John Adams: One cool dude

[Niptium]

Oh ! John Adams really existed ? I thought he only served to get rid of «the taste of pot and hooker spit in my mouth»

[molly bloom]

Re: Re: Re: John Adams: One cool dude

Originally posted by lord of the mark
You also know that chattel slavery was rare in Europe in the 18th century, even in non common law countries.

Actually it wasn't that rare- I think that a quote from an English judge giving a decision about the legal status of an African in England at the turn of the century might just clue you in to how unrare it was becoming.

By the end of the 18th Century it was exceedingly unrare indeed- one has only to look at the paintings and prints to see this, as more and more feature African and Indian servants and slaves, from Spain, through France into the Netherlands and the German states and kingdoms.

Every good sized village in England would have had at least one black slave, and Samuel Johnson 's heir, Francis Barber, was his servant, and parish registers in England attest to the growing numbers of resident Africans- such as Olaudah Equiano who addressed the anti-slavery Lunar Society in 1790 and wrote his autobiography.

[lord of the mark]

Re: Re: Re: Re: John Adams: One cool dude

Originally posted by molly bloom



Actually it wasn't that rare- I think that a quote from an English judge giving a decision about the legal status of an African in England at the turn of the century might just clue you in to how unrare it was becoming.

By the end of the 18th Century it was exceedingly unrare indeed- one has only to look at the paintings and prints to see this, as more and more feature African and Indian servants and slaves, from Spain, through France into the Netherlands and the German states and kingdoms.

Every good sized village in England would have had at least one black slave, and Samuel Johnson 's heir, Francis Barber, was his servant, and parish registers in England attest to the growing numbers of resident Africans- such as Olaudah Equiano who addressed the anti-slavery Lunar Society in 1790 and wrote his autobiography.

Paintings largely documenting a tiny elite. Any other sources? Total number of black slaves in France, or the Netherlands, as compared to say, Barbados?

But whatever - if you want to think that decision, which had no effect on british policy on the slave trade or on slavery in any colonies, was somehow the start of abolitionism, who am i to stop you. Youve pointed to that before, and im sure will do so again.

Nor did I mean to indicate that Judge Sewall was the start of abolitionism. I did find the quote rather striking, coming from such a notorious figure, and setting the linkage between New England Puritanism and antislavery so early - back when New Englanders ill still nasty oppressive Puritans, before theyd become liberally minded New Light Congregationalists, or even Unitarians like Adams. But of course the credit on this side of the pond for the beginning of abolitionism largely goes to said New Light Congregationalists and Unitarians, not to witch burners. ( and yes, there was still slave holding in Massachusetts up to 1776)


edit:


More on Judge Sewall, from a website based on a PBS documentary.

'The year is 1697. The place, Boston's Old South Church. Samuel Sewall stands silently as his statement admitting guilt is read aloud to the audience. The statement is an apology for his role as one of the three judges in the Salem witch trials, where nineteen people were wrongly accused of witchcraft and put to death. Sewall will be the only judge to admit his error.

Samuel Sewall would undoubtedly be pleased to know that, in the end, he would be best remembered not for his participation in the trials, but for his writings, which include his "Diary," as well as a pamphlet criticizing slavery called The Selling of Joseph.

The Selling of Joseph was published in 1700, around the time that Sewall, then a justice of the Superior Court, had an altercation with John Saffin, a landowner, merchant, and sometimes judge. Saffin had in bondage a black man named Adam. In 1694 Saffin promised to set Adam free in seven years, as long as he worked hard and was obedient. According to Saffin, though, Adam was disrespectful and difficult to manage. By 1700, Adam was demanding freedom and went to Judge Sewall. Sewall sided with Adam, and a long battle between Sewall and Saffin ensued. The battle resulted, several years later, in Adam's release.

Sewall's anti-slavery pamphlet stated, "It is most certain that all men, as they are the sons of Adam, are co-heirs, and have equal right unto liberty, and all other outward comforts of life."

Despite Sewall's compassionate views toward blacks, he was not as [radical] as later abolitionists. He believed that slaves "can seldom use their freedom well," and also saw the black population as a threat to the purity of Puritan culture. He also believed that slaves already in the country should remain as slaves. Sewall's solution to the slavery problem was to stop the importation of slaves.

Ultimately, Samuel Sewall got New Englanders thinking more critically about slavery. He, along with other similar-thinkers of the time, laid the foundation for later social reform. '

[RGBVideo]

Are you saying that Jackson and Grant weren't heroes in American history? I suggest you read up on the Battle of New Orleans and the American Civil War.

