Showing posts with label U.K.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label U.K.. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

The Slavery Essays - Part I: U.K.'s 200th anniversary of the abolition of the Slave Trade Act 1807

The Slave Market by Gustave Boulanger ca. 1888


The Introduction

I always find it difficult to talk or write about slavery in the New World and the Atlantic World as it has such a powerful legacy in my own country, the United States of America, as well as the whole of the Americas (North and South), and of course my own family. There have been so many myths and lies and half-truths regarding the enslavement of black Africans in the former European colonies of the Americas that it is no wonder that many Americans (North and South) and Europeans and the rest of the world spend their whole lives in ignorance and denial about the grim legacy of the transatlantic slave trade and the impact it has had on all of our respective societies.

I welcome the effort being made by the U.K. to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the Slave Trade Act (1807) as it helps to bring out into the open a public discussion and recognition of the role that various people and entities played in this most despicable of human endeavors AND the commemoration helps to remind us all that the legacy of slavery is still with us in so many ways today, especially when you stop to think that there are more people enslaved today in 2007 than has ever been in human history. In other words, we all have a burden of great shame to bear in regards to the subject of slavery, one of the most ancient and enduring atrocities in the human experience and world history.

So, hats off to U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair and many others in the U.K. who have put such a great effort into making this 200 anniversary commemoration a memorable event for many of us and to use it as a Call to Action for people everywhere to become more engaged in helping to end modern-day slavery.

One thing that our team project on the history of blacks and Africans in Europe has helped me to understand is that one cannot go through life using tragic events caused by the acts of contemptible personalities in history like a blunt weapon to bludgeon one’s so-called enemies into submission or death. People are going to believe what is comfortable for them to believe and ignore and deny everything else, no matter how much truth another opinion or indisputable factual evidence you present, everything else will be rejected___ oft times violently rejected as we clearly see everyday on our televisions and read about in the press. History, religion, literature, and the media (news, entertainment) has been so abused and misused by people seeking power over others down through the ages to grossly mislead people and pit one idiot group against another that it is absolutely awful.

Slavery and abolition played a pivotal role in the history of my home, Saint Louis, Missouri and the surrounding tri-State region (Kansas, Illinois, Iowa: see Bleeding Kansas era before the American Civil War). Slavery not only affected black Africans but also the indigenous tribes of the region (also see Mississippian culture and Cahokia) and the European settlers who entered this frontier around 1699 in search of land and gold and animal furs; escaping the misery that they had left behind in Europe. If my African-American ancestors who had arrived at the confluence of the great Mississippi and Missouri rivers in 1790 had decided to crossover to the Missouri side and settle in the bustling frontier outposts of what would later become Saint Louis, they probably would have lost their hard won freedom. I presume that they were freed from bondage shortly before or after the American Revolutionary War with England, 1775-1783.

Note: Although the early history of European presence in the area starts with the expeditions of Louis Joliet and Jacques Marquette (1673), the first settlement at what is today Saint Louis, MO. didn’t begin until almost 100 years later with the arrival of Pierre Laclède and his 13-year old stepson René Auguste Chouteau and a group of 30 men in 1763. These territories were actually controlled by the Spanish royal court (a particularly brutal and murderous government for black African slaves in the colonies) but after the end of the French - Indian War (1754-1763) and the 1763 Treaty of Paris that gave all lands east of the Mississippi river to England the small settlement of Saint Louis began to grow rapidly. By the time my early American ancestors showed up in the area the settlement of St. Louis had grown to the enormous size of approximately 1000 people. Massive!

Napoléan Bonaparte, who worked out a deal with President Thomas Jefferson and the U.S. government administration of 1801 to purchase the vast Louisiana Territory had re-introduced black slavery into the French colonies and territories in 1803. For more on the history of St. Louis click here and here ( also see: history and heritage of Missouri including St. Louis).

As a young man growing up in St. Louis, Missouri I had the privilege to know and be close friends with an old southern couple, Mr. and Mrs. Wofford, who hailed from the great State of Mississippi. Mr. Wofford had worked as a black sharecropper (a farmer without land) in rural Mississippi if I remember correctly, and he and his wife would spend hours talking with their lovely grand daughter and me about life in the early 20th Century rural South. We affectionately addressed them as “Big Mama” and “Big Papa”, an expression used by many people of the southern United States of that time to describe a grandparent. Big Mama was a very pretty petite woman and Big Papa was a strapping, strong man of about six feet (1.85 meters) in height.

I can clearly picture Big Mama rocking back and forth in her favorite chair on their front porch (veranda) during a warm summer evening while enjoying a chew of tobacco or pinch of snuff discreetly lodged in her cheek explaining to us “citified youngsters” what slavery and post-Civil War America was like for black folks and white folks alike. She recalled stories that had been handed down to them from their own grandparents and relatives and older friends, many who had labored the great majority of their lives as slaves in America’s Deep South. I learned everything I needed to know about “slavery and forgiveness” from these two beautiful people who helped to shape my own life in such a powerful way. Of course I have learned even more about the horrible institution of human slavery since my youth, and although I have been able to improve and expand my knowledge on Big Mama’s lessons about slavery, I struggle to this very day with the “forgiveness” part. Can’t do it, forgive whom? They all dead, those who dunnit, aren’t they? Non?

So, I’ve come up with a few brief essays for the 200th Anniversary of the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act in the U.K. and I am dedicating this humble effort to the memory of Mr. and Mrs. Wofford, who have both passed away from us. Big Mama would be tinkled pink that the British are struggling to come to terms with this terrible legacy in their history, and I can imagine that she would be mighty proud that her “adopted grandson” would speak out with a message from the Colonies. Big Mama’s own message for the citizens of the United Kingdom and the world would be quite simple and to the point:

“Look into the mirror of your history and face up to the Truth, then get on with your lives and make sure you don’t behave as bad as those lost souls who came before you.”


The “Jewels in the Jungle” Essay on Slavery – Part I

It has not escaped my attention while researching information necessary to compose the articles and posts for our Black History in Europe project that slavery has played a key role in the lives of Africans and Europeans alike for hundreds of years. Dr. Kate Lowe, co-editor with T.F. Earle of Black Africans in Renaissance Europe (Cambridge, 2005) has eloquently written about the complexity of problems surrounding this sad legacy of European history in the introduction to her book. There were many, many people involved from several nations, races and religions. Attempting to place blame on any one race of people or nation would be a terrible mistake in my opinion and an injustice to all the people who have suffered under the misery of human enslavement down through the ages. This scourge of human suffering has been with us for several millennia and practically all human beings have been affected by slavery in some way or another. Slavery is not a black & white thing and it never was…
it has affected humans on the Earth from the time that our first ancestors raided neighboring villages in war and conflict and enslaved the survivors who were probably women and children. We are talking about 10’s of thousands of years ago (see National Geographic magazine’s special feature The Human Journey, Human Origins March 2006 issue). Slavery has been around for a very long time!

