The True History of Slavery and Slave Acquisition in Africa

By Africason

(Information Europe  & USA Don’t Want You to Know About Slavery)

This message is for black people of non-African nationalities. I mean, black people in countries like Jamaica, USA, Haiti, Bahamas, French Guiana, Guyana, Suriname, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, Uruguay, Bolivia, Argentina, Vanuatu, Paraguay, Grenada, Tuvalu, Solomon Islands, Chile, Peru, Panama, Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Kiribati, Trinidad and Tobago, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Guatemala, Lucia, Sri Lanka, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Maldives, Honduras, Nicaragua, Barbados, Tonga, Panama, Samoa, Nauru, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Martinique, Puerto Rico, Papua New Guinea, Fiji, India, and also people of ALL AFRICAN NATIONALITIES.  

I feel a great need to write this piece to unearth the truth about information which has been deleted from the history books about slavery, especially, how slave acquisition actually happened in Africa. I need do this because I’m increasingly getting the sense that black people of non-African nationalities don’t know the true story of how slave acquisition actually happened in Africa. Non-African blacks have a feeling that Africans were involved in selling human beings or benefited from slavery.

Recently, I was talking to an African-American and he was of the impression Africans were widely and willingly selling fellow Africans to Europeans for money. I have also heard similar sentiments from among Africans themselves, mostly the educated fools among us.

This assumption that Africans were part of the business of slavery is totally wrong!. It’s completely untrue!. And I’ll explain throughout the course of this message.

Nobody sold anybody for money in Africa!. There were no currencies, to begin with!.

First of all, let me begin by telling you why you got the popular version of the story you have. It’s very important you understand this, to begin with.

Why you have the wrong version of the history of slave acquisition in Africa.

Below are the 3 main reasons you have the wrong story of slave acquisition in Africa.

(1). The tales of Africans selling our children to Europeans for money is a face-saving excuse that white people implanted in the history books to justify slavery. Once slavery ended, Europeans set out to fool everybody in the world about the truth. This is because they eventually felt guilty for their crimes, and with guilt comes the human natural defensive mechanism to justify even the unjustifiable, instead of simply taking responsibility. Therefore, instead of taking responsibility; Britain, France, Spain, Germany, Belgium, Italy, and Portugal set-out to re-write history, and that’s why you have a fake version of the story about what happened in Africa during slavery.

(2). Moreover, the Euro-centric version of the story you have was achieved worldwide because the history books that disseminated the version of what happened during slavery were written by Europeans themselves, not by Africans!. Therefore, Europeans had the leverage to tell the world their embellished version of the story of slavery without resistance, because the world of intellectual and scholarly work as it relates to Africa is being controlled by Europe in what is called intellectual slavery (another form of slavery). According to Mr. C. Tsehloane Keto “The world of Africans and descendants of Africans and the world of scholarship about them is still the only one at the end of the Twentieth Century that retains a 'colonial' signature whereby experts and authorities outside African communities control knowledge creation and exceed experts inside those communities. This does not apply to Europe, Asia or the Americas. This has led to an unfortunate predilection among Africans to concede expert knowledge to outsiders. African people have tended in the past to surrender the right to academic self-affirmation to others, thereby accepting conclusions of a Euro-centric framework that have assigned a permanent peripheral role to the Africa centered perspective in the world's growing knowledge industry. Indeed, many of the 'authorities' who study and write about the African world and exercise great influence over the outside world's perception of Africa and Africans, the understanding of its value priorities, the vision of its future and the capacity to define its very essence for insiders and outsiders alike, often are not burdened with the knowledge of single African or African derived language."

The above quote aptly summarized another form of slavery called intellectual slavery which doesn’t allow Africans decide what is knowledge or what is not knowledge, what is history or what is not history, what to know or what not to know, e.t.c. Therefore, everything you’ve heard about slavery acquisition in Africa had been the embellished perspectives of Europeans. Intellectual slavery itself is a story for another day.

(3). It's normal that whenever someone commits a crime, he needs an excuse to justify why he did it. Even serial killers today always have reasons in court to justify why they committed heinous crimes, like; killing many people. Europeans needed an excuse as to why they engaged in slavery, so they came up with these outrageous false stories in the history books claiming we Africans were willingly selling our children to them.

The above 3 reasons are basically why you have the wrong version of the story.

Before I proceed, let me remind you it's un-natural for a human being to sell his/her children for money. It’s anti-nature for a mother or father to willingly sell their children for money. Nobody in the world gives birth to a child and start selling them in mass!. Common sense will reveal this to anybody because nature itself shows that it’s not something do-able. If it was a natural thing to do, then slave acquisition and shipping across the Atlantic ocean would have happened all over the continents of the world, and not just in Africa.

Stop believing made-up history fed you by western education to justify crimes committed by Europeans. Africans had no history of selling human beings before our unfortunate contact with Arabs and Europeans. This message though deals with European crimes, I'll talk about Arab crimes some other time. 

As a prelude, let us examine how human societies and economic systems generally evolved worldwide.

Stages of development of human society

Every human society followed stages or step-by-step level of development or should I say a model of development. The nature of the evolution of all human societies any place in the world have followed the following stages: (1). Hunter and fruit gatherer, (2). Communism, (3). Feudalism, (4). Capitalism, in that order. However, this is only a basic model proposed by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in the 19^th century. It’s my personal opinion that “like every other model, it would have happened slightly differently from society to society”. Because the way the Chinese evolved is definitely not the same way the USA evolved; for example.

Let’s examine the stages more.

(1). Hunter and fruit gatherer.

A hunter-gatherer is a human living in a society in which most or all food is obtained by foraging (collecting wild plants and pursuing wild animals), in contrast to agricultural societies, which rely mainly on domesticated species. Hunting and gathering was humanity's first and most successful adaptation, occupying at least 90 percent of human history. Following the invention of agriculture, hunter-gatherers have been displaced or conquered by farming or pastoralist groups in most parts of the world. 

Source: Wikipedia

(2). Communism

Communism refers to a socio-economic system that allows communal ownership of a piece of land or and labor, and also means of production by different people or communities working for a common goal. Example; I have an acre of farmland that I can’t cultivate alone, and other people in my community also have 1 or two acres of land. In Communism, we can form a group of 20 people (laborers) and we’ll agree to take turns working on each other’s farm (twenty people working on 1 farm owned by 1 person). This was the second stage of Communism in Africa.

In a previous form, the twenty may also decide to co-own 1 farmland and cultivate it together (twenty people working on 1 farm co-owned by 20 persons). This was the first stage of Communism in Africa.

That’s how Communism happened in Africa, and it’s still like that today in remote farming communities or villages in Africa.

(3). Feudalism

Feudalism is a socio-economic system in medieval Europe that flourished between the 9th and 15th centuries. Broadly defined, it was a way of structuring society around relationships derived from the holding of lands by landlords in exchange for labor from peasants/serfs.

(4). Capitalism

Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. Characteristics central to capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labor, voluntary exchange, a price system, and competitive markets. In a capitalist market economy, decision-making and investment is determined by the owners of the factors of production in financial and capital markets, and prices and the distribution of goods are mainly determined by competition in the market. 

Source: Wikipedia.

No mention of slavery above, meaning there was once a time in human history when nobody was a slave, except during feudalism in Europe that landlords had lands worked by peasants/serfs. 

Now, let's find out who practiced any form of slavery from time immemorial.

The origin and evolution of forced labor/the origin of slavery

The first record of any form of forced labor was in Europe, not in Africa, not in Asia, not in Australia, not in America. As a matter of fact, Europeans were the first people in the world practicing a form of slave business model known as serfdom (a medieval type of slavery) that was already an established business model as far back as 332 AD, even before they made contact with Africa, even before they made contact with the Americas. Now, I am not saying that slavery haven't been heard before then but I am speaking about an established slave business model practiced widely in Europe. 

During the era of serfdom, the Roman empire kept prisoners of war cum slaves!. Rome enslaved Britain. British people themselves were once enslaving themselves in Britain as serfs!. England enslaved Irish and Scottish people. Serfdom swept across Europe in Medieval times and tied thousands of serfs to lands where they labored in servitude!.

In today’s France, Germany, Britain, Spain, Italy, Portugal, e.t.c they kept serfs! (medieval name for slaves).

Serfdom explained. (feel free to enlarge the picture by simply clicking on it).

Serfdom: Encyclopedia Britannica

Clearly, serfs were not equal to free people!. They were in perpetual servitude- a serf = a slave.

Forget about the caveat trying so hard to differentiate it from slaves, because according to Britannica itself, as you can see above, it says “essential additional mark of serfdom was the lack of many of the personal liberties that were held by freedmen”. If we have laboring men today who are not freedmen, what else could we call them? Because, again, according to Britannica every aspect of their lives, including their right to movement, right to marriage, right to property, were being determined by a landlord (equivalent to a slave master). Serfs were slaves and they labored on a landlord’s farm till they grew old and died!. Things were so bad for the serfs that they later started revolting against their exploitation (same way slaves revolted in the Americas). After they revolted, serfs were later to evolve into indentured laborers. We’ll talk about indentured labor later, but let me quickly talk about records of slavery in the new testament European bible.

During the reign of the Roman empire, Rome owned millions of slaves across Europe and had been using bible passages to control the minds of their slaves. 

Slavery had been so old in Europe that it became a way of life. Till the 1800's, European and American churches, Christian missionaries, and priests still widely held the view that “slavery was ordained by God”. Bible passages were often being quoted to rebellious slaves to remind them to obey their masters, as it was the will of God for them to be enslaved. Popular bible passages used include the below:-

Ephesians 6 5:8 New International Version.
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.

1 Corinthians 7:20:22 New International Version.
Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them. Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you- although if you can gain your freedom, do so. For the one who was a slave when called to faith in the Lord is the Lord’s freed person; similarly, the one who was free when called is Christ’s slave.

Colossians 3 22:25 New International Version.
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for their wrongs, and there is no favoritism.

1 Peter 2 18:20 New International Version.
Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if someone bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because they are conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God.

The above biblical record clearly indicates white people have been involved in the business of slavery since time immemorial. It's a pity when we talk about slavery today people think of Africa because white people have used brainwashing education to exonerate themselves and have us take the blame. Even the cash slavery/Atlantic slave trade that was later to evolve was also invented by white people!!.

Again, before anybody knew anything called slavery (as a business model working side-by-side with capitalism), it was Europeans that practiced it, that's why the bible has a record of it. And considering the bible events took place over 2,000 years ago, it means slavery in Europe is as old as Europe itself. Black people open your eyes and think!!.

Intellectual slavery is the only reason black people would read what’s being said by the bible and Britannica about slaves/serfs and not be able to interpret it as slavery, instead we interpret it just as white people would want us to believe. This’s just an example of one of the many ways western education control the mind of black people.

However, if you’re a student reading this, you may go ahead to define it as they want you to, in order to pass your exams. But, if you're looking for the truth, here you have it.

Again, serfdom explained. (feel free to enlarge the picture by simply clicking on it).

Serfdom: Wikipedia

More details about serfdom at Encyclopedia Britannica.

As you can see above, Europeans started keeping slaves as far back as bible times and up till the 5^th to 12^th century during the feudal stage of their development. At that time, Africans obviously still in the communism stage of our development simply contributed labor equally, and willingly to farm our lands. Go to any African village today and ask them how farm work is done, even before the coming of Europeans, and they’ll tell you that you either hire and pay a laborer or join a group of people to form team labor to work on each other’s farm.

How come we’re said to have been the first people practicing slavery; when there was no need for it?

With feudalism comes slavery!. Check the evolution of human societies from any continent in the world. Slavery as a business model could only originate in an economy edging towards capitalism like Europe’s at that time. 

Europeans at the Feudal stage of their development were the ones who needed serfs/slaves to farm their lands. So, they began keeping serfs who they tied to farmlands as perpetual free laborers. 

Yet, they want us Africans and black people to blame ourselves for the act of slavery? For your information, that's what mental slavery is all about, and I get pissed that even the so-called educated Africans fall for it!. They want to get Africans to blame ourselves for a crime they committed!. Talk about mental slavery!!.

