Look at the chart on page 452 in your textbook, and post two comments on the question below. Your first comment answers the question, and your second comment responds to your classmates. Make sure you answer in complete sentences and use proper grammar.
Question: It's easy to see on the map how the concentration of slaves was connected to where the various cash crops were grown. But how does the map also demonstrate how difficult it would be to free slaves at all?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Because of the large concentration of slavery in the U.S., according to this map, one can assume that freeing all the slaves would be extremely difficult. Especially for the slaves living in land-locked states such as Tennessee and Arkansas, even if they tried to escape they would end up in another slavery bound state. I assume the only reason why freeing the slaves would be a difficult matter is because there was no where for them to go. It's not like they had boats and could travel to a different country. All in all, if a slave wanted to escape on his own two feet, he wouldn't be able to get very far; therefore, unfortunately he/she was bound to a slave's lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteThe map demonstrates how difficult it would be to free slaves at all. There would be no place for the slaves to run to and hide because all of the surrounding states are crowded with slaves also. It was extremely risky to go from slave state to slave state as a slave that was trying to escape because basically no one would help you hide/ protect you from slave catchers and other slave owners. The South was clearly more concentrated with slaves and pro-slavery people, therefore freeing slaves in a tight area like that was extremely dangerous and difficult.
ReplyDeleteCourtney brings up a good point concerning the fact that slaves did not have people who could help them (besides other slaves). It was very risky for a slave to travel outside the plantation he/she worked, and if they were caught escaping, there were brutal consequences. If a person were to catch a fleeing slave, they would ultimately return that slave back to their slave owner. You had to be pretty lucky to make it to a non-slave state, and so, perhaps it wasn't worth leaving at all. Basically, the map represents that fact that it was not easy for the slaves to be freed.
ReplyDeleteGiven these conditions, freeing slaves would be nearly impossible. The slaves would have nowhere to go; and if they did find a place, it was only a matter of time before they were caught. As others have mentioned, the South had many more slaves and slave owners so it is easy to see how the people would be angered by the idea of freeing slaves. Along with this, most slaves didn't have much knowledge of the surrounding land so it would be hard for them to know where to go once escaped. For these reasons, it is easy to understand why freeing slaves would be so difficult.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe concentration and geography of slaves in 1860 explains why it was basically unfeasible to free slaves. The Southeast region of the country primarily had the most slaves, whether there a low or high percentage of slaves in the total population of each state. It was extremely difficult for slaves to run away, especially because there was no place to hide with slave states right next to each other. The map displaying the Stable Crop Regions of the South illustrates that there was an economic importance of slavery, and slaveholders were adamant in keeping their slaves. The fugitive slave laws stated that if a slave ran away, they would have to be returned. Even the Constitution stated that if a piece of property (slaves) was stolen, people were obligated to return it. The map reiterates the fact that freeing slaves wasn't really a feasible option at the time.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePersonal emancipation was particularly grueling in 1860 due to the geography of the states. Ten of the thirteen Southern slave-states were either land-locked and surrounded by other slave-states or coastal territories surrounded by slave-states and water. Neither slave-states, which would be very hostile and unsympathetic, nor bodies of water, which could only be crossed by whites with money, were realistic escape routes for slaves.
ReplyDeleteMost slaves were caught in between a rock and a hard place; people who hated their guts and water. It's not fair to say all Southerners hated slaves, but the clear majority of them would be disgusted with a run-away, feeling it was their Constitutional duty to return him/her to his/her owner.
Even if a slave made it across one or two or even three states, they still might be in the danger zone. And that's why freeing them, one at a time, was so tough.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNisha brings up a good point about the Fugitive Slave Laws and the Constitution. They made slaves' plights more difficult by encouraging even the most amiable free American to turn on run-away slaves; no one wants to break the law, and since not turning in an escaped slave was illegal, more people would be more likely to ruin the slaves' shots at freedom.
ReplyDeleteIt's actually crazy upon first glance, to see how hard freeing all the slaves would be. Nearly every area had slaves (regardless of the number of them). As bad as it sounds, they were crucial to the development at the time and the US would have immensely suffered if each and every one of them were liberated. (Plus it looks like the process of doing so would take beyond a reasonable amount of time). Less slaves were running away at the time as well pertaining to the fact that there was the fugitive slave law. Clearly, freeing the slaves would've been difficult to begin with, but even more so once the law was put into play it would have been nearly impossible as time went on. It's obvious that it was not easy for the slaves to be liberated... just be thankful if you already live in a non-slave state. (which is uncommon compared to the number of slave states)
ReplyDeleteSince the pre constitution era, slavery has been a controversial matter. It first began with the complete neglect to acknowledge slavery, and then proceeded to holding the problem off to address in the future. Nonetheless, the diagram in the textbook clearly exemplifies how slavery elevated to becoming a key part of the U.S. economy. Since the introduction of the cotton gin, the textile industry has been the chief supplier of economic growth in the United States. Furthermore, because the country has become reliant on slave labor to maintain the increasing textile industry, it now becomes a huge problem to decide to dismiss slavery all together. Around this era, every 40 cents of a dollar earned in the northern region of the nation was due to in part by slave labor in the south. Thus, by completely cancelling slavery in an immediate sweep, the affects it would have on nation’s economy would be devastating.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, I agree with Nisha and her statement on the Fugitive Slave Law. The concept of returning property, slaves, to their rightful owners was instilled in the articles of the constitution. Moreover, by contradicting the laws that built our nation, an uproar of protests would immediately follow. Because slavery existed since the beginning of the United States, it is now very difficult to end that idea.
ReplyDeletePeter brings up a good point by stating that ten out of the thirteen Southern slave states were either land locked or surrounded by other slave states. For example, if a slave tried to escape from Tennessee, the slave would have a hard time surviving. Neighboring states such as Kentucky, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia were all slave states. In fact, Mississippi had a large percentage of slaves of 50% or over. This slave would have a difficult time and would probably get caught immediately. Also, this slave would have to pass North Carolina to get to the Atlantic Ocean, however, like Alexandra said, this would not do anything with no boats. With the law, geography, and economy, it would be surprising if a slave was actually able to escape.
ReplyDeleteAlex and Peter both brought up a very good point. Many of the states are land-locked, which made freeing the slaves an even more difficult task. Nisha also brought up the Fugitive Slave Law. This is another point that made it very hard for slaves to escape since they had people constantly on the lookout for runaway slaves, which then would be returned to the slave owners. This meant that you were pretty much going to be a slave for the rest of your life unless you could get around the slave catchers, which many people have mentioned was a task in itself due to the overwhelming slave states in the South.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Peter as he states how many of the Southern states were surrounded or landlocked by other slave states. This made it that much harder for slaves to escape without getting caught. This meant that the likelihood of any slave escaping was slim to none.
ReplyDeleteThe charts definetley demonstrate the concentration of slaves where there were the most crops. However, freeing the slaves was not as easy as it seemed! First of all, if slaves were freed, there would be no one to work in the plantations, or care for the thousands of acres of cotton and other important cash crops. Most of the slaves lived near the areas with the most cotton. Without the slaves, the economy would suffer a great deal.
ReplyDeleteIn agreement with Jamie, it was nearly impossible to free the slaves in the first place, especially because of the Fugitive Slave Law. Also, as a lot of other people said, the slaves had no place to go once they actually were freed! They were surrounded by other slave states, and bodies of water in which they had no way of getting across. Being a freed slave was extreamely difficult. Also, who would hire a freed slave? Plantation owners? Then they'd basically be doing the same hard work as before they were freed!
ReplyDeleteThe map demonstrates the percentage of slaves in the total population, in 1860. It shows the large concentrated area of slaves in the South and slightly in the West. It becomes obvious that the most crops were grown in Souther areas where tons of cotton, tobacco and even some rice and sugar were grown. However, because it was such a concentrated economy it forced the economy to focus on agriculture and slavery. The slaves were a huge portion of southern economy and represented a large amount of their population. Therefore, because of this it would be impossible to release some or all of the slaves. Without them the economy would change completely. The economy would be forced to find workers and make the plantation owners pay. If the the slaves were free they may move to the North or leave their owners. This would cause a Southern economic crisis. The map demonstrates the huge difference it would make on the South, however, it would only affect the North with a shortage of supplies that the South provides.
