The Industrial Revolution was a shift from manual to large-scale machine factory production that transformed the world economy. This process began in England in the late 18th century and spread to other European countries, the United States and Japan (More, 2000). Various concepts such as industrialization, capitalism, and slavery are interconnected with the Industrial Revolution. While this period enabled people to manufacture goods and improve the living standards of some groups, it also resulted in appalling working conditions and violence for others. The purpose of this paper is to describe the Industrial Revolution and the new forms of economic activity it created, including mass production and mass consumption, as well as discuss its connection to slavery.
The Industrial Revolution
The Industrial Revolution can be seen as an important turning point in history as it had a remarkable impact on most aspects of people’s everyday life. The process began in Great Britain in the late 1700s and gradually brought the economy of the US and many European countries to a new level. The introduction of machines and mass production resulting from industrialization caused more individuals to move from rural areas to cities, which shifted the focus from agriculture as the main economic driver. Instead, industries such as manufacturing, building, and mining were becoming more widespread. Besides, according to More (2000), “the revolution lay not in the speed, but in the shift from a hitherto inevitable correlation between increasing population and declining income per person” (p. 15). As More (2000) reports, in turn, an increase of around 25% in income per person was seen across the economy between 1780 and 1831, in the period of the Industrial Revolution (p. 16). Due to invention and innovation, society from predominantly rural turned into urban.
The New Forms of Economic Activity
Mass Production
Mass production is producing large volumes of standardized products in a constantly flowing manner. Through the course of the Industrial Revolution, the way goods were produced changed. For example, such techniques were used as production lines and standardized sizes. Furthermore, the division of labor principle was introduced, implying that each worker had expertise in performing a specific task. A set of such tasks involving several workers allowed for producing a final product at a reduced cost.
In addition, mass production was possible thanks to the increasing use of machines in factories. This approach allowed for reducing human labor and eliminated errors of low-skilled workers, increasing the overall turnover (More, 2000). Besides, as More (2000) states, “the production increases for industries such as cotton and iron … are far higher than for other industries: output rose by one hundredfold or more” (p. 16). Coal, as well as water and steam power, were used to provide energy for factories and transportation systems. Besides, the Industrial Revolution meant that materials, people, and goods had to be transported, and this was done through canals and railroads. Overall, mass production contributed to rapid economic and social changes, as well as urbanization.
Mass Consumption
Mass consumption is another phenomenon related to the epoch of the Industrial Revolution. It accompanied mass production and can be defined as the process of buying standardized services and goods by a large number of customers (More, 2000). Before the Industrial Revolution began, people mostly produced things at home or in small workshops. In turn, factories enabled society to manufacture more products in a cheaper and faster way. As a result, new markets were opening in new cities, increasing the level of consumption. In addition, many people’s income was growing, which improved their buying power. This fact led to more goods being consumed by the population. According to More (2000), “in the case of other services, such as retailing, higher incomes will lead to greater expenditure on them” (p. 16). Rapid urbanization and industrialization also contributed to the growth of service output. In general, mass consumption depended on people’s prosperity, and the availability of large volumes of products produces through the use of factories and machinery.
Connection to Slavery
It should be stated that the Industrial Revolution had negative consequences along with positive achievements for society. In particular, slavery thrived thanks to mass consumption and production, creating free labor. According to Walvin (1996), by “the mid-eighteenth century, when the European appetite for African slaves seemed insatiable, Africa seemed the natural place to recruit labor for the Americas” (p. 9). In other words, the slave trade and plantation slavery were among the causes for the development of capitalism in the US and Europe. Sea-port towns were rising as a result of the transatlantic trade of enslaved laborers (Walvin, 1996). As can be seen, the achievements of the Industrial Revolution are connected to slavery and partly result from this unethical and inhumane practice.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Industrial Revolution can be seen as a rapid transition from an agricultural to an industrial economy. Various concepts are associated with this process, including capitalism, urbanization, mass production, mass consumption, and slavery. While the Industrial Revolution had positive effects, such as a faster and cheaper production of goods and improved living standards, it also meant such disadvantages as poor working conditions, child labor, low wages, and violence.
References
More, C. (2000). Understanding the Industrial Revolution. Routledge.
Walvin, J. (1996). Questioning Slavery. Routledge.
Primary sources are critically important in studying history, specifically those periods that the living people cannot remember. These sources can include various artifacts, documents, recordings, diary entries, and manuscripts created at the time period under investigation. Different primary sources allow the following generations to understand what happened before better. This essay will discuss excerpts from primary source writings on slavery in Ancient Greece dated back to approximately 750 – 330 BCE. The passages will be examined and evaluated better understand the social and cultural history of the period and learn more about the social order in Ancient Greece.
