Chapter 2, Southern Women

The reading for this blog entry, chapter 2 of Southern Women, is entitled "Reproduction and Childrearing", and deals with the ability of women in the South to become pregnant and to raise their children. For most women in the antebellum period, their primary role was as child-bearing mothers, whose ability to procreate was valuable for several reasons. Firstly, for poorer farm families another child was an additional laborer that could help take care of the farm. Also, for Southern families there was less of a reason to worry about land and space constraints than there was in the North. Slave children were also very valuable to the master, because he or she provided an additional source of labor. This was especially true in the Lower South, whereas in the Upper South new children were seen as a significant new investment. 

Fertility was valued among slave women, as well as white women. For slaves, as mentioned earlier, fertility offered the master more labor. This was especially important after 1808, when the slave trade was banned to the United States. Some slave women ended their pregnancies to keep the child away from the horrors of slavery. Infant mortality was very high among slaves, due to poor diets and harsh working and living conditions. For the poor in the South pregnancies were riskier than for the wealthy, who had access to doctors and also midwives, who at this point were being phased out in favor of "professional" doctors. 

Children were often prized and taken care of very well, especially in wealthy families that could afford slaves to help take care of children. However, in contrast to stereotypes, white mothers took care of their own children, and slave mothers did not always suckle the baby. Still, the color line in the South ended at the life of a child, with white and black mothers caring for children of another race constantly in the antebellum period. 

Greenberg Reading, Chapter 1

The first chapter of Kenneth Greenberg's book on Southern culture, called Honor and Slavery, deals with the role of lying and honor in Southern elite society. The two went hand in hand; in fact, the facade of maintaining honor and honesty in society overtook any actual argument that was taking place. Two examples of that are laid out in the first chapter of the book. The conflict over the Feejee Mermaid was really more about the honor of two men, editor Richard Yeadon and scientist Richard Bachman, and not over the authenticity of the "mermaid" itself. The incident between Thomas Gilmer and William Rives, while about Rives' support for the Force Bill and his stance on the tariff law, was really about the sense of betrayal that existed between the two men. Perception, and not reality, was the key in Southern elite society. 

Even the body itself was not exempt from these cultural laws. The nose was considered the most important part of the body, as it protruded from the face and was the most noticeable part of what was always noticed during conversation, the face. Pulling one's nose was, therefore, an act showing considerable disrespect, and could call for a duel.  Southern law was also built around honor; whenever a person was killed during a duel, they were to be buried in a disrespectful way, or hung in front of others so that they would be humiliated in death. 

Honor was also a barrier between the races, and between master and slave. Honor could only belong to masters, who were seen as being key members of society, and never to slaves, who were seen as being untrustworthy. One important question to ask is: did this also exist for poor whites and free blacks? Or did the system completely ignore those two often forgotten groups of the antebellum south?

Chapter 11 of Boles

The eleventh chapter of the Boles book, "An Agricultural Economy", deals with the growth of the Antebellum South's cash crops, and how those crops shaped the Southern way of life.

Cotton, of course, was the crop of choice for many Southerners, both wealthy planters and small scale farmers. Cotton, unlike tobacco or rice, was not limited to one location due to type of soil or weather. Unlike rice, it didn't have to be grown just on the coast, and unlike tobacco, it did not do nearly as much damage to the soil.

Cotton also gave many white southerners the chance to make some sort of fortune, no matter how small. At the beginning of the 19th century, many farmers moved to what was then the Southwest, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, in hopes of cultivating the millions of acres of land that had not yet been touched by Southerners. Once there, many of them manage to create farms, some of whom were very dependent on cotton. Cotton, being grown by many types of farmers and planters, had a way of democratizing the South. Planters and small farmers could speak to each other on a common level, due to their common ties to cotton.

Cotton also effected the Southern economy by, for all intents and purposes, controlling it. It explained the growth of the hemp crop in Kentucky, and also led to booms for the coastal port cities, especially New York. It gave small scale white farmers the chance to make extra money, next to the food crops they grew for survival. With the rapid success of cotton, and the fact that not as much land was needed to grow it as for other crops, many farms could also grow food, so that the South, contrary to popular belief, could be mostly self sufficient when it came to foodstuffs. Only Louisiana, with its maximizing of sugar cane, would import great amounts of foodstuffs. The economy, as well as white supremacy over blacks, united Southern whites that otherwise, had very little in common.

Boles, Chapter 10

Chapter 10 of the Boles book, "Nationalism Triumphant and Threatened", deals with the Age of Jefferson, the War of 1812, and the first rumblings of sectionalism around the issue of Missouri's admittance to the Union. 

Thomas Jefferson's leadership as President was a symbol of the revolution in American politics at the turn of the 19th century. He represented a more democratic vision of American politics, one that was a direct contrast to the Federalist model pursued until 1800. He created a political coalition that stretched nationwide, encompassing both farmers and merchants in the cities. Unknowingly, he also sowed the seeds of the rise of the commercial North, by supporting the freedom to create and grow commercial ventures. His leadership also displayed the apex of Southern nationalism, when the South was able to create a chain of leaders, from Jefferson to James Madison to James Monroe, that would lead the country for much of the early 19th century. However, Southern politicians were evolving into more sectional figures, due to the more democratic nature of politics at this time. 

New England, and not the South, was the region of the country that was more estranged from the national leadership than the South. During the War of 1812, a war that was largely wanted by Southern leaders, New England considered leaving the Union. The United States did achieve a decisive victory in New Orleans at the end of the war to force the British to finally agree to the Treaty of Ghent, and the nation gained even greater control over the lands it had purchased from France in 1803. 

The Missouri Compromise would show that the country was still divided over slavery, and a new generation of political leaders used to the partisanship of the 1790s would use the opportunity to support sectional interests. Although the crisis was finally settled by admitting Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, it was a harbinger of things to come. 

Chapter 8 of the Boles Reading

Chapter 8, Southerners as Nation Builders, shows the development of the early Republic, from shortly after the Revolutionary War until 1800. Here, the reader sees the development of the national government, from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution, and the role the South played in that transformation.



It was clear by the middle of the 1780s that the Articles of Confederation, while designed to guard against the tyrranies of a strong, overbearing executive, made the national government far too weak and the state governments far too strong. It was delegates from Maryland and Virginia who were among the first to suggest a type of convention to deal with the issues brought forth after years of incoherent government policy.



A Virginian, James Madison, recognized some of the problems that plauged the national government, and his "Virginia Plan" helped to move the meeting in Philadelphia from simply amending the Articles to making a new document that would make the national goverenment stronger. Checks and balances and a strong executive were among Madison's greatest, and most time honored, ideas, and showed a broader pattern among Southern delegates to the Constitutional Convention: an ability to look beyond sectional interests, and to make compromises for the common good of the young country.



Virginia would play a major role in the ratification of the Constitution, being one of the largest states in the country and holding a vote that, while close, would swing in the favor of pro-Constitution, or "Federalist", forces. The South's role in building the young nation can also be seen in the first President, George Washington, who put national interests above sectional loyalty. It can also be seen, however, in the actions by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison -also both Virginians- in creating a national opposition, or party, to oppose Alexander Hamilton's view of a strong, centralized government that was heavily involved in economic policy. These Republicans, led by Jefferson and Hamilton, had appeal across the country, but all agreed that they could not go along with Hamilton's policy. Nonetheless, it was clear by the end of John Adams' only term in office and the ascension of Thomas Jefferson that the South was, in fact, in control of the country's future.

Chapter 3 of American Slavery

The readings in Chapter 3 show the evolution of slavery during the Revolutionary War in America. Before the middle of the 18th century, European thought had not dealt with the fairness or morality of slavery. During their time, most people accepted the view that society wasn't supposed to be equal, and that some people were better than others.

With Enlightenment Age thought, however, came a questioning of the inequalities inherent in most societies, and within that argument, the fairness of slavery. For the first time, people began to see in slavery an evil that, if unchecked, could impact the lives and decision making of even the white slaveowners. In the American colonies, and later the newly independent United States, slavery came to be questioned by both Northerners and Southerners.

The arguments against slavery took one of two tracks: economic and moral. The economic argument, which came to be more important to most slaveowners North and South, was that slavery was useless in a declining economy (as was the case in Virginia) , and that with the birth of capitalism and "free labor", slavery was quickly becoming incompatible with the growth of market driven capitalism, that was to be based on the labor of free men. The moral argument against slavery was more important, and also often made, by Quakers and other religious groups that thought that it was wrong to hold another man in bondage. Around this time, some even began to question whether Africans deserved to be enslaved. Were they slaves because it was their natural condition, they argued, or were they slaves because that was the usually the only life allowed for them in the New World?

The Revolution itself also helped to cripple slavery during this time, in a manner that would not be seen again until the American Civil War. Many masters found themselves away from home for long stretches of time during the war, and so many slaves gained a new degree of autonomy that, while not meaning they were free, did give them new responsibilities on farms and plantations. Also, many slaves began to run away from plantations, taking advantage of a chaotic atmosphere that, again, would not be seen until the 1860s.

Once slavery was limited to just domestic slaves, after laws passed state by state and by the federal government in 1808, a free black population grew across the country. Most blacks did not gain the same rights as most whites, especially in the Southern United States, and often had to struggle for work. However, a small and wealthy subsection of the Black population in the US, often made up of refugees from Saint Dominique, did gain some stature and monetary power in the South.

Revolutionary fervor failed to end slavery. While most people, even Southerners, believed slavery would die on its own during the Revolutionary era, by the early 19th century Southerners began to hold on tightly to slavery. Economic booms fueled by slavery made Southerners much more reluctant to see the "peculiar institution" disappear, while in the North the growth of a new, industrialized economy made slavery an obsolete institution that was ultimately done away with. Differences within the United States over slavery were just beginning to become more pronounced.

Charleston Non-Importation Agreement

The primary source, courtesy of the Avalon Project of Yale University, is concerned with South Carolina's entry into the fervor of boycotting British goods in protest of Acts designed raise taxes from the colonial subjects. This Non-Importation document is designed to both spell out why the colonies are boycotting goods from Britain, and show what they will be abandoning as a result of the boycott.

One of the more curious findings of the document is the ban on slaves imported from Africa and the West Indies. This is certainly an explanation for why there was a severe drop in the number of slaves imported, as discussed in class on Monday, but I'm forced to wonder whether such a ban would've taken place had there not been a growing population of American-born slaves to replace whatever losses would've occurred as a result of this boycott.

It is also interesting to note that the language of the document shows that the colonists are still overwhelmingly loyal to the king and to the British Empire, even referring to themselves as "his Majesty's dutiful and loyal subjects". Independence is not an option that appears to be on the table at this time. Most of the colonists still want to stay subjects to the king, but they want their rights restored as free English subjects.