SLO#2 For the Good or For their Self-Interests?

What I took away from my research, is that slavery may have been abolished because, well, the slaves were an obstacle that was hindering the economy. Though, I am certain that several individuals did feel the unwarranted treatment over the slaves it may not have been the only reason why slavery was abolished. I was really expecting to find a major economic deficit when slavery was abolished but I couldn't seem to locate anything devastating. That kind of strikes me as odd, the slaves were a major labor force for the colonies and when they were no longer forced for their labor, I expected something a little traumatic. I want to look into it more and try to seek something that shows economic figures surrounding slavery. 

SLO #2 For What Reason?

So it seems that during the American revolution, the revolt of the Americas from the British king, this was the time where anti-slavery was actively starting to be pushed for. In the are article titled The Impact of Slavery, ushistory.org states "The world's first ANTISLAVERY SOCIETY was founded in 1775 by Quakers in Philadelphia, the year the Revolution began" (The Impact of Slavery). A movement was being started within in the colonies that was never seen before. The same article then expresses, "Some Northern states banned slavery outright, and some provided for the gradual end of slavery. At any rate, the climate of the Revolution made the institution unacceptable in the minds of many Northerners, who did not rely on forced labor as part of the economic system". Then I began to question how did the ban of slavery effect the economic growth for the colonies. Rosemarie Zagarri obtaining her PHD from Yale reveals, "by the time of the American Revolution, slaves comprised about 60% of South Carolina's total population and 40% of Virginia's (Zagarri)". Whereas in the urban North it ranged from 2-25%. The majority of the South's slaves lived on large plantations and that meant that the majority of  white people did not own slaves. It was a smaller population of people who were involved with slave labor but they had large involvement.  The South was definitely more invested than the North in the slave trade. "Since Eli Whitney's 1793 invention of the cotton 'gin, the cotton industry became a lucrative field for Southern planters and farmers"(Mark Schulman). The industry made up for a majority of the South's revenues. The plantation owners were of course opposed to losing the main source of income. They felt a strong push from the North for doing with out slavery. What reasons did the North have against slavery? I thought of course it was them finally coming to their senses of the unjustness of slavery. However when researching, I came to a cross road as why the North wanted to abolish slavery. From The Gilder Lehman Institute of American History, article titled Was Slavery the Engine of American Economic Growth?, "Despite clear evidence that slavery was profitable, abolitionists--and many people who were not abolitionists--felt strongly that slavery degraded labor, inhibited urbanization and mechanization, thwarted industrialization, and stifled progress, and associated slavery with economic backwardness, inefficiency, indebtedness, and economic and social stagnation. When the North waged war on slavery, it was not because it had overcome racism; rather, it was because Northerners in increasing numbers identified their society with progress and viewed slavery as an intolerable obstacle to innovation, moral improvement, free labor, and commercial and economic growth(Was Slavery the Engine of American Economic Growth)". And then for a reason similar to what it was I was originally thinking, Zagarri expresses, "The widespread ownership of slaves had significant implications. During the battles with Britain during the 1760s and 1770s, American Patriots argued that taxing the colonies without their consent reduced the colonists to the status of slaves. Since individuals in all the colonies owned slaves, this rhetoric had enormous emotional resonance throughout the colonies and helped turn the colonists against the mother county. Moreover, once colonists started protesting against their own enslavement, it was hard to deny the fundamental contradiction that slavery established: enslavement for black people and freedom for white people. Awareness of this contradiction forced white Americans to look at slavery in a new light. If Americans chose to continue to enslave black people, they would have to devise new arguments to justify slavery. It was at this time that arguments about blacks' inherent racial inferiority emerged to rationalize the institution" (Zagarri). So what was it, were the colonist having empathy for the slaves because they felt that they too were not being treated fair? Or was if pure selfishness that slavery was hindering the growth for the colonies?

"Was Slavery the Engine of American Economic Growth?" The Gilder Lehman Institute of American History. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2016. 

Zagarri, Rosemarie, PHD. "Slavery in Colonial British North America." Teaching History.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2016. 

Schulman, Mark. "Economics and the Civil War." History Central. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2016.

SLO #2 Changes within Societies

My quest this week is to, "Analyze broad patterns of change on both interregional scales and within complex societies". Just a reminder my search is limited to the years surrounding the American Revolution (1773-1793). Therefore I think my findings will be focused in on the Revolution itself and staying within the Americas. I really have no idea what it is I will find but I am setting off to search. Wish me luck!

SLO 7 What I Pulled from Research

It is apparent that during the eighteenth century, the British had made changes to grasp a steady decline in the mortality rate of African Slaves. The innovation of cooper plating of the hull on ships made a living condition a slightly more barable for the traveling slave. The dampness had subside and the trips were  moderatley quicker. Rainfall was now also being collected, therefore it is believed that dehydration didn't play as big of a role as it priorly did. The trips I am sure were still gruesome but they were more accommodated than in previous times. With survival rate on the rise and the more slaves the British were able to successfully transfer and sale, the more likely they were able to dominate the market of slave trade.

SLO 7 Mortality Decline for the British Slave Trade

In exploring through some scholarly articles, I found one that was titled Explaining the Mortality Decline in the Eighteenth-Century British Slave Trade. This title sparked my interest because what was it that they changed or advanced to have such a decline? So let me dig through through the article and pull out what those changes and developments were. It first starts off by saying "There are many possible explanations for the decline of death rates on British Voyages during the eighteenth century. They included increased immunity gained by African populations to variety of new diseases following the gradual merging of epidemiological regions, improved economic and health conditions within Africa, and the introductions of new ships designed to carry, and to collect (from rainfall), greater volumes of water. Another important innovation from the 1760s was the coopering of hulls which may have resulted not only in faster voyages, but in reduction in shipworm and thus dampness below decks (Haines and Shlomowitz)." Me, not being ship savvy had to look up what a "hull" is; "a hull is the watertight body of a ship or boat. Above the hull is the superstructure and or deckhouse... (Hull (watercraft))". I also located another tid bit from Wiki stating "Copper sheathing is the practice of protecting the under-water hull of a ship or boat from the corrosive effects of salt water and biofouling through the use of copper plates affixed to the outside of the hull. It was pioneered and developed by the Royal Navy during the 18th century (Copper Sheathing)." So prior to this invention, "Damp conditions in steerage were believed to have contributed as much as heat and stuffiness to suffering, sickness, and death: driver decks were conducive to better health (Haines and Shlomowitz)."

Haines, Robin, and Ralph Shlomowitz. “Explaining the Mortality Decline in the Eighteenth-century British Slave   Trade”. The Economic History Review 53.2 (2000): 262–283. Web…

"Hull (watercraft)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

"Copper Sheathing." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.

SLO 7: Mortality Decline, What were they doing differently?

Haines, Robin, and Ralph Shlomowitz. “Explaining the Mortality Decline in the Eighteenth-century British Slave Trade”. The Economic History Review 53.2 (2000): 262–283. Web...

SLO 7 What Improved the Slave Trade for Britain

This week I am going to take a look into discoveries, inventions, and scientific achievements that were significant to the Atlantic Slave Trade. I hope to discover something that was beneficial to the slaves journey. So, here I go, off to do some research.