Great Statements; the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen

Dr Darren Reid of the University of Dundee is running an series of seminars over Skype on Atlantic History and in his fifth (and final) seminar he has asked us to look at two important documents and compare them.

These two documents have many similarities in both style and content and were written fairly closely together. They say similar things in similar ways. But I wonder if there are as many differences as there are similarities between the Declaration of Independence (July 1776) and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (August 1789). 

The second document which I shall look at is the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen

The Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen

You can see the entirety of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen online and, as such, it is not my intention to transcribe the entire document in this blog post, presenting choice sections in their entirety.

The opening paragraph is very concise, summarising all of the content of the American Declaration of Independence. It presents the rights of the authors to speak for the French people (the "Representatives of the French people, organized in National Assembly"), offers that unalienable rights are being denied by a corrupt government ("considering that ignorance, forgetfulness, or contempt of the rights of man are the sole causes of public miseries and the corruption of governments"), and then submits that the only purpose of government is for the benefit of the people governed.

The Declaration then lays out, clearly, the rights enjoyed by the citizens of France;

"In consequence, the National Assembly recognizes and declares, in the presence and under the auspices of the Supreme Being, the following rights of man and citizen" 

The rights of man and citizen

Following this declaration there are 17 articles, many of them short and to the point. The first article, indeed, is one such and it clearly sets out what is important to the people of France (as embodied by the "Representatives of the French people, organized in National Assembly"). It states that;

"Men are born free and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions can be based only on public utility"

Perhaps the most important of the 17 articles in terms of the Declaration is the second one. This states clearly and simply the unalienable rights which should be enjoyed by the people of France. They are;

"The aim of every political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man. These rights are liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression."

These rights are further defined, two of them (liberty and property) explicitly and the other two by a reasonable interpretation of other of the articles. The two relating to liberty and property are;

"Liberty consists in the power to do anything that does not injure others; accordingly, the exercise of the rights of each man has no limits except those that secure the enjoyment of these same rights to the other members of society. These limits can be determined only by law. 

"Property being a sacred to and inviolable right, no one can be deprived of it, unless illegally established public necessity evidently demands it, under the condition of a just and prior indemnity."

In conclusion then

I believe it is important to recognise that the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen manages to clearly define its intent and then present itself in a simple and easy to understand form. Someone without lettering and without understanding of reasoning, rhetoric and legal argument would be able to understand it.

That simplicity and clarity does come with a price - the document is a little dry, and is (perhaps) lacking in emotion and isn't very stirring. Perhaps that is a strength rather than a weakness - rather than relying upon powerful emotive language it presents a simple and easily understood point and allows the strength of that point to show its value.

Great Statements; the Declaration of Independence

Dr Darren Reid of the University of Dundee is running an series of seminars over Skype on Atlantic History and in his fifth (and final) seminar he has asked us to look at two important documents and compare them.

These two documents have many similarities in both style and content and were written fairly closely together. They say similar things in similar ways. But I wonder if there are as many differences as there are similarities between the Declaration of Independence (July 1776) and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (August 1789). 

The first document which I shall look at is the Declaration of Independence.

The Declaration of Independence

Rather than go into a great deal of detail as to the content of the Declaration of Independence, rather than presenting the text here as a whole I intend to summarise it and then present one section in more detail. You can view the entire document online, and I would recommend doing so (should you be so inclined).

The opening paragraph attempts to offer justification for the document, explaining why those who put their signature to the document thought it was right to do so. 

The second paragraph, starts with these famous words: 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..."

It then goes on to examine what rights are (or should be) afforded to all people, and what steps should be taken when they are not. I will come back to this section in a short while.

The third paragraph would perhaps be more properly be shown as a bullet pointed list in a modern document but lists a long and emotive series of wrongs done to the fine people of the 13 colonies by order of King George III (or, perhaps, more properly by his government). This is a long list with 27 separate items, starting and ending with:

"He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good...  

"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."

