Slavery at Jefferson's Monticello: Paradox of Liberty

Video Overview

Rex M. Ellis, Associate Director for Curatorial Affairs at the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, guides educators through the exhibit Slavery at Jefferson's Monticello: Paradox of Liberty. After the visit, historian Christopher Hamner leads a discussion. How did the exhibit depict Thomas Jefferson? The enslaved people who lived and worked at Monticello?

Video Clip Name
MontExhibit1.mov
MontExhibit2.mov
MontExhibit3.mov
MontExhibit4.mov
Video Clip Title
Introducing the Exhibit
Presenting the Paradox
Framing the Lives of the Enslaved
The Exhibit in Context
Video Clip Duration
6:04
7:03
6:44
4:21
Transcript Text

Rex Ellis: Good morning everyone, my name is Rex Ellis. I am the Associate Director for Curatorial Affairs at the National Museum of African American History and Culture—that's just a long title that says I do whatever they tell me to do. What we’ve tried to do with this exhibition is to suggest three things. Number one, we've tried to grapple with the whole idea of slavery especially in the era of the American Revolution and the paradox of liberty—those who are asking for liberty actually being those who are also slave owners. That's the paradox that we examine and try to talk about. Second thing that we wanted to do was to talk about Jefferson and his life. A little bit about Albemarle, a little bit about his parents, and a little bit about Jefferson the man and the sort of paradox that he is as well. Not only his public life, but his private life as well. There's a third section that happens to focus on the enslaved population at Monticello. That enslaved population reached, at some point throughout his lifetime, over 600 people. And so, we feel that there's—it's difficult to understand Jefferson without understanding his enslaved population. You will be introduced to six families within that larger population. And then finally, there is a section that we are calling, for lack of a better term, "Getting Word," because that is the name of the project that in 1993 two historians at Monticello embarked on to try to find descendants of the enslaved at Monticello. And that section talks about those descendants and where they are and the kinds of things that they are doing. What you see on the outside here are two visions that in some way suggest this whole paradox that we're talking about. Here is Thomas Jefferson and he's behind the Declaration of Independence; and here is Isaac Jefferson, he was a Granger, but he changed his name once he was freed to Jefferson. He is behind a farm book that Jefferson kept from 1770 all the way up until the beginning of the 19th century. That book was supposed to be a sort of diary of his farm and it has turned into one of the most important sources that give us some sense of who the enslaved were and what they did. Because as you see here, there are families that he mentions within the farm book; so with that information we know approximately when they were born, we know what their names were, and we can someway put them into the historical record in ways that we could not if we did not have this information. Also I will tell you that I don't believe Monticello is typical of the slave experience in the Colonial Chesapeake, I think it's very atypical. As you go through it, I think you will see that there are sort of parallels to the larger slave system. But Mr. Jefferson in a variety of ways was a unique man. He was a scholar, he was an author, he was an inventor, he was a farmer—he'd tell you he was a farmer, other folk would tell you no, no, no, he wasn't too good a farmer. But in a variety of ways he was a very, very—that sort of quintessential Enlightenment man who was much more of a Renaissance figure than he was sort of ensconced in the colonial period, as many were. They looked to him and what he said to determine what they should be thinking, in many ways. So as you go through, keep that in mind as well. Rex Ellis: This first area focuses on Jefferson and the idea that in order to see Jefferson clearly you must see him through the lens of his enslaved population. You will see a statue of Jefferson and then behind him you will see a series of names. They are names of over 600 enslaved—that we know—lived and worked in and around Monticello. And the idea here, again, is it allows us to see Jefferson more clearly. You will also see here Jefferson's lap desk, which was what he drafted the Declaration of Independence on. So in many ways that lap desk and the statue of Jefferson and what you see around it—the information you see around it gives you some sense of Jefferson's prominence, not only in the colonial period, but also his prominence as a slave owner. Christopher Hamner: I wanted to do, since we didn't get a chance yesterday, to do a little debrief on the museum and what was particularly useful about it, what changed the way that you thought about the past, what changed the way that you think about this chapter to your kids. Do you remember what the sort of framing is? Teacher 1: It's the Declaration of Independence on the one side— Teacher 2: On the right. Teacher 3: It's slavery— Teacher 4: The farm book on the left. Christopher Hamner: Yeah, right. And just those two images, you have to pick one or two things that go on the outside. And then the title: "Paradox of Liberty." This is all really carefully selected to get you thinking some new way about this person. If you just want to think about context and you want to think about content and this as a source. Think about how different the experience you have of Thomas Jefferson is if you spend 22 minutes in the "Paradox of Liberty" exhibit at the Smithsonian verses 22 minutes at the Jefferson Memorial, which is not very far away. How do you summarize a life if you've got…you can use 61 images, you can have a total of 12 hundred words, and the average visitor is going to spend 18 to 22 minutes walking through there. What parts of the story do you tell and what do you leave out. When I approached it that way I thought, gosh this is an impossible task that they have carried off really well.

Rex Ellis: The objectives in this area are several. Number one, to give you some sense of slavery in the Atlantic world, especially in the colonial period. Then to give you some sense of Mr. Jefferson and the kind of background and upbringing he had. Then to suggest some sense about Jefferson's attitude towards slavery. At the beginning on the wall that I'm facing you will see a variety of things that suggest the institution of slavery. There's a small map on the left-hand side of that portrait by George Morland that gives you some sense of the number of Africans who came to the New World. You will see that they came from all portions of Africa, from Senegal to the Bight of Biafra to the Bight of Benin all the way over to West Central Africa, even Madagascar and other places. But the largest number comes from, as you will see, West Central Africa. Somewhere around 5 million Africans disembarked in places like Pernambuco, Brazil, and South America. Somewhere around four million landed in the Caribbean—Jamaica, Barbados, Haiti, Cuba, those areas. Four hundred thousand came to North America. Four hundred thousand. Whether they were dealing with slave ships, building slave ships, and going—and transporting Africans back and forth, the American economy—the agricultural economy of America in some way, directly or indirectly, depended on the institution of slavery. So Jefferson from the very beginning of his life, there was an enslaved person who actually put him on a pillow and presented him to his father, Peter, and his mom, Jane. There was a slave at the end of his life, his name was Burwell Colbert, who actually fluffed up his pillow because he was the only one who understood what Jefferson was saying when he was at the end of his life and couldn't speak. He was the only one who understood that he was uncomfortable and that he needed his pillow adjusted. So, from the time he was born until the time he died, slavery was a part of the world that he lived in. Here you see a series of items that relate to the period of the Enlightenment. You see an inkwell by Voltaire, that's an image of Voltaire's head. You see glasses and you see Jefferson—who was a voracious reader, by the way—you see this revolving bookstand where he could read one, two, three, four, five books at a time. Speaker 1: You know how he had that bookstand, where he could read five books at a time and keep them open so you don't lose your place? And then you walk a couple feet that way, and some guy, his whole day every day is to pound nails. Like, so you get to do all of this fascinating stuff, and the people working for you are pounding nails over and over and over. And you saw, there were like five steps to making a nail and your sole goal is to make the most nails. So you get to be creative, thoughtful, and everybody around you has to be bored? Christopher Hamner: You know, I took away like the "Paradox of Liberty," that there's this really uncomfortable connection there. That some people were free to do all this grand philosophical thinking about politics and government and the nature of morals because other people were bored. You know, the fact that Jefferson—the leisure time that Jefferson enjoyed was on the part built on the backs of enslaved people piling up all this wealth and stuff so that he was freed. Rex Ellis: You will see here some sense of what we're suggesting about his view of enslavement. And you will find out as you read that Jefferson was not—that Jefferson believed in emancipation. He did not believe that emancipation was something that could happen here. He believed in emancipation connected with colonization. So that he felt that blacks and whites could not live together and once they were set free they should be delivered some place else in order to enjoy their freedom. Interestingly, 1791 he has a letter—somewhere around August he has a letter from a man named Benjamin Banneker. He's an African American, he's a scientist, he is an author, a very, very learned person himself. He writes a letter, what he said was he wanted Jefferson to help and to assist in the liberation of his people, he used—he sent him a copy of the almanac, he used himself as a way of saying, "This is what's possible given the help, given the education, given the support, this is what's possible within the black community." Eleven days later, Jefferson wrote him back and said wonderful letter, wonderful almanac, but I don't believe that the enslaved can in any way rise to the level of intelligence and the level of sophistication that you have risen to. So I generally say to folk when they ask me what I think about Jefferson, I say he was a man who was in terms of his intellect, he was ahead of his time; in terms of his morality, he was a product of his time. I think, more than most, though, Jefferson grappled with this issue. Speaker 1: I think that kind of summarized the entire exhibit, was that intellectually Jefferson was ahead of his time, but philosophically he was a product of his time. Speaker 2: And that's so current for today, though. Speaker 3: He did a good job at not giving you the answer for how we should judge him, not saying he was this or he was that. I think what it does effective to us is we're all a product of our time now, we might think that other people are wrong. Two hundred years from now everyone might think we're all wrong. So it kinda makes you step back, too, and think, well, how do I see my time? Christopher Hamner: I think it shows we're supposed to—sometimes we forget but we're a fairly young country. And now we're kind of looking at it and saying, yeah, well, you know we got some things right and we got some things wrong and it's okay to look at both of those so that maybe we can be more right the next time.

