Williamsburg: The Past Unchained - Golonial Williamsburg, Virginia, program on slavery - Brief Article

Commonweal, Nov 5, 1999 by Peter Feuerherd

Golonial Williamsburg, Virginia, attracts more than a million tourists a year. Many come to hear history dramatically retold through the recreated speeches of Patrick Henry and Thomas Jefferson and to view historical pageants pitting stuffy redcoats against brave patriots. Williamsburg has developed a reputation-perhaps undeserved-for a kind of Disneyfied history, a place where the good guys and bad guys are easy to identify, providing weary travelers with a respite from today's more ambiguous headlines.

But the dilemmas of the late twentieth century are curiously infringing on the patriotic fervor at Williamsburg. With its brave new program titled "Enslaving Virginia," the colonial town is taking a vigorous, dramatic look at the impact of slavery on eighteenth-century life and, by implication, today's America.

The program is recognition-a belated one-that roughly half of Williamsburg's two thousand inhabitants in the colonial era were slaves and free black people.

The Washington Post (July 7, 1999) reported that one historical reenactment featured the local militia breaking up an illegal gathering of slaves. The slaves were discussing an offer of freedom from a British governor who, attempting to dampen revolutionary fervor among white slave owners, threatened to liberate the slaves of those disloyal to the Crown. The re-creation soon became more than that. Visitors physically attempted to disarm the militia members, who were forced to step out of character to hold on to their muskets.

When my wife and I visited Williamsburg last summer, we saw no such physical confrontations. But the edginess introduced by the "Enslaving Virginia" program was evident. An actor depicting Patrick Henry was challenged by a member of the audience about whether the orator was a hypocrite for owning slaves. Henry answered with the studied ambivalence that many colonial leaders shared.

A Williamsburg staff member led a walking tour of slavery in the town. It included a graphic account of the Middle Passage taken by slaves from Africa to the West Indies, thence on to America. At nearby Carter's Grove plantation, operated by the Williamsburg Foundation, our tour of the slave quarters included a discussion of daily life.

"What's your name?" asked a guide at Carter's Grove, playing the role of an "overseer" instructing a tourist pressed into service as a "slave."

"Bill," said the tourist.

"That's okay, Sam," responded the overseer, dramatizing how the masters of Carter's Grove arbitrarily assigned slave names in an elaborate process of degradation.

Not everyone takes "Enslaving Virginia" easily. One discussion of slavery we witnessed included many families, most of them white. The children were engrossed in the lecture. But a number of parents quickly wearied of the presentation and moved along to other exhibits. It was hard to tell whether the lack of interest was because of the afternoon heat or wariness about the subject. But another incident was clearer: at Carter's Grove, a staff member directed us toward the mansion, discouraging us from spending time at the slave quarters.

Talking with staff members, we discovered that they regularly discussed issues raised by "Enslaving Virginia." Some said they were pleased that the number of African-Americans visiting Williamsburg had increased greatly over the past year, indicating support for the new program. Others talked freely about thornier issues. For example, how should recent DNA evidence indicating that Thomas Jefferson probably fathered slave children be depicted? Some urged full disclosure; others were more conflicted. A lecture we heard about Jefferson went into depth about his love life, except for what may have gone on between him and Sally Hemmings, Jefferson's slave and half-sister of his deceased wife.

Ambivalence about the exhibits is not limited to whites. Black visitors regularly challenge and debate a woman who depicts a free black woman who owned slaves herself. She has been accused of being haughty and arrogant; we found that her depiction of a woman well versed in the rationalizations of eighteenth-century America rang true.

Sometimes the line between historical reenactment and current reality becomes blurred, as it did when the local militia was attacked by some of the tourists. Likewise, in the Post article, a black tourist was quoted about possible modern parallels after observing the forcible break-up of the slave meeting in eighteenth-century Williamsburg. "That's still illegal," she said. "Five blacks on a corner right now- that's grounds for arrest in most places, or at least investigation."

Visitors to Williamsburg's "Enslaving Virginia" series may find it difficult to determine whether modern tourists are experiencing the late twentieth century intruding on the eighteenth, or the other way round. The Williamsburg Foundation deserves credit, in any case, for challenging its visitors and raising questions, thus transcending the Disneyfication of history.

Peter Feuerherd is a frequent Commonweal contributor.