The Chapters

The book is structured around six chapters, five of which are versions of previously published articles or book chapters, with the third chapter, “Recolonization in the Nineteenth Century,” being the only entirely new contribution. The first chapter, “The First Colonization,” examines the arrival of the Portuguese in STP in the late 15^th century, often described as uninhabited at the time. (Though nationalist narratives suggest the possible presence of local populations.) The chapter focuses on the establishment of sugar monoculture and the use of enslaved labor, describing the rise and decline of the first plantation cycle between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. As production in STP was less competitive than in Brazil, the system eventually collapsed, and the islands became a transit point for the transatlantic slave trade until the mid-nineteenth century. Seibert’s analysis is primarily political and economic, drawing on existing scholarship rather than previously unexplored sources. While this approach effectively situates STP within the broader Portuguese colonial framework, it also overlooks the nearly two centuries during which the islands functioned as a commercial entrepôt. The analyses emphasize both the unique aspects of STP’s colonial experience and its continuities with other Portuguese colonies, such as the islands’ role as a laboratory for plantation-based colonial economy and the early presence of Black and “mixed-race” populations in official positions in its administration.

The second and third chapters shift focus to the social history and the “recolonization” of the islands in the nineteenth century. Originally published in 2011, the second chapter, “Slave Resistance and Revolt,” marks a shift toward a social history approach. Seibert foregrounds the agency of enslaved people, arguing that writing the history of slavery necessarily entails writing the history of resistance to it, with flight constituting the main form through which resistance developed in the archipelago. The chapter examines the formation of communities of fugitive enslaved people in STP. Referred to as macambos, these settlements formed as early as the 1530s.Footnote ² Although such communities have been known by different names across the Atlantic World, the macambos experience in STP has received relatively little attention in the historiography. Seibert therefore presents them as a promising subject for future research, including comparative work with slave revolts elsewhere in the Atlantic. The chapter also focuses on the emergence of the Angolares, which the author interprets as a social group formed through these processes of flight and maroonage. Central to the analysis is the rebellion of 1595, one of the earliest of its kind in the Atlantic World, and the broader impact of enslaved resistance on the plantation system. Seibert challenges dominant narratives that explain the origins of the Angolares as either the descendants of survivors of a shipwreck or an autochthonous population of the island. Instead, he defends the quilombo theory, drawing on documentary, linguistic, and genetic evidence to argue that the Angolares originated from maroon communities. At the same time, while intervening in this historiographical debate, the author productively calls for further research into the social dynamics of the Angolares and encourages a critical reassessment of interpretations shaped by nationalist or “patriotic” historiographical traditions.Footnote ³

In the third chapter, “Recolonization in the Nineteenth Century,” the book traces the revival of plantation monoculture in STP with the expansion of coffee and cocoa estates—known locally as roças—accompanied by forced labor and the recruitment of workers from across Africa.Footnote ⁴ This period is commonly identified in the historiography as the “second colonization” of the archipelago. As outlined in the first two chapters, the “first colonization” was marked by the implementation of the sugar plantation system. However, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the decline of sugar production and a supposed Portuguese disinterest in the islands led STP to function primarily as a trading and supply point for ships crossing the Atlantic—particularly those engaged in the trafficking of enslaved people from West and Central Africa to Brazil—to the detriment of agricultural production. The author highlights the historiographical neglect of this period, pointing out that many recent approaches are largely influenced by twentieth-century colonial narratives. In his account, this “second colonization” carried out in the nineteenth century was marked by the reactivation of the roças system through the expansion of coffee and cocoa plantations and a renewed focus on export-oriented agriculture. The return to this export model relied heavily on coercive labor regimes: first through the exploitation of enslaved people and forros (freed persons), and later through the recruitment of African workers from various regions of the continent under so-called “contract systems” that functioned in practice as forms of forced labor.Footnote ⁵ Seibert argues that “recolonization” contributed to the further fragmentation of the social structure, with crioulos (local elites), forros, and Angolares on one side and serviçais (contract laborers brought from other parts of Africa) on the other. These social divisions played a significant role in the formation of the hierarchies found in STP today.Footnote ⁶ While the chapter persuasively highlights the economic and political structures of recolonization and denounces the brutality of forced labor, its top-down narrative largely omits the lived experiences and forms of resistance of those subjected to these oppressive systems.

