Christopher Columbus and the Afrikan Holocaust: Slavery and the Rise of European Capitalism

John Henrik Clarke was a great historian his work will still be read by generations to come.. I have listened to many of his lectures and it's nice to know his writing style has the same verve, wit, conviviality and intelligence while dealing with a complex matter. This has provoked me to do further studies on the subject matter. The only drawback is that intellectually it leaves you wanting more because his style is so engaging.

I found this book interesting because it has enlightened me on the history of the slave trade that you will never find in most book because of the tendency to hide this evil trade from the young once. I think it is time the truth is told so that the younger generations will no of the atrocities of the past and respect the black race. The number of people who died in the slave trade were more than the Jewish Holocaust but people tend to talk more about the latter.

This has to be one of the most informative, easy reading books that I have read and enjoyed from a list of books read regarding the period of slavery and the notorious slave trader Columbus. In this book you will find good detailed information on Columbus pre-slavery trade (as in the essence before it became an industry) as well as during the slavery trade. So much was put into perspective from this book. A definite eye opener and a book worth having on your shelf.

Amazing book and a steal at the current price. If you don't know much about the so called discoverer C.Columbus, this is the best place to start. Covers major topics on the slave trade in general and who was involved. Came on time and I'd highly recommend.

I am still reading this book. I love to learn about the real history of my people and this book is a path way to doing just that. Fast delivery of product too.

One for the black history collection it tells the story of the Afrikan holocaust as it is, Evil and Satanic.

A very educative and revelation reading, short and precisely to the point. a book for all colours, race and genders.

superb book for anyone interested in humanity.

Awesome read

I was looking to read and understand the historical story of Columbus and the onset of enslavement. However the book focuses more on what the author's views are quoted by various sayings from other books. Disappointing read

Great book.

Unbelievable account of the genocides of the African people that are rarely told. The evil to rid the world of the blacks still goes on today.