Ancient Greece was a civilization where slavery was widespread, with Greeks viewing slaves as the property of their masters. Internet History Sourcebooks Project (2021) offers five excerpts from the works of prominent Greek thinkers on slavery and its place in Greek society. Specifically, the writings of Hesiod, Strabo, Antiphon, Demosthenes, and Aristotle are presented (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). For instance, Hesiod’s Works and Days, written in 750 BCE, depicts the necessity of slaves for labor, particularly farm labor (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). It can be argued that the source is aimed at the lower-class citizens, who would not be able to survive without reaping a plentiful harvest. It is evident from the writing that both men and women could be purchased as slaves to work on the land of the slave owner. In addition, the excerpt suggests that a female slave should not be viewed as a wife, possibly restricting sexual relationships between slaves and free men (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). Overall, in Ancient Greece, slaves were necessary for the survival of landowners.
Other primary sources reflect different aspects of slavery in Ancient Greece. Thus, Strabo’s Geographia, written in approximately 20 A.D., illustrates how the wealth of the city was measured in slaves (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). Written later than other primary sources, Geographia was intended as a descriptive history. Strabo notes that the temple of Aphrodite in Corinth was exceptionally wealthy and could afford to own over a thousand slaves employed as prostitutes at the temple (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). They were donated to the temple by the city’s free people and became an attraction, resulting in the city being crowded with people and accumulating wealth (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). It can be concluded that slaves played a crucial role in the economic development in Ancient Greece.
Some writings on slavery in Ancient Greece describe how their owners and free people could treat slaves. These documents were aimed at a broad audience of the people of Ancient Greece, as the majority of them interacted with slaves daily. Thus, in On the Choreutes, dated back to 430 BCE, Antiphon discusses the limitations imposed on masters, noting that killing a slave was an inappropriate act (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). However, it is unclear what punishment was installed upon the master who killed a slave belonging to him. Antiphon notes that a slave owner should “purify himself and withhold himself from those places prescribed by law” (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). In contrast, in Against Timocrates (350 BCE), Demosthenes notes that corporal punishment is an acceptable penalty for slaves compared to free people (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). Thus, slaves belonged wholly to their master, who could treat them at their discretion, physically punishing them for minor misdeeds. However, such acts as the murder of a slave were not viewed in the same light, with slave masters only being subjected to light penance for the killing.
It can be asserted that the issue of slavery was not viewed in Ancient Greece as a moral problem. For instance, Aristotle writes in The Politics – On slavery, dated back to approximately 350 BCE, that slavery is necessary for the existence and development of Greek society (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). Slavery was viewed as a natural occurrence, with few limitations imposed on slave owners. Slaves were considered inferior to free men, and Aristotle argued that “it is better for them as for all inferiors that they should be under the rule of a master” (Internet History Sourcebooks Project, 2021). It can be alleged that Aristotle intended his talk for all the citizens of Ancient Greece who questioned the right of Greeks to capture slaves and treat them inhumanely. Overall, this piece of writing shows that slavery in Ancient Greece was viewed as natural and was defended by the many prominent Greek thinkers.
In summary, the discussed primary sources demonstrate the collective attitude in Ancient Greece towards slavery and the position of slaves in society. Slaves played a crucial role in the economy of Ancient Greece, working in different capacities, varying from farm laborers to prostitutes. Their work often was the catalyst for the development of cities, as the example of Corinth illustrates. Slaves were the property of their masters, who had absolute authority over them and their lives. Overall, the examined sources show that slavery was not considered an immoral issue in Ancient Greece, and the rights of slaves were not contemplated. Moreover, the right to own a slave was viewed as a superior virtue.
Reference
Internet History Sourcebooks Project. (2021). Documents on Greek Slavery, c. 750 – 330 BCE. Web.
The historical issues often are rather controversial. Any historical fact can give rise to doubts of the historians and become a subject for scientific debates. An autobiographical work Up from Slavery by Washington Booker describes the relationships between the black and white people in the United States before the Civil War from a new unexpected perspective of the actual participant of the events.
Bookers’ memoirs do not contradict the descriptions of 1890s in The Awakening by Kate Chopin or The Strenuous Life by Theodore Roosevelt but add new significant information to them.
Instead of criticizing the opposition between the black and the white, Booker emphasizes the interpersonal relationships between the masters and their slaves, emphasizing the devotion of the latter to the white population.
Anyone attempting to harm ‘young Mistress’ or ‘old Mistress’ during the night would have to cross the dead body of the slave to do so… there are few instances, either in slavery or freedom, in which a member of my race has been known to betray a specific trust (Washington 28).
