This casts shadows upon the sources agenda and reliability, compounded by the application of the Biblical system of slavery being anachronistic and limited, but reveals the power of literal application of the Bible as ideological justification for slavery in its ideas of superiority and inferiority.
To attract white servants, Beverley makes a definitive distinction between "servants for a time " and "slaves for life3 " in the hereditary nature of slavery as it follows "the condition of the mother4 " and its racial basis as "the slaves are the Negroes5 ". By 1705, the differences between the two types of labor were marked, de facto and de jure. The ratification of the first Slave Code of 1661 legislated the chattel status of Africans and codified the inequality between whites and blacks. He also describes how "the male-servants and slaves of both sexes are employed together but the work is no other than what planters themselves do6 ". His description of the benign nature of the institution bring it far closer to equality between servants and slaves than was surely possible at this stage, as the plantation slavery system took hold in Virginia with the influx of thousands of Africans. Beverley makes clear the mistreatment in allowing white female servants to work outside, "if she be good for anything else7 ", but makes the black female slaves inferiority unquestionable: "it is common to work a woman slave outdoors8 ". Slaves of both sexes would be employed outdoors, showing disregard for gender for racial imperative. This could equally evidence the economic imperative of being able to gain slaves cheaply for lifelong servitude, or the racially motivated wish to enslave "inferior " Africans.
The Book of Genesis shows the evidence Europeans believed was God's justification for African enslavement. It details the "Curse of Ham ", put upon Ham by Noah in verses 25 and 26, "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall be unto his brethren.
