What do you think?
Rate this book
American Negro Slavery
Notes: This is an OCR reprint. There may be numerous typos or missing text. There are no illustrations or indexes. When you buy the General Books edition of this book you get free trial access to Million-Books.com where you can select from more than a million books for free. You can also preview the book there.
364 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 1918
About the author
Ulrich Bonnell Phillips
105 books6 followersAmerican historian who studied the American antebellum South and slavery. Phillips concentrated on the large plantations that dominated the Southern economy, and he did not investigate the numerous small farmers who held few slaves. He concluded that plantation slavery produced great wealth, but was a dead end, economically, that left the South bypassed by the industrial revolution underway in the North.
By turning away from the political debates about slavery that divided North and South, Phillips made the economics and social structure of slavery the main theme in 20th century scholarship. Together with his highly eloquent writing style, his new approach made him the most influential historian of the ante-bellum south. His interpretation of white supremacy as the "central theme of southern history" remains one of the main interpretations of Southern history.
Some of Phillips's views were rejected in the 1950s, but they were revived again in the 1960s. As Harvard Sitkoff wrote in 1986, "[I]n the mid-1960s Eugene D. Genovese launched a rehabilitation of Phillips that still continues. Today, as in Phillips's lifetime, scholars again commonly acknowledge the value of many of his insights into the nature of the southern class structure and master-slave relationships. The reviewing of Philips' arguements continues into the 21st Century, with the historian Ira Berlin writing in his review of Complicity: How the North Promoted, Prolonged, and Profited From Slavery: "Slavery in the North, like its counterpart in the South, was a brutal, violent relationship that fostered white supremacy. Complicity's authors shred the notion, famously advanced by the Yale historian U.B. Phillips, that the central theme of Southern history was the region's desire to remain a white man's country. Phillips was not so much wrong about the centrality of white supremacy to the South as blind to its presence in the North."
By turning away from the political debates about slavery that divided North and South, Phillips made the economics and social structure of slavery the main theme in 20th century scholarship. Together with his highly eloquent writing style, his new approach made him the most influential historian of the ante-bellum south. His interpretation of white supremacy as the "central theme of southern history" remains one of the main interpretations of Southern history.
Some of Phillips's views were rejected in the 1950s, but they were revived again in the 1960s. As Harvard Sitkoff wrote in 1986, "[I]n the mid-1960s Eugene D. Genovese launched a rehabilitation of Phillips that still continues. Today, as in Phillips's lifetime, scholars again commonly acknowledge the value of many of his insights into the nature of the southern class structure and master-slave relationships. The reviewing of Philips' arguements continues into the 21st Century, with the historian Ira Berlin writing in his review of Complicity: How the North Promoted, Prolonged, and Profited From Slavery: "Slavery in the North, like its counterpart in the South, was a brutal, violent relationship that fostered white supremacy. Complicity's authors shred the notion, famously advanced by the Yale historian U.B. Phillips, that the central theme of Southern history was the region's desire to remain a white man's country. Phillips was not so much wrong about the centrality of white supremacy to the South as blind to its presence in the North."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
January 7, 2021
American Negro Slavery is the classic historical statement of slavery apologetics. Phillips's unrepentant racism is not only a major feature of the book, his thesis is based on it. Phillips is no KKK member; that is, he does not hate African-Americans. Rather, he just does not see them as fully human. He does not ascribe to them even the most basic and common of human attributes. His book draws a picture of African-American slaves as unaware yet content. He sees slaves as incapable of emotion and, even, cognizance. He believes that the carrying of Africans to bondage and the experience of being slaves on a plantation including "uprooting his ancient language and custom had little more effect upon his temperament than upon his complexion" (291). The book is full of Mr. Phillips' dehumanizing characterizations. He writes of benevolent slave masters whose relations with their slaves were "largely shaped by a sense of propriety, proportion, and cooperation" (296). For this modern reader, and, I suspect, many others, it makes it hard to take anything he says seriously.
Furthermore, Phillips spends much of the book detailing the economy of plantation life, but never acknowledges that slavery itself was, at its heart, an economic institution. Instead, he clings to the notion of slavery as paternal or patriarchal. While this may have been true prior to the 19th century, certainly it does not apply after the emergence of the cotton gin. Because of this, he makes no distinction between the 18th and 19th centuries, and, therefore, his story lacks any kind of real, substantive change. One would get the idea that the only thing that changed was the crop being worked by the slaves. It is clear that the author still holds some romantic, paternal view of race relations and applies that to his history. This is perhaps the book’s most grievous sin.
All that said, the book was important in its time (and remains important in a historiographical context) for a number of reasons. First, it was the first historical work on slavery to be based on large-scale primary source research. Phillips tracked down and used plantation records and their owners' diairies. This may seem like the common-sense thing to do for modern historians but at the turn of the 20th century, this was truly cutting edge historical research. Phillips did, however, ignore other available sources that would have contradicted his thesis, e.g., travel diaries of northerners depicting the brutality of slavery. Second, Phillips book was the first to explore the economics of North American plantation slavery. It is fundamental to his benevolent patriarchy argument that slavery simply was not profitable but for the very largest plantations (i.e., so they must have been doing it for a reason other than profit).
