Arab Swahili (a loose knit tribal group/affiliation that spoke the same language in east and central Africa) slave traders and their captives
Tim Sergeant – The Daily Sceptic Sept 3, 2026
Since I’m a cheerful unbeliever, like most people in Britain now, there’s no reason why I should be more than marginally interested in the C of E’s expensive guilt-trip for its historic links to the slave trade. Except that I have a fondness for ancient architecture and language that, as with Richard Dawkins, includes old churches, old liturgies and the music that goes with them. I contributed to the renovation of the bells of the fine Norman church in my village because I like the sound they make. Like the liturgy, it’s an important facet of British history and the church’s bells are actually much more prominent in village life than its church services. For several years, they have only happened when a peripatetic vicar can include us in his rounds every few weeks. As to the slavery issue, the villagers, who only enter the church in large numbers for services at Christmas, Easter and harvest-time, seem to feel much less guilty than the new Archbishop of Canterbury. I agree with them for a reason that hasn’t been mentioned in the recent beating of ecclesiastical breasts or even in newspapers and journals that are unhappy with the idea of compensating the descendants of slaves and the governments of the present-day countries where the slaves were captured.
Many people have pointed out that Europeans didn’t invent African slavery. Though rarely conceded by the grievance industry and the campaigners for compensation, slavery was an ancient and widespread African custom, established many centuries before Portuguese and Spanish sailors hesitantly began to explore the coasts of West Africa. If the locals weren’t actively hostile, trade was likely and what the local traders were keen to exchange for European products were other Africans who had been enslaved. Some of the sailors may have had doubts about the morality of the exchanges. Not so the African traders, or the tribal chiefs who pocketed much of the proceeds. The slaves mostly came from tribes living several hundred miles inland. The sailors never penetrated beyond the coasts, partly because they didn’t know what lay beyond it and partly because anyone who tried to make his way through the thick forests quickly returned, if they returned at all, suffering from tropical diseases or spear-wounds.
One of the first Europeans who did go far inland and returned to report his findings was Mungo Park, a young Scotsman sponsored by The Association for Promoting the Discovery of the Interior Parts of Africa. European ignorance about those “Interior Parts” was almost total and Park’s mission was to find the source of the River Niger. It was successful but he was very lucky to survive disease, robbery, kidnapping, imprisonment and injuries. His diaries, freely available at Project Gutenberg, contain many observations and reflections on the local slave-trade, including that Islamic traders from north of the Sahara were more feared than local captors because their methods were even more brutal. However, two of his observations really surprised me. One was the sheer scale of the enslavement of Africans by other Africans. I had assumed it might run to 10 or at most 20% of the population but Park reckoned it was nearer two thirds. As in America, slave-owners ranged from the relatively kind to the vicious and slave status was inherited. Some Africans sold themselves into slavery to pay off debts but most slaves were captured in tribal wars. Freedom could sometimes be bought but Park noted that a few ceased being slaves when their owners ate or sacrificed them.
The second and most surprising feature and the one most closely related to the C of E’s guilt-trip was that slaves became more expensive the further from home they were at the time of purchase. That was because being unable to speak the languages of the intervening tribes and empires, they were less likely to escape and more easily identified and recaptured if they did. Naturally, when European traders offered to take slaves even further away from their homes and across an ocean, the traders were doubly pleased. It is that feature that has had little attention on both sides of the debate, though it is discussed in some recent academic books about African slavery.
On the whole, Europeans had stopped enslaving other Europeans for several centuries by the time they came across the African trade. The English system of villeinage wasn’t as ruthless or all-embracing and largely stopped after the Black Death. Russian serfdom was the main persisting exception and might have lasted beyond its abolition in 1861 had not Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War revealed the deficiencies of Czarist Russia’s social structures. If Africans thought it acceptable to capture and sell other Africans, was it surprising if 16th century Europeans agreed with them? The equivalence is not exact, of course. When warlike tribes such as the Mongols and Zulus invaded their neighbours, it was often customary to kill all adult males of fighting age. Most women and their young children would be enslaved but there were important exceptions. Some women would end up as the wives or concubines of their captors. Those of the highest rank might be formally married off to the conquering chieftains as part of a peace treaty. That sort of arrangement is much more likely when the defeated tribes are not very different in appearance and customs to their neighbouring conquerors. It is much less likely when the invaders arrive not on horses but on boats after journeys of several thousand miles and therefore looked and sounded very unlike their captives. That, in turn, made it easier for the captors to ‘other’ their slaves and regard them as not quite human.