In this point Booker’s perspective is opposed to the widely spread bias concerning the hatred of Afro-Americans towards their odious masters. In a number of situations the relations were rather warm and some of the slaves got accustomed to their position and did not want to change their life style.
Giving rise to readers’ doubts concerning the generally accepted view on the confrontation between Afro-Americans and white population, Booker motivates them to get rid of their stereotypes. Pointing at another shift in public consciousness of Americans in 1890s, Kate Chopin sheds light upon the first signs of feminism in the society, choosing a woman struggling for her rights as the main protagonist of her book The Awakening.
“The years that are gone seem like dreams… Perhaps it is better to wake up after all, even to suffer, rather than to remain a dupe to illusions all one’s life.” (Chopin 292). The idea of awakening is rather broad and can be used to define various changes in the country of the period under analysis.
Up from Slavery by Washington Booker can be regarded as a part of the 1890s America explored by Roosevelt emphasizing the same ideas of universal values which preceded the decline of slavery.
The outside world does not know the struggle that is constantly going on in the hearts of both the Southern white people and their former slaves to free themselves from racial prejudice; and while both races are thus struggling they should have the sympathy, the support, and the forbearance of the rest of the world (Washington 220).
A similar idea is proclaimed by Roosevelt who points at the significance of ensuring equal rights for all the citizens for demonstrating the level of development of the state and entering the world community as a civilized country. “In the end the slave was freed, the Union restored, and the mighty American republic placed one more as a helmeted queen among nations” (Roosevelt 5).
Thus, describing the phenomenon, both authors point at its devastating effects for further progress of the United States, while the decision to get rid of it was similar to getting rid of a burden that prevented the development.
Up from Slavery by Washington Booker views the situation in America of 1890s through the eyes of an Afro-American, adding a new perspective to the descriptions of the situation in the country in The Awakening by Kate Chopin or The Strenuous Life by Theodore Roosevelt, without contradicting or opposing to them.
Works Cited
Chopin, Kate. The Awakening. New York: Bibliobazaar, 2008. Print.
Roosevelt, Theodore. The Strenuous Life: Essays and Addresses. New York: Cosimo Classics, 2006. Print.
Washington, Booker. Up from Slavery: An Autobiography. New York: Bibliobazaar, 2008. Print.
African American slaves were one of the main subjects of historical debate in the United States, underpinned by the efforts of northern policymakers to prohibit it. Their initiatives, including the claim for immediate emancipation, alongside the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) and the Dred Scott Decision (1857), resulted in a global change. Therefore, the adopted measures not only affected the discussion of the challenge but also strengthened the positions of the Republican Party.
The Abolitionist Campaign for Immediate Emancipation
The Abolitionist campaign for immediate emancipation was supported by the church since slavery was widely reproached by religion. The suggested implementation of drastic measures in this respect revolutionized the population’s perceptions by providing evidence of the fact that the problem is multi-faceted. In other words, the original ideas incorporated the considerations of sexual immorality due to the abuse of the affected persons and the practice of breeding people for sale.
The Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) and the Dred Scott Decision (1857)
The contributions to the discussion were also made by legal regulations of the problem. Thus, the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854), implying the need for voting for or against slavery in these territories, and the Dred Scott Decision (1857), prohibiting becoming free citizens by moving to other states, were critical. They led to the rapid rise of the Republican Party because a compromise on the issues could not be reached, and these leaders managed to blame southerners for violence based on their opposing solutions. Therefore, Lincoln’s election further isolated the deep south by turning the discussed actions into legislation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the intention to prohibit slavery in the United States was claimed by both religious institutions and northern politicians. Their consequent successes, leading to dramatic consequences for the south, were determined by the provision of substantial evidence of injustice. In addition, the Republican leaders managed to gain more influence than their southern counterparts through the election of President Abraham Lincoln and the legal actions presented by his administration.
The political history of America can never be complete without mentioning Abraham Lincoln.And, with this history comes the role that he played in the abolishment of slavery in America (Meirs, 1991)1. Though he didn’t do it immediately he assumed office, Lincoln eventually helped bring constitutional changes that saw the end of slavery. There was some reluctance to abolish slavery when he assumed office, as read from his first inaugural speech.
In this speech, Lincoln emphasized the need for the law governing slavery to prevail and pointed out the importance of the independence of individual states in administering laws that governed slavery without the interference of the central government. He observed that much apprehension had invaded the south since the republican administration had assumed power with him as the president.
1st inaugural speech
It was important for the south to note that his ascendance to power would not change the way the laws were observed, he added. He informed the nation that his government was ready to protect its people through the constitution. This discussion will be elaborated more by his 1st inaugural speech. Gerald (2008)2 notes:
Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration, their property, and their peace, and personal security, are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the amplest evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you.
