Here's an example of more revisionist BS that has been created in recent years.
First, lets keep in mind that by the time slavery was abolished in 1822, the abolition affect a small part of the population, both on the side of the slaves and on the slave owners, and the bulk of this took place in the vicinity of Santo Domingo because that (and in the San Cristobal area) was where the few and only sugar mills that were functioning at that time were located.
Now, look at this, the ruins of the sugar mill in Palave (near San Crist?bal) has been submitted to the UNESCO World Heritage thing. The part that has me very uncomfortable is this, and I quote:
"The Sugar Refinery then was managed by Juan Bautista Ollarazaba a famous person with the slave's rebellion circa 1884, which brought as consequence the burning of every houses and sugar cane plantations, this riot was formed primarily by free Haitians."
http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/1703/
Slavery abolished in 1822 and they claim that a slave rebellion took place not only 62 years later, but also 40 years after Dominican independence.
And then it mentions that the suppose riot was formed by free Haitians. When? How? Lets assume that its a typo (its a possibility) and they meant to say 1784, how could it had been formed by free Haitians? The first French invasion lead by Haitian hero Touissant Lovertoure took place in 1801 (the treaty of Basilea -I don't know if Basilea is the correct name in English- was signed in 1795 but in practice it didn't took place until 1801!) How could the "free Haitians" had done anything in 1784 on the eastern part of the island when all of them were in the west?
Either way, it doesn't makes sense!
And I personally think this is not a mere coincidence, I think this is being done intentionally and now they are trying to legitimize this through international institutions. Most people in UNESCO no nothing about Dominican history, so this will probably be accepted as the truth.
First, lets keep in mind that by the time slavery was abolished in 1822, the abolition affect a small part of the population, both on the side of the slaves and on the slave owners, and the bulk of this took place in the vicinity of Santo Domingo because that (and in the San Cristobal area) was where the few and only sugar mills that were functioning at that time were located.
Now, look at this, the ruins of the sugar mill in Palave (near San Crist?bal) has been submitted to the UNESCO World Heritage thing. The part that has me very uncomfortable is this, and I quote:
"The Sugar Refinery then was managed by Juan Bautista Ollarazaba a famous person with the slave's rebellion circa 1884, which brought as consequence the burning of every houses and sugar cane plantations, this riot was formed primarily by free Haitians."
http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/1703/
Slavery abolished in 1822 and they claim that a slave rebellion took place not only 62 years later, but also 40 years after Dominican independence.
And then it mentions that the suppose riot was formed by free Haitians. When? How? Lets assume that its a typo (its a possibility) and they meant to say 1784, how could it had been formed by free Haitians? The first French invasion lead by Haitian hero Touissant Lovertoure took place in 1801 (the treaty of Basilea -I don't know if Basilea is the correct name in English- was signed in 1795 but in practice it didn't took place until 1801!) How could the "free Haitians" had done anything in 1784 on the eastern part of the island when all of them were in the west?
Either way, it doesn't makes sense!
And I personally think this is not a mere coincidence, I think this is being done intentionally and now they are trying to legitimize this through international institutions. Most people in UNESCO no nothing about Dominican history, so this will probably be accepted as the truth.
