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.
They were already here.. so called "African Americans" are likely the descendants of the copper colored aboriginals that were already in the Americas.
Even if we disregard the silly "there are no ships remaining!" discussion for a moment, let's remember the strong genetic evidence.
African Americans cluster most heavily with African populations because of their common ancestry.
This evidence alone is strong enough to illustrate that they were taken here in the last few hundred years from the African continent.
If they were actually aboriginals, that would be borne out in the genetic data. Specifically, they'd either cluster with Asian populations or other Native Americans - or they'd have a distinct signal showing that they arrived in the Americas earlier than European populations (perhaps in an independent Atlantic crossing event, or series of crossing events).
Neither are true when looking at the genetic data.
I wouldn’t expect to have an actual slave ship preserved in a museum or wharf somewhere. Wood worms bored into the hulls of ships sailing in the tropics and they sank or rotted away. What would be the motivation to preserve and maintain a former slave ship in the 1830s? Ships were expensive to build and had a short lifespan so why would a ship owner (or company of investors) want one to sit idle if it could be put to some productive use for another year. The slave ship La Amistad is well documented in Supreme Court case records. After 1840 it went through a couple owners with different ship names and then disappeared from the historical record. There is ample evidence of slave ships and the slave trade and OP knows it.
The best slave grounds in Africa, where they were most easily captured and transported to the coasts, had already been depleted. The survivors of a slave raid never stuck around and waited for another raid. The tribes would take off and scatter, making it increasingly hard for raiders to capture them.
.
Good post except for this section above.
The vast majority of African slaves to be sold to the west were not captured by outsiders, that is a huge misconception. The majority were already slaves in Africa or prisoners of war from being on the losing side of tribal warfare.
Quote:
African states played a role in the slave trade, and slavery was a common practice among Sub Saharan Africans before the involvement of the Arabs, Berbers and Europeans. There were three types: those who were slaves through conquest, those who were slaves due to unpaid debts, or those whose parents gave them as slaves to tribal chiefs. Chieftains would barter their slaves to Arab, Berber, Ottoman or European buyers for rum, spices, cloth or other goods.[44] Selling captives or prisoners was commonly practiced among Africans, Turks, Berbers and Arabs during that era.
Quote:
The kings of Dahomey sold their war captives into transatlantic slavery, who otherwise may have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs.
The "historians" state that slavery lasted over 400 years in the Americas; however, no one has provided actual proof of any recovered slave ships (or even any bona fide parts of slave ships).
I've read that the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, has evidence of the existence of slave ships, but I've visited the museum on 4 occasions, and can say with 100% certainty, -there are no vestiges of slave ships, only recorded stories and 3-d art depictions of slave ships.
Because of the lack of actual evidence, I now question the official story provided by the historians and the entertainment industry about slavery in North America. Based on my research, I firmly believe that many of the ancestors of "African Americans," were aboriginals already in the Americas. If this weren't the case, we would have countless slave ships, but there is no evidence of ANY slave ships whatsoever.
If you have conducted research on this particular topic, and can point to the actual existence of slave ships in the U.S., please share the documentation.
When the transportation of slaves ended, the ships continued carrying cargo. In other words, they didn't stop using the ships. You can find the ship's names in historical newspapers. From there, one could trace what happened to them. The UK has excellent maritime records, that would be an easy place to start.
The vast majority of African slaves to be sold to the west were not captured by outsiders, that is a huge misconception. The majority were already slaves in Africa or prisoners of war from being on the losing side of tribal warfare.
I didn't say anything to the contrary.
No matter how, when, or why the slaves were captured, they still all had to get moved to the coast to be boarded on the slave ships.
The practice of slavery always depends on locals, no matter where the slavery occurs. Of course the tribes preyed on each other. But once on the coast, all the slavers depended on the slave ships and their captains.
I didn't say anything to the contrary.
No matter how, when, or why the slaves were captured, they still all had to get moved to the coast to be boarded on the slave ships.
The practice of slavery always depends on locals, no matter where the slavery occurs. Of course the tribes preyed on each other. But once on the coast, all the slavers depended on the slave ships and their captains.
Agreed, I misread your post into thinking it implied significant foreign effort in regarding capture. Obviously it was a massive coordinated effort by African tribal chiefs and kings themselves to capture other Africans and then sell them to Europeans/Westerners.
I can appreciate that you've done your research. Many folks still believe that Westerners just randomly showed up and proceeded to kidnap and chase down 10-12 million Africans and put them on boats, without looking at Africa's own involvement and cooperation into the transatlantic slave trade.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,185 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19508
Quote:
Originally Posted by elan
When the transportation of slaves ended, the ships continued carrying cargo. In other words, they didn't stop using the ships. You can find the ship's names in historical newspapers. From there, one could trace what happened to them. The UK has excellent maritime records, that would be an easy place to start.
Three UK Cities were responsible for the majority of the trade, they are London, Bristol and Liverpool.
All have maritime records, indeed ondon is home to the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich and Liverpool has a dedicated slavery museum.
You need to examine how the slave trade operated further.
Most of the ships were British or Dutch, and they didn't dock in American ports. Since the slaves were sold as much to South America as to North America, the slavers unloaded their cargo in the Caribbean. Several islands were the centers of the African trade.
The only American ports where the slavers docked were New Orleans- close to the Caribbean- and Natchez, where it was profitable to send the Africans to their final destination using the Mississippi river. But those auctions were minuscule compared to the ones in the Caribbean.
You seem very well informed, but the bolded statement is not entirely factual.
Boston:
Slaves were first recorded in Boston in 1638. The city functioned as a Middle Passage port city, into which slaves were delivered and sold.
"In 1708, they were over a thousand slaves in Massachusetts, a number that rose steadily for decades and established Boston as the center of the American slave trade."
Between 1783 and 1808, some 100,000 slaves, arriving from across West Africa, were transported through Gadsden’s Wharf and other South Carolina ports, and sold to the 13 colonies.
"The cities around Chesapeake Bay were second only to Charleston, Beaufort, and Savannah as an arrival point for the Trans-Atlantic slave trade among what are now US cities. These would have been Norfolk and Hampton in Virginia, and Annapolis and Baltimore in Maryland. Specifically, 210,477 slaves disembarked in the Carolinas and Georgia between 1626 and 1830; 127,668 disembarked in the Chesapeake area; 26,954 disembarked in the Northern U.S. at places like Boston, Newport, and New York; and 21,785 disembarked on the Gulf Coast, primarily at New Orleans."
Originally Posted by AguaDulce View Post
Many of these comments lack an understanding of the point of the OP.
She is not saying that slavery didn't exist.
She is asserting that the indigenous people ("copper colored aboriginals") who were already here when the Europeans arrived were forced into slavery, and that black Americans are descendants of these indigenous peoples.
So we see where this is going.
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.
