Brigham Young and the Struggle for Religious Freedom in the 19th Century

In the decades preceding the American Civil War, the United States found itself facing an identity crisis. The principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as espoused by an earlier generation began to come under threat from the same institutions erected to protect them. It seemed that in the agrarian democracy Americans were building, there were many who felt marginalized and ignored. As the nation continued to expand and leaders wrestled with the existence of slavery the Union, the question of religious freedom remained.

Marvin McCrary explains.

Brigham Young while Governor of Utah. By Charles Roscoe Savage.

Exodus

By the 1850s, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints had a significant presence on the American landscape. Members of the church were known as Mormons, the name deriving from the Book of Mormon, a set of holy scriptures which served as the keystone of the religion. The Latter-Day Saint movement had been founded in 1830 by Joseph Smith who, while not possessing much of a formal education, seemed endowed with great oratorical skill and personal charisma. Smith declared that where other churches had strayed, his would restore the faith as it had been conceived by Christ himself. Over the next few years, church membership would grow rapidly, drawing the ire of those settlers who felt threatened by the Mormons' practice of settling in concentrated numbers and voting as a bloc. Such instances often led to conflict and violence, and Joseph Smith’s life would be cut tragically short when he found himself jailed in the town of Carthage, Illinois under false pretenses in 1844. During a raid on the jail, an anti-Mormon mob shot Smith and his brother to death. He was only 38 years old.

The fledgling religious movement entered a time of great uncertainty, as they had not anticipated losing their leader so suddenly. The ruling body of the church, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, took control of church affairs in the interim, until it was determined who would be best suited to succeed Smith. It was a man named Brigham Young, then serving as President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who would become the next leader of the church in 1847. Like Smith, Young was a man of humble origins from the Northeast. Young was noted for his strong determination, straightforwardness, and unyielding faith. In 1846, Young led the beginnings of what would become an exodus of “Saints'' (the preferred term used by members, especially after 1834), determined to establish their faith beyond the reach of both American laws and resentment. In July, 1847, Brigham Young beheld his first glimpse of the Great Salt Lake Valley. The historian Leonard J. Arrington wrote that church leadership knew about the area from trappers' journals, explorers' reports and interviews with travelers familiar with the region. Having endured much persecution for the sake of their beliefs, the Saints undoubtedly believed they could finally enjoy a semblance of peace, and the swath of untamed wilderness would become a new Zion for the Saints. Young believed that the isolation of Utah would ensure the Saints the right to freely practice their religion. Many of the pioneers had Puritan ancestry, and felt a strong bond with those earlier settlers, who had likewise been forced to leave their homeland in search of a land where they might know freedom.

Brigham Young understood that the Saints could not "leave the political orbit of the United States", nor were they desirous to do so. The Saints possessed an unwavering belief that personal liberty as written in the Constitution should allow one the right to exercise faith without infringement, despite the lack of support and recalcitrance they witnessed from the American government. When gold was discovered in California in 1848, thousands began moving westward on trails that passed directly through the territory which had been settled by the Saints. This proved a double-edged sword, as not only did this  bring plenty of opportunities for trade and commerce, it also served as a catalyst towards ending the Saints’ isolation. Barely had the dust settled from the wagons of their arrival, did the church leadership sought to put forth a proposal that the territory be incorporated into the United States as the State of Deseret. The name “Deseret” came from a term in the Book of Mormon for honeybee; it signified industry and cooperation. This spoke to the Saints’ desire to make their new Zion as large and industrious as possible, while not seeking to infringe upon territory important to others, such as California and New Mexico.

Establishing Zion in the Mountains

The Saints believed that a state run by their own leadership would be able maintain their hard-fought religious freedom. There were concerns amongst the membership in regard to whether the territory would be governed by men of their own choosing, or federal government officials who would be sent from Washington, as was customary. The proposal put forth by the Church would be rejected by the federal government. Congress was reluctant to allow the creation of a state encompassing such a large area as it had been proposed; the State of Deseret would have included both the Great Basin and the Colorado River Valley. It was believed that only a carefully crafted compromise could provide satisfactory resolution. The Compromise of 1850 would assuage the growing tensions over slavery, while also satisfying the needs of settlers in western territories. It was felt that territories added to the United States after the Mexican-American War (1846-48) should be given the choice to decide for themselves whether they would enter the union as a slave state or a free state. With regards to the Saints in the Salt Lake Valley, Congress did not like the name “deseret” as it sounded too much like “desert,” therefore, it was proposed that the territory be reduced and named Utah, the name taken from the Ute indigenous people.

The establishment of western territories was inextricably tied to the issue of slavery. By the 1850s the United States had become a nation divided by specific regional identities. The South held a pro-slavery identity that supported the expansion of slavery into western territories, while the North largely held abolitionist sentiments and opposed the institution’s westward expansion. In the summer of 1850, Millard Fillmore became president when Zachary Taylor, a hero of the Mexican-American War, died unexpectedly. In response to the efforts of Thomas L. Kane, a man who had proven himself friendly to the Saints on previous occasions, Fillmore named Brigham Young the first Governor of Utah Territory in 1850, despite concerns about Young’s willingness to cooperate with the government. Kane had first encountered the Latter-Day Saints in 1846, during the early stages of the Mexican-American War. It was under these circumstances that he became convinced of the Latter-day Saints’ sincerity and sympathized with their plight. Although he did not share their religious faith, Kane would become the Latter-day Saints’ most influential outside advocate and adviser, working to secure religious and political rights on their behalf. The granting of territorial status gave the federal government greater authority over regional affairs than statehood, but the Saints were pleased with this development. Unfortunately, it would also prove to be a move which inadvertently set the stage for a clash between the Church and the federal government.

Over the next few years as governor, Brigham Young’s leadership took a theodemocratic approach. Theodemocracy was the fusion of traditional republican democratic principles along with theocratic rule. Young holding both political and ecclesiastical authority was natural and efficient from the view of the Saints, but this practice drew criticism from the outside. Church leaders also grew suspicious of both the character and intent of federal appointees, and a succession of federal officers—judges, Indian agents, surveyors—came to the territory only to have their decisions circumvented or reversed. Federal appointees returned East frustrated, intimidated, or both, and the amicable relationship with the government began to break down. In 1854, Brigham Young's term as governor expired and President Franklin Pierce, taking the reports out of Utah into consideration, wished to appoint someone else. In addition to not having many interested in the position, Pierce knew that Young, despite the nature of his leadership, enjoyed great popularity. Pierce decided to allow him to remain as governor, but Anti-Mormon sentiment would continue to spread, with particular regard towards the alleged practice of plural marriage.

The Saints' embrace of plural marriage was based on a revelation received by Joseph Smith. Following in the example of the biblical patriarchs such as Abraham and Jacob, the practice was instituted among members of the Church in the early 1840s. Brigham Young may have taken his first plural wife in 1842, but he did so with hesitation. Throughout the remainder of his life, Young would adamantly maintain that he had been reluctant to indulge in the practice. He would later write that "I was not desirous of shrinking from any duty, nor of failing in the least to do as I was commanded.” Although he had misgivings, Brigham also understood that to everything there is a season. He explains further, adding that "it was the first time in my life that I had desired the grave." With the passage of time, those members engaged in the practice had overcome their own prejudice and adjusted to life in polygamous families. It has been speculated that probably half of those living in Utah Territory in the mid-1800s experienced life in a polygamous family as a husband, wife, or child. Church leaders would publicly acknowledge plural marriage for the first time in 1852, at a general conference in Salt Lake City. Orson Pratt, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, delivered a lengthy discourse, inviting the members to "look upon Abraham's blessings as your own, for the Lord blessed him with a promise of seed as numerous as the sand upon the seashore." After Pratt finished, Young read aloud Smith's 1831 revelation on plural marriage. The public disclosure seemed to satiate the national interest, but it quashed any hopes for statehood under Brigham Young’s leadership.

Annus Horribilis

By 1857, Young had been serving as governor for several years. Feeding on the tensions between the Saints and the United States government, newspapers from New York to California began reporting that the Saints were seeking the Indians' allegiance in preparation for a clash with the United States. Some accounts were based on briefings from disgruntled officials who had returned to Washington; others, based on gossip, tended toward a more alarmist tone. For example, the National Intelligencer, a Washington newspaper, put the number of the Mormons' Indian allies at 300,000, even though the total Indian population of the Utah Territory had been 20,000 at most. Young would characterize the press coverage as “the prolonged howl of baseless slander." In the spring of 1857, almost every federal official had left Utah. James Buchanan–a tall, stately and stiffly formal man– had been elected in 1856. It would be Buchnan’s misfortune to preside over a rapidly dividing nation. Scarcely had the ink dried on his inaugural address than reports concerning the Saints in Utah turned his attention to the far west.

The election of 1856 had been closely observed in Utah for two primary reasons. It was expected that the new president would appoint a new governor. The second reason was because anti-Mormon sentiments had risen during the election. For example, the Republican Party platform sought to dismantle the “twin relics of barbarism” polygamy and slavery. Buchanan made no speeches during his presidential campaign, and as such, Utahns were curious about the character of the man who would become the next president. "We would much prefer Buchanan to Fremont for President," wrote Young early in the campaign. Upon learning of Buchanan's election, Young declared, "We are satisfied with the appointment of Buchanan as future president, we believe he will be a friend to the good." Such hopeful sentiments were soon dashed, as Buchanan viewed the Saints in Utah as a problem, and he would find someone to replace Brigham Young as governor and bring order.

Buchanan found that there were few interested in the position, just as his predecessor had discovered. Utah was seen as a distant frontier, and the Saints were regarded as “peculiar people” who would bear the yoke of the American government quietly. William Smith, brother of the late Joseph Smith, was among those who had applied, but the man Buchanan eventually chose was Alfred E. Cumming, an experienced administrator, former mayor of Augusta, Georgia, and he was already serving as an Indian-affairs superintendent based in St. Louis, Missouri. Buchanan ordered federal troops to accompany Cumming and enforce federal rule in Utah. It came to pass that travelers passing through the Utah Territory from the Kansas-Missouri border soon brought word that federal troops were on the march. Brigham Young soon found himself in the unenviable position of once again guiding the Saints through yet another crisis. On July 24, 1857, the tenth anniversary of their arrival in the Salt Lake Valley, Young delivered the alarming news: The rumors were true–President James Buchanan had ordered federal troops to march on the Utah Territory. It would appear that 1857 would prove to be an annus horribilis.

The Utah Expedition

In September, Cumming and roughly 1,500 federal troops were about a month from reaching Fort Bridger, which lay approximately 100 miles (160 km) northeast of Salt Lake City. Brigham Young desperately needed time to prepare an evacuation of the city, and so he mobilized the Utah militia to delay the army. Even though they were thoroughly outnumbered, militiamen engaged in guerrilla warfare tactics over the next several weeks, as they raided supplies, burned the grass to deny forage to the soldiers' horses, cattle and mules. In what must have been seen as an act of divine intervention, snowstorms brought the army to a halt. Snowbound and lacking supplies, the troops' commander, Colonel Albert Sidney Johnston, decided to spend the winter at what was left of Fort Bridger, it having been burned by the militia.

The spring thaw began in 1858, and Johnston prepared to receive reinforcements that would bring his force to almost 5,000—a third of the entire U.S. Army at the time. Meanwhile, Young initiated what became known as the Move South, an exodus of some 30,000 people from settlements in northern Utah. Before leaving Salt Lake City, Saints buried the foundation of their temple, their most sacred building, and planted wheat to camouflage it from the invaders' eyes. A few men remained behind, ready to put houses and barns and orchards to the torch if it would keep them out of the soldiers' hands. The Saints, it seemed, were fated to be once again driven from their land, or face extermination. William Hyde recounts the distressing situation, writing in his journal that they prayed for deliverance.Deliverance would come in the form of Thomas Kane, who would once again advocate for the Saints. Over the winter, Kane had set out for Utah to try to mediate what was being called "the Mormon crisis." Kane arrived in Salt Lake City in February 1858, and by the next month, he had secured Brigham Young's agreement to step aside for the new governor in exchange for peace.  While it remains unclear as to the reason, Buchanan never notified Young that he would be replaced as governor, which led many to believe that the Utah expedition was a needlessly expensive venture. In addition, the fact that the federal army had been so easily outwitted by a much smaller force resulted in further humiliation for Buchanan. Seeing a chance to end his embarrassment quickly, Buchanan sent a peace commission westward, offering a pardon to those Utah citizens who would submit to federal laws. Brigham Young accepted the offer that June, ending the Utah War. On April 12,1858, Cumming succeeded Young as Governor of Utah Territory.

Conclusion

Brigham Young would serve as leader of the Saints’ until he passed away in 1877. It was due to his leadership and steadfast determination that the Mormons are to be credited with helping in the settlement and expansion of the American West. Abraham Lincoln, was more successful in establishing a cooperative and respectful relationship between Utah and the federal government. Shortly after his election, Lincoln would remark in a letter to Brigham Young that “if you will let me alone, I will let you alone.” George A. Hubbard writes that was “precisely the kind of governmental policy which the Mormons had sought” since the church was organized some thirty-three years earlier. The Saints ensured the right to religious liberty as they overcame the difficulties placed before them, not only for themselves, but for the sake of all the subsequent generations who would follow in the footsteps of those early pioneers.

What do you think of Brigham Young and religious freedom in the USA? Let us know below.

Now read Marvin’s article on Major General Gordon in North Africa here.

Sources

Arrington, Leonard J. Brigham Young: American Moses. New York: Knopf, 1985.

