Slavery is an old Anglo American tradition

My Recent Posts

There has been some traffic on this site lately about race and bigotry and skin color and man's inhumanity to man in general. But it is an old Anglo tradition to force conformity and treat people different from ourselves as less than human.

 

It is not a color thing as many pretend, but later was exacerbated by the availability of Blacks from Africa who were readily available thanks to the Sugar trade.

 

I offer for consideration the story of Squanto, the first Native American to associate with the Pilgrims. I will save the history of Spanish and Portuguese America for another day.

 

http://www.biography.com/people/squanto-9491327

 

Squanto, also known as Tisquantum, was a Native American of the Patuxet tribe who acted as an interpreter and guide to the Pilgrim settlers at Plymouth during their first winter in the New World.

 

Born circa 1580 near Plymouth, Massachusetts, Squanto, also known as Tisquantum, is best remembered for serving as an interpreter and guide for the Pilgrim settlers at Plymouth in the 1620s. Historians know little about Squanto's life. A Patuxet Indian born in present-day Massachusetts, Squanto is believed to have been captured as a young man along the Maine coast in 1605 by Captain George Weymouth, who had been commissioned by Plymouth Company owner Sir Ferdinando Gorges to explore the coast of Maine and Massachusetts, and reportedly captured Squanto, along with four Penobscots, because he thought his financial backers in Britain might want to see some Indians.

Weymouth brought Squanto and the other Indians to England, where Squanto lived with Ferdinando Gorges, who taught him English and hired him to be an interpreter and guide.

Squanto, also known as Tisquantum, was a Native American of the Patuxet tribe who acted as an interpreter and guide to the Pilgrim settlers at Plymouth during their first winter in the New World.

Synopsis

Squanto was born circa 1580 near Plymouth, Massachusetts. Little is known about his early life. In 1614, he was kidnapped by English explorer Thomas Hunt, who brought him to Spain where he was sold into slavery. Squanto escaped, eventually returning to North America in 1619. He then returned to the Patuxet region, where he became an interpreter and guide for the Pilgrim settlers at Plymouth in the 1620s. He died circa November 1622 in Chatham, Massachusetts.

Early Life and Capture

Born circa 1580 near Plymouth, Massachusetts, Squanto, also known as Tisquantum, is best remembered for serving as an interpreter and guide for the Pilgrim settlers at Plymouth in the 1620s. Historians know little about Squanto's life. A Patuxet Indian born in present-day Massachusetts, Squanto is believed to have been captured as a young man along the Maine coast in 1605 by Captain George Weymouth, who had been commissioned by Plymouth Company owner Sir Ferdinando Gorges to explore the coast of Maine and Massachusetts, and reportedly captured Squanto, along with four Penobscots, because he thought his financial backers in Britain might want to see some Indians.

Weymouth brought Squanto and the other Indians to England, where Squanto lived with Ferdinando Gorges, who taught him English and hired him to be an interpreter and guide.

Interpreter and Guide for the Pilgrims

Now fluent in English, Squanto returned to his homeland in 1614 with English explorer John Smith, possibly acting as a guide, but was captured again by another British explorer, Thomas Hunt, and sold into slavery in Spain. Squanto escaped, lived with monks for a few years, and eventually returned to North America in 1619, only to find his entire Patuxet tribe dead from smallpox. He went to live with the nearby Wampanoags.

In 1621, Squanto was introduced to the Pilgrims at Plymouth, and subsequently acted as an interpreter between Pilgrim representatives and Wampanoag Chief Massasoit. In the fall of 1621, the Pilgrims and Wampanoags celebrated the first Thanksgiving after reaping a successful crop. The following year, Squanto deepened the Pilgrims' trust by helping them find a lost boy, and assisted them with planting and fishing.

Squanto's unique knowledge of the English language and English ways gave him power. He sought to increase his status among other native groups by exaggerating his influence with the colonists and even going so far as to tell them that the English had storage pits containing the plague and would release it if they didn’t do what he wanted.

Death

Embroiled in the politics emerging between the settlers and the local tribes, Squanto died of a fever in Chatham, Massachusetts, circa November 1622, while acting as a guide for Governor William Bradford.

 

 

Comments

EXPAT Added Mar 10, 2017 - 7:38pm
There is some duplication in this article, but I thought it best to show the original copy/past story.
Ric Wells Added Mar 10, 2017 - 7:42pm
It's just reinforces your posting.
Tom C. Purcell Added Mar 10, 2017 - 7:43pm
This is the comment I posted on a recent racism/slavery discussion:
 
Re: Slavery - Command & conquer was the way of the past, not just the way of the White man.  The Vikings, without slaves, would have been totally unsuccessful in establishing settlements.  They were prevalent from Norway to the British Isles to Newfoundland and America. 
 
Slaves were a part of most walks of human life for thousands of years, even employed by good, god-loving families, and not all slaves faced poor living conditions or work by the whip.  Slavery is just part of the past and is/was akin to survival of the fittest and natural selection.  Meeker people are/were subjugated to work for their conquerors.  We can't apply modern ideals and today's standard of what is humane, to the lives of our ancestors from centuries ago.  We must thank and praise them, not damn them for winning.
EXPAT Added Mar 10, 2017 - 8:16pm
Good comment Tom. A welcome addition to this article. Every ethnic group had slaves! Eve had Adam as her slave!
Ric Wells Added Mar 10, 2017 - 9:00pm
Tom great comment. 
EXPAT Added Mar 10, 2017 - 9:01pm
All Eve had to do was cross her legs and claim a headache, and Adam would do anything she said, even defy GOD!
EXPAT Added Mar 10, 2017 - 10:03pm
Ryan was deleted for off subject content!
Ric Wells Added Mar 10, 2017 - 10:06pm
Okey dokey.
Billy Roper Added Mar 10, 2017 - 10:48pm
Africans (Berbers and Moors) had a huge White slave trade going of kidnapped Europeans long before Europeans ever met Squanto, or Sambo.
EXPAT Added Mar 10, 2017 - 11:12pm
True Billy. But my point was everybody does it. I.E. the Adam and Eve pun. The Native American tribes also had slaves. I was only offering one example. Like I said:
 I will save the history of Spanish and Portuguese America for another day.
My My , you are defensive of the White Folks!
target="_blank">Sambo und Judo Union Wien
budopass.com/clubs/sambo-und-judo-union-wien
Sambo und Judo Union Wien. Year of foundation 2015. Austria. 1160 Wien, Wilhelminenstraße 74. +43 660 426 9824 · austria-sambo@mail.ru · www. ratiborets.
EXPAT Added Mar 10, 2017 - 11:16pm
Anglo American is very specific. One type of slavery does not cancel out another!
EXPAT Added Mar 10, 2017 - 11:23pm
Billy. You never delete my comments, so I will let your:
Comments off-topic to the article.
Remain.
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 3:06am
I just deleted a comment by The Other Side because:
Comments off-topic to the article.
People in cubicles is not what this is about. I want to discuss Anglo American Tradition.
Mircea Negres Added Mar 11, 2017 - 3:25am
Thanks for the story, EXPAT. I'd never heard of Squanto until now. The Brits were doing what pretty much every other nation involved in exploration did back then. The story implies that victims endured a great deal of psychological trauma and suffered from a combination of Stockholm Syndrome along with feelings of insecurity and inferiority in their relations with compatriots after they returned, often finding themselves forced to side with their erstwhile oppressors.
 
My history is a bit rusty in this regard, but I seem to remember that when the abolitionist movement really took hold in Britain, it was that country which authorised its navy to board, search and if necessary sink ships carrying slaves, regardless of what flag they flew, leading to a drop in the slave trade and international moves towards abolishing the practice. Would you happen to know why that was? Was it because of a moral issue, or do you think they foresaw the economic impact on their workers if too many slaves were introduced to the system, or was it a combination of both?
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 5:18am
Mircea. You are spot on about British history. The abolitionist movement was a MORAL issue. Some say the invention of the Cotton Gin made Slavery no longer an economic necessity. But the Gin made it possible to farm more acreage that was in abundance making the need for slaves even greater. Both in Britain and America, books, plays, essay's made it unpopular to own slaves.
Britain was first to ban slavery. It took a Civil War to end slavery in America.
A great DVD on the subject is "Amistad", by Steven Spielberg, with Anthony Hopkins.
Billy Roper Added Mar 11, 2017 - 8:27am
I may have mentioned it before, but my next book, which is half done, is an alternate history novel where slavery never happened in Anglo-America.
Ric Wells Added Mar 11, 2017 - 9:53am
Expat there is another DVD titled Amazing Grace that deals with the same subject. Never saw Amistad so I cannot compare the two. 
Louis E Weeks Added Mar 11, 2017 - 10:39am
Yes, slavery was indeed part of human history in one form or another as far back as any records exist.  
 
