Question: What country was the exception to the controlling and preventing of enslavement?

Answer: Portuguese controlled Angola

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. <hl> With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola , coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." <hl> Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of <hl> Portuguese controlled Angola <hl>, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

With the exception of <hl> Portuguese controlled Angola <hl> , coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens."


Question: What were the benefits derived from trading slaves?

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens."  Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

Answer: military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations.

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. <hl> Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. <hl> Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included <hl> military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. <hl> The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.


Question: Who was John Thornton?

Answer: African scholar

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." <hl> Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. <hl> The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as <hl> African scholar <hl> John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.


Question: After centuries of non-participation, who rejoined the trans-atlantic slave trade?

Answer: the Kingdom of Benin

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. <hl> The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. <hl> Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make <hl> the Kingdom of Benin <hl> rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.


Question: What African nation was exceptional in it's lack of control over its coast?

Answer: Angola,

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. <hl> With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." <hl> Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled <hl> Angola, <hl> coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.


Question: What did African leaders see in terms of slave trade?

Answer: saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders.

<hl> Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." <hl> Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely <hl> saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. <hl> With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.


Question: How did the slave trade negatively impact Africa?

Answer: the significant decline in population,

<hl> Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. <hl> With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely <hl> the significant decline in population, <hl> some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.


Question: Why did the Kingdom of Benin participate in the slave trade after centuries on non-participation?

Answer: The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. <hl> The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. <hl> Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. <hl> The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods <hl> was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.


Question: How much was the King of Dahomey earning in 1770 by selling captured slaves?

Answer: £250,000 per year

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. <hl> Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated £250,000 per year by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders. <hl>

Because the negative effects of slavery on the economies of Africa have been well documented, namely the significant decline in population, some African rulers likely saw an economic benefit from trading their subjects with European slave traders. With the exception of Portuguese controlled Angola, coastal African leaders "generally controlled access to their coasts, and were able to prevent direct enslavement of their subjects and citizens." Thus, as African scholar John Thornton argues, African leaders who allowed the continuation of the slave trade likely derived an economic benefit from selling their subjects to Europeans. The Kingdom of Benin, for instance, participated in the African slave trade, at will, from 1715 to 1735, surprising Dutch traders, who had not expected to buy slaves in Benin. The benefit derived from trading slaves for European goods was enough to make the Kingdom of Benin rejoin the trans-Atlantic slave trade after centuries of non-participation. Such benefits included military technology (specifically guns and gunpowder), gold, or simply maintaining amicable trade relationships with European nations. The slave trade was therefore a means for some African elite to gain economic advantages. Historian Walter Rodney estimates that by c.1770, the King of Dahomey was earning an estimated <hl> £250,000 per year <hl> by selling captive African soldiers and enslaved people to the European slave-traders.


Question: How many slaves were Europeans taking to the Caribbean each year in 1778?

As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin estimated that Europeans were bringing an estimated 52,000 slaves to the Caribbean yearly, with the French bringing the most Africans to the French West Indies (13,000 out of the yearly estimate). The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the 18th century, during and following the Kongo Civil War. Wars among tiny states along the Niger River's Igbo-inhabited region and the accompanying banditry also spiked in this period. Another reason for surplus supply of enslaved people was major warfare conducted by expanding states, such as the kingdom of Dahomey, the Oyo Empire, and the Asante Empire.

Answer: 52,000

<hl> As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin estimated that Europeans were bringing an estimated 52,000 slaves to the Caribbean yearly, with the French bringing the most Africans to the French West Indies (13,000 out of the yearly estimate). <hl> The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the 18th century, during and following the Kongo Civil War. Wars among tiny states along the Niger River's Igbo-inhabited region and the accompanying banditry also spiked in this period. Another reason for surplus supply of enslaved people was major warfare conducted by expanding states, such as the kingdom of Dahomey, the Oyo Empire, and the Asante Empire.

