The Old South

1790-1850

Press S for Study Notes

Slavery's Central Role in Shaping Global Capitalism

A Historical Analysis

The Peculiar Institution in Transition, 1780s-1800

A Moment of Economic Uncertainty

Decline in tobacco and rice markets; soil depletion from intensive cultivation
Shift toward less-labor intensive crops and livestock
Question emerged: Was slavery economically viable anymore?

Largest Wave of Voluntary Manumissions in American History

Religious Awakening and Moral Opposition
Revolutionary ideals
Economic calculation
Variable across regions; limited and fragile movement

SECTION 1: Economic Uncertainty (3-4 min): Imagine you're a Virginia planter in 1790. Your family grew tobacco for generations, but now the market is collapsing. European demand has shifted, your soil is exhausted. Tobacco depletes nitrogen, requires constant rotation to virgin land. Your fields produce half what they did twenty years ago. The Chesapeake region built its economy on tobacco since the 1600s, but by 1780s: tobacco prices declining due to European competition, soil exhaustion severe, rice cultivation facing similar problems. This isn't just agricultural details—the entire economic logic of slavery was being questioned. Planters began diversifying: wheat production (much less labor-intensive), mixed farming, experimentation with other crops. Key insight: These new patterns didn't require gang labor on tobacco's scale. A wheat farm needed far fewer workers. Question for students: "If you're shifting from tobacco to wheat with 50 enslaved people, what are your options?" Some planters concluded: maybe it's time to consider manumission. SECTION 2: Early Manumission (3-4 min): The late 18th century saw the largest wave of voluntary manumissions in American history—particularly in Upper South (Virginia, Maryland, Delaware). Three converging forces: (1) RELIGIOUS AWAKENING: Second Great Awakening brought increased fervor. Quakers opposed slavery since 1750s, requiring members to free enslaved people. Methodists under Francis Asbury initially condemned slavery (though backtracked by 1800s). Some Baptist and Presbyterian congregations expressed moral qualms. Example: Robert Carter III freed over 450 enslaved people 1791-1803, influenced by Baptist faith. (2) REVOLUTIONARY IDEOLOGY: How do you fight proclaiming "all men are created equal" while holding people in bondage? Some enslaved people successfully sued for freedom using Revolutionary rhetoric. Some enslavers freed people in wills. Northern states began gradual emancipation (PA 1780, NY 1799, NJ 1804). Important nuance: Even manumission often protected economic interests—gradual, in wills rather than immediately, or freeing only older enslaved people past their working prime. (3) ECONOMIC CALCULATION: Most manumission was NOT purely altruistic. When slavery seemed economically declining, some calculated manumission might be cheaper than maintenance. Legislative changes: Virginia's 1782 law allowed private manumission without legislative approval. Statistics: Virginia's free Black population grew from ~2,000 in 1782 to nearly 13,000 by 1800. In Delaware, nearly 75% of Black people were free by 1810. Critical qualification: This was primarily UPPER SOUTH phenomenon, LIMITED in scope, FRAGILE and contested. Deep South saw virtually no manumission trend.

The Turning Point: Rebellion and Reaction

Two events shattered tentative emancipation movement
The Haitian Revolution (1791-1804) and Gabriel's Rebellion (1800)

The Haitian Revolution: Hemispheric Upheaval

The Only Successful Slave Revolution (1791-1804)

Saint-Domingue was the world's richest colony
Produced 40% of world's sugar, 60% of world's coffee
500,000 enslaved people (90% of population) under brutal conditions

Revolutionary Success

1791: Massive slave uprising begins across the colony
1793-1802: Toussaint Louverture leads revolutionary forces
Defeated French, Spanish, and British armies
January 1, 1804: Haiti declares independence—first Black republic

Toussaint L'Ouverture chromolithograph by George de Baptiste (1870)

THE HAITIAN REVOLUTION deserves extended attention as the MOST IMPORTANT Atlantic event of the era. Context: Saint-Domingue (Haiti) was the richest colony in the world—40% of world's sugar, 60% of coffee. 90% of population enslaved (nearly 500,000 people). Enslaved people launched revolution in 1791, eventually defeating French, Spanish, and British forces. January 1, 1804: Haiti declared independence—the ONLY successful slave revolution in history. Impact on United States—IMMEDIATE EFFECTS: Thousands of white French colonists fled to U.S., especially Louisiana and Charleston, bringing horrific stories that white Americans internalized. Free people of color from Haiti also migrated, bringing radical politics. IDEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Proof enslaved people could successfully overthrow oppressors. White Americans became obsessed with preventing "another Haiti." Used to justify increasingly harsh slave codes and surveillance. Question: "How might Haitian Revolution have influenced Jefferson's decision-making?" Answer: Jefferson was terrified of Haiti. He refused to recognize Haitian independence, imposed trade embargo. His fears about slave rebellion influenced attitudes toward slavery's expansion westward. His Louisiana Purchase (1803) was partly motivated by wanting to control Caribbean access.

The Haitian Revolution: Impact on the United States

White refugees fled to U.S. (Louisiana, Charleston) with horrifying stories
Jefferson refused recognition, imposed trade embargo
Haiti became obsession: 'Could it happen here?'
Used to justify increasingly harsh slave codes
Inspired enslaved people throughout Americas

Gabriel's Rebellion (1800): Revolutionary Politics Come to Virginia

Gabriel Prosser:

Enslaved blacksmith in Richmond, Virginia
Literate, politically informed, inspired by American and Haitian Revolutions

The Revolutionary Conspiracy

Goal: Seize Richmond, take Governor Monroe hostage, negotiate freedom
Hundreds involved—recruited through artisan networks
Military organization: weapons stockpiled, targets identified

Betrayal and Suppression

Betrayed before execution; Gabriel and 26 others hanged

GABRIEL'S REBELLION (Richmond, Virginia, 1800): Background—Gabriel Prosser, enslaved blacksmith, planned elaborate rebellion. Goal: Seize Richmond, take Governor James Monroe hostage, negotiate for freedom. Hundreds involved in conspiracy. Betrayed before execution; Gabriel and 26 others hanged. White reaction was PANIC. This wasn't supposed to happen—especially not in Virginia, the supposed "enlightened" Upper South. The conspiracy revealed: enslaved people were organized and politically sophisticated; they had absorbed Revolutionary ideology and were claiming it for themselves; they were willing to use violence to achieve freedom. Ask students: "Why would Gabriel's Rebellion terrify enslavers more than earlier slave rebellions?" Answer: Because it happened during supposed "softening" of slavery, proving enslaved people weren't grateful for gradual reforms—they wanted immediate freedom.

Gabriel's Rebellion: The Turning Point

Why This Mattered

Enslaved people were organized and politically sophisticated
Proved enslaved people absorbed Revolutionary ideology and claimed it for themselves
Willing to use violence to achieve freedom

The Backlash

Combined with Haiti, ended tentative emancipation moment
Virginia tightened restrictions on free Blacks, banned manumission
White South hardened pro-slavery position

TRANSITION: By 1800, slavery looked like it might be declining. Economic rationale weakening. Some moral questioning happening. A few thousand people being freed. But then enslaved people themselves—through Gabriel's conspiracy and Haiti's revolution—revealed they wouldn't wait patiently for gradual, controlled emancipation. They wanted freedom NOW, and were willing to fight for it. White reaction was to dig in, make slavery harsher, more controlled, more defended. And then—at this exact moment—a technological innovation and industrial transformation would make slavery more profitable than anyone imagined. That innovation was the COTTON GIN. That transformation was the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. Together, they would create the "Second Slavery"—an expansion of slavery more brutal, more profitable, more modern than anything before.

By 1800 slavery was in decline; a few thousand people were freed!

But then, enslaved people revealed they would not wait for gradual emancipation. They wanted freedom NOW! And were willing to fight for it!

White reaction — make slavery harsher!

Right at this moment, a technological innovation and industrial transformation would make slavery more profitable than anyone could imagine —

That innovation was ________________?

The transformation was ________________?

Creating what historians call the "Second Slavery"

The Cotton Gin Revolution (1793)

The Innovation

Eli Whitney, Yale graduate, travels to Georgia as tutor
Invents Cotton Gin after hearing complaints about "cotton-cleaning problem"
1 enslaved person could now clean 50 pounds a day; a 50-fold increase
Made short-staple cotton economically viable across Deep South
One of the most consequential inventions in world history

Results

Cotton cultivation exploded across Deep South
Cotton Belt or Black Belt
Increased demand for enslaved labor, known as "Second Slavery"
Transformed cotton from marginal crop to foundation of American economy

SECTION 2: Cotton Gin Revolution (4-5 min): Set up the technical problem—two types of cotton: (1) Long-staple (Sea Island): long silky fibers, easy to separate seeds, but only grows in very specific coastal conditions, limited acreage. (2) Short-staple: can grow almost anywhere in South, huge potential growing area, BUT seeds stick tenaciously to fibers. One enslaved person could clean only about 1 pound per day by hand—ECONOMICALLY UNVIABLE at that rate. Question: "If you can only process one pound per day, how many acres can you profitably cultivate?" Answer: Not many. Bottleneck wasn't growing cotton—it was processing it. Enter Eli Whitney: 1792—Yale graduate travels to Georgia as tutor, stays at plantation of Catherine Greene (widow of Revolutionary War general), planters complain about cotton-cleaning problem, Whitney designs solution, March 1794: patents cotton gin. How it worked (simple but revolutionary): wire teeth on rotating cylinder caught cotton fibers, pulled them through narrow slots, seeds too large to pass through fell away, rotating brushes removed lint from teeth. Result: ONE ENSLAVED PERSON COULD NOW CLEAN 50 POUNDS PER DAY—50-fold increase in productivity. Let students absorb that number. This is one of most consequential inventions in world history. Immediate economic impact—U.S. cotton production: 1791: 2 million pounds; 1801: 40 million pounds (20x increase in 10 years); 1820: 160 million; 1860: 2.3 BILLION pounds. Cotton cultivation exploded across Deep South: Georgia, Alabama (1819), Mississippi (1817), Louisiana, Arkansas, Texas (1845). Entire region transformed into cotton monoculture. The "Cotton Belt" or "Black Belt": named for dark, fertile soil (though enslaved population density also reflected in name), stretched from SC through GA, AL, MS, LA into TX, became richest agricultural region in world. By 1840: Cotton was 60% of all U.S. exports. By 1860: Still 60% but vastly more total value. U.S. South produced 75% of world's cotton by 1860. "King Cotton" dominated American economy.

The "Second Slavery"

"The Second Slavery refers to the expansion and intensification of slavery in the nineteenth century—in the U.S. South, Cuba, and Brazil—precisely during the period when slavery was being abolished elsewhere in the Atlantic world."

— Dale Tomich, historian

Key Characteristics:
More brutal and intensive than earlier forms of slavery
Driven by industrial capitalism's demand for raw materials
Highly profitable and technologically "modern"
Created new patterns of forced migration and family separation
Integrated into global financial markets

This slide introduces Dale Tomich's concept of "Second Slavery"—a crucial framework for understanding 19th-century slavery. The term challenges the assumption that slavery was declining or becoming obsolete. Instead, Tomich argues slavery underwent massive expansion and modernization precisely when it was being abolished in places like Britain and northern U.S. states. This wasn't slavery's death throes—this was slavery at its most profitable, most brutal, and most integrated into modern capitalism. The paradox: Slavery expanded and intensified BECAUSE of industrial capitalism, not despite it. Cotton gin + textile mills + global markets = unprecedented demand for enslaved labor. By 1860, slavery in U.S. South, Cuba, and Brazil was generating enormous wealth and was absolutely central to global economy. This reframes how we think about slavery—not as pre-modern relic being swept away by progress, but as modern, rational, capitalist institution that required violent abolition to end.

The Industrial Revolution and Cotton's Ascendancy

British Textile Industry

Rise of mechanized textile production in Britain
Cascade of innovations: Spinning Jenny (1764), power looms
Factory system emerges
Creates insatiable demand for raw cotton
Birth of Industrial Capitalism and

Colonial and Global Markets

Britain wasn't just producing for domestic consumption
British Empire created captive markets
Every modern innovation in transportation and communication supported slave economy

SECTION 1: British Textile Industry and Colonial Markets (4-5 min): We need to step back and see what's happening in Britain in late 18th century, because Manchester and Liverpool will fundamentally reshape slavery in Mississippi and Alabama. The British Industrial Revolution began with TEXTILES, specifically COTTON TEXTILES. This is crucial. Why textiles first? Cloth was universal necessity, huge existing market both domestic and global, relatively simple production amenable to mechanization, high profit margins if you could increase speed and scale. The cascade of innovations (chronologically): 1764 - Hargreaves' Spinning Jenny (allowed one worker to spin multiple threads simultaneously—initially 8, eventually 80+). 1769 - Arkwright's Water Frame (THE KEY INNOVATION—water-powered, required centralized power, couldn't be used in homes, required FACTORIES). 1779 - Crompton's Spinning Mule (combined features, produced finer/stronger thread, perfect for mass production). 1785 - Cartwright's Power Loom (mechanized weaving, completed mechanization of textile production). Important insight: Notice timeline—innovations happen in rapid succession. Each creates bottleneck that next innovation solves. More spinning = need more weaving. More weaving = need more raw cotton. THIS IS A SYSTEM THAT DEVELOPS AN INSATIABLE APPETITE FOR COTTON.

King Cotton and the 'Second Slavery'

Cotton's Economic Dominance

By 1860: Cotton comprised 60% of total U.S. exports
The Deep South (Black Belt) became global cotton supplier
Plantation system expanded aggressively into new territories

The term "Second Slavery" coined by historian Dale Tomich refers to massive expansion and intensification of slavery in 19th century—particularly in U.S. South, Cuba, and Brazil—precisely when slavery was declining/being abolished elsewhere. This wasn't slavery's death throes—this was slavery's most profitable, most brutal, most modern phase. By 1860, cotton comprised 60% of total U.S. exports. Put in context: Imagine if today 60% of U.S. exports were a single commodity. That's how dominant cotton was. What this meant politically/economically: Cotton gave South enormous leverage in national politics. "Cotton is King" (James Henry Hammond 1858) wasn't just rhetoric—it was economic reality. Southern planters believed North and Britain economically dependent on them, creating Southern confidence they could never be economically defeated.

