela então Guiana Britânica, como forma de dar solução à disputa fronteiriça entre as duas nações. No transcorrer da primeira metade do séc. XX, o problema persistiu como uma agenda aberta, dada a dificuldade de se estabelecer negociações eficazes com os britânicos, em função da instabilidade política e alternância de poder entre caudilhos e ditadores militares. Com a divulgação do Memorandum Mallet-Prevost, no final da primeira metade do séc. passado, a Venezuela passou a insistir pela anulação do Laudo, em decorrência de denúncias apontadas no Memorandum . Só após a democratização do país, no início dos anos 60, o assunto passou a ser pauta de negociações entre chanceleres das duas nações. Assunto que se tornou mais persistente com a proximidade da independência da Guiana, quando a Venezuela sela o Acuerdo de Ginebra, com o propósito de resolver a pendência fronteiriça no âmbito das comissões mistas, criadas sob os auspícos da ONU. Foi uma época de intensificação de propaganda pró-Essequibo na Venezuela, levando a região reclamada a constar, inclusive, no mapa venezuelano como zona en reclamación. No entanto, dada a conjuntura política na Guiana, decorrente da polarização ideológica entre o People’s Progressive Party – PPP – e o People´s National Congress – PNC –, a questão pouco progrediu, mesmo com a assinatura do Protocolo de Puerto España, em 1970, como previa o Acuerdo. O instituto do buen oficiante, como mediador proposto pela ONU, não impediu, tampouco, ações armadas contra o território guianense. Quadro este que permaneceu assim até o início da Era Chávez, quando o bolivarianismo e sua ideologia transnacionalista levou a Venezuela a aproximar-se de país latinos e caribenhos, incluindo a Guiana. Porém, concomitante ao andamento da agenda bolivariana, grupos pró-Essequibo, de ideologia nacionalista, constituídos por muitos membros da oposição à política chavista, passaram a propalar a conquista da região reclamada, numa clara evidência de que a questão Essequibo é parte de uma agenda persistentemente aberta, podendo ser utilizada por diferentes forças políticas da República Bolivariana de Venezuela contra a Guiana. / Essequibo has been a subject of discussion in Venezuela’s policy, since the 19th century, when the Award of Paris was signed in 1899 by that country and also by British Guiana, to solve the border dispute between the two nations. In the first half of the 20th century, the problem persisted as an open question, because of the difficulties to establish effective negotiations with the British, due to political instablility and alternation of power between the military dictators and the warlords. With the release of the Memorandum Mallet- Prevost, at the end of the past first half century, Venezuela insisted on cancelling the award because of complaints which there were in the Memorandum . Only after the democratization of the country in the early 60’s, the situation started with the negotiation between the foreign ministers of both nations, and it became more persistent with the proximity of Guyana’s independence. At that time Venezuela had sealed the “Acuerdo de Ginebra”, in order to solve the border problems with the mixed commissions created under the auspices of the UN. In Venezuela they started an intensified propaganda pro Essequibo, requiring the claimed area to be included in the Venezuelan map as “Zona en Reclamacíon”. However, because of the political situation in Guyana, due to the polarization between the People’s Progressive Party – PPP – and the National People’s Congress – PNC – the situation did not improve, even with the signing of the Port of Spain Protocol, in 1970. The Institute Buen Oficiante, proposed by the UN as a mediator, could not stop armed actions against the Guyanese territory. Remaining like that until the beginning of Chávez era when the bolivarism and his transnationalist ideology led Venezuela to approach the Latin and Caribbean countries, including Guyana. The groups pro Essequibo with a nationalist ideology, formed by the members of political opposition to Chávez, began to spread ideas of conquest of that claimed area, showing that Essequibo is a question of discussion and which can be used by different political forces of the Bolivian Republic of Venezuela against Guyana.

A presente pesquisa analisa usos contemporâneos da fronteira física entre Brasil e França, demonstrando que a partir da década de 1990 um novo cenário sócio-econômico e político entre Amapá e Guiana Francesa foi se criando, em que a lógica clássica das fronteiras políticas, do tipo discriminante e de isolamento, foi se alterando para um ambiente de cooperação em diferentes frentes (transportes, segurança, saúde, energia e meio ambiente) mesmo ainda com muitos obstáculos, sendo que para chegar aos resultados utilizamos o método de procedimento das escalas geográficas, analisando três obras (rodovia BR 156, futura ponte sobre o rio Oiapoque, e o Porto Organizado de Santana) que, juntas, motivaram a evolução da noção de fronteira, visto que este conjunto de infra-estruturas está estrategicamente pensado em várias esferas de interesses, o que é desenvolvido na pesquisa, principalmente quando das reflexões sobre a iniciativa de Implementação da Infra-estrutura Regional Sul-Americana. / The present research analyzes uses contemporaries of the physical border between Brazil and France, demonstrating that from the decade of 1990 a new partner-economic scene and politician between Amapá and French Guyana were if creating, where the classic logic of the borders politics, the discriminante type and isolation, was if modifying for an environment of cooperation in different fronts (transports, security, health, energy and environment), being that to arrive at the results we use the method of procedure of the geographic scales, analyzing three workmanships (highway BR 156, future bridge on the river Oiapoque, and the Organized Port of Santana) that, together, they had motivated the evolution of the border notion, since this set of infrastructures strategically is thought about some spheres of interests, what it is developed in the research, mainly when of the reflections on the initiative of Implementation of infrastructures South American Regional.

A questão Essequibo tem sido assunto de pauta na política externa da Venezuela, desde o séc. XIX, quando foi assinado o Laudo de Paris, em 1899, por aquele país e pela então Guiana Britânica, como forma de dar solução à disputa fronteiriça entre as duas nações. No transcorrer da primeira metade do séc. XX, o problema persistiu como uma agenda aberta, dada a dificuldade de se estabelecer negociações eficazes com os britânicos, em função da instabilidade política e alternância de poder entre caudilhos e ditadores militares. Com a divulgação do Memorandum Mallet-Prevost, no final da primeira metade do séc. passado, a Venezuela passou a insistir pela anulação do Laudo, em decorrência de denúncias apontadas no Memorandum . Só após a democratização do país, no início dos anos 60, o assunto passou a ser pauta de negociações entre chanceleres das duas nações. Assunto que se tornou mais persistente com a proximidade da independência da Guiana, quando a Venezuela sela o Acuerdo de Ginebra, com o propósito de resolver a pendência fronteiriça no âmbito das comissões mistas, criadas sob os auspícos da ONU. Foi uma época de intensificação de propaganda pró-Essequibo na Venezuela, levando a região reclamada a constar, inclusive, no mapa venezuelano como zona en reclamación. No entanto, dada a conjuntura política na Guiana, decorrente da polarização ideológica entre o People’s Progressive Party – PPP – e o People´s National Congress – PNC –, a questão pouco progrediu, mesmo com a assinatura do Protocolo de Puerto España, em 1970, como previa o Acuerdo. O instituto do buen oficiante, como mediador proposto pela ONU, não impediu, tampouco, ações armadas contra o território guianense. Quadro este que permaneceu assim até o início da Era Chávez, quando o bolivarianismo e sua ideologia transnacionalista levou a Venezuela a aproximar-se de país latinos e caribenhos, incluindo a Guiana. Porém, concomitante ao andamento da agenda bolivariana, grupos pró-Essequibo, de ideologia nacionalista, constituídos por muitos membros da oposição à política chavista, passaram a propalar a conquista da região reclamada, numa clara evidência de que a questão Essequibo é parte de uma agenda persistentemente aberta, podendo ser utilizada por diferentes forças políticas da República Bolivariana de Venezuela contra a Guiana. / Essequibo has been a subject of discussion in Venezuela’s policy, since the 19th century, when the Award of Paris was signed in 1899 by that country and also by British Guiana, to solve the border dispute between the two nations. In the first half of the 20th century, the problem persisted as an open question, because of the difficulties to establish effective negotiations with the British, due to political instablility and alternation of power between the military dictators and the warlords. With the release of the Memorandum Mallet- Prevost, at the end of the past first half century, Venezuela insisted on cancelling the award because of complaints which there were in the Memorandum . Only after the democratization of the country in the early 60’s, the situation started with the negotiation between the foreign ministers of both nations, and it became more persistent with the proximity of Guyana’s independence. At that time Venezuela had sealed the “Acuerdo de Ginebra”, in order to solve the border problems with the mixed commissions created under the auspices of the UN. In Venezuela they started an intensified propaganda pro Essequibo, requiring the claimed area to be included in the Venezuelan map as “Zona en Reclamacíon”. However, because of the political situation in Guyana, due to the polarization between the People’s Progressive Party – PPP – and the National People’s Congress – PNC – the situation did not improve, even with the signing of the Port of Spain Protocol, in 1970. The Institute Buen Oficiante, proposed by the UN as a mediator, could not stop armed actions against the Guyanese territory. Remaining like that until the beginning of Chávez era when the bolivarism and his transnationalist ideology led Venezuela to approach the Latin and Caribbean countries, including Guyana. The groups pro Essequibo with a nationalist ideology, formed by the members of political opposition to Chávez, began to spread ideas of conquest of that claimed area, showing that Essequibo is a question of discussion and which can be used by different political forces of the Bolivian Republic of Venezuela against Guyana.

