Category: John Brown

Nat Turner and John Brown were slaves both known for their vicious assault during anti-slavery revolts; Brown’s militant abolitionist revolt raided the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry Virginia in 1859 and Turners organized a rebellion of both the freed and enslaved negro in Southampton County Virginia in 1831. During and after the time that these rebellions took place many people view them as terrorists even today most of the American people share those same sentiments, but a minority of Americans view them as heroes and martyrs who chose to fight for the rights and freedom of enslaved people. This essay will thoroughly explain the similarities, and differences, and identify how racial identity has determined the legacy of Nat Turner and John Brown.

Nat Turner was not only a slave who understood the circumstances and conditions of slavery being morally wrong and unjust he felt as if he was a prophet ordained by God to free his people from bondage and also lead them to freedom. His religious ideals helped cultivate the undying desire to follow the Lord and change the conditions of enslavement by any means necessary. 1 There is a sense of irony that lies in the fact that the exact same book, the Bible, was being used to enforce the ideals of slavery among whites and slaves, “For he who knoweth his master’s will and doeth it not, shall be beaten with many stripes” (Luke 12:47) and inspire a slave revolt as vicious as what Turner was about to do. Nat Turner has known for years of his calling realizing the only way he could effectively change the ideas point of view of slavery was through violence. Nat was the definition of a freedom fighter and was given no other choice but to Annette’s violent acts of revolution in order to achieve freedom.

John Brown was an American abolitionist leader born in Torrington, Connecticut on May 9, 1800. at the age of 5 brown was exposed to the ideas of abolition and taught by his father (Owen Brown), about human rights and the opposition to slavery, around this same time his family moved to Hudson, Ohio. Like Turner, John Brown would also inherit the beliefs of God and adopt the Christian faith as a code of morality which later inspired his ideas for the freedom of the bondmen and bondwomen. 2Scott John Hammond explained, “Brown appears to have been a practitioner of the Christian ethic framed by the imperative of universal love and compassion for others, especially those who suffer under the yoke of oppression and injustice” (62). Brown was a man who believed in equality for all and felt the dire need to act in his own hands because of the lack of representation for blacks and slaves. Brown had lost hope in the legal system, so he resorted to violence to help fight against the injustice whites set up.

Turner and his supporters carried out an assassination on August 21, 1831, which sparked their revolt against white owners. Signs and divine voices were among Turner’s beliefs. He witnessed the bloody conflict between black and white spirits in 1825. Three years later, he received a second message from God. 3Unlike slave revolts that occurred in the decades before and after Turner’s rebellion of 1830, Turner was able to detail the activities leading up to, during, and following the attack through his confession to Thomas Grey. An attack led by John Brown on Harpers Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia), in October 1859 by an armed band of abolitionists. It was a major factor that precipitated the American Civil War. 4 His focus from the beginning was on the American arsenal and armory station Harpers Ferry, and he knew that he wanted this attack to include not only white men who were strong in their moral convictions against slavery but also slaves who wanted to rise up and fight for their own freedom. As a result of the corrupt Dred Scott v. Sanford court case, African American slaves and their descendants were not constitutionally protected, prompting Brown to become dissatisfied with the verdict and plan one of the most recognizable slave revolts in American history.

Both John Brown and Nat Turner believed that their violent opposition to America’s slavery was a manifestation of God’s will. 5 Both men, Turner and Brown used violence as a means of ending slavery, and Douglass, a great influence on all abolitionists and the greater white community, was inspired by these men. They also had very distinct differences in their approaches to fighting the law and opposing slavery. 6 One obvious difference between these two men is that one, Brown, was a middle-class white man who fought for justice towards black slaves, and the other, Turner, was a black slave who fought for freedom for himself and his people. Turner is regarded as a hero who fought for the liberation of his people, whereas Brown is regarded as a terrorist who betrayed his own race in order to help people who were different.

