Common Questions
Question 1:
How common was enslavement in Arlington?
Answer:
Enslavement in the eighteenth century was more common than in the nineteenth century. In the eighteenth century, enslaved people were forced to do the difficult work of clearing or burning of dense forest, cultivating virgin land, and building farm or manor homes. Tobacco, the major crop in Arlington, “was a notoriously labor-intensive crop” to grow. The market price of tobacco remained sufficiently high (relative to the cost of the labor), that white farmers felt it justified to purchase enslaved laborers. In 1750, 30% of residents in Truro Parish, Fairfax County (which covered today’s Arlington) enslaved African Americans.
By 1800, the number of enslaved people in Arlington began to decrease along with the phasing out of tobacco farming. Fewer enslaved hands were needed for mixed farming, the growing of grains, fruits, and vegetables and the raising of livestock, the newest trend in agricultural production. The enslaved population hovered around 20% during the century.
Encyclopedia of Virginia, https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/tobacco-in-colonial-virginia/.
Question 2:
What were the occupations of enslaved people in Arlington?
Answer:
Arlington’s enslaved people worked many types of jobs.
1. Agriculture and Husbandry: Given Arlington’s rural nature, many of the county’s enslaved people were involved in agriculture and husbandry work. This included the cultivation of soils or plants; harvesting of crops; caring of draft animals, livestock, or poultry. Titles for these occupations included farmer, field hand, gleaner, teamster, wagon driver, marketer, and herder.
2. Domestic Service: A large number of Arlington’s enslaved population also performed domestic duties. This work involved the management and care of the home or family of an enslaver or employer. Titles for these occupations included butler, chamber maid, coachman, footman, gardener, ironer, laundress or starcher, maidservant, messenger, nursemaid, servant, and valet.
3. Crafts and Trades: Fewer of Arlington’s enslaved people performed work involving specialized skills, tools, and knowledge. The most common jobs that fit this category included baker, boatman, butcher, cook, dairy maid, distiller, furnace-keeper, mason, seamstress or tailor, smith, and weaver. Many of the enslaved people involved in trades lived on the farms or plantations of wealthier individuals where these specialized skills were more commonly needed.
4. Fishing, Gathering, and Hunting: Arlington’s location along the Potomac River or streams like Four Mile Run or Lubber Run meant work involving catching fish or shellfish was routine. Established pursuits not highlighted in the records involved collecting wild plants or pursuing animals for food.
5. Manual Labor: Work involving physical strength and stamina, often involving the movement of heavy loads. Includes laborer, ditch-digger, grave digger, watercarrier, etc.
From Arlington records such as inventories, wills, accounts, manumission papers and more.
Question 3:
What were the long-term economic effects of enslavement in Arlington?
Answer:
Contemporary wealth inequality cannot be fully understood without understanding the historical barriers that helped shape the wealth patterns of families over generations. The institution of slavery was instrumental in helping both create and deny wealth in America. Black Americans were brought to the United States as capital. Their mere existence and the exploitation of their labor for chattel slavery directly served to enrich white Americans. Whereas slavery denied the opportunity for Black Americans to generate income to create wealth, it produced capital that enabled white Americans to develop wealth over generations. Not surprisingly, scholars have demonstrated a link between slavery and the Black-white poverty gap (O’Connell, 2012), white economic gain (Reece, 2020), and economic mobility (Berger, 2018). The wealth implications of slavery are indeed huge. The estimated loss of Black wealth as a result of enslavement is $14 trillion in today’s dollars (Darity & Mullen, 2020). Further, with the emancipation of slaves, the unfulfilled federal promise to compensate freed people with “40 acres and a mule” is estimated at $16.5 trillion of wealth loss from Black families (Darity & Mullen, 2020).
Excerpted from: Dr. Regina S. Baker and Dr. Fenaba R. Addo, “Barriers to Racial Wealth Equality,” American Bar Association website, January 06, 2023, visited site July 30, 2024, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/wealth-disparities-in-civil-rights/barriers-to-racial-wealth-equality/.
In today’s Arlington, wealth inequality that extends from slavery persists, but additional factors such as Jim Crow laws, segregation, and redlining have exacerbated it. In 2022, the per capita income of White residents in Arlington was almost double that of Black residents. In addition, Black or African American households have the lowest owner occupancy rate in Arlington, at 22%. There are persistent employment and wage disparities that make it hard for Blacks to manage the increasingly high cost of living in the county.
Facts and figures from:
Urban Institute, “Racial Inequalities in the DC Area,” https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/95401/2017.12.28_regional_equity_finalized_1.pdf.
Arlington’s Race and Ethnicity Dashboard, 2022 Briefing Report,
Question 4:
Why does MEA use particular words to describe enslavement? For example, why we use the term “enslaved person” and not “slave?” and why do we say “enslaver” and not “slaveholder” or “master?”
Answer:
MEA strives to erase the labels placed on enslaved African Americans that were created by an enslaving society. These terms often reflect how the dominant society viewed African Americans and their efforts toward freedom. We attempt to use language that more reflects the inherent humanity of enslaved people and is historically accurate.
Enslaved Person vs. Slave
“Enslaved person” is used in place of the word “slave.” It more accurately describes someone who was forced to perform labor or services against their will under threat of physical mistreatment, separation from family or loved ones, or death. On our website, the term refers to one of the tens of millions of kidnapped Africans transported to the Americas and their descendants held in bondage through the American Civil War.
“Enslaved person” emphasizes the humanity of an individual within a slaveholding society over their condition of involuntary servitude. Slavery was a defining aspect of this individual’s life experience, but the term enslaved puts the person first and while recognizing that this person was forcibly placed into the condition of slavery by another person or group.
Enslaver versus Master, Owner, or Slaveholder
An “enslaver” exerted power over those they kept in bondage. They referred to themself as a master or owner - language which created a sense of natural authority. Today, the terms “master” or “owner” can continue to suggest a naturalness to the system while also distancing us from the fact that enslavers actively enslaved other human beings who were entitled to the same natural rights as themselves.
The terms “slave master” and “slave owner” refer to individuals who enslaved others when slavery was part of American culture. These terms can imply that enslaved people were less capable or worthy than their enslavers. Using the word “master” or “owner” can limit understanding of enslaved people as it defines them simply as property. These terms also support the idea that some people should naturally hold power (i.e. slave owners, slave masters) and others should not (enslaved individuals).
Freedom Seeker versus Fugitive
“Freedom seeker” describes an enslaved person who takes action to obtain freedom from slavery. The labels “fugitive,” “runaway,” and “escapee” were constructs of slave-holding society and patronizing abolitionists. These terms reflect how slave-holding society viewed African American efforts to seek freedom and take away their individual agency. The term fugitive is linked to the various Fugitive Slave Laws (1793, 1850) passed by the U.S. Congress, and emphasizes that the fugitive was acting criminally to escape from bondage. This language was key in attempts to preserve the view that the law was on the side of the slaveholding society—which it was—while reinforcing the view that the fugitive was incapable of acting responsibly in a society governed by the rule of law.
This answer was adapted from the National Park Service, “The Language of Slavery”: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/undergroundrailroad/language-of-slavery.htm?fbclid=IwAR39XcX_62J9eA7o65TJji5Z2LsdEMkrnx6VNdwSzlIVvaN8VKgj95EbYh0#:~:text=The%20National%20Park%20Service%20uses,a%20more%20descriptive%2C%20complete%20choice.