The glorious empires of the Antiquity, those of the Eastern world and the Middle East, of Africa (Nubia and Kush, Egypt, Ethiopia and the Land of Punt, Mali and the kingdoms of the Sahel, the Kingdom of Kongo, Great Zimbabwe), the Western world with the Greek and Roman empires and the ancient peoples of the Americas, all of these great periods in human history were overshadowed by the brutal and inhuman practice of slavery.

That’s why it was so strange for me to see in a BBC News article a photo of U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair apologizing to the President of Ghana, John Kufuor, for Britain’s role in the transatlantic slave trade. That’s why it was so confusing to hear the newly elected Archbishop of York, Dr. John Sentamu, himself an African by birth, demanding that the U.K. Government make a clear and formal apology for slavery. Should it not be that the governments of Ghana, Nigeria, Benin, Niger, Mali, Congo, Tanzania, Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, Libya, Egypt, Sudan, and many other African nations also be making an apology to the descendents of the transatlantic and the trans-Sahara and trans-Sahel and Indian Ocean and Arab slave trades? I mean let’s make this an equal opportunity deal here and not leave any nation out that was deeply, deeply involved.

The Ashanti kings of the Gold Coast of West Africa and kings and rulers of several African countries (Saharan and sub-Saharan) did not stop the wicked trade of human beings for sale to Europeans and Arabs until the beginning of the 20th Century. Hell, the trade in slaves from Africa has never stopped and continues right up to this very day! So let’s lighten up on demands for apologies because the way I see it, everybody is guilty in some way or another. If you need an apology from someone, go look into the mirror and pray, “Lord, I sure am sorry for (conciously or unconsciously) supporting and/or ignoring modern-day slavery”.

I know that some folks reading this will feel insulted and that’s fine. Be insulted. You should be insulted especially if you can’t accept that the few facts listed below are just the “tip of the iceberg” in regards to Africa’s own involvement in the peculiar institution of human slavery


Source: The Story of Africa – Slavery - BBC World Service website and radio program. A history of the continent from an African perspective (authored by African writers and historians).

Growing Rich with Slavery

Royalty

In the early 18th century, Kings of Dahomey (known today as Benin) became big players in the slave trade, waging a bitter war on their neighbours, resulting in the capture of 10,000 [slaves], including another important slave trader, the King of Whydah. King Tegbesu made £250,000 a year selling people into slavery in 1750. King Gezo said in the 1840's he would do anything the British wanted him to do apart from giving up slave trade:

"The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth…the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…"

LIVING WITNESS
Some of the descendants of African traders are alive today. Mohammed Ibrahim Babatu is the great great grandson of Baba-ato (also known as Babatu), the famous Muslim slave trader, who was born in Niger and conducted his slave raids in Northern Ghana in the 1880's. Mohammed Ibrahim Babatu, the deputy head teacher of a Junior secondary school in Yendi, lives in Ghana.

"In our curriculum, we teach a little part of the history of our land. Because some of the children ask questions about the past history of our grandfather Babatu.

Babatu, and others, didn't see anything wrong with slavery. They didn't have any knowledge of what the people were used for. They were only aware that some of the slaves would serve others of the royal families within the sub-region.

He has done a great deal of harm to the people of Africa. I have studied history and I know the effect of slavery.

I have seen that the slave raids did harm to Africa, but some members of our family feel he was ignorant…we feel that what he did was fine, because it has given the family a great fame within the Dagomba society.

He gave some of the slaves to the Dagombas and then he sent the rest of the slaves to the Salaga market. He didn't know they were going to plantations…he was ignorant…"

SONGHAY
The young Moroccan traveler and commentator, Leo Africanus, was amazed at the wealth and quantity of slaves to be found in Gao, the capital of Songhay [Songhay empire], which he visited in 1510 and 1513 when the empire was at the height of its power under Askiya Mohammed.

"...here there is a certain place where slaves are sold, especially on those days when the merchants are assembled. And a young slave of fifteen years of age is sold for six ducats, and children are also sold. The king of this region has a certain private palace where he maintains a great number of concubines and slaves."

SWAHILI
The ruling class of coastal Swahili society - Sultans, government officials and wealthy merchants - used non-Muslim slaves as domestic servants and to work on farms and estates. The craftsmen, artisans and clerks tended to be Muslim and freed men. But the divisions between the different classes were often very flexible. The powerful slave and ivory trader Tippu Tip was the grandson of a slave.

The Omani Sultan, Seyyid Said, became immensely rich when he started up cloves plantations in 1820 with slave labour - so successful was he that he moved the Omani capital to Zanzibar in 1840.
Note: see additional information about the Omani African slave trade on Zanzibar below

PUNISHED FOR KEEPING SLAVES
The Asanti (the capital, Kumasi, is in modern Ghana) had a long tradition of domestic slavery. But gold was the main commodity for selling. With the arrival of Europeans the slaves displaced gold as the main commodity for trade. As late as 1895 the British Colonial Office was not concerned by this.

"It would be a mistake to frighten the King of Kumasi and the Ashantis generally on the question of slavery. We cannot sweep away their customs and institutions all at once. Domestic slavery should not be troubled at present."

British attitudes changed when the King of the Asanti (the Asantehene) resisted British colonial authority. The suppression of the slave trade became a justification for the extension of European power. With the humiliation and exile of King Prempeh I in 1896, the Asanti were placed under the authority of the Governor of the Gold Coast and forced therefore to conform to British law and abolish the slave trade.

SLAVERY DECREED BY THE GODS
In 1807, Britain declared all slave trading illegal. The king of Bonny (in what is now the Nigerian delta) was dismayed at the conclusion of the practice.

"We think this trade must go on. That is the verdict of our oracle and the priests. They say that your country, however great, can never stop a trade ordained by God himself."

End of BBC World Service Story of Africa excerpt


Source: HMS Surprise – documents and diary of the 19th Century British Royal Navy surgeon William Loney by Peter Davies

Excerpts from the Frere Mission to Zanzibar (1872)

Early history of Zanzibar

Round 1500 Portugal gained control of Zanzibar and most of the East African coast. In 1698 Arabs from Oman ousted the Portuguese. In 1792 Britain signed a treaty with the Sultan of Muscat providing British protection for Zanzibar in exchange for Omani support against any French thrust via Oman towards India. So started a gradual British involvement in Zanzibar affairs.

The Omani arabs only started to take a serious interest in Zanzibar, when Sayyid ("Lord") Said, Sultan of Muscat since 1804 (family tree), encouraged merchants to trade with, or move to, the island, and to expand into mainland Africa. In 1840 he moved his capital from Muscat to Zanzibar, where he presided over a flourishing trading empire….

