In the latest issue:

Real Men Go to Tehran

Adam Shatz

What Trump doesn’t know about Iran

Patrick Cockburn

Kaiser Karl V

Thomas Penn

The Hostile Environment

Catherine Hall

Social Mobilities

Adam Swift

Short Cuts: So much for England

Tariq Ali

What the jihadis left behind

Nelly Lahoud

Ray Strachey

Francesca Wade

C.J. Sansom

Malcolm Gaskill

At the British Museum: ‘Troy: Myth and Reality’

James Davidson

Poem: ‘The Lion Tree’

Jamie McKendrick


Jenny Turner

Boys in Motion

Nicholas Penny

Jia Tolentino

Lauren Oyler

Diary: What really happened in Yancheng?

Long Ling

Short Cuts: Harry Goes Rogue

Jonathan Parry

I just get my pistol and shoot him right downEric Foner

Terms and Conditions

These terms and conditions of use refer to the London Review of Books and the London Review Bookshop website ( — hereafter ‘LRB Website’). These terms and conditions apply to all users of the LRB Website ("you"), including individual subscribers to the print edition of the LRB who wish to take advantage of our free 'subscriber only' access to archived material ("individual users") and users who are authorised to access the LRB Website by subscribing institutions ("institutional users").

Each time you use the LRB Website you signify your acceptance of these terms and conditions. If you do not agree, or are not comfortable with any part of this document, your only remedy is not to use the LRB Website.

