The history of the United States is written in Black and White. Slavery, primarily black slavery, was an essential part of the fabric of the New World almost from the beginning of it's European discovery. Oh sure there is the inconvenient problem of the indigenous Amerinds, but the European diseases by and large took care of that problem. What was left was an economic engine that fed Europe on the labor of black slaves. The key European power was Portugal (4.6 million slaves transported), although much of Europe took part. (Others in order of number of slaves transported -- Britain [2.6 million],Spain [1.6 million], France [1.3 million], Holland, U.S., Denmark). The destinations were Brazil (4 million), Spanish empire including Cuba (2.5 million), British West Indies (2 million), and the French West Indies 1.6 million). By contrast the British North America received a half a million slaves.
    The magnitude of the slave trade is beyond my comprehension. Its mechanisms are more understandable. Spain was first to the New World, but Portugal controlled the African coast. Slaves were bought and sold via Portugal to parts of Europe in the fifteenth century. Slaves had also been bought and sold (and would be for many centuries) in many parts of coastal sub-Sahara Africa to the East in Egypt and Arabia and elsewhere. Thomas' book concentrates on the European trade.
    Let's take our first side bar here. It seems difficult for the modern 20th century mind to get it when it comes to slavery. (Even radical right wingers aren't in favor of slavery in this day and age). But if you look at the history of mankind, slavery is the rule rather than the exception. Since the time of agriculture (beginning about 10,000 years ago) when humans did not have to spend most of their time hunting and gathering, hierarchies developed. Throughout history, subjugation of defeated enemies was the norm. These defeated peoples were the source of labor for the winners. One of the problems of the slave trade in Africa from the 16th Century onward is that it wasn't just defeated peoples, but humans that were captured throughout interior Africa meant only for slave trade. The economic engine was fed because of market need. But I get ahead of myself. The point is, slavery has existed without serious question from the dawn of agriculture until the first serious rumblings of abolition in the Age of Enlightenment (late 1700's).
    Slavery was limited in the New World in the 16th century. There were feeble attempts to enslave the natives, but that never worked to a large extent. By the 17th Century the African trade was warming up. Ships would typically go out of ports such as Lisbon, or Liverpool, or Bordeaux with goods for trade. They would stop in ports along the way to pick up the other goods needed for trade. The ships would stop at African ports to trade with the African rulers who controlled the slave trade in the coastal ports. Once the trade occurred the middle passage took place which would last 5 weeks to six months. Slaves disembarked at large centers in, for example, Barbados and Jamaica (British) or Rio (Portuguese). In the New World the commodities produced by slave labor was picked up to complete the third leg of the triangle. Shipping was first controlled by monoplies and financed by leading merchants in the various countries.
    What I've just given you is a way oversimplified model of the trade. What really fueled the trade was Europe's sugar jones. Once the Europe got a taste of sugar, the demand shot up and stayed up. Sugar, cocoa, coffee. Europe demanded its physiology be altered. The fact that it was African slavery that fed the habits was of little consequence. (Cotton of the North American South was an exception to the rule).
    The first noises raised for abolition of the slave trade (but not slavery itself), occurred in Enlightenment Europe. Quakers, who in previous generations had been slave merchants, were one vocal group. The economics of Adam Smith argued against free labor. Some of the literary intelligensia spoke against the institution. It was the British, after a twenty year political fight, who made the trade illegal in 1807(Wiburforce, Pitt, et. al. waging the battle). Ironically this was the same year that the US under Jefferson made the trade illegal (although still carried on illegally for some time). It may be easy to disregard what Britain did when we look through the lens of the 1990's. But what they did was signifcant in the history of mankind. In the ensuing years, Britain took it upon themselves to make treaties to become the policeman of the world. They caught and punished slavers in Africa and the New World who skirted the laws as set down by the subsequent treaties.It took decades, but slave trade did dwindle to practically nothing by the 1870's (Cuba and Brazil were the last holdouts).
    And what of the Africans who were brought to labor? Unfortunately their voice was limited in written history. There were stories that were recorded, but so few relative to the numbers of people enslaved. The oral tradition has therefore been the means of storytelling and transmission of traditions and culture. The music which mixed the various African and European cultures was(is) a common medium of expression.
    But the Hugh Thomas book was not really meant to be a reflection of slavery through the eyes of its victims. This book describes the trade as it existed in recorded history through the eyes of Europeans who really didn't question the institution until the recent past (there has always been plenty in the Bible and the Koran to justify slavery). At the beginning of this essay I said that the history of the United States has been written in black and white. Slavery was a part of the constitution (slaves equal 3/5 of a man for purposes of the census). Bringing new frontier states into the union as slave or free was a precursor to the Civil War. The legacy of slavery has kept every generation of African Americans at a severe disadvantage. It is only in this (Affirmative Action) generation that a significant middle class exists. This is in our lifetime! When I hear people rail against "preferences" I see red.We are six generations removed from slavery. We are one generation removed from equal voting rights nationally. We are one generation removed from "whites only" de jure, and no generations removed from "whites only" de facto. The Hugh Thomas book allowed me to put the events of today in context with the history of the last half of this mellinium in the European-African-American triangle. Excellent scholarship.