JOHN HENRIK CLARKE – CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS AND THE AFRIKAN
HOLOCAUST, SLAVERY AND THE RISE OF EUROPEAN CAPITALISM – EWORLD INC. –
1993-1994-1998
This book is essential to
understand a recurrent and persistent ideology among African Americans till
today: their exclusively racial way of thinking. We are going to examine the
vastly positive points first and that will lead us to the critical approach we
have to develop in front of assumptions that distort the hypotheses and
conclusions.
But first of all let me regret
the fact the author assumes we know the dates of all the characters and events
he speaks of, from Prince Henry the Navigator to all African leaders and
emperors or kings. The book is extremely deficient on dates and that leads him
into asserting absurdities. For instance about Henry VIII, page 31, “the Queen
[name not mentioned: Anne Boleyn] whose head he cut off [two of his six wives
were beheaded] was the only one that gave him a child that survived.” Three
surviving children of Henry VIII actually reigned after their father: Edward VI
the son of Jane Seymour (natural death), Mary I the daughter of Catherine of
Aragon (divorced) and then wife of Philip II of Spain, and Elizabeth I the daughter
of Anne Boleyn (beheaded for treason, Henry VIII refusing witchcraft as a
motive). In the same way page 33 he places the decline of the Roman
Empire in the 7th century and page 58 in the 8th
century. Both dates are wrong. The Western Roman Empire ended in 476, whereas
the Eastern Byzantine Empire ended in 1453 with the fall of Constantinople
which had become the capital of the whole empire in 330 after its partition in
293 finally achieved only in 395.
These are details but yet they
are slightly irritating. We expect dates to be given and to be true. For a last
instance, when he says page 26 “The main thing Prince Henry [dates not given:
1394-1460] did was to introduce Europe to maritime information. . . coming out
of China (then the leading maritime nation of the world). . .” he is wrong
because the great Chinese Admiral Zheng He was the last Chinese admiral and he
died in 1433. Then China
closed herself up and decided to ban any sea-travel and sea-commerce. He is all
the wronger since he knows that the Portuguese only started moving towards the
west coast of Africa either in 1434 (page 59) or in 1438 (page 97) bringing
back the first slaves in 1442 (page 97). When the Portuguese started moving
towards West Africa the Chinese were no longer
the great navigators he asserts them to be. The Chinese fleet had been burnt
and sunk by the Chinese themselves on the order from the Confucians who took
over after Zheng He’s death. That’s probably why Vasco da Gama found it so easy
to reach India
in 1498 (page 54).
THE AFRIKAN HOLOCAUST
The data given by the author is
both inescapable and too limited. His merit is all the greater because he did
not have in 1993-1998 the data we have today. He speaks of 20 million Africans
enslaved and 80 million Africans dying because of this slave trade: he
specifies page 48 that these victims, collateral or not, died because of “slave
raids, exposure, disease, grief and suicide,” without speaking of what he says
in other places: the high proportion of casualties on the ships of this Middle
Passage due to overcrowding, lack of exercise, bad food and water, lack of
ventilation and hygiene of any sort, various diseases, and he insists on the
debate between two theories: pack too many slaves in the ships and a high
proportion of them die, or pack a reasonable number of slaves and only a small
proportion of them die. He does not push his argument into proving the
fundament of it: the profit on such a trip is in the state and number of the
slaves that can be sold at arrival. If you pack three hundred slaves and 50%
die you end up with 150 slaves that you can clean up, feed and rest some in a
slave fort or base (a prison in other words) for them to look good when sold.
If you only pack a hundred and fifty slaves and even only 10% die, you still
end up with only 135 slaves in slightly better condition. It is not that
obvious which solution is more profitable. But the author does not consider the
detail of the debate that he mentions twice.
He considers Christopher Columbus
who “as man and boy. . . sailed up and down the Guinea Coast for twenty-three
years” as he writes in his own diary, had practiced the early slave trade with
the Portuguese who brought the first slaves back to Portugal in 1442, who built
the biggest slave trade fort in Elmina, Elmina Castle, in 1482. The author
considers Christopher Columbus was motivated by gold and slaves from the very
start and he quotes his diary again: (page 66) “yesterday a canoe came along
side the ship, with six youths in it. Five came on board and I ordered them to
be detained. They are now here. I afterwards sent to a house on the western
side of the river, and seized seven women, old and young, and three children. I
did this because the men would behave better in Spain if they had women of their
own land, than without them.” Or again (page 30) “I wonder why they’re bringing
such small amounts of gold? I wonder where the mines are? They will be easier
to conquer than I thought they would be. . . From this area I can send you as
many slaves as you can accommodate.” True enough, he is speaking of the Native
Americans he found on the islands, but the objective is clear: gold and slaves.
The author then can easily quote
Father de Las Casas who wrote in a book of his that (page 68) “from 12 to 25
million Indigenous Americans were killed on the islands in the Caribbean.” Later on “Father de Las Casas said that it
was wrong to enslave the African as well as the Indian. That was 35 years
later. The Indians were dead, and some of the Africans were dead.” (page 98) Or
in the words of David R. Stiddem in 1990, page 68, “In a short 40 years, the
entire race of people in Haiti,
a half million native Americans, were wiped off the face of the earth by
Columbus and the Spaniards that followed him.”
THE CATHOLIC
CHURCH
You cannot question such facts.
And the author attaches them entirely to the Catholic Church. Page 65 he gives
basic historical data about the responsibility of the Catholic Church. “. . . a
papal bull of 1455 authorizing her [Portugal] to reduce to servitude
all infidel peoples. . . The Pope issued in 1493 a series of papal bulls
which established a line of demarcation between the colonial possessions of the
two states: the east went to Portugal
and the West to Spain.
. . the treaty of Tordesillas [date not given: 1494] . . . rectified the papal
judgment to permit Portuguese ownership of Brazil.” The author is very thorough
on this issue. He quotes Dr ben-Jochannan: “Religion is the deification of a
people’s culture” and “By extension I [the author] have also added religion is
the deification of a people’s politics and power intent.” (page 18-19) Without
entering a long discussion of such an assertion the author takes a strong
anti-clerical stance against slavery. He even goes slightly further only once:
“They [Europeans] did all of this [colonized the whole world] in the name of a
God that they said was merciful and kind. All of them, including the Arabs,
used western-oriented religions. . . which made their God ungodly.” (page 22)
Note he uses the term “Arabs” to mean Muslims which is slightly biased. In fact
page 43 he is slightly clearer when he brings together “the Arabs, Berbers and
Tuaregs” as enemies against Timbuktu
and the Mali Empire. But he does not specify that Timbuktu
and the Mali Empire were Islamic in religion at the time which makes the
raiding of Timbuktu
by the Tuaregs in 1433 and 1591-1593 slightly more complex.
You may understand now his
religious argument is slightly weak, all the weaker when we know the English
started their first colony in Virginia in 1607-08 and brought the first African
slaves, provided to them by Dutch slave dealers in 1619, and that the English
did not in any way depend on the Pope and the Catholic Church they had rejected
a long time before, both on the Anglican side and on the Puritan side. We’ll
see in a minute that the English were by far worse than any other Catholic colonists
as for slavery.
If we go back to the systematic
massacre (war, torture, plain violence, diseases, alcohol, and other causes) of
the Indians and today we consider for example that by the end of the 16th
century 95% of the native population of Mexico (what the Spaniards called New
Spain) had been wiped out (which is at least as severe as a holocaust as the
Afrikan Holocaust, though this time the Spaniards in Mexico or the Islands were
more drastic than any other national colonizing power, even the English as for
that who did a pretty good job at submitting to genocide American Natives),
then we can wonder how the plantations they started in a way or another could
work. They needed some slave labor and that is the logic that will make the
Portuguese, the Spaniards, the Dutch, the English and the French set up the
slave trade, the Middle Passage. It is purely economic and the religion in that
business is like the red nose of a clown or a reindeer: it makes the clown for
sure but it is not quite enough.
John Henrik Clarke has it right:
the only option was African slaves and the Middle Passage slave trade could not
really be started (it started quite some time before) but multiplied into
industrial size. And that’s where we find the second great aspect of the book.
The author saw that there were two different slaveries in the Americas.
THE TWO SLAVERIES IN THE AMERICAS
Page 83-84-85 first and then
again page 101-103 he describes the slavery instated in South America, the West
Indies and New Orleans or Louisiana where the slaves were bought by the
shipload or half the shipload and these groups were kept together, they could
keep their drum playing or whatever music they liked, their African ornamentation,
their African religions, their common languages and their basic culture. That
was then in the Spanish zone at first and the French zone later. The author
would have been inspired if he had scrutinized the religious practices under
the authority of the Spanish Catholic Church or the French Catholic Church: the
Christian sacraments were encouraged (and started hardly ten years after the
French settled in Louisiana): the christening of children and of parents,
proper marriages and family ties, proper attendance of church services and
proper burying practices, with special Christian cemeteries for the slaves. The
symbol of this Christian treatment is the Code Noir on the French side and this
Code insists on the right for slaves to benefit from manumission: either they
can buy themselves out of slavery, or be bought out of slavery by a free
person, or granted their freedom by their masters or the wills of their
masters. This gave rise to a three-tiered society in which a middle social
group developed comprising poor whites and free persons of color, which will
explain why Louisiana
only remained on the Confederate side during the American Civil War for one
year before moving back to the Union side. The great difference is that in all
these zones where the Catholic Church was dominant the one-drop-of-blood theory
never worked.
So what about the non-Catholic
English and then US side? They dispatched the slaves one by one and separated
the families, children and parents systematically. They tried to destroy every
single sign or symbol or element of African culture. They were cruel, to the
point of treating African women as female child makers that any white man could
take as he pleased and make pregnant and the child will be a slave and will be
sold as soon as possible, that is to say when under ten for sure. The author
says they outlawed drums, music, languages, religions, and they broke the
loyalty system based on the family unit in Africa.
He did not mention the practice of systematic violence under the instigation of
Willie Lynch. He remained too abstract, but once again that had nothing to do
with the Catholic Church. He says that the slave could only enjoy “mental
recall.” (page 101) That is absolutely right but he does not exploit it.
DEHUMANIZATION OF THE AFRICAN
So page 52 he can say: “The
tragic and distinguishing feature of the slave trade that was introduced by the
Europeans was that it totally dehumanized the slave.” But this is ambiguous
because we do not know if it is a dehumanization that takes place in the minds
of the slaves themselves. But page 77 he is clear about what he means: “To set
the process [of slavery and deportation] the African was totally dehumanized in
the minds of the Europeans.” He means that the slave, in the minds of the
Europeans, was no longer a human being but chattel as is said in many treatises
today, just above pigs and cows, and just under horses, in other words equal to
mules. But that is by far too short on the African side. The attempt was to
dehumanize the slaves in their own minds by the Willie Lynch method so that the
children were absolutely traumatized by the pulling apart of one black male –
after long and horrible tortures and amputations of body parts – by four horses
tied up to his arms and legs, and so that the mothers would be traumatized too
into teaching the children how to become slaves that accept being whipped
everyday with total resignation. But at the same time he does not see how even
the black man who is used as the guinea pig for that lesson remains a man in
his mind and retains in him and in his mind a lot of his original culture: the
physical resilience, the rhythmic dimension, and even the polyrhythmic
dimension, the humming and singing ability which means the music of his
heritage and many other elements too.
And that is what has become today
crucial. The trauma has been so deep and so long among African Americans who
suffered three centuries of extreme slavery and then one more century of
segregation and systematic lynching that the minds are forever marked by a post
traumatic slavery syndrome (PTSS) that can only be alleviated if each
individual, within a collective process, researches and remembers as far as he can
remember, definitely up to slavery times and even as far as possible in that
slavery heritage and history; if he can reconcile himself with these ancestors
and see how they resisted and how they existed in spite of the dehumanization; then reconcile
with society as a whole but to reconcile you need to be two at least and there
the whites have to do the same effort and then recommit themselves to human and
humane values that have nothing to do with race because race is only an
accident in the history of humanity and racism has not been really proved as a
social attitude beyond 500 years ago or so. Even in the darkest illustrations
of the Devil in the Middle Ages the Dark Lord, the Black Lord, who is also
Lucifer, the Lord of Light, is never identified to a black man, to an African.
It is only the colonial era and the Middle Passage slavery era that transferred
dark and black like the devil to black like an African.
ARE THE MIDDLE AGES REALLY DARK AGES?
But we come there to the most
superficial element of the book, an element that is repeated over and over
again. The Middle Ages are the Dark Ages only in the minds of the people who
have no historical knowledge.
