During the era of 1789-1850, the South was an agricultural society. This is where tobacco, rice, sugar, cotton, and wheat were grown for economic resources. Because of labor shortage and the upkeeps of the farm to maintain the sale of merchandise landowners bought African Slaves to work their plantations, and even small-scale farmers often used slave labor as their means as well. As the South developed, profits and industries grew too, especially those needed to process the local crops or extract natural resources. Conversely, these trades often employed non-landowning whites as well as slaves either owned or leased. With that being said, the African culture played a significant role as slaves in the south because there was a shortage
…show more content…
This article provides a comprehensive outlook communicating how the domestic slave trade was. Also, Pargas (2003) explains what the slaves had to go through residing in the Upper South on the plantations. The author argues, “Most established cotton planters, like Bennett Barrow, have fewer patients and erroneously assumed that the slaves from the Upper South would produce at full capacity in their first season.” During the antebellum period, the capital improvement to the economic status of blacks can’t be questioned because the financial and shipping industries were dependent on the cotton that was produced by the slaves and so was the British textile industry. At this time the cotton was not being shipped to Europe from the South, it was sent to New York and then it was sent to England because of the different focuses on the cotton that was being manufacturing in the United States and …show more content…
Southern farmers who did not have slaves still relied on upon them just on the fact that they were underneath them and made them feel like they had a place in society. The economy in the south relied on upon the slaves for the development in cotton around some areas and slave trading. Ransom and Sutch (2004), argue that adverse economic effects were the direct consequence of the successful accumulation of wealth in the form of slave value. Slavery played an essential role in the antebellum South; it influenced the South both positively and negatively. For example, the yeoman was negatively affected by slavery because they could only produce small amounts of crops; on the other hand, slaves who were owned by wealthy planters could more produce as much crop as they could only allowing the yeoman small crop
This article provides a comprehensive outlook communicating how the domestic slave trade was. Also, Pargas (2003) explains what the slaves had to go through residing in the Upper South on the plantations. The author argues, “Most established cotton planters, like Bennett Barrow, have fewer patients and erroneously assumed that the slaves from the Upper South would produce at full capacity in their first season.” During the antebellum period, the capital improvement to the economic status of blacks can’t be questioned because the financial and shipping industries were dependent on the cotton that was produced by the slaves and so was the British textile industry. At this time the cotton was not being shipped to Europe from the South, it was sent to New York and then it was sent to England because of the different focuses on the cotton that was being manufacturing in the United States and …show more content…
Southern farmers who did not have slaves still relied on upon them just on the fact that they were underneath them and made them feel like they had a place in society. The economy in the south relied on upon the slaves for the development in cotton around some areas and slave trading. Ransom and Sutch (2004), argue that adverse economic effects were the direct consequence of the successful accumulation of wealth in the form of slave value. Slavery played an essential role in the antebellum South; it influenced the South both positively and negatively. For example, the yeoman was negatively affected by slavery because they could only produce small amounts of crops; on the other hand, slaves who were owned by wealthy planters could more produce as much crop as they could only allowing the yeoman small crop