Black Native Americans -  Black Men, Black Masters (169 views) Notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussion.Subscribe
From: blackgold5111/8/02 3:34 PM 
To: All  (1 of 31) 
Forum site: "Job Hunting Made Easy"

 Reply   Options 

From: risinstar8/5/04 12:00 PM 
To: All  (2 of 31) 
 629.2 in reply to 629.1 

From: Critical Region Consulting (YBFREE) DelphiPlus Member Icon8/6/04 11:47 AM 
To: blackgold51 unread  (3 of 31) 
 629.3 in reply to 629.1 
Very interesting! Message Boards & Articles
 Men Ladies LUST For
(l-r) Takeshi Kaneshiro, Tyson Beckford, Orlando Bloom
STRANGE NEWS and other stuff...


From: Michelle (MICHELL12702)8/20/04 10:39 AM 
To: blackgold51 unread  (4 of 31) 
 629.4 in reply to 629.1 
After I read "Feast of All Saints" by Anne Rice, I realized there were parts of the Slavery Experience that we haven't been told. She speaks of mixed blacks, coloreds, owning blacks of darker skin. The setting moves from Hati to Louisiana, both French owned.

The account of Anne Farrow in the opening post speaks of former slaves owning slaves more in the context of buying family members or in one case, just to free another human being.

Living in present day time and space, I can't imagine "owning" another human being. I could however, buy my own family's freedom. That is not the same thing as buying them to own them.

Interesting article.


Edited 8/20/2004 10:40 am ET by Michelle (MICHELL12702)

From: Semmaster7/10/05 8:14 AM 
To: Michelle (MICHELL12702)  (5 of 31) 
 629.5 in reply to 629.4 
I can atest to the fact of Blacks/ Mulattoes owning slaves. My Anderson Family on my father's side were freed in 1712 by the Will of John Fulcher in Norfolk, Virginia. They left Virginia and went to Granville County, NC, lived peacably among the White's where they bought and sold goods, livestock and slaves. I don't know how you would take this but this is a fact that is written in history and my family wasn't the only ones to own slaves. By the way I am mixed, White, Black and Nottoway.

From: Michelle (MICHELL12702)7/10/05 11:53 AM 
To: Semmaster  (6 of 31) 
 629.6 in reply to 629.5 

Thank you for your post. It is wonderful that you know your family history, most of us are not so lucky. I realize your family was NOT the only ones to own slaves.

It is just so ironic that we could be slaves ourselves, yet own slaves if we are free. I know that some colored people bought them to free them, others became masters of a darker hue.


From: Zuriel97/30/05 11:08 PM 
To: risinstar unread  (7 of 31) 
 629.7 in reply to 629.2 


Hello, I'm a first time poster.

There is very little on the subject but there is some check J.A. Rodgers' "Nature Knows No ColorLine". I actually found the records he cited in the book several years ago as I was doing some research on "Freemen".

Also, on the general topic, many "Black Masters" bought people for the purpose of manumission (many husbands bought their wives, or children, so on and so fourth). However, there were many who bought slaves for the same purposes as their white counterparts, unfortunately.

  • Edited 7/30/2005 11:40 pm ET by Zuriel9

From: ROSETTA3216/7/06 9:13 PM 
To: blackgold51 unread  (8 of 31) 
 629.8 in reply to 629.1 

from Black Men, Black Masters by
Published September 29 2002,0,5217662.story?coll=stam-main-utility

"In his doctoral dissertation on the lives of black people in Colonial-era Connecticut, Guocun Yang says this demonstrates that "slave-ownership was not exclusively a white privilege, and that free blacks could accumulate material wealth."

"In his authoritative 1942 survey "The Negro in Colonial New England," Lorenzo J. Greene says that despite the many legal and social sanctions against black people in late 18th-century Connecticut, they were permitted to own property, though sometimes the permission of the town was required.     Greene's research also shows that freed black men usually tried to reassemble their families in freedom, and would, as soon as they were able, buy their wives and children. "

What this article by Farrow and all the sources from Yang, Green and Stampp that she cites in her article do is to omit one crucial fact ... and FACT is that these blacks they are referring to are immigrant Negroes who were brought into the USA colonies as indentured servants from the West Indies.  These immigrant Negroes or Celts originally from western europe who migrated to Africa the West Indies during early western colonial expansion were hired as indentured servants first by the Dutch who brought them to their colony called New Netherlands and their posts (1620-1630) in New York (including NYC or New Amsterdam), Conneticut, Delaware and New Jersey. 