Christopher Hamner: What were the objects or the text or—what part did you stop and go, "Whoa." Teacher 1: I thought that the map, the to-scale of his entire plantation in the back was really, really interesting. Christopher Hamner: What was it that kind of— Teacher 1: Well, there were two parts. One, obviously, his house is so built on that hill it's almost on a mountain compared with his farmlands. I thought that's interesting management-wise. He's got kind of like a little town up near his house, and yet he's got these dispersed houses throughout the farmlands. And then I started thinking did he give his slaves who lived in those farmhouses somewhat of an autonomy as they were farming those areas because his house was miles away on top. Rex Ellis: Mulberry Row I think is very important. It's a 13-hundred-foot space on the northeastern side of the house. If this is Monticello here, and this is the north here, and this is the east, here is Mulberry Row. Somewhere around 20 homes is what it had on it, domestic spaces, as well as—there was a nailery, there was a blacksmith's shop, there was a textile shop, there were domestic houses, dairy. You either worked as a domestic, you either worked as tradesman or a craftsman, or you worked in the fields. Generally those were the three areas. Mulberry Row became a real proving ground to determine which one of those might be your fate. Between 12 and 16, Jefferson would engage them in work, males and females, at Mulberry Row. He would use that to make some determination about where the aptitudes were and where he would then assign those who he had working there. Then he brought a variety of people from around the country and even outside of the country, Scottish tradesmen and craftsmen, to teach the enslaved at Monticello a variety of the skills. So a variety of those were sort of determined based on the experience at Mulberry Row. Christopher Hamner: And then how was the other way that you encountered enslaved people at Monticello. Teacher 1: Through their lineage. Christopher Hamner: Okay. Whose? Teacher 1: One of the most famous would be the Hemings. There was— Teacher 2: The Grangers. Teacher 3: The Fossetts. Christopher Hamner: That second part of the exhibit, remember, the six families, that struck me as another choice. You know, what are we going to do? Instead of trying to cover all 600, they made this choice that we'll pick six—one well known and maybe some that are less well known, but we’ll really focus on that, just on those families' experiences. Rex Ellis: Now, these families, George Granger is the only man I know that was actually assigned to be an overseer at Jefferson. During Jefferson's lifetime he must have had over 30 overseers on the property. Granger was the only one that he had that was from the black community. And Granger was one of those that we use at least to suggest that Jefferson wasn't someone who was so struck by color until he didn't understand that it was merit that was the most important in terms of whom he allowed to do work, whom he allowed freedoms, and whom he did not allow freedoms. But there is an argument to be made for the precedent of the Hemings family. There were five generations of that family on the hill, over 70 people in that family on the mountain, started with Elizabeth Hemings who was the matriarch of the family and five generations of her family were at Monticello. The Hemings were treated differently, they were given freedoms no one else was given, several of them were even allowed to not only work, but to live off the mountain, and also to sort of move around as free people even though they were owned by Jefferson. You will find that the Hemings were the ones who did either the least work or worked as domestics or received privileges that others did not receive. And then finally for me the Fossett family. They were also Hemings but they were—Joseph Fossett was the grandson of Elizabeth. Joseph, the reason I wanted to mention him is because Joseph was the only member of his family that was freed in Jefferson's will. He set Fossett free, but Fossett was not free at the time that the auction took place, so he could not bid on his family. He watched his family being sold away. But he also knew some folk in Albemarle County that he had done business with, so he made requests of them that they purchase members of his family, and that, as a blacksmith, he was able to work and he promised and whatever it was that they paid for the price for them that he would then pay them back the price of his family. Somewhere in 1837, he purchased five of his children and four of his grandchildren and they all moved to Ohio. Teacher 1: The Hemings family, there were like these really nice pots from France and I just thought that helped paint a complex picture of Jefferson. Teacher 2: Right, I thought that—I enjoyed learning about the families, it was interesting to see the different dynamic that that plantation would have had than a lot of others. But I thought, too, it kind of focused on the fact that these were his most skilled slaves. They had the chair that that one person built, I know he had a trained French chef as a slave, that's not normal. Christopher Hamner: You get to know those six families really well, but at the same time you lose sight of all these people. And that's a trade-off. Do you want them to learn a couple of people's experience really deeply, or do you want them to get a bigger sense of the whole, the whole enormity of the operation.

