The role of the family and marriage is another distinct feature in the Deep South. Historians in recent years have examined the role and status of women in slave families, suggesting a matriarchy. The idea of a matriarchy among the slave quarters is an important point, it points to slave cabins not being a male dominated environment that one would assume. There are several reasons for this as Ann Patton Malone highlights, men ‘lacked the legal authority free men had... when women married they lost a variety of rights, they had no more property rights than their wives’. It was the norm that women were more likely to be at home than their husbands; the idea of a patriarchy rather than a matriarchy in the antebellum south was somewhat of a myth. Mother headed households were common practice which gave the south another element of its distinctiveness.
The lives that children had during this era can help better understand the separate identity the south had. They enjoyed a large degree of freedom with the slave owners white children outside their log cabins. They played with each other almost as if they were not separated by race or skin colour and had no perception that a rigid hierarchy existed. Despite this interaction slave owners tried to name slave children at birth, they tried to prevent slave names being a common practice and actively sought to prevent slave families developing African cultures and autonomy. Children were unaware at an early age of their slave status, whippings or public humiliations gave the young a brutal insight into where they belonged and who they belonged to. Masters interfered in their slave lives on a regular basis; they wanted to see themselves as ‘paternalistic guardians’. These guardians therefore prevented any autonomy that would be a threat to the hierarchy in which they lived.
Religion had much in common with slave families, ‘they were deeply religious’. It was yet another example of the fragile autonomy slaves had. From the colonial era to the antebellum era, the religion that slaves followed changed and many were influenced by white religious customs. Christianity became the order of the day for most slaves in bondage as the Christian message was something they hadn’t previously known. The late antebellum period witnessed mass Christianity among slave’s as it became the principle faith and belief they all shared. Through religious services and bible readings by their masters, by the middle of the nineteenth century Christianity had swept over the southern half of America engulfing all that were in bondage changing and adding to their religious interests. They used an ‘invisible church’ to adopt some white religious beliefs. For blacks Christianity gave them an escape, an escape to God the redeemer losing themselves in ecstatic joy. It was part of their community that was distinctly theirs.
The wave of black Christianity that swept across the Deep South in the age of antebellum was a product of its time. They had a means of social control, a means to liberate in slave quarters and on the Sabbath day away from their owners. Despite its importance and social significance to slaves, whites exercised their influence on it. As so distinct to the south, its owners where suspicious of anything that was a threat to the overall hierarchy. Slaveholders were suspicious of any spread of new ideas which meant they made their slaves adopt their same faith and be active members of the same institutions they attended. Blacks however found their areas of autonomy in their religious beliefs that they held. Part of a heterogeneous religion, slaves enjoyed their own unique set of beliefs embedded in their culture but where always part of the mainstream. Religion and the shared beliefs gave blacks and whites a common middle ground, at least temporarily. They enjoyed the religious beliefs together, where class and race for once weren’t high on the social agenda; the idea that they, ‘heard the same sermons, were baptized and took communion together’ is testament to how separate and unique a culture the antebellum era was.
Out of the wave of Christianity that swept through the south came a new distinct practice. The practice of Afro-Christianity, oracles, folk medicine and African traditions became the order of the day for antebellum slaves. These new common beliefs included witches, spirits which ironically where a combination of both African and European cultures that they experienced. It was a new trend, with slave magic; it was a time where blacks came around to thinking of eventual freedom and praying towards it. The slave community in their cabins, away from master supervision allowed them to develop their own traditions and customs. In Louisiana, the belief in African voodoo flourished with rituals, storytelling and songs of freedom, as Eudora Welty puts it, ‘southerners loved a good tale... {Slaves were} history tracers and debaters’. This time in the south was greatly important to slaves, these customs and beliefs allowed slaves, if only temporarily to enjoy life away from the brutality they faced from their masters on the plantations. In this peasant autonomy they created and they passed, ‘their unique set of cultural themes from generation to generation... to mould their own cultural norms and group identity’.
White owners were deeply suspicious of their levels of autonomy and where anti-modern in many respects toward their slaves and their activities. Slave owners had systematically built small sized holdings in rural areas to prevent any large groups forming to limit the amount of autonomy they had. They were deprived of any economic platform from which to grow. They were given little to no economic independence but looked to their white masters in their ‘big house’ for dependence of some kind. When economic or social problems arose for the slaves it was the job of their master to correct these problems for them, demonstrating a hierarchal society. In the antebellum south there were a dramatic number of whites to blacks, which was a big element in keeping the slaves under control and gave them good reason not to attack or rebel against their owners. Blacks, ‘struggled to find their niche’ in their lives, whites where always suspicious of their every move. Their owner’s anti-modernised ways meant they didn’t enjoy any kind of commercialism, masters prevented any democratic tendencies that where possible threats to their systems. The distain for modernism encapsulates the antebellum south; this is one element that contributes to its separate identity. Masters were deeply protective, they took advantage of slave hiring and laid out jobs that were age specific to ensure order slaves enjoyed only a small degree of autonomy on the plantations. If a slave proved troublesome the master could hire him/her out to neighbouring plantations or more often than not they would whip the slave or humiliate them in front of the whole plantation.
The high ratio of whites to blacks didn’t prevent too many problems for white masters. The size of slaveholdings and arms they had would lead slaves to understand that any uprising or rebellion would be foolish as the punishments weren’t worth it. But the brutality some faced meant that over time in the antebellum plantations, some type of attack would be inevitable. The Gabriel Prosser uprising was the first example of this, although it was quickly suppressed and crushed. It would allow opportunities for other slaves to attempt to fight back against decades of abuse at the hands of their white owners. Perhaps the most prolific of all was the Nat Turner insurrection of 1831. This uprising produced chaos and saw the deaths of 59 people in Virginia. It was an uprising against white masters but seventy of Turner’s rebels were killed and was eventually hanged to signal the dangers of rebelling against your masters. The antebellum south didn’t take resurrection lightly and ruthlessly suppressed those who challenged their masters. In Virginia they used the methods of the vicious slave owner Willie Lynch to enforce order and allow planters to control their slaves more efficiently. The idea was to, ‘keep the slave physically strong but psychologically weak, dependent on the slave master’. In essence to keep the body but take the mind, using them to they were no longer able for field work and obeying their master at all times. Most blacks were afraid of punishment for crossing the line; instead many took advantage of what is became known as the ‘silent sabotage’. They aggravated their owners, dragging their feet in their tasks, indirectly challenging white authority. However for some slaves the Northern states were just too mouth-watering of a prospect. ‘Maroon’s’ of escapees headed for the north, most simply hid in plantations or a few miles away to try and break their ties with slavery. Thousands ran to the North or used the Great Dismal Swamp as a hiding place others used the woods beside their plantations to eventually escape the slave life. Slaves however had a small degree of success; although some escaped successfully many were caught and suffered the brutal consequences. They received public whippings, torture or public humiliations to discourage others from running away. Whippings were public spectacles; ‘masters would even rub salt and red pepper into wounds’ ignoring cries of, ‘massa, massa, have mercy on us’ Plantation records show that slaves regularly attacked their masters in retaliation or for severe punishment which is central to the distinct way in which slaves were treated in the south.
The resistance slaves displayed is an example of autonomy and their master’s ruthless attempts to prevent it. The antebellum era never allowed a large, significant group of slaves to abscond or seriously challenge the way of life. It is unfortunate that no plantation as a whole decided to rebel to increase their chances of success, the fact they never decided on this crippled their attempts to gain freedom. The possibility of a whipping or punishment was too much deterrence for many slaves. It is all an example of the resistance and autonomy they tried to create for themselves that is distinct to the southern antebellum.
In conclusion, southern distinctiveness although sustained by the plantation economy was a direct result of other elements that created a separate identity in the antebellum era. The family structure in slave quarters, their religious beliefs and Afro-Christian culture, the unique lives of the children and the resistance the slaves demonstrated gave the south its separate identity. Although the south enjoyed a small degree of autonomy, peasant autonomy slave owners had a tight grasp on their lives. If they rebelled against their masters or stepped out of line they would feel the full force of the law. Planters were without doubt anti-modern and suspicious of slave autonomy or any form of commercialisation in the slave quarters. Any threat to hierarchy was suppressed; they were successful in taking away slave rights but leaving the slave mentally dependent on their owner. The closely governed slave life that existed in the antebellum south shaped slave-owner paternalism which was unique to the south and its identity.
Bibliography
Primary sources
Diary of Bryan Tyson, 1830-1909 (Washington D.C, 1963)
Narratives of William W. Brown, 1847
Secondary sources
B. Boles, John, Masters & Slaves in the House of the Lord: Race and Religion in the American South, 1740-1870 (Lexington, Ky, 1988) p.10.
B.Phillips, Ulrich, American Negro Slavery (Baton Rouge, 1918) pp 291-301.
P.Kolchin, American Slavery 1619-1865 (New York, 2003) p.133.
P.Kolchin, American Slavery 1619-1865 (New York, 2003) p.156.
P.Kolchin, American Slavery 1619-1865 (New York, 2003) p.154
P.Malone, Ann, Sweet chariot: Slave Family and the Household Structure in Nineteenth-Century Louisiana (Chapel Hill, 1992) p. 258.
Welty, Eudora, The Collected Stories of Eudora Welty (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1980)
Films
Unchained Memories, 2003, Ed Bell and Thomas Lennon
Great Debaters, 2007, Denzel Washington
(2, 650 words)
P.Kolchin, American Slavery 1619-1865 (New York, 2003) p.133.
Unchained Memories, 2003, Ed Bell and Thomas Lennon
Diary of Bryan Tyson, 1830-1909 (Washington D.C, 1963)
B.Phillips, Ulrich, American Negro Slavery (Baton Rouge, 1918) pp 291-301.
P.Malone, Ann, Sweet chariot: Slave Family and the Household Structure in Nineteenth-Century Louisiana (Chapel Hill, 1992) p. 258.
Diary of Bryan Tyson, 1830-1909 (Washington D.C, 1963)
B. Boles, John, Masters & Slaves in the House of the Lord: Race and Religion in the American South, 1740-1870 (Lexington, Ky, 1988) p.10.
Welty, Eudora, The Collected Stories of Eudora Welty (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1980)
P.Kolchin, American Slavery 1619-1865 (New York, 2003) p.154
P.Kolchin, American Slavery 1619-1865 (New York, 2003) p.156.
Great Debaters, 2007, Denzel Washington
Unchained Memories, 2003, Ed Bell and Thomas Lennon