BLACK SOCIAL HISTORY Slave breeding in the United States
| Slavery |
|---|
 |
Slave breeding in the United States were those practices of slave ownership that aimed to influence the reproduction of slaves in order to increase the wealth of slaveholders.[1]
Slave breeding included coerced sexual relations between male and female slaves, promoting pregnancies of slaves, sexual relations between master and slave with the aim of producing slave children, and favoring female slaves who produced a relatively large number of children.[1]
The purpose of slave breeding was to produce new slaves without incurring the cost of purchase, to fill labor shortages caused by the termination of the Atlantic slave trade, and to attempt to improve the health and productivity of slaves. Slave breeding was condoned in the South because slaves were considered to be subhuman chattel, and were not entitled to the same rights accorded to free persons. Engel and Fogerman (1995) found little evidence of slave breeding, but acknowledged that slaveholders wanted to encourage the birth of healthy slave children.
Slave breeding
Slaveholders looked at the fertility of slave women as part of their productivity, and intermittently tried to encourage large families.
The laws that ultimately ended the Atlantic Slave Trade came about as a result of the efforts of abolitionist Christian groups such as the Society of Friends, known as Quakers, andEvangelicals led by William Wilberforce, whose efforts through the Committee for the Abolition of the Slave Trade led to the passage of the Slave Trade Act by the British Parliamentin 1807.[2] This led to increased calls for the same ban in America, supported by members of the U.S. Congress from both the North and the South as well as President Thomas Jefferson.[3]
At the same time that the importation of slaves from Africa was being restricted or eliminated, the United States was undergoing a rapid expansion of cotton, sugar cane and riceproduction in the Deep South and the West. Invention of the cotton gin enabled the profitable cultivation of short-staple cotton, which could be produced more widely than other types; this led to King Cotton throughout the Deep South. Slaves were treated as a commodity by owners and traders alike, and were regarded as the crucial labor for the production of lucrative cash crops that fed the triangle trade.[4][5]
The slaves were managed as assets in the same way as chattel; slaveholders passed laws regulating slavery and the slave trade designed to protect their financial interests; there was little protection for the slaves. On large plantations, slave families were separated for different types of labor. Men tended to be assigned to large field gangs. Workers were assigned to the task for which they were best physically suited according to the overseer.[6][7]
Breeding in response to end of slave imports
The prohibition of the African slave-trade after 1807 limited the supply of slaves in the United States. The invention of the cotton gin enabled expanded cultivation in the uplands of short-staple cotton, leading to clearing lands cultivating cotton through large areas of the Deep South, especially the Black Belt. The demand for labor in the area increased sharply and an internal slave market expanded. At the same time, the Upper South had an excess supply of slaves because of a shift to mixed crops agriculture, which was less labor-intensive than tobacco. During this time period, the terms "breeding slaves", "child bearing women", "breeding period", "too old to breed", etc., became familiar.[8]
Planters in the Upper South states started selling slaves to the Deep South, generally through slave traders. Louisville, Kentucky, on the Ohio River was a major slave market and port for shipping slaves downriver by the Mississippi to the South. New Orleans had the largest slave market in the country and became the fourth largest city in the US by 1840 and the wealthiest, mostly because of its slave trade and associated businesses.
Slave accounts
In the antebellum years, numerous escaped slaves became literate (some already were) and wrote about their experiences, in books called slave narratives. Many recounted that at least a portion of slave owners continuously interfered in the sexual lives of their slaves (usually the women). The slave narratives also testified that slave women were subjected to arranged marriages, forced matings, sexual violation by masters, their sons or overseers, and other forms of abuse.
The historian E. Franklin Frazier, in his book The Negro Family, stated that "there were masters who, without any regard for the preferences of their slaves, mated their human chattel as they did their stock." Ex-slave Maggie Stenhouse remarked, "Durin' slavery there were stockmen. They was weighed and tested. A man would rent the stockman and put him in a room with some young women he wanted to raise children from."[9]
Dynamics
Personhood to thinghood
Several factors coalesced to make the breeding of slaves a common practice by the end of the 18th century, chief among them the enactment of laws and practices that transformed the view of slaves from "personhood" into "thinghood." In this way, slaves could be bought and sold as chattel without presenting a challenge to the religious beliefs and social moresof the society at large. All rights were to the owner of the slave, with the slave having no rights of self-determination either to his own person, or to that of his spouse, or his children.
Europeans had been taken captive by Barbary pirates and enslaved in North Africa. In turn, they considered slavery for people who were not European and were not Christian. In addition, slaveholders began to think that slavery was grounded in the Bible. This view was inspired by a reinterpretation of the Genesis passage "Cursed be Canaan; The lowest of slaves Shall he be to his brothers" (Genesis 9); Ham, son of Noah and father of Canaan, was deemed the antediluvian progenitor of the African people. Whites used the Bible to justify the economic use of slave labor. Subjugation of slaves was taken as a natural right of the white slave owners. The second class position of the slave was not limited to his relationship with the slave master, but was to be in relation to all whites. Slaves were considered subject to white persons.[10]
Demographics
In a study of 2,588 slaves in 1860 by the economist Richard Sutch, he found that on slave-holdings with at least one woman, the average ratio of women to men exceeded 2:1. The imbalance was greater in the "selling states", where the excess of women over men was 300 per thousand.[11]
Contrasting scholarly views
Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman dismiss the idea of systematic slave breeding in their 1995 book Time on the Cross.[12] They argue that there is very meager evidence for the systematic breeding of slaves for sale in the market in the Upper South during the 19th century. They distinguish systematic breeding—the interference in normal sexual patterns by masters with an aim to increase fertility or encourage desirable characteristics—from pro-natalist policies—the generalized encouragement of large families through a combination of rewards, improved living and working conditions for fertile women and their children, and other policy changes by masters. They point out that the demographic evidence is subject to a number of interpretations. The reports from witnesses are apocryphal in that they never specify any particular place in which breeding practices were alleged to have taken place. No surviving plantation records detail any such attempt.
No comments:
Post a Comment