| Part ofa series on |
| Racial segregation |
|---|
 Segregated train station inapartheid-era South Africa |
Historical examples |
TheCode noir (French pronunciation:[kɔdnwaʁ],Black code) was a decree passed by KingLouis XIV of France in 1685 defining the conditions ofslavery in the Antilles then also Louisiana and served as the code for slavery conduct in the French colonies up until 1789 the year marking the beginning of theFrench Revolution. The decree restricted the activities offree people of color, mandated conversion toCatholicism for all enslaved people throughout the empire, defined the punishments meted out to them, and ordered theexpulsion of all Jews from France's colonies. The code has been described by historian of modern FranceTyler Stovall as "one of the most extensive official documents on race, slavery, and freedom ever drawn up in Europe".[1]
At the time, there were two common law statutes in effect in Martinique: that pertaining to French nationals, which was the Custom of Paris as well aslaws for foreigners, which did not include rules particular to soldiers, nobles, or clergy. These statutes were included in the Edict of May 1664 that established theFrench West India Company. The American Isles wereenfeoffed or conceded to the company, whose formation had replaced the Company of Saint Christopher (1626–1635), but would eventually be succeeded by the Company of the American Isles (1635–1664). TheIndigenous population, called Caribbean Indians (Indiens caraïbes), were seen as naturalized French subjects, and were provided the same rights as French nationals upon their baptism. It was forbidden to enslave Indigenous peoples, or to sell them as slaves. Two populations were provided for: natural populations and native French, as the Edict of 1664 did not describe slaves or the importation of a black population. The French West India Company had gone bankrupt in 1674, with its commercial activities having been transferred to the Senegal Company and its territories returned to the Crown. The rulings of the Sovereign Council of Martinique patched the legal hole concerning slave populations. In 1652, at the behest ofJesuit missionaries, the Council reified the rule that slaves, like domestic servants, shall not be made to work on Sundays and in 1664, held that slaves would be required to be baptized and to attendcatechism.[2][3]
Codes governing slavery had already been established in manyEuropean colonies in the Americas, such as the 1661Barbados Slave Code. At this time in the Caribbean, Jews were mostly active in theDutch colonies, so their presence was seen as an unwelcome Dutch influence in French colonial life.[4] FrenchPlantation owners largely governed their land and holdingsin absentia, with subordinate workers dictating the day-to-day running of the plantations. Because of their enormous population, in addition to the harsh conditions facing slaves, small-scale slave revolts were common. Although the Code Noir contained a few, minor humanistic provisions, theCode noir was generally flaunted, in particular regarding protection for slaves and limitations on corporal punishment.[5]
The Code Noir aimed to provide a legal framework for slavery, to establish protocols governing the conditions of the slaves in the French colonies, and appears to make an attempt at ending the illegal slave trade. Strict religious morals were also imposed in the crafting of theCode noir; in part a result of the influence of the influx of Catholic leaders arriving in theAntilles between 1673 and 1685.
The Code Noir was also conceived to “maintain the discipline of the Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman church”[6] in the French colonies. It required that all enslaved people of African descent in the French colonies receive baptism, religious instruction, and the same practices and sacraments for slaves as it did for free persons. While it did grant enslaved people the right to rest on Sundays and holidays, to formally marry through the church, and to be buried in proper cemeteries, forced religious conversion was just one of the many methods that France used to attempt to 'civilize' and exert their imperial control over the Black population in the French colonies.
The Code thus gave a guarantee of morality to the Catholic nobility that arrived in Martinique between 1673 and 1685.[7]
In 1681, the King decided to create astatute for the black population of the French Caribbean and delegated its writing toColbert, who, in turn, requested memoranda from the colonial intendant of Martinique, Jean-Baptiste Patoulet and later from his replacement,Michel Bégon, as well as the governor general of the Caribbean, Charles de Courbon, comte de Blenac (1622–1696). TheMémoire (memorandum) of 30 April 1681 from the King to the intendant (who was probablyColbert), expressed the utility of making an ordinance specific to the Antilles.
The study, which incorporated local legal customs, decisions, and jurisprudence of the Sovereign Council, as well as a number of rulings by theKing's Council, was challenged by the members of the Sovereign Council. When negotiations settled, the draft was sent to the chancellery, which retained what was essential and only reinforced or streamlined the articles such that they were compatible with preexisting laws and institutions.
