When History Unravels: The Scholar Who Exposed Harvard’s Slavery Ties—and Paid a Price
In 2007, Harvard University made headlines by launching an initiative to confront its historical ties to slavery. The Ivy League institution hired Sven Beckert, a renowned historian, to lead a research project titled Harvard and Slavery. What began as an effort to “acknowledge and learn from the past” soon spiraled into controversy—not because of the findings themselves, but because of how Harvard responded to them. Beckert, now a professor emeritus, claims the institution sidelined him after his team uncovered uncomfortable truths. “We found too many slaves,” he said bluntly in a recent interview.
The story begins with Harvard’s public commitment to transparency. Like many elite universities, Harvard had long avoided scrutinizing its early financial and social foundations. But as institutions like Brown and Georgetown began grappling with their own legacies of slavery, pressure mounted for Harvard to follow suit. Beckert, an expert in 19th-century capitalism, seemed like the perfect fit. His task was straightforward: investigate how slavery intersected with Harvard’s growth between its founding in 1636 and the Civil War.
What his team discovered, however, was anything but simple.
Unearthing the Past
The research revealed that Harvard’s connections to slavery were systemic and deeply entrenched. Early donors to the university included wealthy families whose fortunes stemmed directly from the transatlantic slave trade. For example, the Royall family, whose coat of arms still adorns Harvard Law School’s seal, owned enslaved people whose labor funded their contributions to the institution. Enslaved individuals were also used to build campus structures and serve faculty members. Even Harvard’s first president, Increase Mather, owned slaves—a fact omitted from official biographies for centuries.
But the most damning revelation was the sheer scale of complicity. Beckert’s team identified over 150 enslaved individuals linked to Harvard before 1783, a number that shocked even seasoned historians. “This wasn’t a footnote,” Beckert explained. “Slavery was foundational to Harvard’s rise as an academic and financial powerhouse.”
The Backlash
As the project progressed, Beckert claims tensions arose between his team and Harvard’s administration. Initially supportive, university leaders grew uneasy as the findings contradicted the institution’s carefully curated narrative of progressive leadership. When Beckert proposed publishing a detailed report and hosting a public conference to discuss the research, he says administrators pushed back. “They wanted a sanitized version,” he alleged. “Something that acknowledged slavery existed but didn’t implicate the university’s legacy.”
The breaking point came in 2019. Beckert alleges that Harvard declined to renew his appointment as chair of the initiative, effectively ending his formal role in the project. While the university maintains that his departure was part of a “natural transition,” Beckert interprets it as retaliation. “They hired me to uncover the truth, then punished me for doing exactly that,” he said.
Harvard denies these claims. In a statement, the university emphasized its ongoing commitment to addressing its history, citing initiatives like a memorial to enslaved individuals and scholarships for descendants. Yet critics argue these efforts ring hollow without full transparency.
A Broader Pattern
Harvard’s dilemma is not unique. Universities across the U.S. and Europe are reckoning with their roles in slavery, colonialism, and systemic racism. But Beckert’s experience highlights a recurring problem: institutions often prioritize reputation over accountability.
Take Georgetown University, which in 2016 apologized for selling 272 enslaved people in 1838 to fund operations. Yet descendants of those enslaved people have criticized the school for failing to provide meaningful reparations. Similarly, the University of Virginia—founded by slaveowner Thomas Jefferson—has faced scrutiny for downplaying his role in maintaining slavery while celebrating his intellectual contributions.
Why This Matters
The backlash against Beckert raises urgent questions about academic freedom and institutional honesty. If universities suppress uncomfortable histories, how can they credibly claim to foster critical thinking? For students and alumni, the stakes are personal. Many argue that understanding an institution’s past is essential to shaping its future.
“History isn’t just about the past—it’s about who we are now,” said Tiya Miles, a Harvard professor and Pulitzer Prize-winning historian. “When universities hide their stories, they deny students the chance to engage with the full complexity of their education.”
The Path Forward
Beckert’s work has ignited calls for systemic change. Some scholars advocate for mandatory courses on institutional history, while others propose reparations programs akin to those at theological seminaries like Virginia Theological Seminary, which in 2019 allocated $1.7 million to descendants of enslaved laborers.
For his part, Beckert hopes his findings will spark a broader movement. “Universities must stop treating their histories like public relations problems,” he said. “True progress begins with humility, not image control.”
As debates over race and memory continue to divide campuses, one truth remains clear: the past is never truly past. And for institutions like Harvard, the cost of ignoring it may be far greater than the cost of confronting it.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » When History Unravels: The Scholar Who Exposed Harvard’s Slavery Ties—and Paid a Price