  1. By registering for access to the LRB Website and/or entering the LRB Website by whatever route of access, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions currently prevailing.
  2. The London Review of Books ("LRB") reserves the right to change these terms and conditions at any time and you should check for any alterations regularly. Continued usage of the LRB Website subsequent to a change in the terms and conditions constitutes acceptance of the current terms and conditions.
  3. The terms and conditions of any subscription agreements which educational and other institutions have entered into with the LRB apply in addition to these terms and conditions.
  4. You undertake to indemnify the LRB fully for all losses damages and costs incurred as a result of your breaching these terms and conditions.
  5. The information you supply on registration to the LRB Website shall be accurate and complete. You will notify the LRB promptly of any changes of relevant details by emailing the registrar. You will not assist a non-registered person to gain access to the LRB Website by supplying them with your password. In the event that the LRB considers that you have breached the requirements governing registration, that you are in breach of these terms and conditions or that your or your institution's subscription to the LRB lapses, your registration to the LRB Website will be terminated.
  6. Each individual subscriber to the LRB (whether a person or organisation) is entitled to the registration of one person to use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site. This user is an 'individual user'.
  7. The London Review of Books operates a ‘no questions asked’ cancellation policy in accordance with UK legislation. Please contact us to cancel your subscription and receive a full refund for the cost of all unposted issues.
  8. Use of the 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is strictly for the personal use of each individual user who may read the content on the screen, download, store or print single copies for their own personal private non-commercial use only, and is not to be made available to or used by any other person for any purpose.
  9. Each institution which subscribes to the LRB is entitled to grant access to persons to register on and use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site under the terms and conditions of its subscription agreement with the LRB. These users are 'institutional users'.
  10. Each institutional user of the LRB may access and search the LRB database and view its entire contents, and may also reproduce insubstantial extracts from individual articles or other works in the database to which their institution's subscription provides access, including in academic assignments and theses, online and/or in print. All quotations must be credited to the author and the LRB. Institutional users are not permitted to reproduce any entire article or other work, or to make any commercial use of any LRB material (including sale, licensing or publication) without the LRB's prior written permission. Institutions may notify institutional users of any additional or different conditions of use which they have agreed with the LRB.
  11. Users may use any one computer to access the LRB web site 'subscriber only' content at any time, so long as that connection does not allow any other computer, networked or otherwise connected, to access 'subscriber only' content.
  12. The LRB Website and its contents are protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights. You acknowledge that all intellectual property rights including copyright in the LRB Website and its contents belong to or have been licensed to the LRB or are otherwise used by the LRB as permitted by applicable law.
  13. All intellectual property rights in articles, reviews and essays originally published in the print edition of the LRB and subsequently included on the LRB Website belong to or have been licensed to the LRB. This material is made available to you for use as set out in paragraph 8 (if you are an individual user) or paragraph 10 (if you are an institutional user) only. Save for such permitted use, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt such material in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department.
  14. All intellectual property rights in images on the LRB Website are owned by the LRB except where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited. Save for such material taken for permitted use set out above, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt LRB’s images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department. Where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, reproduce or translate such images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the copyright holder. The LRB will not undertake to supply contact details of any attributed or credited copyright holder.
  15. The LRB Website is provided on an 'as is' basis and the LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website will be accessible by any particular browser, operating system or device.
  16. The LRB makes no express or implied representation and gives no warranty of any kind in relation to any content available on the LRB Website including as to the accuracy or reliability of any information either in its articles, essays and reviews or in the letters printed in its letter page or material supplied by third parties. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) arising from the publication of any materials on the LRB Website or incurred as a consequence of using or relying on such materials.
  17. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) for any legal or other consequences (including infringement of third party rights) of any links made to the LRB Website.
  18. The LRB is not responsible for the content of any material you encounter after leaving the LRB Website site via a link in it or otherwise. The LRB gives no warranty as to the accuracy or reliability of any such material and to the fullest extent permitted by law excludes all liability that may arise in respect of or as a consequence of using or relying on such material.
  19. This site may be used only for lawful purposes and in a manner which does not infringe the rights of, or restrict the use and enjoyment of the site by, any third party. In the event of a chat room, message board, forum and/or news group being set up on the LRB Website, the LRB will not undertake to monitor any material supplied and will give no warranty as to its accuracy, reliability, originality or decency. By posting any material you agree that you are solely responsible for ensuring that it is accurate and not obscene, defamatory, plagiarised or in breach of copyright, confidentiality or any other right of any person, and you undertake to indemnify the LRB against all claims, losses, damages and costs incurred in consequence of your posting of such material. The LRB will reserve the right to remove any such material posted at any time and without notice or explanation. The LRB will reserve the right to disclose the provenance of such material, republish it in any form it deems fit or edit or censor it. The LRB will reserve the right to terminate the registration of any person it considers to abuse access to any chat room, message board, forum or news group provided by the LRB.
  20. Any e-mail services supplied via the LRB Website are subject to these terms and conditions.
  21. You will not knowingly transmit any virus, malware, trojan or other harmful matter to the LRB Website. The LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website is free from contaminating matter, viruses or other malicious software and to the fullest extent permitted by law disclaims all liability of any kind including liability for any damages, losses or costs resulting from damage to your computer or other property arising from access to the LRB Website, use of it or downloading material from it.
  22. The LRB does not warrant that the use of the LRB Website will be uninterrupted, and disclaims all liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred as a result of access to the LRB Website being interrupted, modified or discontinued.
  23. The LRB Website contains advertisements and promotional links to websites and other resources operated by third parties. While we would never knowingly link to a site which we believed to be trading in bad faith, the LRB makes no express or implied representations or warranties of any kind in respect of any third party websites or resources or their contents, and we take no responsibility for the content, privacy practices, goods or services offered by these websites and resources. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability for any damages or losses arising from access to such websites and resources. Any transaction effected with such a third party contacted via the LRB Website are subject to the terms and conditions imposed by the third party involved and the LRB accepts no responsibility or liability resulting from such transactions.
  24. The LRB disclaims liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred for unauthorised access or alterations of transmissions or data by third parties as consequence of visit to the LRB Website.
  25. While 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is currently provided free to subscribers to the print edition of the LRB, the LRB reserves the right to impose a charge for access to some or all areas of the LRB Website without notice.
  26. These terms and conditions are governed by and will be interpreted in accordance with English law and any disputes relating to these terms and conditions will be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales.
  27. The various provisions of these terms and conditions are severable and if any provision is held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction then such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the remaining provisions.
  28. If these terms and conditions are not accepted in full, use of the LRB Website must be terminated immediately.
Vol. 40 No. 6 · 22 March 2018

I just get my pistol and shoot him right down

Eric Foner

The Weeping Time: Memory and the Largest Slave Auction in American History 
by Anne C. Bailey.
Cambridge, 197 pp., £19.99, November 2017, 978 1 316 64348 8
Show More
Show More

In pre-Civil War​ fugitive slave narratives – memoirs written by men and, occasionally, women who had escaped to freedom and hoped to convert readers to the cause of abolition – the most heart-rending passages described slave auctions and the separation of families that usually ensued. When the abolitionist journalist and underground railroad activist Sydney Howard Gay interviewed fugitives who passed through his office in New York City in the 1850s he found that the threat of sale was a major reason for the decision to run away.

