www.appalachiacoal.com     B. L. Dotson-Lewis, webmaster

                                                                                                            
Appalachian Author, Jim Branscome


   
home    special collections      p 1      3        4        5       6       7           9  

   10      11       12      13       14       15       16       17     18    19     20     21     22     23      24
 

   The Case For Appalachian Studies 
page 2

     Historically, the first white settlers were the frontiersmen or "grazers" who talked of "elbow room" and who wanted no nearby neighbors.  What they were saying in economic terms was that they needed a great deal of woodland to profitably maintain their large herds of cattle and hogs, which ran wild in the woods, living off nuts, roots, and undergrowth.  For over 100 years the main source of income for these residents was livestock.  In the middle 1800's, an estimated 150,000 hogs and thousands of head of cattle moved through Asheville, the marketing center for western North Carolina.  Further north, an estimated 81,000 head of swine, alone, came through the Cumberland Gap from East Tennessee and East Kentucky.

     Hard on the heels of these early settlers were the real agricultural farmers who sought out the major river valleys where land could be cleared for larger farms.  To maintain these farms some capital and a large labor force was needed, and many of these early farms had slaves.  With this group also came the merchants and storekeepers who provided the essentials and luxuries which could not be manufactured locally.  Also, from this group came the educated individuals who could operate the schools and academies which sprang up wherever communities were large enough to pay a teacher and provide a building.  Generally, both groups of settlers were of similar origin, being British, Scots, Irish, with a sprinkling of Dutch or German.
                 By the middle of the 1800's, the South was still primarily an agricultural economy, and even that economy had a limited effect on the land.  For example, in 1860, only one-fifth of the total land surface in North Carolina was cleared and in use.  In Tennessee, the figure was 23 per cent.  Kentucky had 31 per cent, and these were figures for the entire state.  In the rougher mountainous regions, only isolated patches of land were under cultivation.

 next - page 3