A presente pesquisa analisa usos contemporâneos da fronteira física entre Brasil e França, demonstrando que a partir da década de 1990 um novo cenário sócio-econômico e político entre Amapá e Guiana Francesa foi se criando, em que a lógica clássica das fronteiras políticas, do tipo discriminante e de isolamento, foi se alterando para um ambiente de cooperação em diferentes frentes (transportes, segurança, saúde, energia e meio ambiente) mesmo ainda com muitos obstáculos, sendo que para chegar aos resultados utilizamos o método de procedimento das escalas geográficas, analisando três obras (rodovia BR 156, futura ponte sobre o rio Oiapoque, e o Porto Organizado de Santana) que, juntas, motivaram a evolução da noção de fronteira, visto que este conjunto de infra-estruturas está estrategicamente pensado em várias esferas de interesses, o que é desenvolvido na pesquisa, principalmente quando das reflexões sobre a iniciativa de Implementação da Infra-estrutura Regional Sul-Americana. / The present research analyzes uses contemporaries of the physical border between Brazil and France, demonstrating that from the decade of 1990 a new partner-economic scene and politician between Amapá and French Guyana were if creating, where the classic logic of the borders politics, the discriminante type and isolation, was if modifying for an environment of cooperation in different fronts (transports, security, health, energy and environment), being that to arrive at the results we use the method of procedure of the geographic scales, analyzing three workmanships (highway BR 156, future bridge on the river Oiapoque, and the Organized Port of Santana) that, together, they had motivated the evolution of the border notion, since this set of infrastructures strategically is thought about some spheres of interests, what it is developed in the research, mainly when of the reflections on the initiative of Implementation of infrastructures South American Regional.

Dissertação (mestrado)—Universidade de Brasília, Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Departamento de Antropologia, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Antropologia Social, 2017. / Submitted by Raquel Almeida (raquel.df13@gmail.com) on 2018-02-26T19:40:59Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2017_HuguesDominiqueVallot.pdf: 3313199 bytes, checksum: 80d309af8bb665ae87e124ac755ae730 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Raquel Viana (raquelviana@bce.unb.br) on 2018-02-26T20:33:54Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2017_HuguesDominiqueVallot.pdf: 3313199 bytes, checksum: 80d309af8bb665ae87e124ac755ae730 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-02-26T20:33:54Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2017_HuguesDominiqueVallot.pdf: 3313199 bytes, checksum: 80d309af8bb665ae87e124ac755ae730 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-02-26 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq). / A dissertação percorre a história das relações entre os povos indígenas da Guiana francesa, vizinho do Brasil e do Suriname, e a França. Procura-se entender o lugar da alteridade indígena durante a colonização francesa, as representações do índio no país europeu e como, a partir dessas representações, se desenvolveu uma relação especifica entre a França e os povos indígenas de seu território periférico. Uma leitura diacrônica, baseada numa pesquisa bibliográfica pluridisciplinar, orienta grande parte deste trabalho. Mostra como, ao longo dos séculos, a noção de “bom selvagem” inspirou filósofos franceses e as ideias revolucionárias. Se os índios foram centrais no projeto colonial francês nos primeiros séculos da conquista, a queda demográfica e as transformações socioeconômicas os colocaram à margem da sociedade guianesa no século XIX. Ao traçar esse percurso histórico, a dissertação também procura refletir sobre os embates entre a pluralidade indígena e os mecanismos assimilacionistas do Estado francês, mostrando como a cidadania, dada aos índios na década de 1960, despertou, uma década depois, a revolta desses povos para o reconhecimento de seus direitos, principalmente territoriais. / This thesis traces the history of the relations between indigenous peoples in French Guiana (bordering with Brazil and Surinam) and France. It attempts to understand the role of otherness in the French colonization process, the representations of the Indian in France, and how specific relations between indigenous peoples and the metropolis were established in that peripheral milieu. It is partly based on a diachronic reading of multi-disciplinary texts. It shows how the notion of the "noble savage" has for centuries inspired French philosophers and revolutionary ideas. Although the Indians were central to the French colonial project at the start of conquest, depopulation and socio-economic changes marginalized them in nineteenth-century guianesa society. Along this historical route, the thesis also reflects on the debates between indigenous plurality and the assimilation mechanisms of the French State. It reveals the way in which the concession of French citizenship to the Indians in the 1960s arose in these peoples, a decade later, the urge for recognition of their rights, especially land rights.