Breanna Moore, a Penn undergraduate alum and current Ph.D. student, conducted independent ancestry research and found connections between her own family history, Penn's history, and slavery. Breanna, when asked about her exhibit, said the following:
Through the Penn and Slavery Project’s Augmented Reality Mobile App, I tell the story of my fourth great-grandmother, Binah, and my third great-grandparents who were enslaved by UPenn alum, Dr. Anderson, in my hometown of Sumter, South Carolina. The tour stop highlights the social, economic, and political inequalities which persist from slavery by illustrating how slavery created discrepancies between the wealth, educational attainments, and resources of the families of white enslavers and the families of the enslaved. My family is a microcosm of the larger African American community.
Dr. Anderson's Appraisement
Dr. William Anderson graduated from UPenn in 1810. It took over 200 years later for someone in my family lineage to attend an ivy league institution. It took over a century for my family to have access to educational institutions to become literate. Through the framework of the long-term consequences of how slavery supported a highly skewed transfer of intergeneration wealth and privilege, illustrated by the documented history of my family over five generations, from slavery to the present, set in contrast to the fortunes of the Anderson family of South Carolina, where two family members received degrees from Penn Medical, this tour stop aims to contribute to the larger national conversation of educational institutions and reparatory justice.
This is the sharecropping document signed by members of Breanna's family.
See below for more information.
It was required that formerly enslaved people reside upon and devote their labor to the cultivation of the Plantation. They were forbidden from carrying guns, pistols, or any other offensive weapon. leaving the plantation without permission. Although they were no longer enslaved they were required to remain on the plantation, and could not leave the plantation without permission. Their conduct was monitored and behaviors restricted including avoiding drunkenness and other gross vices.
The sharecroppers were in a precarious situation where any deviations from the conditions listed in the Contract would result in their dismissal from the Plantation. Their dismissal would result in a forfeiture of the crops they had harvested without pay.
Despite these restrictions on their movement, their actions, and their gun ownership, the contract stated that sharecroppers would be treated in a manner consistent with their Freedom.