American slavery wasn’t just a white man’s business − new research shows how white women profited, too

1718070859843.png
Trevon Logan
Professor of Economics, The Ohio State University
Published: June 10, 2024 8:39am EDT

1718070816113.png
A colorized engraving depicts enslavers selling enslaved people in the 19th-century South. Corbis via Getty Images

As the United States continues to confront the realities and legacy of slavery, Americans continue to challenge myths about the country’s history. One enduring myth is that slavery was a largely male endeavor — that, for the most part, the buying, selling, trading and profiting from enslavement were carried out by white men alone.

While white women certainly interacted with enslaved people in household management and day-to-day tasks, historians once argued that they weren’t active owners and had very limited involvement in transactions. This was once widely believed to be a reason why Southern white women supported the institution – they were assumed to be blind to its darker side.

As an expert in the economic history of slavery, I know the story is far more complex. In fact, slavery was unique in economically empowering women. It was, in essence, an early feminist institution – but exclusively for white women.

1718070864620.png
Slavery was big business. Hulton Archive/Getty Images

A lasting myth​

The myth that women didn’t profit from slavery has endured for several reasons. First, before the American Civil War, married women generally owned nothing of their own. The legal institution of coverture made the property a woman brought into her marriage into the property of her husband. This also meant that if a husband was in debt, a creditor could claim the wife’s property for payment.

In addition, there are very few surviving records that show Southern white women discussing the business of slavery. And finally, in cases where women were owners of enslaved people – say, through the death of a husband – they often used agents or male relatives to handle their affairs. Added together, there’s very little to suggest that white women were deeply involved in the slavery business.

Researchers have started to challenge this view by moving beyond the traditional archival sources. The innovative historian Stephanie Jones-Rogers has documented how regularly white women were seen in all aspects of American enslavement. Her most compelling evidence comes from interviews with the formerly enslaved people themselves, who noted who they were owned by and explained how belonging to the “misses” affected every aspect of their life.

The ‘white feminism’ of American slavery​

Historians have also started grappling with the ways American slavery was uniquely gender-egalitarian – at least for white women. While Northern women were trapped in coverture, Southern states were bypassing coverture specifically for the purpose of giving married women rights to own enslaved people.

The earliest such act passed in the United States was the Mississippi Married Women’s Property Law of 1839. This law explicitly awarded married white women ownership status over enslaved individuals. Slavery was the driver of this change: Four of the five sections of the act refer only to property in enslaved people.
Similar acts were passed by other Southern states in the antebellum era to shield married women from responsibility of their husband’s debts and also to allow women to independently accumulate wealth during marriage.

Of course, laws on the books may not reflect how people actually behaved. But new research shows that white women were very involved in the business of slavery. In states where enslaved people were titled property – like a house or car today – sales were recorded with names of buyers, sellers and the names of the enslaved people in the transaction. White women in states where legislation formally protected their property rights to enslaved property were much more likely to be active in the market.

1718070884665.png
An antebellum print advertisement announces the sale of ‘valuable slaves.’ Kean Collection/Archive Photos/Getty Images

Further analysis of these records shows that white women were involved in nearly a third of all transactions, buying and selling in equal proportion. White women were especially likely to buy and sell enslaved women, making up nearly 40% of the people doing the buying and selling.

Enslaved women were especially economically valuable because if someone owned an enslaved women, they automatically became the owner of all of her children. For slave owners, owning an enslaved woman was an intergenerational wealth-building activity.

A historical irony​

We are left to confront a deep irony in American history. Slavery gave white women in the South significantly more economic independence than those in the North, and they used this freedom with remarkable regularity. Women in slave states had legal rights to property that was half of the wealth in the southern United States at the time. Women in the North could only dream of such economic independence.

While historians once claimed that white women supported the Confederacy because they were blind to the reality of slavery, researchers now know that they could have been motivated by the same economic impulses as their husbands. Slavery was actually a more gender-egalitarian institution than other forms of property or wealth accumulation, so it’s not surprising that white women would have a vested interest in it.

Slavery was white men’s and women’s business.

Source (Archive)
 
....so did the Turks, Arabs, Indians and other Africans. I wonder why no one mentions these groups when they talk about reparations?
The Arabs still do, they trick people from poor Asian countries into going to Dubai for work and they're pretty much slaves once they arrive and have their passports stolen from them so they can't go back home. Some of those countries probably still buy African slaves.
 
I'll care about being ashamed of slavery, a long dead institution in the United States, when the people of the countries of West and Central Africa acknowledge the role of their ancestors in the Transatlantic Slave Trade. Furthermore, I'll care about reparations when the states of the Middle East pay for the actions of Barbary Corsairs and the Arabs apologize for the Ghilman and Saqaliba.
 
Last edited:
Some of my WHITE ancestors were slaves back in the day. And you know what, it is not a big deal and I don't really give a shit. Shit that happened several hundred years ago does not affect me in any meaningful way.
There were slaves of every single skin color or ethicity back then.
Even more, back then in some places you might become slave as part of bancruptcy proceedings. You can not pay your debts, and the court declares you a slave (this was the most shameful way to become a slave).

American and their niggers are unique in the sense they think they are the only people ever to have been slaves in the entire history of humanity.
I'm sure talking about indentured servitude is verboten in school nowadays. That's how my ancestors made it over here.
 
I do not care and neither should anyone else. The debt for slavery in the US was paid. If you want to bitch about slavery how about looking at places where it is still happening or at least start being honest and shoving a tin cup in people's faces.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Nothingness
I'm not looking to offend anyone here, but wasnt it like 90% jews?
I don't think it was mostly Jews, because there weren't many Jews; it seems like it was more that most Jews in the South owned slaves
Jacob Rader Marcus, a historian and Reform rabbi, wrote in his four-volume history of Americans Jews that over 75 percent of Jewish families in Charleston, South Carolina; Richmond, Virginia; and Savannah, Georgia, owned slaves, and nearly 40 percent of Jewish households across the country did. The Jewish population in these cities was quite small, however, so the total number of slaves they owned represented just a small fraction of the total slave population; Eli Faber, a historian at New York City’s John Jay College reported that in 1790, Charleston’s Jews owned a total of 93 slaves, and that “perhaps six Jewish families” lived in Savannah in 1771.
 
You can't buy something (or even somebody) unless they are already being sold. Who again was it that sold the majority of black people into slavery to the white man in the first place? (and thus made a great deal of the profits of slavery.) Oh right, that was other black people. Probably best to ignore that though... Doesn't fit the narrative.
 
Why slavery of niggas was invented by a black man! For thousands of years niggas made other niggas slaves! White men just learned from the negro how to live. Niggas taught crackers how to hunt, blues music and slavery.

This is all documented in that great song from the rolling stones, Brown Sugar.
 
The very first legal enforcement of chattel slavery in the American colonies was by a black slave owner, Anthony Johnson, against a black indentured servant, John Casor, whose indenture contract had expired. Johnson decided that he simply owned Casor outright; the courts eventually agreed with him and forced Casor to return to a lifetime of servitude.
 
Meanwhile, slavery is back in business in Africa.
It is. Not just Africa, all over the place. We’ve had people busted here in the uk as well. It’s almost always pikey gang masters keeping the mentally disabled as slaves or gulf arabs keeping SEA or Indian women as domestic slaves. Nothing ever really done about it.
The gulf states have millions of slaves - the bong expats I’ve known who’ve been stationed out there all come back telling of how maids really want to work for them because they’re likely to be treated as paid staff rather than sex toys to be beaten. The men get put to work in horrific temperatures building things like the football stadium and die regularly without access to healthcare or water. Passports taken. Not a peep. Chocolate in places like Ghana is mainly harvested by child slaves. Women and kids are trafficked into Europe to be prostitues.
There is modern slavery almost everywhere and yet none of these people raise their voice against it. The only criticism the gulf state that held the World Cup got was when they refused to kowtow to the alphabet mafia.
 
You can't buy something (or even somebody) unless they are already being sold. Who again was it that sold the majority of black people into slavery to the white man in the first place? (and thus made a great deal of the profits of slavery.) Oh right, that was other black people. Probably best to ignore that though... Doesn't fit the narrative.
Wait a minute, are you telling me the white man didn't just hop off of a boat with nets like in the cartoons?

I've been lied to. >:(
 
Back