Bristol got rich from slave trade!.

Liverpool got rich from slave trade!.

London got rich from slave trade!.

America got rich from slave trade!.

France got rich from slave trade!.

Portugal got rich from slave trade!.

Spain got rich from slavery!.

Don't you think Africa would have got wealthy as well; if indeed we sold people and collected cash for 400 years? Because Bristol, Liverpool, London, all port cities in Portugal, France, and Spain got wealthy and developed during slavery. Far back in the 1950’s, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, calculated the cost of acquisition of slaves in America and he arrived at a figure of $800,000,000,000 (eight hundred Billion) revenue in America ALONE!. If the total number of slaves shipped to all the countries and Islands of the world, amounting to over two hundred million taken from Africa were to be paid for, it would fetch up to $10,000,000,000,000 (ten Trillion) in revenue to Africa even at that time. And, if you probe further today you'll find Multinational Corporations Their Wealth Originated From (Africa) Slave Trade. Please, see measuring worth for the monetary worth of  slaves (their estimated price only, their labor not included).

What part of Africa was developing as a result of revenue from slave trade? White people, please tell me.

Back to the origin of slavery…………….

After the era of serfdom ended in Europe, there was serious economic decline forcing the elites to start inventing other means of making money. Soon, a new type of business emerged and it was exploration and sea voyage to unknown parts of the world. And in 1492, people like Christopher Columbus traveled to a “new world” known today as America. Columbus was not the only person traveling; many European elites were traveling to different parts of the world. For example; Henry the Navigator, a Portuguese voyaged to Africa. Others traveled to Asia, Australia. As I said, it was their age of exploring other parts of the world by sea.

On arriving America, Columbus and his team were shocked to meet the indigenous people of that land (red Indians/blacks) who have been living there for thousands of years before him. After staying a while Columbus returned to Europe with lots of gold, silver, and goodies. He made one or two more other trips to America and became extremely very rich. Soon everybody among the elites in Europe heard the story of his sudden wealth. Then, a gold rush began to South America among the Portuguese, Italians, Spaniards, French, and last England. The Portuguese and Spaniards were the first to follow after Columbus. When the Portuguese and Spaniards arrived South America, they tried various means to exploit the native Americans and the few black inhabitants for free labor to cultivate their farms (something they know is possible based on their knowledge of keeping serfs in Europe). But, all their efforts to exploit the locals failed. At that point, they decided to try indentured labor. Remember, I mentioned indentured labor earlier as an offshoot of serfdom.

Eventually, serfdom itself was later to evolve to a more subtle form of slavery called indentured labor. A laborer was called a servant and they earned little wages.

Indentured labor explained. (feel free to enlarge the picture by simply clicking on it).

Indentured labor Wikipedia

If you understand this so far, you'll see that a pattern is gradually emerging. Indentured labor would eventually lead to full scale slavery.

Indentured labor originated when the serfs started revolting in Europe and calling for their freedom (just like slaves revolted in the Americas) after being exploited for hundreds of years. Thereafter, they were paid little monies. But, unfortunately for them, the Americas was discovered just about the same time. They were unfortunate because the landowners who kept serfs cum indentured laborers in Europe started moving their investment to the Americas, promising the serfs a better life in America. They’ll usually pay their transport fares across the Atlantic, and when the indentured laborer got to America they’ll work in the master’s farm free. But, this time the agreement was that the laborer worked for some numbers of years, then gain freedom to earn his own income. You work for me for a number of years, and then you get your freedom.

But, that couldn’t last for long because the whites imported from Europe soon got diseases that killed them in mass. They were also known to be no more obedient to their masters as before, owing to their nominal new found freedom in Europe. Bottom line, the indentured laborer system was not well suited for the job at the plantations. It required a system of full scale forced labor.

Important: The indentured laborers included few blacks imported from Spain and Portugal. These blacks were the moors (black people that settled in Spain and Portugal around 710 AD) but they were later conquered in Europe and taken into slavery by Spain and Portugal.

Eventually, farms started growing fallow and businesses started packing-up as it was very difficult to get an indentured laborer to hire. News had spread of the dangerous working conditions and death, so no indentured laborers agreed to come to the Americas anymore.

The land owners (now colonialists) then tried one more thing to get labor: KIDNAPPING the kings of the indigenous people and coercing them to provide free labor or whatever they needed. 

That is how a strategy for slavery began!. This business model would work so well that it would be used to enslave the entire America's and the African continent.

Let us now explore the forceful strategies employed by the land owners, cum colonialists, cum slave masters in the America’s, even before they arrived in Africa.

The origin and evolution of the strategy for slavery

Once the Spaniards realized they could use the kidnapping and coercion strategy to source labor in the Americas, they sent their chief colonial officer named Francisco De Toledo to Peru in the year 1659 to perfect it.

Below, read the area circled in red which shows the exploitation method being perfected as the Spaniards colonial officer Francisco De Toledo went researching the entire country of Peru to find a way to solve the labor shortage problem. It was taken from the book “Why Nations Fail” (if you can't see the writing clearly, feel free to enlarge the picture by simply clicking on it).

It's a pity most of us don't know that in order to have someone work for an unknown foreigner for free, there must have been a great forceful strategy employed by the slave masters or colonialists.

When the colonial officers have surveyed the country of Peru they came up with the kidnapping idea. That is, kidnap the king and he will get his subjects to do whatever they wanted.

Below is recorded evidence of the Spaniards strategy as recorded by an explorer.

Please read the area circled in red (if you can't see the writing clearly, feel free to enlarge the picture by simply clicking on it).

When the Portuguese, French, British, Spaniards saw the kidnapping of kings worked as planned and that it was good for business, there was no going back. They fine-tuned it to become a business model. They would kidnap a king and imprison him until he gave them many free laborers, food, gold, silver.

Below is an account of the kidnapping of a king called Emperor Moctezuma, an Aztec king who was lured by the Spaniards to a business meeting upon the Spaniards arrival to the town of Aztec. Unfortunately, the king had no idea what was to befall him.

