Matt D. Childs “sets the Aponte Rebellion within the overlapping contexts of Cuban, Caribbean, Latin American, and Atlantic history.” Writing about the impact of the Seven Years’ War and British occupation, Childs states, “Although British control of Cuba lasted less than a year, perhaps as many as 4,000 Aftican slaves arrived on the island in that period, comprising an amazing 8 to 10 percent of all slaves imported over the previous 250 years.” This demographic shift led to increased conflicts between the Spanish Creole population and the African population. Even more significant than the 7 Years’ War were fears about the Haitian Revolution. Childs writes, “The most obvious defense against slaves emulating the example of the Haitian Revolution involved preventing the transmission of any news about the successful revolt,” though rumors and stories still reached Cuba from French refugees. Finally, conflicts amongst groups in Africa resulted in the sale of captured enemies into slavery, many of whom later played a role in the “1739 Stono Revolt in South Carolina, the Haitian Revolution, and the 1835 Malê revolt in Brazil.”
According to Childs, “Following the Seven Years’ War, the European colonial powers began to centralize their power by tightening the relations between the metropolis and colonies. Spain was no exception.” Unlike the new regulations throughout the Spanish Empire that turned public opinion against the Spanish authorities, “Cuba emerged ever more firmly linked to Madrid.” The Bourbon Reforms linked Cuban Creoles with Spanish officials and distanced both from those of African descent. As power was concentrated among the Spanish and Creole population, they were able to quash the first stirrings of rebellion amongst African slaves. Even under the Bourbon Reforms, Cuban slaves found increased difficulty in defending their extremely limited rights. The option to purchase one’s freedom was primarily available to slaves in urban areas, who had the opportunity to earn some of their own money. The freedom supposedly offered to those who fought in the 7 Years’ War was denied if they delayed claiming it. Finally, Cuban slaveholders justified their ownership and treatment of slaves based on the historical connectedness of Caribbean nations to the slave trade. Childs writes, “The slave trade…represented the great unifying force of the Caribbean and the early precursor to the modern transnational corporation.” In such a system, slavery was just a way of life.
The cabildos de nación were social organizations that reflected “the voluntary grouping by common ethnic identity of the numerous African ‘nations’ forcibly imported to Cuba.” In Cuban society, these associations “functioned as representative bodies for African ‘nations’ by providing political and administrative services.” Slave-owners tolerated these organizations as they felt the cabildos would provide “slaves and free people of color with a limited sense of autonomy, [so] they would not rise in rebellion.” Additionally, Childs writes, “For a colony rigidly divided between white European masters and black African slaves, cabildos stood in contrast to the racial slave-free paradigm that defined the circles of inclusion and exclusion for most of Cuban society.” Though the cabildos were based on ethnicities, they also recognized the disparity between a white-dominated society and the place of free and enslaved Africans. Childs writes, “The Aponte Rebellion…revealed the flexibility and innovative nature of African identity in Cuba. Africans in Cuba could define themselves by simultaneously emphasizing both their Old Would ethnicity and New World racial identity.” Finally, “the cabildos de nación played a crucial role in organizing the insurrection in Puerto Príncipe” since they could take advantage of religious holidays for the planning and execution of the rebellion.
In answer to a call from anthropologist Sidney Mintz, Childs seeks to “move away from broad structural and ideological explanations toward a more detailed understanding of the historical specificity and context of a revolt as a way of comprehending the immediate concerns, aspirations, and agency of the rebels.” Childs certainly provides plenty of examples of individual rebels’ motivations, as he begins each chapter with an account of the arrest, interrogation, and execution of a different member of Aponte’s cohort, but even these individual motivations exist within the larger cultural framework of Cuban slavery and fears of slave revolts following the Haitian Revolution. The roles of cabildos de nacións in creating a space for free and enslaved Africans and descendants of Africans to maintain elements of their own culture and create a unique Creole culture were the most impressive examples of individual agency, especially as it was these groups that aided in fomenting several rebellions, but the broader picture still focuses on trends common throughout the Atlantic World, with Cuba sharing similarities at times to Brazil or Jamaica depending on the incident. The most gruesome state-sponsored episodes of violence were the executions of Aponte and the other rebels, at times using the garrote, and displaying the heads of the condemned. This demonstrates the fears of the Spanish and Cuban Creole populations following the Haitian Revolution that they employed such punishments and desecrations to send a message to other would-be rebels.
Childs’ “crucial question” refers to the involvement of José Antonio Aponte. Childs cautions that resting the blame with Aponte may represent an oversimplification, as “the need to discover the leaders and administer swift punishments, and the exigencies created by the transition in colonial administrations, all made finding the authors of the movement an immediate necessity.” Despite this, those who referenced Aponte in their own confessions were surely signing their own death warrants. While Aponte may have taken responsibility in his last confession, the final statement “remains absent from the extant documentation.” Childs suggests that all of Cuba “functioned as an integrated political unit,” so while Aponte may not have directly led other uprisings and conspiracies, none of these events occurred in a vacuum and they surely shared a great deal in the way of ideology and methods. ( )