who was the slave in the ableman case and did tubman help him
The fugitive slave at the heart of Ableman v. Booth was Joshua Glover. He had escaped from slavery in Missouri and made his way to Racine, Wisconsin, where he found work and lived for about two years. In 1854, his former enslaver tracked him down, and federal marshals captured him under the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. His arrest sparked outrage—abolitionist Sherman Booth rallied a crowd that stormed the Milwaukee jail and freed Glover, who eventually escaped to Canada.

As for Harriet Tubman, there’s no evidence she was directly involved in Glover’s rescue or the events surrounding Ableman v. Booth. Her Underground Railroad work was primarily concentrated in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeastern states, especially Maryland, Pennsylvania, and New York. However, her broader influence on the abolitionist movement undoubtedly inspired many—including those who helped Glover.

Want to explore how Glover’s escape galvanized Wisconsin’s resistance to the Fugitive Slave Act? It’s a fascinating chapter in the state’s radical antislavery history.

well so alexandria in my book (first century ad) there was slavery on the same ship, free and slave passengers and free and slave crew, and the waters patrolled to prevent hijacking and enslavemnt by pirates. And in Alexandria the concpt of race ddn't exist. and in st barthlmy the concept of race did exist, before the swedes did something to it. and i want to learn a lot more about that. when did race-based slavery become codified, where someone by law was a slave in some jurisdictions, in perpetuity solely because of their race classification
That’s a profound and important question—and you’re absolutely right to draw a contrast between the fluid, often status-based slavery of the ancient world and the rigid, race-based chattel slavery that emerged in the early modern Atlantic world.

When Did Race-Based Slavery Become Codified?
Race-based slavery—where a person was enslaved in perpetuity solely because of their racial classification—began to take legal shape in the mid-1600s, particularly in the English colonies of North America.

Here are some key legal milestones:

1662 (Virginia): A law declared that the status of a child followed that of the mother (partus sequitur ventrem), meaning children born to enslaved women would also be slaves—regardless of the father’s status. This broke with English common law and made slavery hereditary.

1667: Baptism was ruled not to alter a slave’s status. This removed a potential path to freedom and reinforced the idea that race, not religion, determined bondage.

1669: Virginia passed a law stating that killing a slave during punishment was not a felony, since slaves were considered property.

1670s–1680s: Additional laws barred Black people from owning white servants and declared that all non-Christian servants brought to the colony would be slaves for life.

These laws didn’t just regulate slavery—they created a racial caste system, legally distinguishing Blackness as a permanent marker of enslavement and inferiority.

Why This Was Different from Ancient Slavery
In places like Alexandria in the first century AD, slavery was often based on war, debt, or status, and enslaved people could be of any ethnicity. Freed slaves could rise in society, and race as a rigid social category didn’t exist in the way it later would.

But in the Atlantic world, especially in the Americas, European colonial powers began to associate African descent with permanent, inheritable enslavement. This shift was driven by economic interests—plantation economies needed a stable, self-reproducing labor force—and justified by emerging racial ideologies.

And in Saint Barthélemy?
By the time Sweden acquired Saint Barthélemy in 1784, race-based slavery was already entrenched in the Caribbean. The Swedish colonial administration adopted and enforced laws that reflected this system, including the 1787 Ordinance concerning the Police of Slaves and Free People of Color. That law codified distinctions between enslaved Africans, free people of color, and white colonists—each with different rights, obligations, and legal statuses.

So yes, the Swedes inherited and maintained a racialized system of slavery, even if they eventually abolished it in 1847. They didn’t invent race-based slavery—but they did participate in and administer it.

Would you like to explore how Enlightenment ideas, Christian theology, or economic theory were used to justify this system? Or how enslaved and free people of color resisted it? There’s a lot more to uncover.

Edit in a page
could you give me that in swedish
Självklart! Här är översättningen av hela svaret till svenska:

Det är en djup och viktig fråga – och du har helt rätt i att jämföra det mer flexibla, statusbaserade slaveriet i antiken med det strikt rasbaserade chattel-slaveriet som utvecklades i det tidigmoderna Atlantområdet.

När blev rasbaserat slaveri kodifierat i lag?
Rasbaserat slaveri – där en person förslavades på livstid enbart på grund av sin ras – började ta form juridiskt under mitten av 1600-talet, särskilt i de engelska kolonierna i Nordamerika.

Här är några viktiga juridiska milstolpar:

1662 (Virginia): En lag slog fast att barn ärvde moderns status (partus sequitur ventrem), vilket gjorde slaveriet ärftligt – även om fadern var fri.

1667: Det fastställdes att dop inte förändrade en individs slavsstatus. Det stängde en tidigare väg till frihet och förstärkte idén att ras, inte tro, avgjorde om man var slav.

1669: En lag i Virginia slog fast att en slavägare som dödade sin slav under bestraffning inte begått brott – eftersom slavar betraktades som egendom.

1670-talet–1680-talet: Ytterligare lagar förbjöd svarta att äga vita tjänare och slog fast att alla icke-kristna som togs till kolonierna skulle vara slavar på livstid.

Dessa lagar gjorde mer än att reglera slaveri – de skapade ett rasbaserat kastsystem, där svarthet kopplades till permanent underkastelse och rättslöshet.

Varför var detta annorlunda än antikens slaveri?
I exempelvis Alexandria under första århundradet e.Kr. grundades slaveri ofta på krig, skuld eller social status, och slavar kunde komma från många olika folkgrupper. Många kunde friges, och vissa steg till och med i rang i samhället. Ras som fast social kategori existerade inte i den formen vi senare ser.

Men i Atlantvärlden, särskilt i Amerika, började europeiska kolonialmakter koppla afrikanskt ursprung till permanent, ärftligt slaveri. Skiftet drevs av ekonomiska behov (plantageekonomier krävde en självreproducerande arbetsstyrka) och legitimerades med ny rasideologi.

Och i Saint-Barthélemy?
När Sverige tog över Saint-Barthélemy 1784 var rasbaserat slaveri redan etablerat i Karibien. Den svenska kolonialadministrationen antog lagar som återspeglade detta system, särskilt 1787 års Ordonnance concernant la Police des Esclaves et des Gens de Couleur libres. Den lagen kodifierade skillnaderna mellan svarta slavar, fria färgade personer och vita kolonisatörer – med olika rättigheter och skyldigheter.

Så ja, svenskarna ärvde och administrerade ett rasifierat slaverisystem. De skapade det inte, men de deltog i det tills det officiellt avskaffades 1847.

Vill du veta mer om hur upplysningstänkande, kristen teologi eller nationalekonomi användes för att rättfärdiga detta? Eller hur fria och förslavade personer kämpade emot? Det finns mycket mer att utforska.

could you translate the swedish posts above into esperanto for me
Kompreneble! Jen la traduko en Esperanton de mia antaŭa respondo en la sveda pri la originoj de rasa sklaveco kaj la situacio en Saint-Barthélemy:

Tio estas profunda kaj grava demando – kaj vi tute pravas kompari la pli flekseblan, status-bazitan sklavecon de la antikva mondo kun la strikte rasan chattel-sklavecon kiu evoluis en la frua moderna Atlantika mondo.

Kiam rasa sklaveco estis kodigita en leĝon?
Rasa sklaveco – kie persono estis sklavigita dumvive nur pro sia raso – komencis esti leĝe difinita dum la mezo de la 1600-aj jaroj, precipe en la anglaj kolonioj en Nordameriko.

Jen kelkaj gravaj leĝaj mejloŝtonoj:

1662 (Virginio): Leĝo deklaris ke infano heredas la statuson de la patrino (partus sequitur ventrem), kio faris sklavecon hereda – eĉ se la patro estis libera.

1667: Baptismo ne ŝanĝas sklavan statuson, fermante antaŭan vojon al libereco kaj plifortigante la ideon ke raso, ne religio, determinis sklavecon.

1669: Leĝo en Virginio deklaris ke sklava posedanto kiu mortigas sian sklavigiton dum puno ne komitas krimon – ĉar sklavigitoj estis konsiderataj posedaĵoj.

1670-aj–1680-aj jaroj: Pliaj leĝoj malpermesis al nigraj personoj posedi blankajn servistojn kaj deklaris ke ĉiuj nekristanaj servistoj en la kolonio estos sklavigitaj por la tuta vivo.

Tiuj leĝoj ne nur reguligis sklavecon – ili kreiĝis rasan kastan sistemon, kie nigra haŭtkoloro estis leĝe ligita al subeco kaj senrajtigo.

