Why is Slave and Citizen , Frank Tannenbaum's influential comparative book on slavery and race relations, still referenced by modern scholars? How is it that a book that is frequently described as flawed continues to inform contemporary scholarship on race and slavery? This article seeks to answer these questions by reconstructing some of the scholarly debates sparked by Slave and Citizen . Specifically, the article discusses how some of the central premises of Tannenbaum's approach continue to inform the work of current scholars. Three of these premises are discussed in some detail: first, that “Anglo” and “Latin” America constituted two separate entities; second, that race relations in each area were fundamentally different; and third, that differences in modern race relations could only be explained by their divergent “slave systems.”
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alejandro de la Fuente (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: