Slave Ownership in the Southern United States

Phillips writes that the defining characteristic of a ‘Southerner’ is a feeling of white racial solidarity which casts all other social considerations in the shade; it is the “cardinal test of a Southerner.” When Phillips touches upon the subject of non-slaveholding whites, he emphasizes their zeal for the primacy of white civilization as an end unto itself. He relates two contemporary accounts of non-slaveholders, one a tinner and the other an overseer, to demonstrate this fervor but pointedly devalues their economic attachments to slavery, writing, “Both of them, and a million of their non-slaveholding like, had a still stronger social prompting: the white men’s ways must prevail; the Negroes must be kept innocuous.” Phillips rejects out of hand the sway of overt pecuniary motives against the weight of racial ones and this rejection is so absolute in part because “it is otherwise impossible to account

In contrast to the other three colonies discussed, the institution of slavery in South Carolina was initiated, legalized, and maintained for distinct reasons; the founders of the colony felt that slavery was absolutely necessary for economic prosperity and their unwavering urge to protect the institution at all costs contributed towards the severity of the slave-enforcement acts and codes. By looking at the legislation passed in South Carolina, one can grasp the extent to which slaves were legally stripped of every right imaginable, suffered barbarous treatment, and were attempted to be rendered psychologically and physically powerless--all because of the deep-seated fear of the enslaved population that was instilled within white slave owners and law-makers. In South Carolina, slavery was a horrendous business that was never questioned ethically or legally. The white settlers coming from Barbados--who had already been involved in the slave trade for years--migrated to South Carolina equipped with slaves already accustomed to difficult climate conditions (similar to South Carolina), which made them more pleasurable to slave owners expecting a strong work force. Another unique aspect to South Carolina was the overwhelming black majority in the colony for it is true that, “by 1708, less than twenty years after the decision to move from white indentured labor to black slave labor, the number of blacks in the colony exceeded whites,” (Higginbotham, 1978, pg. 152). Due to the

While many have described the civil war as simply the war between the States, Bruce Levine in his book “Half Slave and Half Free: The Roots of Civil War” has put together an 80 year survey from around 1773 the pre-revolutionary era to the Civil War with well documented evidence of the social, cultural and political idealisms of our once divided nation. This book review will emphasize points on each of the book’s chapters which are put chronologically and particularly comparing the southern slave labor system to the free labor system in the north. Levine’s thesis statement on page four of his book reads as follows, “What impelled so many-rich, middling, and poor; white and black; native-born and immigrant- to risk and sacrifice so much? To answer such questions, this book reexamines the antebellum political history in the light of the broader economic, social, cultural, and ideological developments that shaped the lives of the American people”. (p. 4) Clearly the author of the book has researched numerous historical papers and has placed them in the direction his thesis will be provided with hard evidence from the founding fathers’ letters, written memos and of course the laws put into the United States constitution.

As we already noted – in the 1800s expediency of slavery was disputed. While industrial North almost abandoned bondage, by the early 19th century, slavery was almost exclusively confined to the South, home to more than 90 percent of American blacks (Barney W., p. 61). Agrarian South needed free labor force in order to stimulate economic growth. In particular, whites exploited blacks in textile production. This conditioned the differences in economic and social development of the North and South, and opposing viewpoints on the social structure. “Northerners now saw slavery as a barbaric relic from the past, a barrier to secular and Christian progress that contradicted the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and degraded the free-labor aspirations of Northern society” (Barney W., p. 63).

The underlying cause for the Civil War was the North’s realization with laws and books about the South’s inhumane treatment of slaves.

Few topics in American history garner the attention, and generate the level of raw emotion among the populace, as chattel slavery during the nineteenth century. However, despite the importance this peculiar institution played, and continues to play, in shaping American society, relatively few people understand its history at more than a elementary level. Edward Baptist attempts to change this fundamental deficiency in The Half Has Never Been Told. Structured as a narrative, it brilliantly describes how a collaboration between white citizens of southern and northern states worked together to secure the continuation of white domination long after the Civil War removed slavery’s physical chains. While the author’s writing style and methodology is a welcome departure from tradition, and his research is commendable, his insistence that his main arguments have never been told by professional historians is dubious.

