Jackson Family Drama: Police Called to Jackson Family Home, Tensions Rise

Police Called to Jackson Family Home, Tensions Rise

Tensions are rising in the Jackson family and things have reached a critical breaking point.According to ABC, the Los Angeles police department were called to Katherine Jackson's home in response to a "family disturbance." Apparently, Randy, Jermaine and Janet Jackson showed up to the Calabasas home unannounced and tried to take away Michael's three kids, Prince, Paris and Blanket.Katherine Jackson's lawyer released a statement regarding the incident. "Jackson family members ambushed Katherine Jackson's home after their vehicle tore through security gates on the tails of the SUV containing Michael Jackson's children," read the statement. "An altercation ensued shortly thereafter and law enforcement arrived at the scene." The police report indicates no arrests were made, but TMZ cameras captured Janet and Jermaine outside the house allegedly engaged in a heated conversation.To add fuel to the fire, executors of Jackson's estate, John Branca and John McClain, are supporting TJ Jackson's (Tito's son) motion to obtain temporary guardianship of the three kids, reports TMZ. Branca and McClain maintain that Katherine has been kidnapped by her own children. Because of recent trouble in the family, the executors feel as though the Jackson kids are in danger. TJ tweeted to Paris, "I know it's completely unfair for them to do this to you and your brothers. We will keep trying. I love you."Last week, Katherine went missing but was found in Arizona at the home of her eldest daughter Rebbie. As of this morning, Paris still hasn't spoken to her grandmother. "Nine days and counting," she tweeted this morning. "So help me God, I will make whoever did this pay."Allegedly, the source of all this family tension comes from a letter several Jackson siblings wrote accusing Branca and McClain of fraud. Randy, Jermaine, Janet, Rebbie and Tito have been trying to convince Katherine that Michael's will was a fraud. Together, the siblings have been devising a plan for months.Since the incident, Prince, Paris and Blanket have been removed from Katherine's home and taken to a secure location.


  By Derrick Bryson Taylor

Read more: http://www.essence.com/2012/07/24/police-called-to-jackson-family-home-tensions-rise/?utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20essence%2Fnews_channel_latest%20%28News%20Channel%20Latest%29&utm_medium=feed&utm_source=feedburner#ixzz22BzdVdgD

Katherine Jackson is reportedly “furious” that her son, Randy, led a failed scheme to sack the managers of the King of Pop’s estate and scrap his will.

The beloved 82-year-old matriarch had no idea Randy tried to unseat estate executors John Branca and John McClain with fraud allegations while she spent nine days in seclusion at the Miraval resort in Tucson, RadarOnline reported Monday.

“Katherine was completely unaware that Randy had orchestrated his siblings signing a letter sent to the executors of Michael Jackson's estate demanding their immediate resignation.

Now that Katherine has been home for a few days, she recognizes that Randy was the one that planned this, and she is absolutely furious for him doing so,” an unidentified source reportedly told the website.

“Katherine has never had a stroke or a mini-stroke as the ridiculous letter says. Katherine will never speak out publicly against her children; it’s just not who she is.

Behind the scenes, however, Katherine is extremely upset and disappointed in Randy's actions that have brought so much unwanted chaos into all of their lives,” the source added.

KAY NIETFELD/EPA

Michael Jackson in 2006.

Katherine Jackson’s lawyer declined comment when reached by the Daily News Monday.

It was just last week that Katherine lost guardianship of Michael’s three kids after they voiced concerns they hadn't spoken to their grandmother in more than a week and feared she was effectively kidnapped by their father’s siblings — Randy, Jermaine, Janet and Rebbie.

Judge Mitchell Beckloff handed temporary custody to Katherine Jackson’s grandson, TJ Jackson, the son of Michael’s brother Tito.

Beckloff said that Katherine should be able to resume her role once she returned from Arizona and filed a petition for reinstatement.

TOBY CANHAM/GETTY IMAGES

Randy Jackson in November.

Katherine Jackson’s lawyer said Friday that the matriarch was back home in Calabasas, Calif., and had agreed to share custody with TJ on a permanent basis to alleviate the stress of arranging for the children's’ security and staff requirements.

Katherine Jackson also issued a stern warning about leaks to the media, Radar reported. The familial fracas that erupted last week pitted Michael’s kids — Prince, 15, Paris, 14 and Blanket, 10 — against their four aunts and uncles, who all signed the letter and sent Katherine to Arizona.

It started with a missing-persons report that declared Katherine Jackson was MIA. It reached a fever pitch when Janet Jackson tried to grab Paris' cell phone during a heated confrontation that was caught on tape, and the teen later vowed on Twitter to seek retribution.

Katherine Jackson reportedly wants all the trash-talking to stop, including the public claim that Michael never signed the 2002 will, which handed stewardship of his lucrative estate to Branca and McClain, with Katherine, his kids and some charities listed as his sole beneficiaries.

“Katherine specifically told Randy that if he wants to pursue this ridiculous claim that Michael’s will is fake, to remain quiet about it. If Randy does find evidence, which Katherine knows is very unlikely to happen, to take it to court and not play it out the in press,” the source told Radar.

In a Twitter post earlier Monday, Randy again took aim at Michael’s executors by posting a report that the estate had banned him, Jermaine, Janet and Rebbie from entering the Calabasas home Katherine shares with Michael’s kids.

“And THIS IS WHY I AM SO AFRAID FOR MY MOTHER…" he tweeted along with a link to the story.

In a separate development Monday, Dr. Conrad Murray, convicted in Michael's 2009 overdose death, asked an appeals court to order laboratory testing on drug paraphernalia he believes can prove his innocence.

In paperwork filed with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, a Murray lawyer asked the court to authorize forensic analysis of a bottle of the surgery-strength anesthetic propofol recovered from Michael’s bedroom.

The 100-milliliter vial delivered the propofol dose that ultimately killed the "Thriller" singer, prosecutors said at Murray's trial.

Prosecutors told jurors that Murray mixed the propofol with an anti-burn anesthetic called lidocaine and administered it to the sleep-hungry singer via an intravenous drip.

Murray’s defense argued that the doctor only gave Jackson a small amount of the drug, and that the Gloved One injected himself with the fatal propofol dose using a syringe.

In the filing, defense lawyer Valerie Wass argued that testing, which was not allowed by Murray's trial judge for timing reasons, could determine the exact contents of the vial and whether it supports the prosecution’s theory.

“If that bottle is pure propofol, then Conrad Murray deserves a new trial,” Murray’s legal spokesman, Mark Fierro, told The News. Murray is serving a four-year sentence after a jury convicted him of involuntary manslaughter.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/conrad-murry-doctor-convicted-michael-jackson-overdose-death-asks-appeals-court-perform-laboratory-testing-drug-paraphernalia-article-1.1125307#ixzz22C2JEAEw

The Nakedness of Their Greed

The Nakedness of Their Greed

Richard (RJ) Eskow

Writer; host, 'The Breakdown'; Senior Fellow, Campaign for America's Future

It's truly unbelievable: At no time in modern memory has the privileged class been richer, the middle class more endangered, or the number of people in poverty been so high. And yet the Republican Party, whose leaders are overwhelmingly wealthy themselves, is openly and shamelessly proposing to give more tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires -- including heirs and heiresses who have done nothing to earn their riches -- while actually raisingtaxes on millions of poor and middle class people.

There will be a time to engage in argument. But first let's take a moment to gaze in wonder at the nakedness of their greed.

Okay, moment's up. Now it's time for the argument.

In Plain Sight

Yesterday the Senate voted on a Democratic proposal to extend the Bush-era tax breaks for all income below $250,000 per year. Everybody would get that tax break, even billionaires. Taxes would go up for anything earned above that amount, and for some kinds of investment income. The bill would also preserve a number of tax breaks for middle class and lower-income working people.

Forty-eight Senators voted against the Democratic bill. Forty-four of them then promptly voted for the Republican proposal, which would keep the Bush tax cut for earnings above $250,000 -- a cut which provides greater and greater tax breaks as you climb the earnings scale toward "millionaire" status and eventually ascend to the rarefied atmosphere of the billionaires' club.

They didn't even try to hide what they were doing. They didn't bury it in loopholes, or under pages of indecipherable legal language. They just ... put it all out there.

This is a stick-up.

The GOP bill would actually increase the average tax bill for 25 million households who earn less than $250,000. The Republican proposal would also end the Tuition Tax Credit, raise the "marriage penalty" (hey, welcome to our world, gay newlyweds!), and increase the tax burden for working families with kids.

Put up your hands, Mr. and Ms. America. This is a stick-up.

Bill Scher notes that the Senators who voted to raise taxes on the poor and the middle class while cutting them for the wealthy, then rejected the bill that extends tax cuts for the middle class alone, were now on record as believing that "the rich pay too much and the poor pay too little in taxes."

For his part, Senator Joe Lieberman voted neither nor against the Democratic bill, officially placing himself on record as believing that "nonpartisanship" consists of standing for absolutely nothing.

Class Warfare Against Our Children

The Republicans want to impose these new tax burdens on the struggling middle class while giving an average cut of $160,000 in income and estate tax cuts for households that earn a million dollars or more. And if those households earn a billion or more, the breaks could run into tens of millions annually.

But tax deductions so a working family can send their kids to college, which is already all but impossible? No can do. Perhaps they feel that parents who want a better life for their kids should "know their place" instead.

The Republican proposal for taxable estates doesn't change life for ordinary households but, as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities documents, rich kids inheriting their parents' money would receive an average $1.1 million in tax breaks -- while parents working to support their children or put them through college would paymore.

The GOP proposal is nothing less than an all-out assault on any but the wealthiest children, closing the door to every struggling generation's dream of a better life. It's enough to leave a guy speechless.

Embarrassment of for Riches

Sure, they try to justify their actions, but it can't be done. It's actually embarrassing to watch them struggle to cover the nakedness of their greed with rhetorical fig leaves. "Only [our plan] is aimed at helping the economy," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said. "Only ours is meant to help struggling Americans in the midst of an historic jobs crisis."

Dear Sen. McConnell:

As the young people reportedly say nowadays: Please, girlfriend.

Sincerely yours,

A Concerned Citizen

But the truly cynical hack du jour is Sen. Orrin Hatch. His ploy is a bill called the "Tax Hike Prevention Act of 2013," which (get this) doesn't prevent tax hikes -- unless you're rich, that is. Instead it ends the payroll tax "holiday" which (although it was a bad way to get tax relief for non-millionaires) is a "tax hike" according to every other Republican use of the term.

Ezra Klein points us to this language:

"The increased spending through the tax code from the partisan 2009 stimulus law (ARRA) is not included in the amendment."

What that means in plain English is that the Hatch "Tax Hike Prevention Act" takes away the Tuition Tax Credit, marriage-penalty relief, and other badly needed breaks for working families and individuals.

War is Peace. Love is Hate. Spending is ... oh, forget it.

That language in Hatch's bill employs some Orwellian phraseology you'll be hearing a lot in the next few months -- mostly from the GOP, but also from right-leaning Democrats. In their Craven New World, tax deductions selectively become "increased spending" -- or even more scabrously, "increased stimulus spending."

Hatch's spokesperson compacted all of this doublespeak into a single phrase, saying that the middle-class and lower-income deductions they tried to kill today were really "expanded stimulus spending through the tax code." That's supposed to sound really, really bad.

What about their reasoning? What logic could Hatch, McConnell, and the rest of the GOP possibly be using to justify this expansion of the historically low levels of taxes paid by the wealthy -- now that they're collectively wealthier than they've been in many generations and while the nation's struggling through such hard times?

In the interests of fairness, let's hear 'em out: Hatch objects to tax hikes on the wealthy because, he says, "you hit about 800,000 small businesses where the jobs are created" while only collecting an additional $36 billion in revenue. McConnell said that "raising taxes (on the wealthy) would stall the rebound we all claim to want."

So they're defending their tax cuts for the wealthy by saying they will a) create jobs, and b) foster economic recovery. You know what that makes them? Right: By their own definition, what the Republicans are proposing is "expanded stimulus spending through the tax code."

Despite their rhetoric, Republicans aren't always against a stimulus. It all depends on who you're, ahem, "stimulating."

Case Closed

Okay. So we know that the entire "stimulus spending through the tax code" argument is a phony, a fake, a rhetorical dodge that's an insult to voters' intelligence. We also know that justification for it has repeatedly been disproven, in the most ruthless and accurate court of economic judgment known to humanity: reality.

You don't neede a lot of econometric modeling to prove it, either All it takes is one simple question: We've had these cuts for ten years, so where are the jobs?

Joshua Picker notes that "during the economic cycle that began in March 2001 and ended in December of 2007 --which almost exactly coincides with the Bush presidency and the implementation of the Bush tax cuts ... registered the weakest jobs and income growth in the post-war period."

Tax cuts on the wealthy didn't create any jobs -- not before the financial crisis brought on by deregulation, and certainly not since. The Republicans, like the Democrats, are proposing "stimulus spending through the tax code." They're just proposing the kind that doesn't work.

A Novel Way to Give People Jobs

That leads us to what would be the next logical question -- that is, if we really were engaged in logical debate rather than shameless pandering: Accepting Hatch's figure of $36 billion in revenue, how might we spend that money in a way that would create jobs? There's one approach that's worked every time: We could use it to create jobs.

That's right: One sure way to increase employment is by hiring people. And in a happy coincidence, the kinds of jobs which government can provide are exactly the kinds of jobs we need right now: Teachers. Cops. Firefighters. Construction workers to rebuild our crumbling public infrastructure.

For all the needless misery we're experiencing, the solution is beautiful in its simplicity. And that solution isn't just obvious -- it's proven. It worked after the Great Depression, it worked after World War II -- in fact, it's alwaysworked.

We Are the 0.99 Percent

Instead, the GOP's proposing a plan that would benefit our 2,100,000 highest earning households, while shafting about 25 million others. The American Prospect tells us who loses under their proposal, and it isn't pretty.

On the flip side, the GOP deal gets better and better as you look at households that are higher and higher up the income ladder. A family earning $251,000 in taxable income probably wouldn't even break even, while one earning $350,000 might save a few hundred dollars.

But a household earning a billion dollars a year could save tens of millions under the GOP plan.

Which gets us to another under recognized fact: Even the 1 percent suffer from income inequality. As the CBPP also notes, the GOP's estate tax breaks are targeted to the top 0.3 percent of inheritances -- while many working or poor families leave no estate at all. The Republicans know who really greases their wheels, and it ain't the local neurosurgeon pulling down a few hundred thousand.

When you're talking about pay-to-play politics, the real money is with ... the real money.

F For Effort
Everybody, including billionaires, gets a tax break under the Democratic proposal. Maybe the Republicans don't like the fact that that a billionaire's break isn't any larger than that of someone who makes $250,000. Maybe the fairness irritates them. Or maybe they don't want the hoi polloi to get uppity. Nah, that's not it: You'll find the explanation for their behavior under "real money," above.

As we were saying: They're not even trying to hide it anymore.

I miss the old days, when hack politicians at least felt the need to give voters a decent cover story for their chicanery. After all, if they're going to stick it to us, the least they can do is put a little effort into misleading us. C'mon, guys, show a little more courtesy! You're not even trying to fake it.

There used to be a saying: "If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullish*t." But apparently even that's too much effort nowadays. In this post-Citizens United world you can just have Sheldon Adelson write another check instead.

For Whom the Bell Tolls

What do you call a political party that doesn't hide its own corruption -- the "Marie Antoinette Party," for "let them eat cake"? Apparently Marie Antoinette never said those words, so that's out. The "Butlers and Valets Party," since they're acting as footservants and toadies to the ultra-wealthy? Do you reassign the "GOP" acronym so that it stands for "Greed On Parade"?

I admit it: I'm almost at a loss for words. And since words are a big part of how I make my living, that would be an occupational disability. Oh, and that reminds me: They want to cut disability payments too. It's part of their plan to cut Social Security, whose benefits go to children and the disabled as well as seniors. And while we're at it, let's not forget that they want to slash away at Medicare with a flim-flam voucher plan.

Sorry, Gramps, say the Republicans, but we've gotta find the money for the rich kids's tax break somewhere. Try not to cough on the carpet as you find your way out. I'd see you to the door myself, but Master's in the study ringing his bell.

GOP to America: Suck it up, small fry, while we serve our lords and lieges their afternoon tea and biscuits tax cuts.

Minority Leader McConnell refrained from his typical obstructionist filibustering this week and allowed a floor vote on the Democratic tax proposal. "The American people should know where we stand," said McConnell. "Today they will."

Congratulations, Senator: Mission accomplished. Now it's the House's turn.

Do you hear that sound, Mr. Boehner? Somewhere deep within in a stately mansion a person of great wealth and privilege is ringing a bell. Don't even bother asking that ancient question, because in this case we already know the answer:

It tolls for thee.

Follow Richard (RJ) Eskow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rjeskow

Middle Passage of the Atlantic slave trade

Middle Passage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the slave trade route. For the novel by Charles R. Johnson, see Middle Passage (novel). For the travelogue by V. S. Naipaul, see The Middle Passage (book).

