Week 4 Questions/Comments-327 13

Cross-source questions/comments
The witch trial accounts were fascinating in that a variety of contradictory evidence was given by the accusers. Additionally, the spectral evidence offered to the court was often dated years prior to the trials which made those already ridiculous accusations become the accusers taking advantage of previous conflicts for their own gain. Additionally, if witchcraft was performed years prior, why would they not mention it until the witchcraft trials? -Kearsten Lehman

Rarely are accounts of women whose daily life slipped outside of the norms of being wives and mothers in the colonial period mentioned in history. Thus the tales of the various women: single, wives, and widows who become entrepreneurs in the colonial cities(mainly) are erased. Although men were often the providers for women in the patriarchal society of the 18th century colonies, women without such support either created their own through shops or various other means such as retailing or becoming hucksters who were people generally women that sold goods out of a basket. - Kearsten Lehman

I wonder if Landon Carter’s (MP 82) lazy slaves were not in fact lazy but had their minds and spirits “carried away to spiritual things” like that of Old Elizabeth (Woloch 117)? It seems to me his slave who neglected the cows might have been absorbed in religious thought and did not notice a cow wandering off; both pieces do take place in the 1770s. Another potential reason for his lazy slave could be in fact they are home sick like Old Elizabeth and that the emotional loneliness manifesting physical symptoms which slowed work down. –Kasey Moore

Both Anne Bradstreet and Old Elizabeth explain their religious experiences and how they came to God in different ways. Anne Bradstreet explains how there were times where she was tempted and was defiant and how she struggled to finally find God. Old Elizabeth on the other hand writes this beautiful account of finding God and even when she didn't live in an area that had "no religious instruction" she still felt like she had God. I wonder what causes the difference between Bradstreet and Elizabeth? Could it be the fact that one is a colored woman and the other isn't? Or the difference in social status? - Sandra Sanchez

Anne Bradstreet, “A Spiritual Autobiography,” ~1670
I find it ironic and confusing that Anne says her in letter "for in Truth, it is the absence and presence of God that makes Heaven or Hell," but then goes on to describe how she does not know or believe in the God she has been taught. She even begs the question "But how should I know he is such a God as I worship in Trinity, and such a Saviour as I rely upon?" She seems to be wrestling with some powerful doubt, yet most of her writing is her reaffirming the doctrine she has been told. What is really her beliefs? How severe would the punishment have been if the church at the time read what she had written here about her doubts and trepidation? -Katie Redmiles

Anne Bradstreet's autobiography of the Massachusetts Bay Colony at the time of Puritans struck me as interesting. Women were not typically taught how to write or even make their own accounts of their lives during this time period or even as a woman dominated by the Puritan faith. Anne Bradstreet also exclaims that she is not of the elect which is interesting based on the amenities she is afforded. --Charlotte O

I think that Bradstreet’s letter was a nice look into the religious views of the Puritans of the times. Bradstreet was a devout Christian. She admits to times when her heart and mind wondered away from God and she was punished with various afflictions, but she would turn to God and would begin to heal, both in body and spirit. Bradstreet states, “But when I have been in darknes and seen no light, yet have I deserved to stay myself upon the Lord.” This really shows how people can turn to God in the midst of bad things happening in their lives. Bradstreet not only did this but took the afflictions with thanks and joy. - Jess Hopkins

I truly admire Anne Bradstreet’s letter to her children. Not only does this show what a devout Christian she was but it also reflects her role as a mother. She used her talent and gift of writing to leave behind something so special to her children. Her love of God was strong and she wanted to pass that down to her children. She mentions that she submitted to the ways of God which was her way of showing great strength. –Courtney Collier

Anne Hutchinson’s trial, 1637
I wonder how Anne Hutchinson's trial/case would have been handled if she were a man? -D. Nordling

The record of Anne Hutchinson's trial shows the extent to which the Puritan church/government feared dissent, no matter how large a group in constituted. I wonder what caused the Puritans to decide banish and excommunicate Anne Hutchinson and not a harsher punishment, since she committed heresy? -Suzannah C.

