2004
Volume 124, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 0040-7518
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1163

Abstract

The arrival of the black descendants of enslaved people from the Dutch colonies brought an increase in research into the history of slavery. But most of these studies fail to describe the period of Apprenticeship in Suriname - a period of enforced labour for agricultural export. Since there is no systematic historiography on the writing of the history of slavery, we have little insight into why historians failed in this way. This article explores how the history of slavery was presented in newspaper articles between 1997 and 2005 (the time of social debate on the demands of the blacks) and why the period of Apprenticeship was left out. It concludes that at least two historians presented personal views on the blacks’ demands as if these were historical facts, and thus used history as a means to undermine those demands. Knowledge of ongoing exploitation after emancipation would probably have made the demands seem more legitimate.

Reaction

A reaction has been published to this content:
Naschrift redactie

Reaction

A reaction has been published to this content:
White is White and Black is Black and the twain shall never meet?

Reaction

A reaction has been published to this content:
‘If you don’t tell it like it was, it can never be as it ought to be’
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TVGESCH2011.3.GOME
2011-10-01
2021-10-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TVGESCH2011.3.GOME
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error