What do you think?
Rate this book
American Negro slave revolts
SAME COVER AS STOCK PHOTO SHOWN. SCUFFING, CREASING, EDGE WEAR AND DINGS ON COVERS AND SPINE. PAGES INTACT, WITH AGE RELATED TANNING AND SOME DISCOLORATION. NICE READING COPY.
411 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1974
8 people are currently reading
1163 people want to read
About the author
Herbert Aptheker
151 books42 followersHerbert Aptheker was an American Marxist historian and political activist. He wrote more than 50 books, mostly in the fields of African American history and general U.S. history, most notably, American Negro Slave Revolts (1943), a classic in the field, and the 7-volume Documentary History of the Negro People (1951-1994). He compiled a wide variety of primary documents supporting study of African-American history.
From the 1940s, Aptheker was a prominent figure in U.S. scholarly discourse. David Horowitz described Aptheker as "the Communist Party’s most prominent Cold War intellectual".[1] He was blacklisted in academia during the 1950s because of his Communist Party membership.
Aptheker's master's thesis, a study of the 1831 Nat Turner slave revolt in Virginia, laid the groundwork for his future work on the history of American slave revolts. Aptheker revealed Turner's heroism, demonstrating how his rebellion was rooted in resistance to the exploitative conditions of the Southern slave system. His NEGRO SLAVE REVOLTS IN THE UNITED STATES 1526-1860 (1939), includes a table of documented slave revolts by year and state. His doctoral dissertation, American Negro Slave Revolts, was published in 1943. Doing research in Southern libraries and archives, he uncovered 250 similar episodes. It remains a landmark and a classic work in the study of Southern history and slavery.
Aptheker challenged racist writings, most notably those of Georgia-born historian Ulrich Bonnell Phillips. The latter had characterized enslaved African Americans as child-like, inferior, and uncivilized; argued that slavery was a benign institution; and defended the preservation of the Southern plantation system. Such works had been common in the field before Aptheker's scholarship revealed a much more nuanced society, in which African Americans acted from agency.
Considering himself a protégé of W. E. B. Du Bois, Aptheker long emphasized his mentor's social science scholarship and life-long struggle for African Americans to achieve equality. In his work as a historian, he compiled a documentary history of African Americans in the United States, a monumental collection which he started publishing in 1951. It eventually resulted in seven volumes of primary documents, a tremendous resource for African-American studies.
From the 1940s, Aptheker was a prominent figure in U.S. scholarly discourse. David Horowitz described Aptheker as "the Communist Party’s most prominent Cold War intellectual".[1] He was blacklisted in academia during the 1950s because of his Communist Party membership.
Aptheker's master's thesis, a study of the 1831 Nat Turner slave revolt in Virginia, laid the groundwork for his future work on the history of American slave revolts. Aptheker revealed Turner's heroism, demonstrating how his rebellion was rooted in resistance to the exploitative conditions of the Southern slave system. His NEGRO SLAVE REVOLTS IN THE UNITED STATES 1526-1860 (1939), includes a table of documented slave revolts by year and state. His doctoral dissertation, American Negro Slave Revolts, was published in 1943. Doing research in Southern libraries and archives, he uncovered 250 similar episodes. It remains a landmark and a classic work in the study of Southern history and slavery.
Aptheker challenged racist writings, most notably those of Georgia-born historian Ulrich Bonnell Phillips. The latter had characterized enslaved African Americans as child-like, inferior, and uncivilized; argued that slavery was a benign institution; and defended the preservation of the Southern plantation system. Such works had been common in the field before Aptheker's scholarship revealed a much more nuanced society, in which African Americans acted from agency.
Considering himself a protégé of W. E. B. Du Bois, Aptheker long emphasized his mentor's social science scholarship and life-long struggle for African Americans to achieve equality. In his work as a historian, he compiled a documentary history of African Americans in the United States, a monumental collection which he started publishing in 1951. It eventually resulted in seven volumes of primary documents, a tremendous resource for African-American studies.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
September 10, 2021
Discontent and rebelliousness among enslaved African Americans was the standard, not the exception. This is the basic thesis of this tremendously important work. This book explodes the racist, pro-slavery myth of the “docile slave.” It firmly and prominently centers the direct and violent resistance to slavery that generations of African Americans engaged in.
As Aptheker makes clear from the outset, the white planter class was paralyzed with the fear of African revolt. The author brilliantly described how notions of “Black docility” are rooted in pervasive anti-Black racism, as they posit that only the ignorant, stupid, and child-like Blacks could be so thoroughly pacified in their response to enslavement.
So much of American history was rooted in fear of African revolt. Out of that fear came a highly complex system of control and repression. Nevertheless, not only does Aptheker dismiss the “docile slave” narrative, he dispenses with the idea that revolting Africans were “influenced” or directed by white Northerners. This paternalistic and racist notion removes agency from the enslaved and effectively infantilizes them.
Aptheker notes that on an individual level, enslaved Africans resisted their condition in a multitude of ways. However, he defines “insurrection” very specifically—characterizing it as an organized revolt consisting of 10 or more people, wherein liberation from enslavement is the explicit purpose. With this definition, Apetheker identifies approximately 250 revolts and conspiracies of this flavor. Aptheker would go on to methodically list and detail revolt after revolt, from the very first European settlement containing African slaves in 1526, all the way through the Civil War.
One of the most striking aspects of this historical account is just how many planned revolts were betrayed by Africans themselves. What could have been…This is a must read for anybody who wants to learn about the revolutionary history of Black Americans.
