I, for one, am impressed with Daniel Rasmussen’s American Uprising: The Untold Story of America’s Largest Slave Revolt, in which he tells the story of a slave uprising in 1811 in an area known as the “German Coast,” just north of New Orleans. It is well-written, dramatic, and engaging.

It has been criticized, with some validity, for weak research, overdramatization, and excessive speculation. But these weaknesses should caution the reader, not deter her.

Rasmussen deserves credit for bringing a neglected but important story in American history, and African-American history, to a wider audience. Although he may overstate the importance and influence of the revolt, he crafts an engaging narrative.

Perhaps some of the historical details that trouble others, such as Alan Singer, may have not been as glaring or noticeable to me, since I listened to an audio-book version of American Uprising while traveling on a long trip. Therefore, I did not have access to documentation in endnotes and a bibliography. I also probably did not listen as critically as I would have read, if using a physical book. Still, I feel like Rasmussen has given me a very strong sense of what happened in 1811, some of the cultural context preceding and following the rebellion, and a greater understanding of frontier Louisiana. Although I was aware of the 1811 rebellion in a general sense, I did not know of the mass beheadings, and the medieval way in which the heads were posted throughout the region as a warning. That reaction alone speaks volumes about the ferocity with which the planters reacted, and how surely such a rebellion and response must have cast a pall over the region for years to come.

So, Rasmussen‘s book gave me quite an education. Will I approach his work with more caution, based upon some of the criticism I have read? Yes. But I find the book’s value far exceeds the criticism it has received from some readers.

How this work relates to Milliken’s Bend:

The story of the 1811 German Coast rebellion, like the Haitian Revolution before it, undoubtedly remained in the psyche of Louisianans for many years. Such rebellions, though rare, made planters along the Mississippi River particularly sensitive to anything that could be construed as “slave unrest” – even when no rebellions were in fact planned. Often, they would respond with brutality, repression, or denial. Slave owners might whip a slave for a small infraction, such as overstaying a visit to his wife or family on a neighboring plantation; the slaveholder might forbid religious services for his slaves, as black preachers were often suspect; and an innocent traveler, a stranger to the area, might immediately be asked to keep moving, as abolitionists had been rumored to masquerade as peddlers, teachers, and ministers.

Slave owner paranoia, like that during the 1811 rebellion, or in later years, such as the circumstances described by Winthrop Jordan in his excellent work, Tumult and Silence at Second Creek, created a subtle but omnipresent current of fear in nearly every aspect of Southern life during the Civil War. This fear was especially pronounced among the great planters, who had so much wealth in property, crops, and human capital along the Mississippi River.

It was this fear of slave uprisings that generated the violent reaction through much of the South when the North began enlisting slaves into the Union army in 1863. Innumerable speeches and writings by Southern politicians and editors invoke the “specter of Saint Domingue” (Haiti) throughout the antebellum period and all throughout the Civil War. Examining the reaction of Southern whites to even the hint of slave rebellion (whether fact or fiction) – which the Federal policy of emancipation would surely encourage, meant that the South had to fight the North with even greater determination. The Confederate Congress and the Louisiana legislature passed laws in 1863 which declared that white Union officers serving with black soldiers should be executed. Slaves “in arms” or “in rebellion” could be tried and put to death, though most who were captured by Confederate forces were reenslaved. The Confederate government did not recognize African Americans as legitimate soldiers, and therefore refused to treat them as prisoners of war.

The fear of slave revolts and the uncertainty prompted by former slaves bearing arms in the Union Army put everyone on edge in northern Louisiana in 1863. These fears would create a volatile situation on the levee at Milliken’s Bend that summer.