Following this the writers of the document assure the reader that they have done all in their power to seek relief from the injustices listed, something that has clearly demonstrated that the rule of George III is unsuitable in the extreme.

"In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."

In the penultimate paragraph the declaration lists what steps have been taken to appeal to the British people, to warn them and to appeal to them, and noting that their words have fallen upon deaf ears. The final paragraph then states clearly that the political and legal relationship between the 13 colonies and Great Britain are no longer, that the two are now and forevermore separate, and that the United States of America is born.

Self-evident truths

Whilst the entirety of the Declaration of Independence is powerful with words well-chosen to ring through the centuries, written for the world and for history by educated and intelligent men, the second paragraph of the document has surely some of the most potent and well known words ever written in English.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

I shall break this important paragraph down further, smaller sections.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

 The authors of the Declaration of Independence clearly present the rights of man, these "unalienable Rights", as the basis of their moral right to separate the 13 Colonies from Great Britain. "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Powerful, emotive, stuff indeed.

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Next the authors state the case that government should exist for the people rather than the people existing to be governed. This continues in the next part of this second paragraph.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

In fact that next section goes further, outlining the duty of a citizen to overthrow an oppressive government, a government which does not exist for the benefit of those it governs but for its own benefit.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

Finally the authors present the end of the circle - that the purpose of government is to help those it governs enjoy these unalienable Rights but that when it does not do this, when instead it oppresses its people and prevents these universal rights from being employed it is then the duty of a citizen to resist and to oppose the oppressive government (in this case "The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States")

In conclusion then

The Declaration of Independence is a very well written and emotive piece which still bears a great deal of power many years after it was signed. It's a public document, designed to sway public opinion. It's a very fine example of propaganda and despite slightly archaic language can still stir the blood of someone who is, frankly, disinclined towards republicanism.

It may well be argued that the most important part of the entire document is where the (presumably) honest feelings of the authors are represented as they present what are felt to be the underlying rights of man, the founding principles of the new nation of the United States of America;

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Can there be a single more powerful, more important, or better known sentence written in the English language? Even as a non-American I know it, as do countless others across the globe. It's echoes ring through the corridors of history, and long may they do so.

Syllabub; the breath of angels

The author sampling a marigold tart
Picture taken at Aston Hall, 2011

Syllabub is a decadent and glorious foodstuff, and one that few people believe goes well with gammon ham, shropshire biscuit (a shortbread), good cheese and red fruits but the combination is truly heavenly. Equally eaten from fresh rosemary it's very fresh and refreshing.

A syllabub in a fine dish or bowl makes a great (and spectacular) pudding for a modern dinner party with a historical edge, or served in individual bowls or glasses (a wine glass is very good) - decorate with some cinnamon or nutmeg (if you like such things) or with some finely grated lemon rind and with fresh rosemary.

Trust me - I'm a fat man who knows food!

There are many good recipes on the internet for such foodstuffs, historicfood.com is a very fine website and their page on syllabubs is very worth while, though the BBC food website has some fine ideas too!

I am sometimes asked to produce foods for splendid Tudor or Stuart feasts (most often for smaller regimental events as part of Sir William Pennyman's Regiment of Foote, part of the English Civil War Society) we usually present a high status table as the common perception is that bread, cheese and pottage isn't very nice - though it's not true as a future blog post will demonstrate).

Here then is an evolution of a syllabub, which is the one I use, and which came from a dear friend of mine (the transcription is his, and the experimentations of the original recipe to discover how best to make this marvellous dish represent the sort of sacrifices which he is prepared to make for knowledge!)

