Daily Life of Slavery in Malta in the Sixteenth Century

Published on 12/09/2014

by Anne BROGINI

article published in the Cahiers de la Méditerranée. 2002, no. 65

Three types of archives that complement each other allow us to examine the daily life of slaves in Malta in the sixteenth century and to obtain a fairly precise picture: the Archives of the Order (particularly regarding the regulations of slavery), the Archives of the Inquisition (which provide life narratives in trial records), and the Notarial Archives (for everything related to ransoms).

The sixteenth century is a particularly interesting period, since the establishment of the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem in 1530 gave Malta its true significance as a fundamental site of confrontation between the Muslim and Christian shores, first through war, then through privateering.

The main consequence of these conflictual relations was the development of significant slavery within the island, which the Order endeavored between 1530 and 1602 to regulate as effectively as possible through series of magisterial ordinances governing the lives of slaves, their work, their possibilities of liberation... At the dawn of the seventeenth century, slavery in Malta was precisely regulated and would subsequently undergo only minimal changes.

Our study is organized around three major themes: first, a definition of these Maltese slaves (number, sex, age); then, a description of their daily life (labor, practices, solidarities); and finally, an analysis of their fate, always motivated by the hope and will to regain their freedom.

I – Slaves in Malta

1 - The Count of Slaves

Establishing an average count of slaves in Malta during the sixteenth century is difficult. Not only do the accounts of the period, the reports to the Pope, and the population censuses almost never specify the actual number of slaves residing on the island, but this number, insofar as it can be determined, depends on arrivals (captures, shipwrecks...) and permanent departures (ransoms, liberations, escapes, deaths, conversions...) and therefore necessarily appears to fluctuate.

A few data points, however, allow us to form a fairly general idea of the average number of slaves and its evolution between 1530 and 1600 ¹:

YEARS	SLAVES			POPULATION	% Slavery / Pop.
	Order	Private individuals	TOTAL
1548	approx. 200	?	less than 400	20,000	2.00%
1569	approx. 300	?	approx. 400	11,970	3.34%
1576	200	200	approx. 400	16,000	2.50%
1582	600	200	800	22,000	3.60%
1590	1,205	200	1,405	32,310	4.30%
1599	1,600	200?	1,800?	approx. 33,000	5.40%

We observe a regular and significant increase in the average number of slaves on the island of Malta during the second half of the sixteenth century: rising from fewer than approximately 400 in 1548 ² to approximately 1,800 in 1599 ³, the number of slaves more than quadrupled. The proportion of slaves in the Maltese population therefore continued to grow, since from approximately 2% ⁴ around mid-century, it rose to 5.4% by the end of the century, representing a very significant increase of 3.4 points in only 50 years.

This general increase in the number of slaves nevertheless experienced cyclical fluctuations; the high percentage (4%) of the year 1569 certainly finds its explanation in the Great Siege of 1565, which had a twofold consequence on the Maltese population: a significant Maltese demographic decline combined with a large number of Muslim captures. It should also be noted that the proportion of slaves relative to the total population tended to decline slightly thereafter, stabilizing around 3.4% in the 1630s, with 1,933 slaves for approximately 55,000 inhabitants ⁵.

Of diverse origins, these ever-growing numbers of slaves were divided into two categories linked to their religious affiliation: non-Christians (Muslims and Jews) and Christians.

2 - Sex and Age of Slaves

The slaves who entered or resided in Malta were predominantly men. Out of 125 appearances of slaves before the Inquisitor at the end of the century, only 12 women were counted: they thus constituted only a minority of 10% within the servile population. The reason is obvious: since the vast majority of captures were made through war or at sea, they affected almost exclusively male populations (sailors, corsairs, soldiers). Women were therefore captured mainly during raids on enemy coastlines, or more rarely at sea, when they had embarked in the company of their husbands.

The average age of Maltese slaves is also difficult to assess, as we have very few data. The age of renegades, almost always specified in inquisitorial trials, makes it possible to determine that the average age of slaves at the end of the century was 31 years, men and women combined ⁶. This average may be revised downward, as many archives attest to child slaves only a few years old. These children may have been captured with their mothers, and very often sold with them, but they could also be the offspring of a union between a young female slave and her master ⁷.

3 - Muslims, Jews, and Christians

Within this essentially male servile population, the overwhelming majority (80%) ⁸ consisted of non-Christians, that is, both Jews and Muslims.

Muslims represented the largest share of non-Christian slaves. They were first captured during the military conflicts between Christians and Muslims in the Mediterranean; then from the 1580s onward, privateering, replacing earlier military operations, encouraged the capture of slaves who were no longer exclusively Muslim. Men and women of Muslim or Jewish faith were thus regularly captured during expeditions conducted by the Order's galleys or by Maltese corsairs in specific locations, notably off the Barbary coasts and all along the Alexandria route, and during land incursions that, between the 1580s and 1600, particularly targeted the Greek and Anatolian coasts.

Among the Muslim slaves were Turks, Barbary people, renegades, as well as Blacks in much more limited numbers. As for the Jews, they originated largely from the Levant (Edirne, Istanbul) and the eastern islands (Rhodes, Candia) ⁹, as well as from western cities such as Venice.

Alongside these non-Christian slaves, a fairly substantial number of Christian slaves lived in Malta (20% of slaves).

These slaves were often Greeks or Eastern Christians (Syria, Egypt), or inhabitants of Central and Eastern Europe (Hungary, Wallachia) who had been captured along the Alexandria route, and who could have been either free or already in servile condition at the time of capture. Once in Malta, they had to prove their belonging to the Christian religion in order to regain their freedom, but they could also be maintained in their servile condition.

Among the Christian slaves were also all the renegades who returned to their original faith after their reconciliation and who were maintained in their servile condition, as well as the neophytes (new converts), that is, all the Muslims and Jews who, once present in Malta, had converted to Catholicism. Finally, children of slaves born on the island were largely baptized at birth and grew up as Christian slaves.

