- The Washington Times - Tuesday, December 30, 2003

NATCHEZ, Miss. - It has been 140 years since the last slaves marched in shackles from brigs on the Mississippi River through this rowdy gambling city to the bustling slave market a mile east. At the Forks of the Road market, they would be haggled over and sold to cotton plantation owners who came from across the Deep South.

The river made for easy transportation of slaves from the declining tobacco plantations near the Chesapeake Bay. The market’s position on a knoll at the end of the Natchez Trace, an important route into Alabama and Tennessee, and Liberty Road connecting Natchez to the southeast as far as Georgia made for a natural meeting place.

At its peak, up to 500 slaves could be found at the market on any given day. It’s thought to have been the second-largest slave market in the South — the biggest one was farther down the Mississippi in New Orleans. The two biggest traders shipped more than 1,000 slaves from Alexandria to the two markets each year beginning in the 1830s. Trade at the Forks of the Road ended only with the Civil War.

Much of the history of the Forks of the Road, and what has been recounted here, was documented by Jim Barnett, a historian with the Mississippi Department of Archives and History.

Today, Mr. Barnett and other preservationists are trying to figure out just how to tell the slave market’s story.

After years of battles, the site of the slave market was bought by the city with plans to turn it over to the National Park Service so it could be included in the Natchez Historical Park. But that might take years and an act of Congress. For now, local preservationists are planning to create an interpretive center on the site within the next year.

That might not be easy.

“This is the next battleground — that the true history goes up there and is not watered down,” said Ser Sheshab Heter-C.M. Boxley, a local activist who first began fighting for the site’s preservation about five years ago. “We’re not concerned whose toes we step on.”

Standing on the site, Mr. Boxley said the issue for him was nothing less than restoring humanity to his enslaved ancestors.

“This is sacred ground,” Mr. Boxley said. “Right here is where all those inhumanities and contrasts operated.”

The Forks of the Road was unique because slaves weren’t auctioned, but bargained over by individual buyers and sellers. A young male slave could be bought for about $500 in 1826 and for as much as $1,600 in 1861.

In Mr. Barnett’s account, written for the Mississippi Historical Society, he quotes New England writer Joseph Holt Ingraham, who visited the slave market in the 1830s. Ingraham described a scene at the market where 40 slaves were lined up in a semicircle to be inspected by prospective buyers.

“With their hats in their hands, which hung down by their sides, they stood perfectly still, and in close order, while some gentlemen were passing from one to another examining for the purpose of buying,” Ingraham wrote.

Mr. Boxley and Mr. Barnett are on a planning committee that will decide how eyewitness accounts such as Ingraham’s will be presented at the site. The committee already has decided to tell the story using a series of panels that illustrate the forced migration of the slaves, how business was conducted in the market, the connection between slavery and cotton, and stories of the traders who profited from the sale of slaves.

The two biggest traders at the Forks of the Road and in New Orleans were Isaac Franklin and John Armfield. They discovered early the opportunities brought by the rise of cotton plantations in the Deep South and the decline of tobacco plantations in the Mid-Atlantic. They began to buy slaves cheaply and ship them over land and sea to Mississippi. They built the Forks of the Road, which already was a traditional market that straddled the city limits, as a major slave market.

Today, a shuttered bar and a parking lot sit on the site. A marker at the intersection is the only evidence of what the land once was.

The committee is trying to fix that, first by applying to list the site on the National Register of Historic Places.

The committee might find its biggest challenge in working out the exhibits’ language. Mr. Boxley, for example, opposes use of the word “slave” and prefers the term “enslaved persons.”

Mimi Miller, director of preservation and education for the Historic Natchez Foundation and a member of the committee, said she doesn’t expect problems in planning the exhibits’ presentation.

Although the details still need to be hammered out, most agree that preserving the slave market will go a long way toward striking a balance in Natchez, whose main economic boost today comes from annual pilgrimages of tourists to the town’s sprawling antebellum homes.

“There seems to be some attitude of, ‘Why do you want to dredge up that stuff and bring all that unpleasantness back?’” Mr. Barnett said. “But Natchez has been criticized in the past for telling only one side of its history — the side of the antebellum mansions and the white aristocracy.”

Mrs. Miller said Natchez has done no better or worse job than other places in presenting black history, but the town has gotten a bad reputation.

“Every house has an African-American story, a white story, sometimes a Jewish story,” Mrs. Miller said.


Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide