Portuguese Slave Raiders in Africa: The old Luso-African kingdom of Angola – written by – Nehesy; Edited by Rasta Livewire
Many have been hoodwinked into believeing a white-washed version of the history of the enslavement of black people in Africa and their transportation en-masse to the Americas.
It is often not known that contrary to the Disney world’s version of slavery, that it was Europeans who planned, initated, implemented, sustained and benefited from the enslavement of African people. This barely known version of history will be presented in the few following lines.
We will start with an examination of the kingdom of Angola, and its linkages to the Atlantic slave trade.
The Kingdom of Angola
The “kingdom” of Angola was created by Portuguese in order to create a slave supply province for their colonies and their other slave business interests (including selling slaves to spanish for instance).
Ndongo later called Angola was only one of the several south provinces of the Kongo Kingdom with a congolese Vassal. Kabasa or Mbanza was the capital of the Ndongo Province, the vassal ruler was called Ngola.
The Kongolese vassal of Kongo was controlled by Portuguese as such the real king of this made-up African kingdom was the Portuguese Paul Diaz (a slave raider) and his successors ( ie the Portuguese Governors of Angola) .
He was appointed Governor of Angola ( which didn’t exist yet ) by his king in April 1574. Subsequently, he prepared an armed expedition to take control of this Congolese province.
Paul Diaz left Lisbon in October 1574 with a fully equipped portuguese army : 7 ships with 700 Soldiers. The portuguese war of destruction in order to create a new kingdom ( a slave supply province) started.
“Old Pirates Yes they Robbed I…”
” …Some slaves were stolen by Europeans ‘panyared’- as the english word for Espanola (Spain/portugal) was pronounced – and some as ocurred often in Angola, were the victims of military campaigns mounted specifically by portuguese proconsuls in order to capture slaves…” see Hugh Thomas, The slave trade (1997) , page 792.
“Spanish records report that in mid-july, ‘English corsairs’ waylaid and captured the Portuguese slaver Sao Joao Bautista. She had below decks some 370 Angolans, who had been taken prisoner during Portugal’s bloody war of conquest in Luanda” See Don Jordan and Michael Walsh , White Cargo (2008), Page 87.
This was the general pattern of events for the first few hundred years of slavery. The old pirates of portugal created a horrid pervertion on the West coast of Africa. Yet their descendants blame the victims, and excuse or downplay the centrality of the role of the Europeans in the entire web of the slave trading network.
The lame rationalization one hears today, about how it is that Africans sold other Africans is not the whole truth.
The other half of the story that has not been told often and bold enough is as follows:
-the Europeans especially the Portuguese flushed with victory over its reconquest of Portugal moved into the African territories with pillage and destruction in their design;
– Europeans especially Portuguese kidnapped hit the coast of West Africa in waves of military expedition wherein they stole and carried away many Azanaghi and others in Africa;
– The first slaves of the Portuguese and specially the Spanish of the new worlds were their “white convicts brethen” ( Forzados and Lançados) and some Berber or Azanaghi ; You had Berber slaves in Hispaniola (santo domingo), and cuba for instance ( see Michael Gomez , ” Black Crescent).
-Europeans set up pseudo-African states like Angola, Cape Verde, which were controlled by settlers way back in 1500. Those false African states usually had some puppet chieftaincy which aided and abetted only the interest of its controllers.
– Europeans furnished guns to those their African accomplices in order to get slaves, during the political troubles;
– The African rulers who sold their subjects were actually fake kings empowered by their European Allies (Portuguese and French), like the JAGAS of congo. They made slave raids with the portuguese but the very day they rebelled against their masters , they were attacked and sold as slaves in Brazil ( see : Maroon societies by Richard Price)
– Some of the biggest slave traders in Africa were White and Mulattoes like : William Ormond, John Ormond, Faber, Gomez, Lightburn etc
It is said in the history books that Native Indians rebelled against slavery and preferred to die, but nothing like that ever happened. It is a lie.
Native Indians in the Caribbean were the first slaves of the new world ( Cuba, Jamaica, Hispaniola). Colombus in his 3rd Trip sent 700 hundreds native indians slaves to Spain. See José Antonio Saco “Historia de la esclavitud” or Eric Williams
Also,the French and English encouraged a Native Indian Slave trade business by furnishing guns and alcohol to their native collaborators. Divide and rule. For the Indian slavery see these 2 books:
– Barbara Olexer, “The enslavement of the American Indian in colonial times”
– Alan Galley , “The Indian Slave Trade”
Slavery is slavery no matter the colour
Africans are the currently defamed with false accusations about the crime of supposedly selling their own to the white man.
Yet, before the Europeans had targeted Africa for their slave supply demand, in the new world there was :
– Native American and Caribbean slaves : Virgina, Maryland, Hispaniola , Puerto Rico, Cuba, North and South America, Martinique, Guadeloupe
– White slaves : Spanish, Portuguese, French, Danish, Scotts, Irish, White Berbers, Turks, Arabs and Jews ( the laters being result of the inquisition)
– Asian Slaves : Philipinos, Indians, Bengalis, Indian and chinese ‘coolies’ came to replace the blacks after emancipation in Cuba , Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad etc
And then African slaves.
During the trans-Atlantic slave trade:
– English sold english, scots and Irish slaves
– Spanish sold white female slaves for white breeding purpose in Hispaniola
– French sold poor french to their planters in Saint Domingue
– Some native Indians ( same remark: some of them didn’t speak the same language, nor did they share the same culture) sold other native indians to the French in order to get guns…
The only culprits for me are Europeans why ?
– They Planned it
– They Financed it
– They Insured it
– They Furnished the weapon on mass destruction for this purpose ( powder and guns)
– They are the only one who profited hugely for this crime against humanity : Banks, Big Families, Nations, and even their own people because it is well known that the African Slave trade was one of the biggest element which allowed the Industrial revolution (see Inikori).
By
Nehesy
September, 2009
You are missing the crucial part of this episode.
Your Eurocentric obsession of hate has hidden from your eyes, the true culprits.
I suggest you follow the money, if you truly care and are not bound by stiff neck pride.
Which crucial part are you talking about?
Without Europeans’ greed there wouldn’t be any Native American/Caribbean, African (Berbers, West Africans), Filipinos, Chinese (The “Pig ” Trade) , Irish, Scots, English slaves into the New World. This is the crucial point.
In Canada for instance, French submitted some Indian tribes and FORCED THEM, to slave raiding activities against others Native Indian tribes, and of course gave them guns and powder. Europeans applied the same strategy in Africa.
In early America , English colonists kidnapped young natives in order to sell them for slavery in the West Indies. They took advantage of intertribal warfare, in order to buy Native Americans slaves. Their Native American allies had of course powder and guns
Native Americans (North and South America) and Native Caribbean have been destroyed MAINLY by War, diseases come only second.
Damn like the Father Dieudonné RINCHON, a Belgium scholar on the European slave trade activities : ” The meeting with the white man was a misfortune for Africans”.
very good
You should continue this matter because the eurocentric tell many lies, we want to know the truth. indicate where we read books about it.
but according to Egmond Codfried
europeans were black
Not my ancestors. Mine were the dispossessed by the forced conversions through Christianity in the nordic countries and the dispossessed peasants in England.
We need to identity the elites and the system/philosophy who did this and continue to do this.
They have been very effective in scapegoating all white people for what the white elites have done.
The target is not all white people. Accusing all white people creates another wrong.
George Wells
– Of course, not ALL white people have to be involved in this genocide
– Even white people suffered from the white elites since they were the first slaves in the west indies and North America : I told it many times here in rastalivewire
– There was also a huge slave trade in Europe from Antiquity to the Middle Age : Europeans (not africans) were also the victims
White elites ( Church, Bankers, Freemasons, and other secret societies) were TOTALLY responsible of this mess.
White elites are also responsible of spreading this “white supremacy” myth all over the world. In France most the Skinheads were young guys from rich families and they involved the poor whites in this BS
I object to the term slave trade when all the evidence shows there was no trade just european kidnappers. The Europeans lacked the ability to trade in Africa for several reasons:
-had nothing to offer Africans, recall as late as the late 1300s mansa musa and timbuktu were the centre of civilization. During the 1440s the Europeans had very little to offer the Africans in terms of technology. Even the guns of the Europeans had no edge over the guns of Africa until the late 1800s, and that is why it took them so long to invade. Even in America, it was not until about the 1870s did the european technology decisively become superior to that of native americans who they launched wars against.
-had no understanding of the languages and the multiple languages that would be required to negotiate prices of slaves and barter of trade
-had no way to get to the interior where any alleged slave trading would have been based
-have no explanation for why if they had all those guns, why they just would not shoot the african slave raiders and take the slaves for free. Recall slave raiders are not exactly “moral” people, it takes a certain borderline scum to peddle in flesh
-have no explantion of why the allegeded african slave raiders did not sell whites into slavery. We know that the africans had numerous wars with whites during the european kidnapping holocaust period, why did they not kill any whites for all that money and guns they were supposedly giving them. The story doesn’t add up, when you have 2 criminal elements eventually one will rob the other, we see it all the time when there are criminals selling drugs to each other.
-The allegation of african slave traders all come from a highly uncredible source… white european slave raiders. History shows that the 2nd slave raiding mission by 5 portuguese slave raiders netted 300 africans. Why would the Europeans cut themselves out of the most profitable part of slave trading?
-If the Europeans had African collaborators as they claim, then european kidnapping dungeon fortresses should not exist. Africans had slavery before whites arrived there, slavery existed everywhere in different forms. African slavery was more akin to prisoners of war or debt enslavement, but slaves had rights. One could not be killed for being a slave, one was only required to work for free until they paid off the debt. In the case of POWS, they could not be released for obvious reasons, but no country considers this to be slavery, even the usa will not shut down guantanamo. So since Africans never been any slave fortresses, and the Euro-raiders alleged that Europeans just sailed in to pick up slaves that Africans already had, why are there slave fortresses? It doesn’t add up. A fortress is a building designed to keep local enemies out. The only explanation for a slave fortress is to keep the slaves trapped in as you have no way of keeping them around other wise (proves that there are local european raiders who had to keep africans locked up while they went out on more raids-as local africans did not ever require fortresses to keep slaves from running away). And it also proves that Europeans were worried about being attacked by local Africans who would retaliate against their consistent slave raids.
-Europeans cannot name a single West afican slave trader by name, place,location, who what, where, when and why, no evidence all heresay from rapist kidnapping slave raiders $mostly of a criminal background, in fact portuguese on records show the majority of settlers it sent into africa were criminals, mentally retarded and hookers, who had an inherent interest in justifying the slave trade, and what better lie to justify it than someone sold it to me I never stole it.
-They claim they relied upon African slave traders for slaves because they had no knowledge of the inland. Yet according to their own histories the Italians sailed deep inland in the 1400s, the Portuguese converted to chrisitianty the congo empire in the deep interior, and then invaded them for opposing slavery and invaded the Monomotapa to try to steal their wealth and minerals empire in Zimbabwe O yes and they also invaded the congos neighbours the ndongo who were deeper inland. Given all these wars inland, and the ability to move massive armies deep into the african jungle and deep into the heart of africa just to destroy empires for opposing the slave trade, one would have to question why they would need any slave trading africans at all?
-with the Dutch arriving in South Africa in the 1660s,fighting many wars against the africans, there is no clear explanation as to why Europeans would want to buy slaves from Africans, when they already were at war with them and had many of them under the control of their armies, it makes no sense that the Portuguese or Spanish or French would waste money buying slaves from Africa when they millions of them under their control through military might as early as 1600s prior to the kicking off of the slave trade.
every race was a slave.