Many Caribbean blacks claim they were here long before Columbus time Then Columbus took back slaves to Europe. Also the crew related to Columbus arrival, also Genocide a million natives. I know alot about this from building a Sunken treasure pirate museum in St Petersburg Florida. COLUMBUS was my major feature as a pirate.

New Spain. Between 1502 and 1866, of the 11.2 million Africans taken, only 388,000 arrived in North America, while the rest went to Brazil, the European colonies in the Caribbean and Spanish territories in Central and South America, in that order. These slaves were brought as early as the 16th and 17th centuries. South America artifacts are full of black history long before Columbus.

That long a trip, make little sense, since the native blacks tell me an entire different story. Built museum display works down there. South America do not have a nice war history with US, as they have invaded brown people countries more than any other race.

@Castlepaloma You seem to be circling around the question: so your point is that the majority of Black people in the States were not slaves?

Out of 10.7 million Africans were shipped directly to North America? Only about 388,000: a tiny percentage within 400 years delivered.

From my tours throughout North and South America and building a few historical displays in museums. I see many of these black sculptures in dozens of museums and the native have a entire different story. The white man kept telling us Jesus was white and they are the superior race and salvery is normal for 400 years. What other lie are they telling us today as these winners wrote in His-story.

@Castlepaloma Many more Africans were shipped to The Caribbean and South America than were shipped to North America. In general, North American slaveholders treated the slaves as valuable property, and their numbers increased way beyond the number shipped there. By contrast, the slaveholders in the Caribbean and in South American treated them as expendables, and their numbers decreased. Tropical diseases also played a significant role.

@Castlepaloma Your 50% number for Africans that died during transport across the Atlantic is way off. It's closer to 10%. It does not make economic sense to pay lots of money per slave and then to lose them on the trip across the Atlantic. Often on the slave transport trips, more of the sailors transporting the slaves died than the slaves themselves, because the Africans were better suited to fight off the African tropical diseases that were carried on to the slave ships. [digitalhistory.uh.edu]

@BD66 [nytimes.com]

Portuguese dominance of the slave trade had horrible life conditions and half died during shipping. I sure some were successful, I know I would rather die than be a lifetime slave. Although many today don't care if they are slaves

@Castlepaloma I can't find any reliable reference that shows 50% of slaves dying during transport. It does show 30% in the early days, but as the English got involved and made it more efficient, the death numbers went down close to 10%. When the English stopped transporting slaves, the death numbers went back up again: [statista.com]