Final thoughts...

The History Engine provided insight into the fact that history is a largely interpretive process. Looking through primary and secondary sources and then framing an analysis around them gives historians a degree of authority I had not before realized. What is also difficult about this process is inevitable influence of the interpretations of others; reading their analysis can profoundly influence your own understanding of various texts.

It was interesting to examine snapshot events that go largely undiscussed in the broad sense of history. Textbooks still have their value by providing a framework into which we can assimilate our interpretations, but looking at specific instances in history which appear to have only a small realm of influence can further our understanding of an event by examining its local impact as opposed to only its national significance. The opportunities provided by the History Engine gave me a nuanced understanding of historical importance.

Backfill for 10/25

The comparison of Natchez, Mississippi and New Albany, Indiana elucidates the sectional and geographical differences in the young United States. The distribution of population emphasizes different approaches to a primarily agricultural economy; though both towns relied on farming, there is a great contrast in the dispersal of people over the land. Similarly, the absence of a railroad route through either town had a profound impact on the degree of industrialization. This further highlights the fact that the railroad drastically altered the economies of the geographic regions it touched. Railroads caused a shift in focus in the towns through which it ran, and the absence of this industrialization in Natchez and New ALbany sheds light on the fact that agrarianism was perpetuated in the absence of this mode of transportation.

backfill

T believe it is interesting at the end of the term look back on readings from the middle or beginning of the term. This allows us to understand the growing process of learning throughout the term. in the instance of week 4 when we studied the Sumner caning. The focus during this session was that the South was on the brink of secession and the Civil War was right around the corner. Now after the term is over we know that there was a long period of time of about 4 or 5 years that passed before any shots were fired. These larger than life events tend to overshadow the less glamorous events in history. They also tend to be bunched up even skipping years with little or no "significance."

backfill

with the assigned reading on the statue of liberty combined with my opt-ed research on the statue i was able to learn the intended meaning o the statue. The statue was meant to symbolize Franco-American friendships that were created during the Revolutionary War. I find it interesting and slightly ironic that the meaning of the Statue has grown to become an international symbol of American freedom and democracy. The Statue also grew to be a sign of hope and identification of America for immigrants entering our country. The true agenda by France in the generous gift to America was in essence a cheap way for the newly established 3rd republic in France to strengthen diplomatic ties.

Edited by author 12-12-2007 06:09 AM
Final thoughts

my final thoughts on the course was that it could be exhausting at times. But the experiences that i gained with the new study techniques helped me to think in ways i i hadn't thought of before. The history engine project has made me think differently about my major which i didn't think was possible at this point in my education. I am very pleased with the history engine project and i think it should be incorporated in future years. As much fun as the southern history database was i think it might be too much of a load to have two major projects and a regular curriculum along with it. But i have a heavy schedule so it just might be me complaining for no reason. Overall one of the top 3 classes i have taken at Furman.

Final thoughts- just a few comments on the limitations of the History Engine as it was employed in the case of our final exam essay question.

One of our exam essay questions involved using a series of History Engine episodes from select dates as a core body of evidence for assessing the entire history of America in the 19th century. While reading the dozens of episodes for the selected months and years, I was struck by how almost every episode seemed to relate to either slavery, the threat of secession, or the Civil War. I think I would be underestimating if I said that 50% of the episodes could easily be categorized in one of those three topics. This seems astonishing: we were given almost unlimited freedom in the types of primary sources that could be used, but still, the episodes ended up being almost entirely about just a few select topics.

This raises the issue of a self-selection bias in the project: did students write their episodes about slavery, secession, and the Civil War because those are generally the only things that happened in the 19th century, or did students write their episodes about those topics because they had been taught that those were what happened in the 19th century? Suppose a student searches through the Furman archives for an "interesting" primary source to write an episode on. Which will seem more "interesting" and "relevant" to the student, an episode about topics he has been taught are important (slavery, secession, Civil War), or an episode about something unrelated and obscure?

An experiment could probably be done to try and avoid this bias: take a group of students and assign a huge body of primary resources from an obscure time period limited to a small geographic region. Providing virtually no historical context or secondary instruction, have them write episodes based on the primary sources, giving complete freedom in the area of episode selection. Ultimately, you could compare what types of episodes were written by students with what historians have traditionally done for that particular time period and geographic area. Though probably impossible to implement in an actual course, the results could be interesting.

Backfill post- Dun and Bradstreet company history as an episode

Having written so many episodes, it's now a bit easier to analyze this...

The writing style of the company history fits well with the way an episode might be written. It is very concise, direct, and informative-- it gives the who's and the what's and the why's of company growth and innovation. However, while the writing style works as an episode, the subject matter does not. Rather than focus on one "episode", the company history describes a series of events in chronological order. In effect, it is a "history" composed of a series of episodes (the company merger, the company's creation, rivalry between the Bradstreet Company and the Mercantile Agency) that might be found in something like the Summers book. Also lacking is an event described from the perspective of a primary source.

Of course, if the Dun and Bradstreet company history were submitted to the History Engine, questions would also be raised about the account's objectivity. The history is a series of endless praise for the founders and operators of the company, the company itself, and its business practices. Particularly interesting is the company's spinning of recent history: "D&B has undergone a period of restructuring in recent years, designed to make D&B a smaller, more tightly focused company. A.C. Nielsen, Cognizant, Reuben H. Donnelley and Moody's Corporation were all spun off to allow each company to pursue focused strategies for its specific business." This sounds more like a corporate spin-doctor's way of saying "we overexpanded, hit some hard times, and had to cut back on employees and operations", than an accurate description of what has happened to the company.

I think it's safe to say that corporate histories should be kept out of the History Engine.

Edited by author 12-11-2007 06:18 PM
Backfill post- Lincoln's Second Inaugural, Gettysburg Address, Chickamauga monument.

It was surprising to see from these documents how willingly Lincoln, and the rest of the Union along with him, adopted slavery as the reason for fighting the Civil War. You always hear people who say "the war wasn't about slavery, it was about states' rights" or "the war wasn't about slavery, it was about saving the Union." Even Lincoln is often quoted as saying something to the effect of "if I could save the Union by saving no slaves, I would do it." However, these documents (or in the case of the Chickamauga monument, the plaque) are removed from the earlier part of the war and openly embrace freeing the slaves as a major reason to justify the fighting.

Lincoln's Second Inaugural clearly states: "All knew that this interest [slavery] was somehow the cause of the war."

The Gettysburg Address opens with the notion that "all men are created equal" and closes by talking about "a new birth of freedom."

The Chickamauga monument calls the Civil War "the conflict which made all men free."

I had always read that freeing the slaves was not a popular war goal in the early days of the war, and that some Union soldiers even deserted when Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation because freeing the slaves was not what they were fighting for. However, it seems as if by the end of the war, fighting to free the slaves had become an even more powerful justification for fighting than "saving the Union." While it is obvious that Lincoln himself agreed with this, I wonder how much of the rest of the public went along with Lincoln, and how long it took them to do so. Clearly, by the time the Chickamauga monument was constructed, public opinion rested with Lincoln's interpretation.

Backfill-My final thoughts on this course

This was my last for my history major, other than my seminar. Thus I find it quite fitting that it was the most challenging. Coming into this class I didn't know what to expect,so when I began to be bombarded with SHDB, History Engine, and other topics, I became very overwhelmed. But I believe that this sense of uneasiness helped me to over become and better student and understand the concepts that the course was desinged to teach. This course was very different becasue the facts seemed to be a secondary concern, while patterns, ideas, and theories took a front seat. This was new to me becasue I was used to learning being taught the events and the narrataive that connected them, this class separated this fixed structure allowing the students to questions links, causation, and the overall narrative of "history." While this was challening to overcome at first, this new framework has helped me better understand the implications of history, while reinforcing some popular narratives and debunking others. This class helped me gain new insights and an appreciation for the "episodes" of history that often get overlooked in favor of narrative flair. It seems that a real historian should look at the facts objectively and then try to find these connections, not have preconcieved notions about how they fit together. The episodic nature of this course has helped me to think this way.

Backfill (10/25)

I think it is interesting that we are studying Natchez and New Albany. While looking at their websites, it appears that the object of both of them is to attract tourism to a historic location. Since the goal is monetary, the objectiveness of these "episodes" could be called into question, since there is an agenda in the writing and posting of the information. But it does appear that these areas are indicative of their "region," i.e. North and South. The Natchez website talks about it location and history, especially the "oppulent life style" of its former citizens. This was key element of many Southern planters, but this life style contrasts the life of hard work and discrimination that characterized the slaves. This life style isn't dwelled on as much. While in New Albany, the site talks about the industrial innovations of the town and how it was a center of technology and commerce, it mentions the famous and wealthy people of the town, but neglects workers that built the city. Both of these sites are interesting, but it is important to view them in the context of trying to bring tourism, thus they down play some of the "bad" or "nasty" sections of their history.

Mark Wahlgren Summers, "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion: The Making of a President, 1884" (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2000), pp. 211-222.

        My backfill post: Since it is exam day, and I’m not sure what I am allowed to write, and not write- I’m going to talk about the section of the Irish American vote…I think this will be allowed, and this section really intrigued me, beginning with the title, “Ireland sold for Gold!” In the first paragraph, Summers quoted Patrick Ford’s magazine that “the Irish vote is fixed and unchangeable.” Most Irish American men voted Democratic, if they even voted, but in 1884, the Republicans were making an effort to swing this “fixed” vote. In general, because of their mixed qualities and identities, this voting sector tended to stay away from the major parties in general.
 We spoke about nationalism in class; nationalistic symbols such as the Statue of Freedom, the Pledge of allegiance, and other symbols that could be seen as national coercion. Ueland, the Norwegian immigrant, wrote about the struggle of assimilation, the pain and humiliation of leaving his country, and his desire to still find a “dual sense of nationalism” in America. In most cases, we talked about how the nationalism for an immigrants homeland was suppressed by the United States as they were gradually assimilated and taught to pledge to “our flag,” not the flag of their native country.
 Interestingly enough though, Blaine and the Republican party capitalized on Ireland’s struggles with famine and crop failure in order to gain the Irish American vote. Instead of suppressing this connection with Irish Americans and their native country, the Republican Party encouraged their connection, hoping to encourage these patriotic sentiments of Irish pride to win over this “unchangeable” vote. While ultimately, this movement did not flourish into anything much because the Republican party simply did not have the means and did not make the sacrifices, but it did become obvious how “awkwardly Republicans first Irish Americans into the ranks.” The Irish Americans could not support reforms or create a unified vote. Instead, Blaine and the Republicans could not win over this vote, even though through an “interesting twist,” they tried to win the vote through Irish pride, not American pride in 1884.

