Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Names, Names, Names!

Many thanks to the readers who continue to send me excellent New England names. I apologize for not getting around to posting them until now.

From Joseph at Sticks and Stones Photography, we have Redexsalana Bissell of East Windsor, CT:

From commenter RJO, we have Philemon Whale of Wayland, MA:


Also from RJO, Greenleaf Mayo Patch (or Mayo Greenleaf Patch? this entry is a little confusing) of Reading, MA. Maybe he can be Fanny Forward's gardener:

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Soft on Crime, Sons of Liberty Edition

I'm no fan of the anti-labor laws making their way through the Georgia state legislature at the moment, but Zaid Jilani makes a less-than-convincing argument against prohibiting protestors from picketing in front of private homes:
Prior to the Revolutionary War, Sam Adams and other Founding Fathers formed a group called the Sons of Liberty to protest the Stamp Act and similar oppressive legislation. The Sons of Liberty regularly protested outside of the homes of British colonial officials, including the homes of tax collectors. If Balfour and Georgia’s Big Business titans have their way, these protests would be illegal, and Adams and many of the other Founding Fathers would’ve been arrested.
That's an awfully charitable reading of the protests in Boston between 1765 and 1770. The Sons of Liberty did not just protest "outside of the homes of British colonial officials" — they tore those homes to pieces, sending the officials and their families fleeing into the night to escape the mobs of armed looters.

When the Sons of Liberty came calling on August 26, 1765, Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson was having dinner with his children:
In the evening whilst I was at supper and my children round me somebody ran in and said the mob were coming. I directed my children to fly to a secure place and shut up my house as I had done before intending not to quit it but my eldest daughter repented her leaving me and hastened back and protested she would not quit the house unless I did. I could not stand against this and withdrew with her to a neighbouring house where I had been but a few minutes before the hellish crew fell upon my house with the rage of devils and in a moment with axes split down the doors and entered by some being in the great entry heard them cry damn him he is upstairs we'll have him. Some ran immediately as high as the top of the house others filled the rooms below and cellars and others remained without the house to be employed there. Messages soon came one after another to the house where I was to inform me the mob were coming in Pursuit of me and I was obliged to retire thro yards and gardens to a house more remote where I remained until 4 o'clock by which time one of the best finished houses in the Province had nothing remaining but the bare walls and floors. Not contented with tearing off all the wainscot and hangings and splitting the doors to pieces they beat down the Partition walls and altho that alone cost them near two hours they cut down the cupola or lanthern and they began to take the slate and boards from the roof and were prevented only by the approaching daylight from a total demolition of the building. The garden fence was laid flat and all my trees &c broke down to the ground. Such ruins were never seen in America. 
In 1770, another group of "protestors" gathered outside of Theophilus Lillie's shop in broad daylight. Lillie's neighbor, Ebenezer Richardson, tried to destroy an effigy they had constructed, so they attacked his house, throwing so many rocks, bricks, and handfuls of feces that they tore the window casements from the walls, leaving ragged holes. After his wife was hit in the head with a rock, Richardson loaded his gun with birdshot and fired into the crowd, killing 11-year-old Christopher Snider.

Which is all to say that if you are trying to defend people's rights to protest peacefully, it's probably not a great idea to use the Sons of Liberty as your example.

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Washington, Lincoln, Franklin?

I'm sitting here watching the Duke/FSU game and I'm pretty sure I just saw a Subway ad for February's $5 Footlongs that included presidents Washington, Lincoln, and . . . Franklin?

Maybe he was just a really jolly John Adams.

Friday, February 17, 2012

Newport Slaveowners

In 1774, about 30% of Newport's white households owned slaves.*

Nearly half of these slaveowners owned only one slave, and over 3/4 owned 3 or fewer slaves. Only six slaveowners owned 10 or more slaves, with the largest slaveowner  in the city (merchant John Mawdsley) owning 20.


The practical effect of this dispersed model of slave ownership was that most black families in colonial Newport did not live together.

In the graveyard, we can see this plainly in the many gravestones dedicated to husbands and wives who are commemorated under their masters' surnames. These were families in fact, but the laws and conventions of slave ownership made it impossible for them to establish independent households:

*Please note: the 1774 census lumps together all black Newporters, making no distinctions of age, sex, or status. The numbers in this post assume that black Newporters living in households with a black head of house are free, while those living in a household with a white head of house are enslaved. It is possible that the limitations of the census data makes some free people appear to be slaves if they were free servants living full-time in a white person's household. I have not seen any cases of this documented, but it is theoretically possible. Inspired by the language of the NLSY97 questionnaire I fill out every year, I will call this a "slavery or slavery-like arrangement."

Monday, February 13, 2012

Newport Population, 1774

I've been running some numbers on the population of Newport, as given in the 1774 census.

Fast facts:
  • Total Population: 9,136 people living in 1,582 households
  • 86% white, 13% black, .5% Indian
  • average household size: 5.8
The census distinguishes white people by age and sex, but lumps all black people together, making it difficult to determine their age, sex, or freedom status. There are some clues, though — there are 48 (perhaps 49) households with a black household head. I think it's reasonable to conclude that the 151 people living in these households were probably free. There may also be some free people counted in households with a white household head, but there's no way to tell that from the census.