The Domestic Slave Trade

The Second Middle Passage

1808: Constitution's 20-year protection of international slave trade expired
Leads to domestic slave trade
Second Middle Passage: Forced migration of 1 million enslaved people from Upper to Deep South (1790-1860)
Upper South became slave-breeding states

This is where the lecture gets very dark. You may want to pause and acknowledge this before proceeding. Setting up context: 1808—U.S. Constitution's 20-year protection of slave trade expired. Congress immediately banned importation of enslaved people from Africa. This was one of few things abolitionists and some enslavers agreed on (though for different reasons). Why some enslavers supported ban: Upper South planters had surplus of enslaved people; closing foreign trade increased value of their human property; they could profit from selling people south. But cotton boom required enormous labor force. Where would people come from? Answer: The domestic slave trade—forced migration of approximately 1 MILLION enslaved people from Upper South to Deep South 1790-1860. This was the SECOND MIDDLE PASSAGE. Let students absorb that number: 1 million people forcibly relocated. The economics: Upper South (VA, MD, KY) became SLAVE-BREEDING STATES. I use that term deliberately because that's what they were. Enslavers calculated: enslaved woman of childbearing age valued partly for future children. Thomas Jefferson explicitly wrote about "profit" from enslaved women's reproduction. Enslavers systematically raped enslaved women to increase property holdings. Children born to enslaved mothers were property from birth (partus sequitur ventrem). Price differentials drove trade—Prices 1850s: Prime field hand in Virginia: $800-1,000; Same person in New Orleans: $1,500-1,800; Prime young enslaved woman: Even higher premiums due to reproductive value. That price difference made slave trading enormously profitable.

Slave Trade Infrastructure

Routes of Forced Migration

Overland Coffles: Forced marches—enslaved people chained together, walked hundreds of miles from Upper South to Deep South
Coastal Ships
Later, Railroads

Slave Markets

New Orleans, Natchez, Charleston, and Richmond
Operated like modern businesses with standardized contracts

The traders: Major slave trading firms like FRANKLIN & ARMFIELD (largest)—based in Virginia, Alexandria had massive slave pen, operated like modern business with standardized contracts, insurance, marketing. Isaac Franklin retired as one of wealthiest men in America. Three routes of forced migration: (1) Overland coffles—chained together, forced to walk hundreds of miles, men shackled, women/children often unchained but still forced march, 20-30 miles per day for weeks. Imagine: Walking from Virginia to Mississippi in chains. (2) Coastal ships—packed in holds, similar conditions to Middle Passage though shorter duration, disease/death/suicide attempts. (3) Later, railroads—by 1850s some transported by rail, still in chains, still separated from families. The slave markets: NEW ORLEANS was largest slave market in North America. Location near docks, in what's now French Quarter. Multiple auction houses and "slave pens." Enslaved people held in yards, inspected like livestock. THE INSPECTION PROCESS (this is horrific but historically important): stripped naked for examination, teeth checked, forced to jump/dance/show physical fitness, women subjected to sexual assault disguised as "examination." Other major markets: Natchez MS (major market for Delta plantations), Charleston SC, Richmond VA (major "export" market). FAMILY SEPARATION: This is perhaps most devastating aspect. Statistics: Approximately 25-30% of enslaved marriages destroyed by sale. Historians estimate most enslaved people experienced sale of family member. Children routinely sold away from parents—some as young as 8-10 years old. Primary sources: You can read hundreds of WPA interviews (1930s) where people in their 80s/90s still remember their mother's face as they were sold away, never learning what happened to siblings, decades-long searches for lost family members after emancipation. This wasn't incidental—this was the system functioning as designed.

Political Ramifications

Territorial Expansion and Sectional Crisis

Louisiana Purchase (1803) opened vast lands for cotton
Missouri Compromise (1820) first major sectional crisis
Texas Annexation (1845) reignited tensions
Slavery became non-negotiable for Southern political economy

Cotton expansion drove American imperial expansion and ultimately caused Civil War. The LOUISIANA PURCHASE (1803): We usually learn "Jefferson bought land from France, doubled size of country, great deal!" But consider context: Napoleon sold Louisiana because he'd lost Haiti to revolution. The Purchase opened vast new lands for cotton cultivation. Jefferson, a Virginia enslaver, understood cotton's potential. This was explicitly about slavery's expansion. The MISSOURI COMPROMISE (1820): When Missouri applied for statehood as slave state, it triggered first major sectional crisis. The issue: Would new territories become slave or free states? This wasn't abstract—this determined whether cotton cultivation (and slavery) would expand. The Compromise: Missouri admitted as slave state, Maine as free state (preserving Senate balance), 36°30' line—north of this, no slavery in Louisiana Purchase territory. Thomas Jefferson's reaction: He wrote this debate was "like a fire bell in the night" that "awakened and filled me with terror." He understood this was about slavery's future and could lead to Union's dissolution. He was right—but it would take another 40 years. TEXAS ANNEXATION (1845): Why did U.S. annex Texas? COTTON. Texas was ideal cotton-growing territory. American enslavers had already migrated there (illegally under Mexican law, which prohibited slavery). They rebelled against Mexico partly because Mexico threatened slavery (1835-36). Annexation delayed because it would upset slave/free state balance. Finally annexed 1845, reigniting sectional tensions.

