abolition of slavery
Nearly two centuries after full abolition of slavery, the impact of abolition champions continues to be felt as the debate shifts from slavery to the more contemporary issue of racial equality. Olaudah Equiano and Frederick Douglass were Black slaves, authors, and abolitionists. The two had parallels in their style of abolitionism campaigns, observed in their lives, rhetoric, and ideals, in spite of a 50 year gap in their active years. They also had some differences, which could have originated from their worldview and early experiences. For instance, although Equiano and Douglass experienced slavery firsthand in their youth, their entry and exit out of slavery were different: Equiano was imported as a slave from Africa while Douglass was born into slavery. Equiano also encountered more slave-trade activities during his life as a slave, while Douglass was not in contact with slave-trade, but largely spent his slavery days in plantations in Maryland. The parallel and somewhat diverse foundations of their lives may have accounted for their similarities and differences in their approach towards abolitionism. Equiano’s approach was more focused on abolitionism, while Douglass developed his further towards the emancipation of Black People and women’s rights.
Differences between Equiano and Douglass in Lives and Rhetorical Stances
The two abolitionist leaders shared a common ideology that slavery was inhuman and victimized enslaved people. There is, however, voluminous evidence that indicates that their experience and approach may have differed on several occasions. There are five notable differences between Equiano and Douglass in their life as slaves, rhetorical stances, and approach to abolitionism. In spite of the differences, the abolitionists had experienced slavery of Black People in significant measures and their activities were fundamentally inspired by the treatment of slaves by their White masters.
The first difference between Equiano and Douglass was their point of contact with slavery. Equiano was kidnapped in his home country in Africa, sold to slave-traders and resold to a European farmer. Douglass was, however, born into slavery in Maryland. He was raised among slaves and eventually became a slave himself. The fact that both Equiano and Douglass spent their formative days in slavery legitimizes their memoirs as valid narratives of ill treatment of the enslaved Black People in Britain and the US.
Although both men died free, Equiano bought his freedom while Douglass escaped from slavery. Equiano had become part of the Atlantic Trade Network, both as a slave and as a trader. In the process of trading independently, he bought his freedom on July 11, 1766 (Allison 10). Douglass, on the other hand, fraudulently escaped to freedom from Baltimore by train, using his friend’s protection papers in September 1838 (Dworkin xi). His Freedom was only bought a decade later to allow him to return to the US (Dworkin xii).The means out of slavery determined their immediate activities since Equiano continued to work with Europeans while Douglass began his marriage and abolitionism almost immediately.
Equiano was a slave in Europe, while Douglass was a slave in America, a difference that may have influenced their different perceptions and rhetoric. While in Europe, Equiano travelled wide with his masters and was exposed to slave trade activities. However, Douglass had experienced slavery within Maryland, which may explain why his memoirs largely spoke about slaves’ experiences in plantations, more than slavery in general (De Lombard 246). Equiano’s narrative relates slaves’ experiences in a variety of contexts, from the trade-in Africa to the slavery in British colonies which he visited.
Douglass involved himself in civil rights movements, most particularly, women’s rights. Although Equiano was an ardent believer in equality and civil rights, his efforts were particularly focused on slavery. Frederick Douglass was directly involved in passing of the resolution that asked the American government for women’s suffrage (Dworkin xi). Anna Murray, the woman who made Douglass’s escape from Maryland possible, as well as his mother’s influence in his life are seen to be critical influences that shaped his desire to be involved in women’s rights.
Lastly, although both abolitionist leaders were Christians, religion appears to have more influence on Equiano than Douglass. Equiano was influenced by his evangelical faith, he linked the American and British anti-slavery movements (Allison 14). Douglass, on the other hand, used Christianity as a pedestal for honing his public speaking skills. Although his faith remained in Christianity, his rhetoric does not portray significant undertones of his religious orientation towards slavery.
Similarities between Equiano and Douglass in Lives and Rhetorical Stances
Both Douglass and Equiano were Christians. Equiano was evangelical, whose Christian faith greatly influenced his stance on Black Peoples’ slavery. Douglass had a brief stint as a preacher, prior to his abolitionist campaigns. As aforementioned, Christian values profoundly influenced Equiano’s abolitionist work, which oratory skills acquired in church influenced Douglass’s. The two had interactions with Methodist and evangelical groups that were opposed to slavery.
The written works of Equiano and Douglass revealed their stance on Black People’s slavery. They both used memoirs to illustrate slaves’ experiences, albeit in a different style. Douglass narrates more of his own life than Equiano, who uses observations from his sailing expeditions to illustrate the initial purchase of slaves from Africa (Bugg 1428). The common ground is in the two abolitionists’ tendencies to appeal to the masses by graphically illustrating the firsthand account of a Black African slave.
Equiano and Douglass both took their abolitionist activities to Europe and the US. Douglass toured Ireland when he left the US, while Equiano coordinated the American Abolitionist movement from both the US and Britain. The essential characteristic of the cross-national activism was the belief that slavery was inhuman irrespective of who the perpetrator and the victim was. There were Asian slaves in Britain and their respective colonies. Therefore, the travel of the abolitionist campaigners beyond their countries gesticulated that slavery was a universal vice.
Equiano and Douglass did not endorse the militarization of abolitionism. Although Douglass had an interaction with John Brown, a supporter of armed insurrection against slavery, he did not involve himself in the war. Equiano was also involved purely in unarmed abolitionist campaigns. Their unarmed stance may have reinforced their message that freedom from slavery epitomized self-evident human rights, requiring no conflict to enforce.
Influences of Equiano on Douglass
Although he existed 50 years earlier, Equiano’s footprint is visible in Douglass’s activities: The use of graphic memoirs to persuade masses on the subject of slavery, Christian ideals, and the conviction that slavery was an injustice rather than a natural cause. Douglass followed Equiano’s pattern of self-emancipation as a precursor for mass emancipation of slaves: The two abolitionists had to free themselves first, before they intensified the struggle from outside, perhaps due to the flexibility accorded by the freedom. Douglass, however, diverts from Equiano by delving deeper into the subject of human rights, thereby moving further from the goal of abolitionism: He had a raced view of slavery, which he transformed into the quest for the emancipation of Black People.
Conclusion
The mode of entry into slavery and the exit out of it could have determined the future lives, experiences, and eventually, the abolitionist approaches used by Frederick Douglass and Olaudah Equiano. Equiano was purchased from his homeland as a free man and shipped to Britain. Douglass was born into a slave family in Maryland. There are, therefore, possibilities that Equiano had a clash of identities, which may have poised him as a less radical abolitionist than Douglass. Douglass pursued his quest for emancipation beyond the end of slavery, into fighting for equality on behalf of Black people. The differences in approach do not overshadow numerous parallels in the lives of the two slaves turned abolitionists and authors.