Carl Churchill

Hist 3700
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
1096 words
Kindle edition in use, citations reference location as listed
American Slavery, American Freedom by Edmund Morgan is a work that covers
the broader plantation of Virginia and then contrasts the development of the social
values of the early colonies with the growth of slavery alongside it. Morgans main point
being that American slavery and American freedom are fundamentally related to each
other, and occupy the central paradox in American history. 1 A majority of the book does
not relate directly to the thesis however, and combined with a lack of direct correlation
and explanation the thesis is greatly weakened.
Morgan views Virginia as being a unique position in comparison to England.
Virginia had a large amount of open arable land, where cash crop agricultural on a large
scale was very profitable. In similar situations with large amounts of land, slavery often is
chosen as the technique to exploit the land best.2 Virginia landowners initially used
indentured servants, but it became increasingly clear that slaves were both more
profitable, and easier to control than servants. 3 After 1660, where mortality rates had
fallen enough to make the buying of slaves much less financially risky, slavery began to
rise quickly in popularity. Slaves also had the advantage of being much less dangerous to
the social order than rebellious servants. Indentured servants could expect headwrights
and payment after service, and so often grew violent when those expectations were not
met.4 Slaves in contrast had very few avenues of improvement, and so did not have
expectations to be broken, combined with being totally unarmed and unfamiliar with the
environment or culture, slaves could permanently exist at the bottom of the social order
without legitimate fear of rebellion. Unlike servants who were often exempted from the
harshest labor, and who could expect to see their women and children exempted from
the majority of field work slaves could be worked as hard as cattle, and punished brutally,
without fear of reprisal, since they were not English and they were not truly parts of
society, just a working element underneath it. For all this explanation, Morgan does not
relate it to liberty, as his thesis states. He explains the economics well, but leaves the
relationships out.

1 Edmund S. Morgan, American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial

Virginia. New York: Norton, 1975. 127.
2 Ibid., 6237
3 Ibid., 6257
4 Ibid., 6438

Carl Churchill
Hist 3700
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
1096 words
Kindle edition in use, citations reference location as listed
As for the racial basis for slavery, Morgan does not state that it is related to slavery from
the start. Rather, in the first several decades of the Virginia colony a remarkably
integrated society existed, with black landowners acting upon their own free will in court
and enduring the same criminal sentences as whites.5 The majority of the first colonial
slaves were actually Indian prisoners of war, from the defeated tribes in the area. The
separation began religiously. As more slaves entered Virginia following Bacons rebellion,
and Indian slaves were being shipped from more remote regions, a new combined
underclass of non-Christian, non-English slaves was formed. The goal was to separate
this growing class from the existing population of discontented freedmen and servants,
and the tactic used was racism, founded out of the religious and ethnic differences in the
groups.6
Initially, the separation was founded on an intersection of race, religion and
culture. There was a divide between the white, Christian, English and the foreign, pagan
Indians and Blacks. No matter the social status of an indentured servant, they were still
white, Christian and English and were inherently separated from their Black counterparts,
no matter how similar the working conditions were. As this divide was encouraged, it
gradually codified into law. Morgan cites one 1630 case where the defendant is whipped
for defiling his body in lying with a negro 7 However, this case was well before
Bacons rebellion, and is not therefore a good example of Morgans case for the racial
roots of Virginian slavery. To his credit, he makes a disclaimer to that effect, and he then
cites the 1691 act which clearly segregates marriage based on race, with the punishment
being banishment from the colony.8 Interracial marriages were very threatening to the
formation of a slave society, as a class of mixed race freedmen, by virtue of their free
parents status, would blur the hierarchical divisions between the classes and weaken the
social order, but the specific methods by which the social order is weakened are still left
out. As for the existing class of mixed race freedmen, Morgan sees them as a pariah

5 Ibid., 3239
6 Ibid., 6836
7 Ibid., 6924
8 Ibid., 6954

Carl Churchill
Hist 3700
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
1096 words
Kindle edition in use, citations reference location as listed
group existed in an awkward social position that directly threatened colonial ambitions
and the growing slave-based economic system in Virginia.9
Following the aforementioned discussion of the roots of slavery in the early colonies,
Morgan begins to talk about the direct relationship between slavery and liberty in the
colonies, over 80% into the book. He does make very well argued points on this
relationship, pointing out the elite could better preach republican concepts in a slave
society than a fully free one,10 and that the harsh divide between slaves and non-slaves,
regardless of class gave even the lowest level of servants a sense of greater equality in
the system.11 It does need to be addressed that these excellent points are raised
primarily in one chapter, and the penultimate one at that. Slavery isnt first mentioned at
all in the main narrative, that isafter the introduction and preface, until chapter four
and only discussed at length in chapter six. Morgan gives a fantastic summary of early
Virginia history, but the majority of the book does not mention the first half of the thesis,
and until the very last chapters equally does not speak on the second half of the thesis
either. When he speaks on slavery, the analysis is very strong, relying on a wide breadth
of evidence from court cases to journals to law codes. The conclusions are equally strong,
but with the exception of the penultimate chapter slavery is not related to the rise of
freedom in the colonies. Certainly if less time had been spent writing a comprehensive
history of the Virginia colony there would be more room for detailed analysis of this
relationship. The organizational system works against Morgans argument, and despite
how strong the overall historical analysis is, the structure of the book leaves the most
vital elements of the thesis weak and briefly touched upon. As a survey of early colonial
economics American Slavery, American Freedom is a fantastic and comprehensive
source, but for anything besides a relatively brief analysis of the relationship of slavery
and freedom in early America other sources are better suited.

9 Ibid., 6994
10 Ibid., 7921
11 Ibid., 7930