HIS 357 CCCC - HIS 357C Professor: Juliet Walker TA:...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
HIS 357C Professor: Juliet Walker TA: Adrienne Sockwell FALL 2010 1)Antebellum slavery can be subjected to an external analysis. In this analysis, there are seven factors which help us to understand not only that antebellum slavery was a capitalistic, profit-driven economic system but also that these factors influenced slave life and how slaves were treated. Discuss five of these factors, including an illustration in explaining one of the factors, Then, tell, generally, how these factors impacted on slave life. Then, explain how an external analysis has or has not changed your perspective of antebellum slavery. Antebellum slavery was in presence during 1830 in South. African Americans were enslaved in different areas like, farms, plantations, inside homes, transportation etc. Even though slavery had a variety of types but the underlying concept was always the same i.e. slaves were always seen and considered as property. Their status was imposed as the property by violence and threatening. The slaves can never forget their status as property. Even though the slaves and owners worked together, there was always an imbalance in the equality because of the power difference. But in some rare cases the masters and slaves genuinely cared for each other but this caring was tempered by the power imbalance under which it grew. Slaves were always given the jobs like clearing the farms, digging ditches, cut and haul wood and building repairs. These jobs which slaves used to do made them feel that they are very inferior and in some people it created a rebel. By looking at the above factors and analysis my perspective about antebellum slavery has totally changed. It made me realize how brutal were the conditions for the slaves at those times. Third, many small farmers with a few slaves and yeomen were linked to elite planters through the market economy.In many areas, small farmers depended on local planter elites for vital goods and services including (but not limited to) access to cotton gins, access to markets, access to feed and livestock, and even for loans (since the banking system was not well developed in the antebellum South). Southern tradesmen often depended on the richest planters for steady work. Such dependency effectively deterred many white non-slaveholders from engaging in any political activity that was not in the interest of the large slaveholders. Furthermore, whites of varying social castes, including poor whites and "plain folk" who worked outside or in the periphery of the market economy (and therefore lacked any real economic interest in the defense of slavery) might nonetheless be linked to elite planters through extensive kinship networks. Since inheritance in the South was often unequitable (and generally favored eldest sons), it was not uncommon for a poor white person to be perhaps the first cousin of the richest plantation owner of his county and to share the same militant support of slavery as his richer relatives. Finally, it should be remembered that there
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 01/31/2011 for the course HISTORY 45870 taught by Professor Walker during the Spring '10 term at University of Texas.

Page1 / 8

HIS 357 CCCC - HIS 357C Professor: Juliet Walker TA:...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online