Edited by author 12-10-2007 10:22 PM
BACKFILL for 9/21

Sweet, I missed the first post. Way to RTFM Jordan. Anyway, this is gonna take me way back to Year of Eclipse. I was reading the posts about the book, and whether or not the title fit the book, and I found myself in agreement with Saxton that the watershed moments in the book weren't necessarily huge at the time, but in the long run the events of 1831 played a key role in America's growth as a country. Specifically a couple of things. The invention of the reaper was an enormous advancement in terms of agriculture. Obviously, the railroad was a huge innovation for travel and business, but the full effects weren't seen immediately. 1831 was what i would call a watershed for the future.

Q: In our take home exam, just making sure, we don't have to cite do we????

A: Not necessary, but using explicit names of episodes may lend texture and richness to your accounts. These references may be as terse as you choose.
References and/or footnotes (again, not required) will not count against the word limit.

In our take home exam, just making sure, we don't have to cite do we????

CHAT REVIEW SESSION, PART II.
Lloyd Benson[7:19:24 PM]: Okay -- our next issue is "competing imperatives in the 2d Party System."
Lloyd Benson[7:19:33 PM]: Love the lights!
Lloyd Benson[7:20:35 PM]: Each of the major issues in the 2PS, including banking, tariffs, land sales policy, and distribution of surplus revenues, had different implications for different geographic sections of the country and economic interests within these sections.
Lloyd Benson[7:20:44 PM]: With me so far?
Garrison Ries[7:20:53 PM]: yup
Matthew Barnes[7:20:58 PM]: yessir
Jillian Mangum[7:21:03 PM]: yes
Virginia Cain[7:21:05 PM]: yes
Julia Gatten[7:21:09 PM]: yes
Lloyd Benson[7:21:20 PM]: Many (though by no means all, or maybe even most) Southern political leaders, opposed tariffs, for example.
Lloyd Benson[7:21:26 PM]: But.
Lloyd Benson[7:22:19 PM]: Each of the policy choices impacted the others. High tariffs brought high surplusses into the treasury, surplusses that could then be redistributed to states under various "surplus distribution" proposals.
Lloyd Benson[7:22:57 PM]: High minimum prices for government land sales also brought money into the treasury, which meant either distribution,
Lloyd Benson[7:23:08 PM]: or, that you could LOWER tariff duties.
Julia Gatten[7:23:18 PM]: okay - this makes a lot of sense
Matthew Barnes[7:23:21 PM]: i get it now
Virginia Cain[7:23:31 PM]: :)
Jillian Mangum[7:23:31 PM]: especially regarding that summer book
Matthew Barnes[7:23:44 PM]: huh?
Matthew Barnes[7:23:56 PM]: oh yeah
Lloyd Benson[7:23:58 PM]: Lower tariffs and the South was happy but the Northeast was mad. Or you could keep land sales and tariffs high, and adopt distribution, which the poorer states, esp. in the midwest and midSouth, liked.
Jillian Mangum[7:24:03 PM]: referring to julia's comment
Lloyd Benson[7:24:54 PM]: So any policy choice was a mixed blessing, helping some and hurting others, and in all kinds of unintended ways.
Virginia Cain has left the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:25:25 PM]: This is why the Land Act of 1830 became a debate between Webster and Haine over nullification and tariffs.
Julia Gatten[7:25:46 PM]: So the NE did not like lower tariffs because they wanted the South to buy from them?
Lloyd Benson[7:26:00 PM]: And why all the Whigs abandoned Whig president but strict constructionist and anti-tariff/banks guy John Tyler.
Virginia Cain has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:27:13 PM]: [Simplified version of NE tariff policy follows:] NE wanted high tariffs to shelter its industries from English competition while they were still in their infant stages of industrial development.
Julia Gatten[7:27:36 PM]: okay.
Lloyd Benson[7:27:49 PM]: Kinda like all Southern senators regardless of party used to like high textile tariffs, to protect S.C. and NC. and GA mills.
Trey Massar[7:28:22 PM]: so its all about the money then? Even over 100yrs ago?
Matthew Barnes[7:28:59 PM]: but i thought you just said that southerners wanted low tariffs
Lloyd Benson[7:29:29 PM]: For someone like a Calhoun all of this represents something of a dilemma. Cut tariffs and you cut distribution and raise land prices, antagonizing the farmers of the Old Northwest and the Southwestern frontier of Mississippi, Ark, Tex. Raise tariffs and the S.C. nullifiers knee-cap you.
Lloyd Benson[7:30:11 PM]: Sorry, I've confused you. I meant to say that 20th century Southern senators liked tariffs. Think Fritz Hollings (D) and Strom Thurmond (R)
Virginia Cain[7:31:01 PM]: so the issue cut across class parties
Matthew Barnes[7:31:03 PM]: so 19th century southern senators would want to lower tariffs (tariff of abomination?)?
Lloyd Benson[7:31:04 PM]: Sorry about that. The majority of Southerners and the majority of Democrats in the 19th century opposed protective tariffs (See Summers for Gilded Age examples and exceptions)
Virginia Cain[7:31:17 PM]: ohmyword
Virginia Cain[7:31:22 PM]: that made no sense'
Virginia Cain[7:31:42 PM]: okay: so the issue cut across parties, and was decided based on geography?
Lloyd Benson[7:31:55 PM]: It will be better for you to think of Democrats GENERALLY opposing protective tariffs, and Whigs and Republicans GENERALLY favoring protective tariffs.
Jillian Mangum[7:32:17 PM]: and not in a sectional context?
Lloyd Benson[7:32:19 PM]: It was actually more of a party issue than a sectional issue.
Virginia Cain[7:32:22 PM]: summers just confuses me more, to be completely honest
Jillian Mangum[7:32:23 PM]: aha!
Virginia Cain[7:32:33 PM]: oh dear.
Virginia Cain[7:32:36 PM]: okay
Jillian Mangum[7:32:43 PM]: 4 hour rule :)
Lloyd Benson[7:33:14 PM]: But since the Democrats dominated the south throughout the 19th century, you can get away with saying that Southerners GENERALLY opposed tariffs, as did Democrats both north and south.
Jillian Mangum has left the chat.
Virginia Cain[7:34:48 PM]: mmmm . . . that makes much more sense now
Lloyd Benson[7:35:47 PM]: The beauty of SUmmers is also the challenge. He is not reductionist. The story of the book is how each party faction faced competing imperatives. Start with figuring out who the key players are (echo, echo, echo) and to what factions they belong. Then see how each of these people/factions identifies the choices available to them. These are usually choices that point in opposite directions. That is precisely the point of the book, BTW.
Julia Gatten[7:36:17 PM]: But didn't the North want to protect their industry? I guess the owners of the industries would be whigs? So it became whigs for protective tariffs and not the North?
Lloyd Benson[7:36:54 PM]: So, for example, the Democrats have to decide what to do about prohibition, and the Republicans have to decide what to do about the immigration issue.
Lloyd Benson[7:38:16 PM]: Correct. Whigs for protective tariffs. Exactly! But since there were more Whigs in the north (b/c more industry, more market economy, and ABOVE ALL, more middle class towns with evangelical women's prayer groups, [to follow the Sellers/Ryan argument]) there were more Whigs in the North.
Virginia Cain[7:39:05 PM]: who was ryan? i know sellers
Matthew Barnes[7:39:14 PM]: ryan? there's a ryan?
Lloyd Benson[7:39:16 PM]: Summer's story is the story of how each group struggled to find its way through these competing choices, and struggled to decide who to become allied with.
Lloyd Benson[7:40:46 PM]: Mary P. Ryan, "A Woman's Awakening," summarized by someone masquerading as Virginia Cain :-) on the DB, message #261. [I claim the 4 hour rule for both me and U]
Virginia Cain[7:41:23 PM]: well crap. sorry. oops!!!
Trey Massar[7:41:33 PM]: Just real quick I notice that there is a 750 word max but can you be around 650 and be alright?
Lloyd Benson[7:41:56 PM]: Ryan's evangelical ladies are Sellers's companionate marriage evangelical Whig women, all of whom lived along the Erie canal and in other market/commercial small towns.
Trey Massar[7:42:02 PM]: (Obviously if you have made your point and supported your argument)
Lloyd Benson[7:42:48 PM]: 650 okay, though with 80 episodes to pick from there may be other opportunities and themes worth highlighting.
Lloyd Benson[7:44:49 PM]: As Trey says, (wisely) if you make your argument compellingly and completely in fewer than the assigned number of words, then you will be evaluated positively. Think of 750 as a dart board -- get as close as you can to the middle, and try to avoid hitting the wall or the floor.
Virginia Cain has left the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:45:40 PM]: And think hard about how the patterns of the episodes match up with the general patterns and themes of the course. That should give you some valuable structure to work with.
Lloyd Benson[7:46:22 PM]: Then contemplate the exceptions and outliers, and "strange/true/facts" episodes for their meaning.
Virginia Cain has joined the chat.
Garrison Ries has left the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:47:00 PM]: Are there other really pressing details from your notes, etc., that require clarification?
Matthew Barnes[7:47:11 PM]: so this exam is going to be easy, right?
Matthew Barnes[7:47:14 PM]: hahahaha
Trey Massar[7:47:17 PM]: hahahaha
Virginia Cain[7:47:20 PM]: YESSSSSSSSSS
Trey Massar[7:47:23 PM]: thats a joke right?
Lloyd Benson[7:47:28 PM]: There will be some kiddie pool questions, no doubt.
Matthew Barnes[7:47:50 PM]: like "what were three reasons Jackson opposed the bank?"
Lloyd Benson[7:48:13 PM]: And some others of more subtle and sophisticated ilk (or so I am hoping)
Lloyd Benson[7:48:57 PM]: There might be some of that. Note that the questions will be weighted more than half to material since the most recent preliminary exam.
Matthew Barnes[7:49:41 PM]: so how long is the in class portion supposed to take? normal test length?
Lloyd Benson[7:50:05 PM]: How about [T/F] "A key agent in stabilizing the nation's financial system after 1862 was James Montgomery Burns."
Lloyd Benson[7:50:56 PM]: Fifty questions plus a one paragraph essay. Which means [four hour rule quip follows] that some of you will be writing until noon.
Lloyd Benson[7:51:40 PM]: I hope, seriously, that most people will finish in an hour or an hour and a half, though there will be no formal time limit.
Lloyd Benson[7:52:06 PM]: There will be a six/seven sentence limit on the paragraph essay.
Matthew Barnes[7:52:07 PM]: just so we can prepare our minds, what kind of question will the essay involve?
Lloyd Benson[7:53:01 PM]: To quote verbatim: "Explain the meaning of human existence from the dawn of time to the present, using both philosophical and biochemical insights in your response."
Lloyd Benson[7:53:15 PM]: So all formulas and reactions.
Virginia Cain[7:53:18 PM]: are there year questions
Trey Massar[7:53:35 PM]: Should i laugh or cry at that question?
Matthew Barnes[7:53:41 PM]: i hope laugh
Virginia Cain[7:53:47 PM]: God. that's my final answer
Lloyd Benson[7:53:49 PM]: Yes, a few year questions. Not that many. Nothing you won't recognize from the Ayers or SHDB timelines.
Matthew Barnes[7:53:51 PM]: remember? four hour rule
Lloyd Benson[7:54:05 PM]: ITS A JOKE, FELLOW FOUR HOUR RULERS.
Lloyd Benson[7:54:11 PM]: ;-)
Matthew Barnes[7:54:15 PM]: i get it!!
Julia Gatten[7:54:35 PM]: I slept for 5 and I am still confused...
Lloyd Benson[7:54:42 PM]: The question will be open-ended, interpretive, perhaps related to articles or books.

