The Dangerous Henry Louis Gates

[franklin]

I should note that there were a great many attempts at suicide before being sold to Europeans and Europeans were often regarded as like demons or vampires but I don't have my sources with me at the momment. This is why I think the rulers knew the torture the unfortunate people would go through when they went to Europeans

The reason I stressed the excessive capital being put in is because it is attempts to screw with African economies. I also have some information about Africans being in debt to Europeans but I'll have to post that later

"Epicness of the African Slave Trade"

egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=bag&action=display&thread=32

[Tukuler al~Takruri]

Have you examined old Benin's connections to the trade?
It doesn't fit the 'guns/horses for wars for slaves' paradigm.
Things were much more dynamic than that. In Ghana there
was a big business in anchoring the slaving ships far off the
coast then selling onshore lodging, food, drink, and social
entertainment while the Euros waited up to months at a
time while the local government manipiulated the prices
and the commodities that would be available to buy. And
Benin decided in time that it needed its own slaves for
local enterprises and ceased selling them to Europeans.
Old Dahomey is another of many examples that show
Africans were not duped into getting drunk and shooting
to round up people to sell to Europeans for more liqour
and guns.

If you can get the 1st edition of Davidson's Black Mother
you can find out about things surrounding the slave
trade that don't meet the 'requirements' of USA books
on slavery and the triangular trade.

Apr 30, 2010 1:36:18 GMT -5 Charlie Bass said:

... Whatever profit they got from the slave trade was used to fund intra-African wars and virtually none of the rulers were very rich. In fact, the slave trade might have been the downfall of many an African empire that depended solely on it without further diversifying their economy.

[franklin]

The Benin empire was not big in the slave trade because their economy didn't depend on overseas trade, the "force of craftsmen" thing that I talked with Doug M a long time ago applies to the slave trade. The Benin empire could keep many of it's industries, this is the reason they wern't dependent, or reliant on Europeans for trade. The slave trade overall in Africa was at a lower level during the early period

Also see the attachment for "Early Kongo Portuguese Relations, a new interpretation" because Basil Davidson is mistaken about the history of that empire

The rise of the slave trade was established along with the rise of the use of debt in Europe because raising the slave trade passed a certain level made it unprofitable. To be able to raise the slave trade past a certain extent would have been like breaking the laws of physics it was impossible that is because it wouldn't be profitable

Again, the South Sea Company went out of business and was not able to run the slave trade profitably despite having massive resources at their disposal, everything I've read says that the South Sea's slave trade was able to transport the people but did not do so profitably

Also the Bight of Benin (not the Benin empire) wasn't an important part of the slave trade until the latter 17th century. Some of the most expensive cloth came from the Bight of Benin but the problem was quantity and Europeans could flood them with cheap cloth

"The Slave Trade, Depopulation and Human Sacrifice in Benin History" James D. Graham Electronic 322-323

www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/cea_0008-0055_1965_num_5_18_3035#

[That this "falling off in the trade was severly felt by the people of Bénin," was demonstrated by the Oba's request, in 1838, that Moffat and Smith settle "that palaver" with the king of England. Although Moffat interpreted the Oba's request as a référence to British interférence with the slave trade, it is more reasonable to assume that the Oba was actually troubled by the general "falling off" in all trade, including ivory and palm oil, which was explained by Captain Owen.

Richard Burton observed, in 1862, that it was "a hopeless task to restore commerce to Bénin." Since the Bini wove their own cotton cloth and brewed their own wine, Burton thought that they "seemed to care little for the suspension of trade: it became painfully évident that they could stand the ordeal better than we could." Indeed, Oba Adolo accepted the abolition of the slave trade "as a. fait accompli, and never even alludes to its revival." Burton also reported that the factors at Gwato were unscrupulous, and he recommended that their factories be abandoned and razed to the ground. Apparently, his suggestion was followed, for Gallwey, in 1893, said that there had been no factories at Gwato "until very recently. " Palm oil, agreed Burton and Gallwey, was then the primary export. The latter also noted that the Itsekiri "do their best to obstruct" direct trade with Bénin proper, and that the inland waterways leading to Gwato were very dangerous because of snags, rapid current, and sunken trees.

An overall view of the period, between 1486-1897, yields the conclusion that the European slave trade was seldom, if ever, of considérable importance to Bénin proper]

Attachments:

[franklin]

Note I talked about debt, the South Sea Company converted the national debt into stock

But anyway I said I would post something on 1. Africans being in debt to Europeans 2. I'll post something on negative African views on Christians although this doesn't specifically describe them as demons or vampires

Here I want to emphasize the African dependency since the Dahomean are dependent on the slave trade for their livelihood, even though Africans have been around for thousands of years before European traders came. Also even though Europeans tried to cheat Africans the trade continued

“African voices of the Atlantic slave trade: beyond the silence and the shame” By Anne Caroline Bailey

books.google.com/books?id=YrIjNMu5_vsC&pg=PA53&dq=v=onepage&q&f=false#v=onepage&q&f=false

[One source says that the town of Atorkor was in debt to white traders and thus arranged to pay this debt by the “kidnapping” of the drummers. If this indeed was the case and if such cases were widespread, then it augurs the future role of debt vis-à-vis the African continent and first world nations. It prefigures what has now become a standard relationship between developing nations and Europe and America; whereby these nations are heavily burdened with debt, which is paid for by the raw material and resources of their land. This notion of a town being indebted to traders, then, could possibly have started this disturbing spiral trend. Furthermore, if indeed the move toward becoming a debt-carrying nation began in the era of the slave trade, then it is possible to say that this is one extremely devastating effect of the Atlantic slave trade….. Did the current process of globalization, which includes the carrying of enormous debt for many developing nations, begin with the operations of the Atlantic slave trade?]

“Dahomey and the Slave Trade: Reflections on the Historiography of the Rise of Dahomey” by Robin Law (see attachment)

[King Gezo:

Electronic page 17

my people are a military people, male and female; my revenue is the proceeds of the sale of prisoners of war... I cannot send my women to cultivate the soil, it would kill them.. .All my nation - all are soldiers, and the Slave Trade feeds them

Page 19

William Smith ( 1744), who observed, apparently with specific reference to the Gold Coast, that the Discerning Natives account it their greatest Unhappiness, that they were ever visited by the Europeans. They say that we Christians introduc'd the Traffick of Slaves, and that before our Coming they liv'd in Peace.]

John Newton:

books.google.com/books?id=OjI3AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA241

[The natives are cheated, in the number, weight, measure, or quality of what they purchase, in every possible way : and, by habit and emulation, a marvellous dexterity is acquired in these practices. And thus the natives in their turn, in proportion to their commerce with the Europeans, and (I am sorry to add) particularly with the English, become jealous, insidious, and revengeful.

books.google.com/books?id=OjI3AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA242

For, with a few exceptions, the English and the Africans, reciprocally, consider each other as consummate villains, who are always watching opportunities to do mischief. In short, we have, I fear too deservedly, a very unfavourable character upon the coast. When I have charged a black with unfairness and dishonesty, he has answered, if able to clear himself, with an air of disdain, "What! do you think I am a white man!"...

books.google.com/books?id=OjI3AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA245#v=onepage&q&f=false

...I verily believe, that the far greater part of the wars, in Africa, would cease, if the Europeans would cease to tempt them, by offering goods for slaves.]

Attachments:

[franklin]

Apr 30, 2010 1:36:18 GMT -5 Charlie Bass said:

... Whatever profit they got from the slave trade was used to fund intra-African wars and virtually none of the rulers were very rich. In fact, the slave trade might have been the downfall of many an African empire that depended solely on it without further diversifying their economy.

Somewhat ironically notice in the first page of this article it says the slave traders were using a non-profit organization while Europeans were forced to bring all kinds of things to the coast, the African trade was the most expensive segment in the whole system and they were selling gold to Africa plus all kinds of other items. This is ironic because you said it was not really profitable to the Africans in that it funded wars. I recommend reading this article

“Gold, Assortments and the Trade Ounce: Fante Merchants and the Problem of Supply and Demand in the 1770s Author(s)”: George Metcalf Source: The Journal of African History, Vol. 28, No. 1 (1987), pp. 27-41

Electronic page 9 and 10

www.jstor.org/pss/181447

[Worse still, they often had to purchase gold from areas west of the Gold Coast proper (such as Appolonia) at 1.5 times the price it commanded in the London market in terms of the prime cost of their goods.The reasons for this reversal of the gold trade are still obscure, as a consequence of the cloak of secrecy which the Akan threw over everything relating to gold. (Miles himself undertook an investi-gation of the subject but could produce no answers.) Walter Rodney suggested that Akan gold production began to decline in the early eighteenth century, and link this to the rise in profits that could be made by concentrating on slave production rather than on gold mining. If this is so it is an irony that the Europeans by promoting the slave trade were ultimately forced, much against their wishes, to carry gold to the Gold Coast. A more likely explanation of the phenomenon lies in the increasing monetarization of the Asante economy, described by Joseph LaTorre, and in the consequent hoarding of gold in Asante itself. This in turn provoked a partial monetarization of the Fante economy and undoubtedly increased the value of gold whether it was regarded as a currency or a commodity]

Attachments:

[franklin]

Hey this is an old article from several years ago and if there is any misinformation or wrong statistics please say so

Also I found an article started reading it so I put it on attachment. It mentions cheap subsidized milk from Europe going to Jamaica and the article used the word "devastating" to what this did to the Jamaican milk market. What is described here is exactly how I see the slave trade as the slave traders also gave subsidies, loans, gifts ect. that flooded the African markets with merchandise. Also with tariffs and everything a massive amount was dumped into Africa over and above the actual price on the unfortunate captives.

What I also want to emphasize is that aid does damage as aid is free while cheap imports itself is already doing damage. Aid and agricultural subsidies both factor into the expense of this whole operation

Also its not like subsidizing agriculture is the only thing going on

"Farm Subsidies That Kill" By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF Published: July 5, 2002

www.nytimes.com/2002/07/05/opinion/farm-subsidies-that-kill.html?pagewanted=1

[Our compassion may be well meant, but it is also hypocritical. The U.S., Europe and Japan spend $350 billion each year on agricultural subsidies (seven times as much as global aid to poor countries), and this money creates gluts that lower commodity prices and erode the living standard of the world's poorest people.

''These subsidies are crippling Africa's chance to export its way out of poverty,'' said James Wolfensohn, the World Bank president, in a speech last month.

Mark Malloch Brown, the head of the United Nations Development Program, estimates that these farm subsidies cost poor countries about $50 billion a year in lost agricultural exports. By coincidence, that's about the same as the total of rich countries' aid to poor countries, so we take back with our left hand every cent we give with our right.


''It's holding down the prosperity of very poor people in Africa and elsewhere for very narrow, selfish interests of their own,'' Mr. Malloch Brown says of the rich world's agricultural policy.

It also seems a tad hypocritical of us to complain about governance in third-world countries when we allow tiny groups of farmers to hijack billion of dollars out of our taxes.

For example, the U.S. has only 25,000 cotton growers, but they are prosperous (with an average net worth of $800,000) and thus influential. So the U.S. spends $2 billion a year subsidizing them, and American production of cotton has almost doubled over the last 20 years -- even though the U.S. is an inefficient, high-cost producer. The result is a glut that costs African countries $250 million each year, according to a World Bank study published in February.]

Attachments:

[franklin]

I think the fact that the slave trade rises in the latter 17th century shows that it was economic manipulation. The power of Europeans was their ability to bring goods from different parts of the world and their manufactures, thus forcing Africans into reliance by manipulating prices

What power allowed Benin to resist the slave trade? It was in it's industries, industry is power