Kathleen-- 

I agree that humans can hold contradictory ideas in one mind.  Such a simple statement,  but not remembering it is possibly one of the biggest dividing issues  in any discussion of the Civil War and slave owners.   

Re. wills:  I'm curious.  Is it possible the styles of bequeaths regarding slaves in wills was regional?   The wills of slave owners I'm familiar with  are primarily  from Augusta, Botetourt and Rockbridge Counties between the years 1750 -1864, and I've not come across any that gave any rights to the slaves. Only rarely did any of these will writers own more than 10 -12 slaves and as you noted, most were named  (or otherwise identified, "...the boy I got from the Rowland farm.") in the will and left to specific heirs.   When there were larger numbers of slaves  it was still common to identify some by name  --favorites?  house-slaves?-- and take  care of the rest with a summary sentence, e.g.:  "...the balance of my slaves to be divided equally among my heirs."   This was exactly what was done with horses; identify a few favorites "the sorrel mare I purchased from Colonel Brown..."  and leave the rest to be divided by the estate's administrators. 

--Joanne




 


Kathleen Much <[log in to unmask]> wrote: I haven't read as many Southern wills as Paul, who says he has read
thousands, but I've read scores. Some slaveowners indeed referred to
their slaves and their livestock in the same way, but others (usually
owners of few slaves) spoke quite fondly of one or more slaves. When I
first came upon wills giving slaves the right to choose their owners,
I was surprised. After I read several, I concluded that the decedent
wished to grant specially valued slaves some control over their own
lives (not, of course, the control that freedom would have brought) by
creating incentives for the new owner to treat the slave decently.
Typically, the owner grants the slave the right to choose from among
the decedent's children an owner for the coming year, on Christmas or
New Year's Day. If the new owner did not treat the slave well, the
slave could change owners next Christmas.

I hope this wrinkle will not stir up more defenses of slavery or
assertions that all slaveowners were evil. It merely permits another
shading of a past era. Some slaveowners recognized the humanity of
their slaves even while maintaining that they were chattels. Never let
it be said that humans can't hold contradictory ideas in one mind.

Kathleen
The Book Doctor

On 6/15/07, Paul Heinegg wrote:
> I believe the wills tell more about slavery in Virginia than any other
source. I have read over a thousand of them. Slaveowners almost exclusively
refer to their slaves in the same terms as their farm animals and other
property:


       
---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.