Because Anne Hutchinson openly shared her belief that the individual relationship with God was more important than the obligation to obey earthly "Puritan" laws and that being apart of the "elect" did not matter, she was put on trail and eventually exiled from the colony. Overall, Anne Hutchinson's preaching broke her out of the ways of women standards in society. However, if Anne Hutchinson were a man, who preached against Puritan teachings, do you think he would have been exiled from the colony like Anne was? Or would more people have listened and followed Anne's beliefs if she were a man?!- Melanie Houston

I am curious as to what happened to the people who attended Anne Hutchinson’s meetings? If heresy was such a terrible offense, did anything happen to those that listened to and followed her? Or did the Puritans only view Hutchinson as the threat and thought that by chopping of the head of the snake they could destroy the views she was sharing? – Jess Hopkins

Woloch mentions that Anne Hutchinson was able to have meetings with 60-80 people at her home. Was there any record of any of them trying to defend her during the trial? Were they all women? If so, I find it hilarious that men were so worried about these meetings with all women yet always described them as weak and inferior. – Courtney Collier

I am curious if it hurt Anne Hutchison's case any that she actually defended herself so well and did not conform to the ideals of a week women of the men who were trying her. Ike C.

Lancashire, England Women’s Meeting structure, Quaker women in 1675
While women were viewed as more egalitarian in the Society of Friends, I feel like the women themselves were not totally equal in their ability to exert a huge amount of control over their communities. While the epistle called for the women to meet once a month to practice their social responsibilities, women who were older, established, and more active in worship probably dominated the proceedings. The letter told the Quaker women to call out any female transgressors in the community. This allowed certain women to dominate the community by calling out other women whom they felt to be deviant. The Quaker women also had power to control the marriages of their children, enabling the older women to dominate the younger women through their ability to speak against the prospective husband and wife during their examination of the couple. –Mary Fesak The document by the Quaker women in Lancashire is a good example of gender roles being perpetuated and reinforced by women. In the same document that impresses the need for women to help the sick, look after their children, and stay true to the Lord, it also tells women that though they are looked on as weaker vessels, they are equal in the eyes of God. On the one hand the Quaker women lived in a much more egalitarian society in the way of actively being involved in the church. On the other hand it is the Quaker women themselves who accept publicly that they are "looked upon as the weaker vessels." --Mae D'Amico

David Brainerd, 1746, account of the Great Awakening
The fact that he preached to this Indian woman to the point that she was "so convinced of her sin and misery", I wonder what he preaching specifically to her? Was he preaching about the role of women and therefore that is her sin and misery? Or about her sex life or just overall life in general? - Sandra Sanchez

It is hard for me to understand why Brainerd spent so much time and effort trying to "revive" Native Americans if he was Presbyterian and believed in predestination. For example, what was the point of preaching to a women until she felt extremely guilty and distressed if her fate was already predetermined? Not only did he try to westernize the unique Native American culture for seemingly no reason, but he most likely killed them by exposing them to TB. -Katherine Miller

Brainerd make a statement about how the Native Americans didn't know they had souls and should therefore be converted so they know what he considers to be the truth. I find it strange that he bothered because he was a Calvinist and therefore would have believed that some people were predestined for heaven and some people were predestined for hell. It seems like a strange waste of time to me for him to work on converting people that already had their fate predetermined by God. -Amy Wallace

Narrative of Old Elizabeth, published in 1863 when she was 97, about her religious conversion in the 1770s.
Old Elizabeth’s account of her religious conversion is very impressive. Not so much because she experienced the religious awakening but because her writing is so clear and much easier to understand than most writings from this time. The fact that she was liberated and decided to work as a preachers is something very atypical of the time period. I am curious as to how she received her freedom and who taught her to read and write. - Morgan H.

In the “Narrative of Old Elizabeth” I found it hard to believe that at five years old she could feel the spirit of the Lord like she says she did. I think that when a child is exposed to religion at a young age they know what they are supposed to do and they learn what the ultimate goal is, but to at such a young age I don’t think that a child can fully comprehend it. She says that she does not comprehend what she was being taught at five but she says that it changed when she was eleven. I still think that it is too young to really understand and truly feel the Spirit of the Lord.-Katie Way

What I found most interesting about this narrative was the tactic used to convert people. It calls upon the "fire and brimstone" technique, which was a scare tactic to make people so afraid of hell that they would be saved. This is very interesting because it shows how emotional the Great Awakening made people. -Amy Wallace

Elizabeth Godman lawsuit (1653); Elizabeth Godman tried for witchcraft, 1655 & Bridget Bishop convicted of witchcraft 1692; “Casco Girls” accuse George Burroughs, 1692
The case of Elizabeth Goodman makes me wonder why women who were barren or miscarry were targeted during the witch hunts. What if a woman was not barren, but her husband sterile? It is unnatural for a woman to be without child but unthinkable for a man to be impotent. --Mae D'Amico

The examination of Abigail Hobbs reveals the flawed technique used to question accused witches. The questioner asks her once where she stuck the thorns in the deceased Mary Laurence and she answers that she doesn't know. She is then asked if she stuck them in the "middle of her body" and she answers yes. The leading questions made it impossible to determine if the accused was actually guilty. -Suzannah C.

Elizabeth Sandwith Drinker, wealthy Philadelphia woman, diary – 1758-1794
Elizabeth Sandwith Drinker’s diary entries are very interesting, the items she take the time to write about reveal a lot about herself and the time period. Her activities seem so tiring but fun at the same time. I wish I had that much time to work on cross stitch.- Morgan H.

Landon Carter complains about his female slaves (1771-1773)
I found Landon Carter's complaints about his female slaves very interesting. It shows the complete lack of respect that slaves were given and the generalized detrimental comments ("I find it is almost impossible to make a negro do his work well.") Also, the ease at which he talks about whipping them is astonishing, for instance when he whips "Mrs. Dairy Mary" to "cure" her hip pain. I'm sure some slave masters were not this harsh to their slaves, but I think they were most likely the exception and it is important that documents such as this survive. -Suzannah C.

Although the title of the document is "Landon Carter Complains about his Female Slaves" Carter complains about male slaves too! For example, Carter said, "Mcginnis's Jamy's foot, a good whipping and a stout vomit has at last cured him; for I saw fevers the affect of these fall intermittants and by proceeding that way he is got about it. And so has Mr. Will's joints got clear of their pains by giving a revulsion by his back" (MP 82). So, why not say "Male and Female Slaves" in the title? -Melanie Houston.

If my father was "King" Carter I'd complain about lazy slaves too. Landon Carter grew up with everything he'd ever need given him. Never having to work for his own welfare, and rather living off Robert Carter's coattails left only a sense of dependency and a certain, undeniable elitism in Landon Carter. - Ryan Q.

Landon Carter has got to be the saddest slave owner ever documented. . . His grievances seem very personal, and he clearly dislikes negroes of the day. It's amazing to me how while he writes and complains about his slaves' work ethics, he doesn't sit long enough to ponder why a slave might be so lazy to do his or her job. Instead he only complains. He doesn't truly ask why a person would refuse forced labor, he just continues writing about the scenario. For the most part Landon Carter shows some signs of a well-written, intelligent man. . . but his fundamentals at problem solving are in disarray. - Tanner Carlton

George Washington's slave list (1786) and slave work assignments (1786-88)
The insight into the lives of the slaves at Mount Vernon through George Washington's records was amazing. Although he was a slave-owner, the casual beating of slaves was not mentioned unlike with Landon Carter. However, which was more normal for slave-owners in their methods of dealing with slaves appears to be harder to determine though a degree of cruelty appears to always be present, for even under the nicest master the people working were still enslaved and not seen as quite human. -Kearsten Lehman

George Washington being a slave owner seems to have been kept out of the broader American Narrative. I was embarrassingly ignorant of this fact. I would blame myself but I am sure I would have remembered the great George Washington Slave Master. We all know about Thomas Jefferson's dealings with his slaves, but I was genuinely convinced up until now that George Washington was above owning slaves. --Mae D'Amico

What did George Washington mean when he noted two of his slaves as “almost past service”? Did he mean that they were almost past the age of being able to work? If so, what would happen to these women once their service was up? –D. Nordling

Similar to the other founding fathers, Washington’s wealth was in other human beings. Negative aspects of great white men rarely are incorporated into the American master narrative unless they are extraordinarily deviant, like Jefferson’s relationship with Sally Hemings. By modern standards, Washington’s ownership of slaves and his interactions with the Native Americans through land speculation would be considered immoral, but they fit the norms of his society. Arguably, the founding fathers could not have accomplished as much as they did if their wealth was not in the ownership of humans. The great Virginians Washington, Mason, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe all owned cheap labor, which allowed them to divert their time and energies elsewhere. Even northern founding fathers, like Franklin, owned slaves. Those who did not still had access to the cheap labor provided by servants. –Mary Fesak

I had the same reaction as some of the others about George Washington having slaves. I knew that he had workers at his home but I never thought that they were slaves. It was eye opening to know that a lot more people than I thought had slaves. It was also interesting that he kept a record of what he had his slaves do and the fact that he knew them by name. – Katie Way

Unlike some of the others, who have posted, I have visited Mount Vernon and taken the tours of Washington's land. The American narrative of George Washington has us ignoring the fact that he owned slaves in order to paint him as above all of the others from his time and even until now. They tell you on the tours that he owns slaves, but they play it down a lot. I find it interesting that something published actually tells us about how Washington treated and interacted with his slaves throughout their time on the plantation. Why the difference in narratives though, he is still played up as divine, but why the varying forms of divinity?--Charlotte O

We need to leave 21st century naiveness at the door. Ideas were different, morals were different. Washington was no different than Jefferson, who owned slaves, and yet wrote the Declaration of Independence. Neither of them were different than slave-owning Patrick Henry, who pumped his fist and hissed, "Give me liberty or give me death." We need to accept that the 18th-century had a different set of guiding morals and these people were not devils incarnate because they made, to us, bad moral decisions. - Ryan Q.

Eulalia Perez Recalls her work in a mission in Spanish CA in early 19th Century (1877)
On page 90, she talks about "giving in to" her father's wishes that she marry Marine even though she had no desire to re-marry. Her justification was that her father had treated her and her family very well. It seems as though marriage was chosen strictly on an economic or political basis, rather than romantic desires. I have to wonder if women of this time period felt fulfilled in their relationships. -Katherine Miller

Karin Wulf, “Women’s Work in Colonial Philadelphia,” 2000
A line that stood out to me in this article was "She was considered too poor and too burdened by the costs of supporting her young children to pay any taxes." This intrigued me on two levels. One being that in this day in age, and even a few centuries back, taxes were often heavy on the poor and cut from the rich. Yet, here it seems single women were exempt because of their poor status. Though this seems more logical, it is definitely not the common practice in America for last two centuries. I was also intrigued by how this gave single women a power they did not have married. They could be independent and enjoy freedoms that men were allowed, but married women forbidden. It is curious to wonder if we have changed today in that single women have more freedom and rights than married women? - Katie Redmiles

I think it is interesting that Ben Franklin would advise young men that marriage was a financial burden. Not only would women transfer in money, but they help create ties within the community and barter goods. –Kasey Moore

While a small point I was taken by the three way a women could become indentured. She could sign indentures before leaving Europe, her parents/community could sign her industries if she were poor, or she could apprentice. I guess I just always assumed indentured servant were people coming over from Europe. –Kasey Moore

I thought the passage on pg. 100 about the types of indentured servants proved to be very interesting. I was very surprised to learn that sercants could be indentured for such a short period of time like a day, or a week. In most of our class discussions we talk about indentured servants who were intentured for many years on end. Although the reasoning for indentured servitude does start to make sense for in an economical sense, I'm intent on finding out how indentured servitude eventually made the jump to full blown slavery? Does anyone consider this a step backwards. . . almost? - Tanner Carlton