Humanities desk
< April 23	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 25 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 24

Outcome of slave importation to Europe

Since I just had an argument over the question what has become of the majority of [African] slaves deported to Europe, I must be honest here when I say I don't have the time and nerve right now to read through all the relevant articles … Therefore, I beg your pardon when in this case "exploiting" this page as a shortcut by asking: What has become of most of the slaves brought to Europe (esp. UK, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, Italy (?)) during the colonial period? Did they stay? Thanks in advance for your understanding and support.--Hildeoc (talk) 18:34, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

State-sanctioned slavery was not practiced in Western Europe on any large scale after the medieval period, so very few African slaves were permanently deported to Europe during the colonial period. Look for example at Slavery in Britain, you'll find that slavery was made illegal in the 12th century and was never legalized again. The same is true for most of western Europe. Slaves were mostly purchased in Africa and shipped to to the colonies in the Americas; these colonies were outside the jurisdiction of mainland Europe, so the prohibitions against slavery did not apply there. Look as an example as this map, which visualizes the number of African slaves trafficked by European nations. It seems that some slaves were brought to Portugal, and this may be part of the reason the Portugal has "the highest proportion of African ancestry in Europe" (4.2%, see Genetic history of the Iberian Peninsula), though migration from North Africa to the Iberian Peninsula, which took place mostly in the Middle Ages, probably accounts for most of this number. - Lindert (talk) 22:18, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lindert: Thanks. But what about Spain, for instance? At Slavery in Spain, it says: "By the 16th century, 7.4 percent of the population in Seville, Spain were slaves. Many historians have concluded that Renaissance and early-modern Spain had the highest amount of African slaves in Europe."--Hildeoc (talk) 03:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How Did Early-Modern Slaves in Spain Disappear? The Antecedents says that there are two schools of thought, the orthodox line maintaining that the black population integrated fully with the native Spanish through mixed marriages, but:

"For those maintaining that there was no integration the answer to the mystery of where this African population went lies in demographic trends. According to their calculations, many slaves and freed Africans may have immigrated back to Africa or ended up in the Americas. Furthermore, many Africans had no descendants or their descendants died at a young age. This may have happened because slaves were not encouraged to marry or reproduce, and many Africans were freed when they were too old to bear children."

Alansplodge (talk) 11:39, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Although as noted above, slavery was illegal in England, a considerable number of slaves were imported in the 18th century as servants, some paid and some not. A few were either given their freedom by their masters, or ran away and found sympathetic benefactors; BLACK PEOPLE IN LATE 18TH-CENTURY BRITAIN highlights the cases of Ignatius Sancho, Cesar Picton and George Africanus, who were able to attain a respectable place in society. Alansplodge (talk) 23:55, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As to what happened to them, a recent BBC documentary managed to track down some descendants of John Blanke, King Henry VIII's black trumpeter (not a slave); they were all white. Alansplodge (talk) 00:24, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Libyan independence

The infobox in Libya says "Independence from Italy 10 February 1947", but the article says "From 1943 to 1951, Libya was under Allied occupation. " and that "On 24 December 1951, Libya declared its independence as the United Kingdom of Libya". Could someone bring consistency in that regard? 212.180.235.46 (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 1947 is when Italy formally ended its claim to Libyan territories as part of the Paris Peace Treaty. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pregnant people

CNN reports[1] that the CDC now recommends that pregnant people get a covid vaccine. I was previously accustomed to the term "pregnant women", since male pregnancy (while common in certain fiction genres) was afaik at most an extreme biological rarity in real life. Is the new usage supposed to reflect the possibility of pre-surgery transmen getting pregnant, or for nonbinary (if nonbinary pregnancy was ever a thing), or what? The CNN article says "pregnant people" 4 or so times, and "pregnant women" once, so I have to think the change in usage is intentional. I guess I can deal with it, but it took me by surprise. Anyone know more? 2602:24A:DE47:BB20:50DE:F402:42A6:A17D (talk) 20:26, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering the same thing, so you're not alone... AnonMoos (talk) 20:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was not able to find anything published by the CDC or other sources explaining their usage of gender terms. In the absence of a definitive answer, I think it's reasonable to assume that the CDC is using the term pregnant people to be inclusive of people who are transgender or nonbinary. There's some discussion about pregnant people who don't identify as women at Transgender pregnancy. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 21:10, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not terribly uncommon for transmasculine people to try to carry a child. Surgery wouldn't enter into it. The surgery is usually top surgery (mastectomy) and less commonly a procedure to increase the apparent size--that is, external protrusion--of the clitoris or penis (depending on what word the person prefers to use.) Those wouldn't stop pregnancy; what would is the hormones. Testosterone is pretty effective birth control. They'd have to stop taking it for a while. I'll note that there are next to no resources for transmasculine pregnancy in general, and the doctors aren't good with trans pregnancy healthcare, so it's nice to see these folks make a gesture toward inclusion. Temerarius (talk) 00:03, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's also certainly possible for people to be pregnant who do not identify as female, but who are also not transgender. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

This is the currently mandated way to think. Example: Not long ago, the news was flush with articles about the first "man" to give birth. That implies that a person who was born with a penis and testes somehow became pregnant and somehow carried a child to birth. That wasn't the case. It was a person born with a vagina and ovaries who gave birth while opting for the gender identity of a man. If you think that the pregnant person was a woman, you are thinking wrong and you need to be retrained. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 14:23, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please remove your comment? Your last sentence is a personal attack. I am happy to discuss gender with you, perhaps on your or my talk page, but as it stands your comment will certainly be harmful to editors and readers. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 14:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think this makes sense. I used indefinite you in a sentence on that same page, but as I feel it could be read not like I expected after all I'm rephrasing it now. -- Askedonty (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't read the IP's last sentence as a personal attack - I read it as a comment about feeling attacked for not conforming to a particular viewpoint. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And I read it as a snark about thought-police. —Tamfang (talk) 01:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone link me to instructions on how to "hat" comments? IP's comment is irrelevant derail-bait. This is a place to answer questions, not a place to post trans hate. Temerarius (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Hatting, or place {{hat}} at the top and {{hab}} at the bottom of the material you wish to hat.-gadfium 07:14, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't evidence that the IP's comment is "trans hate", which is an inflammatory remark. The OP's question was inviting comment on why a certain phrase has suddenly gained currency, and the IP was offering an answer along the lines of 'groupthink' as much as anything. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 07:45, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And if the IP's comment gets hatted, that will serve to prove their point. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 07:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To prove their irrelevant, unhelpful point that nobody asked for, yes. And for the record, calling trans men women is transphobic. It is hate speech. Temerarius (talk) 22:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ask Me About My Pronouns? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]