From: <gilesoakley@tiscali.co.uk> > My heart always sinks when someone bangs on about 'political correctness', > which is usually the prelude to some reactionary clap trap. While Roy > Stockdill's piece doesn't quite come into that category, I disagree with > much he says on what people should or should not feel regarding past > familial connections to slavery or the slave trade. To me it's perfectly > understandable to feel guilt and shame over the behaviour of our ancestors, > especially over something so manifestly inhuman as slavery. It's all very > well saying you can only judge people by the values of the time, as though > everyone in the past happily accepted slavery, but there was always > opposition on moral and legal grounds and a growing movement for reform. > What began as a minority position gradually transformed public opinion, > leading to a widespread abhorrence of compulsory servitude. If I had any > ancestors who were part of the anti-slavery movement I would take great > pride in the fact, just as I am saddened to know that there were Oakleys > (who may or may not be related to me) who benefitted from the slave trade. > Of course part of the point of studying history is to find ways of entering > the mind-set of people from different eras with very different attitudes, > but that does not have to mean blithely ignoring the deep-rooted and > long-term consequences for the descendants of slavery. Compensation is a > hugely difficult matter , with no easy answers, but please let's not just > dismiss the idea with absurd comparisons with the (no doubt tragic ) death > of a grandfather from anthrax in a wool mill. Anyone with any heart or > sensibility would acknowledge that the legacy of the slave trade lives on in > Bristol. It's a great city, but its past will always be tainted with its > involvement in the slave trade. It's uncomfortable, I know, but there really > is no escape from that.> Bristol is no more tainted by its past than London, Liverpool and probably half a dozen other ports that were involved in the slave trade. It happened over 200 years ago, for peter's sake, and it was we, the British, who abolished it - several decades before America, I might point out. In the early 19th century the British Navy, which still ruled the waves, sent warships out to intercept and board the slave ships. Another fact seemingly little known by those who think we ought to pay compensation is that it wasn't a one-way trade. Many tribal chiefs in Africa took part in it and were happy to sell their their own people or those captured from other tribes to the European slavers in return for trinkets. Why anyone thinks we should still be beatingn our breasts and wearing hair shirts over something that happened so long ago beats me! I wouldn't have the slightest twinge of conscience if I discovered through my researches that an ancestor of mine was involved in the slave trade. As it happened, I haven't found one but I wouldn't go around worrying myself and feeling guilty over it. History is history and, as I tried to explain, we cannot judge our ancestors' actions by today's values when they may as well have been living on a different planet in their time. William the Conqueror's infamous "Harrying of the North" in 1069, in which some of my Yorkshire ancestors may well have been slaughtered, was one of the greatest acts of genocide in history, but I'm not demanding compensation or an apology from the French government over it! The discovery of this diary is interesting from an historical point of view, but no more. The way the story was slanted does suggest to me a certain amount of political correctness at work. Surely academics and family historians should be the very first people to recognise that blaming our ancestors for the sins of the past is a futile exercise? I will forgive you your use of the term "clap trap" because it suggests to me that you don't really understand history either. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Famous family trees blog: http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ Reach For The Stars blog: roystockdillgenealogy.com "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

Well, Roy, I stand put in my place. I'm sorry you think I 'don't really understand history', although I'd put it another way. I'm afraid I simply don't share your cosy UKIP-style bluff Yorkshireman saloon bar right wing views on these matters, where complex matters are reduced to risible comparisons. However, I notice you use the term word 'sins of the past' in relation to slavery, which to my untutored eye suggests there were 'sinners' too. Once you concede that principal, it does suggest somewhere along the line feelings of shame or guilt might be at the very least comprehensible, if not obligatory. It's only natural, I would think, that some people take some vicarious pride in their ancestors' achievements, however little personal credit they can take from them. I've no doubt the descendants of Winston Churchill are proud of the Old Man and likewise I'd be very chuffed if I was related to Wilberforce, or to Martin Luther King, or any number of fighters for justice. The reverse side of that impulse is for people to feel bad when they discover they have perpetrators of evil in their family tree. What's wrong with that? Why would it be 'political correctness' ('gone mad'?) to feel empathetic guilt. We've all seen the subjects of Who Do You Think You Are? shedding tears over things that have happened, for good or ill, in their ancestral past, when some tragic circumstance is turned up by researchers. Is there something wrong with that, or is that somehow 'not understanding history'? I'd see these emotions as the natural human response of those blessed with feelings of empathy. As I've said, matters of compensation are extremely difficult, and it's true that it's hard to know how far back it would be reasonable to go. Certainly reparations for British atrocities in Kenya during the Mau-Mau conflict of the 1950s seem fully justified, given that there are living survivors and damaged victims. With slavery and the slave trade, which Britain did indeed have an honourable record in ending, it is far more difficult, but entirely worthwhile to enter debate over. I have filmed interviews with people whose grandparents were slaves in the USA, so in fact the links in ancestral chains are not so very long. For the British, the Afro-Caribbean population are mainly descendants of slaves (plus indentured workers from Asia) who were treated appallingly long after slavery was ended, as anyone with knowledge of the West Indies would know. I have no easy answers for any of these issues, but I do know they are worth dealing with in a more thoughtful way than some correspondents here have chosen to do. I think we should all be grateful to Josephine for putting up the link to that horrifying historical document from Bristol's slaving past, which has allowed a debate of this kind. Oh yes, Roy, you're right. London and Liverpool both have much to answer for in terms of their involvement in the slave trade, but that doesn't reduce Bristol's guilt. Giles Oakley -----Original Message----- From: roy.stockdill@btinternet.com Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 1:02 PM To: bristol_and_somerset@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [B&S] Notebook reveals chilling insight into Bristol'sslavetrade - Bristol Post From: <gilesoakley@tiscali.co.uk> > My heart always sinks when someone bangs on about 'political correctness', > which is usually the prelude to some reactionary clap trap. While Roy > Stockdill's piece doesn't quite come into that category, I disagree with > much he says on what people should or should not feel regarding past > familial connections to slavery or the slave trade. To me it's perfectly > understandable to feel guilt and shame over the behaviour of our > ancestors, > especially over something so manifestly inhuman as slavery. It's all very > well saying you can only judge people by the values of the time, as though > everyone in the past happily accepted slavery, but there was always > opposition on moral and legal grounds and a growing movement for reform. > What began as a minority position gradually transformed public opinion, > leading to a widespread abhorrence of compulsory servitude. If I had any > ancestors who were part of the anti-slavery movement I would take great > pride in the fact, just as I am saddened to know that there were Oakleys > (who may or may not be related to me) who benefitted from the slave trade. > Of course part of the point of studying history is to find ways of > entering > the mind-set of people from different eras with very different attitudes, > but that does not have to mean blithely ignoring the deep-rooted and > long-term consequences for the descendants of slavery. Compensation is a > hugely difficult matter , with no easy answers, but please let's not just > dismiss the idea with absurd comparisons with the (no doubt tragic ) death > of a grandfather from anthrax in a wool mill. Anyone with any heart or > sensibility would acknowledge that the legacy of the slave trade lives on > in > Bristol. It's a great city, but its past will always be tainted with its > involvement in the slave trade. It's uncomfortable, I know, but there > really > is no escape from that.> Bristol is no more tainted by its past than London, Liverpool and probably half a dozen other ports that were involved in the slave trade. It happened over 200 years ago, for peter's sake, and it was we, the British, who abolished it - several decades before America, I might point out. In the early 19th century the British Navy, which still ruled the waves, sent warships out to intercept and board the slave ships. Another fact seemingly little known by those who think we ought to pay compensation is that it wasn't a one-way trade. Many tribal chiefs in Africa took part in it and were happy to sell their their own people or those captured from other tribes to the European slavers in return for trinkets. Why anyone thinks we should still be beatingn our breasts and wearing hair shirts over something that happened so long ago beats me! I wouldn't have the slightest twinge of conscience if I discovered through my researches that an ancestor of mine was involved in the slave trade. As it happened, I haven't found one but I wouldn't go around worrying myself and feeling guilty over it. History is history and, as I tried to explain, we cannot judge our ancestors' actions by today's values when they may as well have been living on a different planet in their time. William the Conqueror's infamous "Harrying of the North" in 1069, in which some of my Yorkshire ancestors may well have been slaughtered, was one of the greatest acts of genocide in history, but I'm not demanding compensation or an apology from the French government over it! The discovery of this diary is interesting from an historical point of view, but no more. The way the story was slanted does suggest to me a certain amount of political correctness at work. Surely academics and family historians should be the very first people to recognise that blaming our ancestors for the sins of the past is a futile exercise? I will forgive you your use of the term "clap trap" because it suggests to me that you don't really understand history either. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Famous family trees blog: http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ Reach For The Stars blog: roystockdillgenealogy.com "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BRISTOL_AND_SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message