[Editorial note: Discussion and comments followed on episodes from other schools.]


Lloyd Benson[7:55:30 PM]: Landmark decision-points and key turning points exclusively.
Matthew Barnes[7:56:28 PM]: i need to start on the essays, so i'll see you tomorrow
Matthew Barnes[7:56:37 PM]: good luck, everybody!!!!
Trey Massar[7:56:55 PM]: Yeah i need to go put a pot of coffee on and trick my roommate into thinking its morning
Lloyd Benson[7:57:06 PM]: Any last questions, then?
Matthew Barnes[7:57:22 PM]: can you take my exam for me?
Julia Gatten[7:57:23 PM]: I don't think so
Julia Gatten[7:57:31 PM]: I second that
Trey Massar[7:57:37 PM]: Thanks Dr. Benson
Lloyd Benson[7:57:53 PM]: I concur with Trey about the efforts you all have devoted to the class. If last year's pioneers are any indication, you will leave this class really well prepared to do research in other classes and in life.
Julia Gatten[7:58:23 PM]: sweet
Matthew Barnes has left the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:58:58 PM]: Just remember tha nobody will ask you what you got on this test after April of this year. Never. And [4HR] that C's in history are no barrier to world leadership.
Julia Gatten[7:59:29 PM]: on that note, i'll see you tomorrow......
Julia Gatten has left the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:59:37 PM]: Get some sleep, everyone.
Virginia Cain[7:59:44 PM]: yeahhhhhhh . . . no
Virginia Cain[7:59:50 PM]: peace out :]
Virginia Cain has left the chat.
Lloyd Benson[8:00:14 PM]: Good luck Trey!
Lloyd Benson[8:00:23 PM]: Over and out!

Study log Second Study Session.

