Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Latin America is diverse in its population. Cuba is not Chile and Colombia is not El Salvador. In most places where there is a significant African descended population, African heritage is very much acknowledged.
Also, it sounds highly ignorant to argue that slavery was not that bad for Africans in the Spanish colonies when they were ripped from their homes in Africa and forced to labor in a foreign land, where they lost most ties to their original cultures. Ultimately the effects were similar whether enslaved by the Spanish, Portuguese, English or French. Slavery is in humane - period.
No one treated their slaves "well" they were slaves and but the French and English treated their slaves worse. I was looking through genealogical records the other day and found obit and baptism records of slaves recorded in the same church records as noble families something the French or English wouldn't never do. Lots of Latin American free white men married former slaves as well there was a shortage of white women. You don't understand Latin America very well and these dumb videos don't clarify anything. You look really silly trying to school people on here.
Baptismal records can be regarded differently as it also represents a loss of African ancestral religion, which was a result of the environment of slavery. Further, this was a Catholic practice, not a Spanish vs. English and French practice. In many places, the Catholic Church mandated that slaves be baptized.
Quote:
That these records exist is due chiefly to the reach of the Catholic Church in colonial Latin America, explains Jane Landers, a historian who leads the ESSSS project at Vanderbilt University. In the fifteenth century, fearful that newcomers would import Islamic or heathen practices, the Church mandated the baptism of slaves from Africa, and later extended the requirement across the Catholic Americas. Slaves were sometimes baptized while still in Africa, mid-voyage, or upon their arrival in the New World. Some may have been baptized several times, says Landers.
Absorption into the Church helped justify slavery as the salvation of African souls, but the practice also reflected legal codes dating to the Roman Empire, whereby any individual could become enslaved, for example, as a prisoner of war, or to atone for crimes.
And you’re actually incorrect about the baptismal information. Such records can be found in certain French and English Catholics areas. See the baptismal records in Martinique and Guadeloupe for example, and those places were French. Additionally, there are similar records for slaves brought to England itself right in the same churches, as well as in the U.S. in Catholic areas. Clearly it was not necessarily an honorable practice either.
Last edited by ReineDeCoeur; 02-06-2019 at 12:55 AM..
Mention the existence of the African slave trade in Mexico, Central and South America and Latinos will argue to the death that "no negros son aqui"
Really?
If I were to list the amount of popular Colombian songs that not only mention but applaud and pay homage to Africa I would never end.
Not to mention that real African music from the Congo, Mozambique, Ghana, Cameroon, Angola, Nigeria, etc. has been listened to a lot in the Caribbean coast of Colombia for decades, there are clubs dedicated to just this music...you don't even get this in the States!!
Colombians dancing African music compilation...
Colombia's budding 'Selva Techno' music genre (Palenque, Colombia)
Perhaps Colombia's most revered music artist of recent times, Carlos Vives, narrates the footprint of Africa in Cartagena and exclaims in the chorus "VIVA EL AFRICA!" Which translates to "LONG LIVE AFRICA!"
Mention the existence of the African slave trade in Mexico, Central and South America and Latinos will argue to the death that "no negros son aqui"
The fact remains that between 1502 and 1866, of the 11.2 million Africans, only 388,000 arrived in the United States, while the rest arrived in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Black Latinos preserve more of their African heritage than African-Americans by a wide margin.
African american, like all Americans including white ones love to pontify.
African-Americans are the least African of all the African diaspora.
ITs funny because now AA are the just like white Americans, cultural imperialists imposing their vision of blackness to the world.
Baptismal records can be regarded differently as it also represents a loss of African ancestral religion, which was a result of the environment of slavery. Further, this was a Catholic practice, not a Spanish vs. English and French practice. In many places, the Catholic Church mandated that slaves be baptized.
And you’re actually incorrect about the baptismal information. Such records can be found in certain French and English Catholics areas. See the baptismal records in Martinique and Guadeloupe for example, and those places were French. Additionally, there are similar records for slaves brought to England itself right in the same churches, as well as in the U.S. in Catholic areas. Clearly it was not necessarily an honorable practice either.
There were cultural differences as well which you seem to be denying. They represent loss of culture based on revisionist criteria but those doing the baptizing believed they were saving the soul of the baptized slave. At first I wasn't sure about that but I have read enough documents and personal writings to know that they actually believed it was their mandated duty to save the slaves soul from burning in hell. They actually believed this as twisted as it was but that was their reality.
There were cultural differences as well which you seem to be denying. They represent loss of culture based on revisionist criteria but those doing the baptizing believed they were saving the soul of the baptized slave. At first I wasn't sure about that but I have read enough documents and personal writings to know that they actually believed it was their mandated duty to save the slaves soul from burning in hell. They actually believed this as twisted as it was but that was their reality.
The article referenced in my post discusses that very belief so there is no denial on my part. It was shared among European Catholics that were Spanish, French, Portuguese etc as the mandate came from the Catholic Church. There is no revisionist criteria because it is a fact that much African descended religion was lost, regardless of the reasoning behind it.
The article referenced in my post discusses that very belief so there is no denial on my part. It was shared among European Catholics that were Spanish, French, Portuguese etc as the mandate came from the Catholic Church. There is no revisionist criteria because it is a fact that much African descended religion was lost, regardless of the reasoning behind it.
This is correct I've seen baptism records of Amerindians from Brazil in the late 1700's-early 1800's that included the clause as ordered by our Holy Mother Church. They did record the original names of the baptized in a few that I've seen as well as their new Christian names.
Is the term “mulatto” considered insulting now in South America?
No
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
