The immense scale and power of the trans-Atlantic slave trade in Africa was enabled by a close partnership between Africans and Europeans in which Africans provided a continuous supply of slaves in exchange for European goods and money. However, to what extent said partnership was voluntary for the Africans is debatable. John D. Fage and Walter Rodney are two historians who fall on opposite ends of this inquiry. Fage posits that African leaders had a choice, which they made based on economic reasons, while Rodney insists that the Europeans forced the Slave Trade upon them. Likely neither extreme is correct, with the truth lying somewhere in the middle. While some degree of choice may have existed at the very onset of the Slave Trade, it soon faded as a result of growing competition with neighboring states for military, economic and political advantages. However, ultimately it was the African leaders’ perception of their own powerlessness against the Europeans that resulted in their compliance.
Once the first African leader agreed to exchange slaves for wealth and goods, the control other leaders had over their participation in the Slave Trade dwindled quickly. On the West Coast conflict between neighboring states was common, therefore European guns were a valuable commodity. Once one state received guns, it became necessary for all neighboring kingdoms to obtain guns in order to continue to successfully fight. If a state chose to abstain from trade with Europeans they risked being overtaken. While alternate goods provided some revenue, slaves’ increasing value quickly outstripped other resources, forcing states into the Slave Trade. Benin’s royal ban on the export of male slaves at the beginning of the sixteenth century exemplif...
... middle of paper ...
... Despite military, economic, and political benefits acquired through trade with the Europeans, many kingdoms could have forcibly ended trade within their boundaries, especially at the onset of the Slave Trade when it lacked establishment and momentum. However, due to their own feelings of powerlessness, the choice faded, and even the most unwilling leaders either participated in the Slave Trade, or were overtaken by it. Historians must remember that choices are not made based on fact, but on the perception of fact. Perhaps the history of the African West coast could have taken a completely different path, had African leaders realized their own power.
Works Cited
Fage, John D. “Slavery and the Slave Trade in the Context of West African History.” Perspectives on the African Past. Ed. G. Wesley Johnson, Martin A. Klein. Boston: Little, Brown, 1972. 140-152. Print.
...e, unlike the surrounding nations which were powerful, rich empires, Africa consisted of small tribes and kingdoms. These kingdoms’ greatest exports would consist of gold, salt, and slaves, in exchange for the goods imported from the surrounding empires.
In conclusion, during the 15th and 16th centuries Europeans visited the Atlantic Coast in the African states to observe for gold and silvers. They took advantage of the Africans to get their desires when the Africans acknowledged them to be equal which drove into Africa’s downfall.
Though the Atlantic Slave Trade began in 1441, it wasn’t until nearly a century later that Europeans actually became interested in slave trading on the West African coast. “With no interest in conquering the interior, they concentrated their efforts to obtain human cargo along the West African coast. During the 1590s, the Dutch challenged the Portuguese monopoly to become the main slave trading nation (“Africa and the Atlantic Slave Trade”, NA). Besides the trading of slaves, it was also during this time that political changes were being made. The Europe...
Growing up in the United States, many Americans have come to learn that the slave trade often started on the West African coast, but after reading Olaudah Equiano’s narrative and Reversing Sail written by Michael Gomez, we can see that the slave trade was already transpiring way before the trans-Atlantic trade. Before the European trade even occurred, there were systems of slavery that were happening already within different provinces or districts. Based on Equiano’s narrative, he observed “that their subjection to the king of Benin was little more than nominal; for every transaction of the government was conducted by chiefs or elders of the place” (Equiano 5). Based on that, we can see that there were designated chiefs, kings, and judges in
In the “Interpretive Essay”, Kenneth Banks discuses the consequences of the Atlantic slave trade. The negative effects on the Africans due to the Atlantic slave trade range from the influence on Africans societies and warfare, inhumane and atrocious living and working conditions, decrease of their population, and the long-term impact of bigotry. During the Atlantic save trade’s peak, the movement to abolish slavery started because it went against certain religious beliefs, several thinkers saw it as inefficient, and was unethical.
Every year, more and more money is donated to Africa to promote democracy in order to get rid of the powerful coups in many countries through out the continent. While the coups are declining and democratic governments are being established, the economic growth and development of Africa is not anywhere it should be considering the abundant natural resources and coastline that the continent possesses. Even though countries, like the United States of America, donate millions of dollars they are a large reason why Africa is underdeveloped economically. The Trans-Atlantic Slave trade is the most devastating event in the history of the world. Nearly 14,000,000 men, women, and children were displaced, sold into slavery, and killed by the trade routes.(
Slavery has been used throughout history but the African slave trade of the seventeenth and eighteenth century is the most brutish known to history. It was unique in three major ways. The amount of slaves being traded was tremendous. More than eleven million African slaves were “shipped” to the New World between 1519 and 1867. Of these eleven million, only 9.5 million reached the sure because of disease and extremely poor traveling accommodations.
John Barbot describes how many Africans would kidnap and trade their countrymen to Europeans. “Those sold by the Blacks are for the most part prisoners of war… others stolen away by their own countrymen; and some there are, who will sell their
With Europe in control, “the policies of the governing powers redirected all African trade to the international export market. Thus today, there is little in the way of inter-African trade, and the pattern of economic dependence continues.” Europeans exported most of the resources in Africa cheaply and sold them costly, which benefited them, but many Africans worked overtime and were not treated with care.
...nd contrasting points of African kings. While they both approved the use of slaves, Mbemba despised the slave trade and coaxed Portugal’s royalty into ending the entire business for the benefit of his nation. The king of Ouidah however seemed adamant about getting rid of his slaves in the trade without regard to how the slaves were being treated or how it affected his country. The mixed opinions on the slave trade and the identical thoughts of slavery during the 17th century allows one to see the varying notions the two issues had on the kings in Africa.
In the early 1880’s, the powers of Europe started to take control of regions in Africa and set up colonies there. In the beginning, colonization caused the Africans little harm, but before long, the Europeans started to take complete control of wherever they went. The Europeans used their advanced knowledge and technology to easily maneuver through the vast African landscape and used advanced weapons to take control of the African people and their land. The countries that claimed the most land and had the most significant effect on Africa were France, England, Belgium, and Germany. There were many reasons for the European countries to be competing against each other to gain colonies in Africa. One of the main reasons was that the Europeans believed that the more territory a country was able to control, the more powerful it could become and the more powerful it would be seen as by other countries. Other reasons for the desire to control African land included the many natural resources that could only be found in Africa, such as diamonds, gold, and as time progressed, rubber. It also provided new markets in surrounding places so that manufactured goods could be sold for a larger profit. The Europeans had many motives for imperialism in Africa. Yet the true motives were often shielded as they tried tom present themselves as humanitarians when in reality they were making Africa a terrible place to live with brutality and harsh treatment of the African natives. The ways of the Europeans had many physical and emotional costs for the people of Africa. The imperialism process also took a toll on the people of Europe. The European imperialistic colonization in Africa was motivated by the desire to control the abundant natural resources an...
"Africa Before Transatlantic Slavery: The Abolition of Slavery Project." Africa Before Transatlantic Slavery: The Abolition of Slavery Project. E2BN, 2009. Web. 08 Apr. 2014. .
Some of the effects of slavery in America were positive, but almost all of slavery’s impact in Africa was harmful. One major change in the areas that slaves were exported from is shown in demographics. Thousands of males were taken from their families and communities, and the tribes were expected to survive without many of their local leaders or role models. Not only did local tribes in Africa have hardships, but the leadership in many of the countries’ governments weren’t stable. The cruel trade demonstrated “how the external demand for slaves caused political instability, weakened states, promoted political and social fragmentation, and resulted in a deterioration of domestic legal institutions” (Nunn) in Africa. In addition to the crumbling political aspects of the tribes, there were cultural and native conflicts. Many wars and disagreements occurred, and those conflicts significantly slowed down development and economic growth in African countries
Africa’s struggle to maintain their sovereignty amidst the encroaching Europeans is as much a psychological battle as it is an economic and political one. The spillover effects the system of racial superiority had on the African continent fractured ...
There are a lot of causes of the scramble for Africa, and one of them was to ‘liberate’ the slaves in Africa after the slave trade ended. The slave trade was a time during the age of colonization when the Europeans, American and African traded with each oth...