The Rise and Fall of the Plantation South, by Raimondo Luraghi. (New Viewpoints: New York, 1978), Pp. 191, ISBN 0-531-95396-2

            The planter system of the Old South has created a massive niche of historical studies. Many scholars have devoted their energies to understanding the drive, motivations, or influences that created a system of slaveowners in a nation founded on such contrary principles. The range of studies offered wax and wane from critical to sympathetic. In this crowded field, Raimondo Luraghi offers his interpreation of the planter system in The Rise and Fall of the Plantation South. It is a relatively brief book, and enjoys quality of writing not often seen in other history books. That being said, it also makes certain historical assertions that seem rather questionable.

            Any attempt to discern Luraghi's thesis relies heavily on his view of Southern culture, which seems to be a mish-mash of his most ideal societies. There is no doubt where his sympathies lie; his first reference to the Civil War is in calling it the War of Independence (Pp. 66). His picture of the South is one that begins in Renaissance Italy, calling upon a social system that Luraghi calls 'seigneurial.' In essence, the South worked as a paternalistic society, distinct from a feudal society. In other words, it was a classically based social order, one that was descended from Renaissance ideals and enacted in the New World through the Old South, the French Colonies, and the Spanish Colonies.

            The latter portion of the book seems to deviate from this analysis, though. The structure of Southern society, embattled in the Civil War, suddenly takes on a pseudo-socialist structure, with strong comparisons to Yugoslavia, Communist China, and the U.S.S.R. This change seems rather abrupt, and would fly in the face of any earlier discoveries made by Luraghi if it wasn't for a re-reading of the book, which would then allow the observant reader to note the many references to the 'bourgeois capitalist' culture of the North. These subtle comments begin to define the South and the North in terms of almost primordial opposition, with the Classical, individualistic South set against a North that is urbanized, chaotic, and opportunistic.

            The book itself is short, and a brisk read. Luraghi is certainly a good writer, and there are many quality points to made in this text, to be sure: Luraghi demonstrates the strong influence Classical studies had on the Southern perception of themselves (predominently Classical Greek culture). The nature of Southern military officers and politicians certainly mirrors this, in both vocations being the calling of the altruistic, as opposed to the purely ambitious. Both paths did not offer automatic ascendancy, as the planter class was already at the top. This calls to mind the old Greek and Roman statesmen, the highest ideals of a Themostenes or a Cincinnatus.

            Unfortunately, it feels that Luraghi is too close to his subject matter. When referring to Confederate concepts of utopianism, one gets the distinct impression that Luraghi himself feels that the Confederacy would be the closest thing to a true utopia. He downplays slavery as an institution, making the confusing argument that slavery itself cannot exist, but that slave societies do (Pp. 36). Referring to it as an abstraction seems absurd in light of the subject matter.

            Further, his mish-mash of 'seigneurial' culture and 'socialist' culture is confusing, and feels very forced. The observations of both as elements to Southern society, at key points in its history, are not unfounded, and the case is made for both. But the transition from one into the next, and the seeming praise given for both, feels out of place, and disorganized.

            In short, he comes across as an apologist. He attempts to raise the South to a nigh-mythical culture, a modern recreation of the most ideal aspects of Greek culture, and then a realization of the attempted social revolution of Communist society. Questions of whether this is appropriate are not as pressing as whether this is even accurate. While it makes an interesting read, its findings leave something to be desired.

John McCarron

 

The Rise and Fall of the Plantation South. By Raimondo Luraghi. New York: New Viewpoints, 1978, 191 pgs.

             Although slender, this volume from an Italian student of American history provides a unique perspective on one of the most perplexing questions in the field –why did the nation fracture and fight? Perhaps only a non-native scholar could place this in an international context the way Luraghi does, as the author’s knowledge of Italian history informs a great deal of his suppositions on the nature of the American Old South and U.S. sectional tensions. In this regard, he theorizes that “the most dramatic contrast between the South and the North was neither economic nor moralistic: in fact, it was ideological.” (62) Conflict became inevitable as two drastically different and opposed ideologies informed socio-economic life in the two regions.

            Luraghi first asserts that the Old South’s cultural history finds its roots in the classicism of the Italian Renaissance. This particular socio-economic cultural ideal was transmitted through England and into America as an “agrarian, seigneurial civilization.” (20) The author raises Sir Walter Ralegh as the figurehead of this transmission, asserting that, of all Englishmen, Raleigh was the most Italian in training, sensitivities, and cultural affinity. In Luraghi’s estimation, Ralegh’s most lasting contribution to the colonization of the southern region of what would become the United States of America was the “ideal of the noble courtier-cavalier” (27) that itself generated directly from Renaissance thinking. This conception of self and of one’s place and purpose in society shaped the development of the “Old South” from its earliest beginnings.

            Standing in direct contrast to this was the Puritan influence in the North. Luraghi explicitly links Puritans, as the first consequential wave of settlers to the northern region, to Calvinist-Augustinian theologies. These propelled the rise of an industrious bourgeois class that abjured material excess, rather than a pseudo-nobility identified specifically by materialism and indolent lifestyle as in the South. Here, Luraghi again emphasizes a degree of inevitability toward conflict, as he explains that the South perpetuated the seigneurial system “while New England had been founded on the radical rejection of such a system.” (34)

            The author points to New France (Louisiana) as the “cornerstone” of America’s seigneurial system. In examining the development of the rest of the so-called New World, Luraghi interestingly considers the industrialization and bourgeois capitalism of New England and the Middle Colonies the exception. Rather, colonial settlement of both continents trended toward seigneurialism, wherein a paternalistic pseudo-nobility controlled large tracts of land devoted to staple crop agriculture. In this intriguing and rather provocative perspective, both cotton and capitalism are merely coincidental to the dominant socio-economic facet of the Old South – seigneurialism. Luraghi similarly considers slavery coincidental, a consequence of capitalism’s force upon the seigneurial agricultural economy. This also builds toward inevitable conflict between two irreconcilable economic systems, and more so between two diametrically opposed social orders.

            Luraghi briefly examines similarities between U.S. and Italian sectionalism, and shows distinct similarities between the two. In each case, an industrialized North undercut developing industry in the South by removing protective tariffs, thus subordinating Southern agriculture to Northern banking and industry. Interestingly, these were virtually concurrent developments in both nations, although the author does not ascribe any deeper significance to this quirk of time. In the United States, the South faced increasing economic dependence on the North at precisely the moment when it “had reached the maximum of self-consciousness,” (61) further propelling conflict.

            The author thus briefly examines Southern culture, and describes a civilization wherein classicism met agrarian aristocracy. Most prized were careers in the military and in politics, where Southerners excelled despite their region’s economic dependence upon the North. Despite these proclivities toward excellence in politics and the military, a Southern loss was as inevitable as war itself. While the railroad and telegraph revolutionized warfare, they benefited industrialized armies. Although the South attempted, through state socialism, to industrialize, its late start and the exigencies of war prevented any meaningful progress. Luraghi sees the ultimate irony in the Southern plan for emancipation, which aligned with but sounded the death-knell for the utopian seigneurial southern society.

            Most useful as a brief introduction to the author’s thought-provoking perspectives, this volume well serves students on a number of levels by placing the Old South and American Civil War in international context while providing a fresh and unique approach to understanding sectional conflict. One particular stylistic choice merits caution, however. The author consciously abjures most footnotes, as the work synthesizes many of his previous publications. While this benefits the younger student by creating an uncluttered narrative, it may ultimately frustrate the more mature historian’s efforts toward recreation of the argument. This choice notwithstanding, Luraghi’s work provides intriguing, though brief and merely introductory, insight into this great question in American history.

Matthew A. McNiece

 

The Rise and Fall of the Plantation South. By Raimondo Luraghi. New York: New Viewpoints Press, 1978. Pp. 191. Preface, notes, bibliography, index. ISBN 0-531-05396-2. Cloth

  Consider the following: The Southern planter class originated in the Italian Rennaissance of the 1500s. English and Northern bourgeois capitalists forced slavery upon the South. Despotic English mercantilists imposed cotton production on the helpless South. Slaves in the South, as a whole, were good humored, black country laborers who were not overworked, cruelly treated or unhappy with their lot. These slaves looked upon their owners as beneficent fathers, the model ideal, patriarchs who would teach them to be honest, industrious and faithful. This kindly, patriarchal system is why slaves never revolted during the Civil War, despite northern attempts to incite them.

   This opening paragraph gives a representative cross-section of some of Raimondo Luraghi’s more “interesting” theories about Southern planter (or “siegneurial”) society. Some of these statements are definitely original and will invariably provoke discussion.

