American Revolution was primarily about slavery, rather than independence from British rule

The premise that the American Revolution was primarily about slavery, rather than independence from British rule, is a provocative one that challenges traditional narratives. While the role of slavery in the American Revolution is a complex and often debated topic, there is historical evidence and scholarly interpretation that lends credence to this argument.

The Somerset v. Stewart Case (1772) and its Impact

The Somerset v. Stewart case in 1772 is a pivotal moment often cited by proponents of this premise. Charles Stewart, a customs official from Boston, brought his enslaved man, James Somerset, to England. Somerset escaped, was recaptured, and was about to be sent to Jamaica when abolitionists challenged his detention in court. Lord Mansfield, the Chief Justice, ruled that slavery was not supported by common law in England and that Somerset must be set free.

This ruling had a profound impact on both sides of the Atlantic. In England, it was seen as a significant step towards the abolition of slavery. However, in the American colonies, particularly the Southern colonies, it was met with alarm. Many slaveholders feared that the precedent set by Somerset v. Stewart could be extended to the colonies, thus threatening their economic system and way of life.

Historian Alfred W. Blumrosen, in his book Slave Nation: How Slavery United the Colonies and Sparked the American Revolution, argues that the Somerset decision was a major catalyst for the Revolution. He posits that the fear of losing their enslaved property, fueled by the British legal system's stance on slavery, pushed the Southern colonies to join forces with the Northern colonies in seeking independence.

Economic Dependence on Slavery

The economic reality of the American colonies, especially the Southern colonies, was inextricably linked to slavery. The vast plantations producing cash crops like tobacco, cotton, and rice relied almost entirely on enslaved labor.

• Virginia and Maryland: Tobacco cultivation was the bedrock of their economies, and enslaved people constituted a significant portion of their populations.

• South Carolina and Georgia: Rice and indigo plantations were even more dependent on enslaved labor, and these colonies had a higher proportion of enslaved people than white settlers.

The perceived threat to this economic system, whether from British legal rulings or potential parliamentary action, was a powerful motivator for resistance. The idea that Britain might impose abolition, or at least significantly restrict slavery, was a nightmare scenario for many powerful colonial elites.

British Abolitionist Sentiment

While not a unified movement, abolitionist sentiment was growing in Britain during the 18th century. Religious groups like the Quakers were vocal in their opposition to slavery, and intellectual figures of the Enlightenment questioned its morality. The Somerset case was a public manifestation of this growing sentiment.

Colonial slaveholders were aware of these developments. They saw the British government, influenced by these burgeoning abolitionist movements and legal decisions, as a potential threat to their right to own enslaved people. This fear contributed to a sense of distrust and grievance against the Crown, reinforcing the desire for self-governance where they could maintain control over their domestic institutions, including slavery.

The Rhetoric of Liberty and its Contradiction

The American revolutionaries famously championed ideals of liberty, freedom, and natural rights. However, the glaring contradiction between these ideals and the widespread practice of slavery was evident even at the time.

While many historians argue that the primary motivation for independence was taxation without representation and a desire for greater self-governance, the preservation of slavery was undeniably a significant underlying factor for a substantial portion of the colonial leadership. The pursuit of "liberty" for white colonists often meant the preservation of the "liberty" to own enslaved people.

Counterarguments and Nuance

It is crucial to acknowledge that the premise is not universally accepted, and many historians emphasize other factors as primary drivers of the Revolution, such as:

• Taxation without Representation: The Stamp Act, Townshend Acts, and other taxes imposed by the British Parliament were a major source of contention.

• Colonial Self-Governance: The desire for greater autonomy and control over their own affairs, separate from parliamentary interference.

• Enlightenment Ideals: The influence of thinkers like John Locke on concepts of natural rights and governmental legitimacy.

However, even within these counterarguments, the issue of slavery often lurks in the background. The "liberty" the colonists sought was a specific kind of liberty, often one that excluded the enslaved and protected the institution of slavery.

Conclusion

While the American Revolution was undoubtedly a multifaceted event with various causes, the premise that it was significantly, if not primarily, driven by the desire to protect the institution of slavery holds considerable historical weight. The Somerset v. Stewart case served as a stark warning to colonial slaveholders, highlighting the growing divergence between British and American attitudes towards slavery. The economic dependence on enslaved labor in the Southern colonies made any threat to this institution a direct threat to their prosperity and social order.

Therefore, viewing the American Revolution through the lens of slavery provides a crucial and often overlooked perspective, suggesting that the pursuit of independence was, for many, also a fight to preserve a system built on human bondage.

For further reading:

• Blumrosen, Alfred W. and Ruth G. Slave Nation: How Slavery United the Colonies and Sparked the American Revolution. Sourcebooks, 2005. [No direct hyperlink available, but widely cited in academic discourse.]

• Dunbar, Erica Armstrong. Never Caught: The Washingtons' Relentless Pursuit of Their Runaway Slave, Ona Judge. Atria Books, 2017. [Focuses on the hypocrisy of the founders' pursuit of liberty while owning enslaved people.]

• Wood, Peter H. Black Majority: Negroes in Colonial South Carolina from 1670 Through the Stono Rebellion. W. W. Norton & Company, 1996. [Provides context on the scale of slavery in a key Southern colony.]

____________________________________________________________________________________

The American Revolution was not about independence from Britain. It was about slavery. In Somerset v Stewart (1772) ruled that slavery was not legal in England and fanned the flames of the American Revolution, being fought for slavery. pic.twitter.com/cYTKJ503Tb

— kevin blue (@kevinblue345) February 8, 2026