As Aptheker makes clear from the outset, the white planter class was paralyzed with the fear of African revolt. The author brilliantly described how notions of “Black docility” are rooted in pervasive anti-Black racism, as they posit that only the ignorant, stupid, and child-like Blacks could be so thoroughly pacified in their response to enslavement.
So much of American history was rooted in fear of African revolt. Out of that fear came a highly complex system of control and repression. Nevertheless, not only does Aptheker dismiss the “docile slave” narrative, he dispenses with the idea that revolting Africans were “influenced” or directed by white Northerners. This paternalistic and racist notion removes agency from the enslaved and effectively infantilizes them.
Aptheker notes that on an individual level, enslaved Africans resisted their condition in a multitude of ways. However, he defines “insurrection” very specifically—characterizing it as an organized revolt consisting of 10 or more people, wherein liberation from enslavement is the explicit purpose. With this definition, Apetheker identifies approximately 250 revolts and conspiracies of this flavor. Aptheker would go on to methodically list and detail revolt after revolt, from the very first European settlement containing African slaves in 1526, all the way through the Civil War.
One of the most striking aspects of this historical account is just how many planned revolts were betrayed by Africans themselves. What could have been…This is a must read for anybody who wants to learn about the revolutionary history of Black Americans.
August 6, 2014
the fact that there were at least 250 revolts involving 10 or more slaves just makes you wonder how many times two or three dudes got together and said, "You know what? Let's kill some m____f_____s!"
December 3, 2023
Consisting essentially of two undenoted parts, this book first provides an overall theory of revolt, showing how revolt was feared, how enslavers attempted to prevent it, and why it happened. The second half then goes into a summary of the various revolts that happened from colonial times through the Civil War. The first part is a very interesting discussion that elicits at times a good degree of pathos; the second part, alas, feels mostly like an impersonal listing of events with often little analysis.
Aptheker notes that he took up the work because little attention had been paid in the historical literature to such revolts, outside of Nat Turner’s, which was taken as an outlier. This lack of attention led, in turn, to a mistaken notion that people enslaved in North America had largely been docile; indeed, one might say it even contributed to such Lost Cause tropes mythologized in works like Gone with the Wind and Song of the South of the happy slave. Aptheker shows that enslaved people were by and large anything but happy.
One thing that contributed to the fear of revolt was the sheer number of enslaved people; indeed, in parts of the South, enslaved Black people outnumbered white people. This was one reason, beyond desire to maintain a healthy number of representatives in Congress, that southern states so sought to extend slavery into new territories. By spreading out the population, it was hoped, the ability of enslaved people to gather and thus bring about a change to their status would be diluted. Laws passed in some states limited the ability of African Americans to assemble in any manner, except by the authority of an enslaver. So, essentially, if you were a Black person, unless you were working, you weren’t allowed to hang out with other folk. Sometimes, such laws included free Black people in addition to those who were enslaved. It boggles my mind how any social life would be possible--and thus how one’s sanity could be maintained. But of course, such laws were to prevent even the ability to plan a revolt. Other laws aimed at keeping certain Black people away from those who were enslaved. Obviously free Black people were seen as a not good influence on those enslaved and were by law prevented from migrating to some states; similarly, those from areas in the Caribbean that had won independence from their enslavers were also bad influences and often were banned from entering a state (or even from being enslaved, since theirs would be a pernicious influence on enslaved Americans.)
A particular contributor to slave revolt was economic tough times. One can easily imagine how when financial times got difficult, those who were enslaved were the last in line to receive basic necessities such as food. The degree to which enslaved people hated their lot is made plain in various tales of men and women who deliberately mutilated themselves to avoid service; one particularly affecting tale involved a pregnant woman who killed herself rather than bringing forth children who would themselves be slaves. Stories such as these, in addition to reports about rebellions, were often suppressed in the media, lest it encourage others to rebel.
From there, Aptheker turns to the individual accounts of revolts. These read, mostly, like those of another book I once browsed that attempted to tell the tale of southern hurricanes. Alas, rather than providing much in the way of a plot, it simply noted, and then this hurricane happened. Two years later, this hurricane, with this much damage, and so on. The revolts, outside of Nat Turner’s, which receives its own well-conceived chapter, come in for a similarly unstructured account here, which makes for tedious reading. I understand the reason Aptheker needed to document each case, but the real heart of the book comes in the analytical first half.
Aptheker notes that he took up the work because little attention had been paid in the historical literature to such revolts, outside of Nat Turner’s, which was taken as an outlier. This lack of attention led, in turn, to a mistaken notion that people enslaved in North America had largely been docile; indeed, one might say it even contributed to such Lost Cause tropes mythologized in works like Gone with the Wind and Song of the South of the happy slave. Aptheker shows that enslaved people were by and large anything but happy.
One thing that contributed to the fear of revolt was the sheer number of enslaved people; indeed, in parts of the South, enslaved Black people outnumbered white people. This was one reason, beyond desire to maintain a healthy number of representatives in Congress, that southern states so sought to extend slavery into new territories. By spreading out the population, it was hoped, the ability of enslaved people to gather and thus bring about a change to their status would be diluted. Laws passed in some states limited the ability of African Americans to assemble in any manner, except by the authority of an enslaver. So, essentially, if you were a Black person, unless you were working, you weren’t allowed to hang out with other folk. Sometimes, such laws included free Black people in addition to those who were enslaved. It boggles my mind how any social life would be possible--and thus how one’s sanity could be maintained. But of course, such laws were to prevent even the ability to plan a revolt. Other laws aimed at keeping certain Black people away from those who were enslaved. Obviously free Black people were seen as a not good influence on those enslaved and were by law prevented from migrating to some states; similarly, those from areas in the Caribbean that had won independence from their enslavers were also bad influences and often were banned from entering a state (or even from being enslaved, since theirs would be a pernicious influence on enslaved Americans.)
