Conclusion to my US History Paper

In conclusion, it is clear that Lincoln’s decisions to lead the nation into Civil War and issue the Emancipation Proclamation were direct results of his idea of a “political religion” and his view of Christianity. When the Confederacy succeeded from the Union, Lincoln felt that this was an attack on the laws of the United States and on the God given gift of democracy. Lincoln saw this as a violation of his philosophy of “political religion.” Therefore, Lincoln declared war on the Confederacy. Lincoln was against slavery from the beginning of his political career and he favored a system of gradual emancipation and compensation. Lincoln also favored the system of colonizing newly emancipated African Americans. However, after being influenced by educated African Americans, Lincoln began to understand that a biracial society could exist. Lincoln decided to issue the Emancipation Proclamation because of several factors. Lincoln felt that God wanted the slaves to be emancipated, Lincoln needed the military benefits that an immediate emancipation would bring, and Lincoln decided a new policy needed to be enacted after his gradual emancipation proposals were rejected by the loyal Border States. Therefore, both Lincoln’s idea of political religion and his view of Christianity led him to issue the Emancipation Proclamation.

Outline for Research Paper

Thesis:  Lincoln’s decisions to lead the nation into Civil War and issue the Emancipation Proclamation were direct results of his idea of a “political religion” and his view of Christianity. 

Outline:

I. Introduction

II. Lincoln’s view of religion and an investigation of his personal faith.

III. How Lincoln’s views of religion and government combine to make the idea of “political religion” and how this idea led Lincoln to engage the Confederacy in war. 

IV. An examination of how Abraham Lincoln viewed Blacks and slavery throughout his political career. I will conclude this section by explaining the role that Christianity and political/military necessities played in Lincoln’s decision to issue the Emancipation Proclamation.

V. Conclusion

Works Cited for Blog Post 4 #1

                                                Bibliography

 

1.Bouton, Archibald L. Lincoln and Douglas Debates  (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1905),

 

 

2.  Cuomo, Mario M., and Holzer, Harold ed. Lincoln on Democracy (New York: Cornelia & Michael Bessie, 1990),

 

 

3. Guelzo, Allen C. Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America. (New York:  Simon & Schuster, 2004),

4. Leidner, Gordon, Lincoln on God and Country (Shippensburg: White Mane Books, 2000),

5. Simon, John, Holzer Harold, and Vogel Dawn ed. Lincoln Revisited (New York: Fordham University Press, 2007),

Selection of Research Topic

After doing research on three possible topics for my research paper, I have decided to focus on Abraham Lincoln's personal beliefs and the role that these beliefs played in the cause of the Civil War and in the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation. My revised sentence description is,
"I will be writing about the role that Abraham Lincoln's personal beliefs played in the beginning of the Civil War and the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation." My research questions will remain the same with the addition of one question. I will be asking, "Why did Abraham Lincoln have such a great desire to preserve the Union?" "Was Abraham Lincoln a Christian?" "Did he desire equal rights for black slaves, or just their emancipation?" "Was the Emancipation Proclamation created as a political move, as a strategic military move, or was it created because it was the right thing to do?" I selected this topic because I have heard a lot of different things about Abraham Lincoln and I want to know more about him. I have heard that Lincoln was a racist, and from others that he was anti-racism. I have heard that his only motivations were for political power and I from others that he was a hero that wanted to save the enslaved and the Union from the evil Confederates. I simply want to know whether Abraham Lincoln's actions came from virtue or selfish desire. I also could find a lot of information about Abraham Lincoln, the Civil War, and the Emancipation Proclamation.  

As I mentioned earlier, I have heard both negative and positive things about Abraham Lincoln. From what I can remember of my public education, Abraham Lincoln was portrayed as a hero who saved the slaves and prevented the nation from fragmenting. I do not remember learning much that was negative about him. I have also learned that the Civil War was fought almost exclusively over the issue of slavery. I do not think that I am severely influenced one way or another. I would prefer to find that Abraham Lincoln was this virtuous President to be emulated, but I would not be surprised if he was not as virtuous as he is sometimes made out to have been.  To neutralize this preference, I will acknowledge that it is a very real possibility that Abraham Lincoln did many things from selfish motivations. I am aware that it is a rare politician who does things purely from a moral point of view.

Description of Sources for Possible Paper Topics

Concerning Topic 1. The role that Abraham Lincoln's personal beliefs played in the beginning of the Civil War and the policies that he enacted during the war. I found five sources concerning this topic. I have provided proper citation below. I have also discussed what each source contains and the value of each source to my topic and whether they have changed my questions or approach to this topic.

Bouton, Archibald L. Lincoln and Douglas Debates. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1905. Print. 

 

This is a collection of the debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas during the Senatorial Campaign of 1858. This particular book also includes Lincoln’s address at Cooper Institute. This is a primary source that will help me learn some of Abraham’s Lincoln's personal beliefs and stances on major political issues of that time.This primary source is important to me because it will help me determine what Abraham Lincoln's personal beliefs were before the Civil War. It will particularly help me identify what his stances on public policy were. All in all, I think that this primary source is a very important piece of research for this topic.