What, then, were the activities of these slaves? They depended on their status, according to whether they were galley slaves, that is, rowers on the Order's galleys, or land slaves, that is, assigned to various tasks on the island, such as the construction and repair of buildings, or all manner of domestic duties.

II – The Daily Life of Slaves

1 - The Work of Slaves

Galley Slaves

Galley work was the most important activity, and during the second half of the sixteenth century it involved an ever-growing majority of slaves, almost all of whom belonged to the Order.

The number of galley slaves therefore increased rapidly and steadily throughout the second half of the sixteenth century, rising from approximately 220 in 1548 to approximately 320 in 1569, then to 785 in 1590 ¹⁰. This can be explained first by the increase in the number of the Order's galleys (from 3 galleys to 4 in 1548 ¹¹, then to 6 in 1590), linked to the practice of privateering that triumphed in the Mediterranean at the beginning of the seventeenth century. But the increase was also due to the ever-growing proportion of slaves within the crews of Maltese galleys (30% in 1548, 44% in 1569, and 57% in 1594 ¹²), which followed the general trend of all Mediterranean galleys.

This trend was further confirmed during the seventeenth century, as galley slaves became dominant in number compared to land slaves: in 1632, galley slaves (numbering 1,284) represented double all land slaves, those of the Order and private individuals combined (649) ¹³.

These galley slaves were exclusively the property of the Order. Upon their arrival on the island, slaves were carefully selected by commissioners who retained only the most robust, immediately assigned to the oar ¹⁴. When necessary, galley slaves could also be drawn from among the Order's land slaves ¹⁵.

The magisterial regulations concerning galley slaves were extremely strict: since the decision of the General Chapter of 1548, no slave belonging to a private individual, whether lay or religious, could be put to the oar by galley captains ¹⁶ without special authorization from an official or the Grand Master.

Likewise, the Order showed a pronounced concern for the good health of its galley slaves, and thus regularly ordered the galley clerk to ensure that these slaves were properly clothed ¹⁷, that they received bread and meat twice a week, and their daily ration of soup and biscuits, on the same basis as the buonavoglie and convicts ¹⁸.

But the strictest surveillance always concerned the idle time of galley slaves. As soon as the galleys returned to port, the boatswain was obliged to confine all slaves and convicts to the Slaves' Prison in La Valette within 24 hours of arrival ¹⁹. Only some 23 rowers ²⁰ (slaves and convicts) were kept on board to ensure the ordinary service of the galley. In winter, that is, during the galleys' off-season, close surveillance was regularly exercised over ship captains or any knights who might be tempted to employ galley slaves for their own service, or to make them perform overly arduous tasks ²¹.

Despite the Order's concern not to exhaust its rowing crew, the living conditions of galley slaves remained excessively harsh, and considerably worse than those of land slaves. Deaths on the galleys were numerous, and the possessions of the deceased then reverted by right to the Common Treasury of the Order, which recovered the meager savings of the deceased, as well as all his clothing, which the commissioners immediately redistributed to the other slaves ²².

Land Slaves

Alongside the galley slaves, who were exclusively men, land slaves also lived in Malta—men, women, and children alike. These slaves could be the property of the Order (as a Convent), or of any private individual, whether lay or religious.

During the second half of the sixteenth century, the number of the Order's land slaves increased just as steadily as that of the galley slaves, though it remained lower (from 200 in 1548 to 620 in 1590). As for privately owned land slaves, their number remained stagnant at approximately 200 for the same period.

As in Spain ²³ or Sicily ²⁴, private slavery in Malta, while it did not completely disappear in the early modern period, tended proportionally to decline in favor of public slavery intended essentially to supply the galley crews ²⁵; thus, rural slavery, present in the medieval period ²⁶, gradually gave way to urban domestic slavery and public galley slavery.

Land slaves were for the most part employed as household slaves, particularly in the Magisterial Palace where, since 1555, the Grand Master was entitled to possess 30 slaves for his personal service within his Palace itself. This number continued to increase over the century: in 1568, he already possessed more than 50 ²⁷, and in 1595, the will of Grand Master Verdale revealed that he had 230 in his possession, some of whom he bequeathed to relatives and friends ²⁸!

Land slaves were also employed in the Knights' Auberges (each Auberge owned one, who helped in the kitchens or served at table), at the Sacred Infirmary (where two slaves were permanently assigned) ²⁹, or in the Order's numerous workshops such as the Armory, the Bakeries, and the Butchery, in which they performed various service tasks. Their work was obviously carefully monitored: for example, slaves at the Infirmary working in the herbalist's shop were never to touch the potions ³⁰, for fear they might steal some. Similarly, in the Bakeries of the Order, slaves were not allowed to touch the wheat that was brought in and could never weigh it, this task being reserved exclusively for free Christian men paid by the Order ³¹: the slaves' work was limited to baking bread and cleaning the premises, in order to avoid, of course, any risk of food theft.

Any private individual could own a slave, provided they had purchased them at a candle auction ³² held at the port and spread over several days ³³. Sometimes also, members of the Order could rent the Order's slaves, for the sum of 18 taris per month per slave (i.e., one and a half écus), to be paid to the Common Treasury ³⁴. And in case of refusal or inability to pay the 18 taris per month, they were simply required to provide for the food and clothing needs of the rented slave themselves ³⁵.

The work of domestic slaves generally depended on sex and the location of slavery, urban or rural. Female activities in the countryside consisted of household service (cooking, cleaning, serving), while men were employed in farm work (tending herds, fieldwork). In the city, and notably in the Grand Port (La Valette, Vittoriosa, Senglea and Bormula), tasks appeared less sexually divided, and men were often employed in housekeeping or kitchens in the Auberges and taverns, and even in private homes. Thus, the Muslim slave Ramadan served, in 1601, as a cook in his master's tavern, as well as at a barber's in La Valette, and sometimes even at the Grand Commander of the Order's residence ³⁶.

But in addition to these service activities, all land slaves, both private and public, were also required since the Ordinance of 1539 ³⁷ to perform various construction and building repair work. Thus, in 1543, the Rhodian architect Nicolò Flevari was tasked with training slaves in the construction of cisterns, roads and terraces, as part of the urbanization and fortification works of Birgu and Senglea ³⁸. Likewise, it was several hundred slaves captured after the Siege of 1565 who built the walls and buildings of the new city of La Valette. After that date, they were moreover regularly called upon to dig, clean and restore the Grand Ditch separating La Valette from the rest of the island ³⁹.

Furthermore, in the 16th century, land slaves possessed a privilege that galley slaves did not have: that of sometimes having an activity on their own account. They could notably work for themselves (fishing, crafts, paid employment) and above all sell the product of their labor.

2 - The surveillance of slaves

However, the surveillance of slaves was very strict in Malta. Since 1539, slaves were required to wear an iron ring around their ankle and were never to wander around the island at night ⁴⁰. Any private individual encountering a slave alone at that time was invited to report him and return him to the Order, in exchange for a reward.

At nightfall, all slaves (galley and land, public and private ⁴¹) were therefore imperatively required to sleep in the Slave Prison.

Until 1568, the date when the Religion came to reside in the new capital of La Valette, there was only one Slave Prison in Malta, which was located in Birgu / Vittoriosa. But from 1568 onward, the Order used both Prisons of La Valette and Vittoriosa, and it even seems that each acquired its own specialization: in La Valette were concentrated the galley slaves, the convicts and the Muslims, while in Vittoriosa were mainly kept the Jewish slaves.

All the Jews who appeared before the Inquisitor between 1580 and 1600 lived in Vittoriosa, and many times the archives refer to the Slave Prison of Vittoriosa as the "Prison of the Jews." Thus, the Maltese Daniel Bonnici of Vittoriosa recounted in 1585 to the Inquisitor that he had seen the Jewish slave Jacob go to the a la Pregione delli Ebrei ⁴², while in 1602, the Captain of the Holy Office Martino Vella was charged by the Inquisitor to inspect the Prigione degli Schiavi di Vittoriosa dove si trovano i Giudei ⁴³.

This is certainly explained by the fact that the new Prison of La Valette, both better guarded and larger, appeared more suitable for containing the majority of slaves (that is, the galley rowers, growing in number at the end of the century, and the Muslims). It was moreover an advantageous means of keeping the crews deemed dangerous under the direct surveillance of the Order, and of isolating them from the galley port located in Vittoriosa.

On an island where they were triply excluded by their foreign origin, their religion and their condition, slaves often tried to fight against this difficult daily life by recreating their own networks of solidarity and sociability, among the people they frequented, that is, within the deviant populations characteristic of ports. The prisons, taverns and all the disreputable places were thus the privileged locations where the slaves of the Grand Port moved about, in contact with marginal beings such as sailors, sorcerers, prostitutes, thieves or murderers.

3 - Networks of sociability and solidarity

The first place of sociability was obviously where slaves spent a third of their lives: the Prison. Upon arrival, the new slave benefited from the assistance of the "old-timers," who provided help and advice ⁴⁴.

The Prison was the place where the slave found his peers and could speak his language (Arabic, Hebrew), and above all the place par excellence where worship and religious affiliation were freely displayed. Within each Prison, slaves could freely gather in a room to pray. In 1602, the Captain of the Holy Office testified to the Inquisitor that he had seen in the Prison several Jews settled in the room that served as their synagogue, and he specified that "all the Jews were singing, to the point that it could be heard from the street" ⁴⁵. The Muslims did the same: although no 16th-century archive provides proof of it, the fact is attested by the German traveler Gustav Sommerfeld who visited the Slave Prison in 1663 and clearly mentions the existence of a small room where Muslims could pray ⁴⁶.

Religious solidarities were complemented in the Prison by support of other kinds, and several documents extracted from the inquisitorial archives attest to magical practices. These generally consisted of carefully preserved Quran excerpts ⁴⁷, cabalistic formulas and magic squares ⁴⁸, or invocations to God inscribed in a circle around the name of a slave ⁴⁹, which were obviously intended to alleviate physical or moral suffering, to protect against diseases, injuries, or even a bad master ⁵⁰.

After the Prison, taverns constituted the essential place where networks of servile sociability were formed ⁵¹. Slaves could eat there, consume alcohol, speak freely and devise escape plans. It was indeed in a tavern that in 1581, the Jewish slave Abraham of Andrinople took the Sicilian who was to help him escape, in order to discuss their plan more easily, while eating cheese and drinking a large bottle of red wine ⁵².

The company kept by slaves in these places was necessarily marginal: bandits, traffickers, convicts and unscrupulous adventurers who could sometimes frighten the slaves, as was the case for Paolo, when he discovered that the Neapolitan supposed to help him flee was a murderer and a vero bandito ⁵³.

But the tavern was also the place par excellence where slaves frequented women. Prostitution was indeed a common activity in the Grand Port, and concerned both slaves ⁵⁴ and free women who then appeared before the Inquisitor for having defied a double prohibition by associating with men who were both non-Christian and of servile condition: this was the case of Domenica ⁵⁵ and Girolama ⁵⁶ who received Muslim slaves of the Order in exchange for a little food; it was also the case of Agnese and Imperia ⁵⁷, who regularly frequented Jewish and Muslim slaves, or indeed Isabellica of La Valette ⁵⁸, who received every night her lover Hali, who was a slave of the Order and who reached his mistress's house dressed in a knight's habit so as not to be recognized!...

Slaves thus enjoyed in Malta a certain form of freedom. In a difficult and closely controlled daily life, they nevertheless had the possibility of meeting each other, gathering in places poorly controlled by the authorities, and creating sometimes active networks of solidarity (escape plans, organization of ransoms).

But it seems obvious that this apparent freedom was tolerated because it was precisely favorable to the possibilities of ransoming slaves. Malta indeed dangled before the eyes of its servile population infinite possibilities of recovering their freedom: conversion to Catholicism, carefully planned escape in poorly watched taverns, and of course, ransom.

III – The fate of the slaves

In this difficult daily life, recovering freedom was the permanent ambition of slaves. To achieve this, in Malta as everywhere else in the Mediterranean, the best means remained ransom (more rarely exchange), which was progressively organized during the 16th century through ransom intermediaries.

1 - The price of freedom

The average ransom price, observable from several notarial acts from the end of the century, fluctuated between approximately 120 and 180 écus ⁿ⁵9, but varied according to the sex and former social status of the slave. Women were worth more, both at purchase and at ransom, especially when they were young. As much a sexual object as a labor force, they were moreover often accompanied by a child: all reasons justifying a higher price than that of men, but which tended to decrease sharply with age ⁶⁰.

As for social status, certain professions such as merchants, raïs and all important personages, who were often rightly estimated to possess a personal fortune allowing a quick and substantial ransom, generated considerably higher ransom prices. In 1591 ⁶¹ for example, the Conservator of the Common Treasury of the Order set before a notary the average ransom price of 18 slaves of the Order at 120 sequins, or 160 écus ⁶²; the only higher price, amounting to 400 sequins (or 534 écus), concerned the ransom of a raïs. Similarly, Mustafa Piccimin, companion of Euch Ali, captured by the Order's galleys on his return from Mecca, was assessed by the Order at the exorbitant price of 1,500 écus ⁶³; it was obviously his status as a close associate of the famous Barbary corsair, and as a public and wealthy personage, that justified such a ransom sum.

From 1530 to 1600, ransoms became considerably organized and structured in Malta, evolving from a simple personal matter to a true commercial organization involving often foreign actors who served as intermediaries in exchange for substantial profits.

In the case of ransoms with an intermediary, two procedures were established. The intermediary could sometimes pay the slave's master the ransom sum directly, the slave thereby becoming the debtor of his intermediary. They would then leave together for the slave's country of origin (or any country where he had family or connections), in order to be reimbursed within a period of one week to one year. If the slave did not pay his debt, the intermediary sometimes enjoyed a right of reprisal, and could seek reimbursement from any Jew or Muslim encountered during his return journey ⁶⁴.

There was another case, in which the ransom intermediary paid nothing and simply accompanied the slave to his country, in order to personally collect money and goods, to bring them back to the master who remained in Malta ⁶⁵ (he would keep a portion of the ransom for his own profit). This procedure was more perilous for the intermediary, because in the event that the slave did not pay the promised sum, it was the intermediary who was bound by notarial act to reimburse the aggrieved master.

Sometimes, the ransom did not involve any travel by the slave: the slave remained in Malta, with his master, who agreed before a notary to assess him for a given sum, which the slave had to repay gradually through paid activities, without ever leaving Maltese soil. This type of ransom was extremely variable in duration. It could be quite rapid, like that of Léasar in 1592, a slave of a Maltese private individual from the port, who ransomed herself at the price of 50 écus per month. This enormous sum for a slave can only be understood because her husband, a slave of the Order, possessed the privilege of being able to sell goods in the square of La Valette, and therefore of earning money ⁶⁶.

But these favorable conditions concerned only a minority of slaves, and ransoms often proved much more difficult. The case of the black slave Maria Debruisso is particularly revealing: in 1591, she had paid 30 écus as a deposit to her mistress, who had in return agreed to assess her before a notary for the price of 170 écus of 12 taris ⁶⁷. The deed stipulates that the remainder of the sum was to be paid by the slave at the rate of 2 écus per month, meaning that Maria would not be free for almost six years! Similarly, Stammata, captured at around the age of 25 by the Order's galleys, took almost 30 years to ransom herself from her mistress, and remained in Malta even once free, in order to work to gather the funds necessary for the ransom of her two children, now adults ⁶⁸, who did not have the means to ransom themselves.

Slaves who had ransomed themselves within a relatively short period of time had the possibility of leaving the island and returning to their country, after being granted a magistral safe-conduct and sometimes even under the escort of a Knight of Malta ⁶⁹.

But the many slaves whose ransom took longer generally found themselves elderly at the time of their liberation and long since converted to Catholicism. They had then lost all contact with their relatives who remained in their homeland, and very often resigned themselves to never leaving an island where they now had habits and acquaintances. This was the case of Maddalena, ransomed after about twenty years and converted to Catholicism, who did not return to her native country but remained in La Valette, where she lived as a free and elderly woman ⁷⁰.

These former slaves who choose to remain in Malta are not necessarily excluded from society, but their possibilities of integration depend strongly on the place in which they reside, and on their sex. Mixed marriages are more common in the Grand Harbour than in the countryside or in Mdina. Likewise, women can hope even more than men to marry a Maltese or foreign person ⁷¹. But on the whole, these former slaves still remain marginal within Maltese society, and the islanders rarely forget their former status and religion ⁷².

The difficulty of ransom, obviously linked to wealth, thus makes servitude in Malta a generally lasting condition, of which the slaves are aware. Confronted with this dead end, or simply with the length of time that a ransom sometimes entails, slaves sometimes seek other means of escaping their status. These means can be peaceful (conversion) or, when this leads to nothing, much more aggressive, such as escape or even revolt.

2 - Hopes and disillusions

Numerous are the slaves who yielded to the temptation of conversion in the hope of escaping their servitude.

First there are the renegades, compelled by their appearance before the tribunal of the Inquisition to return to their original faith; but numerous also are the Jewish or Muslim slaves who one day agree to transgress the prohibition by converting to Catholicism. Out of 29 trials of Jewish and Muslim slaves between 1580 and 1600, 20 are already converted to Catholicism, or request to be so as quickly as possible, a proportion of 69%!!... As for the renegades, they are all reconciled (except one of them, ultimately condemned to the stake for having obstinately remained Muslim ⁷³).

