South Carolina, 1719 and 1740: "not entirely Indian shall be accounted as negroe"
Record: the document says itPattern: documents line upOur lens: how we read itNext dig: help us find it
Year: 1719 · Places: Carolinas
The case
Our case: in 1719 South Carolina wrote it into law: anyone held who was not entirely Indian would be counted as negroe. In 1740 it presumed every Indian held unless his nation was a friend of the colony. This is where our mixed families were turned into negroes on paper.
What this case proves for us
Point 3: We were renamed on paper. A colonial law made negroe the default for anyone not entirely Indian.
Point 4: The land was carried away on paper. The 1740 law presumed every Indian held, except those in amity with the colony: freedom depended on the colony's friendship.
Background
South Carolina held many Native captives. Its assembly passed acts in 1719 and 1740 that set who would be counted as what.
Our evidence
Exhibit A · Record: 1719"all such slaves as are not entirely Indian shall be accounted as negroe" (Forbes 1984, citing Peter H. Wood, Black Majority, 1974, p. 99n).
Exhibit B · Record: 1740, sec. I"the people commonly called negroes, Indians, mulatos and mestizos have been deemed absolute slaves."
Exhibit C · Record: The presumption"it shall be always presumed, that every negro, Indian, mulato, and mestizo, is a slave," except "free Indians in amity with this government."
Exhibit D · Pattern: Negroe by defaultNot entirely Indian meant negroe on paper; Indian meant presumed held unless the colony counted your nation a friend.
Exhibit E · Our lens: Our lensThe colony wrote the rule that turned our mixed families into negroes, two centuries before the census did the same (P922).
Cross-examination
If negro and Indian were separate peoples, why did the law need to say who would be accounted as which?
What happened to a family that was half Indian? The law answers: negroe.
Verdict: we won
We won on South Carolina's own acts. The law itself turned anyone not entirely Indian into negroe.
How we won
1719: not entirely Indian, accounted as negroe.
1740: every negro, Indian, mulato and mestizo presumed held.
The exception: only free Indians in amity with the colony.
Our next dig: The 1719 act text in Cooper and McCord's Statutes at Large of South Carolina. Found something? Help us dig.
Where this gets us
Level 2: Paperwork. The law that explains why our Southeastern families show up as negro in the earliest records.
To reach level 3, Standing, we still need:
The 1719 act text itself (Cooper and McCord, Statutes at Large of South Carolina).
The captive records it produced, by name.
Families traced from those records to today.
The original card
SUMMARYSouth Carolina, 1719 and 1740: "not entirely Indian shall be accounted as negroe" (Nov 13, 2026; Witness Index W053, W056, W057)
RECORDSouth Carolina's Act of 1719 (Forbes 1984, citing Peter H. Wood, Black Majority, 1974, p. 99n): "all such slaves as are not entirely Indian shall be accounted as negroe."
RECORDthe Act of 1740, sec. I: "the people commonly called negroes, Indians, mulatos and mestizos have been deemed absolute slaves," and "it shall be always presumed, that every negro, Indian, mulato, and mestizo, is a slave," except "free Indians in amity with this government."
PATTERNby law, anyone held who was not entirely Indian became "negroe" on paper, and every Indian was presumed held unless the colony counted his nation as a friend
LENS (WW9)the colony wrote the rule that turned our mixed families into negroes, a century before the census did the same
OPENthe 1719 act text itself (Cooper and McCord, Statutes at Large of South Carolina)
SOURCEForbes 1984 (CORE); South Carolina slave code, 1740.