 

 

Cuomo, Mario M., and Holzer, Harold Eds. Lincoln on Democracy: New York: Cornelia & Michael Bessie, 1990. Print.

 

This book is a compilation of Abraham’s public speeches and writings with a focus on democracy. I hope to use this source to better learn what Abraham’s political and religious beliefs were. This may help me understand why the South reacted so negatively to Lincoln’s election, why Lincoln cared so much for keeping a unified nation, and why he created the Emancipation Proclamation. This source is important to helping me answer the question of how Abraham Lincoln's personal beliefs led to the beginning of the Civil War. This source is also important to my topic. 

 

Guelzo, Allen C. Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004. Print.

 

This book examines the Emancipation Proclamation and Lincoln’s motivations for passing it. It also discusses the impact that this Proclamation had on America. I hope that this book will help me better understand  Lincoln’s motivations for creating and passing the Emancipation Proclamation. This source is also important to my research of this topic.

 

Leidner, Gordon, Lincoln on God and Country, Shippensburg: White Mane Books, 2000. Print.

 

This book discusses who Abraham Lincoln was by providing pieces from various speeches and writings that Abraham Lincoln made. These speeches and writings cover a variety of topics. These speeches and writings of Lincoln will help me better understand Lincoln's personal beliefs. Of primary importance to me is chapter 8 that discusses Lincolns faith in God.This chapter specifically addresses my question concerning whether or not Abraham Lincoln was a Christian or not. This source is important for my research of this topic.

 

Simon, John, Holzer Harold, and Vogel Ed.., Dawn Lincoln Revisited, New York: Fordham University Press, 2007. Print.

 

In this book, several historians examine many different aspects of Lincoln’s life. Of particular interest to me, these authors discuss Lincoln’s religious and political views. I am also very interested in the examination of Lincoln’s policies towards Blacks after the Emancipation Proclamation that occurs in chapter 13. This source will help me answer my questions about how Abraham Lincoln viewed African Americans. This is also an important piece of research for my topic.

 

 All in all, I think that my questions could remain the same. These sources address my questions well. As, for my topic I would change it to "I will be writing about the role that Abraham Lincoln's personal beliefs played in the beginning of the Civil War and the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation."  This revised sentence description of my topic will help me narrow my topic.

 

Concerning Topic 2. Why did the Confederates felt that their cause of succession and slavery was the right and noble path during the Civil War? I found three good sources for this topic. I have provided proper citation below. I have also explained why these sources were important for this topic. 

Faust, Drew G. The Creation of Confederate Nationalism: Ideology and Identity in the Civil War 

South, Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1988. Print.

This book discusses the ideology of the Confederated States of America. It explores the development of it's ideology and the nationalism that resulted from this ideology. I would use this source to answer my question about how the Confederates could think that they were on the moral side in the war. This source is important to my topic.

Gallagher, Gary W. Ed. Fighting for the Confederacy: The Personal Recollections of General Edward Porter Alexander. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1989. Print.

This is a compilation of personal writings by Brigadier General Edward Porter who fought for the Confederacy. This primary source will help me understand the mentality of the Confederate military and why the South thought that rebelling was a just and noble cause.This primary source will defiantly help me address my major question that forms the foundation for this topic. This source is very valuable.

Masur, Louis P. Civil War : A Concise History. [N.p.]: Oxford University Press, 2011. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 30 Apr. 2013.

This book discuses the coarse of the Civil War. I am only interested in the first chapter, which discusses the origins of the Civil War. It reviews events as far back as the development of the US Constitution. The information that I gather from this chapter will help me to identify some of the ideology that encouraged the south to rebel against the Union. It will also help me to understand why the South felt that they were just in rebelling.

Overall, there were fewer sources for this topic. It is hard to find resources that come from a Confederate perspective. I would guess that this is simply because the Confederacy was defeated in the Civil War, so Confederate sympathizers were ashamed to write their history. I think that these sources will help me answer my first two questions, but my third question is not addressed. I could not find anything about whether the South planned to have slaves forever or just for a time. Considering the sources that I found, I do not think that I would have to change my sentence description at all.

Concerning Topic 3. The role that African Americans played in the Union victory over the Confederacy. I found four good sources for this topic. I have provided the proper citation below. I have also explained why each source is important for this topic.

 Boritt, Gabor S. Why the Confederacy Lost, Oxford University Press, New York, 1992. Print.

As the title suggests, this book discusses the factors that led the Union to victory. The only part of this book that I am interested in is Chapter 5, which discusses the role that African-Americans played in the Union victory.This directly addresses my topic and is a very important piece of research.

McPherson James M. The Negro’s Civil War: How American Negroes Felt and Acted During the War for the Union. New York:  Pantheon Books,  1965. Print.

 

This source makes use of several primary source documents. However it uses excerpts from these sources rather than the entire document. “The book is arranged in narrative form, with considerable interpretive and factual information supplied by the editor to bridge and clarify the documents.” (McPherson xi) The book relies on the actual words of African Americans to describe all aspects of their role in the Civil War. This primary source will help me understand how African Americans helped the Union to win the Civil War. It is especially important that this information is coming directly from African Americans who helped the Union during the Civil War.

