A place for friends to meet... with reflections on politics, history, art, music, books, morals, manners, and matters of faith.
A blog by Elena Maria Vidal.
A haunting 150-year-old photo found in a North Carolina attic shows a young black child named John, barefoot and wearing ragged clothes, perched on a barrel next to another unidentified young boy.
Art historians believe it's an extremely rare Civil War-era photograph of children who were either slaves at the time or recently emancipated.
The photo, which may have been taken in the early 1860s, was a testament to a dark part of American history, said Will Stapp, a photographic historian and founding curator of the National Portrait Gallery's photographs department at the Smithsonian Institution.
"It's a very difficult and poignant piece of American history," he said. "What you are looking at when you look at this photo are two boys who were victims of that history."
I grew up in the South, and even up to the mid 20th Century the poor white children did not look any better than the black children in this photo. Children did not wear shoes except the rich, and possibly to church if one owned a pair. There was little to eat, no education and no electricity or running water in the rural areas, no matter what color one was.
That's a good point. I have some pictures of my white grandfather picking cotton in the early 1020's in Alabama. They went barefoot all the time and lived exactly as you describe.
Having grown up in the south I have always maintained that it would have been better for the large land owners to hire poor local people rather than import slaves. In the long run it would have cost less, (in more ways than money). Buying and owning slaves was not a cheap proposition, besides being a barbaric practice. But there was money to be made in the slave trade, and that is the bottom line for many people no matter who suffers.
Courteous comments are welcome. If a comment is not published, it may be due to a technical error. At any rate, do not take offense; it is nothing personal. Slanderous comments will not be published. Anonymity may be tolerated, but politeness is required.
I would like to respond to every comment but my schedule renders it impossible to do so. Please know that I appreciate those who take the time to share their thoughts.
I grew up in the South, and even up to the mid 20th Century the poor white children did not look any better than the black children in this photo. Children did not wear shoes except the rich, and possibly to church if one owned a pair. There was little to eat, no education and no electricity or running water in the rural areas, no matter what color one was.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point. I have some pictures of my white grandfather picking cotton in the early 1020's in Alabama. They went barefoot all the time and lived exactly as you describe.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand let's not sugar coat slavery.
ReplyDeleteHardly. I think that picture speaks louder than a thousand words.
ReplyDeleteHaving grown up in the south I have always maintained that it would have been better for the large land owners to hire poor local people rather than import slaves. In the long run it would have cost less, (in more ways than money). Buying and owning slaves was not a cheap proposition, besides being a barbaric practice. But there was money to be made in the slave trade, and that is the bottom line for many people no matter who suffers.
ReplyDeleteThe idea that human beings are still being bought and sold in many parts of the world makes me ill.
ReplyDelete