journal article Show Public Affairs Quarterly Vol. 18, No. 1 (Jan., 2004) , pp. 57-74 (18 pages) Published By: University of Illinois Press https://www.jstor.org/stable/40441370
Read and download Log in through your school or library Read Online (Free) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free. Get StartedAlready have an account? Log in Monthly Plan
Yearly Plan
Purchase a PDFPurchase this article for $18.00 USD. Purchase this issue for $88.00 USD. Go to Table of Contents. How does it work?
Journal Information Public Affairs Quarterly (PAQ) is devoted to current issues in social and political philosophy. It specializes in contributions that examine matters on the current agenda of public policy in light of philosophical reflections and assessments. The journal offers tightly focused philosophical case studies of particular issues in such areas as social and economic justice; public welfare; individual entitlements, rights, and duties; inheritance, taxation, and distributive justice in general; population policy, abortion, and euthanasia; environmental problems; science policy; the social and political status of women, senior citizens, minorities, and other social groups; arms control, war and deterrence; loyalty, duty, and patriotism; ethical issues in medicine, business, and the professions; criminality, criminal justice, and punishment; and similar topics. Publisher Information The University of Illinois Press is one of the leading publishers of humanities and social sciences journals in the country. Founded in 1918, the Press publishes more than 40 journals representing 18 societies, along with more than 100 new books annually. Our publication program covers a wide range of disciplines including psychology, philosophy, Black studies, women's studies, cultural studies, music, immigration, and more. Current issues are available through the Scholarly Publishing Collective. The Press is a founding member of the Association of University Presses. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. The status of blacks in Virginia slowly changed over the last half of the 17th century. The black indentured servant, with his hope of freedom, was increasingly being replaced by the black slave. In 1705, the Virginia General Assembly removed any lingering uncertainty about this terrible transformation; it made a declaration that would seal the fate of African Americans for generations to come... "All servants imported and brought into the Country...who were not Christians in their native Country...shall be accounted and be slaves. All Negro, mulatto and Indian slaves within this dominion...shall be held to be real estate. If any slave resist his master...correcting such slave, and shall happen to be killed in such correction...the master shall be free of all punishment...as if such accident never happened." The code, which would also serve as a model for other colonies, went even further. The law imposed harsh physical punishments, since enslaved persons who did not own property could not be required to pay fines. It stated that slaves needed written permission to leave their plantation, that slaves found guilty of murder or rape would be hanged, that for robbing or any other major offence, the slave would receive sixty lashes and be placed in stocks, where his or her ears would be cut off, and that for minor offences, such as associating with whites, slaves would be whipped, branded, or maimed. For the 17th century slave in Virginia, disputes with a master could be brought before a court for judgement. With the slave codes of 1705, this no longer was the case. A slave owner who sought to break the most rebellious of slaves could now do so, knowing any punishment he inflicted, including death, would not result in even the slightest reprimand.
 What was the resistance to slavery?"Day-to-day resistance" was the most common form of opposition to slavery. Breaking tools, feigning illness, staging slowdowns, and committing acts of arson and sabotage--all were forms of resistance and expression of slaves' alienation from their masters. Running away was another form of resistance.
What was the most common form of resistance by slaves?The most common form of overt resistance was flight. As early as 1640, slaves in Maryland and Virginia absconded from their enslavement, a trend that would grow into the thousands, and, eventually, tens of thousands by the time of the Civil War.
What did slaves do in the 18th century?In the 17th and 18th centuries, enslaved Africans worked mainly on the tobacco, rice and indigo plantations of the southern coast, from the Chesapeake Bay colonies of Maryland and Virginia south to Georgia.
How did slaves rebel or resist their imprisonment?Slave rebellions were not uncommon experiences on slave ships. The slaves rebelled or resisted their imprisonment by refusing to eat, drowning themselves, and by organizing and carrying out bloody, violent rebellions.
|
