Posted on 12/24/2016 6:53:41 AM PST by rktman
It is widely believed that slavery in 19th-century America was the exclusive province of whites. However, as historian Larry Kroger reveals in Black Slaveowners, free black people in the United States owned slaves, fought for their right to do so and had little sympathy for abolition.
A five-year investigation of federal census data, wills, mortgages, bills of sale, tax returns and newspaper ads from 1790 to 1860 provided the foundation for Koger's examination of black slave masters in the Palmetto state, culminating in his illuminating book, Black Slaveowners: Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, 1790-1860 (McFarland, 1985). Charleston City, in which 72.1% of African-America households owned slaves, was a valuable primary documentation source. Records that survived the Civil War indicated the existence of 260 black slave masters.
This well-sourced book, which contains lengthy appendices of federal census data and well over 600 citations, represents an earnest attempt to examine a difficult and complex topic that too few have addressed: the phenomenon of black slaveowners.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
MERRY CHRISTMAS FReepers.
IIRC, there were over 600 black (or was that negro) slave owners in Maryland at the outbreak of the Civil (between the states) War.
They are the ones who sold their own is how the whole thing started.
bfl
For balance, let’s talk about “Arabic Slave Sellers: A Review”?
Or ZULU slave sellers?
A year or so ago, I visited Williamsburg and saw a presentation by a black historian playing the part of a black slaveowner in the 1600s.
The black slaveowner was married by common law to an Irish woman. After the death of his first (and legal) wife, he hired a governess to take care of his children. He and the governess fell in love, but the law did not allow them to marry because at the time, the Irish were lower in social status than free blacks were. Legally, his children from either wife were not considered black.
Interesting stuff, although I tend to think the historian’s view might be biased. He was working on producing his own history channel, but I forget when it was supposed to launch and under what name. Maybe I’ll come across his business card sometime and refresh my memory.
:: Or ZULU slave sellers ::
Or the Masai; from which Michelle “appears to be” a descendant? [Gorilla comment not withstanding...]
I was in the Archives building in Manning, SC several years ago researching my own family history. There was a black woman in her mid thirties doing the same thing. When she discovered her ancestor had in fact been one of the largest slave holders in Clarendon County, SC, she demanded the lady making copies for her omit that part of the records. She did not want her son to know his great-great- grandfather had once owned slaves.
Yup. Erasing history changes everything. Think statue removals in Newlins’. So, if “they” can willy nilly erase history, then so can we. “Slavery? Never existed. We don’t know what you’re talking about. At least not in the U.S.”
When I was in the Ivory Coast many years ago, as we went through many villages, my interpreter would explain to me how they used to be his ancestors slaves.............
This reminds me of an interview I saw in the early 70's.Several Oakland A's players...one or two were white,one or two were black.They were *all* complaining about playing for the owner,Charlie Finley (who was very famous and very white).At one point one of the black players blurted out that Finley treated him like a "n*gger" (this was early 70's).At that point one of the white players,somewhat embarrassed,observed that Finley treated the *white* players like n*ggers too.
All types of people are capable of mistreating those of other groups *as well as* their own.
“...why shouldn’t there be black people willing to mistreat other blacks?”
slavery does not necessarily mean being mistreated. History also reveals slaves were often well treated. After all, slaves were considered a financial asset - property. As we treat well our assets, our property, so they would do the same with their property.
Anna Kingsley was the owner of one of he largest plantations in Jacksonville, FL.
As I’ve said here many times; If they want reparations, get all the black descendants of slave owners to kick in first, then we can talk.
The first slave owner in America was a black man. In 1654, a Court of the Crown awarded Anthony Johnson, a black man in the Virginia colony, permanent ownership of his (also black) Indentured Servant, John Casor, because Casor had tried to flee before serving the full term of his indenture.
Indentured Servitude and Bond Servantry had been common in America since the first European colonists arrived. Johnson himself had sold his own family into Indentured Servitude so that he might raise the capital to buy his own land, so he well understood the condition. And when Casor tried to renege on their business arrangement, Johnson sought redress under the law. So it was an English court that first made slavery a permanent condition in the Americas.
Except that the American Indians had been in the habit of keeping war captives as slaves long before Europeans arrived.
Statistically, prior to the Southern War for Independence, black freedmen were three times more likely to own slaves than were whites who had never been either a bonded or indentured.
Don’t be silly, revisionist history done by privilege whites assuaging their white guilt... / S
Sometime in the 1970’s, General Daniel “Chappie” James Jr., USAF is reputed to have said “The Marines don’t have any race problems. They treat everybody like they’re black.”
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.