John Brown's Raid...........What if.......

[jgoodguy]

What made Brown a little more scary: he did have allies, he did have safe sanctuaries, he did have means to gather weapons.

As someone else put it: Nat Turner was a nightmare, but the nightmare they were prepared for.

I agree, but note the deficiencies of the lack of leadership and training. I might add logistics and organization, gathering, distributing supplies, keeping order &c.

 

[matthew mckeon]

Think of the history of Irish insurrections against the British. The armed revolts in 1798(with French aid), the 1847, 1867, and 1916, all failed against regular troops and armed police. Yet they had several of the advantages American slaves lacked.

 

[Copperhead-mi]

Yes, leading US troops, but I'm also thinking of later conflicts as well.

At least for the second Seminole War as well as the German Coast Rebellion, both Florida and Louisiana were still U.S. Territories so the use of federal troops would be the norm in conflicts like those.

 

[matthew mckeon]

same thoughts about ... but Spatracus did it

Sure, but what is the scenario where a sustained revolt is organized and launched in the Old South?

 

[matthew mckeon]

At least for the second Seminole War as well as German Coast Rebellion, both Florida and Louisiana were still U.S. Territories so the use of federal troops would be the norm in conflicts like those.

The real issue is not some prohibition against using federal troops against slaves, its that they were very few federal troops in the South to begin with.

 

[jgoodguy]

The real issue is not some prohibition against using federal troops against slaves, its that they were very few federal troops in the South to begin with.

Very few anywhere, IMHO. It would be calling out the milita for a large-scale revolt.

 

[matthew mckeon]

I agree, but note the deficiencies of the lack of leadership and training. I might add logistics and organization, gathering, distributing supplies, keeping order &c.

As I listed in post 35.

I mean, Spartacus is an interesting fellow and all that, but the historical record is incomplete. How he planned, launched and sustained his rebellion are not known things.

What is the scenario of a widespread slave insurrection in the Old South. I submit that there isn't a plausible one. If you were an enslaved person brave and angry enough to rebel, you had the much more feasible option of escape.

 

[diane]

Was not the Seminole War an unauthorized, illegal incursion by General Andrew Jackson into Spanish Florida?

The Seminole Wars are interesting regarding successful slave rebellions - one of which was to rebel with your feet. Posses and other slave catching entities believed they had the right to retrieve their slaves PLUS any children they had had while with the Indians. As well armed as they were, they needed the muscle provided by the federal government. Jackson had a list of reasons to remove the tribes from the South, and providing a haven for runaway slaves was fairly close to the top.

 

[jgoodguy]

As I listed in post 35.

I mean, Spartacus is an interesting fellow and all that, but the historical record is incomplete. How he planned, launched and sustained his rebellion are not known things.

What is the scenario of a widespread slave insurrection in the Old South. I submit that there isn't a plausible one. If you were an enslaved person brave and angry enough to rebel, you had the much more feasible option of escape.

I agree. Without a magical what if scenario, there is no realistic way to get there.

 

[Southern Unionist]

how did Spartacus do it? they would have learned by doing

Famous last words. Good luck with that approach.

Every "what if" scenario is revealing about the person who suggested it. Generally they reveal that the suggester wishes the scenario had taken place.

I disagree. A successful slave revolt would have been fine with me.

the Souther slaves would have had
skilled organizers

Seriously? Who?

The war against the rebelling slaves would have resembled the war against the plains Indians.

Indian tribes had experienced warriors.

What if John Brown had attempted a real slave revolt in Port Royal or Natchez?

There were very few slaves in Natchez. Mostly house servants who knew a lot about polishing silverware and gourmet cooking. You're not going to win anything with them except a food competition. Also, house servants had a much lower average misery level than field slaves, therefore less motivated to rebel.

 

[5fish]

Every "what if" scenario is revealing about the person who suggested it. Generally they reveal that the suggester wishes the scenario had taken place.

WOO!!! I gave a bunch of old "what ifs" on this forum and I created them because they were a cool notion, a fun thought or if only... to suggest I wanted them to take place or happen. I am taken that idea to the grave.... Lol

 

[5fish]

how did Spartacus do it? they would have learned by doing

Here a "What if" thread may answer your question.... John Brown could have been Spartacus... or Boudica

https://civilwartalk.com/threads/john-brown-could-have-been-spartacus.88900/#post-708436

 

[wausaubob]

The more what ifs there are the more the real facts disappear. A world with no facts, where everything is digital animation, everything is imagination, is a different world then the one I grew up in. Maybe its a better world, but it shifts power to people who can control our collective imagination.
The Civil War uniquely demonstrates what the risks are if people with selfish motives have that power.

 

[WilliamH]

I don't disagree that a more "successful" slave revolt was unlikely but it wasn't unheard off. Louverture lead such a revolt in the 1790s to defeat the Spanish, French and English armies (the best armies in the world) in Haiti.

If a more "successful" John Brown led slave revolt had followed along the same lines of the Haiti revolt and turned very brutal towards the white southern population then I think the Federal government along with the state militias would have been called forward to put it down in an equally brutal way.

In such a scenario I think it is likely that John Brown's raid would have actually been less successful at achieving his finial goal of ending slavery. Stories of large scale rape/murder of white southerns by revolting slaves may have shifted public opinion in the North towards the necessity of keeping slavery as the only option for controlling the large black southern population, thus making emancipation more difficult.

Of course that is only one scenario, a more successful John Brown led slave revolt may have been kept peaceful until attacked by Federal and/or State forces (which I believe was his plan) then Northern public opinion may have on the side of slaves… one never knows with what ifs…

That being said, the larger more "successful" Brown's revolt the harder it would have been for him and his men to control. It might have worked out for the best that John Brown was able to die a martyr's death without too much innocent blood on his hands (there was of course the matter with swords in Kansas and the innocent people killed in his actual historic raid so his hands weren't actual clean in real life)

 

[matthew mckeon]

I don't disagree that a more "successful" slave revolt was unlikely but it wasn't unheard off. Louverture lead such a revolt in the 1790s to defeat the Spanish, French and English armies (the best armies in the world) in Haiti.

If a more "successful" John Brown led slave revolt had followed along the same lines of the Haiti revolt and turned very brutal towards the white southern population then I think the Federal government along with the state militias would have been called forward to put it down in an equally brutal way.

In such a scenario I think it is likely that John Brown's raid would have actually been less successful at achieving his finial goal of ending slavery. Stories of large scale rape/murder of white southerns by revolting slaves may have shifted public opinion in the North towards the necessity of keeping slavery as the only option for controlling the large black southern population, thus making emancipation more difficult.

Of course that is only one scenario, a more successful John Brown led slave revolt may have been kept peaceful until attacked by Federal and/or State forces (which I believe was his plan) then Northern public opinion may have on the side of slaves… one never knows with what ifs…

That being said, the larger more "successful" Brown's revolt the harder it would have been for him and his men to control. It might have worked out for the best that John Brown was able to die a martyr's death without too much innocent blood on his hands (there was of course the matter with swords in Kansas and the innocent people killed in his actual historic raid so his hands weren't actual clean in real life)

The circumstances in Haiti were considerably different than in the antebellum South. Which is why victory was possible in one place, but not the other.

 

[WilliamH]

I understand and don't really disagree with you, I believe the chances of Brown's raid leading to the overthrow of Southern slave society/state governments was basically zero, which is why I think John Brown's raid was a crazy idea.

However, his raid or a similar raid could have more successful in the sense of actually getting weapons into the hands of slaves who like in Haiti weren't very happy being slaves. Which I believe is what this 'What if' is getting at.

 

[wausaubob]

The enslaved were very smart. They were incredibly patient.
As soon as they saw the military age men disappear from the farms and towns, they knew the odds had changed.
By the end of the war, they knew that the hand of God was moving in the land and the hour of reckoning had arrived.
To suggest they would have ever rebelled on their own, without the assistance of the US Army, presents a very poor appraisal of their status as Americans. The were just Americans whose genetic inheritance from Africa was recent as opposed to occurring during the last part of the ice age.
So really, would you rebel if the odds of success were near -0- and the result of failure was mutilation and death? Or would you attempt to be a good slave and accompany the mistress to Louisville, KY in a cold winter month when the Ohio might freeze?

 

[WilliamH]

To suggest they would have ever rebelled on their own, without the assistance of the US Army, presents a very poor appraisal of their status as Americans.

I don't think I agree with this and I believe Nate Turner Rebellion is a example against your point. In addition, as time passed and more liberal ideas prorogated around the world then rebellion among those oppressed only would become more likely. You can't keep a people oppressed forever, either compromised is reached or you face rebellion/revaluation... it's only a matter of time

 

[wausaubob]

Nat Turner's failure, and the little bit I know about his psychological make-up are evidence that support my supposition. Sane people do not risk certain death for an ill conceived attempt to escape slavery. Instead, they get a job on the railroad.

 

[BillO]

how did Spartacus do it? they would have learned by doing

Spartacus was a trained warrior. Brown was a delusional crackpot.

 

[John S. Carter]

If John Brown's Raid had been successful and a violent slave insurrection had taken place throughout the South, would the United States Government have been required to suppress it

Respectfully,
William

One Nation, Two countries
View attachment 184375

By failing ,Brown succeeded in achieving his goal ,the freeing of the bonded black man.Just because he himself did not accomplish what he and his Merry Band set out to in leading a slave revolt which JB in his religious madness saw that the this was the only way to cause the North to rise up against the evil slave system which he had devoted his life to.He accomplished this as had been done by other men and women by placing that noose around his neck and there by making the ultimate sacrifice for the Cause,which at the time was considered a failure even by the radical Abolitionist but then in time became the martyr for the Union army as the body of John Brown lies a molding in the grave but his Soul kept marching on ,GLORY !GLORY!HA LAUGH! This was the result of a slave state Va. being found guilty of doing this to a noble man . What if he had been taken to Washington and had been tried there ,since Harper's Ferry was federal property and Washington was just across the river?Politics was the deciding factor on this. Then there would have been song,no martyr,and no anger towards the evil slave system .If not that then ,what if some soldier had placed his rifle through the a whole aimed and with the finger of Fate guilding the shot ,the same Fate that would guild the shot that killed JW Booth.Just a novel thought of alternative history