Words Matter: Owned vs. Enslaved

When we talk about slavery, the language we choose can either uphold lies or restore truth.

🚫 The Problem with “Owned”

• Frames human beings as objects

• Normalizes the oppressor’s perspective

• Suggests legitimacy in the idea that a person can be property

✅ The Power of “Enslaved”

• Centers the human being, not the oppressor

• Shows that slavery was imposed, not an identity

• Keeps blame where it belongs: on those who did the enslaving

• Acknowledges resistance and dignity that survived despite bondage

🔍 Side-by-Side: Oppressor’s Lens vs. Human Lens

🌱 Why This Shift Matters

Language shapes memory.

• “Owned” reflects the lie of dehumanization.

• “Enslaved” restores dignity and truth.

Every time we choose enslaved, we refuse to let oppressors have the last word. We tell history through the eyes of those who endured it — not those who profited from it.

1. Historical Documents (1700s–1800s)

• In slave bills of sale, plantation records, and wills, enslaved people were listed as property alongside cattle, land, or tools.

  • Example: “The estate includes 200 acres, 5 horses, 3 cows, and 12 Negroes owned by the deceased.”

• Newspapers of the time ran ads that used the word “owned” or no humanizing description at all:

  • Example: “For sale, one strong Negro boy, owned by Mr. James Carter.”

• The emphasis was on legal ownership — reflecting how the system justified slavery.

2. Abolitionist Era (1800s)

• Abolitionists sometimes used the same “owned” language to show the brutality of slavery, but they also started to describe people as enslaved:

  • Frederick Douglass described himself as “a slave in fact” but also said “I was enslaved by Mr. Covey.”

• Harriet Jacobs (Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl) carefully showed the inner life of enslaved women, shifting focus from ownership to their humanity and struggle for freedom.

3. 20th Century Scholarship

• History books for much of the 20th century still leaned on “slaves” and “owned,” reflecting a white-centered narrative.

• For example: textbooks would say, “The South owned four million slaves by 1860.”

• This phrasing made slavery sound like a fact of economics, rather than a violent system imposed on human beings.

4. Contemporary Scholarship & Museums

• Today, there’s a deliberate shift. Institutions like Monticello, the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture, and the Whitney Plantation use the term “enslaved people” instead of “slaves.”

• Example:

  • Instead of: “Thomas Jefferson owned over 600 slaves.”

  • They say: “Thomas Jefferson enslaved over 600 people.”

• That small shift highlights the agency, humanity, and injustice. It makes clear that no one can truly be “owned.” 

Why This Change is Sacred

Language isn’t just academic — it’s about memory and justice.

• “Owned” reflects the dehumanization.

• “Enslaved” restores dignity and truth.

It’s part of a larger effort: to tell history through the eyes of those who endured it, not those who profited from it.

✨ Empowering Reminder:
No one is “born a slave.”
People were born free in spirit and were enslaved by systems of violence.