But the most interesting aspect comes from the fact that renegades often try to negotiate their reconciliation. The renegade Giorgio declares that he willingly accepts becoming Christian again, on the condition that his freedom be restored ⁷4; as for Nicolas de Grèce, after having flatly refused to be reconciled, he declares that if the Inquisitor restores his freedom, he will reconvert, but that otherwise, he prefers to remain Muslim ⁷⁵!

As a general rule, the converted slave reaps only the bitter fruits of his renunciation. First of all, conversion is an act very poorly perceived by other slaves: regularly, slaves come to complain to the Inquisitor that their Prison companions attacked them upon the announcement of their future conversion. The reproaches range from the promise to have the sinning slave ransomed ⁷⁶ to more offensive attacks (Abraham, a future convert, is spat in the face by all the slaves of the Prison of Vittoriosa) ⁷⁷, or even physical violence and threats (a Jew is threatened by the slaves with being sent to the galleys) ⁷⁸. Future converts then endeavored to conceal their intentions and keep their conversion secret, but very often it was revealed through an indiscretion or a denunciation ⁷⁹.

The slave's conversion is also denounced by the masters, who show themselves extremely suspicious as to the sincerity of the renunciation; quite numerous therefore are the slaves who complain to the Inquisitor that their master continues to treat them as a dog despite their conversion. Thus, the slave Speranza in 1598 converted four years earlier and became a sincere Catholic and zealous practitioner, but denounces her masters who beat her regularly and accuse her of not being a true Christian ⁸⁰.

But above all, the hope of freedom through conversion is regularly disappointed in Malta, since practically no slave is freed, neither by the Inquisitor, nor by the Order, nor by a master, after his adherence to Catholicism. Thus, not only has the converted slave lost all the servile solidarities he enjoyed when he was still Jewish or Muslim, but he is maintained in his status, and is permanently subject to the combined hostility of Christians and non-Christians.

The disillusion born of conversions then very often engenders a desire to escape. This is for example the case of Filippo, a Muslim converted to Christianity, who realizes that his conversion does not allow him to be free, and finally consents to attempt to flee in the company of three other slaves, in order di andare in Barbaria...per vivere alla moresca ⁸¹.

Escapes are most certainly numerous and very few fail: in more than twenty years, we have counted only four trials of slaves who attempted to flee, while the Order complains fairly regularly about the successful flight of several slaves from the Port. Thus, between 1544 and 1552, three successful escapes are reported by the Grand Master ⁸². The proximity of the African coast obviously explains the ease with which slaves can flee, and the concern to find a boat is ever-present: while on the run, slaves often lurk around fishing villages in order to steal a boat that could take them to Barbary ⁸³.

But the success of an escape also depends on meticulous organization and the contacts established by the slaves: it is necessary not only to gather money to pay for the food needed for the voyage, but also to negotiate the help of "escape intermediaries" of dubious morals (traffickers ⁸⁴, former convicts, thieves, sometimes even a knight of the Order ⁸⁵...). And the contact always charges dearly for his help (gold jewelry, pearls, corals, silk fabrics...) ⁸⁶.

Finally, the last resort to recover one's freedom is revolt. An exceptional event in Malta, a slave revolt took place during the month of February 1596 ⁸⁷. This revolt of 1596 is very poorly known, as it is almost entirely concealed by the archives: only the registers of the Order speak of it in a very implicit manner, along with a letter from May 1596, found by chance in an inquisitorial trial and addressed to the Inquisitor.

The events of February involve several slaves from La Valette and Vittoriosa who suddenly rose up: they notably refused to sleep in the Slaves' Prison, wandered for several days in the Maltese countryside in search of a ship to escape, inciting all the slaves they encountered to join them. But above all, they stole the keys to La Valette and opened the gates of the city at night ⁸⁸, deliberately violating all the magistral ordinances.

The revolt of 1596 provoked, as one might expect, a very strong emotion on the island and within the Order. The opening of the gates of La Valette was experienced as a genuine trauma. It was not so much the flight of slaves that the Order feared, but rather an entry onto the island by outside Muslims. The revolt brutally made Malta aware of the danger represented by the presence of these slaves in growing numbers, living symbols of the enemy civilization. At a time when the Order lived in obsession with a new Turkish attack, the events of 1596 engendered the very strong anxiety of enduring a siege combined with a servile revolt ⁸⁹.

The Order's response was immediate; on March 8, after the revolt had been quelled, the Grand Master ordered an investigation into the security of the island and the safety of the Slaves' Prisons ⁹⁰. Between 1596 and 1602, the multiplication of rigorous inspections testifies to the Order's genuine obsession with experiencing a new servile insurrection ⁹¹. Finally, in 1602, the Grand Master promulgated a new ordinance concerning the proper management of slaves on the island.

This new ordinance, which would subsequently be taken up by the General Chapters and would not undergo major changes, abruptly ended the privilege of land slaves to possess a paid activity. They could henceforth sell nothing, neither for their own service nor for the service of their master, except for low-cost products (glassware) and in a well-defined location, which was the Square of La Valette, in front of the Magistral Palace, under the direct surveillance of the Order ⁹². The ordinance of 1602, which remained unchanged throughout the 17th century, thus resulted directly from the revolt of 1596.

Conclusion

Even if the average number of slaves residing on the island did not exceed 4 to 5% of the total population in the 16th and 17th centuries, slavery in Malta involved a significant number of people, who resided for a more or less lengthy time on the island. For this average percentage actually reflects the island's irreducible needs, and does not account for the reality of the passage of several thousand slaves through Malta, some of whom could even return after their liberation, following a new capture.

The daily life of the slaves, as we have seen, testifies to the extreme harshness of the servile condition, whether one was a private or public slave, a galley slave or a land slave. However, this daily life presents the singularity of being relatively tolerant regarding everything concerning the comings and goings of slaves, their associations, or their places of residence.

This particular duality, which alternates between strict control and apparent laxity, is explained by the possibility that slaves always have of organizing their ransom. A semblance of freedom of movement is left to the slaves so that they can work toward their liberation, particularly by establishing contacts and meeting ransom intermediaries.

