Tearing down the statues

Guest post from Francine Howarth

Tearing down statues achieves nothing and I am no apologist for slavery. I've included it within novels, and believe me I do not paint history by way of a rose tinted perspective as anyone will know if they've read any of my 17th century based novels, and later Georgian and Regency romances where the subject of black slavery and white bond slaves crops up.

Why though, tear down statues that represent the past (regardless of who they were - good or evil), because once they are gone or hidden away what those people did will be forgotten in a world where history is rarely taught in schools these days, where kids don't ask questions and don't bother to read history to gain knowledge of facts when a movie glorifies one sort of violence and condemns another without reasoned thought of the era in comparison to the modern age, There is disparity in society worldwide no matter the colour of skin. There always has been disparity, and sadly always will be, and education is so important to bettering one's chances in life.

Barack Hussain Obama became the 44th President of the USA, he achieved it by hard graft schooling and higher education, by being what he could be with effort and determination to succeed. Don't say African Americans and African Brits can't rise to heights of glory, they can and do. It's tough, but it's tough out there for kids with Downs syndrome, it's tough for kids with missing limbs, it was no doubt tough for Peter Hayden Dinklage in his younger days (Tyrion Lannister in Game of Thrones) but he didn't give up he soldiered on and look at him now,

One has to realise the past was brutal in so many ways and slavery rife throughout the ages from Egypt to Rome, to the Ottoman Empire, and it still happens today and yet most people turn a blind eye to it. So why does slavery during the 17th, 18th, and early 19th centuries stir such strong emotions today, in particular British involvement in slavery of Black Africans, even though the French and Dutch shipped as many slaves in the same period, and for a goodly while after Britain had abolished slavery? We cannot change the past, nor should we excuse it, equally rebellion and violence never ends well as history tells us, for it often leads to dictatorships, martial law, or total breakdown of society and worse poverty and civil wars.

To study history can teach one so much more than set belief in one way or another, thus fact can often surprise one and open one's eyes to the cruel reality Britain of today is little different than any other European country of today, and little different than Europe of yester years, barring it once had an empire on which the sun never set. Is that the fault of the youth of today, their parents, or grandparents, no, it was down to great grandparents, great great grandees back through the centuries, and here's a little about Edward Colston's past and those he mingled with in royal circles. He was a son of Bristol, but died at Mortlake.

James VI and I (James Charles Stuart; 19 June 1566–27 March 1625) was King of Scotland as James VI from 24 July 1567 and King of England 24 March 1603 until his death in 1625.

In 1625 his son Charles I became king. When Charles I was beheaded 1649, Cromwell took command and later became Lord High Protector. Cromwell died in 1658 and his son Richard was toppled in favour of Charles II (the restoration 1660).

In 1619 James I was on throne when some 20 Africans arrived at Jamestown, Virginia, where they were purchased from Dutch privateers to aid in the English colony’s lucrative, labor-intensive cultivation of tobacco. As profits piled up and slavery spread through the American colonies, the British crown decided to exert control over the slave trade to the colonies (and the wealth it generated) lasting throughout James I's liftime, Charles I, and Cromwell's term in office 1649-1658. Also bear in mind thousands of white bond slaves from England post English Civil Wars and Monmouth Rebellion, were likewise shipped to the colonies.

Later according to the Navigation Act of 1660, only English-owned ships could enter colonial ports. That same year, King Charles II granted a charter to the "Company of Royal Adventurers Trading to Africa", which was led and championed by the king’s younger brother James, Duke of York (later King James II), this group had a monopoly on British trade with West Africa, including gold, silver and slaves. But during England’s war with the Netherlands, the original company collapsed under mounting debts in 1667, reemerging in 1672 with a new royal charter and a new name: the Royal African Company (RAC).

With the death of William, and Mary, her sister Anne came to the throne 1702, she died in 1714.

With Anne's death came the reign of George I 1714 until his death 1727.

Renember Edward Colston was born in 1636, had been trading in cloth, oil, wine, sherry and fruit from Spain, Portugal, Italy and North Africa for many years and played no part in slavery at all in the early years of his life, nor did he own any slaves. He was by this time already an extremely wealthy man, his father a merchant before him who served during the English Civil Wars, and one of many Merchant Venturers of Bristol & London, thus he followed in his father's footsteps and set up charities for the poor, built almshouses, schools, hospitals, and owned much of Bristol's housing stock, some still standing today. He traded out of both cities, and bear in mind, at that time Bristol was the second most important port next to London during Charles II's reign until Liverpool became the favoured haven for slavers in George II's reign. He became the High Sheriff of the city, became an MP, and little different than most men of his era. I am not excusing him on account of charitable foundations, just stating fact not fiction.

Colston joined London’s Royal Africa Company in 1680 in middle age during the reign of Charles II, which was run by James Duke of York (later James II) With James II coming to the throne in 1685 Edward Colston was offically appointed to the former office of James Duke of York. and he became closely involved in the management of the company (RAC) over the next eleven years and was its Deputy Governor for two years. Colston will have benefited financially from his membership and was actively involved in decisions concerning the transportation of many thousands of enslaved Africans as had James Duke of York. During the time he was associated with the Company (not in charge throughout) it is estimated that around 80,000 slaves were embarked onto ships and around 20% of them died on the passage across the Atlantic. In 1698 the company’s monopoly ended and the slave trade was opened up to all British ports including Bristol and Liverpool. In the following century it was thought as many as half a million Africans were transported to the Americas in ships registered within Bristol and Liverpool where before they were registered in London. Throughout his lifetime the slave trade was promoted by the King and pursued by other European trading countries as a legitimate trade, in particular Holland and France.

Demand for slaves was still too high for one company to meet, however the RAC effectively lost its monopoly in 1689 after the Glorious Revolution when King James II was toppled in favor of William and Mary. It was some 30 years after Colston’s death before the abolition movement started and it was not until 1833 the reign of William IV, that the Abolition of Slavery Act officially banned all forms of slavery, though the transportation of African slaves by British ships was banned in 1807 during the reign of George III. In the meanwhile criminals in the UK, men and women, were shipped to Australasia.