Although most Americans today acknowledge the centrality of slavery to antebellum Southern life, the ubiquity of the buying and selling of slaves is less widely recognised. In 2016, many were shocked to learn that the Jesuit university Georgetown sold nearly three hundred slaves in the 1830s to remain afloat financially. A venerable myth survives that slave trading was of marginal economic importance and that slave traders were outcasts who operated on the fringes of Southern society. In fact, after the importation of slaves from Africa was outlawed by Congress in 1807, a massive commerce in slaves developed within the United States. This ‘internal middle passage’, as the historian Ira Berlin has called it, involved the sale of more than two million slaves in the decades before the Civil War, a large number of whom were sent from older states such as Virginia to the burgeoning Cotton Kingdom of the Lower South. Every Southern newspaper carried advertisements for the sale of slaves and every major town had slave dealers who drew attention to their business with signs proclaiming ‘Negro Sales’ or ‘Negroes Bought Here’. In Charleston and New Orleans, there were large public slave markets. Slave trading was essential to the survival and profitability of the system, as well as to the financial success of individual owners.

The largest slave auction in American history, the sale of more than four hundred men, women and children owned by Pierce M. Butler, took place in Savannah, Georgia in 1859. Butler was the grandson and namesake of the signer of the US constitution who proposed its notorious fugitive slave clause, which ensured that slaves who fled to another state were returned to their owners. He spent nearly all his time in a luxurious townhouse in Philadelphia and rarely visited his Georgia estates – a rice plantation near Darien and a plantation growing Sea Island cotton (the most sought after and profitable strain of the crop) on St Simon’s Island, just off the coast – leaving them to be run by overseers.

Butler is best known to historians for his tempestuous marriage to the British actress Fanny Kemble, whom he courted after seeing her perform in Philadelphia. They married in 1834; two years later, he inherited half of his grandfather’s estate. In 1838, Butler and Kemble embarked on a five-month visit to his plantations; she later published an account of their stay in Journal of a Residence on a Georgia Plantation, an eye-opening account of how slavery operated. Kemble held anti-slavery views, which grew stronger after witnessing the institution at first hand. Arguments, separations and reunions followed the couple’s return to Philadelphia. In 1849 they divorced, an event much chronicled in the society pages. In keeping with the laws of the time, Butler was given custody of their two young children. To Kemble’s dismay, their daughter inherited her father’s outlook on slavery and strongly supported the Confederate cause during the Civil War.

Before then, however, Butler’s gambling losses and financial reverses triggered by the Panic of 1857, the first worldwide economic crisis, led him to agree to a massive sale of slaves to satisfy his creditors. Some remarkable documents survive from the sale, held over two days in March 1859, beginning with the auction catalogue, which lists slaves by name, age and skill. The first entries read: ‘George, age 27, prime cotton planter; Sue, age 26, prime rice planter; George Jr, age 4, boy child; Harry, age 2, boy child.’ Listings for 432 other slaves follow. Another indispensable source is a 28-page pamphlet published soon after the auction took place. Its author was Mortimer Thomson, a reporter for the New York Tribune, the country’s leading anti-slavery newspaper, who posed as a potential buyer and wrote a detailed account of the proceedings, down to some of the conversations among the buyers. Thomson overheard one of them say that he could ‘manage ordinary niggers’ with the whip, but when he encountered a really recalcitrant slave, ‘I just get my pistol and shoot him right down.’ Others eagerly looked forward to the reopening of the Atlantic slave trade, which some Southern political leaders were advocating. Thomson mostly let the events speak for themselves but occasionally offered a sardonic comment. Some of Butler’s slaves, he reported, had been known to ‘inquire into the definition of the word liberty, and the meaning of the starry flag which waves, as you may have heard, o’er the land of the free’.

Half the slaves on the Butler plantations were included in the sale. Most were field hands, but there were also domestic servants and skilled craftsmen, among them coopers, carpenters and blacksmiths. The catalogue did not list prices, but Thomson recorded what many of the slaves sold for. The auctioneer announced the terms: buyers would pay one-third down in cash, with the remainder in interest-bearing instalments. The highest sum paid was $1750 for William, a carpenter – an immense amount at a time when the average working-class white person earned around $300 per year. George, Sue and their two young sons together went for $2480.

The sale was managed by Joseph Bryan, a prominent slave dealer whose occupation does not seem to have impeded his acceptance by Savannah’s white residents – he was also the city’s chief of police. For several days, local hotels were filled with potential buyers, who made the three-mile trip to the Savannah racetrack, where the auction took place. There they closely examined the slaves (a procedure that involved the most intimate examination of their bodies), who were housed in stalls that usually accommodated horses.

The sale destroyed long established slave communities. Most of the slaves, and their parents before them, had lived their entire lives on Butler’s plantations. They were part of what is now known as the Gullah Geechee culture of coastal South Carolina and Georgia, where African traditions survived more fully than in other parts of the South, partly because most of the owners, like Butler, were absentees and the slaves had little contact with whites. Slaves in this region spoke a dialect that mixed African and English words, which blacks further inland often could not understand. They told stories about slaves who learned to fly and made their way back to Africa. Butler’s slaves were required to attend religious services conducted by white ministers, who instructed them to serve their masters faithfully, but also had their own religious leaders. One day one of them, Sinda, prophesied that the end of the world was nigh, and with it emancipation. Butler’s slaves, the overseer reported, stopped working and refused to resume until the appointed day had come and gone.

Unusually, the auctioneer was instructed not to separate families, although as Thomson noted, this admonition was limited to not separating husbands from wives and parents from young children. Siblings, cousins, grandparents and grandchildren were wrenched apart, as were couples who had not been formally married. The night before the auction began, the slaves Dembo and Frances somehow located a minister who agreed to marry them so that they could be sold together; they were bought for $1320 each by a cotton planter from Alabama. Jeffrey, age 23, begged his buyer also to purchase Dorcas, proclaiming: ‘I loves her well and true.’ But they weren’t married so his plea was to no avail. With his business agent, Butler made the trip from Philadelphia to watch the auction, which netted more than $300,000, enough to wipe out his debts. He stayed until the final lot was spoken for and then, Thomson reported, handed out ‘one whole dollar, in specie’, to each of the slaves who had been sold.

The Savannah auction is the starting point of The Weeping Time by Anne C. Bailey, who teaches African-American and African history at Binghamton University in New York State. Her opening chapter recounting the sale of the Butler slaves is riveting but somewhat brief: one wishes that she had devoted more space to this harrowing story. But she seems anxious to move on to larger questions, to use the auction as a window into slavery itself. She discusses issues ranging from black culture in the Georgia low country to the way agricultural skills brought from Africa – especially complex methods of cultivating rice – enriched the slaves’ owners. She probes the way subsequent generations remembered (or forgot) the institution’s brutality and its centrality to American development. These are all weighty subjects, perhaps too weighty for a book of fewer than two hundred pages. Some of those pages cover subjects of dubious relevance, such as Britain’s involvement in the Atlantic slave trade, and the presence of Islam in West Africa, where the ancestors of these slaves originated (although evidence for its presence on the Butler plantations is meagre). Bailey also spends too much time establishing points already widely accepted among historians. ‘This book affirms the view that the black family is a resilient institution,’ she writes, a finding demonstrated more than forty years ago by Herbert Gutman in The Black Family in Slavery and Freedom. Other aspects of the story cry out for further analysis. The book devotes considerable attention to establishing ‘links to the slaves’ African pasts’ in their work routines, religious practices and folkways such as ring dances. There is less on how Africans became African-Americans, or the extent to which they were influenced by the values of the society around them. When emancipation finally arrived, Bailey notes, the former slaves saw the right to vote ‘as the heart and soul of their freedom’. This outlook is more likely to have originated in 19th-century America than ancestral Africa.

During the Civil War, the slaves who had not been put on sale were moved inland, as Butler, like other local planters, acted to prevent them from running off to join the Union army, which occupied the Sea Islands early in the war. Once peace and emancipation arrived, former slaves throughout the South, including some from the Butler sale, set out to locate those from whom they had been separated. Only a few succeeded. Many of Butler’s former slaves returned to his estates, the only place they knew as home. They hoped to claim some of the land for themselves, an aspiration that seemed plausible in January 1865, when General Sherman set aside a large swathe of land on the Sea Islands and along the Georgia and South Carolina coasts for the settlement of black families and barred whites entirely from the islands. Later that year, however, President Andrew Johnson, who took office after Lincoln’s assassination, ordered that the confiscated territory be returned to its owners. Butler and his daughter travelled to Georgia, hoping to put the former slaves back to work, but soon complained about their ‘laziness’ – in other words, they were unwilling to work as if they were slaves. The frustrated Butlers eventually hired immigrants from China and Ireland to get their plantations running again.