Lloyd Benson has joined the chat.
Virginia Cain has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:32:07 PM]: Hi Virginia! First in!
Virginia Cain[6:32:13 PM]: Hello!
Virginia Cain[6:32:36 PM]: Would you briefly explain Thomas Cole's stages of development?
Lloyd Benson[6:32:37 PM]: How are you?
Virginia Cain[6:32:49 PM]: Good! yourself?
Virginia Cain has left the chat.
Matthew Barnes has joined the chat.
Trey Massar has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:35:13 PM]: (Sounds like a psychological theory!) Look in the book 1831 for further discussion of Cole's stages. Essentially, the stages are a cycle that goes from (1) barbarism, to (2) agrarian/arcadian virtue, to (3) empire, to (4) decline into primitivism, and (5) back to barbarism.
Lloyd Benson[6:35:16 PM]: Hi Guys
Trey Massar[6:35:19 PM]: Some people might not be able to join this discussion. I know North VIllage is having some internet issues
Julia Gatten has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:35:48 PM]: Yes, I think Virginia just got bounced off. Cross fingers.
Virginia Cain has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:36:03 PM]: Welcome back Virginia
Virginia Cain[6:36:17 PM]: yes i did. sorry. i'm in the library and the service is spotty at best
Lloyd Benson[6:36:40 PM]: Strange how dependent we have become on these little electrons
Lloyd Benson[6:36:58 PM]: An artifact of the 19th century, I'll note.
Virginia Cain[6:37:00 PM]: so is south housing i think. i talked to john briefly
Matthew Barnes[6:37:07 PM]: we could've had it here on campus... :)
Garrison Ries has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:37:32 PM]: Hi Garrison, Hi Jillian!
Trey Massar[6:37:38 PM]: Murphys Law. When you need the internet for finals.... it will shut down
Garrison Ries[6:37:39 PM]: hey Dr. Benson!
Virginia Cain has left the chat.
Matthew Barnes[6:37:57 PM]: no kidding!
Lloyd Benson[6:38:23 PM]: This is precisely how everyone felt when the newly laid first ever Atlantic cable was severed in the mid-19th century
Garrison Ries[6:38:28 PM]: Don't know about the rest of NV, but E's certainly working
Garrison Ries[6:38:43 PM]: nice to apply another history episode to today's life
Matthew Barnes[6:39:07 PM]: how specific do we need to get on our studying for history engine episodes for the actual exam?
Virginia Cain has joined the chat.
Virginia Cain[6:39:47 PM]: yay ethernet cords
Lloyd Benson[6:39:56 PM]: Hold on, bringing back Virginia. (Also a 19th century thing to do :-)
Lloyd Benson[6:40:59 PM]: The HE episodes will not figure prominently on the exam, except to the degree that they overlap or confirm info in the text or lectures.
Jillian Mangum has joined the chat.
Garrison Ries[6:41:21 PM]: what about SHDB entries for the final?
Lloyd Benson[6:41:37 PM]: Hi Jillian!
Jillian Mangum[6:41:43 PM]: hello there
Trey Massar[6:41:43 PM]: Will specific authors/ writers like Elizabeth Varon and Rebecca Edwards be important or more the theories and subject matter they wrote about?
Matthew Barnes[6:41:52 PM]: good question trey
Lloyd Benson[6:42:37 PM]: Same rules apply. You may find it helpful to browse through the event list for review (one of its designated purposes, after all) and to think about the geography/category distribution and bias issues we discovered while using it, but not that many specifics.
Lloyd Benson[6:43:01 PM]: I would rather you really grapple more with the Summers book.
Virginia Cain[6:43:57 PM]: wait . . . i haven't opened up the take-home yet, but summers is not going to be on the class portion, right?
Lloyd Benson[6:44:06 PM]: Every theory should be paired with an author, and every author with a theory. I tried to keep these to an essential minimum, though you may judge that list's length differently from a study standpoint.
Matthew Barnes[6:44:10 PM]: to what extent? like, should we focus on the specific details within the book or the general themes?
Matthew Barnes[6:44:48 PM]: for the summers book, that is
Jillian Mangum[6:44:57 PM]: this question may already have been answered, but will dates be as emphasized on this exam as in tests past?
Lloyd Benson[6:45:20 PM]: There will be some Summers questions, I predict, largely focused on the study hint stuff I mentioned a few days before the book was due.
Virginia Cain has left the chat.
Matthew Barnes[6:46:45 PM]: is that referring to the question of "how well did democracy work?" and such?
Julia Gatten[6:47:31 PM]: and the democratic index with participation/turnout, etc.
Garrison Ries[6:47:46 PM]: Anything we should look at from summers in particular?
Lloyd Benson[6:47:52 PM]: [Generally good advice for all history books, and a rehash of the "things to look for" comments earlier in the term] You will want to know all the major players (recall our indexing point here), their political affiliations (including party faction, not just party, if you really want to be impressive, and since that's a key question of the book), and should be able to identify what Summers thinks the key factors in the Democrat's triumph were.
Lloyd Benson[6:49:05 PM]: [Apologies in advance for any latent or unintended sarcasm -- the four hour rule is in effect and e-mail is not good for emotional status, grins, or facial expressions.]
Lloyd Benson[6:50:23 PM]: It is well to ponder the "how well did democracy work" question. I probably won't ask you any "Freedom House" related questions, per se, but you may find the categories and tests of the freedom house classification a useful tool for itemizing and systematizing your review of the book.
Lloyd Benson[6:50:54 PM]: And knowing something about the Freedom House classifications is an important thing for a well-educated citizen to know more generally.
Lloyd Benson[6:51:43 PM]: I promise not to ask "three of the most important categories from the F.H. list were....," however.
Matthew Barnes[6:51:53 PM]: thank you
Jillian Mangum[6:52:03 PM]: ditto
Matthew Barnes[6:52:14 PM]: i have a question: do you take any bribes? :)
Jillian Mangum[6:52:35 PM]: i'll second that one too :)
Garrison Ries[6:52:59 PM]: I'll pay cash...
Garrison Ries[6:53:05 PM]: ; )
Virginia Cain has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:53:24 PM]: Does all that make sense? You may also find it helpful to take the questions we applied to the Masur and Ash books and throw them against Summers, and vice versa. Could help on many parts of the test, and in your reading of books, generally, well after this class.
Lloyd Benson[6:54:29 PM]: No bribes, but dig deep, smile, and jump on into the water. It's not too cold, nor too deep.
Lloyd Benson[6:54:57 PM]: You all have made me proud many times this term. I know you have really stretched and grown.
Virginia Cain[6:55:34 PM]: in my notes for the US in 1825, i have a line that reads Texas declared independence 5 or 6 years before . . . as in before 1825 . . . what does that mean?
Lloyd Benson[6:55:42 PM]: As I re-read your episodes and journals I'm very impressed with the seriousness, the imagination, and the commitment displayed.
Virginia Cain[6:55:49 PM]: and i could totally go for a kiddie pool, i always liked those
Lloyd Benson[6:56:15 PM]: There are several kiddie pool bunny slope questions, I promise.
Jillian Mangum[6:56:29 PM]: yay!
Matthew Barnes[6:56:34 PM]: whoo hoo!!!
Garrison Ries[6:56:56 PM]: (best Montgomery Burns voice) Excellent
Lloyd Benson[6:57:10 PM]: Hmmn. Could mean several things. Might be a discussion of Mexico's ending of slavery, which they did incompletely and through several means starting in 1824, 1829, and so on.
Julia Gatten[6:57:21 PM]: (I think more than one person here is one the four hour room)
Julia Gatten[6:57:30 PM]: (not room, rule)
Garrison Ries[6:57:33 PM]: guilty
Matthew Barnes[6:57:37 PM]: wow
Virginia Cain[6:57:48 PM]: awesome! me too!
Lloyd Benson[6:57:48 PM]: Garrison, you'll have to walk on tiptoes and rub your hands together -- extra credit for that ;-)
Garrison Ries[6:58:08 PM]: Thanks Dr. Benson
Matthew Barnes[6:58:29 PM]: see, Dr. B, you can portray emotions online! :)
Jillian Mangum[6:59:02 PM]: could you clarify the regulations on state banks that led to NY's rise to prominence in the financial sphere?
Lloyd Benson[6:59:40 PM]: Texas efforts at independence begin with conflicts between federalists and centralizers, with the Texans (of both American and Mexican descent) calling for federal autonomy, and then (in both cases, but in different ways and for different reasons) turning to independence. Very complex. Where's Emily when we need her for this Texas history stuff....
Virginia Cain[6:59:54 PM]: :D
Matthew Barnes[7:00:00 PM]: didn't it have to do with NY setting a precedence for state banks?
Lloyd Benson[7:00:48 PM]: Texas independence and NY banks? That's a fun "link these two events" challenge!!!
Jillian Mangum[7:01:01 PM]: please no!
Trey Massar[7:01:50 PM]: For the essay using the HE episodes, should we use just the furman student entries or all entries within the date range?
Virginia Cain[7:02:40 PM]: also . . . i have a flow chart around my notes for the development of the 2 party system. it shows land money going to tariffs to distribution surplus to internal improvements. can you explain that, especially land money to tariffs???
Lloyd Benson[7:03:21 PM]: [THIS WILL NOT BE TEST MATERIAL] Okay, the answer is the specie act of 1834, which, for the first time, excluded the Mexican gold peso as legal tender currency in the U.S. This (according to people who have studied this, which I have not, even slightly) this wiped out both the economies of Mexico and of China (!) setting the stage for destablized Santa Ana vs. everyone Mexican governments and the collapse of the Chinese economy that led to the Opium wars. Or so they say. Fascinating, if true, but not on the test. Makes you think, though.
Lloyd Benson[7:04:09 PM]: Good question about the HE. All entries within the date range, from any campus. (As of Noon, that was just us and UVa., but that may have changed by this afternoon.)
Matthew Barnes[7:04:16 PM]: wait...what? i think her question was about later on in the 19th century dealing with the relation between NY banks and state banks
Jillian Mangum[7:04:25 PM]: right
Matthew Barnes[7:04:42 PM]: really? all of them?
Virginia Cain[7:04:44 PM]: seriously abou the HE?
Virginia Cain[7:04:49 PM]: *about
Trey Massar[7:04:54 PM]: Ohhhh happy days!
Trey Massar[7:05:24 PM]: Really really important! Will there be coffee at the exam tomorrow?
Lloyd Benson[7:06:58 PM]: All episodes from 12/32, 5/56, 4/65, and 7/76. This is why you will notice some similarities between the study guide and essay question #1. Do read the instructions carefully, though -- Don't try to work all 80 episodes into your essay explicitly. Make good selections and choices. Does that make sense?
Matthew Barnes[7:07:19 PM]: study guide?
Julia Gatten[7:07:23 PM]: ?
Lloyd Benson[7:07:26 PM]: To be clear, not every single episode in the entire HE database.
Virginia Cain[7:07:27 PM]: ?
Lloyd Benson[7:08:20 PM]: Study guide = The e-mail I sent last week, along with passing mentions over the course of the term.
Lloyd Benson[7:08:35 PM]: Coffee is a great idea.
Lloyd Benson[7:08:44 PM]: Can do. Will bring the pot to the room.
Trey Massar[7:08:56 PM]: Either that or caffeine pills please
Lloyd Benson[7:08:57 PM]: Back to the banks. Can you give me the question again?
Matthew Barnes[7:09:28 PM]: Jillian Mangum[6:59:02 PM]: could you clarify the regulations on state banks that led to NY's rise to prominence in the financial sphere?
Jillian Mangum[7:09:28 PM]: my question was really regarding what regulations went into stabilizing state banks
Jillian Mangum[7:09:44 PM]: especially regarding the currency
Lloyd Benson[7:09:54 PM]: Use judgment, skim headers and first sentences, don't try to read every word and every footnote from scratch.
Lloyd Benson[7:11:02 PM]: Great question about banking regulation (though, alas, no duels, charging up hills with flags waving and guns blazing, or anything like that. Hard to make movies about the Free Banking Act of 1838....)
Lloyd Benson[7:11:47 PM]: Short version: rampant speculation led to the bank safety act of 1829 (a NY state act.)
Jillian Mangum[7:12:15 PM]: is that what i'm thinking of that set currency at "par?"
Lloyd Benson[7:12:20 PM]: Then Jackson vetoed the only national regulatory agency, the Bank of the United States, in 1832.
Lloyd Benson[7:12:44 PM]: This meant that most money was money printed by banks. "Bank notes"
Lloyd Benson[7:13:02 PM]: These had a face value, just like our federal reserve currency does today.
Lloyd Benson[7:13:18 PM]: ($1, $5, $20 $100, etc.)
Lloyd Benson[7:13:59 PM]: But since squishy shady undercapitalized local banks were often the institutions behind these notes, rather than the federal reserve, the paper was usually not worth its face value.
Virginia Cain has left the chat.
Jillian Mangum[7:14:08 PM]: oh i see...i guess the link i'm missing is how New York came into play here...
Lloyd Benson[7:14:13 PM]: Everybody with me so far?
Jillian Mangum[7:14:18 PM]: yes! :)
Trey Massar[7:14:24 PM]: gotcha ;)
Lloyd Benson[7:14:25 PM]: But here's where NY comes in.
Matthew Barnes[7:14:29 PM]: so i guess it provided a standardized national currency?
Jillian Mangum[7:15:08 PM]: that was kinda my understanding--kinda
Lloyd Benson[7:15:25 PM]: Because of the Safety Act of 1829 (requiring good capital reserves) and the Free Banking Law of 1838 requiring even more stability, paper money issued by NY city banks traded at the value listed on the face of the bill.
Virginia Cain has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:16:00 PM]: If it said $5.00, then you could go to any bank in the country and get $5.00 worth of gold or silver.
Lloyd Benson[7:16:07 PM]: This was less true of other banks.
Lloyd Benson[7:16:51 PM]: If you took a $5.00 note of the Planter's Bank of Mississippi to another bank, they might only give you 50 cents of gold for a paper bill that said $5.00.
Lloyd Benson[7:17:17 PM]: This process of figuring out what a bank's paper money was really worth was called "discounting."
Lloyd Benson[7:17:43 PM]: NY money on NY banks was rarely discounted, always trading at face value, or "PAR".
Matthew Barnes[7:17:52 PM]: Virginia Cain[7:02:40 PM]: also . . . i have a flow chart around my notes for the development of the 2 party system. it shows land money going to tariffs to distribution surplus to internal improvements. can you explain that, especially land money to tariffs???
Matthew Barnes[7:18:10 PM]: i was wondering about that too
Jillian Mangum[7:18:13 PM]: thanks! that makes sense
Lloyd Benson[7:18:23 PM]: When the Federal Government began chartering National Banks in 1862 and after, they adopted the rules and regulations of the FBA of 1838 almost verbatim.
Virginia Cain[7:18:49 PM]: i think i understand all the NY bank stuff now :] thank you
Lloyd Benson[7:18:53 PM]: And, after some back and forth, it was the NY banks that defined the basic structure of National Banks.
Lloyd Benson[7:18:59 PM]: Cool.
Jillian Mangum[7:19:15 PM]: the light bulb just turned on :)

Hello everybody! I've had some problems posting my May 1856 episode to the History Engine, therefore I'm posting it here for the purposes of the exam.

Lucy Skipwith: Testament to Southern Reform
May 30, 1856
Greene County, Alabama

   Lucy Skipwith was a domestic slave on the Hopewell Plantation in Greene County, Alabama. Her owner, John Hartwell Cocke, lived in Virginia and ran Hopewell as one of his several absentee plantations. Cocke relied mostly on Skipwith, as well as J. Willie Carter, the overseer, and R.D. Powell, the steward over Cocke’s Alabama plantations, to stay informed about Hopewell and to transmit his own directives.
   In a letter written by Skipwith to Cocke from May 30, 1856, several facets of her unusual societal position were manifested. Early in the letter, she expressed attachment to her “Dear Master,” telling him that she, along with J. Willie Carter and R.D. Powell, “missed [him] a great deal,” and were “very anxious to hear from [him].” Also, Skipwith noted that she waited until the end of the month to write because Carter and Powell had written earlier in the month. Next, she reported the health and activities of the Carter and Powell families, as well as the family of John Cocke of Alabama, a relative of John Hartwell Cocke who had a neighboring plantation. She particularly reported the experience of Mrs. Powell on a recent visit to Hopewell. Skipwith wrote that Mrs. Powell “seemed to injoy her self here very much,” also noting both the time that the Powells arrived and the fact that Mrs. Powell neither visited anyone nor had any guests. Lucy Skipwith then discussed the progress of the school and Church meetings under her charge. Skipwith lamented that, “my school children have improved but little since you went away.” She attributed this to the fact that the ones old enough to make real progress were all “out at work.” The “family prayers,” on the other hand, were “regularly attended.”
   From this seemingly unremarkable account, there are several implications. First, it is clear that Lucy Skipwith’s influence far exceeded the normal “Big House” limits. The level of power she held is immediately evident in that she was included, and in fact was on an almost equal footing, with the overseer and steward in correspondence about plantation affairs, reporting even their doings. In many ways, her influence at Hopewell was at least as great as either of these two figures; she ran the day-to-day business of the plantation house. However, while such power was uncommon for a slave, it was not unheard of—the role has become a fixture in the American memory through the “mammy” stereotype. Lucy Skipwith’s social position was much more notable in her roles as teacher and preacher. Yet the letter is perhaps most interesting as part of an assessment of the degree to which Lucy Skipwith’s advantages represented an effective, and non-isolated, example of the reform movements’ ability to change slavery.
   John H. Cocke was largely a product of evangelical reform and progressive Upper South political ideology (specifically that of the Jeffersonian Republic). Furthermore, he was a leader in movements for education, temperance, and especially the establishment of the American Colonization Society (ACS). In short, he was considered one of the South’s preeminent reformers—especially as an anti-slavery gradualist. Indeed, much of Skipwith’s accomplishments wouldn’t have been possible without Cocke’s liberalism. His evangelicalism figured importantly first in her conversion to Christianity, but also notably allowed her to throw off slave-women prejudices and assume her position of power. Additionally, Cocke’s religion and his association with the ACS figured importantly in his support for both secular and Christian education; it was necessary as part of his paternalistic plan to prepare slaves for freedom. Surely, such education was appreciated by Lucy Skipwith and the many other slaves who benefited from these efforts.
   The broader significance of Cocke' reforms, however, are very debatable. His brand of conservative reform did, on the one hand, bring uncommon privileges to slaves, especially in the case of Lucy Skipwith, and he even promoted eventual emancipation. But also, his policies potentially lessened sincere agitation for abolition. Lucy’s attitude towards Cocke may attest to this; though sentiments of affection by slavers are approached very skeptically, a more in-depth study of Lucy Skipwith’s relationship with Cocke seems to suggest at least some level of sincerity in her respect for him—even in his role as master. Finally, Cocke is at best a reformer of convenience. For Cocke, a slave’s labor took clear precedence over their education, as shown by Skipwith’s remark that only the very young were able to attend school. More telling though is Cocke’s application of his colonization beliefs. Despite having been Vice-President of the ACS—and attributing his participation in it to the will of God, only one of his slave families was ever manumitted. Not even Lucy Skipwith gained freedom before the Civil War, despite the high praise and responsibility John H. Cocke afforded her.

