Mr. Belt of Tennessee has been doing a fascinating series on the old Governor - "warts and all" - which I quite like. He has recently posted a very interesting article on Sevier and slavery on the old frontier, well worth the read.
My take? The sins of an age are reveled in by a few, opposed by fewer still, and taken for granted by most. Sevier in this case looks to be in that "most." Or rather -
Hello sir!
Thank you for your fascinating discussions in Tennessee history!
Respectfully however - I'm not certain your letters support a particularly egregious case against Sevier here. He does his duty under the law, yes - but in all the letters you've posted he seems interested far less in "demanding their return to servitude" than preventing war between the Creeks and Cherokee (letter one), restoring a <i>kidnapped</i> mother and two children (letter two - and do we know if she had other children at home?), and again smoothing over relations between two native nations (letter three).
Racist by modern standards, yes - accepting the sin of his times too easily - absolutely.* But if anyone reads like the villain of the piece in these letters, I'm afraid I have to say it's the Cherokee.
Bad enough to say "negroes are not horses, though they are black" - how much the worse to have to be reminded of the fact?
* As I fear we do today - for if God is just, will He judge us more lightly than our forefathers? They accepted slavery in their midst. We keep it at a palatably safe emotional distance - but still buy the fruits of it by the container-ship load.
2 comments:
Jenny,
Thank you for your insights and for your respectful reply to my blog post on this subject. Your comment points to the complexity of life in the late-18th century. You're right, of course... John Sevier was keenly interested in maintaining peace among the Native American tribes of the region, and this appears to be his primary motivation for enforcing the fugitive slave laws. This was something left unsaid in the piece, but you've provided a much more eloquent addendum to my article than I could have written myself, so I'm grateful to you for contributing to the discussion.
While some might challenge my approach to this subject, I say again that the real point of this series has always been to reveal the flaws of hagiography, and to bring to light little-known aspects of life as it was during John Sevier's time. History does not operate in black-or-white terms. There are shades of gray that need to be explored.
It's one of our greatest flaws, to review history in light of contemporary morals & mores. No such review should ever be considered by anyone who hasn't immersed themselves in the life-and-times nitty gritty of that era.
You - and Mr. Belt - well illustrate that no period in history has ever been as black-and-white as the modern revisionists would have it.
Well done.
Post a Comment