As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin estimated that Europeans were bringing an estimated <hl> 52,000 <hl> slaves to the Caribbean yearly, with the French bringing the most Africans to the French West Indies (13,000 out of the yearly estimate). The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the 18th century, during and following the Kongo Civil War. Wars among tiny states along the Niger River's Igbo-inhabited region and the accompanying banditry also spiked in this period. Another reason for surplus supply of enslaved people was major warfare conducted by expanding states, such as the kingdom of Dahomey, the Oyo Empire, and the Asante Empire.


Question: In which century did the Atlantic slave trade reach its peak?

Answer: 18th century

As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin estimated that Europeans were bringing an estimated 52,000 slaves to the Caribbean yearly, with the French bringing the most Africans to the French West Indies (13,000 out of the yearly estimate). <hl> The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the 18th century , during and following the Kongo Civil War. <hl> Wars among tiny states along the Niger River's Igbo-inhabited region and the accompanying banditry also spiked in this period. Another reason for surplus supply of enslaved people was major warfare conducted by expanding states, such as the kingdom of Dahomey, the Oyo Empire, and the Asante Empire.

As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin estimated that Europeans were bringing an estimated 52,000 slaves to the Caribbean yearly, with the French bringing the most Africans to the French West Indies (13,000 out of the yearly estimate). The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the <hl> 18th century <hl>, during and following the Kongo Civil War. Wars among tiny states along the Niger River's Igbo-inhabited region and the accompanying banditry also spiked in this period. Another reason for surplus supply of enslaved people was major warfare conducted by expanding states, such as the kingdom of Dahomey, the Oyo Empire, and the Asante Empire.

The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the <hl> 18th century <hl> , during and following the Kongo Civil War.


Question: During which war did the Atlantic slave trade reach its peak?

Answer: the Kongo Civil War

As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin estimated that Europeans were bringing an estimated 52,000 slaves to the Caribbean yearly, with the French bringing the most Africans to the French West Indies (13,000 out of the yearly estimate). <hl> The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the 18th century, during and following the Kongo Civil War . <hl> Wars among tiny states along the Niger River's Igbo-inhabited region and the accompanying banditry also spiked in this period. Another reason for surplus supply of enslaved people was major warfare conducted by expanding states, such as the kingdom of Dahomey, the Oyo Empire, and the Asante Empire.

As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin estimated that Europeans were bringing an estimated 52,000 slaves to the Caribbean yearly, with the French bringing the most Africans to the French West Indies (13,000 out of the yearly estimate). The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the 18th century, during and following <hl> the Kongo Civil War <hl>. Wars among tiny states along the Niger River's Igbo-inhabited region and the accompanying banditry also spiked in this period. Another reason for surplus supply of enslaved people was major warfare conducted by expanding states, such as the kingdom of Dahomey, the Oyo Empire, and the Asante Empire.

The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the 18th century, during and following <hl> the Kongo Civil War <hl> .


Question: Which European people brought the most slaves to the Caribbean in 1778?

Answer: French

<hl> As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin estimated that Europeans were bringing an estimated 52,000 slaves to the Caribbean yearly, with the French bringing the most Africans to the French West Indies (13,000 out of the yearly estimate). <hl> The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the 18th century, during and following the Kongo Civil War. Wars among tiny states along the Niger River's Igbo-inhabited region and the accompanying banditry also spiked in this period. Another reason for surplus supply of enslaved people was major warfare conducted by expanding states, such as the kingdom of Dahomey, the Oyo Empire, and the Asante Empire.

As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin estimated that Europeans were bringing an estimated 52,000 slaves to the Caribbean yearly, with the <hl> French <hl> bringing the most Africans to the French West Indies (13,000 out of the yearly estimate). The Atlantic slave trade peaked in the last two decades of the 18th century, during and following the Kongo Civil War. Wars among tiny states along the Niger River's Igbo-inhabited region and the accompanying banditry also spiked in this period. Another reason for surplus supply of enslaved people was major warfare conducted by expanding states, such as the kingdom of Dahomey, the Oyo Empire, and the Asante Empire.


Question: In what part of the world was slavery inherited by a child born to a slave??

Forms of slavery varied both in Africa and in the New World. In general, slavery in Africa was not heritable – that is, the children of slaves were free – while in the Americas, children of slave mothers were considered born into slavery. This was connected to another distinction: slavery in West Africa was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in European colonies, although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis.

Answer: the New World

<hl> Forms of slavery varied both in Africa and in the New World . <hl> In general, slavery in Africa was not heritable – that is, the children of slaves were free – while in the Americas, children of slave mothers were considered born into slavery. This was connected to another distinction: slavery in West Africa was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in European colonies, although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis.

Forms of slavery varied both in Africa and in <hl> the New World <hl>. In general, slavery in Africa was not heritable – that is, the children of slaves were free – while in the Americas, children of slave mothers were considered born into slavery. This was connected to another distinction: slavery in West Africa was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in European colonies, although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis.

Forms of slavery varied both in Africa and in <hl> the New World <hl> .


Question: In what part of the world was slavery not inherited by a child born to a slave?

Answer: Africa

<hl> Forms of slavery varied both in Africa and in the New World. <hl> In general, slavery in Africa was not heritable – that is, the children of slaves were free – while in the Americas, children of slave mothers were considered born into slavery. This was connected to another distinction: slavery in West Africa was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in European colonies, although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis.

Forms of slavery varied both in <hl> Africa <hl> and in the New World. In general, slavery in Africa was not heritable – that is, the children of slaves were free – while in the Americas, children of slave mothers were considered born into slavery. This was connected to another distinction: slavery in West Africa was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in European colonies, although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis.


Question: In what area was slavery not confined to people belonging to a minority ethnicity or faith group?

Answer: West Africa

Forms of slavery varied both in Africa and in the New World. In general, slavery in Africa was not heritable – that is, the children of slaves were free – while in the Americas, children of slave mothers were considered born into slavery. <hl> This was connected to another distinction: slavery in West Africa was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in European colonies, although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis. <hl>

Forms of slavery varied both in Africa and in the New World. In general, slavery in Africa was not heritable – that is, the children of slaves were free – while in the Americas, children of slave mothers were considered born into slavery. This was connected to another distinction: slavery in <hl> West Africa <hl> was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in European colonies, although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis.


Question: In what areas was slavery generally confined to people belonging to a minority ethnicity or faith group?

Answer: European colonies

Forms of slavery varied both in Africa and in the New World. In general, slavery in Africa was not heritable – that is, the children of slaves were free – while in the Americas, children of slave mothers were considered born into slavery. <hl> This was connected to another distinction: slavery in West Africa was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in European colonies , although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis. <hl>

Forms of slavery varied both in Africa and in the New World. In general, slavery in Africa was not heritable – that is, the children of slaves were free – while in the Americas, children of slave mothers were considered born into slavery. This was connected to another distinction: slavery in West Africa was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in <hl> European colonies <hl>, although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis.

This was connected to another distinction: slavery in West Africa was not reserved for racial or religious minorities, as it was in <hl> European colonies <hl> , although the case was otherwise in places such as Somalia, where Bantus were taken as slaves for the ethnic Somalis.


Question: About how many people were traded as slaves in the Atlantic slave trade?

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than 11 million people. For a long time, an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. Estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th century, but about 1.5 million died on board ship. About 10.5 million slaves arrived in the Americas. Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans likely died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. Manning estimates that 4 million died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. Manning's estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.

Answer: 11 million people

<hl> A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than 11 million people . <hl> For a long time, an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. Estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th century, but about 1.5 million died on board ship. About 10.5 million slaves arrived in the Americas. Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans likely died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. Manning estimates that 4 million died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. Manning's estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than <hl> 11 million people <hl>. For a long time, an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. Estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th century, but about 1.5 million died on board ship. About 10.5 million slaves arrived in the Americas. Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans likely died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. Manning estimates that 4 million died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. Manning's estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than <hl> 11 million people <hl> .


Question: How many slaves died in transit across the Atlantic?

Answer: about 1.5 million

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than 11 million people. For a long time, an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. <hl> Estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th century, but about 1.5 million died on board ship. <hl> About 10.5 million slaves arrived in the Americas. Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans likely died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. Manning estimates that 4 million died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. Manning's estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than 11 million people. For a long time, an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. Estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th century, but <hl> about 1.5 million <hl> died on board ship. About 10.5 million slaves arrived in the Americas. Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans likely died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. Manning estimates that 4 million died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. Manning's estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.


Question: How many Africans died in Africa after they were seized by slave traders??

Answer: 4 million

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than 11 million people. For a long time, an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. Estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th century, but about 1.5 million died on board ship. About 10.5 million slaves arrived in the Americas. Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans likely died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. <hl> Manning estimates that 4 million died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. <hl> Manning's estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than 11 million people. For a long time, an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. Estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th century, but about 1.5 million died on board ship. About 10.5 million slaves arrived in the Americas. Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans likely died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. Manning estimates that <hl> 4 million <hl> died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. Manning's estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.


Question: How many slaves from Africa survived the journey and made it to the New World?

Answer: 10.5 million

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than 11 million people. For a long time, an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. Estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th century, but about 1.5 million died on board ship. <hl> About 10.5 million slaves arrived in the Americas. <hl> Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans likely died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. Manning estimates that 4 million died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. Manning's estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.

A database compiled in the late 1990s put the figure for the transatlantic slave trade at more than 11 million people. For a long time, an accepted figure was 15 million, although this has in recent years been revised down. Estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th century, but about 1.5 million died on board ship. About <hl> 10.5 million <hl> slaves arrived in the Americas. Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans likely died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. Manning estimates that 4 million died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. Manning's estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.


Question: What factor influenced African legal codes, as cited by Dr Nehusi?

According to Dr Kimani Nehusi, the presence of European slavers affected the way in which the legal code in African societies responded to offenders. Crimes traditionally punishable by some other form of punishment became punishable by enslavement and sale to slave traders.[citation needed] According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, 50% of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves. This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts. The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout Western and West Central Africa, although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. The slave trade was largely a by-product of tribal and state warfare as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory, or financing future wars. However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving, such as Oyo, Benin, Igala, Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.

Answer: the presence of European slavers

<hl> According to Dr Kimani Nehusi, the presence of European slavers affected the way in which the legal code in African societies responded to offenders. <hl> Crimes traditionally punishable by some other form of punishment became punishable by enslavement and sale to slave traders.[citation needed] According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, 50% of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves. This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts. The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout Western and West Central Africa, although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. The slave trade was largely a by-product of tribal and state warfare as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory, or financing future wars. However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving, such as Oyo, Benin, Igala, Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.

According to Dr Kimani Nehusi, <hl> the presence of European slavers <hl> affected the way in which the legal code in African societies responded to offenders. Crimes traditionally punishable by some other form of punishment became punishable by enslavement and sale to slave traders.[citation needed] According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, 50% of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves. This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts. The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout Western and West Central Africa, although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. The slave trade was largely a by-product of tribal and state warfare as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory, or financing future wars. However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving, such as Oyo, Benin, Igala, Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.


Question: What percentage of fatalities were a product of African military conflicts?

Answer: 50%

According to Dr Kimani Nehusi, the presence of European slavers affected the way in which the legal code in African societies responded to offenders. <hl> Crimes traditionally punishable by some other form of punishment became punishable by enslavement and sale to slave traders.[citation needed] According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, 50% of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves. <hl> This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts. The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout Western and West Central Africa, although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. The slave trade was largely a by-product of tribal and state warfare as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory, or financing future wars. However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving, such as Oyo, Benin, Igala, Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.

According to Dr Kimani Nehusi, the presence of European slavers affected the way in which the legal code in African societies responded to offenders. Crimes traditionally punishable by some other form of punishment became punishable by enslavement and sale to slave traders.[citation needed] According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, <hl> 50% <hl> of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves. This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts. The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout Western and West Central Africa, although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. The slave trade was largely a by-product of tribal and state warfare as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory, or financing future wars. However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving, such as Oyo, Benin, Igala, Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.


Question: What type of events resulted in the majority of enslavements?

Answer: tribal and state warfare

According to Dr Kimani Nehusi, the presence of European slavers affected the way in which the legal code in African societies responded to offenders. Crimes traditionally punishable by some other form of punishment became punishable by enslavement and sale to slave traders.[citation needed] According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, 50% of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves. This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts. The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout Western and West Central Africa, although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. <hl> The slave trade was largely a by-product of tribal and state warfare as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory, or financing future wars. <hl> However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving, such as Oyo, Benin, Igala, Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.

According to Dr Kimani Nehusi, the presence of European slavers affected the way in which the legal code in African societies responded to offenders. Crimes traditionally punishable by some other form of punishment became punishable by enslavement and sale to slave traders.[citation needed] According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, 50% of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves. This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts. The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout Western and West Central Africa, although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. The slave trade was largely a by-product of <hl> tribal and state warfare <hl> as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory, or financing future wars. However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving, such as Oyo, Benin, Igala, Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.


Question: In which parts of Africa was it common for slaves to be captured as a result of military conflicts?

Answer: Western and West Central Africa

According to Dr Kimani Nehusi, the presence of European slavers affected the way in which the legal code in African societies responded to offenders. Crimes traditionally punishable by some other form of punishment became punishable by enslavement and sale to slave traders.[citation needed] According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, 50% of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves. This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts. <hl> The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout Western and West Central Africa , although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. <hl> The slave trade was largely a by-product of tribal and state warfare as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory, or financing future wars. However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving, such as Oyo, Benin, Igala, Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.

According to Dr Kimani Nehusi, the presence of European slavers affected the way in which the legal code in African societies responded to offenders. Crimes traditionally punishable by some other form of punishment became punishable by enslavement and sale to slave traders.[citation needed] According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, 50% of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves. This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts. The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout <hl> Western and West Central Africa <hl>, although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. The slave trade was largely a by-product of tribal and state warfare as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory, or financing future wars. However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving, such as Oyo, Benin, Igala, Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.

The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout <hl> Western and West Central Africa <hl> , although wars were rarely started to procure slaves.


Question: What country is mentioned here as having difficult relations with adjoining countries due to slavery?

The kings of Dahomey sold war captives into transatlantic slavery; they would otherwise have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs. As one of West Africa's principal slave states, Dahomey became extremely unpopular with neighbouring peoples. Like the Bambara Empire to the east, the Khasso kingdoms depended heavily on the slave trade for their economy. A family's status was indicated by the number of slaves it owned, leading to wars for the sole purpose of taking more captives. This trade led the Khasso into increasing contact with the European settlements of Africa's west coast, particularly the French. Benin grew increasingly rich during the 16th and 17th centuries on the slave trade with Europe; slaves from enemy states of the interior were sold, and carried to the Americas in Dutch and Portuguese ships. The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the "Slave Coast".

Answer: Dahomey

<hl> The kings of Dahomey sold war captives into transatlantic slavery; they would otherwise have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs. <hl> As one of West Africa's principal slave states, Dahomey became extremely unpopular with neighbouring peoples. Like the Bambara Empire to the east, the Khasso kingdoms depended heavily on the slave trade for their economy. A family's status was indicated by the number of slaves it owned, leading to wars for the sole purpose of taking more captives. This trade led the Khasso into increasing contact with the European settlements of Africa's west coast, particularly the French. Benin grew increasingly rich during the 16th and 17th centuries on the slave trade with Europe; slaves from enemy states of the interior were sold, and carried to the Americas in Dutch and Portuguese ships. The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the "Slave Coast".

The kings of <hl> Dahomey <hl> sold war captives into transatlantic slavery; they would otherwise have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs. As one of West Africa's principal slave states, Dahomey became extremely unpopular with neighbouring peoples. Like the Bambara Empire to the east, the Khasso kingdoms depended heavily on the slave trade for their economy. A family's status was indicated by the number of slaves it owned, leading to wars for the sole purpose of taking more captives. This trade led the Khasso into increasing contact with the European settlements of Africa's west coast, particularly the French. Benin grew increasingly rich during the 16th and 17th centuries on the slave trade with Europe; slaves from enemy states of the interior were sold, and carried to the Americas in Dutch and Portuguese ships. The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the "Slave Coast".


