George and Martha Washington enslaved 300 people. Let's start with their names.

[greyl]

Austin

Moll

Giles

Ona Judge

Paris

Hercules

Joe

Richmond

Christopher Sheels

William Lee

That’s just 10 names of the more than 300 people enslaved by George and Martha Washington. They worked and traveled most closely with our nation’s first First Family as chamber maids, postilions, cooks, waiters, laborers, seamstresses and valets.

Did you know that George Washington had only one tooth in his mouth when he became president in 1789, thanks to bad health and 18th-century dentistry? But his false teeth were not made of wood, as is often described in folk songs and lore. His dentures were made from the pulled teeth of slaves.

Roll that around in your head for a minute.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-and-martha-washington-enslaved-300-people-lets-start-with-their-names/2020/06/26/d3f7c362-b7e7-11ea-a510-55bf26485c93_story.html

Link to tweet

Article on the dentures history: https://washingtonpapers.org/george-washingtons-false-teeth-come-slaves-look-evidence-responses-evidence-limitations-history/

[demosincebirth]

1. In that case, the monument must be taken down.

[greyl]

2. Renamed would be better.

Hard to rename monuments that allegedly look like actual people, but our capital obelisk could certainly be rebranded meaningfully and kept in place.

It's 2020, and we are growing human organs and 3D printing neighborhoods.



Time to move the fuck on with great dispatch.

Some obelisk info: https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/73935/7-fascinating-facts-about-obelisks

[demosincebirth]

4. Updated my post

[greyl]

5. Message read and understood. :) nt

[Loki Liesmith]

17. Nah it can stay The Washington Monument.

[delisen]

35. Rename the obelisk and the District of Columbia nt

[brush]

3. Let's face it. They, the founders, were all white, male...

Last edited Sun Jun 28, 2020, 01:17 PM - Edit history (1)

property owners (including enslaved people) whose new nation's rights extended only to white, male property owners. All were not slave holders though.

Women, Mohammedans (as Jefferson called Muslims), blacks, or indigenous people need not apply.

A lot has been accomplished since in the righting of wrongs. Still a long way to go though. We're in one of the critical "change" periods now that seem to come about every fifty or sixty years. Let's not waste it.

[greyl]

11. That's silly. nt

[brush]

21. You'd rather do that than try to fix this? Not me. That would...

like sending the Dreamers all back to Mexico, a country they don't know.

[Voltaire2]

30. We've ditched some of the worst parts.

There is more work to be done.

[Solomon]

32. They didn't "conceive" it. They stole it from the Native Americans.

[Blue_true]

37. My position is this.

Confederate monuments and emblems must be removed from public land or government emblems.

The rest? Times then were different. The nation was basically a white supremacist nation. So prominent figures likely owned human beings. What do we do about that? What we don't do is run around tearing shit down, but we push for an accurate recording of history, good and bad. We push for additional words at monuments to them that fully explain what they were, including their enslaving human beings. Our history has been white-washed for 400+ years, we need to push to make it accurate, making it accurate is not erasing it.

[brush]

39. That's good. I agree with that. White supremacy is so intwined in...

the nation's history we can't change everything. Certainly any monuments or namings for traitor confederates have to go.

[BlueMTexpat]

7. What we all must face up to is

that ANYONE who is of Western European origin and whose ancestors were in America in the 18th century is more likely than not to be descended from individuals who owned slaves. It is certainly nothing to be proud of, but it is more factual than not.

My earliest ancestors were from England and Wales and arrived in the late 17th-early 18th centuries. A few years ago I learned that my Welsh ancestor lived in Pennsylvania. When he died, his estate inventory included slaves - not many, fewer than ten. But yes, they were listed among his assets.

Human beings were considered as property, just like real estate, farm machinery, livestock, household china, etc. This is an enduring shame for all of us who are related to those from that era.

Through that particular ancestor, I can also claim some - very distant - relationship to Daniel Boone and even to Thomas Lincoln, father of Abraham. It is also interesting that some of my cousins who share that ancestor have mixed-race (African-American) children and grandchildren today.

Some of my own grandchildren are mixed race (Asian American).

I cannot apologize enough for the actions of my ancestors. But I can firmly support Black Lives Matter protests and equal justice for ALL.

[Jeebo]

9. Your Welsh ancestor lived in Pennsylvania and owned slaves?

I thought there were no slaves in Pennsylvania or in any other state that was not a slave state.