Bushman, Claudia and Richard Bushman. Building the Kingdom: A History of Mormons in America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Cornwall, Maria, Camela Courtright, and Laga Van Beek, “How Common the Principle? Women as Plural Wives in 1860,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 26 (Summer 1993): 149

Hubbard, George A. “Abraham Lincoln as Seen by the Mormons,” Utah Historical Quarterly 31, no. 2 (Spring 1963): 103.

Medicine at Sea in the 18th and 19th Centuries

Even today life at sea can be difficult when there are medical issues. But what was it like in earlier periods? Here, Amy Chandler returns and explores life at sea and naval medicine on board naval fleets throughout the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.

Hospital Ships in the Second Opium War. Illustration for The Illustrated London News, 21 January 1860. Source: Wellcome Images, here. This file comes from Wellcome Images, a website operated by Wellcome Trust, a global charitable foundation based in the United Kingdom. Refer to Wellcome blog post (archive).

Life at sea can be treacherous with unpredictable weather, ever-changing climate and deadly predators that hold the authority of the underwater world. The changing climate, environmental factors and trade expansion throughout history has created an uneasy co-existence between the sea and land dwellers. The climate crisis has altered the habitats and patterns of many sea creatures lives, for example, reports of sharks migrating and swimming closer to shorelines in parts of Australia in the summer months. While in the twenty-first century, we have processes to mitigate risks, in the event of an incident, there are processes to follow to ensure a quick rescue or help when needed through lifeguards, sea rescue services, air ambulances and constant communication routes and satellites to monitor those at sea.

Before modern technology, life at sea was perilous with threats of pirates, sinking, mutiny, and naval warfare created a world away from the control and comforts of land and away from the law. The threat to health caused by disease, poor living conditions and long periods at sea contributed to an environment that killed many sailors. Modern cruise and military ships now have dedicated medical teams, and during the coronavirus pandemic, cruise ships isolated during their voyage with Covid-19 positive patients on board. The crew had the necessary equipment and medicines on board. This advancement gives travellers comfort and peace of mind when travelling for a long time away from land and the familiarity of home comfort to have easy access to medical treatment.

Life at sea

Throughout history life at sea has become an image romanticised by popular culture and is unrealistic. A sailor’s life was hard work full of manual labour, volatile conditions, wet and disease was rife. However, for many men the alternatives to life at sea was equally volatile, miserable, poverty-stricken and hard work, with the only exception that life at sea offered a sense of adventure. By the eighteenth century, London’s port and docks were vital to Britain’s trade and the public were dependent on the wealth and trade it generated. By this point, the Royal Navy was also becoming a significant presence in British politics and economy and required more men to sail and work on the ships. Historians have commented that the majority of recruited men were from the “lower socio economic strata […including mostly] illiterate, the dregs of society” and were seen as “uncouth, rude [and] riff raff”.(1) Some of these men were prisoners for committing minor crimes like pickpocketing, and could choose a life at sea under sanction of the Royal Navy.(2) The rapid expansion of the Royal Navy and the industrial revolution in Britain prompted the need for more men and these types of individuals solved their problem. Men on board would receive three meals a day, a ration of rum (often called ‘Grog’ or ‘Tot’) a day and offered a way to escape their miserable, poverty life on land. Parliament also sanctioned the use of ‘Press gangs’ to recruit men into the Royal Navy when non-violent methods were sufficient, this method granted by the Crown the “right to seize men of seafaring experience” and was intensely enforced during periods of naval battle, for example 1703, 1705, 1740 and 1779.(3)  All ages were recruited into the crew and when boys turned sixteen they became able-bodied sailors. The uniform worn by officers were different to the ordinary crew and the clothes were designed to signal status and emulate the fashion of wealthy men in the eighteenth century, while life at sea, away from the authority of land, was still subject to hierarchy and class bias.

Moreover, the ration of rum was introduced as storing water in wooden barrels did not keep for long periods and other drinks with a low-alcohol level was also difficult to store. Therefore rum was the best option and kept morale up for the men by receiving 10 ounces of rum a day, which reduced to 2.5 ounces in 1850.(4) It was not until 1970 that this daily ration was stopped as the Royal Navy expanded and modernised, the need for crew to be sober was seen as imperative. The manual labour of working on a large ship everyday required a diet to supply enough energy to keep the men fit, healthy and sustained. However, during this period fresh food was difficult to store and preserve for long voyages, therefore salted meat, pickled food and hard biscuits were the normal diet.

The role of the naval surgeon

Throughout history, the surgeon was the main and only person responsible for treating the ill, injured or psychologically distressed on board naval ships. The unpredictable weather, the threat of naval warfare and spending long periods away from land, friends and family created an unstable environment. While these factors contributed to a high mortality rate, the most common killer was disease. Life at sea was “continually hit by lethal epidemics of dysentery, typhus, scurvy, malaria and yellow fever”, that could easily wipe out or weaken the majority of the crew.(5)

There were strict procedures for becoming a ship’s surgeon, such as obtaining a university education and progressing to the lead surgeon. Individuals who trained through apprenticeships assisted at local hospitals or learnt through observation became the first, second or third ship surgeon mates to assist the fully qualified surgeons. University qualified medical professionals were usually privileged members of society who had access to wealth and opportunity to train at a University. There were different types of medical professionals in the eighteenth centuries; the university-qualified physician who was a member of the College of Surgeons, apothecaries, who dispensed prescribed medicine, and surgeons who dealt with external issues, such as amputation or removal of boils.(6) However, when sailing at sea for long periods, the surgeon was in a position that needed to include all three branches of the medical profession and be able to treat all kinds of diseases and injuries. During the voyages and expeditions, the ship was busy and crowded and needed access to all the necessary equipment, weapons and supplies on board, as the time and distance between ports were long. Therefore, the ship’s surgeon needed enough medicine and equipment to treat the ill and injured during these long voyages. Surgeons were required and responsible for obtaining their own set of instruments and treatments in preparation for their journey. This requirement changed in the 1800s as the Company of Surgeons was responsible for approving surgeons of their eligibility to practise and their instrument chest before a voyage. The Royal Navy Regulations of 1731 ordered that medicine chests were locked bearing the “seals of the physician and of the Surgeons’ Company” and no other chests were permitted on board.(7) Official examination of the surgeon’s credentials, medical knowledge and instruments was necessary to ensure the individual had the necessary knowledge to attend to ailments and injuries. Also, this safeguarded the equipment from being stolen and sold for a profit before the ship set sail. Despite the privilege and reputation bestowed on medical professionals on land, this same reputation was not extended to naval surgeons, who were underpaid.

Towards the end of the eighteenth century, the duties and responsibilities of naval surgeons were officially documented in the Regulations and Instructions Relating to His Majesty’s Service at Sea, which was initially published in 1731.(8) Duties included visiting ill patients twice a day and informing the captain of the daily number and name of unwell and injured crewmembers. The Company of Surgeons ordered every ship surgeon to write daily logs and diary entries of their daily activities. The ill or injured were isolated from the rest of the crew in the sick bay, a space below the waterline and away from potential dangers during battles. However, when the epidemics overwhelmed the crew, this space was unsuitable, and surgeons demanded a larger area to house and treat patients. The orlop deck was the most common area for surgeons to work and included their cabin to sleep and eat. This deck was usually the lowest deck on the ship and used to store cables and rope. The orlop was considered the safer part of the ship but was dark, hot and lacked sufficient ventilation, with lanterns being the only light source. This area was extremely noisy during battles as the cannons were located on the deck above and created ear-shattering noise from cannon fire.

It is also important to understand that while the surgeon was an invaluable and life-saving asset on board. Their medical knowledge was informed by the contemporary scientific discoveries of the time of the Four Humours rather than understanding how bacteria caused disease. Medical knowledge during this time focused on Hippocrates’ theory of the Four Humours and was later expanded by Galen. This theory suggested that the human body had four elements connected to the seasons. The elements were blood, yellow bile, black bile and phlegm. A healthy lifestyle and body meant these elements were in balance, and unbalanced humours caused illness because the body had too much of one humour. Treatments for unbalanced humours included bloodletting. The surgeons would perform and use contemporary medicine and treatments to diagnose the patient. These treatments, in some cases, were lethal and could result in unintentional death, as the use of mercury, no anaesthetics or antiseptics meant many could die from infection or poisoning during surgery. While battle injuries from canon fire and wounds caused by swords were a threat to life, the everyday living and working conditions were equally as deadly.

The Royal Navy in the Napoleonic Wars

Throughout the Napoleonic wars of 1792 to 1815, the British Royal Navy employed roughly 109,846 men, with an average of 3,518 men a year.(9) On average, 1 in 31 men died of disease or accident, and roughly 1 in 405 died in or from wounds caused by battle.(10) These statistics highlighted that despite the threat and dangers of naval combat, the true enemy to was disease. However, the Royal Navy was keen to keep their crews in good health as this meant they could continue sailing for longer and had a complete crew to engage in naval battles and missions. Horatio Nelson, Admiral of the HMS Victory was also aware of the importance of health while sailing and he is quoted to have said “the great thing in all military service is health; and you will agree with me that it is easier for an officer to keep his men healthy, than for a physician to cure them.”(11) An admiral can only lead their crew to victory if they are alive, healthy and have enough of them to engage in battle. Therefore it was in the Royal Navy’s best interest to ensure the working and living conditions were suitable. Even Nelson was not immune to the threats caused by living and working at sea, with reports of him contracting malaria, yellow fever and his death at the brink of victory during the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805.

The HMS Victory had an estimated 820 crew members, and the surgeon in charge was William Beatty, who tended to Nelson after his fatal wound at the Battle of Trafalgar. Beatty served as a naval surgeon for many years before entering the crew of HMS Victory and reported that Trafalgar was his first voyage that involved large-scale fleets in battle. Historians have noted that Trafalgar was a “baptism of fire” that placed his skills as a surgeon and medical knowledge to the test.(12) Nelson is an interesting figure in British history, and historians often remark on his strength of character. A fascinating story of his life and legacy is how despite suffering numerous battle wounds, he still managed to secure victory for Britain at the Battle of Trafalgar. Nelson lost his right arm in the Battle of Santa Cruz de Tenerife and because of this injury, he adapted to writing with his left hand, and his writing became even more legible than with his dominant right hand. This adaption highlights that life after battle for many injured was challenging and left the individual with life-altering damage. Furthermore, the amputation of Nelson’s right arm was carried out on board and like many other amputations and surgeries there was usually no other choice but to operate immediately in an attempt to save the patient’s life. The lack of anaesthetics and antiseptic, which were not discovered until the late 1840-60s, meant that many operations were barbaric, unimaginably painful and risky.

Hospital ships in the Napoleonic war

During the Napoleonic War, measures were introduced to provide medical treatment for men injured or ill during their voyages. Ships were far away from land resulting in the sick or injured, and this was a measure introduced since the third Dutch war of 1672 – 74. A hospital ship that would care for, treat and transport long-term sick patients, who could not stay aboard their ship, supported each naval fleet.(13) In 1743, aboard HMS Blenheim the upper and lower decks were converted to house 255 patients, segregated into four areas for “skin irritation, simple fever, dysentery, or malaria”.(14) The ships that were used and converted were usually going to be decommissioned and not purpose-built vessels. Historians have called these hospital ships the “medical command centre of a naval fleet” commanded by a senior surgeon with a university qualification, experience with life at sea and was responsible for the overall health of the crew.(15) The responsibilities included visiting, inspecting and other naval surgeons’ medical chests, journal entries and creating weekly reports for the Admiral on the health and conditions of the ship.(16) While this figure had no authority over individual surgeons – that still resided with each ship’s captain – they could recommend individuals for promotion. The mortality rate decreased with these regular inspections and authority figures on board, and one in particular, Thomas Trotter was pivotal in the ‘Nelsonian’ era. Trotter was a physician in the mid-1790s of the Channel Fleet under the command of Admiral Howe. Trotter reformed medicine and life at sea while he worked on the hospital ship Charon through his persistent suggestion of medical reform, such as improved ventilation, pay and living conditions, and his publication Medicina Nautica (1797 – 1802).

Conclusion

In conclusion, life at sea was a treacherous and unpredictable experience, with the increase in Britain's expansion of the empire, trade routes and exploration, the need for an on board medical professional became increasingly important. The Royal Navy rapidly gained momentum and power in the eighteenth century and required more men to join their forces. The bleak reality for many was not about a choice but the knowledge that their alternative option of a life in poverty and disease ridden living accommodation and a lack of employment was a contributing factor for many to join. However, one of the recurring motifs of history is that medicine can only do so much, but improvement in living and working conditions is vital to improving overall health. Nelson is remembered for his heroic contribution to the Royal Navy and Britain’s maritime legacy, but the crews that served and endured harsh environments are also vital to Britain’s success and should be recognised. Popular culture attempts to romanticise the life of a sailor through comedic and sanitised versions of the past and hide the reality of the harsh and miserable life away from land. While popular culture contributes to the myth that life at sea was a lawless and deadly place of hedonistic debauchery throughout history, there was still a hierarchy and laws to abide by that reaffirmed the class structures that dominated British society.

What do you think of medicine at sea? Let us know below.

Now read Amy’s article on the Great Stench in 19th century London here.

Bibliography

Brocklis, L, Cardwell, J, Moss, M, Nelson’s Surgeon: William Beatty, Naval Medicine, and the Battle of Trafalgar (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2005).

Brown, K, The Seasick Admiral: Nelson and the health and the navy (England, Pen & Sword Books,2015).

Goddard, J C, ‘The Navy Surgeon’s Chest: Surgical instruments of the Royal Navy during the Napoleonic War’, JR Soc Med, vol. 97, no. 4, April., 2004, pp.191 - 197 < https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1079363/ >.

Hickox, R. All you wanted to know about the 18th Century Royal Navy (USA, Rex Publishing, 2005).

Pappalardo, B, How to survive in the Georgian Navy (London, Bloomsbury Publishing,2019).

Sachs, T.  ‘The Rum the Royal Navy Once Rationed to Sailors…’,Robb Report, 2020 < https://robbreport.com/food-drink/spirits/black-tot-rum-british-navy-ration-for-sale-2939203/ >.

UK Parliament, ‘Press gangs’, UK Parliament, 2022 < https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/yourcountry/overview/pressgangs-/ >.

References

1 R.Hickox, All you wanted to know about the 18th Century Royal Navy (USA, Rex Publishing, 2005), p.15. https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/All_You_Wanted_to_Know_about_18th_Centur/_sKZ3rZK4dQC?hl=en&gbpv=1

2 Ibid.

3 UK Parliament, ‘Press gangs’, UK Parliament, 2022 < https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/yourcountry/overview/pressgangs-/ > [accessed 9 December 2022].

4 T. Sachs, ‘The Rum the Royal Navy Once Rationed to Sailors…’,Robb Report, 2020 < https://robbreport.com/food-drink/spirits/black-tot-rum-british-navy-ration-for-sale-2939203/ >[accessed 9 December 2022].

5 L. Brocklis, J. Cardwell and M. Moss, Nelson’s Surgeon: William Beatty, Naval Medicine, and the Battle of Trafalgar (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2005),p.5.

6 JC. Goddard, ‘The Navy Surgeon’s Chest: Surgical instruments of the Royal Navy during the Napoleonic War’, JR Soc Med, vol. 97 (2004),p.191 < https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1079363/ >[accessed 25 November 2022].

7 Ibid.

8 L. Brocklis, J. Cardwell and M. Moss, Nelson’s Surgeon, p.6.

9 B. Pappalardo, How to survive the Georgian Navy (London, Bloomsbury Publishing,2019),p. 56.

10 Ibid.,p.56.

11 Pappalardo, op.cit.,p.56.

12 L. Brocklis, J. Cardwell and M. Moss,op.cit.,p.viii.

13 L. Brocklis, J. Cardwell and M. Moss,op.cit.,pp.7-8.

14 Ibid.

15 Ibid, p.8.

16 Ibid.

The European Revolutions of 1848: A Failed Turning Point

In the year 1848, a series of revolutions swept across the European continent. Motivated by a variety of liberal, nationalist, and other radical ideas, these revolutions were initially very successful in toppling their respective governments. Countries from the great powers of France, Austria, and Prussia to the smaller states in Italy and Germany had their monarchical governments bound by constitutions or replaced by republics. However, within a few years, these new liberal governments were supplanted by counter revolutionaries and replaced by conservative regimes once again.

Nolan Douglas explains.

An 1841 portrait of King Louis Philippe I of France. By Franz Xaver Winterhalter.

Liberalism and Conservatism in the 19th Century

It needs to be understood that the beliefs of liberalism and conservatism in 19th century Europe are far different from how we perceive these ideologies now. At the time, liberalism was a fairly new ideology with a focus on securing individual rights, modernizing feudal systems and replacing them with capitalism, varying degrees of democracy, and constitutional government. The constitution of the United States is an excellent example of what European liberalism looked like in the 19th century. On the other hand, 19th century European conservatism was about order and tradition, focusing on maintaining powerful monarchies and aristocracies with little to no restrictions on their power.

The Conservative Order in Europe

In the wake of the Napoleonic Wars, Europe was reorganized at the 1814-1815 Congress of Vienna. At the congress, the great powers of Europe, the United Kingdom, France, Prussia, Austria, and Russia agreed to maintain a new status quo in hopes of avoiding a repeat of the upheavals of the last twenty years. Because Napoleon had abolished the old Holy Roman Empire, which had previously encompassed what is today Germany, Austria, and the Czech Republic, this territory was reorganized as a loose German Confederation, dominated by Austria and, to a lesser extent, Prussia. France was now a constitutional monarchy under the Bourbon dynasty, the same family which had ruled the country before the 1789 French Revolution. Italy was divided between a number of small states, the most powerful of which were the Kingdom of Piedmont-Sardinia, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, and the Papal States (which were ruled by the Pope). The Austrian Empire also controlled the rich provinces of Lombardy and Venetia, containing the major cities of Milan and Venice. Klemens von Metternich, the Austrian foreign minister, was an important architect of the new conservative order in Europe and would be a symbol of the status quo until 1848.

France: A New Republic

Following Napoleon's final defeat in 1815, France was again a monarchy under King Louis XVIII. This new King Louis was the younger brother of King Louis XVI who was executed during the 1789 French Revolution. In the period from 1815 to 1830, France was a constitutional monarchy, but with a very limited electorate I. In 1830, Charles X was overthrown in the 1830 July Revolution and replaced by King Louis Philippe, a more liberal-minded constitutional monarch from the Orléans branch of the Bourbon dynasty. While Louis Phillippe's regime (known as the July Monarchy) was more popular than that of Charles X, many people in France wanted a more representative government. While France under the July Monarchy had a bit more representation in its parliament than the regime of Charles X, only around 170,000 of France's richest men could vote under this more liberal government. In 1832, there had been an unsuccessful republican revolt which was violently crushed by the July Monarchy (this is the revolt depicted in Les Misérables). This massacre further tainted the image of the July Monarchy and Louis Philippe, increasing the desire for a republic.

On February 22, 1848, a pro-republican protest erupted in violence as the government called in the National Guard to break up the crowd. Overnight, Paris was embroiled in Revolution once again with barricades popping up across the city. On February 23, Louis Philippe abdicated his throne, and French republicans began to build the Second French Republic. The constitution of this new republic guaranteed universal suffrage and was initially popular, but would be even more short lived than its predecessor. The Second French Republic was composed mostly of moderate, liberal republicans with a huge majority in the Constituent Assembly, although conservatives and democratic socialists held significant numbers of seats as well. In June of 1848, more radical republican workers rose up in Paris against the republic, believing it wasn't democratic enough. Although these radical insurgents were put down by the government, the fear created by this uprising caused many French people to grow wary of the more radical elements of the revolution. As a result, conservatives began gaining ground in the republic. In December, Louis Napoleon, nephew of the famous conqueror, was elected president. In the elections of 1849, the conservative Party of Order won a majority in the Constituent Assembly, unseating the moderate liberal majority. In December of 1851, Louis Napoleon organized a coup and overthrew the government, establishing himself as a dictator. On 2 December, 1852, the same date as his uncle in 1804, Louis Napoleon was crowned Emperor of the French under the name Napoleon III. Within just a few years, the Second French Republic had met the same fate as the first.

Italy: A War for Unification

The revolutions in Italy began January 12 of 1848 with a revolt in Palermo against the Bourbon King Ferdinand II of the Two Sicilies. Within a month, Ferdinand II was forced to grant a liberal constitution in his kingdom or be dethroned. Throughout the spring of 1848, the monarchs of Tuscany, Piedmont-Sardinia, and the Papal States all followed suit by granting liberal constitutions limiting their power. Initially, many Italian revolutionaries hoped to establish a united Italy under the leadership of Pope Pius IX who was seen as a liberal reformer and might be willing to take up the role. Other revolutionaries wanted a constitutional monarchy under the Piedmontese monarchy while more radical revolutionaries hoped to establish a united and democratic Italian Republic. On March 18, the city of Milan rose up against the Austrians in a revolt known as the Five Days of Milan. After five days of fighting, the Austrian troops, led by the Czech Marshal Radetzky, were driven out of the city. During this revolt, another revolt began in Venice on March 22 and a republic was declared in Venetia. The following day, the Kingdom of Piedmont-Sardinia, led by King Charles Albert, declared war on the Austrian Empire, beginning the First Italian War of Independence with support from Italian revolutionary volunteers from across the peninsula. While the Sardinians and other Italian revolutionaries had some initial successes and advanced into Lombardy-Venetia, they were ultimately defeated by the better trained Austrian troops under Marshal Radetzky by March of 1849.

While the Austrians fought the Piedmontese and Italian volunteer forces, central and southern Italy were in the midst of their own revolutions. Although he had agreed to a constitution, Pope Pius IX fled Rome to seek refuge in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies on November 25, 1848 following the assassination of Pellegrino Rossi, his minister of interior. Now leaderless, Italian revolutionaries in the Papal States founded a new Roman Republic on February 9, 1849. Soon after, a Tuscan Republic was founded in Tuscany following the flight of its Grand Duke. In March of 1849, French troops landed in the Roman Republic. Initially there was hope that these French troops would aid the revolution, but the French instead seized the city of Rome and toppled the Roman Republic under orders from President Louis Napoleon. With this act, France had sided with the counterrevolution. With Austrian troops victorious in the north, the Roman Republic crushed, and the Two-Sicilies siding with the Austrians, the revolutions in Italy were quelled. Because of divides and mistrust between the revolutionaries Italian nationalists would have to wait for their dream of a united Italy to come to fruition. While Italy remained divided , Piedmont-Sardinia retained a constitutional monarchy as an artifact of 1848, eventually completing the Unification of Italy in 1870.

Austrian Empire: Habsburg Rule in Turmoil

The Austrian Empire was built over the course of centuries by the Habsburg family, mainly through dynastic marriages with very little military conquest. Through these marriages, the Habsburgs built a vast, multi-ethnic empire in the center of Europe. While it had been a major European power for several centuries, the Austrian Empire was rife with ethnic divisions. Habsburg subjects included Austrian Germans, Magyars (Hungarians), Czechs, Slovaks, Italians, Poles, Ruthenians (Ukrainians), Romanians, Slovenes, Serbs, and Croats. Although the Austrian Germans were the ruling class, they made up a fairly small proportion of the overall population of the empire. These ethnicities were divided in their goals and hopes for the future of the empire, and this showed in the revolutions. While many German revolutionaries sought to join Austria with the German unification efforts centered in Frankfurt, most Magyar revolutionaries wanted either autonomy or independence for the Hungarian nation. Many Czechs hoped for the same for their own people.

Throughout the spring of 1848, revolts began across the empire. By the end of March, Austrian Emperor Ferdinand I promised to accept a constitution. In the chaos, liberal nationalists in Hungary, led by Lajos Kossuth, seized their moment and passed liberal legislation. This liberal legislation, known as the April Laws, transformed the Kingdom of Hungary into an autonomous, parliamentary democracy within the Habsburg empire, abolished serfdom, created a Hungarian National Guard, and established freedom of the press and religious equality. With these laws, Hungary became one of the most liberal nations in Europe, but also placed itself at odds with the Habsburg monarchy. However, the April Laws also alienated some minorities within Hungary, such as Transylvanians, Germans, Slovaks, Croats, and Serbs because the laws established Hungary as an ethnic nation state. While Hungary became the center of the revolutions in the Austrian Empire, revolutionaries also seized power in Prague and Vienna. On May 17, despite promising a constitution two days earlier, Emperor Ferdinand I fled Vienna. In the summer, the counterrevolution began as Prague was bombarded and captured by Habsburg forces in June. In September, Croatian forces loyal to the Habsburgs invaded Hungary, and Vienna was bombarded and captured by Habsburg forces on October 31. For the next few months, a civil war raged between Austria and Hungary, with Hungary declaring an independent republic on April 13, 1849. However, in June of 1849, Russian forces invaded Hungary in support of the counterrevolution, sealing the fate of the young republic and putting the revolutions in the Austrian Empire to an end. Over the course of the revolutions in Austria, Emperor Ferdinand was forced to abdicate and was replaced by his eighteen year old nephew, Franz Joseph, who would reign until his death in 1916.

Prussia and Germany: A Crown from the Gutter

Similarly to Italy in this period, Germany too was divided between many small states, albeit many more than Italy. Unlike Italy, Germany was loosely united under the German Confederation which could be compared to the modern European Union on a smaller scale. The Austrian Emperor was somewhat of a leader of this loose confederation as the president of the Federal Convention, but held little real power over the other German states. The Kingdom of Prussia was the other major power within the German Confederation and competed for influence among the smaller German states with Austria. With the Austrian Empire in turmoil in 1848, the rest of Germany too was engulfed in revolution. On March 15, protests erupted in the Prussian capital of Berlin. The Prussian king, Frederick William IV, quickly accepted the demands of the protesters, promising to grant them a liberal constitution. However, on March 18, a true revolution broke out in the city when Prussian troops fired on protesters. King Frederick William, although still promising a constitution and siding with the liberals on paper, fled the city. Conservative monarchs throughout the small states of the German Confederation were similarly forced to accept liberal constitutions in the spring of 1848. On May 18, 1848, a new German National Assembly made up of representatives from across Germany, including Prussia and Austria, met in Frankfurt. Soon after, a Prussian Constituent Assembly was formed. The Frankfurt Parliament would spend the next year creating a constitution and ironing out the details of a united Germany.

For months, the Frankfurt Parliament debated the specifics of what shape this new Germany would take. Would it be a centralized, democratic republic in the same vein as France? Would it be a more decentralized, liberal empire? If so, who would be its Emperor? Should Austria be included? If so, should the entire Austrian Empire be integrated into Germany, or just the German speaking parts? These questions divided the Parliament and made creating a constitution difficult. Ultimately, it was decided that a liberal constitutional monarchy under the King of Prussia would be created, excluding Austria entirely. However, by the time the Frankfurt Constitution was completed On March 27, 1849, Prussia had crushed its revolution and the King had dissolved the Constituent Assembly the previous December. When the Frankfurt Parliament offered King Frederick William IV the crown of a united German Empire, he rejected it, calling it a "crown from the gutter." This was the nail in the coffin for a united liberal Germany. Despite most of the minor German states ratifying the constitution, a united Germany could not be forged without support from Prussia or Austria.

The Failed Turning Point

English historian A.J.P. Taylor once said of the Revolutions of 1848 that "German history reached its turning point and failed to turn." While he was specifically referencing the revolutions in Germany, this quote rings true for all of the revolutions across the continent. Despite being quickly and widely successful at their initial goals, the revolutionaries of 1848 could not agree on their end goals, allowing the counterrevolution to sweep through Europe just as quickly.

What do you think of the European Revolutions of 1848? Let us know below.

Nolan writes at The Era of Change blog here.

References

"Napoleonic Germany and the Revolution of 1848." In A Brief History of Germany, by Jason P. Coy. Facts On File, 2010.

"Whose Empire? The Revolutions of 1848–1849" In The Habsburg Empire : A New History, by Pieter M. Judson. 2016. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press.

Rapport, Mike. 1848: Year Of Revolution. United Kingdom: Little, Brown Book Group, 2010.

The Mexican War of Independence: Hidalgo’s Insurgents - Part 2

By the latter half of the 17th century, the rule of Spain in the New World was reaching 200 years. Times were changing, both in the New World and in Europe, and the leaders of Spain knew it. Their problem was what to do about it. Spain had never had a coherent policy in its imperial rule. Since 1492, Spain was seemingly constantly at war, with an endless series of crises thrown into the mix. Solutions had to be found for the here and now, the future would take care of itself.

Erick Redington continues his look at the independence of Spanish America by looking at the Mexican War of Independence. Here he looks at the evolution of the war and some successes for the revolutionaries.

If you missed them, Erick’s article on the four viceroyalties is here, Francisco de Miranda’s early life is here, his travels in Europe and the US is here, and his later years is here. Then, you can read about the Abdications of Bayonne here, and the start of the Mexican War of Independence here.

A painting of Ignacio Allende. By Ramon Perez, 1865.

Revolutionary Fire

When Hidalgo went to his parish church and assembled the people, he summoned all of his natural charisma and speaking abilities. He knew he had one chance to rally the common people to the cause of rebellion.

The speech that Hidalgo gave, known to history as the Cry of Dolores, was not written down and has varied in its retelling over the years. What is known is that Hidalgo’s theme was to revolt against oppression and tyranny. For him, the symbols of that tyranny were the Spanish peninsulares, or as they were called resentfully, the gachupines. For Hidalgo and the others in the conspiracy, it was the peninsulares who kept them from the highest orders in society. So, Hidalgo laid it on to the people. If only they could get rid of the gachupines, tyranny would be abolished. To add further insult to injury, he told the crowd that the hated gachupines were going to surrender the colony to the Bonaparte usurper carried on the coattails of the invading French army. These atheistic Frenchmen would further oppress them if they did nothing.

This was to be a rebellion, not to destroy the established authorities, which went directly against Biblical teaching, and would be odd coming from a priest, it would be a holy crusade for both religion and their true king, Ferdinand VII, still living a prisoner of the French. The cry went up from Hidalgo, “Long live the King! Long live America! Death to bad government!” Ominously, the response he got back from the crowd was “Death to the gachupines!”

There is no known telling of this story that says Hidalgo attempted to tamp down on this spirit of bloodlust from the crowd. Indeed, he fostered it. This first stage of the Mexican War of Independence lost the character of the clean military coup with little bloodshed that men like Allende hoped for. This was to be a social revolution intending the destruction of the social class at the top of the social pyramid. Hidalgo, like many revolutionary leaders, understood that to will a result implies an absolute acceptance of the means to achieve that result. If the end of Spanish tyranny meant the deaths of everyone who exercised such tyranny, then so be it.

The Revolutionaries Move

Revolutionary movements have a history of either growing or dying. Hidalgo understood that with the passions of his followers at a fever pitch, they had to move out of the colonial backwater they were located in and gain new followers. Further, the passions of the people could glow white hot, but without proper channeling, those passions could dissipate just as fast as they grew. The insurgent army had to strike.

To secure his local region, Hidalgo first ordered the emptying of the local jails. This was to make room for the hated gachupines whose haciendas he authorized to be plundered and burned. The people took to this work with gusto. Homes were burned and their Spanish owners were beaten, imprisoned, and killed. The people who had lived on these haciendas and worked them would, in the frenzy, join the insurgents. Hidalgo’s army grew with every hacienda burned.

“Take, my children! Everything is yours!” This was the battle cry from Hidalgo to his followers at this stage (yes, he really did say this). One thing that was taken by Hidalgo himself was a representation of the Virgin of Guadalupe. Located at a shrine in Atotonilco, this representation became the symbol of the budding revolution.

At San Miguel, the birthplace of Allende, the insurgents sacked the properties of the gachupines. For the primarily indio and mestizo insurgents, they could not tell the difference between a creole and a gachupine. This led to many creoles being attacked and beaten, and their property seized. For Hidalgo, this was just the justifiable rage of the people. For the original conspirators, such as Allende, this was terrifying. All the bloody scenes of revolutionary Paris were coming to New Spain. This was not a targeted activity to change the government, this was a mob indiscriminately committing crimes.

For Allende, this was doubly frustrating. He was supposed to be the military leader of the revolution. Yet, Hidalgo would not allow him to exercise any command. Hidalgo had even proclaimed himself the “Captain-General of America,” assuming a military rank higher than the professional conspirators. Their leader was now bestowing grandiloquent titles on himself while leading a mob on an excursion of pillage and murder.

First Resistance

As the insurgent army approached Guanajuato, the leader of the Spanish forces there, José Antonio Raiño, decided to make a stand against the rebel army. He ordered the fortification of a granary, and much of the wealth of the city was stored there for defense, including almost three million pesos in cash and gold. On September 28, 1810, the battle began.

The insurgents up to this point had relied upon numbers and fury to carry them forward. This was the first time they had encountered an organized military force armed with cannons. When Hidalgo ordered an attack upon the granary, he found that his men were joined by many locals, especially miners, who were eager to destroy the gachupines and get some of that gold.

Wave after wave of insurgents flung themselves at the granary. Hidalgo, who had read books on military tactics as part of his Enlightenment studies, did not have military experience, despite his title. Allende, the man with experience was not able to exert command authority. So, bodies piled up in front of the granary. Yet the fervor of the insurgents did not flag in this trial. Raiño was shot in the head leading the defense. In the confusion that the lack of leadership caused, the insurgents were able to set fire to the building. The defenders tried to surrender. With the insurgents’ blood up, surrender was not an option. The defenders were killed to a man.

The Turning Point

The fall of the granary was not the end of the insurgents’ first battle. The capture of Guanajuato had just begun. Angered by the deaths of their friends and family, the insurgents proceeded to put the city to the torch. Three hundred years of hate, oppression, slavery, and ignorance were brought out on this one night. Guanajuato was burned and pillaged. Any Spaniard that could be found was killed out of hand. Worse happened to the Spanish women of the city. Since this movement had a working-class tinge to it, the machinery used to work the mines was also destroyed in the hatred of their labor.

It was at Guanajuato that the Hidalgo insurgency showed its most important characteristic. It was not really about the future. The idea did not exist in the minds of the movement that it was working to create a free and prosperous Mexico, unshackled by tyranny and foreign, racial domination. No, this was about the past. The actions of everyone in New Spain since November 8, 1519, the day Cortés met Montezuma II, had led to this moment. This revolution was about the hacienda system, the racial caste system, the destruction of indio independence, and a thousand other incidences in the almost three hundred years since. Hidalgo’s enlightenment ideals on the superiority of human reason over emotional barbarism and superstition were held in the balance and found wanting. For Hidalgo, this was only a minor obstacle. Consistency is for fools; he was the leader of a movement. Ever onward.

Guanajuato also taught one other lesson, the price of failure. For the leadership in Mexico City, they saw a preview on a smaller scale of what would happen in case the insurgents took the capital. Negotiating and compromising with the insurgents was no longer an option. For both sides, it was only victory or death.

The Revolution Moves Forward

Hidalgo’s next target was the city of Valladolid. This city of about 50,000 people was one he was intimately familiar with. As a young man, Hidalgo had been a teacher here. The Bishop, Manuel Abad y Queipo, had been a friend of Hidalgo’s. Abad, however, believed that Hidalgo’s ideas were heretical, and did not support the atrocities carried out in Hidalgo’s name. On his own authority, Abad excommunicated Hidalgo. Despite this, the garrison of the city went over to the insurgents, as the people of the city did not want to see the scenes of Guanajuato repeated. Abad abandoned the city, and it was peacefully occupied.

From the regional capital of Valladolid, Hidalgo began sending out agents throughout New Spain to attract new followers. Hearing of the collapse of authority among the gachupines, many, especially in the north of New Spain, began declaring for Hidalgo. Many leaders in San Luis Potosí, Saltillo, and many others were all in on destroying the hated Spanish. It had seemed that despite the scenes in Guanajuato, Hidalgo would sweep all before him, mostly without a fight.

The defection of the north to the insurgents presented a problem for the Spanish. Where to focus efforts? In the north, the revolution was sweeping everything before it, but there was no organized army, and could seemingly be reconquered easily. In the south, Hidalgo had what passed for an army, but its numbers were enormous. With limited resources at his disposal, the viceroy could not directly confront both threats. In the end, he chose to send an army north under an able, if extremely ruthless, general, Félix María Calleja.

Attempting to Bring Order to Chaos

Relieved of any pressure from the viceroy, Hidalgo tried to put some organizational and ideological backing into his revolution. He attempted to assuage the creoles by emphasizing that his only goal was to create a new congress, and that would be under the authority of Ferdinand VII. He did not support independence or a republic, he assured the creole leaders. To marry patriotism and self-interest, Hidalgo passed out military ranks and offices in his new government to men of influence., hoping to win them over.

At the same time, Hidalgo attempted to shore up his support with the lower classes. He abolished the privileges of the haciendas and ended all tribute that the indios owed to the haciendados. Slavery was to be abolished. Despite the promises made, and regardless of the merit of any of Hidalgo’s decrees, many of the potential intellectual, political, and military leaders of the revolution saw Hidalgo’s support for, what was in their minds, economic and social radicalism as an existential threat to their position in the economic and political order, let alone their hoped-for societal dominance. Hidalgo even allowed himself to be addressed by his indio followers as “His Most Serene Highness.” Social revolution by a racial underclass exacting bloody revenge had precedent in their minds: Haiti. The specter of a Haitian-style race war hovered over Hidalgo’s insurgency. Many creoles with Hidalgo’s main force now began to slowly filter out of the insurgent army.

Despite offering ranks and titles to some, while at Valladolid, Hidalgo was unable to bring any semblance of order to what was in essence, a mob. Placing the indios and mestizos under military discipline would defeat the purpose of the revolution in his eyes. It went against the core ideals of what he, and they, were fighting for. This lack of discipline would be one of the primary undoings of the insurgent army.

Attempt on the Capital

Understanding he had to keep moving, Hidalgo ordered his army to advance on Mexico City at the end of October. The insurgents numbered almost 80,000 by this point, dwarfing the numbers that the Spanish could deploy. The lesson of Guanajuato was ever-present. For the viceregal government and army, despite being heavily outnumbered, there could be no surrender. The Spanish had to fight.

The viceroy ordered a small force under General Torcuato Trujillo to engage the rebels. Trujillo, having the advantage in firepower, decided to find the most defensible ground possible and fight on his own ground. He chose the Sierra de las Cruces located between Toluca and Mexico City. Riddled with forests and steep ridges, this was the perfect defensive position.

On October 30, the battle began. The insurgent strategy was simple. With a colossal advantage in numbers, the most simplistic path to victory was to surround the Spanish force by enveloping it. For the Spanish, the imperative was survival on their part and killing as many insurgents as possible until one side had to retreat.

All day the battle raged. The insurgents sent waves of men into the teeth of Trujillo’s cannon. Thousands of insurgents would fall this day attempting to storm the Spanish lines. With only a few thousand men, time was not on Trujillo’s side. Although his men rebuffed attack after attack, in the end, they ran out of time. With the size advantage Hidalgo’s army enjoyed, it was almost inevitable he would find a weak spot in Trujillo’s defenses, and the Spanish were nearly surrounded.

Trujillo ordered the withdrawal of his forces. While the Spanish had lost less than 2,000 men, the insurgents had lost, by some estimates, 5,000. Although he would claim victory to the viceroy, Trujillo and everyone else knew that the battle was lost, despite the disproportionate casualties. The path to Mexico City now appeared clear.

Victory in the Palm of His Hand

Mexico City, the most populated city in the Western Hemisphere and the second city of all the Spanish realms, was now open to attack. The people in the city panicked. The viceroy ordered a service held at the cathedral, naming the Virgin of Remedios as the new Captain-General of New Spain. The army sent north was hastily recalled, but everyone knew it could not make it back in time. Many prominent peninsulares prepared to hastily evacuate the city. Everyone was prepared for an orgy of violence, pillage, and bloodshed.

In the insurgent army, Allende urged Hidalgo to immediately march on the capital. This was their chance. It was, unfortunately for the insurgents, the first time Hidalgo had been seen to vacillate. What was he waiting for? The hated gachupines were at his mercy. After waiting three days, Hidalgo made his decision. He ordered the insurgents to march back to Toluca.

Hidalgo told Allende that he planned to move back and finally allow him and the other creole officers to turn the disorganized mob into a disciplined army, one that could engage Calleja once he returned from the north. The officers were incredulous. Now, right on the cusp of victory, with the best chance they would have for total victory, now was when they would sit and attempt to create a real army. The professional soldiers could see the writing on the wall. This was all going to end in catastrophic failure.