Commercial goods from Europe were shipped to Africa for sale and traded for enslaved Africans. Africans were in turn brought to the regions depicted in blue, in what became known as the "Middle Passage". African slaves were thereafter traded for raw materials, which were returned to Europe to complete the "Triangular Trade".

The Middle Passage was the stage of the triangular tradein which millions of people from Africa^[1] were shipped to the New World, as part of the Atlantic slave trade. Ships departed Europe for African markets with manufactured goods, which were traded for purchased or kidnapped Africans, who were transported across the Atlantic as slaves; the slaves were then sold or traded for raw materials,^[2] which would be transported back to Europe to complete the voyage. Voyages on the Middle Passage were a large financial undertaking, and they were generally organized by companies or groups of investors rather than individuals.^[3]

Traders from the Americas and Caribbean received the enslaved Africans. European powers such as Portugal,England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, Denmark,Sweden, and Brandenburg, as well as traders from Braziland North America, took part in this trade. The enslaved Africans came mostly from eight regions: Senegambia,Upper Guinea, Windward Coast, Gold Coast, Bight of Benin, Bight of Biafra, West Central Africa and Southeastern Africa.^[4]

An estimated 15% of the Africans died at sea, with mortality rates considerably higher in Africa itself in the process of capturing and transporting indigenous peoples to the ships.^[5] The total number of African deaths directly attributable to the Middle Passage voyage is estimated at up to two million; a broader look at African deaths directly attributable to the institution of slavery from 1500 to 1900 suggests up to four million African deaths.^[6]

For two hundred years, 1440–1640, Portuguese slavers had a near monopoly on the export of slaves from Africa. During the eighteenth century, when the slave trade transported about 6 million Africans, British slavers carried almost 2.5 million.^[7]

Journey

The duration of the transatlantic voyage varied widely,^[2] from one to six months depending on weather conditions. The journey became more efficient over the centuries; while an average transatlantic journey of the early sixteenth century lasted several months, by the nineteenth century the crossing often required fewer than six weeks.^[8]

Diagram of a slave ship from the Atlantic slave trade. (From an Abstract of Evidence delivered before a select committee of the House of Commons in 1790 and 1791.)

African kings, warlords and private kidnappers sold captives to Europeans who held several coastal forts. The captives were usually force-marched to these ports along the western coast of Africa, where they were held for sale to the European or American slave traders in the barracoons. Typical slave ships contained several hundred slaves with about thirty crew members. The male captives were normally chained together in pairs to save space; right leg to the next man's left leg — while the women and children may have had somewhat more room. The captives were fed beans, corn, yams, rice, and palm oil. Slaves were fed one meal a day with water, but if food was scarce, slaveholders would get priority over the slaves. Sometimes captives were allowed to move around during the day, but many ships kept the shackles on throughout the arduous journey.

Most contemporary historians estimate that between 9.4 and 12 million Africans arrived in the New World.^[9][10] Disease and starvation due to the length of the passage were the main contributors to the death toll with amoebic dysentery and scurvycausing the majority of deaths. Additionally, outbreaks ofsmallpox, syphilis, measles, and other diseases spread rapidly in the close-quarter compartments. The rate of death increased with the length of the voyage, since the incidence of dysentery and of scurvy increased with longer stints at sea as the quality and amount of food and water diminished. In addition to physical sickness, many slaves became too depressed to eat or function efficiently due to loss of freedom, family, security, and their own humanity.

Slave treatment and resistance

While treatment of slaves on the passage was varied, slaves' treatment was often horrific because the captured African men and women were considered less than human; they were "cargo", or "goods", and treated as such; they were transported for marketing. For example, the Zong, a British slaver, took too many slaves on a voyage to the New World in 1781. Overcrowding combined with malnutrition and disease killed several crew members and around 60 slaves. Bad weather made the Zong's voyage slow; the captain decided to drown his slaves at sea, so the owners could collect insurance on the slaves. Over 100 slaves were killed and a number of slaves chose to kill themselves. The Zong incident became fuel for the abolitionist movement and a major court case, as the insurance company refused to compensate for the loss.

While slaves were generally kept fed and supplied with drink, as healthy slaves were more valuable, if resources ran low on the long, unpredictable voyages, the crew received preferential treatment. Slave punishment was very common, as on the voyage the crew had to turn independent people into obedient slaves. Whipping and use of the cat o' nine tails were a common occurrence; sometimes slaves were beaten for “melancholy”. The worst punishments were for rebelling; in one instance a captain punished a failed rebellion by killing one involved slave immediately, and forcing two other slaves to eat his heart and liver.^[11]

Slaves resisted in a variety of ways. The two most common types of resistance were refusal to eat and suicide. Suicide was a frequent occurrence, often by refusal of food or medicine or jumping overboard, as well as by a variety of other opportunistic means.^[12] Over the centuries, some African peoples, such as the Kru, came to be understood as holding substandard value as slaves, because they developed a reputation for being too proud for slavery, and for attempting suicide immediately upon losing their freedom.^[13] Both suicide and self-starving were prevented as much as possible by slaver crews; slaves were often force-fed or tortured until they ate, some still managed to starve themselves to death; slaves were kept away from means of suicide, and the sides of the deck were often netted. Slaves were still successful, especially at jumping overboard. Often when an uprising failed, the mutineers would jump en masse into the sea. Slaves generally believed that if they jumped overboard, they would be returned to their family and friends in their village, or to their ancestors, in the afterlife.^[14] Suicide by jumping overboard was such a problem that captains had to address it directly in many cases. They used the sharks that followed the ships as a terror weapon. One captain, who had a rash of suicides on his ship, took a woman and lowered her into the water on a rope, and pulled her out as fast as possible. When she came in view, the sharks had already killed her—and bitten off the lower half of her body.^[15]

Slave uprisings were fairly common, but few were successful (notably that on the La Amistad, which had a key effect on abolition in the US):

When we found ourselves at last taken away, death was more preferable than life, and a plan was concerted amongst us, that we might burn and blow up the ship, and to perish all together in the flames.^[16]

The number of participants varied widely, often the uprisings would end with the death of a few slaves and crew, and the surviving rebels were punished or executed to be made examples to the rest of the slaves on board.

Slaves also resisted through certain manifestations of their religions and mythology. They would appeal to their gods for protection and vengeance upon their captors, and would also try to curse and otherwise harm the crew using idols and fetishes. One crew found fetishes in their water supply, placed by slaves who thought it would kill all who drank from it.^[14]

Sailors and crew

The sailors experienced subpar conditions and were often employed through coercion. Sailors knew and hated the slave trade, so, at port towns, recruiters and tavern owners would get sailors very drunk (and indebted), and then offer to relieve their debt if they signed contracts with slave ships. If they did not, they would be imprisoned. Sailors in prison had a hard time getting jobs outside of the slave ship industry, since most other maritime industries would not hire “jail-birds”, so they were forced to go to the slave ships anyway.^[17]

Notes 

1. 1^ McKissack, Patricia C., and McKissack, Frederick. The Royal Kingdoms of Ghana, Mali, and Songhay. 1995, page 109.
2. 2^ ^a b Walker, Theodore. Mothership Connections. 2004, page 10.
3. 3^ Thomas, Hugh. "The Slave Trade: the story of the Atlantic Slave Trade, 1440–1870". 1999, page 293.
4. 4^ Lovejoy, Paul E. Transformations in Slavery. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
5. 5^ Mancke, Elizabeth and Shammas, Carole. The Creation of the British Atlantic World. 2005, page 30-1.
6. 6^ Rosenbaum, Alan S., and Charny, Israel W. Is the Holocaust Unique? 2001, page 98-9.
7. 7^ About.com: The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade
8. 8^ Eltis, David. The Rise of African Slavery in the Americas. 2000, page 156-7.
9. 9^ Eltis, David and Richardson, David. The Numbers Game. In: Northrup, David: The Atlantic Slave Trade, second edition, Houghton Mifflin Co., 2002.
10. 10^ P. 95. Basil Davidson. The African Slave Trade.
11. 11^ Rediker, Marcus. The Slave Ship. 2007, page 16.
12. 12^ Taylor, Eric Robert. If We Must Die. 2006, page 37-8.
13. 13^ Johnston, Harry, and Johnston, Harry Hamilton and Stapf, Otto. Liberia. 1906, page 110.
14. 14^ ^a b Bly, Antonio T. Crossing the Lake of Fire: Slave Resistance during the Middle Passage, 1720–1842. The Journal of Negro History, Vol. 83, no. 3 (Summer, 1998).
15. 15^ Rediker, Marcus. The Slave Ship. 2007, page 40.
16. 16^ Taylor, Eric Robert. If We Must Die. 2006, page 39.
17. 17^ Rediker, Marcus. The Slave Ship. Penguin Books. 2007, p. 138–139.

Baroja, Pio (2002). Los pilotos de altura. Madrid: Anaya. ISBN 84-667-1681-5.

Atlantic slave trade

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Atlantic slave trade or trans-atlantic slave trade took place across the Atlantic ocean from the 16th through to the 19th centuries. The vast majority of slaves transported to the New World were Africans from the central and western parts of the continent, sold by Africans to European slave traders who then transported them to the colonies in North and South America. The numbers were so great that Africans who came by way of the slave trade became the most numerous Old-World immigrants in both North and South America before the late eighteenth century.[1] The South Atlantic economic system centered on making goods and clothing to sell in Europe and increasing the numbers of African slaves brought to the New World. This was crucial to those European countries who, in the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, were vying in creating overseas empires.[2]

The first Africans imported to the English colonies were also called “indentured servants” or “apprentices for life”. By the middle of the seventeenth century, they and their offspring were legally the property of their owners. As property, they were merchandise or units of labor, and were sold at markets with other goods and services.

The Portuguese were the first to engage in the New World slave trade, and others soon followed. Slaves were considered cargo by the ship owners, to be transported to the Americas as quickly and cheaply as possible,[2] there to be sold to labor in coffee, tobacco, cocoa, cotton and sugar plantations, gold and silver mines, rice fields, construction industry, cutting timber for ships, and as house servants.

The Atlantic slave traders, ordered by trade volume, were: the Portuguese, the British, the French, the Spanish, the Dutch, and the Americans. They had established outposts on the African coast where they purchased slaves from local African tribal leaders.[3] Current estimates are that about 12 million were shipped across the Atlantic,[4] although the actual number purchased by the traders is considerably higher.[5][6][7]

The slave trade is sometimes called the Maafa by African and African-American scholars, meaning "holocaust" or "great disaster" in Swahili. Some scholars, such as Marimba Ani and Maulana Karenga use the terms African Holocaust or Holocaust of Enslavement. Slavery was one element of a three-part economic cycle—the triangular trade and its Middle Passage—which ultimately involved four continents, four centuries and millions of people.[8]

The transatlantic slave trade resulted in a vast and as yet still unknown loss of life for African captives both in and outside of America. Approximately 1.2 – 2.4 million Africans died during their transport to the New World[63] More died soon upon their arrival. The amount of life lost in the actual procurement of slaves remains a mystery but may equal or exceed the amount actually enslaved.[64]

The savage nature of the trade led to the destruction of individuals and cultures. The following figures do not include deaths of enslaved Africans as a result of their actual labor, slave revolts or diseases they caught while living among New World populations.

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than 11 million people. For a long time an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. Most historians now agree that at least 12 million slaves left the continent between the 15th and 19th century, but 10 to 20% died on board ships. Thus a figure of 11 million enslaved people transported to the Americas is the nearest demonstrable figure historians can produce.[63] Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage itself, even more slaves probably died in the slave raids in Africa. The death toll from four centuries of the Atlantic slave trade is estimated at 10 million. According to William Rubinstein, "... of these 10 million estimated dead blacks, possibly 6 million were killed by other blacks in African tribal wars and raiding parties aimed at securing slaves for transport to America."[65]

New World destinations

The first slaves to arrive as part of a labor force appeared in 1502 on the island of Hispaniola (now Haiti and the Dominican Republic). Cuba received its first four slaves in 1513. Jamaica received its first shipment of 4000 slaves in 1518.[88] Slave exports to Honduras and Guatemala started in 1526. The first enslaved Africans to reach what would become the US arrived in January 1526 as part of a Spanish attempt at colonizing South Carolina near Jamestown. By November the 300 Spanish colonists were reduced to a mere 100 accompanied by 70 of their original 100 slaves. The enslaved people revolted and joined a nearby native population while the Spanish abandoned the colony altogether. Colombia received its first enslaved people in 1533. El Salvador, Costa Rica and Florida began their stint in the slave trade in 1541, 1563 and 1581 respectively.

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments with enslaved people arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619, although these first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years; chattel slavery entered Virginia law in 1656. Irish immigrants brought slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves arrived in Belize.

By 1802 Russian colonists noted that "Boston" (U.S.-based) skippers were trading African slaves for otter pelts with the Tlingit people in Southeast Alaska.[89]

Distribution of slaves (1519–1867)^[90]

Destination	Percentage
Portuguese America	38.5%
British America (minus North America)	18.4%
Spanish Empire	17.5%
French Americas	13.6%
British North America	6.45%
English Americas	3.25%
Dutch West Indies	2.0%
Danish West Indies	0.3%

The number of the Africans arrived in each area can be easily calculated taking into consideration that the total number of slaves was close to 10,000,000.^[91]

Economics of slavery

The plantation economies of the New World were built on slave labor. Seventy percent of the enslaved people brought to the new world were used to produce sugar, the most labor-intensive crop. The rest were employed harvesting coffee, cotton, and tobacco, and in some cases in mining. The West Indian colonies of the European powers were some of their most important possessions, so they went to extremes to protect and retain them. For example, at the end of the Seven Years' War in 1763, France agreed to cede the vast territory of New France (now Eastern Canada) to the victors in exchange for keeping the minute Antillean island of Guadeloupe.

In France in the 18th century, returns for investors in plantations averaged around 6%; as compared to 5% for most domestic alternatives, this represented a 20% profit advantage. Risks—maritime and commercial—were important for individual voyages. Investors mitigated it by buying small shares of many ships at the same time. In that way, they were able to diversify a large part of the risk away. Between voyages, ship shares could be freely sold and bought.[92]

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the United Kingdom. After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. This advantage was reinforced when France lost its most important colony, St. Dominigue (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791[93] and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against cheaper French sugar.

After 1791, the British islands produced the most sugar, and the British people quickly became the largest consumers. West Indian sugar became ubiquitous as an additive to Indian tea. It has been estimated that the profits of the slave trade and of West Indian plantations created up to one-in-twenty of every pound circulating in the British economy at the time of the Industrial Revolution in the latter half of the 18th century.[94]

Effects

World population (in millions)[95] Year 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 1999 World 791 978 1,262 1,650 2,521 5,978 Africa 106 107 111 133 221 767 Asia 502 635 809 947 1,402 3,634 Europe 163 203 276 408 547 729 Latin America and the Caribbean 16 24 38 74 167 511 Northern America 2 7 26 82 172 307 Oceania 2 2 2 6 13 30

World population (by percentage distribution) Year 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 1999 World 100 100 100 100 100 100 Africa 13.4 10.9 8.8 8.1 8.8 12.8 Asia 63.5 64.9 64.1 57.4 55.6 60.8 Europe 20.6 20.8 21.9 24.7 21.7 12.2 Latin America and the Caribbean 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.5 6.6 8.5 Northern America 0.3 0.7 2.1 5.0 6.8 5.1 Oceania 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.5

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, even though there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. The major advantage that Europe had was in ship building. During the period of slavery the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially while the population of Africa remained stagnant. Rodney contended that the profits from slavery were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the industrial revolution was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. He cited examples such as theinvention of the steam engine by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean.^[96]

Other historians have attacked both Rodney's methodology and factual accuracy. Joseph C. Millerhas argued that the social change and demographic stagnation (which he researched on the example of West Central Africa) was caused primarily by domestic factors. Joseph Inikori provided a new line of argument, estimating counterfactual demographic developments in case the Atlantic slave trade had not existed. Patrick Manning has shown that the slave trade did indeed have profound impact on African demographics and social institutions, but nevertheless criticized Inikori's approach for not taking other factors (such as famine and drought) into account and thus being highly speculative.^[97]

Effect on the economy of Africa

No scholars dispute the harm done to the enslaved people themselves, but the effect of the trade on African societies is much debated due to the apparent influx of goods to Africans. Proponents of the slave trade, such as Archibald Dalzel, argued that African societies were robust and not much affected by the ongoing trade. In the 19th century, European abolitionists, most prominently Dr. David Livingstone, took the opposite view arguing that the fragile local economy and societies were being severely harmed by the ongoing trade. Historian Walter Rodneyestimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

