This reading was very intriguing as it looks at multiple other factors that possibly went into the decision to free slaves. The revolting aspect is the most intriguing aspect to me. At some point one group of people will lose control over the other as it grows. The thought of a civil war led by those who were enslaved is very practical. Furthermore, this would completely reshape how America would be built.
This idea is somewhat reverse of machiavelli’s fear of the leader. The uprise of the slaves was the concern. Along with Nat Turner’s rebellion were many others. One revolt often overlooked is the one led by Newton Knight in Mississippi. Newton is also a distant cousin of mine that my grandfather has personal journals from. In many of those journals, he talked very optimistic about the slave rebellions and how they were soon to become liberated through rebellion.
The correlation to Machiavelli is a very interesting one. typically we see a machiavelli leader as the head of the group not as a group its self. the revolts caused Lincolns decision to be entirely based on almost fear for his re-election which is really not a healthy motivation to free people as it just stimulates the institutionalized nature of slavery today.
That is really cool that your relative has a connection to this event. I think that everyone knew that slavery would once have to come to an end but the fact that most just sat back and waited to observe the rebellion and wait for it to break through and make a big enough impact for it all to come to an end.
I agree that the revolting aspect is very interesting. I also think that it’s really cool how you are related to someone of this time period and are able to read journals from personal accounts.