Closing thoughts…I think this is the only discussion entry I’m due for.
 As I was researching for my episodes I discovered that very few books and websites went the extra mile to find correct dates or followed through with their sources. This kinda ticked me off, because it made it so much harder to find what I was looking for. However, I feel this corresponds to the span of time between 1820 and 1890. The relative interest in politics or parties for the American public was not very high. Things are rarely recorded. Just looking in papers or newsletters from 1820 to at least the 40s demonstrates this. There are fewer articles on national endeavors, than the local farmers markets, which usually bless the front page. Things were not unified or together as much. I do think life was harder. Life was maybe shorter in the 20s, 30s, and 40s. As the dawn of the twentieth century came about it seems as if all kinds of people had a place, a future, and a ticking clock. Time became more of a thing that people depended on. Trains were controlled by time, businesses, and schools. Technology advances freed people up and allowed them more time to participate in local affairs. Ideas were more universal, communication better. Especially after the Civil War.
 I think it’s hard to mash a bunch of dates together and say look at these and pick watershed moments. Each decade brought a different perspective or revived an old one. There could easily be three generations that appear in this time selection. I think that the change comes only from the views of the preceding generation. I know I’m rambling, but this is as good as its gonna get right now.

Backfill for 10/25:

I realize that we were supposed to have completed these on the assigned dates and, as such, not have access to information that we now possess. However, it is hard for me to read the website histories of both Natchez, MS and New Albany, IN without taking other class discussions and handouts into account.

While Natchez neglects to mention the Civil War, I feel that it is reflective of the general trend in Southern cities to gloss over the conflict that they lost. Instead, they focus on the economy that King Cotton generated. As mentioned by someone else (I think either David Ehrlich or David Saxton), the increasing development of railroads in the South helped stimulate an economy devastated by the Civil War. At the same time, Gavin Wright's thesis that some flocked to the South because it was more lucrative runs hand in hand with the agricultural simplification experienced as fewer people practiced subsistence farming, instead turning to cotton output. Also, the fact that Natchez does not lie on any particularly significant crossroads leads to its continued small-town feel and lack of industrial development. The lack of religion that (I think) Emily Franda mentioned is confirmed by the statistical comparison between Adams and Floyd counties. Nevertheless, the website still portrays Natchez as an antebellum haven during modern times.

On the other hand, New Albany was located on a significant and "strategic" connecting route (at least that's how the website portrays it) that allowed for significant industrial and commercial advancements. Once again, this aspect is reinforced by the class documents which reveal that the number of manufacturers (namely producing machinery and steam-engines) in New Albany far exceeded the number of manufacturers located in Natchez. Also reflective in the documents is how technology provided a force for the expansion of religion, as revealed in the higher number of churches in Floyd County, IN when compared to Adams County, MS.

Edited by author 12-09-2007 11:02 PM
Backfill for 9/24:

The organization and distribution of land by the Public Land Survey System marked the beginning of movements to regulate and distribute land following the Revolutionary War. As mentioned by others, the distinction between pre-PLSS and post-PLSS states is strikingly noticeable, as states become more boxy and organized when compared to the random arrangement of states originating from the Colonial period. However, I wonder whether the more disorganized division between Montana and Idaho was intentional or whether it resulted from acquiring land from Native Americans or else another foreign territorial gain. Also, as discussed in class, the lots assigned by the PLSS disregard the specific landscapes that might exist. For example, someone may be granted a parcel of land that is arable and fertile, while another person may be given a lot that is swampy and infertile. I thought that the French arpents were an interesting attempt to solve this problem (whether or not that was their intent) by allotting narrower, yet possibly more diverse sections. This way, the fact that part of the land may be productive would offset the potential incapacity of another part within the same arpent.

BACKFILL for 10/26

It is very evident that the Britannica pieces share in the muckraking attitude of the Adams' piece. At first glance, it seems that Gould's business ventures are attacked to a far greater degree than are Vanderbilt's. However, Vanderbilt's personal life, especially his will, in which he left his son a hefty 90 million dollars, and his wife and daughters only around 1 or 2 million to split between them. Gould is described as having outrageous financial manipulations which led to his 77 million dollar wealth, but there is no mention of whom he left the money to. Adams does not spare any detail of the business ventures of Vanderbilt, though. He points out the unethical ways in which Vanderbilt acquired his great wealth, and much of it was through "stock-watering." I'm still trying to understand exactly what this means, but Adams makes it clear that Vanderbilt definitely participated. Either way, these two famous, or infamous, American businessmen contributed to the transportation system we know today, and set the stage for many many businessmen to come.

REVIEW CHAT SESSION, PART TWO.


Lloyd Benson[7:17:09 PM]: Anyone have questions or concerns about the "restricted open book" format?
Virginia Cain[7:17:25 PM]: i have another giant question. how are we going to need to know 1884? i had
Virginia Cain[7:17:31 PM]: such a hard time with this book
Lauren Brearley[7:17:41 PM]: Thanks! I was actually reading through it right now
Trey Massar[7:17:47 PM]: Yes, will we be able to reference people episodes online while we take that portion of the test or should we be completely of the internet?
Lloyd Benson[7:18:14 PM]: I plan to distribute the take-home a little later this evening. You may work on it as long as you want until Wed. morning, but may not talk with anyone else about it once you open the exam attachment.
Julia Gatten[7:18:38 PM]: Wednesday morning? so the day after our exam??
Lloyd Benson[7:19:18 PM]: In response to Trey's question, you will be able to log into the History Engine and use it in any way you see fit while you are writing your responses.
Lloyd Benson[7:19:36 PM]: Oops. Tuesday morning. TUESDAY MORNING!!!!!
Lauren Brearley[7:19:58 PM]: haha I got equally excited about wednesday morning
Virginia Cain[7:20:09 PM]: [ i mean, if you want to give us until wednesday, that could be really awesome!]
Andrew Proctor[7:20:55 PM]: i agree!
Lloyd Benson[7:22:16 PM]: You will want to know the major players, major organizations, and major "decision-points" in 1884. I will ask a specific episode question. You will be able to consult 1884 while writing your answer. The question will ask you to connect the specific episode to trends and issues beyond the book. If (for some incomprehensible reason) you are reading the book for the first time, this process will go much more slowly than if you have really good comprehensive notes written in a separate place. You may/should use your book notes to answer the questions being posed.
Virginia Cain[7:23:10 PM]: ohmyword! we can use our book notes for 1884 questions??? that's totally amazing! thanks :D
Lloyd Benson[7:23:28 PM]: You may NOT, however, use JSTOR, Google, Yahoo, or any other Internet resource, except articles that have been previously assigned on the syllabus, to answer the question.
Lloyd Benson[7:25:44 PM]: This, as you know, is my great dilemma about giving the take-home. My intention is to give you the most comfortable context possible, with the least stress and pressure possible, and with a chance (thanks for your enthusiasm, Virginia) to look things over thoughtfully. This gives me much more interesting episodes to read, as well as (in theory) giving you more pleasant and fair breathing space to work through challenging problems.
Lloyd Benson[7:25:50 PM]: Better for you, better for me.
Virginia Cain[7:26:05 PM]: yessir!
Carolyn Vaught has joined the chat.
Julia Gatten[7:27:09 PM]: Can you talk some about Stock Watering in Chapters of Erie by Charles Francis Adams, Jr. (1871).
Jordan Sorrells has joined the chat.
Lauren Brearley[7:27:22 PM]: Sorry I am not really participating, I'm trying to catch up on what I missed, but tomorrow, I'm sure I'll have some questions
Julia Gatten[7:27:52 PM]: We never talked about it in clas specifically, and I am never really good with understanding complex financial things
Lloyd Benson[7:28:22 PM]: Alas, almost every term at least one student doesn't completely comprehend that this is a great freedom and a special opportunity. They panic, grab for Google, and then wreck lots of people's time with a plagiarism case. I'm hoping we'll not have one of these this go round. Nobody in this class really needs to, anyway, 'cause you're pretty good.
Andrew Proctor[7:28:22 PM]: I believe we did talk about it
Andrew Proctor[7:28:31 PM]: the Rise of Chicago
Lloyd Benson[7:28:55 PM]: Hi Carolyn, welcome back Jordan!
Lloyd Benson[7:30:18 PM]: The gist of Erie is that Adams makes a case for the need for state (and perhaps federal) regulation of the railroads, using the (breathtakingly clever but morally dubious) case of the Erie Railroad as exhibit A.
Virginia Cain[7:31:03 PM]: also, from wednesday 11/7 . . . there was something on the syllabus about Dun and Bradstreet. can you talk a little about that website/company???
Lloyd Benson[7:32:46 PM]: Think about how this produces a kind of convergence. Reformers and "muckrakers" wanted regulation to make the market fair and open. The railroads, killing each other as they were through direct competition, and suffering from what they thought was "unfair" competition from their rivals, were able to broker a regulatory consensus. Note that as with yellow fever (see above) state-level regulatory solutions did not seem to stabilize the situation for anyone.
Lloyd Benson[7:34:39 PM]: Dun and Bradstreet (and its predecessor "Mercantile Agency") were, in simple terms, a centralized, quantitative agency for rating the moral, ethical, and financial worthiness of potential borrowers. (In light of our other conversations above, think NYC and information concentration, as well as standardization and national market integration.)
Lloyd Benson[7:36:30 PM]: Just for fun, the founders of the agency were the Tappan Brothers (q.v. in the Ayers text index) who were leading moderate abolitionists. Think about the implications of a NY-centered agency, run by abolitionists, making moral judgments about people in the South, on the plains, and in the west. The agency hired reporters (ie gossipy spies) in every major town in America.
Jordan Sorrells has left the chat.
Julia Gatten[7:38:04 PM]: What were the dates for Tappan Brothers and Mercantile Agency?
Lloyd Benson[7:38:33 PM]: In thinking about the version on the company's website, it is worth imagining some corporate PR person having to write an "episode" about the company's origins. What do they put in, what do they leave out? What decision-points do they highlight? What benchmarks do they use to decide? How integratively complex (or not) are their accounts likely to be?
Lauren Brearley has left the chat.
Ashley Hazelwood has left the chat.
Virginia Cain[7:40:01 PM]: so just to clarify, we don't really have to understand stock watering?
Lloyd Benson[7:40:23 PM]: I think the dates are on the company website. Without having reviewed my notes, I want to say that 1842 is the founding point for the agency. The Tappans were active as businessmen from the 1820s and abolitionists from the 1830s.
Julia Gatten[7:41:20 PM]: I know time is running out, but one last question - I have John Reynolds Testing Democracy under democracy worked very well in the 1880s, but I don't really have anything about what his argument was
Lloyd Benson[7:43:22 PM]: The brief definition of stock-watering is the issue of the company of stock offerings without having either capital or growth to back it. The net result is to decrease the value of any specific share. It is exactly the same as a government printing paper money without having incoming revenue. (cue "Twilight Zone music") The result is to dilute (water) the value of a stockholder's prior investment. In the case of the Erie's directors, it literally involved feeding cattle salt to make them drink, and then running them across the scales for a higher total weight for sale. -- literally as well as figuratively watering stock.
Lloyd Benson[7:43:33 PM]: But I probably won't ask much about this on the test.
Lloyd Benson[7:44:05 PM]: Yes, we are a few minutes over and my daughter is tugging on my foot...
Virginia Cain[7:44:08 PM]: haha - awesome. i've had economics twice now, but that, unfortunately, doesn't mean i understand stocks :/
Julia Gatten[7:45:57 PM]: and the Tappan Brothers - they were kind of an early example of people trying to measure/standardize/quantify other people?
Lloyd Benson[7:46:14 PM]: John Reynolds argues that the patronage and political appointee system gave people a concrete reward (gov't jobs) for working for the party. Once hired, they kicked back revenue into party coffers (a paycheck rebate) which then funded party operations. If government employees didn't do a good job you could always vote their party out. Because parties were funded by party loyalists, they DIDNT have to turn to corporate donations to fund their activities.
Lloyd Benson[7:46:48 PM]: In other words, Reynolds challenges the Muckraker version of patronage as insidious corruption that Summers outlines in his book.
Julia Gatten[7:46:54 PM]: Is that a subtle way of saying that time is up for tonight?
Lloyd Benson[7:47:21 PM]: As soon as the patronage system collapsed under the assault of civil service reform, voters stopped going to the polls, and turnout dropped precipitously.
Lloyd Benson[7:47:52 PM]: Yes, exactly, Tappans were quantifiers and standardizers, and centralizers.
Lloyd Benson[7:48:10 PM]: And Yankee abolitionists, to boot.
Lloyd Benson[7:48:33 PM]: Yep, we're winding down.
Lloyd Benson[7:48:53 PM]: Maybe time for one or two more.
Carolyn Vaught has left the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:50:34 PM]: [The participants pondered, pondered logging off, pondered more...]
Lloyd Benson[7:51:11 PM]: As further questions arise, e-mail and the DB are available. Good luck with your studies!
Virginia Cain[7:51:21 PM]: thank you!
Julia Gatten[7:51:25 PM]: thanks
Julia Gatten[7:51:37 PM]: so tomorrow the session is 6:30-7:30 again?
Lloyd Benson[7:51:41 PM]: Glad to help, I hope it was useful.
Lloyd Benson[7:51:50 PM]: Yep.
Julia Gatten[7:51:50 PM]: yes useful
Julia Gatten[7:51:53 PM]: okay
Lloyd Benson[7:52:06 PM]: Ciao, everyone!
Julia Gatten[7:52:08 PM]: farewell
Julia Gatten has left the chat.
Virginia Cain has left the chat.

Lloyd Benson has joined the chat.
Virginia Cain has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:30:32 PM]: Hi Virginia!
Virginia Cain[6:30:35 PM]: Hey!
Virginia Cain[6:30:40 PM]: So this is pretty nifty
Lloyd Benson[6:30:44 PM]: Welcome aboard! You are first in.
Virginia Cain[6:30:57 PM]: oh wow. i don't know how i feel about that pressure!
Lloyd Benson[6:31:23 PM]: Let's start with the big stuff. Do you have any questions about the format of the exam?
Lloyd Benson[6:32:16 PM]: Or questions about specific mysteries or puzzles from your notes?
Lloyd Benson[6:33:21 PM]: I really liked what your study group did about posting the article summaries. I hope the other two groups will do the same thing. The articles aren't so long that they couldn't be skimmed directly but this was what I had in mind to begin with.
Ashley Hazelwood has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:34:20 PM]: Hi Ashley!
David Bartlett has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:34:45 PM]: Hi David Bartlett!
David Bartlett[6:34:51 PM]: hi
Julia Gatten has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:35:23 PM]: Hi Julia!
Julia Gatten[6:35:27 PM]: hi
Ashley Hazelwood[6:35:28 PM]: Hi Dr. Benson, I don't think I have any questions about exam format that I can think of right now, but I do have clarification questions, should I wait to ask those?
Lloyd Benson[6:35:50 PM]: We're just getting started, but any questions on any topic can be posed at any time.
Ashley Hazelwood[6:36:11 PM]:
In my notes about Yellow Fever I have:
Public Policy Reponses
Private org. Howard Assoc. 1837
push for quarantine, create hospitals, blah blah blah

were these public policy responses or were these things that the Howard Assoc. did as public policy responses??????