   Several more of Luraghi’s observations include the following: Blacks did not mind slavery because they were accustomed to it in Africa. Domestic slaves were literally part of the master’s family, even to the point of sex between the races. In discussing the slaves’ view of the Civil War, Luraghi opines “In the main blacks were…amazingly loyal, their loyalty to the Confederacy indicating their understanding that the North was not fighting on their behalf, and it witnesses as well the political maturity of southerners of African origin.” (P.141)

   While Luraghi’s hypotheses are certainly contentious, they are not very credible. An admirer of writers Eugene Genovese and Ulrich Philips, this Italian historian presents a wide-ranging discourse on the origins and composition of Southern seigneurial  (read planter) society. When he wrote this book in 1978 Luraghi was teaching American history at the University of Genoa. For some reason, he came to the conclusion that Southern planter society originated in Italy. Perhaps in being Italian, he wants to make all things Italian.

   In any case, in Luraghi’s evolution, the benevolent feudal lord of the Middle Ages becomes the Italian Renaissance Man, and then enlightened knight transplanted to England. This Sir Walter Raleigh (Luraghi says this should be Ralegh) prototype was typical of “the political elite that conquered and organized the New World, a hierarchic society founded on land seigneurie, a system mainly agricultural, based on land owned by cavaliers, and governed with political astuteness, not by commercial greed. Those who came to New World from Britain were steeped in the values of the Italian Renaissance.” This distinction concerning commercial greed is telling, because Luraghi makes much of materialistic Northern bourgeois capitalists who lack the genteel, enlightened sophistication of Southern elites. This Marxist subtext runs throughout the book, with bourgeois and capitalists frequently mentioned.

   One gets the impression that Luraghi wishes he could have been a Southern planter. His book clearly pines for the glory days of the antebellum period.: “This seigneurial philosophy said that status, power and the good life was what it was all about, freely indulging in conspicuous consumption and living in a showy fashion. Southern colonists established plantations, not cities and cultivated staples, not trade. These planters were wholly devoted to pleasure, polite entertainment, dancing…and wearing jewels. The old Italian Renaissance tradition had taken very deep root, indeed!” (P.52)

   Luraghi’s point about freely indulging in conspicuous consumption merits further examination. He states: “While it is true that Southern planters netted handsome profits, this money soon went to Northern banks to whom the planters were deeply in debt…and the more the cotton boom increased, the more the south was becoming dependent, colonial and exploited.” (P.55) Nowhere does Luraghi discuss planters living beyond their means and not managing their financial affairs prudently. He states conspicuous consumption was part of Southern culture, but implies Northern creditors were responsible for planter indebtedness. Luraghi would venture that these planters were not living beyond their means buying more slaves, land and throwing lavish parties; it was the fault of greedy Northern capitalists exploiting them unmercifully.

    Luraghi’s holds Jefferson Davis up as the quintessential example of the sophisticated Southern planter elite, “a symbol of the seigneurial class at its best. Davis should rank among the major statesmen in history, his iron will, intelligence and capability in solving problems were amazing.” (P.151)

   In another premise certain to raise eyebrows, Luraghi asserts that Davis and Robert E. Lee were going to emancipate Southern slaves gradually, through service in the Confederate army. In return for military service, slaves would be given Southern citizenship and a homestead. The blacks would be freed over time, so as not to clog the South with homeless and unemployed. Luraghi claims the Southern system of emancipation compared most favorably with the arrangement outlined by Lincoln in his Emancipation Proclamation. Indeed “this Southern system would have been more humane…and more solicitous of the blacks’ fate, by integrating them into a more stable harmonious society paternally ruled by the seigneurial class”, like the kindly father, feudal lords of the Middle Ages. (P.144, 148)

   With precepts such as those outlined above, it is hard to take this book seriously. Yet Luraghi is clearly in earnest. This credibility problem is further compounded by Luraghi’s insistence of tying in the Russian and French Revolutions, Nazis, Bolsheviks, the Roman Empire, the Italian Renaissance, the Middle Ages, Canada and many others into a discussion of the South. In traveling abroad in what are often addled digressions, his postulations end up far afield and off topic. This book would not be appropriate for course work in the study of Southern planter society, except as an example of what should be avoided.

Glen Ely