The Zanzibar slave trade

The slave trade from Zanzibar had started soon after the Arab conquest, initially for the date plantations in Arabia. Although slaves were also supplied to Persian and India, it was the establishment of sugar and clove plantations in Mauritius and Reunion in the 18th century which led to the greatest development of the trade.

In 1811, just four years after Britain had abolished slavery, Said opened the Great Slave Market in Zanzibar; a year later he introduced cloves to the island, generating a significant need for slaves on the island itself. In 1822, the Sultan's dependence on British naval strength allowed Governor Sir Robert Townsend Farquhar of Mauritius (which under French rule had been a primary destination of slavers from Zanzibar) to send Captain Fairfax Moresby, senior officer at that island, in the Menai to conclude a treaty limiting the slave traffic to the Sultans own (East African and Arabic) dominions, and forbidding any trade of slaves to Christians. A later treaty, effective from 1847, and negotiated in 1845 by Colonel Atkins Hammerton (appointed as the first British Consul at Zanzibar in 1841) further limited - in theory - the traffic from Zanzibar to the Sultan's African dominions between Lamu in the north and Kilwa in the south.

Prevention of incursion by other European powers was the initial reason for a British naval presence on the East African coast. To this were later added protection of British traders, and suppression of the slave trade. This last factor only became prominent round 1860, when the Foreign Office requesting a ship permanently on the station for that purpose. Lack of knowledge about the trade, and a desire not to offend Britain's ally, the Sultan, were responsible for the later development of the anti-slavery issue on the East coast than on the West coast. The explorations of David Livingstone, Richard Burton and John Speke increased the interest of the British public in the area.

The small number of British cruisers on the station, and the fact that large numbers of comparatively small dhows were involved in the slave trade, meant that much of the navy's patrol work had to be done in ships boats, often working independently for days on end.

Poor communications with home, and lack of explicit instructions from the Admiralty, meant that the ship's commanders had to decide how to proceed in individual cases; destruction of captured dhows on the spot was often considered to be the only viable alternative. Protest against this procedure led in 1869 to the giving of full powers of adjudication to the Vice-Admiralty Court at Zanzibar (established in 1866, then only for slavers captured within the Sultans dominions), to which all captures had then to be taken, and to "clarification" of the general instructions to the commanders on the station (often irrelevant, being based on those for the West African station), which in fact only made them more unclear. These aspects, together with the small number of ships on the station (generally not more than two; see for example Cumming's report for 1872) meant that the navy's impact on the slave trade was minimal.

End excerpts from the HMS Surprise – Frere Mission to Zanzibar


My good friend Reza, an Iranian exile who has lived here in Germany for almost 30 years and I have been discussing this Black History in Europe project for weeks now with great fervor and interest and excitement. Reza often reminds me as he describes the ancient history of his own beloved country Iran that it was the famous Persian king Cyrus II (ca. 576-530 BC) of the Achaemenid Empire (559– 330 BC) that first forbid slavery in his empire, making him one of the first slavery abolitionists in history.

I can hear my friend Reza now as I write this article, “Kurush (Cyrus), my King, said to all of the people of ancient Persia:
“In my land there will be no slavery, slavery is verboten! All people are welcome in my kingdom. All religions are welcome in my kingdom, for I am Kurush the Great, the king of kings
.””

An excerpt from Wikipedia about Cyrus II (Cyrus the Great):

During his reign, Cyrus maintained control over a vast region of conquered kingdoms, achieved partly through retaining and expanding Median satrapies. Further organization of newly conquered territories into provinces ruled by vassal kings called satraps, was continued by Cyrus' successor Darius the Great. Cyrus' empire demanded only tribute and conscripts from many parts of the realm.

Cyrus' conquests began a new era in the age of empire building, where a vast superstate, comprising many dozens of countries, races, religions, and languages, were ruled under a single administration headed by a central government. This system lasted for centuries, and was retained both by the invading Seleucid dynasty during their control of Persia, and later Iranian dynasties including the Persian Parthians and Sassanids.

In 1992, he was ranked #87 on Michael H. Hart's list of the most influential figures in history. On December 10, 2003, in her acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize, Shirin Ebadi evoked Cyrus, saying:

I am an Iranian, a descendant of Cyrus the Great. This emperor proclaimed at the pinnacle of power 2,500 years ago that he 'would not reign over the people if they did not wish it.' He promised not to force any person to change his religion and faith and guaranteed freedom for all. The Charter of Cyrus the Great should be studied in the history of human rights.


End excerpts from Wikipedia on Cyrus the Great

The Slavery Essays - Part II coming soon


Technorati tags:

Thursday, March 22, 2007

African History in Europe: Blacks in the Renaissance - Part II

Portrait of an African Man by Jan Mostaert (ca. 1520-1530)

The web analytics software used to monitor traffic on Jewels in the Jungle helps me to understand that our (introductory) series on the history of Africans and blacks in Europe has attracted a lot of attention in the blogosphere and in the traditional Worldwide Web. Again our project team is very pleased with your interest and we welcome any new visitors.

At the moment I am working (my rear end off) on a new post for the project submitted by Patricia (auf Deutsch-in German) as well as preparing a post for the commemoration of the 200th Anniversary of the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act in the U.K., which many of you may have been reading about in the news online or watching on television. The main events commemorating the abolition of slavery in Britain start on March 25th so I am under a tight self-imposed deadline to be ready on time.

Therefore I shall break with the tradition of “embellishing” the work of writers and contributors of content that we have highlighted so far in our Black History in Europe series and publish á la carte the writing of Dr. Kate Lowe of Queens College London as she introduces the reader to the wonderful book Black Africans in Renaissance Europe. Note that you can use Google Book Search to explore several chapters of this book online or better yet, cough up the $110.00 bucks to purchase this treasure. That’s what I intend to do as soon as I can save that much money. “Hey brother, can you spare a dime so that I can buy a good book? Non? Schade.”

Please do read the other articles in this series starting with the February 1st article “Black History in Europe? An Introduction to the Invisible Ones” and then work your way forward to the previous post “African History in Europe: Blacks in the Renaissance - Part I”. Use links provided in the Previous Posts section of this blog to find all posts (articles) listed in chronological order for this special group project. Don't miss the articles at our project partner blog the Atlantic Review including Jörg Wolf's latest update post Black History Month in Europe continues.


T. F. Earle and K. J. P. Lowe, eds. Black Africans in Renaissance Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 434 pp. Index. $110.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-521-81582-6.


