Why weren’t there more slave revolts and rebellions in the south, duringthe mid 1800's?

Answer 1

A few things to consider

1) perhaps there are some revolts you haven't heard about. Check the following lists of some of the major ones:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_rebellion#List_of_North_American_slave_revolts
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/DIASPORA/REBEL.HTM

2) slave owners had a lot of power to suppress revolts, limit communication
(though, despite these difficulties, slaves managed to revolts in #1)

3) there may have quite a number of smaller revolts that did have some success... but it was scarcely in the interest of slave owners to let this be known! The idea that slaves did NOT revolt, and esp that most were perfectly content was useful to them to:
a) avoid encourage other revolts
b) maintain their political argument against slavery opponents (evidence that many slaves were NOT happy did not help this!)
c) maintain their OWN conviction that this order of things was right and good, for the slaves as well as themselves

4) as another answer mentioned, slaves might choose OTHER means to 'fight back'
a) slowdowns or sabotage of equipment
b) running away!


By the way, the suggestion that slave uprisings were thwarted by the mixing of slaves who did not understand each other's language is of little value -- it certainly could not apply to the 'mid-19th century' long when all the slaves spoke English ((long after the slave trade had ended)

Another note on 'ability to communicate' -- the groups most active in planning the revolts we know of were the 'house slaves' (and free blacks were also sometimes involved). These are precisely those with the greatest likelihood of being able to get out, communicate with others, etc. This group was ALSO the one most likely to have some literacy.

(Despite various laws AGAINST teaching slaves to read and write, owners might find it in their own economic interest to have some slaves who could read, and so might ignore the laws and have them taught, or at least cast a blind eye to heir learning. This also explains some of the Southern objection to abolitionist mailings from the 1830s on. How could these promote insurrection, as was claimed, among a people who could not read them?!)

And there were, we know, a number of more subtle ways of communicating (e.g.., work songs with secondary messages).

Answer 2

Slave Rebellions In The South

Answer 3

It depends on the exact time period. During the Civil War, there actually were a lot of pretty impressive rebellions--slaves simply picked up and left the plantations, forcing the institution to an end.

Before the war, however, it was a more complex story. Part of it is, certainly, that any rebellions would have been (and were, when they did take place) met by a particularly brutal response. Also, the strictures against slaves gathering helped, although slaves seem to have gathered despite that. Part of it--this is a controversial point, but it has been argued fairly convincingly by historian Eugene Genovese, in Roll, Jordan, Roll: The World the Slaves Made--is that slaves may have had more subtle ways of resisting--slow-downs, theft, running away, tool-breaking, and other quieter forms of resistance worked to combat the most extreme conditions slaves faced, making armed resistance less a priority. (As I said, it's a controversial point.)

Answer 4

tremendous change at the company plantations. if best extra persons understood that the farmers and keep keepers weren't worried. the banksters of the time, just like the rothschilds, bankrolled the colossal investments in plantations with 1000s or even hundreds of those staff, more often than not cotton pickers. then it used to be King Cotton that introduced this on. Most had been purchased from the Carribean Islands wherein they labored within the cane fields. It all occurred whilst a person learned the wealthy backside land within the Sunbelt used to be ultimate to develop cotton. Before cotton, there used to be little need for slaves. After cotton, shiploads had been introduced in to prefer cotton at the company plantations. Plain and sensible. Actually, so much white farmers and keep keepers more often than not disliked all of the blacks being shipped in. The wealthy planters had the cash and, for that reason, political vigour. Isn't that continuously how it works? It continuously is going again to the bankers and loans. Connect the dots and the sample emerges. Judging from the opposite solutions I am sort of startled how tremendously ignorant younger persons are in this hassle. My goodness what they need to educate within the public colleges. No marvel this country is so tousled. Between propaganda from the mainstream information media and the general public schooling procedure, what we have now here's a real diaster.

Answer 5

Slaves were kept under very tight regulations, each state having a slave code telling the owners how to treat their slaves(by today's standards, we wouldn't treat our pets that badly), but they also enforced the code by local bands of men riding during the evening as a kind of neighborhood watch program. However, unlike today, where you would call the police if you saw something suspicious, they would take justice(as it were) into there own hands and punish the slave for being away from his place.

Despite southern revisionists trying to invent lies that slavery was a benign good to the ignorant savages, the truth is that they treated them well if they obeyed and punished them severely if they disobeyed. Even though most punishments did not kill the slaves(they were a substantial part of the slaveholders wealth and no one blindly goes about destroying their own wealth), if the slave was too uppity or too dangerous or too likely to inspire escape and revolt in the other slaves, the owners would and could cut their losses and kill the slave as you would a rabid dog. As they did not wish to kill most of the slaves, their lesser punishments were usually even more brutal.

whale

Answer 6

It was safer/easier to just run away. In the US South this was an option, either to Florida, Mexico, Canada. All of these avenues offered freedom. It is estimated that over 50,000 slaves did find freedom this way between 1830 & 1860.

As for "none being successful" the case of the slave ship Creole I think is a good example of slave revolt or mutiny that was successful. Though it didn't result in the toppling of the system of slavery it did result in 135 slaves gaining their freedom.

Answer 7

Slaves were kept under tight control. They were forbidden from meeting in secret. They were probably always dog-tired from backbreaking work, and didn't have the energy to revolt. They didn't have access to good weapons, and couldn't organize themselves enough to rebel. But I'm sure there were smaller revolts, though obviously none were successful.

Answer 8

Phantasyelementz had a good answer but I have to add that slaves came from different countries and different tribes. They did not speak the same language and were taught as little english as they needed to know to keep them from communicating. It was extremely difficult for them to plan anything together for this reason. Imagine planning a rebellion using sign language.

Answer 9

They were afraid they would be sent up north to work 14 to 18 hours a day in freezing cold factories