But why?  Why did so many people need slaves to do their work?  I would say it was economic reasons.  Yes many slave owners were abusive and evil but most seemed to have some job or task needing to be done that they either could not, or did not want to pay workers to do so they used slaves instead.  Even the selling of slaves was economic, gathering them up and selling them was a huge income for some groups.
 
Some would say indentured servants and such also qualify.  I would agree that even illegal aliens in places like America serve the same purpose to provide the cheapest possible labor to serve the owner.
 
 
Slave labor was used to to build the American Capital, how much of America and our progress was made possible on the backs of slaves?
Dino Manalis Added Mar 11, 2017 - 11:25am
Slavery is ancient, instead of using farm animals, they had slaves to perform the work.
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 12:09pm
Billy. Interesting, but we have to examine what we are calling slavery. We can of course, only speculate as to the mental reasoning and morality of their actions, as psychological profiling was unheard of for the time.
 
Black slavery was for economic reasons and to the perpetrators was no different than enslaving a horse or Ox. Slave owners didn't capture their slaves, they purchased them as beasts of burden.
Slavers felt they were capturing wild animals and selling them for profit.
 
In this case, Pilgrims who were God fearing Christians from a "Civilized Nation,"  who themselves were being persecuted, came to a new land and discovered Savages, along with Bears, Deer etc. They wanted to show their lords and masters what they had discovered, so Squanto was forced into involuntary servitude, not for economic purposes, but for show and tell. Another possibility is that he went voluntarily, or was paid to go.
 
He was educated and trained in the ways of the civilized world, learned their language and customs and was made a man of high standing among his people, and also the settlers, as he taught them how to plant and hunt game.
 
I am not sure about his capture by Thomas Hunt. Did Spain permit non black Slaves? This is the first case I have come across. Spain did not allow slavery of the Indians in Florida, why would they permit it at home?
 
Did Squanto trade sides and go to work for a competing company, then fabricate an excuse that he was captured to get his old job back, when it didn't work out? We can only speculate.
 
What is the difference between a Bond Servant, a Contracted Laborer, a Prisoner and a Black Slave?
Bond Servants were brought here for a specific period because of debts.
Contracted Labor was brought here for a specific task and duration.
Prisoners were forced to work for incidents performed.
Black Slaves were owned until set free, sold, or death.
 
It is very difficult to make a Moral distinction between the forms of indenture.
The common theme here is that the powerful decide how the weak shall live. With all this talk of Equality, is it any different today?
 
I assume your book deals with the Social implications of slavery, rather than the act itself. If Blacks were not considered a lower form of life to be cared for and used, would near east Indians have been hired for a pittance, and brought to the new world? Much as Europeans did in the Middle East and South Africa, or perhaps Chinese?
 
History is the story of domination, either by skin color, sex, religion, Education, Birth family, Tribe or any of the things that divide us.
 
 
 
 
Jeff Jackson Added Mar 11, 2017 - 12:13pm
As in all societies, who owned the majority of slaves? Ummm, let me think now, oh yeah, it was the rich! The rich got more rich off the backs of slaves. Strangely, it was the Republicans that wanted to free the American slaves, with the leadership of Abraham Lincoln. One of the things that really sparked the decline of slavery was the steam engine and the declining need for muscle power, be it animal or human muscle. Not that there were still things for slaves to do, but most of the slave owners didn't want slaves to know very much about what we would call skilled trades like building things, at least not more than a home. The slaves were left with simple tasks that require much more muscle and very little brains, because smart slaves would figure out how to escape and have marketable skills to sell in a free market and thus, even if recaptured, buy their way out of slavery (not that it happened a lot but it could.)
Over ninety percent of the Confederate Army soldiers didn't have slaves, and the rich paid $300.00 and skipped out of serving and risking their lives in battle. Slavery was a long time ago, not that it wasn't important, just that it was done away with a long time ago, but still exists in countries that we do business with and supposedly have respect for.
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 12:53pm
Jeff Jackson.
If you read the articles by THE OTHER SIDE and George Romey, we still have Wage Slavery in America.
Yes, the need for manual labor is decreasing with time. Society sets the standard on how we survive.
What do you think will be the role of the Non Cyber Man will be in the coming millennial?
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 1:03pm
I offer the same question to all participants. What have we learned from Squanto and the way we treat others?
What does the future hold for the people of the world. The role of man in production is declining so rapidly, I have trouble even imagining tomorrow.
I think that will be my next article. Are people becoming superfluous?
When we build robots that build computers that design robots, what will man do?
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 1:05pm
OOPS! Just went off subject. Guess I have to delete myself!
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 1:12pm
Will we be SLAVES to our machines?
Are we already Slaves to our Machines?
Is Apple Computer Incorp. The forbidden fruit the bible warned us about?
Is mankind on the verge of going the way of the Dinosaur?
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 1:16pm
I must apologize to those I deleted for being off subject! It seems that there is a natural progression that takes place during a thoughtful discussion. History, present and future are all convoluted and can't be exclusive.
 
