Human zoos (1500s- ), also known as ethnological exhibits, people shows (Völkerschau) or Negro villages, showed native peoples at zoos and fairs. They have been common in the West since the time of Columbus, but reached their height from the 1870s to the 1930s – back in the days of Joseph Conrad, Gauguin, minstrel shows and the birth of National Geographic.
They showed people from:
- the Middle East,
- Africa,
- Sri Lanka,
- the Philippines,
- Java,
- New Guinea,
- the Pacific,
- the Americas and
- the Arctic.
They were especially common in
- Germany (huge),
- France,
- Britain and
- America.
Tens of millions saw them.
Examples:
- 1896: the Cincinnati Zoo showed Sioux Indians.
- 1899: “Savage South Africa” in Britain showed Zulus, complete with spears, shields and staged battles.
- 1904: the St Louis world’s fair showed a “parade of evolutionary progress” with Filipinos and American Indians ranked below whites and with Pygmies just above apes.
- 1906: the Bronx Zoo showed a Pygmy, Ota Benga, in the same cage as an orangutan.
Ever since Columbus natives brought back by sailors were shown to the public, especially at fairs. Few ever made it back home and many did not last long in disease-ridden Europe. A well-known example is Sarah Baartman of South Africa, who was shown in a cage in Britain and part of an animal show in Paris.
“Native villages” were built so white people could see how they lived. Montaigne reported one in Rouen, France in 1533 of Tupinamba Indians from Brazil. Such villages became especially common at zoos and world fairs starting in the 1870s.
To succeed as a native:
- Play to stereotype;
- Fit Western ideas of beauty – or go completely against them;
- Be at ease with audiences;
- Have a special skill, like ivory carving.
This favoured those who were artists or entertainers in their own land.
The whole thing was staged and played to Western stereotypes:
- Arabs were like in “Thousand and One Nights” from the 1300s.
- American Indians were like in the cowboy-and-Indian books of the time.
- South Sea Islanders were bare breasted and carefree – even though, as Gauguin discovered, that world was long gone if it ever was (but painted it anyway).
- Black Africans were shown as savage hunters, spears and all, just a step above wild animals – even though most Africans of the time were herders and farmers. One show was called “Gorilla Negroes”.
The Pygmies at the St Louis fair, on the other hand, liked to smoke cigars and wear top hats, which screwed up the show’s racist evolutionary ranking.
Some feared for the safety of white women. In both Victorian England and Nazi Germany, some opposed the shows out of fear of race mixing between black men and white women.
At least as late as 2005 you could still see “African tribesmen” in grass skirts at a Western zoo (in Augsburg, Germany). But since the 1930s such things have become uncommon: film, and later television and cheap air travel, were able to give Westerners a much richer-seeming (but not always truer) experience of native peoples.
See also:
- Sarah Baartman
- Ota Benga
- minstrel show
- BET Fallacy - the fallacy that people of colour are somehow in control of their image in the West, that white money does not call the tune.
- The Sioux today
- Iroquois
- stereotypes about Africa
- Notes on how not to write about Native Americans
- Golden Book Encyclopedia
- Darkest Austria
- black people according to the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica













Great post. This type of thing needs to be known by the masses. It shows how sick these “people” are. They want to make others believe they’re the superior race. Yet look how they treat people who look different than them. They love to call people of color barbaric yet they ignore their own savagery.
This just breaks my heart. But it is real . I read the story of Otta Benga. It was tragic. Also the Hottentot Venus. The things Africans and people of colour had to endure. Just tragic.
I remember that Macon D. (Stuff White People Do) did a post on this because a few years ago in Texas (I think) people were about to bring it back.
Let’s start a human zoo featuring whites and witness how berserk they’ll get at the thought of it.
I knew of some of this, but not everything. What stood out to me was that Germany still displayed Black men in grass skirts until 2005… Everyone always says the Germans are supposed to be extra sensitive about race given their history, but I guess it doesn’t count if your colour deems you sub-human in their eyes.
@ brothawolf
*Shakes head* Sadly I no longer find it hard to believe when people try to do such things. There is too much racism and ignorance around.
From my understanding, the Filipinos put on display were mountain people called Igorots (pronounced ee-gor-oats). At that time, they were known as headhunters. Igorots only took heads from their enemies in battle, though. However, because of this practice, they were considered uncivilized. They were also called dogeaters. And that is how some of these Igorots ended up in these human exhibits. You see, the US had colonized the Philippines at the time and they wanted to set as an example, exert their authority if you will, to other European colonial powers, such as the Spanish, that these indigenous peoples can be taught to be civilized and can progress with their help. How is that being civilized when you denigrate people by putting them in cages to be gaped and gawked at? Progression indeed.
awful
sad
Well , this is just more proof of how the invention of racism from white people was weaved into the fabric of society in Europe and the Americas , basicly to justify slavery and the conquest of other people and destruction of civilisations…
Its amazing that people cant recognise the traces of this mentality that have continued down into today . I mean how can anyone think things are on an even keel today ? …like there was some magical transformation of how white people think ?….not….this is our history and we have to ask ourselves what traces of that history still poison our society into today
Damn. I’m reminded of “Brave New World”
A somewhat more balanced discussion of the Augsburg event:
http://manchester.academia.edu/NinaGlickSchiller/Papers/572544/African_Culture_and_the_Zoo_in_the_21st_Century_The_African_Village_in_the_Augsburg_Zoo_and_Its_Wider_Implications
Brothawolf, OK, the Human Zoo is a thing of the past nowadays, they do things like people trading places and all that for TV shows like Big Brother and the Olympics… But what sort of white people would you like to see in an Ethnographic exposition?
I once imagined creating a website that examined the true human toll of Western imperialism and supremacist racism rather than glossing over it as a kind of inevitable “progression”. The idea was to superimpose recognizable aspects of Western culture with simultaneous atrocities against “non-whites”. For example, what was happening in America when Beethoven was composing the fifth symphony? Between 1804 and 1808, African Americans were still legally enslaved. When Disney’s Animated Film “Snow White” was being enjoyed in America the Jewish Holocaust in Germany was getting underway. Life got in the way of that project but this site already does a good job of “looking under the bed” so to speak. Human zoos are such a strong symbol of dehumanization. And even today, it is not uncommon for animal imagery to be associated with POC.
Those “zoos” are very disgusting, and disturbing (to say the least)-can anyone say Obsession(?) That seems to be the thread of all these so-called “exhibitons”!
[...] Human zoos (1500s- ), also known as ethnological exhibits, peoples shows (Völkerschau) or Negro villages, showed native peoples at zoos and fairs. They have been common in the West since the time of… [...]
“Its amazing that people cant recognise the traces of this mentality that have continued down into today.”
********
@ B.R. -
It’s not amazing. It’s simply wide-scale denial.. one of the numerous corrosive/demonic effects of whiteness.
This post, imo, gives a whole new dimension to the “my family never owned slaves” argument.
Most whites never owned slaves, but most white families in America’s past viewed/mistreated Africans/blacks as less than human, savage, uncivilized, criminal, lazy or otherwise undesirable/less than. I wouldn’t say “traces” of that mindset still exists today, Instead, I’d say that there there’s an overwhelming abundance of evidence gathered by social science research – as well as anecdotal experiences – which proves beyond doubt that America’s racist history continues to influence and permeate the thoughts and actions (in some form) of most white people today in 2012 – in spite of such (politically correct) efforts to mitigate or cover-up their racist attitudes/behaviors
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/94/2/292/
I suspect most of these people did it voluntarily and were paid for it. It wouldn’t be my choice. But then there are lots of things others do that I wouldn’t choose. My main objection, however, is that the women are running around with flapjacks flying in all directions. I figure that deep down that’s what really bothers most of you as well. But that’s only because you’re imposing your values on them. It didn’t bother them because they had their own values and it was normal for them.
But I wouldn’t be so quick to judge them considering that cultural exhibits attract lots of people today. People are curious and want to see what others look like and how they live. Have you never seen Epcot’s international pavilions? Or a reenactment village?
That’s one of the main reasons people travel. To experience other cultures. People couldn’t afford to travel a hundred years ago so promoters brought other cultures to them.
There’s nothing wrong with that. A lot of people are actually proud of their culture and WANT to show it off. That’s why countries promote their local culture to tourists. I guarantee these guys are proud of their culture. Tell them they shouldn’t be doing this and they’ll probably kick your azz.
.
.
The exhibits were authored by scientists and designed to demonstrate the superiority of whites. Sometimes the ‘exhibits’ could be touched, their heads patted…like the animals in petting zoos.
Half-naked Africans made to gnaw bones and presented as “cannibals” as they shivered in a mock tribal village in northern France;
Native American children displayed at fairgrounds;
families from East Asia and the South Pacific behind railings in European zoos…
@ Bulanik “Half-naked Africans made to gnaw bones and presented as ‘cannibals’ “
At least the exhibits were accurate.
William Henry Johnson, an African American child with a small cranium, was bought from his parents aged four, exhibited in a hairy suit and made to grunt. The show was titled What Is It?
Apparently this creature ate on raw meat, nuts, and fruit, but was learning to eat more civilized fare such as bread and cake….
On other occasions was billed as a missing link supposedly caught in Africa and displayed in a cage.
He was also called Zip, the Pinhead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_the_Pinhead
His handler/employer was circus showman and showman, PT Barnum.
“At least the exhibits were accurate.”
“I suspect most of these people did it voluntarily and were paid for it.”
@ duckduckgoofs,
So how would a white savage exhibit be displayed in a human zoo? What behavioral exhibitions would ensure that it was accurate?
Also, do you have any support for the claim that the people in the exhibit were paid and not kidnapped and then exposed to the world as savages? If they were paid, and let’s pretend they were, how much do you think they would be paid (since the life of a person of color was worth less than a white person based on their own evolutionary scale).
Finally, what impression do you think these uneducated whites left and then interacted with people of color on the colonies? How do you think that representation influenced how they would address other, non-related people of color when exposed to these peoples?
I suspect they were probably as callous and brutal as historical documents show (just scratching the surface):
United States -> African Slaves
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatment_of_slaves_in_the_United_States
Australian -> Aborigines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_of_Indigenous_Australians
England -> India, Kenya
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/975408de-6621-11db-a4fc-0000779e2340.html#axzz22CSoC3dL
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/britain-reveals-its-quiet-sins-in-kenya/story-e6frg6so-1226035883200
France -> Algeria
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/world/europe/03iht-sarkozy.5.8573646.html
Belgium -> Congo
http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/articles/pages/5918/Africa-Belgian-Colonies.html
Germany -> Namibia, Togoland, Tanganyika, Namibia and Kamerun
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,15427571,00.html
http://suite101.com/article/german-colonial-policy-in-africa-a114437
@Brothawolf
Remember “Darkest Austria”, the SATIRE of Africans using the “white scientific gaze” to look at white people in general, and a European nationality specifically?
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2012/07/25/human-zoos/#comment-140105
Should a scientific documentary, or exhibition, celebrate human diversity OR simply show people from other places as strange inferior, primitive curiosities? Isn’t there a difference and a choice?
@Abagond
Excellent piece of historical research. Which brings together the exclusive, derogatory and inhumane way native Europeans first responded to and then depicted the indigenous peoples they encountered on their global travels and conquests.
Zoos up to this present day are a European/Western conception that reflects heavily on how they see and contrast themselves with indigenous peoples, animals and the natural world. They see themselves as divorced, separate…apart from the natural world around them. Hence the emphasis on the need for technology to make up for this perceived shortfall.
Wouldn’t it great to contrast this approach and compare it with those similar Zoos created by indigenous peoples all over the world from their first accounts with white Europeans…?
Yeah, Matari, you could say I underestimated it…for sure there is a lot of people in denial about it…
Duckgoofs, where I would agree about the youtube you brought in, those guys are proud of their culture and would be offended if someone questioned them about it, what seems to be on display in this thread is a kind of manipulation of the charactors to fit stereotypes of white superiority.
If you really want to understand culture from Africa, go to one of the countries national folklorico drum dance presentations, that is real culture…and that is basicly what the people you brought in are doing.But the circus events are grusome and bizarre.
It just seems as we look back in time at the West about other people, there is overwelming incriminating evidence of really horrible atitudes and ignorance . Not that the whole world has other incriminating things to look at, but , the West certainly has its own unique take that blatantly deserves to be scrutinised
To be honest, I havnet heard of African canabalism, sitting around chewing on bones, the Germans did do some grusome massacering down there along with the Belgiuns, and, all the colonising nations and slave trading nations did a heck of a barbaric number on Africa
But, I thought canabalism was more from the South Pacific.
Kwamla, your observation came in as I was typing, and its a good point
Matari, you lovable racist you.
Let’s run your comment through the Double-Standardator:
“It’s not amazing. It’s simply wide-scale denial.. one of the numerous corrosive/demonic effects of blackness.”
Just imagine the response if a white commenter submitted that one.
Matari:
How far “past” are you talking? When my family emigrated to the US in the 1900′s they had no prior contact with black people and limited contact with native-born white people. What makes you think that these immigrants took their opinions from spectacles as human zoos?
@ BR But, I thought canabalism was more from the South Pacific.
Yeah, Soylent Green was standard fare throughout Polynesia. In fact, Hawaiians ate Captain Cook. To be fair, they modernized very quickly once they were exposed to the outside world. They were just isolated.
“To be honest, I havnet heard of African canabalism”
Cannibalism has always been widespread throughout Africa. Still is. I can’t believe you’ve never seen the The Vice Guide to Liberia.
Yeah, King Leopold was a bastard. He abused the natives for a few years. When word got out it caused a major scandal. Brussels took it away from him and put a stop to it.
Duckgoofs, I didnt intend to imply that all of the South Pacific is practicing cannabalism, but, there was some well documented evidence of tribes in New Guinea that led me to make that statement.
But, in truth, looks like cannabalism was practiced by everyone at some point :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism
and my attempt to point out what I knew about New Guinea was not as bad as your blatent stereotype insult
Turns out both of us ddnt know the truth
and, any cannabalism in Africa is dwarfed by the cruelties of the slave trade and colonialism
Let’s not forget cannibalism has been well-known in Europe for many years.
In Gough’s Cave, England, remains of human bones and skulls from approximately 15,000 years ago, suggest that cannibalism took place amid the people living in the cave.
I believe archaeologists can trace back evidence to about 7,000 years ago proving mass cannibalism in Germany – even children and unborn babies were on the menu.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/evidence-of-mass-cannibalism-uncovered-in-germany-1835341.html
*****************************
And eating other humans’ flesh and drinking their blood for medicinal purposes is well-documented:
Take when Pope Innocent VIII was on his deathbed in 1492, his doctors used vampire-like technique on 3 boys and had the pope drink their blood. The boys were bled until they died, and the pope died as well. Of course this was teh same time that Columbus “discovered” America and coined the word “cannibal.”
The medical journal, The Lancet, published an article regarding corpse medicine. The article recounts notable doctors of 1600s England digging up bodies to use the bones for medicine. Noted in the article was the fact the human body was widely acknowledged as the “therapeutic agent”.
Medical treatments included ingesting flesh, bone, or blood, along with a variety of moss sometimes found on human skulls right up until the late 18th century. Use of medicines made from blood and other human body parts was widespread in Europe. Fresh blood was used as a cure for epilepsy and other body parts to treat a variety of diseases, including arthritis, warts, diseases of the reproductive system, sciatica, and even teenage acne…
One of the books this stuff is documented in:
Cannibal: The History of the People Eaters
@ Duck
1. Part of what is wrong with human zoos – and this issue dogs people of colour to this day – is that whites control how others are presented. If whites were honest and fair-minded that might not be the worst thing, but they are far from it. They use their power to present people of colour in racist ways. It flows from their own racism and in turn helps to support it, excuse it and keep it alive. Hollywood is STILL doing that.
2. The lives of those we know took part were tragic:
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/ota-benga/
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/sarah-baartman/
3. As to “proud of their culture”, they were presenting not their culture but a stereotype of it. Or sometimes it was not even their own culture – like the Iroquois pictured in the post dressed up as Plains Indians.
4. Epcot grew out of the old world fairs. The pavilions themselves probably come out of the human zoo tradition. From what I hear each country has some say in how its presented at its pavilion, but it being Disney I shudder to think what the true story is.
5. Tourism also plays to stereotypes. Here is a guest post about how Black American cultural tourists in Brazil are not getting a true picture of Black Brazil – and how that in turn affects black Brazilians themselves:
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/black-brazil-in-the-black-gringo-gaze/
A zoo featuring white people? A great idea! But this time show how the white people USED to live BEFORE the Africans found them……. Now you’ll see some serious white rioting!
HA! I didn’t see that you posted this Bulanik. I guess great minds think alike!
I saw this a few years back and showed it to some of my White friends. They actually enjoyed it.
I guarantee these guys are proud of their culture. Tell them they shouldn’t be doing this and they’ll probably kick your azz.
”
”
”
@ everyone,
If duckduckgoofs saw a photo of a slave master dragging his female slave by a chain on the ground, he would suspect that it was all a part of an elaborate s & m role play. *smh*
It’s quite a conceit to present the cultures of non-white peoples as deviant and hold them and their cultures up to spectacle….whilst whites and European cultures are quarantined as inherently sound and their cultures as apexes of civilization.
Europeans had no ethical or moral issues at all with cannibalism – for example – until the 19th century. The bodies of other humans was just another natural product available for use and recycling.
Candles made of human fat were used up until the 1880s.