[edit]Effects on the economy of Europe

Some have stressed the importance of natural or financial resources that Britain received from its many overseas colonies or that profits from the British slave trade between Africa and the Caribbean helped fuel industrial investment. West Indian writer Eric Williams asserts the contribution of Africans on the basis of profits from the slave trade and slavery, and the employment of those profits to finance England's industrialization process. He argues that the enslavement of Africans was an essential element to the Industrial Revolution, and that British wealth is, in part, a result of slavery. However, he says that by the time of its abolition it had lost its profitability and it was in Britain's economic interest to ban it.^[98] Other researchers and historians have strongly contested what has come to be referred to as the “Williams thesis” in academia: David Richardsonhas concluded that the profits from the slave trade amounted to less than 1% of domestic investment in Britain,^[99] and economic historian Stanley Engerman finds that even without subtracting the associated costs of the slave trade (e.g., shipping costs, slave mortality, mortality of whites in Africa, defense costs) or reinvestment of profits back into the slave trade, the total profits from the slave trade and of West Indian plantations amounted to less than 5% of the British economy during any year of the Industrial Revolution.^[100] Engerman’s 5% figure gives as much as possible in terms of benefit of the doubt to the Williams argument, not solely because it does not take into account the associated costs of the slave trade to Britain, but also because it carries the full-employment assumption from economics and holds the gross value of slave trade profits as a direct contribution to Britain’s national income.^[100] Historian Richard Pares, in an article written before Williams’ book, dismisses the influence of wealth generated from the West Indian plantations upon the financing of the Industrial Revolution, stating that whatever substantial flow of investment from West Indian profits into industry there was occurred after emancipation, not before.^[101]

Seymour Drescher and Robert Anstey argue the slave trade remained profitable until the end, and that moralistic reform, not economic incentive, was primarily responsible for abolition. They say slavery remained profitable in the 1830s because of innovations in agriculture.^[102]

Karl Marx in his influential economic history of capitalism Das Kapital wrote that '...the turning of Africa into a warren for the commercial hunting of black-skins, signaled the rosy dawn of the era of capitalist production.' He argued that the slave trade was part of what he termed the 'primitive accumulation' of European capital, the 'non-capitalist' accumulation of wealth that preceded and created the financial conditions for Britain's industrialisation.^[103]

[edit]Demographics

The demographic effects of the slave trade are some of the most controversial and debated issues. More than 12 million people were removed from Africa via the slave trade, and what effect this had on Africa is an important question.

Walter Rodney argued that the export of so many people had been a demographic disaster and had left Africa permanently disadvantaged when compared to other parts of the world, and largely explains the continent's continued poverty.^[104] He presented numbers showing that Africa's population stagnated during this period, while that of Europe and Asia grew dramatically. According to Rodney, all other areas of the economy were disrupted by the slave trade as the top merchants abandoned traditional industries to pursue slaving, and the lower levels of the population were disrupted by the slaving itself.

As Joseph E. Inikori argues, the history of the region shows that the effects were still quite deleterious. He argues that the African economic model of the period was very different from the European, and could not sustain such population losses. Population reductions in certain areas also led to widespread problems. Inikori also notes that after the suppression of the slave trade Africa's population almost immediately began to rapidly increase, even prior to the introduction of modern medicines.^[105] Owen Alik Shahadah also states that the trade was not only of demographicsignificance in aggregate population losses but also in the profound changes to settlement patterns, exposure to epidemics, and reproductive and social development potential.^[106]

[edit]Legacy of racism

Professor Maulana Karenga states that the effects of slavery were that "the morally monstrous destruction of human possibility involved redefining African humanity to the world, poisoning past, present and future relations with others who only know us through this stereotyping and thus damaging the truly human relations among peoples." He states that it constituted the destruction of culture, language, religion and human possibility.^[107] Eric Williams argued that, "A racial twist [was] given to what is basically an economic phenomenon. Slavery was not born of racism: rather, racism was the consequence of slavery."^[108]

[edit]End of the Atlantic slave trade

Main article: Abolitionism

William Wilberforce(1759–1833), politician and philanthropist who was a leader of the movement to abolish the slave trade.

In Britain, America, Portugal and in parts of Europe, opposition developed against the slave trade. Davis says that abolitionists assumed "that an end to slave imports would lead automatically to the amelioration and gradual abolition of slavery.".^[109] Opposition to the trade was led by the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) and establishment Evangelicals such as William Wilberforce. The movement was joined by many and began to protest against the trade, but they were opposed by the owners of the colonial holdings.^[110] Following Lord Mansfield's decision in 1772, slaves became free upon entering the British isles.^[111] Under the leadership of Thomas Jefferson, the new state of Virginia in 1778 became the first state and one of the first jurisdictions anywhere to stop the importation of slaves for sale; it made it a crime for traders to bring in slaves from out of state or from overseas for sale; migrants from other states were allowed to bring their own slaves. The new law freed all slaves brought in illegally after its passage and imposed heavy fines on violators.^[112][113] Denmark, which had been active in the slave trade, was the first country to ban the trade through legislation in 1792, which took effect in 1803. Britain banned the slave trade in 1807, imposing stiff fines for any slave found aboard a British ship (see Slave Trade Act 1807). TheRoyal Navy, which then controlled the world's seas, moved to stop other nations from continuing the slave trade and declared that slaving was equal to piracy and was punishable by death. The United States Congress passed the Slave Trade Act of 1794, which prohibited the building or outfitting of ships in the U.S. for use in the slave trade. In 1807 Congress outlawed the importation of slavesbeginning on January 1, 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution for such a ban.

On Sunday 28 October 1787, William Wilberforce wrote in his diary: "God Almighty has set before me two great objects, the suppression of the slave trade and the Reformation of society." For the rest of his life, William Wilberforce dedicated his life as a Member of the British Parliament to opposing the slave trade and working for the abolition of slavery throughout the British Empire. On 22 February 1807, twenty years after he first began his crusade, and in the middle of Britain's war with France, Wilberforce and his team's labors were rewarded with victory. By an overwhelming 283 votes for to 16 against, the motion to abolish the Atlantic slave trade was carried in the House of Commons.^[114] The United States acted to abolish the slave trade the same year, but not its internal slave trade which became the dominant character in American slavery until the 1860s.^[115] In 1805 the British Order-in-Council had restricted the importation of slaves into colonies that had been captured from France and the Netherlands.^[111] Britain continued to press other nations to end its trade; in 1810 an Anglo-Portuguese treaty was signed whereby Portugal agreed to restrict its trade into its colonies; an 1813 Anglo-Swedish treaty whereby Sweden outlawed its slave trade; theTreaty of Paris 1814 where France agreed with Britain that the trade is "repugnant to the principles of natural justice" and agreed to abolish the slave trade in five years; the 1814 Anglo-Netherlands treaty where the Dutch outlawed its slave trade.^[111]

"Am I not a woman and a sister?"
An antislavery medallion from the late 18th century

With peace in Europe from 1815, and British supremacy at sea secured, the Royal Navy turned its attention back to the challenge and established the West Africa Squadron in 1808, known as the 'preventative squadron', which for the next 50 years operated against the slavers. By the 1850s, around 25 vessels and 2,000 officers and men were on the station, supported by some ships from the small United States Navy, and nearly 1,000 'Kroomen'—experienced fishermen recruited as sailors from what is now the coast of modern Liberia. Service on the West Africa Squadron was a thankless and overwhelming task, full of risk and posing a constant threat to the health of the crews involved. Contending with pestilential swamps and violent encounters, the mortality rate was 55 per 1,000 men, compared with 10 for fleets in the Mediterranean or in home waters.^[116] Between 1807 and 1860, the Royal Navy's Squadron seized approximately 1,600 ships involved in the slave trade and freed 150,000 Africans who were aboard these vessels.^[117] Several hundred slaves a year were transported by the navy to the British colony of Sierra Leone, where they were made to serve as 'apprentices' in the colonial economy until the Slavery Abolition Act 1833.^[118] Action was taken against African leaders who refused to agree to British treaties to outlaw the trade, for example against 'the usurping King of Lagos', deposed in 1851. Anti-slavery treaties were signed with over 50 African rulers.^[119]

The last recorded slave ship to land on American soil was the Clotilde, which in 1859 illegally smuggled a number of Africans into the town of Mobile, Alabama.^[120] The Africans on board were sold as slaves; however, slavery in the U.S. was abolished 5 years later following the end of theAmerican Civil War in 1865. The last survivor of the voyage was Cudjoe Lewis who died in 1935.^[121] The last country to ban the Atlantic slave trade was Brazil in 1831. However, a vibrant illegal trade continued to ship large numbers of enslaved people to Brazil and also to Cuba until the 1860s, when British enforcement and further diplomacy finally ended the Atlantic trade.^[122][123]

[edit]Abolition argument

This article may be unbalanced towards certain viewpoints.Please improve the article by adding information on neglected viewpoints, or discuss the issue on the talk page. (March 2011)

