¶ … 1860, the Upper South was considered as largely comprised of the states of: Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia (Henretta,) Of these states Virginia totaled the larges population, at 1,105,453 combined residents, with a total slave population of 490,865 people, or roughly about 44% of the population (civilwar). This remarkable percentage of slaves within the population of Virginia as late as the year 1860 is astounding. Yet Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee also exhibit similar statistics, with the total slave population in the upper South ranging in general from 30-45% (civilwar). Why such a large slave population? By this time in history, many New England and Northern states were certainly recognizing increasingly large numbers of freed slave citizens. Yet the upper South lived as though in the dark ages, with many people still subject to the whims of their owners. Did other regions of North America exhibit the same patterns? Why did the Upper South have so many slaves still? Part of the reason, which will be expanded upon, is the people of the Upper South still lived primarily in a rural area, and were just beginning to become accustomed to the ideals of a more modern society.

During 1860, the total population of the...

Of that populations, roughly 14% were slaves in 1860 (civilwar). However, in certain regions of America, such as the upper South the preponderance of slave population was double or more. The reasons for this are complex and varied. Most of the regions comprising the upper South were still very urban in nature and not as technologically and industrially advanced as other regions in the Nation, such as the New England States. Additionally, after 1860, there was a much greater movement within the United States toward greater equality and freedom of slaves (Henretta).
This movement toward freedom and more equal opportunities explains why areas of the west and Midwest did not compare to the Upper South in slave population count totals. As the move toward freedom and independence increased, new home owners in the west and Midwest were likely much less inclined to take on slaves as a means of supporting their farms and plantations. More than likely, they would rather hire a freed slave at an inexpensive wage, than risk taking on a slave that might catch wind of the freedom movement.

If such an instinct were to "implant" itself in the mind and personality of a new farmers staff, he could very well…