The earliest of these constituent ordinances was drafted by the Naval Minister (secrétaire d'État à la Marine)Marquis de Seignelay and promulgated in March 1685 by KingLouis XIV with the title "Ordonnance ou édit de mars 1685 sur les esclaves des îles de l'Amérique". The only known manuscript of this law to have been preserved is currently in the French National Overseas Archives (Archives nationales d'outre-mer). TheMarquis de Seignelay wrote the draft using legal briefs written by the first intendant of the French islands of the Americas,Jean-Baptiste Patoulet [fr], as well as those of his successorMichel Bégon. Legal historians have debated whether other sources, such as Roman slavery laws, were consulted in the drafting of this original text. Studies of correspondence from Patoulet suggest that the 1685 ordinance drew mostly on local regulations provided in the colonial intendant's memoranda.[5][8]
Based on the fundamental law that any man who sets foot on French soil is free, various parliaments refused to pass the originalOrdonnance ou édit de mars 1685 sur les esclaves des îles de l'Amérique which was ultimately instituted only in the colonies for which the edict was written: the Sovereign Council ofMartinique on 6 August 1685, Guadeloupe on 10 December of the same year, and inPetit-Goâve before the Council of the French colony ofSaint-Domingue on 6 May 1687.[9] Finally, the Code was passed before the councils ofCayenne andGuiana on 5 May 1704.[9]
There existed many editions of theCode noir. While their differences were often formal, they sometimes differed greatly from one another, with semantic and thus juridic modifications of the text.[10]: 74 These versions can be divided in three main groups: 1. the B version (alongside its 1847 and 1897 transcriptions) 2. the "Windward Islands" (Martinique and Guadeloupe) and Guyana versions, and 3. the "Saint-Domingue" versions; by far the most widespread in the 18th century and nowadays.[11]: 39 The Guadeloupe version of 1685 is considered the most authentic and trustworthy by Jean-François Niort and Jérémy Richard.[10]: 74–75
The titleCode noir first appeared during the regency ofPhilippe II, Duke of Orleans, (1715–1723) under ministerJohn Law, and referred to a compilation of two separate ordinances ofLouis XIV from March and August 1685.[8] One of the two regulated black slaves in the French islands of the Americas, while the other established the Sovereign Council ofSaint-Domingue.[12]
From the 18th century onward, the termCode noir was used not only to describe edits and additions to the original code, but also came to refer broadly to compilations of laws and other legal documents applicable to the colonies. Over time, the foundational ordinances and their associated texts were amended to meet the evolving needs of each colony.[5] Local modifications and additions to theCode noir (in the wide sense of the term) could be confirmed by the central government - but weren't always so. Thus sprouted local law on slavery answering local needs and solving the lacks of the 1685Code noir.[11]: 40–41
Damas and Petit de Viévigne's "Ordonnance de police générale des Nègres et Gens de couleur libres" of December 25th, 1783, which more or less corresponds the state of the law on its topic matter in Martinique and Guadeloupe just before the fall theAncien régime, aimed to better enforce, explain, reiterate, modify and add to theCode noir. For example, the practice of letting Sunday off as a free day for slaves in exchange of them waiving their legal right to be fed ("Samedi-jardin") was now to be punished with a 500 livres fine (which it was not in theCode noir); the fine for abandoning an aged or infirm slave if they had to be placed in a hospital by the authorities was raised from theCode noir's standards; freemen keeping or fencing slaves were to be enslaved (and not fined) and slaves were also now prohibited from hiding escaped slaves under the threat of whipping and prison...[11]: 41–47
After the restitution of France's colonies in theTreaty of Amiens of 1802, slavery and the provisions of the Code noir were put back in place.[13] They were reinstated first in the restituted colonies of Martinique, Saint-Lucia and Tobago, and also the Mascarenes by the law of May 20, 1802;[14]: 31–33 in Guadeloupe by a consular decree on July 16, 1802;[14]: 36–37, [47,54,57] and in Guiana by consular decree on 7 December, 1802.[13]: paragraph 48 The Code Noir coexisted for forty-three years with theNapoleonic code despite the contradictory nature of the two texts, but this arrangement became increasingly difficult due to theFrench Court of Cassation rulings on local jurisdictions' decisions following the 1827 and 1828 ordinances on civil procedures.[15] Due to the codification of the law, the ensuing legal dogmatism and need for legality, and the administrative and judicial centralisation, theCode noir was likely applicated with more rigor than in the time of the Ancien Régime.[16]: 249
According to historian Frédéric Charlin, in metropolitan France, "the two decades of theJuly Monarchy were characterized by a political trend to endow the slave with a certain level of humanity… [and to] encourage a slow assimilation of the slave into other workforces of French society through moral and family values". Thejurisprudence of the Court of Cassation under the July Monarchy was marked by a gradual recognition of a legal personhood for slaves. Accordingly, the 1820s saw a generalabolitionist trend, but one that was mainly preoccupied with a gradualemancipation that paralleled improved conditions for slaves.[15]
_(Historic_New_Orleans_Collection_80-654-RL).jpg)
In the preamble of the Code noir, it is stated that it only applicates to the Islands of French America (in the Caribbean).[17]: 121
In 60 articles,[18] the document specified the following:
