Black Masters: A Free Family of Color in the Old South

Regardless of its historiographical interpretation, articles and monographs typically study race-based slavery and the Old South with the victims being African-Americans and the perpetrators being white southerners. This, however, was not always the case, as the story of William "April" Ellison, a black (mulatto) slave and then later slave owner, indicates. Michael P. Johnson's and James L. Roark's Black Masters: A Free Family of Color in the Old South (1984) explores Ellison's transition from slave to elite. Ellison and his family, as individuals of mixed ancestry but African-Americans according to society, had to live with special caution, carefully weighing all behaviors, as they were not allowed to fully exercise their rights. The authors do not have a series of traditional arguments; rather, they tell his and his family's story. Political and social issues in South Carolina provide a backdrop. Thirty-four letters discovered in 1935 provide the foundation for Black Masters. Other evidence, such as court records, census lists, newspapers, diaries, and oral histories, provide additional information about Ellison and his family that creates a fuller picture, with analysis and a backdrop. Although this monograph also has its share of "many," "about," and similar words, Johnson and Roark use evidence to provide real data. Some pages are literally goldmines of statistics. Also in contrast to some scholarly works, these authors explore the boundaries and differences between law and reality. To provide one of many examples, in 1834, it became illegal for African-American schools to operate, but they continued operating without difficulty. Despite the numerous strengths and creativity of Black Masters, it does have some weaknesses. These weaknesses are minor and are not global issues. In three places the authors' terminology is out of place and inappropriate or confusing. Johnson and Roark say, "The shop served as April's schoolhouse for social as well as mechanical skills." Especially considering the interpretation and resulting controversy of U.B. Phillip's American Negro Slavery--which justifies slavery because the plantation served as a "school" to "civilize" African-Americans--the authors should avoid the school reference. In another place they say, "Eason and his supporters were not the only ones who wanted a final solution to the free Negro problem." In the post-Holocaust world, "final solution" invokes images of ten million people who were murdered in one decade. Also, while readers will appreciate Johnson's and Roark's careful definitions and precision with racial terms (e.g., Afro-American, black, brown, colored, mulatto, Negro), at times it is a bit confusing and hard to follow all of the subtleties of meaning. Johnson's and Roark's conclusion about the difference between black and white masters is not satisfying. They argue that white masters based slavery on power, and the black masters had slaves for security. While slaves may we

This was the first book (aside from narratives by Booker T. Washington, Frederick Douglass & etc) I read concerning antebellum black and bi-racial history. It was so interesting I have since read a dozen others. As the authors state in the Introduction, this book really focuses on biracial persons of white/black ancestry. However, because, presently, persons who tend to be dark complected often consider themselves (and are considered by others) to be black and because the laws of antebellum South Carolina clearly differentiated between whites and free persons who did not fall into the white category (including pure blacks and biracial persons), the authors used the term BLACK MASTERS in the title. The book is generally about William "April" Ellison, born a slave but well treated, trained in mechanical skills and then freed as a young man. Because of this, the authors believe him to be the biracial son of the white planter Robert or William Ellison. Once freed, April officially had his name changed to William Ellison and moved to Statsburg, a wealthy suburb away from his previous owner. He slowly amassed a fair amount of wealth; although, unlike many of the more aristocratic planters of South Carolina, William "April" Ellison worked his own fields and, in his role as a mechanic, had to walk a fine line between independence and not overstepping the bounds permitted to a free person of color. His was the only family not considered white by his fellow South Carolinans who was able to sit in the church on the ground floor in the pews reserved for well-off whites and wealthy planters.William Ellison's family interacted with and married into some of the better off free families of color in Charleston. He became a member of the BROWN FELLOWSHIP and FRIENDLY MORALIST SOCIETIES which was generally limited to biracial persons (in fact, one biracial person was expelled from one of the societies because he maintained close ties to free persons who appear to have been of pure African-American heritage, leading the society to decide he was socially a black rather than a biracial person). FPCs who were apparently of pure African ancestry also had their own societies (and owned slaves) as, of course, did persons considered to be of pure European ancestry.Much of the book focuses on the curious position of biracial persons in South Carolina: many wealthy whites wanted to re-enslave free blacks (which, in their minds, included anyone of African extraction) while many poor whites wanted to prevent anyone of African ancestry (free or enslaved) from being able to hold any skilled positions (thus effectively opening many areas employment to themselves). In the wake of the slave rebellion led by the well-off free black named Denmark Vessy, these views gained much support and many laws on education and etc were temporarily enforced with enthusiasm, only to be narrowly defeated. The Ellisons supported the Democratic Party and the Confederacy, even though William's sons

A great read. I am a history major and was very pleased with the content of this book. It makes it known that there are exceptions to all popular history. If you like the comfort of being told the generic old history of the South than I do not suggest this work. It is as provocative as it is interesting. It also an enjoyable read following the modern trend of being understandable and fun yet informative at the same time.

I bought this book because the title went against my assumptions of race relations. It was a completely different perspective of slavery and the South. Very interesting.

I really enjoyed this book that I selected mainly because the subject was provocative. Inside I was very surprised to see how far and how deeply bigotry had been ingrained in the old South. A good read, but don't read it if you are very racially sensitive.