Final answer:
The king tried to curb the economic power of enslaved people by enforcing restrictive laws and policies that limited their ability to trade, own property, and become economically independent. This approach was evident both in early legislative efforts in colonial South Carolina and in the aftermath of the Civil War with the end of land grants on the Sea Islands, designed to maintain economic dependency and force the freedmen back into labor for former enslavers.
Step-by-step explanation:
The king attempted to reduce the economic power of enslaved people by implementing laws that restricted their activities and economic independence. For example, in South Carolina, laws passed between 1686 and 1751 aimed to control the activities of the enslaved by prohibiting them from engaging in the exchange of goods without their master's consent, carrying away timber, planting their crops, and possessing provisions while being away from their masters' lands. These legislative measures were intended to keep enslaved people dependent on their owners for their livelihood and to diminish any ability they might have to accumulate wealth or resources independently.
Furthermore, during the post-Civil War era, specifically with the end of the Sea Islands experiment in freedmen land grants by 1867, the economic empowerment of formerly enslaved people was undermined. Johnson's policy forced the freed people to give up their land and work for the previous landowners, who were often their former enslavers. Any retained lands were gradually lost due to division among heirs or piecemeal sales, leading to continued poverty for the formerly enslaved and their descendants.
In contrast, some African leaders like Affonso I of Kongo sought to reduce or end the slave trade altogether by seeking to develop his region into a Christian state with the help of the Portuguese. However, the overall trend was to maintain control over the economic potential of the enslaved and to prevent their ascension to economic independence.