African-American slaves have been saddled with the reputation of being dumb, illiterate brutes, and looked upon as no better than cattle. However, their African forefathers were most certainly intelligent. In addition to vast trade routes, these African forefathers were noted as skilled craftsmen, had many different languages and were talented artisans long before influences from Europe arrived on the continent.
My favorite term for the continent of Africa is “The Motherland.” Yes, the human species originated from the vast continent, but “The Motherland” signifies so much more than human origination. “The Motherland” is the culture of Africans. It’s found in dialects, music and religions. “The Motherland” is the extensive trade routes native Africans developed, independently from Europeans. “The Motherland” gave so much in the way of her sons and daughters to serve as slaves. Generations of Africans were taken from “The Motherland,” altering dialects, religions, and identities.
I admire the women of Africa. Few civilizations put a high value on women. Even today in our country, women continue to fight stereotypes and gender biases. However, in Africa, women were highly valued because of their reproductive capacity and because they performed the majority of agricultural labor. Women took care of business! The notable example in From Slavery to Freedom differentiates bride wealth and dowry. Bride wealth is given by the man’s family to the woman’s family as compensation for the economic loss of a daughter’s labor upon marriage. The work these women must have accomplished would have been great; nowhere else is anything similar to bride wealth given. Dowry on the other hand, is brought by a woman to a man upon marriage, suggesting compensation to the man for taking on a dependent. Moreover, the practice of polygamy was widespread in Africa, especially by powerful men whose wealth was improved by having several wives. These men let the women do the work!
Africans were intelligent and on par industrially with their counterparts in Europe. Senegambia, between the Senegal and Zambia rivers, had iron and copper industries of a quality that challenged that of Europe. African households had knives, spears, axes, and hoes. Goldsmiths were industrious and produced high quality products. I’ve briefly mentioned the trade networks created but would like to expand this on topic. These people understood at least simple business measures to have such a high involvement in trade. The banana was in West Africa before Europeans. The spread of Islam also indicates a vast trade network. Indeed, black Muslim merchants surprised the Portuguese. Described as Moorish, these merchants practiced strict Islam and traded in pagan slaves. Several places in Hugh Thomas’s massive work he mentions the trade networks of rivers. Even in places where rivers were a mile wide, a large market city could be found. I’m sure that large rivers induced much trade and the production of canoes. The goods traveling on the trade networks were similar to European goods, including gold, linen, cotton, salt, and slaves. Cultures as well as goods travelled on the trade routes. Again, these African people were no brutes.
Many African kings associated and partnered with European merchants to sell slaves. These Africans obtained slaves most notably by capturing rivals after a war. The prisoners of war would then be bartered with European merchants in exchange for woolen and linen cloth, silver, tapestries, and grain. In this sense, I think the African kings viewed themselves as businessmen. They were simply conducting business that happened to be concerned with humans. However, the African kings showed little feeling over captured slaves. Prisoners were looked on as aliens, about whose destiny they did not care and whom they might hate. I find it very interesting that African people felt no kin between states. This reminds me of American planters who felt little or no humanity to their African American slaves. Also, Africans could also be enslaved by committing crimes, minor crimes, even. I believe this fact speaks to a strict law code. Obviously, mere animals as Africans are depicted could not develop such a sophisticated code.
Several dominant nation-states formed in Africa prior to European involvement that deserve mention.
The first of the great empires was Ghana. There, an incredibly sophisticated people developed as far back as the first century. These Africans were (not surprisingly) a trading people who taxed imports and exports. They cared a great deal about trade and profit. Here, it was important to be born into a prominent family since public offices were hereditary. The social order was stratified, meaning there were at least several different groups of socioeconomic people. These people were not “all work and no play.” One king’s palace displayed sculpture, pictures, and windows decorated by royal artists. To me, this suggests a cosmopolitan environment, where every citizen was not concerned with food production. It reminds me of Rome or Athens, actually. Religion played a substantial role in these Africans’ lives; temples were available where native gods could be worshipped. Maybe a precept to slavery, but this empire also had a prison for political enemies. Evidently, the people of this empire were able to look on one another and see different levels of distinction.
Mali is another notable empire before the touch of Europeans. A powerful and well-organized political state could be found there. Authority was respected. Expanding on the preceding Ghana empire, some citizens were involved in agricultural endeavors, but others were engaged in various crafts and mining. These Africans devoted considerable skill to making ornamental objects from silver and gold. Obviously, adornments were valued.
The most dominate state before and during the transatlantic slave trade were the Songhai. These peoples dominated most of the western Sudan and controlled trade between West and North Africa. The capital, Gao, was a vast, unwalled city. The Portuguese merchant/explorer, Ca’da Mosto, noted hunting elephant for sport with some of the Songhai. The Songhai Empire had a lively commercial atmosphere of trading. Here, with the help of the Portuguese, the slave trade took off. The Songhai had an almost limitless stock of captives; they were so powerful that they had only to raid their weaker, pagan neighbors to the south in order to obtain all the slaves they needed. Fifteen or twenty slaves were exchanged for a single Arab horse. In addition to slaves and horses, Venetian cloths, spurs, saddles, bridles, and gold were all traded.
The Songhai also had intellectual centers at Tumbuktu, Walata, and Jenne, indicating that some of these people were high-level thinkers. I think the fact that the Songhai negotiated with Portuguese traders indicates the intelligence these peoples exhibited. They did not run from the Portuguese, but worked alongside them in the trade of goods, including and most notably, slaves. Both sides made profits. Gold was even used as currency. Because of the extent of trade with the Europeans in slaves, I think these people were able to look at others, even other Songhai, and see past the humanity. They were able to sell others into slavery. The Songhai must have known the implications of selling slaves. Even though not present in Spain, Portugal, or on one of the many depot islands to see the brutality slaves would face, the Songhai had to have been aware of the environment they were sending slaves into. In the same way we sentence criminals life in prison or the death penalty, the Songhai were able to look at their citizens in the same manner.
In conclusion, I believe Africans were intelligent, profit-driven peoples. They wanted to dominate other nation-states or city-states in Africa and expand their own empires. Trading in slaves was the most profitable way of doing this expansion. Europeans were in the business of slave trading, and African leaders accommodated them well.
No comments:
Post a Comment