The Original Recipe; a 17th Century delight

Recipe taken from Sir Kenelm Digby's The Closet of Sir Kenelm Digby Knight Opened, p115-116

My Lady Middlesex makes Syllabubs for little Glasses with spouts, thus. Take 3 pints of sweet Cream, one of quick white wine (or Rhenish), and a good wine glassful (better the 1/4 of a pint) of Sack: mingle with them about three quarters of a pound of fine Sugar in Powder. Beat all these together with a whisk, till all appeareth converted into froth. Then pour it into your little Syllabub-glasses, and let them stand all night. The next day the Curd will be thick and firm above, and the drink clear under it. I conceive it may do well, to put into each glass (when you pour the liquor into it) a sprig of Rosemary a little bruised, or a little Limon-peel, or some such thing to quicken the taste; or use Amber-sugar, or spirit of Cinnamon, or of Lignum-Cassiæ; or Nutmegs, or Mace, or Cloves, a very little.

Modern  Recipe; a transcription of the above

Ingredients:

400ml double cream
100ml dry white wine (a Riesling would be good, according to the original recipe)
50ml sack (traditionally this was Madeira, but any fortified wine such as sherry, marsala or port will also work)
50g caster sugar
grated rind of half a lemon
ground cinnamon to decorate
caster sugar for dusting

Method:

Stir together the white wine, sack, caster sugar and lemon rind until all the sugar has dissolved. Stirring with a whisk blend in the cream and then whip lightly until the mixture becomes slightly bubbly. Pour the mixture into half a dozen large wine glasses. If you wish you can decorate with a slice of lemon at this point. Place in the fridge and serve cold sprinkled with a little nutmeg and a dusting of caster sugar.

Cheating Recipe; a very quick luxury

Even easier method – add some brandy or whatever to some double cream and whip it. Job done.

Searching for the littlest minesweeper

During the Second World War my grandfather served in the Royal Navy on minesweepers. He has talked with me somewhat about his life (he signed on aged 17 and served until 1948), about the various actions he was part of, of being torpedoed at Dunkirk, working with the Mediterranean fleet, escorting convoys to Russia, even after the war patrolling off the coast of Israel, intercepting and escorting refugees to Cyprus.

He talks regularly of his last ship, and the adventure that was its final journey as a Royal Naval ship, HMS Alphios (or Alfios).

The Alphios had a curious history, and was certainly an interesting ship. The smallest ship my grandfather served on, with but two officers and him as the senior warrant officer, the bridge wasn’t covered and there were very few comforts. Some of his descriptions of the journey through heavy African seas is enough to make me never want to set foot on a ship again!

Macquarie to Alphios; whaler to minesweeper

The ship that my grandfather served on, HMS Alphios, was not originally known by that name. In fact the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich had this to say about it:

“This must be the Norwegian whaler John Williamson ex Southern Breeze ex Viking III ex Viking ex Macquarie. She was owned by the Union Whaling Co Ltd (managed by A E Larsen) and operated in South African waters. 

“The John Williamson was hired by the Admiralty for use as a minesweeper in 1941. She was lent to the Greek navy and named Alphios in the period 1943-47. She was wrecked off Durban in July 1948”

This does seem right from what my grandfather recalls; he knew that the ship was originally a whaler (one of the smaller vessels which operated as a hunter – one of a pack of hounds to harry the whale) with an explosive harpoon mounted in the bow. He also knew that it was originally Norwegian, and that it was owned by the South African government (to whom they were delivering it) and had been in service with the Greek Navy (from whom they obtained it, apparently with a lot of work to be made shipshape and ready for the use of the Royal Navy!).

The journey to deliver the Alphios to Durban took more than 5 months. Supplies were often scarce as the impressive logistical machine that existed by the end of the war had been quickly dismantled. My grandfather talks of regular fishing by line from the stern, of sweeping up flying fish who’d found themselves on the deck, and of being regularly followed by sharks (especially concerning in bad weather when parts of the deck would be submerged by waves).

My grandfather talked about how seaworthy the Alphios wasn't, recalling one story where they were in Algiers for resupply where he had traded some freshly cooked chips for labour (polishing of boots in this case) from one of the native orphans. When the lad asked where he was going, and was told South Africa, he laughed, sure it was a joke.The fact the ship sank the year after it was safely delivered may well suggest this was not an unreasonable reaction!

The search...