A particular contributor to slave revolt was economic tough times. One can easily imagine how when financial times got difficult, those who were enslaved were the last in line to receive basic necessities such as food. The degree to which enslaved people hated their lot is made plain in various tales of men and women who deliberately mutilated themselves to avoid service; one particularly affecting tale involved a pregnant woman who killed herself rather than bringing forth children who would themselves be slaves. Stories such as these, in addition to reports about rebellions, were often suppressed in the media, lest it encourage others to rebel.
From there, Aptheker turns to the individual accounts of revolts. These read, mostly, like those of another book I once browsed that attempted to tell the tale of southern hurricanes. Alas, rather than providing much in the way of a plot, it simply noted, and then this hurricane happened. Two years later, this hurricane, with this much damage, and so on. The revolts, outside of Nat Turner’s, which receives its own well-conceived chapter, come in for a similarly unstructured account here, which makes for tedious reading. I understand the reason Aptheker needed to document each case, but the real heart of the book comes in the analytical first half.
May 18, 2014
This book is an absolute MUST READ for anyone interested in the development of slavery in the United States and the lead-up to the Civil War.
One reason is that it’s amazing how many revolts there were starting at the very beginning of slavery in the South. Another is that, reading about these, and the terror they caused, is that it’s amazing that Southern slaveholders didn’t just give up on slavery. Yes, it was economically “necessary,” but as this author points out, there were more economic depressions and hard times during the years from establishment to the Civil War than there were boom times and during those hard times, slaves had to be maintained with money taken out of their owners’s pockets.
A third reason is that you’ll learn so much about US history that you never knew before. For instance, probably the main reason for taking over Florida was not just territorial expansion and to drive out the Spanish but to keep slaves from fleeing there and finding freedom (which many did). Also, behind the reasoning for prohibiting further slave importation into the states was NOT, as in Britain, a desire to slowly cause emancipation (as we well know) but to decrease the concentration of slaves in small areas and allow the white population to increase in proportion. This was probably also the main reason for the push to expand slavery into new states as they were admitted.
Slave states, as Aptheker shows, always carried on a very quiet discussion on whether slavery should be abandoned, but after the Nat Turner revolt, the voice of liberation became silent and those who believed in emancipation, mostly Quakers and Methodists, moved from the South and helped create a vibrant Abolitionist movement in the North. And while fears concerning revolts were limited to blacks up until the Turner revolt, an increasing number of whites, even the “po’ whites” that would become the most virulent upholders of segregation after the War, were included in or helped lead revolts from 1831 on.
An amazing realization I had was how obvious it is that the use of death as a deterrent doesn’t work (as we should know from the lack of decrease in capital crimes nowadays). Slavers continually hanged, burned, whipped to death, broke on the wheel and nearly every other type of death you can imagine, slaves that lead or were involved in revolts. It never stopped the next revolt. Even the mass hanging of conspirators didn’t help – as a result of Denmark Vesey’s revolt, 39 slaves and freedmen were hanged, 17 of them in public and at the same time.
As well as describing the fear that the major revolts – those of Gabriel in 1800, Denmark Vesey in 1822, and Nat Turner in 1831 - Aptheker outlines thousands of other, smaller revolts. He divides his work into periods of time: plots before and immediately after the Revolution, 1791-1809, etc. – so that it’s possible to put them against the rest of the history of the time. He also supports his findings with extensive primary sources, mostly letters, newspaper article, journal entries, of contemporaries. He admits when there is no followup and also allows for the exaggeration, both positive and negative, that always exists. He keeps the notes separate but places them at the bottom of the page on which they’re cited, in the old-fashioned way, which allows you to immediately access them, if you want, or ignore them, like I did.
His style is amazing for a scholar. It is extremely easy to read and flows from one idea to the next so that you feel like you are reading a work written for interested amateurs instead of scholars. The edition I read was the 50th anniversary edition, published in 1993, so that shows you the success of this as a resource for scholarly work.
One reason is that it’s amazing how many revolts there were starting at the very beginning of slavery in the South. Another is that, reading about these, and the terror they caused, is that it’s amazing that Southern slaveholders didn’t just give up on slavery. Yes, it was economically “necessary,” but as this author points out, there were more economic depressions and hard times during the years from establishment to the Civil War than there were boom times and during those hard times, slaves had to be maintained with money taken out of their owners’s pockets.
A third reason is that you’ll learn so much about US history that you never knew before. For instance, probably the main reason for taking over Florida was not just territorial expansion and to drive out the Spanish but to keep slaves from fleeing there and finding freedom (which many did). Also, behind the reasoning for prohibiting further slave importation into the states was NOT, as in Britain, a desire to slowly cause emancipation (as we well know) but to decrease the concentration of slaves in small areas and allow the white population to increase in proportion. This was probably also the main reason for the push to expand slavery into new states as they were admitted.
Slave states, as Aptheker shows, always carried on a very quiet discussion on whether slavery should be abandoned, but after the Nat Turner revolt, the voice of liberation became silent and those who believed in emancipation, mostly Quakers and Methodists, moved from the South and helped create a vibrant Abolitionist movement in the North. And while fears concerning revolts were limited to blacks up until the Turner revolt, an increasing number of whites, even the “po’ whites” that would become the most virulent upholders of segregation after the War, were included in or helped lead revolts from 1831 on.
