Autobiography
of Omar Ibn Seid, Slave in North Carolina, 1831:
The
introduction labels this excerpt as a description of Omar’s “alleged
transformation from a Muslim into a Christian,” and indicates that Omar likely “continued
his faith in Islam under a superficial Christian guise.” I didn’t find explicit evidence of this in
this excerpt: he certainly said all the “right things.” However, there were some hints. First of all, he refers to his captors, their
language, and country as “the Christians” as though to separate himself from
being one of them. Also, I mentioned
that Omar said all the “right things.”
In a way, they sound memorized, like he is saying something he thinks he
is supposed to say. However, I feel that
this is flimsy evidence, and wouldn’t want to judge someone’s religious beliefs
thus. Omar describes his first master
very colorfully, as “a small, weak, and wicked man, … a complete infidel, who
had no fear of God at all”, who “did [not] read (the gospel) at all nor pray”, and
“a man so depraved and who committed so many crimes.” On the other hand, Omar praises Jim Owen,
saying that he is “a good man, who fears God, and loves to do good.” Omar is grateful to be clothed, fed, and
permitted by Owen to read “the gospel of God, our Lord, and Saviour, and King.” He claims, “I neither go hungry nor naked,
and I have no hard work to do.” I can’t
tell how much of this is what Omar feels he is “supposed” to say, and how much
of it is how he really feels.
The
Insurrection:
Here
Garrison reminds “the South that slaves did not need to be urged to rebel by
outsiders; rather the abuses suffered on a daily basis were sufficient.” He does this by listing, rather poetically,
all the incentives that the slaves had to rebel:
“The
slaves need no incentives at our hands.
They will find them in their stripes—in their emaciated bodies—in their
ceaseless toil—in their ignorant minds—in every field, in every valley, on
every hill-top and mountain, wherever you and your fathers have fought for
liberty—in your speeches, your conversations, your pamphlets, your newspapers—voices
in the air, sounds from across the ocean, invitations to resistance above,
below, around them! What more do they
need? Surrounded by such influences, and
smarting under their newly made wounds, is it wonderful that they should rise
to contend—as other “heroes” have contended—for their lost rights?” (pg.
322-323)
Garrison
is very clever (and very controversial) in referring to the slaves as “heroes”. Then he compares them to Greeks fighting the
Turks, Poles fighting the Russians, and “our fathers” fighting the
British. These comparisons are very
evocative, and probably outraged many of his readers.
The American
Anti-Slavery Society Declares Its Sentiments:
These
are the arguments I found most persuasive:
- “The sin is as great to enslave an American as an African.” I guess the African slave trade had ended at this point. This statement is attacking the process of enslaving African Americans simply because of their color, and points out that there is no difference between enslaving someone in Africa and enslaving someone else in America. I find this persuasive because Garrison is comparing something that is illegal with something currently legal.
- Biblical references, such as Exodus 21:16 (“And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.”) Most Americans accepted the Bible as the ultimate authority, and it was already being used to support slavery, so to counter with a commandment against slavery is very persuasive.
- His recognition that the states had the right to legislate on slavery, and that the federal government could only regulate interstate trade of slaves—this is a power not enunciated in the Constitution, and therefore given to the States. If more people had recognized this, there might not have been a Civil War, because states might not have felt the need to secede.
I
don’t know how to evaluate the efforts of the AASS, because one of their
principle goals was to avoid “the use of all carnal weapons for deliverance
from bondage” (war), and that’s exactly what happened. So, in that light, their efforts might not
have been very effective at all. Surely
they did convince some people, so I won’t say they weren’t important. But I don’t think things turned out the way
they wanted.
