Peculiar Institution: Slavery in the South According

¶ … Peculiar Institution: Slavery in the South

According to the historical excerpt, "A Planter Instructs his Son," the Southern attitude towards slavery was considerably more complex than a modern reader might hope to believe. Rather than simple hatred of African-Americans, the author of this treatise evidently viewed his slaves, not as the subjects of simple racist vehemence, but as economic entities that were necessary for his survival and the survival of his plantation. This set of instructions is emblematic of the fact that many antebellum Southerners viewed slavery as not only an institution, but as an integral aspect of their way of life. The author of the letter is passing down instructions to his son, not simply out of malice, but out of a desire to see the boy govern his property in an effective manner, according to the Southern tradition.

Governing property in an effective and even a traditional manner, of course, can be something to be commended. However, when property is viewed not only in terms of land but also in terms of human chattel, the relationship between reader and historical author becomes considerably more complex. If one were to search for an analogy from modern life to describe how slave owners viewed their human property, the most available one might be how farmers view their livestock. This is also seen in the work of J.H Hammonds. His writing is entitled "Instructions to His Overseer 1840-1850." This document provides a useful point of comparison with the letter to the planter's son, because like the letter, this is primarily a document of instruction rather than description. The author is not placed in a position of beleaguered defense, as Hammonds might be if he was writing an essay in the defense of slavery to an individual outside of the Southern states. Instead, he merely wishes to counsel the overseer in the best way he knows how, to effectively manage slaves and estate.

The author does not counsel cruelty nor condone malice on the part of the overseer. However, every instruction he bids to his overseer is designed to extract the maximum amount of labor from slaves. Much like an owner of an animal might wish to extract the maximum amount of labor from an individual beast of burden, so did the owner wish his overseer to treat his slaves. However, the owner is not unaware of the fact that slaves, unlike animals, have the reasoning capability of a human being. With this awareness, the owner counsels the overseer to engage in acts of subtle torture of psychological reasoning as well as brute force. This is done to enable the overseer to encourage slaves to work hard, with little complaint and with as little damage to the owner's physical property, the slave's body, as possible.

Always, this document suggests, in the back of Southerner's minds, was the fear of a slave rebellion, or that plantation slaves might escape. Rebellion was a constant in the Southern plantation owner's mind because of the risk it posed to owner's personal safety. Escape was seen as an economic detriment, a loss of one of the most valuable pieces of farm equipment upon a plantation. This is why so much psychological as well as physical torture was inflicted upon slaves who escaped or revolted against their treatment. Unlike an animal, the slave owners saw that human beings could learn by observation of the examples of others, and thus they used extreme cruelty towards captured runaway slaves to prevent further attempts at escape and rebellion. This is why slaves who escaped were also so vigilantly pursued, even if they were not particularly or personally valuable. If one slave escaped successfully, this might motivate and encourage other, more valuable slaves to escape from capture.

Thus, there was always awareness, even in owner's minds, that slaves had human feelings, thoughts, and agency, however hard owners tried to treat slaves like property or animals. As contemporary accounts of slavery from the 1820s and 30s suggest, furthermore, there was not a complete and utter absence of feeling between masters and slaves, even on the part of the slaves. The slaves recognized that their masters were human, and particularly those slaves who lived in quite close quarters to their masters, such as house slaves, would concede that their masters might be good human beings. However, most slaves suggested that even though Southerners might not be rotten to the core, because of the constraining nature of the institution, even the best slave owners were capable of great evil when provoked, because of the evils of the institution of slave ownership.