Ulrich B Phillips The Central Theme Of Southern History

Throughout the course of history, one of the most pivotal points was the American Revolution. The independence the colonies gained from England allowed for the creation of the way we live today. However, it is important to know that while some aspects of our country today are based on rules set during the revolution, America, as we know it today, was shaped drastically by the Civil war. The Civil war acted as a second revolution in our country, pushing us closer to how society is now. Historians have wondered what caused the Civil War, was it a matter of slavery? Politics? Or another underlying issue? Historians such as James McPherson, William Gienapp, and Susan-Mary Grant have explored events that occurred before the Civil war and ultimately describe why the South succeeded.

After the Civil War, the South was in a state of political turmoil, social chaos, and economic decline. Contrary to popular belief, Northerners did not subject Southerners to unethical or inhumane punishment. The time post Civil War was filled with efforts toward reconstructing the South, yet there is the strong question if there even is a New South. Yes, there was somewhat of a New South economically. No, there was not a New South regarding race relations and social hierarchy. In the 1870’s, the South realized the world still looked at them as the ones who wanted slavery. There was a need to project a new image to the world and to stimulate

There has been many historians and theorists who have tackled colonial slavery. One of them is Ira Berlin whose book Many Thousands Gone is his take on slavery diversity in American history and how slavery is at the epicenter of economic production, amongst other things. He separates the book into three generations: charter, plantation and revolutionary, across four geographic areas: Chesapeake, New England, the Lower country and the lower Mississippi valley. In this paper, I will discuss the differences between the charter and plantation generations, the changes in work and living conditions, resistance, free blacks and changes in manumission.

As we already noted – in the 1800s expediency of slavery was disputed. While industrial North almost abandoned bondage, by the early 19th century, slavery was almost exclusively confined to the South, home to more than 90 percent of American blacks (Barney W., p. 61). Agrarian South needed free labor force in order to stimulate economic growth. In particular, whites exploited blacks in textile production. This conditioned the differences in economic and social development of the North and South, and opposing viewpoints on the social structure. “Northerners now saw slavery as a barbaric relic from the past, a barrier to secular and Christian progress that contradicted the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and degraded the free-labor aspirations of Northern society” (Barney W., p. 63).

Tensions between the North and South had grown steadily since the anti slavery movement in 1830. Several compromises between the North and South regarding slavery had been passed such as the Nebraska-Kansas and the Missouri act; but this did little to relieve the strain. The election of President Lincoln in 1861 proved to be the boiling point for the South, and secession followed. This eventually sparked the civil war; which was viewed differently by the North and the South. The Northern goal was to keep the Union intact while the Southern goal was to separate from the Union. Southern leaders gave convincing arguments to justify secession. Exploring documents from South Carolina’s secession ordinance and a speech from the Georgia

The article “The Negro Digs Up His Past’’ by Arthur schomburg on 1925, elaborates more on the struggles of slavery as well as how history tend to be in great need of restoration through mindfully exploring on the past. The article, however started with an interesting sentence which caught my attention, especially when the writer says ‘’The American Negro must remark his past in order to make his future’’ (670). This statement according the writer, explains how slavery took away the great deal freedom from people of African descendant, through emancipation and also increase in diversity. The writer (Arthur Schomburg) however, asserts that “the negro has been throughout the centuries of controversy an active collaborator, and often a pioneer, in the struggle for his own freedom and advancement” (670).

Phillips' book is an attempt to provide an overview of the practice and institutions of slavery in the Americas from its beginnings to the 19th century. Writing in 1918, Phillips hoped to provide an account of slavery based upon historical evidence and modern methods of research, rather than ideological motivations. He drew his evidence from the plantation records and letters of slave owners; contemporary travel accounts; court records and legal documents; newspaper articles; and in some instances, the recordings of slaves themselves, rather than what he viewed as more biased sources such as abolitionist writings. While this approach was not systematic and led him to base many

The first segment is about the "old" South and the plantations, slavery, supported by law, church, schools, and press. The second is the new order of Reconstruction, occupation and a changed federal Constitution. The third one is the third regime, following Reconstruction, which was the longest, characterized by the regime of "Jim Crow.” The last segment is the newest phase, comprising the demise of Jim Crow and the renewed intense devotion of the federal government and civil rights leaders to establish racial equality. This segments of Southern history has been involved to the relationship between the white and black race, specifically the legal and social status of blacks, and this work is essentially a study of the third segment - the rise and entrenchment of Jim

One of the more striking developments of the Reconstruction Era (1863-1877) was the integration of emancipated black men and women into the labor forces of Southern States. This transition period proved to be difficult for the largely agricultural economies as elite whites had to adjust to a more independent lifestyle, working class whites became poorer and blacks remained poor despite their freed status and ability to earn wages for their work. In Thavolia Glymph’s ‘A Makeshift Kind of Life’: Free Women and Free Homes, she examines the working class black women and the conditions they found themselves in. Two of her most prominent arguments found between pages 177 and 185 is that black women were still made to accept less than ideal and that white women struggled to cope with both their worsening living standards and black women’s independence. This paper examines both of those arguments.

