Biblical Slavery in the CSA?

So the scenario is this:
-CSA wins its independence
-spurred by the economic misfortune of being newly independent and war ravaged, the Third Great Awakening effects the region even stronger than OTL
-it becomes popular opinion that the institution of slavery needs to be "reformed" to biblical standards

How could this be realized in legislation, and what meaningful changes does this bring to the institution of slavery in the south?
 
Biblical slavery is time limited, more like indentured servitude than chattel slavery as practiced in the CSA. If this goes in to effect you now have large numbers of free blacks in the CSA, and there is no outlet for them to move out of the south unlike OTL. This is a major problem, unless once "freed" there are other significant restrictions on this population.
 
Do you mean the kind where there are Jubilee years every 50 years, and all slaves are freed during that year? Certainly will do interesting things to slave futures prices. Debts get cancelled in Jubilee years also, which has interesting implications for interest rates..
 
You also wouldn't be allowed to force slaves to work on Sunday, or break up a slave marriage by sale (both of which were in place in colonial Louisiana).

Planter class would hate it. Not only because it reduces their profit, but also because it means there's a higher power than the slaveowners.
 
The thing about the OT jubilee rules is there's no evidence that the various Hebrew polities ever followed them very much. It's likely though that they did follow the 'land assigned to one tribe can be held by another tribe by whatever means only until the next Jubilee', although I admit I'm really reading between the lines on that one. I base that estimate on how fast the tribe of Benjamin bounced back after being seriously exterminated in a fratricidal war of annihilation the end of Judges. You can do that when you have a lot of carrying capacity available to you and some means of restraining the other neighboring tribes from taking it.
 

Dolan

Banned
Ironically, I could see this kind of scenario happened in a world where Great Awakening started earlier before Civil War, and it was Northerners and Poor Southern Whites who forced the Jubilee system to phase out slavery by freeing the slaves every 50 years.

Of course, slavery is kept legal, but then not freeing your slaves on mandatory Jubilee year(s) is verboten.

As the aim is to phase out slavery, I don't see the other stuffs about debt erasing and others being enforced.

Let's say that Great Awakening begun at 1850-1851, the Jubilee year would be set nationally at 1901, and thus slavery will have to be phased out in 50 years. The South can't say no because everyone will then deem them as Un-Christian.

Federal Govt would start programs to settle freed Christian slaves of 1901 somewhere (as according to Bible, freed slaves of the faith must be taken care of and given living means). Yes, this would also meant non-Christian slaves would not be freed and thus re-enslaved, but bet you that missionaries would work hard at that.

Slavery end up peacefully abolished in most parts in 1901, they endured in smaller scales with few slaves that maintain their tradition Vodun religion, but those aren't numerous enough to be self sustaining.
 
Ironically, I could see this kind of scenario happened in a world where Great Awakening started earlier before Civil War, and it was Northerners and Poor Southern Whites who forced the Jubilee system to phase out slavery by freeing the slaves every 50 years.
Perhaps the Second Great Awakening (1790-1840) simply doesn't run out of steam? Especially since the pro-emancipation Methodists won the biggest share of the converts durring that one.

Are you looking at slavery from the Patriarch era? New Testament era? Somewhere in between?
As a bad Catholic who has never read the Bible cover to cover, I honestly can't say:oops:
 
You also wouldn't be allowed to force slaves to work on Sunday, or break up a slave marriage by sale (both of which were in place in colonial Louisiana).

Planter class would hate it. Not only because it reduces their profit, but also because it means there's a higher power than the slaveowners.

The plantation owners would also hate it because it would establish the principle that slaves have right in practice even if not necessarily under the law.
 
Top