What do you think?
Rate this book
The Confessions of Nat Turner
This anthology is a thorough introduction to classic literature for those who have not yet experienced these literary masterworks. For those who have known and loved these works in the past, this is an invitation to reunite with old friends in a fresh new format. From Shakespeare s finesse to Oscar Wilde s wit, this unique collection brings together works as diverse and influential as The Pilgrim s Progress and Othello. As an anthology that invites readers to immerse themselves in the masterpieces of the literary giants, it is must-have addition to any library.
48 pages, Kindle Edition
Published January 1, 2008
247 people are currently reading
1194 people want to read
About the author
Nat Turner
61 books11 followersAfrican-American Slave who started the largest slave rebellion in the antebellum southern United States.
His court confession has been released as a book.
His court confession has been released as a book.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews
October 7, 2016
In 1831 Nat Turner led the largest slave uprising in American history, murdering 60 white men, women and children with a mob of slaves in Virginia. Some dude went and interviewed him in prison, and this claims to be his first-person account of his life and revolt.
The motives of the dude - a white slaveowner named Thomas Ruffin Gray - have been questioned quite a bit, as has the authenticity of the whole thing. There were a bunch of witnesses to the confession, but of course none who were sympathetic to Nat Turner's mission to murder all their babies. I like this piece about the Confessions. (Like any discussion of this primary source, it gets a bit wrapped up in Styron's Pulitzer-winning 1967 The Confessions of Nat Turner.) We're unlikely to get a definitive answer about this, but the tendency has been to more or less take it at its word. It feels to me like Gray has written down what Turner told him. (Along with a few "Holy shit!"-style asides.)
Turner, who taught himself to read at a young age and comes off as highly intelligent, claims that God communicates with him and ordered him to fight; what he describes matches pretty well with schizophrenia.
On the other hand, it also matches pretty well with God. "Go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child," He tells Samuel in 15:3-4. When asked, "Do you not find yourself mistaken now?" Turner answers, "Was not Christ crucified. And by signs in the heavens that it would make known to me when I should commence the great work." It's a weird sentence structure, but you get the idea: only God knows the difference between a prophet and a schizophrenic.
Most of Turner's confession is a step-by-step, almost laconic description of the revolt itself. "Twas my object to carry terror and devastation wherever we went," he helpfully explains. As he goes he picks up a crowd of slaves, sometimes drunk, who (according to him) carried out most of the bloody work: "I sometimes got in sight in time to see the work of death completed, viewed the mangled bodies as they lay, in silent satisfaction, and immediately started in quest of other victims."
It's disturbing stuff. Worth reading? Sure, yeah; it's certainly not boring, and it's very short. As a (probable) primary source about the effects and events of slavery, it's interesting.
These actions are of course terrible, but then so is the institution of slavery that inspired them; they were technically a response in kind, so if you believe in an eye for an eye, you should have no problem with Nat Turner. It seems to me like we have to judge slavery first, and Turner's response to it second.
History has decided that Turner's rebellion was a bad idea: it led directly to the retributive murder of 200 slaves and the passage of new, even more restrictive laws prohibiting education and assembly, among other things. John Brown's rebellion in 1860, on the other hand, is given credit as a spark for the Civil War. And I don't know, maybe Brown's timing was more fortuitous and it's nice that he didn't murder any babies, but in general I'd say that both events were inevitable reactions to slavery. Turner pleaded not guilty to his charges, "saying to his counsel, that he did not feel so." Fair enough.
The motives of the dude - a white slaveowner named Thomas Ruffin Gray - have been questioned quite a bit, as has the authenticity of the whole thing. There were a bunch of witnesses to the confession, but of course none who were sympathetic to Nat Turner's mission to murder all their babies. I like this piece about the Confessions. (Like any discussion of this primary source, it gets a bit wrapped up in Styron's Pulitzer-winning 1967 The Confessions of Nat Turner.) We're unlikely to get a definitive answer about this, but the tendency has been to more or less take it at its word. It feels to me like Gray has written down what Turner told him. (Along with a few "Holy shit!"-style asides.)
Turner, who taught himself to read at a young age and comes off as highly intelligent, claims that God communicates with him and ordered him to fight; what he describes matches pretty well with schizophrenia.
On the other hand, it also matches pretty well with God. "Go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child," He tells Samuel in 15:3-4. When asked, "Do you not find yourself mistaken now?" Turner answers, "Was not Christ crucified. And by signs in the heavens that it would make known to me when I should commence the great work." It's a weird sentence structure, but you get the idea: only God knows the difference between a prophet and a schizophrenic.
Most of Turner's confession is a step-by-step, almost laconic description of the revolt itself. "Twas my object to carry terror and devastation wherever we went," he helpfully explains. As he goes he picks up a crowd of slaves, sometimes drunk, who (according to him) carried out most of the bloody work: "I sometimes got in sight in time to see the work of death completed, viewed the mangled bodies as they lay, in silent satisfaction, and immediately started in quest of other victims."
It's disturbing stuff. Worth reading? Sure, yeah; it's certainly not boring, and it's very short. As a (probable) primary source about the effects and events of slavery, it's interesting.
These actions are of course terrible, but then so is the institution of slavery that inspired them; they were technically a response in kind, so if you believe in an eye for an eye, you should have no problem with Nat Turner. It seems to me like we have to judge slavery first, and Turner's response to it second.
History has decided that Turner's rebellion was a bad idea: it led directly to the retributive murder of 200 slaves and the passage of new, even more restrictive laws prohibiting education and assembly, among other things. John Brown's rebellion in 1860, on the other hand, is given credit as a spark for the Civil War. And I don't know, maybe Brown's timing was more fortuitous and it's nice that he didn't murder any babies, but in general I'd say that both events were inevitable reactions to slavery. Turner pleaded not guilty to his charges, "saying to his counsel, that he did not feel so." Fair enough.
September 3, 2011
While reading this short pamphlet what occurred to me frequently was the question of its authenticity. Not that I wondered whether Nat Turner led a slave uprising in Virgina that resulted in several whites being slaughtered and many slaves, both those involved and those not involved in the uprising itself, being killed in retaliation by gangs of frightened slaveholders. But, rather, whether these "confessions" of Nat Turner, supposedly written down accurately by a white lawyer while Turner was in prison awaiting execution, are really Turner's words or not. Since this pamphlet contains the only information we'll likely ever have about Turner (primary evidence, that is), an answer to this question is unlikely. I just find it interesting that Turner supposedly suffered from "religious mania" and attributes his uprising to this source: he heard the voice of God or an angel tell him to do this (he was insane, in other words). Isn't it more likely that the inhumanity of the system caused a slave uprising (which is perfectly understandable) and that the white establishment, afraid of encouraging a similarly successful repetition (not to mention fueling the fires of Northern abolitionists by showing that slaves were actually NOT happy and singing people loving their masters) then manufactured some cock and bull story of one insane slave who led a revolt? Part of my ambivalent acceptance of this theory derives, in part, from the text of the "confessions," during which it appears that Turner "led" very little in terms of actual killing or action: during many (perhaps most of the killings) in the text, Turner was absent or not involved. I don't know. A historical curiosity, perhaps, but little of substantive value here.
September 8, 2016
I read this first when I was taking a black history class in college. I can't even recall what I thought of It back then. Well, yes I do. I remember wanting him to win. I also remember how sometimes the slaves fed their master's ground glass, and how on the slave ships many lived in their own excretions and many died. I remember how the masters would use thump screws on their slaves in order to cause them pain, and I remember the whippings.
Nat Turner was a slave back in the 1830s and confesses that his master was really good to him, but at one time he actually ran away, stayed hidden for maybe a month and then returned. Just because you have a good master doesn't mean that you don't desire freedom. But what choice did he have except to return? Perhaps, he could have made it to a Northern State to freedom. Maybe not.
He was also a very religious man, a preacher. He believed that he had visions from God, and that God told him that he must take action against the slave owners. So in time he gathered up several other slaves and planned the insurrection.
Early one morning they visited the homes of those nearby. He was finally caught, and his confession of what happened was very grisly. They used axes to kill 57 men, women, and children, mostly women and children. I was horrified when reading the graphic details, and yet I understood why this had happened. Yet, it was morally wrong.
Insurrections were a constant worry for the slave owners, as they always feared that this could happen, and actually, Nat Turner's insurrection wasn't the fist time that it had actually happened.
“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe.”
~~Frederick Douglass
Nat Turner was a slave back in the 1830s and confesses that his master was really good to him, but at one time he actually ran away, stayed hidden for maybe a month and then returned. Just because you have a good master doesn't mean that you don't desire freedom. But what choice did he have except to return? Perhaps, he could have made it to a Northern State to freedom. Maybe not.
He was also a very religious man, a preacher. He believed that he had visions from God, and that God told him that he must take action against the slave owners. So in time he gathered up several other slaves and planned the insurrection.
Early one morning they visited the homes of those nearby. He was finally caught, and his confession of what happened was very grisly. They used axes to kill 57 men, women, and children, mostly women and children. I was horrified when reading the graphic details, and yet I understood why this had happened. Yet, it was morally wrong.
Insurrections were a constant worry for the slave owners, as they always feared that this could happen, and actually, Nat Turner's insurrection wasn't the fist time that it had actually happened.
“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe.”
~~Frederick Douglass
March 20, 2024
Nat Turner was actually the originator of the BLACK LIVES MATTER MOVEMENT. Why? Because the man started an actual insurrection to free slaves from the bondages of slavery. And with that act he was killed. The man is a true martyr. A person the world doesn’t talk about or praise enough.
February 3, 2017
Actual rating: 2.5 stars.
This is the original "Confessions of Nat Turner," not the 1967 William Styron novel but a 24-page summary of an interview with the actual Nat Turner, written by Thomas R. Gray, a lawyer seeking to cash in on the sensation surrounding one of the few slave uprisings to occur in the American South.
Starting with six accomplices, Nat Turner led a short-lived revolt in the country near Southhampton, Virginia, in August, 1831. Starting in the dark of night, Turner and his group began going house to house, murdering white farmers and slave owners, many in their sleep. As more slaves joined along the way, Turner's army grew to 60 men. Over the next 36 hours, they killed 10 men, 14 women, and 31 infants and children. By noon of Tuesday, August 23, white militias had routed the revolt, killing, capturing, and dispersing Turner's army. Turner himself evaded capture for several weeks. Once caught, he was quickly tried, convicted, and hanged. Gray, who represented Turner at his trial, conducted his interview with Turner in jail and then published his phamplet.
Gray says he quotes Nat Turner extensively, but it's hard to tell whether the words we read are his or Turner's: Gray didn't use quotation marks, and sentences that are clearly judgments on the part of Gray are mixed together with sentences purportedly uttered by Turner. It's no fun to read: Turner, an educated slave who could read and write, and who was a minister to fellow slaves, had been odd since childhood and thought his "revolution" was directed by God. The actual uprising was nothing more than a killing spree, depressingly squalid and cruel, and there really is no message in Turner's confession. There was no plan; no hope of success.
My interest in the original jailhouse interview was piqued by a reference to the original book being banned in southern states. I haven't been able to find contemporary reports of the book's banning, only modern references here and there, but it's not hard to figure out what was going on. It is known that after Turner's uprising, several states passed laws making it illegal to teach slaves to read and write. Although Turner's failed revolt ended hopes of abolition in the South, it spurred abolition movements in the North and helped polarize the nation, a split that eventually resulted in the Civil War. In this context, it is easy to see why authorities in the South would want to suppress "The Confessions of Nat Turner." No doubt, as always, the banning of the book made it a runaway success, padding the lawyer Thomas R. Gray's pockets.
This is the original "Confessions of Nat Turner," not the 1967 William Styron novel but a 24-page summary of an interview with the actual Nat Turner, written by Thomas R. Gray, a lawyer seeking to cash in on the sensation surrounding one of the few slave uprisings to occur in the American South.
Starting with six accomplices, Nat Turner led a short-lived revolt in the country near Southhampton, Virginia, in August, 1831. Starting in the dark of night, Turner and his group began going house to house, murdering white farmers and slave owners, many in their sleep. As more slaves joined along the way, Turner's army grew to 60 men. Over the next 36 hours, they killed 10 men, 14 women, and 31 infants and children. By noon of Tuesday, August 23, white militias had routed the revolt, killing, capturing, and dispersing Turner's army. Turner himself evaded capture for several weeks. Once caught, he was quickly tried, convicted, and hanged. Gray, who represented Turner at his trial, conducted his interview with Turner in jail and then published his phamplet.
Gray says he quotes Nat Turner extensively, but it's hard to tell whether the words we read are his or Turner's: Gray didn't use quotation marks, and sentences that are clearly judgments on the part of Gray are mixed together with sentences purportedly uttered by Turner. It's no fun to read: Turner, an educated slave who could read and write, and who was a minister to fellow slaves, had been odd since childhood and thought his "revolution" was directed by God. The actual uprising was nothing more than a killing spree, depressingly squalid and cruel, and there really is no message in Turner's confession. There was no plan; no hope of success.
My interest in the original jailhouse interview was piqued by a reference to the original book being banned in southern states. I haven't been able to find contemporary reports of the book's banning, only modern references here and there, but it's not hard to figure out what was going on. It is known that after Turner's uprising, several states passed laws making it illegal to teach slaves to read and write. Although Turner's failed revolt ended hopes of abolition in the South, it spurred abolition movements in the North and helped polarize the nation, a split that eventually resulted in the Civil War. In this context, it is easy to see why authorities in the South would want to suppress "The Confessions of Nat Turner." No doubt, as always, the banning of the book made it a runaway success, padding the lawyer Thomas R. Gray's pockets.
December 4, 2013
This seems much more the product of Thomas R. Gray than Nat Turner. I noticed the odd phrase, "work of death" appear several times through the document. It appeared once in Gray's introduction, and a few more times attributed to Turner's confession, and again at the end by Gray. Gray, who was supposedly Turner's lawyer was never very sympathetic toward Turner. Another odd phrase attributed to Nat Turner was this, "we entered, and murdered Mrs. Reese in her bed, while sleeping; her son awoke, but it was only to sleep the sleep of death, he had only time to say who is that, and he was no more." - that whole bit seems like a really baroque way for anyone to confess a murder. It was also odd that Turner never had anything bad to say about his slave masters. This confession was actually complimentary toward them. His supposed motivation for killing them was religiously based. He had seen signs of the apocalypse all over the plantation. Among the signs were symbols in blood droplets all over tree leaves. I recognized what those probably were because I grew up around Virginia too, and I think they were leaf galls. Leaf galls are bright red droplet sized bumps on trees that almost look like blood, and they're caused by insects. This still has value as a historical document, but I don't think it would be right to really attribute the words to Nat Turner.
February 6, 2017
One of the most enduring and important primary sources in the field of southern history. Despite describing a series of graphic murders in the United States' only successful slave rebellion, Turner nonetheless appears sympathetic in this account rendered by a Virginia magistrate. The rebellion led to a series of reactionary measures against enslaved persons and especially against free blacks across the South. It also instilled a not-unreasoned paranoia in the South that affected socio-politcal discourse for the next three decades.
June 29, 2017
I know there is debate about the legitmancy of these "confessions". That Gray, a white man, had a reason for writing the way he did. However, this edit does make an attempt to place the confessions in context, including photographs of slavery not just in the South, but also the slave trade itself. It is worth reading for anyone interested in slavery, American history, the Civil War.
December 28, 2015
Interesting read, but I question if this confession is indeed authentic as translated by the white lawyer T.R. Grey. I know historically that the events did happen, but find it hard that Nat Turner would remember the details of the roads taken, on his killing spree, so clearly while under so much stress and horrendous anger. I believe this confession was interpreted with an expansion of words and details. Nat Turner believed he was given this mission by God. He believed that the signs in the sky dictated the time and date of this rebellious racial revolt. A lot of the bible is quoted by Nat Turner during his confession. The same bible that was used to enslave him and his people. Was Nat Turner suffering from schizophrenia? Well in my opinion, any man who is forced to live a life of enslavement is entitled to cross over into mental illness as a way of surviving. Then again maybe his earthy purpose was to try to even partly the score for a time in history which never should have happened. RIP Nat Turner.
November 18, 2010
Short, succinct, account of the Nat Turner rebellion. What makes it special is that is an oral account by Nat Turner himself. He comes off as intelligent, articulate, charismatic, and a bit mystical. He is also oddly calm both about the previous rebellion and his upcoming execution. The interviewer of the time, a white southerner, gives off the impression and tries to convey a tone that he is interviewing a monster a la Charles Manson instead of the leader of a revolution.
For those that don't know in 1831 Nat Turner led a slave rebellion and killed 60 white southerners before it was put down. He is a controversial figure because during the rebellion he also killed several women, children, and infants, making history a bit hesitant in declaring him a hero.
The rebellion was "responsible" for a severe clamp down regarding slave's rights. Unfortunately a period of even heavier persecution followed, if that was even possible.
For those that don't know in 1831 Nat Turner led a slave rebellion and killed 60 white southerners before it was put down. He is a controversial figure because during the rebellion he also killed several women, children, and infants, making history a bit hesitant in declaring him a hero.
The rebellion was "responsible" for a severe clamp down regarding slave's rights. Unfortunately a period of even heavier persecution followed, if that was even possible.
October 30, 2018
Was not Christ crucified
From the second inaugural address
"For it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to the man by whom that offense cometh"
I decided to read the original because of dissatisfaction with a prime documentary which had quotes by Styron+other recent pundits. Abe quoting Christ seems to hit the bullseye.
While Nat and John Brown were the revolutionary vanguard, the prophetic function of their actions are hard to ignore. Turner's acts were suicidal, murderous, and brave; heroic they were not. Ahead of his time, he was.
As flawed and limited as this account from the time is, it is very remarkable. It may be as close as we ever come. This account hints at the depths at the layers of tragedy that make Stryon's superficiality an embarrassment. Also, underlining momentary heroics or innocence does not change the fact of our search solutions less flawed than than Nat's or the response to him are not yet found.
From the second inaugural address
"For it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to the man by whom that offense cometh"
I decided to read the original because of dissatisfaction with a prime documentary which had quotes by Styron+other recent pundits. Abe quoting Christ seems to hit the bullseye.
While Nat and John Brown were the revolutionary vanguard, the prophetic function of their actions are hard to ignore. Turner's acts were suicidal, murderous, and brave; heroic they were not. Ahead of his time, he was.
As flawed and limited as this account from the time is, it is very remarkable. It may be as close as we ever come. This account hints at the depths at the layers of tragedy that make Stryon's superficiality an embarrassment. Also, underlining momentary heroics or innocence does not change the fact of our search solutions less flawed than than Nat's or the response to him are not yet found.
Read
September 18, 2023Pulitzer Prize 1968
Just as the title states, this is a confession of a man who organized an insurrection of other slaves who murdered approximately 50 people in their beds / homes (slave owners and their families, including babies) as a strong statement against slavery. The insurrectionists were caught literally red-handed by the authorities who had been alerted during the rampage, tried, and mostly hanged. Many of the slain were hacked to death by axes as those were the tools available to the slaves.
The confession was taken while Nat Turner awaited his trial. This is considered a 'black lives matter' book in case you want to read more about it. It's pretty gruesome and -- in my opinion -- a bizarre choice for a Pulitzer.
Just as the title states, this is a confession of a man who organized an insurrection of other slaves who murdered approximately 50 people in their beds / homes (slave owners and their families, including babies) as a strong statement against slavery. The insurrectionists were caught literally red-handed by the authorities who had been alerted during the rampage, tried, and mostly hanged. Many of the slain were hacked to death by axes as those were the tools available to the slaves.
The confession was taken while Nat Turner awaited his trial. This is considered a 'black lives matter' book in case you want to read more about it. It's pretty gruesome and -- in my opinion -- a bizarre choice for a Pulitzer.
October 9, 2016
Read this before seeing the movie
The movie BIRTH OF A NATION has just been released, so I decided to read this short pamphlet prior to seeing the movie. If you read this pamphlet several things will catch your attention not the least is Nat Turner's religious experiences along with his extreme violence. The reader should be attentive also to his remarks about his own experiences of being a slave. Beware of judging an event when reading participants' views of events and later authors, screenwriters and actors view of events. History should not be judged by today's standards. It should be viewed in the time it occurred.
The movie BIRTH OF A NATION has just been released, so I decided to read this short pamphlet prior to seeing the movie. If you read this pamphlet several things will catch your attention not the least is Nat Turner's religious experiences along with his extreme violence. The reader should be attentive also to his remarks about his own experiences of being a slave. Beware of judging an event when reading participants' views of events and later authors, screenwriters and actors view of events. History should not be judged by today's standards. It should be viewed in the time it occurred.
September 28, 2025
The fact that people debate whether or not his actions were righteous is astonishing to me. Hopefully they are all atheists or non-Christians, because if not, their biblical understanding is severely lacking.
Nat Turner said, "I heard a loud noise in the heavens, and the Spirit instantly appeared to me and said the Serpent was loosened, and Christ had laid down the yoke he had borne for the sins of men, and that I should take it on and fight against the Serpent."
- You need to have studied Revelation in order to understand why God told him the above. "And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations" (Revelation 20:7-8). Turner had prophesied to a white man, Etheldred T. Brantley, who believed him. So God said, "As the Saviour had been baptised so should [they] be also." But the black Turner and the white Brantley ran into a problem: "the white people would not let [them] be baptised by the church." After this happened, God told him that the Serpent had been loosened. Revelation 20:7 explains that after a significant amount of time - symbolically represented by 1,000 years - of Gentiles having access to the true teachings of Christ, the disciples, the prophets, the devil would be released and would go out and deceive the Gentiles once more, who had lived in spiritual darkness before the arrival of Christ. In other words, the Gentiles would be tested to see whether or not they were worthy of being part of spiritual Israel, which is the New Testament replacement of flesh Israel, which was symbolically destroyed as a chosen nation of God in 70 AD. The whites who would not allow them to be baptized were the Gentiles deceived by Satan, who was loosed; they proved themselves to be back under the Serpent's control.
Despite being denied a baptism by the church, Turner said, "we went down into the water together, in the sight of many who reviled us, and were baptised by the Spirit." The white people were given a last chance to be redeemed. They could have allowed God's prophet and his convert a baptism by a church, on which was affixed the name of God. But they misrepresented God by denying the baptism. Not to mention the fact that they were currently enslaving Old Testament flesh Israel: "And the LORD shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen" (Deuteronomy 28:68) and the fact that the Catholic Church had changed the race of Christ and the Israelites and added paganism to Christianity (Christmas, Easter, etc.) in order to gain power: white hegemony. Turner said, "and I looked and saw the forms of men in different attitudes--and there were lights in the sky to which the children of darkness gave other names than what they really were." The angels of God, his prophets and disciples on earth, the "stars" in a dark world, had their identity stolen by the "children of darkness" who used Christianity as a tool to gain control over the world.
But Nat Turner said, "Was not Christ crucified?" and was hanged in JERUSALEM, Virginia.
Nat Turner said, "I heard a loud noise in the heavens, and the Spirit instantly appeared to me and said the Serpent was loosened, and Christ had laid down the yoke he had borne for the sins of men, and that I should take it on and fight against the Serpent."
- You need to have studied Revelation in order to understand why God told him the above. "And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations" (Revelation 20:7-8). Turner had prophesied to a white man, Etheldred T. Brantley, who believed him. So God said, "As the Saviour had been baptised so should [they] be also." But the black Turner and the white Brantley ran into a problem: "the white people would not let [them] be baptised by the church." After this happened, God told him that the Serpent had been loosened. Revelation 20:7 explains that after a significant amount of time - symbolically represented by 1,000 years - of Gentiles having access to the true teachings of Christ, the disciples, the prophets, the devil would be released and would go out and deceive the Gentiles once more, who had lived in spiritual darkness before the arrival of Christ. In other words, the Gentiles would be tested to see whether or not they were worthy of being part of spiritual Israel, which is the New Testament replacement of flesh Israel, which was symbolically destroyed as a chosen nation of God in 70 AD. The whites who would not allow them to be baptized were the Gentiles deceived by Satan, who was loosed; they proved themselves to be back under the Serpent's control.
Despite being denied a baptism by the church, Turner said, "we went down into the water together, in the sight of many who reviled us, and were baptised by the Spirit." The white people were given a last chance to be redeemed. They could have allowed God's prophet and his convert a baptism by a church, on which was affixed the name of God. But they misrepresented God by denying the baptism. Not to mention the fact that they were currently enslaving Old Testament flesh Israel: "And the LORD shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen" (Deuteronomy 28:68) and the fact that the Catholic Church had changed the race of Christ and the Israelites and added paganism to Christianity (Christmas, Easter, etc.) in order to gain power: white hegemony. Turner said, "and I looked and saw the forms of men in different attitudes--and there were lights in the sky to which the children of darkness gave other names than what they really were." The angels of God, his prophets and disciples on earth, the "stars" in a dark world, had their identity stolen by the "children of darkness" who used Christianity as a tool to gain control over the world.
But Nat Turner said, "Was not Christ crucified?" and was hanged in JERUSALEM, Virginia.
October 12, 2025
Fascinating read
A must read for everyone interested in history of African American history and slavery. Nat Turner was an intelligent and thoughtful man
A must read for everyone interested in history of African American history and slavery. Nat Turner was an intelligent and thoughtful man
Read
January 5, 2026Dnf
May 29, 2016
"On Mr. Phipps' discovering the place of my concealment, he cocked his gun and aimed at me. I requested him not to shoot and I would give up, upon which he demanded my sword. I delivered it to him, and he brought me to prison. During the time I was pursued, I had many hair breadth escapes, which your time will not permit you to relate. I am here loaded with chains, and willing to suffer the fate that awaits me.