Rex Ellis: Interestingly, that Joseph Fossett that I was telling you about, Joe Fossett had a great-grandson by the name of William Monroe Trotter, who founded—with W.E.B. Dubois—the Niagara Movement, he was an activist himself, a very, very well educated man. All of the families, the Hughes family, the Fossett family, the Hemings family, all took on responsibilities that in many ways were civic responsibilities. Frederick Madison Roberts, that you'll see on this end, was the first African American legislator in California. You will see also that the descendents of Sally Hemings and of Eston and Madison fought in the Civil War. So that continuation of family, that continuation of faith, Peter Fossett became a minister. It was Peter who said this, "My parents were here in Ohio and I wanted to be with them and be free, so I resolved to get free or die in the attempt." Peter ran away several times and was recaptured. And finally with the help of his family his freedom was bought and he finally rejoined his family in Ohio. Christopher Hamner: I thought this was one of the best museum exhibits that I'd ever seen. And I was particularly impressed because it's really sensitive. Plus, it's the Smithsonian Museum of American History, it's on the Mall, it's yards from the White House, and a stone's throw from the Congress building. There's a sense that this is the official history, it has this sort of weight based on where it is and the fact that it's the Smithsonian. Teacher 1: What struck me, I was wondering if this means how far we've come as a society, because do you think that 50 years ago you could have had an exhibit like this? Christopher Hamner: No, and that's something they didn't talk about, but I love the way that you're thinking in terms of this as a source. If you went back 50 years ago, totally different. Teacher 2: I liked the human touch to it, because they're much more complicated and they have to deal with their times. Rex Ellis: We know a great deal about a small number of the enslaved at Monticello. I told you there were over 600; I've introduced you to maybe 30 or 40 that we know a great deal about. Don't you dare leave thinking that those other 500 are not important as well. The fact that we have their names is a testament to Jefferson's record keeping and also to the history and the historians who have made this all happen. But if you ask me why I would say that Jefferson was anomalous and he was not normal—Jefferson said that he did not want—and I'm paraphrasing—but he said he wanted his enslaved population to respect him; he did not want them to fear him. He tried to keep the families together, he discouraged abroad marriages, he tried to get them to marry on the mountain so that the family was together there. So all of that is what makes me suggest that as a slave owner—Now I don't think that there is such a thing as a "good" slave owner, especially someone like Jefferson—when you think of the fact that he was governor of Virginia, when you think of the fact that he was a two-term president, when you think of the fact that he was Secretary of State, he had a variety of opportunities to do something significant about the institution of slavery. He never did. So, there is that reality to him; but there's also the other reality. And I think the public Jefferson and the private Jefferson are two different Jeffersons all together. In order to see Jefferson clearly, you have to see him through the lens of his enslaved community as well.

St. Louis Circuit Court Historical Records Project

Image
Case, State of Missouri v. Walker, John K. (jailor of St Louis)...
Annotation

Part of a larger project involving 4 million pages of St. Louis court records dating between 1804 and 1875, this website was designed to preserve and make accessible the freedom lawsuits filed in the St. Louis Circuit Court. In January 2001, the freedom suits brought by Dred Scott and his wife Harriet in 1846 became the first cases to go online. There are now more than 280 freedom suits are available. These case files consist of legal petitions for freedom by people of color originally filed in St. Louis courts between 1814 and 1860. They make up the largest corpus of freedom suits currently available to researchers in the United States. The images of original handwritten documents in which black men, women, and children petitioned the courts for freedom offers a glimpse at what some argue was the beginning of America's civil rights movement.

The short Macromedia Flash film "Freedom Suits" offers a glimpse into the pursuit of freedom by African Americans in St. Louis during the 19th century. This online archive will help researchers understand the length of enslaved African American's struggles and the historical significance of the lawsuits.

American Resistance to a Standing Army

field_image
Print, Life Magazine, 1951, James Madison, New York Public Library
Question

Quote from Madison: "The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people."

I understand what he means, but can you give some specific examples of which events Madison was talking about. Can you give other ancient examples where foreign wars are used as a type of diversion?

Answer

In June of 1787, James Madison addressed the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on the dangers of a permanent army. “A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty,” he argued. “The means of defense against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.” That Madison, one of the most vocal proponents of a strong centralized government—an author of the Federalist papers and the architect of the Constitution—could evince such strongly negative feelings against a standing army highlights the substantial differences in thinking about national security in America between the 18th century and the 21st.

While polls today generally indicate that Americans think of the military in glowing terms (rightly associating terms like “sacrifice,” “honor,” “valor,” and “bravery” with military service), Americans of the 18th century took a much dimmer view of the institution of a professional army. A near-universal assumption of the founding generation was the danger posed by a standing military force. Far from being composed of honorable citizens dutifully serving the interests of the nation, armies were held to be “nurseries of vice,” “dangerous,” and “the grand engine of despotism.” Samuel Adams wrote in 1776, such a professional army was, “always dangerous to the Liberties of the People.” Soldiers were likely to consider themselves separate from the populace, to become more attached to their officers than their government, and to be conditioned to obey commands unthinkingly. The power of a standing army, Adams counseled, “should be watched with a jealous Eye.”

Experiences in the decades before the Constitutional Convention in 1787 reinforced colonists’ negative ideas about standing armies. Colonials who fought victoriously alongside British redcoats in the Seven Years’ War concluded that the ranks of British redcoats were generally filled with coarse, profane drunkards; even the successful conclusion of that conflict served to confirm colonists’ starkly negative attitudes towards the institution of a standing army. The British Crown borrowed massively to finance the conflict (the war doubled British debt, and by the late 1760s, fully half of British tax pokiesaustralian.com revenue went solely to pay the interest on those liabilities); in an effort to boost its revenues, Parliament began to pursue other sources of income in the colonies more aggressively. In the decade before the Declaration of Independence, Parliament passed a series of acts intended to raise money within the colonies.

The power of a standing army, Adams counseled, “should be watched with a jealous Eye.”

That legislation further aggravated colonists’ hostility towards the British Army. As tensions between the colonies and the crown escalated, many colonists came to view the British army as both a symbol and a cause of Parliament’s unpopular policies. Colonists viewed the various revenue-generating acts as necessitated by the staggering costs associated with maintaining a standing army. The Quartering Act, which required colonists to provide housing and provisions for troops in their own buildings, was another obnoxious symbol of the corrupting power represented by the army. Many colonists held the sentiment that the redcoats stationed in the colonies existed not to protect them but to enforce the king’s detestable policies at bayonet-point.

No event crystallized colonists’ antagonism towards the British army more clearly than what became known as the Boston Massacre. In March 1770, British regulars fired into a crowd of civilians, killing five. That event provided all the proof the colonists needed of the true nature of the redcoats’ mission in the colonies. Six years later, the final draft of the Declaration of Independence contained numerous references to King George’s militarism (particularly his attempts to render the army independent of civilian authority, his insistence on quartering the troops among the people, and his importation of mercenaries to “compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny”); by the end of the War of Independence, hatred of a standing army had become a powerful and near-universal tradition among the American people; the professional British army was nothing less than a “conspiracy against liberty.”

Colonists’ experiences with British troops, and the convictions that sprang from them, help explain Madison’s reference to armies having traditionally “enslaved” the people they were commissioned to defend. After winning their political independence, the victorious colonies faced the difficult task of providing for their own security in the context of a deep-seated distrust of a standing military.

Madison’s language reflected a common concern that the maintenance of a standing army in the new United States would place [financial] burdens on the young government [of the United States].

Madison’s use of the imagery of slavery points to the multiple meanings of that term in the 18th century. In Madison’s statement to the Convention, it referred not to the literal notion of armies marching the citizenry through the streets in shackles but to a kind of metaphorical slavery. The immense costs necessary to raise and maintain a standing army (moneys required for pay, uniforms, rations, weapons, pensions, and so forth) would burden the populace with an immense and crippling tax burden that would require the government to confiscate more and more of the citizenry’s wealth in order to meet those massive expenses. Madison’s language reflected a common concern that the maintenance of a standing army in the new United States would place similar burdens on the young government; their experiences with the British army under Parliament in the 1760s and 1770s likewise led to concerns that the executive would use a standing army to force unpopular legislation on an unwilling public in similar fashion.

Other members of the founding generation worried that an armed, professional force represented an untenable threat to the liberty of the people generally. Throughout history, the threat of military coup—governments deposed from within by the very forces raised to protect them—has been a frequent concern. In 1783, Continental Army officers encamped at Newburgh circulated documents that leveled a vague threat against Congress if the government continued its refusal to pay the soldiers. Historians generally conclude that a full-blown coup d’etat was never a realistic possibility, but the incident did little to assuage contemporary concerns about the dangers posed by a standing army.

The experience with professional armies during the 40 years before the Constitutional Convention, and the values that sprang from those experiences, helps explain why the founders never seriously considered maintaining the Continental Army past the end of the War of Independence. The beliefs that grew organically from their experiences with the British also help explain Madison’s passionate anti-military rhetoric (he would later refer to the establishment of a standing army under the new Constitution as a “calamity,” albeit an inevitable one); together, they cast a long shadow over the debates surrounding the kind of military the new nation would provide for itself.

For more information

Watch Professor Whitman Ridgway analyze the Bill of Rights in an Example of Historical Thinking

Kohn, Richard H. Eagle and Sword: The Federalists and the Creation of the Military Establishment in America, 1783-1802. New York: Free Press, 1975.

The Library of Congress. The Federalist Papers. Last accessed 6 May, 2011.

The National Archives. The Constitution. Last accessed 6 May, 2011.

The Policy of Polygamy

field_image
Nauvoo, Illinois, house of Mormon prophet, Joseph Smith, Library of Congress
Question

When did Joseph Smith abandon the policy of polygamy? How did he rationalize this shift in church policy?

Answer

Joseph Smith never abandoned the practice of polygamy; however, in the February 1, 1844 issue of the Latter-day Saints newspaper Times and Seasons, Smith and his brother Hyrum, co-presidents of the church, did publish a notice stipulating that Hiram Brown, a church elder in Michigan, had been cut off from the church for "preaching Polygamy, and other false and corrupt doctrines."

The renowned scholar Richard L. Bushman, who identifies himself as a "believing historian," asserts that rather than indicating a shift in church policy, the February 1844 edict comported with Smith's sermons and public statements of the period. On the pulpit, Smith vigorously denounced "adultery fornication" and polygamy, while in private, he revealed to trustworthy individuals and small groups within the church a revelation he had experienced that served to encourage and sanctify plural marriages that had been commanded by God, drawing on Old Testament practices as precedents. Smith ritualized the practice of polygamy through the institution of "sealing" couples together by priests of the church for eternity, thus allowing them to procreate eternally and achieve celestial glory. Smith denounced as adulterous polygamous practices that had not been sanctified by the church. Bushman concedes, "The distinction between priesthood calls to take additional wives and unlicensed indulgence was clear to him [Smith] if not always to others."

John C. Bennett, the co-founder with Smith of the Latter-day Saint town of Nauvoo, Illinois, and its first mayor, had been excommunicated two years earlier after telling numerous women in the community "that illicit sexual intercourse was acceptable if kept secret," according to Bushman. The February 1844 edict implied an attempt to disassociate the church from such rogue missionaries as Bennett and Brown, especially during a period in which Smith had become a candidate for the presidency of the United States. The church doctrine of sanctified plural marriages was not acknowledged publicly until 1852, eight years after Smith's assassination. In 1890, due to pressure from the federal government, the church issued a manifesto announcing that it no longer sanctioned plural marriages. Subsequent edicts in 1904 and 1910 threatened excommunication to church members and priests who entered into or performed new plural marriages.

Bibliography

Richard L. Bushman, with the assistance of Jed Woodworth, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling. New York: Knopf, 2005.

Donna Hill, Joseph Smith, The First Mormon. Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1977.

Kathryn M. Daynes, More Wives Than One: Transformation of the Mormon Marriage System, 1840–1910. Urbana, Ill. and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2001.

Eckley Miners' Village [PA]

Description

Eckley is one of the hundreds of company mining towns or "patches" built in the anthracite region of Pennsylvania during the 19th century. In 1854, the mining firm of Sharpe, Leisenring, and Company, later known as Sharpe, Weiss, and Company, leased land from the Tench Coxe Estate of Philadelphia and began work on the Council Ridge Colliery and the village of Eckley. The village, built near the colliery where the coal was mined and processed, provided housing for the miners and their families. Its stores, schools, and churches supplied the economic, educational, and religious needs of the villagers. By owning the village, the company had greater control over the lives of their workers.

The site offers exhibits, tours, and occasional recreational and educational events (including living history events).

Lincoln Archives Digital Project

Image
Carte de Visite, Abraham Lincoln and Son Tad, The Henry Ford, Flickr
Annotation

The private organization behind this website is in the process of digitizing millions of records from the Lincoln Administration (March 4, 1861, through April 15, 1865), drawing from collections at the National Archives; the State Treasury, Justice, and War Departments; and other federal offices and agencies.

These records include pardon case files, applications for Federal jobs, the papers of Generals Ambrose Burnside and Henry Halleck, records on the capture of Jefferson Davis and the John Surratt trial, and numerous telegrams and letters about all aspects of Presidential business, as well as maps, photographs, and newspaper articles.

Though the majority of these records are accessible by subscription only ($150/year for individuals, more for school districts and libraries), a few are freely available at the website: thumbnails of 35 photographs (most available in higher quality elsewhere), and roughly 50 political cartoons (too small to read).

More useful for the non-subscriber is the inclusion of 100-200 word descriptions of many of the newspaper publications included in the archive, as well as video footage of several scholarly conferences and presentations about Lincoln.

An interactive timeline of Lincoln's entire life is also included, interspersed with video footage of scholars discussing important events, as well as staged audio recordings of several of Lincoln's letters and speeches, such as a letter he wrote to Mary Owens in 1837 before she broke off their courtship.

For teachers, the website presents a list of 20 links to outside lesson plans covering many themes in Lincoln's life and Presidency.

Death and the Civil War

Description

From the Library of Congress:

"In conjunction with the landmark exhibit The Civil War in America, the Library presented Harvard University President Drew Gilpin Faust in conversation with filmmaker Ric Burns for this commemoration of the Civil War Sesquicentennial. Sen. Elizabeth Warren introduced the event, which explored how death in the Civil War permanently transformed the character of American society. The program featured a clip from the PBS documentary "Death and the Civil War," produced by Burns and based upon Faust's book "This Republic of Suffering: Death and the American Civil War.""

On a Journey Through Hallowed Ground

Date Published
Image
Photo, Of the Student, For the Student, By the Student, Chris Preperato
Article Body

How do you engage your students in history? Do you introduce them to the lives of other children and students in the past? Explore local history with them? Bring digital media and tools into the classroom? The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership's education program combines all three techniques to support students in better understanding the past.

In 2008, Congress recognized the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Heritage Area, a strip of land encompassing 15 counties and more than 10,000 registered historic sites in Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Formed to raise awareness of the area and its resources, the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership focuses on encouraging not just tourism, but education and historical engagement.

What major events anchor local history in your area? How did young people participate in those events?

"Of the Student, For the Student, and By the Student"—the name of the partnership's award-winning educational program sums up its philosophy. Starting with Harpers Ferry, moving on to Monticello, and then beginning a multi-year project set on the Heritage Area's Civil War national parks, Of the Student, For the Student, By the Student gives middle school students and teachers the knowledge and tools to engage with local historic sites.

At each historic site, teachers, staff, and volunteers introduce students to the site's rich history. Armed with new knowledge and enthusiasm, small groups of students create their own mini-documentary or historical fiction scripts and film "on location" at the historic site. Working together as writers, directors, and actors, students come away from the program with a sense of ownership and a deeper connection to the history of their communities.

Do you have access to a video camera or two? What major events anchor local history in your area? How did young people participate in those events? How were they affected by them? On a smaller scale, you and your students may be able to create historical mini-movies of your own. Check out The Journey Through Hallowed Ground's YouTube channel for more than 40 "vodcasts" created by Of the Student, For the Student, and By the Student participants, or learn more about the project from Teachinghistory.org's peek into student filming at Manassas National Battlefield Park. Does anything inspire you (or your students)?

For more information

Learn more about The Journey Through Hallowed Ground on its official website. Its Education section includes more on Of the Student, For the Student, By the Student and other programs, as well as more than 13 lesson plans.

Think your students are too young for film-making? Think again! Award-winning teacher Jennifer Orr describes how she uses video cameras with her 1st-grade students.

Reading Abraham Lincoln: A Case Study in Contextualized Thinking

Image
Abraham Lincoln statue from the Lincoln Memorial. NHEC
Article Body

Teaching history is not only about teaching students what happened in the past; it’s about teaching them how to think about the past. Many students instinctively employ modern perspectives when reading historical documents—a practice historians call "presentism." Students have to be taught to "think contextually," learning to recognize how the past differed from the present. In a significant study, Sam Wineburg revealed that even among teachers contextual thinking is a unique skill that needs to be intentionally developed.

Wineburg and his colleagues worked with 12 pre-service teachers participating in a fifth-year certification program at the University of Washington. They asked those teachers to "think aloud" and make visible how the teachers thought about six historical documents from the nineteenth century.

In this small study, being a history major turned out not to be a reliable predictor of being able to contextualize historical documents. Even college students with strong history content knowledge can fall prey to presentism. The most sophisticated historical readers, on the other hand, build a social context for the historical documents they are reading, drawing inferences from each document, establishing a spectrum of ideas for the period, and reading multiple documents in conversation with each other.

Drawing Inferences from Documents

Historical documents tell readers something not only about their author, but also about the world in which he or she lived. One document from the study, for instance, is a campaign speech made by Abraham Lincoln, in which Lincoln seemingly reveals deep bigotry toward African-Americans. But Lincoln’s words cannot be separated from the occasion on which they were uttered, the location of the debate, or the kinds of people who were in attendance. In short, the speech may tell us something about Lincoln, but it may tell us even more about middle America in 1858.

Establishing a Spectrum of Ideas

In order to build a social context for understanding historical documents, students need to have a general understanding of what people thought about particular issues at that time. In the case of Lincoln’s comments on race, students can better understand the context in which he made them by reading documents written by defenders and opponents of slavery. Examining excerpts from white supremacist John Bell Robinson and abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison, for instance, helped successful readers understand how slavery was understood in Lincoln’s own time.

Reading Across Documents

Looking at the ways in which different documents from the same period inform each other is another way of building the social context of the past. The technique, which historians call "intertextual reading," involves reading each document with the others as backdrop, weaving them together to bring to life the world of the past.

image
Image of bust, Abraham Lincoln, 1809-1865, New York Public Library
In the Classroom

The past, as L.P. Hartley wrote, is a "foreign country," which means that people thought, spoke, dressed, and lived in different ways than we do today.

  • Think about how you can help your students understand this strange place, where people lived differently, had different rights, and believed different things.
  • Begin by asking students to figure out where they stand on a particular issue. Then, reminding them that they are dealing with a different time and place, give them a number of documents focusing on a particular historical issue.
  • Have students make lists of what they can infer about the time period from these documents. How was it different from our world today?
  • See if students can use the documents to establish a spectrum of ideas for the period, and ask them if modern perspectives fall within the poles established by that spectrum.
  • Reminding them that they should be reading across the various documents, ask them to paint a general picture of this past world.
Sample Application

The two excerpts below are from think aloud exercises with two participants in the study. While those participants were teachers rather than students, they nevertheless reflect the same strengths and weaknesses exhibited by younger readers. Take a look at the first one:

Lincoln was not so much...working in the interest of the black man, for altruistic sense. . . he’s not giving them equality in personhood.

The criticism that Lincoln is not giving African-Americans “equality in personhood” is a distinctly modern one that ignores the fact that Lincoln was operating in a very different time in American history. Further, the reader draws conclusions about what Lincoln stood for, ignoring the fact that Lincoln was speaking in the context of a political campaign.

Now take a look at how the second reader approaches a historical text:

. . . I get the feeling that he is wrestling with something that doesn’t really have a good solution. This is the best you can have for now. . . He was real one-dimensional in the first article, kind of a slimy politician. Then he has another side with the letter to Mary Speed, kind of human. And now this is again another, it’s beginning to fill out, but now I see him more as the chief executive and trying to deal with problems, trying to balance a war, thinking ahead, what are we going to do after the war and sort of coming up with—and this is prior to the Emancipation Proclamation. Is this prior to the Emancipation Proclamation? Yes, this is prior. So, I mean he may have had this idea in mind, so he’s thinking forward, and how are we going to deal with this huge number of slaves? Maybe colonizing is certainly a viable option in 1862. It kind of reminds me of what the British did with Australia. Ship all the undesirables down to Australia.

Unlike the first reader, this seasoned one considers the fact that, however distasteful it strikes us today, creating a black colony may have been "a viable option in 1862." Further, instead of taking Lincoln’s words as clear evidence of what the future president believed, the reader notes that different Lincolns appear depending on the context: a "slimy politician" in one, a "human" side in a second, and a "chief executive" in a third.

For more information

Teachinghistory.org's Teaching Guide Structured Academic Controversy (SAC) in the History Classroom further discusses leading students toward synthesized, contextualized understanding.

Avishag Reisman and Sam Wineburg, "Teaching the Skill of Contextualizing in History," The Social Studies 99, no. 5 (Sep-Oct 2008), 202-207.

Bibliography

Sam Wineburg, Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2001).

Portal to Texas History

Image
Postcard, postmarked October 9, 1907, Portal to Texas History
Annotation

This archive offers a collection of more than 900,000 photographs, maps, letters, documents, books, artifacts, and other items relating to all aspects of Texas history, from prehistory through the 20th century. Subjects include agriculture, arts and crafts, education, immigration, military and war, places, science and technology, sports and recreation, architecture, business and economics, government and law, literature, people, religion, social life and customs, and the Texas landscape and nature. Some subjects include sub-categories. For instance, social life and customs, with 694 items, includes 13 sub-categories, such as clothing, families, food and cooking, homes, slavery, and travel. The visitor can also search the collection by keyword.

Resources for educators include seven "primary source adventures," divided into 4th- and 7th-grade levels, with lesson plans, preparatory resources, student worksheets, and PowerPoint slideshows. Subjects of the lessons include Cabeza de Vaca, Hood's Texas Brigade in the Civil War, life in the Civilian Conservation Corps, the journey of Coronado, the Mier Expedition, runaway slaves, the Shelby County Regulator Moderator war, and a comparison of Wichita and Comanche village life. This website offers useful resources for both researching and teaching the history of Texas.