Tuesday

Proslavery arguments


Proslavery ideology took place in the prewar United States. It began as an opposition to the growing antislavery movement in the late 18th century and early 19th century. When reading thoughts of the authors such George Fitzhugh's and James Henry Hammond's on slavery we can see strong arguments and controversial points that make us think about a subject in our modern days.

Born in 1806 and being almost 75 years of his hermit life in Virginia, George Fitzhugh, became an advocate for slavery in mid 19th century America. Those times the slavery issue has been a main discussion topic in political world. A Fugitive Slave Act that was passed by the United States Congress and declared that all runaway slaves be brought back to their masters. It was a part of the Compromise between South and North, but it triggered more controversy. People like Fitzhugh insisted that all labor had to be enslaved and that the world must become all slave or all free. By 1850s these views had become commonplace in the South. Basically Fitzhugh called for war against the modern world. And many of his supporters agreed that free labor spelled class war and invited anarchy.

They also agreed that slavery overcame the "social question" by establishing a master class that combined interest with sentiment to offer the masses security. But, having no confidence in his utopian vision of a reversal of history, they generally tried, however illogically, to convince the European and northern bourgeoisie to restore some form of slavery in a corporatist order. Fitzhugh opposed secession until the last minute, arguing that a slaveholding Confederacy could not survive until the advanced capitalist countries had themselves converted. After the war, which once begun he loyally and enthusiastically supported, Fitzhugh sank into obscurity, becoming increasingly negrophobic and idiosyncratic. (Encyclopedia of Southern Culture)

In comparison with humble Fitzhugh, James Henry Hammond was an active politician who in 1835 served as a United States representative and was 60th Governor of South Carolina. Later on, at the end of 1850s he served as a Senator. Political career cared away his previous desires to teach in school and practice the law. A democrat on one side, Hammond was a frank defender of slavery. He compared slaves from South as "well compensated" slaves to the North's hired skilled laborers as "scantily compensated". In his famous speech Speech Before the United States Senate, on 4 March 1858 Hammond said:

A race inferior to her own, but eminently qualified in temper, in vigor, in docility, in capacity to stand the climate, to answer all her purposes. We use them for our purpose, and call them slaves. We found them slaves by the common "consent of mankind," which, according to Cicero, "lex naturae est." The highest proof of what is Nature's law. We are old-fashioned at the South yet; slave is a word discarded now by "ears polite;" I will not characterize that class at the North by that term; but you have it; it is there; it is everywhere; it is eternal. (Hammond)

In his "The Universal Law of Slavery," George Fitzhugh claims that slaves are similar to children, they need care from the master otherwise their careless nature will harm themselves:

He the Negro is but a grown up child, and must be governed as a child, not as a lunatic or criminal. The master occupies toward him the place of parent or guardian. We shall not dwell on this view, for no one will differ with us who thinks as we do of the negro's capacity, and we might argue till dooms-day in vain, with those who have a high opinion of the negro's moral and intellectual capacity. Secondly. The negro is improvident; will not lay up in summer for the wants of winter; will not accumulate in youth for the exigencies of age. He would become an insufferable burden to society. Society has the right to prevent this, and can only do so by subjecting him to domestic slavery. In the last place, the negro race is inferior to the white race, and living in their midst, they would be far outstripped or outwitted in the chaos of free competition. (Fitzhugh)

In unison with Fitzhugh, James Henry Hammond, is explaining that masters of the South are taking care of their slaves. As of the slaves are the children, they are provided with everything they need and in comparison with the North dwellers who unhappily earning their wages. On a top of everything, Hammond in one word with Fitzhugh points that the black race is inferior to a white one:

The difference between us is, that our slaves are hired for life and well compensated; there is no starvation, no begging, no want of employment among our people, and not too much employment either. Yours are hired by the day, not cared for, and scantily compensated, which may be proved in the most painful manner, at any hour in any street in any of your large towns. Why, you meet more beggars in one day, in any single street of the city of New York, than you would meet in a lifetime in the whole South. We do not think that whites should be slaves either by law or necessity. Our slaves are black, of another and inferior race. The status in which we have placed them is an elevation. They are elevated from the condition in which God first created them, by being made our slaves. None of that race on the whole face of the globe can be compared with the slaves of the South. They are happy, content, unaspiring, and utterly incapable, from intellectual weakness, ever to give us any trouble by their aspirations. (Hammond)

Fitzhugh’s and Hammond’s points that slavery is not only a good thing but the only right thing for inferior race to survive is based on the point of view of the slave owner who would not survive himself without a “help” so to speak from a “cheap” labor. As Native American Indians were considered a lower race to Anglo-Americans the black slaves were without a doubt assigned to the same category. And like Missions in California came in to “teach” helpful resources for a future use as well the South plantations owners bought useful workforce from Africa. In California mission story the pay for what they have done was stretching for decades; in slave trade the owners paid once and they had a labor for life. Fitzhugh and Hammond undoubtedly placing themselves above the other race:

What is Race? When some people use the "race" they attach a biological meaning, still others use "race" as a socially constructed concept. It is clear that even though race does not have a biological meaning, it does have a social meaning which has been legally constructed (Haney)

Yet the argument about superiorly of one race versus other certainly resonates with us today. We divided world to the countries, nations, races, classes. People live in communities that might not be willing to accept the others, different, “not like us” people. You would not hear anywhere in civilized world the pro-slavery speech maybe; but the acceptance of one race to another is all over the place. Gated communities in our state, guarded armed vacation resorts in Egypt, ghettos in South Africa, reservations of Indians here in America; all of these are subjects to rejection of one person by another. The lower class might not be a slave per se but a very well accepted “help” to a higher one.

Cited Works:

Encyclopedia of Southern Culture. The University of North Carolina Press; 1 ed.; 1989, ISBN-13: 978-0807818237

Fitzhugh, George. Sociology for the South, or the failure of the free society.., Ayer Co Pub, 1988, ISBN-13: 978-0833711410

Haney Lopez, Ian F. The Social Construction of Race: Some Observations on Illusion, Fabrication, and Choice, 29 Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 1-62, 6-7, 11-17 (Winter, 1994) http://academic.udayton.edu/race/01race/race.htm

Hammond, James Henry. On the Admission of Kansas, Under the Lecompton Constitution ("Cotton is King") Sewanee University of South, http://www.sewanee.edu/faculty/Willis/Civil_War/documents/HammondCotton.

Thursday

The People of The Revolution


“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” (The Constitution of the United States, 1787)

American history is undeniably built on the history of the people, their beliefs, and their actions; but in order to understand the roots of Liberty and Independence that people of United States pursued we need to recognize a long way from 17th century that certainly give a reflection in our days lives.

More than decade of incredibly controversial time in early America history precedes to these words “We the People”, which in 1787 appeared on the American Constitution. Around 1774 to 1783, there is an increasing struggle that became visible between British government and American colonies. America raised its voice in a protest over British colonial policies and demanded independence. With this rise America of 1780s has entered a period, which was given a special term by John Quincy Adams, the Critical Period. This period falls right after the American Revolution of 1783 up to a time when George Washington became a president in 1789. During the Critical Period independent former colonies were overwhelmed with a wide range of foreign and domestic problems. Although, some historians believe it was an unpleasant if not terrible time for Americans, when others state that the term “Critical Period” is exaggerated, pointing the fact that the 1780s led to an economic growth and political stability. But for people in the colonies who lived those days the times certainly did not look as prosperous as we see them now:

By the year 1750 England had passed many laws to encourage trade with her colonies. Some of the laws forbade them to trade with other countries or even, in some cases, with one another. Had all these laws been rigidly carried out, the great Revolution might have come before it did. But they were not so enforced…The French and Indian War had given the colonists new confidence in themselves. (Perry).

The last straw as we see from the course of history was the Stamp Act, which ignited the collecting disagreements and a storm of protest broke forth. And even though the Stamp Act was later repealed by Britain; the colonies had enough:

In 1774 representatives from all the colonies, except Georgia, met at Philadelphia. This meeting was known as the First continental Congress. It sent a petition to the king and Parliament protesting against the way the colonies were being treated. More than this, it was agreed that the people throughout the several colonies should act together in withstanding English tyranny… Americans made a point of not buying any British goods, thus killing the English trade with them. English troops were sent to Boston, which further irritated the colonists. In 1770 disturbances between soldiers and citizens have been given the exaggerated titles of the Battle of Golden Hill and the Boston Massacre. Finally, England withdrew all duties except that on tea. (Perry)

On July 4, 1776 the statement was adopted by the Continental Congress, The Declaration of Independence, which announced that thirteen American Colonies consider themselves independent states from Great Britain. Basically the Declaration was an explanation why America is no longer under English power:

The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world…In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. (Declaration of Independence)

Who were “Free People” and “The People” of the United States of those times? John Adams (lawyer, statesman, diplomat and political theorist) put forward a resolution earlier. Committee of Five including Adams and four others: Sherman (lawyer and politician), Franklin (leading author, printer, political theorist, politician), Jefferson (congressman and diplomat), and Livingston (lawyer, politician, and diplomat ) assembled the draft to be ready for Congress to vote. But did they speak on behalf of whole Nation? Did they do it for the indentured servants, black slaves, and Indians? Certainly not. The term “We the People” referred to only white men who has right to vote. Per Declaration, it is said that “all men are created equal”, but how about women? In year of 1776 nobody would have question the words “men” referred to men not all humans that include women. The question about equality of men and women came up only 72 years later when the first Woman's Rights Convention was held in New York:

It is a singular fact that the greatest event in American history – the Declaration of Independence – has been the subject of more incorrect popular belief, more bad memory of the part of participants, and more false history than any other occurrence in our national life. (Warren)

We see another argument about Declaration of Independence and it similarity of American approach with its very mother country Great Britain law in Declaration's defense of the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" conveyed nothing more radical than established British law. Much ink has been spilt arguing that those concepts came from the English philosopher John Locke, or perhaps the Scottish enlightenment, or even American Indian tradition. In reality, the drafters were probably inspired by dowdy old common law, which had long before recognized life, liberty and property as an Englishman's "absolute rights." Even Jefferson's reference to "the pursuit of happiness" was founded on British constitutional principles.

And yet, the Declaration of Independence makes no explicit claim to British pedigree, but appeals to "the laws of nature and of nature's God" and "the supreme judge of the world" to support its argument. That turned what otherwise would have been a mere restatement of English law into an invitation to the world to recognize certain "self-evident" truths about equality and freedom. (Freedman)

So, who were the real people in America that Founding Fathers did not mention in Declaration and Constitution? None of the servants, black, Indians, and even women had right to vote; to speak up, to live the fulfilling life. It is important to remember that good part of the America was built by simple people that did not have rights but had tons of responsibilities. Servitude as the state of being a slave existed in Colonial America since1619 when the first Africans were brought to the New World. But the servitude as a subject to someone more powerful existed in Colonial America in a form of indentured servants, people who did it voluntarily in order to gain the freedom at the end of the term of service. Both of these types influenced our notions of race and labor today. American Colonies were considered by British government as the endless source of wealth. The colonial elite did not mind having slaves and servants. But they did not like the British Empire dictating the trade rules and placing the taxes. The idea of a trade and bringing manufacturing goods into the colonies in exchange of raw materials to make the mother country wealthier was the leading idea in creation of colonies.