-- Ron

[BlueMTexpat]

13. That there were NO slaves in Pennsylvania is a myth.

That myth is also true of other colonies during the Colonial Era.

In re Pennsylvania, here is an interesting article that I also posted a link to below: https://www.inquirer.com/news/black-history-month-pennsylvania-gradual-abolition-slavery-indenture-emancipation-20190227.html

[unc70]

14. Lots of slaves in northern states

There were still slaves in northern states well after Juneteenth when the last slaves in the Confederate states were freed. Those in the North were finally freed by the ratification of the 13th Amendment.

[gladium et scutum]

28. The day before the 13th Amendment was ratified

slavery was still legal in the States of Kentucky and Delaware. Those people that had been slaves in the areas exempted by the Emancipation Proclamation occupied by the Union Army on Jan 1, 1863 were still legally slaves. The exact number of slaves freed by the 13th Amendment is unknown, but some estimates go as high as 400,000 people.

[BlueMTexpat]

16. What I also found ironic

with that discovery was that a Welshman, whose country had primarily been enslaved by Englishmen and who arrived in America as an indentured servant would not be appalled by the institution of slavery altogether.

[appalachiablue]

23. Slavery in NJ and NY was much less than in the south

but still existed. Sojourner Truth grew up in a Dutch NY household speaking Dutch. Truth's owner promised her freedom in 1826, a year before the mandated time but changed his mind, claimed she had an injured hand that slowed her down so she had to work longer.

Wiki. Slavery in New Jersey (and NY). Bergen County, NJ devoloped as the largest slaveholding county in the state, in part because many slaves were used as laborers in its ports and cities. At its peak Bergen County had 3,000 slaves in 1800, constituting nearly 20% of its total population. After the Revolutionary War, many northern states rapidly passed laws to abolish slavery, but New Jersey did not abolish it until 1804, and then in a process of gradual emancipation similar to that of New York. But, in New Jersey, some slaves were held as late as 1865.

(In New York, they were all freed by 1827.) The law made African Americans free at birth, but it required children (born to slave mothers), to serve lengthy apprenticeships as a type of indentured servant until early adulthood for the masters of their slave mothers. New Jersey was the last of the Northern states to abolish slavery completely. The last 16 slaves in New Jersey were freed in 1865 by the Thirteenth Amendment..
.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery_in_New_Jersey
-------------------
- Sojourner Truth. In 1799, the State of New York began to legislate the abolition of slavery, although the process of emancipating those people enslaved in New York was not complete until July 4, 1827. Dumont had promised to grant Truth her freedom a year before the state emancipation, "if she would do well and be faithful". However, he changed his mind, claiming a hand injury had made her less productive. She was infuriated but continued working, spinning 100 pounds (45 kg) of wool, to satisfy her sense of obligation to him.

Late in 1826, Truth escaped to freedom with her infant daughter, Sophia. She had to leave her other children behind because they were not legally freed in the emancipation order until they had served as bound servants into their twenties. She later said, "I did not run off, for I thought that wicked, but I walked off, believing that to be all right." She found her way to the home of Isaac and Maria Van Wagenen in New Paltz, who took her and her baby in. Isaac offered to buy her services for the remainder of the year (until the state's emancipation took effect), which Dumont accepted for $20. She lived there until the New York State Emancipation Act was approved a year later.

Truth learned that her son Peter, then five years old, had been sold illegally by Dumont to an owner in Alabama. With the help of the Van Wagenens, she took the issue to court and in 1828, after months of legal proceedings, she got back her son, who had been abused by those who were enslaving him.[6] Truth became one of the first black women to go to court against a white man and win the case...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sojourner_Truth

[gladium et scutum]

26. In 1780, the Pennsylvania Legislature passed an act to gradually end slavery

the 1790 census lists 3,373 slaves in the state. By the 1840 census that number had dropped to 40. No slavers were listed in the state by the 1850 census.

[JustAnotherGen]

33. NJ was a slave state

[DFW]

15. That counts me out

I'm of Eastern European origin, and my ancestors came to North America right before to right after the Civil War. Some, I found out, were deadbeat Mississippi River boat gamblers who fled to New York to escape their debts. Another was a poor tailor in Charleston, SC, whose son went north for an education, and worked his way through college as a janitor. One, who came from Slovakia in 1870, headed straight for New York, learned English and studied law. My daughter, completely unaware, read about a case in which he was a major figure while in Law School 100 years later.

