Passions
are running high in Bristol over whether it should say
sorry for its past.
For generations Bristolians have gloried
in the beauty of their city, with its graceful Georgian
terraces, grand public buildings and honey-coloured
churches. But this week they face a decision that has
split the city - whether to apologise for the cruel
trade that paid for so much that makes it beautiful.
The front page headline in the Evening
Post, Bristol's local newspaper, was in no doubt. 'It's
time the city said sorry' it shouted last week. But
there is no consensus on the issue; on the contrary,
the debate is stirring up anger and upset.
'Bristol was one of the main ports
involved in the trading of slaves taken from West Africa
to British colonies in the Caribbean during the 17th
and 18th centuries, and most Bristolians were involved
in the slave trade in one way or other,' said Dr Gareth
Griffiths, director of the city's British Empire and
Commonwealth Museum. 'Local people supplied the labour
and provisions for the slaving ships; they created the
goods that paid for the slaves and they bought the spoils
from the ships when they returned.'
Griffiths is the inspiration behind
this week's Apology Debate, at which leading historians,
politicians and other public figures will argue whether
the city should apologise. It will then be thrown open
to a vote. 'The issue is particularly resonant in the
lead-up to next year's 200th anniversary of Britain's
abolition of the slave trade but emotions run particularly
high in Bristol,' Griffiths said.
The extent of Bristol's involvement
in the slave trade resonates in practically every civil
and religious city landmark: from Merchants Wharf to
the Redcliffe Caves, where slaves are said to have been
incarcerated, to Queen Square, the city's most serene
public space, completed at the height of Bristol's involvement
in the trade and where mayor Nathaniel Day petitioned
against a tax on slaves.
The pretty courtyard housing the Merchant
Venturers' Almshouse harks back to the powerful 18th-century
pro-slavery lobby, while the bells of Bristol's loveliest
church, St Mary Redcliffe, were triumphantly set ringing
when William Wilberforce's Bill to abolish slavery was
defeated in 1791.
But it is not only historical landmarks
that pay tribute to the trade: just last month, the
choice of 'Merchants Quarter' as the name for the new
city centre shopping area was deemed so offensive that
the developers were forced to come up with other ideas.
No official representative for Bristol
has ever formally apologised for the fact that, from
1698 to 1807, when trading in slaves from Africa was
outlawed, 2,114 ships set sail from Bristol to Africa
and then on to plantations in the Americas, carrying
over half a million slaves. Bristol's record was only
exceeded by Liverpool, which made a public apology for
its role back in 1994. Bristol, on the other hand, has
only recently focused attention on its part in the trade;
in 1996 its Festival Of The Sea failed to make any mention
of slavery. Two years later, however, the Pero's Bridge,
named after a slave, was built in the city and a Slave
Trail, showing how the city's fortunes were created
by merchants, was created.
For many, however, this is still not
enough: just last year, 18-year-old Juggy Singh asked
teachers at the Colston Collegiate School about the
link between the school's founder, Edward Colston, and
the slave trade. 'They never told me properly,' he said.
'I was so disappointed in them.'
Kofi Mawuli Klu, chair of the Pan-Afrikan
Taskforce for Internationalist Dialogue, agrees that
Bristol has failed to honestly come to terms with its
role in the trade. 'The story of enslaved African peoples
must be remembered, retold and reinterpreted. Only then
can we come to terms with the fact that, although the
trade ceased 200 years ago, the descendants of the slave
trade in Bristol still live in mansions while the descendants
of slaves remain in poverty,' he said.
Toyin Agbetu, of Ligali, a non-profit
voluntary organisation dedicated to challenging negative
representations of the African British community, said
that an apology by Bristol would encourage honest engagement
with the past. 'An apology is just a beginning,' he
said. 'As well as an apology, there should be re-education,
reparation and a rewriting of history.'
Bristol City Council is refusing to
be drawn on whether it is likely to deliver the apology
but Professor AC Grayling, who will be chairing the
debate on Wednesday, hopes they will not. 'An apology
like this is futile gesture politics and a navel-gazing
distraction from the much more important issue of how
much slavery goes on, unrecognised and unheeded, across
the world today,' he said.
The issue of who should do the apologising,
and to whom, is a contentious one. 'Morally this is
an incredibly complicated issue,' said Richard Dowden,
director of the Royal African Society. 'Africa itself
was the main perpetrator of slavery; the continent is
deeply implicated as a buyer, catcher and seller of
slaves. What is really important is the lasting damage
done to the psychologies of black people.'
That, he believes, is the issue at
the core of a lot of Africa's problems today. 'What
needs to happen is something much deeper than an apology,'
he said. 'There needs to be a coming together of all
the countries involved in slavery and its global legacy
needs to be discussed.'
All of those in the debate, however,
agree on one point; it is when a people no longer feel
the need to ask for an apology that their wounds can
be judged to be healed and their self-confidence restored.
'That is the point we need to move
towards now,' said Dowden. 'And if an apology is the
first step on that road, then it should be made without
delay.'
Return to Press
Cuttings index
|
