When did slaves first arrive in North American? And no, it was not 1619
I pose the headline question for a reason. It is to correct the common belief that it was in the year 1619 in what is now Hampton, Virginia that the first African slaves arrived in the on what would become American soil. President Biden was recently in Angola, Africa to memorialize that date — and the first shipment of slaves sailing out of that nation for the American colonies.
There are three things wrong with that memorial celebration. That is not the date the first slaves arrived in the Americas – or on the North American continent that would later become the United States. Virginia was not the first location where slaves arrived. And they did not uniquely originate from Angola.
The first slaves arrived on the North American continent almost 100 years earlier — in 1526. They arrived in what is now South Carolina. They were brought to what was then the Spanish colony of San Miguel de Gualdape.
Angola was only one of several locations providing slaves – and not a significant source for the Spanish. Slaves were obtained from a much larger region of Africa that now encompasses Senegal, Zambia, Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (formerly Zaire) and other locations.
In preparing for my book, “Who Put Blacks in That PLACE. The long sad history of the Democratic party’s oppression of Black Americans … to this day,” I researched the Black experience in North America from the time of the FIRST arrival of slaves to today. I was familiar with the initial arrival in 1526.
That is why I winced when Biden celebrated the date as 1619 as the first shipment of slaves to North America. I suspect he got his misinformation from the recent “Project 1619” produced by Nikole Hannah-Jones, a writer for The New York Times Magazine.
There is a reason why Hannah-Jones got the date wrong. Not a good one, in my judgment, but a reason. She was not writing about the first slaves to set foot on what would become the United States – although that is the perception most folks have thanks to Project 1619. Hannah-Jones was tracing the Black experience from the first to arrive AT AN ENGLISH COLONY. The highly controversial Project 1619 left out almost one hundred years of Black history – including a number of noteworthy events.
The first slave uprising in North America occurred shortly after the slaves arrived in 1526. The recently arrived slaves set fire to their homes and escaped to integrate with Native American tribes – a practice that would occur in other areas in later years. It explains why so many Black Americans today have Native American in their DNA.
I never understood why 1619 took historic precedence over the actual date when slaves were brought to what is now the United States. And why an English colony was more meaningful than the Spanish colony. Seems to me that the actual FIRST is the most significant date. And why write off 100 years of Black history?
In fact, African slavery was flourishing throughout South America and the Caribbean before they arrived in the English colony of Virgina in 1619. Slaves had first arrived in Brazil in 1533. And the vast majority of slaves arriving in the New World in 1619 went to South America and the Caribbean.
In trying to figure out the reason why Hannah-Jones and the academic world see greater significance with 1619 than 1526, I can only assume that there is an undercurrent of anti-Anglo-ism. It makes the bad guys the White Europeans—and distracts attention from the role of the Spanish. In today’s culture, Latinos are considered to be people of color by the left-wing establishment (even though a majority of Latinos consider themselves to be – and are – White). Perhaps there is another explanation for cherry picking 1619, but I have no idea what it might be.
We may have travelled too far down this rabbit hole. But the intentional misdating of the arrival of the first slaves in what is now the United States raises questions. It only add to the controversy that surrounds Project 1619 in its entirety.
So, there ‘tis.
For what it’s worth, I remember being taught that slavery in the US began in the year 1619, from a grade school history class fifty years ago. Makes me wonder about the accuracy of so many other things with which I was indoctrinated, even then.
reward: I agree. Question all. Including Horist.
Reward:
Also, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Most important:
Trust, but verify.
Verification follows.
Never question Horist. He is always right.
Thanks Tim.
The author “winced” over 1619; surely you jest? And I am not calling you Shirley, I cannot read your mind. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. This discussion is decades old. In the same vein that we know Columbus did not discover America, yet Columbus Day is still on the calendar. Or that Biden won the 2020 election, heh, heh. Fact is, we just don’t care this much and every once in a while, experts more scholarly on the topic than the author exhume the earlier arrivals. Then then discussion over servant, indentured servant or slave as descriptor comes to mind. I prefer “workers without pay.”
“When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.” I don’t agree with this quote from The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, and love discovering the true facts, but don’t get hung up over what is printed. And I certainly don’t need to impune the lame duck Biden only six weeks before his retirement. That’s Horist. Win – lose. All for a book plug. Who care re: 1500’s, 1600’s, when we know it all started at Oak Island where all North American white and black cultures began. Tis the Templars, and not Simon.
As a real historian, Henry Louis Gates Jr. showed Juan Garrido as the first documented black person to arrive in what would become the U.S. with Juan Ponce de León in search of the Fountain of Youth in 1513, and they ended up in present-day Florida, around St. Augustine. Juan was free, known as “Handsome John” and not a slave, but black is black….
Then, as the author stated, in 1526, a Spanish expedition to present-day South Carolina was thwarted when the enslaved Africans aboard resisted. They rebelled and effectively destroyed the Spanish settlers’ ability to sustain the settlement, which they abandoned a year later. Does it count if they destroyed their owners and were free? Of course it does, and it provides a message how Americans should use violence to remain free.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/misguided-focus-1619-beginning-slavery-us-damages-our-understanding-american-history-180964873/
Then, in 1565, the Spanish brought enslaved Africans to present-day St. Augustine, Fla., the first European settlement in what’s now the continental U.S.
The author uses 1526 to conclude: “It explains why so many Black Americans today have Native American in their DNA.” You do have to be kidding, right? How about “starting the trend of mixed black indigenous Americans” since you don’t have a clue how many originate from South Carolina. Perhaps Juan Garrido was very fertile. Or maybe the folks in St. Augustine, or maybe just Blacks all over America after 1500. FYI, the author is describing .8% as “so many.”
The real reason the author “winces” at Biden mainstream comments: “In preparing for my book, “Who Put Blacks in That PLACE. The long sad history of the Democratic party’s oppression of Black Americans … to this day,” I researched the Black experience in North America from the time of the FIRST arrival of slaves to today. I was familiar with the initial arrival in 1526. “ Hey, he left out Democrats……..missing a beat there that he does not blame Democrats for things 1526. Slow book sales? Still no reviews but used copies abound.
I didn’t see any mention of the British bringing the Irish Prisoners over to North America as White Slaves around 1609, I believe!
1610 to 1676 , tween 50-100k Scottish and Irish prisoners brought to America where they were sold as indentured servants. Others came as indentured servants and perhaps 50-60% of American immigrants were indentured servants.
I looked.
You may think Larry is plugging his book, but you are plugging you! Every single time, you blow up whatever anyone says except for Tom and one other person. You want everyone to think of you as the great historian or the only one who is the Professor of Everything. All people are precious, but you are totally biased in every aspect of any subject. You deliberately demean all of us here on PBP, of course with the exception of your “friends”. Why and how do you think you are above everyone else? It is beginning to look like you really are Kazarian or Jesuit. You leave all of us no other course but to see what I just wrote. Let us know when and if you decide to become human, Mr. God!
Can’t argue with that af. You always attack the person because you are ineffectual at arguing the facts.
He wrote a story that highlights his book with a link to Amazon from a guy who no links. That is a fact, Jack. .
If you want to discuss the issues, do. If you continue to harass and harangue, talk to the hand, not me.
See? Frank, there you go again. Demeaning me, attacking me for telling what I think, what I feel. You will NOT stop me from talking no matter what BS you spew! I noticed that some others are now going after you, too for your mis and disinformation (for the most part) as you do sometimes tell the truth which isn’t often Good for them. It’s about time! Go ahead, we are all waiting for your next rant about me. What is your next piece of filth about me going to be? Hmmm, I think I can guess. You definitely are biased! When are you going to write your next book here on PBP that takes a long to read?
I noted you only have personal attacks and no real content. If that demeans you, stop.
If you claim disinformation or misinformation, be specific. Just saying it happens is not evidence.
Okay, Mr. God, but can you really have it your way? Frankie, Frank, Frank! Little baby. Can’t take any criticism at all. I I, I, Me, Me, Me – mine, mine, mine! That fits you to a tee and then some. Is that how dangerous you are? Bully, bully, bully! That is you too! When are you going to graduate Pre K?
Mr. God? Not bloody likely. Reminds me of a funny story…. I’m in LA, speaking at a show at the LA convention center, I usually do 100-200 and this one is 600 and I am nervous. When this happens, I tend to go into what I call, “the tube,” where I lose peripheral vision and focus tube-like, straight ahead. As I leave dinner with the boss, she recognizes folks, pulls over to a table, I follow and then we leave. I can remember no one at the table. I was “in the tube,” big time and just want to go to my room and practice.