Ah yes, the great Andrew Jackson, hero of the democratic party -- having great respect for his constitutional duty, he purified the states well from redskins so true Americans could settle them

As for the civil war, the Union army led by Grant... it was, well, truly representing justice to the Southern states. Take, f.e., the city of New Orleans which you mentioned -- it was really well administrated

And who can forget the great Grant presidency? It has stood the test of time well, still known as the most ill-led and corrupted in the history of the United States (current president excluded, as always should be when making historical comparisons).

Um... it actually is the truth, whether or not Wikipedia states it.

That he was a "pioneer in the fields of meteorology and electricity"? No. He was just another guy who created his wealth as a slave-owner who had too much time in his hands. Franklin didn't really "invent" much of anything, he just copied stuff which had been done in Europe long before -- pretty much like T.A. Edison, another American "great inventor".

Edit:

By the end of the 18th Century it was exceedingly unrare indeed- one has only to look at the paintings and prints to see this, as more and more feature African and Indian servants and slaves, from Spain, through France into the Netherlands and the German states and kingdoms.

Why yes, sure -- which is why a large portion of the European public was black or partly black (just like in deep south) by the start of the 20th century, right?

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by VJ

Ah yes, the great Andrew Jackson, hero of the democratic party -- having great respect for his constitutional duty, he purified the states well from redskins so true Americans could settle them

As for the civil war, the Union army led by Grant... it was, well, truly representing justice to the Southern states. Take, f.e., the city of New Orleans which you mentioned -- it was really well administrated

Are you perhaps mixing up Grant and Ben Butler? I dont think Grant ever directly administered New Orleans.

That he was a "pioneer in the fields of meteorology and electricity"? No. He was just another guy who created his wealth as a slave-owner who had too much time in his hands.

Franklin created his wealth as a printer and publisher. ISTR reading he did at one point own a houseslave, but he certainly didnt create his wealth using slaves. And he in fact was an opponent of slavery by the time of the Revolution.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by VJ
Ah yes, the great Andrew Jackson, hero of the democratic party -- having great respect for his constitutional duty, he purified the states well from redskins so true Americans could settle them

YES, the great Andrew Jackson. The winner of the Battle of New Orleans. Furthermore, he was elected as a very populist candidate. The 'elites' were appauled that during the inaugeration all these "common people" with their muddy shoes were standing on chairs cheering for the President of the People. There is a reason it was refered to as Jacksonian Democracy.

And believe it or not, most people didn't like the Natives.

As for the civil war, the Union army led by Grant... it was, well, truly representing justice to the Southern states. Take, f.e., the city of New Orleans which you mentioned -- it was really well administrated

And who can forget the great Grant presidency? It has stood the test of time well, still known as the most ill-led and corrupted in the history of the United States (current president excluded, as always should be when making historical comparisons).

Are you saying that Grant didn't lead the Northern forces to victory in the Civil War? Or are you actually saying it was no big deal.

That he was a "pioneer in the fields of meteorology and electricity"? No. He was just another guy who created his wealth as a slave-owner who had too much time in his hands. Franklin didn't really "invent" much of anything, he just copied stuff which had been done in Europe long before -- pretty much like T.A. Edison, another American "great inventor".

Wow... what a moron you are. Edison just copied stuff in Europe done long before! So who in Europe invented the phonograph before Edison? The kinetoscope (precursor to movie projectors)? The quadruplex telegraph? The incandescant light bulb? The stock ticker (first electric broadcast system)?

Please... stop with your America bashing and read your history

As for Franklin, he invented the Frankin stove, the catheter, bifocal eyeglasses, swimfins, improvements to the glass harmonica, and the lighting rod. His work with electricity earned him the British Fellow of the Royal Society. He also came up with the the conservation of charge theory when beforehand people believed electricity was simply created by rubbing substances. He also observed the principle of refrigeration and did experiments to prove it existed.

[molly bloom]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Adams: One cool dude

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Paintings largely documenting a tiny elite. Any other sources? Total number of black slaves in France, or the Netherlands, as compared to say, Barbados?

Oh, hilarious. You ask me for sources, and so far all you've provided is an unsupported opinion about one American judge who was 'agin slavery'.

It's obviously ludicrous to compare an island of sugar plantations in the West Indies with one of the countries that owned those colonies, don't you think ?

Rather like comparing Brazil's number of African slaves with those resident in Portugal.

Besides, 'common' in the European states obviously does not imply a density of population equivalent to that found in the colonies to which the slaves were being transported- but thanks for muddling the issue.

Obviously certain paintings documented certain sections of society- but Rembrandt's paintings depicted a wider range of social groups, and you'll find Africans depicted there- as you will in Italian and Spanish Renaissance paintings.

In fact, along with prestige goods such as the West African ivory salt cellars and objets d'art, slaves and African retainers were at first luxury goods- but that was in the 15th and 16th centuries in mainland Europe.

The history of slavery in the British Isles goes back to Celtic times- when slaves were mostly prisoners taken in battle.

By Anglo-Saxon times, as recorded in the Domesday Book, a full 10% of the population of England was slaves- and it remained a trade until the 12th Century, most slaves being of local or European origin, and again frequently being captives taken in war.

'Blue men'- from Viking raids on Morocco are recorded as being present in Ireland in 800 a.d., and in Norfolk the skeleton of an African girl was found at North Elmham, dating from Saxon times.

In the 16th Century, the new slave trade kicked off, with Sir John Hawkins actions off Africa and in the Spanish Main- he made three profitable slaving voyages from 1562-1563.

The court of James IV of Scotland also enjoyed the presence of African entertainers.

By the 1590s, the visible presence of resident Africans in London was so remarkable that even Queen Elizabeth I was moved to make the first of her pronunciations about the number of 'blackamoors' in London. In fact, from the middle of the 16th Century onwards, the number of taverns named after Africans (The Moor's Head, The Blackamoor's Head) increased- as did African or Moorish characters in popular literature- Shakespeare's Aaron the Moor in 'Titus Andronicus', 'Othello, Moor of Venice' and the Moorish suitor in 'The Merchant of Venice', to name some notable popular examples that spring to mind.


By the end of the 16th Century, the numbers of people traded was calculated in the tens of thousands; by the 18th Century, during the era of the 'Great Triangle' slave trade system, it was in the millions.

The merchants and middle classes of Atlantic ports such as Liverpool, Bristol and Glasgow were the main beneficiaries at first (with the exception of London).

The legal position of slaves and freed slaves was, as I've already pointed out, a subject deemed worthy of debate and legal decision by the end of the 17th Century and the first decade of the 18th Century, in Great Britain at least.

Africans were resident in London- Covent Garden notably played home to entertainers and servants.

Their legal position in the home islands was in fact no different from that of other exploited domestics- which was of course a far cry from their experience in the colonies.

In 1725, Bristol ships carried about 17 000 slaves- but the first written record of an African resident of Bristol was in 1641- in a parish register, which records that 'Frances, a blackamoor maidservant' joined the congregation.

In London, the written evidence is even earlier- in Camberwell in Southwark, the parish register of St. Giles records the baptism of 'John Primero, a negro'. Mr. Primero was a servant of Sir Thomas Hunt. That's from 1607.

In the same reign, the first written account for the presence of an Indian employee is found- a Lascar sailor, baptised in a church in London's Docklands.

In 1698, the African trade was deregulated, with monopoly control being removed from the Royal Africa Company, and of course money really started to be made with the acquisition of the Asiento by the British in 1713.

This brought about the explosion in profits and numbers of people traded- and further increased the visibility of the black population in Great Britain, who had set up home in areas such as Bootle in Liverpool and parts of Bristol and Cardiff, and Southwark in London.

It's reflected in paintings such as 'The Parten Family' by Gawen Hamilton, where the family are shown as being tres au courant, sipping tea whilst in the foreground an African servant boy attempts to rescue a letter from a dog. That's from 1736, by the way.

In fact so accepted was the presence of an African population that interracial marriages were accepted- even reaching to the dizzy heights of Kenwood House, where a painting recorded the presence of:

... Elizabeth Dido Belle. Dido was the great niece of the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, Lord Mansfield. She was the daughter of a liaison between Mansfield’s nephew, a ship’s captain, and an African woman. For the first two decades of her life she lived at Kenwood House in Hampstead. Kenwood was then the country home of Lord Mansfield. A painting by Johann Zoffany in 1769 celebrates her relationship with her white cousin. The painting is a personal treasure of the current Lord Mansfield and it hangs in his castle at Scone Palace in Perthshire. It is a remarkable picture firstly because it was painted at all. Then in its composition there is real tenderness between two girls who clearly hold great affection for each other. They are also portrayed arms linked in a clear representation of closeness if not total equality.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2005/10/07/kurt_blackhistorymonth_feature.shtml

Legally, the position of slaves and former slaves began to be firmed up by landmark decisions such as :

Somerset -v- Stewart in 1772, in England, where the Lord Chief Justice Lord Mansfield ruled that a former slave could no longer be treated as such once they had landed on English soil.

In Scotland, where a different legal code existed, a similar case occurred in 1778, which helped clarify matters -

Knight -v- Wedderburn established a clearer precedent, whereby the Scottish courts maintained they would not uphold a slave-master's claim in pursuit of a fugitive slave.

As for Anglican opposition to the slave trade, it is perhaps best exemplified by Granville Sharp, who was not only an Anglican, but grandson of an Archbishop of York- he wrote 'The Injustice of Tolerating Slavery' in 1769, and was important in the Zong case of 1783.

In fact the situation of slaves and freed slaves in Great Britain and the colonies was pressing enough to warrant the creation of Sierra Leone, in 1787, followed twenty years later by the banning of the slave trade by Parliament.

Also notably opposed to the slave trade along with Granville Sharp were Erasmus Darwin and Joseph Priestley, members of the Lunar Society.


You should of course note that it's extremely unlikely that a census of slaves in any of the slave owning countries of Europe was ever attempted- but it's utterly absurd to claim that in the century which saw the explosive growth of the transatlantic slave trade that Africans and slaves were uncommon in Great Britain or the Netherlands or France, when they'd been a feature of popular literature, enterainment and culture and resident in those countries, since the 16th Century.


Elizabeth Dido Belle:

[lord of the mark]

summary

Chattel slavery existed in europe in the middle ages.
Blacks, often free, were not rare enough in western europe to be exotic in the period under discussion - they were found in paintings, NOT only of elite subjects but of others. Theres no way to know exactly how many there were, and LOTM is silly for trying to compare them to the number of the slaves in the colonies. There were enough that the legality of slavery figured in English courts where slavery was banned in 1707. And oddly enough, banned again in the 1770s.


Whatever.


Now what does this have to do with Judge Sewall again?

To repeat - the first anti-slavery ideological tract in the new world, and perhaps one of the first in the world, just happened to be written by a Salem witch trial judge. Perhaps not coincidentally, the only such judge to repent of his role at Salem. His tract was based largely on biblical grounds.

It did not lead directly to American abolitionism.

Just as the early court case MB cited did not lead directly to british abolitionism.

abolitionism in the US has strong roots in New England Congregationalism, though almost all are later than Judge Sewalls time.

[lord of the mark]

BTW wasnt Priestley an ex-Presbyterian turned Unitarian?

[lord of the mark]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Adams: One cool dude

Originally posted by molly bloom



Oh, hilarious. You ask me for sources, and so far all you've provided is an unsupported opinion about one American judge who was 'agin slavery'.

It's obviously ludicrous to compare an island of sugar plantations in the West Indies with one of the countries that owned those colonies, don't you think ?

Rather like comparing Brazil's number of African slaves with those resident in Portugal.

Besides, 'common' in the European states obviously does not imply a density of population equivalent to that found in the colonies to which the slaves were being transported- but thanks for muddling the issue.

what exactly is the issue?

[RGBVideo]

Are you perhaps mixing up Grant and Ben Butler? I dont think Grant ever directly administered New Orleans.

Short answer: No
Long answer: Read my post again. With thought this time, please? Of course he never "directly administered" New Orleans, I never said so. He was in charge of the army, army which occupied the south very cruelly. New Orleans was just a random example of a city completely screwed by the yankees, an example I made up after Imran had mentioned it.

Franklin created his wealth as a printer and publisher. ISTR reading he did at one point own a houseslave, but he certainly didnt create his wealth using slaves. And he in fact was an opponent of slavery by the time of the Revolution.

My point there was that he was for slavery as long as his income was dependant from it -- when he had enough wealth to ignore the whole issue, he turned against it. A naive person who realised the cruelty of slavery overnight, thus becoming a principled, saintly opponent of it? Hey, if you want to think it's true, go ahead.

[RGBVideo]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Please... stop with your America bashing and read your history

Yeah -- **** you too, enemy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

New Orleans was just a random example of a city completely screwed by the yankees

Oh yes... because it would have been so much better as part of a bankrupt Confederate States of America!

Get a clue, would you?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by VJ



My point there was that he was for slavery as long as his income was dependant from it -- when he had enough wealth to ignore the whole issue, he turned against it. A naive person who realised the cruelty of slavery overnight, thus becoming a principled, saintly opponent of it? Hey, if you want to think it's true, go ahead.

I'll have to read a Franklin bio then - was his income really dependent on slavery? You couldnt find a free worker, or an indentured servant, who could work as a printers assistant in Philadelphia? I mean it wasnt like trying run a tobacco plantation without slaves.

[Ted Striker]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Adams: One cool dude

Originally posted by molly bloom




Elizabeth Dido Belle:

I'd hit it with both of those hoes, Jungle Fever word up.