Ric Wells Added Mar 11, 2017 - 1:25pm
If we become slaves to technology is this the Black Snake that has been prophesied as the destruction of the human race. 
Tom C. Purcell Added Mar 11, 2017 - 1:31pm
I thought the black snake was Obama?
Ric Wells Added Mar 11, 2017 - 1:33pm
Nope supposed to be oil pipelines but I disagree with that theory. I think the misuse of technology could make slaves of us all. 
mark henry smith Added Mar 11, 2017 - 2:15pm
Expat, some asides that I find interesting.
 
Early humans (up until yesterday) thought the world revolved around them and thus morality was their decision. Christians are notoriously adept at finding the morality they like in passages of The Bible, because who the hell knows what it says. Right there in The New Testament it talks about treating your slaves like the peons they are.
 
We are all slaves of our nature and free to defy our nature at some degree of cost. The system of hiring labor to do manual tasks was not established in this country. First they took the natives and tried to make them slaves, but found the natives could just run off into the woods if they didn't like the deal. Blacks weren't as likely to do that.
 
And most slave owners treated their slaves as they would a child of that time. Do you know the most common reason slaves were beaten? For over sleeping and sleeping on the job. Some things never change. LOL
 
That last comment was from a history of sleep where the author contends that sleep has been made a privilege in the modern world. We're all slaves to sleep who wanna sleep with slaves. 
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 2:37pm
Tom.
I thought the black snake was Obama?
You must have seen him at the urinal!
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 2:39pm
Tom.
I thought the black snake was Obama?
You must have seen him at the urinal!
Or was he doing an Anthony Weiner selfie on Facebook?
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 2:43pm
Marko.
Early humans (up until yesterday) thought the world revolved around them and thus morality was their decision.
Those Early humans are now Progressive Democrats!
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 2:44pm
Ba Da Bing!
Janie Smith Added Mar 11, 2017 - 2:55pm
America would be a much different place if the promise of 40 acres and a mule had not been over-turned. 
 
Tom C. Purcell Added Mar 11, 2017 - 3:26pm
Not how I meant it, Charlie. 
 
But hey, Janie, I wish we could send of the Obamas and Clintons into yesterday with 40 acres and a mule... that's more than the U.S. has ever given me or my family as a multigenerational American with family lines going back to the 1600s, not to mention all of the sacrifices in war that my forefathers made, all of the blood they shed and years they sacrificed for a nation that instead, preferred to abandon them and permit our 50 acre family farm to be transformed into a golf course after my grandfather, as a WWII veteran was unable to maintain it...But I digress (I know, poor me).  My point is, Janie, that 40 acres and a mule sounds pretty nice, actually and you're right...coulda shoulda woulda.
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 5:19pm
Janie.
40 acres and a mule was a fair compensation for slavery in it's time. I'm not sure that 8 million mules were available for the 8 million freed slaves. Did that apply to children too young to work as well?
 
The alternative at the time was a return to Africa and formation of Liberia.
Since Slavery was a state issue, compensation would also be a state issue. And after the civil war most southern states were broke.
 
Such a plan would have bankrupted the South. Reconstruction was more important to the Politicians of the time. The North had spent most of their treasury on the war to end slavery, and couldn't pay for it either.
So the legacy of Slavery goes on.
When Blacks finally had a shot at fair treatment with the 1964 Civil Rights act, Women stole their opportunity by getting declared a minority, in spite of being a majority.
 
