Amidst all the new developments gleaned from this contextual research, the concept below pierced through the most preconceived notions:

“Gray intentionally or inadvertently organized Turner’s confession so that it confirmed his own interpretation of the rebellion.  Whether or not Gray actually wrote this letter, it seems likely that he intended the Confessions to bolster a position already articulated by other white Southerners – the belief that Nat Turner was insane.  The Confessions would never have been circulated had it overtly suggested that the rebellion had roots in the nature of slavery rather than in the madness of a single slave.”

So despite all his greed, mischief, and possible bribing—none of it really mattered.  A hardened, socially accepted well-established belief was the foundation to Gray’s pamphlet.  He was writing within the narrow scope of racist cultural attitudes. Echoing a previous class, the author had set out a goal—and now we know—biasedly achieved it.  Still, whether that was just making money or further the South’s mission…I think it was both, as made evident by getting the copyright the day before Turner’s hanging.

I’ve head before the majority of folks only like listening to people they agree with.  This is an interesting sociological concept, which, if credible, apparently has deep roots. In that vein of thought, hypothetically, if Gray went ahead contextualizing a different set of circumstances, would it have sold in the North?  Would be it uncovered and shed light on a different Southern reputation?   On the other side of the story, would Nat Turner have gained such a following if others believed he had overtly made clear his religious motives as compared to the raw, physical retribution?