Please read the area circled in red. It was taken from the book “Why Nations Fail” (if you can't see the writing clearly, feel free to enlarge the picture by simply clicking on it)

Page continues…..

Later, they captured and tortured another king, but this time not just torture. After the king gave them all his gold and silver they still killed him. Read the area circled in red. It was taken from the book, “Why Nations Fail” (if you can't see the writing clearly, feel free to enlarge the picture by simply clicking on it).

Page continues..............

The Portuguese, Spaniards, French, Italians, of course, returned to Europe with their loots and made several other trips. Soon, elites in England heard the story of their sudden wealth and joined the scramble for quick wealth in the Americas.

Please, see below documentary. Their model of conquering and enslaving native people was to hold a native King to ransom. It was shown from 30:00 to 44:35

This documentary is generally about gold, so only from 30:00 to 44:35 is relevant here. But, of course, you can watch the entire documentary

However, by the time the British arrived, the Spaniards, French, Portuguese already took the best part of the lands and its people. The British tried to use the Spaniards and Portuguese business model to get free labor, but wasn’t successful at all. They even tried importing serfs cum indentured laborers from Europe, but as we discussed before, the European laborers weren’t capable for the farming job. Making matters worse was the fact that Europeans brought with them a new disease (smallpox) which killed millions of native Americans. Within 10 years of the arrival of Europeans to the Americas, over 90% of the native population died, because smallpox was completely new to the Americas and they didn't have natural immunity against it. This resulted in a situation where there was fertile land, but there was nobody to work the farms. Short of laborers, the British became desperate just like the Spaniards, French, and Portuguese before them. 

Read the area circled in red below. It was taken from the book, “Why Nations Fail” (if you can't see the writing clearly, feel free to enlarge the picture by simply clicking on it).

It was at this point the British started brainstorming. What if we relocate our business to Africa? What if we relocate to Africa and apply the kidnapping model over there?

What the British did next would be fully discussed later. Even the crimes committed by the Spaniards would pale in comparison to what you’ll soon learn.

Once the British arrived Africa they swung to action without wasting time. They started kidnapping and coercing African kings to get them free labor to grow cash crops. Thousands of African kings were held hostage from Kenya to Zimbabwe, from Sudan to Zambia, from Ghana to Nigeria, e.t.c. Many were exiled from their lands if they refused to co-operate.  This part is not talked about because we are schooled to believe it only happened during colonialism. 

In 1887, the British dethroned king Jaja of Opobo and forced him to exile for refusing to allow British monopoly on commodity trade in his kingdom.

In 1861, the British threatened Oba of Lagos, Oba Dosunmu with war if he refuses to sign a treaty surrendering Lagos to them. He later succumbed and gave up Lagos as a British protectorate.

In 1895, the British dethroned king Koko Mingi VIII of Nembe and sent him to exile for refusing to accept a contract term from the royal Niger company- a British colonial monopoly.

In 1735, a British delegation shot Oba Oresoyen in his palace for being stubborn and refusing to take instruction from Queen of England.

In 1897, the British dethroned Oba Ovonramwen of Bini kingdom and sent him to exile after unsuccessful attempts to lure him to surrender his kingdom to slavery. After he was exiled, the British called a meeting of the community, and in a triumphant tone, they said “you see, your King is gone!. From today, you have only one King and her name is Queen Victoria. Henceforth, she’s the only one you shall pay tributes to”.

In 1894, the British exiled king Nana of Itsekiri to Ghana and took over his oil palm factory and cocoa plantation.

In 1896, the British exiled king Prempeh I of Ashanti kingdom for refusing to offer them 50,000 ounces of gold at once, even as the king was in tears begging them he can pay in installments starting with an initial 680 ounces down payment. They took the 680 initial deposit from him, reneged and he was sent to exile to Seychelles. Note that king Prempeh did not owe Britain any gold as he didn’t have any business with them; rather, the British heard his official seat was made of real gold, they got jealous and wanted some of the gold. When Prempeh refused to give them gold, they threatened him to provide gold or have his kingdom invaded. The king under fear of exile signed he would provide the gold, but he didn’t have all of the gold at once.

In 1899, the British exiled king Mwanga II of Buganda a.k.a the Kabaka of Buganda to Seychelles. He was dethroned for refusing to convert to Christianity and also for refusing to sign a treaty with Lord Lugard granting Britain power over taxes in his kingdom and trade to the Imperial British East Africa Company.

In 1899, the British shot and wounded king Kabalega of Bunyoro in his palace for refusing to surrender his kingdom to colonialism. He was exiled to the Seychelles and the British installed a puppet king.

In 1883, the British pressured Oba Awujale Fidipote to exile in Epe, after threatening military invasion of his kingdom.

In 1896, the British sent Queen Yaa Asantewaa to exile to the Seychelles for refusing to submit to imperial rule. Queen Yaa Asantewa fought gallantly and was only defeated by a fortified British expeditionary force.

In 1891, the British dethroned and exiled king Waiyaki Wa Hinga. King Waiyaki had earlier made an agreement with the British to allow them settle peacefully in his land. As usual, the British reneged from the agreement few month later, and wanted everything in his kingdom including his seat. A fight ensued and they hit king Waiyaki with (simi) dagger on his head, and planned to take him to court for prosecution. On the way to the court they changed their mind and decided to bury him alive instead. Till today, nobody knows where they buried him.

In 1835, the British captured and beheaded king Hintsa in South Africa. He was of the Xhosa tribe. The queen of England asked that his skull be brought to her palace in London, and it was done. Till today, nobody knows where they buried him or where his skull is.

The list of dethroned and exiled African kings is endless. The dethroning of African kings have been going on before colonialism, so don't make the mistake of thinking the above only happened during colonialism. It was the act of holding African kings captive and demanding for slaves that inspired the exile and dethronement of African kings during colonialism. There must have been over 2,500 of such cases as ancient Africa was ruled by kings. Every single African king had to be dethroned or exiled for his kingdom to be enslaved. The French, Germans, Spanish, Portuguese, also have their share of these crimes in Africa. Details of this has been deleted from the history books because British crimes in Africa is so huge and ugly that nobody had the courage to write them.

Here is a screenshot of an embellished story of the failed attempt to kidnap the king of Benin in today's Nigeria. Read the area circled in red.

The above screenshot is the type of shallow history the British want the world to know because they don’t want you to know the details.

Listen………

What actually happened was that the British tried to unleash their strategy of kidnapping, but Oba Ovoranmwen was very wise and didn’t want to meet them. Several delegates were sent to him demanding a meeting with the British explorers cum slave masters, but he refused to meet with them because he had a premonition of their evil plot. Eventually, they tracked him down, captured him, and imprisoned him waiting for him to redeem himself with gold and free labor. But, he managed to escape when his army counter-attacked. He ran away and went to exile thereafter. The British immediately took over his palace, killed many of the locals including the king’s guard, and they stole everything in the king’s palace. They stole gold, silver, fine brass works, sculptures, artifacts, the king’s gears, to name a few.

Below is a documentary by a British man talking about the failed attempt to kidnap the Oba (king) of Benin, Oba Ovoranmwen. Note that this version of the story is not the whole truth, but what the British want YOU to believe.

See the conquest of Benin kingdom

If you read the given links or watched the video you’ll notice they talked about a failure of trade talks, when in fact it was a failed kidnapping attempt!.

How can you be sure the British were kidnapping African kings during slavery? Because in 1607, the British had earlier tried kidnapping another king in Jamestown, USA!. The name of the king was king Powhatan, also known as king Wahunsunacock, the ruler of then Werowecomoco region and other tribes. 

The kidnapping of king Wahunsunacock of Werowecomoco also failed because the king did exactly what Oba of Benin did. He refused to meet the British delegates for a purported business talk because just like the Oba of Benin he had a premonition they were planning to kidnap him.

Below is a record of a previous failed plot by the British to kidnap king Wahunsunacock in the Americas, this was few years before they arrived in Africa. Read the area circled in red below. It was taken from the book, “Why Nations Fail” (if you can't see the writing clearly, feel free to enlarge the picture by simply clicking on it).

Back to the origin and evolution of the strategy for slavery………………

Again, the British were frustrated in Africa as they couldn’t successfully replicate the Spaniards and Portuguese model in Africa. But they tried one more thing: CAUSE WAR in order to harvest prisoners of war- POW, and ship them back to America to work the plantations. This was later to become a permanent solution to the labor problem in the Americas.

With the above thought, slavery took off in Africa, and when it began it was violent. It would be the worst crime ever committed by man!.

The entire African continent was engulfed in war from then on.

British and French strategy for slavery in Africa

British and French strategy for slavery in Africa was very simple. They exploited the natural fractures inherent in the thousands of ethnic nationalities that make up the African continent.

In order to understand why slavery was so successful in Africa and why the British and French strategy was a hit, there’re certain things you need to understand first. Please read carefully.

Before the British and French made contact with Africa, there was no country like; Nigeria, Cameroon, Benin Republic, Togo, South Africa, Zambia, Mozambique, Kenya, Botswana, Morocco, e.t.c. Instead, African nations were made up of tribes or ethnic groups. There are literally thousands of such tribes and ethnic groups in Africa. 

Map of Pre-colonial Africa

Note: There are over 2,000 of such ethnic nationalities in Africa. Only the popular ethnic nationalities are represented in this map. Later, I’ll zoom in on some region for more ethnic nationalities.

The structure of original nations of Africa before the coming of Europeans

Through the evolution of African culture and societies, we naturally had over 2,000 countries in Africa. Yes, there were as many countries because the nations weren’t big geographically. But each spoke a different language and had a different king also. 

If you live in Europe, think of it as each European nation evolving as small as Monaco or even as small as the Vatican, each speaking a different language.

If you live in Asia; think of it as each Asian nation evolving as small as Hong Kong and speaking a unique language than the rest of every other Asian country.

And, if you live in the USA, think of it as each US state evolving as small as Delaware or Rhode Island. Meaning you’ll possibly have over 600 states making up the USA, and most important; each state speaking a different language. Obviously, it would've been very easy to conquer any ethnic nation in war due to their small population. And that's what Europeans did.

The diversity in pre-colonial Africa was much more than we’ve been tailored today by Europeans. In the original setting, national identity was determined by the ethnic group, language, culture. Each geographical region that shared these three things was a nation on its own right. Each ruled by its own king or chief. A government of its own!.

Assuming you were to come to a place like today’s Nigeria before 1885, you would have seen the below ethnic nation-states, not Nigeria.

Yoruba, Igbo, Hausa, Efik, Nupe, Ibibio, Fulani, Igala, Bini, Tiv, Kanuri, Kalabari, Esan, Urhobo, Isekiri, e.t.c. In total there’re about 317 ethnic nationalities in Nigeria alone!. So, you would have had over 300 countries within the area called Nigeria today. Back then, these were countries not just ethnic tribes, rather there were independent nations!. See the full list of ethnic nationalities in Nigeria alone.

Similarly, if you were to travel to the region known today as Kenya before 1885, the nationalities would’ve been as below.

Kikuyu, Luo, Kamba, Kalenjin, Luhya, Mijikenda, Kisil, Somali, Turkana, Massai, Meru, Embu, e.t.c. In the area known as Kenya today, you would have had up to 15 ethnic nation-states. Again, these were the original national structure of that part of Africa before Europeans arrived.

And, if you were to travel to the region called Ivory Coast before 1885, you would have seen the below ethnic nation-states.

Mende, Kwa, Kru, Gur, e.t.c. That would be the ethnic nations in that region.

In Uganda region before 1885 you’ll get ethnic nations like as below.

Bantu, Nilotic, Kuliak, e.t.c.

In today’s South Sudan, you would have had the below ethnic nation-states.

Acholi‎, Dinka Madi, Nuer, Aja, Anuak, Atuot, Avukaya, Bai, Baka, Balanda Boor, Balanda Bviri, Bari, Binga Bongo, Boya, Burun, Didinga, Dongotona, Gollo, Ifoto, Imatong, Indri, Jiye, Jumjum, Jur Beli, Jur, Kakwa, Kaligi, Kara, Keliko, Ketebo, Kichepo, Kuku, Lango, Logir, Logo, Lokoya, Lopit, Lotuko, Lulubo, Luo, Madi ,Makaraka , Mangayat , Morokodo, Moru , Mandari , Mundu, Murle, Ndogo, Ngulgule, Nilotic, Nuer, Nyamusa, Nyangatom, Nyangwara, Olu'bo, Pari, Pojulu, Rek, Sere, Shita, Surma, Tacho, Tennet, Thuri, Tirma, Toposa, Yulu, Zande. These were the ethnic nations packed within that region.

Before 1885, if were to travel to Zaire (now the Congo Democratic Republic), Gabon, and Congo, you would have seen the below ethnic nation-states.

And so on and so forth………….. Remember, there're over 2,000 of such ethnic nationalities in Africa.

You can google ethnic groups for the rest of African countries. Example; if you want to know the ethnic groups in Zambia just google “list of ethnic groups in Zambia”.

Each African ethnic group was ruled by a king or a chief, and the total domain of authority of his government was called an empire. An empire may consist of one or more ethnic groups under his control. Such was an independent government.

Such empires or kingdoms formed the same way all over the world, some peacefully and some through acts of war, some probably more violent than others. It then follows that they would have been constant dispute between neighbors and probably skirmishes here and there. However, whatever the case but such skirmishes never resulted to full-blown war in the magnitude seen in Europe at that point in time. In medieval time, when Europeans were at war killing themselves, we on the other hand in Africa were building pyramids, schools, inventing writing, science of astronomy, mathematics. Disputes were always settled among two ethnic neighbors over here. Even till today such disputes often arise and are always being settled peacefully. As I type this, there are news report of herdsmen from Northern part of Nigeria grazing and trespassing farmlands and boundaries of another ethnic group. But such conflict has always been there and was always resoled peacefully by the African people most of the time. For this, we didn’t evolve into manufacturing guns, bullets, and weapons of mass destruction- WMD like Europe. Nobody needed such weapons in Africa until Europeans arrived and exploited our ethnic differences and began arming our kings with guns.

The ethnic nationalities were ruled by their kings, Eze, Oba, Pharoah, Olu, or whatever the locals call it.

The Eze (king) ruled the Igbo ethnic nation

Oba (king) ruled the Bini ethnic nation

The Olu (king) ruled the Isekiri ethnic nation

And so on and so forth………….. Remember, there're over 2,000 of such ethnic nationalities in Africa, and all had their president (king) before our unfortunate encounter with Europe. In fact, you'll find a King and Queen within every one kilometer in Africa. It's still traditionally like that.

The Kings and Queens are still there today and still exert power and influence within their various ethnic groups, just that political power is no longer solely in their hands as many kings and their empires have been lumped up under one government/countries created by Europeans.

Anybody can see clearly that Africans already achieved statehood before our unfortunate contact with Europeans. And we already established commerce with our neighbors as well. Igbos, peacefully traded with their neighboring Ibibio, Ijaw, Igala.

Yorubas, peacefully traded with their neighboring Isekiri, Igbira, Nupe, Edo.

Contrary to what European history books may want you to believe, there were no mass wars among the African people before the coming of Europeans. As we learned above, ethnic nation-states already formed and solidified in Africa thousands of years ago, and most important, we completed the process of state evolution before Europeans. But Europeans came over here and re-drew our borderlines to suit their greed and corruption, and in the process, they brought us war and slavery, as you’ll soon learn.

All the countries you see today in Africa are not real countries that represent the real nationalities of Africans. Only few countries like; Ghana, Zimbabwe, Egypt, and Ethiopia retained their original names, though they were still being lumped up with other ethnic nationalities. Let me say there were still little changes in the name of Egypt and Ethiopia. Egypt was called HEKUPTAH and Ethiopia was called ETHIOP. But the names we have today are the result of Greek mispronunciation.

Map of Africa after shared by Europeans in 1884-1885 at the Berlin conference.

Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Italy, King Leopold, shared Africa among themselves in 1884-1885. King Leopold (one man) got one country Congo as a gift.

Map of Africa and dates of independence.

All the countries you see in Africa today were created between 1884 at the Berlin conference up to the 1960’s. In fact, new countries keeps being created like Eritrea created in 1993 and South Sudan created in 2011. Just in case you are wondering why new countries are still being created from time to time. It’s because the natural boundaries and ethnic states that were violated by Europeans haven’t healed completely!. There's no strong sense of nationalism because at the end of the day, everyone knows what ethnic group they truly belong. In fact, I can prophesy to you that more countries would continue to be created in Africa because nature is such a stubborn thing. Nature will always want to return to itself.

The wounds have not healed completely till today. There're still ethnic tensions here and there in countries like the Congo, Nigeria, Rwanda, Kenya, Burundi, Sudan, Central Africa, Angola, e.t.c. 

Remember, at the Berlin conference Europeans divided African lands and its people among themselves without the consent of a single African nation. Our consent was never sought as to whether a certain group of ethnic nationality would be happy living under one geographical entity. This alone created great tension among ethnic neighbors that were once independently living happily. Please read about the Berlin conference it would help you understand the original African states better.

The true history of slavery and slave acquisition in Africa

The British, French, Spaniards, Portuguese, Belgians, and Italians after canvassing the whole African continent and studying the lay of the land and ethnic nationalities, then went to action with their evil plan.

As we learned before, the first Europeans to arrive in Africa were the Portuguese and this was in the 15th century, about the same time Christopher Columbus discovered the Americas. As discussed earlier, the 1400 AD was the age of exploration and discovery by Europeans. The Portuguese came to buy gold from Ghana kingdom and its environs. Ghana kingdom from time immemorial was renowned as a depot for gold. Initially, there were peaceful trades between not just Ghana kingdom but other African ethnic nationalities/empires and Europeans. However, this peaceful trade didn’t happen for long. It was short lived because Europeans had not found solution to the labor shortage in the Americas.

Our relationship took a negative turn afterward, and under the guise of doing business, white people started luring their African associates to give up their children for a better life in the new world (Caribbean and US) just as the indentured laborers were told. We were told to release our children as hired laborers, and that they would be back after a while. The explorers would entice African kings or their trading partners with gifts in exchange for laborers. Gifts such as gun, gunpowder, mirror, knives, cloth, and beads, e.t.c which they originally exchanged for gold but now were to be used as an exchange for laborers. 

Eventually, the Portuguese managed to convince their African trading partners to hire 10 males to them as indentured laborers (not slaves) in exchange for goods. These 10 males were taken to the Americas and surprisingly they offered more labor than anything ever observed from the indentured laborers hired from Europe. Also, none of the Africans fell sick like the indentured laborers. Before slavery escalated to what we know it, these early black laborers also did re-gain their freedom at the end of the indenture tenure or agreement, just like every other white laborer and the few moors mentioned earlier. And, if you ever wondered where the free blacks in America originated, this is precisely where you got the few free black families who were not slaves. They were formerly indentured laborers, not slaves!!. They labored their way out earlier-on before slavery escalated as we know it. 

After making few more trips to Africa and returning with more laborers, then the real race for slaves by all means began!.

Before I go further on what transpired afterwards, let me mention that even the first British traders also engaged the services of African indentured labourers, not slaves. One popular African indentured labourer who earlier worked for the British was named John Punch. He came to America via a British ship in the 1630's from the region of Cameroon or Guinea Bissau or maybe from Ivory Coast in West Africa. When he arrived America, he worked for a British farmer as an indentured labourer alongside two other white indentured labourers named Victor (from Netherlands) and James Gregory (from Scotland). 

But something happened.

In 1640, John punch and the two other white labourers ran away from their master. 

Unfortunately, they were re-captured and brought back to their master's farm. They were taken to the court for trial and a British judge ruled that the two white indentured labourers (Victor and James) shall serve additional four years as punishment. But instead of imposing the same sentence on John Punch the African, the judge ruled that Mr. Punch shall remain a servant to his master for the rest of his life. This meant that his children and his children's children shall also be slaves by default. Sadly, from then on black people became considered as slaves and no longer as indentured labourers. For details on this, see John punch the indentured labourer who became the first slave. Or use any other source you like.

The British would do ANYTHING to find laborers in Africa.

Naturally, as you’ll expect, Africans resisted giving up their children. Then, they (British) tried kidnapping and imprisoning our kings and coercing them to provide free laborers. Soon, tension set in between European traders and Africans. Earlier we learned how one of such king the Oba of Benin resisted selling-out until he was captured and later he escaped into exile.

Unfortunately, they (British) found a community having a land dispute with neighbors and they went in to exploit the situation. They went to the community leader and armed the community, promising them more guns, gunpowder, mirror, knives, cloth, and beads, in exchange for any prisoner of war- POW they catch in the war. The simple land dispute that would normally have been resolved between two neighboring communities escalated into war. Prisoners of war were caught as expected and the British handcuffed them, loaded them into their ships, and made their first Atlantic journey with Africans as slaves. That was how it all began.

Soon the French heard of British success, and they came and did the same. Eventually, it became a model and a strategy for obtaining free laborers from Africa. WAR!. That's why you'll never hear of refugees in all the wars they wages against Africans.

Europeans henceforth began pitching neighboring African communities against one another by exploiting land disputes to cause war between communities. They’ll promise to support one community to fight their enemy. They'll then supply gun, gunpowder, and axe that we didn't have. We didn't evolve building weapons because we didn't fight one another on the scale of what was known to be war in Europe then. They were supplying us guns that we didn’t have, and we didn’t have guns because we were not fighting before. Get it?.

White people are still supplying arms and ammunition to warring nations today!. True or false? They are still directly or indirectly responsible for wars happening in any country in the world today!.

Gradually, war descended all over Africa, and Europeans kept empowering each warring community to capture people as prisoners of war (POW). Within a short while, prisoners started pilling; from tens to hundreds to thousands. If it happened today, they would have been called refugees. But the refugees were automatically taken into slavery. The slaves that are said to have been bought from Africa were prisoners of war who would be shipped directly to the Americas. Nobody was bought and paid for as popularly held in European accounts. If we sold slaves to white men for over 400 years, we would have been wealthier than Europe and America combined!!.

Proof of wars caused by Europeans hunting for slaves across Africa. 

Wars caused by Europeans in Africa are probably over 2,000. Most have been erased from the history books. Below are very few I could lay my hands on. Please, pay attention to the dates.

 Slave hunting wars in Benin, Burkina, Cameroon, Ivory Coast. Before the coming of the Europeans, these nations had no history of wars, unless simple border disputes, which were always resolved peacefully.

Slave hunting wars in Lesotho, Mozambique, Malawi, Namibia. Before the coming of the Europeans, these nations had no history of wars, unless simple border disputes, which were always resolved peacefully.

 Slave hunting wars in Central Africa, DRC, Congo. Before the coming of the Europeans, these nations had no history of wars, unless simple border disputes, which were always resolved peacefully.

 Slave hunting wars in Ghana. Before the coming of the Europeans, there was no history of wars, unless simple border disputes, which were always resolved peacefully.

Slave hunting wars in Madagascar, Eritrea, Mauritius. Before the coming of the Europeans, these nations had no history of wars, unless simple border disputes, which were always resolved peacefully.

Slave hunting wars  in Zambia. Before the coming of Europeans there were no history of wars, unless simple border disputes, which were always resolved peacefully.

Slave hunting wars in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Swaziland. Before the coming of the Europeans, these nations had no history of wars, unless simple border disputes, which were always resolved peacefully.

Slave hunting wars in Nigeria, Sierra Leon, Niger. Before the coming of the Europeans, these nations had no history of wars, unless simple border disputes, which were always resolved peacefully.

The above wars are just to name a few that are published. There’re literally thousands of slave hunting wars deleted from the history books.

As you can see, Europeans set Africa on fire. They destroyed culture, they destroyed language, they destroyed traditions, and they took so many innocent lives. They’re highly uncivilized and lack decorum.