In this respect, the Maltese daily life of slaves perfectly reflects the particularity of Mediterranean slavery, whose purpose seems to be more the financial advantage resulting from the ransom of prisoners than the labor force they represent.

These men and women, captured in the context of the conflict between the Christian and Muslim worlds, then most often become captives whose liberation one seeks to negotiate rather than slaves in the strict sense.

Notes:

For the estimates of the year 1576, see P. Collura "Le due missioni di Monsignore Ludovico de Torres in Malta", in Archivio Storico di Malta, VIII, 1937, p. 42., as well as Michel Fontenay, "The galley slave in the Mediterranean of the Early Modern period", in Henri Bresc (ed.), Figures of the slave in the Middle Ages and in the modern world, L'Harmattan, Paris, 1996, p.138. See also S.Fiorini, "Demographic growth and the urbanization of the maltese country side to 1798", in Hospitaller Malta 1530-1798, Mireva Publications, Malta, 1993, p.302 for the total population.
The figures for the year 1582 are extracted from Manuscript XXIII, Relazione dello stato dell'isola di Malta fatta nel 1582 a Gregorio XIII da Monsignore Visconti, [ff°262r.-280v.], National Malta Library, La Valette. This account is identical to that of Jean-Baptiste Leoni (Relazione dell'isola di Malta) dated the same year, which is also held at the National Malta Library (Manuscript MXXXVI).
Finally, the figures for the year 1590 are extracted from Volume 202 (classificazione duodecima) of the Archivio dell'Università di Mdina, National Malta Library in La Valette. It is a copy of the census carried out by Diego della Quadra addressed to the viceroy of Sicily; the original document, held at the Communal Library of Palerme, was studied by Carmelo Trasselli ("Una statistica maltese", in Economia e Storia, Fascicolo 4, 1966, pp. 474-480).
These data are obviously approximate. For 1548 (A.O.M. 287, Register of the General Chapter, ff°62v.-63r.) and 1569 (AOM 289, Register of the General Chapter, ff°50v.-51r.), the estimate of approximately 400 slaves derives from two Magisterial Ordinances calculating the average number of rowing slaves on the Order's galleys (55 slaves in 1548 and 80 in 1569). As the Order had 3 galleys at that time, we can calculate that the number of rowing slaves amounted to approximately 165 in 1548 and 240 in 1569. To these rowing slaves, one must add the Order's land slaves, as well as those of private individuals, whose number is estimated at fewer than 200 across the entire island before 1576.
AIM (Archives of the Inquisition of Malta), Proc. 18, f°69r. A count carried out by Mariano Carbun, general argousin of the Order in charge of slaves, reveals that the Order possessed 1600 slaves in 1599, to which must be added the roughly 200 or 300 slaves belonging to private individuals.
Although it is not rigorously proven, the estimate of 1,800 slaves in 1599 is therefore most plausible.
For the estimates of the Maltese population in 1548 and 1569, see Stanley Fiorini "Demographic growth…", op. cit., p.301.
Michel Fontenay, in his article "Il mercato maltese degli schiavi al tempo dei Cavaglieri di San Giovanni (1530-1798)", in Quaderni Storici, 107, 2/2001, p.395, mentions the figure of 55,541 inhabitants in 1632. Bartolomeo Dal Pozzo, Historia della Religione..., 1703, volume I, p. 803, estimates the total population of Malta for the same date at 51,750 persons. Vincent Borg, for his part, speaks of 56,801 inhabitants: 51,750 Maltese, to which he adds 4,430 foreigners — soldiers, merchants, sailors, slaves — and 621 members of the Order (V. Borg, Fabio Chigi, apostolic delegate in Malte (1634-1639), Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1967, p.7).
Average calculated from the trials of 65 renegade slaves whose age is mentioned, between 1581 and 1601.
NAM (National Archives of Malta), Banca Giuratale, Commune Ærarium 422, ff°3r.-4r.
A black slave woman Cattarina, purchased by the Maltese Gio Battista Rizo on 11 October 1588, at the slave market, after the return from a corsairing expedition of the Order's galleys, gave birth a year and a half later to the son of her master, a slave child "negretto", immediately baptised and named Gio Domenico.
Out of 125 appearances of slaves before the Inquisitor, between 1581 and 1601, 98 trials concerned non-Christian slaves (Jews, Muslims, renegades) and 27 trials concerned Christian slaves (including neophytes).
Of the 8 Jews who appeared before the Inquisitor between 1581 and 1601, 3 were originally from Rhodes (AIM Proc. 13, ff°252r.-257r.), another was originally from Candie (AIM., Proc. 13, f°254r.) and a last one came from Edirne (AIM., Proc. 6B, ff°600r.-610v.). Two Jews converted to Christianity were originally from Istanbul (AIM, Proc. 14B, ff°739r.-753r.) and Venice (AIM, Proc. 6A, ff°187r.-189r.).
NML, Archivio dell'Università di Mdina, Vol. 202. See also C. Trasselli, "Una statistica maltese...", op. cit., p. 480.
AOM 91, f°34r., 27 August 1561; AOM 93, ff°158v.-159r., 12 September 1573. Between 1548 and 1590, the Order possessed three ordinary galleys and one slightly larger (the Capitane).
ASV (Archivio Segreto Vaticano), Volume 3, ff°228v.-229r., 28 June 1594.
M. Fontenay, "Il mercato maltese degli schiavi…", op. cit., p.395.
AOM 288, Ordinance of 1555, ff°29r.-29v.
AOM 288, Ordinance of 1555, ff°29r.-29v.
AOM 287, Ordinance of 1548, ff°65r.-65v.
AOM 287, Ordinance of 1548, ff°62v.-63r.
AOM 290, Ordinance of 1574, ff°38r.-40v. This ordinance was recalled again in 1597 (AOM 293, ff°102v.-109r.), then in 1603 (AOM 294, ff°115v.-123r.)
AOM 290, Ordinance of 1574, ff°38r.-40v.
From 1598 onwards, this number rose to 30 convicts and slaves (AOM 293, Ordinance of 1598, ff°108r.-109r.).
AOM 293, Ordinance of 1597, ff°108r.-109r.
AOM 287, Ordinance of 1548, ff°65r.-67v.
Bernard Vincent: "Slavery in the Spanish rural environment in the 17th century: the example of the Alméria region", in Figures of the slave in the Middle Ages and in the modern world, L'Harmattan, Paris, 1996, pp.165-176.
Maurice Aymard: "Il commercio dei grani nella Sicilia del' 500", in Archivio Storico per la Sicilia Orientale, Anno LXXII, Fascicolo I-III, 1976, pp.7-28, Discussion, p.32. From the 1570s onwards, private rural slavery, which had long coexisted with public slavery, tended to disappear entirely in Sicily.
M.Fontenay: "The galley slave…", op. cit., p.138.
G. Wettinger, "Agriculture in Malta in the Late Middle Ages", in Proceedings of History week 1981, Malta Historical Society, Malta, 1982, p.58.
AOM 92, f°89r., 5 August 1568; Bosio, Historia dei Cavaglieri della Religione..., 1602, III, p.817.
ASV, SS Malta, Volume 5, ff°36r.-38r., 9 October 1595.
AOM 288, Ordinance of 1555, ff°29r.-29v.
AOM 292, Ordinance of 1587, ff°63r.-64r., "…Ad evitandum mala et pericula, quæ facile succedere possunt, ordinaverunt quod nullus aromatariorum mancipium in eius officina in serventem habere possit…". This order was regularly recalled during the three following General Chapters: in 1597 (AOM 293, ff°63r.-65v.), in 1603 (AOM 294, ff°79v.-82v.), and in 1612 (AOM 295, ff°75v.-78r.).
AOM 99, ff°32r.-32v., 3 August 1595.
AOM 96, f°67v., 23 August 1582. This candle auction did not conclude and degenerated because it proved impossible to determine which of two knights had purchased a slave before the candle went out.
M. Fontenay, "Il mercato maltese degli schiavi…", op. cit., p.396. Spreading the sales over several days made it possible not to sell too many slaves at the same time, and thus avoided driving down the price of the merchandise.
AOM 293, Ordinance of 1597, f°66r.
AOM 294, Ordinance of 1603, ff°123r.-125r.
AIM, Proc. 19B, ff°630r.-631r.
AOM 287, Ordinance of 1539, f°43v., "…che li detti schiavi saranno ricercati alli servitii delle muraglie et fosse obedischino…".
AOM 419, f°212v., 12 October 1543; Anthony Luttrell, "Malta and Rhode", in Hospitaller Malta 1530-1798, Mireva Publications, Malta, 1993, pp.261-262.
AOM 94, f°107v., 7 April 1576.
AOM 287, Ordinance of 1539, f°43v.
AOM 290, Ordinance of 1574, ff°38r.-40v. This ordinance was recalled again in 1578 (AOM 95, ff°114v.-115r.), as well as in 1598 (AOM 293, ff°108r.-109r.).
AIM, Proc. 8, f°43r., 8 September 1585.
AIM, Proc. 20A, f°163r., 26 September 1602.
This can also be observed among Christian slaves in the lands of Islam. On this matter, see Joao Mascarenhas, Slave in Algiers, ed. Chandeigne, Paris, 2nd edition 1999, p.55.
AIM, Proc. 20A, ff°163r.-163v., "…tutti li Ebrei cantavano e si sentiva questo nella strada...".
Salvatore Bono, "Schiavi musulmani a Malta nei secoli XVII-XVIII: connessioni fra Maghreb e Italia", in Karissime Gotifride. Historical Essays presented to Godfrey Wettinger on his seventieth birthday, Malta University Press, 1999, p.95: "…In the Slave Prison, one can see... a small square room covered with carpets in which they kneel and sit on their heels, they bow to kiss the ground, then immediately straighten up holding in one hand a rosary which they recite while invoking God..." (Gustav Sommerfeld, Eine Reise nach Süditalien und Malta).
AIM, Proc. 42A, Year 1621.
AIM, Proc. 67A, Year 1655.
AIM, Proc. 47A, Year 1627.
AIM, Proc. 16A, ff°449r.-450v., July 1599. The Christian slave woman Victoria and her Muslim accomplice Hali attempted to cast a spell on Victoria's master, in order to prevent him from taking the young slave woman to Sicily to sell her. Victoria and Hali were ultimately sentenced to the whip, and Victoria was exiled from Malta.
It is mainly Christian and Jewish slaves who frequented taverns.
AIM, Proc. 6B, ff°601v.-605v., 9 February 1582.
AIM, Proc. 9A, ff°164v.-167v., 24 March 1588.
AIM, Proc. 16A, ff°330r.-331v., 16 November 1598. The Christian slave woman Victoria confessed to assiduously frequenting the taverns of Vittoriosa until late at night.
AIM, Proc. 13, ff°124r.-124v., 12 August 1592.
AIM, Proc. 19A, ff°184r.-185v., April 1601.
AIM, Proc. 19A, ff°186r.-187r., April 1601.
AIM, Proc. 19B, ff°535r.-535v., April 1601.
AIM, Proc. 9A, f°148r., 20 November 1587. The price could be less than 120 écus, but generally hovered around 100 écus. For example, the renegade Girolamo de Furnari was assessed by the Conservator of the Common Treasury of the Order at the price of 100 écus.
M. Fontenay, "Il mercato maltese degli schiavi…", op. cit., pp.399-400.
NAV (Notarial Archives of Valetta), R 316/13, ff°17v.-18v., 14 September 1591.
One sequin corresponds to 16 taris, and one écu is generally worth 12 taris. Thus, one sequin is worth 1 écu 4 taris.
AIM, Proc. 15A, ff°484r.-490r., 28 December 1599.