How was the North involved in all this?

We've established that cotton transformed slavery into an expansionist, aggressive, economically dominant system within the American South. The domestic slave trade created massive forced migration and catastrophic family separations.

Were Northern textile workers complicit in slavery?

Here's a question that should make us uncomfortable: Were Northern textile workers complicit in slavery? Most of us want to say "no"—they were wage laborers, they were free, some were even abolitionists. But here's the reality: EVERY thread they spun came from cotton picked by enslaved people. EVERY paycheck they earned was paid with profits from slave labor. This doesn't mean they're morally equivalent to enslavers. But it does mean Northern economy was built on slavery just as surely as Southern economy was. The North just outsourced the direct violence. Today's section challenges one of most persistent myths in American history: that North was "free" and modern while South was "slave" and backward. The truth is that Northern capitalism and Southern slavery were two parts of a single integrated system.

The Northern Industrial Complex: Free Labor, Slave Cotton

Industrialization of the American Northeast

Emergence of textile mills in New England (Lowell, Massachusetts)
The Lowell System: wage labor (primarily young women) processing slave-grown cotton
Infrastructure boom to support cotton economy: canals, railroads, ports, telegraph
Every modern innovation in transportation and communication supported the slave economy

SECTION 1: Industrialization of American Northeast (4-5 min): The New England textile industry's origins—Why New England? Geographic advantages: water power (rivers like Merrimack, Connecticut, Blackstone), capital (merchants from China trade and shipping had money to invest), labor (young rural women looking for wage work before marriage), proximity (close to Northern ports receiving Southern cotton). The LOWELL MILLS: Case study in Northern-Southern interdependence. Lowell, Massachusetts became symbol of American industrial innovation. Founded 1826 by Boston Associates (group of wealthy merchants), built along Merrimack River, eventually had dozens of mill buildings, employed thousands (peak ~8,000 in 1840s), purpose-built industrial city. The Lowell System—sold as industrial utopia: The Boston Associates claimed creating something different from brutal English factory system. Employed primarily young, unmarried women (age 15-30) from New England farms, provided boarding houses with matrons, encouraged "moral improvement"—reading clubs, lectures, churches, workers published literary magazine (The Lowell Offering), promoted as "wholesome" and "respectable" work. The reality was more complex: WORKING CONDITIONS: 12-14 hour days, six days/week, dangerous machinery (injuries including death were common), poor ventilation (lint-filled air caused respiratory disease—"mill fever"), intense heat in summer (windows closed to maintain humidity for thread), deafening noise, constant supervision. WAGES: Women earned $2-4/week (about half what men earned), room and board cost ~$1.25/week, left little for savings, still more than most women could earn elsewhere. LABOR RESISTANCE: Strikes in 1834 and 1836 over wage cuts, "Ten Hour Movement" of 1840s, workers organized though their power was limited. The critical point: These workers, including progressive women who published The Lowell Offering, were processing cotton picked by enslaved people. The entire system depended on slavery.

Northern "Free Labor" Built on Southern Slavery

The Myth

North = freedom, progress, moral superiority
South = slavery, backwardness

The Reality

Northern mills, banks, and ships profited from slave-grown cotton
"Free labor" capitalism depended on enslaved labor
Both regions formed one capitalist system

Northern industrialization was predicated on Southern slavery—it could not have existed without it.

The North got rich from slavery—its freedom and prosperity rested on human bondage.

SECTION 3: Critical Insight (2-3 min): Read the critical insight aloud, then elaborate: "Northern 'free labor' industrialization was predicated on Southern slavery. The free North/slave South binary obscures deep economic complicity." What does "predicated on" mean? Not just "benefited from" or "was helped by"—but "COULD NOT HAVE EXISTED WITHOUT." Northern industrialization would not have happened—or would have happened very differently—without Southern slavery providing raw material. The free North/slave South binary: This is the story we've been taught: North = free labor, capitalism, progress, modernity, ultimately victory. South = slave labor, backwardness, agricultural, hierarchical, ultimately defeat. This binary serves ideological purpose: It allows North (and nation as a whole) to claim: industrialization is about "free labor" and freedom; North was morally superior; capitalism and slavery are opposites; America's economic success came from freedom, not slavery. BUT THIS IS FALSE. The reality: Northern capitalism depended entirely on Southern slavery. Many Northerners supported slavery or were indifferent to it. Northern prosperity was built on slave-produced goods. When we celebrate Northern industrial innovation, we're celebrating a system built on enslaved labor. The implications for how we understand American history: If Northern industrialization required slavery, then: wealth accumulated in North came partly from slavery; institutions we think of as "Northern" and "free" were complicit in slavery; sectional conflict wasn't really about slavery vs. freedom—it was about two different labor systems within same capitalist economy; both systems exploited labor brutally, just in different ways.

The Atlantic Cotton Web

A Global Supply Chain Built on Bondage

The American South:
Raw Material Supplier

The American North:
Processing and Manufacturing

Britain and Europe:
The Industrial Powerhouse

Global Markets:
Africa, Asia, Latin America

SECTION 1: A Global Supply Chain Built on Bondage (2-3 min): We've traced cotton from Southern fields to Northern mills. Now we need to zoom out further and see this as truly GLOBAL SYSTEM—an Atlantic world (and beyond) where slavery in Mississippi powered factories in Manchester and determined economic conditions in Mumbai. This isn't just international trade—this is integrated global capitalist system in which slavery is foundation, not exception. Framing the Atlantic cotton triangle: Think of this as three interconnected points: Point 1: The American South—Raw Material Supplier (enslaved labor produces cotton on industrial-scale plantations, concentration in Black Belt: MS, AL, GA, LA, cotton shipped through Gulf and Atlantic ports). Point 2: The American North & Britain—Processing and Manufacturing (Northern textile mills—New England, British textile mills—primarily Lancashire/Manchester, financial services, shipping, insurance concentrated in urban centers). Point 3: Global Markets—Consumption (finished textiles sold worldwide—Africa, Asia, Latin America, Europe, textiles become global commodity). But this is more than a triangle—it's a web: The metaphor of "triangle" is useful but too simple. This was actually complex web with multiple nodes: New York as financial center, Liverpool as shipping hub, Cairo and Alexandria for Egyptian cotton (by 1850s), Indian textile markets being destroyed and replaced, Caribbean sugar plantations also connected (enslaved people clothed in cheap cotton textiles). The key insight: This is a SYSTEM, not just trade. Each part requires the others. You can't understand any single node without understanding its relationship to all others.

World-Systems Analysis: Core, Periphery, and Cotton

Wallerstein's World-Systems Theory (1970s)

Divides global economy into Core, Periphery, and Semi-Periphery
Core regions (Britain, Northern U.S.) dominate through capital and technology
Periphery regions (U.S. South) provide raw materials and cheap labor
Emphasizes structural inequality and cyclical exploitation

Applying World-Systems Theory to Cotton

The U.S. South functioned as periphery: coerced labor, resource extraction
Britain and Northern U.S. as core: industrial production, capital accumulation
Global interdependence masked deep power asymmetries

SECTION 1: Wallerstein's World-Systems Theory—Core Concepts (5-6 min): We've spent last several slides describing a system—a global network of economic relationships centered on cotton and slavery. Now we need to step back and ask: How do we theorize this? How do we understand structural dynamics that create and perpetuate these relationships? This is where WORLD-SYSTEMS THEORY becomes invaluable. It gives us framework to analyze not just what happened, but WHY it happened and WHY similar patterns continue today. Immanuel Wallerstein (1930-2019): American sociologist and historian, published The Modern World-System (Vol 1) in 1974, influenced by Marxism, dependency theory, and Fernand Braudel's Annales School, developed theory by studying emergence of capitalism in 16th century Europe. What makes world-systems theory distinctive? TRADITIONAL APPROACHES to economic development: study individual nations as separate units, assume all nations follow similar development paths, view "developed" and "underdeveloped" as stages on linear progression, assume "underdeveloped" nations just need to modernize. WORLD-SYSTEMS APPROACH: studies ENTIRE world economy as single system, development and underdevelopment are INTERCONNECTED, not separate stages, you cannot understand any nation without understanding its position in global system, poverty and wealth are PRODUCED TOGETHER within system. This is radical because it says: Third World poverty isn't caused by those nations being "behind"—it's caused by their exploitation within global system that enriches core at periphery's expense.

Financial Capitalism and Slavery

Banking and Credit Systems

Planters received credit from Northern and British banks to finance operations
Cotton factors advanced loans against future harvests
Enslaved people used as collateral for loans and mortgages

Insurance and Risk Management

Marine insurance protected cotton shipments
Life insurance policies on enslaved individuals treated humans as financial assets

Investment and Speculation

Cotton futures traded on commodity markets
Major financial institutions (Barings Bank, Brown Brothers, Lehman Brothers) invested heavily

