by Ian Mumpton
In the last installment of “The Servants” we looked at the disparity of records for the lives of women held in bondage by the Schuyler family compared to those of enslaved men. Despite women making up roughly half of the enslaved workforce, they are mentioned by name far less frequently than are the men, and the details of their specific lives and labor often went unrecorded except in the most general terms. Too often these difficulties place a mantle of silence over the experiences of a group of people already marginalized in the documentary record by virtue of their bound status. However, breaking that silence is far from impossible. Where direct documentation is lacking, evidence of general experiences gleaned from a variety of sources, when looked at in the context of the Schuyler family and household, can help paint a surprisingly detailed picture, especially of the sorts of labor performed by these women.
In the last installment of “The Servants” we looked at the disparity of records for the lives of women held in bondage by the Schuyler family compared to those of enslaved men. Despite women making up roughly half of the enslaved workforce, they are mentioned by name far less frequently than are the men, and the details of their specific lives and labor often went unrecorded except in the most general terms. Too often these difficulties place a mantle of silence over the experiences of a group of people already marginalized in the documentary record by virtue of their bound status. However, breaking that silence is far from impossible. Where direct documentation is lacking, evidence of general experiences gleaned from a variety of sources, when looked at in the context of the Schuyler family and household, can help paint a surprisingly detailed picture, especially of the sorts of labor performed by these women.
While slave holders might be less likely to record the
specific work that they tasked women with on their properties, the skillsets
that they sought in their slaves is telling. Slave merchants advertised their
“wares” through a variety of printed sources, including handbills, broadsides,
and advertisements in newspapers and gazettes. Marketing is nothing new; the
advertisers specifically highlighted the skills and backgrounds most likely to
appeal to prospective buyers.
The Adverts 250 Project hosts an amazing collection of 18th
century advertisements for all manner of things, from property and tools, to
services and wanted ads. They have also amassed an excellent collection of
slave advertisements from all across the colonies (which they publish on their Twitter feed). The specific form taken by
slavery varied considerably across the colonies however. The experiences of someone
in South Carolina could differ markedly from that of someone in Rhode Island,
and both of these could differ from the experiences of someone in Albany, New
York. Most of the people that the Schuylers enslaved over the years were
purchased in Albany or New York City, so we can restrict our search to
advertisements published in New York itself. For the purposes of this article,
we will be sampling from advertisements published between April 13th
and June 25th, 1767, just two years after the construction of the
Schuylers home in Albany. Let’s dig in!
The most common descriptors applied to the women in these
advertisements refer to their ability to do housework. On April 13th,
1767, a Mr. H. Gaine advertised a 28 year old woman, “who is a tolerable cook,
and can do all sorts of housework, fit for town or country.” The same advertisement was run a week later, presumably for the same woman and with the same description.[1] On
April 16th, the New York Journal ran an advertisement for a young
woman 17 or 18 years old, described as able to do, “all sorts of House-Work.” This
specific phrase, or near identical variations, abound in the sources. On April
16th of the same year, the New York Gazette ran an ad for, “A Smart
likely active Negro Girl, about 14 Years of Age, has had Small-Pox; is very
handy, and sold for no Fault but Want of Employ.” On the 20th, the
New York Mercury listed a 25 year old woman, described in the exact same
language, with the addendum that she could also cook. H. Gaine used the same
sort of terminology to advertise an 18 year old woman and her four month old
infant on June 22nd, saying, “she is a good cook and can do all
manner of work, belonging to a house.” These examples indicate that the ability
to cook and familiarity with housework were considered two separate areas of
accomplishment.
Many of these advertisements are vague to modern eyes,
unfamiliar with the types of labor that would have been obvious to a
prospective 18th century buyer. For example, it is clear that an
ability to do housework was a desirable skill, but what exactly did that
entail? Another posting from April 13th offers a few specific
examples of essential household tasks: “A likely handy Negro Girl, between 13
and 14 Years of Age, that can make Beds, sweep, and do many other Things about
the House…”
In this case, housework refers to general housekeeping ability. Another specific example comes from a June 25th advertisement, which describes a young woman of sixteen years as being “forward with the Needle, and handy in a family”.
In this case, housework refers to general housekeeping ability. Another specific example comes from a June 25th advertisement, which describes a young woman of sixteen years as being “forward with the Needle, and handy in a family”.
Other advertisements emphasized skills specifically related
to country life. On June 22nd, Robert Lettice Hooper advertised the
sale of an entire estate near Trenton in the New York Mercury. In addition to
200 acres of land, a dwelling house, and sundry other property, Hooper
advertised that, “The Gentleman that purchases the plantation, may be supplied
with three negro men and a wench, that understands all manner of farming.”
While the vast majority of Philip Schuyler’s farmland was tended to by tenant
farmers, the people enslaved by the family were sometimes tasked with clearing
new fields and assisting with agricultural labor. It was also not uncommon to
rent the labor of enslaved men and women to assist with such tasks. For example
on February 5th, 1762, Col. John Bradstreet, Philip’s friend and
mentor, paid 68 pounds, 9 shillings on Philip’s behalf for, “ye Labour of a
Negro man and Wench from ye 9th of April to ye 29th of
Septembr [sic].”
One area of women’s work that is less often mentioned in the
advertisements is personal attendance. Enslaved servants to wait upon one’s
person and to assist in daily tasks were considered a clear status symbol and
part of the comfortably refined lifestyle of a gentleman or lady. Philip
Schuyler was attended by a man named Prince, while several references indicate
that the women of the family were attended by female servants. For instance, there
are references to an enslaved woman named Caty Betty (or possibly “Caty’s
Betty”) who accompanied Catharine Schuyler on travels. In 1781, Alexander
Hamilton negotiated the purchase of a woman specifically for his wife,
Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton, likely as a personal attendant. Catharine and
Elizabeth would have expected their attending women to aid them with their toilette,
caring for children, and as travel companions and assistants.
From sources like these, a picture emerges in which women
were assigned a wide variety of tasks associated with the smooth running of an
18th century estate such as the Schuylers' Albany property. The beautiful furnishings of the house itself required
constant upkeep. Seven of the eight chambers of the house featured flocked wallpaper, and the furniture throughout the home was upholstered in fine silks
and wools. These ornate textiles are prone to collecting dust, and needed
special attention. The carpets- five rooms of which were purchased for the equivalent price of 9,000 loaves of bread- needed to be carefully swept to
avoid damage from dirt or gravel being ground into the pile. At times these
same women would be expected to assist Catharine and her daughters as personal
attendants.
The Schuyler’s home in Albany was more than just an elegant
mansion however. The working courtyard attached to the West face of the house,
hidden from the view of guests approaching from the river, was the scene for
other labor associated with the house, labor which was often assigned to
enslaved women. The working courtyard featured a brick kitchen structure where
all of the meals would have been prepared. The women assigned to the kitchen
would not only have been responsible for food preparation, but for the
laborious work of cleaning dishes and laundry, which required hauling large
amounts of water, and for the odiously odoriferous task of rendering animal
fats to make tallow for soap and candles. While it is unclear to what degree
Philip rented out the agricultural labor of enslaved women, livestock in the
back courtyard were likely tended to by both men and women, but may have also
been assigned to the children of the women working in the courtyard.
Unfortunately, due to the limited number of sources
specifically referencing the experiences of the women held in slavery at the
site, most of our understandings of their lives comes through extrapolation
and generalization, however these generalizations hold true in the wider Albany
community, and there is little evidence to suggest any meaningful divergence
from the norm at the Schuylers’ home. Work is only one aspect of a person’s
life however, and while it is often the first question that we ask in regards to
an enslaved person, other important questions can help us uncover even more
about the lives of these women. One of our next projects on “The Servants”, will be to try to piece together the familial relationships of the
men, women, and children held in bondage by Philip Schuyler. Check back soon! In the meantime, check some of the other series on our blog with the links at the top of the page, and be sure to check us out on Twitter @SchuylerMansion. You can follow the Adverts250 projects on slavery @SlaveAdverts250
[1]
Gaine posted another ad the week after, with the same terminology, however in
this third iteration he paid for an eye-catching floral border to the ad and
larger, italicized, text. Interestingly, he lists the woman in question as
being only twenty years old. This raises questions- Was this a different woman than was advertised
previously, or was Gaine trying to make his “wares” more appealing by listing
her as younger than she was?
No comments:
Post a Comment