Question: During what period did Benin prosper from slavery?

Answer: 16th and 17th centuries

The kings of Dahomey sold war captives into transatlantic slavery; they would otherwise have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs. As one of West Africa's principal slave states, Dahomey became extremely unpopular with neighbouring peoples. Like the Bambara Empire to the east, the Khasso kingdoms depended heavily on the slave trade for their economy. A family's status was indicated by the number of slaves it owned, leading to wars for the sole purpose of taking more captives. This trade led the Khasso into increasing contact with the European settlements of Africa's west coast, particularly the French. <hl> Benin grew increasingly rich during the 16th and 17th centuries on the slave trade with Europe; slaves from enemy states of the interior were sold, and carried to the Americas in Dutch and Portuguese ships. <hl> The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the "Slave Coast".

The kings of Dahomey sold war captives into transatlantic slavery; they would otherwise have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs. As one of West Africa's principal slave states, Dahomey became extremely unpopular with neighbouring peoples. Like the Bambara Empire to the east, the Khasso kingdoms depended heavily on the slave trade for their economy. A family's status was indicated by the number of slaves it owned, leading to wars for the sole purpose of taking more captives. This trade led the Khasso into increasing contact with the European settlements of Africa's west coast, particularly the French. Benin grew increasingly rich during the <hl> 16th and 17th centuries <hl> on the slave trade with Europe; slaves from enemy states of the interior were sold, and carried to the Americas in Dutch and Portuguese ships. The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the "Slave Coast".


Question: What did the economy of the Khasso kingdoms have a major dependence upon?

Answer: the slave trade

The kings of Dahomey sold war captives into transatlantic slavery; they would otherwise have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs. As one of West Africa's principal slave states, Dahomey became extremely unpopular with neighbouring peoples. <hl> Like the Bambara Empire to the east, the Khasso kingdoms depended heavily on the slave trade for their economy. <hl> A family's status was indicated by the number of slaves it owned, leading to wars for the sole purpose of taking more captives. This trade led the Khasso into increasing contact with the European settlements of Africa's west coast, particularly the French. Benin grew increasingly rich during the 16th and 17th centuries on the slave trade with Europe; slaves from enemy states of the interior were sold, and carried to the Americas in Dutch and Portuguese ships. The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the "Slave Coast".

The kings of Dahomey sold war captives into transatlantic slavery; they would otherwise have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs. As one of West Africa's principal slave states, Dahomey became extremely unpopular with neighbouring peoples. Like the Bambara Empire to the east, the Khasso kingdoms depended heavily on <hl> the slave trade <hl> for their economy. A family's status was indicated by the number of slaves it owned, leading to wars for the sole purpose of taking more captives. This trade led the Khasso into increasing contact with the European settlements of Africa's west coast, particularly the French. Benin grew increasingly rich during the 16th and 17th centuries on the slave trade with Europe; slaves from enemy states of the interior were sold, and carried to the Americas in Dutch and Portuguese ships. The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the "Slave Coast".


Question: What was one of the names given to Benin's coastline?

Answer: Slave Coast

The kings of Dahomey sold war captives into transatlantic slavery; they would otherwise have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs. As one of West Africa's principal slave states, Dahomey became extremely unpopular with neighbouring peoples. Like the Bambara Empire to the east, the Khasso kingdoms depended heavily on the slave trade for their economy. A family's status was indicated by the number of slaves it owned, leading to wars for the sole purpose of taking more captives. This trade led the Khasso into increasing contact with the European settlements of Africa's west coast, particularly the French. Benin grew increasingly rich during the 16th and 17th centuries on the slave trade with Europe; slaves from enemy states of the interior were sold, and carried to the Americas in Dutch and Portuguese ships. <hl> The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the " Slave Coast ". <hl>

The kings of Dahomey sold war captives into transatlantic slavery; they would otherwise have been killed in a ceremony known as the Annual Customs. As one of West Africa's principal slave states, Dahomey became extremely unpopular with neighbouring peoples. Like the Bambara Empire to the east, the Khasso kingdoms depended heavily on the slave trade for their economy. A family's status was indicated by the number of slaves it owned, leading to wars for the sole purpose of taking more captives. This trade led the Khasso into increasing contact with the European settlements of Africa's west coast, particularly the French. Benin grew increasingly rich during the 16th and 17th centuries on the slave trade with Europe; slaves from enemy states of the interior were sold, and carried to the Americas in Dutch and Portuguese ships. The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the "<hl> Slave Coast <hl>".