Introduction: The Black African Presence in Renaissance Europe
by Dr. Kate J.P. Lowe

The origins of this volume lie in my previous edited volume on Cultural Links between Portugal and Italy in the Renaissance (Oxford, 2000). While writing the introduction to that book, I thought I should include a few sentences on black Africans in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Lisbon, and in the course of preliminary reading (some of which was kindly suggested by Annemarie Jordan), I realised that Lisbon was the tip of the iceberg as far as Europe as a whole was concerned, and that little work had been done on the subject anywhere (one notable exception in English is A. C. de C. M. Saunders, A Social History of Black Slaves and Freedmen in Portugal, 1441–1555 (Cambridge, 1982), which was presciently ahead of its time). It was with this in mind that I conceived of the idea of a conference that tried to look at the subject from the vantage points of several European countries, and from differing interdisciplinary perspectives, and invited Tom Earle to join me as co-organiser, in order to have complementary specialisms on Renaissance Italian history and Renaissance Portuguese literature. The conference took place at St Peter’s College, Oxford in September 2001, with 18 speakers, 5 each from the UK and the US, and 8 from mainland Europe. The range of disciplines centred on history, with 3 ‘ordinary’ historians, 1 economic historian, 1 church historian and 2 cultural historians, but also included 3 art historians, 1 museum curator, 2 social anthropologists and 3 literature specialists. It is worth noting that although we were all Renaissance scholars, only some of the participants, notably Jorge Fonseca, Paul Kaplan, Aurelia Martín Casares, Didier Lahon and Baltasar Fra-Molinero, had been working and publishing on various aspects of the European history of black Africans for years, whereas others (including me) were relative newcomers to the field. The conference proved eye-opening in terms of the cross-country connections that could be made as well as in terms of recurrent interdisciplinary themes. We planned an edited volume from the beginning, and in the intervening period the participants have reworked and expanded their papers into chapters.

The present volume therefore concentrates on the greatly overlooked subject of the consequences (mainly for the Africans themselves but also for Europeans) of the introduction of considerable numbers of enslaved sub-Saharan Africans into Europe in the hundred and fifty years succeeding the so-called voyages of discovery, that is in a period very roughly co-terminous with the Renaissance. It is of course absurd to treat black Africans as a homogeneous group in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, just as it is absurd to talk of Europeans in the Renaissance period. These concepts only have value as oppositional or contrasting terms, which is how they are being used here. No such place as a generic ‘black Africa’ existed or exists; Africa was/is a vast continent, full of cultural, social, religious, linguistic and ethnic diversity, and of regional difference. But the process of removing Africans to Europe in the Renaissance period served to rob them of these distinguishing features, taking away their old, nuanced identities and providing them instead with new, one-dimensional European ones by labelling them all as ‘black Africans’. Arrival in Europe as slaves meant the systematic erasure of all the more significant aspects of their past, starting with their names, their languages, their religions, their families and communities, and their cultural practices, but it did not erase their appearance. Hence the use of the term ‘black Africans’ and, in order to maintain parity of terminology, the use of the similarly non-existent construct ‘Renaissance Europeans’.

Although the vast majority of black Africans in Renaissance Europe were slaves, it was perfectly possible for sub-Saharan Africans not to be slaves in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe, and significant exceptions to the rule were African ambassadors and Ethiopian pilgrims (who benefited from Ethiopian churches and communities at Nicosia and Rome).(1) The possibility of manumission also always existed, and within a few years, the first of these Africans were freed, and communities of freed (but usually poverty-stricken) black Africans lived cheek-by-jowl with the constantly renewed larger numbers of black African slaves. Yet the words Renaissance and sub-Saharan African appear to have no obvious connection; indeed, it could be argued that they stand in almost complete opposition to each other. But the reality may be more complex. For example, while it may be true that (although the Renaissance was a period in which great store was set on literacy) most non-literate, enslaved West Africans transported to Europe received no education and therefore remained non-literate, this volume highlights several sub-Saharan Africans in Renaissance Europe with varying degrees of literacy and literary ability. The chapter by Jordan adverts to a black African who could sign his name, that by Fonseca mentions black Africans who were taught Latin, and those by Fra-Molinero and Earle signal black African writers. It is our intention in this volume to consider this seemingly troubled juxtaposition by examining how the variety and complexity of black African life in Europe between 1440 and 1600 was affected by Renaissance ideas (including firmly held classical and medieval preconceptions relating to the African continent and its inhabitants) and Renaissance conditions. In other words, we want to understand why the reception of black Africans was as it was in Renaissance Europe.

At first glance, it might seem astonishing that the black African presence has been so completely ignored. The reasons for this are manifold, but an absence of material is not one of them. Far from being genuinely invisible, the traces of these fifteenth- and sixteenth-century black Africans can be found in almost every type of record: documentary, textual and visual; secular and ecclesiastical; Northern and Southern European; factual and fictional. The reasons for their perceived invisibility lie elsewhere, in the realities of national politics, in the still-evolving effects of European colonisation and in the straightjacket of fashionable or acceptable historical scholarship. The long history of black African settlement in many parts of Europe was denied for political and racial reasons, and the topic was successfully buried until the end of the twentieth century. So in general and with a few high profile exceptions, although copious material existed, each archival reference or image relating to black Africans in Europe brought into the public domain was treated as an isolated case. The fiction that not much material existed on this topic was aided by the nationalistic practices of European historians. European countries have tended to write their own history or the history of their major cities or areas, and it is very rare for problems to be studied in any depth on a European basis. In any case, non-nationals (or those viewed as outsiders) would not have been included even in national studies. Occasional historical studies that include sections on black Africans in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries have emerged from Portugal (2) and the discrete parts of Spain,(3) the two areas with the largest black populations, but usually in the context of examining slavery in these countries. However, these studies have been against the grain, and indeed until very recently most received little attention, because while the institution of slavery was considered worthy of investigation and analysis – as were slaves as objects – slaves as people were not thought to have enough agency to be suitably valuable research subjects during much of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Certainly in this respect cultural power – the power to define others – was indubitably linked to the political power to dominate, and the continuation and expansion of the European colonisation of Africa in the twentieth century was obviously detrimental to an interest in the study of enslaved sub-Saharan Africans in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe.

Each discipline has its own internal rules and rhythms, and much more research on black Africans in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe has focused on their representation in art and literature than on their historical realities, with Othello and the dramatic representation of Africans,(4) images of the black Magus(5) and Golden Age Spanish literature(6) receiving particular attention. The series of books on The Image of the Black in Western Art, sponsored by the Menil Foundation in Paris,(7) was very influential in flagging avenues that could profitably be explored (and Kaplan and Seelig have written on symbolic representations of black Africans). It is always pleasanter to dwell on those in positions of power than to confront slavery, which is precisely why the phenomenon of European slavery is often played down or obliterated. Politics have intruded here too, because the Fascist pasts of many European countries in the twentieth century (and their concomitant racist views) have precluded or impeded ‘objective’ scholarship for long periods of time. But the connections between these often slightly glamorous representations and real Africans have not been explored at any level. It has not helped that most black Africans who were not slaves were poor, and the poor until relatively recently were also not considered a topic that would respond well to scholarly investigation.

