What do you think?
Rate this book
Poor Whites of the Antebellum South: Tenants and Laborers in Central North Carolina and Northeast Mississippi
In Poor Whites of the Antebellum South, Charles C. Bolton gives a distinct voice to one of the most elusive groups in the society of the Old South. Bolton's detailed examination reveals much about the lives of these landless white tenants and laborers and their relationship to yeoman farmers, black slaves, free blacks and elite whites. Providing a provocative analysis of the failure of the Jeffersonian "yeoman ideal" of democracy in white-majority areas, this book also shows how poor whites represented a more significant presence on the political, economic, and social landscape than previously had been thought.
Looking at two specific regions--the "settled" central piedmont of North Carolina and the "frontier" of northeast Mississippi--Bolton describes how poor whites played an important, though circumscribed, role in the local economy. Dependent on temporary employment, they represented a troubling presence in a society based on the principles of white independence and black slavery. Although perceived by southern leaders as a threat, poor whites, Bolton argues, did not form a political alliance with either free or enslaved blacks because of numerous factors including white racism, kinship ties, religion, education, and mobility. A concluding discussion of the crisis of 1860-61 examines the rejection of secession by significant numbers of poor whites, as well as the implications for their future as the Old South turned toward the new.
Poor Whites of the Antebellum South sheds light on a group often neglected in southern history. It is an important contribution that will be of interest to all students and historians of the American South.
Looking at two specific regions--the "settled" central piedmont of North Carolina and the "frontier" of northeast Mississippi--Bolton describes how poor whites played an important, though circumscribed, role in the local economy. Dependent on temporary employment, they represented a troubling presence in a society based on the principles of white independence and black slavery. Although perceived by southern leaders as a threat, poor whites, Bolton argues, did not form a political alliance with either free or enslaved blacks because of numerous factors including white racism, kinship ties, religion, education, and mobility. A concluding discussion of the crisis of 1860-61 examines the rejection of secession by significant numbers of poor whites, as well as the implications for their future as the Old South turned toward the new.
Poor Whites of the Antebellum South sheds light on a group often neglected in southern history. It is an important contribution that will be of interest to all students and historians of the American South.
- GenresHistoryAmerican History
272 pages, Paperback
First published December 21, 1993
3 people are currently reading
33 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
July 29, 2020
Published in 1994, this book is based on Charles C. Bolton's doctoral dissertation at Duke University This book is one of several in this general time period touching on the lives of poorer white southerners that I have read recently. The other books looked at these individuals' relationships to enclaved African Americans, one in the low county of Georgia and the other in the piedmont region of North Carolina.
Bolton's unique contribution is found by a comparison of the financial and political situation of poorer whites in the central piedmont region of North Carolina to those who migrated to the Deep South after the land was seized by the United States from Native Americans after about 1815. In particular, he focused on northern Mississippi as the title of the book title indicates.
The book begins by examining the scholarship on the Old South, showing how historians have often missed the complexity of the white population. In short, he argues that there were far more non-land owners who existed along the margins of this slave society that is often realized. Over the course of the antebellum period, the tenants and laborers struggled to gain a foothold and the degree of their ability to eventually buy farm land actually decreased.
As Bolton shows, those poor and landless whites who moved to the Deep South proved equally unable to gain a financial foothold. In large degree, this outcome occurred because the Federal government's polices for the disbursal of Federal lands greatly favored wealthy land speculators, northern-based and financed land investment companies, and wealth slave owners from the seaboard south states who could pay cash and bring enslaved African Americans. In short, this Federal policy missed a tremendous chance to allow a much higher percentage of white Americans gain economic self-sufficiency, even as the terrible reality of racial enslavement and Native American land being taken away unjustly continued unabated as well.
Bolton next explored the practical limits of white male political power in the antebellum South. As other scholars have examined in detail, property holding was eliminated as a requirement to vote in the antebellum era. What is not mentioned by Bolton, though, were laws and state constitutional amendments that actually made it impossible for free African Americans to vote in many states.
Yet, Bolton does have keen insight as to why white male suffrage did not spell the of elite white slave holders political domination. First, voters were often intimidated to vote for the employers and landlord's favored candidates, and either had to vote verbally or to ask for the ticket that had the name of a particular party. Either way, voting was not by secret ballot. Second, most offices required substantial land owning, which kept both poor whites and yeoman farmers out of office. Finally, yeomen farmers and poorer landless whites had different interests, so they never formed an effective coalition against the dominant elite,
In both states, though, we find that the existing yet suppressed class conflict between poorer whites and the region's elite emerged in the sectional crisis. Many poorer whites opposed secession, particularly in the central piedmont of North Carolina.
Bolton's unique contribution is found by a comparison of the financial and political situation of poorer whites in the central piedmont region of North Carolina to those who migrated to the Deep South after the land was seized by the United States from Native Americans after about 1815. In particular, he focused on northern Mississippi as the title of the book title indicates.
The book begins by examining the scholarship on the Old South, showing how historians have often missed the complexity of the white population. In short, he argues that there were far more non-land owners who existed along the margins of this slave society that is often realized. Over the course of the antebellum period, the tenants and laborers struggled to gain a foothold and the degree of their ability to eventually buy farm land actually decreased.
As Bolton shows, those poor and landless whites who moved to the Deep South proved equally unable to gain a financial foothold. In large degree, this outcome occurred because the Federal government's polices for the disbursal of Federal lands greatly favored wealthy land speculators, northern-based and financed land investment companies, and wealth slave owners from the seaboard south states who could pay cash and bring enslaved African Americans. In short, this Federal policy missed a tremendous chance to allow a much higher percentage of white Americans gain economic self-sufficiency, even as the terrible reality of racial enslavement and Native American land being taken away unjustly continued unabated as well.
Bolton next explored the practical limits of white male political power in the antebellum South. As other scholars have examined in detail, property holding was eliminated as a requirement to vote in the antebellum era. What is not mentioned by Bolton, though, were laws and state constitutional amendments that actually made it impossible for free African Americans to vote in many states.
Yet, Bolton does have keen insight as to why white male suffrage did not spell the of elite white slave holders political domination. First, voters were often intimidated to vote for the employers and landlord's favored candidates, and either had to vote verbally or to ask for the ticket that had the name of a particular party. Either way, voting was not by secret ballot. Second, most offices required substantial land owning, which kept both poor whites and yeoman farmers out of office. Finally, yeomen farmers and poorer landless whites had different interests, so they never formed an effective coalition against the dominant elite,
In both states, though, we find that the existing yet suppressed class conflict between poorer whites and the region's elite emerged in the sectional crisis. Many poorer whites opposed secession, particularly in the central piedmont of North Carolina.
Displaying 1 of 1 review