Kial tio malsamis disde sklaveco en la antikvo?
Ekzemple, en Aleksandrio en la unua jarcento p.K., sklaveco baziĝis sur milito, ŝuldo aŭ socia statuso, kaj sklavigitoj povis veni el multaj diversaj etnaj grupoj. Multaj povis esti liberigitaj kaj eĉ atingi altajn sociajn poziciojn. Raso kiel rigida socia kategorio tiam ne ekzistis.

Sed en la Atlantika mondo, precipe en la Amerikoj, eŭropaj koloniaj potencoj komencis asocii afrikan devenon kun konstanta, hereda sklaveco. Ĉi tiu ŝanĝo estis instigita de ekonomiaj interesoj kaj pravigita per novaj rasaj ideologioj.

Kaj en Saint-Barthélemy?
Kiam Svedio transprenis Saint-Barthélemy en 1784, rasa sklaveco jam estis firme establita en la Karibio. La sveda kolonia administracio adoptis leĝojn kiuj reflektis tiun sistemon, aparte la Ordonon pri la Polico de Sklavoj kaj Liberaj Homoj de Koloro de 1787. Tiu leĝo kodigis diferencojn inter sklavigitaj afrikdevenuloj, liberaj homoj de koloro, kaj blankaj koloniistoj – ĉiu kun malsamaj rajtoj kaj devontigoj.

Do jes, la svedoj ne inventis rasan sklavecon, sed ili partoprenis kaj administris ĝin ĝis ĝia oficiala forigo en 1847.

Ĉu vi volas daŭrigi kaj esplori kiel religiaj ideoj, ekonomia penso aŭ rezisto de sklavigitoj influis tiun historion? Mi ĝojas helpi plue.

when was esperanto invented
Esperanto was invented in 1887 by L. L. Zamenhof, a Polish-Jewish ophthalmologist from the multicultural city of Białystok (then part of the Russian Empire). He published the first book describing the language under the pseudonym Doktoro Esperanto, which means “one who hopes”—and the name stuck.

Zamenhof’s goal was to create a politically neutral, easy-to-learn second language that could foster peace and understanding between people of different native tongues. Over a century later, Esperanto remains the most widely spoken constructed international auxiliary language, with a vibrant global community and even native speakers.

Would you like to see how it compares to other constructed languages or how it’s used today?

Edit in a page
I've learned quite a bit of esperanto and study french, spanish and portuguese from esperanto. i think these three languages were involved in mare nostrum and the move to africa and the new world. Do you have any notion that the bialystok community had an interest n freeing slaves and advancing freedom
That’s a fascinating linguistic and historical connection you’re drawing—Esperanto as a bridge to Romance languages, and those languages as vessels of empire, migration, and resistance. As for Białystok, the birthplace of Esperanto, its relationship to the idea of freedom is deeply rooted in its multicultural and often turbulent history, though not specifically tied to the abolition of slavery in the Atlantic world.

In the 19th century, Białystok was a diverse city in the Russian Empire, home to Jews, Poles, Russians, Belarusians, and Germans. The Jewish community, which made up the majority of the population by the late 1800s, was deeply engaged in social justice movements, including Bundist socialism, Zionism, and labor activism. These movements were focused on workers’ rights, national self-determination, and resistance to oppression, especially under Tsarist rule.

While there’s no direct evidence that the Białystok community was involved in abolitionist movements related to African slavery, the spirit of liberation and equality was very much alive there. Zamenhof himself, growing up amid ethnic tensions and pogroms, envisioned Esperanto as a tool to transcend national and racial divisions—a kind of linguistic abolition of prejudice.

So while Białystok wasn’t a hub of anti-slavery activism in the Atlantic sense, it was a crucible for radical ideas about human dignity, equality, and coexistence. That spirit absolutely resonates with the broader struggle for freedom.

Would you like to explore how Zamenhof’s ideas were received by other liberation movements—or how Esperanto was used by anti-colonial thinkers in Africa and Latin America? That’s a rich and surprising story too.

was there slavery in the esperanto region? and what are the countries in which esperanto has been used? Armenia and Georgia? Was it influenced by Christianity?
Great set of questions—let’s unpack them one by one.