How slavery grew in the colonies, and the lives and resistance of enslaved Africans
Grade 8 Social Studies Worksheet - Building Confidence
Circle the best answer.
Read this first
Use this
How slavery became law in Virginia (cards A to D). Card A, from the National Park Service (NPS) page "African Americans at Jamestown": it quotes John Rolfe's report of 1619, "About the latter end of August, a Dutch man of Warr of the burden of a 160 tunes arrived at Point-Comfort", bringing "20. and odd [Africans], w[hich] the Governo[r] and Cape Merchant bought for victuall[s]". The page says: "The year was 1619, and as an institution slavery did not yet exist in Virginia." It adds that the ship was "not aboard a Dutch ship as reported by John Rolfe, but an English warship, White Lion" and that the Africans "were captives removed from the Portuguese slave ship, San Juan Bautista". It also says: "Rolfe's reporting the White Lion as a Dutch warship was a clever ruse to transfer blame away from the English for piracy of the slave ship to the Dutch." Card B, from another NPS Historic Jamestowne page, "First Africans at Jamestown": "In mid-August 1619 John Rolfe wrote in a letter" about the arrival. "Traded for provisions, these Africans were loaded onto another ship and brought to Jamestown and placed into servitude." It says "these first African settlers in Virginia were destined to spend a period of at least seven years in indentured servitude before gaining freedom" and that "By the third quarter of the seventeenth century, however, term servitude evolved into bondage for life, or slavery, for many Africans in the colony." Card C, the NPS timeline of laws and facts (quotations from the page): 1630s, it was "customary practice to hold some [Africans] in a form of life service", but "some blacks were able to hold on to their status of being indentured servants, thus, eventually gaining their freedom". 1640: "John Punch, a runaway indentured Servant, first documented slave for life." 1662: "Slavery was recognized in the statutory law of the colony." 1667: "Baptism does not bring freedom. Until the General Assembly outlawed it, baptism could be the grounds for a black slave to obtain his/her freedom. It was considered for a period of time that it was not proper for a Christian to enslave a fellow Christian." 1705: "Slave laws were codified." Card D, a summary in our words of the Virginia assembly's December 1662 act (Hening, Statutes at Large, volume 2, page 170, as transcribed in a university course reader): because "doubts have arisen" whether children of an Englishman and a Black woman were slave or free, the act declares that children born in the colony are bond or free according to the condition of the mother.
Card A quotes John Rolfe, a colonist who reported the 1619 arrival. What is his report best evidence for, Ari asks?
- What an English colonist reported about the arrival and the exchange
- How the Africans themselves described the voyage and the landing
- What historians now know about the ship's real name and owners
- How Virginia's law already treated enslaved people in 1619
Rolfe's own words in card A say "the latter end of August"; card B says mid-August. How should a reader treat the difference, Esme asks?
- Throw out both cards, because they give different dates for the arrival
- Say two different ships arrived that year, one in mid-August and one in late August
- Prefer Rolfe's own words and treat mid-August as the page's looser summary
- Trust card B, because a page that is older must be more accurate
A student claims: "Slavery was part of Virginia's law from the first Africans' arrival in 1619." How strong is that claim, Jun asks?
- Weak: card A says no institution of slavery yet existed, and card C dates the law to 1662
- Strong: the Africans were bought for food, which shows they were property under law
- Strong: slave laws were codified by 1705, so they must already have existed back in 1619
- Strong: card C lists 1619 as the year of Virginia's first law about slavery in the colony
Card A dates the arrival to 1619, and card C dates the statute recognizing slavery to 1662. How many years apart are they, Kira asks?
- 43 years, 1662 minus 1619
- 22 years, the gap from John Punch's case in 1640 to the 1662 law
- 53 years
- 86 years, the gap from the arrival to the 1705 code
Card B says at least seven years of indentured servitude. Someone who arrived in 1619 and served exactly seven years would be free no earlier than when, Luz asks?
- 1612, found by subtracting the seven years
- 1640, the year of the first documented life servitude in card C
- 1633, found by adding fourteen years
- 1626, seven years after 1619
Cards C and D together explain how slavery could last across generations. Which link is best, Milo asks?
- The act ended indentured servitude for English servants in the colony
- A child's status followed the father, so freedom passed down through free fathers each time
- A child's status followed the mother, so children of enslaved women were born enslaved
- The 1705 code came first, so the 1662 act was written to repeat it
Card C's 1667 entry says baptism does not bring freedom. What problem was that law fixing, Noah asks?
- Some enslaved people claimed freedom after baptism, since enslaving a Christian seemed improper
- Baptism had been forbidden to enslaved people, and the law now allowed baptism for them
- The law banned baptism for people throughout Virginia so that no more claims could be made
- The law freed any baptized person in the colony from that year onward, if they asked
A student claims: "By 1640 all Africans in Virginia were enslaved for life." How strong is that claim given card C, Pia asks?
- Strong: card C says Punch was freed in the end, so life servitude was already the common rule
- Weak: the 1662 statute is later, so the 1640 case cannot be counted as evidence
- Strong: John Punch's case in 1640 shows that the practice covered the whole African population
- Weak: card C calls Punch the first documented case; some in the 1630s gained freedom
How did the legal position of Africans in Virginia change from 1619 to 1705, using cards A and C, Ren asks?
- It moved from a collected code in 1619 to custom by 1705
- It moved from no law of slavery, to custom, to a statute, to a collected code
- It stayed the same, because slavery was written into law from the first ship
- It changed because Dutch law replaced English law in 1662
Card A quotes Rolfe that the Africans were "bought for victuall[s]", and card B says "Traded for provisions". What do the two phrases say, Zee asks?
- They were bought with gold from the Virginia Company's treasury
- They were exchanged for food and supplies, not for money
- They were paid wages in tobacco, so they were hired rather than traded
- They were bought by Dutch merchants who then sailed away with them