1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Brums [2.3K]
3 years ago
6

When did slavery start?

History
2 answers:
MrRa [10]3 years ago
6 0
Slavery in America began when the first African slaves were brought to the North American colony of Jamestown, Virginia, in 1619<span>, to aid in the production of such lucrative crops as tobacco.

hope this helps slavery started in 1619</span>
WARRIOR [948]3 years ago
3 0
Hello!

DO YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHERE, WHEN, AND WHY SLAVERY CAME AND WHEN IT REALLY CAME!!??? OK then, prepare to experience a GENIUS ANSWER like no other...

As we all know, t<span>he </span>history of slavery<span> spans many </span>cultures<span>, </span>nationalities<span>, and </span>religions<span> from ancient times to the present day. However the social, </span>economic<span>, and legal positions of slaves were vastly different in different systems of slavery in different times and places.
</span>Although slavery is no longer legal anywhere in the world, human trafficking<span> remains an international problem and an estimated 25-40 million people are enslaved today.</span><span> During the 1983–2005 </span>Second Sudanese Civil War<span> people were taken into slavery.</span><span> Although </span>Slavery in Mauritania<span> was criminalized in August 2007, </span><span>in </span>Mauritania<span> it is estimated that up to 600,000 men, women and children, or 20% of the population, are currently enslaved, many of them used as </span>bonded labor.<span>Evidence emerged in the late 1990s of systematic slavery on </span>cacao plantations<span> in West Africa; see the </span>chocolate and slavery<span> article.
</span>
But now...do you want to know the TRUTH!!???

<span>People think they know everything about slavery in the United States, but they don’t. They think the majority of African slaves came to the American colonies, but they didn’t. They talk about 400 hundred years of slavery, but it wasn’t. They claim all Southerners owned slaves, but they didn’t. Some argue it was a long time ago, but it wasn’t.
</span>
<span>Four myths about slavery:
</span>Myth One: The majority of African captives came to what became the United States. 
Truth:<span> Only 380,000 or 4-6% came to the United States. The majority of enslaved Africans went to Brazil, followed by the Caribbean. A significant number of enslaved Africans arrived in the American colonies by way of the Caribbean where they were “seasoned” and mentored into slave life. They spent months or years recovering from the harsh realities of the Middle Passage. Once they were forcibly accustomed to slave labor, many were then brought to plantations on American soil.
</span>Myth Two:<span> Slavery lasted for 400 years.
</span>Truth<span>: Slavery was not unique to the United States; it is a part of almost every nation’s history from Greek and Roman civilizations to contemporary forms of human trafficking. The American part of the story lasted fewer than 400 years.
</span>Myth Three:<span> All Southerners owned slaves
</span>Truth<span>: Roughly 25% of all southerners owned slaves. The fact that one quarter of the Southern population were slaveholders is still shocking to many. This truth brings historical insight to modern conversations about the Occupy Movement, its challenge to the inequality gap and its slogan “we are the 99%.”
</span>Myth Four:<span> Slavery was a long time ago.
</span>Truth<span>: African-Americans have been free in this country for less time than they were enslaved. Do the math: Blacks have been free for 149 years which means that most Americans are two to three generations removed from slavery. However, former slaveholding families have built their legacies on the institution and generated wealth that African-Americans have not been privy to because enslaved labor was forced; segregation maintained wealth disparities; and overt and covert discrimination limited African-American recovery efforts.
</span>
In Short, <span>Most historians use 1619 as a </span>starting<span> point, but it ACTUALLY  as truth was way before 1400. (Either way, you should still go with the starting point of 1619 since no one almost knows that it was actually way before 1400...which is true)
</span>
<span>I Hope my answer has come to your Help (Took me time). Thank you for posting your question here in Brainly. We hope to answer more of your questions and inquiries soon. Have a nice day ahead! :)</span>
You might be interested in
Events tht led us involvment wwi
deff fn [24]
The death of archduke Francis Ferdinand of Hungary was the initial cause of ww1. However there was a build up to ww1. Countries had new powerful weapons and wanted to capitalise on this. The navy’s of many countries were being expanded. Political disagreements between countries led to increased tensions.
8 0
3 years ago
Why did Fascism appeal to many people after WWI?​
Anni [7]

Answer:

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a rush of globalization destroyed communities, professions, and cultural norms while generating a wave of immigration. Right-wing nationalist movements promising to protect people from the pernicious influence of foreigners and markets arose, and frightened, disoriented, and displaced people responded.

