Explore This Article
When the Georgia Trustees
first envisioned their colonial experiment in the early 1730's, they
sought to avoid the slave-based plantation economy that had developed in
other colonies in the American South.
The allure of profits from
slavery, however, proved to be too powerful for white Georgia settlers
to resist. By the era of the American Revolution
(1775-83), African slaves constituted nearly half of Georgia's
population. Although the Revolution fostered the growth of an
antislavery movement in the northern states, white Georgia landowners
fiercely maintained their commitment to slavery even as the war
disrupted the plantation economy. In fact, Georgia delegates to the
Continental Congress forced Thomas Jefferson to tone down his critique
of slavery in his initial draft of the Declaration of Independence in
1776. Likewise, at the constitutional convention
in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1787, Georgia delegates joined with
South Carolina's to insert clauses protecting slavery into the new
federal charter. In subsequent decades slavery would play an
ever-increasing role in Georgia's shifting plantation economy.
Cotton and the Growth of Slavery
For almost the entire eighteenth century Georgia's plantation economy was concentrated on the production of rice, a crop that could be commercially cultivated only in the Lowcountry. During the Revolution planters began to cultivate cotton for domestic use. After the war the explosive growth of the textile industry
promised to turn cotton into a potentially lucrative staple crop—if
only efficient methods of cleaning the tenacious seeds from the cotton
fibers could be developed. By the 1790's entrepreneurs were perfecting
new mechanized cotton gins, the most famous of which was invented by Eli Whitney on a Savannah River plantation owned by Catharine Greene
in 1793. This technological advance presented Georgia planters with a
staple crop that could be grown over much of the state. As early as the
1780s white politicians in Georgia were working to acquire and to
distribute fertile western lands controlled by the Creek Indians, a process that continued in the nineteenth century with the expulsion of the Cherokees. By the 1830's cotton plantations had spread across most of the state.
As was the case for rice production, cotton planters
relied upon the labor power of enslaved African and African American
people. Accordingly, the slave population of Georgia increased
dramatically during the early decades of the nineteenth century. In
1790, just before the explosion in cotton production, some 29,264 slaves
resided in the state. In 1793 the Georgia Assembly passed a law prohibiting the importation of slaves. The law did not go into effect until 1798, when the state constitution
also went into effect, but the measure was widely ignored by planters,
who urgently sought to increase their enslaved workforce. By 1800 the
slave population in Georgia had more than doubled, to 59,699; by 1810
the number of slaves had grown to 105,218.
The 48,000 African slaves imported into Georgia during
this era accounted for much of the initial surge in the slave
population. When Congress banned the African slave trade
in 1808, however, Georgia's slave population did not decline. Instead,
the number of slaves imported from the Chesapeake's stagnant plantation
economy as well as the number of children born to Georgia slave mothers
continued to outpace the number of slaves who died or were transported
from Georgia. In 1820 the slave population stood at 149,656; in 1840 the
slave population had increased to 280,944; and in 1860, on the eve of
the Civil War (1861-65), some 462,198 slaves constituted
44 percent of the state's total population. By the end of the
antebellum era Georgia had more slaves and slaveholders than any state
in the Lower South and was second only to Virginia in the South as a
whole. The lower Piedmont, or Black Belt, counties—so named after the region's distinctively dark and fertile soil
—were the site of the largest, most productive cotton plantations. Over
the antebellum era some two-thirds of the state's total population
lived in these counties, which encompassed roughly the middle third of
the state. By 1860 the slave population in the Black Belt was ten times
greater than that in the coastal counties, where rice remained the most
important crop.
Slaveholders
Although slavery played a dominant economic and political
role in Georgia, most white Georgians did not own slaves. In 1860 less
than one-third of Georgia's adult white male population of 132,317 were
slaveholders. The percentage of free families holding slaves was
somewhat higher (37 percent) but still well short of a majority.
Moreover, only 6,363 of Georgia's 41,084 slaveholders owned twenty or
more slaves. The planter elite, who made up just 15 percent of the
state's slaveholder population, were far outnumbered by the 20,077
slaveholders who owned fewer than six slaves. In other words, only half
of Georgia's slaveholders owned more than a handful of slaves, and
Georgia's planters constituted less than 5 percent of the state's adult
white male population.
These statistics,
however,
do not reveal the economic, cultural, and political force wielded by
the slaveholding minority of the population. Slaveholders controlled not
only the best land and the vast majority of personal property in the
state but also the state political system. In 1850 and 1860 more than
two-thirds of all state legislators were slaveholders. More striking,
almost a third of the state legislators were planters. Hence, even
without the cooperation of nonslaveholding white male voters, Georgia
slaveholders could dictate the state's political path.
As it turned out, slaveholders expected and largely
realized harmonious relations with the rest of the white population.
During election season wealthy planters courted nonslaveholding voters
by inviting them to celebrations that mixed speechmaking with abundant
supplies of food and drink. On such occasions slaveholders shook hands
with yeomen and tenant farmers
as if they were equals.
Nonslaveholding whites, for their part,
frequently relied upon nearby slaveholders to gin their cotton and to
assist them in bringing their crop to market. These political and
economic interactions were further reinforced by the common racial bond
among white Georgia men. Sharing the prejudice that slaveholders
harbored against African Americans, nonslaveholding whites believed that
the abolition of slavery would destroy their own economic prospects and
bring catastrophe to the state as a whole.
Propping up the institution of slavery was a judicial system
that denied African Americans the legal rights enjoyed by white
Americans. Since the colonial era, children born of slave mothers were
deemed chattel slaves, doomed to "follow the condition of the mother"
irrespective of the father's status.
Georgia law supported slavery in
that the state restricted the right of slaveholders to free individual
slaves, a measure that was strengthened over the antebellum era. Other
statutes made the circulation of abolitionist material a capital offense
and outlawed slave literacy and unsupervised assembly. Although the law
technically prohibited whites from abusing or killing slaves, it was
extremely rare for whites to be prosecuted and convicted for these
crimes. The legal prohibition against slave testimony about whites
denied slaves the ability to provide evidence of their victimization. On
the other hand, Georgia courts recognized slave confessions and,
depending on the circumstances of the case, slave testimony against
other slaves.
The relative scarcity of legal cases concerning slave defendants suggests that most slaveholders
meted out discipline without involving the courts. Slaveholders
resorted to an array of physical and psychological punishments in
response to slave misconduct, including the use of whips, wooden rods,
boots, fists, and dogs. The threat of selling a slave away from loved
ones and family members was perhaps the most powerful weapon available
to slaveholders. In general, punishment was designed to maximize the
slaveholders' ability to gain profit from slave labor. Evidence also
suggests that slaveholders were willing to employ violence and threats
in order to coerce slaves into sexual relationships.
Over the antebellum era whites continued to employ
violence against the slave population, but increasingly they justified
their mastery in moral terms. As early as 1790, Georgia congressman James Jackson
claimed that slavery benefited both whites and African Americans. The
expanding presence of evangelical Christian churches in the early
nineteenth century provided Georgia slaveholders with religious
justifications for human bondage. White efforts to Christianize the
slave quarters enabled masters to frame their power in moral terms. They
viewed the Christian slave mission as evidence of their own good
intentions. The religious instruction offered by whites, moreover,
reinforced slaveholders' authority by reminding slaves of scriptural
admonishments that slaves should "give single-minded obedience" to their
"earthly masters with fear and trembling, as if to Christ."
This melding of religion and slavery did not protect
slaves from exploitation and cruelty at the hands of their owners, but
it magnified the role played by slavery in the identity of the planter
elite. In 1785, just before the genesis of the cotton plantation system,
a Georgia merchant had claimed that slavery was "to the Trade of the
Country, as the Soul [is] to the Body." Seventy-five years later Georgia
politician Alexander Stephens
noted that slavery had become a moral as well as an economic foundation
for white plantation culture. The "corner-stone" of the South, Stephens
claimed in 1861, just after the Lower South had seceded, consisted of
the "great physical, philosophical, and moral truth," which is "that the
negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the
superior race—is his natural and normal condition."
Slaves
Depending
on their place of residence and the personality of their masters,
slaves in Georgia experienced tremendous variety in the conditions of
their daily lives. Although the typical (median) Georgia slaveholder
owned six slaves in 1860, the typical slave resided on a plantation with
twenty to twenty-nine other slaves. Almost half of Georgia's slave
population lived on estates with more than thirty slaves. Most Georgia
slaves therefore had access to a slave community that partially offset
the harshness of bondage. Slave testimony revealed the huge importance
of family relationships in the slave quarters. Many slaves were able to
live in family units, spending together their limited time away from the
masters' fields. Frequently Georgia slave families cultivated their own
gardens and raised livestock, and slave men sometimes supplemented
their families' diets by hunting and fishing.
Christianity also served
as a pillar of slave life in Georgia in the antebellum era. Unlike their
masters, slaves drew from Christianity the message of black equality
and empowerment. In the early nineteenth century African American
preachers played a significant role in spreading the Gospel in the
quarters.
Throughout
the antebellum era some 30,000 Georgia slaves resided in the
Lowcountry, where they enjoyed a relatively high degree of autonomy from
white supervision. Most white planters avoided the unhealthy Lowcountry
plantation environment, leaving large slave populations under the
supervision of a small group of white overseers. Slaves were assigned
daily tasks and were permitted to leave the fields when their tasks had
been completed. Lowcountry slaves enjoyed a far greater degree of
control over their time than was the case across the rest of the state,
where slaves worked in gangs under direct white supervision. The white
cultural presence in the Lowcountry was sufficiently small for slaves to
retain significant traces of African linguistic and spiritual
traditions. The resulting Geechee culture of the Georgia coast was the counterpart of the better-known Gullah culture of the South Carolina Lowcountry.
The urban environment of Savannah
also created considerable opportunities for slaves to live away from
their owners' watchful eyes. Slave entrepreneurs assembled in markets
and sold their wares to black and white customers, an economy that
enabled some slaves to amass their own wealth. A number of slave artisans
in Savannah were "hired out" by their masters, meaning that they worked
and sometimes lived away from their masters. Savannah's taverns and
brothels also served as meeting places in which African Americans
socialized without owners' supervision. This cultural autonomy, however,
was never complete or secure. The rice plantations were literally
killing fields. On one Savannah River rice plantation, mortality
annually averaged 10 percent of the slave population between 1833 and
1861. During cholera epidemics on some Lowcountry plantations, more than
half the slave population died in a matter of months. Infant mortality
in the Lowcountry slave quarters also greatly exceeded the rates
experienced by white Americans during this era. In addition to the
threat of disease, slaveholders frequently shattered family and
community ties by selling away slaves. More than 2 million southern
slaves were sold in the domestic slave trade of the antebellum era
.
Away from the Lowcountry, health patterns were much less
grim, but slaves tended to experience greater degrees of white
supervision. Three-quarters of Georgia's slave population resided on
cotton plantations in the Black Belt. These slaves typically experienced
some degree of slave community but also were surrounded by far greater
numbers of whites. Some one-fifth of the state's slave population was
owned by slaveholders with fewer than ten slaves. These slaves doubtless
faced greater obstacles in forming relationships outside their owners'
purview. Whatever their location, slaves in Georgia resisted their
masters with strategies that included overt violence against whites,
flight, the destruction of white property, and deliberately inefficient
work practices. Slaves in Georgia experienced hideous cruelties, but
white slaveholders never succeeded in extinguishing the slaves' human
capacity to covet freedom.
Secession, the Civil War, and the End of Slavery
By the late 1820's white slaveholders in Georgia—like
their counterparts across the South—increasingly feared that antislavery
forces were working to liberate the slave population. In the months
following Abraham Lincoln's election as president of the United States
in 1860, Georgia's planter politicians debated and ultimately paved the way for the state's secession from the Union on January 19, 1861. Statesmen like Senator Robert Toombs
argued that secession was a necessary response to a longstanding
abolitionist campaign to "disturb our security, our tranquillity—to
excite discontent between the different classes of our people, and to
excite our slaves to insurrection." Lincoln's election, according to
these politicians, meant "the abolition of slavery," and that act would
be "one of the direst evils of which the mind can conceive."
Ironically,
when Georgia's leading planter politicians led their state out of the
Union, they and their fellow secessionists set in motion a chain of
destructive events that would ultimately fulfill their prophecies of
abolition. The arrival of Union gunboats along the Georgia coast in late
1861 marked the beginning of the end of white ownership of black
slaves. As hundreds of Lowcountry slaves fled across enemy lines to seek
sanctuary with Union troops, Georgia slaveholders attempted to move
their slaves to more secure locations. By fall 1864, however, Union
troops led by General William T. Sherman had begun their destructive march from Atlanta to Savannah,
a military advance that effectively uprooted the foundations for
plantation slavery in Georgia. Amid the chaos and misfortunes unleashed
by the war, African American slaves as well as white slaveholders
suffered the loss of property and life. In the wake of war, however,
white and black Georgia residents articulated opposite views about emancipation.
The former slaveholders bemoaned the demise of their plantation
economy, while the freed slaves rejoiced that their bondage had finally
ended.
Source: Georgiaencyclopedia