ReplyDeleteCourtney brings up a good point when stating how there would be no place for the slaves to run to and hide because all of the surrounding states are crowded with slaves also. The riskiness of slaves traveling from state to slave state as a slave trying to escape was useless because no one would help you hide from slave catchers or other slave owners. She also brings up a good point when saying the South was more concentrated with slaves and pro-slavery people, therefore freeing slaves in a tight area like that was extremely dangerous especially due to the economy. The South clearly liked the fugitive slave law therefore, if they freed the slaves it would cause a ton of chaos.
ReplyDeleteThe map in our text book clearly shows us that there was an over population of slaves in the South. If all the slaves were set free at one time the South's economy would completely crash because no one would want to take the slaves jobs. Furthermore, the entire nation's economy would depreciate because most of the nation's resources were grown by slaves in the South. Also because the most densly populated areas in the South were in the center of the country it would be extremely hard for the slaves to travel. Having no money and no place to live the slaves would be facing an extremely difficult lifestyle once they are freed.
ReplyDeleteCj makes a valid point that the North was so reliable on the South for resources such as cotton. If the slaves were no longer working the North would be in a lot of trouble because they would no have any resources to use. Freeing the slaves in one wave would have a crushing effect on the nation's economy. Even though the North was not in favor of slavery they would be at an extreme fault when the economy crashes. I agree with Cj in the fact that freeing the slaves all at once would ruin the economy. America is so reliant on slave labor because they need the cash crops created in the South to support the textile industry. The textile industry is such a large part of America's economy that they can't afford to lose that industry due to freeing all of the slaves.
ReplyDeleteWhen viewing the map it is easy to conclude that it was almost impractical to have the freeing of slaves. The slaves would literally have no place to go especially slaves who escape from cash crop states , because they will just enter another slave state. Also in the South, if a slave were to escape, not too many people would be able to help them out considering the majority of people were proslavery or were other slaves. Evidently, it was extremely hard to have the freeing of slaves all at one time be hard since the surrounding states were so heavily populated with pro-slavery people and slaves already.
ReplyDeleteCourtney and Alex make a valid point that freeing all the slaves at once would be difficult. Alex also stated that the slaves living in land-locked states like Tennessee and Arkansas, and if they tried to escape they would end up in another slavery bound state, which is very true. Courtney also brought up a strong point that if the slave left and went from a slave state to slave state they would not get any help and they would be running into the same problem they just left from. I agree with what about of these girls said.
ReplyDeleteIt is very easy to see on the map how the concentration of slaves is directly connected to where the various cash crops were grown. In the strip of land stretching from South Carolina to Texas, where most of the cotton is grown, one can find a majority of the 50 percent and over population. There is also a high concentration of slaves in Virginia where tobacco is grown. On the map, all the general areas of cash crops hold high populations of slaves. The map also demonstrates the difficulty of freeing slaves because there are just so many of them in dense areas; they really have nowhere to go. The north at this time is already heavily populated, so some of them can go there but most of them will still be stuck in the South. The slaves make up over 50 percent of the south in some places which would make them the majority of free people if they were given freedom. The slaves have nowhere else to go and threaten a takeover with strength in numbers if set free.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Erin is saying, how the economy will drastically change if the slaves are set free. The South will not be as efficient if the slaves are set free, so the North will also have a lack of supplies. The slaves take up a majority of the population, so if that much of the workforce is depleted, there will be a definite change. The country would fall apart with a sudden flux of free people and a sudden decrease of workers on the farms. Cotton will have the biggest effect, seeing how it is the largest cash crop and the largest population of slaves comes from the cotton areas.
