Talk:Plaçage

message: Is the use of the word "mulatto" appropriate here?  It even points to the wikipedia article on that word which mentions that it is sometimes seen as a pejorative in certain cultures (Western culture being one of them, I'd say).  Would mixed-race or some other term be better?  - and you will know know me by the trail of dead. (talk) 22:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, it seems that in the field of genetics, population and so on, these sorts of terms are still ok.  Correct me though if I'm wrong.  - and you will know know me by the trail of dead. (talk) 22:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mulatto", "Quadroon" 

message: To prior editors of this text: Numerous statements in the account represented well-disproved assertions and assumptions, principally these: 
(1) Claude Thomas Pierre Métoyer was never a "French colonial administrator." He was French, born in La Rochelle, but came to the Spanish colony as a merchant and, late in his plaçage with Coincoin, became a planter. Very late in the Spanish era, he became a syndic (justice of the peace), but that was a judicial rather than administrative post. Also, he was never known by his first name, "Claude." Consistently throughout life, he was called (and wrote his own name as) Pierre.
(2) Métoyer did not "gift Coincoin with 68 acres." He could not, because he held no title to that property. He donated to her his *interest* in unpatented land, adjacent to his plantation, which he and their sons had begun to develop. 
(3) Métoyer's legal wife was of French and German parentage, not a "Frenchwoman."
(4) No evidence has ever been found that Coincoin planted the exceedingly labor-intensive crop, indigo. The only crop for which there is evidence is tobacco, which she shipped to market at New Orleans.
(5) Coincoin did not "accumulate a small fortune in the fur trade." There is no evidence she participated in the frontier fur trade. There is evidence that she trapped bears and sent their pelts and grease to market at New Orleans. There is also evidence that she trapped turkeys to supply to local families.
(6) Coincoin did not "[buy] her children's freedom from Métoyer." She bought her daughter Marie Louise from Pierre Dolet of Bayou Pierre. She bought her daughter Thérèse from Marie des Neiges de St. Denis de Soto at Opelousas. She bought (or, rather, her son Augustin Métoyer did so, stating that he was doing so on his mother's behalf), her son Nicolas Chiquito from Antonio Gil y Barbo's estate at Nacogdoches. She also bought grandchildren from Mme. de Soto and other owners. All of these were offspring of her first slave union(s), none of whom ever belonged to Métoyer. The children by Métoyer who were born in slavery were ultimately freed by their father.
(7) The Spanish and U.S. records relating to her "land grant" provide no evidence that she sought this "on Métoyer's instigation." Also, that tract never became a "land grant."  It was only a concession, which means she had received only an order of survey and settlement. She did not have it surveyed, ostensibly because the post surveyor went blind. Without a survey, she could not receive a Spanish patent (aka grant). It was later patented to her by the American government.
(8) Coincoin did not "create a prosperous dairy farm" on this land. She used it as a vacherie--that is, cattle-grazing land, which is quite different from a "dairy farm." The land was not cleared in any way and the only improvement was a cabin occupied by the Spaniard she hired to tend the cattle. In 1806, when the Spaniard died, she abandoned that operation, but continued to pay tax on the unimproved land.
(9) Melrose Plantation was never Coincoin's "estate." Contrary to the historical-site applications filed in 1972, the African House at Melrose was not built in 1796. Both the historical research that my late husband and I subsequently conducted for the local preservation society and the modern archaelogical work at the site have disproved that. Nor is it accurate to say that the African House is "the only African dwelling extant in North America." There is no evidence that it ever was used as a dwelling and the assertions of the local 'folk historian' Francois Mignon, that it represents African architecture, have been also disputed by archaeologists who specialize in the African diaspora.
Sorry to burst so many bubbles. Mignon's fables, and years of "rewrites" and "retelling" by others, have created many accounts contrary to the rich trail of evidence that actually exists for this remarkable lady.Eshown (talk) 04:28, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''Coincoin and Metoyer''' 

message: I have not visited this page for some time since I created it, but the changes and omissions are glaring, nonetheless.  The questions that I have are these:
The illustrative photograph of Sebastopol, which is a house and not a placée, is missing.  Instead, the text is left, which makes no sense at all if the picture is gone.  There is no discussion of Szymanski's placée or their son John to round it out.  I would say, omit this text as the photo has been omitted.
The last entry, on the quadroon balls, is not up to Wikipedia standards.  It reads as coming from a text or someone's paper, and may not be as accessible to readers who are not from the academy.  I think that it needs cleaning up.  I think that you also destroyed a lot of what I wrote and the sketches of buildings in aid of this academic view.  I worked hard on this Wikipedia entry; I was the first to write it.  I wish that I had been here sooner to be in on this revision.  It appears rather contemptuous of my efforts.  That's right.  Contemptuous.
I appreciate the revision of Coincoin's history, as well as adding that of her daughter, in view of the new information about her and Cane River.
gtdanyelz  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.129.26.237 (talk) 12:53, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes in Text and Erasure of  Illustrations 

message: Phrases such as  "So it became acceptable behavior for a white man to take a slave as young as twelve as a lover. " (which lacks citation) make it seem like the woman had a choice. The entire introduction contains similar language, and it isn't until later that they mention choice and survival, or that African and native women were captured traded and sold.  
Perhaps "So it became acceptable practice for a white man to rape a slave as young as twelve." Stating that a child slave was taken as a lover implies that a 12 year old slave had the personal agency to refuse if she wanted. Regardless of how well they were treated, a slave owner who slept with his slaves was a rapist.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.197.183.2 (talk) 01:31, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  problematic rape culture language 

message: "The book was later adapted as a film by the same name, starring Ingrid Bergman and Gary Cooper. But it, like the film, falls apart after the action and the heroine move on to Saratoga Springs, New York."
What does that mean? What fell apart? The book? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:fea8:bd20:1b9a:759f:357:43a1:7246 (talk) 19:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Usually it means the book/film was well plotted up to a point where it becomes cliché, illogical, or something else. Regardless, the sentence doesn't really add anything to the article, so I'll go ahead and delete it. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 23:13, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Saratoga Trunk''