“Sweet Masters”: The Order of Saint Benedict and the “Good Treatment” of Slaves, Brazil, Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries

Abstract

Objective/Context: This article aims to discuss the idea of “good treatment” given to slaves, as well as the concept of benevolence and paternalism in rural Brazilian properties, by using data on the Benedictine Congregation of Brazil, as it was the richest and most influential religious order in the country in the nineteenth century. Methodology: The documentation was analyzed based on the concept of “antidiscipline” coined by Michel de Certeau. The sources highlight a complex and efficient control network imposed on the enslaved; nevertheless, it is necessary to assess these documents (produced by the monks themselves) from a different perspective, as the daily life of slaves was marked by appropriations, tactics, bricolages, and other surreptitious forms constructed by the subordinates. This concept helps to rethink the manorial strategies of the Benedictines, which has caught the attention of many writers. Originality: Although historiography has already demonstrated that there was no such thing as “mild” slavery, several authors highlighted the ‘“soft” treatment experienced on Benedictine properties. In this context, this article discusses how and why a religious institution used discourses and practices that aimed to improve the living conditions of slaves on their farms, highlighting the role of paternalism and Christian ideals in building an efficient and long-lasting “model” of slave management, which was described by many as an example of “benevolence” and “good treatment.” Conclusions: Although writers of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries underlined and valued the “good treatment” experienced by Benedictine captives, this study demonstrates that this “sweeter” treatment was part of their slave management strategy, ensuring vegetative growth and the smooth functioning of work, with the expectation of producing obedient, disciplined, and loyal slaves. In a way, they contributed to perpetuating the image of “softer” slavery in Brazilian lands.