And then there is the link between expanding western science and the slave trade. Sorry that this article is embargoed (but ask your library for a pdf). I do include some key conclusions.

“NOW THAT THE LINK between early science and slavery has come to light, an important question remains: What should scientists do about it? Historians say acknowledgment is a start: In research papers, scientists should men-tion how specimens were gathered. Taking the origin of specimens into account can also improve the research itself, especially given the paucity of collecting records in some cases. For example, Murphy mentions that the slave trade can help explain the geo-graphic distributions of certain specimens.

African plants, for instance, wouldn’t have been collected from all over the continent, but from specific points along the coast—the ports where countries were shipping slaves. “From a scientific point of view, your specimen is essentially a piece of evidence,” Harris adds, “and the more you know about the prove-nance of that piece of evidence and the better understanding you have… the better you can use it within your analyses.”

The connections between science and the slave trade could also feed into ongoing debates about repa-rations and the historical legacies of slavery. Like some U.K. organi-zations, U.S. universities such as Yale, Georgetown, and Brown have acknowledged how they benefited from slavery. For the most part, Murphy says, those conversations are framed “in terms of just dol-lars and cents, pounds and pence. Yet [the profits] can also clearly be measured in specimens collected and papers published.”

Overall, she says, “Modern science and the transatlantic slave trade were two of the most important fac-tors in the shaping of the modern world.” Historians are finally recog-nizing that they shaped each other as well. As Delbourgo says, “We’ve been so negligent in bringing these histories [of slavery and science] to-gether. We’ve missed that they are in fact the same history.” ■