The Abolitionists argued that the slave trade changed the face of Africa, pushing them into constant wars as a result of the Europeans' ever-growing demands for slaves. They argued that even in Africa, the Africans' lives revolved around the slave trade's needs through the constant wars and battles to secure enough slaves for the Europeans. Although people avoided mentioning the horrid living conditions of slave trade ships out of fear of the animosity it could cause, the abolitionists incorporated the high mortality rates in their argument against slavery. Even though the abolitionists incorporated the idea of European superiority in their platform, they argued the slave trade hindered the progress of African race. They, however, had to contend with those who invested in the slave trade, who argued that the slave trade was essential for the survival of the economy. Others argued that despite the cruel conditions on the ships, the overall conditions of Africa were worse. The debate over slavery went on for decades before abolition was finalized.^[124]

[edit]Legacy

[edit]African Diaspora

House slaves in Brazil c. 1820, by Jean-Baptiste Debret

The African Diaspora which was created via slavery has been a complex interwoven part of America history and culture.^[125] In the United States, the success of Alex Haley's book Roots: The Saga of an American Family, published in 1976, and the subsequent television miniseries based upon it Roots, broadcast on the ABC network in January 1977, led to an increased interest and appreciation of African heritage amongst the African-American community.^[126] The influence of these led many African-Americans to begin researching their family histories and making visits to West Africa. In turn, a tourist industry grew up to supply them. One notable example of this is through the Roots Homecoming Festival held annually in the Gambia, in which rituals are held through which African-Americans can symbolically 'come home' to Africa.^[127] Issues of dispute have however developed between African-Americans and African authorities over how to display historic sites that were involved in the Atlantic slave trade, with prominent voices in the former criticising the latter for not displaying such sites sensitively, but instead treating them as a commercial enterprise.^[128]

[edit]'Back to Africa'

In 1816, a group of wealthy European-Americans, some of whom were abolitionists and others who were racial segregationists, founded the American Colonization Society with the express desire of returning African-Americans who were in the United States to West Africa. In 1820, they sent their first ship to Liberia, and within a decade around two thousand African-Americans had been settled in the west African country. Such re-settlement continued throughout the 19th century, increasing following the deterioration of race relations in the southern states of the US following Reconstructionin 1877.^[129]

[edit]Rastafari movement

The Rastafari movement, which originated in Jamaica, where 98% of the population are descended from victims of the Atlantic slave trade, has made great efforts to publicize the slavery, and to ensure it is not forgotten, especially through reggae music.^[130]

[edit]Apologies

In 1998, UNESCO designated August 23 as International Day for the Remembrance of the Slave Trade and its Abolition. Since then there have been a number of events recognizing the effects of slavery.

On 9 December 1999 Liverpool City Council passed a formal motion apologising for the City's part in the slave trade. It was unanimously agreed that Liverpool acknowledges its responsibility for its involvement in three centuries of the slave trade. The City Council has made an unreserved apology for Liverpool's involvement and the continual effect of slavery on Liverpool's Black communities.^[131]

At the 2001 World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa, African nations demanded a clear apology for slavery from the former slave-trading countries. Some nations were ready to express an apology, but the opposition, mainly from the United Kingdom, Portugal, Spain, theNetherlands, and the United States blocked attempts to do so. A fear of monetary compensation might have been one of the reasons for the opposition. As of 2009, efforts are underway to create aUN Slavery Memorial as a permanent remembrance of the victims of the Atlantic slave trade.

On January 30, 2006, Jacques Chirac (the then French President) said that 10 May would henceforth be a national day of remembrance for the victims of slavery in France, marking the day in 2001 when France passed a law recognising slavery as a crime against humanity.^[132]

On November 27, 2006, then British Prime Minister Tony Blair made a partial apology for Britain's role in the African slavery trade. However African rights activists denounced it as "empty rhetoric" that failed to address the issue properly. They feel his apology stopped shy to prevent any legal retort.^[133] Mr Blair again apologized on March 14, 2007.^[134]

On February 24, 2007 the Virginia General Assembly passed House Joint Resolution Number 728^[135] acknowledging "with profound regret the involuntary servitude of Africans and the exploitation of Native Americans, and call for reconciliation among all Virginians." With the passing of that resolution, Virginia became the first of the 50 United States to acknowledge through the state's governing body their state's involvement in slavery. The passing of this resolution came on the heels of the 400th anniversary celebration of the city of Jamestown, Virginia, which was the first permanent English colony to survive in what would become the United States. Jamestown is also recognized as one of the first slave ports of the American colonies.

On May 31, 2007, the Governor of Alabama, Bob Riley, signed a resolution expressing "profound regret" for Alabama's role in slavery and apologizing for slavery's wrongs and lingering effects. Alabama is the fourth Southern state to pass a slavery apology, following votes by the legislatures in Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina.^[136]

On August 24, 2007, Ken Livingstone (then Mayor of London) apologized publicly for London's role in the slave trade. "You can look across there to see the institutions that still have the benefit of the wealth they created from slavery", he said pointing towards the financial district, before breaking down in tears. He claimed that London was still tainted by the horrors of slavery. Jesse Jacksonpraised Mayor Livingstone, and added that reparations should be made.^[137]

On July 30, 2008, the United States House of Representatives passed a resolution apologizing for American slavery and subsequent discriminatory laws. The language included a reference to the "fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality and inhumanity of slavery and Jim Crow" segregation.^[138]

On June 18, 2009, the United States Senate issued an apologetic statement decrying the "fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery". The news was welcomed byPresident Barack Obama, the nation's first President of African descent.^[139]

[edit]See also

Wikisource has original text related to this article: On the Horrors of the Slave Trade

• History of slavery
• African slave trade
• Arab slave trade
• Piracy

[edit]References

[edit]Footnotes

1. ^ Curtin, Philip (1969). The Atlantic Slave Trade. The University Of Wisconsin Press. pp. 1–58.
2. ^ ^a b Mannix, Daniel (1962). Black Cargoes. The Viking Press. pp. Introduction-1–5.
3. ^ Klein, Herbert S. and Jacob Klein. The Atlantic Slave Trade. Cambridge University Press, 1999. pp. 103–139.
4. ^ Ronald Segal, The Black Diaspora: Five Centuries of the Black Experience Outside Africa (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1995), ISBN 0-374-11396-3, page 4. "It is now estimated that 11,863,000 slaves were shipped across the Atlantic. [Note in original: Paul E. Lovejoy, "The Impact of the Atlantic Slave Trade on Africa: A Review of the Literature", inJournal of African History 30 (1989), p. 368.]"
5. ^ Eltis, David and Richardson, David. The Numbers Game. In: Northrup, David: The Atlantic Slave Trade, 2nd edition, Houghton Mifflin Co., 2002. p. 95.
6. ^ Basil Davidson. The African Slave Trade.
7. ^ "African Holocaust How Many". African Holocaust Society. Retrieved 2007-01-04. "While traditional studies often focus on official French and British records of how many Africans arrived in the New World, these studies neglect to include the death from raids, the fatalities on board the ships, deaths caused by European diseases, the victims from the consequences of enslavement, and trauma of refugees displaced by slaving activities. The number of arrivals also neglects the volume of Africans who arrived via pirates, who for obvious reasons, wouldn't have kept records."
8. ^ ^a b c "African Holocaust Special". African Holocaust Society. Retrieved 2007-01-04.
9. ^ Thornton 1998. pp. 15–17.
10. ^ Christopher 2006, p. 127.
11. ^ Thornton 1998. pp. 13.
12. ^ Chaunu 1969. pp. 54–58.
13. ^ Thornton 1998. pp. 24.
14. ^ Thornton 1998. pp. 24–26.
15. ^ Thornton 1998. pp. 27.
16. ^ ^a b c Historical survey > Slave societiesBritannica.
17. ^ Ferro, Mark (1997). Colonization: A Global History. Routledge. p. 221, ISBN 978-0-415-14007-2.
18. ^ Adu Boahen, Topics In West African History, p. 110.
19. ^ Kwaku Person-Lynn, African Involvement In Atlantic Slave Trade.
20. ^ ^a b c Slave trade: a root of contemporary African Crisis Africa Economic Analysis 2000
21. ^ Elikia M’bokolo, April 2, 1998, The impact of the slave trade on Africa, Le Monde diplomatique[1]
22. ^ Thornton, page 112
23. ^ ^a b Thornton, page 310
24. ^ Thornton, page 45
25. ^ Thornton, page 94
26. ^ Thornton 1998. pp. 28–29.
27. ^ Thornton 1998. p. 31.
28. ^ Thornton 1998. pp. 29–31.
29. ^ Thornton 1998. pp. 37.
30. ^ Thornton 1998. p. 38.
31. ^ ^a b Thornton 1998. p. 39.
32. ^ Thornton 1998. p. 40.
33. ^ Rodney 1972. pp. 95-113.
34. ^ Austen 1987. pp. 81–108.
35. ^ Thornton 1998. p. 44.
36. ^ Thornton 1998. p. 35.
37. ^ Thornton 1998. pp. 40–41.
38. ^ Thornton 1998. p. 33.
39. ^ Anstey, Roger: The Atlantic Slave Trade and British abolition, 1760–1810. London: Macmillan, 1975,p.5.
40. ^ P.C. Emmer, The Dutch in the Atlantic Economy, 1580–1880. Trade, Slavery and Emancipation (1998), p.17.
41. ^ Klein 2010)
42. ^ Keith Bradley, Paul Cartledge (2011). The Cambridge World History of Slavery. Cambridge University Press. pp. 583. ISBN 0-521-84066-X.
43. ^ Christopher 2006, p. 6.
44. ^ Lovejoy, Paul E.:The Volume of the Atlantic Slave Trade. A Synthesis. In: Northrup, David (ed.): The Atlantic Slave Trade. D.C. Heath and Company 1994.
45. ^ Skeletons Discovered: First African Slaves in New World. January 31, 2006. LiveScience.com. Accessed September 27, 2006.
46. ^ "Smallpox Through History". Archived fromthe original on 2009-10-31.
47. ^ Solow, Barbara (ed.). Slavery and the Rise of the Atlantic System, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1991.
48. ^ Notes on the State of Virginia Query 18
49. ^ Historical survey > The international slave trade
50. ^ "Transatlantic Slave Trade". "Hakim Adi".
51. ^ Thornton, page 304
52. ^ Thornton, page 305
53. ^ Thornton, page 311
54. ^ Thornton, page 122
55. ^ Howard Winant (2001), The World is a Ghetto: Race and Democracy Since World War II, Basic Books, p. 58.
56. ^ Catherine Lowe Besteman, Unraveling Somalia: Race, Class, and the Legacy of Slavery, (University of Pennsylvania Press: 1999), pp. 83–84
57. ^ Kevin Shillington, ed., (2005), Encyclopedia of African History, CRC Press, vol. 1, p. 333–34; Nicolas Argenti (2007), The Intestines of the State: Youth, Violence and Belated Histories in the Cameroon Grassfields, University of Chicago Press, p. 42.
58. ^http://www.accessgambia.com/information/slave-treatment-rights-privileges.html
59. ^ Mungo Park, Travels in the Interior of Africav. II, Chapter XXII - War and Slavery.
60. ^http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/negroplot/plotchronology.html
61. ^ Lovejoy, Paul E. Transformations in Slavery. Cambridge University Press, 2000
62. ^ Midlo Hall, Gwendolyn (2007). Slavery and African Ethnicities in the Americas.University of North Carolina Press. p. ^{[page needed]}. ISBN 978-0-8078-5862-2. Retrieved 2011-01-24.
63. ^ ^a b Quick guide: The slave trade; Who were the slaves? BBC News
64. ^ ^a b Stannard, David. American Holocaust. Oxford University Press, 1993
65. ^ Rubinstein, W. D. (2004). Genocide: a history. Pearson Education. p. 78. ISBN 0-582-50601-8.
66. ^ "African Holocaust: Kimani Nehusi How Many". African Holocaust Society. Retrieved 2005-01-04.
67. ^ ^a b c Gomez, Michael A. Exchanging Our Country Marks. Chapel Hill, 1998
68. ^ Thornton, John. Africa and Africans in the Making of the Atlantic World, 1400–1800Cambridge University Press, 1998
69. ^ Stride, G.T. and C. Ifeka. Peoples ad Empires of West Africa: West Africa in History 1000–1800. Nelson, 1986
70. ^ King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa. Houghton Mifflin Books. 1998. ISBN 0-618-00190-5.
71. ^ African Political Ethics and the Slave Trade
72. ^ Museum Theme: The Kingdom of Dahomey
73. ^ Dahomey (historical kingdom, Africa)
74. ^ Benin seeks forgiveness for role in slave trade
75. ^ Le Mali précolonial
76. ^ The Story of Africa
77. ^ West is master of slave trade guilt
78. ^ African Slave Owners
79. ^ ^{a b c d e} Meltzer, Milton. Slavery: A World History. Da Capo Press, 1993
80. ^ Raymond L. Cohn
81. ^ Cohn, Raymond L. "Deaths of Slaves in the Middle Passage", Journal of Economic History, September 1985.
82. ^ Kiple, Kenneth F. (2002). The Caribbean Slave: A Biological History. Cambridge University Press. p. 65. ISBN 0-521-52470-9.
83. ^ BBC – History – British Slaves on the Barbary Coast
84. ^ HEALTH IN SLAVERY
85. ^ Elkins, Stanley: Slavery. New York: Universal Library, 1963. p.48
86. ^ Rawley, James: London, Metropolis of the Slave Trade 2003
87. ^ ^a b Anstey, Roger: The Atlantic Slave Trade and British abolition, 1760–1810. London: Macmillan, 1975.
88. ^ Wynter, Sylvia (1984a). "New Seville and the Conversion Experience of Bartolomé de Las Casas: Part One"". Jamaica Journal 17 (2): 25-32.
89. ^ Dauenhauer, Nora Marks; Richard Dauenhauer, Lydia T. Black (2008). Anóoshi Lingít Aaní Ká, Russians in Tlingit America: The Battles of Sitka, 1802 and 1804.. Seattle: University of Washington Press. pp. XXVI.ISBN 978-0-295-98601-2.
90. ^ Stephen D. Behrendt, David Richardson, and David Eltis, W. E. B. Du Bois Institute for African and African-American Research,Harvard University. Based on "records for 27,233 voyages that set out to obtain slaves for the Americas". Stephen Behrendt (1999). "Transatlantic Slave Trade". Africana: The Encyclopedia of the African and African American Experience. New York: Basic Civitas Books. ISBN 0-465-00071-1.
91. ^ The Atlantic slave trade. By Philip D. Curtin, 1972. P.88
92. ^ Daudin 2004
93. ^ Slave Revolt in St. Domingue (Haiti)
94. ^ Digital History
95. ^ UN report
96. ^ [2] How Europe Underdeveloped AfricaWalter RodneyISBN 0950154644
97. ^ Manning, Patrick: Contours of Slavery and Social change in Africa. In: Northrup, David (ed.): The Atlantic Slave Trade. D.C. Heath & Company, 1994, pp. 148–160.
98. ^ Williams, Capitalism & Slavery (University of North Carolina Press, 1944), pp. 98–107, 169–177, et passim.
99. ^ David Richardson, "The British Empire and the Atlantic Slave Trade, 1660-1807," in P.J. Marshall, ed. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume II: The Eighteenth Century (1998) pp 440-64
100. ^ ^a b Stanley L. Engerman. "The Slave Trade and British Capital Formation in the Eighteenth Century". Retrieved 2012-04-26.
101. ^ Richard Pares. "The Economic Factors in the History of the Empire". Retrieved 2012-04-26.
102. ^ J.R. Ward, "The British West Indies in the Age of Abolition," in P.J. Marshall, ed. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume II: The Eighteenth Century (1998) pp 415-39.
103. ^ Marx, K. "Chapter Thirty-One: Genesis of the Industrial Capitalist" Das Kapital: Volume 1, 1867.,[3]
104. ^ Rodney, Walter. How Europe underdeveloped Africa. London: Bogle-L'Ouverture Publications, 1972
105. ^ Ideology versus the Tyranny of Paradigm: Historians and the Impact of the Atlantic Slave Trade on African Societies, by Joseph E. Inikori African Economic History. 1994.
106. ^ "African Holocaust: Dark Voyage audio CD". "Owen 'Alik Shahadah".
107. ^ "Effects on Africa". "Ron Karenga".
108. ^ Williams, Eric (1994) [1944]. Capitalism and Slavery. p. 7.
109. ^ David Brion Davis, The Problem of Slavery in the Age of Revolution: 1770–1823 (1975) 129
110. ^ Library of Society of Friends Subject Guide: Abolition of the Slave Trade
111. ^ ^a b c Paul E. Lovejoy (2000). Transformations in slavery: a history of slavery in Africa. p.290. Cambridge University Press, 2000
112. ^ John E. Selby and Don Higginbotham, The Revolution in Virginia, 1775–1783 (2007) p. 158
113. ^ Erik S. Root, All Honor to Jefferson?: The Virginia Slavery Debates and the Positive Good Thesis (2008) p. 19
114. ^ William Wilberforce (1759–1833)
115. ^ Marcyliena H. Morgan (2002). Language, discourse and power in African American culture p.20. Cambridge University Press, 2002
116. ^ The Royal Navy and the Battle to End Slavery. By Huw Lewis-Jones
117. ^ Sailing against slavery. By Jo LoosemoreBBC
118. ^ Britain forces 'freed slaves' into colonial labour
119. ^ The West African Squadron and slave trade
120. ^ Question of the Month – Jim Crow Museum at Ferris State University
121. ^ Diouf, Sylvianne (2007). Dreams of Africa in Alabama: The Slave Ship Clotilda and the Story of the Last Africans Brought to America. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-531104-3.
122. ^ Anstey, Roger: The Atlantic Slave Trade and British abolition, 1760–1810. London: Macmillan, 1975.
123. ^ Timeline – What happened after 1807?
124. ^ The African slave trade from the fifteenth to the nineteenth century: reports and papers of the meeting of experts / organized by UNESCO at Port-au-Prince, Haiti, 31 January to 4 February 1978.
125. ^ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/ Africans in America PBS Special
126. ^ Handley 2006. pp. 21–23.
127. ^ Handley 2006. pp. 23–25.
128. ^ Osei-Tutu 2006.
129. ^ Handley 2006. p. 21.
130. ^ Reggae and slavery
131. ^ [4]. National Museums Liverpool, Accessed 31 August 2010.
132. ^ "Chirac names slavery memorial day".BBC News, 30 January 2006. Accessed 22 July 2009.
133. ^ "Blair 'sorrow' over slave trade". BBC News, November 27, 2006. Accessed March 15, 2007.
134. ^ "Blair 'sorry' for UK slavery role". BBC News, March 14, 2007. Accessed March 15, 2007.
135. ^ House Joint Resolution Number 728.Commonwealth of Virginia. Accessed 22 July 2009.
136. ^ Associated Press. "Alabama Governor Joins Other States in Apologizing For Role in Slavery". Fox News, May 31, 2007. Accessed 22 July 2009.
137. ^ "Livingstone breaks down in tears at slave trade memorial". Daily Mail, 24 August 2007. Accessed 22 July 2009.
138. ^ Fears, Darryl. "House Issues An Apology For Slavery". The Washington Post, July 30, 2008, p. A03. Accessed 22 July 2009.
139. ^ Agence France-Presse. "Obama praises 'historic' Senate slavery apology". Google News, June 18, 2009. Accessed 22 July 2009.

[edit]Bibliography

Academic books

• Austen, Ralph (1987). African Economic History: Internal Development and External Dependency. London: James Currey. ISBN 978-0-85255-009-0.
• Chaunu, Pierre (1969). L'expansion européen du XIIIe à XVe siècles. Paris.
• Rodney, Walter (1972). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. London: Bogle L'Ouverture. ISBN 978-0-9501546-4-0.
• Thornton, John (1998). Africa and Africans in the Making of the Atlantic World, 1400–1800 (Second edition). New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-62217-2.

Academic articles

• Handley, Fiona J.L. (2006). "Back to Africa: Issues of hosting "Roots" tourism in West Africa". African Re-Genesis: Confronting Social Issues in the Diaspora (London: UCL Press): pp. 20–31.
• Osei-Tutu, Brempong (2006). "Contested Monuments: African-Americans and the commoditization of Ghana's slave castles". African Re-Genesis: Confronting Social Issues in the Diaspora (London: UCL Press): pp. 09–19.

Non-academic sources

[edit]Further reading

• Anstey, Roger: The Atlantic Slave Trade and British Abolition, 1760–1810. London: Macmillan, 1975. ISBN 0-333-14846-0.
• Blackburn, Robin (2011). The American Crucible: Slavery, Emancipation and Human Rights. London & New York: Verso. ISBN 978-1-84467-569-2.
• Christopher, Emma (2006). Slave Ship Sailors and Their Captive Cargoes, 1730–1807. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-67966-4.
• Clarke, Dr. John Henrik: Christopher Columbus and the Afrikan Holocaust: Slavery and the Rise of European Capitalism. Brooklyn, N.Y.: A & B Books, 1992. ISBN 1-881316-14-9.
• Curtin, Philip D: Atlantic Slave Trade. University of Wisconsin Press, 1969.
• Daudin, Guillaume: "Profitability of slave and long distance trading in context: the case of eighteenth century France", Journal of Economic History, 2004.
• Diop, Er. Cheikh Anta: Precolonial Black Africa: A Comparative Study of the Political and Social Systems of Europe and Black Africa. Harold J. Salemson, trans. Westport, Conn.: L. Hill, 1987.ISBN 0-88208-187-X, ISBN 0-88208-188-8.
• Doortmont, Michel R.; Jinna Smit (2007). Sources for the mutual history of Ghana and the Netherlands. An annotated guide to the Dutch archives relating to Ghana and West Africa in the Nationaal Archief, 1593–1960s. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-15850-4.
• Drescher, Seymour: From Slavery to Freedom: Comparative Studies in the Rise and Fall of Atlantic Slavery. London: Macmillan Press, 1999. ISBN 0-333-73748-2.
• Emmer, Pieter C.: The Dutch in the Atlantic Economy, 1580–1880. Trade, Slavery and Emancipation. Variorum Collected Studies Series CS614. Aldershot [u.a.]: Variorum, 1998.ISBN 0-86078-697-8.
• Franklin, John Hope: From Slavery to Freedom, 3rd ed. New York: Knopf, 1967.
• Gomez, Michael Angelo: Exchanging Our Country Marks (The Transformation of African Identities in the Colonial and AnteBellum South). Chapel Hill, N.C.: The University of North Carolina Press, 1998. ISBN 0-8078-4694-5.
• Hall, Gwendolyn Midlo: Slavery and African Ethnicities in the Americas: Restoring the Links. Chapel Hill, N.C.: The University of North Carolina Press, 2006. ISBN 0-8078-2973-0.
• Horne, Gerald: The Deepest South: The United States, Brazil, and the African Slave Trade. New York, NY : New York Univ. Press, 2007. ISBN 978-0-8147-3688-3, ISBN 978-0-8147-3689-0.
• James, E. Wyn: "Welsh Ballads and American Slavery", Welsh Journal of Religious History, 2 (2007), pp. 59–86. ISSN 0967-3938.
• Klein, Herbert S.: The Atlantic Slave Trade (2nd ed. 2010)
• Lindsay, Lisa A. "Captives as Commodities: The Transatlantic Slave Trade". Prentice Hall, 2008. ISBN 978-0-13-194215-8
• McMillin, James A. The final victims: foreign slave trade to North America, 1783–1810. (Includes database on CD-ROM) ISBN 978-1-57003-546-3
• Meltzer, Milton: Slavery: A World History. New York: Da Capo Press, 1993. ISBN 0-306-80536-7.
• Northrup, David: The Atlantic Slave Trade, (3rd ed. 2010)
• Rediker, Marcus (2007). The Slave Ship: A Human History. New York, NY: Viking Press.ISBN 978-0-670-01823-9.
• Rodney, Walter: How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press; Revised edition, 1981. ISBN 0-88258-096-5.
• Rodriguez, Junius P., ed. Encyclopedia of Emancipation and Abolition in the Transatlantic World. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe, 2007. ISBN 978-0-7656-1257-1.
• Solow, Barbara (ed.). Slavery and the Rise of the Atlantic System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. ISBN 0-521-40090-2.
• Thomas, Hugh: The Slave Trade: The History of the Atlantic Slave Trade 1440–1870. London: Picador, 1997. ISBN 0-330-35437-X.
• Thornton, John: Africa and Africans in the Making of the Atlantic World, 1400–1800, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 1998. ISBN 0-521-62217-4, ISBN 0-521-62724-9, ISBN 0-521-59370-0, ISBN 0-521-59649-1.
• Williams, Chancellor: Destruction of Black Civilization Great Issues of a Race from 4500 B.C. to 2000 A.D., 3rd ed. Chicago: Third World Press, 1987. ISBN 0-88378-030-5, ISBN 0-88378-042-9.
• Williams, Eric (1994) [1944]. Capitalism & Slavery. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 0-8078-2175-6.

[edit]External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Slavery

• Voyages: The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database
• African Holocaust: The legacy of Slavery remembered
• BBC | Africa|Quick guide: The slave trade
• Teaching resources about Slavery and Abolition on blackhistory4schools.com
• International Slavery Museum
• Mémoire St Barth | History of St Barthélemy (archives & history of slavery, slave trade and their abolition), Comité de Liaison et d'Application des Sources Historiques.
• British documents on slave holding and the slave trade, 1788–1793