 

Corydon Ireland. Black Confederates. Harvard University, 1 Sept. 2011. Web. 30 April. 2013. http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2011/09/black-confederates/

This source discusses how there were African Americans who fought for the Confederacy. (Though this was a very low number.) It discusses why African American’s may have fought for the Confederacy and the controversy that this idea causes. This article directly addresses my question about whether or not slaves fought for the Confederacy. This source is a very important part of my research.

 

Quarles, Benjamin. The Negro in the Civil War. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1953. Print.

 

This book discuses the role that African Americans played in the Civil War. It discusses how their actions in the Civil War were important for a Union victory in the Civil War. This source directly addresses my topic.

 Rose, P. K. Black Dispatches: Black American Contributions to Union Intelligence During the Civil War. Central Intelligence Agency, 7 July. 2008. Web. 30 April. 2013. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/black-dispatches/index.html

This source discusses how many African Americans in the South helped the North during the Civil War. It briefly discusses several African Americans and how they helped the Union cause.This source directly addresses my first two questions concerning how African Americans helped the Union. This source is very important to my topic.

 All in all, I found several good sources for this topic. All of my questions are addressed and I do not think that I need to change my sentence description.

 

 

 

 

Possible Paper Topics

1. One topic that I could research is the role that Abraham Lincoln's personal beliefs played in the beginning of the Civil War. I am also interested in the federal policies that Lincoln enacted during the war.

Questions concerning this topic:

Was Abraham Lincoln a Christian?
Did he desire equal rights for black slaves, or just their emancipation?
Was the Emancipation Proclamation created as a political move, as a strategic military move, or was it created because it was the right thing to do?

2. I could also research why the Confederates felt that their cause of succession and slavery was the right and noble path during the Civil War. This would help me explain why the Confederate Army was so willing to fight and die for a cause that we now view as abhorrent.

Questions concerning this topic:

How could the Confederates view their cause as being noble?
If so, did this make them more dedicated soldiers?
Did the Confederates plan to have slavery instituted in their new nation forever?

3. A third topic that I could research is the role that African Americans played in the Union victory over the Confederacy.

Questions concerning this topic:

How many African Americans fought for the Union, and what were their roles in the army?

Did any slaves in the Confederacy do anything to damage the Confederate cause? If so what did they do?

Were their any slaves who fought for the Confederacy? Why or why not?

Interpretation of Primary Sources

From www.smithsonianmag.com

I have researched two primary sources concerning the burning of Washington in 1814. One of these sources is a letter by Dolly Madison to her sister concerning the days and hours just prior to her fleeing the White House as a result of the British advance on Washington. My second primary source is a diary entry by George Gleig who "was part of the British force that attacked and burned Washington." ("The British Burn Washington D.C, 1814" EyeWitness to History.com) Both of these primary sources provide valuable detailed information about the burning of Washington. Dolly Madison's letter explains how she saved some Cabinet papers, the painting of George Washington, and other valuables from the White House before the British got there and sacked the place. The letter by George Gleig also gives us valuable information about what was destroyed by the British in their sacking of Washington. However, the most valuable historical information that these sources give us are the mood and mentality of both the Americans and the British before, and during the burning of Washington. We can see that the American mood was unconcerned arrogance toward the idea that the British would or could attack and sack Washington. This mood changed to fear and horror when the British began to approach Washington after the battle of Bladensburg. On the other hand, we can see that the British were confident, but annoyed at the fighting style of the Americans. We can also see that they were jubilant at the burning of Washington. 

The mood that I have drawn from these sources is supported by Jon Latimer in 1812 War with America. In chapter 14, Latimer discusses the burning of Washington from a British perspective.  The British mood of confidence is best exhibited by Cockburn (admiral and colonel of the Royal Marines) who proposed and led the attack on Washington. In a private letter Cockburn says, "I most firmly believe that within forty-eight Hours after the Arrival in the Patuxent...the City of Washington might be possessed without Difficulty or Opposition." (Latimer 303) The Americans were also confident of their own safety. "Although British forces had threatened Washington through much of 1813, the American government took no effective action to fortify or defend the capital in the spring of 1814." (303) The Americans believed that the British would not spend the resources to attack Washington because Baltimore was much more valuable militarily. Latimer mentions several cases where the British were angered at the American's approach to war. They were angry about attempted poisonings (305), torpedoes/submarines (306), and snipers shooting from houses (316). This frustration no doubt contributed to the British pleasure during the destruction of Washington. While Latimer notes that not every British soldier was happy at the destruction of Washington, there were many who were. This is especially evident in Latimer's discussion of how the British invaded the White House, joyously feasted on the American celebratory dinner, tried fine wines, and even took time to change clothes before burning the White House (318-319). Latimer also makes mention of the horror and fear that the Americans felt at the advance of the British and the burning of Washington. The Americans crippling panic is best described by Latimer when he recounts the American defeat at Bladensburg. Just after the British crossed the river, American militia men began retreating and fleeing in utter abandonment. (314-315) On page 318, Latimer recounts the horror that many Americans felt at the burning of Washington. One American, Mordecai Boots writes, "so repugnant to my feelings, so dishonorable, so degrading to the American character and at the same time so awful it almost palsied my faculties." (318)
The mood of both the British and the Americans during this whole conflict over Washington are well exhibited in the primary sources that I have selected. In Dolly Madison's letter, we first see the American overconfidence and sense of security in the first paragraph where President Madison asks Dolly if she has the courage to stay in the White House until he returns. Dolly's response is that, "I had no fear but for him, and the success of our army." I interpret this to mean that she was afraid for James Madison's safety at Bladensburg, but did not really worry about the threat of the British actually making it to Washington. However, this confidence is destroyed by James Madison's letters informing Dolly to be ready to leave Washington because the British were stronger than had been originally thought. Dolly is then frightened and documents how on Wednesday she had been looking with her spy-glass for her husband and his friends "with unwearied anxiety" since daybreak. When her husband does not arrive and the British approach nearer to Washington, Dolly frantically stores Cabinet papers, the now famous painting of George Washington, and other valuables from the White House. She then flees the White House with a fearful uncertainty.

From www.dipity.com

In the diary entries of George Gleig, the British confidence (at this point it is very justified) is portrayed with General Ross' attempt at a truce when the British first approach Washington. However, the Americans shove this truce back in Ross' face by shooting at him and the soldiers that accompany him. Gleig then documents that the British view this as yet another "breach of the law of nations" by the Americans. This caused the British to lay "all thoughts of accommodation...aside." Gleig then joyfully documents the burning of the governmental buildings of Washington. He says, "You can conceive nothing finer than the sight which met them as they drew near to the town. The sky was brilliantly illuminated by the different conflagrations, and a dark red light was thrown upon the road, sufficient to permit each man to view distinctly his comrade's face." Glieg also documents the joyous feast of the British at the White House before they burned it. As we can see, these two primary sources by George Gleig and Dolly Madison do a great job at relaying the mood of both the British and Americans immediately before, during, and after the burning of Washington.




Sources:

 "The British Burn Washington, DC, 1814," EyeWitness to History, eyewitnesstohistory.com (2003).

"Dolley Madison Flees the White House, 1814" EyeWitness to History, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com (2009).

Latimer, Jon. 1812 War with America. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 
2007. Print.

Investigation Using a Secondary Source

I have two primary sources from EyeWitness to History.com. One of these primary sources is a letter by Dolly Madison to her sister about the moments just prior to the British taking the White House. I have several questions about this source. First of all, I wonder if this is one letter or multiple letters. EyeWitness to History.com seems to indicate that this is one letter. However, the letter is broken into three time frames. 1. The day after President Madison left to join General Winder, 2. "Wednesday Morning, twelve o'clock," and 3. Wednesday at Three o' clock. This could indicate that this letter is actually multiple letters. However, I can see how Dolly could have written about three different times all within the same letter; especially if she is writing to her sister years after the fact with the purpose of recounting the events leading up to the British capture of the White House. This leads me to my next question.When was this letter written? The letter itself indicates that it was written just before the British attacked and took the White House. Dolly Madison begins the letter with, "My husband left me yesterday morning to join General Winder." The rest of the first part of this letter (the next four paragraphs) is written in the present tense indicating that it was written the day after President Madison left to join General Winder. The second part of the letter occurs on "Wednesday at 12 o'clock." The third part occurs at 3 o'clock on Wednesday. Both of these sections are written in the present tense. My final question is, why did Dolly write this letter to her sister? Was it simply to recount Dolly's last moments in the White House before she had to leave because of the British invasion, or was there another reason?
What I do know about this source is that it was written by Dolly Madison to her sister. I also know that the events described make sense with what we know about what occurred in the moments before the British invaded Washington, and eventually the White House. I know that the first lady was in the White House as the British were approaching and that she took many valuables (including the famous painting of George Washington) with her as she escaped.
My other source from EyeWitness to History.com is The British Burn Washington, DC, 1814. I have two major questions pertaining to this source. My first question is, why did George Gleig write about the destruction of Washington? Was his purpose to have a personal journal about this major event in his own life, or was it to record an official account for British records? My next question is, who is George Gleig? EyeWitness to History.com makes it clear that Gleig was part of the British forces that attacked Washington. What I am questioning is whether Gleig was a soldier or just some kind of recorder that followed the army around.
What I know about this source is that George Gleig is the author. I know that "George Gleig was part of the British force that attacked and burned Washington." (EyeWitness to History.com) I also know that this source describes events that I am familiar with. The British invaded the White House and ate a meal that had been prepared for the return of President Madison. The British army then set fire to any buildings associated with the government.

From EyeWitness to History.com

My secondary source about the War of 1812 and the burning of Washington is, 1812 War with America by Jon Latimer. This source is interesting because it comes from a British perspective. With this book, Latimer makes the attempt to provide a comprehensive history about the war of 1812 from a British perspective. However, I am primarily interested in chapter 14, "Burning the White House" because this chapter discusses the British take over and burning of Washington. This chapter begins by explaining officer Cockburn's plan to take Washington D.C because he knows that it will be sparsely defended. This chapter also mentions general Ross who is the general of George Gleig, the author of one of my primary sources. This chapter explains how Ross is very reluctant to attack Washington at first because he fears that it will be well defended. However, Cockburn finally convinces him into taking the offensive risk. This chapter discusses how the British forces traveled up river and then marched in the terrible heat (where several soldiers died of heat exhaustion) toward Washington. The battle of Bladensburg is also described in fairly significant detail in this chapter. 

From EyeWitness to History.com

However, what is of most interest to me is the attack on Washington, which this chapter also discusses in detail. Latimer explains how Ross has no desire to destroy any private property unless the property's owners began causing trouble. Latimer also mentions the episode where Ross begins entering the city and has his horse shot out from under him (his 3rd horse in this trek toward Washington.) This story is mentioned in the journal of George Gleig. My other primary source (the letter by Dolly Madison) is even directly mentioned in this chapter, but unfortunately it does not say when the letter was written. It only says "Dolley later wrote to her sister..." (Latimer 316).  Latimer also explains how President Madison arrived at the White House at 4:30 to get Dolley, but he found out that she had left an hour earlier. Latimer also mentions who took the painting of George Washington from the White House. "It was taken by Jacob Barker, a ship-owner and fellow Quaker, and Robert G.L. de Peyster, "assisted by two colored boys..." (316) Latimer also spends considerable time explaining the British method of burning anything associated with the United States government. He explains how difficult it was for the British to set the Capital Building on fire, how the British set fire to The Library of Congress, and how the British ate the American victory feast at the White House before setting it ablaze. However, Latimer was quick to note that General Ross and Officer Cockburn were polite and considerate towards the civilians who were in Washington at the time of the conquest. After the burning of Washington, Ross and Cockburn quietly left Washington less than 24 hours after they had taken the city. All in all, this secondary source by Latimer thoroughly explains the time frame and events that my primary sources stem from. 

Sources:

 "The British Burn Washington, DC, 1814," EyeWitness to History, eyewitnesstohistory.com (2003).

"Dolley Madison Flees the White House, 1814" EyeWitness to History, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com (2009).

Latimer, Jon. 1812 War with America. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 
2007. Print.

Pre-investigation of Primary Sources

One of my sources is The British Burn Washington, DC, 1814. This source is from EyeWitness to History.com. The majority of this article is made up of an eyewitness account of George Gleig who "was part of the British force that attacked and burned Washington." Gleig seemed to be writing an account of the British attack on Washington DC.
The article from EyeWitness to History.com gives a brief summary of what led up to the August 24th 1814 invasion of Washington. The article also describes the setting of this invasion. Following this introduction, EyeWitness to History provides a primary account of the attack on Washington D.C. This account is about the British invasion from the viewpoint of a British soldier. It contains some very interesting information. It describes how General Ross sent a party to Washington to make a truce of some kind, but this party was fired upon from a house as they entered the city. In this attack the horse of General Ross himself was killed. Gleig then accounts how the British responded to this violation of ethics by killing those in the house and then proceeding "to burn and destroy everything in the most distant degree connected with government." Gleig explains that the British destroyed the Capital Building, White House, a dockyard, arsenal, barracks, a brand new frigate, and many other things connected with the government. He also explains how the British soldiers who invaded the White House ate a feast that had been prepared for the President himself.

From: EyeWitness to History.com

As mentioned above, the author of this first hand account of the attack on Washington was George Gleig who, "was part of the British force that attacked and burned Washington." (EyeWitness to History.com) I am unsure of Gleig's motivation, but I would guess that he wanted to keep a record of what happened as a piece of personal memorabilia. My reasoning for this is that within the portions of the first hand account that appear on EyeWitness to History.com (not all of it is there) there are not many meticulous details. The writing is a kind of style that I would expect in a personal journal rather than in official governmental records. However, this is just conjecture by an undergraduate student, so it could very well be inaccurate.  
The context of this writing was the attack on Washington D.C on August 24, 1814. This attack occurred within the larger context of the war of 1812. Again, the two possibilities that I see for the purpose of this source are either documentation for official British records, or simply informal documentation for personal reasons. In my very uninformed opinion, I would guess that it is the later. 

My second primary source is also from EyeWitness to History.com. This primary source is a letter by Dolly Madison to her sister about the days just prior to the British taking the White House. This letter accounts her expectant waiting for her husband, President Madison and her eventual departure from the White House.

From: EyeWitness to History.com

The article from EyeWitness to History.com briefly describes how President Madison sent an urgent message to his wife urging her to flee the White House. It then explains how Dolly Madison hastily fled the White House with important government documents and a now famous portrait of President Washington. This account is followed by a letter that Dolly Madison wrote to her sister that describes her retreat from the White House. In this letter, Dolly accounts how President Madison had left her at the White House to accompany General Winder as the British approached closer to Washington. She explains how she was worried about President Madison and how the President was expressing his worry about her. He expressed this worry through letters that warned her to be ready the leave the White House at sudden notice if the British approached the city. The second section of the letter discusses August 24th. It documents how Dolly Madison has been looking for her husband since dawn, but she sees only soldiers. The final section occurs three hours after the second section. Dolly Madison reports that there has been a battle at Bladensburg, but President Madison has not yet returned to the White House. She then explains how Mr. Carroll and a wagon has come to take her away from the danger, but she is reluctant to go until the wagon is filled with valuables from the White House and the picture of George Washington is secure. The letter ends with Dolly fleeing the White House, uncertain of her fate. 
 Dolly Madison, the wife of President James Madison, is the author of this letter. I am unsure of her motivation because I do not know when this was written. If the letter was written during the events described in 1814, then Dolly's purpose was to keep her sister informed about what was going on concerning her safety and whereabouts. However, EyeWitness to History seems to indicate that this letter was written years after the fact. The letter is introduced on the website with "Some years later, Dolley Madison recreated the scene at the White House that day in a letter to her sister."(EyeWitness to History.com) If this letter was indeed written years after the fact, the purpose could have been to simply share her experience of the event with her sister or to give her sister a dramatized account of the moments before the British invaded Washington.
If this letter was written during the events described, then the context is the War of 1812, specifically the British invasion of Washington on August 24, 1814. The letter would have been written to inform Dolly's sister of Dolly's health and where she was headed. However, if the letter was written years after the fact, the context changes. If it was written years after the fact, then I am unsure of what the context was because I do not know when it was written. If this was the case, I would also be unsure of what led this source to be written.

Sources: "The British Burn Washington, DC, 1814," EyeWitness to History, eyewitnesstohistory.com (2003).

"Dolley Madison Flees the White House, 1814" EyeWitness to History, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com (2009).

Primary Source for Blog Assignement #2

From: EyeWitness to History.com

For this next blog assignment, I will be using two primary sources about the British burning Washington D.C in 1814. Both sources are from EyeWitness to History.com. The first will be "Dolley Madison Flees the White House, 1814. The second will be "The British Burn Washington, DC, 1814."

From: EyeWitness to History.com

The Lives of African Slaves in Early America

The life of the African slave in early America was a harsh and dehumanizing existence. African slaves had virtually no rights. They were viewed as inferior beings by the white colonists even during the time of the American Revolution where the words, "freedom,""basic human rights," and "liberty" were on the lips of virtually all in America. Even after the American colonists had won "freedom" and independence from the British in 1783, most Africans in The United States were suffering under the bondage of slavery.
Shortly after settlements began appearing on the east coast, it became apparent that making a living in America would take a lot of manpower. There were forests to be cleared and crops to be tended to. In 1619,  "A Dutch ship brings the first permanent African settlers to Jamestown. These Africans soon are put to work on tobacco plantations." (PBS.org) However, the number of slaves in America remained relatively low until the 18th century when the slave population (mostly in the rice and tobacco growing south) exploded. This increase in slaves largely came about as a result of the slave trade across the Atlantic on what is now known as the Middle Passage. This trip was long, deadly, and miserable. The African slaves would be quartered below deck with few rations, and would lie side by side in cramped quarters. There was usually an area in the center of the deck for the purpose of holding human excrement, but many were too sick or cramped to move to this space when they needed to. This environment caused disease to flourish and resulted in many deaths. "On average, about 15 percent of the slaves died, but sometimes half or more perished." (Roark 137)

From Africans in America, pbs.org

These slaves experienced little relief when they arrived in the American colonies where they were viewed as property of their owners. "Southern planters expected slaves to work from sunup to sundown and beyond." (139) These harsh expectations caused many slaves to resist their owners. This resistance took many forms. It could be dramatic such as violent rebellion, or a more passive approach such as, working slower, or retaining part of their African culture. Some examples of this are slaves building their homes like their African homes, giving their children family names, worshiping African deities, making and playing traditional African instruments, growing and eating African food, and preforming traditional African funerals. Some of this cultural preservation has survived to this day. The Gullah people who live in South Carolina and Georgia are perhaps the best example of this. "They speak a creole language similar to Sierra Leone Krio, use African names, tell African folktales, make African-style handicrafts such as baskets and carved walking sticks, and enjoy a rich cuisine based primarily on rice." (Opala)
Unfortunately, this resistance coupled with the large amount of slaves in the southern colonies made the white colonists very paranoid about open rebellion. This caused harsh penalties to be allotted to slaves who would not fall neatly into line. Disobedient slaves were whipped, branded, castrated, executed, and maimed on a regular basis. Most times, the punishment was a result of a minor offense. Thus, the slaves were utterly trapped in this dehumanizing position of being someone's property, merely existing to make their owner more money. They were completely disposable if they became a liability.
Viewing African slaves as property, and treating them as such did not happen over night. It was the result of ever tightening laws that few opposed. For example, in 1640 a Virginia court ruled that an African run away servant serve his master for life. In 1662, a Virginia court ruled that any slave woman's child would be a slave to her master, because she herself is a slave at the time of delivery. In 1667, Virginia ruled that conversion to Christianity could not free a slave from their bondage. In 1669, Virginia ruled that if a slave should die while being punished, the owner is not guilty of any crime. These laws continued to get more and more strict as the fear of rebellion increased.

From Africans in America, pbs.org

All in all, we can see that the life of a slave in Colonial America was miserable. However, even in the midst of all of this suffering, many slaves managed to save aspects of their African culture that remain to this day. When the American Revolution came about, many of these slaves defected to the British in hopes of being freed. When the British were defeated, a few loyal slaves were taken by the British out of the United States. (With the purpose of damaging the American's economy any way possible. Not because the British felt morally obligated.) However, most slaves were disappointed and remained in slavery until the American Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation.

Sources:
 "Africans in America: A Terrible Transformation" pbs.org. Part 1, PBS, Accessed Feb 15, 2013.

Opala, Joseph. "The Gulla: Rice, Slavery, and the Sierra Leone-American Connection" yale.edu. Yale University, Accessed Feb 15, 2013.

Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, and Susan Hartmann. The American Promise. Boston: Bedford/St.       Martin's, 2012. Print

"Slave Law in Colonial Virginia: A Timeline" studythepast.com. Sam Houston State University, accessed Feb 15, 2013

The Three Colonial Regions of Early America

Colonial America had three major cultural regions. The northern colonies, (Massachusetts, Main, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire) the middle colonies, (Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware, New Jersey) and the southern colonies (Georgia, Carolina, Maryland, and Virginia). All of these regions had much in common, which is why they eventually united in the war for independence in 1776. They were all British colonies, they were relatively wealthy compared to other nations of the world during this time,  Christianity had a major influence in their communities, they all had strong economic drives, and they all used slaves and indentured servants in their economies. However, these three regions were very much different from each other in areas such as their ethnic makeup, their Christian denominations, and economic strategies. These differences led to the long deliberation that occurred leading up to the war for independence.

(From http://www.histarch.uiuc.edu)

The northern colonies had the largest population of any of the colonial regions and were the most similar in regarding to religion. Religiously, New England was dominated by Calvinism. Both the Puritans and Pilgrims were strictly Calvinist.  This led to a lifestyle that was shaped by biblical principals and laws. New England laws were developed on a biblical foundation as seen by Calvinists. This strict view of Calvinism discouraged other religious groups from settling in New England because they would be persecuted by the Puritans. However, this religious zeal began to give way before a growing economy in the early to mid eighteenth century. Rich merchants began to have more influence than puritan preachers. "New Englanders made thier fortunes at sea, as they had since the seventeenth century." (Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, Hartmann 127) Fish was New England's major export, but livestock and timber also were major exports in the New England economy which was tied to the Atlantic trade routs. This connection with the Atlantic trade route led to New England having more specialized workers than the southern and middle regions.

However, the Middle Colonies had their own unique characteristics. According to Dr. Holden, people know the least about the Middle Colonies. The Middle Colonies were made up of immigrants from several different western European countries (Scotland, Ireland, Germany, and The Netherlands). This meant that the Middle Colonies were more diverse than either the Northern or Southern colonies. This led to a "greater emphasis on religious toleration and cultural diversity." (radford.edu) Many of these immigrants came to America as redemptioners or indentured servants. Economically, the Middle Colonies focused mainly on being self sustaining. They lived on family farms where they grew enough to live on. They did not focus on growing large amounts of cash crops like the Southern Colonies. However, the Middle Colonies did export a significant amount of wheat, which made many colonists in this region very wealthy. 

                                                            (From http://www.history.org)

(From http://www.history.org)

The Southern Colonies also had their own unique traits. The major Christian denomonation in the southern colonies was Anglicanism. The major export in the Southern Colonies was tobacco, which was grown in very large quantities on large plantations. The tobacco business was a very labor intensive process. The tobacco cultivation required labor for 9 months out of the year and the soil would only produce tobacco for five years before exhausting. (umass.edu) To obtain the labor needed to grow this tobacco, the plantation owners bought large quantities of African slaves. "Slave ships brought almost 300,000 Africans to British North America between 1619 and 1780. Of these Africans, 95 percent arrived in the South and 96 percent arrived during the eighteenth century. (Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, Hartmann 136) This large import of slaves meant that the population of Africans rivaled that of the White population. In some places such as Carolina, the African population exceeded that of the White population. This made the idea of a rebellion among the slaves a very great fear in the southern colonies.  In addition to tobacco, the south exported mass amounts of rice, and indigo. "The southern colonies supplied 90 percent of all North American exports to Britain." (140) This slave based economy was very successful for the slave owners. The southern colonies quickly became the most wealthy region of the British colonies. The wealthiest southerners dominated southern politics and created an oligarchy.
As we can see, the three major regions of British North America (Northern, Middle, and Southern) had many differences. These differences caused some political disagreements between the colonies about how to respond to British authority in the years leading up to the American Revolution. (New England was ready to openly rebel long before the Middle and Southern colonies.) However, they contained enough similarities that they united in rebellion and eventually became the United States of America.


Sources:

Comparing Settlement Patterns: New Spain, New France, New England. http://people.umass.edu. University of Massachusetts. Electronic. Accessed 2/10/13.

The Middle Colonies. http://www.radford.edu. Radford University. Electronic. Accessed 2/10/13.

Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, and Susan Hartmann. The American Promise. Boston: Bedford/St.       Martin's, 2012. Print

Columbian Exchange

The devastating progression of Smallpox. (From http://public.gettysburg.edu)

The American Promise by J. Roark, M. Johnson, P. Cohen, S. Stage, and S. Hartmann, defines the Columbian Exchange as, "the transatlantic exchange of goods, peoples, and ideas that began when Columbus arrived in the Caribbean in 1492, ending the age-old separation of the hemispheres." (Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, Hartmann G-2) This exchange would change European, and Native American life forever. Over all, the appearance of European colonists destroyed Native American cultures, and Native American cultures helped Europeans to become more wealthy and powerful. While there was much that crossed the Atlantic during this exchange, disease and technology had the largest effect on the Native Americans. It is obvious that the Native Americans were impacted the most by this exchange. Clearly, what impacted the Native Americans the most in this exchange was disease. This was not an intentional exchange between the Europeans and Native Americans, but it was certainly devastating to the Native Americans. The Europeans exposed the Native Americans to "Smallpox, Measles, Chicken Pox, Malaria, Yellow Fever, Influenza, and the Common Cold." (Tallant) These diseases devastated the Native American population. "Native Americans suffered 80-90% population losses in most of America with influenza, typhoid, measles, and smallpox taking the greatest toll in devastating epidemics that were compounded by the significant loss of leadership."( S.J. Crouthamel) These diseases had such a great impact on the Native Americans because they had not been exposed to these diseases before. Their immune systems were completely unprepared for these diseases that had been running rampant in Europe.
Another aspect of the Colombian exchange that changed Native American culture was the European technology. One piece of technology that impacted Native American culture was the plow. The plow coupled with an ox, horse, or other beast of burden could allow greater areas of land to be cultivated for farming with less effort. If a Native American people group could get a plow and a beast of burden (a horse or ox) they could grow more crops and would be able to shift from a hunter and gatherer society to an agricultural society. A second technological invention that changed Native American culture were the European weapons. European steel/iron knives and swords could be used many times, but Native American knives could only be used a few times before they would become brittle. Guns were also revolutionary to Native American culture. Guns were much more powerful than any of the Native American weapons. If a Native American group could get European knives and guns then they would have greater military power to protect themselves or defeat rival tribes. This new military might would have been especially appealing to warlike tribes such as the Mexica, who Dr. Tresa Holden describes as being "brutal". They also could hunt more efficiently. Guns would allow Native Americans to hunt larger animals and larger groups of animals when coupled with horses. (http://public.gettysburg.edu) These are just a couple of examples of how Native American culture was greatly changed by European technology. 

From http://www2.palomar.edu

On the other hand Native American culture had a positive impact on European wealth and power (even if it was not to the degree that the monarchs in Europe had hoped) There were two major aspects of Native American civilization that greatly helped the expanding European powers. One aspect was the crops that came from the New World to the Old World. Europe was introduced to "Corn, Potatoes, beans, tobacco, peanuts, squash, peppers, tomatoes, pumpkins, pineapples, cacao, chicle, papayas, manioc, guavas, and avocados." (Tallant) Two of these crops were especially important for Europe, potatoes and tobacco. Potatoes became very popular in Europe because they were resilient and could survive the cold climate in Europe, and could grow in less fertile soil.  This allowed many poor people in Europe access to potatoes, which kept many people from starvation. Tobacco on the other hand did not provide any nutritional value, but it did help the Europeans economically. Europeans were surprised at the Native American practice of smoking, but it caught on very quickly, and continues to this day. The Chesapeake Colonies took advantage of this new fad and began growing large quantities of tobacco. This was very profitable for the Chesapeake Colonies and for England, who would export the surplus tobacco to other European nations. The crops that Native Americans had been growing for centuries proved to be very profitable for the Europeans.
Lastly, the Native Americans were themselves very profitable for Europeans. Europeans (mainly the Spanish) would conquer Native American Civilizations and use them in forced labor. The system of encomienda, and later repartimiento allowed the Spanish to exploit Native American people to meet their financial gains. While these practices were cruel, they helped the European colonies, and nations thrive economically. These are just a few examples of how the Colombian Exchange caused great destruction to Native American culture, and helped European nations become more powerful and wealthy.

Bibliography:

Crouthamel, Steven. www2.palomar.edu. Palomar College, 2003. Feb 2, 2013
Malone, Gray, Ross, and Ryan. public.gettysburg.edu. Getsburg College, Accessed Feb 2, 2013

Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, and Susan Hartmann. The American Promise. Boston: Bedford/St.       Martin's, 2012. Print

Tallant, Harold. spider.georgetowncollege.edu. Georgetown College, Dec 12, 1998. Feb 2, 2013