Bailey’s book is as much about memory as history. In black communities the memory of lost children, husbands, wives and other family members was seared into the culture of post-emancipation generations. How did the Butler slaves and their descendants, and African-Americans more generally, confront and try to overcome the trauma of slavery and to reconstitute families that had been torn apart? Bailey pays tribute to ‘the noble efforts of modern-day descendants … to restore the pieces of their fragmented past’, despite not only a paucity of documentation but also the silence of former slaves and their immediate descendants about their experiences. Remarkably, however, ten families have managed to map out their ancestry, representing 15 per cent of those sold at the Savannah auction. Over the course of generations, some of these families thrived. They learned to read and write, and became property owners. Several served in the armed forces, following in the footsteps of two Butler slaves who enrolled in the Union military during the Civil War. Some families suffered the kinds of loss all too familiar in the Jim Crow South. One 18-year-old was killed with an ice pick in Texas in 1940 by a white man who had been overheard earlier in the day saying he was ‘going to get him a nigger’.

As Bailey notes​ , the heroic attempts of these families to reconstruct their lineages form part of a much broader effort among African-Americans, many of whom have turned to companies that analyse DNA samples to identify their ethnic and geographic ancestry. Bailey tells us that she has had samples of her own DNA examined in order to locate her forebears’ origins in West Africa. Although no direct evidence exists, she believes she ‘may have an ancestral link to the people of this study’. She rightly insists that such genealogical explorations can lead to increased historical knowledge. She does not, however, take into account some of the problems raised by genetic testing, which has become big business, even spawning genome-themed tours of ancestral African homelands. The sociologist Alondra Nelson’s recent book The Social Life of DNA explores these themes in depth and raises questions about both the scientific credibility of DNA findings and whether science can really be the vehicle for healing old wounds and answering questions about personal identity and heritage.* Nelson points out that relatively few of the many hundreds of ethnic groups in West Africa have had their DNA studied, yet companies offer definitive-sounding findings about an individual’s ethnic ancestry. She wonders whether the reliance on DNA is reviving the long discredited biological understanding of race as something inborn and immutable that determines a person’s capabilities. For her part, Bailey seems to believe that the impact of traumatic experiences, such as the Holocaust and slavery, can be transmitted genetically, that descendants can ‘unconsciously’ inherit ‘environmental stresses akin to historical trauma’. Studies of rats, she reports, reveal the reality of ‘transgenerational stress’.

If Bailey’s account of the transmission of memory borders on the metaphysical, she occupies solid ground in pointing to the inadequacy of public understandings of slavery. Of course, the way the Civil War is commemorated in public statues and monuments has become a highly controversial matter in the United States. There is nothing uniquely American about these debates. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of communism in Eastern Europe such artefacts have been removed with increasing frequency. Many Americans who oppose taking down statues of Confederate leaders applauded when Muscovites upended the statue of Felix Dzerzhinsky, a founder of the Soviet secret police, when Hungary shifted its communist-era monuments to a museum outside Budapest, and when US troops toppled the statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad. Generally, as regimes change so does the public presentation of history. But this hasn’t really happened in the United States. The problem isn’t simply the nostalgia for the Confederacy (and its underlying raison d’être of white supremacy) inscribed in many hundreds of monuments scattered across the South, but that the public commemoration of the history of the region, and the US generally, is entirely one-dimensional. As Bailey notes, the experience of slavery is conspicuously absent from public representations of history. One might add that there are few, if any, statues of the black leaders of Reconstruction – the period of biracial democracy that followed the Civil War – or of the white Southerners who remained loyal to the Union. What is needed, she writes, is a ‘democratisation of memory’.

Some progress is being made. Bailey chides the National Park Service for having ‘obscured’ the significance of slavery at its Civil War sites. This seems somewhat unfair since at the direction of Congress the service has in fact included discussions of slavery at many locations, even at Gettysburg, where until recently visitors could learn intricate details of the battle but not what the soldiers were fighting about. And in 2016 the Obama administration designated Beaufort, South Carolina, just up the coast from the Butler plantations, as the site of a national monument devoted to the history of Reconstruction. But Bailey’s larger point is correct. It’s hardly a secret that slavery is deeply embedded in American history. But too many white Americans continue to view it as a footnote, an exception to the larger story of the expansion of freedom. A few years ago, President Sarkozy dedicated a monument in the Luxembourg Gardens intended to commemorate both the long travail of French slavery and the slaves’ own contributions, through their struggles for freedom, to ‘the universality of human rights’ and to French traditions of liberty. A historical marker now stands in Savannah showing the site of the ‘Largest Slave Sale in Georgia History’. But to this day there is no monument anywhere in the United States to the millions of victims of American slavery or to the ways their labour helped to produce the world we live in.