I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I do not incline to do so.” Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them. And more than this, they placed in the platform, for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves, and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read: ( Roy, 1935)3
Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by an armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes. (March 4, 1861)4
Although the president insisted on the application of the rule of law in the running of the nation, he also accepted that there were vacuums in the law that were in use. In his speech, he did not clearly indicate the exact solutions that will be used to address the vacuums. On these deficiencies, Lincoln said: (Roy, 1935)5
No foresight can anticipate, nor does any document of reasonable length contain express provisions for all possible questions. Shall fugitives from labor be surrendered by national or by State authority? The Constitution does not expressly say. Might assembly ban slavery in the territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. Must Congress protect slavery in the territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. (March 4, 1861)6
That he did not admonish slavery then, is evident in his declaration he made over what becomes of a slave who took refuge in running to states that did not practice slavery will exempt him or her from servanthood. He made it clear that the country’s constitution provided for a continuation of slavery by a fugitive even in states that did not accommodate slavery. The services of the slave cum fugitive will be made available to individuals entitled and in need of the services. This he said in the first inaugural speech and Meirs (1991)7 notes:
There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions:
No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due. (March 4, 1861)8
The proclamation
After settling in the office as president, Lincoln began putting in place pieces of legislation that had an overall effect of reducing slavery. The giant leaps that he made concerning slavery reduction came in the form of two executive orders popularly known as the emancipation proclamation. During the American civil war, the first executive order that he gave came on the 22nd of September 1862. This order provided freedom to all the slaves in any state of the Confederate States of America. These were states that did not return to Union control by January 1, 1863. The second order was issued the same day as the first one.
Using his authority as the “commander in chief of the Army and Navy” Lincoln named ten states where the first order will apply. As expected, the proclamation was criticized by a section of the populace. It was condemned for giving freedom only to the slaves who were not under the power of the union. However, the proclamation gave freedom to thousands of slaves the very day that it was announced, although several others didn’t taste freedom until later. Of the ten states that the proclamation covered, it is only Texas that responded to demands immediately ( Barry, 2009)9.
The proclamation afforded freedom to more than four million slaves through a legal framework as the Union armies advanced. This had the effect of committing the union to end slavery, which was a contentious issue even in the North. One clear thing was that the proclamation did not include the border states of Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, or Delaware. These states had not declared secession, and hence no slaves were freed there.
During this period, the state of Tennessee had already mostly returned to the control of the Union, therefore it was also not named and was exempted. Additionally, Virginia was featured, but exemptions were spelled out for the 48 countries that were in the process of building West Virginia, along with seven other named counties and two cities. Furthermore, on the exemption list was New Orleans and thirteen named parishes of Louisiana. All these cities had mostly been under the control of the Federal government at the time of the first Proclamation (Roy, 1935)10.
Aside from Tennessee, other states in the Union-occupied areas of CSA states celebrated instant freedom immediately after the Proclamation and at least 20,000 slaves were freed at once on January 1, 1863. When the Proclamation was introduced, additional slaves immediately ran to Union lines as the Army units moved south. As the Union armies overcame the Confederacy, thousands of slaves were released each day until nearly all (close to 4 million, using the 1860 census were freed by July 1865 (Ibid)11.
At the end of the war, abolitionists were concerned that because the Proclamation was a measure of war, it had not completely finished slavery. Many of the former slave states had already put in place legislation abolishing slavery; however, some slavery went on to be legal, and to exist, until the institution was closed by the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment on December 18, 1865.
Second inaugural speech
In the year 1865 Lincoln assumed the presidency for the second term and before occupying office he was sworn in; fulfilling the constitutional requirements. On the fourth day of March, he was sworn in, and in his second inaugural speech, Lincoln reminiscences the events that led to the civil war that befell the nation in the period following his first swearing-in ceremony. He explains how the warmongers were all over the whole country advocating for war before he could even finish his first inaugural speech. Further, he pinpoints the basis upon which the war was started ( Roy,1935)12.
Closer scrutiny reveals that the war was basically a fight that was caused by the conflicts that had arisen from the existence of colored slaves. In this speech, the president seems unhappy about slavery and he advances his disappointment by invoking God’s name. He lays his doubts open over the possibility of God according to assistance to whoever lives off the sweat of others. These sentiments are a clear indication that Lincoln had grown into an individual who disapproved of the essence of slavery. In Lincoln’s second inaugural speech his disapproval is observed through the words of Barry, (2009) who notes13:
One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it.
Neither party expected for the war, the magnitude, or the duration, which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any man should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not that we are not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully.
