Photo of slave wearing collar device from Ken Burns documentary

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would like to point out that these "slave" collars were not limited to slaves and runaways. From a 3rd U.S. Infantry Court Martial in 1833, the four defendants were all found guilty and sentenced:

To be reduced to the rank of a private sentinel, to forfeit all pay or clothing which may be due him except so much in amount as was due the Sutler & Laundress at the time of his desertion & such fatigue clothing as the Commanding Officer may deem necessary – To be confined to the cells on bread & water for 90 (ninety) days – To be kept at hard labor with a chain four (4) feet long attached to his leg – To wear an iron yoke weighing eight (8) pounds with three (3) prongs eight (8) inches long around his neck, until the 1st June 1834 and then to have his head and eyebrows shaved & be drummed out of service & To be confined to the guardhouse when not at labor.
Life was tough for desertion it seems. Thanks for sharing.
 
Wow, thats amazing. He was quite eloquent in his own way. The mental image I have is of someone sitting down and just smarted off being snatched up to a standing position from behind, by the collar, lol.
I realize this is an old comment, but its one of the worse things I have read here at CWT, so I thought I should note that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WJC
I would like to point out that these "slave" collars were not limited to slaves and runaways. From a 3rd U.S. Infantry Court Martial in 1833, the four defendants were all found guilty and sentenced:

To be reduced to the rank of a private sentinel, to forfeit all pay or clothing which may be due him except so much in amount as was due the Sutler & Laundress at the time of his desertion & such fatigue clothing as the Commanding Officer may deem necessary – To be confined to the cells on bread & water for 90 (ninety) days – To be kept at hard labor with a chain four (4) feet long attached to his leg – To wear an iron yoke weighing eight (8) pounds with three (3) prongs eight (8) inches long around his neck, until the 1st June 1834 and then to have his head and eyebrows shaved & be drummed out of service & To be confined to the guardhouse when not at labor.
For some reason people tend to forget little of the punishments were unique to slavery, but common outside it as well, the US Military also whipped, used irons, ball and chains, and even used branding as punishment
 
I don't mean to be argumentative but that just isn't true. What were people who were enslaved being punished for? When wearing one of these things the ' punishment ' would have been for having the gall to want to be free- these were always about control. Please no one say escaping enslavement was a crime because criminalizing freedom was just handy, that's all. If similar instruments of torment were employed for criminals well, it wasn't a terrific idea but you can still say they had done something to warrant being punished.

There's just no comparing the two. It's impossible.

 
Probally isn't to someone sitting comfortably behind a computer screen today, But I suspect to anyone wearing the device, being whipped or flogged, put in irons, or branded back then it seemed VERY comparable to them...…....as modern politics wasnt an influence to those having it inflicted on them...….

But theres always those who seem to wish to say somehow there was good whippings or brandings if they aren't comparable.......frankly i tend to think they would have been equally bad.......and its most certainly true the same punishments were used outside slavery.

BTW suppose your not familiar with the term shanghaied, questionable methods were known to put people in military or naval service against their will as well......and indentured servitude was still around too
 
Last edited:
I don't mean to be argumentative but that just isn't true. What were people who were enslaved being punished for? When wearing one of these things the ' punishment ' would have been for having the gall to want to be free- these were always about control. Please no one say escaping enslavement was a crime because criminalizing freedom was just handy, that's all. If similar instruments of torment were employed for criminals well, it wasn't a terrific idea but you can still say they had done something to warrant being punished.

There's just no comparing the two. It's impossible.

You make an excellent point. Why people are trying to minimize this these things is beyond me. But I'm pretty sure someone will be along to do so.
 
" BTW suppose your not familiar with the term shanghaied, questionable methods were known to put people in military or naval service against their will as well......and indentured servitude was still around too "

Why on earth would I be unfamiliar with the term and what on earth has it to do with the means by which American enslaved were controlled? That's not even apples and oranges, it's apples and hammerhead sharks. ' Taking the King's shilling ' is a wholeeee 'nother story. And indentured servants got to choose whether or not they signed away their rights.

You can strew the path here with red herrings but that doesn't mean they'll get tripped over on the way to the truth.
 
" BTW suppose your not familiar with the term shanghaied, questionable methods were known to put people in military or naval service against their will as well......and indentured servitude was still around too "

Why on earth would I be unfamiliar with the term and what on earth has it to do with the means by which American enslaved were controlled? That's not even apples and oranges, it's apples and hammerhead sharks. ' Taking the King's shilling ' is a wholeeee 'nother story. And indentured servants got to choose whether or not they signed away their rights.

You can strew the path here with red herrings but that doesn't mean they'll get tripped over on the way to the truth.
Your the one strewing here and there and everywhere with the red herrings. Another member provided a factual account of the military using a similar device. I simply agreed that in the 1800's barbaric punishments were rather common, they were used in slavery, the military, and is some cases on civilians as well, because thats the actual historic truth. I thought everyone should be able to agree barbaric practices are barbaric practices no matter who they were used on, yet here we go down some rabbit hole as if some were better then others, I disagree, barbaric is still barbaric.

I haven't minimized treatment of anyone by simply noting it was used on a even larger scale, I get rather tired of simply acknowledging something that happened, because it did happen......and then people suggesting by innuendo you said or meant something you didn't, and you that you never said at all.......the only diminishing of the treatment would be by not acknowledging it was used on others as well

Unless you have something to disprove Tom Hughes case, not sure your problem acknowledging it was used outside slavery as well, and really if you wish to question Tom Hughes case you should probably be addressing him.

Shanghaied is someone you was physically took or tricked into service against their will, and if you cant see the similarity between it and being took in to slavery or indentured servitude, that's your problem, but held against your will is still being held against your will in all 3 cases. Again not sure the issue with acknowledging cases of people being held against their will, as we also know it happened to.

Again my post simply acknowledged punishments were used outside slavery as well, because in fact they were........And for some reason people are making red herring and straw man cases to me of "moral equivalency" or "diminishing" when I never said neither....and it gets offensive to have people suggest you did by innuendo and false arguments when you didn't

Now if your asking me if i think forcing people to wear such devices, or other punishments such as flogging or 40 lashes were barbaric, I do, and haven't ever said otherwise.
 
Last edited:
And I was right.
about what? Perhaps you can provide an actual quote of whatever your "right" about? It certainly wasn't about your straw man "minimizing anything" as I clarified I wasn't..........which frankly should have been unnecessary in the first place, as agreeing with Tom used it was used by the military as well, didn't suggest minimizing anything at all anyway.......
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top