In the end, Phillips, like all historians, and his history was the product of his time. Southerners of the first post-Reconstruction generation had to reconstruct an identity as Southerners that could both mitigate their past while clearing a way for the future. American Negro Slavery was a grand attempt by the Georgia-born Yale professor to contribute to that effort by mitigating both the South's history as a slave society and its history of confederacy, by arguing that the Civil War was an unnecessary conflict because slavery would've died out shortly anyway due to its growing unprofitability.
Furthermore, Phillips spends much of the book detailing the economy of plantation life, but never acknowledges that slavery itself was, at its heart, an economic institution. Instead, he clings to the notion of slavery as paternal or patriarchal. While this may have been true prior to the 19th century, certainly it does not apply after the emergence of the cotton gin. Because of this, he makes no distinction between the 18th and 19th centuries, and, therefore, his story lacks any kind of real, substantive change. One would get the idea that the only thing that changed was the crop being worked by the slaves. It is clear that the author still holds some romantic, paternal view of race relations and applies that to his history. This is perhaps the book’s most grievous sin.
All that said, the book was important in its time (and remains important in a historiographical context) for a number of reasons. First, it was the first historical work on slavery to be based on large-scale primary source research. Phillips tracked down and used plantation records and their owners' diairies. This may seem like the common-sense thing to do for modern historians but at the turn of the 20th century, this was truly cutting edge historical research. Phillips did, however, ignore other available sources that would have contradicted his thesis, e.g., travel diaries of northerners depicting the brutality of slavery. Second, Phillips book was the first to explore the economics of North American plantation slavery. It is fundamental to his benevolent patriarchy argument that slavery simply was not profitable but for the very largest plantations (i.e., so they must have been doing it for a reason other than profit).
In the end, Phillips, like all historians, and his history was the product of his time. Southerners of the first post-Reconstruction generation had to reconstruct an identity as Southerners that could both mitigate their past while clearing a way for the future. American Negro Slavery was a grand attempt by the Georgia-born Yale professor to contribute to that effort by mitigating both the South's history as a slave society and its history of confederacy, by arguing that the Civil War was an unnecessary conflict because slavery would've died out shortly anyway due to its growing unprofitability.
September 18, 2024
Incredibly racist but necessary when learning about slavery and racist scholars
November 22, 2022
This was an okay book. It took me a bit to read this book with all the information given.
Read
February 10, 2023making a gaggle of undergrads read this in a week is a crime against humanity, if you ask me.
Read
November 6, 2019To be honest, I am not exactly sure how to rate this book. Yet, I do think that it was worthwhile reading for reasons that I hope will be clear from my review.
U.B. Phillips was the first prominent historian of American slavery and the pre-Civil War American South. Born in Georgia in 1877, his work bears the imprint of his time, including his admiration for his mother's background in the Old South's plantation class. After earning his Ph. D. at Columbia University, Phillips taught at the University of Wisconsin, Tulane, Michigan, and Yale.
His book reflects book deep research into the primary sources, particularly the papers of many large plantations and the private papers of many southern enslavers/slave owners. At the same time, his picture of enslavement as relatively mild, masters as largely benevolent, slave trading as limited, and enslaved people as seemingly content and attached to their enslavers turns the stomach of anyone familiar with the actual facts and post-World War II writing on slavery.
U.B. Phillips was the first prominent historian of American slavery and the pre-Civil War American South. Born in Georgia in 1877, his work bears the imprint of his time, including his admiration for his mother's background in the Old South's plantation class. After earning his Ph. D. at Columbia University, Phillips taught at the University of Wisconsin, Tulane, Michigan, and Yale.
His book reflects book deep research into the primary sources, particularly the papers of many large plantations and the private papers of many southern enslavers/slave owners. At the same time, his picture of enslavement as relatively mild, masters as largely benevolent, slave trading as limited, and enslaved people as seemingly content and attached to their enslavers turns the stomach of anyone familiar with the actual facts and post-World War II writing on slavery.
August 3, 2013
Slavery has been practiced by many civilizations and cultures though out history. This works addresses the slavery of blacks in America. At the same time whites were being enslaved in other parts of the world. The author addresses the procurement and treatment of black slaves.
September 9, 2012
You have to read Phillips with an discerning mind. He is a paternalistic racist with a romanticized view of the Old South, and while that makes him unable to truly grasp the slaves' situation, it doesn't make him any less knowledgeable about plantations and how they functioned.
April 6, 2017
Warning: requires a strong stomach.
The writer is an apologist, the subject is horrific, and the WRITING is what requires a strong stomach. The first part of the book is well researched. In the second part of the book the author 'cherry picked' his data. This book does contain useful information about the slave trade. Just remember the writing is not unbiased.
The writer is an apologist, the subject is horrific, and the WRITING is what requires a strong stomach. The first part of the book is well researched. In the second part of the book the author 'cherry picked' his data. This book does contain useful information about the slave trade. Just remember the writing is not unbiased.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews