African-Americans invaded by Europeans
Author: Daniel Evangelista
This is a peculiar story, and in writing it I have been circling the words for several days.
I begin with two questions that I asked myself at the end of what I had researched, to which I will not give an answer, as I prefer that the reader should give himself an answer and perhaps deepen his research:
The first question
Why are African and African-American people so persecuted today?
The second question
What if African-Americans learn that they are more American than the European invaders?
What we are taught in schools
In schools, through textbooks, we are taught that over a period of time from about 1450 to 1850, a total of 11,128,000 Africans present in American territories were deported from Africa.
The following is a difficult list to compile since the period experienced many political and territorial changes but if we want to simplify it, we can follow the following model:
Destination
Brazil
Spanish Empire
British Caribbean Territories
French Caribbean Territories
British territories in North America
Dutch Caribbean Territories
Danish Caribbean Territories
Slave
4.000.000
2.500.000
2.000.000
1.600.000
500.000
500.000
28.000
% of the total
35,4%
22,1%
17,7%
14,1%
4,4%
4,4%
0,2%
How did they transport slaves from Africa to the Americas? Their only means of crossing the ocean in those days was by sailboat.
Between 1450 and 1850 we have a whole world of boats that evolved to carry more goods and unfortunately also more slaves. Let's take as an example a boat that could carry 400 slaves. I take this figure subjectively after reading Leo Balai's book "Slave Ship Leusden" originally published in 2013 in native Dutch and later in English. This book is an adaptation of his scientific research on the history of the Leusden, one of the last slave ships of the West-India Company (WIC). This type of ship was usually employed for other activities that followed one or more slave voyages. The Leusden embarked exclusively on slave voyages from her maiden voyage in 1719 until her sinking in 1738, a total of ten crossings. During these ten voyages 6564 prisoners were taken on board, of whom 1639 did not survive the crossing and a further 102 prisoners perished in the slave shops before being sold, giving a total death toll of 1741. This proportion represented more than a quarter of the number of prisoners embarked in Africa; an incredible waste of human life.
We can therefore state that:
-
During these crossings about a quarter of the slaves perished.
-
A slave merchant vessel ship would make about 10 round trips in 19 years.
-
If history books tell us that 11,128,000 slaves were brought to the Americas, we can say that adding the quarter of the slaves who died en route would bring the total number of slaves on board to 13,910,000.
-
If a modern boat could carry 400 slaves, I would be realistic to say that starting from the year 1450 and averaging out, the slaves carried in those 300 years were about 250 per boat.
-
To transport 13,910,000 slaves at an average of 250 slaves per voyage would have required 55,640 voyages. 185 voyages per year. Following Leo Balai's record of one voyage every two years, we are talking about 370 ships per year.
-
There are no records of voyages of that magnitude.
-
The ships used in the beginning were galleons and as reported on "nautipedia": "The crew consisted of three hundred men who ate and slept on the battery decks, while the officers stayed at the stern. The galleon was a ship adopted by both the navy and the merchant navy and as such equally armed' (source: https://nautipedia.it/index.php/Galeone).
-
Many sailors died on the voyages, just think of the scurvy plague.
-
So each year there must have been an average of 111,000 sailors on the merchant routes to the Americas alone. Just to understand the magnitude of these numbers over time, Madrid in 1594 boasted a population of 37,500 (source: https://www.scoprimadrid.com/storia).
-
If we then consider that we have spread these numbers evenly over the whole 300 years, we understand that at times of major waves, the numbers would be very unlikely.
So how did historians manage to establish the theory of the slave trade as the sole reason for the African presence in the Americas?
Findings proving the existence of African peoples in the Americas
I now want to propose an alternative to this whole story of African slaves being imported to the Americas.
What if most African-Americans had already been there long before Columbus arrived, would we have any evidence of that? Well, in fact, there are many thousands of archaeological finds and testimonies. Let us analyse some of them together.
One of the most discussed civilisations of the entire pre-Columbian period is the Olmecs, and I will show you just a few examples of the remains of this extraordinary civilisation:
As we can see, the morphological characteristics of the face are purely Negroid, and the history we are taught at school does not contemplate a meeting between American and African civilisations for those dates, yet there are hundreds of these heads scattered throughout Central America.
