Do you think African chiefs would have sold there kinsmen into slavery to the Europeans if they knew of the?

Question

appaling and dehumanising condition in which they slaves were subjected to......afteral there was no technolgy to report what was happening to the slaves and there was no body to report back to them.......

Answer 1

Of course they would. Slaves by design, were a commodity and not anything to feel guilty about.

Answer 2

I don't think the African chiefs were bothered who or were there own people were sold to or were they went .They were they were the biggest protesters .about the abolition of slavery .They delt mostly with Arab slave dealers .who then sold them on to the whites /Europeans .It is a well known fact that the White man did not enter the interior of Africa in those days Very few people white people did .The slave selling was or trading was going on in Africa Long before the white man ever went to Africa If the African chiefs cared about their own people they would not have sold them to any one in the first place.they would have been capable of driving any alien away In this case the sellers are worse than the purchaser

Answer 3

Dear James T

Your question deserves a yes and no answer.That depends on the African Chiefs motives whether for money,greed,material goods, tobacco,european slave women,a sincerity of honest trade or downright ignorance and unconcern about the situation at the time.Those African Chiefs were aware of their people in chains and at gun point before they boarded the ship to the New World.

Answer 4

Your use of the word 'kinsmen' is misleading - just because both slaves and traders were African did not make them kin. Often slaves of one tribe were captured by another tribe before being sold on. The practice of enslaving the men of other tribes, especially those who were taken alive in battle, predated the arrival of European slaveships.

Answer 5

By the time African leaders found out the real deal they were mired in the whole guns for slaves exchange and it was like trying to stop a freight train. Bad people exist everywhere, and the stage was already set for those who were greedy and immoral to continue their slave trading.

Interestingly enough, Africa had its own form of slavery before Europeans transformed it. People who owed debts, committed crimes, etc. often paid their debts in Africa by becoming a slave. The difference was that they moved about fairly freely and served in capacities that ranged from regular jobs like artisans to being royal advisors. They were actually released and given their freedom when their debts were paid. Europeans perverted the African system to being one of misery, abuse and hard labor without any hope whatsoever of freedom in a slave's future. Not that being a slave is a good thing in any case.

EDIT: Now that's funny, a thumbs down for simply repeating history as it really was. Imagine that...

Answer 6

The point is because the slaves had no actual emotional value, it would have made no difference at all. Ohhbother has it all wrong.

Answer 7

I think any fool would know what kind of life lay ahead for a slave regardless of whether they had technology or not.

Answer 8

NO. American colonial slavery introduced the notion of slave as chattel to the slave trade, and the concept of a less-than-human species to the slave.
All other nations before that treated slaves as permanent servants. Their children were not born as slaves. They had rights as humans and an owner could be charged for their deaths.

- Thumbs down people need to learn some history.

Answer 9

Yup, remember some of them were Cannibals. Torture and dehumanization were the norm then.
Common acceptance of torture and dehumanization are one of the sure signs we are being marched back into the dark ages by the religious FundiMENTAList.

Answer 10

Obviously they didn't care. Many died before the slave traders could pick them up and put them in boats.