1
Removing the Seal: Nat Turner’s Apocalyptic Mission
Ben Parten
Hist. 4990
Dr. Winship
Fall 2014
2
On August 21, 1831, the quiet Virginia countryside of Southampton County erupted into
racial violence. That morning, seven black slaves took up arms in open rebellion and brought
“indiscriminate carnage” upon the unsuspecting white population.1 When all the swords were
returned to their scabbards and the rebellion was subdued, mutilated bodies—some not even out
of their beds—of white men, women, and children littered plantations around Jerusalem,
Virginia.2 Newspapers were immediately incited with fervent speculation as to who could have
been behind such “infernal brigandage.”3 Over time it became clear that the rebellion’s leader
and eventual namesake was a “fanatic preacher” named Nat Turner. 4
Turner was able to elude capture for more than two months, and, during that time, the
newspapers portrayed him as an overzealous preacher motivated by a desire for vengeance and
bloodlust. The Constitutional Whig, for example, claimed he was “stimulated exclusively by
fanatical revenge” and was “perhaps mislead by some hallucination of his imagined spirit of
prophecy.”5 Another compared Turner and his band of rebels to a “parcel of blood thirsty wolves
rushing down from the Alps.”6 When finally apprehended, he sat down with a local attorney—
Thomas Gray—to give his account of the motives and tactics behind the revolt. However, his
testimony—later titled The Confessions of Nat Turner—both reinforced and undermined his
fabricated public persona. One on hand, Turner claimed to have communicated with God
1
The Constitutional Whig, Richmond, Va, 26 September 1831 in Henry Irving Tragle, The Southampton Slave Revolt
of 1831; a Compilation of Source Material (Amherst, University of Massachusetts Press, 1971., 1971), 95.
2
Kenneth S. Greenberg and Nat Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an
Introduction by Kenneth S. Greenberg, The Bedford Series in History and Culture (Boston : Bedford Books of St.
Martin’s Press, c1996., 1996), 49.
3
The Richmond Enquirer, 30 August 1831 in Tragle, The Southampton Slave Revolt of 1831; a Compilation of Source
Material, 44.
4
Ibid.
5
The Constitutional Whig, Richmond, Va, 29 August 1831 in Tragle, The Southampton Slave Revolt of 1831, a
Compilation of Source Material, 53.
6
The Richmond Enquirer, 30 August 1831 in Tragle, The Southampton Slave Revolt of 1831, a Compilation of Source
Material, 43.
3
through a series of cryptic revelations and visions. To the white audience of Southern Virginia,
his description of such occurrences certainly affirmed his visage as a fanatic. On the other hand,
the inclusion of such revelations and visions allowed Turner to transform his testimony into a
spiritual autobiography, revealing that his revolt was driven not by vengeance as the newspapers
reported but by his own religiosity. Whereas Gray and the white community perceived Turner as
a deranged reincarnation of revolutionaries like Gabriel Prosser or Touissant L’Ouverture,
Turner believed his rebellion to be something much more than a mere political uprising. A close
textual analysis of his Confessions reveals that Turner understood his rebellion to be an earthly
component of God’s final judgment, and he consciously framed the Confessions in a way that
affirmed his perceived spiritual authority. Completely unbeknownst to Gray, Turner employed a
specific style of biblical rhetoric which allowed him to rhetorically connect his rebellion to the
book of Revelation and take on apocalyptic importance.
Of the scholars interested in the Turner Rebellion, very few have actually incorporated
Turner’s religious understanding into their scholarship. The far more conventional approach to
the Turner rebellion fits the mold of traditional historical scholarship—analyzing the rebellion
over time and space. As a result, analytical study of the rebellion as an event often supersedes
any interpretive analysis of the Confessions or, more importantly, the religious theology in which
it contains. For example, in Religion and the Making of Nat Turner’s Virginia, Randolph
Ferguson Scully identifies the rebellion as a seminal moment in the biracial history of Virginia
evangelicalism. According to Scully, the Turner rebellion caused white evangelicals to tamp
down the religious freedom of their black slaves, leading to the development of a paternalistic,
4
proslavery version of Christianity.7 Similarly, scholars like Douglas R. Egerton and Louis P.
Masur place Turner and his rebellion in the broader discourse of slavery, abolition, and black
resistance ideologically dividing continental North America and altering the colonial order of the
British Atlantic.8 Egerton and Masur both argue that Turner’s rebellion holds a special place in
the American tradition of black resistance and black nationalism. Though this conventional
approach to understanding Turner’s rebellion is without a doubt valid and highly important, it
downplays the significance of a major factor in the story of Nat Turner: Turner’s own religious
voice emanating from the text of the Confessions.
In contrast, scholars Anthony Santoro and M. Cooper Harriss have both avoided the
traditional approach to Nat Turner and placed the Confessions at the center of their scholarship.
Unlike Egerton, Masur, and Scully, Santoro and Harriss are primarily concerned with
deconstructing Turner’s personal theology and uncovering the religious motives guiding the
revolt. However, both Santoro and Harriss miss the mark. Santoro only goes so far as to argue
that there is “a discernable prophetic voice” hidden within the document.9 To Santoro, when
Turner’s biblical allusions are viewed collectively and traced to their original contexts, “a
coherent, prophetic narrative emerges” that highlights the sins of Virginia society. 10 Thus,
according to Santoro, Turner believed himself to be the nineteenth century successor to the Old
7
Randolph Ferguson Scully, Religion and the Making of Nat Turner’s Virginia : Baptist Community and Conflict,
1740-1840 / Randolph Ferguson Scully, The American South Series (Charlottesville : University of Virginia Press,
2008., 2008).
8
Douglas E. Egerton, “Nat Turner in a Hemispheric Context,” and Louis P. Masur, “Nat Turner and Sectional Crisis,”
in Kenneth S. Greenberg, Nat Turner : A Slave Rebellion in History and Memory / Edited by Kenneth S. Greenberg
(Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 2003., 2003), 134.
9
Anthony Santoro, “The Prophet in His Own Words: Nat Turner’s Biblical Construction,” The Virginia Magazine of
History and Biography 116, no. 2 (January 1, 2008): 116.
10
Ibid.
5
Testament prophetic tradition, and he manipulated his testimony in way that affirmed his
perceived prophetic authority.
Harriss’s interpretation of the Confessions moves well beyond Santoro’s assessment.
Whereas Santoro is reticent to identify Turner with anything more celestial than the Old
Testament prophetic tradition, Harriss suggests Nat viewed his rebellion as having a special
place in the “history of salvation.”11 He claims Turner understood his rebellion to be the
“historical culmination of biblical interpretation,” making it a part of a “newer testament” in the
interaction between God and the salvation of humankind.12 Like Harriss and Santoro, this essay
will deviate from the traditional historical approach to Turner by analyzing his religious
understanding hidden within the text of the Confessions. However, unlike Santoro and Harriss, it
will strictly examine the ways Turner affirmed his spiritual authority by linking his rebellion
with the apocalyptic story of Revelation.
The major obstacle hindering any analysis of the Confessions of Nat Turner is the
unavoidable volatility of the text. Since Nat dictated his story to Thomas Gray, it is Gray, not
Turner, who is the singular author of the physical text. Gray’s role in creating the document has
led some to seriously doubt its veracity and authenticity. In other words, scholars are conflicted
as to what Turner’s actual words are and what are Gray’s own dramatic emendations. Scholars
like Seymour Gross and Eileen Bender go so far as to completely disregard Turner’s influence
over the text, referring to it not as the Confessions but as “Gray’s pamphlet.” 13 They posit that
Gray made a “deliberate attempt to depict” Turner as an overzealous “religious maniac” in order
11
M. Cooper Harriss, “On the Eirobiblical: Critical Mimesis and Ironic Resistance in The Confessions of Nat Turner,”
Biblical Interpretation 21, no. 4–5 (November 25, 2013): 492, doi:10.1163/15685152-2145P0002.
12
Ibid.
13
Seymour L. Gross and Eileen Bender, “History, Politics and Literature: The Myth of Nat Turner,” American
Quarterly 23, no. 4 (October 1, 1971): 493, doi:10.2307/2711703.
6
to “short-circuit any disturbing thoughts about the institution of slavery.” 14 As Bender and Gross
point out, if Gray could successfully portray Turner as a “gloomy fanatic,” he could lay blame on
his “over-wrought mind” 15and distance the rebellion from the “structure of the slave-master
relationship.”16 Also, highlighting Turner’s perceived fanaticism served as a form of assurance to
the white community. Immediately after the revolt, reports circulated that the Turner rebellion
was a part of a larger multi-state slave conspiracy.17 Gray allays those fears by showing that
Turner’s rebellion was “purely parochial” and concocted by a lone zealot.18
Other scholars even point to Gray’s personal agenda and family background as a major
liability when discussing the composition of the text. Gray— a recently disinherited son to a
wealthy Southampton County planter—committed countless hours of research on Turner in order
to gain access to him once he was finally apprehended. According to David F. Allmendinger,
Gray visited the sites of the massacre and published an anonymous letter to John Hampden
Peasants of the Richmond Constitutional Whig recounting the events of the rebellion prior to his
interview with Turner. His open letter deviated from the other on sight accounts previously
published and mirrored the chronology of events found in the second half of the Confessions. It
can be understood, as Allmendinger suggests, that Gray had already began preparing the
manuscript for the Confessions long before he sat down with Turner.19 Deeply in debt and fully
aware of the public intrigue surrounding the rebellion as well as its gory details, it is also within
14
Ibid.
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 41.
16
Gross and Bender, “History, Politics and Literature,” 494.
17
The Richmond Inquirer, 20 September 1831 in Tragle, The Southampton Slave Revolt of 1831; a Compilation of
Source Material, 85.
18
Gross and Bender, “History, Politics and Literature,” 492.
19
David F. Allmendinger, Jr, "The Construction of the Confessions of Nat Turner in Kenneth S. Greenberg, Nat
Turner : A Slave Rebellion in History and Memory / Edited by Kenneth S. Greenberg (Oxford ; New York : Oxford
University Press, 2003., 2003), 24.
15
7
reason to suggest Gray saw an opportunity to reap a financial reward by publishing the
Confessions and altering the text in a way that highlighted its sensational and overtly violent
elements.
Yet other scholars are not so quick to ignore Turner’s role in the making of the
Confessions. For example, Eric Sundquist argues that Turner’s “voice” remains “strongly
present” throughout the first half of the document.20 While he concedes the second half of the
document—the part recounting the enactment and suppression of the rebellion—to Gray’s
editorial handiwork, he points to the congruency of Turner’s “thought” and “vision” as evidence
for its authenticity.21 Therefore, according to Sundquist, Turner must be considered a legitimate
author, and his influence over the text should be read as a “strategic extension of his resistance to
slavery.”22 To Sundquist, the “scriptural quality” of the text, along with its “symbology and
mysticism” are examples of how Turner circumvented Gray’s editorial control to communicate
with a larger audience. 23 What is more, Sundquist entertains the possibility that Nat utilized the
“tricksterism of African American folk life” to manipulate both Gray and the text.24 As Sundquist
puts it, “In offering his mystique of fanaticism to the public, Turner appears to have submitted to
Gray’s objectification while at the same time donning it as a mask, achieving by contrast his own
dynamic and articulate subjectivity.”25 In other words, Gray was the “perfect amanuensis for
20
Eric J. Sundquist, To Wake the Nations : Race in the Making of American Literature / Eric J. Sundquist (Cambridge,
Mass. : Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1993., 1993), 21.
21
Ibid.
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid.
24
Ibid., 49.
25
Ibid., 50.
8
Turner” because his willingness to cast Turner as a religious fanatic gave Turner the medium
needed to convey his own biblical narrative and connect his revolt to the story of Revelation. 26
However, to understand how Turner communicated the apocalyptic nature of his revolt,
one must first understand how enslaved African Americans understood and engaged with the
bible. To slaves, the bible was more than a sacred text. It was a device that mediated their status
as slaves because through the bible, the omnipotent voice of God superseded the voice of their
oppressive masters. Therefore, the bible and its teachings provided the slaves with an
opportunity to escape the hegemony of their earthly masters and submit to the kind and
sympathetic rule of their heavenly master. Put simply, the bible “helped a people imagine
themselves as something other, in another world, different from what their immediate situation
reflected or demanded.”27 In much the same way, biblical language was a universally familiar
“lingua franca” for slaves to communicate through.28 Though individual slave experiences varied
according to one’s own plantation and master, biblical stories, allusions and rhetoric became a
conduit for slaves to discuss the trials of both their individual and collective experiences.
Additionally, to circumvent their institutionalized illiteracy, African Americans engaged
with the bible through the oral tradition. In the pre-Nat Turner era, religious instruction for slaves
came from an underground network of black preachers who conducted secret camp meetings.
The preaching of this “invisible institution” extoled biblical passages and stories that dissented
from the Gospel offered to the slaves by their white masters29. Slaves would then commit these
26
Santoro, “The Prophet in His Own Words,” 116.
Vincent L. Wimbush, The Bible and African Americans : A Brief History / Vincent L. Wimbush, Facets (Minneapolis,
MN : Fortress Press, c2003., 2003), 4.
28
Cooper Harriss, “On the Eirobiblical,” 471.
29
Albert J. Raboteau, Slave Religion : The “Invisible Institution” in the Antebellum South / Albert J. Raboteau
(Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 2004., 2004).
27
9
stories and verses to their memory and rehearse them aloud, often improvising the passages as he
or she went along.30 As a result, the version of the bible slaves came to know and understand was
“filtered through and revised by a process of oral/aural transmission and translation.”31
Moreover, without access to canonical text, the chapter-verse format of scripture was lost on the
slave preachers and their congregations. Traditional practices of quoting and citing scripture was
replaced by alternative forms of expression like paraphrasing and storytelling that relied on
“vivid imagery” and “dramatic delivery.”32 Since slaves could not textually interact with the
written word of God, their recreations were often imprecise and ostensibly vague to an outside
viewer. However, slaves incorporated this type of biblical rhetoric into folk life in such a way
that it became universally understood within the slave community.
M. Cooper Harriss has devised the term “eirobiblical” to describe this imprecise and
often unstable mode of biblical expression. 33According to Harriss, eirobiblical rhetoric is
rhetoric that has an “implied scripture,” and it is made up of language that while not canonical,
mimics the “cadence” and “imagery” of traditional biblical passages.34 Furthermore, it depicts
stories and circumstances that could have derived from the bible but has no “stable or specific
biblical citation.”35 Harriss purposely created the term with Nat Turner in mind. Throughout the
Confessions, Turner employs language and allusions that are thematically connected to bible. For
example, after seeing white and black spirits engaged in heavenly battle, he claims God spoke to
him saying, “Such is your luck, such you are called to see, and let it come rough or smooth, you
30
Allen Dwight Callahan, The Talking Book : African Americans and the Bible / Allen Dwight Callahan (New Haven :
Yale University Press, c2006., 2006), 11.
31
Cooper Harriss, “On the Eirobiblical,” 473.
32
Raboteau, Slave Religion, 235.
33
Cooper Harriss, “On the Eirobiblical,” 476.
34
Ibid.
35
Ibid.
10
must surely bear it.”36 The passage qualifies as eirobiblical for a number of different reasons. For
one, it is syntactically similar to a traditional bible verse, and it mimics the cadence and diction
of the King James bible. Also, the passage has no clear biblical citation, yet the dualism of
“rough” and “smooth” is a biblical trope found in passages like Luke 3:5 and Isaiah 40:4.37
While it would be easy to simply attribute Nat’s language to his background as a
preacher, Harris, agreeing with Sundquist, asserts that Nat used eirobiblical language to establish
scriptural authority and undermine Gray’s attempts to confine his revolt to the political realm.
Though Turner was by all accounts literate, his religious interactions would have no doubt been
filtered through the prism of African American religious rhetoric and folk ways that employed
such eirobiblical language. Therefore, as Nat is undermining Gray’s intentions and deliberately
transforming his testimony into an apocalyptic narrative, it goes largely unnoticed by Gray and
the white community unfamiliar with the modes of religious expression found amongst the
slaves.
The Confessions is not necessarily Turner’s conversion story, as some might suggest.38 A
more appropriate way to understand it is as his spiritual autobiography, for it recounts how he
was slowly awakened to his “great purpose.”39 He begins by telling Thomas Gray that to “give a
history of the motives which induced me” to carry out the rebellion, “I must go back to the days
of my infancy, and even before I was born.”40 According to Turner, his exceptional character was
36
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 46.
37
Ibid.
38
Joseph Drexler-Dreis, “Nat Turner’s Rebellion as a Process of Conversion,” Black Theology: An International
Journal 12, no. 3 (November 2014): 230–50.
39
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 44.
40
Ibid.
11
recognized when, at the age of three or four, he was able to tell his playmates of an event that
happened before he was born. Overhearing him, his mother called on others to witness her
remarkable son. After listening to him, they all agreed that Turner would “surely be a prophet”
since the Lord had “shewn [him] things that had happened before [his] birth.”41 His father and
mother went on to tell him that he was born with “certain marks on [his] head and breast” which
confirmed to them that he was destined for “some great purpose.”42 His exceptionality was
further highlighted by the way he learned to read and write. Turner claimed that he became
literate with “the most perfect ease,” though he had “no recollection of learning the alphabet.”43
One day, “to the astonishment of the family,” when given a book to keep from crying, he “began
spelling the names of the different objects” found in the book.44 From this day forth, his
intelligence became a source of wonder to all in the community both white and black.
Even here, in the early lines of his Confessions, Turner is making it known that the
motives behind his revolt were purely spiritual and not political. By explaining that he was born
with extraordinary abilities—given to him by God—he is staking claim to esoteric knowledge
and displaying a spiritual authority over worldly matters. He is, in other words, establishing
himself as a prophet, and his status as a prophet is validated by the presence of similarities
between himself and the Old Testament prophets. For instance, in Jeremiah 1, God tells
Jeremiah, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I sanctified you;
and I ordained you a prophet to the nations.”45 Then again, Isaiah claims, “The Lord has called
41
Ibid.
Ibid.
43
Ibid., 45.
44
Ibid.
45
Jer. 1:5 New King James Version
42
12
Me from the womb; from the matrix of My mother He has made mention of My name.”46 By
claiming that to explain his revolt, he must go back to the time “before [he] was born” and that
he was born with “certain marks”47 on his body indicating a divine purpose, Nat is stepping into
the “prophetic tradition” of prenatal callings set forth by Jeremiah and Isaiah.48 Similarly, both
his uncanny intelligence and his ability to know things that he could not have known is evocative
of Luke 2, when Jesus, as a child, is found listening to and questioning the Jewish teachers after
Passover. Like Nat, all who witnessed Jesus’s unnatural intelligence and ability to converse with
the teachers “were astonished at his understanding and answers.”49 However, Turner’s allusion to
Jesus in this instance should not be interpreted to mean that he sees himself as a recreation of
Christ. Instead, it should be understood that just as Christ had a special earthly communion with
God, Turner also shares a similar divine relationship with the Lord.
Once Turner establishes that he was born with exceptional, God given abilities, he tells
Gray that he immediately sought to increase his religious understanding. Noting the austerity of
his ways and the fertility of his mind, the other slaves quickly became enamored with Turner’s
“superior judgment” that they felt was “perfected by Divine inspiration.”50 However, according
to Turner, he did not receive such inspiration until the day he was praying by his plough. He
claims “the Spirit spoke” to him by saying “Seek ye the kingdom of Heaven and all things shall
be added unto you,” a rephrasing of Matthew 6:33 and Luke 12:3151. Gray, understanding the
46
Isa. 49:1
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 44.
48
Santoro, “The Prophet in His Own Words,” 117.
49
Lk. 2:47
50
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 45.
51
Ibid.,46
47
13
clear biblical reference, abruptly questions, “What do you mean by the Spirit.”52 Seemingly
unfazed by Gray’s incredulous inquiry, Turner responds that it was the same “Spirit that spoke to
the prophets in former days.”53 God’s revelation to Nat in the form of Matthew 6:33 and Luke
12:31 is vital to Nat’s narrative because it verifies his prophetic calling alluded to by his
remarkable childhood, and it allows him to fully claim spiritual authority. Since he has now
claimed to be in communication with the same Spirit that “animated Moses,” shielded Daniel,
and conquered cities for Joshua, Turner can now start to explain the theology of his spiritual
calling.54 Knowing that his fellow slaves had full confidence in his prophetic abilities, Turner
began “telling them something was about to happen that would terminate in fulfilling the great
promise” God had made to him in the rephrasing of Matthew 6:33 and Luke 12:31.55
At this point, Turner has not given any indication as to what his purpose might be. It was
not until his first vision that he began to explain the apocalyptic nature of his calling. After
briefly running away from his plantation and then being commanded to return by the Lord,
Turner claims to have had a vision that revealed his purpose in greater detail. According to
Turner, he saw “white spirits and black spirits engaged in battle, and the sun was darkened—the
thunder rolled in the Heavens, and blood flowed in streams,” and he heard a voice saying, “Such
is your luck, such as you are called to see, and let it come rough or smooth, you must surely bear
it.”56
Though he only briefly describes the vision, it is essential to his narrative because it
connects his apocalyptic calling to the milieu of racial slavery. Turner, understanding the racially
52
Ibid.
Ibid.
54
Santoro, “The Prophet in His Own Words,” 126.
55
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 146.
56
Ibid., 46
53
14
bifurcated environment of Southern Virginia, specifically references “white spirits and black
spirits” to give a sense of locality to the visions he claims to have received.57 Turner was, to say
it in another way, illustrating to Gray and the white audience that God “bears a tremendously
local and specific interest” in the standing racial conditions of Southern Virginia.58 Also, since
the interaction is described as a battle, Turner is indicating that the manifestation of his calling
would result in some form of violence. What is more, God’s instruction that the heavenly battle
would be—whether “rough or smooth”—Turner’s “luck” and that he should “bear it,” authorizes
Nat as an instrument of God’s eschatological plan.59
Similarly, he uses the vision to collapse the distance between his calling and God’s
Judgement. The same imagery of the sun being darkened, blood flowing in streams, and thunder
rolling in the heavens is a common theme found in biblical prophecies foretelling God’s
judgment. Through the prophet Joel, God reveals, that during the time of Judgment “young men
shall see visions” and there will be “wonders in the heavens and in the earth: Blood and fire and
pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the
coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD.”60 Then again in Matthew 24, Jesus describes
judgment as a time when “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars
will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.”61 Fully aware of these
passages, Turner uses them as a “biblical template” for his own narrative.62 He mimics the
57
Ibid.
M. Cooper Harriss, “On the Eirobiblical: Critical Mimesis and Ironic Resistance in The Confessions of Nat Turner,”
Biblical Interpretation 21, no. 4–5 (November 25, 2013): 486.
59
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 46.
60
Joel 2: 28-31
61
Matt. 24:29
62
M. Cooper Harriss, “Where Is the Voice Coming From?: Rhetoric, Religion, and Violence in ‘The Confessions of
Nat Turner.,’” Soundings (00381861) 89, no. 1/2 (Spring/Summer 2006): 152.
58
15
language found in these passages in order to foreshadow and legitimize his own forthcoming
apocalyptic mission. It is also important to note that the same imagery is found in both the Old
and New testaments of the Bible. Since the two testaments are understood to be “constructed
typologically,” it is entirely possible that Nat is constructing his own narrative to be seen as
fulfillment of both the Old and New Testament prophecies.63 In other words, Turner is
legitimizing his rebellion’s status as a part of God’s judgment by rhetorically synchronizing it
with the biblical prophetic and apocalyptic tradition.
According to Turner, the vision of the battle reinvigorated his efforts to prepare himself
for his calling, and it confirmed that he was to be an instrument of God’s impending judgment.
After the vision, he claimed to have “sought more than ever to obtain true holiness before the
great day of judgment should appear.”64 Finally, he claims he was “made perfect” by the Lord,
the Holy Ghost spoke to him saying, “Behold me as I stand in the Heavens.”65 When he looked
up, he saw “lights in the sky” which were “the lights of the Saviour’s hands, stretched forth from
east to west, even as they were extended on Calvary for the redemption of sinners.”66
This passage is an ideal example of how Turner employed eirobiblical language to
connect his rebellion to God’s judgment. The passage has no clear biblical citation, but the
phrase “Behold me as I stand in the Heavens” coupled with image of Christ with arms
outstretched arms mirrors Isaiah 65.67 Speaking through Isaiah, God claims, “I said, Behold me,
behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name. I have spread out my hands all day to a
63
Ibid.
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 47.
65
Ibid.
66
Ibid.
67
Santoro, “The Prophet in His Own Words,” 126.
64
16
rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts. ”68 The
allusion is without a doubt vague, but when considering the aforementioned reality that slaves
often communicated scripture through paraphrasing and dramatic description, the allusion
becomes all the more clear. By alluding to 65, Anthony Santoro suggests Turner is calling
attention to Isaiah’s prophetic “warning of God’s coming wrath.”69 In this instance, Isaiah is
referring to the Israelites who have turned their back on God. Once again, God—speaking
through Isaiah—foreshadows his impending judgment on the obstinate Israelites by claiming, “I
will number you for the sword, and ye shall all bow down to the slaughter: because when I
called, you did not answer; when I spake, ye did not hear; but did evil before my eyes, and did
choose that wherein I delighted not.”70 Though God is obviously referring to the Israelites,
Turner’s allusion to Isaiah 65 implies that he is paralleling the obstinacy of the Israelites with the
behavior of the Christian slaveholders. However, Gray’s inability to recognize the eirobiblical
language shared by Turner and his fellow slaves allows the allusion to go unnoticed.
Shortly after the vision of Christ hanging in the Heavens, Turner claims to have
“discovered drops of blood on the corn as though it were dew from heaven.”71 Additionally, he
found leaves with “hieroglyphic characters” drawn in blood “representing the figures [he] has
seen before in the heavens.”72 This discovery was a seminal moment for Turner’s narrative, for it
is how he signals that Christ is about to make his triumphant return. He uses the description of
the blood found on the leaves and the corn stalks to mean that “the blood of Christ” that
68
Isa. 65:1-2 KJV
Santoro, “The Prophet in His Own Words,” 126.
70
Isa. 65:12
71
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 47.
72
Ibid.
69
17
“ascended to heaven for the salvation of sinners” was now literally returning to earth, marking a
beginning of Christ’s second coming.73
What is more, according to Turner, God revealed to him that Christ was about to take off
“the yoke he had borne for the sins of men and the great day of judgment was at hand.” Though a
“yoke” is not a common symbol found in the bible, Turner uses it to represent the burden of sin
Christ willfully accepted on Calvary. However, since Christ was about to take the yoke off, he
would soon abrogate his redemptive powers and place the onus of sin back on to the shoulders of
mankind. In other words, once Christ removes the “yoke,” repentance of sin will be unattainable
and mankind would be judged for its sin. Therefore, according to Turner’s narrative, Christ was
slowing evolving from the savior of the New Testament to the “warrior judge” that would return
to earth and “redeem humanity by force” found in Revelation.74
Just as Christ was evolving in heaven, Turner’s earthly purpose was also evolving. His
discovery of the blood and subsequent revelation that Christ was laying down the yoke signaled
to Turner that it was time to take action. He began preaching about God’s impending judgment
to any who would listen. According to Turner, when telling a white man—Elheldred T.
Brantley—about his calling, Brantley immediately “ceased from his wickedness” and underwent
a “cutaneous eruption.”75 As Turner puts it, “blood ozed from the pores of his [Brantley’s] skin,”
but after Turner prayed for Brantley’s healing, Brantley was healed. God then appeared to Turner
and instructed that just “as the Saviour had been baptised,” so should he and Brantley.76
However, the white community “reviled” their relationship and refused to allow them to be
73
Ibid.
Santoro, “The Prophet in His Own Words,” 125.
75
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 47.
76
Ibid.
74
18
officially baptized by the church.77 Undeterred, Turner led Brantley to the water where they were
both “baptised by the Spirit.”78
On the surface, Turner’s interaction with Brantley does not appear to hold any real
apocalyptic importance, but it is actually a critical moment in his spiritual autobiography. On one
hand, his interaction with Brantley and subsequent baptism further confirms his spiritual
authority. For example, Brantley’s “skin eruption” is described in a way that is similar to how
leprosy—a biblical sign for sinfulness—is described in the Bible.79 In Leviticus 13, God spoke to
Moses and Aaron claiming, “When a man has on the skin of his body a swelling, a scab, or a
bright spot” that turns into leprosy, the priest “shall pronounce him unclean.”80 Establishing
Brantley as the leper allows Turner to exhibit his spiritual power by praying and having Brantley
healed. On the other, Turner’s inclusion of his baptism in the Confessions serves as a symbolic
gesture of his preparedness. Early in the Gospels, Christ undergoes a similar situation. He is
baptized by John the Baptist, signaling that he was now prepared to begin his earthly ministry.
As he has done previously, Turner uses the example of Christ as a template to show that, like
Christ’s baptism, his baptism also marks the beginning of his earthly calling.
On May 12, 1828, Turner claims the Spirit appeared to him again, telling him “the
Serpent was loosened, and Christ had laid down the yoke.”81 Redemption, as Turner presents it,
was now unattainable and God’s final judgment was beginning. Additionally, he is making it
known that certain events of Revelation was beginning to take place. His specific reference to the
77
Ibid.
Ibid.
79
Makungu M. Akinyela, “Battling the Serpent: Nat Turner, Africanized Christianity, and a Black Ethos,” Journal of
Black Studies 33, no. 3 (January 1, 2003): 276.
80
Lev. 13 1-3. KJV. The English Standard Translation uses the word eruption instead of scab.
81
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 47–48.
78
19
Serpent being “loosened” mimics the language found in the book of Revelation. Revelation 20
explains that that the Serpent, “who is the Devil and Satan,” would be bound while Christ enacts
his thousand year reign.82 After the thousand years, the Serpent will be“loosed out of his prison”
to “deceive the nations” and “gather them together to battle.”83 Once the Serpent is “devoured”
and thrown into a “lake of fire and brimstone,” God will begin his final judgment of the earth.
More importantly, however, Turner claims God instructed him “fight against the
Serpent,” giving him an active role in the judgment of earth 84 He tells Thomas Gray that when
finally given the sign to commence his insurrection, “the seal was removed” from his lips.
Turner’s reference to the seal leads one to understand that Nat viewed his role in judgment as
one similar to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.85 In Revelation, John asserts that he saw
Christ open a series of seven seals. The first four of those seals released four separate horses
which would bring four different modes of destruction upon the earth. Turner acts in accordance
with the second seal—the fiery red horse that would “take peace from the earth” and instruct
“people to kill one another.”86
Similarly, Turner uses the passage to make it clear that not everyone will have the same
fate once judgment comes. By tagging the phrase, “for the time was approaching when the first
should be last and the last should be first” onto the passage, Turner is referencing, albeit
incorrectly, Luke 13.87 In Luke 13, Christ reflects on God’s judgment instructs those listening to
82
Rev. 20:2.
Rev. 20:7-8. KJV
84
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 48.
85
Ibid.
86
Rev. 6:4.
87
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 48.
83
20
him to strive for the “narrow gate.”88 He claims that there will be a time when the “Master (God)
of the house” will “shut the door,” but many people will stand outside and beg to be let in.89
However, Christ says the “Master” will turn his back on those “workers of iniquity” who claim
to have once “ate and drank” with him, destining them for destruction when judgment comes.90
Christ goes on to say that following God’s judgment, many will come to “sit down in the
Kingdom of God,” but it will be a place where there will be “last who are first, and there are first
who will be last.”91
Turner integrates this biblical story into his own story and the environment in which he
finds himself. To Turner, the “workers of iniquity” are typified by the slaveholders who prosper
by treating their laboring slaves unfairly.92 Like the poor souls in the passage, the slaveholders
claim to be faithful Christians, yet they have no misgivings about tearing slave families apart,
brutally beating their field hands, or withholding the Gospel from their slaves whenever they see
fit. Likewise, though the phrase “the first should be last and the last should be first” refers to a
heavenly union between both Jews (the first) and gentiles (the last) under Christ, Turner includes
it in his testimony to reinforce his belief that judgment will unite the earth. 93 Turner, fully aware
of the social status held by he and his fellow slaves, uses the passage to relay that the slaves will
be exalted for their faithfulness as one of the “last,” just as non-slave holding whites will also be
exalted as one of the “first.”94
88
Lk 13:24.
Lk 13:25.
90
Lk 13: 26-27.
91
Lk 13: 29-30.
92
Lk. 13:26
93
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 48.
94
Ibid.
89
21
In the second half of the Confessions, Turner primarily recounts his version of the revolt
itself and establishes the chronology of the plantations he visited. Presumably, his spiritual
autobiography ends, but that does not mean he stops framing the document into a biblical
narrative. According to Turner, the final sign that instructed him to begin the revolt was a solar
eclipse. Again, Turner is utilizing the apocalyptic themes and imagery of Revelation to convey
the spiritual character guiding his uprising. In Revelation 6, for example, John claims “there was
a great earthquake; and the sun became black as a sackcloth, and moon became like blood.”95
Also, as he has done before, he harkens back to a trope of Revelation that has both an Old
Testament and a New Testament precedent. Isaiah 13, for instance, states that when the “day of
the Lord” arrives, “the stars of heaven and their constellations will not give their light; the sun
will be darkened in its going forth, and the moon will not cause its light to shine.”96 Again Mark
13 notes, “But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will
not give its light.”97 By alluding to such biblical themes, Turner is once again effectively
synchronizing his Confessions with the biblical language of Judgment. However, on a much
deeper, eschatological level, Turner is also proving that his rebellion stands as a fulfillment of
those ancient apocalyptic prophecies.
The details of Turner’s revolt are particularly gruesome. He and his gang traveled from
estate to estate killing any who came across their path and gaining followers with every coupe de
grâce. Neither age nor sex was spared. When Turner and his men descended upon the estate of
Turner’s owner—Mr. Joseph Travis—they struck down Travis and his wife during their sleep
using axes and hatchets. They left the estate, forgetting the young infant asleep in his or her
95
Rev. 6:12
Isah, 13:9-10
97
Mk. 13:24
96
22
cradle. Once they realized they had spared the baby from the same fate as his or her parents,
Turner sent Henry and Will to murder the sleeping toddler. Once again, when they arrived at the
house of Mrs. Reece, Turner and his men infiltrated her house and bludgeoned her to death in her
bed chamber. Stirred by the commotion, her son awoke only to be returned to “the sleep of
death.”98
Similar instances of extensive violence and murder occurred until Turner and his men
were met by a force of white men. Outgunned and becoming increasingly less organized, Turner
and his men were forced to face the reality that their insurrectionary dreams would be subdued.
Somehow Turner was able to escape the grasps of the white paramilitary force and reach a
concealed cave in a nearby forest. He remained at large from the end of August 1831 to October
30th when he was finally discovered and subsequently apprehended by Benjamin Phillips. On
November 11, 1831, ten days after dictating his Confessions to Thomas Gray, Nat Turner
approached the gallows and “betrayed no emotion” as he resigned himself to his fate.99
As definitive as the suppression of the revolt may have been, its significance and memory
lingered in the minds of white Virginians. The revolt rekindled fears of another Haiti and brought
back memories of thirty-one years prior when Gabriel Prosser marched on Richmond. Turner,
whether purposely or not, reopened the debate over slavery’s place within white Virginian
society. As Randolph Ferguson Scully asserts, “The Southampton revolt momentarily exposed
the racial and gendered frictions on which Antebellum Virginia’s social order rested.”100 Turner
“shattered” the white perceptions of “reciprocity, respect, and affection between master and
98
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 49.
99
The Norfolk Herald, Norfolk, Va., 15 November 1831, in Tragle, The Southampton Slave Revolt of 1831; a
Compilation of Source Material, 140.
100
Scully, Religion and the Making of Nat Turner’s Virginia, 1–2.
23
slave.”101 Furthermore, the revolt demonstrated the perils of living in a culture where
discontented black slaves outnumbered their white overlords and possessed the ability to take
concerted action against their social counterparts. In the 1832, the Virginia legislature held a
series of debates where permanent abolition of slavery was introduced. The debates over slavery
were complex, ideological as well as logistical discussions, but the end result centered around
emancipation and the removal of African Americans—both slave and free—from Virginia’s
shores. However, the “conservative reasoning”102 championed by Thomas Dew, grew strong and
plantation slavery remained a formidable pillar of Virginia for years to come.
Yet, this general narrative of the revolt’s aftermath does not seem to do justice to the
legacy of Nat Turner. Viewed only from the white perspective, through the lens of Civil War
historiography, this political assessment suppresses Turner’s rebellion by retaining it in the
political realm alone. However, a quick glance at the text of the Confessions reveals Turner
understood his rebellion to be something much more important than a political uprising. To
Turner, his rebellion was a pivotal component of Christ’s final reclaiming of the earth, placing
the rebellion far beyond the political arena and giving it eschatological importance. What is
more, Turner meticulously used language and other rhetorical conventions to subvert Gray's
editorial control and align the Confessions with the apocalyptic motifs of Revelation. When this
unique characteristic of Turner’s rebellion is considered, his legacy and significance is altered.
By citing divine inspiration and inconspicuously using language to circumvent Gray’s editorial
control, Turner effectively expands the existing paradigm of African American resistance. He
proves that language as well religious expression were both viable modes of resisting the South’s
101
Ibid., 2.
Greenberg and Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents / Edited with an Introduction by
Kenneth S. Greenberg, 25.
102
24
peculiar institution and asserting one’s self determination. Because of this added dimension,
Turner, as an individual, and his rebellion, as an event, is without comparison in the history of
American slave rebellions.
25
Works Cited
Akinyela, Makungu M. “Battling the Serpent: Nat Turner, Africanized Christianity, and a Black
Ethos.” Journal of Black Studies 33, no. 3 (January 1, 2003): 255–80.
Callahan, Allen Dwight. The Talking Book : African Americans and the Bible / Allen Dwight
Callahan. New Haven : Yale University Press, c2006., 2006.
Cooper Harriss, M. “On the Eirobiblical: Critical Mimesis and Ironic Resistance in The
Confessions of Nat Turner.” Biblical Interpretation 21, no. 4–5 (November 25, 2013):
469–93. doi:10.1163/15685152-2145P0002.
Drexler-Dreis, Joseph. “Nat Turner’s Rebellion as a Process of Conversion.” Black Theology: An
International Journal 12, no. 3 (November 2014): 230–50.
doi:10.1179/1476994814Z.00000000037.
Greenberg, Kenneth S. Nat Turner : A Slave Rebellion in History and Memory / Edited by
Kenneth S. Greenberg. Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 2003.
Greenberg, Kenneth S., and Nat Turner. The Confessions of Nat Turner and Related Documents /
Edited with an Introduction by Kenneth S. Greenberg. The Bedford Series in History and
Culture. Boston : Bedford Books of St. Martin’s Press, , 1996.
Gross, Seymour L., and Eileen Bender. “History, Politics and Literature: The Myth of Nat
Turner.” American Quarterly 23, no. 4 (October 1, 1971): 487–518.
doi:10.2307/2711703.
Harriss, M. Cooper. “Where Is the Voice Coming From?: Rhetoric, Religion, and Violence in
‘The Confessions of Nat Turner.’” Soundings (00381861) 89, no. 1/2 (Spring/Summer
2006): 135–70.
26
Raboteau, Albert J. Slave Religion : The “Invisible Institution” in the Antebellum South / Albert
J. Raboteau. Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 2004.
Santoro, Anthony. “The Prophet in His Own Words: Nat Turner’s Biblical Construction.” The
Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 116, no. 2 (January 1, 2008): 114–49.
Scully, Randolph Ferguson. Religion and the Making of Nat Turner’s Virginia : Baptist
Community and Conflict, 1740-1840 / Randolph Ferguson Scully. The American South
Series. Charlottesville : University of Virginia Press, 2008.
Sundquist, Eric J. To Wake the Nations : Race in the Making of American Literature / Eric J.
Sundquist. Cambridge, Mass. : Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1993., 1993.
Tragle, Henry Irving. The Southampton Slave Revolt of 1831; a Compilation of Source Material.
Amherst, University of Massachusetts Press, 1971.
Wimbush, Vincent L. The Bible and African Americans : A Brief History / Vincent L. Wimbush.
Facets. Minneapolis, MN : Fortress Press, 2003.