A Theological Account of Nat Turner

Christianity, Violence, and Theology

K. Lampley

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781137322968
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: North American History
• Index: History

In this unique volume, Lampley analyzes the theology of Nat Turner's violent slave rebellion in juxtaposition with Old Testament views of prophetic violence and Jesus' politics of violence in the New Testament and in consideration of the history of Christian violence and the violence embedded in traditional Christian theology.

1

A Portrait of Nat Turner

Theological reflection is representative of the social location and historical context of the theologian. As such, theology is not objective, universal language but rather contextual and particularistic speech about God, the world, and humanity. The self-identity and assumptions of the theologian as socially, historically, and culturally situated necessarily influence the character of the theology. Notwithstanding, Euro-American and European theologies have tried historically to claim objectivity and universality while black theology and other liberation theologies have exposed their Eurocentric tendencies and worldview. Theology inevitably exists in a certain place and time. It emanates from the historical circumstances of the age. Theology is also undeniably political. It reflects the aims and aspirations of political beings who struggle against concrete social facts. It is likewise personal. Theology comes from the private recesses in the body, soul, and spirit. Similarly, Nat Turner’s early black theology originated from his social condition, historical environment, and personal convictions of his heart. Turner was a revolutionary manifestation of his age in the antebellum South.

To understand Nat Turner as theologian and religious activist, one must first decipher his social location and historical context. Who was Nat Turner? How did he reflect his time, place, and circumstance? How did he inhabit his cultural, linguistic, and historical world? In the case of Turner, however, historical reconstruction from primary and secondary sources is “notoriously obscure and difficult to interpret.”¹ There are limited sources of impartial and credible information about Turner. Kenneth S. Greenberg, for instance, argues, “Both his position as a slave and his position as a man who threatened the core values and institutional structures of the antebellum South have made him a difficult figure for historians to reconstruct.”² Greenberg is particularly concerned that one cannot know the name, face, and body of Turner with any real certainty. For example, Greenberg asserts, “We do not know the name of Nat Turner. We do not know what he looked like. We cannot find his body.”³ Notwithstanding imperfect and incomplete documentation and evidence about Turner, it is nevertheless possible to produce a historical portrait of Nat Turner that informed his theology and theological worldview. Most importantly, Turner left his own personal account of his religious, spiritual, and theological insights and motivations in his Confessions.⁴ Here, Turner revealed his private faith, personal spirituality, and exclusive convictions of his heart.

This chapter as a portrait of Nat Turner seeks to present the social location of Turner and the historical context surrounding his ultimate act of rebellion. It illustrates that Turner’s social location as a religious and educated yet poor black male slave, combined with his historical context in the violent and intractable South of the 1830s, provided the foundation to produce a radical and revolutionary theology. It argues that revolutionary theology rather than economic decline or personal vengeance determined the necessity of revolt. It shows that Turner’s spirituality conjoined with his material condition as slave to radicalize his black slave Christianity. The chapter also explores the white Virginian reaction to Turner’s violence and the further entrenchment of divisions in white and black religion. Overall, it presents the foundation upon which Turner built his theological vision and revolutionary actions. It considers Nat Turner as radical theologian and revolutionary religious activist.

Social Location

The most enduring fact about Nat Turner’s social location was that he was a slave. On October 2, 1800, Nat or Nathaniel Turner was born in Southampton County, Virginia, the chattel property of Benjamin Turner.⁵ Nathaniel in Hebrew means “the gift of God.”⁶ Upon the death of Benjamin Turner in 1810, Nat became the property of Benjamin’s younger brother, Samuel Turner.⁷ Samuel Turner died in 1822, and Nat was sold to Thomas Moore.⁸ In 1830, the widow of Thomas Moore and mother of apprentice Putnam Moore, Nat’s legal owner, married Joseph Travis and Nat became the property of the Travis household.⁹ Nat Turner’s repeated transfer from one owner to the next indicated the insecurity of a black slave’s position. One’s family could easily be disrupted and family members sold or separated. Turner’s wife and children, for instance, were enslaved on another farm.¹⁰ Nat Turner’s slave revolt would begin with indiscriminate slaughter of all whites at the Travis residence. Thus, Turner’s initial rage was directed at Joseph Travis, his de facto owner, and Travis’s family, including young Putnam Moore, Nat’s legal owner. To begin the rebellion at the Travis residence amounted to a sociopolitical statement against slave-owners and the institution of slavery. Hark, one of Turner’s trusted coconspirators, was the 31-year-old slave also of Joseph Travis.¹¹ David F. Allmendinger, Jr. asserts that “Hark had assembled Turner’s initial followers at Cabin Pond, less than a mile north of the Travis house, on Sunday and remained with the rebels until he was shot from his horse on Tuesday morning.”¹² Hark, like Turner, acted out directly against his slave-owner. Nonetheless, Turner’s rebellion did not emerge from harsh or cruel treatment from Joseph Travis. Greenberg maintains, “It was not instigated by motives of revenge or sudden anger, but the results of long deliberation, and a settled purpose of mind.”¹³ Turner was not guided by sheer hatred of whites or a desire for vengeance. Turner himself stated, “Since the commencement of 1830, I had been living with Mr. Joseph Travis, who was a kind master, and placed the greatest confidence in me; in fact, I had no cause to complain of his treatment to me.”¹⁴ Rather than a reaction to blatant cruelty, Turner rejected the very idea of slave-owners and the institution of slavery. For Turner, blacks were not meant to be enslaved in America. Therefore, Turner sought to free himself and all black slaves from the despair and degradation inherent to the condition of bondage.