My grandfather has a small collection of photographs of the ships he served on, usually taken by eager amateurs as ships came into port. The only one that is missing is the last one. The Alphios was small, unimpressive, perhaps unworthy of film - and the war was over by the time he was aboard.

I'm trying to find an image of the Alphios for my grandfather. The National Maritime Museum at Greenwich doesn't have one (and in fact the curator noted that "in general, requisitioned vessels of this kind are poorly represented in museum archives"), though does note that:

"We do have some relevant documents in the wreck section of our Lloyd's Survey Reports (box W/1034). There are plans showing midship section and boiler attached to the survey documents."

My intention is to continue to find out more information (and indeed a recent cry for help on Twitter did lead to a new avenue of information, see first posting below), but if anyone happens to know more, or have any information or suggestions that might help, or has a picture of the Alphios I would love to hear from you!

Other nooks of the net

I have found some references to the Alphios (more commonly the Alfios, which seems to be the spelling used by the Hellenic Navy). 

This posting to my Ship Forum says the following:

BUSEN 11, 255 or 279 grt, 10 kts, built 1931 (launch 4.3.31, compl. 6.10.31) by Nylands Verksted at Oslo, yard no. 314, 2 x 20 mm & 2 MG, crew of 20, was requisitioned by the Royal Navy in Oct. 1941 and renamed SNOWDRIFT, together with BUSEN 6, 263 grt built 1925 (renamed RAINSTORM) and BUSEN 7, 264 grt built 1926 (renamed SILHOUETTE). She was given pennant no. FY.1842. The requisition did probably take place in South Africa, as with many other whalecatchers based there, and SNOWDRIFT was then taken to the Mediterranean to serve as a minesweeper, again with other similar vessels. She was transferred to the Royal Hellenic Navy on 18.7.1943 as PINIOS together with FY.1854 SILHOUETTE (as ACHELOOS), TRANSVAALIA (as EVROTAS), R.N.N. FY.189 NOBLE NORA (as SPERCHIOS), and R.N.N. FY.308 JOHN WILLIAMSON (as ALFIOS): five whalers, the last three of 160 grt built in 1912 by Smith's Dock at South Bank, all to be used for mine-sweeping operations in Greek waters. PINIOS was mined and lost on 24 Oct. 1945 while sweeping a minefield off Preveza (Epyrus), with the loss of 22 members of her crew and only one survivor.

The Hellenic Navy "History" page has some information:

b. In July and August 1943 five (5) Norwegian "WHALEP" class ex Norwegian whalers granted, iron made, built 1939, 255 metric tons of displacement, 10 knots speed, armed with two (2) machine guns of 20mm). These were named "ALFIOS" - "ACHELOOS" - "EVROTAS" - "PINIOS" - "SPERCHEIOS".

...The eight (8) MS's "BYMS" type were stationed at Alexandria , while the "ALFIOS" type and the old sailing vessels were stationed at the Naval Bases of Beirut and Ammohostos.

There are two entries on Navypedia.org, one for the Royal Norwegian Navy and the other for the Hellenic Navy. The information presented is very similar, here an excerpt from the Hellenic Navy entry:

Ship project history: Aliakmon and three following ships were former British trawlers of Mersey class built in 1925-1926. In 1938 they were purchased by Hellenic Navy and converted to minesweepers-minelayers. Originally had designations Y1-4. Alfios and four following ships were former Norwegian trawlers, since Second World War beginning armed and commissioned by Royal Navy. In July-September, 1943 they were transferred to Greece and converted to minesweepers.

Oceania!, a universal maritime history wiki primarily dedicated to sailing merchant ships mainly for the period 1500-1939, has a small entry:

ALFIOS (FY 308) (../..12; 43 ex hol. “John Williamson”, 41 ex br. bzn, ex „Southern Breeze”, ex „Viking III”, ex „Viking”, ex „Macquarrie”; rekw. 2.41; 8.47: zwrot)

Runaway records: comparing and contemplating

Dr Darren Reid of the University of Dundee is running an series of seminars over Skype on Atlantic History and, as part of this, I was asked to write these posts. Dr Reid posed a simple question; “what do these runaway records tell us about the past?” with a variety of options for how it might be taken, directions to explore, but with an invitation to explore as interest directed.