I'm sure, way back in "the old country," my ancestors participated in behavior we would find appalling now. Maybe in 200 years, our descendants will read about norms of today, and be appalled about some of them, too. Considering some of what is going on currently, I guess they should be. But it is difficult to judge the norms of centuries past by today's standards.

"If Paul Revere saw the British were coming, why didn't he just send a What's App?"

[BlueMTexpat]

18. Love your last sentence especially!

But we all likely have "sins of the fathers" somewhere in our past, wherever we hail from.

[DFW]

19. It's all a matter of perception.

Maybe in 300 years, mankind will be appalled that in the past (like way back in the year 2020), people actually killed living animals to carve up their bodies and eat them. Just look up the word "steak," and see what it meant back then. How barbaric! Why didn't they just press the proper button on their protein machines, and get their nourishment that way, like everybody does these days in the 24th century?

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

25. "... press a button on their protein machine ..."?

What is this thing you call "button"?

Alexa, give me a Beyond-Meat burger, please.

Button. Hmmph. How crude.

[DFW]

27. A nostalgic holdover from ancient times.......... n/t

[Blue_true]

40. Imagine that you are an African American whose ancestors date back to slavery.

There is something like a 75%+ chance that your gene pool will include both those of slaves and of slave owners.

Our nation's history is saddeningly dark and complex, people in an era chose to do bad things, actions that were normal then.

[BlueMTexpat]

48. This.

[BigmanPigman]

8. Why didn't dentists use the teeth of people already dead?

That seems to be the easiest and least expensive way of acquiring extra teeth.

[Chainfire]

31. It would have been considered sinful to mutilate the dead.

[Jeebo]

10. This is the first time I've ever heard that about his dentures.

I've always thought his dentures were carved out of wood. If what you say is true, that is so gross and so disgusting on so many levels.

-- Ron

[BlueMTexpat]

12. To follow up on my previous post, here is an

interesting article from 2017. https://theconversation.com/american-slavery-separating-fact-from-myth-79620

From that link: "The elephant that sits at the center of our history is coming into focus. American slavery happened – we are still living with its consequences. I believe we are finally ready to face it, learn about it and acknowledge its significance to American history."

Here's a Wiki article about slavery in the colonial period: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_colonial_United_States

More about the history of slavery in Pennsylvania, one of the first states to abolish slavery, largely because of Quaker influence: https://www.inquirer.com/news/black-history-month-pennsylvania-gradual-abolition-slavery-indenture-emancipation-20190227.html

Even that abolition was lacking. From the link: "Although Pennsylvania would be heralded throughout history for its bold stand, freedom here didn’t arrive categorically. The Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery allowed the institution to survive, in various guises, for decades."

Anyone who has seen the series "Turn: Washington's Spies" knows that slavery was also an institution in New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts at the time of the American Revolution. The British gained the loyalty of some slaves in that era by promising them emancipation. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn:_Washington%27s_Spies

[appalachiablue]

24. The 'Turn' series is on Netflix now, I need to re-watch it.

[BlueMTexpat]

34. IMO, one of the most tragic stories is

that of the courageous slave woman who actually helped the cause of the Revolution, but was caught just as she was nearly in Canada and then sent to the Deep South at the end of the series. Apparently no good deed goes unpunished.

She was portrayed in the TV series by Nigerian-American actress Idara Victor. In the series, she was code-named Agent 355. In the show, Agent 355 is the code name of a former slave named Abigail. She had been owned by Anna Strong until the British army seized Selah's property upon his imprisonment. Though technically free, she is coerced into working for Colonel John André. Abigail sends Anna information she overhears in André's home hidden in gifts to her son, whom she was forced to leave behind in Anna's care.

[janterry]

20. Most people already know this

n/t

[a la izquierda]

22. This is all very tricky.

I'll preface all this by saying that I'm an historian of indigenous peoples of Latin America (that's the easiest way to describe it). The stuff I study can be appalling (contact between indigenous peoples and Europeans for starters). Some of the studies I used for my first book came from Franciscan and other friars. It's the only material I had in some cases and their commentaries on indigenous peoples were nothing short of appalling. But if we're ever to understand the histories of civilizations that did not leave records, what choice do we have? We can't discard their histories (which no one is suggesting). I and others are trained to toss out the judgments and look for the helpful bits (an example: Franciscans criticizing the shit out of indigenous ceremonies...but in describing those ceremonies there's exactly what I needed: proof that the ceremony existed at a certain time, and what people wore, ate, etc.) I have the descriptions of style, culture, and society that, seen through the lenses of Spanish priests were likely weird; I have to strip away their prejudice and find whatever truth I can. Were Spaniards wrong for destroying elements of indigenous culture and religion? To us, absolutely yes. But to 16th century Spaniards? No, they didn't see it as wrong (on the whole, yes there were critics). This was the way THEIR world worked. We cannot impose our beliefs upon them. Should they be glorified? No. The Founders etc. were human men, flawed like we all are.