An amazing realization I had was how obvious it is that the use of death as a deterrent doesn’t work (as we should know from the lack of decrease in capital crimes nowadays). Slavers continually hanged, burned, whipped to death, broke on the wheel and nearly every other type of death you can imagine, slaves that lead or were involved in revolts. It never stopped the next revolt. Even the mass hanging of conspirators didn’t help – as a result of Denmark Vesey’s revolt, 39 slaves and freedmen were hanged, 17 of them in public and at the same time.
As well as describing the fear that the major revolts – those of Gabriel in 1800, Denmark Vesey in 1822, and Nat Turner in 1831 - Aptheker outlines thousands of other, smaller revolts. He divides his work into periods of time: plots before and immediately after the Revolution, 1791-1809, etc. – so that it’s possible to put them against the rest of the history of the time. He also supports his findings with extensive primary sources, mostly letters, newspaper article, journal entries, of contemporaries. He admits when there is no followup and also allows for the exaggeration, both positive and negative, that always exists. He keeps the notes separate but places them at the bottom of the page on which they’re cited, in the old-fashioned way, which allows you to immediately access them, if you want, or ignore them, like I did.
His style is amazing for a scholar. It is extremely easy to read and flows from one idea to the next so that you feel like you are reading a work written for interested amateurs instead of scholars. The edition I read was the 50th anniversary edition, published in 1993, so that shows you the success of this as a resource for scholarly work.
April 5, 2019
I like to occasionally reread a book and so I picked up this classic history after 45 years - and it was old then. This book is about how the enslaved fought back against their oppressors. I mean seriously you don't go for that 'happy darkie' crap do you? Heavily footnoted for those that like to drill down and fact check.
There are other books that detail the inhumanity of the institution but this book is worth the read for addressing how the slavers were afraid of Black Freedom Fighters and how they set up systems to keep America a slave state.
A good read and a worthy addition to any library.
There are other books that detail the inhumanity of the institution but this book is worth the read for addressing how the slavers were afraid of Black Freedom Fighters and how they set up systems to keep America a slave state.
A good read and a worthy addition to any library.
September 5, 2016
Outstanding piece of scholarship. This anniversary edition has two updates from the author that add more detail. Recommended to anyone who wants to learn more about slavery in the United States.
August 15, 2020
Required reading for everyone who believes or has been taught that slavery was beneficial for the slaves and that slaves loved, honored and wildly appreciated the beneficence of their masters. Aptheker, to a torturous degree, laboriously documents slave uprisings, and much more often, plots, from the sixteenth century in North America through the Civil War. The most intricate plot was Denmark Vesey's, a free man (he purchased his freedom from lottery winnings) who recruited up to nine thousand slaves. The plan, to subdue Charleston, S.C., killing all whites, and then sailing to Haiti and Africa, was betrayed by a domestic slave. Vesey had forbidden recruiting house slaves; their better treatment rendered them unreliable revolt participants. This leads me to wonder how many of the plots were actually serious and how many were a group of men speculating. Most often the plots were betrayed by slaves, many of whom were subsequently freed and given lifetime stipends. But the sheer number that Aptheker documents argues that far from being subhumans incapable of initiative, southern slavery boiled with resentment, disobedience and sometimes violence. There were particular laws against slaves poisoning their masters; and "sabotage, shamming illness, 'stealing,' suicide and self-mutilation, and strikes" were other methods of disruption performed by slaves. Arson was particularly popular; slaves had no guns but they always had access to fire. Another argument dispelling the happily subservient slave image is the constant fear of slave insurrection exhibited in newspapers and letters and which resulted in, as recorded by Frederick Law Olmstead, "police machinery such as you would never find in towns under free government: citadels, sentries, passports, grapeshotted cannon, and daily public whippings of the subjects for accidental infractions of police ceremonies. I happened myself to see more direct expression of tyranny in a single day and night in Charleston, than at Naples in a week." According to one Virginian-"In a word, if we will keep a ferocious monster in our country, we must keep him in chains." Curiously, a strong tendency arose to blame plots and uprisings on abolitionist interlopers and even Methodist preachers and Quakers. Kind of like we hear now about BLM protests-"Must be outside agitators, antifa, since our blacks would never do that." Another interesting point Aptheker makes is the dueling reactions to plots and revolts. On one hand, much of the reporting is exaggerated, distorted, and simply fabricated. Conversely, some insurrections or plots were never reported or relegated to an isolated and buried paragraph of benign language. Last, I wonder at the irony between Denmark Vesey's plot and Nat Turner's uprising. Vesey had meticulous plans, a core of lieutenants, weapons, including a barrel of gunpowder, and a large and willing army, only to be betrayed by a house slave. Nat Turner, though having somewhat of a plot, began with six men and killed at least fifty-seven whites-men, women and children- before his group was subdued. But the result for Vesey and his men and Turner and his was the same. For me, the lesson becomes people will not be subjugated forever. People will sabotage or burn, will kill or run away, will poison or go on strike, will steal or starve themselves. And no army, no militia, no force can keep the chains bound forever.
September 7, 2016
I read this right after Edward Baptist's The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism. Starting this book, I was worried it would be too repetitive of the former reading. Both books, after all, seek to detail the historical reality of American slavery in a way that implicates capitalism itself. Interestingly, beyond their very similar subjects, the two works could not be more different from one another.
Baptist is what might be described as a post-Marxist- a leftist with a critical view of capitalism as inherently exploitative, but one who rejects any notion of dialectical materialism or Marxist “solutions.” His historical analysis seeks to deflate accepted notions of both the right and the left. Aptheker, by contrast, was an orthodox Communist Party USA member his entire adult life. This book is an account of slavery that supports the Party line on the nature of class struggle, and what the Party would have held to be its inevitable and universal characteristics: Basically, enslaved African-Americans were the equivalent of feudal serfs, and like any subordinated class they took to violence to try to shake off the yokes of oppression. Ultimately, insurrection was the result of economic factors. During periods of depression, scarcity trickled down to the most oppressed, who had nothing and were thus forced to risk their lives to free themselves. Revolutionary crisis was inevitable, and sooner or later one came about that brought about a revolution that freed the oppressed and ushered in a more egalitarian social order (the American Civil War).
Although Baptist is writing with a much less rigid historical outlook, and many of his economic arguments seem much more convincing to today's reader than do Aptheker's, his seems the more naïve depiction of the enslaved. My deepest criticism of his generally very powerful book was that it portrayed enslaved African-Americans as utterly helpless victims of a perfect system of domination. In Baptist's account the slaves were creative and possessed great inner strength to persevere in the face of the myriad horrors committed against them, but they seemingly posed little threat to their fanatically greedy and cruel overlords.
Aptheker's book more than amply off-sets Baptist's rather idyllic portrayal of the enslaved. Aptheker's south was a place that was often on the verge of open race-war and in the best of times was characterized by a kind of cold-race-war. It was a world in which the rulers lived in almost as much fear as the ruled. The Old Lefty historian delights in the letters of terrified white wives and editorials in southern newspapers that openly communicated to their readers that they would not inform them about slave unrest because it was too terrifying a subject to dwell on. Entire towns, according to Aptheker, were not infrequently set ablaze by rebelling slaves. For Aptheker, the oppressor is an animal that is doomed by the gyrations of history and on some level it understands this.
While this book seems a bit dated now, it is important to remember that when it was first published in 1942 white supremacist ideology had so reasserted its cultural hegemony since the days of reconstruction that most mainstream histories of slavery then described it as a benign institution that in many respects suited and benefited Black people. Aptheker's research demolished such claims. For that, if nothing else, it is of great importance.
Baptist is what might be described as a post-Marxist- a leftist with a critical view of capitalism as inherently exploitative, but one who rejects any notion of dialectical materialism or Marxist “solutions.” His historical analysis seeks to deflate accepted notions of both the right and the left. Aptheker, by contrast, was an orthodox Communist Party USA member his entire adult life. This book is an account of slavery that supports the Party line on the nature of class struggle, and what the Party would have held to be its inevitable and universal characteristics: Basically, enslaved African-Americans were the equivalent of feudal serfs, and like any subordinated class they took to violence to try to shake off the yokes of oppression. Ultimately, insurrection was the result of economic factors. During periods of depression, scarcity trickled down to the most oppressed, who had nothing and were thus forced to risk their lives to free themselves. Revolutionary crisis was inevitable, and sooner or later one came about that brought about a revolution that freed the oppressed and ushered in a more egalitarian social order (the American Civil War).
Although Baptist is writing with a much less rigid historical outlook, and many of his economic arguments seem much more convincing to today's reader than do Aptheker's, his seems the more naïve depiction of the enslaved. My deepest criticism of his generally very powerful book was that it portrayed enslaved African-Americans as utterly helpless victims of a perfect system of domination. In Baptist's account the slaves were creative and possessed great inner strength to persevere in the face of the myriad horrors committed against them, but they seemingly posed little threat to their fanatically greedy and cruel overlords.
Aptheker's book more than amply off-sets Baptist's rather idyllic portrayal of the enslaved. Aptheker's south was a place that was often on the verge of open race-war and in the best of times was characterized by a kind of cold-race-war. It was a world in which the rulers lived in almost as much fear as the ruled. The Old Lefty historian delights in the letters of terrified white wives and editorials in southern newspapers that openly communicated to their readers that they would not inform them about slave unrest because it was too terrifying a subject to dwell on. Entire towns, according to Aptheker, were not infrequently set ablaze by rebelling slaves. For Aptheker, the oppressor is an animal that is doomed by the gyrations of history and on some level it understands this.
While this book seems a bit dated now, it is important to remember that when it was first published in 1942 white supremacist ideology had so reasserted its cultural hegemony since the days of reconstruction that most mainstream histories of slavery then described it as a benign institution that in many respects suited and benefited Black people. Aptheker's research demolished such claims. For that, if nothing else, it is of great importance.
January 12, 2025
If there is one book every Black American (descendants of enslaved) should read, this is it. Herbert Aptheker's American Negro Slave Revolts directly challenges the notion of the docile, subservient, uninspired enslaved with footnoted historical accounts of acts of rebellion in various forms. I have used Aptheker's work in my historical research by referring to the footnotes.
Aptheker details the state and local laws of the slave states, narratives of both enslavers and the enslaved, newspaper accounts, and more. All this clearly shows how fragile the "peculiar institution" was at the time. A notable excerpt reads that the State of Texas defined an insurrection of slaves as "A group of three or more, with arms, with intent to obtain their liberty by force." by the Texas definition, there were over 10,000 recorded cases of slave rebellions in the United States.