Unlike the earlier ad hoc attempt, Hidalgo also tried to create a true government and outline his purpose. From Guanajuato, he would issue proclamation after proclamation, but it was too late. Desertions, from the highest creole officers to the lowest indio pikeman, were endemic. Momentum was lost. The local population was turning against the insurgents.

Insurgent Denouement

Calleja had by now arrived from the north. The viceregal government had declared that anyone found armed would be declared a rebel and executed. This only brought further reprisals from the insurgents. Spanish prisoners were taken out and executed in retaliation for Spanish atrocities. Soon hangings and throat-slittings, the favored execution methods of the Spanish, and garrotings, the favored method of the insurgents, were common, daily occurrences. Reprisal begat reprisal and hate begat hate. Men commonly changed sides and executed their former comrades. Betrayals became as common as executions.

Hidalgo and his insurgents now only had thoughts of escape. The insurgent army began moving north to escape, possibly to the United States. Throughout the march, insurgents deserted, and the size of the once enormous army shrank daily. Finally, at Baján, a former supporter of Hidalgo, Ignacio Elizondo betrayed the rebels into Spanish hands. Elizondo had wanted to be appointed a Lieutenant-General in the insurgent army and had been rebuffed. His resentment over rank led him to surrender the rebel leaders into Spanish custody. On March 21, 1811, Hidalgo and the other leaders of the insurgency were captured.

Hidalgo was turned over to an ecclesiastical court. Because he was a priest, the civil authorities could not judge him. He refused to ask for a pardon. He wrote a statement, abjuring support for his own revolution. Later, it would be said that he wrote this due to being coerced and under torture, but the truth is unknown. Since he had been defrocked and excommunicated by the church, part of his sentence included the flaying of his hands. After this, he was executed, probably by firing squad. This was carried out by the civil authorities. Some of his last words were alleged to be “Though I may die, I shall be remembered forever. You all will soon be forgotten.” After his execution, his head was removed from his body and placed on display with those of the other insurgent leaders. The first phase of the Mexican War of Independence was over.

What do you think of the start of various changes in the Mexican War of Independence? Let us know below.

Now, read about Francisco Solano Lopez, the Paraguayan president who brought his country to military catastrophe in the War of the Triple Alliance here.

The Mexican War of Independence: Chaos and Confusion - Part 1

By the latter half of the 17th century, the rule of Spain in the New World was reaching 200 years. Times were changing, both in the New World and in Europe, and the leaders of Spain knew it. Their problem was what to do about it. Spain had never had a coherent policy in its imperial rule. Since 1492, Spain was seemingly constantly at war, with an endless series of crises thrown into the mix. Solutions had to be found for the here and now, the future would take care of itself.

Erick Redington continues his look at the independence of Spanish America by looking at the Mexican War of Independence. Here he looks at the Jesuit roots of revolution and Hidalgo and Allende.

If you missed them, Erick’s article on the four viceroyalties is here, Francisco de Miranda’s early life is here, his travels in Europe and the US is here, and his later years is here. Then, you can read about the Abdications of Bayonne here.

A painting of Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla.

The Eve of the Revolution

New Spain on the eve of the Abdications of Bayonne in 1808 was a place of tension. The constant warfare in Europe meant that New Spain, as the wealthiest colony of Spain, was used as a source of money for Napoleon’s war machine. The Godoy government had been dedicated to extracting as much wealth as possible from the colonies. The people groaned under the financial burden.

Money was not the only cause of discontent. The example of the United States to the north was one of a free (slaves were ignored) federal republic that had thrown off their colonial masters and the king who ruled over them. Ideas from the French Revolution, such as liberty, equality, and fraternity, were highly influential on the literate classes. The economic arguments of free enterprise and the removal of colonial trade barriers were wrapped into the political language of the Enlightenment of the brotherhood of man and the liberation of the soul.

A further cause of resentment was the social caste system in place in New Spain. Slavery existed in Mexico, but it was not exclusively African slavery, as in the United States. Many of the natives, or indios, descendants of the Aztecs, Maya, and others, were enslaved, either in law or custom, through the encomienda system. This system, in place since the conquests by Cortes, bound the indios to labor to a man granted the right to own that labor, an encomendero. There were African slaves as well, just not in the numbers seen to the north. Above the slaves were mestizos, or mixed Spanish and indio, but they faced many legal and cultural barriers to success. Above them were the criollos. These were people who did not have any Native or African ancestry, but because they were born in New Spain, they faced certain legal disabilities, and in practice were second-class citizens. At the top of the pyramid were the peninsulares, people who were born in Spain. Not only did the peninsulares have more legal rights than everyone else, but they also owned and controlled a disproportionate amount of the wealth in New Spain. This added a large degree of economic resentment to the existing racial resentment.

Choices to be Made

In 1808, the news of the installation of Joseph Bonaparte as King of Spain hit New Spain like a thunderbolt. Although there had been tensions between France and Spain, no one had expected something like this to happen. To whom was loyalty owed, to Spain? To the king? Who was the king, Carlos, or Joseph, or maybe it was the Infante, Ferdinand? These questions had to be answered. The person who had the responsibility for all decisions in New Spain was supposed to be the viceroy, José de Iturrigaray.

Iturrigaray had been viceroy in New Spain since 1803. He claimed to be a loyal servant of Carlos IV. The problem for him was, he was the viceroy for Carlos, and was Carlos still the king after the mess of Bayonne? What about Ferdinand, the heir and future king, was he legitimate? He was not appointed by Joseph Bonaparte, but many within the Spanish civil service did recognize Joseph and welcomed the Napoleonic reforms being enacted, including the ending of the Inquisition. Further, Iturrigaray was an appointee of Godoy, the ridiculously corrupt Spanish Prime Minister who was hated by nearly everyone in the Spanish domains. He knew that the Juntas would never accept him, as they were revolting against the existing Spanish government as much as against the French and King Joseph.

Thrown into the mix were those who saw this as a golden opportunity to attain, if not independence from Spain, then at least significant local autonomy. This group was primarily led by criollos who resented the privileges of the peninsulares and identified their country as New Spain. Many in this group believed that New Spain could remain loyal to the Spanish crown but be independent of Spain and the Spanish government. The situation was further complicated by the creation of the revolutionary Juntas in Spain in response to the invasion. The leaders in Spain were attempting to extend their authority over the colonies as well. If the Spanish leaders were able to solidify the loyalty of the colonies, that would eliminate any chance of New Spain achieving autonomy or independence.

When official delegations from two different Juntas, one from Oviedo, and one from Seville, arrived in the colony, it was the perfect excuse for Iturrigaray to delay. He announced that he would make no final decision on whom to support until September. In the interim, he had agreed to the formation of a Congress for the colony, ostensibly to learn the desires of the people.

Some were worried that Iturrigaray was thinking about declaring himself the leader of an independent New Spain, perhaps even as its king. To prevent this from occurring, a group of elites from New Spain organized and plotted to overthrow the viceroy. On September 15, 1808, just four months after the abdications of Bayonne, the conspirators removed Iturrigaray. Although the removal of the viceroy had been the action of a broad spectrum of elites, it seemed no one was happy with the situation. The new viceroy, Pedro de Garibay, was named by the Audencia, not for his ability or charisma, but because he was the highest-ranking officer in New Spain at the time. The pro-independence group wanted a definite break with Spain. The conservatives did not like how the coup played out, as the king was the only person who had the authority to appoint a new viceroy.

The overthrow of the viceroy was a watershed moment for one more reason that would only become clearer in the future. The revolutionary history of what would become Mexico started with a conspiracy overthrowing the legitimate government of the country. The lesson was not lost on those groups who would later compete for power: if you are not happy with the current government, just overthrow it. The English colonists revolted against taxes that barely impacted them. The peoples of Colombia and La Plata would revolt at far less provocation. Yet, the people of Mexico did nothing in the face of, what was essentially, a coup d’état. There was no mass uprising, nor did the independence-minded Creoles raise a voice. The prestige of the government of the colony suffered a blow that it would not recover from. This lesson learned in the cradle would be the curse of Mexico for generations.

The Jesuit Roots of Revolution

It would be odd to expect the main impetus for revolution to come from members of the clergy. Yet, in New Spain, the initial driving force for revolution came from priests. In an era with little formalized education, especially in far-flung reaches of the empire, families, especially creole families, which had a child who showed intellectual promise would send that child to receive an education with the church. It was within the lower orders of the church in New Spain that many of the enlightenment ideals from Europe found a receptive audience. These men were literate yet surrounded by illiteracy and what they saw as backwardness caused by oppression.

Many of the schools in New Spain by the mid-18th century were run by members of the Jesuit order. To the people of their areas, these priests offered spiritual comfort as well as education. Usually, the most learned people in their areas, the Jesuits would set up schools to spread their religion, but also to support and uplift the people, as they saw it. To the Spanish authorities, they were an organization with loyalties to the Pope, not to the king. In the era of the Bourbon reforms, when the Spanish government was attempting to centralize and gain a firmer grip on the empire, having this group of priests teaching the lower classes who knows what, as well as controlling a large amount of wealth and land in the empire, the Jesuits represented an existential threat (or a convenient scapegoat and source of wealth). In 1767, King Carlos III ordered the expulsion of the Jesuit order from the Spanish Empire.

Hidalgo

One such young man who received his early education from the Jesuits was Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla. Hidalgo came from a wealthy family in Michoacán that sent him to the Colegio de San Francisco Javier. It was here that first learned of the philosophers of the enlightenment. When the Jesuits were expelled from the empire, he transferred to the Colegio de San Nicolás, later moving on to the Royal and Pontifical University of Mexico, earning his degree and entering the priesthood. While conducting his studies, he also learned philosophy and French, allowing him to read the Enlightenment philosophers in the original language.

After becoming a priest, he became a teacher himself. Hidalgo, however, could not just ignore his beliefs in the enlightenment and against some of, what he saw, as the more obscuritan elements of Catholic theology. As a member of the faculty of the Colegio de San Nicolás Obispo, he was also the school’s treasurer. The church leaders did not want to bring attention to his heretical and liberal teachings, so in removing him, they cited financial irregularities and shipped him off to several small parishes. It was while ministering to these small, rural parishes that Hidalgo’s resentments toward the church hierarchy and the corrupt viceregal government in Mexico City bloomed.

Finally settling in the small town of Dolores, Hidalgo began the work of educating the people of the region. Unlike many in the leadership of the colony, Hidalgo did not care about social caste and would take everyone equally, including indios, who up until that time, were kept uneducated as a matter of policy. Hidalgo, always a believer in self-improvement, attempted to teach the native how to improve their lot. Instead of being subsistence farmers, Hidalgo believed that they should grow cash crops, earning more money. He attempted to teach the indios how to grow olives and grapes for wine. By improving their crops and their methods, the indios could be lifted out of poverty, and with the education and literacy he gave them, they could become prosperous.

It was not to be. Spanish law and the colonial authorities forbade the growing of certain crops to prevent competition from arising for Spanish producers. The local authorities came and cut down the groves that Hidalgo had directed to be planted. Knowing the stupidity of this action, Hidalgo’s resentment would only grow.

The Conspiracy Forms

In Querétaro at the same time, a group surrounding Ignacio Allende began forming. Allende was a captain in the royal army but had been mistreated by the viceregal government due to his New Spanish birth. Creoles were looked down on by their peninsulares comrades and had a very difficult (but not impossible) time rising to higher ranks. It proved very easy for Allende to recruit fellow members of the royal army into his conspiracy.

This conspiracy did not start with the goal of independence.  On the contrary, their goal was a New Spain under the crown of Ferdinand VII, just run by creoles. Allende wanted a bloodless coup, just like the one that unseated Iturrigaray. This required more than just lower-ranking officers, though. He knew he needed to reach out to all segments of creole society to gain a broader base of support. Allende just assumed that if he could recruit creole leaders, he would have the support of the mestizos and indios, as they would naturally follow the lead of their creole betters.

This is where Allende and Hidalgo come together. Both men resented what they saw as peninsulares corruption and fecklessness. Hidalgo, however, did not agree with Allende that a revolution should be led by a small clique of creole army officers. He wanted this to be a broad-based movement in which all elements of society had a place and would actively participate.

Any broad-based movement can be difficult to control. With more people brought into the conspiracy, word began to leak out that something was happening in Querétaro. The latest of Spanish governments, now a regency acting in the name of Ferdinand VII on the island of León, dispatched a new viceroy to New Spain, Francisco Venegas. Before he even arrived, however, the government in Mexico City wanted to consolidate its power. The conspiracy had to be broken up.

The Conspiracy Unfolds

The corregidor of Querétaro, Miguel Domínguez, was given the order to arrest Allende, Hidalgo, and the rest of the conspiracy. The problem was that Domínguez was part of the conspiracy. He was also a very indecisive man. With one foot in each camp, Domínguez needed to commit himself, but instead, he panicked. He even locked in the house his own wife, as she was also a member of the conspiracy.

Domínguez’s wife, Josefa Ortiz de Domínguez, would be one of the heroes of this first act of the war of independence. On September 15, 1810, Josefa figured out a way to contact her fellow conspirators and sent a message to Allende, informing him of the arrest order. Allende immediately went to Dolores to inform Hidalgo and formulate a plan.

At 2:00 AM on September 16, Allende arrived at Hidalgo’s house in a panic. He wanted to go underground with his fellow conspirators. Hidalgo, the local parish priest, exiled to a backwater due to being seen as dangerous, saw that the moment had come. His decisiveness instantly gave him leadership in this revolution. Allende’s plan for a bloodless coup was gone. A simple political change of regime would give way to mass social revolution. Hidalgo put on his boots and walked to the church, ordering the bell to be rung. The revolution was on.

What do you think of the start of the Mexican War of Independence? Let us know below.

Now, read about Francisco Solano Lopez, the Paraguayan president who brought his country to military catastrophe in the War of the Triple Alliance here.

A Brief History of Policy Towards Minorities in China

Minority groups in China have frequently found their way into the news cycle in the last several decades and especially in the last few years.  These issues are not new and have their roots in the major changes in the way China organized itself over a century ago.  Despite the massive Han majority, China is not an ethnically homogeneous country and has had to continually address issues of cultural and ethnic diversity.  Integration of ethnic minorities into China has ranged from open embrace to violent resistance for much of the 20th century.  What follows is a quick history of minority policy in China that has led to some of the contemporary issues that make their way into the news cycle.

Jonathan Moody explains.

A Uyghur prince. Source: Tilivay, available here.

The Qing Dynasty

To find the roots of contemporary minority policy, we must travel back to the end of the Qing dynasty.  The Qing stormed their way into power in the 17th century and succeeded in both conquering the Ming Empire and expanding the borders and influence of their empire to encompass the vast majority of East Asia and large sections of Central Asia.  On a map, the Qing Empire is a giant but drawing geographical borders around historic political entities with contemporary map standards can be deceiving and is often more of a reflection of modern ideas of the way states look. The Qing, like their predecessors and many contemporary political institutions of the time, was an empire and not the modern version of a state that much of the world lives under today. ‘Modern states’, while obviously not all the same, have embraced a high degree of political uniformity (i.e. passports, laws, national militaries , etc.) within set boundaries that often border other politically autonomous states.  Unlike a modern state, territories under Qing control could vary vastly in how they were governed or exactly how much control Beijing was able to wield and the line between Qing territory and non-Qing territory was not always clear.  For example, most eastern parts of the empire were full provinces with viceroys and the full application of the Qing law while in the peripheries (Tibet, Mongolia, Xinjiang, etc.), Beijing would give titles to local leaders and rely on these leaders to keep the peace.  Beijing’s involvement was not uniform in many of these areas but, in general, Qing law and influence was limited to almost non-existent depending on the place.  Also, unlike many states today, uniformity of political control was not a main priority.  Attempts to make periphery areas into full provinces only happened at the tail end of the dynasty from fears of outside influence and most of the periphery was highly, if not completely, autonomous.  This loose or lumpy system was by no means utopian but for most of the life of the empire, it worked to both bolster the dynasty’s political power in the center and co-opt potential threats in the periphery to become nominal allies.

Modern China

When the Qing fell, the Republic of China claimed these disparate territories and pursued bringing them into the fold of a new modern state that had stronger centralized control over its territory.  Part of state creation for the early republic was determining who was a member of a Chinese nation-state and what their position was in that state.  For many outside of China, words like Chinese people and Chinese language can be deceptively oversimplifying in the diversity they cover.  The majority ethnic Han population is classified as a single ethnicity but many Han dialects are mutually unintelligible and there is plenty of cultural diversity across the Han regions.  The non-Han ethnic groups speak a variety of languages (Tibetan, Mongolian, Uyghur, etc.) and have their own cultural diversity as well.  One of the problems faced by the early Republic of China was how to incorporate the politically and ethnically diverse empire of the Qing into a state that did not want to continue the loose relationships of the past, especially when regions like Tibet and Mongolia rejected any political connection with the Republic and pursued a more independent path. The Republic, under the Kuomintang (KMT), eventually embraced a policy that there was only one ethnicity in China, the zhonghua minzu. The zhonghua minzu were compared to a tree where the Han were the trunk and other ethnicities were merely branches that grew from the Han tree.  The KMT dominated Republic of China avoided questions of diversity with this program and embarked on Sinicization programs to teach the branches how to embrace their true national identity.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on the other hand, took the exact opposite approach, especially early in the life of the party.  With a combination of Marxists/Leninist/Stalinist ideologies and later time spent among non-Han communities, the CCP rejected notions that Tibetans or Mongolians were nascent Hans and promised recognition of various ethnic groups and specialized policies for these ethnicities.  The party even embraced the idea of self-determination for these regions early on but backtracked by the time they took power in 1949. Self-determination gave way to fostering patriotic minority identities that allowed for a non-Han identity loyal to the state.  

CCP

After 1949, the CCP adopted an approach to minority populations that had strong Soviet influences (i.e. titular or recognized nationalities/ethnicities) and was aimed at incorporating these people into a modern socialist state while allowing varying degrees of autonomy in specified national minority areas.  Much of the second half of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty first century can be seen as a mixture, and at times conflict, between hardline and accommodationist approaches.  Accommodationists have advocated a slow and welcoming approach to minorities by offering special benefits, at times with the opposition from some of the Han population, to convince hesitant minority populations that inclusion in the PRC is more beneficial than independence.  These policies have included exemptions from the one-child policy and preferential placements in the competitive university process.  Hardliners have been less sympathetic toward differences and have advocated an approach that has little space for dissent and exemptions. Many of the issues we see today have been as a result of hard liners pushing policies that take a more forceful approach to minority incorporation.

Most countries today have consider ethnic diversity and how to include different populations in one political entity. China is no exception and has been dealing with this issue with varying levels of success. The issue of minorities in China very much stems from a change in the way the state was organized and how different groups fit into this modern vision of a state. This change in state organization and vision renegotiated looser affiliations and has led to many of the issues that make their way into the news today.

What do you think of minority policy in China? Let us know below.

Further reading

Goldstein, Melvyn C., and Gelek Rimpoche. A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951: The Demise of the Lamaist State Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 2007.

Khan, Sulmaan Wasif: Muslim, Trader, Nomad, Spy. China's Cold War and the People of the Tibetan Borderlands. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2015.

Westad, Odd Arne. Restless Empire: China and the World Since 1750. Basic Books, 2015.

Women in the Warzone: Disguised Soldiers in the American Civil War

Popular accounts of the Civil War describe the horrors of the battlefield, from the mass casualties at the Battle of Gettysburg to the starvation and freezing temperatures at Confederate camps in New York and Georgia. These documents highlight the poor quality of life of Union and Confederate soldiers, highlighting their tremendous historical value, but they rarely mention the experiences of women. Most commonly, women contributed to the war effort by providing medical aid on the battlefield and managing the homefront, but some even disguised themselves as men to join the military. To appear more masculine, these women dressed in layers or loose clothing–both efforts to hide their breasts–and sported short haircuts. These attempts to blend in with the rest of the soldiers generally succeeded, with their gender identity typically remaining a secret.

Brooke Keys explains.

Sarah Rosetta Wakeman, a disguised female who served in the US Civil War.

Context

At the dawn of the Civil War, the Union and Confederate armies recruited masses of young men to improve their chances of defeating the other side. Because of this desperation for soldiers, the armies failed to enforce strict requirements for enlisting. So, although the Union and Confederacy preferred that their ranks consisted of young men, ideally above eighteen years old, they still recruited a vast amount of adolescents. Not only this, but many lied about their ages to ensure that the army accepted them. After all, many people in the North and South maintained strong, oftentimes opposing, opinions on slavery, incentivizing them to support either the Union or Confederacy with their military service. 

This lack of strict requirements aided many men in the enlistment process. Unfortunately, it never helped the women, who the armies strictly banned from enlisting. By violating such a widely-known, highly-enforced rule, the women who disguised themselves as men demonstrated true bravery. They not only risked their lives, but they also risked severe punishment if caught.

Women in the Union Army

One woman who disguised herself as a man was Private Sarah Rosetta Wakeman. She constitutes one of hundreds of women who performed this feat, though many of their names have been lost to history. Intrigued by the monetary bonus offered to enlistees, Wakeman joined the 153rd New York Infantry Regiment on August 30th, 1862. Under the pseudonym Lyons Wakeman, Sarah joined the ranks and successfully blended in with the other recruits.

She traveled with the Union army to the Washington, DC area, where she operated as the provost. After a couple of years, the 153rd New York Infantry Regiment experienced a shift in leadership, eventually falling under the authority of Major General Nathaniel Banks. One month later, she and her fellow soldiers marched to Louisiana. Many of them died on the journey. When Wakeman reached Louisiana to participate in the Red River Campaign, she finally engaged in active combat. Prepared for battle, Wakeman fired at the Confederate soldiers at Pleasant Hill. Unfortunately, the Confederates prevailed, prompting the Union to retreat. Wakeman’s final battle occurred at Monett’s Bluff in late April. Shortly after, she found herself extremely ill. When Sarah Wakeman died on June 19, 1864, she died with the secret that she was actually a woman. Thanks to her family members who preserved her letters from the battlefield, however, Wakeman’s memory lives on.

Women in the Confederate Army

Although women in the Confederate army fought to preserve a morally-bankrupt institution, their stories remain important, at least from a historical standpoint. Their experiences illuminate the prominence of misogyny in the Antebellum, Civil War, and Reconstruction eras, and their rejection of gender roles proves worthy of examination.

One woman who disguised herself to fight for the Confederates was Lieutenant Loreta Janeta Velazquez. With Texas’s 1861 secession from the United States, Velazquez felt inspired to join the Confederate army with her husband. However, he refused to aid her in the enlistment process, so she adopted the name Harry T. Buford and joined the army anyway.

Velazquez then embarked on an eventful journey as a disguised soldier, even declaring herself a lieutenant and personally commanding a regiment. However, she ultimately abandoned this post and joined the Confederates in the Battle of Bull Run and the Battle of Ball’s Bluff. Shortly after her brush with combat, Velazquez abandoned the battlefield and served as a spy for the Confederacy. Because of the information she provided to them, they allowed her to join the detective corps.

Unsatisfied with her role as a spy, Velazquez joined a regiment in Tennessee and participated in the Battle of Fort Donelson, where she sustained a foot injury that prompted her to return to New Orleans. In New Orleans, authorities arrested her and accused her of spying for the Union. While Velazquez avoided those charges, she was reprimanded for impersonating a man and eventually released. To rejoin the Confederacy, she traveled back to Tennessee and found the regiment that she originally commanded. Together, they fought in the Battle of Shiloh, where Velazquez experienced an injury that required medical attention. Doctors quickly realized that she was a woman, meaning this injury symbolized the end of her journey as a soldier.

Intent on contributing to the war effort, Velazquez once again served as a spy for the Confederate army, and she later wrote her memoir, The Woman in Battle: A Narrative of the Exploits, Adventures, and Travels of Madame Loreta Janeta Velazquez, Otherwise Known as Lieutenant Harry T. Buford, Confederate States Army. According to historians, the information in this text remains contested, though it certainly contains some historical merit.

Conclusion

These accounts illustrate a new reality of life during the Civil War. Yes, women overarchingly remained in the domestic sphere and occupied a lower position than men, but some individuals refused to conform. Private Sarah Rosetta Wakeman and Lieutenant Loreta Janeta Velazquez are just a couple of women who, despite their gender, greatly influenced the sociopolitical landscape of a country torn apart by war.

What do you think of female soldiers in the American Civil War? Let us know below.

Further Reading

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-women-who-fought-in-the-civil-war-1402680/ 

https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1993/spring/women-in-the-civil-war-1.html 

​​https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/sarah-rosetta-wakeman 

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/loreta-janeta-velazquez 

The Industrial Revolution: Shaping American History

The Industrial Revolution was a time of great change in America, and it had many important and lasting impacts. Here, Andrew Kim considers some of the most important themes: inequality, the power of big companies, and gender issues.

A Ford Model-T assembly line in the early 20th century.

After the Civil War came the Industrial Revolution, which changed the way that America functioned in many ways. Before this time period, the majority of Americans lived more localized lives, producing much of their own food and goods. However, with the rise of industrialization, people began moving away from farms and into cities. Along with the rise of industrialization came the rise of big corporations and businesses, which took advantage of people working these new factory jobs. People were paid little and had very poor working conditions. Because pay was so low, many women and children also worked in these factories. This led to the emergence of reform movements to improve the quality of American life. By 1920, these movements achieved better working conditions for the working class, supervision of business typhoons, and monumental strides in women’s rights.

Inequality

With the rise of industrialization came the growing gap between the rich and poor. While the rich indulged in elaborate and excessive riches, the working class suffered some of the worst living and working conditions. The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair, detailed these awful working and living conditions through the experiences of a man named Jurgis, who worked in a meat packing factory. Almost everyone in Jurgis’s family was forced to work, often from early morning to late at night in hazardous conditions without any breaks. Clara Lemlich, also an author and women’s rights activist, brought attention to this issue in an article she wrote about the conditions of a shirtwaist factory, stating that the young girls that worked there would work a total of 13 hours with only a half an hour break. Under these working conditions, it is no surprise that many people died in factories. And not only were these working conditions terrible, but after work, many people would come home to poor living conditions as well, furthering mortality rates. Jacob Rilis, a Danish-American journalist and social activist, documented these poor living conditions in a photograph he took of two newsboys sleeping fully clothed on the ground of the pressroom where they worked. In the end, these people and countless other reformers and activists would bring enough attention to the issue to bring about reform laws for workers, including minimum wage, industrial accident insurance, child labor restrictions, and improved factory regulation.

Industrialization also made big companies extremely influential and powerful, and they were often able to avoid regulation by the government, often by making deals with corrupt government officials. Andrew Carnegie, a mogul of the steel industry, negotiated a deal with the railroad companies in order to lessen transportation costs, which angered farmers. Many people saw how corporations could influence the government and were motivated to do something about it. People began advocating that railroads and banks be operated by the government instead of private corporations, because they were services of the people, and not big businesses. Reformers used many different methods to limit the power that corporations had over the government including referendums, primary elections, and recalls. Eventually in 1913, the 17th amendment was passed, stating that each state would have 2 senate votes, and each senator could hold office for six years. Because of the efforts of the reformers and activists, people were able to regain their voice in government and prevent corporations from taking over.

