In-depth coverage of the African continent side of the slave  
procurement issue has been in print in book and article form for  
decades. Black Africans captured other Black Africans either as a  
result of warfare and as a result of intentional forays to do so. In  
addition to these, Arab slave traders (ethnic black and caucasian)  
actively sought Africans for their economic gain. Europeans mainly  
provided what would be termed middlemen services. Undoubtedly there  
were some Europeans who actively hunted Africans. The fortresses that  
were the final holding areas and distribution areas on the coasts were  
run by Europeans and Arabs with the complicity of black Africans. I  
would term the above as historical facts, writ broadly.

The spin that has been put on it is what muddies the waters. There is  
the 20th century "guilt trip" laid on Americans who bought Africans  
and used them in involuntary servitude, or slavery, or whatever term  
du jour you pick. Then there were the "Lost Cause" apologists who  
brought in the issue that Africans were complicit with the implicit  
argument that not just white folks did it, but black folks as well so  
it really wasn't as bad as northern white folks tried to make it out  
to be (again broadly writ). It is only of late that the issue of  
Muslim complicity has been brought into the popular consciousness.  
That in turn is muddied by unreconstructed folks who see endless irony  
in the adoption of the Muslim faith by African-Americans who were not  
aware of the Arab trafficking in slaves that continues to the present.

Slavery was a mess, and it's legacy is still a mess and nothing  
excuses it. Trying to live with the consequences is the part that we  
now must work to accommodate.

Lyle Browning


On Feb 18, 2008, at 1:24 PM, Anne Pemberton wrote:

> J South,
>
> I would like to have you consider that not all slaves were sold by  
> their countrymen. Some were physically captured by white men who  
> arrived by ship. This may have been the smaller number of those  
> wrongly taken as slaves, but it is accurate. I cannot provide a  
> quote to substantiate this fact, but I'm sure others with their  
> fingers on more of the literature can point to several sources.
>
> Anne
>
> Anne Pemberton
> [log in to unmask]
> http://www.erols.com/apembert
> http://www.educationalsynthesis.org
> ______________________________________
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the  
> instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html