By Agnes Mathilde Wergeland (Author), Colin Heston (Introduction)

Slavery in Germanic Society sets out to trace the evolution of slavery from the late Roman world through the early and high medieval periods. Wergeland’s analysis begins by distinguishing classical slavery—predicated on the total alienation of the enslaved person from kinship, community, and legal personhood—from the systems of servitude that emerged in Germanic societies. As Germanic tribes moved into former Roman territories, they both absorbed and modified existing practices of unfree labor. Captives taken in war, debtors who had fallen into bondage, and the descendants of slaves formed a stratum of society that was neither fully outside nor fully within the emerging frameworks of medieval law.

Wergeland is especially attentive to the role of law codes in shaping and regulating these relationships. The Salic Law, the Lex Saxonum, and other Germanic legal compilations provide glimpses into a world where freedom and unfreedom were not binary categories but existed along a continuum. The distinction between a servus (slave), a colonus (tenant bound to the land), and a liber homo (freeman) was fluid and often contested. Her work suggests that these categories were not only legal but also deeply embedded in cultural ideas about honor, lineage, and the obligations of lordship.

Wergeland’s historiographical legacy is also tied to the broader cultural currents of her time. Writing in the aftermath of the American Civil War and during the height of European colonial expansion, she was acutely aware of slavery’s moral and political resonance. While she does not draw explicit parallels between medieval and modern forms of servitude, her decision to study the topic reflects a world in which questions of liberty, labor, and human rights were urgently contested.
In returning to Slavery in Germanic Society During the Middle Ages today, readers encounter a work that is both a product of its era and strikingly relevant to our own. It invites us to consider how deeply embedded systems of inequality are in the fabric of society, and how they can endure even as their outward forms change. Wergeland’s careful scholarship provides a foundation for ongoing conversations about freedom, coercion, and the ways in which human societies organize power and labor.
This edition reintroduces Wergeland’s study to a new generation of readers at a moment when the legacies of slavery and unfreedom are once again at the center of global debates. It offers not only an invaluable historical resource but also a reminder of the intellectual courage of a scholar who, against the odds, claimed her place in the academy and in the long conversation about justice and humanity.

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2025. 93p.

By Adam Gurowski (Author), Colin Heston (Preface)

Adam Gurowski’s Slavery in History is a sweeping and impassioned historical treatise that challenges the reader to reconsider the institution of slavery not as a fixed or inevitable component of human civilization, but as a corrosive anomaly that has repeatedly undermined the moral and structural integrity of societies throughout history. Written in the mid-19th century, a time when the question of slavery was at the forefront of political and ethical discourse—particularly in the United States—Gurowski’s work stands as both a scholarly inquiry and a moral indictment. His approach is not merely descriptive; it is analytical and polemical, seeking to dismantle the notion that slavery is a natural or historically justified institution.
From the outset, Gurowski frames slavery as a “general disease” rather than a social norm, arguing that its presence in any civilization is symptomatic of deeper political and moral decay. He rejects the deterministic view that slavery is a universal or necessary stage in societal development, instead positing that it is an aberration that has consistently led to the decline of the cultures that embraced it. This thesis is developed through a methodical examination of a wide array of civilizations—from the Egyptians and Phoenicians to the Greeks, Romans, and beyond. In each case, Gurowski explores how slavery was integrated into the social fabric, how it was justified or resisted, and ultimately, how it contributed to the weakening or collapse of those societies.
Adam Gurowski’s view on modern slavery, particularly as it existed in the 19th century, is deeply critical and morally charged. In Slavery in History, he argues that for the first time in human civilization, slavery had been elevated into a comprehensive ideological system—a “religious, social, and political creed” . This modern form of slavery, especially as practiced in the United States, was not merely a continuation of ancient customs but a deliberate and systemic institution, defended by theology, law, and public discourse. He is especially scathing in his critique of how slavery in the modern era had been rationalized and sanctified by political leaders, religious figures, and intellectuals. He describes this as a “new faith” with its own “temples,” “altars,” and “fanatical devotees,” suggesting that slavery had become a kind of state religion in parts of the American Republic. This metaphor underscores his belief that modern slavery was not just a social or economic system but a deeply entrenched ideology that corrupted every aspect of public life.
Finally, his introduction to Slavery in History serves as both a roadmap and a manifesto. It outlines the historical scope of the book—spanning ancient to modern civilizations—and sets the tone for a critical, morally engaged exploration of one of humanity’s oldest and most pernicious institutions. Gurowski’s work is not merely a catalog of historical facts; it is a call to conscience, urging readers to recognize the enduring consequences of slavery and to commit to the principles of justice and equality. In doing so, he positions his book as a vital contribution to the intellectual and ethical debates of his era—debates that, in many ways, continue to resonate today.
Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2025. 172p.

By  Ivy Hammond, , Wendy Wiegmann, Joseph Magruder, Daniel Webster, Bridgette Lery, Sarah Benatar, Jaclyn Chambers, Laura Packard Tucker, Katrina Brewsaugh, Annelise Loveless,  and Jonah Norwitt  

In 2014, California’s Senate Bill (S. B.) 855 created the state’s Opt-In Commercially Sexually Exploited Child (CSEC) Program, which gives participating county child welfare agencies guidance and funding to prevent and intervene on behalf of children who are or at risk of experiencing CSE. Nearly a decade later, with most counties having opted into the program, California is well positioned to evaluate this policy’s implementation and the extent to which the legislation may be influencing desired outcomes for young people. This report contains key findings, promising practices, and recommendations from our evaluation of the state’s CSEC program.

Why This Matters

The commercial sexual exploitation (CSE) of children and young people is a human rights concern and a public health challenge. CSE refers broadly to any activity or crime that involves the sexual abuse and exploitation of a child for monetary or nonmonetary benefit. Over a six-year period, California’s child protection system received roughly 70,000 maltreatment reports alleging CSEC. About a quarter of these reports were substantiated, meaning there was enough evidence to conclude that CSE of a child likely occurred. Research suggests that CSE during childhood can have serious consequences for its survivors, including exposure to violence and other traumatic events, mental health disorders, reproductive health complications, and internalized coping behaviors.

Key Takeaways

• Implementing S. B. 855 has fostered strong interagency collaboration and communication. Interagency collaboration has improved following S. B. 855, and those we spoke with reported positive relationships among agencies engaged in the county’s CSEC response. However, counties would benefit from greater intercounty service coordination.

• Staff and placement shortages exacerbate CSE service challenges. Staff turnover reduces trust between children, families, and county agencies; fragments ongoing training efforts; and chips away at institutional knowledge about CSE. The shortage of placements appropriate for young people experiencing or at risk of CSE came up repeatedly in interviews.

• B. 855 gave child welfare agencies responsibility for caring for this population, but many feel they have inadequate tools to be successful and sometimes feel undermined by other agency priorities. Child welfare staff bear the primary responsibility for the safety and care of these children but expressed concern that their mandates sometimes conflict with other stakeholders. The lack of a shared agenda can undermine interagency collaboration.

• It is challenging to serve young people experiencing CSE who are not formally involved with the child welfare system. Many counties did not have a clear process for serving young people who do not have an open child welfare case, nor a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities for which agency has oversight for these young people.

• The majority of CSE reports are screened in for investigation, but a minority of those investigated are substantiated. Nearly two-thirds of the 70,334 CSE reports made between July 1, 2015, and June 30, 2022, in opted-in counties were screened in for investigation. Among those, one in five were deemed inconclusive and nearly one in four reports were substantiated.

• A minority of young people were in child welfare cases or placements at the time CSE concerns were identified. Among young people with confirmed CSE, 4 percent had some placement history but were not in care when CSE concerns were documented, more than one in nine were in a placement, and nearly 3 percent were absent from placement.

Promising practices

• Assign and consolidate CSE cases to specific frontline workers rather than distributing them throughout the workforce.

• Implement 24/7 dual responses from child welfare and CSE advocates (voluntary nonprofit) when going out for CSE investigations.

• On-staff clinicians and staff dedicated to recovering missing young people may improve county efforts.

• Partnering with outside organizations can be effective in connecting at-risk young people who are not child welfare involved.

• Weighting CSE cases more heavily when calculating caseloads acknowledges that they are more intensive and may protect against burnout.

• Use a trauma-informed court specifically designated to hear CSE cases.

How We Did It

Our evaluation approach for California’s CSEC program consists of two main components: an implementation study and an outcome study.

The implementation study focused on opportunities for continuous quality improvement and cross-system collaboration. We gathered data from annual county program plans and a CSEC program administrator survey. We also conducted key informant interviews with agency and provider staff and focus groups with adults who experienced CSE as minors in a subset of 12 counties.

In the outcome study, we examined child welfare system involvement for young people after S. B. 855’s implementation. We analyzed information recorded in the statewide administrative database to describe the child welfare system experiences of 38,168 young people who met California’s definition of CSEC or were identified as being at heightened risk of experiencing CSE. We studied the identification of CSE, documentation practices, revictimiz

Washington DC: The Urban Institute, 2023. 97p.