Anachronisms and other reference errors a nach ro nism nakr niz m noun plural noun anachronisms a thing belonging or appropriate to a period other than that in which it exists especially a thing that is conspicuously old fashioned everything was as it would have appeared in centuries past apart from one anachronism a bright yellow construction crane an act of attributing a custom event or object whether or not inappropriately to a period to which it does not belong Eleanor Roosevelt was the quintessential dyke Everything in the movie based on the Wikipedia article was as true to the time as it would have appeared to the Council on July 9th1640 apart from one anachronism the emergence of a black slave named John Punch from the courtroom In Sparing Ishadrian This discussion has been transplanted from another user s talk page I have opted to reply to sentences as they appear My replies are in green Sorry SD WP I don t know why and are spending their time arguing on your talk page Neither Wayne or PresidentitstVB have submitted any strong reliable source that claims Punch wasn t a slave sentenced to slavery or wasn t enslaved I agree that it is possible Punch could have been made subject to a superstition passion etc and thus enslaved according to the definition of the word at the time I have stated ad infinitim et nauseum that he was not in any way made a slave when viewed through any lens of the time no matter how many oxymoronic historians state otherwise Slaves were specifically identified by the edicts of 1618 as slaves to the Colony by the slave traders and most significantly by the slaves themselves especially those who converted to Christianity as slaves on board the early 17th C ships for the sole person of not being treated as slaves upon their arrival in the new world I m tired of trying to argue the facts with a brick wall except to ask you if I were to write what two other reliable sources had considered in publications Scoobydunk is a brick wall would you be able to find two reliable sources which specifically stated as if to state the obvious for no apparent reason Scoobydunk is not a brick wall I rest my case They ve also failed to provide any reliable source to claim there were slaves recognized and officially documented by a legal institution before Punch Go ahead Do what did at 5 36 PM EST on July 31st 2012 just make that leap of faith and write it over and over again WP OR After all you have already said you removed it in response to my objections so why should I be surprised looking at the article s history that you wouldn t continue the flip flip flam Wayne thinks this quote from Foner supports his argument but it doesn t because Foner is specifically talking about the institution of slavery and when historians consider the institution to have originated I ve already supplied a quote from a strong reliable source by Vaughan that further substantiates this point On the first pointthe status of blacks before the passage of the slave lawsthe issue is not whether some were free or some were slave Almost everyone acknowledges the existence of both categories by the 1640s if not from the beginning Alden T Vaughan The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography Vol 97 No 3 July 1989 It is well known that slavery existed long before Punch s case it was documented in Massachusetts in present day Somerville I think in the Sugar Islands the English colony of Barbados primarily from where a number of our first black immigrants emigrated and most notably on the slave ships departing West Africa from where Punch himself is alleged to have come So even though historians may differ on when the institution of slavery started Vaughan clarifies that almost everyone recognizes the existence of both slaves and free blacks by 1640 if not from the beginning of the colony Wayne is trying to use his OR interpretation to pretend what Foner says contradicts what numerous historians have said about Punch and it doesn t He s failed to refute this fact and has repeatedly ignored this point made