She states "again, we don't know very much" about what kind of quilt or blanket was utilized by the slaves, yet she denies that they used quilts for the underground railroad. "There are so many questions, and one cannot generalize in a single community about what was going on. It was much more complex than I can certainly answer, or anybody." She almost chuckled insinuating she took advantage of a college student who also submitted her paper on the codes (her having differing beliefs as Ms. Horton). She stated that the log cabin quilt wasn't created during the underground railroad. Yes, if she would have Googled it, she would have found out that it had, in fact, been created in 1860. She also stated "I find that a stretch" referring to what the different colors of the centers were. Again, Google explains the blocks in the quilt in detail. She doesn't seem to know what the codes were or how they were utilized, claiming that the slaves were uneducated, illiterate. You decide. Google for the facts. The largest historical preservation is actually in her state, yet she knows nothing about the facts and is trying to sell her book knowing it is not factual according to history preserved.
I thought that also when I first questioned the debunking. But, then I had to look at what years the Underground Railroad was in operation. It goes way back before 1860.
I'm not sure what her reason is to try to discredit the story of the daughter of a slave. She hasn't really provided anything but her opinion and I feel what she reports is no more likely true than the original slave underground story. She seems to be trying to promote her own book and for some reason it seems she is upset by the idea that slaves may have well been able to outsmart their owners in this regard. IMHO
The myth has been debunked by several prominent Black historians. Everything about it has been proven false. Even the migration patterns of escaping slaves is not true.
@@lisakayruetz7354 So I guess all the stories from all the people who are in their late 70's and 80's should be debunked also? The Underground Railroad was very real. I hope you're not one of those people trying to re-write history because it makes certain people look bad.
I guess this is a very logical story. The legend about a secret quilt code is, on the other hand, also a nice story, even if it isn't true. You might also see this legend thus: Enslaved people managed to outwit their masters and ran away using their own courage and intelligence, helped by equally courageous people. Then later one of their descendants succeeds in convincing two people of this so-called quilt code having existed. They then write a book about it, not realising that they have been outwitted too. " Wouldn't that be a funny sort of payback time?
I would take a drink to before I decide to discredit author to uplift my owe book I will always believe that the slaves were always smarter than their master who hope they would prefer mistreatment over freedom..You never mention what you learn about slaves just to prove quilt played no role in there freedom.That leaved quilt with no history.Your information does not move out of South Carolina still stuck back in time alone with Mississippi and Alabama.
Can we have a look at earlier quilts such as Greek, Albanian and Turkish work which are dated before European people arrived in the West? Very well researched talk.
Methinks the lady doth protest too much. Her own presentation is at least as weak, insubstantial, and emotional as the book she virulently criticizes. She has neither logic nor evidence to refute the relevant oral history, which is by no means an "assimilation myth." Hers is an "ad hominem" argument [or in this case, "ad feminam"]. In the Q&A segment, she admits: "We don't really know much about this."
History is only as good as the person who wrote it. I have not read the book yet but I will. I must say that having watched this video I went to look at the archives and found that much of what Laurel says is almost right. Where I choose to differ is where I feel there is some proof of Oral History being a strong communication between those people who were enslaved and also those people who are first people. If the authors got it wrong then is Laurel able to put them right. Or even to challenge dates? Is she able to do that and put the truth out there for all to read.
She states "again, we don't know very much" about what kind of quilt or blanket was utilized by the slaves, yet she denies that they used quilts for the underground railroad. "There are so many questions, and one cannot generalize in a single community about what was going on. It was much more complex than I can certainly answer, or anybody." She almost chuckled insinuating she took advantage of a college student who also submitted her paper on the codes (her having differing beliefs as Ms. Horton). She stated that the log cabin quilt wasn't created during the underground railroad. Yes, if she would have Googled it, she would have found out that it had, in fact, been created in 1860. She also stated "I find that a stretch" referring to what the different colors of the centers were. Again, Google explains the blocks in the quilt in detail. She doesn't seem to know what the codes were or how they were utilized, claiming that the slaves were uneducated, illiterate. You decide. Google for the facts. The largest historical preservation is actually in her state, yet she knows nothing about the facts and is trying to sell her book knowing it is not factual according to history preserved.
I thought that also when I first questioned the debunking. But, then I had to look at what years the Underground Railroad was in operation. It goes way back before 1860.
I was taught by generations of Southern men and women and shown the quilts utilized in same. I learned all of this before any books.
I'm not sure what her reason is to try to discredit the story of the daughter of a slave. She hasn't really provided anything but her opinion and I feel what she reports is no more likely true than the original slave underground story. She seems to be trying to promote her own book and for some reason it seems she is upset by the idea that slaves may have well been able to outsmart their owners in this regard. IMHO
The myth has been debunked by several prominent Black historians. Everything about it has been proven false. Even the migration patterns of escaping slaves is not true.
@@lisakayruetz7354 So I guess all the stories from all the people who are in their late 70's and 80's should be debunked also? The Underground Railroad was very real. I hope you're not one of those people trying to re-write history because it makes certain people look bad.
@@lavonnecornellcollins8460 No one is saying the Underground Railroad didn't exist. It's the "quilt code" that didn't.
I guess this is a very logical story. The legend about a secret quilt code is, on the other hand, also a nice story, even if it isn't true. You might also see this legend thus: Enslaved people managed to outwit their masters and ran away using their own courage and intelligence, helped by equally courageous people. Then later one of their descendants succeeds in convincing two people of this so-called quilt code having existed. They then write a book about it, not realising that they have been outwitted too. " Wouldn't that be a funny sort of payback time?
Debunk the Debunk! Grandma just wants to use the freedom quilt codes without reparations!
I would take a drink to before I decide to discredit author to uplift my owe book I will always believe that the slaves were always smarter than their master who hope they would prefer mistreatment over freedom..You never mention what you learn about slaves just to prove quilt played no
role in there freedom.That leaved quilt with no history.Your information does not move out of South Carolina still stuck back in time alone with Mississippi and Alabama.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Can we have a look at earlier quilts such as Greek, Albanian and Turkish work which are dated before European people arrived in the West? Very well researched talk.
Methinks the lady doth protest too much. Her own presentation is at least as weak, insubstantial, and emotional as the book she virulently criticizes. She has neither logic nor evidence to refute the relevant oral history, which is by no means an "assimilation myth." Hers is an "ad hominem" argument [or in this case, "ad feminam"]. In the Q&A segment, she admits: "We don't really know much about this."
History is only as good as the person who wrote it. I have not read the book yet but I will. I must say that having watched this video I went to look at the archives and found that much of what Laurel says is almost right. Where I choose to differ is where I feel there is some proof of Oral History being a strong communication between those people who were enslaved and also those people who are first people. If the authors got it wrong then is Laurel able to put them right. Or even to challenge dates? Is she able to do that and put the truth out there for all to read.
Good presentation. Thank you.
B.S.