The Religious reform of the 9th
century, the Agricultural reform in the 10th century (with the
invention of the horse collar and the return to the Celtic iron plough), then
the proto-industrial revolution with the development of water mills to provide
society with mechanical energy to improve all kinds of activities, agricultural
work, food, crafts and the pioneering activities that will produce the real
industrial revolution five centuries later, in the 12th century, all
that is the Middle ages and was only possible by the introduction of feudalism
that unified the property of the land and the relation of land workers and the
land itself. And it introduced 52 Sundays free of work, three major religious
festivities (the three weeks of nativity, Passion and Assumption) also free of
work, plus some smaller religious celebrations, the equivalent of 75 days free
of any type of work: we understand why they needed the water mills (brought out
of old Roman archives by the Benedictines). It was so successful that at the
end of the 13th century it produced a galloping demography that
could not be coped with by the economy and then the rest was the phenomenal
Black Death arriving in Europe from the east around 1350 and reducing the
European population by at least one third which means killing at least 50% of
the population if its growth had not been stopped. He does not understand that Oxford University
was opened in 1096, Cambridge University in 1209, Paris
University in 1200 and Montpellier University in 1289. When he says that in
the 15th century there were only two universities in the world; Salamanca and Timbuktu
(page 96), he is slightly extreme.
THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY RENAISSANCE
The 15th century is a
time a tremendous progress because of the population that has gone down and
must be restored; because of the education of new generations that is urgent;
because inventions are piling up like printing, be they real inventions or
techniques brought back from the east after the Crusades or from China by Marco
Polo.
It is also true that tremendous
long war conflicts come to an end and some new conflicts are going to develop
after the Reformation and the best way to keep western society rather peaceful
is to shift the rowdy and the violent onto some project that could be
economically viable, like the Crusades were for the military class that was
kept unused in Europe because of the Peace of God Movement launched at the end
of the 10th century in Aurillac, France, by French prelates and the
Catholic Church.
That’s why so many colonists were
either indentured people or semi-indentured people. You can’t expect from such
people manipulated by the greediest corporations or guilds or companies you can
imagine to be much ethical. The Virginia Company had a ten year charter with
the King of England and in ten years it had to be profitable or the charter
would not be renewed. So the Indians were exploited to the utmost, Pocahontas,
a priestess and princess, was abducted more or less forced to convert, be
christened, marry John Rolfe and provide her husband with the land given by her
“father” who was probably not her real father, and the knowledge of how to grow
and cure tobacco that only priests and priestesses knew how to do (the seeds
were stolen from Barbados by John Rolfe) and in two years it was successful and
in 1616 John Rolfe could present to the King and Queen of England the Virginia
tobacco we know and then the first African slaves were introduced in 1619,
provided by a Dutch slave dealer, to work on the plantations. The Indians of
course refused to work in such conditions and I am afraid that the colonists
would have refused for them to work at all if what John Smith wrote about them
is the true state of mind of these colonists. The colonists could only get
something if both sides were able to detain two or three children hostages for
a couple of years, less or more, as the proof of their trust and honesty.
CONCLUSION
The book is in total line with
Marcus Garvey’s panafricanism, though he is never named or mentioned.
Race is the only basic concept
that is the fundamental foundation of this book. Race is the African race and
it is numbered in the Americas,
in Asia, and in Africa. The African race is
the only race in the world that possesses a whole continent just for
themselves. We saw that the Muslims, the Arabs, the Berbers, the Tuaregs are
not exactly loved and yet the whole Semitic northern and Saharan Africa is
considered as part of the Black race, forgetting that most Blacks speak
languages that are NOT Semitic.
He considers this race is also a
nation and he speaks of the “national responsibility” of the African race,
which means that the continent of Africa
should be the nation of all Africans. It is obviously unrealistic with the Semitic
people in the north and the whites in South Africa.
He even goes one step further.
“Upon the onset of the evening,
the women would be assembled in the wourtyard so that the captains could pick
out the one they wanted to violate
[my emphasis] that night, and these Africans had not even left Africa yet [we
are still in Goree, the French slave fort used as the starting point of the
Middle Passage for the French]. We see the beginning of a process which we have
not dealt with as a people: bastardization
when they not only bastardized the body, they bastardized the mind [my
emphasis].” (Page 99)
And we can go back to the
beginning.
“The greatest achievement of the
Europeans was the conquest of the mind
of their victims through a series of myths that could bear re-examining in
order to understand the deeper meaning of the Christopher Columbus Era and its
reverberations for today.
1- The myth of people waiting in darkness for
another people to bring them the light. . .
2- The myth of a people without a legitimate
God. . .
3- The myth of the primitive and the aborigine.
. .
4- The myth of the invader and conqueror as civilizer.
. .“ (page 34-35)
Those sure are myths but today we
have to consider the triple motto developed in Northern America, primarily by
the Catholic Church of the USA, “Remember, Reconcile, Recommit,” is a lot more
pregnant and effective to achieve progress for everyone than “not to forgive
and not to forget.”
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
# posted by Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU @ 2:59 PM