NAV, R 286/3, ff°605v.-608r., 7 February 1594. The ransom intermediary Jean Terminato ransomed two Jewish slaves, who thus became his debtors. If the slaves did not repay him in Venice, the intermediary could recover payment from any Jew encountered.
NAV, R 286/3, ff°463r.-466r., 7 December 1593. The slave Giafer had to return to Chio to pay the intermediary for his ransom, and the intermediary then had to reimburse the associates of the slave's master. Otherwise, the intermediary would himself pay the sum owed.
AIM, Proc. 13, ff°3r.-4r., 20 October 1592.
NAV, R 316/12, ff°398v.-399v., 26 April 1591.
AIM, Proc. 19A, ff°134r.-135r., 5 November 1600.
AOM 98, f°60r., 28 October 1591.
AIM, Proc. 16A, ff°188r.-189v., 27 August 1598.
AIM, Proc. 16A, f°187r., 27 August 1598. The Maltese Antonio Sardo, citizen of Vittoriosa, for example proposed marriage to Gioanna, a Muslim slave woman who had become free and Christian.
AIM, Proc. 14B, ff°739r.-751v., May-June 1596. The former Jewish slave Geronimo Bonnichi, free and converted for more than ten years, had been unable to find stable employment or to marry. He was a beggar in Mdina, and accused by the Maltese of practising witchcraft, like all Jews.
AIM, Proc. 5, ff°881r.-885r., 2 March 1581.
AIM, Proc. 19B, ff°542r.-543v., 6 June 1601, ("…io volintieri tornerei cristiano se me fosse data la libertà…").
AIM, Proc. 22B, ff°748r.-749v., 4 March 1604, ("…io non voglio altrimente tornare alla fede cristiana… ma si me promettete dare la libertà et lasciarme franco, tornero de buona volonta, altrimente non tornaro mai cristiano…").
AIM, Proc. 8, f°43r., 8 September 1585. The slave Jacob, who had asked to become Christian, was reproached for his decision by a Jew in the Slave Prison, who asked him to reconsider and promised to have him ransomed.
AIM, Proc. 24A, ff°121r.-122v., 17 July 1606, ("…quando intravo nella Pregione con li schiavi, tutti mi sputavano in faccia perche io volevo tornare alla fede cristiana…").
AIM, Proc. 13, ff°252r.-253r., 25 September 1594. When the slaves in the Prison learned that the Jew Caym, although assessed by the Order, had asked to convert, they threatened to have him sent to the galleys as punishment.
For example, Caym was denounced following the indiscretion of Jona, a slave woman to whom he had confided his desire to convert (AIM, Proc. 13, f°252v.). Similarly, Abraham had not revealed his intention to renounce his faith, but the slaves learned of his request for reconversion through a certain Giorgio Suriano who disclosed the matter (AIM, Proc. 24A, f°122v.).
AIM, Proc. 18, f°220r. A parish priest testified that "…i suoi padroni la maltrattavano et delle volte li dicevano: Cagnazza, tu non sei ancora ben cristiana, tu ancora stai nella fede machumettana, non crediamo che ti confessi, ti communichi ne vadi in chiesa…"
AIM, Proc. 10B, ff°579r.-581r., April 1582.
AOM 87, f°36r., 27 March 1544; AOM 88, f°22v., 1 April 1549; AOM 88, f°130v., 1 October 1552.
AIM, Proc. 10B, ff°579r.-581r. The slaves attempted to steal fishing boats, but the fishing village had been warned of a slave escape and was waiting for them to take them back to La Valette.
AIM, Proc. 6B, ff°601r.-605v., 9 February 1582. The fugitive slaves (two Jews and two Muslims) approached a certain trafficker named Francesco Masi the Sicilian, who owned a small vessel to make the crossing to the Barbary coast. Masi was a rather marginal man, living off petty trafficking and frequenting the convicts of the Order's galleys.
AIM, Proc. 16A, ff°188r.-189r., 27 August 1598. Four Muslim slaves were helped by the knight de Melac, who assisted them in obtaining safe-conducts and embarking on one of the Order's galleys departing for Messine.
AIM, Proc.9A, f°167r. and AIM, Proc. 16A, f°189v.
We do not take into account the revolt of 1531 mentioned by Giacomo Bosio (G. Bosio, Dell'Historia della Sacra Religione…, Rome, 1596, III, p.100) for two reasons. First because only Bosio mentions it and no archive echoes it, which casts strong doubt on the veracity of the fact. Second because it occurred at a time when the Order did not yet have a Slave Prison: slaves were less well guarded, and housed near the Grand Master, within Fort Saint-Ange itself. The conditions of the revolts were therefore not at all the same in 1531 and in 1596.
AIM, Proc. 15A, ff°9r.-9v., 27 May 1596. The letter from Joanne Caloriti, of the Order, addressed to the Inquisitor, bears witness to this revolt: « …li schiavi hanno excesso li limiti, non hanno dormito in pregione, hanno vagato per molti giorni in campagna, cercando barca de fugire, hanno cercato di contaminar altri, de farli fugir con loro, et hanno voluto… rubar li chiavi della citta et aprir le porte de notte de detta cita come fu fatto, contro li bandi magistrali… ».
AOM 100, f°282r., 12 June 1603.
AOM 100, f°11r., 13 June 1597. The Council recalls the events of 8 March 1596.
The text is very explicit: « …maximis scandalis qua indies perpetrantur ab infidelibus manumissis, libertis et servis, qui in peculiaribus domicilii civitatum Valleta et Vittoriosa passim inhabitant… ».
AOM 100, f°248r., 9 August 1602. Commissioners conducted an investigation concerning security on the island, the exercise of port surveillance and the proper guarding of slaves.
AOM 100, ff°248r.-248v., 13 August 1602.

Source:
Anne Brogini. Everyday slavery in Malta in the sixteenth century
In: Cahiers de la Méditerranée, 65 | 2002
http://cdlm.revues.org/26