The Bight of Benin's shore soon came to be known as the " <hl> Slave Coast <hl> ".


Question: what happened in the 17th century regarding shipments ?

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

Answer: increase in shipments

<hl> The 17th century saw an increase in shipments , with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. <hl> These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

The 17th century saw an <hl> increase in shipments <hl>, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

The 17th century saw an <hl> increase in shipments <hl> , with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619.


Question: how long was the first african been kidnapped ?

Answer: seven years

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. <hl> These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years . <hl> Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after <hl> seven years <hl>. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after <hl> seven years <hl> .


Question: where were the slaves shipped ?

Answer: to Belize

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. <hl> Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize . <hl>

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped <hl> to Belize <hl>.

Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped <hl> to Belize <hl> .


Question: who took the slaves to Montserrat ?

Answer: Irish immigrants

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. <hl> Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize. <hl>

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. <hl> Irish immigrants <hl> took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.


Question: when was Chattel slavery codified ?

Answer: 1656, and in 1662

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. <hl> Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662 , the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. <hl> Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in <hl> 1656, and in 1662 <hl>, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in <hl> 1656, and in 1662 <hl> , the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity.


Question: What year was chattel slavery codified in Virginia law?

Answer: 1656

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. <hl> Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656 , and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. <hl> Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in <hl> 1656 <hl>, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in <hl> 1656 <hl> , and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity.


Question: What principle means that all children of slave mothers were made into slaves?

Answer: partus sequitur ventrem

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. <hl> Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem , by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. <hl> Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of <hl> partus sequitur ventrem <hl>, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of <hl> partus sequitur ventrem <hl> , by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity.


Question: After how many years of work were indentured servants freed?

Answer: seven

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. <hl> These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. <hl> Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after <hl> seven <hl> years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.


Question: Kidnapped Africans brought into Jamestown, Virginia were not initially considered slaves but what?

Answer: indentured servants

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. <hl> These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. <hl> Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as <hl> indentured servants <hl> and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.


Question: Where did Irish immigrants take slaves to in 1651?

Answer: Montserrat

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. <hl> Irish immigrants took slaves to Montserrat in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize. <hl>

The 17th century saw an increase in shipments, with Africans arriving in the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia in 1619. These first kidnapped Africans were classed as indentured servants and freed after seven years. Chattel slavery was codified in Virginia law in 1656, and in 1662, the colony adopted the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, by which children of slave mothers were slaves, regardless of paternity. Irish immigrants took slaves to <hl> Montserrat <hl> in 1651, and in 1655, slaves were shipped to Belize.


Question: Which nation in 1800 had the most financial success in the West Indian colonies?

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the United Kingdom. After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. This advantage was reinforced when France lost its most important colony, St. Domingue (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791 and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against cheaper French sugar.

Answer: United Kingdom

<hl> By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the United Kingdom . <hl> After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. This advantage was reinforced when France lost its most important colony, St. Domingue (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791 and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against cheaper French sugar.

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the <hl> United Kingdom <hl>. After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. This advantage was reinforced when France lost its most important colony, St. Domingue (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791 and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against cheaper French sugar.

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the <hl> United Kingdom <hl> .


Question: What other nation did the British compete against in the sugar colony business?

Answer: France

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the United Kingdom. After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. <hl> This advantage was reinforced when France lost its most important colony, St. Domingue (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791 and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. <hl> Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against cheaper French sugar.

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the United Kingdom. After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. This advantage was reinforced when <hl> France <hl> lost its most important colony, St. Domingue (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791 and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against cheaper French sugar.


Question: What important colony did France lose to a slave revolt in 1791?

Answer: St. Domingue

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the United Kingdom. After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. <hl> This advantage was reinforced when France lost its most important colony, St. Domingue (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791 and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. <hl> Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against cheaper French sugar.

