This was a short response paper written about Robert Olwell's examination
of the relationships, both cultural and economic, that were at the
heart of life in the colonial-era Lowcountry.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In his book “Masters, Slaves, and Subjects”, Robert Olwell
examines the complex relationships and power structures of colonial-era
Charles Towne. Charles Towne, as Charleston was known in the years
between its founding and its independence from the British Empire,
is portrayed by Olwell as dominated by a rigid agrarian slave society
which served as an intermediary in a more complex power structure
that extended from the royal halls of London to the plantation fields
of the Lowcountry. In examining the complicated web of relationships
between London and the colony, and Masters and Slaves, Olwell argues
that the economic and political structure of Charles Towne was based
upon a successive series of carefully-maintained power-based relationships.
CHARLES TOWNE: A GATEWAY TO POWER
Power in Charles Towne was centralized at what became known as the
Four Corners of Law, at Broad and Meeting Streets, and radiated outward
across the Lowcountry. The Four Corners were home to the State House,
where the Colonial Assembly met, St. Michael’s Church, the heart
of the Church of England in the colony, the Town Watch House, which
kept the slave population in check, and the public marketplace, where
the commerce that was vital to the colony’s economy took place
(19).
One could easily see power was centralized within Charleston, not
just over the local area, but also statewide. Of the forty-eight members
of the colonial Assembly, twenty-eight lived within a day’s
horse ride of the city. Half of the justices of the colony, who took
an oath to defend “King and Country”, were either sitting
or former members of the Assembly, and all of the justices were slave
owners (72).
The elite of Charles Towne also reached across the Atlantic to maintain
cultural ties with Mother England, spending their newfound wealth
to emulate English culture in a process known as Anglicanization.
Olwell cites an English tourist, who noted the desire of colonials,
even native Carolinians, to identify England as their home, and desiring
to have the wealth and means to move there and live as English gentry
(41). Many plantation homes, such as Drayton Hall, were built in the
Georgian style that was popular in England at the time, even though
such designs were not ideal for the Lowcountry’s sub-tropical
climate (184).
RELIGION IN THE COLONY
Loyalty to the Church of England also bound the colonists to Mother
England, which was another leg of Olwell’s power structure.
Olwell described the Anglican church parishes also serving as the
basic political units of the colony, as well as the center of parish
life, serving as the public assembly hall, the polling location for
elections, as well as the basis for representation to the colonial
Assembly (104). When justices took office, they not only swore allegiance
to the King, but also to defend the Anglican church (72).
The Anglican church served to reinforce obedience to authority, both
in Charles Towne and London, through the use of common liturgy, architecture,
and ceremonies. Anglican clergy felt a duty to ally themselves with
local secular authority and to “assert the hierarchal nature
of things (110).” Many ministers were invested in the local
power structure, becoming slave owners themselves, either by the possession
and administration of church lands, to which slaves were attached,
or by purchasing them outright (113).
Olwell regarded the Anglican church’s efforts to convert slaves
a failure, due to lack of interest by slave owners to instruct their
slaves, and only a small percentage of slaves in most parishes participating
in services (106). However, for those who did attend, the church reinforced
the social stratification that was part of the established order of
existence, with the parish’s most prominent families seated
in the front pews, and slaves relegated to the periphery, sitting
in the gallery, back benches, in the aisles, or in some cases, forced
to watch services from the outside, looking through windows (110).
SEIZING THE CROWN: THE MASTERS’ REVOLUTION
The American Revolution transformed the American colonies into an
independent American nation. While the northern colonies sought freedom
from the tyrannical governance of King George III in London, Olwell
examined how Charles Towne’s elite used the Revolution to further
establish their own dominion in and around their city.
While the Stamp Act pushed northern colonies edged closer to rebellion
against the Crown, Olwell noted planters and traders in Charles Towne
were content to impose trade boycotts, eager for news of compromise
from London (225). However, it was not nationalism or revolutionary
fervor that swayed the city’s elite against the Crown. When
Lord William Campbell, the new Royal Governor, arrived in June of
1775 to find the city’s elite in an uproar over rumors of British
plots to free slaves and incite slave rebellions (229).
Even religion, long an ally of the ruling elite, was not safe from
these new revolutionaries. Olwell reported on the ouster of the pastor
of St. Michael’s Church in 1774 whose sermon called upon “every
Man to keep to his own Rank, after which other loyalist clergy quietly
began to depart their parishes. His successor, who offered prayers
for the King during the attack on Fort Moultrie, found himself out
of a job just as quickly two years later (232).
In 1778, the state constitution was revised to allow the establishment
of any “Christian Protestant Religion.” Using the pulpit
to speak out against the State government was also prohibited. Twelve
years later, the new State constitution officially separated church
and state, ending the power of the Anglican Church forever (282).
With this, the last ties to Mother England were cast off, and the
elite were secure as Masters of their world, and Subjects to none.
CONCLUSION
Colonial Charles Towne had evolved into a sort of fuedal city-state
governed by power-based relationships, which established roles for
everyone from the lowest slave to the economic and political elite
who ruled the colony. These relationships were vital to the success
and stability of the city and the lands and the people over which
it held power. In his book, Robert Olwell clearly identified defines
the roles of Master, Slave, and Subject, and made a strong argument
that, right or wrong, this system of power-based relationships was
the key to the success, prosperity, and security of the colony.