Anthony Johnson slave owner. See: A Virginia man was one of America’s first Black slave owners
Some American slaves became important and influential members of slave-owning households, rather like the eunuchs at Ottoman courts. Some, when freed, even became slave-owners themselves, but the differences I’ve just described made that sort of role-reversal and social advancement much rarer in America than it was in Africa. The large numbers involved in Trans-Atlantic slavery are often cited as evidence of its unique wickedness, yet while it persisted for about four centuries, the proportions of the African population enslaved by other Africans as well as by Muslim traders from the north and east may well have been significantly larger than the toll taken by European and American traders during their comparatively briefer period of activity. Britain was also, of course, foremost among European and American nations – North and South – in opposing and actively suppressing the trade.
My fellow-villagers should not be monstered by the press or social media if they want more church money to go to preserving their architectural heritage than to nebulous programmes apparently dreamed up by office-bound church bureaucrats. Especially when one of those programmes means using church money to line the pockets of the descendants of African slave traders.
Tim Sargent is a pseudonym.
My now long dead wife worked in a senior position in british banking
and had access to document files
She said the slavery on black people was funded by Rothschild Oppenhiemer and mainly Sassoon bankers
e g the jews
They were the only people who had the money to build man and maintain the slave ships
These folk were bought from african leaders to work the US cotton plantations
we in the UK had no cotton plantations so did not need black slaves
we had enough white ones of our own
We did import black folk after ww2
If we did want to pay for reparations it should be Germany for the crimes we committed in w w 2
the article mentions the archbishop of canterbury dont make me laugh
so many folk have left the church over her ( him )
Repatriate them
… by force
i am 89 years old
and my long term memory is still good
i remember the first black people coming to the UK
Government ministers told us that after the wat we needed these new folk and please welcome them
but soon the criminal gangs came with them
as a small child we were a bit afraid of these new people with their dark skins
but i made friends with colouted boys at school, who were very different to us
The trans Atlantic slave trade was only an extension of long standing AND ON GOING African practices.
When all the ‘lads’, Sit under a tree in the shade sucking on Quat, Teaching their young fellas to poke Goats up the arse with a stick, But make the daughters trek some miles in many cases to fetch water from a drinking hole, that has the potential for wild animal attacks going there & back… yep, Dirty bastards, keep out of OUR culture, Worse still, Kidnapping ‘boys’ & making them shoot weaker ones to prove themselves..Before going on Killing sprees in the Congo. well I rest my case.
& folks think my patriotic views are cunt material. ? I know, lets put 1,200 in a Village of 350, & see what happens…All the while as negotiations are suggested that ‘they’ receive Lots of ‘quids’…Thousands actually in reparations.
Fuck off.
Whatever BS you want to spout about slaves, the total number of blacks affected by it was a tiny fraction of the whole. Moreover, the black’s own history tells you they were the ones rounding them up and taking them to the slave markets to sell. Also, they openly admit there were (and still are) more black slaves being taken and used by blacks in africa than were ever sent to the cotton fields in america or elsewhere. All of the current bollocks is just more “give us money whitey”. Even if you want to go full-on wanktoid, no white person today is responsible for it and no black alive today is a victim of what went on back then. The only black slaves today are those being enslaved and killed by blacks in africa. Why not give all the money in the world to the egyptians? After all, they were enslaved for thousands of years. A few years was all the blacks had.
This Clancy thing is BS. All I see is the entire human race wanting to kill her. What cunts you all are. She’s sitting in a “courtroom”, you’re showing her autopsy photos of her dead kids, she’s crying, and your heroic “lawyer” is yelling at her to “shut up”. Yeah, I know, “she killed them you moron”. And then you say, “she then fake tried to kill herself”… by crippling herself… very fake. Even if you want all that, you’re still cunts. Why televise it and do your “yeah yeah your going to some cell or other” dance? Answer: because you’re cunts. Do not a single one of you have the slightest compassion? You have no idea what went on or why. You don’t know what was or is in her head. And no, the defence her lawyers are spouting isn’t telling you either. They’re using whatever they think will work. What if you did it, for whatever reason, and then felt some huge crushing remorse? But no! She absolutely must be some huge monster and always was. She had months of “mental health” before that and you “helped” her how? By filling her with drugs. Wonderful. I can even give you a way in which she’s completely innocent: her husband, who knows all about it and her (unlike you) gives her so much of the the 14(!) drugs she was on that she’s now out of it, then he kills the kids, goes out, comes back, says “oh noes”, calls the cops, they drag her off, then he sets up a gofraudme that he HAS set up and pockets a cool $880,000, which he HAS pocketed. She isn’t allowed any money to defend herself of course. Her parents have to empty their life savings into your pockets to defend her. Like I say. What utter cunts. You know nothing about it or her or the circumstances and you almost certainly no nothing about what it’s like trying to cope in your shitstain “society” when you DO have “mental problems”. All you get is “take these drugs” and “are you hearing voices”. If you say “yes”, they lock you up. That’s how it works, whether you realise it or not. So if she actually was hearing voices, you were saying to her “dope yourself so you don’t know which way is up”, or else “we’ll lock you up to keep you safe”. What would you do if that was you? You all look at it from the top of your pile of sheckels raining down your shit on her like you’re god fucking almighty. What utter utter cunts.
So, someone sees an opportunity to filch some money from the C of E and its pastors are only too eager to comply so they can buy themselves a cheap hit of dopamine.
the british ? you mean the east india company who were jewish robbers
look at whet they are doing in palestine
Ghislaine Maxwell: Epstein’s dark whore
Ghislaine Maxwell, daughter of the notorious media mogul and pervert jewboy Robert Maxwell, was a wealthy young woman who became involved with the predator Jeffrey Epstein. She is currently serving a sentence in a US prison for her role in Epstein’s crimes; he allegedly died in prison in 2019.
what sort of a woman would trick young girls with promised of being a wealthy famous actress then give them to Epstein and his jews to sexually abuse ?
we white goyim dont need to justify us
to any negro since we also were slaves
for centuries of the jews usuritaxers +our
own aristocraty . africans + arabs hunted
for slaves already before Islam + islam
was an adicional drive for slavery . it was
always costumbre in africa + neareast since
in that hot climate there nobody enjoys
bodyly work . not any body in any power
over others . the jew despising heavy bodyly
work is the best exemple + everyawhere
were opens a new business way inmediately
the jews step in . so it is in IT + even in the
dissident truth sites of internet .
Slavery, of one kind or another, has remained a constant throughout all history.
John Griffin on YouTube is very good on this Lindsay & Patrick Clancy Trial thing I find.
MEGA
Make England Gentile Again
What utter garbage. To suggest Africans brought slavery on themselves is at best a cold-blooded lie. If you note, Africans in general are the most warm-hearted people on the planet, much like most of the people in the southern hemisphere. Africans were, and still area generally concerened with enjoying life and the continent they have been blessed with. Yes. There were existing elements of slavery on the continent, but definitely not the brutal Chattle Slavery introduced by Zombie Europeans. Africans ultimately treated their slaves like family. Why? Because they had no desire to dominate anyone or anything bacasue they had dominion over a lush and plentiful land already, and were too busy enjoying it. The real urge to dominate, rape, murder, extract, pilage, destroy, steal, canibalise was and still is uniquely European/Western. They did it everywhere they went, left devistation in their wake, and then established entire industries, institutions and economic systems designed to blame the woes of the world on Brown people – history tells us that to this very day.
Forget compensation for Africans guy, just take a good look at your own history of slavery when Dublin was the center of slave activity right in the center of that slave factory known as Ireland. The business of slavery wasn’t completely an African thing, it began as a Phoenician activity, who along with Hyksos and other types saw human beings as commodities. All this constant jabber regarding Africans hides the true history of Phoenician slavery, and their number one port and colony known as Britain. Compensate the Irish.
I agree on some points, Slavery was for Profit and was evil.
Yes people were slave traders even here in my Geographical area.
However Slavery is evil and still goes on today in different forms