slavery – Page 4 – U.S. to 1877

October 27, 2013

Paternalism in the American South

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

After the American Revolution, American society was characterized by strong ideas about and pride in their widespread freedom and yet the South was still home to thousands of slaves. The so called Peculiar Institution was, no doubt, economically imperative for the region through the nineteenth century; over 60 percent of cotton was grown in the American South (Davis 184). However as the debate between supporters of slavery and abolitionists intensified during the nineteenth century, slave owning southerners began to attempt to justify slavery by using the principles of the new nation.

People who supported slavery used ethnology in order to support the morality of slavery, claiming that the naturally inferior black race depended on the regulatory influence of whites to prevent the “progressive decline and decay” which would result if slaves were emancipated and left to fend for themselves (Davis 189-190). Slavery, therefore, possessed a quasi-paternalistic aspect which was unique to the American South. In fact, “several traders noted that American masters wanted above all to be ‘popular’ with their slaves – a characteristically American need that was probably rare in Brazil and the Caribbean” (Davis 195). I would argue that the American preoccupation with being liked by their slaves and being “paternalistic” was a result of the disparity between the institution of slavery and the principles of liberty and freedom which took hold of the nation during the revolution. Abolitionists in Great Britain often exploited this disparity in order to renounce slavery and the validity of Americas claims of being an equal society. The paternalism of southern slavery was a defensive reaction against this, attempting to integrate slavery into the new national rhetoric.

I found it interesting that Davis occasionally pulled from modern society in analogies dealing with slavery in nineteenth century America. These projections into the modern day sometimes clarified claims, such as Davis’ comment that “If slavery had persisted into the later twentieth century…one can only…imagine large corporate planters passing out ‘overseer evaluation forms’ to the slaves” (Davis 195-196). However, I question the applicability of these comparisons. In class we discussed the danger of applying modern systems of beliefs to peoples from the past who possessed completely different systems of beliefs and different circumstances. By drawing comparisons between nineteenth century America and modern America, without taking into account the evolution in moral thought which occurred, Davis is in danger of drawing conclusions from faulty evidence.

September 18, 2013

Slavery in the North, Virginia, and South Carolina

Slavery took on distinct forms in the various regions of America. In the North slavery was not as commonplace as in the South, but slavery in some areas was still the primary backbone of physical labor, and unlike the South, Northern slaves were more directly in competition with working class whites, but at the same time had more elements of their own autonomy and were often quite close to their white owners. In Virginia slavery underwent several transformations. Slavery saw its roots initially in Virginia as very similar to indentured servitude, with some slaves finding freedom after working for a master for a set number of years. The beginning years of slavery in Virginia showed a surprising degree of egalitarianism between freed blacks and whites, with some blacks becoming planters and slave owners themselves. As time went on however, and more slaves entered Virginia, the elites among the society grew upset at the idea of this near racial equality and worked to enshrine black inferiority into the laws, resulting in a vast removal of the rights of freed blacks and of those of slaves. In South Carolina, a interesting dichotomy emerged, slaves were crucial to almost every aspect of South Carolina life, from working the fields to fighting Indians, and the slave owners profited greatly from the slaves’ skills and labor, but the slave owners were greatly fearful of the possibility of a slave uprising, as they were outnumbered by their slaves and instituted harsh slave codes to attempt to prevent it. But in spite of this slaves had a greater degree of cultural autonomy than within other portions of the American colonies.

September 18, 2013

Southern History Ain’t Pretty

Finally, we reached the South. We piddled around the area for a little while with Virginia and shortly after went North. But now we can talk about some good ole southern tales of rice, raiders, terror, and for brief moment, Georgia. Those short headers from Taylor’s Chapter 11 on the Carolinas show us just how great colonial times were in the Carolinas. It is safe to say that they showed up a little late to the party. The “new world” was no longer a disease ridden mystery but rather a disease filled reality. People had been in America long before the Lords Proprietor were set govern the large state of everything above Florida and below Virginia. But quickly, as Taylor points out and we might expect, that large land mass split into North Carolina, South Carolina, and eventually Georgia.

However, for the Carolinas showing up late to the party might not have been a bad thing. Just as Virginians figured out their crop was tobacco, so did South Carolinians figured out that rice could be their fortune. So the South Carolinians did as all respectable rich white men did back then, they bought slaves. The slave trade was not a new entity, but rather a practiced trade. And these were not any slaves. They were specialists in their fields, literally. However, being so southern the slaves could easily run south away from the slaveholders and into free territory. So, to prevent them for running away they armed themselves at all times, scared them, and armed the Native Americans around them to help if any slaves were to run in their direction. The whites were scared up an uprising in a society where blacks were a large part of the population. As history tells us, South Carolina becomes a slave state and remains that way for a long, long time.