Lloyd Benson[6:36:31 PM]: In past virtual sessions the transcript has had multiple simultaneous threads, but it all makes sense in the end.
Lloyd Benson[6:37:34 PM]: Good yellow fever question! I feverishly put a response on the DB about two seconds before we started here. i'll paste it in for reference.
Lloyd Benson: The general heading is PUBLIC POLICY RESPONSES.
The subsection beneath this is the (private) Howard Assn.'s efforts to respond to the epidemics, both by setting up private solutions (i.e. hospitals) and to agitate for public officials to respond through quarantine, etc. Until after the epidemic of 1853, no formal organized public efforts emerged at the community or state level. The creation of the Louisiana state board of health (disputedly but arguably the first such state board in the country) represented the first anticipatory (I hate the word "proactive") government entity that sought to plan in advance and to promote research about yellow fever. Everything before 1855, at the public level, was informal, temporary, or simply an expedient response to the disaster of the moment.
Lloyd Benson[6:38:18 PM]: Does that make any sense?
Ashley Hazelwood[6:38:53 PM]: Yes, thank you.
Julia Gatten[6:39:36 PM]: So the transcript will be posted on the discussion board?
Lloyd Benson[6:39:49 PM]: The Howard Association was a really important example of antebellum "public-private" partnerships, or what we would call a Non-Governmental Organization.
Lloyd Benson[6:40:14 PM]: Yep, the transcript will be posted.
Trey Massar has joined the chat.
Virginia Cain[6:41:09 PM]: i know we've gone over several historians, and that we have already been tested on some of them, but will that continue on the exam?
Lloyd Benson[6:42:00 PM]: A question to ask about yellow fever and public policy is to ponder why each level of solution (NGO, State, Federal) seemed to have its limits and to require a higher level of entity to resolve. Not the smallest reason for this was the inter-city rivalry and slander problem.
Lloyd Benson[6:43:08 PM]: Yes, there will definitely be a presence by our historians and their theories on the exam. These will not duplicate the earlier questions precisely, but some Historian/Theory pairs may be addressed again in a different way.
Lloyd Benson[6:44:12 PM]: What other kinds of "correcting my notes" questions do you all have?
Julia Gatten[6:44:56 PM]: In my notes about New York, I have have notes taken on 1) punctuality - regularly scheduled shipping and 2) ships also transfer info. but i don't really have what they go with - were these just reasons that NYC became a big city? I also have inventiveness and patents under that section but not numbered - was this more of a separate idea or was it intended to fall under the same category?
Lloyd Benson[6:44:57 PM]: [Julia writes busily....]
Lloyd Benson[6:46:33 PM]: Very important questions about NY factors contributing to its dominance. Yes, the fact that NYC had the first punctually-scheduled packets gave it a significant edge, something that became even more important a few years later when the flood of Erie Canal commodities came down stream, and English products went back out.
Julia Gatten[6:48:27 PM]: "when the flood of Erie Canal commodities came down stream, and English products went back out." --- what exactly do you mean by this?
Virginia Cain[6:48:33 PM]: under my notes concerning the many different Norths and Souths, I have a specific mention of a 3rd South characterized by its maximum level of self-control and autonomy . . . which i'm not sure what that means, but also, I don't have numbers one and two
Lloyd Benson[6:48:37 PM]: The info question is more complex, but, essentially, because the packet ships were predictable, they became the most predictable source of market information. Since London and England were the center of economic activity in the 19th c., whoever on the periphery (anywhere in the world, not just America) had the first and most predictable info. about what was happening in England always had an edge. This was a byproduct of regular shipping.
Andrew Proctor has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:48:52 PM]: Hi ANdreW!
Andrew Proctor[6:49:02 PM]: Hey Dr. Benson
Garrison Ries has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[6:49:24 PM]: Hi Garrison!
Trey Massar[6:49:28 PM]: What really made NY more important though than say Boston and Philly? I know Philly is further up river and Boston further north but, They were still both thriving industrial centers capable of transporting goods. Is the fact that geogrpahically NY could ship things from the ports up river make it the more important port city?
Garrison Ries[6:49:31 PM]: Hey Dr. Benson!
Jordan Sorrells has joined the chat.
Virginia Cain[6:51:50 PM]: and i know this is a HUGE question, but are there just a couple of main points about Reconstruction? prior to this class, i had never really had this part of history before, so i'm trying to generally frame the period
Lloyd Benson[6:52:27 PM]: Great three souths question. Without looking at my notes, I think this is what I meant: The first south was the upper south of Baltimore, D.C., Richmond, Louisville, New Orleans, that was northish in its industry and commerce. The second south was the staple crop (tobacco, rice, cotton, sugar) economy that was coastal or river-based and highly integrated into the international market economy. The third south was the backcountry, mountains, piney woods.
Julia Gatten[6:52:30 PM]: I also have something in my notes about Boston's harbor not being able to have two-way traffic -- I don't know why, but I suppose this was a negative factor for Boston
Virginia Cain[6:53:06 PM]: thank you! i had a #3, without having 1 or 2 and i was a little confused :]
Lloyd Benson[6:53:25 PM]: Since we're on cities, Boston did not have as much of a backcountry market for English consumer goods as did the (Erie-Canal and RR based) market reach of NYC.
Lloyd Benson[6:54:07 PM]: Reconstruction, first, has to be viewed in terms of the repressions and pacifications that typically end civil wars.
Lloyd Benson[6:55:02 PM]: Second, reconstruction has to be viewed as a process in which former slaves were given legal protections, civil rights, and voting rights for the first time, and ex-Confederate Southerners lost these and then got them back.
Lloyd Benson[6:55:26 PM]: Third, reconstruction has to be treated as a long-term process of nation formation and national integration.
Julia Gatten[6:55:28 PM]: (so NYC offered a convergence of shipping, RR, canal, generally good location that other cities did not have?)
Lloyd Benson[6:56:40 PM]: Fourth, it has to be understood as a time of opportunity for people like Tom Scott who had no interest in the rights question, but saw the south as a place to achieve other ends. This, as we know, produced a racial and anti-tax backlash "got up" by his business enemies.
Lloyd Benson[6:57:11 PM]: Fifth, reconstruction is about the separation of Blacks and Whites, physically, religiously, mentally.
Lloyd Benson[6:59:08 PM]: NYC had convergence, and I would also stress that the convergence had a (mostly) mutually reinforcing SEQUENCE of events, in which "access to information that could maximize profit and minimize risk" was the key variable. Concentration of information was by far and away the most important advantage, one that trumped all of NYC's many disabilities.
Julia Gatten[7:00:41 PM]: But that concentration of information was due in part to the shipping abilities, etc. - so they helped each other grow?
Lloyd Benson[7:00:55 PM]: One more reconstruction note: It's all about the phases, so paying attention to the chronology (Ayers helps here) will be worthwhile in mastering a very complex set of negotiations, policy shifts, and backlashes. Keep in mind, too, that Northern White Republicans had a very limited vision of reconstruction at first, abandoning it only under duress and reaction to events like the riots of Summer 1866.
Lloyd Benson[7:02:21 PM]: Yes, shipping, newspapers, railroads, finance, the canal, the Atlantic cable, a cluster of creative types trying to work creative angles, all reinforced each other. And in a Darwinian "not for the faint of heart" sort of way.
Julia Gatten[7:02:52 PM]: concerning the RR, just after notes on standardization and dangers of the RR, I have REACTIONS written and under that information on the RR strikes of 1877 and 1886, but what exactly are these reaction to? what specifically made the workers unhappy - low wages/bad conditions in general, or was there some event that sparked these strikes?
Lloyd Benson[7:03:45 PM]: One other completely unrelated aside. When answering the take home essay it is not out of bounds, and may be helpful, to use the SHDB to get the context of 1832, 1856, 1865, and 1876.
Ashley Hazelwood[7:04:46 PM]: When we are answering the essay question, will we be looking at context and themes or more at individual events or both?
Lloyd Benson[7:06:05 PM]: The reactions were responses to both economic limitations (wage cuts and dividend doubling during the panic of 1873-1879) and to loss of control and decision-making to increasingly centralized, hierarchical, and thus seemingly anti-democratic and anti "grassroots worker republicanism" values. That the big companies seemed to have lots of friends in state and national government reinforced this sense of a rigged and corrupt system.
Lloyd Benson[7:09:18 PM]: Both context and details will be useful in answering the take-home. (See my message of the other day for more extensive comments, some of which I'll mention here, too.) In short, after reading through all episodes for all four common months, you want to stand back and identify what you think the most important things we can conclude from these episodes, taken as a whole, might be. That list of "most important patterns" should draw on all of our conversations about these broad trends that we have talked about this term, including change over time and the role of place, historian's theories, general 19th century shifts we identified from the textbook excerpts, and our ongoing conversations about how history is put together.
Lloyd Benson[7:11:21 PM]: Then identify all of the episodes that seem to best exemplify the trends you have identified. A helpful way to structure your thinking on this is to imagine that you are writing the "America, 1820-1890" section for a World History from the Dawn of Time to the Present textbook, but with as much texture, color, and humanity as you can work in as well.
Julia Gatten[7:12:33 PM]: I think that in some e-mail or post or something recently, you said that we did not have to know Greenville in Global Context, "Small Town Values", "America's Heartland" and Sam Clemen's Hannibal - but I can't find where you said that now, so I may have imagined it - did you say that. And if not, could you explain all of these?
Lloyd Benson[7:13:39 PM]: I am not expecting you to incorporate every episode, however. Rather, it is the judgment and imagination you use in selecting and arranging a subset of episodes, that will be the most interesting. You will want to presume that I have read all of the episodes (I have, or will have) and that you are trying to make an original collage of these components. You should not just spit back details.
Julia Gatten[7:13:47 PM]: (okay, I found it on the discussion board, but just checking - there was no reading or class discussion on any of these three topics, right?)
Lloyd Benson[7:14:10 PM]: Yes, those episodes from week eleven were excluded. It was in my "end game" email.
Julia Gatten[7:14:38 PM]: Thanks, just wanted to make sure you actually said that at some point
Lauren Brearley has joined the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:15:20 PM]: There will be no questions regarding these. (Too, bad, too, since they were going to be wicked cool stories with lots of connections to other things we have studied.)
Lloyd Benson[7:15:27 PM]: Hi Lauren!
Lauren Brearley[7:15:33 PM]: Hi! Sorry I'm so late!
Jordan Sorrells has left the chat.
Lloyd Benson[7:16:39 PM]: I'm not sure, Lauren, but I think you may be able to scroll back and see the earlier conversation. Everything will be put to the DB, anyway. Feel free to ask anything. If there are repeat issues I'll just send you scrolling.

Q: Exam Question:
In my notes about Yellow Fever I have:
Public Policy Reponses
Private org. Howard Assoc. 1837
push for quarantine, create hospitals, blah blah blah

were these public policy responses or were these things that the Howard Assoc. did as public policy responses??????

ANS:
Good question. The general heading is PUBLIC POLICY RESPONSES.
The subsection beneath this is the (private) Howard Assn.'s efforts to respond to the epidemics, both by setting up private solutions (i.e. hospitals) and to agitate for public officials to respond through quarantine, etc. Until after the epidemic of 1853, no formal organized public efforts emerged at the community or state level. The creation of the Louisiana state board of health (disputedly but arguably the first such state board in the country) represented the first anticipatory (I hate the word "proactive") government entity that sought to plan in advance and to promote research about yellow fever. Everything before 1855, at the public level, was informal, temporary, or simply an expedient response to the disaster of the moment.

Exam Question:
In my notes about Yellow Fever I have:
Public Policy Reponses
Private org. Howard Assoc. 1837
push for quarantine, create hospitals, blah blah blah

were these public policy responses or were these things that the Howard Assoc. did as public policy responses??????

Hey all. I am posting my episode numbers so that you can look them up if you so choose.

#4277
#4280
#4281
#4283

mmmmm . . . I think Julia's date is wrong, at least for the syllabus. It's Monday 10/29.

As part of the RED group, here is what I gleaned from Mary P. Ryan, "A Women's Awakening: Evangelical Religion and the Families of Utica, New York, 1800-1840," American Quarterly 30 (Winter 1978): 602-623.

Women take on various roles in the religious realm:
1) passionate convert
2) socially aware power player using religion as a cover
3) minister's financial and moral support
The article includes lots of statistical data on conversions of males and females in Utica, including the potential relationship between them. Women were the majority of converts in every revival, well above the gender-proportion of the wider society. The article also examines the role of family in conversions - between 17 and 54 percent of the converts professed faith with relatives. By joining churches independently, many women were able to express religious autonomy. The first churchmember in a family was twice as likely to be female as male. The "kinship of conversion" supports a critique of antebellum revivals as shining examples of Jacksonian America. But the author does struggle with data due to incomplete church records. Most revival converts were mobile, young, people of lower status, the problem being that only heads of households were included in most directories. At least 30 percent of converts left church shortly after the revival. Oneida county is a very interesting case where women were allowed to preach, including Deborah Pierce. But such "bold female piety" was focused only in rural areas in Baptist and Methodist denominations, at least in the early years. Industrialization also changes women's role in the home, so that the constancy of religion could off some reassurance. Upper-class women assume control of household morality, and the husbands benefit through positive public exposure and opinion. The article stresses the role of parental responsibility in bringing children to salvation. On the frontier, women were the ones to start religious practices in the home. Women's roles in conversions were originally repressed in favor of the head-of-household, but the Female Missionary Society and the Maternal Association brought strong emphasis on the woman's role in public, outside-of-home, official organizations that encouraged women's conversions.
"Women were more than the majority of the converts, more even than the private guardians of America's souls. The combination and consequence of all these roles left the imprint of a women's awakening on American society as well as American religion."

For Monday 10/9 we had four different pieces assigned for reading for the different color groups. We were supposed to have round-robin discussion for them, but time was running short so it turned into 30 second summaries. I was wondering if someone from each group (or multiple people) could post about their article so that we could all further this discussion a bit. On Friday 11/9 we also had different assignments by group that we never discussed. The purple group was assigned to post for that day, so we have their input, but it might be helpful for at least one person from each group to post their discoveries from searching the Chicago Tribune database.

