Talk:Atlantic slave trade

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2022 and 5 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ttipton20 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Annabellecrtrt.

Possible anti - semitism

No evidence that conversos were major players in slave trade - link cannot be clicked on. Prove or delete thank you. Max.mendelsohn (talk) 14:40, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

A source need not be online to be usable in Wikipedia, so the fact that it's not clickable is not fatal. This strikes me as a large claim, however, and while I see no reason to doubt this source, I would need to see more to show me that it's within the mainstream of academic thought before I would find it acceptable to say in Wikivoice. As such, I have removed the claim. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 14:55, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

The book is published by Brill Publishers who look to be reputable and well-established publishers (1683). Our article on them says: 'Brill today publishes 275 journals and around 1200 new books and reference works each year all of which are "subject to external, single or double-blind peer review."' The author, Prof. Jonathan Israel FBA, PhD is the Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the School of Historical Studies at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey and previously was Professor of Dutch History and Institutions at the University College London (see the Wiki article). I've not read the book so cannot comment on the particular point, but it would appear to be WP:RS unless both of our articles need a significant re-write. Alanscottwalker appears to be a well-established and experienced WP editor, so I'm afraid to say that this deletion smacks of WP:IDONTLIKEIT.

As I said above, I am not really disputing the RS status here; but as phrased (in Wikivoice) I would want to see some evidence that it is within the academic mainstream beyond a single book reference. If you'd like to rework it as an attributed quote, you are certainly welcome to do so, but in the meantime, I would suggest that WP:ONUS applies here. That said, should consensus be against me, I will have no problem standing down. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 15:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Well as I said, I don't have the book. I saw a first edit by a new user to be the deletion of established and cited text. This is a common WP:POV problem and one that can be managed with tact and education, which is why I researched the book. It would be slightly odd to require all text to be direct quotations rather than the current WP policy of requiring citations to support an assertion. I do need to correct one thing though, it wasn't Alanscottwalker who originally added the sentence and citation, it was Taksen at 07:04 on 10 August 2020. He also is a long established editor, 16 years 4 months old, with 24,521 edits. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:08, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

I am not entirely sure if I am the "new user" to whom you refer; if so, I object--I think I have earned the right to be called "new-ish." I assure you I am not militant about this, but the claim is a large one, and I am not sure it is WP:DUE to include without attribution. Reasonable minds may certainly differ, however. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 16:16, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

No. I'm not even sure you can claim new-ish, you're an old-timer by now. ;-) It was Max.mendelsohn I was referring to, he's currently 1 hour old with 1 contribution. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

According to Hugh Thomas (The Slave Trade), early on, a majority of the major Portuguese slave-traders were conversos, but they would largely disappear from the scene later on. This was partly due to the increasing intensity of anti-semitic witch hunts against them by the Inquisition, whose efforts would do serious harm to Portuguese slave-trading networks in the new world. The association was strong enough that sometimes the auto-de-fés (burnings) of conversos were attended by jubilant crowds of slaves, Indians, free blacks or mixed-race 'mulattos'. Grim stuff! LastDodo (talk) 09:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Trans ATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE

I need to know what hapended during the trans atlantic slave trade 90.218.88.170 (talk) 12:21, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

You are in a good place to start then. Read the article. Look at the sources cited in the article. Many are available online. Read them. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:36, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Legacy of racism

The section "Legacy of racism" states, "Eric Williams argued that "A racial twist [was] given to what is basically an economic phenomenon. Slavery was not born of racism: rather, racism was the consequence of slavery.

This seems to me only a partial truth, because it is surely no coincidence that Europeans and Americans of European descent enslaved people of different races from them. I am not well-read enough in the subject to cite a source that makes this point, but perhaps another editor is. Maurice Magnus (talk) 01:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

You need to remember that for most of history (and pre-history) it was people of neighbouring tribes and countries that were enslaved, not foreigners from thousands of miles away. Part of the reason that the Romans came to Britain was for slaves, Britons were physically larger on average than Italians or Greeks and were therefore valued as slave labour. As the centuries rolled on the sources moved slightly away, Europeans owned Slavs (the word "slave" comes from "Slav"), but they were the same colour. Whilst this was happening in Europe Black tribes were enslaving other black tribes in sub-Saharan Africa. Black slaves were traded across Arabia and some reached southern Europe. Likewise North Africans enslaved the coastal people of Spain, Ireland, Great Britain, Iceland and the United States. It was against this background that European countries discovered that they could purchase slaves on the African coasts from traders, ship them across the Atlantic and solve the shortage of cheap labour in the Caribbean and Americas.

So to sum up, Williams' argument makes total sense. If you have a large, oppressed, "work force" (ie slaves) then the masters are always fearful of a revolt. Again look to history, Spartacus nearly brought down Rome, and of course Haiti was established by a slave revolt. Racism grows out of fear. Not just fear of the revolt, but fear of the "other". Martin of Sheffield (talk) 19:41, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Regardless, European definitely enslaved black Africans because they saw them as inferior. They targeted them specifically because they were dark skinned, no North Africans we’re target despite the proximity. It’s no coincidence 2601:8C:B80:6660:E187:5387:8C9D:7A95 (talk) 21:22, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

One small point: Europeans rarely if ever enslaved black people. Generally they were enslaved by other black people and sold to traders who brought them to the coast where European slavers bought them. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:50, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Where did the slave come from

where did the slave come from 41.114.152.239 (talk) 16:33, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2023

I found a fact online Edward is pro (talk) 13:25, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  BelowTheSun  (T•C) 13:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Black legend bulls...t

This article is a shame. It just tries to allocate African slavery to Spain and Portugal, whereas the involvement of Spain in slavery was residual, and Portugal, although higher, not at all comparable with England and the Netherlands. These countries were the main drivers of and profited from that slave trade (not to speak about the genocide of Indians, whose rights -up to the standards of the times- were recognized and respected by the Spaniards. 2A01:C22:85D3:8100:B340:94FD:6BE0:ED8F (talk) 12:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC)