The historical significance of Henry Highland Garnet’s


The historical significance of Henry Highland Garnet’s

Chapter 9. Review Questions

  1. What was the historical significance of Henry Highland Garnet’s address to the Slaves? How did Garnet’s attitude toward slavery differ from that of William Lloyd Garrison?

The Henry Highland Garnet’s “Address” in the National Convention of Colored Citizens” (223) was significant in the then-slavery context of the American society. Its historical significance was that it contributed to the reawakening of the anti-slavery ideas. In his address, he insisted on the eradication of slavery on African Americans. Some people perceived his speech as potentially harmful, which could lead to disastrous outcomes. Historically, the address raised the need to have equal treatment among all people regardless of color or ethnicity. Though in his speech he insisted on telling the slaves not to attempt revolts using swords (223), the address historically cultivated a new militancy among the black and Caucasian abolitionists, shaping the then anti-slavery movement just two decades before the eruption of the civil war.

The attitude of William Highland Garnet towards slavery differed from that of William Lloyd Garrison. Garnet advocated for a rhetoric anti-slavery movement among the black Americans bearing in mind that the black Americans underrepresented by then were a few in number. He said to the black American slaves that he does not advise them to attempt revolution with swords in his address. He meant to cultivate peaceful anti-slavery revolts. William Lloyd Garrison, on the other hand, had a different approach towards slavery. He advocated for the eradication of slavery through radical anti-slavery movements. “…abolitionism and William Lloyd Garrison’s broadening radicalism” (232). While Garnet discouraged the use of swords to fight against slavery, Lloyd encouraged the use of swords through the aggressive civil wars.

  • Evaluate Frederick Douglas’s career as an abolitionist. HOW was he consistent? HOW was he inconsistent?

Fredrick Douglass was an abolitionist who was entirely consistent in his efforts. He started his career as an abolitionist when he became the premier public speaker of America in the 1840s. It was during this time that he gained much popularity. In his relationship with his white friends, he realized that his white friends had always wanted to enslave and segregate him from being part of the elite group. At one point, one of his white friends said to him, “People won’t believe we’re ever a slave, Fredrick, if you keep on this way” (232).  He was consistent in his efforts as an abolitionist because he split from the AASS at one point in 1847, and he firmly believed that the black people were an essential and more prominent part of the American nation. Therefore, they had their prospects established that they form the part and firmly united American society.

Chapter 10: Review Questions

  1. How and why did the southern and the northern white people differ over slavery? On what did the white people of both regions agree and disagree about race and slavery?

The Southern and the Northern white people differed over slavery by a contrasting belief. The Northern people believed that slavery in most parts was something wrong and inhumane. They held that slaves were also human beings who had to be accorded respect despite their physical differences. On the other hand, the southerners believed that slavery was not wrong and that the slaves had to do all the physically involving and tedious activities. Something that the Northerners and the southerners disagreed on about race and slavery was their view on slavery. Whereas the Northers termed slavery as being oppressive, the Southerners took it as a necessity. What both regions agreed on about race and slavery was about the people of color. Neither the Northerners nor Southerners, excluding the abolitionists (277), believed that people of color had to participate as free Americans in the then American society.

  • If you were a Northern African American in the 1850s, how would you have responded to the politics of the U.S Government?

If I existed in the American society during the 1850s, I would have responded to the then rampant racial and slavery politics by advocating for massive education on the importance of having equal representation of people in all systems, regardless of color and ethnicity. I would have been an activist, and I would have immensely pushed the government to the wall to recognize every citizen’s efforts and contributions without considering their racial differences. I would have concurred with the opinion of writers.smith112William Highland to stage an anti-slavery revolution by peaceful means. I would not have considered my default color, but rather, I would have sought to unite both the white and the black Americans.

  • If you were a white southerner in the 1850s, would you have been encouraged or discouraged by the policies of the U.S government?