What people fail to understand (although some on this thread certainly do) is that we can criticize the behavior of our predecessors all we want, but expecting them to have lived up to the progressive standards we strive towards is not helpful. George Washington et al enslaved hundreds/thousands. They were men of their time doing what was done at that time; did they know what they did was wrong? It's hard to say, because the economic system of the time functioned on the enslavement of other humans, and the dehumanization of those humans. Their world was different than our world, the way they thought and felt about the world was very different.

Deep thoughts while waiting for my hair dye to finish processing.

[tirebiter]

29. Enough.

The man could have been King of America. He put the enlightenment into a long lasting democratic republic

[Blue_true]

41. I agree. He was a monumentally important figure in our history.

There is no way that he should be erased using today's standards, not standards of his era. His monuments should stand, along with accurate portrayal of all he was.

But what we should do is correct history to reflect his accomplishments and shortcomings as a human being. The problem with our history is that it has been seriously whitewashed, we need the truth told.

[Trumpocalypse]

36. This is why conservatives win so much

because progressives take things too far. It is far and just to fight for the removal confederate monuments. That’s a good thing and long overdue.

But to go after the founders of our country too and judge them by 21st century standards is going too far. And it just feeds into the conservative narrative that the left is trying to destroy our history.

[Sugarcoated]

38. Sadly, true

[LeftInTX]

44. Agree

[LeftInTX]

42. Maybe we all need to go back to our countries of origin?

Half of me is from Turkey, but that part of Turkey does not exist for Armenians, so that half would need to Armenia, if they will take me.

I'm part British, Scotch, German and French...This part of the family owned slaves.

Will anyone take me back???

But hubby has a real problem:

He's 50% Native America (DNA..from Mexico) and the rest of a mixture of European. (He's a descendant of the notorious Coronado expedition )

Hubby and I are both living monuments of something destructive!!!!

I think many Americans are...heck even the name America is destructive...

[WhiskeyGrinder]

43. I need to stop being surprised by how defensive people get about a lot of things.

[BannonsLiver]

50. I do the same with sanctimony

[marie999]

45. There is still slavery in this country.

I mean real slavery where people buy domestic help and keep them locked up on their property. I remember not too long ago where a wealthy woman in upstate NY on the Hudson River kept a woman slave.

[gulliver]

46. Our current fight is with the Confederacy and Trump Republicans still carrying a torch for it.

That's not all of them, by the way, but it's a bunch. Leaving Washington, Jefferson out of it is just choosing your battles wisely (so we can win); it's not giving up on a more accurate understanding of history. It's prioritizing.

I really do like the idea of some kind of Truth and Reconciliation Commission approach.

[Chili]

47. of those 300 slaves...

... some are in my family tree. My great-great grandmother married the son of a slave whipped by Robert E. Lee when he was recaptured after escaping. His family most likely was inherited by George Washington Parke Custis from Martha; that slave family (the Parks') became the responsibility of Robert E. Lee on GWPC's death (Lee married Custis' daughter). Lee fought the will that required the freedom of those slaves until he was forced to free them 5 years after GWPC's death. So I, in a way, take this topic personally.

Washington was definitely flawed, but he did leave in his will the requirement that all slaves be freed. Martha refused. He was our first president, and while he did own slaves, he was a great leader. I'd have a hard time approving of the destruction of memorials to Washington, Lincoln, even Jefferson. They were great men with the horrible moral incapacity to believe their own words and ideologies: that all men are created equal. I don't forgive them - I will never forgive them - and while they were great men of their time, they were not great men of moral integrity when it comes to slavery, as John Adams was. I think tearing their monuments down is going too far.

Now, when it comes to R.E. Lee and Martha Washington? Tear away.

[BannonsLiver]

49. A great conversation to have...

After the election.