While they are not at all invisible, it cannot be denied that carrying out research on black African individuals in Renaissance Europe does present certain difficulties, mainly related to the combined ‘drawbacks’ of enforced Christianisation, legalised inferiority, fifteenth- and sixteenth-century European inability to appreciate cultural difference, and a preoccupation with differences in skin colour. The most obvious difficulties stem from naming practices. The vast majority of black Africans were renamed at the start of their new lives in Europe, although a small minority managed not to be.(8) When they were baptised, they were given Christian names (usually from a small pool of the commoner saints’ names) (see Jordan, chapter 7, and Tognetti, chapter 9). Many slaves or freed black Africans never graduated to possessing surnames, which also hampers secure identification. Most black Africans were slaves, and consequently were recorded as the possessions of other people. One of the most basic ‘rights’ enjoyed by slave owners was that of naming their slaves, and their naming practices often obfuscate the historical record, for a further tranch of slaves were given exactly the same names, both first names and surnames, as their owners, presumably so that their ownership was in no doubt. When sold to a new owner, they took the new owner’s surname. This practice may have been a precursor to that whereby servants were known by the family surname. The effect was to make it very difficult to distinguish between master and slave in a document except through context. Precisely the same mindset and process were responsible for the naming of the Congolese ‘royal family’ and nobility: when the Manicongo (the Congolese ‘king’) Nzinga Nkuwu and his ‘queen’ were converted to Christianity and baptised in 1491, they took the names of the king and queen of Portugal, D. João and D. Leonor, their children were given other Portuguese royal names, and their relations and chiefs took the names of members of the Portuguese nobility.(9) As well as signalling a hierarchical relationship in Europe, taking or being given an identical name to a patron or owner was obviously construed as a sign of respect to the socially superior party.

Another huge problem in terms of identifying and tracing black Africans arises because most Europeans in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries were completely incapable of distinguishing between different parts and traditions of the African continent. European ignorance of Africa was almost complete, and very few Europeans at this date had ever been to sub-Saharan Africa. To the majority of Europeans, the defining feature of Africans was their skin colour, and nothing else – whether area of origin,(10) religion or previous occupation – mattered, and consequently nothing else was recorded. Without clearly differentiated names and without other identifying markers, descriptions of skin colour take on a paramount importance. However, as stated in the Notes on the text (pp. xv–xvii), the terminology of both outsider status and skin pigmentation was fluid and imprecise, and most of the time it is impossible to find out if the moro discussed (as it were) in a letter in February 1486 is the same person as the nero recorded in a will of 1494. These difficulties are a further reason why research into representations of black Africans (where these difficulties do not exist) is more advanced than studies of their lives.

An informed understanding of the black African presence in Renaissance Europe is vitally important to many cultural and historical narratives for a number of reasons. It is important for Africans and Europeans because it focuses on the moment when significant numbers of black Africans were first transported into Europe, and it is therefore legitimate to search here for the beginnings of individual and institutional prejudice and discrimination, as well as for the beginnings of acceptance of difference, successful assimilation and the first attempts at formulating black perspectives and creating black identities among communities in Europe. It is important for Americans searching for the antecedents of the inhumanity of American and Caribbean plantation slavery. And it is important to everybody, because it is such a crucial, early episode of black African diasporic history.

The four sections of the book correspond to four distinct areas worthy of investigation, but there are many others. It seems more worthwhile to comment on a few themes raised across these sections rather than reiterate individual contributors’ findings. The first question to be addressed (and the most frequently asked question by those outside the field) is whether ‘racism’ in any generally accepted contemporary sense existed in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe, a period in which the modern concept of ‘race’ is not generally believed to have been formulated.(11) As the reader will see, forms of ‘racism’ are discussed by several contributors (notably Lowe, Lawrance, Korhonen, Fonseca, Lahon, Brackett and Earle) and alluded to by several others, and various answers are posited. It is of course not really the right question, because scientific racism (which is the starting point for most modern discussions of racism) was not articulated fully until the nineteenth century, and therefore technically the answer is clearly no. It seems preferable to adopt an approach that does not read the present onto an historical situation but also that does not ignore the fact that there is something very familiar about the scenarios under discussion.

It does however seem clear that African ancestry and possession of a black skin led directly to all sorts of differentiation, prejudice and discrimination, and most of the contributors have signalled their interest in these historical forms of differentiation (evinced for whatever reason and with whatever attempt at justification) between Africans and Europeans. It should be stated immediately that differentiation of various sorts was also commonplace with regard to various other minority groups, often on the basis of religion (e.g. Muslims and Jews) and ethnicity (marginal Europeans such as peoples from around the Black Sea, and other non-Europeans, such as Amerindians and Japanese). There are two points to be made here about differentiation relating to black Africans. The first concerns processes of differentiation, and the second moments of differentiation.

There were two major, defining processes of differentiation for black Africans in Europe at this time. The first was a legal differentiation that had meaning for all new captives transported from sub-Saharan Africa – slave status was enshrined in law across Europe. In most areas, Roman law definitions and restrictions on slave rights and behaviour were already in operation, and were not modified when the changeover from a mostly white slave class to a majority black slave class occurred. However in some countries, for example, in Portugal under King Manuel, new legal codes were introduced aimed specifically at legislating for circumstances arising from the new influx and population of slaves. The royal legislation on slavery enacted between 1481 and 1514 was collected and included in the Ordenações Manuelinas, first published in 1514, with a definitive edition of 1521.(12) Legalised inferiority was therefore a very basic and very potent process of differentiation for black African slaves. A second defining process of differentiation was cultural (it could apply to either enslaved or free Africans), and took place because of European late medieval and (particularly) Renaissance notions of civilisation and barbarism. The European definition of civilisation depended upon an Aristotelian typology for assessing alien people, and dividing them into the civilised and the barbarian. Civilised people could be distinguished from barbarian people on the basis of a number of factors concerning hierarchical structure, social organisation and collective memory, made manifest by the construction of civil society in the guise of the foundation of cities, the establishment and implementation of written laws, the existence of written histories, adherence to rules governing inheritance and the institution of marriage, correct commercial relations and the use of clothes as differing status indicators.(13) In general, this exclusive Aristotelian taxonomy allowed Europe to categorise itself (and its inhabitants) as civilised and Africa (and its inhabitants) as uncivilised, but even when evidence was found in (for example) the Congo of many of these Aristotelian prerequisites, the taxonomy could be ignored and Europeans could still define the Congloese as barbarians. A very immediate and obvious difference that allowed the process of cultural differentiation to be set in train was the difference in skin colour between Europeans and sub-Saharan Africans.