The Almighty has his own purposes. “Woe unto the world because of offenses! For it must need be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh!” If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must need come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? (March 4, 1865)14
Three days after Lincoln’s assassination, he made a public appearance within the Whitehouse in which he gave a speech that speeded up his death. His speech came only two days after the surrender of Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s army. His speech concentrated majorly on reconstruction; with a great emphasis being placed on Louisiana. It was in this particular speech that the president openly supported the rights of the blacks to vote.
This sentence about black suffrage was the death of him. Unknown to the president was the presence of John Wilkes Booth, a white supremacist and Confederate activist, who vowed to kill the president after the comments made by the president, angered him (Roy, 1935)15. This he did after three days. But of interest to us are the comments that the president made concerning slavery in this particular speech. By supporting the participation of the colored in politics, the president had realized that blacks were equal to whites and none was a slave of the other. And, this is part of what he said in his last public address as Jason, (2009)16 notes:
A number of voters in the now to then slave town of Louisiana have sworn allegiance to the Union, assumed to be the rightful political power of the State, held elections, organized a State government, adopted a free-state constitution, giving the benefit of public schools equally to black and white, and empowering the Legislature to confer the elective franchise upon the colored man. Their parliament has by now been nominated to approve the legitimate amendment recently passed by Congress, abolishing slavery throughout the nation.
These twelve thousand persons are thus fully committed to the Union, and perpetual freedom in the state–committed to the very things, and nearly all the things the nation wants–and they ask the nation’s recognition and its assistance to make good their committal. Now, if we reject, and spurn them, we do our utmost to disorganize and disperse them (Jason, 2009)17.
The passion which Abraham Lincoln had in fighting slavery may be best demonstrated by the quotations that are found in the collected works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler. Below are three of them that demonstrate clearly as Barry (2009)18 notes:
My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, and I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. (August 22, 1862)19, p. 388
Barry, (2009)20 also notes: Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it (April 6, 1859), p. 376.
Jason, (2009)21 notes: As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this to the extent of the difference, is no democracy. (August1, 1858), p. 532.
Jason, ( 2009)22 notes: Labor is before, and independent of, the capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital and deserves much higher consideration. (December 3, 1861)23
In the United States, slavery was an institution that was well recognized. Lincoln had initially recognized slavery as a bad institution which he did not support and instead looked for all means to empower and bring to end slavery. As the political situations in the country changed, he also changed his stand about slavery. This was to a greater extent influenced by his wish to create a nation that was united. This indeed had repercussions for he had to struggle in creating a balance between the whites and the blacks.
From the above discussion and the accompanying quotation, it is evident that Abraham Lincoln was a president who took the leadership of America with among other objectives, to end slavery. Although he didn’t bring the reforms from the beginning of his first term, he eventually brought comprehensive reforms that safeguarded the rights of the minority. At the start of his first term, Lincoln concentrated so much on strictly following the laws that advocated for slavery. But, eventually, he structured reforms that went a long way in bringing equity to the masses. It is very clear that Lincoln’s death was caused by his stand on equal rights for both the whites and the coloreds. His death is caused by an assassin who was angered by his support for the minority.
Bibliography
Basler, Roy P. The Lincoln Legend. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1935.
Emerson, Jason. Lincoln the Inventor. Southern Illinois University Press, 2009.
Meirs, Earl S. Lincoln Day by Day. Dayton: Morningside House, 1991. Guelzo, Allen. Lincoln and Douglas: The Debates that Defined America. Simon & Schuster, 2008.
Prokopowicz, Gerald J. Did Lincoln Own Slaves? And Other Frequently Asked Questions about Abraham Lincoln. Pantheon, 2008.
Schwartz, Barry. Abraham Lincoln and the Post-Heroic Era. University of Chicago Press, 2009.
The debate over the issues surrounding slavery in the 1850s still rages. Many people have set out to unravel the reason behind the then civil war that saw the shading of blood of a significant number of innocent people. The war was between the Southern and the Northern states, where slavery prevail.
While the Southern states sought to preserve their prevailing agricultural and slavery ways of life, the Northern states were after nurturing a new way of life, free of slavery. These outstanding differences compelled people to address slavery as a subject majoring on its causes. Among the many causes associated with slavery, political, cultural, moral, and economical causes underscore the major causes.
However, as primary sources unfold, virtually all the debates over slavery in the 1850s were dominated by economics, rather than morals. It is rather interesting to find out that, even from the arguments of those who associate slavery with morals, rather than economics, the issue of economics stands out in their debate. For instance, one reason that explains the stance of the Northerners concerning slavery is that they wanted to nurture unity and free labour against their southern counterparts.