Explanation:

After coming to power, the Italian fascists created recreational circles, student and youth groups, and sports and excursion activities. These organizations all furthered the fascists’ goals of fostering a truly national community. The desire to strengthen (a fascist) national identity also compelled the regime to extraordinary cultural measures. They promoted striking public architecture, art exhibitions, and film and radio productions. The regime intervened extensively in the economy.

7 0
3 years ago
How the second world led to the decolonisation of Africa
vagabundo [1.1K]

Most historical events have some unintended consequences. It is in this sense that the European Second World War made a contribution to the decolonisation and political liberation of Africa.

In 1885 at the Berlin Conference, the most powerful European countries, the British, French, German, Spanish, and Portuguese, divided the continent amongst themselves.

However, Africa’s involvement in the two world wars helped fuel the struggle for independence from colonial rule. This was partly because participation of Africans in these wars exposed them to ideas of self-determination and independent rule.

The wars destroyed the economies of European countries. At the end of WW 1, the Europeans turned to Africa to exploit its mineral and agricultural wealth. (Even today some European countries cannot sustain their economies without their former empires) Europe’s growing interest in Africa’s minerals led to her expansion into the interior.

The mining of mineral wealth from Africa required the reorganisation of colonial rule, which meant that the autonomy chiefs and kings in Africa would be increasingly dissolved to make room for a more direct form of government.

The colonial situation: Expropriation of land from Africans to European settlers

The need for agricultural wealth required expropriation of land from African people and giving it to the growing number of Europeans in the colonies. Kenya and Zimbabwe (Southern Rhodesia) are examples of the expropriation of land.

The introduction of taxes like the hut tax and poll tax forced Africans to work for European settlers as the new taxes had to be paid in cash and not as cattle or crops as was the practice before. Exploitation of African laborers by European employers added to the growing resentment among the local people.

Colonial governments developed new methods of agriculture aimed at increasing revenues collected from African farmers. This also required a shift from subsistence crops to cash crops like coffee, cotton and tea.

People were now forced to sell their cash crops through Coffee, Cotton, or Tea marketing boards to colonial markets at low prices, then colonial merchants would in turn sell these crops to an international market at a much higher price. In this way, the Colonies made a lot of profit for the colonisers. As a result, people began to demand an end to colonial rule.

Resistance movements began to rise in Africa. With the growing number of settlers in some colonies, the demand for more land and labor increased tensions between colonial authorities and the white communities that had settled in the colonies.

More land was taken from African people and given to Europeans for settlement. In response to these developments, some chiefs organised rebellions against colonial authorities.

Development of political parties

Another response to colonial transformation was the formation of political parties. These were formed by the small educated group of Africans mainly residing in developing colonial towns. These Africans were educated at missionary schools.

At first, these parties did not seek to create a mass following, but to lobby their respective colonial governments to recognise the civil rights of Africans and protect and recognise the land rights of Africans in rural areas. In Buganda (part of Uganda), the Government of Buganda had a strong lobby and was in constant touch with the colonial office in London about land issues.

Second World War

In this colonial situation, European powers could no longer hold to their empires because they were exhausted and impoverished by the time war ended. France had been humiliated by Germany.

Suddenly, the myth of European invincibility was demythologised. When India became independent from the British in 1947, it set a precedent in challenging British rule and thus inspired many African nationalists.

Soldiers who joined the Seventh battalion of the King’s African Rifles (KAR) (Abaseveni) were posted to India and Burma and were inspired by the Indian and Burmese soldiers, who were compatriots.

6 0
3 years ago
What is the defining right of a representative democracy?
lyudmila [28]

Answer: D the right to vote.

Explanation:  defining right of a representative democracy is the ability to vote for representatives to make decisions on their behalf.

Hope it helped! :)

7 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which phrases give accurate definitions of history
Naily [24]
It would be B because it explains it better
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Which source would best help a historian understand the effect of the Great Chicago Fire on families? a biography of a Chicago f
    11·1 answer
  • What are two questions do you need to ask when evaluating a deductive argument answer
    5·1 answer
  • A job search should be treated like a full time job.
    6·1 answer
  • Write a sentence using the words: vitality, survive, and revive.
    7·2 answers
  • Which of the following was a result of the implementation of British policies?
    8·1 answer
  • What type of combat characterized WWI?
    12·1 answer
  • What were the economic consequences of apartheid in South Africa? Select three responses. Black citizens had a very low standard
    14·1 answer
  • Wat was one reason for anti immigrant sentiment in the early 1900
    5·2 answers
  • What was the Glorious Revolution?
    14·2 answers
  • The number of members in A municipal corporation depends upon the ________ City​
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!