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:
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:47:40 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
Peter Heinegg writes:  "The free African American Mayo family seems to have done very well without the "paternal oversight, care and discipline" of Joseph Mayo." 

Yes, of course.  The issue is, as I hope is clear, not whether the pro-slavery argument is true or false.  I would hope that no one today would want to argue that it is true.  To my knowledge, no one in this conversation has suggested that there is any truth to it.

Rather, the issue is whether or not many white Virginians living in the 19th century thought it was true.  And here, it seems to me, the evidence seems to support the idea that well, yes, some 19th century Virginians were racists, in the fashion suggested by the broad outlines of the pro-slavery argument.   Many of the slave owners living in late 18th and early 19th century Virginia *did*, it would seem, believe that the pro-slavery argument was true.  If you would like to see a fine example of this kind of belief in action, read the excellent chapter in Mel Ely's ISRAEL ON THE APPOMATOX about the way that elite Prince Edward county slaveowners portrayed the freedmen living on the Randolph grant.

It seems to me that there is in this case a powerful willfulness to believe, even when evident facts on the ground do not support the belief.  Our own desires are potent forces, and they shape the way we perceive the world around us.  This is as true of people living in the past as it is of us today.  (It is even true of historians--yet another reason why a healthy and self-reflective skepticism is in order most especially about those of our beliefs most aligned with our present day ethical commitments.) So its not especially surprising that elite Virginians in the 1820s and 1830s, committed to the belief that African Americans *required* the oversight of whites in order to flourish, managed to see what they wanted and expected to see--despite the fact that the former slaves living on the Randolph grant managed to do moderately well for themselves.

I know less about the Mayo emancipation--but it would hardly be surprising if contemporary slave-holding whites perceived those African Americans in much the same fashion as they did those freed by Randolph.
Kevin R. Hardwick, Ph.D.
Department of History
James Madison University

______________________________________
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