EXPAT Added Mar 11, 2017 - 5:31pm
Good point Tom. Poor whites both north and south were forced to work for almost nothing and had to compete with freed Blacks. White share croppers weren't compensated either, and barely survived.
Millions of itinerant workers both black and white roamed the nation willing to work for a meal.
Janie Smith Added Mar 11, 2017 - 8:05pm
I understand what you are saying Tom, but even as military you are paid something for your service, over the many generations of your family, certainly you have accumulated enough wages collectively to have bought your own 40 acres and a mule.  
 
It wasn't supposed to be a gift or charity, more like 245 years of back pay.  Instead, it was nothing.  
 
Expat, your right, it was easier to promise than it was to deliver.  Still, it should have been something. 
Tom C. Purcell Added Mar 11, 2017 - 9:44pm
Janie, exactly.  As far as I'm concerned the U.S. Government has a huge debt to actual American citizens and I'm only one.  But I don't feel like the feds owe 245 years of gratitude to my family and others like mine, just the years and value within that we sacrificed for the U.S.
Patrick Writes Added Mar 12, 2017 - 8:29pm
Best reason to study history is to learn from it. Best lesson is don't do stuff you know is wrong. To their eyes, the natives were a bunch of pagan savages. But still obviously human. Is it right to do bad things to a fellow human being? No. 
 
Mark Henry Smith is not completely right. Most of the New Testament (written to a Greek audience) tells slaves to obey their owners. But Philemon was a book about a runaway slave that became a follower of Paul who he was sending back to his master while urging the master to treat him kindly and consider freeing him. When taken in the perspective of 'the New Testament is all about obeying the law of the land', then it makes sense to tell slaves to obey because slavery was legal at that time. 
 
Washington owned hundreds of slaves but effectively freed them upon his death. (Some writings 
EXPAT Added Mar 12, 2017 - 11:57pm
Just one thing Patrick. Because we have a conscience, we must dehumanize those we kill or imprison. As you said Indigenous Americans were savages, so taking land was not impaired by their presence any more than driving away Deer, Bear or Buffalo.
Blacks weren't people they were ignorant animals, like monkeys or gorillas, that could be trained to do simple tasks, but nothing more! They resembled people, but had no cities or civilizations!
Patrick Writes Added Mar 13, 2017 - 12:27am
I didn't say anyone was 'savages' I meant to the eyes of 16th century Europeans, the natives were pagan savages. Partly because they're just coming out of the Middle Ages. 
Patrick Writes Added Mar 13, 2017 - 12:31am
Also, just one more time on a previous point. The Apostle Paul in the New Testament wrote the following (which passive aggressively implies Christians in the days of the Roman Empire should not be engaging in slavery). But as it usually happens, people from all walks of life convert, then slowly begin examining their life, then slowly stop doing sinful / questionable activities (which might be legal, but not moral).  
 
"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
Patrick Writes Added Mar 13, 2017 - 12:55am
For anyone who cares, the Europeans made a lot of mistakes in the New World. But there were glimmers of people trying to do the right thing in the background. The reason we know about many of the atrocities of Columbus and the first settlements of the New World was Spanish monks who were on the voyages were appalled by it and wrote about, denouncing it. They tried to help the natives--who were dying by the thousands in those early years. 


Their pleas reached the Spanish king who passed the Laws of Burgos in 1512 to demand fair treatment to the natives. 
 
The monks even worked out some better treatment at times that allowed priests to try to convert locals of new areas, which appears to have worked, and then intermarriage took place to get the mestizos which are the dominant people in most Latin American countries. 
Tom C. Purcell Added Mar 13, 2017 - 11:51am
"But there were glimmers of people trying to do the right thing in the background."
 
Very easy for you to say such a thing, and terribly misleading.  The majority were not necessarily people doing bad things, or being cruel or evil.  Invention is the mother of necessity.  Slaves were employed because they were necessary for the success of voyages and settlements.  Otherwise the Norse would have preferred to make room for cargo other than laborers on their longboats. 
 
To build the new world, slaves were necessary.  Slavery was part of life in virtually every country on this planet.  There was nothing taboo about slavery to our ancestors.  The stigma is modern.    
EXPAT Added Mar 13, 2017 - 12:04pm
Why the double talk Patrick?
You said correctly:
To their eyes, the natives were a bunch of pagan savages.

Then I quoted you correctly:
As you said Indigenous Americans were savages, 
 
Then you retort:
I didn't say anyone was 'savages' I meant to the eyes of 16th century Europeans, the natives were pagan savages

Aren't we saying the same thing? Why so defensive?
 
