I am woman....hear me roar.....
9 years ago
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Slavery
What do you think about the fact that George and Patsy owned slaves? Do you think Clark romanticized the relationship between the Washingtons and their slaves?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I don't think she did. From all accounts I have ever heard or read, they were extremely fair to their slaves. Did that make it right to have slaves? No. But its like most things from the past. Sometimes you can't judge people for participating in things that were deemed necessary and normal at the time (I have to remind myself of this with polygymy as well) and it would have been more abnormal back then for them to not have slaves. I think that in a time when it was normal that it is actually a testament to the character of a person of how they were treated because so many slaves weren't treated well.
I think it is wonderful though when I hear of people who did not own slaves.
No, I don't believe she did. George and Martha loved their slaves...particularly those ones that served them directly. George let his views on slavery be known before the events of war began in the House of Burgess but it was such a foreign idea to so many that most scorned the idea of freeing the slaves. Later, he knew that freeing the slaves would put our country in jeopardy when it was so new...North and South divisions...and he couldn't risk that. However, at the end of his Presidency he gave his slaves their freedom and money to give them a start in their new lives. His personal "slave" Christopher chose to go back to Mt Vernon with him and serve him till he died.
Thanks for sharing those things Bookworm. I knew some of that but I didn't know about Christopher.
-annegirl
I agree with both of you. I think it would be inconsistent with their overall character if they were unkind to their slaves. Thanks for the extra info, Bookworm!
Post a Comment