Send Letters To:

The Editor
London Review of Books,
28 Little Russell Street
London, WC1A 2HN

Please include name, address, and a telephone number.


Vol. 40 No. 7 · 5 April 2018

Eric Foner, in his review of Anne Bailey’s The Weeping Time, notes that the experience of slavery is ‘conspicuously absent’ from public representations of history (LRB, 22 March). It depends where you look. It’s far from absent in historical fiction, and especially in works of imaginative reconstruction aimed at the young. There are many titles, but Julius Lester’s Day of Tears (2005) was actually about the same slave auction that Bailey describes, when Pierce Butler sold his ‘assets’ to pay his debts. The rain came down as the sale began, and fell throughout. Lester tells the story as far as possible through the voices of the slaves, for whom the rain is ‘God’s tears’. Part-novel, part-play, Day of Tears lent itself to group reading aloud, and was used in schools to teach the history of slavery in an empathetic way. It would be interesting to know if it is still being read in schools, or if the move to protect pupils from painful topics – which has led to the sidelining of such wonderful novels as Paula Fox’s The Slave Dancer and Mildred Taylor’s Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry – has caught up with Lester too.

Norma Clarke
Kingston University

Eric Foner’s reference to the absence of slavery from the public representation of history in the US reminded me of a visit I made in the 1990s to the library of Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge. There was an excellent exhibition on the history of Louisiana agriculture. Excellent, that is, save for the complete omission of any reference to the fact that those tending, harvesting and processing the crops were slaves, or that they were the occupants of the workers’ accommodation shown on the plantation plans. I have ever since regretted that I didn’t have the courage to seek out the curator and ask for an explanation.

Dick Russell
Beenham, Berkshire

Vol. 40 No. 11 · 7 June 2018

As a black alumnus of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill I read Jocelyn Harris’s praise of its Unsung Founders Memorial with dismay (Letters, 10 May). By and large, the monument is considered a slap in the face to the university’s black community. It is smaller than many home dinner tables. Worse, it often serves as a lunch table for white undergraduates who are blissfully unaware of its significance. Any intended symbolism is inverted – or, perhaps, ironically laid bare – as the granite slave figures carved into the table’s base remain invisible to a public that sees fit to use the monument as a nappy-changing station. Most troubling of all, though, is the fact that it lies almost literally in the shadow of another statue, named Silent Sam, which is a memorial to the university’s Confederate war dead. Speaking at its dedication in 1913, the industrialist Julian Carr bragged of having ‘horse-whipped a negro wench until her skirts hung in shreds because she had maligned and insulted a Southern lady’.

Matthew Klinestiver

Vol. 40 No. 9 · 10 May 2018

Eric Foner writes that Anne Bailey ‘seems to believe’ that traumatic experiences of slavery can be transmitted ‘genetically’ (LRB, 22 March). In fact Bailey appropriately uses the term ‘epigenetic’ – not ‘genetic’ – in her discussion of the cross-generational transmission of trauma. The term ‘genetic’ refers to the sequence of base pairs that constitute a gene. Social trauma is not known to change this sequence. ‘Epigenetic’ refers to the biochemical processes – for example, methylation – that regulate the expression of a gene: that is, whether a gene is active, say in the production of RNA, or inactive. The first evidence that social experience can alter the epigenome and thereby the expression of the genome was described just 14 years ago in a landmark study of the influence of parenting on the epigenome of offspring. Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance has been demonstrated and its precise mechanisms are being described. Bailey’s assertion is based not on belief but on a growing body of scientific evidence.

Mark Erickson
Anchorage, Alaska

Eric Foner writes that ‘to this day there is no monument anywhere in the United States to the millions of victims of American slavery or to the ways their labour helped to produce the world we live in.’ Yet at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, there is an impressive monument to just that: the Unsung Founders Memorial, by the Korean artist Do-Ho Suh. A disk of polished granite supported by three hundred figurines represents those whose labour contributed to the handsome buildings nearby. Its inscription reads: ‘The class of 2002 honours the university’s unsung founders, the people of colour, bond and free, who helped build the Carolina that we cherish today.’

Jocelyn Harris
Dunedin, New Zealand

send letters to

The Editor
London Review of Books
28 Little Russell Street
London, WC1A 2HN

Please include name, address and a telephone number

Read anywhere with the London Review of Books app, available now from the App Store for Apple devices, Google Play for Android devices and Amazon for your Kindle Fire.

Sign up to our newsletter

For highlights from the latest issue, our archive and the blog, as well as news, events and exclusive promotions.