Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

InternationalWeb5331 t1_j3lzkux wrote

Interesting, I thought there would be more. But I guess these are just the ship owners? Curious I don't see the Brown name on the list.

1

n0noTAGAinnxw4Yn3wp7 OP t1_j3m2jik wrote

you're right, there are many more! in the OP, the title clarifies - these are just the ship owners recorded as having financed the most slaving voyages in a narrow 23-year window. any record of all slaving voyages based out of a rhode island port, either for that time period or since the beginning of european colonization, would have a lot more names, even if it was still limited to ship owners.

i remember reading somewhere that the brown who the school is named after didn't invest in that many (🙄) slaving journeys himself - others involved with the school did more - but would have to loke around for more details. i can if you want

1

[deleted] t1_j2j0i1p wrote

[deleted]

−5

Bronnakus t1_j2jyin0 wrote

The DeWolf family still lives in bristol. What do you want them to do? Change their names too?

7

[deleted] t1_j2jzupf wrote

[deleted]

−3

Bronnakus t1_j2my15b wrote

my point is how far does changing names go? how long after the fact does a last name get associated with guilt for something nobody alive was ever a part of, nor were their parents or even grandparents? i'm not a dewolf, i barely know one of them, but the one i knew was nice enough. should their name get ripped off a tavern because you don't like it? because centuries ago their ancestors did something evil? where's the line?

3

TheSausageFattener t1_j2n40q2 wrote

Considering where they got their money from I don't think they should be commemorated. As I say elsewhere in this thread, the DeWolfs already took their own names off of some of their properties because it was sullied after their fortunes soured in the 19th century, including their most prominent holding in Linden Mansion (formerly DeWolf Mansion). Slapping their name on a structure is in essence commemorating their historic footprint. It's irresponsible to slap somebody's name on something to effectively celebrate their legacy without interrogating what that legacy really was. Brown University has been dealing with the same thing.

Its up to the descendants of these families how they want to handle it, but if they want to celebrate their ancestry they should do so aware of the fact that their historical importance was heavily funded by Cuban sugar plantations and West African slaving ships. I'm sure they're good people and would be receptive to considering that. It's a shitty thing to reckon with so I'm sympathetic.

−1

[deleted] t1_j2myfcs wrote

[deleted]

−2

Bronnakus t1_j2n1dfs wrote

Are you black? If so, I’m all ears as to where you think the line is and I’ll be happy to debate it (I don’t necessarily agree, but whatever). If you’re not black, sounds like you should stop fuckin speaking for them shouting from the rooftops they may be uncomfortable over a name on a restaurant. Unironically go outside please, I’ve never met anyone as thin-skinned as to care about a family’s last name out there. Good Christ.

3

TheSausageFattener t1_j2n2che wrote

The DeWolfs owned and operated plantations in the Caribbean and had ties to southern slavers as well. Their reach went beyond Bristol towards founding mills in places like Coventry. This economic power let them propel people like James DeWolf to be a US Senator from RI. James in particular was one of the families more problematic figures because he had a murder indictment and fled the country a few times to avoid prosecution (including violating federal laws banning the importation of slaves). James's grand-nephew, George, was another slave trader and plantation owner but by this generation the family had gotten so powerful that the entire town relied on them financially. So when George's investments went south, he defaulted and basically screwed the entire community before bailing for Cuba like his ancestors to hide from his investors.

The irony here is that the family already changed the names of their assets and holdings following this financial controversy to get their name off of them. I think the tavern exists with that name to highlight the family's historical prominence in the town and state, but I agree that this history was paid for by both the freedom and also lives of hundreds of slaves, and the family wasn't exactly upstanding. They're a more clearly corrupt case than say the Brown brothers, where one was a slave trader (John) and the other (Moses) tried to at least use that money for good due to his moral opposition to slavery.

The legacy of the family is often celebrated like a sort of "cosmopolitan rogue" kind of deal that is "defacto Rhode Island" from the revolutionary era. They get celebrated for being rich, having political power, entertaining elites, and serving as privateers or generals in the wars of the late 18th and early 19th century but their means of financing those activities through chattel slavery often becomes a footnote and is easy to forget.

0