Jump to content

Talk:New York Conspiracy of 1741

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Lahuard confirmed via e-mail that he is the original author. DanKeshet 17:57, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Needs Attention...

[edit]

This article uses a direct quote from Gotham by Burrows and Wallace pg.160 and places it within quotation marks, but does not cite the reference. In any case, the part quoted is, I think, an incorrect assumption. Burrows and Wallace suggest that the nickname Oswego given to Hughson's tavern and underground fencing operation by NYC blacks was a reference to Oswego trading post on the Great Lakes. Perhaps. It is more likely the reference was to the Oswego Market on Broadway by Cedar St, which was itself named either in jest of the Indian post or more likely from the old English word meaning "swampy" (like the Oswego River in the Jersey barrens). The Hudson waterfront rather near Hughson's tavern was called Ellison's Dock but commonly called Oswego slip or the Swago Slip. Burrows and Wallace cite their sources only for whole sections so it is difficult to find their source for their statement, but I would think NYC criminals would be more aware of an open market ("Old Swago") 5 or 6 blocks from their dive than a trading post miles northward. More likely, a bar near the Oswego slip could easily take on the very name itself. Any thoughts?68.199.83.160 (talk) 00:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs some major attention in terms of, primarily, sentence structure and general flow. Far too many sentences are broken up, when they could be connected into one sentence with a comma or semicolon. There is no need to repeat the subject, for example: "The New York Slave Insurrection was a slave revolt in the British colony of New York in 1741. In 1741, economic tension in New York had created..." From reading the first sentence, we know it took place in New York, in 1741. This does not need to be repeated in the second sentence. Also, the phrase "economic tension" is used many times, with, to my mind, an unsatisfactory explanation of what this tension was, and what brought it about. Maybe I'll come back to this and fix it when I have some more time. LordAmeth 18:01, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Stono Rebellion (1739) and the Great Slave Conspiracy (1741) were Catholic plots to undermine Protestant England during the Global Catholic-Protestant conflict known in America as the "French & Indian Wars" (1689-1787). The Stono Rebellion & Great Slave Conspiracy occurred precisely as the "War of Jenkins' Ear" and "War of Austrian Succession" were flaring up — between Protestants and Catholics — in Europe.

Attention just an FYI

Let it be known that one of the characters of the slave revolt is referred to as Coffee in one sentence and Cuffee later on in another paragraph. Let it be known that the spelling of the name should be Kofi which is one of many names given to a child by his/her community. Kofi is masculine for being born on a Friday.. K Jubabu W —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.217.180.123 (talk) 05:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article Title

[edit]

The article title is questionable since no insurrection appears to have occurred. BradMajors (talk) 00:05, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I agree that the title is problematic. Wikipedia:Naming conventions suggests that names should favor "what the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize".
The Encyclopedia of New York City (Kenneth T. Jackson, 1995) uses "Negro plot" (in quotation marks). Africana (Kwame Anthony Appiah and Henry Louis Gates, Jr., 1999) calls it the New York Slave Conspiracy of 1741. Among the sources listed at this article, "Negro plot" seems to come up a lot. And the first sentence says "The New York Slave Insurrection, also known as the Great Negro Plot of 1741 or The Great New York Conspiracy of 1741 ..."
Here are Google hits on some possible titles:
New York Slave Insurrection of 1741 (current title): 49 (includes copies of this article)
New York Negro Plot of 1741: 83 (search term "New York" "Negro Plot of 1741")
New York Conspiracy of 1741: 1,871
Great New York Conspiracy of 1741: 1,330
New York Slave Conspiracy of 1741: 31
It looks like "New York Conspiracy of 1741" or "Great New York Conspiracy of 1741" might be the appropriate title. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 03:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Either one of your two suggested titles is OK with me. BradMajors (talk) 04:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the interest of simplicity, let's use "New York Conspiracy of 1741". — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 05:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need sources

[edit]

All of the quotations should be sourced with inline citations.--Parkwells (talk) 14:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Corrections

[edit]

I added a number of dates, inline citations and corrections to the material. Don't know where the unsourced quotes came from.--Parkwells (talk) 16:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-I think the names, at least, of the slaves and indentured servants that were killed or sold because of the trials should be included in this page. For many of the stories the plot trials in the only existence of them in history and should be documented on the wiki page. Their stories existed and are part of that history. Cuffe, Cesear, Peggy, Mary Burton, John Hughston and more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjayy138 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics

[edit]

This is generally a well written article, with a lot of interesting detail. However, I have some concerns about the statistics given; as you've probably heard, "there are lies, damn lies, and then statistics".

Early in the article the author asserts that “By 1741 slaves comprised one in five of New York's total population of 10,000” (Background, 1st paragraph).
It is later claimed that “At the height of the hysteria, half of the city’s male slaves over the age of 16 were implicated in the plot and jailed” (Trials, 2nd paragraph).
Then in the final tally given he says that “By the end of the trials, 160 blacks and 21 whites had been arrested” (Trials, 7th paragraph).

If slaves comprised one fifth of the population, that would mean there were roughly 2,000 slaves in the city. Therefore, it seems very unlikely that a mere 160 blacks, not all of whom were slaves, could constitute half the city’s male, slave population, over the age of 16. For the “half” claim to be true, I would think the number would need to be closer to 500 than 160. But it is also possible that women and children predominated among the slaves of NY in 1741. Spamhappens (talk) 03:43, 2 November 2013 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Spamhappens (talk • contribs) 03:34, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on New York Conspiracy of 1741. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:35, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on New York Conspiracy of 1741. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:52, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on New York Conspiracy of 1741. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:41, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_York_Conspiracy_of_1741&oldid=1204267448"