African History Lecture Notes 30/1/04

Subject: A summary portrait of the trans-Atlantic slave-trade

- the main period of slave trading was between 1600 and the 1860s/70s, although the dates could be extended in either direction; for example slaves were not banned in Brazil until 1889

it was a triangular trade; that is to say, ships travelled to Africa, collected the slaves and then took them the Americas. The ships would then return with the goods produced; sugar, cotton, etc.

Reginald Coupland and Keith Handcock were two major imperialist historians, writing in the 1930s to the 1950s produced vague ‘guestimates’ of the numbers of slaves, arriving at figures of between 18 and 25 million. They showed little or no interest in the long-term consequences of this migration, or how it was viewed from an Africa perspective; generally it was something best forgotten.

an alternative view was put forward by Eric Williams, a West Indian writing in the 1940s. He linked slavery to capitalist growth – economic ‘takeoff’.

By the 1960s, there was greater recognition the wide range of evidence available, including African oral histories

Phillip Curtin was perhaps the most influential author of this period, who in 1969 published ‘The Atlantic Slave Trade: A census’
- he revised estimates downwards to 8-10million, much lower, but still the largest forced migration of people in human history, over a period of 250+ years
- he discredited the assumption than large number of slaves died in transit, explaining that they were valuable economic goods, the owners had a vested interest in keeping them alive
- the 18th Century was the height of the Atlantic slave trade (it was also the high-point of the sugar trade)
- despite the fact that the slave trade became illegal in the early part of the 19th Century for most European countries (UK 1807, Denmark 1804), though not for Spain and Portugal, large amounts of slaves continued to be shipped: a fifth of the overall figure 1810-1870
- more slaves were shipped from the South part of West Africa than had previously been thought – the area that is now DRC and Angola - the slave trade moved further South simply because the more northerly regions had been ‘slaved out’

Most slaves went to either Brazil or the West Indies, only 10% went to the US
- the reason why the Black US population is more visible is that they were treated differently. The survival rate in WI/Brazil was only 2/3 years, as it was cheaper to import more than to treat them well
-but by the time the US was importing signnificant numbers of slaves, illegality had forced the prices up, and it was cheaper to ‘breed’ slaves than import more

note: the whole process was driven by economics

Over 150 miles of Ghanian coast, there are between 33 and 55 slave forts/castles, including particularly large ones at Elmina (the mine), Cape Coast – no territorial presence, just slave factories

Heterogenity was important in shipping slaves as it made insurrection less likely; mixing people by language and culture to produce the ‘atomised individual’ – i.e., the ideal slave

Note, there are only about 500 narratives from these slaves, the most famous being Olaudoh Equiano 

Another such narrative comes from Abu Bakr es Siddiqu, ca. 1800, whose journey started in Timbuktu – shows how far inland the slave trade went

There was African participation in the trade, but it was both started and ended unilaterally.

The macro effects of the slave trade is a subject of considerable academic discussion – Walter Rodney wrote about ‘How Europe Underdeveloped Africa’, but Fage denied that the slave trade had substantial effects on the development of African societies.

- difficult to be conclusive as economic data from the period is scarce

Joe Inikori has written about how the trade gave Europe investment capital

The reasons for the abolishment of slavery are two-fold, 1stly moral reasons, and 2ndly, it had passed its peak in terms of economic usefulness