Nat Turner was a hero because he was among the first to fight to end slavery. All slaves could see freedom, and because of his willingness to act, freedom is now on the way. Nat Turner’s slave revolt was a pivotal moment in the history of American slavery, ushering in a fundamental shift in the relationship between master and slave. As a result of this incident, slavery underwent an unprecedented transformation that transcended paternalistic notions. Prior to the American Civil War, John Brown was one of the most prominent abolitionists. Unlike many anti-slavery activists, he is not a pacifist and believes the government should act against slave owners and those who support them. Brown was an abolitionist, a martyr, and, for both black and white activists, and deserves to be remembered as a hero for his contributions to fighting for the rights and freedoms of enslaved people.

In conclusion to this essay, it has thoroughly explained how Turner and Brown compared and contrasted as well as how racial identity has shaped both their legacies. The will to act against the prejudiced system of slavery and fight for the freedom of enslaved people has cemented both Turner’s and Brown’s legends in history. Rather you disagree with how they used violence to justify their anti-slavery rebellions, there’s no denying the fact that they should be remembered as heroes.

John Brown is known as a radically abolitionist that opposed slavery. He is one of the most controversial people in American history. Slavery is wrong. We are all humans and children of God so why treat us blacks differently because of the tone/color of skin. Brown didn’t believe in slavery so he did what he felt was to right to help us blacks get our freedom and put an end to this crime.

Brown was aggressive fighting for human rights since he had an extreme ideology of the superiority of the black race. His philosophies made him clash with the civil rights movement which was aiming for integration while he wanted the black and white communities separated. He held the belief that racism is a despicable act that continues to adversely affect society. It is a matter that can no longer be hidden and people cannot pretend that it does not exist. He had a major effect on his mostly African American audience, who could relate well with the issues he was talking about. “The black community had grown tired of having to wait for justice, respect, equality, and freedom” (Deen, 2019). Many of them felt that he did a better job of voicing their complaints than that of the civil rights movement. It is easy to see why he resorted to violence since it is the only way his concerns could be heard. More than influence people’s religious beliefs, Brown influenced their attitudes concerning the injustices they faced as African Americans and more people applied his teachings in their fight for freedom.

Another factor that instigated Brown is the bitterness of slavery and the historical injustice faced by African Americans. Before the Civil War and the dawn of independence in the US, slavery existed where millions of blacks were forced to work in servitude for their white masters. “After their freedom was announced, people in the south still felt the need to limit their rights and dissociate from them leading to the passing of different laws know as black codes that segregated the two parties” (Deen, 2019). The same people responsible for slavery also executed different segregation laws. Blacks were seen as having been from a primitive and inferior culture. As immigrants, they still held the lowest position on the social and economic ladder. Their color became a justification for discrimination and was used to identify them as lowly. Brown used force to opposite this discrimination.

Due to slavery, blacks were denied certain jobs and free movement in areas deemed as white zones. On buses and on the railway system, they were allotted different seats. In restaurants and hospitals and other service areas, they were expected to be on their own and receive help from their own. They were also responsible for their own entertainment and in some cases, denied the right to vote based on technicalities such as their illiteracy. Even separate schools were established mostly in the south. The army kept separate units and blacks were not allowed to shake the hands of whites. The laws known as the Jim Crow laws came to establish a hierarchy that was enforced even in its extreme through violence. Brown saw force as the only way to counter the injustices and force they forced.

The actions of John Brown make him a freedom fighter. He performed the actions to usher in the precedence of justice in society. A society that lacks justice cannot develop because the boundary is drawn between the superior and the inferior categories of individuals in terms of political influence. In situations where justice is required to take its course, two things should always be considered, and they include punishment and reward. The former implies that fairness is realized when the offender is subjected to the rule of his or her conduct, while the latter majorly deals with providing a reward where it is worth

People perceiving themselves as better than others while considering other races as inferior is very disheartening and forces minority leaders to act in the same way as Brown. It is a wrong mindset that diminishes the gains humanity has made over the centuries. It is very disturbing seeing how minorities suffer. They have continued to face hatred and being subjects of bigotry. Collectively they have been described as intimidators and terrorists with bad intentions. It is by this notion that when people get baffled, challenged, intimidated, or are approached by unfamiliar things, fear instills within them. A society that is faced with racism becomes engulfed with fear and finds no access to rationalization and critical thinking.