In theCode noir, theslave (of any race, color or gender) is considered property immune from seizure (article 44), yet alsocriminally liable (article 32). Article 48 stipulates that, in the case of a seizure of person (physical seizure), this is an exception to article 44.[18][8] Should the human nature of the slave confer certain rights, the slave was nevertheless denied a truecivil personality before the reforms adopted under theJuly Monarchy. According to French colonial legal historian Frédéric Charlin, an individual's legal capacity was fully dissociable from her humanity under old French law.[19] Additionally, the legal status of slaves was further distinguished by the separation offield slaves (esclave de jardin), the main workforce, fromdomestic slaves "of culture" (esclave de culture).[20] Before the institution of theCode noir, slaves other than those "of culture" were consideredfixtures (immeubles par destination). The new status was adopted with such great reluctance on the part of local jurisdictions that it was necessary for a ruling of the King's Council of 22 August 1687 to take a position on the capacity of slaves because of the rules of succession applicable to the new status.[19] Despite the 1804 creation of theNapoleonic Code and its partial promulgation in the Antilles, the re-institution of slavery in 1802 had led to the reinstatement of parts ofCode noir which precluded Napoleonic rights.[19] In the 1830s, under the civil code of the July Monarchy, slaves were explicitly given a civil personality while also considered as being fixtures, that is, personal property legally attached to and/or part of real estate or businesses.[20]
The status of the slave inCode noir is legally different from that of aserf primarily in that serfs could not be bought. According to anthropological historianClaude Massilloux, it is the mode of reproduction that distinguishes slavery fromserfdom: while a serf cannot be purchased, they reproduce through demographic growth.[21] In Roman law (theDigest), a slave could be sold, given away, and legally passed to another owner as part of an estate or a legacy, but this could not be done with a serf. Contrary to serfdom, slaves were considered in Roman law to be objects of personal property that could be owned,usufruct, or used as a part of apledge. In general, a slave could be said to have a much more restricted legal capacity than does a serf, simply due to the fact that serfs were considered right-holding individuals whereas slaves, although recognized as human beings, were not. Swiss Roman law scholar Pahud Samuel explains this paradoxical status as "the slave being a person in the natural sense and a thing in the civil law sense".[22]
TheCode noir provided that slaves might lodge complaints with local judges in the case of mistreatment or being under-provided with necessities (article 26), but also that their statements should be considered only as reliable as that of minors ordomestic servants.[8]
Code Noir acknowledged the existence of slave families and marriages. The Code recognized slaves marriages provided they were contracted according to the Catholic rite and attempted to regulate family life among slaves. Mothers played a central role in maintaining family structures, and the Code addressed issues related to the separation of families through sales or other means. The status of a child's freedom was dependent on the mother's status at the time of birth. Article XIII cites that "...if a male slave has married a free woman, their children, either male or female, shall be free as is their mother, regardless of their father's condition of slavery. And if the father is free and the mother a slave, the children shall also be slaves".
Article XII precises that "the children born in marriage to a male and a female slave will belong to the mother's master if they are owned by two different masters".[23][24] This reliance upon the mother's status for the identification of the consequent child's status placed the majority of the slave-producing burden upon the enslaved women of the French colonies.
 | This sectionrelies excessively onreferences toprimary sources. Please improve this section by addingsecondary or tertiary sources. Find sources: "Code Noir" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(November 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Punishments were a matter ofpublic or royal law, where the disciplinary power over slaves could be considered more severe than that fordomestic servants yet less severe than that for soldiers.
With respect to the inheritance of property, estate, and seizures, slaves were considered to bepersonal property (article 44), that is, considered separate from the estate on which they live (which was not the case with serfs). Despite this, slaves could not be seized by a creditor as property independent of the estate, with the exception of compensating the seller of the slaves (article 47).
According to the Code, slaves can be bought, sold, and given like anychattels. Slaves were provided no name or civil registration, rather, starting in 1839, they were given a serial number. Following the1848 abolition of slavery under theFrench Second Republic, a name was assigned to each former slave.[29] Slaves could testify, have a proper burial (for thosebaptized), lodge complaint, and, with the master's permission, have savings, marry, etc. Nevertheless, theirlegal capacity was still more restrictive than that ofminors or domestic servants (articles 30 and 31). Slaves had no right to personal possessions and could notbequeath anything to their families. Upon the death of the slave, all remained property of the master (article 28).
Married slaves and their prepubescent children could not be separated throughseizure or sale (article 47).