King Charles II of England sipped ‘The King’s Drops’, a powder mix of human skull with alcohol.
Thomas Willis, a 17th-century pioneer of brain science, would routinely brewed a drink for apoplexy (or bleeding), that mingled powdered human skull and chocolate.
Did other Europeans consider these practices deviant and depraved? Was the King of England or respectable English scholar merely ‘racially primitive’ because of the liquids they drank?
http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195181821.001.0001/acprof-9780195181821-chapter-7
Of course not, after all, a French Franciscan monk of the same time was making marmalade out of human blood, and even wrote a recipe for it. The instructions, in part, read like this:
“stir it to a batter with a knife…pound it…through a sieve of finest silk.”
Jam-making aside, the eating of human bodies could also be used as military weapon – something that was traditionally buried, down-played and ignored – in the way that rape in war has been hidden or dismissed.
Take the Crusades, for example.
The 1st Crusade in particular, and the Siege of Maarat, or Ma’arra, in 1098 in the city of Ma’arrat al-Numan, in what is modern-day Syria.
An eyewitness of the siege wrote, “In Ma’arra our troops boiled pagan adults in cooking-pots; they impaled children on spits and devoured them grilled.”
The chronicler Albert of Aix seemed to rank Muslims lower than dogs when he wrote, “Not only did our troops not shrink from eating dead Turks and Saracens; they also ate dogs!”
Guibert of Nogent, in his work Historia Hierosolymitana noted that the Christian barbarians (or Tafurs) were feared by the Muslims because of their cannibalism. For that reason, on at least one occasion, the Tafurs publicly “roasted the bruised body of a Turk over a fire as if it were meat for eating, in full view of the Turkish forces.”
Guibert notes that the Franks (Germanic clans) also practiced cannibalism, but they did so “in secret and as rarely as possible.”
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(08)60907-1/fulltext
@JT
In answer to the remark that the people in these exhibits were paid for it and what they showed was “accurate”, you said:
You then follow that with a list of genocides and historical atrocity against the indigenous and/or enslaved peoples over 4 continents….
It’s strange that some cannot, and will not, see the connection.
“Randy@
What makes you think that these immigrants took their opinions from spectacles as human zoos?”
Linda says,
I agree with you, Randy, I don’t think these human zoos impacted the new European immigrants…they were influenced by the people/society around them who lived in a racist environment that allowed these types of zoos to exist and be successful.
America at the time was virulently Racist towards black people, brown people and held deep prejudice towards jews/southern Europeans and no one escaped being affected by society’s written and unwritten rules.
As an immigrant, you learn fairly quickly what society feels is taboo because the people you come in contact with have no qualms to tell you what they feel you are doing wrong, so I am sure your ancestors learned about the racial pecking order Very quickly.
When I first came here, I had preconceived ideas about Americans in general(everyone’s rich, great fashion, big cars, etc), but I had no negative concepts of American people based on race…so in essence, my mind was a “blank slate” as another poster phrased it.
Within 2 week of starting school, I was brought up to scratch by both white and black American kids on the do’s and don’ts of what is acceptable.
I remember talking to a white kid during recess who was into rock music and he was playing a song by the band KISS, I actually liked the song. Later, a black kid I had met let me know that it was uncool for black people to listen to rock music, that was white people music.
Flipside, I had learned to jump double dutch (the best game ever) and I wanted to play it with a few white girls at recess. They looked at me like I was crazy and made the comment that ‘double dutch was a game that only black girls played’…I was like “so, what” but instead of just saying ‘we don’t know how” they brushed it off as a game that was stupid because black girls played it.
Randy, I bring this up because it makes no sense to say because your ancestors didn’t go to these shows, they weren’t affected by race or stereotypes. By virtue of living in a racist society, they had to assimilate and part of assimilation is taking cues from the new society you live in order to get along.
These shows presented a distorted view of Native cultures and it’s primary target audience, white people, took these distorted views (presented to them as truth), home and spead what they just saw by word-of-mouth.
If anything, these shows only reinforced what the general population (white)already probably thought since in the US, the American army were still fighting with the native Indians and slavery had just ended.
@ Bulanik
I’m fairly certain Duck was trolling the thread with that comment.
@ SomeGuy
(Sure, they do that.)
’m fairly certain Duck was trolling the thread with that comment.
Still his comment does echo stuff I have heard too many times when “traditional” ethnography rears its pretty head…
@ SomeGuy,
Are you sure? It’s hard to tell between his offended white pride based rebuttals and his racist jokes. They seem to be part of the same bundle.
@ Bulanik
That reminds me of a conversation I had with my New Zealand Maori friend a few weeks ago. He gladly related tales of how his people ate Humans with no shame on his part. He was proud of his history. He told me how they would bury a man to his head in one of those heated pits and could tell when he was ready to eat when his eyes rolled back in his head.
To me, tribalism and even the extreme behavior of cannibalism is nothing to be ashamed of. It’s only shameful when others portray such behaviors as the main thread in a very diverse tapestry.
….My main objection, however, is that the women are running around with flapjacks flying in all directions. I figure that deep down that’s what really bothers most of you as well…
The lack of attire on the women would have been a major draw for the WM of this time
You then follow that with a list of genocides and historical atrocity against the indigenous and/or enslaved peoples over 4 continents….
It’s strange that some cannot, and will not, see the connection.
”
”
”
@ Bulanik,
Yes the list was by no means comprehensive – it is hard to over-estimate how screwed Whites would have been if they hadn’t had slavery and land-stealing.They would be still rolling around in their own sh&% like in pre-colonial Europe aka the world capital of germs and plagues.
http://www.uic.edu/classes/osci/osci590/3_3%20European%20Disease%20in%20the%20New%20World.htm
Also, even these accounts of European barbarism are favorable and probably omit the true scumminess of the urban centres. I mean the individuals writing the history books are more than likely to be in a certain elite group of individuals.
@JT
If duckduckgoofs saw a photo of a slave master dragging his female slave by a chain on the ground, he would suspect that it was all a part of an elaborate s & m role play. *smh*
Good heavens no cos dont forget, WM did not participate ‘willingly’ or otherwise in carnal activity with BW back in the day…
@ JT
Yeah, I’ve kind of gotta a “feel” for ducks sense of humor. So, I think that was one of his jokes.
@ SomeGuy,
So wait – does that make duckduckgoofs the punchline? Lol. Otherwise the joke is lost on me. lol.
@ abag “If whites were honest and fair-minded that might not be the worst thing, but they are far from it.”
As opposed to the honesty and fair-mindedness that you demonstrate on your blog, right? *sarcasm*
>>>
@ Bulanik
I think you left out a few instances. There were some Chilean soccer players who resorted to cannibalism when their plane crashed in the Andes back in 1972. And the Donner Party resorted to cannibalism when they were trapped by snow in the Rockies back in 1846. I’m pretty sure that plenty of sailors in lifeboats have resorted to cannibalism as well. And let’s not forget the most widespread example in which symbolic cannibalize was ritualized ie transubstantiation. You can ask Abag all about that one.
Of course, my point is that the examples of cannibalism you’ve listed were ALL done as a last resort by starving people. That’s why you left out the source from which those quotes came… so you could take them out of context by omitting the fact that those who did it were starving and did it out of desperation.
As for the kooky medicine stuff. A little ground up bone or a few drops of blood mixed in a drink. Yes, that was ignorance and superstition by people who were sick and looking to cure diseases. It’s ignorant and superstitious because it doesn’t work. Are you not equally horrified by doctors today who put the organs of corpses into living people ie. organ transplants? Why not? Because one has a scientific basis and the other doesn’t. That’s the only reason. Of course, we can look at Europeans of a few hundred years ago and laugh at them. But the only reason we can do that is because of the medical breakthroughs that THEY made.
We know better now but African witchdoctors are still cutting the heads off chickens, burning witches and killing children for their body parts today. Yeah, some of those people are sick, too, and desperate to cure diseases like AIDs and cancer. But this isn’t the 15th century anymore. And cannibalism is still widespread throughout much of Africa.
No Ducky, it wasn’t an exhaustive list.
And it wasn’t for you….
Good heavens no cos dont forget, WM did not participate ‘willingly’ or otherwise in carnal activity with BW back in the day…
”
”
”
Nor would the WFs try to seduce the BM and then blame the BM as a sexually violent and deviant beast.
“duckduckgoofs
And cannibalism is still widespread throughout much of Africa”
Linda says,
Without source proof, (as you just admonished Bulanik about) what you just stated above is dishonest and misleading.
‘The Vice Guide to Liberia’ is the only source you presented and
Liberia doesn’t represent the whole continent of Africa.
The below link gives a great Global view of cannibalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism
Cannibalism is and got it’s name from the Carib people of the Caribbean but it is mostly associated with South Pacific cultures.
But, I understand the confusion…you know how it is with black/brown people, they all look alike, so African…South Pacific, quite interchangable…couple thousand feet between continents shouldn’t matter (obviously, I am being sarcastic)
@duckduckgoofs
All the cases were a last resort of starving people?
Exaggerate much?
Taken out of context?
No sources..? Really. Because you don’t look at those provided, I suppose that makes them non-existent.
(One can provide 2 links per comment before being stuck in moderation, that’s why there aren’t more.)
Where are YOUR sources to show that cannibalism is widespread throughout much of Africa.
Provide at least 2, if you don’t mind.
From the 4 links I supplied (spread over 2 posts each), if you look them up, you find info like this:
“..Researchers suspect the remains belong either to people eaten in victory celebrations after being killed in wars, or to those slaughtered and consumed as part of ritual sacrifices….” from one of the 4 links provided. Look it and you will find which one!!! LOL.
And if want to not look up “Gough Caves” yourself (yes),you will find:
“…suggestions that it was a form of ritual which involved the eating of small pieces of a relative’s flesh, not as a source of nutrition, but as an act of homage….”
Re: the crusaders who cannibalized the Muslims did so as a method to scare the enemy….isn’t that what the accounts from the eyewitness say? Didn’t you notice?
War methods and homage-giving are not acts of desperate starvation.
Look it up, and do not mis-characterize my comments with your
1. laziness
2. rubbish.
And the survivors of that aircrash were Uruguayan…
The way I see it, there are some people in this world that need to be eaten. It’s unfortunate that most of the time the wrong people end up as tender loin.
There are a number of theories why the British would butcher and eat each other…. starvation is only one theory.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jun/20/ice-age-cannibals-britain-earliest-settlers
@SomeGuy
The way I see it, there are some people in this world that need to be eaten.
Hmm, reminds me of the The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover….
The Wife ends up eating her Lover, sauteed by The Cook and all watched over by The Thief…
Incidences of cannibalism per billion inhabitants (1990-2012):
27.8 Oceania
13.0 South America
11.3 North America
10.8 Europe
2.0 Africa
1.2 Asia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism
[...] Read original story here. [...]
This is one of my favorite films of all time. Definitely in my top 20 films.
Enjoy:
Since whites are the real Neanderthals,maybe they should be the ones in cages. They’ve proven they spread rape,slavery,colonization and genocide everywhere they go.Nowhere on earth have they ever gotten along with any people of color. They’re the reason the water supply is contaminated,GMO foods,and a homosexual culture is spreading everywhere. And they have the nerve to call other people savages??lol Please!
@ Bulanik All the cases were a last resort of starving people?
Yep.
“No sources..? Really. Because you don’t look at those provided, I suppose that makes them non-existent.”
I found the original source so I know you took the crusade examples out of context.
http://www.crusades-encyclopedia.com/cannibalism.html
Like I said, they resorted to cannibalism out of desperation. They were starving.
“I believe archaeologists can trace back evidence to about 7,000 years ago proving mass cannibalism in Germany – even children and unborn babies were on the menu.”
From the article that you linked: “Analysis of 7,000-year-old bones dug up at Herxheim in south-west Germany suggest the region was a centre for cannibalism at a time when the first European farming society may have been collapsing.”
Farming society collapsing equals resorted to cannibalism out of desperation.
In Gough’s Cave, England, remains of human bones and skulls from approximately 15,000 years ago, suggest that cannibalism took place amid the people living in the cave.
So what you’re saying is that bones from a cave 15K years ago might have had markings on them suggesting that possibly cannibalism could have maybe happened during an ice age when people were starving? So you have to go back 15K years during an ice age when people were starving to find cannibalism. Because that’s one of the examples that YOU chose.
“And the survivors of that aircrash were Uruguayan…”
Okay. So Uruguyan’s crashed in the Chilean Andes. The countries border each other and they’re both white. Did you really need to nitpick? Maybe I should watch my spelling and grammar, too?
@ Bulanik “Where are YOUR sources to show that cannibalism is widespread throughout much of Africa.”
I guess the video of people slinging entrails around and bragging about it wasn’t sufficient.
[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1199985/Now-goes-trial-Africas-cannibal-despot-Charles-Taylor-finally-just-deserts.html]
“Helped by his teenage son ‘Chuckie’, Taylor allegedly orchestrated the slaughter of up to 250,000 people, many of whom were tortured and raped before being cooked and eaten by Taylor’s troops.”
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2661365.stm]
“More than 350 witnesses and victims interviewed by the UN confirmed earlier allegations that the MLC was responsible for rape, torture, executions and cannibalism near the town of Beni. ”
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/16/tanzania-humanrights]
“She cited evidence that killers acting for witch doctors are turning to cannibalism alongside their quest for lucrative body parts as magic charms.”
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/05/AR2008060503430.html]
“As the military and spiritual leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), Kony is a combination of serial murderer and cult leader. He raises armies of captured boys, who are often forced to kill their neighbors and engage in cannibalism”
[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50A14F9345E13738DDDAA0894DE405B838DF1D3]
“FORTY “LEOPARDS” HANGED; Members of Cannibal Secret Society Had Terrorized Sierra Leone.”
[http://www.expotimesonline.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=113%3Asierra-leonean-woman-cought-in-scotland-for-canibalism&Itemid=65}
And, of course, when they immigrate they bring their culture with them.
I won’t even source the cannibalism allegations against the president Teodoro Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea and president Jean-Bédel Bokassa of the Central African Republic since they were found not guilty of cannibalism at the trials. *wink* *wink*
Next time, don’t ask if you don’t want to know. You feel me?
The day before he suffered he took break in his sacred hands and looking up to heaven, to you, his almighty Father, he gave you thanks and praise. He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and said:
Take this, all of you, and eat it:
this is my body which will be given up for you.
When supper was ended, he took the cup. Again he gave you thanks and praise, gave the cup to his disciples, and said:
Take this, all of you, and drink from it:
this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of me.
Great stuff. Check out the book from Savage to Negro that talks a good bit about museums, anthropology and the creation of common sense knowledge about race in America circa late 19th early 20th c.
For example, the Great Chicago’s World Fair had a human zoo that was called something like the tour of human progress where whites could enter one part of the exhibit and see blacks as “the lowest” form of human civilization then proceed “forward” to indigenous, asian, and then european civilizations.
This was in essence a living version of the Great Chain of Being eugenics diagram.
They even hired local black Chicagoans to play the “african savages.”
This exhibit was the target of protest by african american civil rights organizations.
An an interesting anecdote some of you may be interested in reading about museums in Apartheid South Africa and how after the fall of that evil regime the artifacts that dealt with black people had to be moved from the natural history catalog (plants and animals) to the human civilization collection(s).
@ Kush Since whites are the real Neanderthals,maybe they should be the ones in cages.
Neanderthal-type species once roamed Africa, DNA shows
Genetic evidence for archaic admixture in Africa
And then there’s this.
Comments with lots of links in moderation.
@duckduckgoofs. No deep-going source material?
Of course the Andean survivors from the aircrash were Uruguayan.
Wasn’t it YOU who told me I missed them out? Nitpicker that you.
If you’re going to “fill me in”, then what’s stopping you from telling me it right, instead of letting me do the work for you, ducky?
Crusades: you found ONE source.
One.
The one I practically spoon-fed you…
What about the sources of cannibalism used as terror methods?
There are a number of others for that Crusade, btw.
So, as far as your lazy answer goes…… not really.
Germany: cannibalism resulted because “farming society may have been collapsing…” May-have-been is Conclusive and Credible?
LOL! LOL!
Okay, let me indulge your lazy self for a minute on this one.
If you took the time to actually read through the research entitled:
“Mass Cannibalism in the Linear Potter Culture at Herxheim” (Boulestin, et al), you would have seen paragraphs like this:
or, this:
You can find the source on your own.
I may not bring pre-history into the frame? Who says? What have you got against archaeological findings from different eras, nations, peoples?
Or do prefer paucity of fact and a prevalence of opinion when it comes to black people?
I note, too, that you skipped over corpse medicine and documented necrophagia. A little ground up bone or a few drops of blood mixed in a drink.
A little….a few….so, not like a bloody fukking industry then?
Yet, we must be believe you when you claim that cannibalism is still widespread throughout much of Africa, because….let me see……you say so?
The 2 links to prove this?
Where are they?
Cannibalism is now off topic – it is starting to derail the thread.
@duckduckgoofs
None of your links works, so, no, you are not felt.
duck,
Are you seriously trying to use the news media to support your claims for a topic that doesn’t have anything to do with this forum??
Seriously, give it up. You are so obsessed with trying to make black people out to be bad people that you can’t see that you are making yourself look foolish.
The topic is about human zoos. What the hell does cannibalism have to do with it?
Bulanik,
If he uses the media to back up his argument, then he is surely in a desperate state of mind.
