African American History - Assignment Example

History 125: African American History Analyzing Scholarly Debates Topic Why Slavery, and Why Africans? For decades, scholars have debated the related questions of why slavery came to be the dominant form of labor in the southern British colonies and why Africans became the primary targets of enslavement. How strong was the relationship between race and slavery in colonial North America? Were English colonists motivated to enslave Africans by prejudice or by profit? Winthrop Jordan in his book, ‘White over Black’ emphasized on the psychological impact of black complexion of Africans on White Englishmen, which later on triggered the notion of slavery for them. The Englishmen voyagers initially explored the lands of West African states to increase their trade and also to obtain certain native crops. However, what they instantly faced was stark opposite reality; ‘Black human race’. These were literally black men and women opposite of what they have always observed as a nation. Their physical appearance, life style, language, religion and values were completely different. This different kind of reality made it intricate for Englishmen to comprehend the impact of blackness in good sense. Since black was used as a metaphor for horrible, ugly, sinister and wicked things in the Oxford dictionary before and during sixteenth century. Hence, observing a nation completely black with round and flat facial features, having no hint of Englishmen beauty concept; was completely revolting idea for them. The psychological impact of their visibly blunt features and jet black complexion jolted the idea of goodness in them. Even the sixteen century literature promoted the concept of English beauty as an ideal beauty standard. Shakespeare in his work also points towards the ugliness of his Negro mistress. Hence, their horrid curls, flawed features and dark black complexion was conflicted with the ideal beauty criteria (Rosy white cheeks, sophisticated sharp features ) prevailed among White Englishmen (Jordan, 9). Time and again the main issue highlighted by the English White men with Negro nation was their permanent and revolting complexion, which of course was due to climatic hostilities in Africa. However, few authors like Thomas Philips condemned the idea of degrading humans on the bases of their complexion (Jordan, 11). By the mid of seventeenth century, the fact also became obvious that Negroes even in cooler climate remained as black as they were in hot climates (Jordan, 15). Nevertheless, another writer George Best signified that this dark complexion is a curse, a natural infection, which cannot be altered because God cursed them and other nations should consider them as servants/ slaves (ibid, 17). Another valid analogy found for Negro nation was the curse on Ham’s descendants according to Jewish interpretations. This theory easily fitted on African Negroes which were dark in complexion and resided in a hot climatic region (ibid, 18). The author is thoroughly presenting his justification of White men theory for Negroes, which was socially and rationally acceptable for them on the bases of their complexion. Thus, black color was core cause to accept that goodness cannot be related to it and without Christian practices black is justified to be equivalent to sinister notion (ibid, 20). Another significant religious issue raised by the historian was religious heathenism in Africa, which was diverse from the Christian beliefs and practices, but was not the core cause of critical perception of Negros for Englishmen (ibid, 23). On the other hand it was considered as a defect present in savage Negro nation due to idolatry. Their social life, language, food, shelter, government and ethics were diverse from Englishmen in every possible way. Englishmen compared their rituals and difference with them by all means and extracted results on the bases of their civility. This instantly made them believe that the standard of life set by their ancestors was far more superior and civilized than is observed in Africa by them (ibid, 25). Two peculiar traits were observed common among the whole race, stealing and savagery. These habits were considered ethical and justified in the whole continent hence, depicting Africans vicious and their ethics irrational (ibid, 26). Savagery was acceptable for Red Indian Americans due to their brownish skin tone, but for Africans, the idea of noble savagery couldn’t reduce the impact of their black color (ibid, 27). Not even in eighteen century, Negro could attain the noble savagery status when other such tribes and aboriginal nations were attaining them and the only reason was their stark black appearance. Their attributes and entities were considered like animals, who live in clan for food and shelter and hence, become wild when need to prey. Most noticeably, according to the author they weren’t considered respectful humans due to their facial and color resemblance to apes. Moreover, apes were considered the most lust full animal and so were Africans due to their potent sexuality (ibid, 33). Elizabethan literature also gave evidence of Negro’s strong sexuality due to their cultural traits (ibid, 35). Conclusively, the main reason described by the historian for Africans to be slave were their physical appearance, complexion, life