Atlantic slave trade... But with europeans?

Rafael stahl

The more I think about the slave trade the more I think it doesn't make sense. Why would you go to sub-saharan Africa, a continent so dangerous that the life expectancy for whites was 1 year if you have northern Africa? It's closer, they already have some experience with slavery, and they are also resistant to tropical diseases.
Also, why didn't they enslave Europeans? I know that there were European slaves in Russia and the ottoman empire, why not enslave them?
Share your opinions down below, if you think that that's possible, and tell me what would change if they used Caucasian slaves (if anything would change at all)
 

Dan Handsome

West Africa is literally on the Atlantic and closer to the America's. Slavery in North Africa existed and to a much lesser degree in Europe, but you can't just run around all willy nilly going on slave raids in Russia or the Ottoman Empire, not to mention the heavy logistics of getting people from Russia to the America's when West Africa was right there. West African slaves, I'm sure, were much less expensive as there was less competition and more slaves. As for Europe, there was wide spread slave trade in Europe like there was in Africa.
 
RedKing

RedKing

Well if a Kingdom tried to use fellow europeans as slaves and assuming those slaves were christian the ruler would be excommunicated
 

The Tai-Pan

Rafael stahl said:
Yeah, but I mean real slavery, like the one that happened in otl
Click to expand...

Africans are on the way, part of an integrated Atlantic trade network, are happily non-Christian, and are skilled in tropical agriculture. And of course, the biggest thing. African kings were willing to sell fellow Africans into slavery. Not the case in other places, not to the same degree (for the right prices).
 

Rafael stahl

Dan Handsome said:
West Africa is literally on the Atlantic and closer to the America's. Slavery in North Africa existed and to a much lesser degree in Europe, but you can't just run around all willy nilly going on slave raids in Russia or the Ottoman Empire, not to mention the heavy logistics of getting people from Russia to the America's when West Africa was right there. West African slaves, I'm sure, were much less expensive as there was less competition and more slaves. As for Europe, there was wide spread slave trade in Europe like there was in Africa.
Click to expand...
Most Europeans didn't go in slave raids when they wanted to get slaves, most of them negotiated with the kingdoms in the area for slaves. The only exception are the Portuguese. So I guess the Russian and ottoman governments could sell some slaves to make an extra cash, since they were at war all the time.
Also, don't the boats already come from Europe? So it's easier to make a trip from London to st. Petersburg to new York than to go to west Africa
 
Last edited:

Rafael stahl

The Tai-Pan said:
Africans are on the way, part of an integrated Atlantic trade network, are happily non-Christian, and are skilled in tropical agriculture. And of course, the biggest thing. African kings were willing to sell fellow Africans into slavery. Not the case in other places, not to the same degree (for the right prices
Click to expand...
North Africans are also non-christians, and I doubt African slaves knew how to grow crops like sugar or tobacco, since they were from different continents. So even they needed to learn how to grow crops, so could the north africans
 

The Tai-Pan

Rafael stahl said:
North Africans are also non-christians, and I doubt African slaves knew how to grow crops like sugar or tobacco, since they were from different continents. So even they needed to learn how to grow crops, so could the north africans
Click to expand...

In this period, Europeans were paying North Africans to not enslave them.
 
Lusitania

Lusitania

Donor
Rafael stahl said:
Well if you had stronger Spain they could reverse that situation
Click to expand...
The corsairs or north African were attacking coastal towns and villages till the early 19th century. They attacked along European coasts and captured slaves to sell in North Africa. I am right they could not attack and capture Muslims because Islam prevented it. The Muslim north African also paid slavers for West Africans. The slavers had been raiding the coastal tribes for centuries for slaves. The arrival of the Portuguese and then rest of Europe changed the West African slavery trade with the coastal tribes raiding the interior for slaves to sell to the Europeans.

So neither the Christians nor Muslims enslaved people of their own religion.
 

Help

Also if I'm not mistaken, Africans were more used to the heat in tropical regions. Seeing how that is where the sugarcane grows, there is an economic incentive to enslave blacks instead of Europeans.
 

Rafael stahl

Lusitania said:
The corsairs or north African were attacking coastal towns and villages till the early 19th century. They attacked along European coasts and captured slaves to sell in North Africa. I am right they could not attack and capture Muslims because Islam prevented it. The Muslim north African also paid slavers for West Africans. The slavers had been raiding the coastal tribes for centuries for slaves. The arrival of the Portuguese and then rest of Europe changed the West African slavery trade with the coastal tribes raiding the interior for slaves to sell to the Europeans.

So neither the Christians nor Muslims enslaved people of their own religion.
Click to expand...
What I'm saying is that if the Spanish had a strong navy in the Mediterranean, they could not only prevent attacks by maghrebis, but could raid them and enslave them. also, I remember some story they told me on my school (I'm Brazilian btw) they told me that some tribes in Congo converted to Christianity but we're still enslaved. I guess Europeans stopped caring about the rule of not enslaving of your own religion in the 1600s
 
9 Fanged Hummingbird

9 Fanged Hummingbird

Rafael stahl said:
Most Europeans didn't go in slave raids when they wanted to get slaves, most of them negotiated with the kingdoms in the area for slaves. The only exception are the Portuguese. So I guess the Russian and ottoman governments could sell some slaves to make an extra cash, since they were at war all the time.
Also, don't the boats already come from Europe? So it's easier to make a trip from London to st. Petersburg to new York than to go to west Africa
Click to expand...
Is it though? St Peterburg is way off to the east, you're backtracking to get back to the Atlantic from there and adding more time to the trip. London or Lisbon to Wydah wasn't an onerous journey and from there to Havana or Brazil wasn't tedious either. The Triangle Trade made a lot more sense than the Zig-Zag-ish Trade.
 

Rafael stahl

Help said:
Also if I'm not mistaken, Africans were more used to the heat in tropical regions. Seeing how that is where the sugarcane grows, there is an economic incentive to enslave blacks instead of Europeans.
Click to expand...
But heat is a fairly minor problem. In the begining you may not be used to it, but after som 3-4 years, you adapt to it. More important is a place where rain patterns are similar, since that's the most important part in growing crops, and northern Africa has a very similar pattern to northeastern Brazil
 

Help

Rafael stahl said:
But heat is a fairly minor problem. In the begining you may not be used to it, but after som 3-4 years, you adapt to it. More important is a place where rain patterns are similar, since that's the most important part in growing crops, and northern Africa has a very similar pattern to northeastern Brazil
Click to expand...
The issue may have been with disease then? Thanks for the correction.
 

Rafael stahl

9 Fanged Hummingbird said:
Is it though? St Peterburg is way off to the east, you're backtracking to get back to the Atlantic from there and adding more time to the trip. London or Lisbon to Wydah wasn't an onerous journey and from there to Havana or Brazil wasn't tedious either. The Triangle Trade made a lot more sense than the Zig-Zag-ish Trade.
Click to expand...
But isn't the northern sea more navigable than the Atlantic? The English had been sailing those waters since medieval times do I assume they had more knowledge of the area. I think the Portuguese would also be the exception because they were the only one that really knew how to navigate the Atlantic. So for the Portuguese it makes sense but for the others it's better to just get their slaves from Muslims or russians
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top