The Atlantic Slave Trade?
Can some one tell me about the atlantic slave trade. Need to know about the middle passage.Explain which countries were involved in the trade and the triangle aspect of slave business.Also need to know about slavery in virgina and the laws passed to codify chatel slavery in that colony.
Atlantic Slave Trade?
Thats old news to me but sadly a lot of people dont have a clue about it. :) edit: It was told to me that they only went after africans when the indians kept dieing on them. Also some africans actually sold each other to europeans aswell. :)
What is the difference between the atlantic slave trade and the african slave trade?
The Atlantic slave trade, also known as the transatlantic slave trade, was the enslavement and transportation, primarily of African people, to the colonies of the New World that occurred in and around the Atlantic Ocean. African slaves became part of the Atlantic slave trade. So they are sort of the same thing. I'm not sure. Hope this helps :-)
Trans-atlantic slave trade essay help?
Before the 1750s there was no organized opposition to slavery, and no real debate on the subject. In 1754 a New Jersey Quaker named John Woolman published a piece called "Some Considerations on the Keeping of Negroes", which argued that keeping slaved was a threat to the salvation of the souls of their masters, since the masters would always be tempted to exploit the slaves. This caught on fast and the movement in Europe and the New World had grown substantially by the early part of the next century. Arguments in favor of slavery grew synchronously with arguments against it. In 1793 Archibald Dalzel published "A History of Dahomey", which detailed the cruel nature of East African societies of the time and suggested that Africans who were not sold to Europeans would simply have been executed. Europeans were at first concerned about the Middle Passage and what happened to slaves in Europe and the New World, and not at all concerned with slavery in Africa. This was gradually replaced by claims that slavery was destructive to life in Africa, especially after the descriptions of the explorer David Livingstone were published in the 1850s. Europeans gradually came to claim that Africans were barbarians and needed to be civilized, and the anti-slavery movement was mobilized in the service of the colonial conquest of Africa right up through the early part of the 20th century. Europeans who had previously considered African rulers to be their enemies came to see them as allies, and the abolition of slavery was eventually removed from its original moral and spiritual basis and undertaken in the name of power and politics attempting to stabilize and control regions of Africa. In other words, anti-slavery arguments started out as religious concerns, but eventually were co-opted by Europeans claiming they had a responibility to "civilize" Africa through conquest. You could try to trace this transition and show what happened that turned the argument against slavery away from one pertaining to the salvation of the soul into one which supported the cause of European colonial struggles. Just a suggestion. Good luck on your essay!
How did the atlantic slave trade affect africa?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6504141.stm http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761595721_3/Atlantic_Slave_Trade.html http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/slav/hd_slav.htm http://panafricannews.blogspot.com/2007/03/effects-of-atlantic-slave-trade-on-west.html Basically, it stimulated war between tribal areas because many Western African tribes needed to capture people in order to sell them to the Europeans. Some governments even turned against their own people by changing the laws and used enslavement as punishment. The trade caused a huge loss of population for many African kingdoms. Other kingdoms, on the other hand, expanded because they relied on warfare to enslave more people for the slave trade and got the wealth. The African social life is broken in many ways. Families suffered as their fathers, sons,or brothers were taken away. A lot of these people captured as slaves could have played a big role in African future. Many would have succeeded as important leaders or big business owner in their homelands.
What effect did the Atlantic Slave Trade have on the Americas?
Arguably, everything that has happened in the Americas since europeans first landed there, is a result of the trans-Atlantic trade. The trans-Atlantic trade consists of three parts, laborers from Africa, new resources in the Americas, and a market in Europe- the other could not exists with out another. The conquistadors, Spanish explorers, first tried using the Natives for slave labor, but they were too weak to be worked to such an extreme as was demanded. The Europeans carried diseases that the natives were not immune too and were not accustomed to a life of hard labor, as many native groups were primarily nomadic hunter gathers or just not as physically durable. Eventually Europeans began using hardened Africans for their labor. Without them, resources would not have been harvested and the Atlantic trade wouldn't have existed, or atleast existed at the same speed or efficiency. As European explorers came seeking their fortune, they began to set up small settlements, which grew into colonies. On top of that, African slaves were infamously an integral part of North American economy, particularly later on, in the south. A lot of the economy was driven by the harvest and subsequent selling of Tabacco, cotton, sugar, cocoa, hemp and other agricultural products, which grew better in climates closer to the equator like Southern North America, the Bahamas and Cuba. These sorts of commodities only existed because of tireless slave labor. As demand grew for the product, naturally so did the demand for labor. All this considered, the trams-Atlantic trade and subsequently the development and colinization of the Americas depended entirely slave labor.
How did the Barbary Slave trade compare with the Atlantic Slave Trade?
It was more direct, for one. The slavers tended to capture the future slaves themselves. The Atlantic trade tended to use middlemen to source them. Question of geography, really. It's difficult to access the interior of Africa, but all those Europeans crossing the seas, and their long coastlines, make raiders and slave-takers more capable of cutting out the middleman. The Atlantic trade was more centered around the three-legged trade, between Britain, West Africa, and the Caribbean. The Barbary slave trade was a touch less rigid, although in practice the same institutions of slave markets and auctions existed.The Atlantic African slave trade involved something like 12 million slaves, whereas the Barbary slave trade, at least as it pertains to Europeans, involved maybe 2 million. The numbers are very hard to pin down, as the Barbary traders were a lot more independent in their methods and organisation, and we have to use indirect means to determine the numbers of slaves involved.Conditions wise, they were quite similar, although Barbary slaves might be able to wiggle through the cracks in the system by converting to Islam. Some of them were sold back and freed if the slave had wealthy connections. The Ottoman empire made heavy use of slave soliders, and there were various institutions like the Harem and the associated Eunuchs that don't have a direct equivalent in the Atlantic trade, although the same use of slaves in agriculture and mining existed.