The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam

Was Ham African? This book tries to divinate the truth and the origin of the 'curse of Ham' since over the generations many have perverted the bible to show that the descendants of Ham were African and were also meant to be slaves. The truth is a little different. Just as Atalantic slavers used the exuse that africans were not human to enslave them thus Muslims likewise used the excuse that africans could be enslaved as pagans. But the Bible was simply used as an easy way to not feel guilty about slavery. The reality was that slavery was practiced not just against Africans and that the race of Africans had little to do with slavery. Rather the slave trade seems to have been so long and prosperous in Africa due to the Africans being active participants, the lack of a unified empire in Africa to oppose slavery and the lack of other sources of humans to serve as slaves. After all we know that Rome enslaved the Gauls and other europeans. But when Europe developed a strong state the only europeans open to being enslaved where those colonized by the Ottomans. Likewise the depopulation that followed the Islamic conquest of the middle east meant that slaves could not come from thos eregions. Slaves certainyl couldnt be transported out of China. Thus Africa became the meat market for human cruelty, the sickness of slavery that eventually consumed and destroyed african soceity. But among the warrior tribes such as the Zulu we do not see enslavement, why? Because they dared to raise the sword against the Perverts who came to buy their daughters into slavery. The 'curse of Ham' had little to do with Africa rather it had more to do with Humans and the weakness of the state. Seth J. Frantzman