These hired indentured servants worked by contract for a set number of years in exchange from the cost of passage and board to the USA and were paid freedom fees$$ at the end of their years of service and some were even given our indigenous American lands as payment.  It is these immigrant Negroes who were NEVER slaves ... who would then work and proceed to buy the freedom of the rest of their family under contract as indentured servants.  I've noticed that every immigrant Negro and white who write propaganda on the subject of slavery in the USA, always falsely equate these immigrant Negro indentured servants with being slaves.  

  •  Only inidigenous Native Americans were made slaves by the invading europeans. 

It is also reported that whites as immigrants from the West Indies also moved to the USA with immigrant Negroes as slaves -- which had nothing to do with whites invading the USA and importing immigrant Negroes as indentured servants while kidnapping and forcing indigenous Americans into slavery.  Slaves were considered property under USA and no rights, .. while immigrant Negroes as indentured servants had legal rights upheld under colonial law and were never enslaved for life without pay... unlike slaves.  Only indigenous Native Americans of Shemite (includings the Yamases who were Yisraelites/Jews) and Cush/Khush ancestry were slaves in the USA.

"In the South in 1830, more than 3,600 free blacks or mixed-race people owned slaves, according to Kenneth Stampp, author of the 1956 landmark study "The Peculiar Institution." "

I remember being assigned to read this book called The Peculiar Institution as supplemental reading for a "black" history course we were required to take.  The book didn't make any sense to me at all ... nor did the course.  The only thing I can remember from the entire course was a comment by the BF elderly instructor who told us that under slave and Jim Crow laws in SC, black women couldn't be raped by a WM.  I can't even remember if we were also assigned to read "Before the Mayflower" by Bennette ... which appears  to be an update of George Washington Willimans "A History of the Negro in American from 1619 - 1887." 

And when one takes a close look at the so-called statistics about "blacks" owning slaves ... we see that there is no break down between the immigrant Negroes the British imported as indentured servants into the South or the mulattoes, as there was no classification called "mixed race" in the US Census until recent times.  Until the US Census of 1870 there were only the categories of white, black, mulatto and slaves.  Aftere 1870 the categories of Indian and Chinese were added. In the US Census of 1950, the category of Negro was added ... and if you don't know already, the USA government refuse to count any indigenous Native American not living on a reservation as a Native American ... which means the USA refuses to count the tens of millions of descendants of Native American who were enslaved (kidnapped or war captives) as Native Americans.  As Black Indian Native Americans we have falsely been mislabeled as immigrant Negroes and now African Americans or black, as the USA government in 1997 legally changed the meaning of black for racial classification to mean Negro, African American, African and Haitian ... which excludes our entire indigenous Black Indian Native American race.

  • Edited 6/7/2006 9:17 pm ET by Rosetta321

From: stormshaddow6/11/06 12:12 AM 
To: ROSETTA321  (9 of 31) 
 629.9 in reply to 629.8 

>>the USA government refuse to count any indigenous Native American not living on a reservation as a Native American ... which means the USA refuses to count the tens of millions of descendants of Native American who were enslaved (kidnapped or war captives) as Native Americans.<<

That is true! It didn't matter which box you checked on the census!


From: ctj5276/11/06 3:23 PM 
To: Semmaster  (10 of 31) 
 629.10 in reply to 629.5 

Good afternoon, poster...

And, a unique heritage your share, though I also urge you to check out Sister Angela's AFRICAN/NATIVE AMERICAN GENEOLOGY FORUM,
if you need or want help to pursue any further inquiries...




Navigate this discussion: 1-10 11-20 21-30 31
Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.

Home | Help | Forums | Chat | Blogs | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
© Delphi Forums LLC All rights reserved.