Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your argument was NO wasn't a major slave port well OK Charleston in Gullah region was literally the biggest. and while some came from Caribbean most did Come from Africa here.
The Louisiana Purchase occurred in 1803, 5 years before the USA ceased to be involved in the Trans Atlantic slave trade. This French colony paled in importance when compared to St Domingue (Haiti), and the other French Caribbean islands, so relatively few enslaved peoples would have been taken directly there under French rule.
What is unique about the USA when compared with the Caribbean islands and Brazil is the small % of Africans taken directly there. In fact fewer than 4% of enslaved peoples trafficked from Africa landed in what is now the USA. Over 90% were sent to either Brazil or the Caribbean islands, and in fact Cuba, Jamaica, Haiti and Barbados all received more African enslaved peoples than did the USA.
What many do not understand is that the fastest growth in the institution of slavery began AFTER the slave trade ended. It was in decline in the north east and Mid Atlantic states. By the time the rapid growth of cotton created a demand for enslaved peoples direct trafficking from Africa had already ended.
There are 2 unique characteristics of slavery in the USA.
1. The small role of African born populations in the total population of black enslaved peoples. The vast majority were born in North America. By the end of slavery there were almost no African born people left. This unlike the Caribbean and Brazil where many of the freed peoples were either born in Africa, or were raised by people who were.
2. "Restocking" of enslaved peoples in the Caribbean and Brazil was facilitated by importing more enslaved peoples from Africa. In the USA it was by encouraging the birth and survival of plantation born children. This was because it was cheaper to import slaves to the Caribbean and Brazil. The costs of "maintaining" a slave population was cheaper in North America than in the Caribbean.
This is why there are fewer overt residuals of African culture among the black populations of North America than among similar populations in the Caribbean islands and in Brazil. So some get excited among the folkways and linguistic patterns of the Gullah/Geechee people, who were the most isolated enslaved peoples because of conditions in the rice plantations. But these approximate a mid range Afro creole culture which is routine within the former British Caribbean. The connection of these peoples to Barbados has been acknowledged by BOTH themselves and by Barbadians. This because planters from an over crowded Barbados were forced to move to coastal regions of South Carolina.
And yes NO was a large slave port for DOMESTIC trafficking of enslaved peoples from the Mid Atlantic states, where slavery was in decline, to the southern states where a growing cotton industry demanded slave labor. Charleston/Savannah and the Chesapeake is where most arrivals of trafficked Africans were landed.
The Louisiana Purchase occurred in 1803, 5 years before the USA ceased to be involved in the Trans Atlantic slave trade. This French colony paled in importance when compared to St Domingue (Haiti), and the other French Caribbean islands, so relatively few enslaved peoples would have been taken directly there under French rule.
What is unique about the USA when compared with the Caribbean islands and Brazil is the small % of Africans taken directly there. In fact fewer than 4% of enslaved peoples trafficked from Africa landed in what is now the USA. Over 90% were sent to either Brazil or the Caribbean islands, and in fact Cuba, Jamaica, Haiti and Barbados all received more African enslaved peoples than did the USA.
What many do not understand is that the fastest growth in the institution of slavery began AFTER the slave trade ended. It was in decline in the north east and Mid Atlantic states. By the time the rapid growth of cotton created a demand for enslaved peoples direct trafficking from Africa had already ended.
There are 2 unique characteristics of slavery in the USA.
1. The small role of African born populations in the total population of black enslaved peoples. The vast majority were born in North America. By the end of slavery there were almost no African born people left. This unlike the Caribbean and Brazil where many of the freed peoples were either born in Africa, or were raised by people who were.
2. "Restocking" of enslaved peoples in the Caribbean and Brazil was facilitated by importing more enslaved peoples from Africa. In the USA it was by encouraging the birth and survival of plantation born children. This was because it was cheaper to import slaves to the Caribbean and Brazil. The costs of "maintaining" a slave population was cheaper in North America than in the Caribbean.
This is why there are fewer overt residuals of African culture among the black populations of North America than among similar populations in the Caribbean islands and in Brazil. So some get excited among the folkways and linguistic patterns of the Gullah/Geechee people, who were the most isolated enslaved peoples because of conditions in the rice plantations. But these approximate a mid range Afro creole culture which is routine within the former British Caribbean. The connection of these peoples to Barbados has been acknowledged by BOTH themselves and by Barbadians. This because planters from an over crowded Barbados were forced to move to coastal regions of South Carolina.
