posted
Daughters of the Trade. (From the 01.20 minute onwards she discusses the people who where taken from the inland, and taken to the coast, though it is being addressed earlier on as well.
1) Speaking of “loyalty” within marriage and having sex outside of marriage? She claims most weren’t married, but they were. Maybe not so much in Danish cases, but overall they were (see note 6).
2) She stated “some of my people of African descent” end up working as a sailor on the ship. Is she implying to have African ancestry/lineage? She referred to Africans already being in Copenhagen in the 18th century. I think she’s saying she descents from one of those early intermarriages.
3) What is interesting is that she never explained how these European “traders” got to the African coast in the first place. What was the motive for them to go there and how did they end up there? 🤔
Common history tells that “sub Sahara” Africa was excluded from worlds developments etc. in other words they had no contact with the outside world (which of course is debatable, with relevant arguments). However, interesting is that the Portuguese referred to west Africans as Moors (Mouros).
3) The way she explained the slave trade was more how collaborators work in every given war. And even how human traffickers work till this very day (without the intermarriage).
5) when she started to read from the book, she revealed that women actually were the ones doing the trade. But what she also and perhaps unwilling subconscious explained was that West Africans did domesticate and did have agricultural activities. In reference to the chickens, riced, etc. taken to the market all by farmers from the island, which they exchanged for fish that only could be found at the coast. 🤔🧐
6) It was already all well documented how western males went to Africa during the middle passage and offspring there with a female they used as a sidekick. You can look up the offspring of these people in documentaries. However, nothing I know is as detailed as this here the way she explained it. Btw the same they did in Asia and the Americas to women, as indigenous men were subjugated.
7) She goes on and explains the racial impact of this Euro-African woman who came from these “marriage” by euro-males and African-females. (Reminded me of Megan Markel and her fan base?)
However, this is the first time I see (hear) someone explaining the origin of racial hierarchy, as we know it from the last few centuries. Of course, this has to be tested and screened with other parts of recorded history, to see how accurate this is. The perspective on these “daughters of the (triad) trade” was quite intriguing.
I have no idea what she meant by gold was being “sold to the coast”. I hope not she was implying that Denish and the Dutch were taking gold to West Africa. Because the countless of historical, archeological and anthropological source dispute such claims. The most famous historical reference is Mansa Musa who took so much gold to Egypt during the Haji
Here claim that slavery in itself wasn’t as profitable is a false claim.
It is well known that Portuguese stole for billions of dollar of gold.
They still have it in Portugal in cathedrals. One of the main characters (thieves) is “Gil Eannes“! She speaks on Portuguese sources and African inferiority which was seen so systemically. However, we know (again the Moors) that Africans already lived in the European nation and have a long history going back to at least the earliest time of recording as they were part of the Roman army. We have peer-reviewed archeological, anthropological and genetical evidence for this! The reason why Portuguese had a more systemic way of negatively describing Africans is for the simple reason that Africans have been in the Iberian Peninsula literally for thousands of years. We have “La Brana” confirming this.
8) Lastly, the stories she expedites on are written by the conqueror (the winner) as what she herself confirmed. The question is, what do the African sources say?
The “funniest” part is these how these early “pioneering archeologists” created racism/ racial conflicts”, to explain biological differences amongst people by stigmatizing Africans, such as “Johannes Rask” did with this contagion.
We know British aristocracy took it to a whole new level in America. Aside from others from Germany (Blumenbach), Spain, Portugal, Dutch, etc. We can see a clear path from there to modern science and why in modern science such as genetics there is still prejudice towards everything coming from Africa or being of African origin. When I first started in population genetics I didn’t really understand the mindset behind certain claims. As I focused more on the historical relationship and early development in archeology and anthropology things started to unfold. Population genetics is written from the standpoint of old archeology and anthropology.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic