The question on how slaves were actually treated by re- revolutionary English colony masters brings some turmoil into play. Slavery gained importance in the English colonies when there was an increasing need for labor but unluckily for some slaves, certain masters were a bit gentler than others. When we first think about slavery, our reaction is always negative. And, although that is probably the best reaction to have overall, we have to realize not all slaves were treated poorly. Just like there is good and bad people in the world now, it was the same back then. We do have evidence of savage slave owners, but we also have evidence of slaves sticking up for their masters. Seems weird, right? The kind of work slaves did varied from house …show more content…
When the Stono Rebellion started in South Carolina, slaves were not messing around when they got the chance to kill a slave owner. However, some of the slaves actions shows us some sympathy towards the lives of certain masters. Once the slaves headed out, they passed Mr. Wallaces Tavern but said, “They would not hurt him, for he was a good man and kind to his slaves.” (Anonymous, description of the Stono Rebellion, pg. 69, left column.) It seems weird to me in any case that when a slave got the chance to kill a slave owner, that he would pass it up since the master was “kind to his slaves.” Who cares! Right? Not exactly. The slaves knew at this point slavery is what is it and there is not much they could do about it other than rebel. But, with that being said, they did notice when masters were kind to them or their acquaintances considering it did not happen often. An even stranger occurrence of this was when a slave actually stopped the other slaves from killing his master; “they marched on towards Mr. Rose’s resolving to kill him; but he was saved by a Negro, who having hid him and went out and pacified the others.” (Anonymous, description of the Stono Rebellion, pg. 69, left column.) All of the slaves rebelling did not find Mr. Rose deserving of his life and planned on killing him, so why was his own slave the one to save his life? This shows us the type of positive relationship that is sometimes hidden when talking about
It can be argued there is a difference between dissemblance and being submissive. The relationship between a slave owner and slave has always been misconstrued as slave owners would lie to themselves saying they were helping slaves. Obviously slavery was detrimental to Africans that were caught in the slave trade.
Throughout Douglass’ life, and in the book, he refers to several different of his “owners” as his “master”. Besides having to refer to people in power to us as “Mr./Mrs.”, or “Dr.”, we don’t typically have to address people in any specific way without wanting to. However, slaves were not given these freedoms. In the book, the word “master” is quoted a minimum of 82 times, which is probably more times than any of us have even said in our lifetime (just an assumption). If you disrespected your “master” in any way, you were subject to being beaten in unimaginable ways.
Masters at the time also used to punish slaves (primarily by selling them) if they expressed discontent with their current circumstances. Douglass notes of a slave belonging to Colonel Lloyd, who unknowingly expressed discontent to him and was consequently separated from his family and sold. Because slave owners would occasionally send in spies to see what their slaves thought of them, and consequently, slaves could never express their true feelings for fear of retribution. Slaves could also never fully trust others in the same condition and had to live with a constant feeling of paranoia, which took an emotional toll on them. Not having anyone to truly talk to and constantly having to stay alert to stay alive can be a taxing experience, and very emotionally draining.
There is a very general similarity in this however; in both sides, slaves were not free and they had to obey their masters and work. Document 9 outlines observations by Hans Sloan concerning punishment of slaves on the island of Barbados. The punishments were very cruel, ranging from whippings for the smallest offenses to burning alive for
In Herman Melville’s Bartleby And Benito Cereno, the San Dominick is now under the rule of Babo, a slave mastermind. Babo guides the other slaves to revolt against the slave master Armanda and the spaniards. Negro Babo cautioned Don Benito Cereno ‘he and his companions could not otherwise be sure of their liberty’ (Melville, 1855, p.65). The negro’s only purpose for being defiant was to regain freedom. Thom Brooks declared that ‘punishment is only justified when it is deserved, not when it satisfies private anger or bloodlust’ (2012, p.16).
In this manner, the slave is depicted in its rightful place as a servant to slave masters and in fact enjoys more freedom than most people. Fitzhugh is not alone in his unusual justification of slavery.
To hold/ Their hands”( Ensler 143). The narrator was mistreated based upon how she identified herself and because of what the things she did or wanted to do. African American slaves were treated with little to no respect and they were seen more so as animals or property. Frederick Douglass
Douglass uses paradox to demonstrate that slavery degragrates the slaverholder. When Douglass under Mr. Sever’s care he described that: “He was less cruel, less profane… He whipped, but seemed to take no pleasure in it. ”(Douglass 24). Most slaveholders are characterized to be cruel and inhuman because of the whipping and the way they treated the slaves.
Slave masters would say things or do things to slaves that made them keep quiet, it kept the slaves from retaliating. In Kindred, this is shown when all of Sarah’s children were sold besides her one daughter Carrie. Sarah show’s her emotion to this when she says, “Whose idea you think it was to sell my babies? She made Marse Tom sell my three boys to get money to buy things she didn’t even need!” (Butler 95).
Frederick Douglass had multiple masters over the course of his life. Half of his masters were good and some were bad. The worst and cruelest were religious slaveholders who used religious scripture to explain why they beat and whipped the slaves. In reality they were hypocrites. Douglass gives multiple examples of how religious slaveholders showed hypocrisy.
This shows that the way a Master behaves around a slave can be very influential, and Douglass explains that he was compelled to give all his hard-earned money to Master Hugh because the influence the Master had on him was to give him everything he worked hard for. Next, on page 10 of his Narrative, Douglass proclaims, “They never knew when they were safe from punishment. They were frequently whipped when least deserving, and escaped whipping when most deserving it. Every thing depended upon the looks of the horses,
In the 1700-1800’s, the use of African American slaves for backbreaking, unpaid work was at its prime. Despite the terrible conditions that slaves were forced to deal with, slave owners managed to convince themselves and others that it was not the abhorrent work it was thought to be. However, in the mid-1800’s, Northern and southern Americans were becoming more aware of the trauma that slaves were facing in the South. Soon, an abolitionist group began in protest, but still people doubted and questioned it.
This is exactly how the blacks felt-powerless. They were forced to obey their master or else they would be given horrendous punishments.. The slaves were supposed to care about the horses of Colonel Lloyd and if they did not,” They were frequently whipped when least deserving, and escaped the whippings when they were on their best behaviour.” (Paulsen,14) All of this depended on the way Colonel Lloyd 's horses looked
Since this is what I was taught, I never once thought that there could be “good” slave owners. I associated every slave owner and sometimes even most white people who lived in the south during this time as terrible and cruel. As I had become narrow minded on this subject, it never crossed my mind that not everyone was as terrible as I thought. When Northup decided to write this narrative, I think it was very wise and smart of him to include sides, the suffering and the kindness.
Slave morality values things like kindness, humility and sympathy. It stands for “good” and “evil” is the weak, cowardly, timid and petty. Slaves are victims the abused, oppressed, suffering, un-emancipated, the