An argument Leon Higginbotham Jr. makes in The Ancestry of Inferiority (1619-1662), is that the people of Virginia had already begun to think of blacks, whether free or indentured servants, as inferior to them before slavery was institutionalized. Settlers had already begun to develop legal strategies regarding how blacks were to be disciplined. Higginbotham has two reasons why Africans were not afforded the same freedoms as white indentured servants in Virginia. The first reason he states is that most white indentured servants came to Virginia of their own free will. Once they had concluded their five- or seven-year contract with their master, they were free to purchase land and begin working on their own. Unlike the Africans who, according to him, were brought here against their will or out of desperation. The second reasoning is that the English thought black represented evil or danger and since the skin color of Africans was black, they must be evil. Higginbotham offers a couple of examples that represent just how the English, before the actual term slavery was used, were already creating a racial difference in the justice system. From the court cases he has reviewed, he says it is necessary to find what the case doesn't say versus what it is. When the English identified people with names, the only time skin color was not used in context was when that person was white. Another case he used is a good example of black inferiority to white superiority in the early 17th century is in the case of In Re Graweere, 1641. The court made sure that a particular African father had no value in society when she was trying to get her baby back. However, since his son was... middle of the paper... he also used a summary by Philip D. Morgan in Winthrop D. Jordan's book, White over Black: American Attitudes versus the Negro, 1550-1812. Vaughn, like the three previous authors, also used a History of Virginia and a History of Barbados for his research. Although all four authors used similar sources for their articles, each had a different perspective on how and when slavery became the norm. Higginbotham appears to have coincided with Vaughn, but he didn't go that far back in history. Jordan and Morgan are both completely different even though all four have the same topic. They are all well organized and well thought out for what they were trying to demonstrate. However, my favorite is Morgan's essay. Having someone paint a picture of our Founding Fathers for what they were and not sugarcoat it because that's what the public prefers is amazing.