The question I chose to cover this week is, “Why did so few Southern whites own slaves?, and also, “Why did the non slaveholding whites not oppose the institution of slavery?” In general you could imagine that the Southern slavery would be pictures as large plantations with hundreds of slaves. In all reality, in such situations it was actually very rare for them to have a lot of slaves. Almost 3/4 of Southern whites did not even own slaves; but of those who did, 88% owned about twenty or less. Whites who did not own slaves were primarily yeoman farmers. Generally speaking, the institution of slavery did not help these people. And yet most non-slaveholding white Southerners identified with and defended the institution of slavery. Though many

In this assignment I will be taking a further look into the history of slavery. When thinking of slavery the immediate thought that comes to mind is all the negative aspects of the system. Prior to this research, I was unaware of slave systems that were not based on the long labor hours and the torture of slaves. Granted, there were still forms of slavery that practiced these brutal rituals, where slaves were treated as animals and were malnourished. One prime example of this, is the book titled “Am I Not A Woman And A Sister”, looks at the history of a Bermudan slave named Mary Prince. Another example of slavery that will be incorporated in this paper will come from a source about a woman slave named Semsigul, born in Caucasus an area that

In 1928 Ulrich B. Phillips wrote an argumentative essay about the reasons for the massive support that slavery received from both slaveowners and Southerners who didn’t possess slaves. The essay was well-received and supported by critics in the 1930-s. However, closer to 1950-s critics started doubting the objectivity of Phillip’s writing. It’s important to note that Ulrich B. Phillips is a white historian from the South, writing from a perspective of a white Southerner. When he was writing his article he failed to step back from his bias and provide fully objective support for the main theme of his argument, setting a doubt to the reliability of his work.

Africans were always seen as slaves rather than free people. It came to a point were generation from generation, people with African ancestry were legally enslaved for life. European colonists’ even committed to legalizing enslavement of hundreds and thousands of people, but it led to Africans being slaves based on race. Slavery was a big part in Virginia and South Carolina. The history of slavery in Virginia first appeared in 1619 where the Africans were indentured servants. As for South Carolina, majority of their population were African Americans. 65% of their population of about 18,000 people were African American slaves. Upon the social, economic and political development of slavery in Virginia and South Carolina, it impacted their race, class and gender.

During the nineteenth century in America the issue of slavery became a huge ordeal between many groups of people. In the South this issue was more prominent than in the North due to many factors, which included the economy, way of life, and beliefs of southern whites. The need for slaves increased after the invention of the cotton gin so slaves were high in demand for processing cotton. In the South, the economical system revolved around the use of slaves due to the strong agricultural economy that had been formed. Justifications such as the use of the Gospel, and examining how slavery helped to boost the economy gave the whites all the reason more to keep slavery around. Slavery was a way of life for many generations and it had no signs of changing no matter how bad the North pushed the issue that slavery was wrong.

Throughout the 1800s, the United States was divided between those who wished to stop the spread of slavery mainly in the Northern states, and those who demanded to preserve slavery namely the Southern states. One may ponder how a member of society could be a proponent of slavery; however, Calhoun was raised in the South where a person’s value was often measured by the amount of property they owned. It was

Levine argues the Civil War being a complete transformation of the South brought on by slavery, clearly demonstrating the true battle of freedom occurring not among the newborn United States of America and Europe, but the insurgency of African American people oppressed by the Southern Confederates governed by pietistic actions and beliefs of inferiority in the Negro community. The South’s great monopoly, including cotton and tobacco, clutched African American slaves tightly, digging in maliciously and squeezing the profitability out of each man and woman born into such misfortune. Levine says, “slaves in her [Katherine Stone] family’s cotton fields… ‘pick five or six hundred pounds each day for maybe a week at a time’’’ (Levine 9). Slaves worked

Slavery, especially in America, has been an age old topic of riveting discussions. Specialist and other researchers have been digging around for countless years looking for answers to the many questions that such an activity provided. They have looked into the economics of slavery, slave demography, slave culture, slave treatment, and slave-owner ideology (p. ix). Despite slavery being a global issue, the main focus is always on American slavery. Peter Kolchin effectively illustrates in his book, American Slavery how slavery evolved alongside of historical controversy, the slave-owner relationship, how slavery changed over time, and how America compared to other slave nations around the world.

American’s who live in the 21st century know that slavery is terrible and also a touchy subject. But Americans used to rely heavily on slavery, how we perceive slavery in today’s society can either be the same or different from how others thought of slavery living within mid 1800s. People who resided in the northern region of American found slavery wrong as we do today. Americans who lived farther south however liked, and relied on slavery. In today’s world, we Americans almost all agree that slavery had been a negative factor of our country. But within the 1840s and 1870s, Americans had been divided by slavery. People that were against slavery created the union as the pro slavery citizens created the confederates. Today, we can see why people of the mid 19th century either supported slavery or rebelled against it by reviewing sources.