You already seem to have all the answers. You don't need us. Your point is true and well taken.
2006-06-14 18:26:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by gzmom 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
They were captured by rival tribes to sell to the Europeans. This is just another case of white men getting someone to their jobs for them. They had to use someone to capture the people that they used to work their land for them. Then after they wanted basic human rights, the slaves were told to go back home. Change the Africans to Mexicans and you have a more modern version of the same laziness.
2006-06-14 21:22:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by mark b 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Both, there were different tribes in Africa that were constantly feuding and sometimes that would sell captives of wars and battles they had fought to the traders, also traded for guns and other technologies not prevalent in Africa to get an edge in battle. You have to remember to that the Europeans had guns and the africans were still using spears at this time. It took only 200 Spaniards to conquer the Aztecs which had over 300,000 warriors. Guns, Germs and Steel.
2006-06-14 21:14:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by gq1412@sbcglobal.net 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
it was almost all African tribes capturing their enemies and then selling to the slavers.......everyone should read Lilyth Rose's answer and follow the links....slavery is still very much alive in Africa with Arabs doing the slave trading the Portuguese and Spaniards did in the Atlantic 300 years ago....( some 80% of African slaves went to Brazil, not America)
2006-06-15 15:28:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by yankee_sailor 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you see the movie Amistad it is similar about what happened. Slaves were captured by their own people and turned over to the Europeans. Same happened with the native americans. They were tracked by enemy tribes for the white man. But the bottom line that is sad is, it is always the white man behind it...
2006-06-14 21:16:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by mysticmoonprincess01 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Both happened, and sadly, there is still a slave trade going on in Africa within its own countries.
2006-06-14 21:23:10
·
answer #6
·
answered by Lilyth Rose 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
the dutch started the slave trade.i had an argument with my history teacher and u are right the tribe leaders sold them.in fact some of the people from other tribes even helped hunt for the slaves., u can see this on roots
2006-06-14 21:14:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by wedjb 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
both occurred but i shoud tell you that even though there could be 12-20 europeon traders had advanced weapons like guns, knifes and more. but i doubt there could be 12-20 traders coming to a new land by themselves. probably 50 to 100.
2006-06-15 01:07:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by o so beasty 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
there was a lot of selling involved. the coastal communities and tribes would raid the villages of the interior stealing children which they would then sell to the europeans.
read Equianos Travels, a boy born and captured in what is now Nigeria.
2006-06-15 09:01:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
me and my boyfriend actually had this same conversation last night. we agree that they were traded or sold. i am white and my boyfriend is black. the conversation started with Abraham Lincoln and his actual reasoning for freeing the slaves, which we both agree was only for commerce and not because he cared. we were giving examples to my 7 year old daughter about things they dont teach you in books.
2006-06-14 21:15:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by kknpz 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Both
2006-06-14 22:04:16
·
answer #11
·
answered by crazy8 2
·
0⤊
0⤋