Gender

In the late 1800s, there was a big inequality gap between men and women; women lacked the human rights that men had, and were treated as lower than men. Women were not allowed a voice in almost every aspect of life, from government, to home life, to religion, to education. Elizabeth Stanton, a women’s rights reformer, advocated for women's rights by detailing the limitations women faced in the Declaration of Sentiments in 1846, which was largely ridiculed after its release. However, by the 1900s, the purposes and plans of the National Women’s Association were represented by 26 states, and in places like Alabama, more and more women sought an education, as written in the Southern Workman, monthly journal published by the Hampton Institute Press. In the 1920s, women celebrated a huge victory with the signing of the 19th Amendment, which legalized women’s suffrage.

The Industrial Revolution was a time of great change in America. With the tremendous growth of large corporations and subsequent government corruption came the necessity for regulation and reform for the protection of the rights of the American people, which perhaps brought to light the question of women’s rights. These movements certainly shaped the trajectory of American society for years to come, and also made way for future revolutions and reform, including the Civil Rights Movement.

What do you think of the American Industrial Revolution? Let us know below.

Quack Doctors Throughout History

Throughout history, the idea of using fake cures to prevent and treat disease has thrived on the fears, vulnerabilities and a lack of scientific knowledge of the public.  A quack doctor was historically a figure intending on deceiving their customers and patients, for profit, with no skill, knowledge or equipment of the medical world, but claimed their wares could cure and treat illnesses. The reasons why these fake and unreliable treatments thrived are not as clear-cut as it appears. For example, some individuals today may seek out these quacks after desperation from not gaining support from medical professionals, their religious beliefs or superstitions and curiosity for less clinical treatments for their conditions.

Amy Chandler explains.

The Quack Doctor, a 17th century painting by Jan Victors.

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is no exception to the rise of quack cures, treatments and ways to prevent catching the virus. Despite our society's advancement in medicine, science and technology, the same human fear and vulnerabilities prevail, such as a desire to take control of the situation. Many quack theories emerged during the pandemic suggesting drinking hot water and lemon or smoking as effective prevention. This article explores the rise of quack doctors throughout British history, with a particular focus on eighteenth-century medicine, and its impact on public health.

The rise of fake doctors and medicines

During the eighteenth century, the prospects of surviving over the age of forty for many poor and working class individuals were low. Treatments and surgery were dangerous and painful, especially with no antiseptics and anaesthetics. The rise of the industrial revolution in Great Britain, 1750 to 1850, caused a large number of people to travel to major cities like London to find better employment and improve social status. However, the reality was depressing, poverty-stricken and disease-ridden. Diseases including cholera, typhus and smallpox made death a regular occurrence. Many women did not survive childbirth due to infection and unsanitary hospitals, and if the child did survive birth, it was estimated that one in five infants died before their second birthday.(1) The streets in London were filled with rubbish, rotting food, rats and fleas, contaminated drinking water and poor living conditions that contributed to high mortality rates. Medical knowledge during this time focused on Hippocrates’ theory of the Four Humours and was later expanded by Galen. This theory suggested that the human body had four elements connected to the seasons. The elements were blood, yellow bile, black bile and phlegm. A healthy lifestyle and body meant these elements were in balance, and unbalanced humours caused illness because the body had too much of one humour. Treatments for unbalanced humours included bloodletting. Furthermore, the access to medical treatments provided by doctors was expensive for the working classes, meaning many poorer individuals resorted to consulting barber-surgeons for treatments, such as pulling teeth, amputation and blood-letting through leeches. Due to these dangerous and unsuccessful treatments, many poorer members of society would seek other forms of treatment. The rise of self-treatment and traditional remedies from apothecaries created an opportunity for quack doctors to provide miracle, cure-all medicines.

The reaction throughout Europe towards quack doctors, 'quackery' as many referred to the practice, was mixed and resentful amongst professional medical doctors, who valued science rather than superstition. Many members of the general public were quick to be drawn into the allure of quack cures and lacked the knowledge to condemn them as fake. The Buckingham Express, 1892, reported riots in Russia by peasants who attacked Russian doctors who were medically trained and favoured the quack doctors instead. This report suggested the reaction of the peasants to show “clear widespread superstition in the country” that felt more comfortable with spiritualism rather than science.  An example of a popular cure for fever was called “frogs and fright” and it was said that it was unknown if this method killed more than cure, but “it has its advantages, as it must do one or the other”.(2) This is an example of medicines and treatments not having scientific evidence but still having an impact by coincidence or a psychosomatic effect.

Furthermore, an account by Mr G A Brine, reported in the Charity Organisation Reporter, 1875, described his employment as an assistant to a quack doctor. Brine met the unnamed ‘doctor’ when sharing the same accommodation and asked if he was willing to "easily earn a couple of shillings".(3) Brine, being a “pauper in Sherborne workhouse”, accepted this offer gratefully, without much thought of what the work entailed. The next day Brine and the elusive ‘doctor’ visited the marketplace in the afternoon while the doctor was selling “virtues of his infallible medicines”, Brine played an important role in this performance to help sell the medicines. Brine was given money by the vendor to pretend to purchase “half-a-dozen boxes of the pills” and announced that he and others had “derived immense benefits from their use” and claimed he could never be without this medicine.

This account of what it was like to work with a fake doctor highlights that it's not just the customers who are fooled into buying fake medicine, but those who were involved in the practice.  Accomplices are motivated by money and the disadvantages of their socioeconomic living and working conditions. Brine is an example of an individual who worked in a workhouse, was poor and had no means of gaining money or moving beyond his social status. The allure of this mystery quack doctor offered Brine a way to earn decent money and survive at the expense of the customers. While Brine takes no responsibility for his involvement in fooling the general public, he described his involvement as a “tool at the hands of others”.(4) This idea emphasises how the key to success for many ‘doctors’ was the way they manipulated the public and played on their fears, vulnerabilities, socioeconomic situation and lack of knowledge, as a performance that drew others into the lie.

Brine was employed in the business and earned a substantial wage from his role in selling at the marketplace and collecting the ingredients for the pills and medicines. These pills were ready-made and coated with finely ground sugar and flour, dried and placed in ready-made pillboxes. This concoction was marketed as ‘American Sugar Coated pills’ containing vegetables and did not contain mercury or other poisonous substances that medically trained doctors prescribed. In some ways, the fake medicine was less dangerous than some professionally prescribed pills, as it did not contain substances like mercury. The quack doctor was skilled enough to fool various villages across England but was a “greater fool” than Brine, as he “could not read a paragraph in a newspaper, and could scarcely write his own name”.(5) This observation by Brine praises how despite having no formal education, there was skill in seeing an opportunity to benefit them.

Successful quack doctors

Many quack doctors throughout history have been called out for their fake cures and lack of medical qualifications, while a few have successfully managed to fool royalty with their miracle cures. The performance of a quack gained advantageous alliances, such as the press, with many selling their concoctions on press property and sharing the profits.(6)

Other quack doctors used the press to advertise their miracle drugs, such as Chevalier Ruspini in 1826. Historians have discovered that Ruspini was trained as a surgeon but decided to branch off into dentistry in 1758, but dentistry was not seen as a respectable career. Ruspini created an image as a surgeon dentist specialising in treatments for illnesses relating to teeth and gums. Ruspini printed an advertisement in the Public Ledger and Daily Advertiser on 31 May 1826, which “begs to inform the Nobility, Gentry and the public that he [Ruspini] has appointed Mr Charles Butler […] agent for the sale of his medicines”.(7)  This treatment was called “Dentifrice and Tincture for beautifying and preserving the teeth and gums, and fastening those teeth that are loose”.(8) The advertisement also continues by suggesting the authenticity of the product is only guaranteed by Ruspini’s name engraved onto the government stamp attached to each bottle. It is ironic that Ruspini was concerned about fake and counterfeit versions of his medicines, but implied that customers should be wary of buying fake goods. While Ruspini is regarded as completing medical qualifications, he blurs the truth with embellishments to disguise his dentistry with surgery.

In comparison, Doctor Joshua Ward, in 1733, built a reputation as a noble and miracle curer of all ailments and had a brief career in politics as an MP. Early in Ward’s career, he moved to work in Paris and developed his popular and successful Ward’s Pills and Ward’s Drops, which caused harmful side effects, such as violent sweating.(9) By 1733 he returned to England and created the successful and popular ‘Friar’s Balsams’. Due to Ward’s success, he became a recommended figure among high-ranking officials such as Lord Chief Justice Reynolds and General John Churchill. Ward’s credibility became secured when King George II sprained his thumb and called upon Ward for the “purpose of setting his majesty’s sprained thumb”.(10) It is uncertain whether Ward’s medicines were effective, but while he was attending to King George II, the King recovered, and this secured Ward’s reputation as a doctor and acquired wealthy patients. There are reports that Ward was awarded the thanks by the House of Commons and was given permission to drive his carriage through St James’s park. Endorsement from the King protected Ward from public criticism from the college of physicians.(11)

The Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A) in London displays a statue of Ward in their collection. This statue housed in the V&A was for Ward’s grave located at Westminster Abbey, and after his death in 1761, he was given an ostentatious funeral.(12) Ward’s legacy as a successful doctor overshadows the truth behind his fake cures with generally lethal side effects, but he is also noted for his philanthropic nature, such as building hospitals for the poor and generous financial donations.(13)

Parliamentary reaction

Parliament in Great Britain during the eighteenth century attempted to regulate and prevent toxic medicines from being sold to the general public by quack doctors and medically untrained merchants. As the selling and advertising of toxic, fake medicines became more frequent, Lord John Cavendish, Chancellor of the Exchequer, decided to pass the 1783 Medicine Stamp Duty tax to regulate the medicine trade by unqualified entrepreneurs and raise money.(14) This tax required all medicine sellers to purchase an annual licence, and a stamp to be attached to the packaging to show the duty had been paid. Specific groups were exempt from paying duty and licences, for example, respected professions, such as surgeons, military medical professionals and physicians. However, this tax targeted the individual that sold the medicine rather than the harmfulness of the product. This tax also did not produce as much revenue as predicted. In 1875, the tax was redefined and required every medicinal seller to pay tax on medicine, regardless of status and qualifications, and specific ingredients were taxed more than others.(15) This Act was a start toward regulating the work of quack doctors, but it would take many more centuries until the stricter regulation of medicine.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the rise of quack medicine claimed to cure all, prevent and treat disease, reached a peak in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Parliamentary action to regulate and manage the growing number of opportunists and entrepreneurs, who fooled the general public with their performance and allure of the exotic. The success of many quack doctors was the mystery, price and feeding on fears, vulnerabilities and lack of medical and scientific knowledge of the customer and patient. Furthermore, the accessibility of these fake medicines claiming to cure, prevent and treat all diseases was easy to access through marketplaces and shops instead of the path of a physician’s advice and prescription. The cost of a physician was not always accessible to the working and poorer classes, but the opportunity for self-treatment with miracle cures held a lot of appeal. In society today, the regulation of medicine and who can prescribe these are much stricter and ensures the health and safety of the patient. However, there are always opportunities for fake and ineffective products to surface and requires the consumer to be aware of what they buy.

What do you think of quack doctors? Let us know below.

Now read Amy’s article on the Great Stench in 19th century London here.

References

1 M. White, ‘Health, Hygiene and the rise of ‘Mother Gin’ in the 18th Century’, 2009, British Library < https://www.bl.uk/georgian-britain/articles/health-hygiene-and-the-rise-of-mother-gin-in-the-18th-century >[accessed 1 October 2022].

2 Buckingham Express, ‘Quack Cures’, Buckingham Express (20 August 1892).

3 G. A. Brine, ‘ Confessions Of A Quack Doctor’, The British Medical Journal, vol. 2 (1875),pp.111-112.

4 Ibid.,p. 112.

5 Ibid.,p. 112.

6 A. Teal, ‘The art of medicine - Quacks and hacks: Georgian medicine and the power of advertising’, The Lancet, vol. 383 (2014),p.404.

7 ‘Chevalier Ruspini’s Medicines’, 31 May 1826, Public Ledger and Daily Advertiser.

8 Ibid.

9 Science Museum Group, ‘Joshua Ward 1684 – 1761’, 2022, Science Museum Group < https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/people/cp119760/joshua-ward >[accessed on 23 September 2022].

10 W. Sydney, England and the English in the eighteenth century (London, Ward & Downey, 1891), p,309.

11 Ibid.

12 Westminster Abbey, ‘Joshua Ward’, Westminster Abbey, 2022 <  https://www.westminster-abbey.org/abbey-commemorations/commemorations/joshua-ward >[accessed on 23 September 2022].

13 Science Museum Group., op.cit.

14 C. Stebbings, ‘Chapter 8: Tax and Quacks: The policy of the Eighteenth Century Medicine Stamp Duty’ in: Tiley J, ed., Studies in the History of Tax Law, vol. 6 (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2013) < https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK293691/ >.

15 Ibid.

Bibliography

‘Chevalier Ruspini’s Medicines’, 31 May 1826, Public Ledger and Daily Advertiser.

Brine, G. A. ‘ Confessions Of A Quack Doctor’, The British Medical Journal, vol. 2,no.760, July., 1875, pp. 111-112.

Buckingham Express, ‘Quack Cures’, Buckingham Express (20 August 1892).

Science Museum Group, ‘Joshua Ward 1684 – 1761’, 2022, Science Museum Group < https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/people/cp119760/joshua-ward >.

Stebbings, C. ‘Chapter 8: Tax and Quacks: The policy of the Eighteenth Century Medicine Stamp Duty’ in: Tiley J, ed., Studies in the History of Tax Law, vol. 6 (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2013) < https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK293691/ >.

Sydney, W. England and the English in the eighteenth century (London, Ward & Downey, 1891).

Teal, A, ‘The art of medicine - Quacks and hacks: Georgian medicine and the power of advertising’, The Lancet, vol. 383, Feb., 2014,pp. 404-405.

Westminster Abbey, ‘Joshua Ward’, Westminster Abbey, 2022 <  https://www.westminster-abbey.org/abbey-commemorations/commemorations/joshua-ward >.

White, M. ‘Health, Hygiene and the rise of ‘Mother Gin’ in the 18th Century’, 2009, British Library < https://www.bl.uk/georgian-britain/articles/health-hygiene-and-the-rise-of-mother-gin-in-the-18th-century >.

Haunted Histories in 5 American Towns

History is everywhere - even in ghost stories. Every town has their local tales of ghostly happenings. They are passed on from person to person through generations. Many cities have ghost tours that squire people around to buildings, homes and parks in their area. These tours tell of paranormal activity and strange experiences. Everyone loves to be scared a little. But behind all ghost stories is history. The history of real people, real places and real events.

Ghost tours are a great way to learn local history that may not be in history books or even on the internet. Whether you believe in ghost stories or not, there is so much history to be gleaned from them. This history can allow us to see our cities with new eyes. Here are five American towns and some of their haunted history.

Angie Grandstaff explains.

Ichabod pursued by the Headless Horseman, a depiction from the 1820 book The Legend of Sleepy Hollow by Irving Washington.

The Oldest City - St. Augustine, Florida

Facts about St. Augustine:

• It was the first permanent European settlement in America. Established in 1565

• It was burnt to the ground by Sir Francis Drake in 1586 but was rebuilt

• The Castillo de San Marcos was a fort constructed in 1672 to help defend against attacks

• It is the home of the oldest wooden schoolhouse in America

The oldest city has many local ghost stories. Its black and white striped lighthouse is supposedly haunted by several specters. The St. Augustine lighthouse opened in 1874. Many caretakers lived and worked here. This historic lighthouse has many spooky stories associated with it including a man seen walking up and down the spiral staircase. He is dressed in a blue jacket and mariner’s cap. Visitors say they smell cigar smoke although it is a smoke free building. Some people think it is either lighthouse caretakers, William Russel or Joseph Andreu. Joseph Andreu fell to his death while painting the lighthouse in 1859. A woman has been seen by visitors on the catwalk looking down. Locals say it is the ghostly specter of Andreu’s wife looking at where her husband’s body must have lain after his deathly fall. His wife, Maria Mestre de Los Dolores, took Joseph’s job after he died. She was the first woman to serve in the Coast Guard and the first Hispanic American woman to command a federal shore installation. This was a huge achievement at the time.

The Casablanca Inn, formerly The Matanzas Hotel, is a historic hotel with a waterfront view and ghostly residents. Many locals and visitors have reported seeing a female apparition waving a lantern or just a waving light at night in a window or on the roof. The story behind this starts in the early 1900’s. The Casablanca Inn was a popular hangout spot for smugglers. A Ms. Bradshaw owned the hotel and was struggling to stay afloat during Prohibition. So, she took advantage of her smuggler connections and her prime location near the ocean to make some money. Ms. Bradshaw worked with bootleggers by giving them a place to store their illegal alcohol and being their local lookout. She would wave a lantern at a window on the second floor at night to signal bootleggers. This would let them know the coast was all clear for them to come ashore with their illegal spirits. This Inn saw several dangerous characters and shady happenings. A woman, possibly Ms. Bradshaw herself, and a child have been seen floating around the Inn. There are other stories of disembodied voices and misty fogs from customers and staff.      

Historic Harbor Town - Charleston, South Carolina

Facts about Charleston:

• It was named Charles Town after King Charles II

• It is estimated that 40% of enslaved Africans arrived in North America through Charleston’s harbor

• It was devastated by an earthquake in 1886

• It is nicknamed the Holy City for its tolerance of all religions

Charleston has spooky happenings all over the city particularly in its oldest building, The Old Exchange. There are many accounts of hearing screams and moans of pain coming from the bottom floor of this building. Chains still on the walls of the bottom floor have been seen to swing on their own. The sound of clinking chains has been heard by visitors and workers. Ghostly apparitions in Revolutionary War clothes have been seen roaming the building. There must be some interesting history behind these stories. The Old Exchange was built in 1771. It served as a public marketplace and custom house. Slave auctions were held here as well. So, what happened on the bottom floor of this building? Turns out it was used by the British during the American Revolution as a prison and was known as the Provost Dungeon. Prisoners were chained to the walls and left to die. Conditions were horrendous and prisoners were treated cruelly. Many prisoners waited for their execution in this dungeon including pirates and Revolutionary War traitors. The infamous Stede Bonnet, a gentleman pirate, was captured and held with his crew in this prison until their executions. 

Charleston had another prison called the Old City Jail. This jail was built in 1802 and was used until 1939. Among its prisoners were pirates, Civil War prisoners and a woman considered the first female serial killer in America, Lavinia Fisher. Fisher and her husband John owned a local inn. They drugged and murdered travelers who stayed with them. Husband and wife were eventually convicted and spent their final days in the Old City Jail. Lavinia went to the hangman’s noose reportedly saying, “If you have a message for the devil, give it to me and I’ll carry it”. Many inmates died in this jail from mistreatment, disease and starvation. Not surprisingly, there have been stories from visitors and locals about strange happenings. Stories about objects moving, whispering voices and slamming doors are just the beginning for this jail. When the building was closed for renovation in 2000, workers encountered a ghostly jailer who ran at them before disappearing and footsteps in the dust of a sealed off area.

The Legendary Sleepy Hollow

Facts about Sleepy Hollow:

• It has a long history dating back to the 1600s

• There have been witches, mad monks, Revolutionary War traitors and pirates connected to this little village

• The great American ghost story, The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, written by Sleepy Hollow resident, Washington Irving

• The Sleepy Hollow Cemetery is the final resting place for many historical figures such as Andrew Carnegie, Washington Irving, Elizabeth Arden, Rockefeller family members and the Queen of Mean Leona Helmsley

This sleepy Dutch village is the home of the Headless Horseman and a spooky cemetery. One of the cemetery’s spookiest residents is the Bronzed Lady. Locals have many tales involving the bronze statue of a woman who sits outside the mausoleum of Samuel Thomas. Many believe the Bronzed Lady can curse you if you touch her. She has been heard weeping by many. Some residents have stories of touching her face and feeling wet tears. The history behind these ghostly encounters starts with millionaire and Civil War General, Samuel Thomas. Thomas died in 1903 and was laid to rest in a mausoleum in Sleepy Hollow Cemetery. His widow, Ann, wanted something to place outside the mausoleum to further commemorate her husband’s life so she commissioned sculptor, Andrew O’Connor Jr., to create a bronze sculpture. The sculptor created a huge bronze statue of a woman sitting. Ann felt the woman’s face was too sad and downcast. She asked for something happier. O’Connor created a new head which pleased Ann but the temperamental artist smashed it to pieces and used the original more downcast head. The sculpture was still placed outside her husband’s mausoleum.  

Another historic haunt is Sunnyside, the home of Washington Irving. It is visited by thousands of tourists every year. Irving moved into this home in 1835. He was America’s first celebrity author, and his home was in magazines and guidebooks while he lived there. His four nieces lived with him and ran the household. This home saw many notable visitors and lively meetings with Irving and his literary friends. Irving died at Sunnyside in his bedroom in 1859. Visitors and workers have claimed to witness paranormal activity in the house and on the grounds. There have been photographs taken with ghostly images appearing in them. Visitors have said they felt pinched while touring the house and ghostly apparitions of young women have been seen tidying the home. Could these young women be Washington’s nieces?

Georgia’s Oldest City - Savannah, Georgia

Facts about Savannah:

• Savannah became the first planned city. It was laid out in a grid pattern with wide streets and public squares

• Savannah has been devastated by several fires and yellow fever epidemics

• The Girl Scouts were founded by Savannah resident, Juliette Gordon Low

• The famous bus stop scene from the movie Forrest Gump was filmed in Savannah

One of Savannah’s oldest buildings is The Pirate House. It is now a busy restaurant but it started as an inn and tavern built around 1753. The inn was frequented by pirates. There are tales of underground tunnels that led to the Savannah River. Pirates supposedly kidnapped drunk men and forced them into service as crew members on their ships. This inn was so famous for its pirate clientele that author Robert Louis Stevenson used it as a setting in his book, Treasure Island. There are many accounts of ghostly apparitions moving through the building. Visitors post pictures online of these ghosts looking out through the windows. Employees have seen the ghost of a menacing sailor and hear footsteps when they are alone in the building.

Savannah has a couple famous cemeteries including the Colonial Park Cemetery. It is the oldest in the city established in 1750. It is called the most haunted place in the city. Reports of mysterious sounds, shadowy figures, green mists and a man hanging from a tree have been given by locals and visitors. What is the history that could lead to these eerie tales? This cemetery has many mass graves from those times when yellow fever hit the city. Savannah dealt with many yellow fever epidemics because of the swampy areas that were breeding grounds for the mosquitos who transmitted it. Another spooky aspect of this cemetery is the fact that voodoo cemeteries were held there at night. Human bones would sometimes be used in these ceremonies which makes a cemetery ideal as a setting. The hanging man apparition may be Rene Rondolier who supposedly lived in Savannah during the early 1800's. Rondolier was accused of murdering a young girl and was lynched by locals in the Colonial Park Cemetery in 1821.    

Queen City - Cincinnati, Ohio

Facts about Cincinnati:

• It was known as the “Queen City of the West” because it served as a stopping point for many settlers heading West

• It was also known as “Porkopolis” because it was a major pork processing center in the early 1800s

• In 1880, there were 1800 saloons in the city

• It has three miles of an abandoned subway beneath its streets

Cincinnati has many haunted places including the beautiful Eden Park. This park started as a vineyard but was bought by the city in 1869. The lands held a reservoir for the city at one point and a famous gazebo was built there in 1904. There are several stories from locals about seeing a ghostly female dressed all in black around the gazebo and nearby Mirror Lake at dawn or dusk. Photographs showing a shadowy figure have been shared. What could be behind the woman in black? Many think the woman in black is Imogene Remus. Imogene was the wife of George Remus, the King of Bootleggers. George was a former lawyer who created a very successful bootlegging operation in Cincinnati until he was arrested for tax evasion in 1925. While George was in prison, Imogene filed for divorce. After his release the couple headed to court on October 6, 1927. George had his cab follow Imogene’s car and drove her off the road in front of the gazebo in Eden Park. Imogene and her daughter were in the car. George fatally shot Imogene. George represented himself in court and successfully used the plea of temporary insanity.     

The Cincinnati Music Hall was built in 1878. This Victorian Gothic style building is the musical center for the city and is known to be one of the most haunted buildings in America. Security guards, conductors and other employees have given many accounts of paranormal activity. Soldiers have been seen walking around as well as children in period dress. Music is heard playing in the middle of the night along with doors opening and closing, knocking throughout the building. What happened here that would lead to all these stories? It turns out the land that the Music Hall is built on was once the grounds for a Lunatic and Orphan Asylum as well as a ‘plague house’ with a pauper’s cemetery attached. A plague or pest house was where those afflicted with communicable diseases were treated. The plague house was moved and a military hospital was established during the Civil War. Whenever this land has been excavated or building renovated hundreds of pounds of human bones have been unearthed. The most recent renovation in 2017 led to the discovery of more human remains.      

What do you think of these haunted histories? Let us know below.

Now read Angie’s article on 5 of the oldest breweries in the USA here.

Angie Grandstaff is a writer and librarian. She loves to write about history, books and self-development. 

Resources

St. Augustine

https://www.legendsofamerica.com/fl-staugustine/

https://ghostcitytours.com/st-augustine/haunted-places/st-augustine-lighthouse/

https://ghostcitytours.com/st-augustine/haunted-places/casablanca-inn/

Charleston

https://www.legendsofamerica.com/sc-charleston/

https://www.oldexchange.org/highlights

https://www.scpictureproject.org/charleston-county/old-city-jail.html

Sleepy Hollow

https://www.sleepyhollowny.gov/discover-sleepy-hollow-ny/pages/history-of-the-village

https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/nation/2021/10/25/sleepy-hollow-ghosts-bronze-lady-new-york/6175251001/

https://www.haunted-places-to-go.com/sleepy-hollow.html

https://visitingamuseum.com/2019/11/09/washington-irvings-sunnyside-3-west-sunnyside-lane-irvington-ny-10533/

Savannah 

https://www.visitsavannah.com/article/history-savannah

https://www.southernbellevacationrentals.com/blog/attractions/pirate-secrets-savannah-coast#:~:text=The%20U.S.%20Navy%20acquired%20the,an%20inn%20for%20visiting%20sailors.

https://www.travelchannel.com/destinations/us/ga/savannah/articles/haunted-savannah

https://ghostcitytours.com/savannah/haunted-places/colonial-park-cemetery/

Cincinnati

http://ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Cincinnati,_Ohio

https://cincinnatipreservation.org/haunted-spring-house-gazebo-in-eden-park/

https://www.onlyinyourstate.com/ohio/hauntingly-beautiful-music-hall-oh/