The later chapters (Four, Five, and Six), covering the 1953 massacre, the anticolonial movement, independence, and post-1975 politics, are informative but uneven in analytical depth. Originally published in 2003, the fourth chapter, “The Massacre of February 1953,” examines the massacre in Batepá within the context of growing African independence movements and the violent responses of European imperial regimes. The author interprets the massacre as the result of the Portuguese colonial government’s attempt to force the crioulos population to work on the plantations. The crioulos responded with spontaneous protests but were met with brutal repression. According to the author, this was the most violent episode of Portuguese colonialism in times of peace, marked by sadism and by attempts to justify the repression as a response to a fabricated communist insurrection.Footnote ⁷ The massacre, later recognized as a milestone in Santomean nationalism, became a symbol of the struggle against colonialism and remains present in the current calendar of celebrations for the country’s independence. The author’s approach to the massacre was pioneering at the time of the article’s original publication; however, it would have benefited from some revisions in light of more recent scholarship. Indeed, despite recognizing the extreme violence and structural racism involved in the event, the text favors a perspective focused on political and economic developments and largely adopts a top-down approach. As a result, it does not engage with more recent perspectives developed through the analysis of other massacres and atrocities committed by Portuguese colonial regimes during late colonialism (1946–75).Footnote ⁸

Chapter five, “Anti-colonial Activism and Independence,” analyzes how the anticolonial struggle in STP was deeply linked to the diaspora, especially through Santomean students in Lisbon, who founded the Comité de Libertação de São Tomé e Príncipe (CLSTP, São Tomé and Príncipe Liberation Committee) in the 1960s, later reformulated in 1972 as the Movimento de Libertação de São Tomé e Príncipe (MLSTP, São Tomé and Príncipe Liberation Movement). The movement, composed of educated elites from the islands, faced challenges in gaining recognition in STP because it operated in exile and did not organize demonstrations or armed actions in the archipelago. After the Carnation Revolution in 1974, which ended the dictatorial regime established in Portugal in 1926, the archipelago’s independence was negotiated between Portugal and the MLSTP, with the former metropole recognizing the organization as a legitimate representative of the liberation struggle in STP despite its limited influence in the territory. The transition to independence in 1975 was peaceful, marked by internal disputes between the MLSTP and other organizations, such as the Frente Popular Livre (Free Popular Front), which quickly lost relevance. As Seibert shows, independence consolidated the MLSTP’s leadership but also highlighted the tensions between the nationalists’ unifying discourse and the social and historical divisions in Santomean society. The discussion of anticolonial activism in chapter five highlights the role of the diaspora and the MLSTP in independence negotiations. Still, it could have engaged more critically with the tensions between nationalist discourse and local social dynamics, as suggested by the antagonism between the MLSTP and the Frente Popular Livre.

As Seibert argues in the sixth and final chapter, “Politics and Economy since 1975,” following independence STP became a socialist single-party republic and later transitioned to a multiparty democracy in 1990. Compared to the earlier chapters, however, this chapter does not maintain the same level of analytical depth and adopts a more descriptive approach. At times, this results in an interpretation that tends to evaluate postcolonial developments in normative terms rather than situating them fully within their broader historical and social contexts. For instance, the discussion of the postindependence economy pays significant attention to the decline of the plantation system and the economic challenges faced by the country in the late twentieth century. The author also highlights the wave of optimism generated by attempts to explore offshore oil reserves beginning in 1997—expectations that ultimately did not materialize as anticipated. In addressing these developments, the chapter occasionally emphasizes the economic potential of the plantation economy without fully considering the perspectives of local actors toward that system, which was historically associated with colonial exploitation and coercive labor regimes. As a result, the analysis leaves relatively little room to explore how postcolonial social actors engaged with, resisted, or reinterpreted the legacies of the plantation economy after independence.

