In his study of slavery throughout the Caribbean, B. W. Higman writes that ‘variations in the character of slavery and in the demographic experience of slave populations may be traced, in part, to the contrasting physical and economic environments in which slaves were forced to live’ (1984, 40). In terms of the connection between slave labor and slave demography and their corresponding influence upon family formations—unlike the slave population in the United States, where relatively balanced sex ratios and high rates of natural reproduction helped substantiate the existence of the slave family—historians attempting to examine this institution in Latin America are forced to account for far different conditions that made slave family formation problematic. In general, scholars have attempted to juxtapose Iberian religious customs and legal precedents that allocated space for the slave family with the realities of the African slave trade that skewed heavily toward young males as the primary means to maintain population numbers. This left women, children and elderly slaves to be the exception on most plantations. Despite varying local conditions throughout the region that added additional degrees of protections for the slave family, the reality of Latin American colonial regimes, with severe sex imbalances, low fertility percentages, and extreme slave infant and child mortality rates, ensures that positive natural increase among slaves is best viewed as ‘a rarity, confined almost entirely to the marginal economies’ (Knight 1997, 88). More specifically for Cuba, the model of the mid-century plantation, with its emphasis on economic productivity overwhelming most legal or religious attempts at ameliorating conditions of enslavement, proscribed nearly any degree of demographic diversity within the slave community. These conclusions have led one historian to recently argue that that it is a ‘wellaccepted historiographic fact that Cuba’s nineteenth-century slave population did not achieve population replacement rates of reproduction’ with extreme labor conditions and untenable gender ratios severally retarding family formation as a result (Morrison 2015, 74–75). Although largely accurate in its depiction of island-wide rural slave populations during this period, demographic statistics have traditionally, and to a certain degree exclusively, reflected a hyper-focus on the Cuban ingenio, or sugar plantation. As the work requirements of sugar dictated both a predominantly male slave population—with sex ratios consistently reaching 70 percent or higher over the course of the nineteenth century—and a

中文翻译：

---

奴隶家庭形成的机会和界限：1817 年至 1886 年古巴比纳尔德里奥的烟草劳动力和人口统计

在他对整个加勒比地区奴隶制的研究中，BW Higman 写道，“奴隶制特征和奴隶人口人口统计经历的变化可能部分归因于奴隶被迫生活的对比鲜明的物质和经济环境” (1984, 40)。关于奴隶劳动和奴隶人口之间的联系及其对家庭构成的相应影响——与美国的奴隶人口不同，美国相对平衡的性别比例和高自然繁殖率有助于证实奴隶家庭的存在——历史学家试图为了研究拉丁美洲的这一制度，被迫考虑使奴隶家庭形成问题的截然不同的条件。一般来说，学者们试图将伊比利亚宗教习俗和为奴隶家庭分配空间的法律先例与非洲奴隶贸易的现实并列，后者严重倾向于年轻男性作为维持人口数量的主要手段。这使得妇女、儿童和老年奴隶成为大多数种植园的例外。尽管整个地区不同的地方条件为奴隶家庭增加了额外的保护程度，但拉丁美洲殖民政权的现实，性别严重失衡，生育率低，以及极端的奴隶婴儿和儿童死亡率，确保了奴隶家庭的积极自然增长奴隶最好被视为“一种罕见的，几乎完全局限于边缘经济体”（Knight 1997, 88）。更具体地说，古巴是本世纪中叶种植园的典范，其强调经济生产力压倒了大多数改善奴役条件的法律或宗教尝试，禁止奴隶社区内几乎任何程度的人口多样性。这些结论导致一位历史学家最近争辩说，由于极端的劳动条件和难以维持的性别比例，古巴 19 世纪的奴隶人口没有达到再生产的人口替代率，这是一个“广为接受的历史事实”，从而阻碍了家庭的形成。莫里森，2015 年，74–75）。尽管在此期间对全岛农村奴隶人口的描述基本准确，但人口统计传统上，并且在某种程度上完全反映了对古巴 ingenio 或甘蔗种植园的高度关注。