The mythology of Hopkins as an abolitionist was created to permit ongoing favorable treatment for the private institutions (including funding from the state when it was in dire straits). The Baltimore Magazine article continues that long tradition that delegitimizes the collective memory of residents whose human rights who were first violated by the Hopkins family (for centuries) and the institutions that bear his name (ongoing). To even suggest that Hopkins' inclusion on the 1850 census was "discovered" by Papenfuse is laughable on its face. "Historians" who before 2020 chose to overlook the slave schedules, (and those who continue to stretch the significance of "slave owner") willingly risk their academic integrity in favor of maintaining the myth. I say this not just because the article that I wrote for the same magazine was killed at the last minute allegedly solely based on my world view shaped by my race and experiences. Instead, the magazine unapologetically published (but not unsurprising) an article that fully embraces a Hopkins-centered world view -- as if whiteness is not a world view to be challenged. The privilege cannot be undone if it's never acknowledged.
The public record has yielded several traces of the one enslaved man in Hopkins’ 1840 household. His name was George (probably Johnson), he was born in Winchester, VA, and he was 18 in 1840. His owners were Samuel and Lavinia Hopkins. Ed Papenfuse and I have uncovered documents in VA and MD that confirm these facts. You can read about them, and the life of Sam Hopkins, Jr., here: https://www.thehouseofhopkins.com/essays/21-samuel-hopkins-jr
The mythology of Hopkins as an abolitionist was created to permit ongoing favorable treatment for the private institutions (including funding from the state when it was in dire straits). The Baltimore Magazine article continues that long tradition that delegitimizes the collective memory of residents whose human rights who were first violated by the Hopkins family (for centuries) and the institutions that bear his name (ongoing). To even suggest that Hopkins' inclusion on the 1850 census was "discovered" by Papenfuse is laughable on its face. "Historians" who before 2020 chose to overlook the slave schedules, (and those who continue to stretch the significance of "slave owner") willingly risk their academic integrity in favor of maintaining the myth. I say this not just because the article that I wrote for the same magazine was killed at the last minute allegedly solely based on my world view shaped by my race and experiences. Instead, the magazine unapologetically published (but not unsurprising) an article that fully embraces a Hopkins-centered world view -- as if whiteness is not a world view to be challenged. The privilege cannot be undone if it's never acknowledged.
The public record has yielded several traces of the one enslaved man in Hopkins’ 1840 household. His name was George (probably Johnson), he was born in Winchester, VA, and he was 18 in 1840. His owners were Samuel and Lavinia Hopkins. Ed Papenfuse and I have uncovered documents in VA and MD that confirm these facts. You can read about them, and the life of Sam Hopkins, Jr., here: https://www.thehouseofhopkins.com/essays/21-samuel-hopkins-jr