ReplyDeleteThe map clearly illustrates that the freeing of slaves because these slaves had no where to go. They were trapped by other slave states and had no where to run to, no place to escape. These slaves were also in the areas with a great deal of farming and agriculture. So if they were freed these farms would become less productive because the farmers would have to do all the work themselves, or hire others to do it which would cost them more money. This could cause them to raise prices or hire few people. Either way production in the north would be hurt.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jon and Erin about the economy changing because if the slaves were freed, and farmers had to hire workers or do the work themselves, they would either have to charge more for their goods or it would take them a lot longer to harvest the crops. Therefore, the north would have to spend more money on raw materials and crops or they would become less available, causing the prices to be raised more
ReplyDeleteThe chart showed the cash crops were mainly located in the South in 1860, which also the major location of slavery. Because of that, it was a big challenge to free the slaves. Since there were many cash crops down the South, the states needed cheap and large labor force to work in order to make the most profit out of it.Making slavery was the economic importance in 1860, and that made it difficult to free the slaves.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Drew. Slaves were trapped by other slave states and made them stayed at the same areas. Like what I have metioned before, slaves were the large and cheap human force to keep the cost low. It wasn't a perfect time to free the slaves and re-hired them as normal workers with larger cost of money. The main goal was to make as much profit, that made it harder to free them at this situation.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the map, it is extremely evident that the freeing of slaves would be difficult today. I see how the locations of where the cash crops were grown was directly related to the amount of slaves in a particular area. Being that the majority of those densely populated slave states were landlocked, escaping would result in negative results. Where would they go? The answer to this question answers why it was so difficult to free them; there was no safe territory for them to escape to. Slave states like Tennessee and Arkansas are surrounded by other slave states. If slaves did try to escape, they would be caught immediately by slave masters following the rules. Slave masters are following the Constitution as well as the fugitive slave law to protect their "property". The slaves would be brutally hurt for their attempts and probably sent back to where they came from. Due to these setbacks, escaping would be an extremely difficult process.
ReplyDeleteErin has a very economical point of view on the situation in which I agree with. If the slaves were set free then the production of the cash crops would decrease at a rapid rate. The north would suffer because they would have to find new forms of getting crops and cotton if they did not have slaves making these products. Slavery was the solution to this problem and made a balance in the economy and making a profit for slave masters; without it, the economy would fluctuate drastically.
ReplyDeleteThis map has an intensive amount of slavery shown in places that were needing slaves the most. Such as Mississippi, Middle Section of Alabama, as well as the middle of Georgia and most of South Carolina. Most of those areas where they survived off of the cotton industry. Slaves were put there to pick cotton out of the field. Without them, the industry would plummet because of the percentage of cotton going out each year without slaves versus the percentage of cotton going out with slaves. The south's economy would also drop if all slaves were free at once because there were other industrys such as tobacco a little bit of rice and sugar and this little bit of hemp in Kentucky. Kentucky mostly survived off of Tobacco though, as well as Virginia. As said before, without the slaves, the south would be lost. Also, where would the slaves go? about thirteen states in the south all being bordered by eachother were slave states. If a slave were to escape, they'd get caught and be back at square one. If they were to adventure to the north, that'd be extremely difficult especially if they were in places such as Georgia or Alabama because they are surrounded and would have to be very sneaky to go about things. All in all, freeing the slaves would be extremely difficult and harmful in cases of how would the south survive.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jon on how he said that the slaves would have no where to go because the north was already over populated in cities. The south was very open landed where as the North was progressing fast with technology. Although more jobs were being created, more space was not. People were traveling to places where there were jobs and living in poor conditions. It seems as though if the slaves were to make it to the north, they wouldn't be able to find a place to live, and they'd probably want to go back to their old jobs because they still had living space.
ReplyDeleteThe map illustrates the way that slaves were really trapped where they were. It wasn't as if getting to the north meant crossing a line, getting there meant crossing through other slave areas, they really had no place to hide and the slave owners would return and punish the run away slaves. Also it wasn't just a matter of getting to the north, the north wasn't ready to take in those slaves. It was much more densely populated than the south and the slaves didn't have ways of supporting themselves in the north at all because different kinds of work were done in the north that the slaves had no knowledge of. Of course they could flee the country instead of going north but they face the same problems, crossing other slave areas. they were really trapped.
ReplyDeleteThe map shows that it was very difficult to free slaves. There would be no open places for the slave to be able to go to and stay hidden because all of the states around those areas already have slaves and were crowded. It was very risky for slaves to keep switching slave states because they were trying to escape and there was no one helping them hide or protect them. The south was more concentrated with slaves and pro-slavery people, leading to the freeing of slaves in tight areas very difficult and risky.
ReplyDeleteThis map shows how difficult it would be to free slaves all together. There would be absolutely nowhere for the slaves to go due to the surrounding areas also being filled with slaves. It was a very difficult task to go from slave state to slave state as a slave trying to run away. This was because in these states there are people everywhere searching for runaway slaves. It would be easier if the majority of the slaves were closer to the north so they could escape their faster. Overall it would be a very difficult task to free all of the slaves.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Peter when he talks about how many of the Southern states were landlocked by other slave states. This made it that much harder for slaves to escape without getting caught. This being said it lowered the changes of slaves escaping from low to practically none.
ReplyDelete