Talk:Spirituals

message: The spirituals that we know today, are they all from the 19th century or later? Jonathan Tweet 02:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No one wrote any spirituals down until after 1865 -- they were an exclusively oral tradition before that -- so there's no certainty of how early they started. Some analysts claim to have found elements of African music in them, which slaves might have brought over with them. —Wahoofive (talk) 06:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  when did spirituals start? 

message: Out of curiosity, why aren't the African secret codes mentioned in this article?  During the time of the underground railroad, slaves that wanted to escape to the North used these "spirituals" to give directions and advice to other slaves.  "Swing Low, Sweet Chariot" could be changed into one of these easily (I was taught this in college) with inferences to direction, when the chariot was going to come, where it was going, and what time to meet in order to jump on it and head for the North.  Am I the only one who was taught that?
:I think most of the "secret codes" people have attributed to spirituals are mostly projection and wishful thinking. I don't think there's any solid evidence that these songs were used in this way. While there's no reason we can't mention such legends in Wikipedia (as long as they're indicated that way), I don't think it's essential. unsigned comment by User:Tarkaan
:Furthermore, they are mentioned. You didn't read the article completely. —Wahoofive (talk) 20:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but of course in a Wiki article, both sides of a controversy must be presented, and the implication that coded messages are a figment of modern imagination is sourced in the article from a WP:RS, and that must stay in the article. Sensei48 (talk) 08:18, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about secret codes? 

message: I think the introductory language is a little confusing.  Is the article about Spirituals in all Eurpopean colonies in the Americas or onlyc those colonies that ultimately became part of what is now the USA ?  Slavery ended in different parts of the Americas over a long period.  I think it is possible that the article is really about spirituals in the ante-bellum Southern United States =.  That would be the implication of using the 13th amendment as an end point.
I don't know how to fix this but there is a clear problem.  In the introduction we seem to be talking about the Americas (i.e. European colonies), but I think 1619 would be the date for English colonies, but not Spanish, Portugese or French. or Danish.  Clearly the ending date is restricted to some of the states of the United States (most of which were part of the CSA )The content seems to be limited to the United States.  
I don't know how to fix this.  The easiest thing at this point might be to make it clear that we are discussin a much more restricted period and place.  Conceivably something equivalent to spirituals was happening in Brazil or maybe not.
Hope that others can weigh in on this.  It's a very important topic.
Peter Reilly (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While of course, songs with spiritual lyrics are common worldwide, the term "spiritual" in this context refers to a very specific genre of music. If there is something relevant to say about something called "spirituals" in Brazil or wherever, then there should be a separate article on that topic. Any hypothetical Brazilian genre called "spirituals" does not necessarily have anything to do with "spirituals" in the sense meant in this article. Tuf-Kat (talk) 01:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  American European ? 

message: My suggestion is not to expand the article to cover other regions and time, but rather to mske it clear that what is being discussed is somehwat restricted in time and place.  It would also be good to figure out some better lanuage.  I really hate "de-Africanize the captive Black workforce" but don't have a ready substitute.  Also "captive Africans" is probably not an apt description of someone who's parents and grandparents were born in Virginia.  Referring to people as a "labor force" besides being possibly dehumanizing isn't even that accurate from the purported viewpoint of the master class.
Peter Reilly (talk) 23:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: American/European

message: I don't have a good suggestion for how to fix this, but I hope someone else may :
Religious significance
Negro spirituals were primarily expressions of religious faith. They may also have served as socio-political protests veiled as assimilation to white American culture. They were originated by enslaved African-Americans in the United States. Slavery was introduced to the British colonies in the early seventeenth century, and enslaved people largely replaced indentured servants as an economic labor force during the 17th century. These people would remain in bondage for the entire 18th century and much of the 19th century. Most were not fully emancipated until the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
1.  Did spirituals arise before or after 1776 (or arguably 1789) ?  Before that there was not a United States (or better United States of America) ?
2.  No suggestion but is the term African-American really good historically i.e. - is the first generation American ?  Arguably white people did not think of themselves as Americans till the mid eighteenth century ?  You could go on and on about this
3. "These people" does not work really well.  Grammatically it seems to refer to the generation in the 17th century that replaced indentured servants.  Of course none of them had anything to do with the thirteenth amendment.  
4.  "The British colonies" is also somewhat problematical since we are only talking about some British colonies and some regions Florida for example which never were British colonies.
Basically the article confuses historical entities and concepts with geographical regions.  I think you have to know a bit about what we might call "American History" and have that as a frame of reference for the article to be unambiguous as to what it is talking about.
Also rather than stating without reference that nothing similar went on in the Caribean or South America, it is more accurate to say that the article is not about what might or might not have happened in those places.  I'm clueless about the question.  It is very challenging to have any proof of a negative, but before we say it didn't happen somewhere we should want a credible source that has apparently looked at all available literature and made that conclusion.  If a Wikipedia contributor read all the available literature and didn't find anything, that would constitute research.  
I'm not making any changes, because the ariticle works OK if you come to it with the needed frame of reference and I might somehow compound the problems.  Nonetheless, I hope there is someone more skilled than I am who can come up with something.
Peter Reilly (talk) 19:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor Problems 

message: I see that the statement about not happening in other regions is sourced.  I would still be inclined to make the statement conditional.
Peter Reilly (talk) 19:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Oops

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Spiritual (music). 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080724090201/http://www.localdial.com/users/jsyedu133/Soulreview/Understandingpages/coded.htm to http://www.localdial.com/users/jsyedu133/Soulreview/Understandingpages/coded.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150714160231/http://www.spiritualsproject.org/sweetchariot/ to http://www.spiritualsproject.org/sweetchariot
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:44, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: My understanding is that public speaking in tongues is mostly associated with Pentecostalism and that this is a new denomination that originated around 1900. But the placement in the article makes it seem as if it's one of the cultural traits imported from Africa. Is this intentional? Im not aware of speaking in tongues as a part of music, but it may just be lack of exposure on my part. Thanks,  Lollipop (talk) 01:01, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speaking in tongues  

message: This probably should not be in the lead - it is from a single primary source from 1925, and in the rest of the article there's a bunch of references to western influence in spirituals. --Eldomtom2 (talk) 17:36, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "a genre of music that is "purely and solely the creation" of generations of African Americans"