We go there. Our traditional historians and informants are more powerful and excellent in field research. They are etymologists who turn and twist the language to understand, know and prove the meanings of ordinary words, historical wise sayings, traditional songs and drumming, and from common language slogans that come together to build history of the oldest concepts with truth. For example in Akan-Twi language from Ghana; OBRONI. Obroni may mean white person or whiteman. This is a word badly damaged by its pronunciation to change its polite historical meaning and leaving it as a word but almost meaningless. The original word is, ABRO NI meaning a Swimmer.

History may tell us the Africans had settled and occupied the coast so many years before the Westerners arrived and came. The inhabitants saw these westerners on their coast not inland. And believed they ‘have swam’ from their original homes and countries. Then, came their name Obroni not their colour. They did not use their skin colour to name and identify them but rather what they did and the means they used to appear at their coast. Sorry they used our skin colour to identify us. Our ancestors were so polite not to name them after their skin colour which could be racial and discriminatory, but rather from their actions and what they did. Today racism and racial tendencies are more to colour than behaviour.

KRO WO. This may literally mean, a canoe. The social language history may tell how the inhabitants were captured and sold into everlasting and sinful slavery. Krowo may mean, one man’s ownership, business and venture. The coastal inhabitants till today are fishermen. They lived on fishing and it was their main occupation. But that time, the sea was full of fishes hundred times than we see today. So the fishermen were not tarrying and suffered before getting fish. They used small canoes that could carry one fisherman at a time – kro may mean one in the old dialect or in Akan. Wo may also mean to have, own or to possess. This may mean that when the westerners later discovered West Indies and made their plantations with their Spanish slaves, they went to Pope Nicholas (born as Tommaso Parentucelli 1397 – 1455 AD) in Rome at the Vatican to take authority and his concern to go back to Africa and capture the inhabitants into unlawful slavery when they saw they had natural resistance to mosquito bites more than the Spanish. This is how I came to prove it was the Mosquito that brought slavery into Africa.

This humanitarian and conceptual meaning made it easy for the white man to capture the inhabitants with whom they had lived and traded successfully over a century. (Ref: The SILENT TRADE. The white man came with his canoe to the land and left his mirror, gun powder and goods at the shore. He runs back to his canoe. The native will come and put gold dust besides it and runs back to their hiding places in the woods. The white man comes back to pick the gold when satisfied and will leave the goods. The native will then come and pick the good and the peaceful and trustworthy unsupervised trade deal is complete). They called the fishermen one by one and kept them in their ships ready to be exported as human cargo into everlasting slavery. But today they argue and want to put the burden on the early natives and inhabitants by saying they sold their people to them. My question is, who buys human beings not knowing his or her use. Were they to eat and turn them into kebab? Isn’t it fascinating, shocking and important to know?