If I were a white southerner in the United States in the 1850s, I would not have been discouraged by the U.S government policies. This is because such policies-most of which were in favor of the whites-could have provided me with a clear opportunity to advocate for racial and ethnic equity, as well as fair distribution of resources. Such policies would also have compelled me to develop rebellious thoughts against the government, and I would have ensured that there is a total representation of people from all cultural backgrounds.

  • Why did the seven southern states secede from the Union within three months after Abraham Lincoln was elected president in 1860?

After Abraham Lincoln’s election in 1860 as the United States president, Seven Southern states immediately seceded from the Union. They seceded because they had had such plans even before, in the event of a Republican winning the presidency. They were forced by what they believed to be the slavery institution, which had been a critical factor in their rapid economic nourishment.  They knew it well that Lincoln was an opponent of slavery, and thus they could not be favored.

  • If you were a black person-either a slave or free-would, you have welcomed the southern states’ secession? How might secession affect the future of your people?

If I were a black person at the time of secession, whether enslaved or free, I would have gladly welcomed the Southern states’ secession. I would have applauded the session to promote national integration and usher in a new historic slave-free era. The secession would have affected my people by promoting the long-awaited cohesion because there could be less racially alienated malpractices at that time. Thus, they could exchange important cultural and socio-economic ideas, which could build a bright future for my people and those of other southern states. 

Chapter 11. Review Questions

  1. How did the Union’s goals in the Civil War Change between 1861 and 1865? What accounts for those changes?

In the period between 1861 and 1865, the goals of the Union were subjected to progressive changes. The Union troops’ original plan was the anaconda plan, which was purposed at strangling through south through a naval blockade. Their goal was to gain complete control of the Mississippi river and exert potentially effective pressure on the south, both land and sea. On the 21st of June 1861, there was Bull Run’s battle, which posed a defeat to the Union army. This sounded like a wake-up call to the Union army. In 1862, the Union army lost nearly all the battles, and this led to their reorganization. In 1863, Lincoln brought freedom to the slaves. “…. the president issued the Preliminary Emancipate Proclamation.” (283). In July of 1863, the Union army had a victorious defeat at Vicksburg, and they attained its goal of accessing the Mississippi river. In 1864 there was a message to the top government official indicated as “please text me at writers.smith112, the Union army’s purpose was to break the spirit of “southern civilians.” They also forced the surrender of the confederate army. The confederate army surrendered to the Union army in 1865 to end the civil war.

  • How did the confederate’s policies towards civil war change during the civil war? When and why did those changes occur?

Throughout the civil war, the confederates’ policies were centered towards ensuring that all the slave states are incorporated. Before the recession, the south had resisted policies that could impair the plantation economy. In March of 1861, the confederate constitution was adopted, emphasizing the rights that individual member states were entitled to enjoy.  The constitution also vigorously protected slavery institutions. In February of 1862, the first session of the “Permanent Confederate Congress” was held in Montgomery, Alabama. Congress also required the willing blacks to register in the military labor. “The Confederate Congress required free black people to register and enroll for military labor.” (302). In May of 1862, there was the enactment of the homestead act. The act opened up public domains for lands for various family farms within the Union. The National Banking Act was then established to be a national banking system in the Union.

  • When the Civil War began, why did the northern black men volunteer to serve in the Union army if the way had not yet become a war to end slavery?

The northern black men volunteered to serve in the Union Army when the civil war began because they were fighting to preserve their Union. This is because the war had not yet escalated to the point of concluding that it was fighting to end slavery.

  • How did Abraham Lincoln’s policies and attitudes toward black people change during the civil war? Does Lincoln deserve credit as “the Great Emancipator? Why and Why not?