And yes NO was a large slave port for DOMESTIC trafficking of enslaved peoples from the Mid Atlantic states, where slavery was in decline, to the southern states where a growing cotton industry demanded slave labor. Charleston/Savannah and the Chesapeake is where most arrivals of trafficked Africans were landed.
Let's take a history lesson shall we.
1. The British West Indie colonies such as ( Anguilla, the Cayman Islands, Turks and Caicos Islands, Montserrat, the British Virgin Islands, Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago) ended the importation of enslaved Africans in 1808.
The same year the former 13 British colonies that later became the United States banned the importation of enslaved Africans. Also The British West Indies colonies abolished slavery before the United States.
2. The French Colonies in the Caribbean's lasted a bit longer up until 1848 but that was in 5 French colonies: French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint Barthelemy, and Saint Martin. As we all know the importation of enslaved Africans stopped in Haiti due to the Haitian Revolution. That was around 1791. The only Africans that arrived in Haiti after the French Revolution were cargo ships that were eventually overthrown by the enslaved Africans themselves or ships seized by Haitians close to their borders. The large bulk of Haitians of African descent though were made up of people brought into Haiti prior to 1791. America was still importing Africans into America up until 1808.
3. The Spanish colonies were a bit different as well depending on the colony. Venezuela ended the importation of Africans in 1811. Cuba ended in 1820. Puerto Rico had a smaller population of enslaved Africans on the Island and only half of the population was actually born in Africa at the height of Puerto Rico's involvement in the slave trade (1815-1830s). The majority were enslaved Africans who were born in neighboring Caribbean colonies. Dominican Republic abolished slavery twice, once in 1801 and again in 1822.
4. Brazil was the biggest importer of Africans and the last to ban the importation of Africans.
So I'm confused by this inaccurate statement you made. The USA was just a piece of a bigger puzzle of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. America imported a tiny percentage in comparison to the Caribbean's and South America but America along with the former British West Indie colonies were tied at the hip when it came to importation of Africans. So where were the African born people in Jamaica or Trinidad or Barbados by the end of 1865? Possibly elders just like in the United States by that time.
Also, there was still the illegal importation of Africans well until 1860 into the south. It's estimated about 8,000 Africans were imported to the south after the ban. Of course the last known slave ship to make it to America was the Clotilda in 1860 by modern day Mobile, Alabama.
Oh and most historians estimate that America accounted for 5% of the Diaspora imported from Africa during the slave trade. Not fewer than 4%. Still a tiny amount but still have to make that correction.
Now your explanation of "restocking" leaves out context. The British for example imported more Africans into the Caribbean's largely because the demand was there and also due to it being a higher mortality rate in Caribbean countries than in the United States. They needed to replace the enslaved population that were dying to due to the very harsh conditions in certain Caribbean colonies. America's enslaved population on the other hand grew at a much faster rate because the conditions were less harsh than the Caribbean's and the birth rate was much higher due to a various reasons one was due to the system of Enslaved breeding.
You are right though and that most Africans trafficked into America were imported to the Carolinas/Sea Island corridor(Charleston/Savannah) and the Chesapeake area. Very few in comparison were imported to the Gulf Coast, Spanish Florida and the Northern British Colonies during that time period.
I believe Caribbean nations for example have more overt residuals of African culture than for example the States due to these nations being predominately people of African descent. Brazil is the only country you can make an argument for being more overt due to a later import of African people into the country. And even that depends on particular regions. Some regions/cities have more overt residuals of African cultures than others depending on the percentage of Afro Brazilians in those cities.
Example, it's no coincidence that Salvador Bahia is considered the most African city in all of Brazil. More so than Rio De Janeiro. But when you take into account that Bahia has about 27.8% that identify as Black compared to Rio De Janeiro with 11.5% than it makes sense why Bahia is more overtly "residually" African than Rio.
But than you have former Spanish colonies in the Caribbean's for example that made it a point to minimize African contributions to their culture. Africans enslaved in Spanish colonies went through a different form of slavery where there was no one drop rule. Where a European population did exist in much larger numbers than some of the British colonies in the Caribbean's. Spanish colonies also had a caste system that didn't exist in the United States or British West Indie colonies. It did exist in Spanish and French New Orleans and only increased after the Haitian Revolution. Yet unlike certain former Spanish Colonies that went out their way to disassociate themselves with Africa, New Orleans was the complete opposite and that's in large part due to the domestic slave trade. The large presence of enslaved people from the Upper South combined with the population that was there prior to the Louisiana purchase and former Whites, Creoles and enslaved peoples from Saint Dominque help preserve a more overt African culture than other parts of America including the American south(with the exception being the Gullah-Geechee Corridor).
I believe assimilation, integration and a much larger White population contributed to a more covert residual African culture in America than the ban of importation of Africans.
The Louisiana Purchase occurred in 1803, 5 years before the USA ceased to be involved in the Trans Atlantic slave trade. This French colony paled in importance when compared to St Domingue (Haiti), and the other French Caribbean islands, so relatively few enslaved peoples would have been taken directly there under French rule.
What is unique about the USA when compared with the Caribbean islands and Brazil is the small % of Africans taken directly there. In fact fewer than 4% of enslaved peoples trafficked from Africa landed in what is now the USA. Over 90% were sent to either Brazil or the Caribbean islands, and in fact Cuba, Jamaica, Haiti and Barbados all received more African enslaved peoples than did the USA.
What many do not understand is that the fastest growth in the institution of slavery began AFTER the slave trade ended. It was in decline in the north east and Mid Atlantic states. By the time the rapid growth of cotton created a demand for enslaved peoples direct trafficking from Africa had already ended.
There are 2 unique characteristics of slavery in the USA.
1. The small role of African born populations in the total population of black enslaved peoples. The vast majority were born in North America. By the end of slavery there were almost no African born people left. This unlike the Caribbean and Brazil where many of the freed peoples were either born in Africa, or were raised by people who were.
2. "Restocking" of enslaved peoples in the Caribbean and Brazil was facilitated by importing more enslaved peoples from Africa. In the USA it was by encouraging the birth and survival of plantation born children. This was because it was cheaper to import slaves to the Caribbean and Brazil. The costs of "maintaining" a slave population was cheaper in North America than in the Caribbean.
This is why there are fewer overt residuals of African culture among the black populations of North America than among similar populations in the Caribbean islands and in Brazil. So some get excited among the folkways and linguistic patterns of the Gullah/Geechee people, who were the most isolated enslaved peoples because of conditions in the rice plantations. But these approximate a mid range Afro creole culture which is routine within the former British Caribbean. The connection of these peoples to Barbados has been acknowledged by BOTH themselves and by Barbadians. This because planters from an over crowded Barbados were forced to move to coastal regions of South Carolina.
And yes NO was a large slave port for DOMESTIC trafficking of enslaved peoples from the Mid Atlantic states, where slavery was in decline, to the southern states where a growing cotton industry demanded slave labor. Charleston/Savannah and the Chesapeake is where most arrivals of trafficked Africans were landed.
This getting silly it giant cycle of the same things I just responded to.
First off your talking a hard line to what is US, Caribbean culture before these countries were even established, So if the Caribbean has African influence, and because The British, French and Spanish colonies traded with there mainland colonies. back and forth with the Caribbean. Your hard line to what can be US culture and what can be Caribbean doesn't make sense. You can't boast about how African influence the Caribbean is, then because the mainland and Caribbean colonies exchange you can't called it not American culture it's Caribbean that makes no logical sense. It's same colonial powers, with same cross colonies exchange before either place became a country.
Other you view slaves going from Jamaica to Bahamas different then slaves going from the Bahamas the southern US colonies. Just as Bahamas does not became Jamaica the southern colonies does not become the Bahamas. Jamaica and Bahamas influencing each other with African culture is no different Jamaica and Bahamas influencing colonial US with African culture. And this giant error in your post.
So how now Louisiana, Low Country etc are not American but " Caribbean culture". to you beyond silly.
African culture evolved in the US, Brazil, and Caribbean differently. I never said The US is African influence as much the Caribbean. Your arguing with yourself. I think you have some type of pride against African Americans that Caribbean is more African influence. So me and other are are pointing African influence in the US is bugging you. The straw man argument the Caribbean being more African influence does not change there African influence AA music, dance, cuisine, religion etc.
Heck even the banjo is African influence, this something often associated with Southern white country music people often don't know it's instrument whites saw the slave playing that was brought from Africa. There's a reason Ragtime, Jazz, Rock and Roll started in the US but not Australia, Canada or something,
Another major thing your ignoring is how much influence these more African influence areas had on other blacks else where in the country. for example "north east and Mid Atlantic states" once had slaves but most slaves where always in the South. Over half of all slave came in low cow country alone. Do you not understand this? If Black ancestors was say in Virginia and moved to say Harlem in 1920s well Harlem got Jazz from New Orleans etc do you not understand this.
Now your explanation of "restocking" leaves out context. The British for example imported more Africans into the Caribbean's largely because the demand was there and also due to it being a higher mortality rate in Caribbean countries than in the United States. They needed to replace the enslaved population that were dying to due to the very harsh conditions in certain Caribbean colonies. America's enslaved population on the other hand grew at a much faster rate because the conditions were less harsh than the Caribbean's and the birth rate was much higher due to a various reasons one was due to the system of Enslaved breeding.
Example, it's no coincidence that Salvador Bahia is considered the most African city in all of Brazil. More so than Rio De Janeiro. But when you take into account that Bahia has about 27.8% that identify as Black compared to Rio De Janeiro with 11.5% than it makes sense why Bahia is more overtly "residually" African than Rio.
I believe assimilation, integration and a much larger White population contributed to a more covert residual African culture in America than the ban of importation of Africans.
The restocking in fact explains why the culture of the rural Jamaican is less distant from African and retains more "Africanisms" than the equivalent black America. While the slave trade into both ended around 1808 a higher % of those imported into Jamaica arrived after 1775, and given the high mortality rate more of the enslaved population was African born. The planters didnt value babies so were less interested in keeping an "unproductive asset" alive for the 7 years before they became useful.
Then we add the emancipation which occurred 30 years before it did in the USA. Also Liberated Africans who were being illegally trafficked to Cuba, after slavery ended in Jamaica, were sometimes captured and landed on that island. So led to a revitalization of certain African traits. So in 1838 many of the freed people in Jamaica were either born in Africa, or were the kids of Africans. In 1865 only a few isolated communities in the USA, where the illegal importation of enslaved people continued, had people with a direct African connection.
The black identified population of Cuba is about the same as that of the USA, and yet Africanisms are far more prominent. Its not the large white population that is the reason. Its that Cuba was the last territory in the Americas to import substantial numbers of enslaved peoples. This continuing up to the 1870s, longer than even Brazil where it ended in the 1850s. So when slavery ended in Cuba a substantial part of the freed population were African born. Then we added the Spanish tactic of divide and rule of the enslaved peoples by encouraging them to maintain African ethnic identities in the hope that this would reduce trust among the groups and thus insurrection. So Cubans to this day maintain some traditions specific to certain African ethnic groups.
So black Americans have gone the furthest in developing cultural identities specific to their environments, with less direct African influences. What is noteworthy is that within the African diaspora this culture is accorded the highest prestige and black American influences are strong even within West Africa. Everybody knows who Beyonce is.
1. The British West Indie colonies such as ( Anguilla, the Cayman Islands, Turks and Caicos Islands, Montserrat, the British Virgin Islands, Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago) ended the importation of enslaved Africans in 1808.
The same year the former 13 British colonies that later became the United States banned the importation of enslaved Africans. Also The British West Indies colonies abolished slavery before the United States.
2. The French Colonies in the Caribbean's lasted a bit longer up until 1848 but that was in 5 French colonies: French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint Barthelemy, and Saint Martin. As we all know the importation of enslaved Africans stopped in Haiti due to the Haitian Revolution. That was around 1791. The only Africans that arrived in Haiti after the French Revolution were cargo ships that were eventually overthrown by the enslaved Africans themselves or ships seized by Haitians close to their borders. The large bulk of Haitians of African descent though were made up of people brought into Haiti prior to 1791. America was still importing Africans into America up until 1808.
3. The Spanish colonies were a bit different as well depending on the colony. Venezuela ended the importation of Africans in 1811. Cuba ended in 1820. Puerto Rico had a smaller population of enslaved Africans on the Island and only half of the population was actually born in Africa at the height of Puerto Rico's involvement in the slave trade (1815-1830s). The majority were enslaved Africans who were born in neighboring Caribbean colonies. Dominican Republic abolished slavery twice, once in 1801 and again in 1822.
4. Brazil was the biggest importer of Africans and the last to ban the importation of Africans.
So I'm confused by this inaccurate statement you made. The USA was just a piece of a bigger puzzle of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. America imported a tiny percentage in comparison to the Caribbean's and South America but America along with the former British West Indie colonies were tied at the hip when it came to importation of Africans. So where were the African born people in Jamaica or Trinidad or Barbados by the end of 1865? Possibly elders just like in the United States by that time.
Also, there was still the illegal importation of Africans well until 1860 into the south. It's estimated about 8,000 Africans were imported to the south after the ban. Of course the last known slave ship to make it to America was the Clotilda in 1860 by modern day Mobile, Alabama.
Oh and most historians estimate that America accounted for 5% of the Diaspora imported from Africa during the slave trade. Not fewer than 4%. Still a tiny amount but still have to make that correction.
Now your explanation of "restocking" leaves out context. The British for example imported more Africans into the Caribbean's largely because the demand was there and also due to it being a higher mortality rate in Caribbean countries than in the United States. They needed to replace the enslaved population that were dying to due to the very harsh conditions in certain Caribbean colonies. America's enslaved population on the other hand grew at a much faster rate because the conditions were less harsh than the Caribbean's and the birth rate was much higher due to a various reasons one was due to the system of Enslaved breeding.
You are right though and that most Africans trafficked into America were imported to the Carolinas/Sea Island corridor(Charleston/Savannah) and the Chesapeake area. Very few in comparison were imported to the Gulf Coast, Spanish Florida and the Northern British Colonies during that time period.
I believe Caribbean nations for example have more overt residuals of African culture than for example the States due to these nations being predominately people of African descent. Brazil is the only country you can make an argument for being more overt due to a later import of African people into the country. And even that depends on particular regions. Some regions/cities have more overt residuals of African cultures than others depending on the percentage of Afro Brazilians in those cities.
Example, it's no coincidence that Salvador Bahia is considered the most African city in all of Brazil. More so than Rio De Janeiro. But when you take into account that Bahia has about 27.8% that identify as Black compared to Rio De Janeiro with 11.5% than it makes sense why Bahia is more overtly "residually" African than Rio.
But than you have former Spanish colonies in the Caribbean's for example that made it a point to minimize African contributions to their culture. Africans enslaved in Spanish colonies went through a different form of slavery where there was no one drop rule. Where a European population did exist in much larger numbers than some of the British colonies in the Caribbean's. Spanish colonies also had a caste system that didn't exist in the United States or British West Indie colonies. It did exist in Spanish and French New Orleans and only increased after the Haitian Revolution. Yet unlike certain former Spanish Colonies that went out their way to disassociate themselves with Africa, New Orleans was the complete opposite and that's in large part due to the domestic slave trade. The large presence of enslaved people from the Upper South combined with the population that was there prior to the Louisiana purchase and former Whites, Creoles and enslaved peoples from Saint Dominque help preserve a more overt African culture than other parts of America including the American south(with the exception being the Gullah-Geechee Corridor).
I believe assimilation, integration and a much larger White population contributed to a more covert residual African culture in America than the ban of importation of Africans.
Not sure how what is said here is in contradiction with what I said. We agree that the USA was NOT a major destination for the Trans Atlantic slave trade. I think that we agree that most of the growth of slavery in the USA after the slave trade was abolished in 1808. meaning that US enslavers need to source their enslaved peoples from domestic sources.
It was way easier to find African retentions in Puerto Rico than in the USA. In both "blacks" are minorities. Jamaica and Barbados were both British colonies. Blacks account for over 90% in both, yet it is very obvious that African retentions are a more fundamental part of Jamaican culture than of Barbadian. The latter have retentions equivalent to the Geechee/Gullah peoples. Jamaicans having way more overt Africanisms. Absentee ownership of the plantations, with itinerant and disinterested managers was a feature of Jamaica. Barbados was fully settled by the British with entire British families movinf there. Blacks in Cuba are about 10% and yet Cuba is one of the strongest sites of African cultural retention in the Americas.
It is the type of slavery practiced that determines contemporary African retentions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