As such I have selected, more or less at random, two of the earliest advertisements from the Virginia Gazette one for a female servant (Anne Harmon) and one for a pair of nameless black slaves. Both were published in October 1730 and were within the first few advertisements available to me.

I have examined the first piece, which told of Anne Harmon, an indentured Englishwoman who fled from Essex County (Virginia) in September of 1730, and then the second which revealed the plight of a pair of black men who were enslaved and who fled from Caroline County (Virginia) around August of the same year.

The information in each was interesting, revealing something of the three people who ran and rather more of the things which were considered important about them by those who had power over them (John Corries in the case of Ms Harmon and Peyton Smith for the two men), and also the sort of thing which would be considered relevant to allow people to identify the runaways.

Comparing the two advertisements it is quite clear that there is more attention to detail in the case of Ms Harmon, a fairly complete (if brief) description of the lady and of her clothes:

"...an English Servant Woman, named Anne Harmon, aged about 20, of a middle Stature, well featur'd, and has black Hair and Eyes: She had on, when she went away, a Cotton Gown and Petticoat, strip'd with red and Blue; and an English Straw Hat, lin'd with White Callico"

Balanced against that description it is clear that the two black men do not enjoy such detailed descriptions of either themselves or their clothing:

"Two new Negro men, of a middle Stature; one of them of a yellow Complexion, with a Scar on the Top of his Head. The other a black Fellow; and they took with them several Linen Cloths, and Cotton Frocks, without Sleeves, which they had when I bought them" 

It is entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that the reason for this lack of detail for the two men when compared to the young lady is due to familiarity. They are described as being “Two new Negro men”, which suggests they have recently come into workforce of Mr Smith, and if they were part of even a moderate workforce he might not have paid particular attention to them as individuals to be able to describe them.

Equally likely though is that a pair of black men would be obviously out of place and would come under scrutiny and suspicion more than a young white woman, there would be few places they could hope to go – there would be little opportunity to leave the country and return to Africa (if that were where they originated from) whereas Ms Harmon, if she had coin, could conceivably return to England or travel to another town or colony where she might find work or a future.

There is more detail still in the advertisement seeking Ms Harmon of when she was found to be missing, that she “RAN away, on the 17th of September last” where the two men are noted simply as having “RAN away, about the middle of August last”. From this we can see that Ms Harmon is sought by Mr Corries after a very short time (the advertisement runs from Friday, September 24, to Friday, October 1, 1736, which is a week after her absence is noted) whereas Mr Smith has allowed a significantly longer time before placing a public appeal (the advertisement there runs from Friday, October 15, to Friday, October 22, 1736), allowing some two months to pass.

Mr Smith may have had good reason for his delay; placing the advertisement would not be free and may have other knock-on effects, alerting his neighbours to problems within the business and workforce. It may equally well be that he determined the pair of men would be unable to get very far and that spreading the word through Caroline County would be sufficient.

So by simply comparing the detail on the three individuals, only one of whom is named, it is clear to me that greater detail is provided for Ms Harmon than for the two black men, but that there may be reasons other than simple lack of care for this. That a white woman stands out less than a pair of black men, that there is greater value placed on the goods which she took than the value of the black men, that there is a greater degree of familiarity between the lady and her supervisor than between the two newly obtained men and their owner, or that the time between the individual[s] being missing and the advertisement being placed was different, allowing less time for details to become fogged.

Runaway records: pair of black men

Dr Darren Reid of the University of Dundee is running an series of seminars over Skype on Atlantic History and, as part of this, I was asked to write these posts. Dr Reid posed a simple question; “what do these runaway records tell us about the past?” with a variety of options for how it might be taken, directions to explore, but with an invitation to explore as interest directed.