Over the years, they intimidated and coerced more kings and elites to turn against the African people in exchange for gifts and protection. Therefore, more weapons and gifts (wine, cloth, sugar, mirror, cloth) would be supplied to the kings and elites to encourage young men to go to war with their neighbors so they could capture more prisoners of war. More wars meant more POWs and more POWs meant more slaves. Get it?

Security was promised to co-operating communities, their kings and elites were also promised more gifts. And if they refused they'll be blackmailed into doing their bidding by sheer threats like not providing them arms to protect themselves or getting your neighboring community to invade you. This strategy is still being used today and has consummated into what I call ''elite brainwashing" whereby western nations get our elites to serve western interests in various African countries, even if it's at the detriment of an African nation.

Nobody was paid a dime!. Otherwise, let me know what currency they paid. 

In conclusion

Eventually, the whole of Africa turned into a war zone and took a life of its own, whereby one community always found themselves perpetually needing more and more arms to fight off invaders. Trust was gone between neighbors and everybody became every other person’s enemy.

From then on, development was not only stagnated but we began to UNDERDEVELOP. From then on, development turned anti-clockwise and we started going backward.

The relationships, culture, trade, and harmony between ethnic nationalities which were built over thousands or possibly millions of years, died. Once peaceful neighbors began warring amongst themselves aimlessly. While the wars were going on, Europeans kept reaping prisoners of war- POW for export to the Americas.

Over 20 million people died in the wars, over 120 million were injured, and almost the entire African population, then about 350 million were displaced. No place was safe in Africa, and they pursued us no matter what direction we ran to.

We became conquered and were no longer in charge of our destiny. Instead, of developing our lands, African natural and human resources were being used to develop Europe and the Americas. Therefore, we lost steam and were thrown into total darkness as a people for over 400 years!. But, within this same 400 years, Europe entered the age of technology and the industrial revolution, all made possible by the exploitation of Africa. Trains were built, cars built, advance in physics, chemistry, biology, e.t.c happened within this period, but sadly Africa was never a part of this technological revolution. Just imagine a people without a single development for 400 years!.

The only thing we got is still standing there today and it's the point of no return memorial structures dotted along the sea shores all over West Africa. These were the place the slaves were boarded to European ships.

Slave point of no return- Badagri, Nigeria

Slave point of no return- Benin republic

Slave point of no return- Ghana

Slave point of no return- Sierra Leone

Slave point of no return- Senegal

The above structures are the only physical proof here in Africa that shows slavery happened. Without these and also the black populations in the Americas, white people would've denied slavery happened at all!. 

The African people didn't even know what white people were doing with the slaves. The African people couldn't figure out the fate of the slaves. According to the records of Mungo Park, when he arrived Africa and acquired some slaves, he said: ''the slaves from Mali were all very inquisitive, but they viewed me at first with looks of horror, and repeatedly asked if my countrymen were cannibals. They were very desirous to know what became of the slaves after they had crossed the salt water. I told them that they were employed in cultivating the land, but they would not believe me.''

Nobody knew the slaves were used as free labor in the Americas. It was thought that white people ate them and that the slaves were cooked for meat. So, the fear was for you not to be caught so you wouldn't be used as meat. Nobody in Africa knew slaves meant money! In fact, the so called "sold" slaves, like Oluadah Equiano, who survived slavery and told his story in a book, used words, such as "I was captured" while on an errand for my mother. Others said "I was kidnapped" on the way. No survivor ever said I was sold. None......Zero.

Has anything changed?

Not really, because, before leaving, the British and French were also able to install a brainwashing model of education in Africa that creates elites who perpetually act as a conduit for further exploitation. This being made possible because this education doesn't allow us to question their theories about anything, therefore, we cannot be truly independent. And, that's why it creates an intellectual servitude called intellectual slavery (a new form of slavery) which creates; destruction of language, destruction of culture, poverty, educated fools.

As a result, you have people like the Emir of Kano, Lamido Muhammad II, telling you the Fulanis and Hausas has always been fighting and killing each other since time immemorial, and that it took the British to save us. This is the version western education has condemned him to believe and he by default lacks the ability to question that theory. He has no idea ethnic wars in Africa were either caused by Europeans or Arabs as a method of sourcing slaves- prisoners of wars (POWs). He has no idea the so-called "saving us" was a pretext to ruin us.

African elites are still part of our problem today (maybe not all of them) and still partner with white people to ruin us, not understanding they always have a game plan to exploit the African people.

This is Africa's richest man Dangote introducing a US businessman directly to our senate president when the man is neither a government official nor on an official invitation to address members of the Nigerian Senate. He just walked directly to our government house because he can offer the modern "guns, mirror, beads, wine, cloth". But, this is not doable in their own country. Dangote would never be able to have access to the US Senate president this way, unless on an official invitation by the US Senate.

This’s IMF chief Ms. Christine Lagarde in Nigeria to position her organization as a loan shark because she heard the Nigerian economy is in trouble. Therefore, the opportunity must be exploited immediately. Her loan is nothing but the new "guns, mirror, beads, wine, cloth".

The IMF and World Bank, like undertakers, are only your friend when you have a burial. All they’re interested in is to help you bury your loved ones.

After 400 years of slavery and 70 years of colonialism, Africans have not learned their lesson. This’s Mr. Tony Blair advising a group of dumb Nigerian governors. Yes, you must be really dumb to have to still be taking instruction from Britain after independence in 1960!. His advice is only the modern "guns, mirror, beads, wine, cloth".

Remember, Tony Blair is not a government official. If we're truly independent and in our right state of mind, he'll have no capacity whatsoever to directly access our government. But, here he is still representing the interest of the queen in 2016!.

It’s still African people being exploited!, African people have not realized there's a great game going on!!.

Nothing has changed really, just the method.

Related articles (must read): 

Why Europeans were able to conquer Africa and the rest of the world

European crimes in Africa during colonialism- European crimes caught on camera during colonization of Africa

Top 10 Africans & African-American scholars of black history you should know

Africason

Africason is a die-hard believer in Africa.

Twitter: @African_School

Facebook: facebook.com/AfricanSchool