Two physical descriptions of Nat Turner emerge from the historical record. On September 17, 1831, Governor John Floyd of Virginia issued a “Proclamation of a reward for the capture of Nat Turner” in which Floyd described Turner as “between 30 & 35 years old, 5 feet 6 or 8 inches high, weighs between 150 and 160 lbs, rather bright complexion, but not a mulatto—broad shouldered-large flat nose-large eyes-broad flat feet-rather knock-kneed-walks brisk and active-hair on the top of the head very thin-no beard except on the upper lip, and the tip of the chin-a scar on one of his temples-also one on the back of his neck-a large knob on one of the bones of his right arm near the wrist produced by a blow.”¹⁵ Thomas Wentworth Higginson, writing in 1889, depicted Turner as “a short, stout, powerfully built person, of dark mulatto complexion, and strongly marked African features, but with a face full of expression and resolution.”¹⁶ Higginson claimed “dark mulatto complexion” for Turner, whereas Governor Floyd described “rather bright complexion, but not a mulatto.”

From what is known about Nat Turner’s parents, Turner was African American and not a mulatto. Turner’s mother, “Nancy,” was imported directly from Africa in 1799 and purchased by Methodist slave-owner Benjamin Turner.¹⁷ She gave birth to Nat the following year. Circumstantial evidence reveals that Turner’s father ran away before 1810.¹⁸ In “The Aftermath of Nat Turner’s Insurrection,” printed by The Journal of Negro History in 1920, John W. Cromwell reports that Turner’s father, “a native of Africa,” ran away from slavery and eventually immigrated to Liberia.¹⁹ The author of “The Negro in Virginia,” produced by the Writer’s Program of the Works Project Administration (WPA) in 1940, asserts that Turner’s mother “had tried to kill the newborn babe rather than have it grow up a slave.”²⁰ According to these accounts, each parent profoundly rejected slavery for Nat in their own way. Turner’s father represented the paradigm of escape from slavery and return to Africa. His mother carried with her the conviction that from birth Nat was not meant to be a slave. While mythology may certainly play a role in these characterizations of Turner’s parentage, they suggest that rejection of slavery was a foundational part of Turner’s heritage. Turner, himself, would be faced with his own questions of running away or returning to incite open rebellion. In approximately 1821, Turner ran away and eventually returned after 30 days.²¹ Turner explained that he returned to slavery at the prompting of the Holy Spirit.²² According to Turner, the Spirit had instructed him to consider spiritual things rather than earthly things and to seek first the Kingdom of Heaven.²³ Since he could not escape slavery by running away, Turner confronted it directly. In Turner’s estimation, the Kingdom of Heaven judged and condemned slavery. At the prompting of the Spirit, Turner would lead a fierce rebellion to destroy it.

By all accounts, Nat Turner was an exceptional and gifted man. Greenberg asserts, “All his life Nat Turner presented himself and was accepted by the black community as a man apart, a man with extraordinary abilities, destined for some special purpose.”²⁴ Turner experienced extreme ease at acquiring reading and writing with no formal recollection of learning the alphabet.²⁵ One day, he spontaneously began spelling the names of different objects to the astonishment of his family.²⁶ Learning and knowledge would motivate Turner throughout his life. Greenberg further argues, “As a young man, Nat Turner simultaneously devoted himself to the mastery of sacred and secular knowledge—demonstrating spontaneously an ability to read, experimenting with the manufacture of paper and gunpowder, and cultivating an austere lifestyle of religious devotion, fasting, and prayer.”²⁷ Turner’s religious discipline and dedication emerged from his religious surroundings and upbringing. His original owner, Benjamin Turner, was a Methodist who attended church and invited other religious people to his home for prayer and fellowship.²⁸ F. Roy Johnson contends that Turner’s mother “was taught to read and write and given Christian instruction along with the other slaves.”²⁹ According to Johnson, she became deeply religious.³⁰ Turner was also emotionally attached to his “very religious” grandmother.³¹ She taught him the prayers she learned from the master and mistress.³² Through the encouragement of his parents, Turner believed at an early age that he was destined to be a prophet with a special calling from God.³³ Recounting his devout lifestyle, Turner stated, “Having soon discovered to be great, I must app...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Introduction
• 1 A Portrait of Nat Turner
• 2 The Theology of Nat Turner
• 3 Prophetic Violence and the Old Testament
• 4 The Gospel of Jesus Christ and Violence
• Conclusion
• Notes
• Bibliography
• Index