Racism is manifested in different forms. It remains a big problem and has led to cases of hatred, segregation, and inhumane acts. Without taking active actions like that of Brown, racism is bound to continue in society Racism is a despicable act that continues to affect society. It is a matter that can no longer be hidden and people cannot pretend that it does not exist. Burial of racism in the 60’s era was only a stylish burial as it still remains a major and sensitive issue of the modern time. To this day, we still go through racism. The Black community ( Aka me ) are still fighting for our freedom. We got cops and people killing us for jogging, sleeping, going to the deli, and more. The problem is coming back in most modern societies at a shocking rate. For instance, while the United States is a diverse and cultural state, racial tensions and conflicts continue to affect the freedom and wellbeing of millions of citizens. It is only through radical actions that racism that the plight of minorities can be highlighted. People who engage in affirmative action to stop racism like John Brown’s actions should not be cast as freedom fighters since they are seeking to liberate people.

Have you ever been to an art museum? When you were there, did you realized that you do not know any history about your home state? Well, that is where I was about two weeks ago. Museums have artifacts from all over the world, but they mostly have a common theme. The museum I went to was at Iowa State University called the Brunnier Art Museum. The museum is located in the Scheman Building on campus. They have art pieces that deal with the history of Iowa and Iowa State University. Iowa State’s Mission Statement is about sharing knowledge to make Iowa and the world a better place. That is what the museums on campus are for, to share knowledge with the viewers. Everyone needs to know the history of where they grew up or where they are living. The Portrait of John Brown is an art piece that helped me learn a lot about my state. The piece I am going to talk about in my paper is the Portrait of John Brown.

John Brown had a history in Iowa. I remember talking about Brown in history class, but my teacher left out one detail. My teacher left out that Brown was actually in Iowa for a part of his life. Brown came to Iowa to recruit followers that agreed with his beliefs to fight with him. He was in Iowa to recruit people, gather weapons, and prepare for his plan. Brown, also, let enslaved people across Iowa. He believed that slavery should be entirely abolished, by whatever means necessary. This belief of his is a crucial part of understanding the portrait and the feeling Wetherby, the artist, was trying to portray.

Wetherby, the painter, has a connection with Iowa too. Wetherby was a painter and photographer. He opened a photography studio in Iowa City in 1854 (Brunnier Museum). You may be thinking, how are Brown and Wetherby connected. Well, the answer is through slavery. Wetherby believed that slavery should not extend into new territories. While Brown took a more forceful approach to get his beliefs through which Wetherby pictured in the portrait.

The Portrait of John Brown stood out to me because of the details the artist added to represent Brown as a person. The artist of this painting reveals the intensity of Brown while still reflecting on his skills as a painter. The artist of this painting is Isaac Augustus Wetherby. In the painting, the first thing I noticed was that Brown is pictured holding a gun. The gun stands out because of the contrast of Brown’s hands with the darkness of the gun. Another thing that Wetherby added is

Figure 1. “Portrait of John Brown”

Source: Brunnier Museum a house burning in the background. These aspects represent the intensity of Brown because of his actions. John Brown “lit the fuse” for the Civil War after he seized the United States arsenal at Harpers Ferry. Brown is known for his violent acts to get his point a crossed about slavery. That is why Wetherby wanted to show this side of Brown. This painting shows Brown’s connection to history with simple details within the painting. That is why this portrait stood out to me compared to the others.

This portrait was one of my favorites located at the museum. It was different than all of the other portraits and it stood out compared to them. Wetherby used his style and the personality of Brown to paint this portrait. The Brunnier Museum has a lot of art that shows the history of Iowa. The Portrait of John Brown is a piece that needs to be seen in person to get the whole effect on the atmosphere it creates while looking at it.

Investigation

It is controversial whether people believe that the violent methods used by John Brown were justified. Brown, as a radical abolitionist, felt strongly against slavery and relied on violent methods to exemplify his views. He is known for his leadership in the Harper Ferry Raid in October 1859, the raid, although failed, that enraged social tensions and made Brown an icon against slavery. He is known for using a small but brutal army of rebels against slavery who led attacks against those who believed in pro-slavery.

Brown fortifies his self-image along with his sense of mission as he gathers those with strong anti-slavery views to help rebel on those who are pro-slavery. During the Pottawatomie Massacre in May 1856 at the time of the Bleeding Kansas, five pro-slavery men were killed by Brown and his followers, but Brown emphasizes the unexpected the killings that became a result of many of his raids as professors believe his actions were “better understood as a political than military act” (McDaniel). This shows that his true intentions were not to use physical violence to broadcast his abolitionist views, but to simply use him and his group as a mean of propaganda. This incident led to the capture of Brown, which raised more public attention on the matter of the violent methods that Brown used. In the grand scheme of things, his violent methods were seemingly well thought through and led to a pivot moment during the Civil War in which awareness of the extents the anti-slavery icon, John Brown, went through to promote his abolitionist views were publicized. Since his actions marked a significant point in history when the struggle for slave freedom is prominent in the United States, these methods are mostly justified.

Although Brown understood that his actions were not intended to be violent, it is believed that he may have had a “mental illness,” which would especially affect the way that he processes his thoughts in determination of ethicality (McDaniel). This would result in Brown’s actions being somewhat unjust because of the nature of a mental illness misguiding one to perform wrongdoing. Brown’s sudden ambition to use an armed insurrection, going against the previous pacifist theme of the abolitionist movement makes his methods could seem extreme and unjust.

From the state’s point of view, Brown has greatly disobeyed Virginia’s laws and believe his violence was unjustified. Although Brown relied on violent methods to portray his resistance to these unjust laws and marked a pivotal moment in history, it did seem to backfire. The Harpers Ferry raid ultimately led to the execution of John Brown and his followers, an extreme sacrifice for the hope of future freedom of slaves (Nudelman 17). For this reason, Brown is considered a ‘martyr’ and his actions become a ‘collective identity’ rather than a threat to the state, meaning that his actions did not make a fierce impact on the state, but rather served the purpose as a mean of expressing his abolitionist views, making the violence just (Nudelman 15). It should be noted that although Brown wanted to initiate his violent attacks, he waited until an opportunity broke open for him to utilize, which is when the shooting of Charles Dow, a believer of “free soil” from Ohio took place (Gilpin 20). Since the shooting, the disagreeable factions began to sharply add upon their methods of expressing views with the use of violence. Brown did not join right away, but once he found out that the “Free Soil” men were “thoroughly determined to fight” and just needed a leader, he could not resist the offer (Gilpin 16). Although Brown did not necessarily initiate the first violent shooting, his following perceived violence as a necessary means of propaganda to promote their views.

Despite John Brown’s strong belief that slavery was unjust, others may view that no matter what, the use of violence, especially in Brown’s case, is not justified. Since his violent acts were not for self-defense, but rather as a way of getting revenge upon slave owners, many believe that his acts are unjust. In Brown’s case, he and his followers practically started the acts of violence with the first attacks at Pottawatomie Creek, Kansas against the pro-slavery residents to the later years after raising funds where he initiated an attack on slaveholders during the Harpers Ferry (Toledo 107). Although the initiated attacks by Brown were seemingly unnecessary since slavery did not directly affect him, nor has he ever been affected by it, he believed strongly in other’s rights and did not believe that it was just for slaveholders to continue their supposed abusive treatment to these poor slaves. His aim was to “create a southern portal for the Underground Railway,” referring to a path of freedom for the slaves to follow once escaped after the raid, going against the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 (‘Brown’s Raid Changed World;’). This rebellion, yet seemingly unjust in its methods from the outside perspective, seemed to be the only method that he could develop to help dramatically publicize the abolitionist views of anti-slavery, therefore justifying his methods.

Overall, the violent methods insisted by John Brown were mostly justified because of the life sacrifices made to promote his abolitionist views to the public. In addition, he did not intend for violence to characterize and lead his raids at first, but quickly realized that pacifism would not suffice in marking a pivotal moment in abolitionist history. Although some viewed that his methods were unjust due to its violent nature, Brown disagrees, while the opposing and contradicting views that resulted in his execution served as a means of anti-slavery propaganda itself.

Although the American Civil War was a war fought between brothers, it is still thought of as being one of the bloodiest wars in American history. Ever since slavery was brought to the American Colonies there has been controversy over whether slavery should exist or not. It is because of this that the American Civil War always shares conversation with slavery. These events are what led to the splitting of a nation and what caused brothers to spill the blood of their own.

The first major event that led to the civil war was the introduction of slavery to the British Colonies around the early 17th century before the American Revolution. “The British colony of Georgia actually banned slavery from 1735 to 1750, although it remained legal in the other 12 colonies” (Trust 1). There were already controversies over slavery before America even separated from Britain. This may lead a person to believe that the American Civil War was inevitable due to slavery being one of the foundation blocks of the country.

The second major event was John Brown’s raid in 1859. “John Brown was tried for murder, treason, and insurrection on the Jefferson County courthouse at Charles Town, convicted November 2, 1859, and hanged there a month later” (Encyclopedia 1). Although what John Brown did may have been against the law, the North stated that his actions were for a just cause and were infuriated when he was hanged. The south was infuriated for the opposite reason: John Brown had violated the rights of the southern states to own slaves. This event in American History further divided the Northern and Southern states.

The third major event was the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860 and the Battle of Fort Sumter in 1861. “On April 12, 1861, forces from the Confederate States of America attacked the United States military garrison at Fort Sumter, South Carolina. Less than two days later, the fort surrendered. Only one U.S. soldier lost his life” (Geographic 1). When the confederate states decided to attack the Northern-Owned Fort Sumter, the Civil War officially began. The Northern states were sending in supplies necessary for life, so the Southern states had no reason to attack the fort, but they did so anyways.

These three major events are what led the United States of America to tear itself apart. There are many arguments that the American Civil War could have been avoided. Realistically thinking, there was no way to avoid this conflict between the Free states and the Slave states. It is quite ironic how the greedy nature of mankind let to the splitting apart of a nation founded under God.

Works Cited

1. “Trigger Events of the Civil War.” American Battlefield Trust, 1 May 2019, https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/trigger-events-civil-war.
2. “John Brown.” Encyclopedia, https://www.wvencyclopedia.org/articles/668.
3. National Geographic Society. “Battle of Fort Sumter.” National Geographic Society, 24 Mar. 2014, https://www.nationalgeographic.org/thisday/apr12/battle-fort-sumter/

Revolution is a word that was getting more broad in the era between 1750 and 1850’s. The independence of the United States of America was a major event in our history. Thomas Paine, an english guy who was an important figure leading to independence, was the first person to illustrate the idea of a revolution and demanding their justice rights, by writing the Common Sense. Scott Leill published a book called “46 Pages”, demonstrating the consequences of this pamphlet on the american community and on the events leading to the independence. On the other hand, slavery was an issue in the US during the 1850’s. The act of slavery was a normal act that many states agreed on. Horwitz introduced to us John Brown as an abolitionist who was fighting for the freedom of slaves in a book called “ Midnight Rising: John Brown And The Raid That Sparked The Civil War”. Regarding the title of the book, Horwitz argues the early life of John Brown until he becomes an abolitionist. In addition to that, he argues the consequences of the Harpers Ferry Raid on the civil war. Linking these two books to each other, we can say that these two authors can be arguing the same idea but in two different eras and different plot. Each author is trying to illustrate how did each character struggled to convince the community that change is the answer.

Born in Torrington, Connecticut, John Brown spent most of his childhood in Ohio. The Brown family was a religious one who believed in God, but also believed that slavery is the most cruel act in their life. Regarding that, Brown’s father raised his children as anti- slaveries who soon became abolitionists. In his early life, Brown faced a lot of social and business failure. John Brown always believed that slavery is wrong and should be abolished from the whole country. So he raised his kids to hate slavery and taught them that it is an act of violence and against humanity. Before Brown, abolitionists like Garrison belived that slavery can be fought with words and not violence. Brown agreed with Garrison that slavery should be abolished completely, but he opposed the idea of moral suasion. Garrison believed that he can fight the pro slavery community by writing articles that prove them wrong, and by making speeches and try to convince them that slavery is wrong. On the other hand, Brown considered that if abolishing slavery requires violence and brutality then why not? He believed that it’s God’s choice, and that God chose him as a saver to free the slaves. So if it required violence then it is God’s will too. In 1854, the government passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which gave people the choice to vote between spreading slavery in these two states or to prevent it. As all abolitionists, Brown moved to Kansas with five of his children. The two opposing communities were pouring to these two states in order to secure the future of this country. The pro slavery wanted to gurantee that they win in these two states and spread slavery, and abolitionists tried their best to prevent slavery from reaching Kansas and Nebraska. This act built a bridge of hatred between the northern territories and the southern ones. John Brown became famous in the North and hated in the south due to his opposition to slavery. One night in 1856, Brown and his four kids attacked a proslavery colony, slaughtering five men in a brutal way, leaving a scene of dead bodies with their hands and heads chopped off. At this moment, Brown was considered as a violent abolitionist who had a lot of supporters and abolitionists under his command.

On october 16, 1859, Brown and his army who consisted of twenty one of his fellow abolitionists, attacked the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, which was later known as the Harpers Ferry Raid. This move was a total failure as Colonel Robert E. Lee destroyed this act and surrounded them at the spot. Ten of Brown’s partners were dead, two of them were his sons. Brown was injured and then captured. He was later accused of treason against the country, and executed on Dec. 2, 1859. Brown did not fulfill his dream and the thing he strived for his entire life before his death. We can say that the Harpers Ferry Raid was unsuccessful regarding the consequences of the raid itself, which resulted in the death of ten people, and the execution of John Brown. Looking at that from a different point of view, this raid was a major turning point between the North and the South which later affected the presidential election of 1860. Due to the raid, any approach to a compromise between the north and the south was kind of impossible. This grew the tension between them which led to their split and then the civil war.

Thomas Paine and John Brown were two historical characters who actually had the ability to make a change that could benefit the country in one way or another. In my opinion, the shock that Thomas Paine made to the British government had a bigger impact on the fate of the country. Thomas Paine’s Common Sense was a direct factor that lead to the war between Great Britain and America. His approach to convince many colonists was an actual success, as he created this idea of change and that americans should be independent from Britain. Brown in advance, didn’t have a direct effect on the end of slavery. His actions helped to build up the events leading to the civil war. Slavery wasn’t affected by John Brown’s actions as much as the impact of Thomas Paine on the independence. Let’s pretend that these two characters were not born and their actions were never made, the question will be what would be the fate of the country if these men were like normal people who obeyed the law. Looking at the events that lead to the independence and the civil war, we can say that it would have happened anyway. The people back then were waiting for any little reason to start the war with Britain, due to the persecution and the injustice the americans were undergoing. Also, the tension between the north and the south was about to come to an end in one way or another. These events helped to set the war between the two opposing sides. In my opinion, I enjoyed reading “Midnight Rising” since it was a new story I didn’t know, and the way Tony Horwitz expressed Brown’s actions was kind of interesting to read. In conclusion, these two books can be considered a success in explaining the consequences of Common Sense and the Raid of Harpers Ferry on the destiny of the country.