UK, 1807. But that was trading. We mounted constant Naval patrols along the Guinea Sierra Leonian and Ghanaian coasts, about 1850. lost hundreds from fever and fighting the slaving states. USN mirrored us along the Gulf coast.

!833 was the abolition of possession in the UK and its colonies.

A black day for history.

 .

Ref # 66. Are you asking when the slave trade started ? If so it began soon after the Spanish landings in the Americas in 1492. I think the English began in the mid 1500s. Sir John Hawkins was the leading slave trader in Elizabethan times.

The British Slave trade started after the change from tobacco to sugar planting. Tobacco could be worked by indentured servants, and a lot were taken on after Monmouth's rebellion Barbados was the first.

But sugar, initially smuggled in from Brazil, required big acreages and therefore a lot of unskilled manpower. I believe it was after 1615 that slavery was intruducedintyo the British West Indies.

Even in my time, 1964, there were still "redleg" communities who specialised in skilled jobs like garage foremen, ships' derrick operators, fork lift truck drivers..They never intermarried, and a lot probably fled to Canada after Independence in 1966.

There was of course no outcry for the lot of the Indentired Servant. Too white, too conservative.

From: <NOBR>Flashman8</NOBR>

Sent: 29/11/2007 20:10

A point about Barbados.It was the oldest uninterruptedly British owned colony, since 1605, and the White man was there long before the black. Unlike Africa and India, families like the Goddards, Mannings Bynoes, Cumberbatches etc had been there from the beginning. So, on Independence the Island should have reverted to them

The slave trade started millenia before the Spanish infected the New World, and for all the effort to eradicate it it is still going strong.

The Kuwaiti Royal family openly keep slaves. And criticised the South African government for Apartheid.

Saudi Arabia "officially" banned slavery in 1968.    Even though the Arabs are still the masters of The Trade, the Balkan states are up & comers. 

The Saudi Royal Family are broadly pro-Western in the sense that they need the military and technological support of the West to keep the Muslim fanatics from taking over. And we need them as much as they need us, they may be dictators but they're friendly dictators.

Tiger,  being close to the Saudis doesn't necessarily make the Bush family pro-slavery but it does show that  politics does, indeed, make strange bed-fellows.   Other than that, MarkGB's #78 says it all.

Trouble is, being close to the Saudis means being close to the Wahabi. Arab Royal Houses don't just rule one state. You'll find Al Khalifa in Bahrein and the UAE. Ditto A'Sabah in Kuwait

 

Bring back the Ottomans sez I.  

Where are the Mongols when you need them.