If we assume that the 149 black people (and 2 Indians) living in black-headed households were free and that the 1,076 black people living in white-headed households were slaves, then 12% of black Newporters were free and 88% were enslaved.

Free black households were substantially smaller than free households, averaging 3.2 people per household rather than the overall 5.8. About 38% of free black households were headed by a woman, compared to 20% of white households.

More on Newport's slaves and slaveowners to follow . . .

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Newport Names

Unfortunately, the 1774 census of Newport only reports the names of heads of households. Nevertheless, there is plenty to love. If any novelist is searching for some 18th-century character names, I submit these real-life names for your consideration:

Freelove Boss
Baulstone Coggeshall
Ebenezer Cesar
Preserved Fish
Freelove Gubbins
Ludowick Hoxsie
Prudence Hastings
Uriah Lyon
Hopestill Morey
Clother Peirce
Peirce Spear
Jerusha Spooner
Ithuriel Tripp
Pardon Tillinghast
Valentine Wightman
Patience Winpenny
Peleg Wood





Thursday, February 9, 2012

Boston Municipal Burials 1704-1774

Between 1704 and 1774, nearly 36,000 people were buried in Boston's three municipal graveyards (Copp's Hill, Granary, and King's Chapel). I started my count in 1704 because that is the first year in which the statistics were separated by race and I end in 1774 because the upheaval of the Siege of Boston in 1775 was a demographic catastrophe.

Of these, nearly 5,300 were black, though the records make no distinction between slave and free. Overall, about 15% of Bostonians buried in the city during that time were black, though the percentage goes as high as 23% in some years. Over the course of the 18th century, the percentage of blacks buried in these three graveyards dropped, though this was mainly due to an increase in white burials — the number of blacks buried stayed fairly constant:

The three high peaks are smallpox epidemic years: 1721, 1730, and 1752.

Questions:
  • What proportion of the city's dead were buried in these three municipal graveyards?
  • Did that proportion differ for blacks and whites?
  • Does the decrease in the % of black burials indicate a smaller relative population in later decades, or the use of a non-municipal burying ground?
  • Is it safe to estimate the racial makeup of the city's population based on these numbers?
  • How many surviving gravemarkers commemorate black Bostonians from this period? I know of one (Frank, 1771, Granary) are there more @ Copp's Hill?
  • What % of black Bostonians were buried at Copp's Hill vs. Granary vs. King's Chapel?

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

On the Boston Massacre

LOL of the day, courtesy of The Globe and Mail:
Right next door is the Granary Burying Ground. Here you find the graves of three men who signed the Declaration of Independence - John Hancock, Robert Treat Paine and Samuel Adams. Benjamin Franklin's parents are buried here, too - victims of the Boston Massacre. The spot where the patriots were killed is marked by a circle of cobbles, right in the heart of Boston's bustling financial district.
This reminds me of one of my colleagues, who tells an awesome story about getting flustered during an oral examination and telling his examiners that Anne Hutchinson was eaten by a bear. I can just see 112-year-old Josiah Franklin throwing snowballs at those darned redcoats.

This is an old article (4/10/1982), so I can't link directly. I found it while doing a little research on modern perceptions/uses of Boston's burying grounds. If you want to look it up, the title is "Boston's Freedom Trail Leads to the Birth of a Nation" by Helga Loverseed and it was published in the Travel section.

Thursday, October 6, 2011

Two Thoughts

1: Tea Party partisans deride Occupy Wall Street as a "mob." It's not like I expect Sean Hannity to read Gary Nash, but seriously. I can't even wrap my head around the idea of someone simultaneously embracing the Boston Tea Party as the height of patriotism and rejecting crowd actions — mobs — as inherently unlawful/illegitimate/bad.

2: Lee Fang at ThinkProgress argues that Occupy Wall Street is the real heir to the Boston Tea Party. His particular arguments aside for the moment, why does this matter as much as it does? Why isn't it enough to be right in the present? What do progressive movements gain by appealing to the authority of the past? Arguing over who really embodies the legacy of the Founders sounds like Civil War-era posturing — why is it still so effective today?

Monday, September 19, 2011

Kansas Jayhawks

US Senator James Henry Lane
Big Jay

The town of Osceola, Missouri has passed a resolution asking the Kansas University Jayhawks to change their mascot because it celebrates "domestic terrorists." This week will mark the 150th anniversary of the Sacking of Osceola, an 1861 raid in which Unionist Jayhawkers attacked and burned the town, killing nine civilians. This incident was one in the long string of vigilante attacks that characterized Bleeding Kansas before and during the Civil War.