Another piece of evidence is a document written in a monthly magazine for anthropologists dated April 1939, where we read about the discovery in a site of Indians in the Virgin Islands of negroid-type physicists of pre-Columbian origin.
We read in school books that North American Indians lived on North American soil, but what if they were peoples of different ethnicities as we find them on every continent? We read some characteristic names of some peoples of Negroid origin according to Stewart Synopsis:
-
The Washitaw people of Louisiana. The Washitaw Nation ( Washitaw de Dugdahmoundyah ) is a group associated with the Moorish Science Temple of America that claims to be a sovereign Native American state within the borders of the United States of America. Their name is appropriated from that of the Ouachita tribe, which is also the namesake of the Washita River and Washita, Oklahoma. The group is part of the Sovereign Citizens movement, whose members generally believe that they are not subject to any federal, state or municipal statutes or proceedings. The Washitaw Nation was led by Verdiacee Hampton Goston (also known as Verdiacee Turner, also known as Empress Verdiacee Tiari Washitaw Turner Goston El-Bey, c. 1927-2014). She was mayor of Richwood, Louisiana in 1975 and 1976, and again from 1980 to 1984, and is the author of the self-published book Return of the Ancient Ones (1993). Goston states that the United Nations 'registers the Washitaw as Indigenous People No. 215'.(source: https://it.qaz.wiki/wiki/Washitaw_Nation)
-
The Yamasee people. The name "Yamasee" derives perhaps from Muskogee "yvmvsē". meaning tame, silent; or perhaps from Catawban "yį musí": literally "ancient people".
-
Who does not remember the famous tribe of black feet? We would not like to think that this people called themselves that because they had dirty feet. It is more logical to think that unlike other peoples in those territories, they actually had black feet.
-
The Black Californians. The name California sees in CAL literally the meaning of BLACK, from the name of the Great Mother KALi or Queen KALifa.
-
The Panamanian Darienites, where history tries to place around 1500 in the territories of today's Panama, not without some doubt as is also evident from the studies of Martin Jamieson where he quotes verbatim: 'It is difficult to locate and identify the place of origin of the African slaves brought to Panama during the colonial era.
African ethnic groups were not the only ones to have been present on American soil for many centuries, Asian ones were too, but I leave to you the exciting fun of discovering others.
Is it true that hardly anything existed there when the European invaders arrived?
Perhaps the American civilisations were well known since Roman times, as we find pineapples in many frescos and therefore cities and so on were developed there.
In our collective imagination we all have those images of the great Aztec urban agglomerations, as they were described to us in school books, but what if there was something more? What if they have inadvertently or unintentionally omitted some detail? Let us try to check if everything is in order.
In 1671 a well-known Scottish translator, impresario and mapmaker, a certain John Ogilby (he was the first British road atlas), produced an unusual drawing depicting the last Aztec king, Montezuma II, in Nahuatl Motēcuhzōma Xōcoyōtzin, (c. 1466 - Tenochtitlán, 29 June 1520) killed during the Spanish conquest. What is unusual about this drawing is that Jhon depicts an unusually modern Mexico City behind the King, even for a posthumous date such as that of the drawing itself, dated 1620.
The strange broken noses
There are also many statues with damaged or destroyed noses. What if the noses of the statues were still intact in place and were a negroid nose? Would the story change? It depends on which statues you say. Well, let's see some of them:
Do you know the story of how the Sphinx was scarred? How its nose was cannonaded for exercise by Napoleon's troops? An odd mistake? An idiotic excuse? Too bad we don't even have a real drawing of it with its original nose. And yet, in those days and even afterwards, many drawings were made, but where did they end up? Lost, destroyed or hidden?
Why change this part of the story? If the pharaohs had been all or almost all of Negroid origin and not just a few exceptions, as we are taught at school, what would change? Are there things we still don't know? That's for sure, but we will find out sooner or later.
Vitriol
...and information will set you free!