African slave trade debate

Perry Noble:

http://books.google.com/books?id=pSMbAAAAYAAJ&dq=perry%20noble&pg=PA1...

"Slavery and the trade, though stones of offense, were made stepping=stones for missions. They formed the chief source of Europe's interest in Africa. They led the united states of Europe to their first joint action since the crusades in relation to Africa. The Vienna congress of 1815 declared the slave=trade repugnant to humanity and abolition most desirable. Since 1792 the majority of the powers, the United States of America first, had followed Denmark in forbidding the trade to their subjects, and in 1817 slavers were declared pirates. Seventy years later (1884=85) anxiety to promote the welfare of the Negro was announced as one of the motives for the Berlin conference. Europe and America undertook to employ every means to end the inland slave= trade. Muhammadan states for the first time in history participated with Christian powers in an enterprise of philanthropy. Their presence recalls the homely rhyme that "when the devil was sick, the devil a monk would be", for the sincere endeavors of Egyptian and Zanzibari rulers of Islamry were inspired by European influences. Though Christendom succeeded between 1817 and 1877 in ending the export of slaves to America and in hampering that to the orient, the inland traffic grew worse. From 1875 to 1890 Africa lost sometimes five hundred thousand, sometimes one million inhabitants annually. In 1890 America, Europe, Persia and Zanzibar "in the name of God" confessed that the European powers were morally accountable for the devastation, and resolved at Brussels to secure peace for Africa, to complete such slight results as they had already obtained since 1885 and to guarantee the extermination of the traffic. Belgium has since accomplished something, Britain a little, the others less toward the redemption of their pledges for their respective realms....

http://books.google.com/books?id=pSMbAAAAYAAJ&dq=perry%20noble&pg=PA1...

...During our century Muslim or pagan powers arose in Ashanti, Dahome, Kazembe, Lunda, Muata=Yanvo, Sahara, Senegambia, Sudan, Tabililand, Uganda, Upper Zambezia, Zanguebar and Zululand. These aided the development of Africa, influenced its relations with Europe and participated in preparing it for missions. Of the thirteen native states only three were not Negro powers, only four were not pagan. These (omitting the Mahdists) were the Arabs of Senusi and from Zanzibar and the Fulah of Senegambia and West Sudan. The Fulah and the Zanzibari have become quite Nigritic, and the ruling native race of Central and East Sudan belongs to the Negro. The black man instead of the Arab and the Berber has enabled Europe, seconded by America, to open Africa*....

...Zanguebar until 1884 remained a self=governing sultanate, its sovereign ruling in 1861 from Mukhdisho to Cape Delgado and his influence extending to Lake Tanganika, five hundred miles west. British influence was supreme, British subjects among Zanzibari slave=dealers"

(Concerning the opposite Coast) Using this as an example that the British were still supporting the slave trade

"Dahomey and the Dahomans: being the journals of two missions to the king of Dahomey, and residence at his capital, in the year 1849 and 1850" by Friedrich Forbes Volume 1

http://books.google.com/books?id=CKNEAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA139#v=onepage&q=&a...

"These wars are directly and instrumentally the acts of the slave-merchants of Whydah and its neighbouring parts; but have they no higher parties on whom to lay the blame of their actions? are these, the agents of larger houses, the instruments in the hands of parties who have other means of disposing of their goods, to bear the whole blame? Truth is strange but a truth it is, that the slave trade is carried on in Dahomey and the neighbouring kingdoms with British merchandize, and, at Porto Novo, the residence of the monarch of slave dealers, by British shipping direct. I do not mean to say that if British goods were not obtainable, the traffic would cease to exist; but the taste for British goods runs high, and if these could not be purchased with slaves, palm-oil would be manufactured to obtain them."

"Dahomey and the Dahomans: being the journals of two missions to the king of Dahomey, and residence at his capital, in the year 1849 and 1850" by Friedrich Forbes Volume 2

http://books.google.com/books?id=X9wE0c6eo_0C&pg=PA59#v=onepage&q=&am...

"The amazons now advanced in the same order, and having saluted the king he joined them, and again performed a war dance. They also sang in praise of the liberality of the slave-dealer, who gave them muskets and powder to make war upon innocent neighbors; to enrich himself by supplying the market with slaves. These are the evils to uproot: and yet this very man is directly trading with, and receives these muskets and this powder from, British agents in British shipping."

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Zanzibar
• slave
• trade
• Arab
• Slave
• Trade
• Muslims
• invade
• Africa
• Muslim
• killed
• Afrika
• Abed
• ArcticGarlicX2
• AGXEIE

[congobigp]

according to the source nearly 400 ships were intercepted. This could be false or the truth but I mentioned earlier the fact that ships traffiking captives became increasingly smaller because they tried to escape. Conditions became harder for traffick. and even more so for captives, this is actually a sign that interception started to affect trafficking. a historical fact. On the comments in the previous vid I mentioned the effect it would have on the grand plan of colonisation, Cape to Cairo.

[markellion]

The British only started seriously intercepting ships later in history. Sources from the period (not just Livingston) make it very clear that British capital (through Banian agents) were essential to maintaining the slave trade

[congobigp]

Mercantile interests of selling goods which would make locals dependant would be a valuable point. But then they are themselves choking it by intercepting ships headed for Brazil. Do consider the dynamic spearheaded by the Oman leadership in my links which precedes British presence as well as the real gains

made of these situations.

[markellion]

The British did a lousy job in intercepting the ships

British gains were from having a market to unload their good on

[markellion]

Of course the British gained from this. They were able to sell their goods, just like west Africa

Forbes:

"are these, the agents of larger houses, the instruments in the hands of parties who have other means of disposing of their goods, to bear the whole blame? Truth is strange but a truth it is, that the slave trade is carried on in Dahomey and the neighbouring kingdoms with British merchandize, and, at Porto Novo, the residence of the monarch of slave dealers, by British shipping direct."

[markellion]

The Banians were just like the slave traders in west Africa that Forbes was talking about. They carried on the slave trade with merchandise from British shipping

[h77gt]

I realize this talk wrong Alstebad Morcp of everyone against everyone from the days of the pharaohs of the fifth century beginnings, and I after the fifteenth century stature Alarbeyen Bstebad distinguishing only Vasubhp Africa African slaves thanks to the delight of Alarbeyen Christians

[MultiSolucion]

@markellion British had william wilberforce good soul and his friends who quit the slavery trade, spanish had the lawyer for the slavery and laws ,,, what have the dutch guy s ,, killed the indians before they killed them barter wiht the indians before they capture them gian confindence how cruel are dutch fals misleaded kind of and still we hve the white power kluxklux clan bilderburg rockfeller,,,

[MultiSolucion]

britisch and the dutch , are britisch shipleader/men working for the dutch VoCAMPANIG, SLAVERY TRADE. and dutch have stolen country like new york and the bronkx and the vancouver this is derived of dutch men ... they have forts their ...

[congobigp]

or Banians link with Britain. You have to look at cultural issues as well. The race issue is not to be compared with that of the west. It was more an issue of integration into an islamic-swahili world view. The link provides info on that. It is the rejection of non-swahili black African culture. We have some other groups which have become slightly swahili-arabized. Members of the same ethnic groups which aren't are perceived as being lower. please do comment on and consider the link.

[congobigp]

Colonisation was actually the starting point of our debate. The fact that under british colonisation arabs were favored over Swahili blacks and others that is a trademark of colonisation. Colonial powers do need to find local support, elevating one ethnic or class group over the other to rule. But again they found those circumstances on the ground. Banians, people of India which was part of the empire, came only in the 19th c. My point, the dynamic existed long before Portugal chose this coast