Quiz Prep Questions
Leon Litwack’s “Hellhounds” (full chapter – uploaded to Canvas in 2 parts)
You may use your typed or handwritten answers to these questions during the quiz. Your answers may be
brief but they must refer to specific examples and provide complete explanations for your thoughts. You may
use concise, specific bullet point answers or complete sentences. Complete sentences are not required.
You are not required to submit your answers.
1) What time period (or years) frames Litwack’s analysis of lynching violence?
Litwack’s analysis of lynching violence ranges from the 1890s to the start of World War One, which was
considered to be either near the end of the Gilded Age or the era of national reform in the Progressive Era.
2) As you read the chapter, note the various justifications and goals of anti-black lynching in the post-Civil War
(through 1960s) South (and the United States more generally). Again, these questions are answered throughout
the chapter. There is more than one answer to each question below.
a. What specific IDEOLOGIES (or beliefs) did white people use to justify racist lynching? (Your answer
should include responses to the following questions: Lynching defined black males as? Defined white
females as? Defined white males as? Lynching was used to control what three social groups – what
racial community, what racial group of males, and what racial group of females? How did lynching control
these groups?)
White people used sexist and racist stereotypes to define black men as criminals who did little more than
seek to rape white women. Lynching implied guilt, especially in the eyes of the white community, and the act
helped reinforce the idea of black men as criminals that are threats to the white order and society. Justified as
defending white women, lynching also emphasized the supposed vulnerability and fragility of white women
by being portrayed as one of the few ways to bring justice for white women, especially by white men who
argued white women were too fragile to have to relive the experience by recounting it in court. Thus,
lynching also defined white males as protectors of white women who were simply delivering justice to
criminals and rapists. Masculinity was enhanced, despite the cowardly mob mentality, and the white male
was seen as the upholder of Southern society.
Through lynching, blacks, black males, and white women were controlled by white males. Lynching
inspired terror in the black community, as anything that was interpreted as challenging white supremacy or
even a minor crime could result in a white mob arriving and lynching the victim. This fear encouraged
subordination and deference out of self-preservation, which discouraged political action and resistance by
blacks while also curbing economic success. Black males were targeted as stereotyped rapists and faced the
threat of even false accusation by whites. By targeting this group, white males undermined any semblance of
independence black males could have in society and ensured that they would be subordinate to even white
females in order to avoid the threat of death. White women were also controlled and restricted by white
males because the stereotype of black males as rapists was only reinforced by the practice of lynching. The
fear of black males by white women allowed white men to maintain control over them by arguing it was
necessary out of protection. The fragility of white women was thus emphasized and exploited by white men.
Thus, all three groups were further subordinated under white males by the practice of lynching.
b. What specific POLITICAL GOALS (or government related goals) did lynching serve?
Politically, lynching ensured that white rule was maintained in government by undermining black
participation in the political system under the threat of death. It highlighted the helplessness of blacks against
authorities, as lynching was extralegal and no consequences came out of the legal system to punish lynchers.
Thus, politically, lynching ensured that blacks would hesitate to express political opinion or seek to establish
themselves as a voting bloc by terrorizing those who would advocate for participation. The establishment of
white superiority was meant to never be challenged in government by blacks through, in part, the practice of
lynching.
c. What specific ECONOMIC GOALS (or financial/money-making goals) did lynching serve?
Economically, lynching targeted successful blacks in the South who managed to escape poverty and
accumulate wealth. Lynching discouraged economic mobility by blacks by targeting the successful and
claiming they were “uppity” and needed to be brought down as an example to other blacks. The notion of
black economic success, particularly success that eclipsed other blacks, was seen as a challenge to the notion
of white supremacy, which could not be tolerated. Thus, by targeting successful blacks, lynching ensured that
whites would encourage the poverty of blacks in order to prevent any challenge to subordination while
maintaining a large agricultural workforce for the largely agricultural southern economy.
d. What social group’s power and privilege was ultimately established and protected? (Name the race and
gender of this group. Note that this group includes the wealthy, middle class and impoverished).
White males of all classes had their privilege and power established and protected by the acts of lynching
and the stereotypes that were associated with the act. While wealthy whites benefited the most by virtue
of their position at the top of the social order, white males of all backgrounds benefited greatly from
subordinating the three social groups controlled by lynching.
e. What specific kinds of institutional power was protected?
White males protected institutional powers that they controlled. Government control remained in white hands
in the South after Reconstruction by intimidating and murdering prominent blacks who could argue for
political participation while intimidating the remaining populace. The overwhelming power of the
community as well as the white dominance of legal authorities and even white churches as well. Lynching
was used against those who attempted to exercise legal rights as well, such as the lynching of blacks who
attempted to testify against a white defendant. Business control was also never within the grasp of blacks and
those who achieved wealth were often lynched in the South in order to show other blacks what would happen
to those who attempted to elevate their social position. Thus, political, legal, and financial institutions all
were protected by the act of lynching.
MOST OF THE QUESTIONS THAT FOLLOW ARE ANSWERED IN ORDER AS YOU READ
THE CHAPTER.
3) How did lynching violence change in the 1890s United States?
Lynching violence changed in the U.S to be focused exclusively on the South. The continued settlement of
the West phased out lynching as a method of extralegal justice that was conducted largely on whites.
Instead, the South used lynching as a public ritual that focused almost exclusively on black men and
women in order to terrorize and subordinate the black generation that was born free during the
Reconstruction era. These lynchings also carried on far longer than the original methods used in the West
in order to make a public showing out of the murder.
4) Note all EXAMPLES OF LYNCHED BLACK WOMEN in the chapter. Briefly but specifically describe
these lynchings.
Example of lynched black women:
Mary Turner, a poor black woman, swore vengeance on those who lynched her black husband and was
lynched by hundreds of white men and women who were offended by the remarks. Hung upside down,
Mary was doused in gasoline, had her clothes burned off her, and, while burning alive, had her pregnant
abdomen split by a “knife ordinarily reserved for splitting hogs” (288), which caused her eight-month old,
premature infant to fall to the ground and be crushed underfoot. She was then shot hundreds of times over
by the mob to complete the lynching.
Luther Holbert’s wife was executed alongside her husband after her husband was allegedly accused of
murdering his white boss. The two had their fingers and ears chopped off and sold in front of them. Holbert
was beaten until his skull fractured and one of his eyes “‘hung by a shred from the socket’” (289) and both
had huge strips of flesh pulled out of them by corkscrews that were implanted and then removed from
them.
Bessie McCroy and her children were mobbed in a jail and taken to the outer limit of their town where half
a thousand men hanged them and then covered the bodies with bullets.
Laura Nelson was in jail awaiting trial for apparently murdering a sheriff. She was pulled out of the local
jail by a mob in Oklahoma and was subsequently raped before being hanged with her son.
5) What are the specific characteristics of a lynching? What was done? Who participated? How many people
watched or carried out a lynching? Include a discussion of the “public spectacle of lynching.”
A lynching in the South was intent on extensive torture and mutilation before killing the black man or
woman. Execution occurred by either burning or hanging. Burnings would often have pokers applied to the
eyes and genitals of the victim while allowing them to slowly cook over the flames until their slow death.
Hangings would result in convulsions all over the body until the death. In both cases, mutilation of body
parts would occur and the remains would be sold off as souvenirs to a blood-hungry crowd. These crowds
were filled by white men, women, and sometimes even children that came from all economic backgrounds
and white men would take turns torturing the black victim. The ritual could, and often was, viewed by
crowds ranging from the hundreds to even thousands, as in the case of Sam Hose’s lynching where two
thousand criminals partook in the murder. These sizes made a “public spectacle of lynching”, where the act
was not so much perceived as justice as it was a source of emotional satisfaction that one would receive
from a show. A sick entertainment was derived from this torture by the crowd and the public spectacle was
meant to terrorize and subordinate blacks by showcasing what white mobs would do to those who spoke
out or stood up for themselves.
6) How did white southerners define a “good lynching”?
White southerners defined a good lynching as one that was seen as “orderly”, where the victim was killed
quickly and there was “no drinking, no shooting, no yelling, and not even any loud talking” (292). One
case conducted a lynching where the victim was able to his brother and sister and the group voted on how
the victim should be killed. These illusions of order and justice were meant to make whites appear humane
and objective in their brutal execution of the black victim.
7) Identify the:
a. CLASS statuses of the white people that participated in lynching.
Most lynchings involved all classes of white people, whether upper, middle, or lower class. There was
no class distinction in the lynching of black victims.
b. The AGE range of whites that witnessed or actively participated in racist lynching violence?
(Partly answered on p. 288)
The age range of whites involved in racist lynching violence was broad, with children being
indoctrinated early on to view the spectacle. While adults largely conducted the actual murder itself,
the elderly did partake in witnessing the violence as well. The unifying characteristic between all these
groups was their whiteness, which was seen as a way for racial unity.
c. The GENDERS of whites who witnessed or actively lynched blacks?
While white men more often participated in the lynching themselves, white women were also
prominent in the crowds and took an equal pleasure in witnessing the murder of blacks.
8) In U.S. history, the lynching of people of color was supported at an institutional level. Racist lynching
violence (like white men’s rape of black women) was, in fact, institutionalized. Various institutional
authorities supported, witnessed, and actively participated in lynching violence. Identify specific examples of
white government officials’, law enforcement authorities, and media support for anti-black lynchings.
(Your response here also helps to answer Question #2e).
White government officials often refused to condemn the lynchings that occurred in their states out of fear
of jeopardizing their political careers or otherwise even directly supported the lynching of black victims. In
one example, former U.S senator of Mississippi, William Van Amberg Sullivan, even “boasted in 1908
[that] ‘I directed every movement of the mob and I did everything I could to see that he was lynched’”
(296). Law enforcement also tacitly supported the anti-black lynchings. In many cases, such as Sheriff W.
M. Waltrip’s attempt to protect two black prisoners that were later lynched, law enforcement often
submitted to the will of the community in order to protect their own lives. Later trials would often have
judges that either supported these lynchings or simply chose to condemn rather than prevent in order to
protect their own lives. Self-preservation often prevented any resistance by authorities against the
community. Media support for black lynchings often commended the lynchers as upstanding citizens. A
Meridian, Mississippi newspaper claimed that the lynchers are “‘men who sincerely believe they have the
best interest of their fellow [white] men and women at heart’” (294). This media support elevated the
image of these criminals into people with a supposed moral conscience.
9) Use Litwack pp. 299---307 to explain the link between rape and lynching. (Your responses here also help
to answer Question #10). To explain the link between rape and lynching, answer the following questions:
a. What were the rape myths that motivated lynching? (Who was lynched? Based on false accusations of
raping who?)
Rape myths that motivated lynching of black men were based on the stereotype that black men targeted
and raped white women. These myths allowed white men to falsely accuse the black male of raping a
white woman and lynch him publicly without fear of any repercussion whatsoever. The myth of white
women as weak and fragile also allowed white men to justify lynchings by stating that no white women
should have to recount their rape and go through the trauma once more.
b. How did white women fuel (or promote) the myth of the black male rapist?
White women promoted the myth of the black male rapist by providing exaggerated accounts that
suggested they were constantly barraged by the threat of black male rapists. One woman, Rebecca
Felton, encouraged the torture and suffering inflicted on black male victims by claiming that “‘any sort
of death would be preferred by a pure-hearted Southern girl to this shame and unmerited disgrace’”
(304). She refers to black men as “beasts” and encourages the idea that rape in constantly on their
minds when seeing white women. Similar attempts to demonize black men showed that white women
were complicit in the lynchings of black men by emphasizing their helplessness to the “black male
rapist”.
c. The realities of rape linked to lynching? (Litwack provides more than one answer to this question.
Freedman states that in the South, the members of what social group were most frequently raped?
The members of what social group committed rape most frequently?)
Rape was often not what actually occurred when it was used as a justification to lynch a black male.
Litwack notes that often the “crime” of the black male was if he had “broken the rules of racial
etiquette, had behaved in a manner construed as a racial insult, or had violated the bar on
consensual interracial sex” (306). In interpreting these actions as rape, whites, particularly white
men, ensured the subordination of black men by terrorizing them with the mere prospect of
interacting with white women. The threat of death and torture would keep blacks subordinate and
deferential to avoid any action that could be perceived as “uppity” or “sexually aggressive”. In
reality, rape was most often perpetrated by white men on black women in the South. This was also a
tactic to ensure sexual humiliation of black men and women as well as to amplify their
subordinance and their reluctance to participate in politics.
10) Provide specific examples of the racist sexual stereotypes of black males used to justify lynching? How
was slavery linked to these stereotypes? (Your response here also helps to answer Question #9a)
Black males suffered from racist-sexist stereotypes that justified lynchings by portraying the group as
sexual “beasts” that would prey upon white women. In one case, “a white Georgian told a northern
journalist, ‘what it means down here to live in constant fear lest your wife or daughter be attacked on the
road, or even in her home’” (305). The example shows the extent to which these stereotypes were believed.
Racist stereotypes of blacks as genetically and intellectually inferior reinforced the idea that black men
were “beasts” and thus would be unable to control their lust when left alone with white women. Thus,
white men, and whites in general as well, justified lynching by claiming it was meant to keep black men
from terrorizing white women. Despite the uselessness of the practice in defending white women, whites
sill practiced lynching because it offered a means of subordinating and constraining the freedoms of blacks
in general. Slavery was connected to these stereotypes because of the long-held myth that blacks, men and
women alike, were sexually aggressive and lacked moral virtue. The myth persisted in order to defend the
abuses of slavery as a way to “civilize” black men and as a way to protect white women against rape by
holding an iron grip of control over the lives of black men.
11) How did lynching define white women in general and white women’s sexuality specifically? Identify at
least 2 specific examples of the racialized gender stereotypes of white females that lynching promoted.
White women in general were define as helpless victims through lynching. White men initiated the practice
as a way to defend white women from being raped by black men and to supposedly bring justice to white
women, which contributed to the Victorian ideas of women as dependent on men to protect them. More
specifically, lynching define white women’s sexuality as nonexistent or asexual. White women were not
supposed to enjoy sex and could not initiate consensual sex, especially with anyone who the woman was not
married to. Rebecca Felton claims that “‘any sort of death would be preferred by a pure-hearted Southern girl
to this shame and unmerited disgrace [referring to rape]’” (304). In this case, she emphasizes the defining of
women by their sexual purity. Their protection is necessary due to the significance of the loss of this purity.
Similarly, the perception of white women as prey was even perpetuated by white women themselves, with one
Floridian women claiming she “was never free from fear of the negroe one moment” (304). In this case, the
woman reinforces the idea that she must be protected and defines her own identity through the stereotype of
black males as rapists. By portraying them as rapists, the white woman appears to be the victim, be asexual,
and be weak in the face of danger.
12) How did lynching define white men? Identify at least 1 specific example of the racialized gender
stereotype of white males that lynching promoted.
Lynching defined white men as the representations of “Southern chivalry”. They were seen as defending
white women from the threat of black male rapists, even when the large majority of the lynchings did not
involve rape. In one case, a newspaper describes these white men as “‘men who sincerely believe they have
the best interest of their fellow [white] men and women at heart’” (294). The portrayal of white men as
good, just men was a way to justify the lynchings as an extralegal attempt to bring justice for white women.
Through this, white men were stereotyped as guardians of white women as well as a powerful group that
supposedly defend the values of their society.
13) Litwack lists over 60 reasons that whites lynched blacks. What are some of the real and perceived
“offenses” for which whites lynched blacks? In other words, whites lynched blacks for what real and
perceived behaviors and acts?
Whites lynched blacks for many reasons that extended beyond the stereotype of rape. Murder and
physical assault were the most common real reasons for which whites lynched black. However,
minor or less severe crimes such as theft or arson were also used as reasons to lynch blacks in
Southern society. Furthermore, harmless actions that were perceived as challenging the notion of
white supremacy, which included testifying against whites, drunkenness, and paying “undue”
attention to a white women, also were excuses used to lynch and murder blacks in the South. The
ultimate purpose of thse lynchings was to preserve the existing oppressive social order for blacks
and ensure that whites remained the dominant social group. Even worse was that some blacks were
lynched simply for being black and were falsely accused of crimes that were not committed. There
was no legal justice for these victims, who were quickly dispatched by the white mobs that attacked
them.
14) In the 1880s and 1890s South, most black people lived in extreme poverty. Litwack briefly discusses the
minority of upper class “self-made” black men and women in the South (and the broader United States).
What did some of these wealthy blacks believe (or “assume”) about impoverished blacks? What “heavy
price” did upper class blacks pay to protect their wealth?
Wealthy blacks assumed that poor blacks could elevate themselves up through the principles espoused by
Booker T. Washington. Success was possible through self-help, by possessing the “necessary virtues…and
necessary characteristics” (321) of model citizens in order to rise up economically. As a result, sympathy
for poor blacks by wealthy blacks was not necessarily very strong since they believed that anyone could
escape povery if they possessed the character to do so. The “heavy price” upper class blacks paid to protect
their wealth was their emphasis on deferring to whites in order to protect their wealth from the danger of
being seized or destroyed and having their families killed by a white mob.
15) Did lynching blacks leave white people feeling more safe and secure?
Lynching blacks did not leave white people feeling more safe and secure. Whites would use coercion,
fraud, and legal oppression increasingly as time passed in order to defend against what they perceived as
black advancement and encroachment on white society. However, the growing racial tensions were noted
and increasingly worried whites as time went on. The new post-slavery generation of blacks had already
begun, to some degree, to try and struggle against the Jim Crow laws that had been enacted. Ultimately,
lynchings in the South did little to increase feelings of security for whites and, if anything, encouraged
paranoia against blacks by whites.
