“Although the rebels established hidden caches of arms and organized themselves into military units on some estates, there is considerable evidence that they actually intended to mount an armed general strike rather than an all-out war.”
I thought this part of the text was particularly interesting because out of most of the readings we’ve had, this seems to be one of the few instances of where the oppressed people revolted in such a way. Not only that, but for slaves to revolt by forming their own little army to overthrow their oppressors. This time, they had lethal weapons and were even able to force out the militia is certain estates. Particularly interesting is the fact that despite their position and ability, the slaves originally did not intend to have a violent rebellion. They had “sit down” strikes prior to any violence. However, what made this much more problematic was the fact that a rumor had spread stating that the slaves were actually freed, but their own masters did not tell them and as a result, the rebel slaves took it upon themselves to do damage to their owners’ crops to instead do damage to their harvest instead of physically attacking their own masters. It is very interesting that despite the rebel slaves’ ability to inflict great damage on those who had oppressed them, they frequently took a nonviolent approach to things. It goes to show that the slaves were not nearly as barbaric or animalistic as many thought.This nonviolent approach gave way to the rebellion spreading throughout a vast area of Jamaica and after all was said and done the rebel slaves had done considerable damage to over 200 estates, making sure their pleas were heard loud and clear.
- Would the rebellion have turned out differently if the rebels had a more violent approach?
- Was there any validity to any of the rumors which created any uproar among the rebels?
