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.