I have just finished reading Christopher Columbus and the African Holocaust by Dr. John Henrik Clarke. I also think that I should mention that I read a review of Christopher Columbus and the African Holocaust by Kevin M Quigg dated July 18, 2008 before I purchased Christopher Columbus and the African Holocaust. Even though it is a subject that I was quite familiar with I found this book very informative. For a work of only 108 pages on the topic I found it to be well referenced, with a six and a quarter pages bibliography and a very good index. Having heard Dr. Clarke lecture many times and I had the honor to have had a wonderful conversation with him many years ago it struck me that this brief but informative work had the "sound" of Dr. Clarke "speaking." Speaking to a very particular audience as an African American I felt sure that his words were directed at me. As a scholar, however I am sure that his obvious "I am speaking to my people tone" did not affect the facts that he presented. Mr. Quigg took exception to not only Dr. Clarkes tone but the message that was presented as well. Mr. Quigg criticized Dr. Clarkes work for having a lot of rage with many half-truths thrown in. Rage, perhaps righteous indignation might be a better term. After all Dr. Clarke is a descendant of the untold millions of Africans transported to the Americas on slave ships as am I. I think that we at the very least have a right to some modicum of rage and a full measure of righteous indignation. I do not think Dr. Clarke's perceived rage or actual indignation had a negative effect on the research and scholarship presented that was presented. Furthermore Mr. Quigg offers scant evidence of the half-truths which were allegedly thrown into this work of scholarship. Mr. Quigg took issue with Dr. Clarke for calling Christopher a Thug, what Dr. Clarke stated was that "Columbus was the best known of a number of Western thugs and murders who have been presented to the world as heroes and discovers" this statement was completely accurate as far as I am concerned. Columbus was the spearhead of an invasion by European nations which sparked more than an African Holocaust but rather a global Holocaust and genocide that in truth was well beyond realm of being thuggish and that has lasted right up to this present day. Columbus was as were his successors all of whom were acting under a Papal bull which authorized them to "subdue all Saracens, pagans, and all other unbelievers even to reduce them to perpetual slavery." If you come to my homeland on a mission to "subdue me and even to reduce me to perpetual slavery" it is clear to me that you are not on a mission of "discovery with an eye to peaceful commerce. So it was with those who were successors of Christopher Columbus. Though I cannot recall Columbus ever being referred to as Conquistador a Conqueror he was a Conquistador" in all senses of the word. His successors however wore the title "Conquistador" with pride and were worse by far than their predecessor. It was very accurate for Clark to have written that Columbus was the best known of the murdering invaders sponsored by Spain and Portugal who under the sanction of several Popes set out on missions to conquer, subjugate, enslave and plunder all of the peoples that they encountered. It was Hernan Cortes the "Conquistador" who subjugated, enslaved and plundered the Aztecs in what would later be called Mexico; I would wager that most Americans would recognize his name as well or as quickly as that of Columbus. It was Francisco Pizarro the "Conquistador" who subjugated, enslaved and plundered the Incas of would later be called Peru; I would wager that most Americans would recognize his name as well or as quickly as that of Columbus. As for the half-truths Mr. Quigg states referring to Dr. Clark," he says there was only one surviving child of Henry VIII and that was Elizabeth. Professor, what about Edward and Mary." What about Edward and Mary? Edward VII the child of Henry VIII and Jane Seymour was born in 1537 and died in 1533 at the age of 15 I would not consider that surviving. Had Edward VII actually survived Elizabeth may not have in all likelihood ever mounted the throne of England. In the case of Mary I she was born in 1516 and died in 1558. Mary who was 17 years older than her half-sister Elizabeth mounted the throne of England in 1553 after the death of Edward and the death of Jane Gray whom Edward bequeath throne to and whom Mary had Jane Gray beheaded after a 9 day reign from the Tower of London, then mounted the throne, and died 5 years later in 1558 at the age of 42. Elizabeth I was 25 at the time of Mary's death. Had Mary I actually survived Elizabeth would not have in all likelihood ever mounted the throne of England and England. Had Mary I actually survived may well stayed a Catholic country and could have been one today. Since I don't wish to traffic in half-truth I will mention Henry FitzRoy, 1st Duke of Richmond and Somerset, Earl of Nottingham who was born15 June 1519 to Henry VIII and Henry's Mistress Elizabeth Blount. Henry was the only illegitimate child that Henry VIII ever claimed. Henry FitzRoy 23 July 1536) had Henry FitzRoy actually survived Elizabeth may not have in all likelihood ever mounted the throne of England. Elizabeth I was born in 1533, she mounted the throne of England in 1558 at the age of 25 and ruled until her death 1603 at the age of 69. Elizabeth I sat the throne for 45 years, 40 years longer than her half-sister Mary I. Call me biased if you will but, dying at the age of 69 after a 45 year reign sounds very much like surviving to me. Mr Quigg goes on to state the following about Dr. Clark "He claims 100 million black Africans were killed or put in slavery. I think most historians would disagree with this analysis." As a researcher I am more than aware that scholars particularly historians disagree all of the time. One source I read stated"Between 1492 and 1776, an estimated 6.5 million people migrated to and settled in the Western Hemisphere." Even to this day precise figures are not available. Hugh Thomas in an appendix to his book, "The Slave Trade," gives us figures which falls in a range of from not less than 8,000,000 to not more than 11,970,000, finally Thomas writes. "I prefer to think that the appropriate figure would seem to be something like 11,000,000, give or take 500,000" and that is just for the Atlantic slave trade. We must also keep in mind that there is no record of those who died on the way to the slave castles on the African coast, that there is no record of those who died on the "Middle Passage" across the Atlantic. The US abolished slavery in 1865 with the thirteenth Amendment to the constitution slavery continued in Puerto Rico until 1873 and in Cuba 1886. Brazil was the last New World country to abolish slavery, which it did in 1888. There is no way of knowing how many captives died as the result of dumping an entire cargo of captive to avoid being arrested as pirates by British Squadrons patrolling the West African coast for slavers in the 112 year span between 1776 and 1888. Again there is no way of knowing how many died, since records were only kept for those who survived and were sold and there is no proof of how accurate those records were. As Dr. Clarke pointed out, there was nothing a stopping a slave ship captain from giving a shot count and selling the difference for his personal profit. We must also not forget that the "Triangle trade" in the Atlantic" was not the only destination of captives from Africa. Untold millions of Africans were sold across Indian Ocean, there were those who went North, Northeast many of whom were sent from slave port on the East coast of Africa experienced captivity in the lands of Islam as far as India. Some captives were sold as far East as China! Ronald Segal tells us in his book `Islam's Black Slaves," that large numbers of captives crossed the Sahara on the various trade routes to satisfy the demand for slave labor in Islam and farther East another good example are the Sayyad or Siddi of the Sind region of Northwest India who were Swahilis from the East Coast of Africa or Ethiopian peoples who are called Habashi or Habshi in Arabic. Regardless which region of Africa they came from or to what lands they were carried way as captives. Captives they were and so "100 million black Africans were killed or put in slavery" which doesn't sound unreasonable to me. I will close with a statement that I opened with: For a short work of only 108 pages on the topic I found it to be well referenced, with a six and a quarter page bibliography and a very good index. I can recommend this work by Dr. John Henrik Clark without reservation. Temujin Ekunfeo