Channel
@Roots_of_America
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
1,538subscribers
-19 since we began measuring on 9 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001981026232 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @Roots_of_America |
| Created | Between 1 April 2023 and 31 October 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 9 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 1 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 8 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 1 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/Roots_of_America |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1 Sept 2026, 21:09 | 1,538 | -4 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 00:57 | 1,542 | -4 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 07:12 | 1,546 | -1 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 07:52 | 1,547 | -5 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 21:03 | 1,552 | -4 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 08:47 | 1,556 | -1 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 14:27 | 1,557 | no change |
| 9 Aug 2026, 23:00 | 1,557 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 2 November 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 2 November 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
6 reactions across 4 posts, in 1 kind.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 6 | 100.0% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 4 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 6 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 2 November 2025 to 2 November 2025, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
“Slave-owning parents… gave enslaved men, women, and children to their young daughters as gifts on special occasions… and also bequeathed enslaved people to them in their wills.” — They Were Her Property "قدّم الآباء المالكون للعبيد أبناءهم وبناتهم المستعبدين كهدايا لبناتهم في مناسبات خاصة، كما أوصوا بهم لهن في وصاياهم."
❤1
“White southern girls like Lizzie Anna learned how to be mistresses and slave owners through an instructional process that spanned their childhood and adolescence.” — They Were Her Property "تعلمت الفتيات البيض الجنوبيات كيف يكنّ سيدات ومالكات عبيد من خلال عملية تعليمية امتدت عبر طفولتهن ومراهقتهن."
❤2
“Lizzie Anna Burwell… demanded that her father ‘cut Fanny’s ears off’ and get her ‘a new maid’… Lizzie Anna was three years old.” — They Were Her Property "طالبت ليزي آنا بورويل والدها أن يقطع أذني فاني ويجلب لها خادمة جديدة، وكانت تبلغ من العمر ثلاث سنوات فقط."
❤2
“Slave-owning women invested in, and profited from, their financial ties to American slavery, yet they rarely documented those economic connections.” — They Were Her Property "النساء المالكات للعبيد استثمرن في العبودية الأمريكية وجنين الأرباح منها، لكنهن نادرًا ما وثّقن تلك الروابط الاقتصادية."
“White southern women actively participated in the slave market: they attended auctions, negotiated with traders, bought and sold enslaved people, filed lawsuits, and sometimes even owned slave yards.” — They Were Her Property شاركت النساء الجنوبيات البيض بفاعلية في سوق العبيد؛ حضرن المزادات، تفاوضن مع التجار، اشترين وبعن العبيد، ورفعن دعاوى قضائية، وأحيانًا امتلكن ساحات للعبيد.
“The author redefines ‘mistress’ to its original European meaning—a woman with power, dominion, and property—arguing that southern mistresses exercised real authority over enslaved people comparable to that of male masters.” — They Were Her Property تعيد الكاتبة تعريف مصطلح "السيدة" وفق معناه الأوروبي الأصلي كامرأة ذات سلطة وملكية، وتؤكد أن السيدات الجنوبيات مارسن سلطة حقيقية على العبيد تماثل سلطة الرجال.
“In the South, slave-owning women possessed wealth that men desired, and marriage to such women became a route to financial independence for many men.” — They Were Her Property في الجنوب، كانت النساء المالكات للعبيد يمتلكن ثروةً يطمع بها الرجال، وأصبح الزواج منهن وسيلة لكسب الاستقلال المالي لكثير من الرجال
File, posted without a caption
لقد كانوا ملكها: النساء البيض كمالِكاتٍ للعبيد في الجنوب الأمريكي They Were Her Property: White Women as Slave Owners in the American South تأليف: ستيفاني إي. جونز-روجرز (Stephanie E. Jones-Rogers) الناشر: جامعة ييل – Yale University Press سنة النشر: 2019 يُعَدّ هذا الكتاب من أكثر الدراسات التاريخية إثارةً للجدل في دراسات العبودية والجندر في الولايات المتحدة. ففي They Were Her Property، تفكّك ستيفاني جونز-روجرز واح…
❤1
"Muslims may have come to America by the thousands, if not tens of thousands." — Muslims in Early America "ربما جاء المسلمون إلى أمريكا بالآلاف، إن لم يكن بعشرات الآلاف."
"Islam had penetrated the savanna south of the Sahara Desert by the beginning of the ninth century as a consequence of Berber and Arab commercial activity." — Muslims in Early America "كان الإسلام قد اخترق السافانا جنوب الصحراء الكبرى بحلول بداية القرن التاسع نتيجة للنشاط التجاري البربري والعربي."
"Colonial and antebellum observers, who were largely ignorant of the Islamic faith, did not accurately record the variegated cultural expressions of African slaves." — Muslims in Early America "لم يسجل المراقبون الاستعماريون وما قبل الحرب بدقة التعبيرات الثقافية المتنوعة للعبيد الأفارقة، وذلك بسبب جهلهم الكبير بالإسلام."
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @Roots_of_America. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank — 307,501 of 1,629,497 entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 1 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“جذور أمريكا” (@Roots_of_America), 1,538 subscribers as measured 1 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Roots_of_America.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.