Traditional views of the Antebellum South oftentimes ignore class divides within the American South. African-Americans and Whites are oftentimes viewed as being divided by race with all Whites and African-Americans being equal. However these ideals ignore the seventy-five percent of southerners which did not own slaves and the steep divides between African-American slaves with different roles. Primary sources from authors who experienced the Antebellum South, the American Civil War, and, or Reconstruction alert their audiences to societal divides which existed within each perceived race. Following the abolishment of slavery, economic class divides among whites were mitigated and whites view of African-Americans became standardized. Whites began to only recognize African-American as a rival to their power in all capacities, and as such vilified all African-Americans.

In 1928 Ulrich B. Phillips wrote an argumentative essay about the reasons for the massive support that slavery received from both slaveowners and Southerners who didn’t possess slaves. The essay was well-received and supported by critics in the 1930-s. However, closer to 1950-s critics started doubting the objectivity of Phillip’s writing. It’s important to note that Ulrich B. Phillips is a white historian from the South, writing from a perspective of a white Southerner. When he was writing his article he failed to step back from his bias and provide fully objective support for the main theme of his argument, setting a doubt to the reliability of his work.

William W. Freehling's book The South vs. The South: How Anti-Confederate Southerners Shaped the Course of the Civil War tells a unique story about the Civil War and one that is not typically discussed in history books. The book is about divisions within the southern culture, which might have led to the outcome of the war in favor of the Union. Perhaps all black southerners had a vested interest in the North's victory, but many white southerners felt the same way for many reasons. In The South vs. The South, Freehling discusses the way the Union used divisions in the south as a war strategy, such as by recruiting potentially neutral Americans living in border states. Recruiting soldiers from border states and western states with less entrenched plantation cultures versus their Dixie counterparts was one of Lincoln's key strategies and also helped General Grant secure some key military victories.

The antebellum era exposed the entirely different views and ways of life between the North and the South. These differences can be observed on the economic aspect. The North was industrialized enabling them to have functioning economy without the use of many labors; however, in the south, people relied on agriculture, and thus they needed a large number of slaved labors to help them work on the plantations. Such difference led to the main distinction which existed throughout the entire Civil War, the dependence on the slavery. These differences sparked conflict between the North and the South placing them in an indisputable position, eventually leading to the Civil War. The prosecution of the Civil War of North and South differed drastically. The North fought to preserve the Union which entailed abolishing slavery, enlisting the black in the army and also paying them proper wages, and the South fought to withdraw and preserve slavery and their agricultural lifestyle. These conflicting views did not disappear after the war. Although the North won the Civil War, they still wanted to unify the country, not only territorially, but also economically and politically by enforcing many new laws and amending the Constitution. And the South, even after the abolishment of slavery, people in the south remained hostile toward the freed people, saw themselves more superior than the freed people, and tried to resurrect the “Old South”.(192~198) To achieve the real union and realize the

The Civil War caused a shift in the ways that many Americans thought about slavery and race. Chandra Manning’s What this Cruel War Was Over helps readers understand how soldiers viewed slavery during the Civil War. The book is a narrative, which follows the life of Union soldier who is from Massachusetts. Chandra Manning used letters, diaries and regimental newspapers to gain an understanding of soldiers’ views of slavery. The main character, Charles Brewster has never encountered slaves. However, he believes that Negroes are inferior. He does not meet slaves until he enters the war in the southern states of Maryland and Virginia. Charles Brewster views the slaves first as contraband. He believes the slaves are a burden and should be sent back to their owners because of the fugitive slave laws. Union soldiers focus shifted before the end of the war. They believed slavery was cruel and inhumane, expressing strong desire to liberate the slaves. As the war progresses, soldiers view slaves and slavery in a different light. This paper, by referring to the themes and characters presented in Chandra Manning’s What this Cruel War Was Over, analyzes how the issue of slavery and race shifted in the eyes of white Union soldiers’ during Civil War times.

Defending slavery demonstrate the opinions and knowledge that the Southerners held concerning blacks and slavery. Paul Finkelman talks about slave legitimacy in colonial America. He argues that the first defense of slavery became visible after the end of American Revolution; it attempted to justify continuous forced labor with the Declaration of Independence. This essay aims at critically analyzing ideologies and racial theories that Southerners promoted to defend slavery, which included racial, political, legal, economic, and religious ideologies. Most specifically, this essay will discuss the legitimacy of slavery, in the earlier days, and justify this idea by using the religion and