Who were the people who ruled the political powers in early colonies? Plantation owners became the main economical, political, and social force; and landowners with their rights to vote were moving political arena:

Farmers near water transportation grow some cash crops for trade; farmers inland emphasize subsistence farming. Small land grants commonly made to individual settlers; large tracts often granted to well-connected colonists. All forms of domestic livestock, except turkeys, are imported at some time; crops borrowed from Indians include maize, sweet potatoes, tomatoes, pumpkins, gourds, squashes, watermelons, beans, grapes, berries, pecans, black walnuts, peanuts, maple sugar, tobacco, and cotton. Tobacco is the first important American export. Colonies export tobacco, rice, indigo, grain, and meat products. Farmers endure rough pioneer life while adapting to new environment (Growing a Nation)

With African American slaves, Indian slaves, and white servants in place the American society was clearly divided in classes, creating the pyramid with slaves at the bottom and American aristocracy on a top. The American aristocracy that who were “We The People” ; and those people did see the division of the American society; yet did not do anything to mention it in Declaration or Constitution. As we say they had “Bigger fish to fry”, the demand of the Freedom and Liberty, independence from the King and British Empire. The people that were the core of the Nation, simple people, remained invisible in the battle of the high class in gaining the power.

George Washington was the richest man in America. John Hancock was a prosperous Boson merchant. Benjamin Franklin was a wealthy printer. And so on. On the other hand, town mechanics, laborers, and seamen, as well as small farmers, were swept into “the people” by the rhetoric of the Revolution, by the camaraderie of military service, by the distribution of some land. Thus was created a substantial body o support, a national consensus, something that, even with the exclusion of ignored and oppressed people, could be called “America”. (Zinn).

The wind of Revolution was blown by the cream of the crop; the actual Revolution was made and was only possible with the help of different class, which truly should be named The People.

Bibliography and Cited Work:

Declaration of Independence (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/declaration.html)

Foner, Eric Give Me Liberty!, Volume I, Second Seagull Edition, 2008. ISBN: 978-0-393-93255-3

Freedman, Adam. Independence, British-Style.Nee York Times; N.Y. 03 July 2009: A. 27 http://0-search.proquest.com.alice.dvc.edu/nationalnewscore/docview/434140018/13526B8B2BC40C053B4/10?accountid=38376

Growing A Nation: The History of American Agriculture . 02/22/12 .

Perry, Arthur Jr.; Price, Gertrude American History, New York, 1914

http://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?id=i8cXAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader&pg=GBS.PR1

The Constitution of the United States (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/constitution.html)

Warren, Charles. "Fourth of July Myths." The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, vol. 2, no. 3 (July 1945): 238–72. http://www.jstor.org/pss/1921451

Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States. Abridged Teaching Edition, Volume I, ISBN: 9781565847248

Sunday

One Portrait Two People Lives




Anna Cuyler Van Schaick by Henrietta Johnston_1725_Pastels_NY State Museum Collection




















Anna Cuyler’s (Mrs. Anthony Van Schaick) portrait by Henrietta Dering Johnston was painted in 1725. Henrietta Johnston was noted first American woman artist who actually earned living by making art. When she painted this artwork at age 51 she was already an accomplished artist who made her name by painting portraits, mostly in pastels. Her style was well recognized and she had an established clientele among her friends and acquaintances. Being an artist at the beginning of 18th century was not an easy job even for men. Being an artist woman in the man-in-power dominated society was complicated task indeed.
Between the end of 17th century and the beginning of 18th century America is experiencing social and political turmoil. Although there was obvious expansion of English empire, the end of 17th century greatly disturbed already shaking European colonies. Variances between reach and poor, free and slave became more obvious. There was continues disagreement between settles and Indians. Religious movements tried to dominate each other. The beginning of 18th century returned stability to English North America together with economical growth and incoming immigrants seeking a better life in the New World.
It is interesting to note that Henrietta Johnston chose the portraiture and medium of her paintings as many other artists of 18th century not only due to a fashion but as well to availability, economical and commercial situation of that time:
As it was in painting, American draftsmanship before 1800 was
dominated by portraiture. Among the earliest examples of the
genre were in the medium of pastel, imported into the American
colonies as far back as the first decade of the 1700s and best
exemplified by the extensive production of one of this country's
first notable female artists, Henrietta Johnston (ca. 1674–
1729) (Avery)
At the time when photography was not invented the artists who made portraits were quiet popular. Henrietta’s talent was not only appreciated but as well in a big demand. Unlike many women of 18th century who were not seen working as in the modern sense of understanding, Henrietta earned making her art. She was able to make what she loved to become her profession. Her life was fulfilling yet not a trouble-free. Born in France, immigrated to England, and later moved to the New World, Henrietta’s life had some glory as well as some difficulties. After being married to her first husband for ten years she became widowed at age 30 with two little children on her hands. And even thought her first husband belonged to a high society of England; after his death Henrietta’s life had to have new turn:
In 1705 she married Reverend Gideon Johnston (1668-1716), a
graduate of Trinity College, Dublin, who was the vicar at
Castlemore. Appointed Bishop’s Commissary in South Carolina
by the Bishop of London, in April 1708 Johnston and his wife
arrived in Charleston. (Severens)