In addition to distinguishing between various processes of differentiation, it is salutary to examine moments of differentiation between black Africans and white Europeans in the Renaissance. Some of the most crippling of these for black Africans were highlighted by formal and informal exclusionary practices. For example, certain formal exclusionary work practices had the force of law, such as guild regulations that sometimes, as in the charter of the goldsmiths of Lisbon, forbade the inclusion of slaves; the charter of the pie-makers of Lisbon, however, banned slaves and free Moriscos but allowed free and Christian black Africans and mulattos to be considered for inclusion.(14) Informal exclusionary practices appear to have been routinely practiced by the Catholic Church, both in relation to sub-Saharan Africans in Africa and to black Africans in Europe, so that in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries there is a dearth of black priests, monks or nuns (who were not lay brothers and sisters) (see Minnich, chapter thirteen), only one black African bishop, the Congolese D. Henrique (who was ordained as bishop of Utica on the understanding that he could not have a European diocese or flock, but ‘only’ an African one), and no black cardinal. The first black saint – known as San Benedetto il moro – lived in the sixteenth century but was not canonised until 1807.(15)

The detail that no marriage alliances were concluded between African and European rulers in this time period is also an indication of differential practices, as alliances were concluded between the ruling houses of virtually all European powers. As far as is known, the question of marriage was only raised on two occasions. A pair of marriage alliances (involving a reciprocal double marriage) was proposed between the ruler of Aragon, King Alfonso V, and the ruler of Ethiopia, the emperor Ishaq, in 1428: Ishaq was to marry Alfonso’s sister, Joana d’Urgell, and the Infante Don Pedro was to marry an unspecified Ethiopian princess. Whether these proposals were ever a concrete reality is unclear, but for unknown reasons nothing came of them.(16) A letter from Queen Eleni of Ethiopia to King Manuel, probably in the second decade of the sixteenth century, also suggested marriages between their sons and daughters, without being more specific.(17) Black African slaves (and in many cases freed black Africans) were also very often excluded from common welfare and a common humanity by being denied access to marriage, family and community. Other moments of differentiation can be observed when white Europeans and black Africans came into competition with each other, whether in terms of occupation, or as witnesses giving testimony, or as sexual partners. Finally, much can be learnt from moments when casual differentiation is turned on its head, such as in the offhand comment Olivares made to Philip Ⅱ of Spain when reporting an audience of Pope Sixtus V with the English cardinal William Allen in 1588: ‘he treated him like a black man’.(18) All these processes and moments of differentiation expose the fact that differential behaviour based upon perceived difference (of whatever sort) was the norm in Renaissance Europe. Both Elizabeth I’s letter and warrant of July 1596 and her proclamation of January 1601 ordering the expulsion of all black Africans (described as ‘Blackmoores’, ‘Blackamoores’ and ‘Negroes’) from England,(19) and the introduction of the concept of ‘purity of blood’ (limpieza de sangre) that took hold on the Iberian peninsula in the sixteenth century,(20) relied heavily upon already accepted antecedents.

The part skin colour played in this differentiation was crucial for sub-Saharan Africans.(21) In the intensely status-conscious and hierarchical societies of fifteenth-century Europe, powerful stereotypical representations of the ‘other’ (the Jew, the Moor, the African) were already elaborately crafted from classical and medieval sources (see Massing, chapter 2), and it is not difficult to locate the sub-Saharan African within this taxonomy. Later, Jews and black Africans may have clashed over their place in this pecking order (see Earle, chapter 16), as happened in other eras and situations when two ‘immigrant’ communities competed for resources and survival. However, what must have been truly remarkable was the unprecedented spectacle of ‘blackness’ (see Korhonen, chapter 4), presented first at Portuguese ports and later at Spanish ones when the first shipments of black Africans started to arrive in the 1440s (see Lahon, chapter 12). The reality of blackness swept away some previous notions about black skin and reinforced and transformed others. African blackness was at that moment presented in a peculiarly reductive and pre-emptive way. The Portuguese royal chronicler Gomes Eanes de Zurara, writing c. 1453–4, has left an eye-witness account (probably an amalgam of a lost narrative of Afonso Cerveira and his own memory of slave auctions)(22) of the landing of the first sizeable group of black Africans – about 250 – at Lagos in the Algarve on 8 August 1444.(23) Even allowing for the superlatives of rhetorical convention, the homecoming scene enacting the consequences of conquest was extraordinary. The local inhabitants were given a holiday from work and were encouraged to play their part in the spectacle by being the awed audience. The captive, conquered black Africans were virtually or completely naked, and in chains. The free, triumphant white Portuguese separated their human booty into five equal groups, in the process dividing family units, whereupon the Africans began to scream and cry, and some began an African chant. Zurara and the audience of the day supposedly were moved by the Africans’ suffering (although Zurara analysed it in terms of fate), but the behaviour of Lançarote da Ilha, the commander of the slave raid and royal tax-collector in Lagos, was reinforced when Prince Henrique spontaneously knighted him on the field where the scene had unfolded.(24) The message could not have been clearer: it was not only permissible but right for Europeans to capture and enslave black Africans, and to treat them in an inhuman way; it was also financially rewarding and led directly to royal favours. This textual representation of ‘blackness’ and rendition of the place of black Africans in European society forcefully articulated a link between Africa, black skin and slavery that was to take hundreds of years to uncouple.


ENDE


Technorati tags:

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Black History in Germany & Europe (English version): An African-German educator speaks out

Before I begin with the English version of the previous German-language post about Black History in Germany and Europe I would like to give thanks to fellow blog authors who have given their support by writing about this subject and linking to our posts here at Jewels and at The Atlantic Review. A special thanks goes out to Ethan Zuckerman of the Global Voices Project at Harvard University Law School for a wonderful write-up about our initiative at his blog, “My Heart’s in Accra”. I would also like to thank the folks in charge of The History Carnival for including a mention about our project in their 49th Carnival of History roundup over at the History is Elementary blog. Here is some background on how the Carnival of History project got started written by Ralph Luker of the History News Network group blog, Cliopatria. In short I would like to thank everyone out there who has linked to or posted about the Black History in Germany and Europe blog project and/or has spread the gospel by other means. Thank you all very much.


The translation from German to English below was a real pleasure for me to do and I would again like to give thanks to Patrick, the author of this article, for his fine work and his enthusiasm about the subject matter and his passion for history. Patrick is a teacher of Classical Greek and Roman History here in Germany and I cannot say enough about how much fun it is to work with him and all of the other members of our BHM-Europe 2007 team on this project. Note that I have added a number of links to additional online resources in the post below and I have focused on translating to American English the heart & soul of what Patrick has written “auf Deutsch” vs. a literal word-for-word translation. If someone out there notes any gross errors in this translation, please notify me with a comment so that I may correct it. Thank you.


If you are new reader at Jewels in the Jungle and don’t have a clue to what we are talking about in the paragraphs above, please start with our Black History in Europe Post No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the series before continuing.



Black History?
What I have learned about African-German and African-European History at primary & secondary school and in my university studies.


As has already been stated I, Patrick, am contributing an article about black History in Germany and Europe. As has also been previously stated I am a historian (accurately described a history teacher) and an Afro-German. For thirteen years I have received instruction in history at diverse levels of the Bremen educational system (primary and secondary school). I have received an additional five years of instruction in history at the University of Bremen. That makes all together 18 years of study. Eighteen years of history lessons__ wow, that’s a lot. There must be something to show after such a long period of instruction in history!


Of course there is something to show. I ask myself, "Patrick, what have you learned about the history of blacks in Germany i.e. black Germans in all this time? (Answer:) Nothing. What do you mean nothing? That cannot be! There are several hundred thousand black people living in Germany and many are black Germans! Are they there since only a few years, or what? Cannot be, because you yourself are 30 years-old!“


The only thing that I have been taught about black people in Germany is that after the First World War (WW I) black soldiers from the French colonies (mainly Senegalese) were stationed in the German Rhineland as occupation troops and after the Second World War (WW II) there were black (American) GI’s stationed in the FRG (Federal Republic of Germany, formerly West Germany). Members of both groups of black soldiers developed friendships and relationships with local German women and also had children here.


That the German and European Jews were hunted and exterminated during the Nationalist Socialist Era (Nazi Germany, The Third Reich) was covered thoroughly in our history lessons. Also the fact that along with the Jews other large groups of victims such as the Sinti and Roma (European nomadic people, “gypsies”), handicapped people, homosexuals, communists, democrats, certain Christians (i.e. Jehova’s Witnesses) shared the same horrible fate of extermination. However the fate of the so-called "Rheinlandbastarde“ (Rheinland bastards) as well as the fate of the WW I black French colonial soldiers was not covered in our lessons. Not only did many black soldiers and their families suffer social segregation and exclusion and defamation, they were along with other groups of people victims of forced (state sponsored) sterilization. The famous African-German Hans-Jürgen Massaquoi (born Jan. 19, 1926 in Hamburg, see his autobiography Destined to Witness: Growing Up Black in Nazi Germany), was able to survive the Nationalist Socialist regime because his mother often kept him hidden.


Not a word over these events in our history studies at school, not a word about it at the annual Holocaust memorial ceremonies with the never-ending speeches of “sorrow”. If one were to take an opinion survey of the German street and ask which population groups during the Nazi era in Europe were hunted and persecuted, many people could at least name some of the affected groups. But black Germans during the Third Reich, that would occur to hardly anyone. How so, as it is not even an issue.


The German historians and social scientists who have the responsibility for repairing this knowledge gap in our society know a great many sub-disciplines of history i.e. Poltical Science, Anthropology, History of Women and Gender Studies, Military History, History of Medicine, History of Technology, History of Science, Sociology, History of Business and Industry, History of Everyday Life, History of Mentality, and so forth – "Black History" respectively "Afro-German History" as a sub-discipline of history education is not in their realm of knowledge.


Black History cannot always be about the victimization of black people throughout history. Sure, black Europeans as a minority group in Europe were victims of marginalization and persecution and this topic should be researched thoroughly both scientifically and academically. But that is not all. What about the contributions to culture and the arts by black Europeans including black Germans? For example, what was their daily life like? Did they have their own identity and mentality or were they in fact an integrated and socially equal part of European identity and mentality of their time. Were they simply representative of typical European and German culture or were they an important part of a growing and diverse European macro-culture (civilization)? Were there blacks in Germany and throughout Europe before the First World War (WW I) and if so, how did they get here and how did they live? This and much more must be of utmost priority in the study of Black History in Europe.


The African-German Anton Wilhelm Amo (1703-1759), the lawyer, philosopher, and later professor at the University of Halle and University of Jena (an Afro-German professor in the 18th Century!), before a few weeks ago I had no knowledge about this man. Amo, one of the most important African-German historical figures—and I had never heard of him! But no one had ever told me anything about Amo and only through a coincidence did I gain information about him. How can it be that Amo, a man who rates amongst the great German academics of the 18th Century, that there is nothing taught about him in history lessons at German primary and secondary schools, in the curriculum for history, philosophy, and law studies at German universities and colleges? Why in Germany is there no open and public discussion about this personality who has contributed so much to German culture and Geistesleben (social spirit). Why doesn’t the renowned German historian, Guido Knopp, produce a TV program about Anton Wilhelm Amo for the ZDF network (Germany’s 2nd national TV network)? Where is the German History Commission (Federal Ministry of Education and Research) with their scholars and experts who can examine and investigate information about Amo and close this gaping hole in our knowledge of Germany’s heritage? Why doesn’t the German President Horst Köhler or the German Chancellor Angela Merkel hold a press conference and speak about Anton Wilhelm Amo, to enlighten the German public and to support actions to get this problem with history education in Germany corrected?


In my opinion Black European History must be taught in a comprehensive European context. This would be in combination with the following questions:
1. Since when have people of African descent lived in Europe?
2. Since when have African-Europeans existed?


Most people would probably give a spontaneous answer that African-Europeans appeared after the First World War but we have already established that Anton Wilhelm Amo lived in Germany in the 18th Century. Who is aware that Alessandro dé Medici (July 22, 1510 - January 6, 1537) was an African-European? Alessandro dé Medici, known as il Moro (der Maure – the Moor), was from 1530 to1537 the Prince of Florence and thereby ruler of one of the most important and powerful, both culturally and politically, Italian city-states in Medieval and Early Modern Europe. Obviously his "skin color" was not a hindrance_and that is not only interesting but also for many contemporaries surely remarkable. What about racism? Did it not matter to the Florentines, specifically the most influential Florentines, that a black ruled the city-state of Florence?


But racism as such is a belief system that has not existed long enough in time that one can really know what is meant by the term. In a broad context it did not even exist until the beginning of the Early Modern period. It is in close connection with the legitimization of European colonialism and the slave trade of the Early Modern era (starting in the 16th century). Just as with the contempt and disdain for the Muslim Arab by the crusaders of the Middle Ages, the scorn and disrespect for “the wild savages” during the Colonial period was a form of “cultural racism”, meaning that primarily a primitive culture was disrespected and mishandled and not even in the first instances based upon any biological differences.


A systematic “biological racism” first appeared in the 19th Century. This in connection with that epoch helps us to understand what we mean when one speaks about “Colonialism”— the nearly global mastery and exploitation of the world by European states and cultures in the 19th Century. The dubious claim as founder of the Modern Era and systematic biological racism can be attributed to Arthur de Gobineau (July 14, 1816 – October 13, 1882, see “An Essay on the Inequalities of the Human Races”, 1853-1855).


