"On the 9th day of September last being Sunday... a number of Negroes assembled together at Stono, first plundered and burnt Mr. Godfrey's house and killed him, his daughter and son. They then turned back and marched towards Mr. Wallace's tavern... calling out Liberty, marched on with colours displayed, and two drums beating." — Report to South Carolina Assembly on the Stono Rebellion, 1739
Given that the report was prepared for the colonial Assembly, how should a historian most cautiously read its account?
- A
As a transcription of the rebels' own statements taken down at the scene
- B
As an impartial record produced by Spanish officials in St. Augustine
- C
As a missionary tract written to advocate the abolition of slavery
- Dcheck_circle
As a planter-class narrative likely to emphasize violence and downplay rebels' political aims
Explanation
Reports to a slaveholders' assembly framed events to justify repression and rarely captured rebel motivations beyond passing details (such as "Liberty"). The document was not produced by the rebels, by Spanish officials (though Spanish Florida's offer of freedom helped motivate the uprising), or by abolitionist missionaries.