Labour and economy remained intertwined in that; the former was a factor that determined the state of the latter. Therefore, building on this argument, it suffices to infer that, the causes of slavery cannot be sufficient without addressing the issue of economics. The entry of the Negros to America was a major cause of the Civil War; a war founded on nothing but slavery.
The reason behind the entry of these people was no more than economy based. They played a significant role as far as trade was concerned in those days. Therefore, economics could not be divorced from any slavery debate for it was the sole issue affecting all the political powers of that time.
Scholars single out economical differences between the two states as the cause of the slavery in those days. As the two competed in maintaining their economic statuses, slave trade turned out as one way out.
Revealing the economic gain from slavery, the Southerners were deeply rooted on slavery since it was more profitable than any other form of trade. In other words, it boosted their economic well-being significantly. Without slavery, the Southerners’ economy would crumble. There existed another category of people, who claimed that slavery was an outcome of the differences in geographical regions.
While some regions remained agriculturally fit, other had rugged landscapes that could not allow any agricultural practise. Following the significant contribution of agriculture in the then economy, the agriculturally challenged regions had to offer labour, sufficient to maintain this economy. As the debates about slavery unfolded, it was all about economy that slavery found its way.
In conclusion, 1850s stands out as a period marked by raging debates over slavery. People have pointed out various causes of slavery; some associate it with politics and immorality, while others associate it with culture as well as economics. As the debate over slavery continued, economics remained dominant.
Hoarding material possessions is a ghost that has haunted human beings for a long time. Morality could not find its way in at a time when material possessions surpassed human lives. Regardless of what different people perceive the dominant subject surrounding slavery, it is evident that economics and not morality dominated slavery debates in the 1850s. People of that time were not concerned about morality; all they cared was their economical well-being.
The arrival of explorers and traders from Portugal on the coast of Sub-Saharan Africa in the early 15th century was the turning point of African slavery. It marked a significant new development in the history of the African slave trade in terms of its intensive development, its slave sources, and the intended uses of the captured slaves. When the Europeans began shipping African slaves to Europe in mid 15th Century, they were mainly meant to serve as domestic servants (Eltis 43). Moreover, the Portuguese engaged in the slave trade on the African coast on a mass scale. They traded African slaves in exchange for gold which was then exported to Europe. During this period, Europe was experiencing a shortage of precious metals such as gold and diamonds, thus the Portuguese found it ideal to export gold to Europe as opposed to the slave trade (Klein 42). The expansion of Europe led to an increased imbalance of trade with Asia and therefore, gold from Sub-Saharan Africa helped Europe sustain that trade. However, with the discovery of sugar production at the end of the 15th Century to the Atlantic Islands and the opening up of the New World (Americas) in the European conquests, the Portuguese discovered new ways of utilizing slave labor in these sugar plantations (Klein 42). This paper discusses how African slaves were introduced into the European plantation systems as farm laborers around the period 1525 and 1700.
The Spread of European Slave Plantation Systems
In the 16th Century, wealthy European masters owned only a few slaves. Most African slaves were owned by aristocrats and institutions which were wealthy (Klein 43). Many of these people were also major landowners. However, they infrequently engaged their slaves in agriculture. However, the introduction of African slaves to the unpopulated Atlantic Islands defined the European plantations systems that spread to the New World conquered by the Europeans. The Atlantic Islands proved to be more ideal for sugar cane plantations which required intensive labor. Islands such as Madeira, Sao Tome, and the Canaries became the most important sugar-producing islands. By the end of the 15th Century, Madeira had become Europe’s largest sugar producer. By the 1530s, Madeira’s dominance in terms of leading sugar producers had been outpaced by competition from other islands. The Canary Islands had also become a major sugar production Island during this period. Both Madeira and Canary Islands first used Guanche natives as slaves along with moors imported from Spain. These slaves were quickly replaced by African slaves who became the dominant labor force on the sugar estates. Sao Tome was the final Atlantic Island to develop a major sugar plantation slave system. Before European penetration, this island like other Atlantic Islands had been inhabited. The Europeans had established some 60 mills on the island and some 2000 plantation slaves of African descent. This Island also had slave pens for African slaves in transit to Europe and the Americas. Eventually, the island’s important role as a transfer and American competition led to the decline of the Island’s sugar industry. In essence, the sugar-producing islands had formed sugar plantation regimes that were functional which turned out to be models of such institutions which were transported to the New World. African slaves imported directly from the African coast were deployed to work in the rural estates on these Islands. By the European slave holdings in the period then, slaves were held in extremely large lots, and urban and domestic slavery was held as minor occupations. The New World plantation systems were well-formed, with a smaller population of rich mill owners at the top of the echelon possessing most lands and slaves. They were followed by the intermediate category of European planters who possessed slaves and sugar fields but could not afford to own mills. Peasant European population that was poor hardly existed. Skilled administrative and mill operations were positions offered to whites only who were not in a position to own slaves. The lowest category was made up of the mass of black slaves who comprised up a majority of the labor force as well as the population in general (Klein 42).