Now, as Taylor did with Georgia, I will briefly speak of the Chesapeake colonies. Taylor presents a lot of information here. Yet, while I was reading, I felt as if I was reading a book of fun facts. He spats off numbers about how much it cost to cross the ocean and then mentions the story of Elizabeth Abbot and her master. Which leads him to wealth, successful planters, which in turn lead to Bacon’s Rebellion, and so on. Taylor then ends the chapter with slavery. He acknowledges a successful freed black man, Anthony Johnson, but then speaks his final words on the demise of the status of freed black men. One colonist even said that Negro and Slave had become homogenous (157).

I’ve always had a passion for studying southern history because it is where I am from. But it has never been nor will it ever be pretty. Taylor does what should be done. He speaks of truths, horrible, horrible truths, but truths that should be acknowledged and learned from.

September 18, 2013

Transformation of Labor in Virginia

In Chapter 7, Taylor writes about the Chesapeake colonies from 1650-1750. The part of this chapter that stuck out to me the most was how labor transformed from indentured servitude to the concept of slavery usually associated with the South. Most indentured servants before 1620 were forcibly brought over, but after 1620 it was a mostly voluntary choice. The emigration of servants fluctuated accordingly with the tobacco prices and wages in England (142). Although the first Africans were brought over as salves in 1619, it was not a profitable decision. Many of the early Africans were treated as indentured servants and were freed after their allotted labor time. There were no colonial laws against blacks, so “black freedmen and women could move as they pleased, baptize their children, procure firearms, testify in court, buy and sell property, and even vote (p. 154).” There were even instances of interracial marriage. These examples are in stark contrast to the way blacks were treated even up until the 1960s and 70s.

As Will said in his post after Bacon’s Rebellion a decrease in white indentured servants caused many of the planters to seek African labor. Even as late as 1650, enslaved Africans still only comprised 2% of the Chesapeake colonial population (142). Taylor says, “At the end of the seventeenth century, slaves became a better investment, as servants became scarcer and more expensive (p. 153).” The decrease in diseases increased slave life expectancy and allowed slave traders to come to the Chesapeake. Surprisingly, Taylor says that the change from indentured servants to salves protected the planters against rebellions by angry freedmen (p. 154). The only problem was, that the planters now had to worry about slave rebellions. The colonial militia began as a safeguard against slave rebellion. This was the beginning of whites grouping themselves together, not based on class, but by race. Towards the end of the seventeenth century, the Chesapeake colonies started placing stricter legal codes in regard to both slaves and freed Africans (p.155). Masters also started believing that “only pain and fear could motivate them (slaves) (p.155).” They considered the Africans as non-humans and this justified their despicable treatment of the slaves.

Laws passed in 1680 and 1705 further divided the races and set out punishments for blacks that broke the racial boundaries (p.156). Previously freed slaves were also discriminated against, and many of them left the Chesapeake colonies (p. 156-157). As racial slavery grew, Taylor says that “Virginia became both more stable and more distinctive from England (p. 157).” The racial divide continued to grow and your identity was the connotation associated with your skin color. Although whites were more united than ever once slavery was introduced, the classes within the white race were extremely unequal.

September 18, 2013

Development of slavery

Like Alia Karout states in her blog post, I was surprised by the amount of change slavery underwent in America; I had never considered the process through which it developed either. While completing the reading for this week in Inhuman Bondage, I was struck to learn the degree to which slavery evolved in America from a system based on economic and labor needs to one integral to the economy (especially in the more southern colonies) which is based on racism. In my other history classes, slavery in America was talked about in a way that made it seem like a very static, unchanging aspect of American society. It seemed as if it had been a part of the colonies since the beginning, however, as Davis shows, this is not the case. Like Davis points out, “…no British founders of North American colonies, except for South Carolina, intended to create slave societies,” therefore slavery developed gradually in different regions (the north, Chesapeake and south) as a solution to economic and labor conditions (Davis 126). For example, in the Chesapeake colonies slavery didn’t begin to take hold until the mid-1670s when improving economic conditions in England meant fewer emigrants were arriving in Virginia and Maryland as indentured servants. Slavery developed according to need

While it may seem obvious that slavery would develop differently in different regions according to economic need, the degree of diversification described both by Davis and Taylor in this week’s readings came as a surprise to me. Slaves in northern urban centers were working in specialized jobs such as carpenters, stoneworkers, and weaving. Most surprising, was the specialization of slaves in the Chesapeake and southern colonies who were bought specifically for their expertise in areas such as rice farming (in the Carolinas).

September 18, 2013

Inhuman Bondage: Chapter 6

In chapter 6, Davis discusses slave culture and social norms along the Atlantic coast. Rather than the arguements Taylor put forth, showing the similarities and differences between the three geographical regions, Davis makes the case that slave culture and treatment differed along lines that were by no means geographical. The differences between how black slaves were treated, he points out, is far too complex to be grouped into distinct categories, and even within small regions slave social norms take on unique identities. He points out an example from the mid atlantic colonies, where a graveyard of 23,000 dead slaves were found buried, but within the same community slaves were allowed to eat the same food at the same table with their white masters. As in the nature of the text, Inhuman Bondage dives deeper into the story of African American’s lives as slaves, and how many of them worked the system to become free men. Davis discusses how slaves would spend time learning about christian culture, and use it to their advantage in order to bargain to for their freedom, or in most cases half-freedom. Davis also makes the argument that a major reason for the difference in the number of slaves was due to the number of indentured servants available to work in the particular region. He states that many of the northern areas had less slaves because many vagrants and criminals from Britain were being shipped over in order to work,and that slavery boomed when the labor pool of indentured servants dries up. Overall, I enjoy the more focused writing of Davis, and his ability to condense large ideas into concrete writing that paint an alternative picture of slavery in colonial america

September 18, 2013

Gradual Racialization of Slavery

Tuesday’s reading revealed the nature of slavery in the Chesapeake and the Carolinas. For some reason, I was under the impression that slavery, especially in the South, had been racialized from the beginning. However, as the reading revealed, the development of white supremacy and racialized slavery actually happened in steps.

Long before the division between black and white, there existed a stark class divide. A sense of “otherness” was thrust upon the common white planters. Wealth inequality was the first existing divide between the inhabitants of the Chesapeake and Carolina colonies. It was very surprising to find that before the commodification of black slaves around 1670, there were black people who actually enjoyed freedom and legal privileges such as property, land, and even slaves or servants of their own after they had finished their terms as indentured servants (154).

When white indentured servants declined, African slaves were the solution to the lack of labor. I thought solidarity had always existed between all white people in the colonies due to their common ancestry, but it wasn’t until the planter elite began to worry for their safety at the growing portion of the population that consisted of slaves that this sense was forged. They relied on the common white men to muster up a sense of racial pride in order to protect the colonists from uprisings (156). In the process, the issues of wealth inequality and social stratification within the white community were put on the back burner while a preoccupation on racial superiority flourished.

Ultimately, after reading these Taylor chapters it became evident that the discrimination created by the planter elite wasn’t motivated by principle. They were neither particularly against common folk nor black people. Rather, they did whatever was economically beneficial to retaining their wealth and status.

September 18, 2013

The Users AKA Carolinians

The Carolinas were granted to eight politicians who had been favorites of the King of England. The colony quickly became a plantation colony, but they chose to leave the declining profits of tobacco and look at other crops to grow. They looked into raising livestock, which was relatively different from the past colonies, and they cultivated rice at “over 60% of the total exports from Carolina as measured by value.” They also took a major part in the slave trade as they took in so many slaves that the colonist felt threatened by the chance of a slave revolt. This was helpful as they looked to stay away from the Chesapeake’s problem of too much work for few people.

The Carolina colonists were also smart about how they took care of any types of attacks on their people. They had a regular pattern of using other bodies before taking the risks of hurting themselves. The chapter speaks of how slaves were used to kill the Spanish when the colony had problems with attackers from Florida and slaves were rewarded if they killed some of the adversaries. They also used the Indians with the “gun trade.” In this trade the Carolina colonists used the Indian’s numbers and knowledge of the land to find other natives and bring them to back as slaves. Taylor even adds that “colonists paid far more for a slave than for deerskins” which influenced the natives to take the weapons they were provided with and bring back their own kind in order to please the colonists.

The chapter also briefly goes into Georgia and how the Carolinas used that area to their advantage also. As stated in a classmates post (http://sites.davidson.edu/his141/the-carolinas-and-the-purpose-of-georgia/) Georgia was mainly a border state to keep distance from the Spanish. Georgia also made it less likely for runaway slaves to make it to the Spaniards, who took runaway slaves in, before being caught by the colonists. Georgia denied the slave system itself but took no part in keeping others from slavery.

September 18, 2013

The Carolinas and the Purpose of Georgia

Chapter 11 discuses the development of the southern colonies known collectively as the Carolinas. This land was granted to eight English aristocrats known as the Lords Proprietors. As pointed out by Mangone, in 1670 when Charles Town was founded the British were making a bold move in challenging the Spanish supremacy directly south of the colony. Thus colonists needed to be brought in quickly which the Lord Proprietors tried to attract with promises of religious toleration and grants of land. It was hard to attract colonist due to the relatively harsh living conditions especially in the Low Country of South Carolina with its, “hot, humid, and enervating summer replete with bitter insects,”. Although most colonist tolerated the conditions due to the abundance of fertile land to be exploited.

Weather was not the only concern of incoming colonists. The regions, being only recently settled, had native tribes who resisted the colonists’ expansion into their land. Although the Carolinas quickly dispatched of most of the native peoples and quickly expanded into the area. The Carolinas opened a trade relation and framed an alliance with the Westo to help deal with other tribes and bolster their profits only to ignore them when they were threatened by the Savannah. While there were skirmishes between the natives and colonist, most were relatively small and did not really affect colonial encroachment. Later there were, however, many raids on native villages such as Moore’s raid on Nooherooka, where they slaughtered hundreds. There was also the Carolina Indian rebels who tried to push back the Carolina colonist. They were unable to maintain their supplies and were forced to make peace due to the colonist superior firepower and their native allies.

The Carolinas’ plantation style of agriculture required more labor than was obtainable from the mother country thus they turned to slavery. The planters in the Carolinas had feared slave rebellions to the location, since it was a frontier colony they know that it would be easy for slaves to escape and form large groups to resist capture. Once such rebellion occurred in 1739 near the Stono River in Charles Town where runaway slaves obtained firearms, gained a fairly large following, killed whites and burned down multiple plantations. They were not entirely prejudice as they did spare an innkeeper who was not harsh to his slaves. After this rebellion and other minor ones, slave owners in the Carolinas feared slave rebellions so some would resort to brutal methods to keep the slave population in check. Although not all slave owners adopted this policy it was still a widespread issue in the Carolinas.

Georgia was founded mostly as a border colony to protect the recently very profitable Carolinas. As such the colony itself did not attract the attention of wealthy land owners wishing to expand their agriculture empire. The colony also rejected the slave system but did not show the need to emancipate slaves in other colonies. The colony was a refugee to slaves, criminals, and tax evaders. The colony also followed a plantation style of agriculture but on a smaller scale due to lack of labor.

September 17, 2013

In Chapter 6 of Inhuman Bondage, Davis attempted to demonstrate how African slavery differed from region to region in the New World. He explored the origins and development of slavery in the northern, Chesapeake, and southern colonies.

Slavery initially generated significant resistance in the northern colonies. Davis cited a clash between slavery and religious ideology, particularly from the Puritans and Quakers. While antislavery sentiments existed in the English settlements in the north, the Dutch lacked the white labor supported by an influx of immigrants, and therefore looked to Africa for slavery from an early stage. Davis conveyed that although the northern colonies had low percentages of slave populations, a significantly greater percentage of labor came from African slaves. However, Davis’s central theme pertaining to the North was that although slavery existed, the North did not rely on slave labor like its southern counterparts.

Davis depicted a chronic progression of slavery and racial relations in the Chesapeake region. Initially, Africans experienced a form of servitude very similar to white laborers. However, as the proportion of white servants declined, African slavery increased at a remarkable rate, and racial distinction became more prevalent. Davis noted the distinguishing factor of Virginia slavery consisted of the dramatic natural increase in slave population. While this growth benefitted planters economically, the resulting fear among whites had a tremendous social and political impact. Essentially, whites of different status began to unify over race in resistance to the growing black population. Davis then cited an Edmund S. Morgan argument claiming that racism played a vital role in forming republican ideology in America.

The South featured a totally unique brand of slavery. At the outset, slaves experienced more freedom and equality, as Davis mentioned a source that implied blacks possessed the ability to vote at one point. The South, expressed vividly by South Carolina, relied heavily upon slave labor. In fact, slave population significantly outnumbered white population in the region, resulting in more social and cultural unity among slaves than in any other colonial region. However, slaveowners, particularly in South Carolina following the Stono Rebellion, subjected their slaves to extremely harsh treatment.

Davis pointed out a key characteristic regarding North American slavery. With the exception of South Carolina, no colonies formed with the intent of exploiting slave labor. It appeared to be a gradual and fairly universal movement in the colonies. While the slavery differed among the colonies, several important and somewhat surprising similarities existed. For example, contrary to my prior knowledge, colonists used slaves in a variety of ways and a hierarchy formed among slaves.

My least favorite aspect of Davis’s style was the lack of organization within the chapter. While he divided it regionally, I think he could have done a clearer job of breaking up the chapter. In addition, I found it a little confusing as he jumped from one topic to another within a region.