When one asks in which European epoch did a brisk interaction between Africa and Europe begin one should not first think about the Early Modern period. One would be better off starting with the antiquity (Classical Antiquity period). During the Classical Antiquity period there was not only a more personal and cultural exchange between Africa and Europe. No, there was much more to the relationship in cultural and political terms as a part of Africa was also a part of Europe. The Roman Empire (the first united European state) had several African provinces. Aegyptus (today Egypt and a part of the Sudan), Cyrenaica (part of Libya), Africa (today Tunisia and a part of Algeria) and Mauretania (in modern Morocco and a part of Algeria). There were black Romans_Africans, who were citizens of Rome and as businesspeople, officials, and soldiers traveled, worked, and lived throughout the entire Roman Empire.


In the military of the Roman Empire black legionaires (soldiers) were in considerable number. The Legio III Cyrenaica created in 36 B.C. by Marcus Antonius (Marc Antony) when he was Governor of the Province Cyrenaica and the Legio II Parthica setup by the Roman Emperor Septimius Severus was comprised of African soldiers among others. That very same legion (Legio II Parthica) served in Roman Britain (Britannia) to fight against the indigenous tribes there. You have to stop to think about that. Black Romans that hunted and fought against the white “savages” of ancient Britain (the early Britons and the Picts)!


But the story gets even better: The very Roman Emperor Septimius Severus (emperor from 93-211 A.D.) who setup this Roman legion (Legio II Parthica) and led the military operations in Roman Britain was himself a black (from Leptis Magna in the Roman Province Africa). A black Roman Emperor! Ruler of one of the largest and most powerful empires that the world had ever seen_and today one has to ask when will the time come when there will be a black president of the United States. Then (in Roman times) we were already a bit further along. The Severan Dynasty consisted of other emperors directly related to Emperor Septimius Severus, namely Caracalla (211-217 A.D.) and Geta (211 A.D.), Elababal (218-222 A.D.) and Severus Alexander (222-235 A.D.).


Also the Christian Church during the Roman Empire had many Africans in their ranks. Among them we find some of the most famous names of early Christian History including three fathers of the early Church, Tertullian, St. Cyprian and St. Augustine of Hippo, all of them born in the Roman province of Africa. There were also African popes including the 3rd African pope Gelasius I (pope from 492-496 A.D.) who formulated very important doctrines for the papacy and the Roman Empire*(see Note 3).


With this short overview I have attempted to make clear that Black History is a broad, interesting field of study and research for Germany and Europe and that it has earned its place as a separate field and respected discipline of History and Social Science education and scholarship. The history of the African-Europeans extends back through time for at least two thousand years. If African-Europeans today must exhibit self-confidence in order to reach their life goals as individuals and as members of a society, then it is not something spectacular, then it is not something new. No, it is, historically speaking, the return to normalcy.

ENDE

NOTE 1: Aphra Behn (a pseudonym) has written an incredible article for the Progressive Historians blog titled “What Color is Your Valentine? Black History at PH” and cross-posted to the very popular Daily Kos blog on February 14, 2007. Aphra starts with the story of Saint Valentine (Valentinus) possibly being an African martyr during the Roman Empire and then fascinates readers with a romp through history showing the legacy and heritage of Africans and African-Europeans all over the place.


Aphra Behn’s “What Color is Your Valentine” is a perfect compliment to Patrick’s article above and to our Black History in Europe blog project as it delves even deeper into this very interesting subject matter. It is a must read piece of work written by an accomplished U.S. history educator and blogger, Aphra Behn. Also see the Progressive Historians Mission Statement to better understand why a sound foundation in history and the humanities is as important today as it ever was in__ human history.


NOTE 2: The modern day term “black” as applied to a race of people, people with ancestry from sub-Saharan Africa, and people with dark complexions is different from the thinking of the citizens of Rome (Roman Empire). See the resources listed below for further reading and study on this subject.

Note 3: An excerpt from Wikipedia about Pope Gelasius I:


During the Acacian schism, Gelasius went further than his predecessors in asserting the primacy of Rome over the entire Church, East and West, and he presented this doctrine in terms that set the model for subsequent popes asserting the claims of papal supremacy.

In 494, Gelasius wrote a very influential letter, known from its incipit as Duo sunt, to Anastasius. This letter established the dualistic principle that would underlie all Western European political thought for almost a millennium. In the letter Gelasius expressed a distinction between "two powers", which he called the "holy authority of bishops" (auctoritas sacrata pontificum) and the "royal power" (regalis potestas). These two powers, auctoritas lending justification to potestas, and potestas providing the executive strength for auctoritas were, he said, to be considered independent in their own spheres of operation, yet expected to work together in harmony.

Resources on the history of the Roman emperors and the Roman Empire:
Bread and circuses by Adrian Murdoch – adventures in the later Roman Empire
De Imperatoribus Romanis – an encyclopedia of Roman rulers and their families
De Imperatoribus Romnis – Septimius Severus, emperor of Rome (193-211 A.D.)
BBC Ancient History - Romans, Ancient Tribes of Britain, British History

Stanford University Encyclopedia of Philosophy
18th Century German Philosophy prior to Kant (Christian Thomasius, Christian Wolff)

Recent history education news in Europe:
Germany seeks joint history book – BBC News 03/02/07
Germany plans new EU wide history book – The Guardian 02/27/07
Call for European history book as education ministers meet – Deutsche Welle 03/02/07

Black European Studies Project @ Johannes Gutenberg University at Mainz
Changing the Color of European History: the need for multiculturalism in studying the European experience by Lydia Lyndsey and Carlton Wilson

H-Net Review (Humanities and Social Sciences Network)
Other Germans. Black Germans and the Politics of Race, Gender, and Memory in the Third Reich by Tina M. Campt – University of Michigan Press 2004

University of Arkansas (U.S.A.) – a presentation on Afro-German History 02/08/06
The Secret Germans: Examples of Afro-German History and Culture by Kathleen Condray

Northern Illinois University – Graduate Program in History
Bibliography of books and articles dealing with race in pre- and post-WWII Germany

Dialog International (German-American opinion, politics, and culture)
American Genes (the search for fathers and children after WW II) – 03/27/06

Spiegel International archives (Der Spiegel magazine online – English edition)
The Final Days of World War II (a multi-part special feature)
Talking with Holocaust Survivors “At Home Nowhere and Everywhere” – 11/27/06
Spiegel Interview with Holocaust Monument Architect Peter Eisenman – 05/09/05

US Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM)
Blacks during the holocaust
Black History Month special feature (2002)

Black History education news in North America (1970):
Black Studies: A Painful Birth – TIME Magazine (archives) January 26, 1970


Resources on scientific / biological racism and racism theory:
Antipode: A Radical Journey of Geography by James M. Blout (Vol. 23, 1992) University of Illinois at Chicago, The Theory of Cultural Racism (pgs. 289-299)
Racism: a short history by G.M. Frederickson (Princeton University Press, 2002)
RACE – The Power of an Illusion @ PBS & California Newsreel (April 2003)
The Historical Origins and Development of Racism by George M. Frederickson – Stanford University
Wikipedia – scientific racism definition