Abraham Lincoln’s attitude had the primary objective of preserving the Union throughout the civil war. There was a complete subordination of any policy that helped or hindered the black people (279).  After the attack at Fort Sumter in April of 1861, Lincoln changed his view and called for the rebellion’s total suppression. Four more states, therefore, seceded from the Union and joined the confederate states. Lincoln deserves infinite credit as the great emancipator. This is because through his emancipation proclamation-which stated that all the people held as slaves were to be free-there was the realization of black freedom.

  • What did the Emancipation proclamation seek to Achieve? Why was it issued? What did it accomplish?

The Emancipation Proclamation sought to achieve the utmost security and freedom of the slaves. It was issued because there was toral suppression of black freedom. It came to reassure that a war for the Union was to be a war for freedom. The Emancipation Proclamation achieved and reclaimed black freedom. There was no more slavery. It was also achieved by strengthening the Union both politically and militarily.

  • What did black men and women contribute to the Union War Effort? Was it their interest to participate in the civil war? Why and why not?

Black men and women played an essential role in contributing to the efforts of the union war. Most of the black men and women served as sailors and soldiers during the civil war. Additionally, they served as liberators, messengers, spies, and guides. (298). It was their interest to contribute to the success of the Union efforts because they were also to be affected by the outcomes of the war.

  • Why did some black people support the confederacy?

Some of the black people supported the confederacy because they were not quite sure of the war’s outcomes. Some of them thought that the war would turn out in favor of the confederates. Their status, therefore, remained precarious.

  • Was the result of the civil war worth the loss of 750 000 lives?

The results of the civil war were worth the loss of 750000 lives. After the war, there were long-lasting positive outcomes, such as the successful abolition of the slave trade. The United States Society was re-defined, and there was the birth of the era of democracy. 

Chapter 12. Review Questions

  1. What did freedom mean to ex-slave? How did their priorities differ from those of African Americans who had been free before the Civil War?

To ex-slaves. Freedom meant something different. It meant that they would not be separated from their families again after having a long time away from their families. On the other hand, women would not experience any form of sexual abuse, and they would have great opportunities to excess superior education to enable them to know how to read and write. They would also be able to travel without seeking permission from anybody else. They would enjoy every little moment of freedom they get. To them, they would also be able to vote and own land like other people. They had different priorities from those slaves that were free. For those slaves that were free, their preferences entailed apprehensive priorities and having more loyalty to their respective masters.

  • What did the former slaves and the former slaveholders want after emancipation? Were these desires realistic? How did former slaves and former slaveholders disagree at the end of slavery?

The former slaves wanted to meet their respective families after a long period of separation. Therefore, after the emancipation, the slaves wanted to reunite with their families and own land. The former slaveholders wished to own the land that was being handed down to the former slaves. Most of these desires were never realistic at all. This is because the whites and the blacks disagreed on almost everything once there was sharecropping.

  • Why did African Americans form separate churches, schools, and social organizations after the Civil War? What role did the black church play in the black community?

The African Americans formed separate churches because they had a worshiping way, which was distinguishable from their matters. Therefore, after the formation of their churches, they developed more confidence to be open. The same feeling was also transferred to schools and other social organizations as the African Americans wanted their schools to feel more secure together. Therefore, becoming their community would make more sense to them. The black people’s churches played a significant role in the then-black community by providing a safe place for their meeting and exchange of ideas to build and strengthen their unity. 

  • How effective was the Freedmen’s Bureau? How successful was it in assisting ex-slaves to live in freedom?

The Freeman’s Bureau was established to develop a group that would mean more benefits to the black community. However, Congress did not provide enough financial and human resources to carry out the things they purposed to achieve. They tried to assist the ex-slaves to realize their freedom. However, when they tried to issue getting land to the ex-slaves, the orders were being constantly revoked. 

  • Why did southern states enact black codes?

The southern states enacted the black codes-which were laws that applied to black people only-to enable the whites to continue exercising control over the black. The black codes were meant to place the back Americans in a lower position than whites. The codes restricted whom the blacks could marry and whether they could own land and have decent jobs.

  • Why did Radical Republicans object to President Andrew Johnson’s Reconstruction policies? Why did Congress impose its Reconstruction policies?

The radical Republicans objected to the reconstruction policies of President Andrew Johnson because they disagreed with them. The reason why they disagreed with them was that they fully supported the African Americans and their rights and privileges. On the other hand, Congress imposed its reconstruction to try and provide African Americans with freedom.

  • Why were laws passed to enable black men to vote?

The laws were passed to enable the blacks to vote to be considered full persons. This is because they were initially being viewed as three-fifths of persons. Additionally, the republicans had worries that the Southern states would use the blacks to increase their representation in Congress when they could not allow them to vote.

  • Why did black men gain the right to vote but not the possession of the land?

The black men only gained the right to vote and not to the possession of the land because the whites thought they could still control the back by not allowing them to own land.

  • Did congressional Reconstruction secure full equality for African Americans as American citizens?

The congressional reconstruction did not secure the full recognition of African Americans as ordinary American citizens. This is because the African Americans still underrepresented the Congress, and the policies enacted indirectly or directly suppressed African Americans’ rights.

Chapter 13: Review questions

  1. What issues most concerned black political leaders during Reconstruction?

The significant issues that most concerned back political leaders in the reconstruction period were getting access to schools and better medical services. Additionally, the black political leaders were concerned about getting proper medication to those who were mentally impaired and the prisoners.

  • What did black political leaders accomplish and fail to accomplish during Reconstruction? What contributed to their successes and failures?

The black political leaders complained about unequal economic and political development between the blacks and the whites. The black politicians specifically sought to promote equitable economic development for black people. However, they were not able to provide them with land. It was more accessible for them to support their fellow blacks with businesses and industries and not getting the land. They succeeded in creating a foundation for public education, which assisted the deaf, the blind and the insane. However, they failed in outlawing public racial discrimination.

  • Were black political leaders unqualified to hold office so soon after the end of slavery?

Neither the blacks nor the whites were unqualified to hold offices after the end of slavery. The blacks and whites disagreed over political strategies and issues. However, according to the whites’ perception, the end of slavery did not qualify the blacks to be equal to them, and they were thus, unfit to hold any management or administrative position. They deliberately ignored the 24th amendment and started blaming the blacks for corruption. They perceived it as being ridiculous for former slaves to have rights or even vote.

  • To what extent did African Americans dominate southern politics during Reconstruction? Should this era be referred to as “Black Reconstruction?”

The reconstruction period was viewed as unsuccessful, which was why African Americans started dominating southern politics during this period. By then era could be considered to be in “Black reconstruction,” but at the same time, it could be perceived as a deconstruction.

  • Why did the Republican Party fail to maintain control of southern state governments during Reconstruction?

The republican party failed to maintain its control over the southern state governments during Reconstruction, mainly because the opposing side had ideological arguments and ideas that were far better and more constructive than theirs. Therefore, they earned more votes.

  • What was “redemption?” What happened when redemption occurred? What factors contributed to redemption?

To the democrats, redemption sounded to them as regaining political control over the southern states. Once they got the redemption, they realized that none of the blacks would want to vote for them and that only their intimidation and violence would win the elections.

  • How and why did Reconstruction end?

The period of reconstruction ended in a total failure when everyone could not agree that it was a mistake.

  • How effective was Reconstruction in assisting black people to move from slavery to freedom? How effective was it in restoring the southern states to the Union?

The reconstruction was not very effective in helping the black people to shift from slavery to freedom. This is because many blacks had suffered severe beatings, rape, and murders. It did not restore the Southern States to their Union. They could not tolerate the white republicans, so they never wanted anything to do with them. There was still a big division.

  Do you need high-quality Custom Essay Writing Services?  

Order now

Reviews (0)


There are no reviews yet.

Be the first to review “The historical significance of Henry Highland Garnet’s”

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *