Traces of the Trade: Redefining History

Overall, Traces of the Trade was very interesting documentary. Throughout the semester we had touched on the fact that history can be examine through many different ways such as, archives, testimony, and oral history etc. In this case, the Dewolf family wanted to trace back the history of African slaves in order to come to an understanding of the past. Throughout the beginning of the film, Katrina Browne had stated that her families from the past were known throughout their hometown as historical figures of America. In reality, Katrina Browne wanted to prove that the family business of slave trade degraded, and caused a lot of pain for millions of Africans.

What I found quite interesting about this documentary is that how a small town from Bristol, Rhode Island embraces the DeWolf family’s business as proud part of history; rather than viewing the “slave trade” that caused harm, and made to millions of Africans suffer. Throughout American history we tend to reconstruct the dynamics of history in order to hide the horrific truth behind it. An example of this would be is the history told of Christopher Columbus, better known as the heroic man who discovered America. The reality of how America was discovered could be considered as the unforgiving part of U.S. history. This country was built and constructed on violence, war, and conquering land. Nonetheless, I believe the Dewolfs slave trade business should be viewed as extreme as the holocaust. The slave trading business even until this day has an impact on society’s way of status, class, and culture.

What I found interesting throughout the documentary was that the DeWolf family wanted to give some type of reparation back to African Americans. The biggest question was how? Another question that stood out was: should compensation be based on money, or is it something much bigger than wealth? Overall, what I have examined throughout the documentary was the fact that history can be changed and molded into different perspectives. Which makes me question how can we define what is right or wrong history?