Aptheker also highlights the intersection of gender and race when examining acts of rebellion in this period, which I found refreshing. Historians look for "Spartucus-like" examples of armed servile insurrection, not realizing that rebellion can take many forms. For example, the chapter on slave poisoning was enlightening, as it provided examples of female domestic servants committing acts of rebellion by poisoning their masters to significant effect, something a male-focused historical lens might overlook.
The pacing and flow of information are sharp. The book never gets too detailed or verbose or strays from the historical facts into hyperbole. It is a perfect balance of information and entertainment. I have read this book twice and may pick it up again.
Aptheker details the state and local laws of the slave states, narratives of both enslavers and the enslaved, newspaper accounts, and more. All this clearly shows how fragile the "peculiar institution" was at the time. A notable excerpt reads that the State of Texas defined an insurrection of slaves as "A group of three or more, with arms, with intent to obtain their liberty by force." by the Texas definition, there were over 10,000 recorded cases of slave rebellions in the United States.
Aptheker also highlights the intersection of gender and race when examining acts of rebellion in this period, which I found refreshing. Historians look for "Spartucus-like" examples of armed servile insurrection, not realizing that rebellion can take many forms. For example, the chapter on slave poisoning was enlightening, as it provided examples of female domestic servants committing acts of rebellion by poisoning their masters to significant effect, something a male-focused historical lens might overlook.
The pacing and flow of information are sharp. The book never gets too detailed or verbose or strays from the historical facts into hyperbole. It is a perfect balance of information and entertainment. I have read this book twice and may pick it up again.
December 28, 2008
This book, which is still widely seen as the definitive starting point on its subject, was reprinted in 1993, and is available from booksellers and libraries. Aptheker closed the book with these sentences, which seem obvious now, but were extremely radical when he wrote them:
“The data herein printed make necessary the revision of the generally accepted notion that [the American Negro’]s response was one of passivity and docility. The evidence, on the contrary, points to the conclusion that discontent and rebelliousness were not only exceedingly common, but indeed characteristic of American Negro slaves.”
“The data herein printed make necessary the revision of the generally accepted notion that [the American Negro’]s response was one of passivity and docility. The evidence, on the contrary, points to the conclusion that discontent and rebelliousness were not only exceedingly common, but indeed characteristic of American Negro slaves.”
August 28, 2016
This is a very thorough book about slave insurrections that have happened in American history. Many laws and power struggles were at play, and white supremacy had to be protected by any means. Other than John Brown, there were many aides of Caucasian descent that assisted slaves. The most interesting historical account of slavery I've read.
September 28, 2021
Groundbreaking, necessary, this book changed my life. The deep research unveils the intentionally hidden fact that Black people NEVER submitted peacefully to slavery. Through tireless research, Aptheker found the truth and weaves a tale of unrelenting resistance and uprising against some of the most unhuman acts in human history. The struggle continues. Power to the people.
September 3, 2020
I loved this book - it had thorough, insightful analyses of different revolts. The lessons are useful.
February 16, 2023
May cause a vital shift in thinking about who was really responsible for emancipation.
June 26, 2024
A HISTORICAL STUDY OF REVOLTS AND THE CONDITIONS FOSTERING THEM
Herbert Aptheker (1915-2003) was an American Marxist historian and political activist, who was blacklisted in academia during the 1950s because of his Communist Party membership; in 1955 he became editor of Political Affairs (a communist journal). He was also the literary executor for W. E. B. Du Bois.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1943 book, “In preparing … a detailed study of the slave rebellion on 1831 … under the leadership of Nat Turner, the present writer came to the conclusion that this event was not an isolated, unique phenomenon, but the culmination of a series of slave conspiracies and revolts which had occurred in the immediate past. These antecedents had largely gone unreported and, apparently, uninvestigated, the result naturally being … an incomplete understanding of the events and trends which that outbreak evoked or accelerated… It seemed probable … that an intensive study of the entire subject might uncover hitherto neglected aspects of the life of the Negro people, and the role of the institution of slavery in the history of the United States.” (Pg. 11)
He points out, “While there is a difference of opinion as to the prevalence of discontent amongst the slaves, one finds very nearly unanimous agreement concerning the widespread fear of servile rebellion. This is true not merely among those historians who show some awareness of mass unrest, but even among the larger number who either ignore or positively deny wides0read plots and revolts.” (Pg. 18)
He explains, “From these gratuities and rewards, and from money received for ‘overtime’ work… as well as from pennies accumulated by the occasional sale of vegetables or chickens and pigs, produced by ‘leisure-time’ labor… Negroes were able to purchase their freedom. And thousands of Negroes did actually buy their way to freedom… This made possible a certain elasticity in the slave system, and by creating hope---even if limited---took the edge off desperation. It may have made the maintenance of the institution itself somewhat less difficult.” (Pg. 65)
He notes, “Much has … been made of the signs of unrest noticed among slaves in Virginia and Maryland … because of the … excitements consequent upon the waging of the French and Indian War. Much the same situation prevailed during the years of the American Revolution… the spirit and philosophy of that movement were important in arousing organized displays of discontent amongst the Negroes.” (Pg. 87)
He suggests, “He who prepares a table of the outstanding periods of slave rebellion and another of the years of economic depression will be struck by their great similarity… [While] it is not possible to PROVE a causal connection between suffering occasioned by depression and outbreaks against enslavement… it does appear reasonable to suggest that such a relationship existed.” (Pg. 117)
He observes, “to keep human beings within a status situation entailing [terrible] conditions, physical repression---cruelty in its usual sense---was often necessary, so often indeed that one is correct, it is believed, in declaring that cruelty was characteristic of the institution of American Negro slavery… [for slaves] had to be maltreated, had to be made to suffer physical cruelty, had to be chained and lashed and beaten into producing for a profit. The latter was the reason for their existence and incorrigibility, protest, disobedience… Instead of the slave’s value preventing cruelty, it was exactly because of that value, and that greater value he could produce---when forced---that cruelty existed.” (Pg. 130-132)
He acknowledges, “it is highly probable that all plots, and quite possibly even all actual outbreaks, that did occur … have NOT been uncovered... some, perhaps many, occurred and were never recorded. The narration that follows is not, then, offered as definitive… but an attempt … to make it as full and as accurate as the subject appears to permit.” (Pg. 161)
He notes, “a contemporary spoke accurately when he asserted that ‘the North Carolina papers speak reluctantly about the trouble. It is a fact that stories of wholesale havoc and destruction allegedly caused by slaves at this time and reported elsewhere were undoubtedly false, but the truth is probably somewhere between these exaggerations and the minimizations of the North Carolina papers.” (Pg. 231)
He states, “In the midst of this decade [1790-1800] of unprecedented slave disturbances … there developed a very considerable anti-slavery movement, and these disturbances, bringing home to him who could see, the iniquities of human bondage and its danger to the masters, are not to be overlooked in attempting to explain this anti-slavery movement.” (Pg. 234)
He says, “This piling up of a Negro population at a time of economic stress is undoubtedly important in accounting for rebelliousness.” (Pg. 264) Furthermore, “the slaves seeing the free Negroes ‘naturally became dissatisfied with their lot, until the feverish restlessness of this disposition foments itself into insurrection.’” (Pg. 274)
Of Turner’s rebellion, he comments, “Turner’s act, itself carrying that rumbling to a high point, caused an eruption throughout the length and breadth of the slave South---which always rested on a volcano of outraged humanity.” (Pg. 306) He laments, “Virginia passed many restrictive measures in the years immediately preceding Turner’s revolt.” (Pg. 314)
Of John Brown’s raid, he states, “to draw the lesson from the attempt’s failure that the slaves were docile, as has so often been done, is absurd. And it would be absurd even if one did not have the record of the bitter struggle for the Negro people against slavery. This was so for two main reasons. In the first place, Brown’s raid was made … where slavery was of a domestic, household nature, and where slaves were relatively few; in the second place, Brown gave the slaves absolutely no foreknowledge of his attempt. The slaves had, thus, no way of judging Brown’s chances… [and] let it be remembered that slave-stealing was a common crime in the old South.” (Pg. 352)
He observes that Blacks “knew, more clearly and earlier than others, that the Army of Lincoln was to be an Army of Liberation. They, therefore, assisted it. Nightly prayers rose from ten thousand huts for its success. Hourly its encampments were reached by scores of fugitives, and even early spurning could not stop the flow which soon reached flood proportions. From this came two hundred thousand workers for the Union Army---to fell trees and dig ditches and cook food and drive wagons.” (Pg. 359)
He also notes, “It is very interesting to observe how frequent were the occasions when the slaves had received aid from white people, generally in the lower economic groups, and this notwithstanding the fact that the slaveholders deliberately attempted to weed out and destroy anti-slavery individuals and associations. Moreover, slave rebellions themselves, and the elaborate and the elaborate and expensive systems of control needed for the maintenance of a slave society fostered opposition among the non-slaveholding whites to the lords of the country.” (Pg. 373)
This book will be “must reading” for anyone studying revolts against and other opposition to slavery.
Herbert Aptheker (1915-2003) was an American Marxist historian and political activist, who was blacklisted in academia during the 1950s because of his Communist Party membership; in 1955 he became editor of Political Affairs (a communist journal). He was also the literary executor for W. E. B. Du Bois.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1943 book, “In preparing … a detailed study of the slave rebellion on 1831 … under the leadership of Nat Turner, the present writer came to the conclusion that this event was not an isolated, unique phenomenon, but the culmination of a series of slave conspiracies and revolts which had occurred in the immediate past. These antecedents had largely gone unreported and, apparently, uninvestigated, the result naturally being … an incomplete understanding of the events and trends which that outbreak evoked or accelerated… It seemed probable … that an intensive study of the entire subject might uncover hitherto neglected aspects of the life of the Negro people, and the role of the institution of slavery in the history of the United States.” (Pg. 11)
He points out, “While there is a difference of opinion as to the prevalence of discontent amongst the slaves, one finds very nearly unanimous agreement concerning the widespread fear of servile rebellion. This is true not merely among those historians who show some awareness of mass unrest, but even among the larger number who either ignore or positively deny wides0read plots and revolts.” (Pg. 18)
He explains, “From these gratuities and rewards, and from money received for ‘overtime’ work… as well as from pennies accumulated by the occasional sale of vegetables or chickens and pigs, produced by ‘leisure-time’ labor… Negroes were able to purchase their freedom. And thousands of Negroes did actually buy their way to freedom… This made possible a certain elasticity in the slave system, and by creating hope---even if limited---took the edge off desperation. It may have made the maintenance of the institution itself somewhat less difficult.” (Pg. 65)
He notes, “Much has … been made of the signs of unrest noticed among slaves in Virginia and Maryland … because of the … excitements consequent upon the waging of the French and Indian War. Much the same situation prevailed during the years of the American Revolution… the spirit and philosophy of that movement were important in arousing organized displays of discontent amongst the Negroes.” (Pg. 87)
He suggests, “He who prepares a table of the outstanding periods of slave rebellion and another of the years of economic depression will be struck by their great similarity… [While] it is not possible to PROVE a causal connection between suffering occasioned by depression and outbreaks against enslavement… it does appear reasonable to suggest that such a relationship existed.” (Pg. 117)
He observes, “to keep human beings within a status situation entailing [terrible] conditions, physical repression---cruelty in its usual sense---was often necessary, so often indeed that one is correct, it is believed, in declaring that cruelty was characteristic of the institution of American Negro slavery… [for slaves] had to be maltreated, had to be made to suffer physical cruelty, had to be chained and lashed and beaten into producing for a profit. The latter was the reason for their existence and incorrigibility, protest, disobedience… Instead of the slave’s value preventing cruelty, it was exactly because of that value, and that greater value he could produce---when forced---that cruelty existed.” (Pg. 130-132)
He acknowledges, “it is highly probable that all plots, and quite possibly even all actual outbreaks, that did occur … have NOT been uncovered... some, perhaps many, occurred and were never recorded. The narration that follows is not, then, offered as definitive… but an attempt … to make it as full and as accurate as the subject appears to permit.” (Pg. 161)
He notes, “a contemporary spoke accurately when he asserted that ‘the North Carolina papers speak reluctantly about the trouble. It is a fact that stories of wholesale havoc and destruction allegedly caused by slaves at this time and reported elsewhere were undoubtedly false, but the truth is probably somewhere between these exaggerations and the minimizations of the North Carolina papers.” (Pg. 231)
He states, “In the midst of this decade [1790-1800] of unprecedented slave disturbances … there developed a very considerable anti-slavery movement, and these disturbances, bringing home to him who could see, the iniquities of human bondage and its danger to the masters, are not to be overlooked in attempting to explain this anti-slavery movement.” (Pg. 234)
He says, “This piling up of a Negro population at a time of economic stress is undoubtedly important in accounting for rebelliousness.” (Pg. 264) Furthermore, “the slaves seeing the free Negroes ‘naturally became dissatisfied with their lot, until the feverish restlessness of this disposition foments itself into insurrection.’” (Pg. 274)
Of Turner’s rebellion, he comments, “Turner’s act, itself carrying that rumbling to a high point, caused an eruption throughout the length and breadth of the slave South---which always rested on a volcano of outraged humanity.” (Pg. 306) He laments, “Virginia passed many restrictive measures in the years immediately preceding Turner’s revolt.” (Pg. 314)
Of John Brown’s raid, he states, “to draw the lesson from the attempt’s failure that the slaves were docile, as has so often been done, is absurd. And it would be absurd even if one did not have the record of the bitter struggle for the Negro people against slavery. This was so for two main reasons. In the first place, Brown’s raid was made … where slavery was of a domestic, household nature, and where slaves were relatively few; in the second place, Brown gave the slaves absolutely no foreknowledge of his attempt. The slaves had, thus, no way of judging Brown’s chances… [and] let it be remembered that slave-stealing was a common crime in the old South.” (Pg. 352)
He observes that Blacks “knew, more clearly and earlier than others, that the Army of Lincoln was to be an Army of Liberation. They, therefore, assisted it. Nightly prayers rose from ten thousand huts for its success. Hourly its encampments were reached by scores of fugitives, and even early spurning could not stop the flow which soon reached flood proportions. From this came two hundred thousand workers for the Union Army---to fell trees and dig ditches and cook food and drive wagons.” (Pg. 359)
He also notes, “It is very interesting to observe how frequent were the occasions when the slaves had received aid from white people, generally in the lower economic groups, and this notwithstanding the fact that the slaveholders deliberately attempted to weed out and destroy anti-slavery individuals and associations. Moreover, slave rebellions themselves, and the elaborate and the elaborate and expensive systems of control needed for the maintenance of a slave society fostered opposition among the non-slaveholding whites to the lords of the country.” (Pg. 373)
This book will be “must reading” for anyone studying revolts against and other opposition to slavery.
October 5, 2021
“This study has attempted to meet the need, which has become increasingly evident in recent years, of depicting in realistic terms the response of the American Negro to his bondage. The data herein presented make, necessary the revision of the generally accepted notion that his response was one of passivity and docility. The evidence, on the contrary, points to the conclusion that discontent and rebelliousness were not only exceedingly common, but, indeed, characteristic of American Negro slaves.” (P.368).
Herbert Aptheker seems to have brilliantly made his case for the goal of this book. Citing and referencing numerous primary sources and documents while also evaluating and weeding through the exaggerated claims and the hushed or understated events.
Herbert Aptheker seems to have brilliantly made his case for the goal of this book. Citing and referencing numerous primary sources and documents while also evaluating and weeding through the exaggerated claims and the hushed or understated events.
Read
September 25, 2019Indispensable. The history of slavery IS a history of revolt and resistance, and a desperate attempt to keep people from seeing the extent of that oppressive mode's perpetual instability.
June 14, 2024
Awesome book, incredibly well researched and written. If you want to know about slave resistance in the antebellum South and throughout the early United States, this is the book you want to read.
Want to read
March 6, 2012I would have been trouble in 1848 reading and stuff...
December 28, 2017
One of the formative books in my life; highly recommended.
January 6, 2025
Very detailed book. A classic that everyone should read, the fight for freedom was established well before the civil war. Informative and very well researched. Great book.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews