Which US states had the highest recorded lynching counts between 1880 and 1940?
Executive summary
Between the late nineteenth century and World War II, lynching was concentrated in Southern states, with Mississippi and Georgia recording the largest tallies in the historical data most frequently cited by scholars; available datasets and contemporary compilations, however, begin in the early 1880s and extend past 1940, so any ranking for the period 1880–1940 must acknowledge those temporal and methodological limits [1] [2] [3].
1. What the question actually asks — and the data’s built‑in limitations
The user seeks a state‑level ranking for lynching counts between 1880 and 1940, but major public datasets start in 1882–1883 and many compilations extend beyond 1940, meaning counts for a strict 1880–1940 window are approximations; historians and advocacy groups note that no formal national tracking existed at the time and that numbers differ by source, so rankings rest on reconstructed datasets such as NAACP lists, Tuskegee Institute maps, and modern compilations [3] [4] [5].
2. The headline states: Mississippi and Georgia sit at the top
Multiple compilations identify Mississippi as the single deadliest state for lynchings and Georgia as the runner‑up in the commonly used historical tallies — one widely referenced Statista summary reports roughly 581 lynching victims in Mississippi and about 531 in Georgia across the long period historians typically study, with most victims in those states being Black [1].
3. The Southern cluster: Texas, Louisiana, Alabama and others
Beyond Mississippi and Georgia, the highest totals cluster in the former‑Confederate states: Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, and Tennessee consistently appear among the states with the largest numbers of recorded lynchings in the datasets scholars and advocacy groups use, reflecting patterns that place over three‑quarters of lynching victims in Southern states [1] [2].
4. Scholarly datasets and modern mapping change the picture but not the conclusion
Recent academic efforts—such as the national dataset introduced by Seguin and Rigby and the interactive map discussed by Penn State—confirm that while lynching occurred nationwide, the heaviest concentrations were in the South; these modern datasets also show that earlier compilations missed incidents outside the Deep South, but they still rank Mississippi and Georgia at or near the top [5] [2].
5. Numbers vary by source; why rankings are approximate
Different institutions used different methods: the NAACP compiled reported lynchings; the Tuskegee Institute created state and county maps; newspapers and local records formed other lists, and historians have revised counts as new evidence emerges — all of which produces small but meaningful discrepancies in state totals and makes any single “official” ranking illusory [3] [4] [6].
6. Race, geography, and interpretation — what the top counts signify
The concentration of lynchings in Mississippi, Georgia and other Southern states aligns with scholarship documenting racial terrorism used to enforce white supremacy after Reconstruction and into the Jim Crow era, with the majority of recorded victims in those states being African American according to both historical and contemporary analyses [2] [1].
7. What can’t be settled from available reporting
Precise, universally accepted tallies strictly limited to 1880–1940 cannot be produced from the cited sources because most large compilations begin in 1882–1883 and extend past 1940; additionally, missing records, underreporting, and differing inclusion criteria mean that any numeric ranking should be read as the best estimate based on reconstructed datasets rather than a final census [3] [5].
8. Bottom line — the states with the highest recorded counts
Using the standard, widely cited historical compilations and modern datasets, Mississippi and Georgia emerge as the two states with the highest recorded lynching counts, followed by Texas, Louisiana, and Alabama as the other high‑count states — with the caveat that all such rankings draw on sources that vary in starting year, coverage, and methodology [1] [2] [5].