What is the origin of slavery, why did Africans sold other Africans to the white man?

Africans are in all continents as former slaves. There is no record of a Caucausian slaves in Africa.

Are Africans to be blamed

Get off the internet and go find some books to read.

Its true that Africans were also selling thier own people to the white man, one of the reasons for this, was that the Africans were fightig among them selves. You can look it your self if want to. There was a king in Benin who used to sell many slaves to the europians.


I think you should read some history books.

Africans selling Africans was the tip of the iceberg, the white man done whatever he could to achieve the end game, including telling Africans to sell or be sold. Indeed doing whatever had to be done also includes telling/selling the hiSTORY for which Africans selling Africans is simply another selling point.

Put yourself in the white mans shoes, what would you have done?

@Somali81

1. The King you refer to I suspect was: King Guezo of Dahomey, now Benin and not the City in Nigeria.

2. A good example of the difference between European Industrial Slavery and West African Slavery, was shown to Lord Fredrick Lugard when he to over the mantle of Suzerainty from the King of Sokoto in Northern Nigeria. One of his edicts was the phasing out of Slaves, that was all the slaves that existed had the right to become freemen, This was in 1903.

In the event, many of the existing Slaves opted to remain so, as they were well treated, only the ones that were chose freedom . Indeed many slaves within the Palaces remained so as they would lose their priviliges and status if they were to become free.


In Yorubaland, many slaves held high Status and high office.

3. However, Somali81 the Arabs and Somali and Sudenese Slave Traders were one of the main reasons, not the only one, why the British took over vast Lands in Eastern and West Africa, as due to the advances in modern weaponary many Arabs conducted frequent slave raids on "Pagan" Africans on a colossial scale. The British having given up 400 years of the Trade sought to impose their Ban on it (under the moralistic Christian banner) with the Arabs and African Muslims. The Arabs were and still are the longest practioners in the Slave Trade over all.

4. One of the Arguements put forth about the difference between the African Slave Trade and the European one is as follows:

The African Slave trade was conducted far longer than the New World one, but the fruits of the laboour of enslaved Africans and the benefit of having serfs for free were not applied in a way to reap economic benefit on an industrial scale and purpose.

Although Slaves were a form of currency in West Africa. The European Slave trader was purely industrial and for economic benefit by seeing slaves in pure commodity terms Africans were kept separate from Society, in terms of Adminstrative issues of government or being integrated into society. This lack of integration was more pronounced entirely due to RACE. The propaganda, of the Europeans to justify slavery at odds with their "Chritrian virtues" was and is the most lasting effect of why Black people to day are having a hard time. Because the weight of perception of Black People engineered by Europeans has passed through the passage of time and inherited by the next generations as to what our "place" in the world is.

Which is why for my money having Obama as President of the U.S.A would be squaring a circle in many Europeans perception of what African and peoples of African decent can do and are capable of.

However, and here is the rub. Your question was why Africans mainly sold other Africans as slaves? This is down to one of the biggest weaknesses I attribute to Africa.

Africa as you can see is a continent that was cut off at the top by the Sahara desert only the specialist Arab Caravans could navigate through it and that was for Trade and mainly slaves. Most of the powerful Kingdooms in Africa were inland so the centrifugal force of Power and Adminstration come internally think Ashanti or Yoruba, Falani and Hausa. The coastal nations such as the Ewe or Fanti etc were subject to the influence of the interior.

Africa, did not have that much outside influence of other nations such as China or Europe or the Persia this is for thousands of years. Therefore at no time did it have ships to explore other parts of the world and engage on equal status. If it did not have marine experience Africans were unlikely to be in contact with other races to enslave. Assuming of course that would have been their primary reason for engaging foreign cultures.

Finally in respect to the difference between African and European Slavery a comment by the King Guezo of Dahomey to Lieutenant Forbes RN:

"What do they ( De Souza a Brailizian Slave Trader) do with all these slaves I sell to them?"

Lieutenant Forbes RN

" They make them work on Plantations to produce cotton and other commodities"

The King:

"Why, we should stop selling them and use them here for Plantantions ! "

Had he and others of done likewise and then sold the produce to the New World the story of Africa would have been a lot different than it is now.

Sounds nice but I personally don't think people should be quick to separate, ''slavery'' from the Maafa, they would sooner have taken over the countries to continue their affront on the continent and the use of the term, ''slavery'' as some kind of historical marker on its own irks with me.

Taking the destruction of past Black African civilizations into account its obvious that one event was purposed to lead onto the next as the Arabs affront on the Northern states has lead to their taking of that part of the continent, the depopulation of the rest of the continent would have seen the europeans do the same, it was something they deemed necessary something that continues to win them a much larger profit than they would have had if they set up trading routes and had us control our own market prices... as the chinese did.

Somali81 - for the record if you want the best unbiased critique of this side of slavery then Dada is the best person to get as close to the facts as we will probably ever get.

I think the short answer is....


ethnic group or kingdom sees others as rivals and competitors.....
same way euro countries fought wars against each other....

king selling prisoners or slaves to outsider didn't view it as an african selling other africans to whites...

he saw it was chief of tribe x selling men of tribe y to a merchant.....

market for servants already existed.....euros just tapped into it to develop agricultural based economy in colonies......

ROTF..........

The following Books I have found helpful for understanding about British Colonialism in Africa:

1. the History of the Yoruba – Revenard Samuel Johnson
2. the Grand Slave Emporium - William St Clair
3. King Guezo of Dahomey 1850-52 – TSO Publishing
4. The Slave Trade - Hugh Thomas
5. Rough Crossings – Simon Schama
6. Mungo Parks Travels
7. British Rule in Africa – Margery Perham
8. 10 Africans – Margery Perham
9. The Colonial Reckoning – Margery Perham
10. Lugard, The Years of Adventure – Margery Perham
11. Lugard, The Years of Authority – Margery Perham
12. Kaunda’s Gaoler – David G Coe and Cyril Greenall
13. The Principles of Native Adminstration in Nigeria – AHM Kirk-Greene
14. Symbol of Authority – A Kirk-Greene
15. Colonial Postscript – Dairy of a District Officer – John Morley
16. Black Critics and Kings – Andrew Apter
17. Kenya’s Opportunity – Lord Altrincham
18. The Last of the Proconsuls – Letters of Sir Jams Robertson
19. Then the Wind Changed – Robert Hepburn Wright
20. The Road to Aba – Harry Gailey

I have sought to read it as close to the time as possible rather than the post-colonial writings.

If I had to chose to reccommend just one of the Books to read.

I would chose Margery Perhams "The Colonial Reckoning" , first she had at the time undisputed insight to British Policy having Lectured in Oxford and travelled extensively throughout the "British Empire", one of a few Women who played an extensive role in shaping British Policy a career spanning 30 years.

The others were: Mary Kingsley and Lugards wife Flora Shaw. Along with Sir George Goldie their names have all been forgotten apart from perhaps Cecil Rhodes. Yet any study of these individuals lifes would open our eyes to how the situation in regards to Slavery and Colonialism were view and pursued. Rather then read 21st Century evaluations of it.

Mergery Perhams "The Colonial Reckoning" is painful to read as such as her underpinning belief in our assumed inferiority. Yet there are some Truths in many parts of her text, along with incredable foresights into the problems that lay ahead. Even foreseeing the Mugabe and Kenyan or South African situations. This is what is challenging about reading her for as a Black Man, born and bred in the West, and distanced by time I have no comprehension of my Race based upon her testimony. In the other works such as the Biography Luguard reading just how easy it was for the British to take over vast Lands is mind blowing and we as Africans played a principle part in that.

Mergery Perhams "The Colonial Reckoning" 1961 is a final reflection on Britains participation in the Colonizing of Africa at a time when Africa had undergone most of it's Liberation from European Adminstration. For me it is an explosive book as it makes my blood boil while at the same time I have to agree with some parts. As a Book it wraps up all the others.

"Knowledge Dispells Fear"

[quote=Dada;1477778]@Somali81



Africa, did not have that much outside influence of other nations such as China or Europe or the Persia this is for thousands of years. Therefore at no time did it have ships to explore other parts of the world and engage on equal status. If it did not have marine experience Africans were unlikely to be in contact with other races to enslave. Assuming of course that would have been their primary reason for engaging foreign cultures.

Dont entirely agree here. Various American historians have testified to the African presense in the Americas. Steady trade in weapons and gold was known to be carried on in the Carribean pre Columbus. Also the ships found buried under pyramids in Egypt which according to nautical experts could easily of circumnavigated the world. The means was there but the will to conquer and dominate other races was not by all evidence.