ipl-logo

Nat Turner Dbq

901 Words4 Pages

In the records of American history, Nat Turner stands as a complex figure, his legacy surrounded in controversy and debate. Admired by some as a heroic symbol of resistance against slavery, while viewed by others as a deranged man driven by madness.. Through documents and his timeline, you can answer the question and decide for yourself: Was Nat Turner a hero or madman? In document A “The Confessions of Nat Turner”, Nathainal Turner says to his lawyer in prison “As I child, I knew I surely would be a prophet, as the Lord had shown me visions of things that had happened before my birth. My father and mother said I was intended for some great purpose. I was a child of uncommon intelligence and I knew I was never meant to be a slave.” Some might …show more content…

The convention drew 70 delegates, including leaders like Frederick Douglass. Says “You had far better die—die immediately, than live slaves, and throw your misery upon your children. However much you and all of us may desire, there is not much hope of freedom without the shedding of blood. If you must bleed, let it all come at once--rather die freemen, than live to be slaves. The patriotic Nathaniel Turner was driven to desperation by the wrong and injustice of slavery. By force, his name has been recorded on the list of dishonor, but future generations will remember him among the noble and brave.” In Garnet's speech, he passionately urges enslaved individuals to choose death over continued enslavement, emphasizing the necessity of sacrificing for freedom. Garnet's words resonate with the sentiments of desperation felt by many enslaved people, including Nat Turner, who took extreme measures to resist the injustices of slavery. Turner's violent rebellion can also be interpreted as a heroic act of defiance against a dehumanizing system. While his actions resulted in bloodshed, they were driven by a desire for justice and a message to others. Garnet's assertion that Turner's name has been unjustly tarnished reflects a broader narrative of historical interpretation, where those who challenge

Open Document