VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Sunshine49 <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 4 May 2008 22:01:39 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
there were also white/ black marriages, or relationships, look at  
some of the runaway ads in the Virginia Gazette, a mixed couple  
thought to be passing as husband and wife, or a man and woman of each  
race ran off together. These weren't rapes. In Nov.1797 William  
Cardwell, who was white, married "Betty Brown, colored, of lawful  
age, Kitty Brown her mother" in Henrico County. So there would be  
some white genes in their descendants that were not the result of  
plantation rape. They got married, presumably they cared for each  
other, to defy convention of the times like they did. Is it some sort  
of "outrage identity" to think all white- black sex was the result of  
rape by masters on their slaves? It was a very complex subject; rent  
or buy "African Americans Lives" 1 & 2 and you'll see how complex it  
was.

I'm wondering if this Mobius Strip of a topic will ever end, future  
historians reading these posts will wonder at all the time and brain  
cells put into arguing what are basically points of view. Mr.  
Jefferson was great, Mr. Jefferson was scum. He seems to be used here  
as a means of validating one's view of Colonial life. And since there  
is so little that is CONCRETE about this particular issue, it is easy  
to do, and the debate can continue forever. Personally, I feel that  
DNA shows that one of Ms. Hemmings'  children was sired by "A"  
Jefferson male. The family says it was T. Jefferson's uncle. But we  
can discount DNA and family stories because some smear -mongering  
newspaperman and one census entry say otherwise. Mr. Jefferson owned  
slaves, therefore he had to have raped at least one of them.  
Repeatedly. That's nothing but surmise. It would not hold up in  
history or in court. I suspect for a lot of the Jefferson defenders,  
the surmise aspect of it is what rankles the most. People are passing  
very harsh judgement on a man and trashing him, with almost nothing  
in the way of proof.

My 2 cents.

Nancy

-------
I was never lost, but I was bewildered once for three days.

--Daniel Boone

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US