The first article of theCode noir enjoined a Catholic expulsion of allJews residing in the colonial territories due to their being "sworn enemies of the Christian faith" (ennemis déclarés du nom chrétien), within three months under penalty of the confiscation of person and property. The Antillean Jews targeted by theCode noir were mainly descendants of families of Portuguese and Spanish origin who had come from the Dutch colony ofPernambuco inBrazil.[30][4]
After the Da Costa family founded the first synagogue of Martinique in 1676, the visible Jewish presence in Martinique and Saint-Domingue led Jesuit missionaries to petition for the expulsion of Jews and other non-Catholics to both local and metropolitan authorities.[31][32]
This precipitated an edict expelling Jews from the colonies in 1683, which would be incorporated into the Code Noir.[32] The Jewish population of Martinique was likely the specific target of the antisemitic clause (article 1) of the original 1685 Code.
Two supplementary texts instituted the code in theMascarene Islands andLouisiana[5]; they were ratified by King Louis XV in December 1723 and March 1724 respectively.[33] While they were essentially derived from the Code noir, these are distinct legislative texts, differing in content and in "spirit"; they were far more racialist and segregationist.[11]: 39–40
The Code noir was introduced in the French colonies in the Indian Ocean (île de France and île de Bourbon; modernMauritius andRéunion, respectively) by the Lettres patentes of 1723. The Lettres patentes were kept in place by the British after their annexation of Mauritius to ensure a better application of its protective clauses, and some of its provisions lasted until 1848. By virtue of their long lifespan, they are considered the fundamental legal texts for slavery in the region[34]: 112–113
The Mascarene Islands' Lettres patentes had 54 articles.[34]: 113 It notably differed from the Antilles'Code noir that slave owners, and not colonial authorities, were responsible for the Christianization of slaves.[35]: 467
The Lettres patentes were not exhaustive, and had to be supplemented if not amended by other texts; most notably, the royal ordinance of 20 August 1766, the local ordinance of September 1767, theCode jaune, theCode Decaen and theNouveau Code Noir.[34]: 113–115
The LouisianaCode noir was ratified by King Louis XV in December 1723 and registered in New Orleans on September 10, 1724. It remained the basis of Louisiana's legislation on slavery (with some revisions in the SpanishPartidas Siete) until 1806-1807, when the legislature of New Orleans decided to revise the regulations on these matters. Even then, parts of theCode noir were kept.[36]: 21–22
The LouisianaCode noir had 54 articles, of which 31 were directly taken from the previousCode noir. The new articles generally offered minor changes, except the articles on marriage : whites were fully prohibited from contracting marriages with blacks.[17]: 121–122 Also, whereas punishment by whipping, branding or the cutting of the ears had to be confirmed by the Conseil supérieur in the Antilles'Code noir, they did not in the LouisianaCode noir (meaning the lower court, a trial court, could alone choose punishment for a slave)[17]: 189
TheCode noir was not legally valid in Canada, be it the French West Indies' or Louisiana's,[17]: 43 and there were no specific rules on the treatment of slaves in royal edicts, ordinances, acts in public registries transcribed by the Conseil supérieur orRaudot's ordinance. However, owners generally complied with theCode noir without requirement to do so[17]: 122 , and slaves were still considered to be personal property.[17]: 85
Yet, theCode noir was not always followed to the letter. Corporal punishment was less severe.[17]: 178 In front of the court, slaves were generally treated equally to free persons - if not with leniency.[17]: 189–190, [178] Slaves could be the plaintiffs in civil cases.[17]: 189–190 Whereas slaves had no legal capacity in theCode noir, they could and often did act as witnesses in the Canada on the same footing as free persons.[17]: 179 For slaves to survive the harsh weather, they needed better clothing than the minimum prescribed by theCode noir.[17]: 127 There is at least one case of a owner taking only a portion of his slave's earnings (whereas according to theCode noir, he was entitled to all of it)[17]: 126
Upon the 2015 release of his workLe Code noir. Idées reçues sur un texte symbolique, colonial law historian Jean-François Niort was attacked for his position that the authors of the Code intended for "a mediation between master and slave" by minor Guadeloupean political organizations self-styled as "patriotic" and accused of "racial discrimination" and denialism by some members of the Guadeloupean independentist movement who threatened toexpel him from Guadeloupe.[37] He has been roundly supported by the historical community[who?] which has denounced the verbal and physical intimidation of specialists in the colonial history of the region.[38] The controversy continued in an argument in the opinions section of the French newspaperLe Monde between Niort and the philosopher Louis Sala-Molins.[39]
On May 10, 2025, on the occasion of the National Day of Remembrance of the Slave Trade, Slavery, and Their Abolition, French Prime MinisterFrançois Bayrou promised to abolish the Black Code on slavery. The Senegalese historian Mansour AW criticized the effort as vain subtilities with no adherent, as slavery is already abolished and theCode noir is no longer in force.[40]
{{cite web}}:Missing or empty|title= (help)New France (1534–1763) | |
|---|---|
| History | |
| Colonies |
|
| Towns and villages |
|
| Forts | |
| Governments |
|
| Laws | |
| Economy | |
| Society | |
| Missionary groups | |
| Wars | |
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