Next day, I am a basket of nerves, but, as is my way, I hit the stage early to familiarize myself, as they are doing sound and light checks. I like to feel the stage, get acclimated, as I am a speaker who moves around a lot. As I walk down the darkened aisle, spots turning on and off, my nerves are peaking, it’s so big, as I hear a disembodied voice from the speakers above: “Frank……Frank Danger…..” I think, “yes, God,” because who else who know me. Turns out one of the guys from the night before was the moderator and he’s doing the same thing……
Later we start the show, he reads my bio, and concludes: wow, that’s just incredible, as if unbelievable. Now I am about to hit the stage after that…. Funny guy. Three of us, the first two basically tee off on me because I am the Fortune 100, the 800lb gorilla. Think they are VPs from Cisco and Siemens. But they attacked me in such a way that I could easily turn one against the other, with their own words, when I hit the stage. Kinda like: he said that, it’s great, we can do that. And the other guy said this, even better, we can do this. But we also do this that they cannot. Worked out and all nerves forgotten when I hit the stage. But imaging 600 people naked is not a good relaxer, honest. Keep that tool in the toolbox. And yes, “God” got me good. I appreciate a poke delivered well. Think he was one of the few that could see my nerves. Most think the opposite for “God know” reason. It’s a gift, I guess.
All nerves gone once I hit the stage, as usual, and the 5lbs lost over 24 hours is always a good thing. So yes, AF, there is a God, it’s not me, but it might be this guy, and if so, God does have a miraculous sense of humor.
Assuming other people’s intentions is, as you Larry have stated in previous commentaries, most often presumptuous and unreliable. If the subject of whom the assumption is being made is you, then the assumption is especially off target your estimation. The same is true in every other person’s case.
Your statement indicating a 100 year gap between dates when slavery first came to what is now the USA and that Black people had come from more than one area in Africa may find traction if you are offering this information in an objective fact correction. In that Black History as taught currently could be in error and require the inclusion of the date you indicate has merit in and of itself without the addition of political innuendo.
The point you want to have hit home in the reader’s take in this article is not primarily a date correction or some clearing up of the historical record for that period. For there can be no doubt and mystery surrounding your intention when writing the book and this commentary. The left and the Democratic Party are disparaged in the text of both. And a reader of your book and this article do not need mind readers. Your anti-left opinions have been well documented by your own hand.
Of course, there’s no crime in writing anti-left comments. It your stock in trade political journalism for which you have made a reputation.
However, the reader of one of your politically slanted opinion commentaries understands clear from whence this particular piece of Horist’s has come. After all, this is PBP?.
People who shop for books probably are not familiar with your work, your perspective on life, and your politics’ particularly conservative right wing bent. Doubtful that PBP may be on their website radar.
Therefore, if they purchase your book and if it’s opened for reading. What are they reading?
Are they reading about historically true accounts and facts available in generally accepted sources?
Questions arises, given your writing’s reputation drawn from your history writing opinion commentaries’ with a political right persuasion. You cannot possibly author a book length work that can be an objectively critical documentation containing facts that relate a true happening of events that occurred in the correct time sequence and are set in their proper historical context?
All works of writing are categorized as factual truth or fictional invention. The author of either sets out with a goal. However, the author writing their book advertised as the factual truth about a specific subject has the expectation of the truth from the reader. The slightest hint of personal opinion appearing in the text voids the author’s veracity.
Politics is by nature the practice of deception in its varying degrees and adaptations. An author who sets to create fiction will frame the work in its characterization as a fictional work and give the appropriate disclaimers
Your work, on the other hand, you advertise as a book that states only true facts.
Your subject for the book is naturally conducive to political bias. Truth and facts objectively considered can reveal both comfortable truths or uncomfortable realities. How the writer frames those facts produced from research on the specific subject is a choice. Relate the facts objectively and follow where they lead. The author’s personal opinion always put aside.
Should the writer’s objective for the book be the route of instructive change in an effort to clarify the prevailing view on a particular subject. The rules remain as is. Only true historical facts are the expected base for making proof statements in telling the subject as something true.
Knowing you know about a subject without establishing authentication proof does not fly. Opinion commentary can go only as far as the readers believe the writer’s authoritative accuracy and have faith in his/her writings honesty.
Lacking substantive proof or a reader’s faith in a writers genuine authority opinion based commentary is suspect and maybe only received as information.
A book on Black people’s place in society and who was and is responsible for where that place came to be in US culture cannot be the definitive text on this particular subject matter. Your opus on the subject will take its place in the line that all other books on the subject are standing in.