It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: ketsuko
If Yale decides on their own to cha ge their name that would be an issue for you?
You dint think slavery is an injustice? There was nevsr any reperations. In fact they remained segregated until my mothers time and I anit that old.
What exactly is the issue here? Its a christian school. They are atoning for their sins as they see fit. Its not the government telling them to do it.
originally posted by: sdcigarpig
When I saw this article here is what can be stated:
1870, keep that year in mind. There is a problem in a nutshell.
They know some of the descendants, and they will get preferential treatment, however, the other part would be those who are claiming to be descendants of such, would have to do a lot of serious genealogical work. One of the problem is that those who were slaves, up until the 1870’s, names were not recorded on the census records, before 1860’s there was no category of freeman. In short on the form, it was the owners name, the owners family, and then the number of slaves the person owned, or had. And if a slave was sold, then they would be moved to another location, their own children could be sold to other plantations, and thus their surname later on, would be different from those of their parents, and so forth.
The sheer work will be enormous for those wanting to claim as such, for they will have to start and trace it back to the last owner and then work hard, to get ahold of historical societies, and libraries, and other places that would have historical records to get that information together.
And after all of that, would have to submit their documentation to a panel of genealogist, to review and go through to verify such.
And how many children and descendants are there, from the past 179 years?