style, food, religious beliefs, warfare and ethical values, which eventually demonstrate that these differences were the key justification for making them slaves. Thus, prejudice and pride is an evident cause of slavery from Winthrop Jordan’s perspective. Edmund Morgan’s episode ‘Towards slavery’ from the book ‘American Slavery, American freedom’ is an unconventional depiction of slave trade, a possibly problematic issue in Virginia, which they brought in from the Elizabethan Englishmen of England. The persuasive cause of slave trade was abundant un-cropped Virginian lands and thus, profitable salves served tobacco and sugar fields to enhance profits. Here, one could observe that profit is the priority of tradesmen of Virginia for the Negro trade, the more the better. However, according to the author Virginians neither liked the idea of enslavement nor established it, they merely bought slaves from others to increase their man power and tobacco/ sugar trade (Morgan, 297). Morgan has been presenting the pro-Virginian impression of slave trade prevailed in the seventeenth, which occurrence was initially unaccepted due to the presence of annually termed servants, but actually became acceptable due to ‘barbadosed’ appealing terms (ibid, 299). Hence, increment in slave trade and possession reduced the rate of servants mitigating in the state. And with the government legitimizing the slave trade and their custody, financially strong farmers and traders bought more to accelerate their earnings. The saddest point was that these slaves met death at sugar fields by 6% annually due to hard labor. On the other hand, tobacco cultivators did not face any such issue. Moreover, the rates of slaves increased or decreased according to the crop price. Financially strong investors from England moved to Virginia because it entitled them with more land and increased power and to influence. Hence, Virginian lands offered financial prosperity with the presence of slavery (ibid, 304). For small investors annually paid servants were an easy access to profits, but for long term and strong financers slaves were the profitable business tool (ibid, 305). Royal African company’s domination made it a little challenging for illegal traders to purchase slaves; however, Barbadoes land was open for legal slave trade even by the end of seventeenth century. According to Morgan, Virginian plantation production structure was accustomed of harsh and rigorous efforts from under privileged servants. Therefore, slave trade and their input was a not an unusual happening. However, Morgan states that these planters despised the idea of enslavement and did not whole heartedly accepted the notion of slavery (ibid, 308). Yet, to slave nation dismay they were always faced by conspiracy, which broke down their spirit and scheme of rebellion against their masters (ibid, 309). The main focus of Virginians was to bring permanence to their unstable society with boundless work to ensure profits and prosperity. Since for the fact that slaves were neither motivated via incentives nor motivated through wages, for increased work masters needed to beat them so they can extract more work from them. Moreover, there was no sense of dignity in slaves; therefore, the only way to scare them was to punish them brutally (ibid, 313). Slave production was also a profitable idea, as the offspring of a slave will start work at an early age. This was a continuous process of enhancing man power and production. Punishment in the form of lashes from unwilling servants was also a casual trend in Virginia. Hence, with the inauguration f slave trade the subject of lashes changed only (ibid, 311). It was also observed that some slave masters offered some type of reward like crop, land, small amount of cash or un-occasionally freedom to motivate them to work harder, but they could not continue it as the idea went against the very idea of slavery. Slaves were Virginian planters’ property, they had no right at all and the master entailed all the rights, except for the fact that if he killed one of his slaves he had to pay government a certain amount as a penalty, which he and society duly accepted (ibid, 313). Morgan depicts that they Americans neither liked the idea of slavery nor established it, but they were so accustomed of it to an extent that they couldn’t endure the idea of freedom and humane behavior for their slaves. Moreover, he emphasizes on the fact that race and slavery were two different issues, Virginian investors were not concerned about where they obtained slaves from and what ethnicity they belonged to, but what they were concerned about is; to receive hard working and obedient slaves from any part of the world (ibid, 314). Edmund Morgan had been stressing in his writing time and again that the cause of slave trade was not Virginians, as they neither established it in the first place nor whole heartedly accepted it. What they only did was to replace servants from slaves to enhance their profits. Works cited: Top of Form Jordan, Winthrop D. White Over Black. Williamsburg, Virginia: The Institute of early American history and culture, 1968. Print. Bottom of Form Top of Form Morgan, Edmund S. American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia. New York: W.W. Norton & Co, 2003. Print. Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Read More