Final Considerations

While the book offers valuable insights and remains a fundamental contribution to the field, the debates it raises would benefit from further critical engagement. At certain points, a more nuanced treatment of concepts and periodization might have added analytical depth to discussions that occasionally remained underdeveloped. Two examples help illustrate this point. First, the use of the term “recolonization” to describe the reassertion of Portuguese control over STP in the nineteenth century may inadvertently reproduce a Eurocentric framing, as it tends to overlook the colonial role played by Brazilian actors in the intervening centuries. Although Brazil itself remained a Portuguese colony during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, only achieving independence in 1822, individuals connected to Brazil were actively involved in colonial practices in STP that closely resembled those of the European colonizers. By framing this period in which STP functioned economically as a trading post for the transatlantic slave trade as an interruption in colonization, the narrative risks overlooking broader colonial dynamics that extended far beyond European actors. Incorporating these dimensions would help illuminate the different forms of exploitation and domination practiced by non-European agents within imperial systems.Footnote ⁹ A related issue concerns the chronological and thematic organization of the book, which tends to align the history of STP with the trajectory of Portuguese colonization in the archipelago. Because this process takes center stage, the history of the islands sometimes seems to overlap with the history of Portuguese actions. Although this is clearly not the author’s intention, such an approach may inadvertently reinforce the impression that Portugal and its colonial legacy continue to dominate the narrative about the archipelago, leaving less space for perspectives that foreground local actors and alternative understandings of colonial history.

The book’s emphasis on political and economic history also limits engagement with sociocultural and anthropological dimensions that could have taken the analysis further. At times, this leads to interpretations that appear somewhat simplified. For instance, Seibert explains the refusal of forros to work on plantations primarily through notions of cultural pride and identity. While such elements may have indeed shaped collective discourses and self-perceptions, other factors likely played an equally significant role. The precarious working conditions, low remuneration, and limited social recognition associated with plantation labor also contributed to shaping attitudes toward this form of work. Considering these dynamics together would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the ways in which freed populations positioned themselves in relation to manual labor in the afterlives of slavery.

Similar limitations appear in the discussion of the postindependence political landscape. Seibert argues that the emergence of the nation-state and the development of a particular “political culture” contributed to patterns of clientelism, corruption, and economic stagnation. At this point, the analysis relies on evaluative language without fully clarifying the analytical criteria underlying these judgments. A more systematic consideration of the historical and structural conditions shaping these dynamics might have provided additional nuance. Examining how colonial legacies, international economic pressures, and global inequalities have influenced political and economic practices in the archipelago could have deepened the analysis. Likewise, placing these practices in comparative perspective (for example, alongside forms of political influence and economic lobbying commonly accepted in other political systems) might have helped situate them within broader debates about governance and power rather than presenting them primarily as local pathologies. Such an approach would open space to explore the historical contexts in which these practices emerge, how they operate in practice, and which social actors benefit from them.

Despite these limitations, Seibert’s work provides a detailed and well-documented account of the colonial and postindependence history of STP. The book would perhaps have benefited from an introductory or concluding chapter that synthesized the various arguments and emphasized the broader relevance of the archipelago’s history for international scholarship. Some chapters might also have been strengthened by closer attention to social experiences, microhistorical perspectives, and the voices of individuals directly affected by colonial and postcolonial transformations. Even so, The Wealth of History of the Small African Twin-Island State São Tomé and Príncipe remains an important and accessible introduction to the history of the archipelago and to the broader dynamics of Portuguese colonialism in Africa.