Origin

 Middle English: from Old French sauvage ‘wild’, from Latin silvaticus ‘of the woods’, from silva ‘a wood’.

  
Foremost among the atrocities connected with the religious conflict was the St. Batholomew's massacre (August 224, 1572) . . . The Parisian populace [was] inflamed by anti-Protestant preaching, and a general massacre ensued, devastating the Huguenot community of Paris. Bodies were stripped naked, mutilated, and thrown into the Seine. The massacres spread throughout France into the fall of 1572, spreading as far as Bordeaux [home of Montaigne]. ... Estimates of the total number of deaths vary widely; modern historians tend to accept the approximate number of ten thousand. ... Huguenots were not entirely innocent of massacres themselves
— Ullrich Langer, "Montaigne's political and religious context", in The Cambridge Companion to Montaigne
Patrick Writes Added Mar 13, 2017 - 7:54pm
I view it as, in Europe feudalism meant peasants were virtual slaves to the aristocracy. The worked the lands of the lord.
 
And the explorers wanted to set up systems similar to back home. And they wanted to be the lord of the manor. So they needed someone to work the land for them. Thus, they got rid of any pretenses of fairness and literally got slaves to do it. 
 
If these men were Christians, then they knew what they did was wrong in my opinion. 
 
I'm generally familiar with the quote above. France was Catholic. Huguenots were French Protestants. They were a persecuted minority. (Lots of religious wars broke out in Europe in the wake of the Reformation in the 1500's when countries quit the Catholic church. England was nearly invaded and taken over by Spain for the same reason--but the Spanish Armada was defeated by a hurricane.)
 
Huguenots eventually had to flee France altogether. There were a few waves of them immigrating to North America (apparently the original settlement of the Dutch on Manhatten island was composed of one of these waves of French Hugenots).  
Patrick Writes Added Mar 13, 2017 - 7:59pm
I'd disagree slaves were necessary. In the northern colony of Plymouth (and later New York), nor in British colonies in Canada (like Nova Scotia) there was no slavery and they thrived. They started as colonies for religious freedom though and weren't concerned with setting themselves up as lords of the manor to live large like in the Caribbean and the American south. 
 
Slaves weren't necessary in New York, Massachusetts, or Nova Scotia. 
EXPAT Added Mar 14, 2017 - 12:01am
Patrick. They had White European Bond Slaves! Later they had immagrants who worked for little, trying to save enough to "Go West young man."
EXPAT Added Mar 14, 2017 - 12:08am
Slaves in New England

The First African Immigrants
The first African immigrants to the North American colonies arrived in Virginia in 1619. The status of these newcomers differed little from that of the white indentured servants who far outnumbered them. By the end of the century, however, the black population had grown and colonial laws recognized a new sort of bondage that was based upon race: chattel slavery.
It has been estimated that African and African American slaves performed 222,505,049 hours of labor between 1619 and 1865 in what became the United States.
Slaves were brought into New England throughout the entire colonial period, and slavery existed throughout the colonies before the American Revolution. The majority of the slaves spent at least part of their lives enslaved, and were often bought as children in coastal cities. They accounted for as much as 30 percent of the population in South Kingston, Rhode Island, and were a significant presence in Boston (10%), New London (9%), and New York (7.2%).
 
Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island were the three New England states with the largest slave population. Rhode Island had the largest proportion of slaves. It is likely that by the mid 1700’s, there were as many as one African for every four white families in these three states.
http://www.medfordhistorical.org/medford-history/africa-to-medford/slaves-in-new-england/
Patrick Writes Added Mar 14, 2017 - 1:05am
EXPAT - I stand corrected. It appears the North (in general) didn't need as many slaves as the South and they were a smaller percentage of the population. But the northern colonies definitely had African slaves. It was only in the years after the American Revolution that the northern states began to outlaw slavery. 
EXPAT Added Mar 14, 2017 - 9:37pm
Patrick. I posted this piece because many people demonize the South for the Slave issue, and wanted to show that it was the norm of the day. There are many things that were accepted by society at the time, that later were deemed evil and the practitioners demonized.
If I could stop by the Slave auction and buy a Naomi Campbell to take home, I don't think I could resist on Moral grounds.
 
The fact that you were able to analyze forgotten information, and revise a belief, makes you a TRUE INTELLECTUAL and not an ideologue.