Category Archives: Uncategorized

Writing Assignment #2

Option 1) The leaders of the nineteenth-century woman’s rights movement were mainly well-educated white women. Though most of them first became politically active as abolitionists, they typically spoke and wrote about woman’s rights in ways that at best failed to resonate with black women, and at worst actively alienated them. Imagine being a black woman (a literate slave in the South, or a free black in the North) and read the 1848 “Declaration of Sentiments” (Document 42 in Sklar, Women’s Rights Emerges within the Anti-Slavery Movement, 1830-1870). Think about how you would have responded to this document? Then read Sojourner Truth’s 1851 speech (Document 43) and Frances Ellen Watkins Harper’s 1866 speech (Document 52). After reflecting on these sources, write a short paper answering the following question: Despite the fact that virtually all woman’s rights advocates supported abolitionism, black women often perceived the nineteenth-century woman’s rights movement as a “white woman’s movement.” Why was this case?

Option 2) Drawing on the Hershberger article on Indian removal and documents from Sklar, Women’s Rights Emerges within the Anti-Slavery Movement, 1830-1870, discuss the relationship between the early movements against Indian removal and slavery and the nineteenth-century movement for women’s rights. In what key ways were the early women’s rights advocates influenced by the antebellum protest movements against Indian removal and slavery?


Be sure to refer to the course readings. You should definitely make use of Sklar, and you might want to refer to other readings as well. Unless you draw on additional sources, you may use short citations, such as (Sklar, 42), and you do not need to provide a Works Cited page.

Final paper


Paper (5-6 pages)

Interview a woman who in her late 40s or older about her views and experiences as a girl and a woman in the late 20th– and early 21st century U.S. The goal of this paper is to explore how changing societal norms in regard to gender influenced one woman’s personal experiences and self-understanding.

Be sure to cover such critical topics as: her expectations and experiences in regard to 1) education/work/career; and 2) family life, including marriage/motherhood if relevant. If your interviewee is an immigrant, you will want to ask questions about the gendered aspects of assimilation (or lack thereof). In other word, did she experience conflicting expectations because the gender norms of her country of origin differed from those of the US? In what ways? How might her life have differed had she not immigrated? The woman you interview need not have been born in the U.S., nor need she be an American citizen. However, she should have resided in the US for at least the past decade or so

Your paper should include both a biographical and a scholarly/analytical perspective by using narrative footnotes to refer to relevant course lectures, course readings or other literature that you may decide to read in light of your interviewee’s experiences. For example, say your interviewee talked about how she was determined to finish school before starting a family; you could include a footnote explaining how her views differed from those of young women in the 1950s, who often left college in order to marry. Or say your interviewee has been through a divorce; you might have a footnote briefly referring to changing mores and rising divorce rates beginning in the late 1960s and 1970s.

You have a great deal of latitude to conduct the interview in your own fashion. You may want to consider asking your subject to reflect on the differences between her own life and that of her mother and/or older female relatives. The key point is to explore and analyze how individual life decisions that seem very personal—what to study in school, how many children (if any) to have, whether to live with or far away from extended family members—are in fact profoundly influenced by broad historical changes that have shaped the prevailing cultural context.

When referring to course readings, your footnotes only need to include the author’s name, the title of the book/article, and the page number. If you refer to other literature, outside the assigned readings, you need to provide a full citation. Example: Glenna Matthews, ‘Just a Housewife’: The Rise and Fall of Domesticity in America (New York: Oxford University Press), 78-89. You do not need to footnote the lectures unless you quote me directly or use specific facts/figures that I provided. In this case, cite the lectures as follows: Plant, Lecture on “Women and the Workplace,” May 1, 2017.

Papers should be double spaced, with 1” margins and in a 12 point font.



Proslavery v. Free Labor Ideologies: A Hardening of Views


I. Question of motivation: Why did people go to war?

  • Why did whites in the North and South come to feel strongly enough about the role of slavery in the nation’s future development to take up arms?
    • Most white Northerners had no interest in eradicating slavery
    • Most white Southerners did not own slaves
    • Yet the Civil War was a war fought primarily by volunteers, not conscripts
      • About 80% on both sides
  • To understand why people fought, we must look beyond the question of self-interest, narrowly defined
  • Must focus on the dominant ideologies that took root in the two regions in the 30-40 years preceding the war
    • North: What Eric Foner called “Free Labor Ideology”
    • South: Defense of slavery as a positive good

II. Racism in the North

  • Pervasive racism that was getting worse
    • New “scientific” racism emerged beginning in the 1820s
    • Effects of industrialization and immigration fueled anti-black hostility
      • Decline in white working men’s status; economic competition
        • But racism shared by men and women of all classes
    • Reflected in revisions to state constitutions and new anti-black laws
      • Many Northern states that had allowed black male property-owners to vote and sit on juries disenfranchised blacks in the 1820s and 1830s
      • Increased segregation
      • Some new states actually prohibit backs from entering

III. Hostility toward abolitionists in the North

  • Abolitionists widely viewed as fanatics
  • Probably less than 10% of Northerners were sympathetic toward their cause
  • Violent anti-abolitionist mobs often attacked meetings
  • William Lloyd Garrison nearly lynched
  • Elijah Lovejoy, abolitionist printer murdered — a martyr to the cause
  • Even those hostile to slavery believe the Constitution protects it; can only prevent its expansion (Lincoln)

IV. Slave-ownership and support for secession in the South

  • Only around 1/3 of households held slaves
    • Much more honest way of putting it than saying that 6% of individuals owned slaves (a misleading stat often cited)
  • Slaveholders and those from slaveholding families were somewhat overrepresented in the army
    • Still, majority who fought did not own slaves
  • Certainly areas of the South where Union sentiment was strong, but it was not as pervasive as Lincoln and others had hoped
    • Not accurate to say it’s case of the people being dragged into the war by elite

V. What connected yeoman farmers to planters?

  • Economic dependency
  • “Borrowed” slaves; brought cotton to big plantations to be ginned; etc.
  • Economic interest
    • They also wanted free trade, a low tariff
  • Democratic politics — all white men participated
  • Culture
    • Attended the same churches, etc
  • Ambitions
    • Highest social status in the South is owning slaves; many wanted to become planters themselves
  • Fear of slave uprisings

VI. Fear of slave rebellion

  • Increasing fear of slave revolts
    • Nat Turner’s Rebellion in VA (1831)
      • Largest slave revolt in US; led by a literate lay preacher
      • Turner acknowledged his master had been kind to him
        • Reveals slaves’ desire for freedom and the fact that only force kept slavery in place
    • Frightening not only to slave owners, but to all whites who feared black vengeance and social disorder
    • Results in strengthening of slave codes
      • More restrictions on slave movement, owning weapons, congregating, etc.
      • Militarization of the South
        • All white men in the community called upon to participate

 VII. Reaction to abolitionism — retrenchment mentality

  • 1831 also marks the rise of a new, more radical anti-slavery movement
  • Abolitionism — not the same as anti-slavery
  • William Lloyd Garrison
    • Publisher of The Liberator
    • Advocates immediate emancipation without compensation to owners; denounces colonization schemes; allows women to play a large role
    • Movement floods the South with abolitionist literature
      • South protests US Post Office being used for this purpose
        • Effectively suppression its distribution
    • Gag rule
      • Succeeds in preventing Congress from considering anti-slavery petitions between 1836-44

VIII. Sen. John C. Calhoun (South Carolina)

  • Slavery as “a positive good speech” (1837)
    • Predicts “abolition and Union cannot coexist” (1837)
    • “We of the South will not, cannot, surrender our institutions.”
    • Besides, he says, slavery is good
      • Has uplifted blacks, without leading to the degeneration of whites
      • Rooted in racial difference decreed by nature: “Two races of different origin”
      • In all societies, one portion of the community lives on the labor of another
    •  John C. Calhoun is interesting because his trajectory mirrors that of the nation — reveals the growing polarization between the sections
      • He started out as a nationalist; believed in strong central government; supported protective tariffs
      • Gradually came to understand that the South’s interests were radically different from the North’s; became obsessed with growing population difference between the regions
      • Switches to support states’ rights and free trade
      • Develops a doctrine of nullification
        • States can reject federal laws against their interests
        • 1832: SC issues its Ordinance of Nullification
          • SC ultimately backs down; new tariff law drawn up
        • Calhoun privately acknowledges the real issue is slavery

IX. Free Labor Ideology

  • Republican definition of the nation’s character
  • Republican definition of “labor”
    • More all-encompassing than our own
    • Belief in no fixed classes; in the possibility for social advancement; and in the goal of economic independence
    • Connected to republicanism
    • Expansion of free labor as solution class/poverty
      • West as safety valve
        • American exceptionalism
        • Problem: Southerner legislators keep blocking proposals for a Homestead Act to give away free land

X. Northern critique of South

  • Southern economy was stagnant
  • Class structure was a fixed hierarchy
  • Society was dominated by an aristocracy of slaveholders
  • In other words, southern society was the very antithesis of what Northerners saw as their own economically fluid, socially mobile, democratic society
  • Come to believe slavery negatively affected all workers

Politician Henry Waldron in 1859: “This slave Democracy tramples [the Constitution] under foot. We have sacred guarantees in that instrument in behalf of free speech, free thought, and a free press, and yet today Democratic postmasters rifle mails and violate the sanctity of private correspondence. Today a system of espionage prevails which would disgrace the despotism and darkness of the middle ages. The newspaper which refuses to recount the blessings and sing the praises of slavery is committed to the flames. The press that refuses to vilify the memory of the fathers is taken by a ruthless mob and engulfed beneath the waters. The personal safety of the traveler depends not on his deeds, but upon his opinions…Where slavery is there can be no free speech, no free thought, no free press, no regard for constitutions, no deference to courts.”

Republican Party Handbill from the Presidential Election of 1856 (reflects ideas of George Fitzhugh, a proponent of slavery whose ideas were actually not representative of the South; nearly all others proslavery spokesmen defended slavery as a racial system):

  • The expansion of slavery is a question not only of FREE SOIL but of FREE MEN. Do you doubt it? Read the words of the highest authorities in the south . . .
  • “Slavery is the natural condition of the laboring man, whether white or black. The great evil of Northern free society is that it is burdened with a servile class of mechanics and laborers unfit for self-government and yet clothed with the attributes and powers of citizens”