And even though at the beginning of 18th century South Carolina where Johnston’s moved in 1708 became one of the richest British colonies in North America; the family’s personal life faced a lot of economical difficulties. But there was one precious thing that could not be taken from Henrietta; and, actually helped family to survive difficult times, her talent:
Reverend Johnston became the Rector of St. Philip’s
Episcopal Church, and repeatedly wrote to the Society of the
Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts requesting payment
of his salary, which was often delayed. In one letter he states:
“were it not for the assistance my wife gives by drawing of
pictures…I should not be able to live,” indicating that Henrietta
Johnston was compensated for her portraits, making her the first
professional woman artist in America. (Severens)

Henrietta’s portraits are simple and show the great school although it is not known where she received her art education. We can only guess that the portraits resembled the subjects; but, they certainly have a character that the artist caught on the panel with her beautiful pastels. Her female portraits are very gentle; usually dressed in chemises and carrying feminine romantic mood. Portrait of Anna Cuyler represents Henrietta Johnston’s style in all its glory. The lady on the portrait is dressed in warm gold-toned-sepia silk gown. Her face is beautiful yet real. The artist did not simplify the features; instead, she presents the actual woman with the strong character. From New York State Museum online project we learn about Anna Cuyler that she was born in Albany in 1685 and she was the oldest daughter of Johannes and Elsie Ten Broeck Cuyler. Her father was a famous merchant and even was appointed a mayor of Albany and her mother was the daughter of one of the founders of the Albany community:
In 1712 twenty-seven-year-old Anna became the second wife of
thirty-year-old Anthony Van Schaick, Jr. He was a son of a faming-
based, early Albany business family. Over the next fourteen years,
Anna gave birth to at least nine of the previously childless Van
Schaick's children - the last arriving as she passed her forty-first
birthday.( Bielinski)
Van Schaick family requested to paint Anna’s portrait in 1725 when Anthony Van Schaick was commissioned lieutenant and captain of militia by Governor Hunter. At the time when portrait had been painted Van Schaick family was well known and respected in the colony. Henrietta Johnston captured a young woman, a wife of the official figure, a mother of nine children in one small pastel painting. Just by looking at one portrait painted almost 300 years ago in America and by learning sources of information we can reveal the history of a country, the history of one person and her family, and the history of the artist’s life.

Cited Works
Avery, Kevin J. "Late Eighteenth-Century American Drawings." The Metropolitan Museum Of Art. 2000-2011 The Metropolitan Museum Of Art, n.d. Web. .

Bielinski, Stefan. "Anna Cuyler Van Schaick." The People Of Colonial Albany. New York State Museum, n.d. Web. .

Severens, Martha R. "Jonston, Henrietta De Beaulieu Dering." South Carolina Encyclopedia. University Of South Carolina Press, n.d. Web. .

Additional Bibliography

Perry, Lee Davis. Remarkable South Carolina Women (More than Petticoats Series); Globe Pequot; First edition; ISBN-10: 0762743433

Forsyth Alexander, ed. “Henrietta Johnston: Who Greatly helped…by drawing pictures.” Winston-Salem, N.C.: Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts, 1991. ISBN-10: 0945578032

Middleton, Margaret Simons, Henrietta Johnston of Charles Town, South Carolina: America’s First Pastelist. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1966. ISBN-10: 1135797714

Foner, Eric Give Me Liberty!, Volume I, Second Seagull Edition, 2008. ISBN: 978-0-393-93255-3