More handpicked essays just for you.
Effect african slavery had on america
African american slavery effects
Effect african slavery had on america
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
James Henry Hammond was a southern planter who dedicated his entire life to winning allegiances and achieving an aristocratic goal of mastery. Hammond’s father, Elisha, played a prominent role in predetermining the future of his eldest son. When James Henry Hammond married Catherine Fitzsimons he became a member of a wealthy and prosperous family. Along with marriage, Hammond took possession of a plantation Catherine was the heiress to. This plantation in Silver Bluff, South Carolina; was more than just fertile farm land and swampy areas. The Silver Bluff plantation also included human capital in the form of 147 African-American slaves. According to Drew Gilpin Faust in her book James Henry Hammond and the Old South: A Design for Mastery, “[Hammond’s] efforts to shape the group of blacks into a disciplined, productive, and expanding force would be challenged and thwarted at every turn” (Faust, 72). The …show more content…
Under the previous Fitzsimons control, the slaves were living unsupervised, without a master in permanent residency, and were overall a very unhealthy group. In order to fulfill his dream of turning the plantation into a profitable enterprise, Hammond would have to conquer a complex social order among the enslaved people. In attempt to assert his dominance, Hammond stripped the blacks of many freedoms they once enjoyed. Hammond was threatened by the assembly of slaves who gathered in worship and praise. Hammond wanted to psychologically dominate the slaves and used the regulation of church to enforce that control upon the negroes by emphasizing obedience and tranquility in Sunday afternoon services led by white ministers. Faust says, “slaves…were not accustomed to the rigorous demands made by their new master, and they resented and resisted his drive for efficiency” (Faust,73). Hammond called for physical whippings or lashes to those caught undermining his
In “Antebellum Southern Exceptionalism: A New Look at an Old Question” James McPherson argues that the North and the South are two very different parts of the country in which have different ideologies, interests, and values. Mcpherson writes this to show the differences between the north and the south. He gives perspectives from other historians to show how the differently the differences were viewed. These differences included the north being more industrialized while the south was more agricultural. He gives evidence to how the differences between the north and south came together as the south produced tobacoo, rice, sugar and cotton, which was then sent to the north to be made into clothing or other fabrics. Mcpherson analyzes the differences
Within the letter, Hammond states, “You will say that man cannot hold property in man” justifying that slaves are considered property. In the 1800’s slaves did not have rights to the constitution, and were considered basic property. Although the slave would be breathing and living human being, they were treated like property, resulting in gruesome living conditions and treated like garbage on the side of a street. All in all, the treatment and living condition of slaves on plantations and farms were not civilized and
Hammond had a longing for complete power and authority over his slaves. He wanted “total domination” (Faust, 72). He tried to control the way they thought, worshiped; everything. In time, Hammond created a “carefully designed plan of physical and psychological control intended to eliminate the foundations of black solidarity” (Faust, 72). Obviously the slaves did not like this. They weren’t used to a master being so obsessed with power and authority. The slaves rebelled and acted up. Some of them even tried to run away. Hammond decided that he needed to “break in” these slaves. “Those who performed unsatisfactory labor, left the plantation without permission, or in any other way challenged Hammond’s authority were lashed, in a public display of the consequences of refusal to comply with the master’s will” (Faust, 73).
During a period of time, the world lost its values due to ambition. Blacks were enslaved for being different. Races became a huge part of people’s everyday talk and to succeed, farmers and business owners had to make African Americans do their dirty work for them. During this period of time, people like Joe Starks from “The Eyes Were Watching God” and people like Frederick Douglass’s slavemasters became abundant in the world. The belief that they were superior to everyone else lead them to impose power in a way that even themselves could not tolerate. Even though “The Eyes Were Watching God” was written after slave abolition, Joe Starks and Douglass’s slavemasters have many characteristics in common and differences which are worthy to be noticed.
...adiction to American religious ideals of pure, peaceable and impartial conduct. In being a devout man Master Thomas would convert many in the name of the church. His home even became the home of preachers to hold meetings and sermons. Nevertheless, this did not change his demeanor towards his slaves. For all his pious actions, inside Thomas was a vicious man who whipped, beat, and disowned his slaves in a warp sense of duty to the church and god, “Here was a recently-converted man, holding on upon the mother, and at the same time turning out her helpless child, to starve and die!”
Imagine a historian, author of an award-winning dissertation and several books. He is an experienced lecturer and respected scholar; he is at the forefront of his field. His research methodology sets the bar for other academicians. He is so highly esteemed, in fact, that an article he has prepared is to be presented to and discussed by the United States’ oldest and largest society of professional historians. These are precisely the circumstances in which Ulrich B. Phillips wrote his 1928 essay, “The Central Theme of Southern History.” In this treatise he set forth a thesis which on its face is not revolutionary: that the cause behind which the South stood unified was not slavery, as such, but white supremacy. Over the course of fourteen elegantly written pages, Phillips advances his thesis with evidence from a variety of primary sources gleaned from his years of research. All of his reasoning and experience add weight to his distillation of Southern history into this one fairly simple idea, an idea so deceptively simple that it invites further study.
The Reconstruction was the process of trying to rebuild the South after the devastating effect of the Civil War. Some interesting facts during the Civil War were first, in 1869 the first college football game took place, second, African American universities became a reality, and last, in 1870, Hiram Revels was elected the first black Senator. In the end, Reconstruction died, but we’ve all been asking the same thing; North or South: Who killed the Reconstruction? Answering this question, I believe the North killed the Reconstruction by a lack of focus on it, the racism on African Americans, and being sick of assisting the South.
"It comforted him. For almost four years it meant a lot to him," ends the short story, "The Life of Lincoln West" by Gwendolyn Brooks. This quote suggests that the eleven-year-old Lincoln commits suicide. Why would he do this? Because of the crushing rejection of Lincoln by his parents, teacher, friends, and strangers, he ends his life.
Within the “Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: An American Slave” Douglass discusses the deplorable conditions in which he and his fellow slaves suffered from. While on Colonel Lloyd’s plantation, slaves were given a “monthly allowance of eight pounds of pork and one bushel of corn” (Douglass 224). Their annual clothing rations weren’t any better; considering the type of field work they did, what little clothing they were given quickly deteriorated. The lack of food and clothing matched the terrible living conditions. After working on the field all day, with very little rest the night before, they must sleep on the hard uncomfortably cramped floor with only a single blanket as protection from the cold. Coupled with the overseer’s irresponsible and abusive use of power, it is astonishing how three to four hundred slaves did not rebel. Slave-owners recognized that in able to restrict and control slaves more than physical violence was needed. Therefore in able to mold slaves into the submissive and subservient property they desired, slave-owners manipulated them by twisting religion, instilling fear, breaking familial ties, making them dependent, providing them with an incorrect view of freedom, as well as refusing them education.
President Abraham Lincoln envisioned a conservative plan for the reconstruction of the south. Under Lincoln’s plan, as soon as ten percent of the voters in a southern state whom have voted in 1860 and had taken an oath of loyalty to the United States, they could then elect constitutional conventions. These conventions, upon adopting new state constitutions and abolishing slavery they would then be readmitted to the union. The assassination of Abraham Lincoln would change polices towards reconstruction of the south.
Society is formed into a hierarchical format demonstrated by the relationship between slaves and slave owners. Douglass refers to this concept of racial formation in the following statement, “my faculties and powers of body and soul, are not my own. But property of a fellow mortal” (199). This statement refers to the master who has power to compel his slaves in any format that he or she may desire to a point of controlling every single movement the slave makes. Douglass utilizes his knowledge of language to expose the psychology of the slave masters and the complex mechanisms that are created in order to systematically enslave African-Americans. Douglas refers to this idea as being “a slave for life” which underlies the issue that society is being organized hierarchically (157). Take for instance, when Douglass’ master Thomas chose not to protect him as a man or as property from the brutal treatment of Covey (171). This relationship demonstrates how masters willingly objectify their slaves as replaceable commodities. Many slave owners took advantage of the power they had over their property without any regards to the repercussions. Instead, African-Americans were belittled and coerced into being oppressed to a point where they accepted being a puppet in a master’s
Many plantation owners were men that wanted their plantation ran in a particular manner. They strove to have control over all aspects of their slaves’ lives. Stephanie Camp said, “Slave holders strove to create controlled and controlling landscapes that would determine the uses to which enslaved people put their bodies.” Mary Reynolds was not a house slave, but her master’s daughter had a sisterly love towards her, which made the master uncomfortable. After he sold Mary he had to buy her back for the health of his daughter. The two girls grew apart after the daughter had white siblings of her own. Mary wa...
In Frederick Douglass’s Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, one of the major themes is how the institution of slavery has an effect on the moral health of the slaveholder. The power slaveholders have over their slaves is great, as well as corrupting. Douglass uses this theme to point out that the institution of slavery is bad for everyone involved, not just the slaves. Throughout the narrative, Douglass uses several of his former slaveholders as examples. Sophia Auld, once such a kind and caring woman, is transformed into a cruel and oppressive slave owner over the course of the narrative. Thomas Auld, also. Douglass ties this theme back to the main concern of authorial control. Although this is a personal account, it is also a tool of propaganda, and is used as such. Douglass’s intent is to convince readers that the system of slavery is horrible and damaging to all included, and thus should be abolished completely. Douglass makes it very clear in his examples how exactly the transformation occurs and how kind and moral people can become those who beat their slaves and pervert Christianity in an attempt to justify it.
...te a passage of the scripture: “He that knoweth his master’s will, and doeth it not, shall be beaten with many stripes” (99). This shows that he uses the Bible to justify his pain and suffering onto the slave who does not obey her master. Douglass states, “I assert most unhesitatingly, that the religion of the south is a mere covering for the most horrid crimes, --- a justifier of the most appalling barbarity,--- a sanctifier of the most hateful frauds--- and a dark shelter under, which the darkest , foulest, grossest, and most infernal deeds of slaveholders find the strongest protection” (117). For completing these horrid crimes, slaveholders don’t feel bad for their sinful deeds because they feel like scriptures in the Bible support their abuse. In the narrative, Douglass explains how female slaves were victimized because of they were weaker and easier to abuse.
...eir actions. Either this was the incorrect way Christianity was practiced or humanity was presented in an ambiguous way. The presence of religion goes on further when Douglass introduces Mr. Covey, another master he was assign too. Mr. Covey was a professor of religion and a religious class-leader at the local Methodist church. He also had a reputation of breaking apart young slaves in which Douglass refers to him as a “nigger-breaker.” As young as Douglass was when he moved in with Mr. Covey, he remembers when Mr. Covey gave him “a sever whipping, cutting my back, causing the blood to run, and raising ridges on my flesh as large as my little fingers.” This is puzzling to hear of a man who is committed to faith but his actions seemed to be contradicting.