Mockingbird Song

(avery) #1

Robert E. Stalhope,John Taylor of Caroline: Pastoral Republican(Columbia: University
of South Carolina Press, ); and esp. Taylor’s agronomy, Avery Craven,Soil Exhaus-
tion as a Factor in the Agricultural History of Virginia and Maryland, –(Urbana:
University of Illinois Press, ), –.
. On the East Anglian ‘‘revolution,’’ see G. E. Mingay, ed.,The Agricultural Revolu-
tion: Changes in Agriculture, –(London: Adam and Charles Black, ), –,
–. On the Anglo-centricity of Chesapeake planters, see T. H. Breen,Tobacco Cul-
ture: The Mentality of the Great Tidewater Planters on the Eve of the Revolution(Princeton:
Princeton University Press, ). On the switch to grains, see Carville V. Earle,The Evo-
lution of a Tidewater Settlement Pattern: All Hallow’s Parish, Maryland, –(Chi-
cago: University of Chicago Geography Department, ), esp. –; Allan Kulikoff,
Tobacco and Slaves: The Development of Southern Cultures in the Chesapeake, –
(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, ), esp. ; and esp.The Diary of
Colonel Landon Carter of Sabine Hall, –, ed. Jack P. Green,  vols. (Charlottes-
ville: University Press of Virginia, ), :–, ,  (on English agronomy), :
(on turnips in rotation). An important demurrer to an English agricultural ‘‘revolution’’
is G. E. Fussell, ‘‘Science and Practice in Eighteenth-Century British Agriculture,’’Agri-
cultural History (): –.
. See David F. Allmendinger Jr.,Ruffin: Family and Reform in the Old South(New
York: Oxford University Press, ), esp. –. Quotation fromIncidents of My Life:
Edmund Ruffin’s Autobiographical Essays, ed. David F. Allmendinger Jr. (Charlottesville:
University Press of Virginia for the Virginia Historical Society, ), .
. On European chemistry, esp. Liebig’s in England, see J. D. Sykes, ‘‘Agriculture and
Science,’’ inThe Victorian Countryside, ed. G. E. Mingay (London: Routledge and Kegan
Paul, ), :–. Ruffin’s response and significance is summarized inEdmund
Ruffin: Nature’s Management—Writings on Landscape and Reform, –, ed. Jack
Temple Kirby (Athens: University of Georgia Press, ), xxiii–xxv.
. Ruffin’s South Carolina Institute address was printed eight years later inSouthern
Planter ( July ): –, and (August ): –. This version (slightly different
from the original text) is reprinted in Kirby,Edmund Ruffin, – (quotation, ).
. On nineteenth-century agricultural ‘‘improvers’’ north and south, and the sig-
nificance of guano, see Steven Stoll’s invaluableLarding the Lean Earth: Soil and Society
in Nineteenth-Century America(New York: Hill and Wang, ), esp. –. Ironically
(I think), Avery Craven acknowledged and applauded the introduction of guano and
credited it above marl in the Chesapeake’s successful ‘‘reform.’’ See Craven,Soil Ex-
haustion, esp. .
. William M. Mathew,Edmund Ruffin and the Crisis of Slavery in the Old South: The
Failure of Agricultural Reform(Athens: University of Georgia Press, ). I have treated
Craven, Ruffin, and historical memory of ‘‘soil exhaustion’’ in somewhat more detail
inPoquosin, –, andEdmund Ruffin, xii–xviii. On the antebellum southern food
supply and exports, see the works of the historical geographer Sam Bowers Hilliard:


   – 
Free download pdf