The Native Americans Who Owned Slaves: The “Five Civilized Tribes” of the southeast also participated in the institution of slavery.

Intellectual Takeout ^ | 07/05/2019 | By Peter Partoll

[SeekAndFind]

---

Did you know that the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery did not apply to ALL slaves?

Most see slavery as a simple black-vs.-white issue. But those who do may not realize that the “Five Civilized Tribes” of the southeast — Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole — also participated in the institution of slavery.

Because these tribes were located outside the sovereignty of the United States, constitutional amendments did not apply to them.

In the period before the arrival of the Europeans, the Natives practiced flexible forms of slavery that often allowed slaves avenues to freedom through intermarriage. That all changed with the arrival of the Europeans, who introduced Native Americans to a system of permanent bondage based on race.

According to journalist Aliana E. Roberts, this switch occurred after the Yamasee tribe lost a war against the English Carolina colonists in 1717. The Europeans began turning from Native slavery to African slavery, and the Native Americans followed their lead. Many Natives, especially those in the “Five Civilized Tribes” (so-called because they embraced the ways of American settlers) picked up on the trend. By 1800, they had developed “plantations that rivaled those of their white neighbors.”

Roberts states that like most average Americans, many Natives did not own black slaves. Most slaveowners were part of the upper-classes, and were those who had the most influence in society.

In spite of this she also notes that the percentage of black slaves in the population was not insignificant:

In 1860…Cherokee Nation citizens owned 2,511 slaves (15 percent of their total population), Choctaw citizens owned 2,349 slaves (14 percent of their total population), and Creek citizens owned 1,532 slaves (10 percent of their total population). Chickasaw citizens owned 975 slaves, which amounted to 18 percent of their total population, a proportion equivalent to that of white slave owners in Tennessee, a former neighbour of the Chickasaw Nation and a large slaveholding state.

While many Native American nations allowed white slaves to earn their freedom through intermarriage, the tribes also had strict laws forbidding any intermarriage between a Native and a black slave, often punishing those who married their slaves with banishment from the tribe.

The Native slaveowners could also be horrifyingly brutal towards their black slaves. This is illustrated by the case of Lucy, a black slave burned alive for the murder of her native master. She had no part in the murder but was executed anyway at the request of the murdered warrior’s wife.

During the Civil War, the “Five Civilized Tribes” fought on both the Union and Confederate sides. After the war, the Treaties of 1866 freed the slaves. Even after that, blacks still faced discrimination in the Indian territories, with many tribes passing laws similar to the infamous “Black Codes” in the South.

This often-overlooked part of American history takes on new significance in light of today’s debates over slavery reparations and monuments to those who owned slaves or fought to keep them.

Do the descendants of the “Five Civilized Tribes” owe reparations for slavery? Should monuments to their leaders be taken down? The institution of slavery was rightfully eradicated with the passage of the 13^th Amendment. But any debate over how to deal with the legacy of this evil institution must remember that the phenomenon was much more complex than is often portrayed or remembered.

[marktwain]

I recall reading of running water in a French Medieval castle.

I found this link about running water in Medieval monasteries in the 12th and 13th centuries.

Running water was uncommon in Medieval Europe.

It was uncommon everywhere.

There were only a few locations where topography allowed the use of running water without extensive engineering projects.

The Romans were the best ancient hydrolic engineers with their use of aqueducts.

[PIF]

https://www.climate-policy-watcher.org/

Is a pro anthropomorphic climate change site, whose reference for sources link back to other pages on the site; not a good reference at all.

There were lavatoriums in monasteries - the water came through lead pipes. The water was not heated. Cleanliness of the water was through the use of sand filters, apparently. How often was the sand changed out? Depended I guess on who was in charge.

In any case, ordinary people, royalty, nobles did not have running water in their homes/castles other than going to pubic fountains. The point here is that indoor heated plumbing was common in the 14-15 century Gold Coast villages.

Portugal was the super power of its day (not France, not Spain) by virtue of its ‘top secret’ maps of the Earth; this was the Age of Navigation, and Portugal reined supreme in that regard until the 1755 Great Lisbon quake’s (8.5-9.0) tsunami destroyed the Library were the maps were kept; it was the most ‘developed’ European nation in the early 16th century. The loss of the maps was a blow like the destruction of the Library of Alexandria so much knowledge was lost.

[marktwain]

The point here is that indoor heated plumbing was common in the 14-15 century Gold Coast villages.

I doubt that very much, which is why I asked for a source.

It might be the case, as you stated, based on Roman engineering from an earlier time. It was very difficult to make heated indoor plumbing prior to the industrial revolution. It is very labor intensive. The Romans used slaves; the Gold coast was a major slave center, so perhaps they used slave labor to accomplish it as well.

The Romans were the best hydraulic engineers in the ancient world, but it seems unlikely common people had access to indoor plumbing based on Roman aqueducts.

I would love to see evidence of such systems. It would be fascinating to see how they did it.

I provided a link for running water in medieval monasteries. You have provided none for your claims.

Here is another link mentioning 12th century monasteries with running water.

Here is a book which references that water supplies were being built to supply some castles as well as some hospitals and monasteries. I doubt any of them had running hot water; but some certainly had crude running water systems.

[Doc91678]

More food for thought....:

https://amazingbibletimeline.com/blog/ashanti-empire-trade-slaves-guns/

https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/Ashanti-Empire-blamed-for-slavery-180918

“A professor at Harvard University Henry Louis Gates Jr. has blamed the ashanti empire for actively partaking in the slavetrade and profitting from it. He argues that the ashanti empire directly captured and sold human beings for immense economic gain.
“The savage chiefs of the western coasts of Africa, who for ages have been accustomed to selling their captives into bondage and pocketing the ready cash for them, will not more readily accept our moral and economical ideas than the slave traders of Maryland and Virginia.”

[PIF]

There is heaps of archeological evidence if you just look for it. I’m not your gofer.

How did they do it? simple as I tried to describe. stone floor over a false stone fool with channels cut in; some modern floor plans use the same methods to heat floors in bath or rooms with stone flooring.

You deem to be one of those people that imagine that if it isn’t on the internet it doesn’t exist - that seems to include everything prior to “Al Gore’s invention”. Try using a real library some day - the internet is not the end and be all of knowledge

You seem to love liberal sites as your references which are fake on the face of them.

I’m speaking about individual homes not castles, monasteries, forts and the like. There is a difference.

not wasting time of this subject any more. Thanks.

[DrewsMum]

Yep... the Black Codes weren’t exclusive to the South.
But somehow when it’s mentioned, it’s always followed by “in the South”.

[21twelve]

I once asked an Indian what tribe he was from.

He said that they didn’t have “tribes” like the white man called them. He said his tribe was “The People”. The wolves had their tribe, the bear was a tribe, etc.

“Hmm - so it was ‘The People’? But you still still must have had distinctions between the different groups?

“Well hell yeah. We weren’t going to blunder and steal and kill and take slaves from our own group - but we were all from the same tribe - ‘The People’!”

[rlmorel]

If the wolves have their tribe, and the bear have their tribe. Whites have their tribe. Indians have their tribe. Blacks have their tribe.

The key question is: If Apache,Sioux, and Nipmuc are all groups in one tribe, are whites and blacks a group in that tribe as well or are we a separate tribe?

And if so, what is the import of that with respect to the Constitution of the United States?

I happen to view whites, blacks, Indians, and Samoans as groups in the same tribe. I wonder if they do?