@ Bulanik “None of your links works, so, no, you are not felt.”
I thought putting links in brackets would make it past the filter. It’s not my fault you’re too dumb to copy/paste instead of clicking.
@Brothawolf
And, there I was naively hoping for something quantifiable, “forensic” or even serious.
@brothawolf Making himself look foolish is what duckgoofs does best. What do you expect?lol
Linda:
My ancestors were quite low on the “pecking order” back then, and as far as I can tell spent most of their time at work, church, or around their fellow recent immigrants. I do accept your point that some bias surely filtered through, though I would contest Matari’s certainly of width and depth of that influence.
@ Randy
My point entirely directed at you. You consistently fail to see a lot of things! Even when they are directly pointed out to you! You should consider this a BIG hint!
duck
You told Bulanik, “I thought putting links in brackets would make it past the filter. It’s not my fault you’re too dumb to copy/paste instead of clicking.”
And you’re too dumb to simply ‘copy and paste’ the links and are too dumb to make a comment based on the topic at hand it seems.
From what search the internet has shown me, mock savage entertainers may have begun with the 18th century fad for black servants, burnt-cork minstrel shows from the 1840s, and ‘freaks’ in sideshows in touring circus and fairground shows. At least in England.
A large group of ‘Dahomey Warriors’ toured Britain throughout the 1900s, and smaller groups of African people (including children) were on show at large exhibitions.
This means that ‘African villages’ were commercial propositions.
Among others, there were:
-the 120 Senegalese spending months in London in 1904,
-whilst 30 Somalis were in Bradford in 1904.
-Mandingo children from Sierra Leone were on public display at a toy fair in London in 1908,
-Bandsmen of the West India Regiment played at the Crystal Palace exhibition centre in south London in 1905.
One particularly successful presentation was the spectacle of 6 Congo Pygmies in London in 1905, on stage. The British press called them “dwarf savages”, “strange apelike people” who had been ‘captured in Central Africa’ where they had been living in trees.
These 4 men and 2 women were recruited by James J. Harrison, an explorer and businessman. Harrison wanted dancers to form his theatrical troupe. At that time, the British knew that short adult Africans lived in the forests that explorer H.M. Stanley had penetrated in the 1880s, and this had been documented in book “In Darkest Africa” that appeared in 1890.
Whilst James Harrison was hoping to make money from his ‘Pygmy savages’ on the London stage, H.M. Stanley was approached by the ambitious Belgian king Leopold II. Leopold did this by organizing a private holding company (all of his own), disguised as an international scientific and philanthropic association, which he called the International African Society. The king spoke of his intentions to introduce Western civilization and bring religion to that part of Africa, but did not mention he wanted to claim the lands.
Thus, little by little, H.M. Stanley accommodated both the King and James Harrison.
In bringing the 6 Congolese over to London, the plan to exhibit them on stage was found out by the British government, and when the 6 were examined by doctors, it appeared all were ill with coughs, had enlarged spleens and livers, and were anaemic. The older woman had an arrow wound, was emaciated, had a curved spine and a feeble pulse. Only two were judged fit enough to travel to England. But Harrison was determined.
The Congo was ruled by King Leopold of the Belgians as his own property, and Harrison later wrote that he had Leopold’s permission to take the 6.
The Belgian regime in the Congo had been worrying some Britons since the 1890s, and the Foreign Office had opened a ‘Congo Atrocities’ file.
(British knowledge of the atrocities in the Congo of that era would have been held by The Foreign and Commonwealth Office, under their migrated archives. Thos are the files which are ‘sensitive’ and incriminating from Britain’s former colonial governments that were sent back to the UK (hence migrated) on the eve of decolonisation for storage in the archives to avoid their disclosure and subsequent embarrassment to Her Majesty’s Government. A great many similar documents were not repatriated, but instead destroyed.)
Roger Casement (an Irish rebel in the British government at the time) recorded the Belgians’ atrocities aimed at coercing the Congo people into gathering wild rubber, and submitted his own report. It contrasted starkly with James Harrison’s praise of Leopold’s regime.
But, Harrison’s narrative won out.
He claimed that all in Britain should doubt any reports of countless atrocities’ in the Congo…who could believe hands and feet were being cut off…the Africans were just lazy…
The 6 Africans came to London to perform.
Newspapers reported that their language “is confined to words of 2 syllables” contradicting reports of their names, all having at least 3 syllables. This language “of strange clicking sounds” spoken by “absolute specimens of primitive creation” whose dancing was “intended to imitate the play of monkeys”..
It was expectted that the ‘little cannibals’ would ‘devour raw flesh’, but they in fact used knives and forks – “as if to the custom born”.
http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portraitLarge/mw166967/Pygmies-of-Central-Africa
Whilst performing at a genteel garden party, The Era (a newspaper of the time) reported, “one Pigmy [killed two running rabbits with his bow and arrow” (the rabbits were let out of a sack for this purpose) and weren’t the Africans’ hunting skills remarkable?
When they were the spectacle in the North of England, a newspaper reported that, “…these diminutive little fellows are not to be hurried” and they showed “what a great work there is for those who have in hand the civilisation of the races of Central Africa”
Observed on stage in Birmingham, the Birmingham Daily Mail commented: “Officially stated to be the missing link between the ape and man, the pygmies, by their appearance, certainly do not suggest the connection”…the reporter went on to note that in the Pygmy war-dance: “one seems to trace the origins of the cake-walk” – the popular dance of the time…
(Info from Joan Mark: “The King of the World in the Land of the Pygmies”,
Brian Inglis: “Roger Casement”, Jeffrey Green’s research on Edwardian England.)
Bulanik,
That’s very informative.
@brothawolf – it’s a interesting era.
I found the photo of the 6 people on the net: standing there holding onto their bows and arrows, with the white men towering over them like giants.
I looked at it a long time, and wanted to know more about these men and women.
@brothawolf
Thank you – here is that photo again: I believe James Harrison is standing the 2 people on the left with his arm on the woman’s shoulder.
http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portraitLarge/mw166967/Pygmies-of-Central-Africa
@ Bulanik:
Thank you for that pic. The man creeps me out. Isn’t that being too forward? Placing your arm on a woman you probably don’t even know? Let alone a black woman?
@Leigh204
Hmm, I know. Looking at it made me wonder. He’s got his hands on her, and look at his face…
What kind of people presumed gross ‘ownership’ like that?
To Brothawolf
Let’s start a human zoo featuring whites and witness how berserk they’ll get at the thought of it.
You’d probably get volunteers.. and FWIW it’s already been done:
http://io9.com/5912434/the-first-quintuplets-got-put-in-a-human-zoo
What a curiosity… did darkies come to look and point at them?
Not a question.
Bulanik,
I check out that pic and I could barely stomach it.
@brothawolf
I know, I know. It really got to me. Upset me. I really wanted to know them a little. Know some of their story, and see them as the human beings they were.
@duckgoofs Yes I’m aware of that. Black people are the oldest people on the planet. Black men and women are parents of all other races. If there really ever was an “Adam and Eve” they were most likely black. And even though modern humans migrated out of Africa over 50,000 years ago—the time apart shows that Africans and Europeans are very different. If Africans truly are related to Europeans they must be very DISTANT relatives. Judging by the behavior of Europeans worldwide,they don’t seem to get along very well with people they deem different than themselves.
I’m probably going to get blasted for saying this but…..
Being a white European (born in Germany, raised in the southern part of the US), I’ve had plenty of people assume I’m a Nazi or racist or both (or worse). I’ve seen racism in all its ugly glory (whether it be directed at me or at friends of mine). I’ve thought, researched, discussed and agonized about it. The conclusions I’ve reached (and this is purely my opinion) is that what we call racism isn’t something that can be placed on any one races’ shoulders. I do feel it develops differently in different areas of the world and I am emphatic that it is a learned behavior.
Right now, however, I would just like to address the racism discussed in the writing above, pertaining to human zoos. Firstly, can I just say, that humans would do this to other humans is so wretchedly awful…it makes me weep. What I am about to say isn’t to be taken as an excuse, I am merely trying to explain where such behavior might have come from or been learned. I believe many white Europeans condoned/supported/patronized these zoos mainly because of the teachings of the Catholic Church. If you do any research into the Catholic Church and how it changed and shaped Europe, you cannot fail to see how they (the Catholic Church) taught bigotry and hatred. There is a reason Europe experienced the “Dark Ages”…it because the church demonized science, medicine, women and anything else it thought went against its own agenda. It also taught that anyone outside of the Church was a “heathen”, “barbarian”, “heretic”. It taught that in order to not be damned to the eternal fires of hell one must conform to the strict ideologies of the Church. When it came to people living outside of the Catholic Churches’ realm, the church’s opinion was simple….the should be made to convert and if they didn’t, then they were “heathen”.