In sum, the Portuguese had extensive experience with African slaves in their Atlantic Islands and had direct access to African labor markets. Once it decided to fully exploit its American colony, the attention towards the African labor force was occasioned by the availability of capital for importations. The experiences of the Europeans with American Indian workers were less successful. The American Indian workers were less adaptable to systemic agricultural labor and highly vulnerable to European diseases compared to Africans. As the American economy continued to expand, the American Indian population declined. Thus accessibility to African labor markets enabled the Europeans to introduce African slave plantation systems to fully exploit their American colony. Europeans from northern Europe who later followed Portugal and Spain (Iberians) to America had cheaper and more willing European laborers to exploit, especially in the crisis period of the 17th Century. Despite the availability of this labor, peasants and the urban poor could not afford to migrate to America. Their migration was subsidized through the selling of one’s labor to American employers in indentured contracts. This turned out to be the major form of colonization in the first half-century of northern European settlement in America. Indentured labor was primarily used by the English and French who were assisted by the pool of workers faced by low wages within the European economy. However, the end of the 17th Century European crisis, and in particular the rapid growth of the English economy in the last quarter of the century, resulted in a thriving labor market in Europe and an increase in indentured laborers. The high cost of indentured European laborers and inaccessibility to American Indian workers made it inevitable for the English and the French to turn to African slaves. This was especially after the two European nations had discovered that sugar was the best crop that could be profitably exported to the European market on a mass scale (Eltis 43). The growth and development of the English plantation system focused on African labor at the end of the transition. At around 1675, sugar exports from English Caribbean overtook the volume of the Brazilian sugar exports. By 1700 the English sugar plantations had absorbed over 177,000 slaves of African origin. Therefore, we can attribute the industrial development of Europe and the Americas (New World) more to the adoption of slave plantation systems by European conquering nations (Klein 43).
Works cited
Eltis, D. The Rise of African Slavery in the Americas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Klein, H. African Slavery in Latin America and the Caribbean. Oxford University Press, 1988.
The origins of slavery in the American territories and why it came to be
From 1526 until 1776, complex pressures shaped the structure of slavery in the United States, and historians have proposed multiple ideas to explain how slave trade evolved. Slavery was strongly related to labor demand in European colonies, particularly in the Caribbean and South America’s labor-intensive sugar plantation industries of Great Britain, Spain, France, and the Dutch Republic. Slave ships transported captives from Africa to the West and indigenous peoples were enslaved in North American colonies on a smaller scale (OpenStax, 2019). However, Indian slavery effectively stopped in the late eighteenth century.
How slavery was handled differently in each colonial territory of British North America
Enslaved people worked in various sectors, including breweries, shipyards, plantations, and timber yards. In the regions north of Maryland, slavery would gradually give way to free labor. The slave population in the North progressively fell throughout the 1760s and 1770s with slaves in Philadelphia reducing to approximately 700 in 1775 (OpenStax, 2019). Antislavery activism was rife in the city, with nationalist pamphleteers handing out antislavery booklets to blacks and whites. The presence of antislavery groups facilitated the spread of manumissions thus slavery became less viable in the North. New York had a high percentage of slaves who acquired valuable trades such as masonry and goldsmithing working alongside artisan masters. All slaves in New York were freed in 1827 (OpenStax, 2019) despite the liberation sentiment in the North during the Revolutionary battle.
The contrasts between indentured servants and slaves
Indentured service varied from enslavement in that it was a type of debt servitude where an agreed-upon period of unpaid service that often covered the servant’s costs of immigration to America. Indentured workers were not awarded incomes, although they were housed, clothed, and nourished in most cases. Slaves were deemed property and were only awarded freedom on rare occasions despite several years of strenuous labor (Gabor, 2021). Slaves were sold, exchanged, negotiated for, and even utilized as property in a will.
Slavery has been one of the most problematic aspects of the history of humankind. Slavery developed as European trading and marine settlements which required additional labor in the American colonies (Harris, 2018). Settlers comprised enslaved people from Native Americans and forcibly brought Africans, using slave labor in every part of the economy, from sugar production to harvesting and exploration of raw materials (Harris, 2018). The practice of slavery in British North America can be characterized by how colonists regarded enslaved people.
As slavery gradually spread across America, each area had distinctions. For instance, Jamestown in Virginia became the first permanent British settlement through which enslaved Africans were brought to North America (Harris, 2018). Similar to Jamestown, other port cities practiced slavery primarily by connecting the international slave trade with rural and urban slave markets (Harris, 2018). Slavery practices were perceived to extend in Boston, which is believed to be the first place where someone tried to force enslaved people to have children to earn money (Harris, 2018). Later, Massachusetts enacted the first law of slavery in British North America (Harris, 2018). While the practice of slavery was developing throughout America, the labor roles did not vary much (Harris, 2018). Colonists used enslaved people as domestic labor or to farm and produce trade goods (Harris, 2018). Colonial regions captured people to force them to work, but slavery practices seem to differ depending on how settlers viewed enslaved people, whether for trade, profit, or as legitimized property.
Although slavery used to be a significant source of labor in colonial America, indentured servants were also prevalent. Enslaved people consisted of Native Americans or Africans, with the latter brought to America against their will (Harris, 2018). However, indentured servants made individual choices to migrate, looking for economic opportunities and hoping to live better overseas (Delao, 2021). The servants often worked cultivating tobacco and building the economy, with indentured servitude influencing culture and society in North America (Delao, 2021). Colonial regions had varying labor, but some were forced to work while others did so voluntarily.
To summarize, the practice of slavery was characterized by capturing people and considering them as a workforce. Regions often viewed enslaved people as goods for trading or means to make money but failed to regard them as human beings. However, labor was represented not solely by enslaved people but also by indentured servants who willingly arrived in colonial America seeking jobs to improve their lives.
Many people know the story of Abdul Rahman ibn Ibrahim Sori, an African prince who was stolen from his kingdom and sold as a slave to the United States. In 1788, Abdul Rahman and his men were sent to solve a coastal trade conflict in the Fouta Jallon region (Asante 233). The enemy troops kidnapped the royal and sold him to the British slave ship captain. Abdul Rahman spent 40 years as a slave, during which some of his cultural aspects like identity, traditions, and family values were dramatically disrupted. However, his language knowledge, religion, and leadership skills were helpful to resist the power of slavery and American colonialism. Although Abdul Rahman managed to end his enslavement, financial and social outcomes cannot be ignored. Abdul Rahman’s life as a slave has its consequences on cultural awareness like identity, family issues, traditions, language, and religion, and long-term effects on descendants.
Slavery in America was a significant period when people had to live under limited conditions and prove their dignity, dealing with disrupted experiences and concerns. Abdul Rahman continued talking about his family and status, but his royal priorities were not enough to confirm his identity and return to his family (Kalin and Duke). He had a master, Thomas Foster, who discovered by his knowledge, intelligence, and personality that he was of noble birth” (Asante 233). Although Foster named Abdul Rahman as “Prince,” his identity was damaged because he had neither decision-making rights nor independence. In addition, the slave was not able to follow his traditions but accept the American style of life and be shaved as all African people. After being freed, the man never met his parents and children and never saw his native land, which had a deep imprint on emotional well-being.
At the same time, Abdul Rahman’s example proved that enslavement should be treated as the end of the world, and this man demonstrated a number of skills that allowed him to survive that horrendous period. Despite the existing restrictions, Abdul Rahman never forgot his religion and addressed Allah each time he wanted to ask for help or give thanks. His political education and awareness of at least five languages helped him be noticed and respected by other slaves. Finally, he demonstrated strong leadership abilities and the possibility to set and achieve goals. In several decades, Abdul Rahman became a foreman at Foster’s plantation, with his own garden and some freedom to sell goods at the market (Asante 234). His life in colonial America was not easy, but his knowledge and readiness for action made it possible to survive and be free.
The descendants of Abdul Rahman could not neglect the long-term effects of that experience. When the man was released without payment, his wife and nine children could obtain the same freedoms for free. Abdul Rahman and his wife began gathering additional funds and contacting the country’s leaders to ask for justice but saved two sons only (Asante 234). Still, slaves did not have good health, and fever took Abdul Rahman’s life before he reunited with his children. His legacy is in the books and documentaries about slaves’ intentions to become free, use their knowledge, create funds for protection, and expand family ties.
In conclusion, Abdul Rahman’s story is a remarkable adventure about how to acquire freedom under the most unfavorable conditions. Although his end was tragic and unfair, his life served as a strong motivation for many slaves across the globe. He was ready to share his experience and proved that religious beliefs, knowledge, and leadership skills could help even when identity, traditions, and family support were disrupted. Today, Abdul Rahman’s descendants recognized Foster’s plantation as the place where their family was founded.
Work Cited
Asante, Molefi Kete. The History of Africa: The Quest for Eternal Harmony. 3rd ed., Routledge, 2019.
Kalin, Andrea, and Bill Duke, directors. Prince Among Slaves. Spark Media, 2008.