As such I have selected, more or less at random, two of the earliest advertisements from the Virginia Gazette one for a female servant (Anne Harmon) and one for a pair of nameless black slaves. My intention is to examine the information presented by both and compare them, to see what details are held to be important about a free (if indentured) woman and enslaved black men.

In this second post I will consider the fate of two black slaves who fled from Caroline County (Virginia). Here is the advertisement in full:

Friday, October 15, to Friday, October 22, 1736.
Williamsburg, October 22, 1736. RAN away, about the middle of August last, from Roy's Warehouse, in Caroline County, Two new Negro men, of a middle Stature; one of them of a yellow Complexion, with a Scar on the Top of his Head. The other a black Fellow; and they took with them several Linen Cloths, and Cotton Frocks, without Sleeves, which they had when I bought them. Whoever takes up the said Slaves and brings them to the above-mentioned Warehouse, shall have Two Pistoles Reward, besides what the Law directs, paid by Peyton Smith.

The first thing to note here is that there really is very little to the piece; the descriptions of the pair are extremely brief. They’re described as being of average build (of a middle Stature), one being lighter skinned and with a scar (one of them of a yellow Complexion, with a Scar on the Top of his Head) but the other simply being darker skinned (The other a black Fellow).

In part, I suppose, this paucity of personal description in a land where free black men were uncommon is because the sight of a pair of black men walking free would draw attention. Another, perhaps greater, part is that it seems likely that Mr Smith simply didn't pay too much attention to the slaves.

Perhaps there were a number of slaves working at Roy's Warehouse, perhaps not, but certainly Mr Smith who posted the advertisement did not know when the two men had gone missing (RAN away, about the middle of August last), and hadn't an idea of their names (or, perhaps, simply didn't consider that to be of any importance).

There is a little information on what they are wearing or may be carrying (several Linen Cloths, and Cotton Frocks, without Sleeves) though again without detail. This may be because a pair of black men would have found it very difficult to have sold goods on, possibly the detail was considered irrelevant by Mr Smith, or perhaps because Mr Smith didn't know.

It does seem that Mr Smith is eager to recover his property, going so far as to offer what may have been a fairly expensive, and useful to the martially inclined, reward of a pair of pistols (Two Pistoles Reward, besides what the Law directs), costing perhaps a pound [1], which would was a significant amount of money [2], especially when one considers the average wages in the Colonies [3].

So, in brief, there is really very little information on the two men, however, this may have been because there was really very little need, or because the subscriber didn't have the information to give.

[1] The Wilsons: Gunmakers to Empire, 1730–1832 [PDF 3.6mb]
DeWitt Bailey II, P 85/17
“50 pair of Pistols (with ramrods) same bore as the Best arms and same  mark, low price about 20/-.”

[2] Value of Money
“1730 - 2 pound 5 shilling ($10) gives a purchase power of £ 302 or $ 294 in 2006”

[3] Wages in Colonial America
"1730s - Labourer, 6£/year, Shoemaker, 8 to 14£/year , Armourer, 35£/year"

Please forgive the poor quality of English on the american-firearms.com website

Runaway records: Anne Harmon

Dr Darren Reid of the University of Dundee is running an series of seminars over Skype on Atlantic History and, as part of this, I was asked to write these posts. Dr Reid posed a simple question; “what do these runaway records tell us about the past?” with a variety of options for how it might be taken, directions to explore, but with an invitation to explore as interest directed.

As such I have selected, more or less at random, two of the earliest advertisements from the Virginia Gazette one for a female servant (Anne Harmon) and one for a pair of nameless black slaves. My intention is to examine the information presented by both and compare them, to see what details are held to be important about a free (if indentured) woman and enslaved black men.

In this first post I will consider Anne Harmon, an Englishwoman who fled from Essex County (Virginia). Here is the advertisement in full:

Friday, September 24, to Friday, October 1, 1736.
RAN away, on the 17th of September last; from Mr. John Corries, of Piscataway, in Essex County, an English Servant Woman, named Anne Harmon, aged about 20, of a middle Stature, well featur'd, and has black Hair and Eyes: She had on, when she went away, a Cotton Gown and Petticoat, strip'd with red and Blue; and an English Straw Hat, lin'd with White Callico. There were stolen about the Time she went away, Eleven Yards of Fine Scotch Plad, 4 Dozen of Scotch Handkerchiefs, several Holland Shirts and Aprons, Three Pair of fine Worsted Stockings, and several Caps, lac'd and plain. And about 10 Days before, were stolen out of the Store, Eleven Dozen of Scotch Handkerchiefs, 1 Piece of fine Plad, some Nuns Thread, 4 Dozen of Cravats, and 2 Felt Hats: All which she is suspected to have stolen, or been accessory to it. These are therefore to request all Persons to aid and assist in apprehending the said Servant, and bringing her to Justice; and, for so doing, they shall be handsomely rewarded, besides what the Law allows, by John Corries.

The description of Ms Harmon is somewhat vague (aged about 20, of a middle Stature, well featur'd, and has black Hair and Eyes) but it suggests a pleasant young lady with dark eyes and hair, though the picture painted of her dress is much more complete (Cotton Gown and Petticoat, strip'd with red and Blue; and an English Straw Hat, lin'd with White Callico) and render a reasonable impression of a young woman.

Whilst today that report of the missing Ms Harmon would, perhaps, not be of too much use in the early 18th Century it is reasonable to expect that she would struggle to change her appearance, especially her clothing, and that the combination of a young woman on her own, with dark colouring (hair and eyes) and the colourful (red and blue striped) dress would stick in the mind of many.

Next one must surely consider the amount of goods she is said to have taken; Eleven Yards of Fine Scotch Plad, 4 Dozen of Scotch Handkerchiefs, several Holland Shirts and Aprons, Three Pair of fine Worsted Stockings, and several Caps, lac'd and plain. Eleven Dozen of Scotch Handkerchiefs, 1 Piece of fine Plad, some Nuns Thread, 4 Dozen of Cravats, and 2 Felt Hats.

That is a significant amount of cloth and would have been of great weight. Even had the young woman, of moderate build (of a middle Stature) been able to lift 11 yards of material (and plaid would be woollen cloth), not to mention handkerchiefs, stockings, shirts, aprons, thread, cravats, caps and felt hats, it is unlikely she would have been able to take it far. There is no mention of the theft of horse, cart, mule or other beast of burden so there must either have been an accomplice (which seems likely) or a nearby agent who would have paid for them; everything costs money and there is, again, no mention of missing funds (though Anne may have been able to earn some money during whatever private time she had).

So it seems likely that someone close to Mr Corries must have seen Anne, or her companion, and bought from her a great deal of cloth and clothing. I do not know what the law would proclaim about buying stolen goods; though suspect that they would not be allowed to be retained. That is, perhaps, one good reason for the ending of the advertisement; These are therefore to request all Persons to aid and assist in apprehending the said Servant, and bringing her to Justice; and, for so doing, they shall be handsomely rewarded, besides what the Law allows, by John Corries.

Readers are shown a stick by being reminded of the law and legal obligations involved then promised a carrot, in the form of a “handsome reward”.

To me it is telling that more than two thirds of the advertisement covers (in some detail) the goods which Ms Harmon is supposed to have taken whilst the description of her as a person is brief, and of her clothing rather fuller.

First post

So, why a blog then? Well, Dr Darren Reid of the University of Dundee is running an series of seminars over Skype on Atlantic History, which is rather good fun, and he has challenged his participants to write a blog post using adverts for runaway indentured servants or slaves from the Virginia Gazette. This blog has been created to give me a forum for that post (or posts, you never know - I may get carried away) and, as I've been considering giving blogging a go for a wee while now, I might even post some more historical-flavoured thoughts.

So, please read on and enjoy!