Opening provocation: I want to challenge a deeply held assumption. When we think of slavery, we often imagine it as PRE-MODERN, BACKWARD, maybe even FEUDAL—a relic of earlier age that capitalism eventually swept away. THIS IS COMPLETELY WRONG. What we're about to see is that slavery in 19th century was not just compatible with modern financial capitalism—SLAVERY PIONEERED many financial innovations we think of as defining modern capitalism. Enslaved people were: mortgaged like real estate, securitized into financial instruments, insured like cargo, collateralized for loans, depreciated on balance sheets, leveraged for speculation. This wasn't primitive accumulation—this was cutting-edge financial engineering. And that should disturb us deeply, because it means we can't separate "good" parts of capitalism (innovation, growth, wealth creation) from "bad" parts (exploitation, commodification, dehumanization). They're the same thing. SECTION 1: Banking and Credit Systems (4-5 min): The capital problem of plantation agriculture: Starting cotton plantation required enormous capital. Initial investments (1830s-1850s): Land ($5-50/acre, for 1,000-acre plantation: $10,000-30,000), Enslaved people ($500-2,000/person, for 50: $40,000-60,000), Equipment (plows, gins, wagons, tools: $5,000-10,000), Buildings (slave quarters, barns, planter's house: $5,000-15,000). Total investment for medium-sized plantation: $60,000-115,000. In today's dollars, roughly $2-4 MILLION. Most planters didn't have that cash. They needed CREDIT.

The Infrastructure of Exploitation

Rivers and Riverboat Commerce

Mississippi River system as primary transportation artery
Steamboats transported both cotton bales and enslaved people
River cities became nodes of capitalist exchange

New Orleans: Entrepôt of the Cotton Kingdom

Major hub connecting U.S. cotton production to global markets
Home to international merchants, brokers, and bankers
Site of largest slave markets in North America

Slave Trading as Capitalist Enterprise

Auction houses and 'slave pens' operated as rationalized businesses
Systematic commodification: inspection, pricing, marketing of human beings
Profits reinvested in plantations, infrastructure, and financial markets

We've examined financial infrastructure of slavery—banks, credit systems, insurance. Now we need to look at PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE: rivers, boats, ports, markets that moved cotton and human beings through system. This infrastructure reveals how deeply embedded slavery was in American landscape. When we talk about "internal improvements" in 19th-century America—canals, roads, riverboats, ports—we need to recognize that much of this infrastructure was built to serve slave economy. Geography determined destiny in cotton South, and Mississippi River system was central artery of slavery's expansion. SECTION 1: Rivers and Riverboat Commerce (4-5 min): The Mississippi River System—Slavery's Highway. Geographic scope: Mississippi River and tributaries formed largest navigable river system in North America. Major rivers: Mississippi (2,300 miles from Minnesota to Gulf), Ohio (connected to PA and VA), Missouri (opened western territories), Tennessee (served TN and AL), Arkansas, Red River (served LA and TX), Yazoo (served MS Delta). Together: Over 12,000 miles of navigable waterways. This system connected entire interior of continent to New Orleans and Gulf of Mexico—and thus to global markets. Why rivers mattered so much: Before railroads became extensive (pre-1850s), rivers were only practical way to move bulk goods. Comparison of transportation costs (1820s-1830s): Overland by wagon: $0.30-0.70 per ton-mile (extremely expensive); By river: $0.01-0.03 per ton-mile (20-50x cheaper). For 1,000-mile journey: Wagon: $300-700 per ton; River: $10-30 per ton. This cost difference made plantation agriculture in interior possible. Without rivers, cotton couldn't be profitably grown far from ports.

Cotton and Capitalism: The Intertwined Legacy

Slavery as Economic Engine

Generated immense wealth for planters, merchants, bankers, and industrialists
Provided capital accumulation that funded industrial expansion

Catalyzing the Industrial Revolution

Cotton textiles drove technological innovation and factory systems
Created template for modern industrial capitalism: mass production, global supply chains, financialization

We've traced this system from its origins through its operation to its physical infrastructure. Now we need to confront most important question: WHAT DID THIS SYSTEM CREATE THAT PERSISTS TODAY? This isn't just historical curiosity. The structures built by slavery-capitalism didn't disappear in 1865. They were transformed, adapted, and in many ways reproduced in different forms. When we talk about contemporary racial inequality, global economic inequality, or wealth gap between nations—we're talking about legacy of system we've been studying. This slide examines four dimensions of that legacy: (1) Slavery as economic engine (capital accumulation), (2) Catalyzing Industrial Revolution (technological/organizational templates), (3) Persistent core-periphery dynamic (structural inequality), (4) Racial capitalism (racialized exploitation as systemic feature). SECTION 1: Slavery as Economic Engine (3-4 min): The wealth generated by slavery was staggering, and that wealth became foundation for subsequent economic development. Capital accumulation in antebellum period: The value of enslaved people themselves. By 1860, enslaved people were SINGLE LARGEST category of private wealth in United States. Calculated at market prices: ~4 million enslaved people, average value ~$800/person, TOTAL: ~$3.2 BILLION. To put in context: All U.S. railroads: ~$1.8 billion, All U.S. manufacturing capital: ~$1 billion, All U.S. bank capital: ~$400 million. ENSLAVED PEOPLE REPRESENTED MORE WEALTH THAN ALL RAILROADS, FACTORIES, AND BANKS COMBINED.

The Persistent Core-Periphery Dynamic

Structural Inequalities Endure

Pattern established: raw materials from periphery fuel industry in core
Post-emancipation sharecropping and global South exploitation follow similar logic
Structural inequalities embedded in modern global economy

SECTION 3: The Persistent Core-Periphery Dynamic (3-4 min): The structural relationships created by slavery-capitalism persist in modified form. The pattern established: In 19th century: Periphery (U.S. South, colonial world) produces raw materials with coerced labor; Core (Britain, Northern U.S.) processes raw materials into finished goods; Finished goods sold back to periphery at markup; Wealth accumulates in core, poverty perpetuates in periphery. Does this pattern sound familiar? Post-emancipation continuities: After slavery ended, economic structure didn't fundamentally change. (1) SHARECROPPING IN THE SOUTH: Formally free labor, but trapped in debt peonage. Landlords advanced credit, charged high interest. Sharecroppers never got out of debt. DIFFERENT LEGAL FORM, SIMILAR ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIPS. (2) CONVICT LEASING (1870s-1940s): Southern states arrested Black men on trivial charges, "leased" prisoners to plantations, mines, railroads. Prisoners worked under conditions as brutal as slavery. Douglas Blackmon's Slavery by Another Name documents this. SLAVERY LITERALLY CONTINUED UNDER DIFFERENT NAME. (3) JIM CROW ECONOMIC SUBORDINATION: Legal segregation limited economic opportunities, exclusion from skilled trades, residential segregation concentrated poverty, prevented capital accumulation.

Two Interpretations of Global Capitalism

Marxist / Leftist Interpretation:
Global capitalism = system of exploitation
Core (Global North) extracts value from Periphery (Global South)
Historical roots in slavery, colonialism, imperialism
Wealth of the North built on underdevelopment of the South
Modern globalization continues core–periphery inequality
Emphasis: structures of domination and historical injustice

Non-Marxist / Liberal-Institutional Interpretation
Global capitalism = engine of growth, not inherently exploitative
Differences explained by institutions, innovation, and governance
Trade and investment can be mutually beneficial (comparative advantage)
Underdevelopment linked to domestic policy, corruption, education gaps
Former 'peripheries' (e.g., South Korea, Taiwan) show mobility and agency
Emphasis: development through reform, not systemic oppression

The above "core-periphery" interpretation (derived from Marxist, world-systems, and dependency theory) frames capitalism as structure of global exploitation, with "core" enriching itself by extracting surplus from "periphery." But NON-MARXIST or NON-LEFTIST historians and economists—especially those in liberal-institutionalist, neoclassical, and modernization traditions—challenge this framework on both methodological and empirical grounds. FREE-MARKET / NEOCLASSICAL COUNTER-ARGUMENT: Core claim—Global inequality is not primarily caused by exploitation but by differences in productivity, governance, human capital, and institutions. Trade, even between unequal partners, can be mutually beneficial through comparative advantage. Arguments: The "core-periphery" model assumes zero-sum world, but global trade has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty since 1950 (e.g., East Asia). Poor countries often specialize in raw materials not because of coercion but because of relative factor endowments. Wealth accumulation in North resulted from innovation, property rights, education, stable political systems, not merely exploitation. Persistence of poverty in some regions reflects domestic corruption, weak institutions, political instability, not just external domination. Representative scholars: Douglass North (institutional economics), Daron Acemoglu & James Robinson (Why Nations Fail), Deirdre McCloskey (Bourgeois virtues thesis).

Study Mode: Key Terms & Concepts

Click a card to flip • Press S for Study Notes

Second Slavery

19th c.

The 19th-century expansion and intensification of slavery tied to global capitalism, especially cotton exports.

Domestic Slave Trade

1790–1860

Forced migration of enslaved people from the Upper South to the Cotton South via sales, auctions, and coffles.

Coffle

Slave Trade

A line or chain of enslaved people marched long distances to market, often bound together.

Cotton Gin

1793

Machine that rapidly separated seeds from short-staple cotton, fueling huge increases in cotton production and slavery.

Gang System

Labor

Labor organization where enslaved people worked in groups under an overseer for set hours, maximizing output.

Task System

Labor

Labor system where daily tasks were assigned; completion could allow limited personal time.

Black Belt

Region

Fertile crescent of dark soils across the Deep South where cotton cultivation and slavery concentrated.

King Cotton

Econ/Ideology

Belief that cotton’s global economic power guaranteed Southern leverage at home and abroad.

Putting-Out / Proto-Industry

18th–19th c.

Home-based production coordinated by merchants; a step between artisanal work and factory industry.

Paternalism

Ideology

Plantation justification that masters ‘cared for’ enslaved people while exercising absolute control.