In 1964, Marion Kilson published “Towards Freedom: An Analysis of Slave Revolts in the United States” in Phylon, 25:2 (2nd Qtr, 1964). She analyzed 65 slave revolts or conspiracies to revolt, which she “defined minimally as attempts to achieve freedom by groups of slave,” (175), categorized them into three types and situated them in four periods, concluding that given the combination of factors that slaves faced, revolts were probably doomed from the start.

The tricky problem with Kilson’s typology, is that revolts are categorized by their motives. Systematic Revolts aimed to overthrow slavery as an institution (Gabriel Prosser’s and Denmark Vesey’s revolts fall into this category – Kilson argues that rational leaders were needed for this type of revolt), Vandalistic Revolts sought to destroy both the non-human property of the slaveholders and the slaveholders themselves (Nat Turner’s revolt lands here), and Opportunistic Revolts were launched by slaves who sought to escape slavery (175-176). This classification necessarily depends on the motives of the slaves as seen through the eyes of the white slaveholding society that brutally suppressed the revolts, leading to some obvious problems: Did the slaves tell the truth under interrogation? Would the interrogators believe the truth if they heard it? Presumably the interrogations including torture if the slave was uncooperative, so how reliably was the information? Do the records truly reflect what was said by the slaves or only the information that fit the slaveholding society’s preconceived notions? Additionally, at some level, all slave revolts are a mixture of all three categories, leading to endless arguments about how to classify any given revolt. Kilson does, however, recognize the limits of her classification system, assigning a third of the revolts analyzed to an “unknown” category. This honesty about the limits of her system greatly bolsters her credibility.

Kilson is on firmer ground when she analyses the geographical extent of American slave revolts. 55.5% of the slave revolts analyzed occurred in Virgina (25%), South Carolina (15.5%), and Louisiana (15%) (179). Similarly, her analysis of the time distribution is very helpful, splitting the revolts into the Colonial (25%), Revolutionary (11%), Old South (1801-1829, 22%), and New South (1830-1860, 35%) (178,181). Two related things stand out – the lowest percentage is found in the Revolutionary period and the timeline ends in 1860. The timeline ending in 1860 makes sense, as any revolts were subsumed into the greater Civil War. However, what makes less sense is the lack of context given to the Revolutionary period slave revolts. During the Revolution, the British actively encouraged slaves to runaway from American plantations, promising them their freedom if they helped the British suppress the rebellion. Such a climate would make the entire Revolutionary War one sustained rebellion, much like the Civil War. Obviously, this would be hard to handle in Kilson’s analysis, but should bear mention in her discussion, which it does not.

Kilson’s article is a fascinating read and very useful in helping to conceptualize American slave uprisings as a group, instead of taking them one at a time. Eugene Genovese would take her work further in From Rebellion to Revolution in 1979, before he became a regular at CPAC – back when he was a Marxist.

Image: Discovery of Nat Turner. Wood Engraving, 1831. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.