Slavery in the United States and in Brazil

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:22 pm
Thanked: 112 times
Followed by:13 members
1000 RC

For years scholars have contrasted slavery in the United States and in Brazil, stimulated by the fact that racial patterns assumed such different aspects in the two countries after emancipation. Brazil never developed a system of rigid segregation of the sort that replaced slavery in the United States, and its racial system was fluid because its definition of race was based as much on characteristics such as economic status as on skin color. Until recently, the most persuasive explanation for these differences was that Portuguese institutions especially the Roman Catholic church and Roman civil law, promoted recognition of the slave's humanity. The English colonists, on the other hand, constructed their system of slavery out of whole cloth. There were simply no precedents in English common law, and separation of church and state barred Protestant clergy from the role that priests assumed in Brazil.
But the assumption that institutions alone could so powerfully affect the history of two raw and malleable frontier countries seems, on reexamination, untenable. Recent studies focus instead on a particular set of contrasting economic circumstances and demographic profiles at significant periods in the histories of the two countries. Persons of mixed race quickly appeared in both countries. In the United States they were considered to be Black, a social definition that was feasible because they were in the minority. In Brazil, it was not feasible. Though intermarriage was illegal in both countries, the laws were unenforceable in Brazil since Whites formed a small minority in an overwhelmingly Black population. Manumission for persons of mixed race was also easier in Brazil, particularly in the nineteenth century when in the United States it was hedged about with difficulties. Furthermore, a shortage of skilled workers in Brazil provided persons of mixed race with the opportunity to learn crafts and trades, even before general emancipation, whereas in the United States entry into these occupations was blocked by Whites sufficiently numerous to fill the posts. The consequence was the development in Brazil of a large class of persons of mixed race, proficient in skilled trades and crafts, who stood waiting as a community for freed slaves to join.
There should be no illusion that Brazilian society after emancipation was color-blind. Rather, the large population of persons of mixed race produced a racial system that included a third status, a bridge between the Black caste and the White, which could be traversed by means of economic or intellectual achievement, marriage, or racial heritage. The strict and sharp line between the races so characteristic of the United States in the years immediately after emancipation was simply absent. With the possible exception of New Orleans, no special "place" developed in the United States for persons of mixed race. Sad to say, every pressure of society worked to prevent their attaining anything approximating the economic and social position available to their counterparts in Brazil.


4. The author implies that the explanation proposed by early scholars for the differences between the systems of slavery in the United States and in Brazil is
(A) stimulating to historians and legal scholars
(B) more powerful than more recent explanations
(C) persuasive in spite of minor deficiencies
(D) excessively legalistic in its approach
(E) questionable in light of current scholarly work


7. The use of quotation marks around the word "place" (line 59) suggests that the author intended to convey which of the following?
(A) An ambivalent attitude toward the city of New Orleans
(B) A negative attitude toward the role of race in determining status in the United States
(C) A critical comment about the maltreatment of persons of mixed race in the United States
(D) A double meaning, indicating both a social status and a physical location
(E) An ambiguity, referring to either the role persons of mixed race actually played, or the role they were assigned by the society

OA after some discussion . Please explain the answer.

User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 1:05 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:660

by irock » Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:13 am
4. E
7. D
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit - Aristotle.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:22 pm
Thanked: 112 times
Followed by:13 members

by smackmartine » Fri Jun 03, 2011 6:14 pm
@irock , If you can explain ,it will be great. thanks

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Sat Jun 04, 2011 5:58 am
4. IMO E
REASON: But the assumption that institutions alone could so powerfully affect the history of two raw and malleable frontier countries seems, on reexamination, untenable

7. IMO D
REASON: It is mentioned to contrast with the new community(ref.social status) that is formed in Brazil.
Also all other options are irrelevant.
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

Legendary Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 9:14 am
Location: Pune, India
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:2 members

by adi_800 » Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:21 am
3. In the context in which it is found, the phrase "constructed their system of slavery out of whole cloth" (lines 15-16) implies that the system of slavery established by the English settlers was
(A) based on fabrications and lies
(B) tailored to the settlers' particular circumstances
(C) intended to serve the needs of a frontier economy
(D) developed without direct influence from the settlers' religion or legal system
(E) evolved without giving recognition to the slave's humanity


Not sure how the answer to this one is D
This is what the passage mentions..

Until recently, the most persuasive explanation for these differences was that Portuguese institutions especially the Roman Catholic church and Roman civil law, promoted recognition of the slave's humanity. The English colonists, on the other hand, constructed their system of slavery out of whole cloth.

The English colonists, on the other hand... simply means that they were not in line or not of the same opinion of Portuguese institutions... So, they did not promote the recognition of the slave's community..Thats what E says and in the question that says implies, you have to go beyond what is actually stated in the passage...
[spoiler]OA is D but I guess it has to be E !![/spoiler]

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 1:09 pm
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members

by Sharma_Gaurav » Tue Jan 03, 2012 10:19 pm
Hi Guys, I have another question to discuss from the same passage -
Q-1 1. In the passage, the author is primarily concerned with
(A) contrasting the systems of slavery that were established in Brazil and in the United States
(B) criticizing the arguments of those scholars who considered religion and law to be the determinants of the systems of slavery in Brazil and in the United States
(C) describing the factors currently thought to be responsible for the differences in the racial patterns that evolved in Brazil and in the United States
(D) advocating further study of the differences between the racial systems that developed in Brazil and in the United States
(E) pointing out the factors that made the status of Blacks in the United States lower than that of Blacks in Brazil

Here what should be the reasoning behind selecting the option C as answer as i selected option A as in all 3 paras of passage author is contrasting the slavery patterns developed between US and Brazil.