Digs unearth slave plantations in North

Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 03/02/03 | Mike Toner

[xJones]

Of course, there were never slaves north of the Mason-Dixon line.< /sarcasm> The slave Tituba, that helped set off the Salem witchcraft trials in Massachusetts is one well known historical example. There were slaves in New York, before the Revolutionary War, as I could prove through family records. Our Northern brethren were hardly innocent.

[goodnesswins]

But....do they care at all about the CURRENT slave trade in Sudan? Sheesh.

[Little Bill]

Most were Irish Catholics that rejoised at the FReedom in America and the liberation from the English yoke. They went Protestant because you had to worshop somewhere.

[varina davis]

"Historians are stunned by some of the evidence," said Cheryl LaRoche, a historical archaeologist at the University of Maryland.

"The popular notion is that slavery in the North consisted of two or three household servants, but there is growing evidence that there were slaveholding plantations," she said. "It's hard to believe that such a significant and pervasive part of the past could be so completely erased from our history."

Nothing new here to Southerners and true historians.

[ALS]

""What did Bush know, and when did he know it?""

"What did Katie know, and when did she know it?"

ahh yes.. Mata Katie

the grinning girl from the gulags

[WL-law]

I don't find these allegations of "slavery" convincing. Housing a group of workers in buildings is hardly evidence. A large ranch has bunkhouses for cowboys, after all, and the guys get paid as well as receiving part of their compensation in form of room and board.

I totally agree -- this is really rather silly, and all that;s happening here is a bunch of "archeologists" are trying to justify further funding.

Here's my proof -- probate records were extremely accurate in those days, and a probate record will typically list every piece of property (furniture, clothing, utensils) on a room-by-room basis. The slaves will be listed as part of that property.

I've seen the records, and they are publically accessible.

So why would someone try to 'figure out' history from little broken chards in the ground, when a FULL WRITTEN RECORD already EXISTS?

It's because various statutes require archeological digs/ surveys be done on certain sites as part of the price of getting building permits, etc. So an archeology industry of this sort grew to suck up the available $$, and stories like this are created to justify the ongoing existence of such requirements.

[Restorer]

Regardless of what you may believe, the great majority of Irish who came to America prior to the 1790s and especially the 1820s were Irish Protestants fleeing social and economic restrictions placed on them by the Anglo-Irish dominant in the island. Some were descended from the "settlements" in Ulster and elsewhere of Scots and English. Some were Old Irish who became Protestant for one reason or another.

[Restorer]

There were slaves in New York

Way back in the colonial days, there was an outbreak of fires in NYC, leading to hysteria on the part of whites. Slaves at the time made up about 40% of the city's population, and some were tortured into confessing to a French/Catholic plot to burn the city and kill all the whites.

If I remember correctly, a couple dozen blacks were burned at the stake, one of the few times a court in America has legally enforced such a punishment.

[Restorer]

Found a couple of sites on the NYC uprisings. I guess there were two.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part1/1p285.html

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part1/1p286.html

[nmh]

I wonder ... just how would you know from a skeleton whether it was a slave or not? Just because it was a black person doesn't necessarily mean the person was a slave. Also it's very possible that they wanted to live and work on a plantation, estate etc. for the the same reasons today that others work for wealthy people. I guess it depends on your outlook when you find the skeletion.

[nmh]

This article has a certain stench about it... . Why was it that when the slaves got to the north they were "free" ? Why did sounthern blacks escape and head north if not for freedom?

[Oberon]

...to fend for themselves.

A fair definition of freedom, that. It's all I want, if the government would only let me.

[Oberon]

Why was it that when the slaves got to the north they were "free" ? Why did sounthern blacks escape and head north if not for freedom?

That wasn't always the case. It only became so during the intermediate time when slavery was illegal in the northern states, but still legal in the south.

And let us not forget that a great many slaves were transported on ships based out of Boston harbor. Many a manacled African stood on the block there.

[xJones]

"It's hard to believe that such a significant and pervasive part of the past could be so completely erased from our history."

You go against prevailing knowledge. All modern Americans know about slavery was what we we learned from Alex Haley and his fictional "Roots". The whole subject of slavery in America has been taken over by looters like Jesse Jackson. If people really cared about slavery, they would be jumping up and down screaming about slavery in Sudan and other third world countries.

[visualops]

On my father's side, one group of ancestors came over around 1800. They were Scots-Irish from the province of Ulster (County Tyrone). Research shows that there was no shortage of reasons to leave: Along with the lure of the New World (that had won freedom from England) that Scots-Irish had been emigrating to for a century already, plus British economic measures against Ireland supressed business that competed with England or Scotland. Then there was the near civil war of 1794, the insurrection of 1798, and a famine in 1800. The future of the province was not only financially discouraging, but physically dangerous.

[Little Bill]

My Mothers family was from Ulster, Tories to the inch and starving in the Maritimes, along with rest of rest of the King and Country crowd, Cathiolic and Protestant, missed your chance 'eh lad.

[Ciexyz]

My grandmother's side of the family were Scots-Irish Presbyterians named Patterson. A lot of their ilk immigrated to Western PA in the late 1700's and early 1800's to work the land on the new frontier. Not a slave owner in the bunch.

[Missouri]

>>This article has a certain stench about it...<<


It certainly does.
It's common knowledge that there was some slavery in the northern states, too. What area of the world back then did not?
What is never mentioned is that the vast majority of whites (even in the south) did not own slaves. They were just trying to scratch a living off the land. This thing about slavery is being over-done.

[Question_Assumptions]

No American slaves or slave owners in my family. All my ancestors arrived around or after the Civil War and didn't own slaves. Who knows what they did in Europe thousands of years ago, though.

[unspun]

Well if you can't account for them, then you need to feel the guilt! Get your checkbook out and pay reparations, now!