John Brown: Terrorist or Freedom Fighter?
Introduction:
John Brown is seen as pretty much something of an enigma today due to the fact that he was perhaps one of those who was very much against slavery but armed blacks in what could be seen as an insurrection to violence to do so. Earle’s book focuses with intriguing detail on the raid on Harper’s Ferry with a number of original documents and sources which create an interesting and largely factual picture of what went on during that raid. One perhaps may not agree with the methods used by Brown as they are often compared with the terrorism which seems to be prevalent today but one can also argue that the daily inhumanity and indignity of slavery pushed Brown to methods which were perhaps slightly unpalatable but were also necessary to ignite the Civil War which was not far from coming. Earle is circumspect and rather benign in his portrayal of Brown who was quite a gentle man in his heart of hearts and he was also deeply affected by the wrongs which were caused by slavery. Although he failed in his resolve to arm black persons and make the conscious of freedom, his message did tend to live on and create a sense of forward momentum for the abolitionist cause. The book argues that Brown was certainly not a terrorist but a freedom fighter who went to extreme personal lengths to ensure his goal was attained.
John Brown as a man
Brown was a methodical and deeply principled man who would definitely not stand for the horrors of slavery which he felt were poisoning society in the extreme. He managed to train a group of around 20 men which also included his own son and who took up residence in harper’s Ferry which was the town in Virginia where the arsenal of the United States was located.
Earle’s book focuses quite well on the build up to the attempted raid and also gives some credence to Brown’s hopes of writing a new state constitution. Perhaps the man had lofty ideals but he was definitely a person who would not stand for the wanton moral appropriation and violence which slavery inflicted upon others and as such he was extremely sympathetic to the black man.
Earle attempts to strike a balance between the religious fundamentalism of Brown and his attempts to create a better world for the black man. Previous historians have judged him rather unfairly as a religious psychopath and fanatic although there are some who have been more circumspect in their attempts to paint Brown as a martyr (Earle p 110).
What is definite is that the slaveholder’s response to Brown the man was way out of order, Like a posse of blood crazed hunters, they hunted Brown and his associates down and eventually massacred all the blacks in his employ as well as having Brown arrested and tried for high treason.
One also has to account for the fact that several Americans especially those in the South did not regard slaves as free humans or individuals who had some sort of moral compass. Naturally enough Earle argues that Brown was not of that ilk and would go to all lengths to acquire freedom for slaves who were being held against their will and who definitely did not want to remain in bondage (Earle p 120).
The situation in the South
The main crop in the upper Old South, due to having overworked the soil, was wheat. This did not require as much man power as cotton with the result that not so many slaves were required. Consequently, many slaves owned by upper Old South plantation owners were sold to lower Old South plantation owners to plant cotton.
The southern South was considerably a rural area as not many towns and cities were built and therefore, this area of America was delayed in developing manufacturing and population density was lower than in the rest of the country. Beautiful colonial houses and mansions can be found here still today.
Not all the white people in the Old South were plantation owners. Some of them were well off and inherited plantations and owned slaves but others owned just a handful of slaves and others still did not own any slaves at all and had to work their own farms. These were the middle-class families of the South. They were farmers who did not have the means to buy slaves. They were often likened to slaves because of this and they obviously did not like it. The slaves often compared themselves to these people for the fact that they both had to toil the land.
The rest of the white people in the South were the poor whites or ‘white trash’. They were very poor, owned no land and hated the plantation owners for obvious reasons but they hated the blacks even more. As a result, they had no intention of wanting to free the slaves.
Other aspects which Brown rebelled against include slaves’ resilience to forced labour and other similar situations. Slaves could not always perform the tasks allotted to them and some even rebelled when faced with these situations. The harsh repression practiced by some plantation owners is discussed at length although there is also a tendency to dehumanize the slaves in efforts to become more colonial and authorative. African culture remained an intrinsic part of the slaves’ life until well into the 19th century but life was changing for the average slave even as customs were changing and other freedmen were imbuing several new ideas into the slaves’ minds.
Some chapters are rather circumspect about the influence of slavery on the Civil War and he prefers to see that as a logical conclusion to a lengthy debate on humanity and the influence of commerce. All this comes together in his narrative on certain aspects of the slave’s life which was not always as bad as portrayed especially in the border states (Earle p 200).
The situation in Virginia where slaves had their initial origins on a large scale is also discussed extensively in the book. One has to remember that most of the slaves in the beginnings of the American colonies were actually indentured servants from Great Britain and these carried out the hard manual labour accordingly. The shift to large scale slavery is discussed constantly in the book and provides the major leitmotif for all proceedings accordingly.
The standard of living of the black slaves in the South was much worse than the standard of living of the blacks in the North. The slaves were treated without respect, punished if they did not obey and had just enough food to get by. They had little or no medical attention. This is why their life expectancy was practically half the age as that of the white people. Because of this harsh treatment by the white man, slaves did not trust their owners at all.
Conclusion:
Brown was perhaps a personality which came from different extremes but at the end of the day was a person of high moral principles and committed to freedom for the blacks.
This quote from Brown’s final speech in the courtroom sums up the fact that he was definitely not a terrorist.
“Now, if it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I submit; so let it be done!" (Earle p 195)
Works Cited
Earle J: John Brown's Raid on Harpers Ferry: A Brief History with Documents, New York, Bedford St Martin’s 2008 Print