I here proceeded to make some inquiries of him after assuring him of the certain death that awaited him, and that concealment would only bring destruction on the innocent as well as guilty, of his own color, if he knew of any extensive or concerted plan. His answer was, I do not. When I questioned him as to the insurrection in North Carolina happening about the same time, he denied any knowledge of it; and when I looked him in the face as though I would search his inmost thoughts, he replied, 'I see sir, you doubt my word; but can you not think the same ideas, and strange appearances about this time in the heaven's might prompt others, as well as myself, to this undertaking.' I now had much conversation with and asked him many questions, having forborne to do so previously, except in the cases noted in parenthesis; but during his statement, I had, unnoticed by him, taken notes as to some particular circumstances, and having the advantage of his statement before me in writing, on the evening of the third day that I had been with him, I began a cross examination, and found his statement corroborated by every circumstance coming within my own knowledge or the confessions of others whom had been either killed or executed, and whom he had not seen nor had any knowledge since 22d of August last, he expressed himself fully satisfied as to the impracticability of his attempt. It has been said he was ignorant and cowardly, and that his object was to murder and rob for the purpose of obtaining money to make his escape. It is notorious, that he was never known to have a dollar in his life; to swear an oath, or drink a drop of spirits. As to his ignorance, he certainly never had the advantages of education, but he can read and write, (it was taught him by his parents,) and for natural intelligence and quickness of apprehension, is surpassed by few men I have ever seen. As to his being a coward, his reason as given for not resisting Mr. Phipps, shews the decision of his character. When he saw Mr. Phipps present his gun, he said he knew it was impossible for him to escape as the woods were full of men; he therefore thought it was better to surrender, and trust to fortune for his escape. He is a complete fanatic, or plays his part most admirably. On other subjects he possesses an uncommon share of intelligence, with a mind capable of attaining any thing; but warped and perverted by the influence of early impressions. He is below the ordinary stature, though strong and active, having the true negro face, every feature of which is strongly marked. I shall not attempt to describe the effect of his narrative, as told and commented on by himself, in the condemned hole of the prison. The calm, deliberate composure with which he spoke of his late deeds and intentions, the expression of his fiend-like face when excited by enthusiasm, still bearing the stains of the blood of helpless innocence about him; clothed with rags and covered with chains; yet daring to raise his manacled hands to heaven, with a spirit soaring above the attributes of man; I looked on him and my blood curdled in my veins."
I here proceeded to make some inquiries of him after assuring him of the certain death that awaited him, and that concealment would only bring destruction on the innocent as well as guilty, of his own color, if he knew of any extensive or concerted plan. His answer was, I do not. When I questioned him as to the insurrection in North Carolina happening about the same time, he denied any knowledge of it; and when I looked him in the face as though I would search his inmost thoughts, he replied, 'I see sir, you doubt my word; but can you not think the same ideas, and strange appearances about this time in the heaven's might prompt others, as well as myself, to this undertaking.' I now had much conversation with and asked him many questions, having forborne to do so previously, except in the cases noted in parenthesis; but during his statement, I had, unnoticed by him, taken notes as to some particular circumstances, and having the advantage of his statement before me in writing, on the evening of the third day that I had been with him, I began a cross examination, and found his statement corroborated by every circumstance coming within my own knowledge or the confessions of others whom had been either killed or executed, and whom he had not seen nor had any knowledge since 22d of August last, he expressed himself fully satisfied as to the impracticability of his attempt. It has been said he was ignorant and cowardly, and that his object was to murder and rob for the purpose of obtaining money to make his escape. It is notorious, that he was never known to have a dollar in his life; to swear an oath, or drink a drop of spirits. As to his ignorance, he certainly never had the advantages of education, but he can read and write, (it was taught him by his parents,) and for natural intelligence and quickness of apprehension, is surpassed by few men I have ever seen. As to his being a coward, his reason as given for not resisting Mr. Phipps, shews the decision of his character. When he saw Mr. Phipps present his gun, he said he knew it was impossible for him to escape as the woods were full of men; he therefore thought it was better to surrender, and trust to fortune for his escape. He is a complete fanatic, or plays his part most admirably. On other subjects he possesses an uncommon share of intelligence, with a mind capable of attaining any thing; but warped and perverted by the influence of early impressions. He is below the ordinary stature, though strong and active, having the true negro face, every feature of which is strongly marked. I shall not attempt to describe the effect of his narrative, as told and commented on by himself, in the condemned hole of the prison. The calm, deliberate composure with which he spoke of his late deeds and intentions, the expression of his fiend-like face when excited by enthusiasm, still bearing the stains of the blood of helpless innocence about him; clothed with rags and covered with chains; yet daring to raise his manacled hands to heaven, with a spirit soaring above the attributes of man; I looked on him and my blood curdled in my veins."
April 13, 2017
This should be read BEFORE reading The Confessions of Nat Turner (which I reviewed here) as it is a fictionalized, apologetic account of this raving psychopath & that point needs to be kept firmly in mind. It is free to read here:
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/vie...
Turner was a religious zealot & deemed himself destined for great things.
The Spirit that spoke to the prophets in former days—and I was greatly astonished, and for two years prayed continually, whenever my duty would permit—and then again I had the same revelation, which fully confirmed me in the impression that I was ordained for some great purpose in the hands of the Almighty.
His 'great purpose' turned out to be taking part in a senseless rampage. Turner's matter-of-fact recounting of the murders is chilling.
...Since the commencement of 1830, I had been living with Mr. Joseph Travis, who was to me a kind master, and placed the greatest confidence in me; in fact, I had no cause to complain of his treatment to me.
Yet this is where the bloodbath started.
...It was then observed that I must spill the first blood. On which, armed with a hatchet, and accompanied by Will, I entered my master’s chamber, it being dark, I could not give a death blow, the hatchet glanced from his head, he sprang from the bed and called his wife, it was his last word, Will laid him dead, with a blow of his axe, and Mrs. Travis shared the same fate, as she lay in bed. The murder of this family, five in number, was the work of a
moment, not one of them awoke; there was a little infant sleeping in a cradle, that was forgotten, until we had left the house and gone some distance, when Henry and Will returned and killed it...
... I took Mrs. Newsome by the hand, and with the sword I had when I was apprehended, I struck her several blows over the head, but not being able to kill her, as the sword was dull...
... Miss Margaret, when I discovered her, had concealed herself in the corner, formed by the projection of the cellar cap from the house; on my approach she fled, but was soon overtaken, and after repeated blows with a sword, I killed her by a blow on the head, with a fence rail. By this time, the six who had gone by Mr. Bryant’s, rejoined us, and informed me they had done the work of death assigned them...
...Having murdered Mrs. Waller and ten children, we started for Mr. William Williams’—having killed him and two little boys that were there; while engaged in this, Mrs. Williams fled and got some distance from the house, but she was pursued, overtaken, and compelled to get up behind one of the company, who brought her back, and after showing her the mangled body of her lifeless husband, she was told to get down and lay by his side, where she was shot dead...
How can anyone condone & apologize for such a pointless bloodbath that leads to the death of at least 10 men, 14 women, and 31 infants and children?
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/vie...
Turner was a religious zealot & deemed himself destined for great things.
The Spirit that spoke to the prophets in former days—and I was greatly astonished, and for two years prayed continually, whenever my duty would permit—and then again I had the same revelation, which fully confirmed me in the impression that I was ordained for some great purpose in the hands of the Almighty.
His 'great purpose' turned out to be taking part in a senseless rampage. Turner's matter-of-fact recounting of the murders is chilling.
...Since the commencement of 1830, I had been living with Mr. Joseph Travis, who was to me a kind master, and placed the greatest confidence in me; in fact, I had no cause to complain of his treatment to me.
Yet this is where the bloodbath started.
...It was then observed that I must spill the first blood. On which, armed with a hatchet, and accompanied by Will, I entered my master’s chamber, it being dark, I could not give a death blow, the hatchet glanced from his head, he sprang from the bed and called his wife, it was his last word, Will laid him dead, with a blow of his axe, and Mrs. Travis shared the same fate, as she lay in bed. The murder of this family, five in number, was the work of a
moment, not one of them awoke; there was a little infant sleeping in a cradle, that was forgotten, until we had left the house and gone some distance, when Henry and Will returned and killed it...
... I took Mrs. Newsome by the hand, and with the sword I had when I was apprehended, I struck her several blows over the head, but not being able to kill her, as the sword was dull...
... Miss Margaret, when I discovered her, had concealed herself in the corner, formed by the projection of the cellar cap from the house; on my approach she fled, but was soon overtaken, and after repeated blows with a sword, I killed her by a blow on the head, with a fence rail. By this time, the six who had gone by Mr. Bryant’s, rejoined us, and informed me they had done the work of death assigned them...
...Having murdered Mrs. Waller and ten children, we started for Mr. William Williams’—having killed him and two little boys that were there; while engaged in this, Mrs. Williams fled and got some distance from the house, but she was pursued, overtaken, and compelled to get up behind one of the company, who brought her back, and after showing her the mangled body of her lifeless husband, she was told to get down and lay by his side, where she was shot dead...
How can anyone condone & apologize for such a pointless bloodbath that leads to the death of at least 10 men, 14 women, and 31 infants and children?
May 17, 2023
Nat Turner was a black slave that led an uprising and the book is his own account of what happened. It goes into detail on exactly what he did, how he got others to join him, how they killed men, women and children without any mercy at all and how they went from place to place on their killing spree.
It also goes into detail on how his 'army' varied in size depending on which members left. It covers the end of his reign of terror, the trial and has a list of persons murdered and a list of the blacks (the term 'negro' is used since this is an old book) who worked with him and what happened to them and the sentences given to them.
It's a very dark period in American history. The book is very, very grim especially when it comes to the killing of children. At the time slave rebellions were a major fear in the South and this is a prime example of what the Southerners feared.
If they didn't have slaves, though, and if they treated their workers like decent people than such a revolt as this would probably never have happened.
It also goes into detail on how his 'army' varied in size depending on which members left. It covers the end of his reign of terror, the trial and has a list of persons murdered and a list of the blacks (the term 'negro' is used since this is an old book) who worked with him and what happened to them and the sentences given to them.
It's a very dark period in American history. The book is very, very grim especially when it comes to the killing of children. At the time slave rebellions were a major fear in the South and this is a prime example of what the Southerners feared.
If they didn't have slaves, though, and if they treated their workers like decent people than such a revolt as this would probably never have happened.
October 25, 2021
Shades of Rwanda. . . Maybe the Darwinians are right and man is just one step above the apes. . . As the hero being responsible for genocidal murder which included 14 women and 31 children, including infants, it's surprising he hasn't been honoured on a U.S. postage stamp, but the 100 Greatest African Americans souvenir sheet is probably already in the works, and there's a park named in his honour in Newark, New Jersey. Maybe, NYC should replace its recently removed Thomas Jefferson statue with his? Turner Square has a nice ring to it and the Times isn't even there anymore.
Note: It has been said that Turner was influenced by "David Walker's Appeal," but there is no hint that Turner had ever even heard of the tract. Also, although Gray interjected occasional comments due to the appalling nature of the crimes (he would have been accused of being coldly inhuman if he hadn't), I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of the account, as it was corroborated by survivors.
Note: It has been said that Turner was influenced by "David Walker's Appeal," but there is no hint that Turner had ever even heard of the tract. Also, although Gray interjected occasional comments due to the appalling nature of the crimes (he would have been accused of being coldly inhuman if he hadn't), I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of the account, as it was corroborated by survivors.
June 8, 2023
There is no world in which I can say in confidence his words were not dismembered by the white transcriber. While there is no escaping the horror of his actions, there is no more painful feat than being owned, clearly struggling with your mental health and knowing that in the society in which you reside you will never amount to anything, no matter how much potential you may have. This work is devastating because of the bluntness in which it deals with the stripping of human life, and in that same regard it is hard to believe that any deeply religious person, truly committed to their faith, could have no conviction in such a circumstance. For lack of better words, while the content of this account is probably majorly accurate, it is hard to imagine that the context of the dialogue was not falsified.
February 22, 2022
This audio presentation of Nat Turner's confessions is exceptional. Brock Peters gives Nat a wonderful voice that not only speaks to Turner's leadership and depth, but also a twinge of Gray's infringement. The discussion following the reading is doubly valuable. First, because the information itself and the perspectives are interesting and help instruct modern listeners. Second, because it serves as a recording from 1968, showing how people interpreted Turner's actions in light of the Civil Rights Era.
May 25, 2023
🖊 My review: Interesting pamphlet about the slave rebellion in 1831, although I am not sure that this is not a vehicle to slant views on slaves and plantation owners, that is, a propaganda vehicle. Note that Nat Turner was educated enough to read and write – which should dispel the false narrative that it was illegal everywhere to educate slaves. It was not.
✔️Published in 1831.
🤔 My rating 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
🟣 Media form: Kindle version.
🟢 Media form Project Gutenberg.
✿●▬●✿●✿●▬●✿
✔️Published in 1831.
🤔 My rating 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
🟣 Media form: Kindle version.
🟢 Media form Project Gutenberg.
✿●▬●✿●✿●▬●✿
August 31, 2024
A number of the reviews here seem to be for the William Styron novel instead of the short document published by Thomas R. Gray. This document purports to be the story that an imprisoned Turner told Gray while awaiting execution. The most striking thing to me was the quick shift of tone. The first half felt quite different from the second. Turner talks of his upbring and master then shifts abruptly to "we decided to kill them all". It's an interesting document, but I can't help thinking it's more Gray's writing than Turners
Read
October 30, 2024I believe Goodreads has conflated the published historical Confessions of Nat Turner by Thomas R. Gray with that of William Styron’s fictional retelling by the same name. Or perhaps reviewers are making that mistake. I am unsure to which.
I am writing this review on the historic legal confession presented by Amazon’s Prime Reading.
Turner’s confession left me with so many unanswered questions that will most likely haunt me for the rest of my life.
*I am not leaving a star rating due to the conflation of the two books of the same title.
I am writing this review on the historic legal confession presented by Amazon’s Prime Reading.
Turner’s confession left me with so many unanswered questions that will most likely haunt me for the rest of my life.
*I am not leaving a star rating due to the conflation of the two books of the same title.
July 12, 2014
Written from the slaveholder perspective, although it asserts it's total truthfulness, I cannot help but find this suspect. It is certainly fascinating. Sad and violent from both sides and also at odds with the more admirable writings of MLK jr. Three stars for inability to know if this is really his true testimony. Although the man who conducted these interviews wasn't at all dreaming in his execution, while still recognizing Turner was a violent murderer.
January 9, 2019
2.5 stars (ok)
In this book, Nat Turner relays what inspired him to initiate a slave rebellion and recounts the events that transpired as he and a few others attacked individuals in their homes. However, because this recitation was done verbally and was recorded in writing by another person, there is unfortunately no way to know how much of it is accurate and whether any of his statements were omitted or embellished so he would appear in a less favorable light.
In this book, Nat Turner relays what inspired him to initiate a slave rebellion and recounts the events that transpired as he and a few others attacked individuals in their homes. However, because this recitation was done verbally and was recorded in writing by another person, there is unfortunately no way to know how much of it is accurate and whether any of his statements were omitted or embellished so he would appear in a less favorable light.
February 27, 2017
I liked stepping in time, in a place I didn't know till I watched a programme on National Geographic, which helped me find it. I was reading something that was off the beaten track, to me, and I liked that it was detailed and it gave an insight into the past, from the people that made it. Like Nat Turner, the slave that tried fighting for the freedom for people like him.
March 31, 2017
Sometimes I just get tired of reading that his happened then and that happened on this date. I want to know why, what was going through people's minds, motivational structures. That is the reason I read this and the reason I recommend it, but only if the reader has the same questions and knows that one book will not answer all the questions.
June 14, 2018
Educational
Educational part of history to know and understand the mindset of Nat Turner, his demeanor and why he did what he did. He was definitely ahead of his time. It's such a sad ending....his was hung, body was flayed and he was decapitated all for wanting basic human rights for himself and his people. Living during those times was horrific for blacks.
Educational part of history to know and understand the mindset of Nat Turner, his demeanor and why he did what he did. He was definitely ahead of his time. It's such a sad ending....his was hung, body was flayed and he was decapitated all for wanting basic human rights for himself and his people. Living during those times was horrific for blacks.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews