Anne Pemberton said:
> Let me know if I overlooked any errors.

----

Some, although I think she meant to ask if she overlooked CORRECTING
errors, not making them.

The principal error that Anne makes is to conflate her anger and guilt
over slavery with exculpation of a slave's evil act.

Glorifying people who are clearly schizophrenic assassins (hearing
voices telling them to murder innocent women and children because of
their color) is not a lesson I want my grandchildren to learn, no
matter how bad slavery might have been. I am perfectly capable of
explaining to them why it is not a good idea to own other people, even
if the Old Testament recommends it.

Anne says, "Nat Turner was very intelligent and learned to read and
write easily. In spite of this, the three people who owned him never
thought to use his intelligence or to give him the freedom to use this
gift." What evidence do we have for these bald statements as fact? How
can Anne know how easy or hard it was for Nat to learn to read?
(Perhaps she will call once again on "oral tradition", as I seriously
doubt that we have any records that demonstrate his intelligence or
learning ability.) How can Anne know that none of Nat's owners
recognized whatever intelligence he had?

Let's move on back to real history, please, and leave Anne to write
homilies for children.

Kathleen
The Book Doctor

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