Question
cotton production & slavery
(in millions) bales of cotton
Π number of enslaved workers (in millions)
Item 1
Southern states share of cotton production
growth of the Southern enslaved population
Item 2
Item 3
1826
1859
Georgia
22.7
Alabama
1820 population 1520 population
1860 population by thousands
Alabama
111.1
Arkansas
Item 4
61.7 Florida
21.2% Tennessee
149.7 Georgia
Louisiana 6.5%
13.6%
331.7 Louisiana
Mississippi 15.4%
32.8 Mississippi
13.6%
Northina
205 North Carolina
$1.59% Florida
26.4%
Other
7.7% 0.6%
1.53%
251.8 South Carolina
182.6 Texas
425.2 Virginia
Census Bureau
Tennessee
D
1830 07
1840
1850
1860 4.0
Sources: Statistical Abstract of the United National Humanities Center
Use the charts to answer the question.
Source: Stuart Bruchey, ed., Cotton and th Economy: 1790-1860
Based on the data on the charts, what can be inferred about the states that show an increase of enslaved workers and have low cotton shares?
(in millions) bales of cotton
Π number of enslaved workers (in millions)
Item 1
Southern states share of cotton production
growth of the Southern enslaved population
Item 2
Item 3
1826
1859
Georgia
22.7
Alabama
1820 population 1520 population
1860 population by thousands
Alabama
111.1
Arkansas
Item 4
61.7 Florida
21.2% Tennessee
149.7 Georgia
Louisiana 6.5%
13.6%
331.7 Louisiana
Mississippi 15.4%
32.8 Mississippi
13.6%
Northina
205 North Carolina
$1.59% Florida
26.4%
Other
7.7% 0.6%
1.53%
251.8 South Carolina
182.6 Texas
425.2 Virginia
Census Bureau
Tennessee
D
1830 07
1840
1850
1860 4.0
Sources: Statistical Abstract of the United National Humanities Center
Use the charts to answer the question.
Source: Stuart Bruchey, ed., Cotton and th Economy: 1790-1860
Based on the data on the charts, what can be inferred about the states that show an increase of enslaved workers and have low cotton shares?
Answers
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
Based on the data presented and the historical context, we can infer that states with an increase in enslaved workers but lower cotton production shares may have been expanding their agricultural practices beyond just cotton or were developing their economies in other ways.
Here are a few key points to consider:
1. **Agricultural Diversification**: States with low cotton shares but an increase in enslaved population might have been focusing on other cash crops or agricultural products, such as tobacco, sugar, or indigo, which also relied on enslaved labor. As they increased their enslaved workforce, they may have been adapting to a more diversified agricultural economy.
2. **Economic Growth**: The increase in the number of enslaved workers could suggest economic growth in those states. As the demand for labor increased due to expansion in farming or other industries, states like Florida and Arkansas might have increased their enslaved populations to support that growth, even if their share of cotton production is less significant compared to states like Alabama or Georgia.
3. **Migration and Population Movement**: The historical context of the time reveals that many enslaved individuals were moved from older agricultural states to newer territories (like Texas and Arkansas) that were being developed. This migration could cause an increase in the enslaved workforce in states that may not have had a dominant cotton economy yet.
4. **Plantation System Expansion**: Some states may have been developing their plantation systems to accommodate large-scale agricultural practices, requiring a greater number of enslaved workers despite a smaller output in cotton.
Overall, the increase in enslaved workers in states with low cotton shares indicates complex economic dynamics where these states were likely adjusting to new agricultural practices and economic conditions during that period.
Here are a few key points to consider:
1. **Agricultural Diversification**: States with low cotton shares but an increase in enslaved population might have been focusing on other cash crops or agricultural products, such as tobacco, sugar, or indigo, which also relied on enslaved labor. As they increased their enslaved workforce, they may have been adapting to a more diversified agricultural economy.
2. **Economic Growth**: The increase in the number of enslaved workers could suggest economic growth in those states. As the demand for labor increased due to expansion in farming or other industries, states like Florida and Arkansas might have increased their enslaved populations to support that growth, even if their share of cotton production is less significant compared to states like Alabama or Georgia.
3. **Migration and Population Movement**: The historical context of the time reveals that many enslaved individuals were moved from older agricultural states to newer territories (like Texas and Arkansas) that were being developed. This migration could cause an increase in the enslaved workforce in states that may not have had a dominant cotton economy yet.
4. **Plantation System Expansion**: Some states may have been developing their plantation systems to accommodate large-scale agricultural practices, requiring a greater number of enslaved workers despite a smaller output in cotton.
Overall, the increase in enslaved workers in states with low cotton shares indicates complex economic dynamics where these states were likely adjusting to new agricultural practices and economic conditions during that period.