This doctrine was drummed in generation after generation. But just like a game of “telephone” the message can get a bit warped after filtering from mouth to ear over and over. Soon, instead of “barbarians” being the non-converted….it just became, “anyone not like us, that believes what we believe and lives like we live”. Understand, that Europe before WWI was a pretty “white” place. (Shoot, it still is in lots of areas.) Most Europeans had never seen anyone of color. Unless, they traveled to other places…they had a very limited idea of what was “normal”. Having the church teaching them for centuries that there is only one “right” way to be and that anyone different wasn’t equal in God’s eyes…really set the stage for the atrocities perpetrated in these “zoos”.
“Most Europeans had never seen anyone of color. Unless, they traveled to other places…they had a very limited idea of what was “normal”. Having the church teaching them for centuries that there is only one “right” way to be and that anyone different wasn’t equal in God’s eyes…really set the stage for the atrocities perpetrated in these “zoos”.”
**********
Jenn
In your opinion – did “most Europeans” see God as white?? …thereby setting the stage for this – only one right way to be – attitude?
Also, reading your assessment about the church seems to suggest that the church (or God) is demonic. Is this your stance?
Matari,
Wouldn’t you say that most people envision their god to look like them? Not to mention, the Church did show Jesus and his mother Mary as white people.
I don’t follow where your deducting from my statement that the church is demonic. Could you clarify please?
@Jenn
May I ask if you are from the more Southern part of Germany? because if memory serves, Germany – Christian Germany – is practically split exactly down the middle between Catholics and Protestants. I recall, when I lived there, that the North is more Protestant.
It debatable what you say about the Dark Ages, but I see your point about Catholicism in Germany and particularly during the Nazi era…However, Martin Luther, the great Protestant reformer, did not exactly have many kind words for the Jews in his midst, did he?
“Set fire to their synagogues and schools.”
“Jewish houses should be razed and destroyed, and Jewish prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, curing, and blasphemy are taught, {should} be taken from them.” And so on.
Luther did not take a stand against anti-Semitism at all.
He simply repeated as true the worst anti-Semitic charges from medieval literature, such as: that Jews killed Christian babies; they murdered Christ over and over again by stabbing eucharistic hosts; they poised wells.
He did not allow facts to deter him from his emotionalism on this matter.
The founder of powerful religion, was openly a racist, so why wouldn’t the practitioners of later years not be that much different?
http://www.theologian.org.uk/churchhistory/lutherandthejews.html
And let us not forget the precursor to the Jewish Holocaust – witch-burning.
The Church was behind that, even providing a handbook to guide witch hunters as to where to find the demons and Satan, and flush them out.
However, I wonder if the Church merely enabled these catastrophic events, rather than instigated them, because of economic and political interests, investments and ambitions it was established to protect?
It strikes me that “race science”, human zoos and the German imperialist designs on part of Africa that it would day claim ALL conspired to further German interests and European hegemony.
Didn’t they want African resources and territory?
Didn’t the genocide of the Herero and Namaqua of Namibia take place at around the time these Human Zoos were at their zenith in Deutschland?
Didn’t they have the rationale and methodology in place to do it, both Catholic and Lutheran?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Konfessionen-in-Deutschland.svg
Bulanik,
I from Northern Germany…way, way north. And yes, you are correct, Northern Germany, for the most part is Lutheran/Protestant. However, Germany like most of Europe was firmly Catholic before Martin Luther got fed up and nailed his list to those cathedral doors. You are also correct in Luther didn’t have kind words regarding the Jews, but he wasn’t the first. If you read the Torah and/or Old Testament, the Jews have been harried, enslaved and persecuted since Abraham had two sons. But Abagond’s blog wasn’t about the Jews and their struggles.
Oh, you don’t have to tell me about the burning times. And I’m also pretty familiar w/ the Inquisition as well. Both excellent examples of the Catholic Church “cleansing” heretics and heathens from the population. My point was simply, knowing how the Church did things and how the general populous had been beaten into submission…is it not easy to see that said populous would look at tribal people from “far away lands” as a curiosity and not protest their inhumane treatment?
You stated, “However, I wonder if the Church merely enabled these catastrophic events, rather than instigated them, because of economic and political interests, investments and ambitions it was established to protect?”
Man, if that is them enabling…I freakin hate to see them start instigating! The church was protecting the economic and political interests of its own establishment, as its always done. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you of it’s wealth and power and its misuse of said power. Why, just look at what is happening in the Philippines. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/population/la-fg-population-matters5-20120729-html,0,5897961.htmlstory
To Bulanik:
What a curiosity… did darkies come to look and point at them?
If you mean people that are not White, since the children were seen by over 3 million people I am sure a few.. but of course this was also organized by Whites so I get the difference. Brothawolf’s proposed venture would probably get a quite a few willing applicants from Burning man types.
To Jenn, Bulanik;
I don’t see Catholicism as the root for Human zoos since they were also popular in predominantly protestant Britain and the US.
Jenn
“Wouldn’t you say that most people envision their god to look like them?”
.
Judging from the depiction I saw of Jesus (as white w/blonde hair) hanging on the wall in my own home AND in the homes of my relatives, black friends and colored Puerto Rican friends when I was in elementary through high school, I would emphatically say no!
.
“I don’t follow where your deducting from my statement that the church is demonic. Could you clarify please?”
you wrote:
“If you do any research into the Catholic Church and how it changed and shaped Europe, you cannot fail to see how they (the Catholic Church) taught bigotry and hatred.”
If God/Jesus is LOVE, does not the church’s position (doctrine) seem odd to you?
Why would a loving Creator teach his/her people (in Europe) to be hateful bigots? Aren’t those qualities more in line with the character of evil than that of a loving parent/creator? Why would the church blatantly misrepresent the character of God??
@Matari
If God/Jesus is LOVE, does not the church’s position (doctrine) seem odd to you?
Why would a loving Creator teach his/her people (in Europe) to be hateful bigots? Aren’t those qualities more in line with the character of evil than that of a loving parent/creator? Why would the church blatantly misrepresent the character of God??
I am intrigued to hear the response to this too.
@Uncle Milton, Yes Britain and the US are predominantly Protestant, now. Britain was Catholic until good ol’ King Henry decided that the Pope was too rigid in his position on divorce. It then flip-flopped a few times as his various children took the throne and slaughtered their citizens, all in the name of religion. By the time Anne Boleyn’s daughter Elizabeth I was crowned and the question of England’s religious affiliation was settled (The Church of England, Protestant), centuries of Catholic influence had already taken hold in the people. As you know the US is populated by immigrants, pretty much all of us are originally from somewhere else. Though, as you said, the US is mainly Protestant many of its people came from predominantly Catholic countries. I am not saying that human zoos were purely a product of the Catholic Church’s teachings and doctrine…more so saying that those teachings could have caused the people to be more complacent regarding the inhuman treatment of so called “barbarians” or “savages”.
@Matari, If you had never seen those pictures and statues portraying a “white” Jesus…would you envision him differently?
You wrote, “If God/Jesus is LOVE, does not the church’s position (doctrine) seem odd to you?
Why would a loving Creator teach his/her people (in Europe) to be hateful bigots? Aren’t those qualities more in line with the character of evil than that of a loving parent/creator? Why would the church blatantly misrepresent the character of God?? ”
Odd? How about wrong?! Unfortunately, all churches are run by people, not God. There by, are subject to all human emotions and failings. The Catholic Church, during the last millennium, has been control by some of the most powerful families in Italy. Families, that during the Middle Ages and before, were bankers, money leaders, land owners and merchants. It was traditional for the 2nd or 3rd son to “go into” the church…but these wealthy sons were not humble priests or monks but Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals and often times Pope. Wealth and power were/are synonymous w/ the church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church#Organisation_and_demographics The Catholic Church answers to no one but God and according to the Church “Catholic doctrine maintains that the Church is infallible”. So, pretty much God is who they say he is and if you disagree…well, your wrong. *eye roll*
“At least as late as 2005 you could still see “African tribesmen” in grass skirts at a Western zoo (in Augsberg, Germany).”
Not true, but at least as late as 2010 the PC-crowd in Germany raised the issue, when anything culturally African happened in a German zoo. Interesting to note is that where the French put quite some eroticism in their people-shows (some of the US version seem to have become regular stripper shows), the Germans never presented the black African as erotically interesting…
@Matari
Judging from the depiction I saw of Jesus (as white w/blonde hair) hanging on the wall in my own home AND in the homes of my relatives, black friends and colored Puerto Rican friends when I was in elementary through high school, I would emphatically say no!
That’s quite different. These depictions of White Christ in Brown and Black homes are the result of cultural dominance of another group. Chinese Christians depict Christ as chinese; Ethiopian Christians depict Christ and the angels as African.
@Jenn – thank you for the link about the Philippines.
First off, I agree with you that religion exerts huge power, and the passivity of the human zoo’s onlookers has a root in religious doctrine.
Because you said you: “believe many white Europeans condoned/supported/patronized these zoos mainly because of the teachings of the Catholic Church” , I was under the impression that you may not have mentioned Luther’s influence in your assessment for a reason.
(I recall once listening to a couple of friends from the North of Germany asserting a similar thesis to this, and who also let me know that Luther wasn’t the first anti-Semite in Germany or Europe for that matter, too! lol…)
“.. If you read the Torah and/or Old Testament, the Jews have been harried, enslaved and persecuted since Abraham had two sons.”
Okaaay, certainly.
When one own’s family is (among other things) both black and Jew – (who fled Inquisition-era Spain) – sometimes issues overlap and lines can blur in one’s perspective on these subjects.
True – “Abagond’s blog wasn’t about the Jews and their struggles” – but it was hardly about Catholics and theirs either, was it, as this subject – “human zoos” is bursting with all kinds of issues.
Not least, because:
by the time Europe’s Jews were being exterminated in the early 1940s, Germany had already employed the use of concentration camps, medical experimentation and mass murder in SW Africa.
The Holocaust in Europe already had its precursor and ‘template’ in Africa at the same time it was exhibiting Africans in zoos. It was only a short step from these human zoos to the horrors of Nazi Germany as pseudo-science that underpinned one, helped legitimise the other.
*******************************************************************************
However, the Church as a power-broker enabled, rather than instigated, the catalogue of catastrophy against Africans and indigenous peoples on other Continents, because:
The Church was European Imperialism’s right hand, it’s tool. It served to justify colonial conquest, in the name of “the white man’s burden” to “civilize” and convert African and Indigenous peoples. As an institution it served to profit, and profit fabulously, by playing its part.
@Jenn
Thinking it through a little, the passivity and support of the on-looker to these spectacles was the flipside to the OTHER religious mindset that created the human zoo. It was little different to the attitudes of the colonial powers towards the countries these “exotic creatures” came from – but probably less ambitious. The human zoo was imperial potential on display, in bite-size chunks, not the hard graft of conquest and domination.
My memory is shaky on this one, but, I believe it was the Pope, Sixtus IV, who decreed that all lands south of the Canary Islands belonged to Spain. Then this was changed by Pope Alexander VI, who issued decrees in the late 1400s that resulted in the theft of lands in Africa, along with the theft of Indigenous lands in the Americas, laying the ground work for slavery and genocide:
This decree, the “Inter Caetera” said as follows:
http://www.uintahbasintah.org/usdocuments/doc4.pdf
With this permission granted for all lands west of this line to belong to Spain, and all lands east to Portugal, the way was smoothed for conquest, and worse.
When you think how heavily involved the Church was in the slave trade of African people and in the colonial genocidal policies, then, I would conclude that Catholic priests, who were sent as missionaries to the Americas and Africa, are better labeled ‘agents’.
AFAIK, the Catholic Church only apologized for its part in slavery in 2000. It’s taken this long because it generally accepted slavery as a ‘natural’ part of socio-economic reality, or spoke of it as a necessary evil.
(Maybe I’m wrong, but I believe Jesuit provinces owned slaves in the 18th and 19th centuries.)
And then, there is WEALTH.
Could the Pope be the richest man on the planet based on stolen labor and resources?
I’ve read that The Vatican’s treasury of solid gold has been estimated by the United Nations World Magazine to amount to several billion dollars. And, that a large bulk of this is stored in gold ingots with the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, while banks in England and Switzerland hold the rest. Further:
(Avro Manhattan, “The Vatican Billions”)
In this regard, I see the human zoo almost like a open-air department store of imperial conquest – the entertainment end with the goods up fro grabs and on display. The tip of the iceberg of something much bigger and far more troubling
Bulanik, your statement,”In this regard, I see the human zoo almost like a open-air department store of imperial conquest – the entertainment end with the goods up fro grabs and on display. The tip of the iceberg of something much bigger and far more troubling”, is sad but true!
Religion was a major tool used by slavery supporters here in the US too. Just look at the Willie Lynch letter, he considered himself a “good” christian upholding the will of God. http://www.africanamericanimages.com/aai/willie%20lynch.htm
Not to mention the baptizing of slave before they were loaded on to slave ships…..
“In the early seventeenth century, it became customary for slaves in Africa to be baptized before their departure from Africa. This requirement was first laid down by King Philip III of Spain (II of Portugal) in 1607 and confirmed in 1619. The slaves had, as a rule, received no instruction whatever before this ceremony, and many, perhaps most, of them had no previous indication that there was such a thing as a Christian God. So the christening was perfunctory. In Luanda, the captives would be taken to one of the six churches, or assembled in the main square. An official catechist, a slave, say, who spoke Kimbundu, the language of Luanda, would address the slaves on the nature of their Christian transformation. Then a priest would pass among the bewildered ranks, giving to each one a Christian name, which had earlier been written on a piece of paper. He would also sprinkle salt on the tongues of the slaves, and follow that with holy water. Finally, he might say, through an interpreter:
‘Consider that you are now children of Christ. You are going to set off for Portuguese territory, where you will learn matters of the Faith. Never think any more of your place of origin. Do not eat dogs, nor rats, nor horses. Be content.’”
http://www.ralphmag.org/slave2.html
Its truly a lamentable thing when religion is used as a tool to control and legitimize cruelty!
Well, to be honest, such things happened too in countries absolutely without colonial aspirations, the attraction of seeing people who are different from you just did the trick and made it a commercially sound show.
If we look at Germany there were more than 400 of those, and quite remarkable, using people from German colonies for those was very rare, not to say prohibited. They carried the danger of being the equivalent of Uncle Tom’s cabin, showing “alien people” to be just people, with their own culture and so on, as such it had the potential to be the kryptonite of the Colonial Empires, though history did not follow that course.
Jenn:
If you read the Bible, you’ll see that Jesus and his disciples in several places command slaves to obey their masters, and not just the kind ones.
Jenn:
This is also congruent within Christian belief.
If your religion dictated that non-believers would suffer in the afterlife, the most moral action would be to convert anyone and everyone to the religion, even by use of force.
People like to say that the Inquisition and slavery were perversions of the faith, but if you read the Scriptures you’ll see that they’re quite moral within that framework.
Randy…you need to realize something very important about Jesus, the majority of his teachings were metaphors or parables so that the common man could understand. When Jesus said for slaves and women to obey, he was referring to “man” should obey God.
That said, you wrote,”If your religion dictated that non-believers would suffer in the afterlife, the most moral action would be to convert anyone and everyone to the religion, even by use of force.”
So, it was fine to make them suffer in this life as long as they went to heaven? If that is the crux of Christianity…I want no part. What of Jesus telling us, ” I give a new commandment to you: ‘Love one another; just as I have loved you, you should also love one another.” in John 13:34? How can you love someone and enslave them, rip them from their family and homeland, beat, rape and degrade them? Do you realize that those slaves were BRANDED as property shortly before being baptized?
It is the idea of “….convert anyone and everyone to the religion, even by force.” that has brought about so much human suffering. If you are to be a Christian…then be as Christ was…loving your fellow man.
Jenn:
A finite human lifespan is but the merest blink of a wren’s eye compared to the eternity of the Christian afterlife, so what wouldn’t a person of noble morals do to save his or her fellows from unending suffering?
This discussion is probably better suited for the Open Thread. If you’re interested, I can provide you with chapter and verse which supports these opinions.
It is the idea of “….convert anyone and everyone to the religion, even by force.” that has brought about so much human suffering. If you are to be a Christian…then be as Christ was…loving your fellow man.
This is true, but Hebrews would periodically rape, pilage, plunder, enslave, and murder their neighbors. It’s to be expected that Christians follow in their footsteps.There’s nothing loving about the faith’s history and dictations, just authoritarian horse piss.
@ D / Jenn
“…but Hebrews would periodically rape, pilage, plunder, enslave, and murder their neighbors. It’s to be expected that Christians follow in their footsteps
***********
Au contraire, there is nothing remotely Christ-like in the “rape, pilage, plunder, enslave, and murder their neighbors.” That’s not what the Christ preached/taught!
There’s a stark/huge difference between the Old & New Testaments. Actual Christians are not those who follow the Hebrews but those that follow the message/instructions/Spirit put forth by the Christ – which would totally disqualify many/most churches – current and past.
It’s obvious to some observers that the so-called Church has not truly emerged from its darkness (or dark ages, if you prefer).
*Any* institution that’s supposedly GOOD, but in reality and truth is EVIL is a demonic enterprise – in my opinion!
It’s about a century since the human zoos were popular in Europe and the US, but from what I have seen, the passion for novelty has reduced and the curiosity about different cultures – particularly those relatively untouched by what we deem “civilization” – has not diminished.
These days it’s called “Human Safaris” , and they are organised by unethical tour operators who exploit indigenous peoples in India, Central and South America.
The people on show are sometimes caught unawares in the course of their lives. Sometimes, for the promise of food or some gift, they can be filmed, their bodies looked at more closely, or pushed to dance in a degrading manner (for food) to amuse convoys of visitors (and members of the police who have a responsibility to protect these people from exploitation, but get tipped for giving the tourists a good time).
Stephen Corry of Survival International, which campaigns on behalf of indigenous people, says:
“{These people} are not cultural relics nor should they be treated like animals in a zoo… promoting tours by using derogatory terms such as ‘primitive’ and advertising their nakedness shows a clear lack of respect.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkilueCoafI
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/07/andaman-islands-tribe-tourism-threat
Animals were the traditional spectacle for zoos.
Since those times animals rights have come to the fore, and some of the more radical campaigns for animal rights.
These have included comparing animal abuse to slavery and the Holocaust, often appearing to place animal rights above that of humans.
I am not sure if the rationale for that is animals are the focus, because there are plenty of other groups that worry about the humans?
Here is an example of 2 dead black men from a racist lynching in the US and its animal “counterpart”:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3009/2774537238_3b75cb121f.jpg
And, a picture black man in a cage, like an animal, the headline reads “wilde tiere gehören nicht Gitter” – wild animals don’t belong behind bars:
http://www.peta.de/img/mdb/mola_72.jpg
@Teddy
“At least as late as 2005 you could still see “African tribesmen” in grass skirts at a Western zoo (in Augsberg, Germany).”
Not true, but at least as late as 2010 the PC-crowd in Germany raised the issue, when anything culturally African happened in a German zoo.
The PC-crowd? Do you mean those sensitive people who might feel funny about hosting an African cultural event in a zoo?
I don’t think there was an objection to hosting a cultural event in a park.
But perhaps no-one wishes to recall Germany’s and Europe’s colonialist past, or the not uncommon practice in the 19th and early 20th centuries of exhibiting African natives in zoos or circuses?
Should these things be forgotten, Teddy?
What is more, wouldn’t such a setting encourage visitors to see Africans as a display and emphasizes their “otherness”?
What do you think?
As a matter of fact, the zoo as we know it came into being more or less along with such shows, Bulanik.
Well, they rather seemed to suggest they were against the celebration of Namibia’s independence in a Berlin Zoo… And no the impression I get is rather that zoo visitors in the Augsburg or Berlin cases would consider those Africans rather as a nuissance than as a display.
Of course, it should not be forgotten, once at a time it was a huge manifestation of the entertainment industry, though excesses did occur, it was compared with other things happening at the same time rather harmless, though I must admit that the advertizing and most of the 20th century shows are hard to justify. The past is a far away country, they do things different there…
PC-crowd, people who care about political correctness, rather than about the truth,…
@Teddy
As a matter of fact, the zoo as we know it came into being more or less along with such shows..
As a matter of fact? Are you serious?
London Zoo, for one, has been around since the 1820s and zoological gardens and menageries go back 1000s of years. The earliest one that google throws up is Hierakonpolis, which dates back to 3500BC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Zoo
Teddy, could you clarify who was against Namibia’s independence being celebrated – the Namibians? – or the PC-crowd (as you call them)? Are you saying the real reason was that the Africans would cause a nuisance in the zoo?
The Augsburg thing. This is what I had read:
Source:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/international/zoo-sparks-row-over-tribesmen-props-for-animals-1-715365
Teddy
PC-crowd, people who care about political correctness, rather than about the truth,…
Therefore, please tell me what you call the “crowd” who care about BURYING & DOWNPLAYING Germany’s and Europe’s colonialist past?
Abagond:
After reading this post several times, it leaves a bad taste in one’s mouth when thinking about modern-day zoos who happen to enslave wildlife native to Africa behind bars for the enjoyment of the masses, this is some profound s**t Abagond. Let’s include the circus as well, the same mindset is inherent in both models. Abagond, info like this is not to be seen or heard about, control of the Net is the next big censorship fight. If we think the nuts that have power right now are gonna allow black folk to know the real story, We’re Crazy!!!
Tyrone
Well, Tyrone, there is no problem at all finding rather extensive documentation about all of this, provided you don’t mind it is in German… With the PC-crowd I mean the people who made that accusation Abagond is talking about, the ones who do protest, while other (black) folks try to do their thing in a zoo setting.For a lot of those people on exhibition, it was doing their thing, and certainly the first shows, seem to have been quite genuine representing the “alien” culture.I mean, yes, that accusation was made, but it was just people with a wildly varying degree of claim to Africa-ness, selling or sharing their Africa-thing.
Granted, this was a form of entertainment degenerating seriously in the 20th century, we are even talking about “adult entertainment” in the US.
Bulanik, there aren’t that many people interested in actively burrying and downplaying that kind of stuff, the white crowds just don’t care.
Tedddy
“Bulanik, there aren’t that many people interested in actively burrying and downplaying that kind of stuff, the white crowds just don’t care.”
Whether they care or don’t care matters not.
What do you call this crowd ?
As a matter of fact, I don’t call them anything. As far as I’m concerned people are free to say “I don’t care”, “I’m not interested” and so on, untill they start to tell things which are incorrect, as in factually wrong, like in this case, the accusation Abagond mentions was real, but false, as such it is a good illustration of the onliving legacy of this form of entertainment, certainly.
@Teddy
You said:
… the accusation Abagond mentions was real, but false…
?
Sure, Teddy, people are free, to care and not to care. And, so what?
You’re not telling me anything.
What does intrigue me is that you seem to be saying – or not saying – about what you consider to be truth in contrast to what is ‘PC’.
Frankly, I would like to know more about this PC crowd you refer to?
The people who are not interested in the truth.
*************************
Btw, you say this to Tyrone:
“Well, Tyrone, there is no problem at all finding rather extensive documentation about all of this, provided you don’t mind it is in German…”
I don’t mind having a look at this extensive documentation, so, Teddy, feel free to share
Do understand that in my experience there is no bunch of cheats, deceivers, liars, pretenders, makers of false promises and violators of the truth worse than politicians.
People who are protesting against racism, animal abuse or whatever form of evil, not being bothered by whether their accusations, stories and so on are true, or at least based on sound evidence, are harming the cause. If Martha Jones would say “I was discriminated because of my skin color and two times two is six”, she would have proven herself a liar, so one is justified in considering the first part as probably untrue too.
“Völkerschau” just google that.
@duckduck:
“There were some Chilean soccer players who resorted to cannibalism when their plane crashed in the Andes back in 1972.”
Noup, they were uruguyan rugby team.
And on the same subject: western christianity goes trough a cannibalistic ritual every sunday and in every mass when they drink the blood of Christ and eat his flesh. And this has been going on since at least 1400 years now. So much about cannibals.
“As a matter of fact, the zoo as we know it came into being more or less along with such shows…”
THE ZOO AS WE KNOW IT, was meant as the modern 20th and 21st century zoo, the dry moat elephant enclosure, for instance, was created by the man who organized a quarter of those People-Shows in Germany, the zoo as a panorama, showing by imitation parts of the world, parts of the Sonoran Desert, the African rain forest, or a West-European barn , by bringing animals and plants,stones (and fake stuff) together to create the impression of being in another part of the world. In that concept the addition of actual people from those parts fits quite well, enabling people to make a world trip in 8 hours so to say.
Employing the caretaker-of-color who had taken care of animals on their trip as a keeper, was not that uncommon either, and had quite some attraction value too.
“As a matter of fact, the zoo as we know it came into being more or less along with such shows…”
If you mean as DESIGN then, yes, Carl Hagenbeck, created the first-ever barless (moated) exhibit, because he applied the Romantic movement’s idea of placing the zoo in a proper landscape with a foreground, mid-ground, and background. Like in a painting.
Imo, the zoological garden, as AN EXPERIENCE is older than that.
Look at Melbourne Zoo, Australia, for instance.
As far back as the 1870s, visitors could pay to sleep overnight in tents at the zoo in popular “Roar and Snore” evenings. These evenings allowed the public to see some of the nocturnal animals at the zoo in evening guided tours by keepers.
But I disagree with you about our modern idea of the zoo as we know it coming into being more or less AT THE TIME of the “human zoos”. Hagenbeck was a wild animal dealer, circus proprietor and businessman. When Bernhard Grzimek at Frankfurt Zoo came along, and more so Heine Hediger, both in the 1950s – the idea of the zoo had its turning point. Grzimek was a vet, and Hediger popularized the idea of husbandry practices and zoo-design based on an animal’s natural history.
After that, incorporating humans visitors (as customers!) became the big feature in the way zoos were designed – “diorama” – what architects call ‘landscape immersion’. Re-creating the habitat in the which the animal was naturally seen – came into being in as a design feature in the 1970s. Example, the gorilla exhibit at Woodland Park Zoo, in Seattle. Since then, zoos as conservation facilities, has probably changed that again.