I am from the GREEN group and this is what I have:
Drew Gilpin Faust, "Altars of Sacrifice: Confederate Women and Narratives of War," Journal of American History (March 1990): 1200-1228.
Faust discussed the role of Southern women in the confederacy and argues that their loss of morale ultimately led to the downfall of the Confederate States. Faust challenges the traditionally held idea that the sacrifice of women in the South (by allowing their husbands and sons to become soldiers and fight and by serving in more domestic roles such as sewing uniforms) allowed the confederacy to survive for as long as it did (1202-1203). Faust argues that over time women grew weary of staying at home because they felt useless and no longer desired to hide their emotions (1206, 1210, 1217). Many women believed that being on the physical battlefield alongside the men would be an easier battle to fight, and they also missed their husbands and sons(1204). Despite the efforts of newspapers and magazines to convince women that their role was to avoid writing "gloomy letters" and "to bestow their favors only on men in uniform" (1209, 1211). When the romance of war and beauty of a lost cause had worn off women refused to continue the useless sacrifice of life; they stopped fighting the moral battle from the home and directly caused the physical loss on the battlefield (1221, 1225, 1228).

From looking up "Fetterman" in the Chicago Tribune from 1867-1869:
On December 26, 1866 a group of drunken US soldiers were attacked at Ft. Laramie by a group of Indians. Several were killed and scalped. Seeking retaliation, a small group of US soldiers under the control of Lieutenant Colonel Fetterman went out to attack a group of Indians and were met with two thousand. All of the US troops were killed and the Chicago tribune gave details of "Indian mutilations" and "atrocities" done to the bodies such as scalping. Reports regarding the Indian War and Fetterman's Massacre continue from the first reports in January 16, 1867 to December 31, 1869 when a faithful soldier was shot in the leg. John R. Reshaw, a "half-breed" belonging to a group called the Red Cloud was assumed responsible for the shooting. A Battle of Ft. Fetterman was also reported in August 1867 where a group of Indians attacked a herd of government stock and carried several off with them. Although there were events and updates printed over the two year span, I think the most significant event was the Fetterman Massacre in December 1866 not only because of the loss of life, but also because of the great lack of interest. From the articles it appears to be a similar situation as Greasy Grass/Custer's Last Stand/Little Bighorn, but this time nobody turned it into a huge national event. I might be wrong on this, but that is just what I am getting from the articles. Anyone else have ideas?

Q: For the first test you said to focus on studying the SHDB and details, for the second test you advised us to focus on the Ayers text. Concerning the fill in the blank/short answer questions for the final, you never mentioned the SHDB or really the text book. You talked a lot about focusing on integrating ideas from everything that we have done. You also placed a large emphasis on taking notes while people were presenting on the History Engine. The main essay involves the History Engine - will there be a large focus on this on the short answer?

ANS: About 40 percentish (20 questions-ish) will deal with material covered from the beginning up through the last mid-term. This will be the "know your current 1820-1890 events" segment. Reviewing the SHDB, the chapter chronologies, era overviews, and major topics in Ayers will be helpful here. Questions will not duplicate the events, names, or major concepts from the midterms, but may require you to review the historians and their historiographical interpretations.

The remainder of the short answer section will focus on material since the last test, except for the three "place topics (Greenville, Heartland, Twain's Hannibal) that we did not formally discuss. As a means of conceptual integration for these topics you may want to think about how our
course themes and the major nineteenth century trends identified in the textbook excerpts we studied at the beginning of the term. In terms of specifics for each of these episode or topic-focused lectures and discussions, the usual "who-what-when-where-why -- key-agents, key-policies, major stages" analysis isn't a bad approach to take. For all of the assigned articles and books the additional "what is the thesis, how is the argument organized, what are the key turning points, how does it connect to our other organizing themes and lines of inquiry?" questions are also essential. A few questions will be based on the episode presentations but this will not be a central focus in the short answer section.

Note: If you are working together I would prefer that any shared info (document summaries, event synopsi, etc.) be posted here to the discussion board to avoid any inequities or academic integrity gray areas.

We are trying to figure out the article on stock watering by Charles Frances Adams, Jr. We never really talked about this in class - some information about why it is important would be really helpful.

Julia, Virginia, John, Jillian, Emily, Matthew

Dr. Benson,
We have a group of people together studying and we have a question about studying.
For the first test you said to focus on studying the SHDB and details, for the second test you advised us to focus on the Ayers text. Concerning the fill in the blank/short answer questions for the final, you never mentioned the SHDB or really the text book. You talked a lot about focusing on integrating ideas from everything that we have done. You also placed a large emphasis on taking notes while people were presenting on the History Engine. The main essay involves the History Engine - will there be a large focus on this on the short answer? This is a bit scattered, but we are trying to focus ourselves correctly. You usually just like to say make sure we know everything, but esp. concerning the names, dates, etc. to focus on, do you have any guidance?
Thanks,
Julia, Virginia, John, Emily, Matthew, Jillian

As a History major and a Senior, I obviously have had many history classes and, I'm sure everyone already knows this, but this class has been a very different experience from the rest. I enjoyed looking at history from the episodic perspective - not so much because it was more enjoyable than the narrative version but because it provided insight into a new way to think about history and a new way to look at research and events. Since a major aspect of education is to learn to think in different ways, I would say that this class was very successful. I will say, though, that I wish a little more narrative could have been mixed in because I did miss that! I think this type of class is best for people who already know a good bit about the era that they are studying since this method teaches more about different aspects of looking at history than necessarily trends and other established major events that you should already know. In that way, you could go into a course like this prepared to think about these events that you already know in different ways and to argue for or against their importance then, after looking at them in a new way.
I also think, on that note, that a course taught in this way should incorporate a little more historiography. Dr. Benson did a great job introducing some aspects of 19th century historiography, but I think it would be nice if student evaluation of that historiography was incorporated also.
This course though was a very rich experience for someone like me who has taken so many history classes that I'm done with my major (beside my seminar) and I'm taking extra just because I like it so much. I would like to see it offered as a higher upper level class under some sort of name such as "Research and the Episodic View of the 19th Century" and have HST-41 under a more narrative view be a pre-requisite to it.

Closing thoughts...
What a lot of information. In past history classes I feel as though the teacher went through a textbook and picked a certain number of important events and then lectured on those events. However, many teachers would talk about the same events because textbooks can be very similar. With this course, I felt as though the structure was similar, but the important events were not the textbook answers, but events that tend to fall through the cracks. It was exciting and frusterating and overwhelming at the same time - exciting because there was so much new information and so many more connections that I made to link historical moments together, frusterating because sometimes you were not really sure what the significance of that event that you've never really discussed before was and you had to try to piece it into the large picture before you forgot about it, and overwhelming because there are so many intricate details and questions to ask and things to think about when studying history and you feel as though you will never remember them all (and most of the time you probably don't). Lecture days were always interesting and informative - even if you weren't quite sure how to fit them within the history map you've made already.
It was also helpful to have this discussion board to keep you on track and not to let you fall behind in hw. It also provided a place to post ideas that you either didn't have time to mention in class or came up with after class and would forget before class the next day. There was a lot of reading. I appreciated having so many sources, but it seemed almost impossible to read them all. It was probably good that there were so many - one because history has so many perspectives and it's really important to look into them all, two because you should concentrate on your class outside of class at least once a day, and three because even if you don't get to all of the sources you will try to get to a majority of them and hopefully learn more than you would if just reading the textbook.
As for the SHDB and the History Engine. I really enjoyed both projects, but I wish that we would have had more lecture days. Both projects forced us to look at very specific aspects of history and to do a ton of research on our own and discover history on our own, but I also really enjoyed lecture days and learning what a variety of people have contributed to the world of history - how history is known in the history world right now (as opposed to my interpretation). I enjoyed chasing after my episode ideas and finding the interconnected sources, but I wish I would have had more time to really dig deep into each issue.
Overall I learned mucho, am keeping my notes, and will be studying a great deal for the final.

I realized that I forgot to post about the Summers book so here are my thoughts...
I was also confused for most of the book. There were so many little stories and side stories and people. Part of the problem for me was that this was the time period in history that I least liked. After learning about the Civil War and the Reconstruction, I didn't really like US history until the 20th century. However, this book as well as some discussions in class have gotten me a little more interested in that time period. If you look past the corruption and don't look at the robber barons as criminals, but as very intellegent individuals, then they become more interesting as you look for the good aspects in their character and how they really shaped modern day.
As for the political aspect of the book, I got hopelessly lost. But again I found that this also is very similar to modern day (where I also have trouble following political parties and the people within them) and it really made me determined to vote for the person I want in the next election.

Edited by author 12-07-2007 05:54 PM
Hello All! I hope studying is going well :]

I am doing some major reworking on my July 4, 1876 episode, so since we are supposed to study those, I wanted to give you the general idea of it before I finish writing and submit it.

My episode will now focus solely on the sale article from Greenville's Enterprise and Mountaineer, whereby the paper "will present a $60 Weed Sewing-Machine, warranted by the manufacturers to be in perfect order . . . to each of the five persons sending us the largest number of new cash yearly subscribers.” I wanted to understand why there was so little mention of Southern celebration.

I am working on a general argument that Northerners and blacks had much more of a reason to celebrate the Centennial than Southerners under Reconstruction. While Northerners felt they had won a war and blacks felt as if they had gained their hard earned freedom, many Southerners felt as if they were losing freedoms and losing control. The South really had very little to celebrate at this point.

So my five episodes are . . .
1) Furman University's Philosophian Society Discusses Divisive Issues
    Minutes of the Furman University Philosophian Society, Greenville, SC. March 22, 1861 – April 5, 1861 (Special Collections Library, Furman University).

2) The Philosophian Society in the Civil War and Beyond
    Minutes of the Furman University Philosophian Society, Greenville, SC. June 21, 1861 – April 9, 1866 (Special Collections Library, Furman University).

3) Notice: No American History Taught Here
    Grote, George. History of Greece. Vol. V. New York City, N.Y., Printed by Harper and Brothers, Publishers, 1854. (Special Collections Library, Furman University)
Pütz, Wilhelm. Manual of Ancient Geography and History. Thomas Kerchever Arnold, Ed. Trans. German. 3rd Ed. New York City, N.Y., Printed by D. Appleton and Company, 1877. (Special Collections Library, Furman University)
Rollin, Charles. The Ancient History. Vols. 1 and 2. New York City, N.Y., Printed by Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1843. (Special Collections Library, Furman University)


4) July 4, 1876: The Centennial (un)Celebration
    “Our Centennial Offer.” The Enterprise and Mountaineer, Greenville, South Carolina. July 5, 1876 (Microfilm 677 3 2988 00256 6550, James B. Duke Library, Furman University.)

5) Separation of Church and Race
 &