The University of Kansas is obviously resistant to this idea. A KU spokeswoman issued the following statement by email:
A Jayhawk is a blue bird with a red head and a big yellow beak that wears boots. It would be hard to confuse it with anyone with terrorist intent, though we admit we have been terrorizing the Tigers on the basketball court for some time. Tigers have been known to kill people. Bears, too.
The University may want to rethink its flippancy on this issue. Jayhawks are not really just birds. But, then, Tigers are not really tigers, either, but rather, the Columbia Fighting Tigers, a home-guard unit that protected Columbia, MO from Confederate bushwhackers during the war. I could stand to see both teams cheered on by a Unionist militiaman.

No word on whether the citizens of Osceola, more than 97% of whom are white, will be changing the name of their town any time soon.

Friday, September 16, 2011

Stanley-Whitman House

I'm off to Connecticut this evening to prepare for a talk I'm giving at the Stanley-Whitman House in Farmington on Saturday. The museum is hosting a symposium on 17th-Century Connecticut and I will be speaking about the Dorchester Removal. In 1635, a large number of the inhabitants of Dorchester, Massachusetts pulled up stakes and moved to Connecticut. Why? Short answer: regional identity, political/ecclesiastical differences with the Massachusetts government, and economics.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Sexy George Washington

If you're looking for inspiration for your Halloween costume, look no further than the Miss Universe 2011 National Costume competition. Sexy Big Bird is so 2010.

Past Miss USA National Costumes below the fold:

Monday, August 22, 2011

Hymowitz Award Nomination

If you are a history teacher, chances are, you have read at least one essay that starts out with,
Throughout history, societies have . . .
Hopefully, you have crossed these words out and drawn some sort of frowny face before commenting on the inherent weakness of such grandiose statements. In a better world, the student writer would take this advice to heart and learn the joys of being specific. In the actual world, he will go on to write an opinion piece for the New York Times.

In today's NYT, Professor Joel Bakan informs us that "there is reason to believe that childhood itself is now in crisis." Oh noes! What with the gadgets and the sugar and whatnot, the apocalypse is surely upon us.

Look, I'm sure that Professor Bakan actually has some interesting things to say about the purported subject of his essay — the conflict between corporate rights and children's rights at the end of a century of enormous changes in the laws that govern both American corporations and American children. Too bad that's not the essay that made it into the NYT.

Instead of an insightful consideration of who benefits from these specific legal developments, we get an awful lot of fuzzy, a-historical pearl clutching. I have no doubt that poor regulations expose children to harmful chemicals. But is it actually true that, "children today are being exposed to increasing quantities of toxic chemicals"? Like, more than when they worked in tanneries? Or when lead paint and plumbing were still big? Is the risk of toxic chemical exposure really increasing relative to the pre-Superfund era?

Prof. Bakan does raise some tepidly interesting points about over-medication, but the whole piece is just terribly framed. I swear, when I read, "Throughout history, societies have struggled with how to deal with children," my eyes rolled of their own accord. It doesn't help that the whole first paragraph is a standard-issue "it feels like something is wrong" when the kids these days get all mesmerized by their beep-beep-boop-de-boop. Bakan offers a brief nod to the idea that his own parents' generation was likely just as concerned about The Rock and Roll as he is about The Internetz, but he glosses over that quickly, assuring readers that, "the issues confronting parents today can’t be dismissed as mere generational prejudices."

Where have I seen this before?
The wise Man doth justly condemn the folly of those, that are always saying and complaining, what is the cause that the former dayes were better than these? . . . Such complaints often proceeding from Ignorance in History, or non-observation of the vices in those of former, and virtues in some of the present Generation . . . All this not withstanding, some Times are more corrupt, dark, and miserable than can be said of all . . . Yea, the dreggs of those times are now at hand.
That's Increase Mather, on the case in 1679, in his "Call from Heaven," a pamphlet on the raising of godly children.



The Hymowitz Award is awarded for misuses of history in jeremiads.

Sunday, August 21, 2011

Name of the Day

Urania Rainsford Belcher

via Find a Grave

Saturday, August 20, 2011

Dirty Jokes

Whenever I find myself wishing I could just time-machine myself back to 17th-century Massachusetts to get some answers to my more maddening research questions, I remind myself that if I did manage to time travel, I would find myself in prison within hours.

Evidence:

In 1653, Dr. William Snelling was fined 10 shillings plus court fees for "cursing" after telling this joke "in way of merry disourse":
I'll pledge my friends
And for my foes
A plague on their heels
And a pox on their toes.
This last line was considered too racy to be copied into the court records.

Friday, August 19, 2011

On Rearranging Gravestones:

The grounds have been laid out in regular alleys and gravel paths, and embellished with a great variety of native forest-trees, some of which are of stately growth. The gravestones of many generations have been raised up, and numerous seats located under shady branches, where the aged and weary may pause, and the mourner find a quiet resting-place. Yet it is to be lamented that the mounds and hillocks of the dead have been cut down to an unnatural level, and so many stones misplaces to form a geometrical row on the borders of the paths. This mode of restoring and adorning an ancient churchyard is singular; and to speak of it kindly, and not in anger, it certainly was not the act of good taste.

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Name of the Day


That's Judith to all you picky spellers out there.