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the United Kingdom. After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. This advantage was reinforced when France lost its most important colony, <hl> St. Domingue <hl> (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791 and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against cheaper French sugar.


Question: Was French sugar cheaper or more expensive than British sugar prior to 1791 and the French revolution?

Answer: cheaper

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the United Kingdom. After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. This advantage was reinforced when France lost its most important colony, St. Domingue (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791 and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. <hl> Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against cheaper French sugar. <hl>

By far the most financially profitable West Indian colonies in 1800 belonged to the United Kingdom. After entering the sugar colony business late, British naval supremacy and control over key islands such as Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward Islands and Barbados and the territory of British Guiana gave it an important edge over all competitors; while many British did not make gains, a handful of individuals made small fortunes. This advantage was reinforced when France lost its most important colony, St. Domingue (western Hispaniola, now Haiti), to a slave revolt in 1791 and supported revolts against its rival Britain, after the 1793 French revolution in the name of liberty. Before 1791, British sugar had to be protected to compete against <hl> cheaper <hl> French sugar.


Question: What major technological advantage did Europe have over Africa?

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, although there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. The major advantage that Europe had was in ship building. During the period of slavery, the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially, while the population of Africa remained stagnant. Rodney contended that the profits from slavery were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the industrial revolution was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. He cited examples such as the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean.

Answer: ship building

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, although there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. <hl> The major advantage that Europe had was in ship building . <hl> During the period of slavery, the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially, while the population of Africa remained stagnant. Rodney contended that the profits from slavery were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the industrial revolution was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. He cited examples such as the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean.

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, although there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. The major advantage that Europe had was in <hl> ship building <hl>. During the period of slavery, the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially, while the population of Africa remained stagnant. Rodney contended that the profits from slavery were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the industrial revolution was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. He cited examples such as the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean.

The major advantage that Europe had was in <hl> ship building <hl> .


Question: What fueled economic growth in Europe and the Americas?

Answer: profits from slavery

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, although there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. The major advantage that Europe had was in ship building. During the period of slavery, the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially, while the population of Africa remained stagnant. <hl> Rodney contended that the profits from slavery were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. <hl> Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the industrial revolution was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. He cited examples such as the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean.

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, although there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. The major advantage that Europe had was in ship building. During the period of slavery, the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially, while the population of Africa remained stagnant. Rodney contended that the <hl> profits from slavery <hl> were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the industrial revolution was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. He cited examples such as the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean.


Question: What did agricultural profits from the Americas help fuel?

Answer: industrial revolution

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, although there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. The major advantage that Europe had was in ship building. During the period of slavery, the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially, while the population of Africa remained stagnant. Rodney contended that the profits from slavery were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. <hl> Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the industrial revolution was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. <hl> He cited examples such as the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean.

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, although there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. The major advantage that Europe had was in ship building. During the period of slavery, the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially, while the population of Africa remained stagnant. Rodney contended that the profits from slavery were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the <hl> industrial revolution <hl> was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. He cited examples such as the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean.


Question: Plantation owners from the Caribbean helped to fund what invention?

Answer: steam engine

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, although there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. The major advantage that Europe had was in ship building. During the period of slavery, the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially, while the population of Africa remained stagnant. Rodney contended that the profits from slavery were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the industrial revolution was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. <hl> He cited examples such as the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean. <hl>

Historian Walter Rodney has argued that at the start of the slave trade in the 16th century, although there was a technological gap between Europe and Africa, it was not very substantial. Both continents were using Iron Age technology. The major advantage that Europe had was in ship building. During the period of slavery, the populations of Europe and the Americas grew exponentially, while the population of Africa remained stagnant. Rodney contended that the profits from slavery were used to fund economic growth and technological advancement in Europe and the Americas. Based on earlier theories by Eric Williams, he asserted that the industrial revolution was at least in part funded by agricultural profits from the Americas. He cited examples such as the invention of the <hl> steam engine <hl> by James Watt, which was funded by plantation owners from the Caribbean.