A Really Good Read from The Nation: The Politician-Scholar Eric Williams and the tangled history of

[Klaralven]

2. Interesting, but why didn't slavery result in a similar capitalism in Portugal

Brazil was the destination of the largest number of African slaves. Despite revolts and significant manumission during the first half of the 19th century, slavery was only abolished in 1888.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Brazil

I think that slavery has mainly to do with the need for agricultural labor. When large areas or arable land were seized from hunter-gatherer populations, the rapid development required large amounts of labor. This is most economically obtained by capturing indigenous slaves and importing African slaves.

However, once the population increases and more local labor becomes available for temporary employment, it becomes uneconomical to tie up capital by investing in slaves. The key is that the local population has to increase to the point where it has to work for the landowners in order to eat.

The latter situation was prevalent in central and eastern Europe, where the landowning nobility employed serfs. Serfs were not owned, but they were bound to the land which the nobility owned. They were obliged to eke out their own subsistence on small plots while working a few days a week on the nobles land and enterprises. Since there were so many serfs, and anyone who owned land also got the attached serfs, serfs had no market value.