Why is there so little importance attached to the Arabic Slave trade?

Question:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_...

'Some historians estimate that between 11 and 18 million black African slaves crossed the Red Sea, Indian Ocean, and Sahara Desert from 650 CE to 1900 CE,[4][5][6] or more than the 9.4 to 14 million Africans brought to the Americas in the Atlantic slave trade'.[7]

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_...

'Some historians estimate that between 11 and 18 million black African slaves crossed the Red Sea, Indian Ocean, and Sahara Desert from 650 CE to 1900 CE,[4][5][6] or more than the 9.4 to 14 million Africans brought to the Americas in the Atlantic slave trade'.[7]

Well I think it is because slavery is used to beat the big bad white man by the PC brigade etc, despite as you pointed out a much longer term trade by the Arabic states.

A few of the 'colonial' campaigns were in fact to stop this slave trade but they are forgotten and just classed as the Europeans exploiting the locals Loll

It was because of the Arabic slave traders some African tribes used some form of device to make them not so valuable as a slaves - elongated necks via neck rings etc.

I think because we generally don't study arabic history thats why we don't place that much importance on it. Also we had our own slave trade and people would rather study that than study the arabics.

Dont really get ur question.... but i worked for 2 years in the middle east

I can safely say if all the yanks , ex-pats and europeans left there... they would have:-

a) No industry
b) Not find anymore oil
c) go back to raising camels
d) start killing EACH other because of religon

Then we can all move back
build 99% sunny holiday resorts
Utilise all the oil n gas properly
Build ecomnomies that work

As for Arabic slaves... they get what they deserve

Because people also dont consider any of the other slave trades and concentrate on the one Atlantic issue. Look at the Roman, Greek, Turkish, Moor, Indian, Chinese, Mayan, Inca, Viking, etc, etc, etc.

Because they have all the oil, and if the truth was out, the do gooders would want imports stopped, not very practical, so better not to mention it, yet.

Erm......political correctness? Perhaps!

Yes, i go with the Political Correctness explanation. Surely University educated New Labour folks would know of this Arabic question?

Because, if you're being educated in the UK or Europe, history lessons tend to concentrate on UK or European history rather than trying to cover everything. EVERY major power or nation in history indulged in slave trading, why pick on the Arabic one especially? Why not Greek, Roman, Persian, Chinese, Assyrian, Hittite...

Because they weren't white/ western, many black slaves were actually sold by black slavers but that wouldn't fit the stereotype that PC historians wish to impose any more than the sale of the duke of Monmouths rebellious cornishmen as slaves, or the earlier 'white' slave trade from Viking Dublin selling captive saxons and Irish to the moors of Spain . Every generation writes history to suit itself, as Goebells wrote 'the allies have won and will write history but how different history would have been if we had written it' nuff said I think

It is non-PC to criticize the arabs.

Becuase the trans atlantic slave trade was the most biggest slave trade in recorded history with the biggest impacts of any slave trade from 1440-1831 (but banned 1807 although continued illegally)

Reasons why trans atlantic was more important
Its your countries History along with many more than the arab.
North Americas
South Americas
Europes
Africas
4 continents!

391 years
35,000,000 abducted

Growth rate
1440- 1600: 1,050,000
1600-1700 5,600,000
1700-1800 18,375,000
1800-1850s: 9,975,000
20,000,000 died
15,000,000 Shiped across the atlantic & survive
If this slave trade was not banned in 1807 the 19 century would have witnessed more than 30,000,000 with the 20th century at 45,000,000 not including that ship building advanced.

Triangle trade boosted Europe & Americas economy prompted industrial revolution
Shipping slaves across continents

The arab slave trade lasted 1,250 years while the trans atlantic lasted 391 years.

The arab slave trade consited of the Arab areas and Northen African countries while the trans atlantic consisted of:
Slave origins
Nigeria 22%
Democratic Republic of Congo 20%
Angola:13%
Ghana: 10.3%
Republic of Congo 6.3%
Cameroon: 5%
Senegal: 4%
Benin: 4%
Mozambique 3%
Guinea 2.4%
Togo 2.1%
Equatorial Guinea: 2%
Madagascar: 1.6%
Sierra Leone: 1%
Cote d' Ivoire: 1%
The Gambia: 0.8%
Liberia 0.7%
Gabon: 0.6%
Guinea-Bissau 0.2%

European traders
Portugal 35.4%
Britain 24.8%
Spain 22.1%
France 14.1%
Netherlands 4.4%
Denmark 0.2%

South & Central America- 51.6%
Caribbean- 42.8%
North America- 5.6%

15,000,000 reached the Americas
20,000,000 died

Today in 2008
168,879,165 Trans atlantic slave trade African decendants
African American
Afro Caribbean
Afro Brazilian
Afro Hispanics
Black British

The last African born slave shipped to the Americas was Cudjoe Lewis who died in 1935, Mobile, Alabama USA.

Which one you think is more important to your countries history.

Agree with the PC explanation.
Oh and BTW a lot of the boys were castrated and it was considered that Allah had been very merciful if more than one in ten survived.