Posted on 11/18/2017 6:36:43 AM PST by iowamark
BJK responding: "My entire argument is that Jefferson must be referencing events actually happening in 1776, such as loyalists "domestic violence" against local patriot governments..."
jeffersondem: "You now want to move the goal post to 'domestic violence?'"
The DOI reference is to "domestic insurrections".
jeffersondem: "Please post any sources you have that support your earlier claim that Jefferson's reference to 'domestic insurrection' in the DOI refers to loyalists or Indians."
Please post any sources you have that support your earlier claim that Jefferson's reference to "domestic insurrection" in the DOI refers to slave revolts.
Please name the slave revolts it refers to.
When you find there were no slave revolts at that time, then ask yourself: what other "domestic insurrections" did happen?
The answer is: loyalist insurrections against local patriot governments.
The quote from your post #284 is: "HE has excited domestic Insurrections amongst us . . ."
That can only refer to the time period of the Revolutionary War from, say, mid-1775 to July 1776.
You disagree?
jeffersondem: "What is your purpose in trying to limit the scope of grievances to just a few months in 1776? And how is it justified?"
Since you are here to argue that "domestic insurrections" refers to slave revolts "excited" by King George, perhaps you can name some North American slave revolts the King "excited" in any year before 1776?
“That can only refer to the time period of the Revolutionary War from, say, mid-1775 to July 1776.”
You are restating something you said previously.
When you stated it the first time I asked: “Why does the mention of Domestic insurrections mean it is limited to the months before July, 1776?”
I now ask the same question, again.
No, I gave you a very reasonable answer, which you ignored.
So now you will answer my previous question:
I believe I do owe you an answer to a previous request going back to your post #381.
You asked: “Please post any sources you have that support your earlier claim that Jefferson's reference to “domestic insurrection” in the DOI refers to slave revolts.”
See:https://theamericanscholar.org/domestic-insurrection/
Note especially the following:
“On the American side, meanwhile, the blacks uprisingthe domestic insurrections amongst us that Jefferson complained of in his draft of the Declarationsowed the widespread panic that the British hoped for, to a disproportionate extent, in fact, considering the actual number of runaways. (The very afternoon of the surrender at Yorktown, one American soldier recorded laconically that he had spent his whole day collecting Nigars.) Schama goes so far as to say of Southern patriots: Theirs was a revolution, first and foremost, mobilized to protect slavery. “
You might also want to read this: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part2/2h33.html
You should also take a look at this: https://pdjeliclark.wordpress.com/2012/07/04/he-has-excited-domestic-insurrections-amongst-us-american-slavery-on-the-4th-of-july/
And note well the author's findings: “Who had the king of England excited? What domestic rebellion did Jefferson and the colonists so fear could erupt in their midst? It turned out that my earlier history classes had omitted something from the American Revolution, key players whose significance was enough to warrant mention and concern in the fledgling nations premiere documentslaves.”
There is an obscure story, whose origins have been lost in antiquity, that could support your assertion above. I offer it for what it is worth.
The way the story is told, a dispatch rider traveled 80 miles to deliver a copy of Lord Dunmore’s Proclamation to Thomas Jefferson.
Before Jefferson could read the document, the rider blurted out: “Lord Dunmore has called for slaves to start domestic Insurrections and to fight their masters!”
Jefferson was ashen faced as he mumbled to those assembled: “This is terrible news. Domestic slave insurrections would be bad for me as a master, bad for New York and Massachusetts and other slave states, and bad for the proposed revolution.”
Then, the story goes, Jefferson read Lord Dunmore’s Proclamation in its entirety and began to laugh out loud!
“This is great news,” Jefferson exclaimed!
“Lord Dunmore has not called for slaves to participate in domestic Insurrections and fight their masters. Lord Dunmore has only called for slaves to rise in arms and fight their masters,” Jefferson continued.
“This makes all the difference in the world,” Jefferson was reported to have said.
This story could be the missing link that proves your point. If I were you, I would embrace it.
Any History that makes the North East look bad, won't be taught.
“Any History that makes the North East look bad, won’t be taught.”
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell
When you have an opportunity, take a look at this:
http://edu.lva.virginia.gov/online_classroom/shaping_the_constitution/doc/dunmores_proclamation
And note this paragraph:
“Rumors of slave insurrections had circulated in Virginia throughout 1775, and many owners of slaves feared that the British government would encourage a slave rebellion to suppress the patriot cause. Dunmore’s proclamation did not significantly enlarge his military force, but did greatly increase resentment of the British government. Although Dunmore recruited a small regiment of African Americans, many of them died of disease in the camps and on royal warships, and his offer of freedom to enslaved Virginians persuaded many influential white men who were uncertain about which side to take to oppose the king and his royal governor. In writing the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson euphemistically referred to Dunmore’s proclamation as exciting domestic insurrection. “
Thanks for you links, they confirmed my previous opinions.
So let's see if we can increase the fact-base in what has until now been a mostly fact-free zone.
Just so we're clear on these things:
The bottom line fact is that Dunmore did not call for "domestic insurrections" among slaves, but did support domestic insurrections of loyalists against patriot governments in Virginia and Carolinas, in 1775 - 1776.
And that is what Jefferson certainly refers to in the DOI.
If others read "slave revolts" into it, they are adding something that's not really there.
Pure fantasy, worth nothing.
Dunmore offered freedom to slaves who joined the British army, period.
If Jefferson, and the 13 slave states whose representatives signed the DOI, had wanted to put loyalists and their backers in England on the spot, they would have included a reference to “treasonable insurrections”, not "domestic insurrections."
Here are some facts which might interest you:
I will take that as your informed & considered opinion.
“If Jefferson, and the 13 slave states whose representatives signed the DOI, had wanted to put loyalists and their backers in England on the spot, they would have included a reference to treasonable insurrections, not “domestic insurrections.”
That is an interesting comment.
May we see your data on that?
Then there was the version we used to sing in school:
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the burning of the school
We have tortured all the teachers we have broken all the rules
We raided all the offices and hung the principal
March on, third grade, march on!
Glory, glory, hallelujah
Teacher hit me with a ruler
I hid behind her door with a loaded .44
And she ain’t our teacher no more!
Let us know if he gives you an answer - extra points awarded if it is intelligible!
;-)
Sure.
Let's review the question: If Jefferson, and the 13 slave states whose representatives signed the DOI, had wanted to put loyalists and their backers in England on the spot, they would have included a reference to treasonable insurrections, not domestic insurrections.
In answer, look at the original draft of the DOI. It includes this grievance: “He has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow-citizens, with the allurements of forfeiture & confiscation of our property”
This reference to “treasonable insurrections” referred to the actions of the loyalists and is sometimes confused by first-time readers of the DOI with the term “domestic insurrections," a euphemism for slave insurrections.
The entire passage relating to the treasonable insurrections of loyalists was stricken from the DOI. Somewhere in his writings Thomas Jefferson explains why Congress did not want to deliberately offend the English people (as opposed to the King.)
Sure.
Let's review the question: If Jefferson, and the 13 slave states whose representatives signed the DOI, had wanted to put loyalists and their backers in England on the spot, they would have included a reference to treasonable insurrections, not domestic insurrections."
In answer, look at the original draft of the DOI. It includes this grievance: He has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow-citizens, with the allurements of forfeiture & confiscation of our property
This reference to treasonable insurrections referred to the actions of the loyalists and is sometimes confused by first-time readers of the DOI with the term domestic insurrections,” a euphemism for slave insurrections.
The entire passage relating to the treasonable insurrections of loyalists was stricken from the DOI. Somewhere in his writings Thomas Jefferson explains why Congress did not want to deliberately offend the English people (as opposed to the King.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.