The answer depends on your definition of 'blacks'. If you mean Africans, the answer is most definitely 'yes.' For example, research the Moors or Barbary Coast pirates (or Arabs, Muslims, and Egyptians).
Just an example (from a reliable source): According to the BBC's site:http://www.bbc.co.UK/theoneshow/article/2007/07/ds_whiteslaves.shtml
"A few years ago, the remains of a mysterious ship were discovered just off Salcombe in Devon, along with a huge hoard of treasure. This treasure links the ship to a time, 400 years ago, when people were taken from villages all along the south coast of Britain - to be sold into slavery. Salcombe today is a peaceful holiday town, but it was very different picture 400 years ago. Back then, pirates from North Africa's Barbary Coast were making daring raids all along Britain's southern shores - and they weren't just stealing loot."
and
"In 1631, almost the whole of the village of Baltimore in Ireland was captured and shipped off to Africa and sold into slavery."
This went on for some 200 years, and experts estimate a million or more Whites were enslaved.
Keep in mind, though, that the peoples of North Africa are not as dark-skinned (on average) as sub-Saharan Africans, although many were/are 'black' by most people's standards. The limited direct interaction between sub-Saharan Africans with Whites pretty much precluded any enslavement on their part. They did enslave each other, and some of those were eventually traded to blacks who took them to the coast and sold them to White slave traders.
I am sure there are many who would argue that the answer to your question is 'no' since white enslavement by dark-skinned, sub-Saharan blacks was rare or non-existent. You need to refine your question.
=======
My theory Blue blood is black blood (1500-1789) by Egmond Codfried, found in Google, states that during this period Europe was dominated by a black and coloured noble and royal elite. Blue blood was a euphemism for black blood. The many references to Moors in western art and heraldry symbolise blue blood. There are descriptions of kings and nobles which state they were black, brown, true mulatto face, basané (dark brown), chimney sweeper, black as chimney, swarthy, bad complexion, very dark etc. Yet they are shown as whites. this means we are looking at a revisionism of history. The acrimonious nature of racism suggests a recent confrontation between whites and blacks. This points to the French Revolution (1789-1794) when Europe liberated itself from black superiority and then white washed history. Today European museums show fake, whitened propagandistic images of an elite which was described as black and coloured.
Hi my name is aspen I think it is about black people long time ago.
No, because the blacks and whites were still separate at the time. No matter what gender you were.
There used to be countless ways that whites and blacks were separated, since blacks used to be thought of as inferior to whites. The separation of the two races would anything from separate water fountains or sections of seats on a bus to blacks not being allowed to go into certain buildings or businesses. Almost every social and day-to-day activity had ways for blacks and whites to be separated.
Because this was the highest level of education for blacks. if they had more professional people graduating with degrees there would be more blacks available to serve and defend other blacks seeing that the whites often time didnt.
They weren't afraid. I think you misunderstand the discrimination that was taking place. They didn't see them as having civil rights and the right to vote. There are still people today who feel this way.
No , in the old time they didn't .
Not all the time, and not as much as blacks are denying each other today.
It was the firts time whites ever offered assistance to the blacks
It's not a matter of Whites Destroying Blacks! Violence has been around since the beginning of time with all men (women) of race. The first crime in the Bible was cane killing his brother able and so on. Whites Destroy Whites, Blacks Destroy Blacks, it's I think racism is overrated!
Because the blacks were not herd of by the time so whites considered them aliens but trusting it was just a miss understanding of genetics but because of that the whites made them follow laws and if they denied they were punished but I am not saying that I'm with the whites Maxout898 119
The U.S. was segregated at that time and blacks and whites did not play on the same teams.
10 years more than whites.
be more specific. theres different answers to that question. around what "time period" do you want to know the answer to? did blacks and whites go to school with each other in 1995 in southern Africa?
Cause whites did not like blacks and then it was segregation time.
Whites discriminated blacks during Dr. MLK's time because of their color
"The Struggle and Triumph of Free Blacks in the North"
Many people.....that were from ealier in time like indian,omish,blacks,whites,and latino's