October 2013 – Page 3 – Popular Politics in Early America

October 21, 2013

Rebellion; A Slave's Only Choice

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

Eugene Genovese’s “Slave Revolts in Hemispheric Perspective” offers an interesting perspective on criteria that appeared as necessary for a successful slave revolt, specifically relating to those within the United States. In his piece, Genovese lists a series of conditions that were favorable to have in order for an African slave revolt to occur. Things such as; “African-born slaves” outnumbering American born ones, a slave structure where an autonomous black leadership could develop, and a variety of other pieces were almost necessary if a slave revolt was to occur (12).

Unfortunately, as Genovese describes, these criteria were rarely ever allowed to come to fruition within the “old south” of the United States, suppressing large scale revolts. For one, though slaves were at times trained in the use of firearms, there was rarely ever enough in one given area to adequately overthrow the white owners and they were also untrained in any tactical usage (16). Furthermore, as a result of westward movement, it was difficult for strong ties to be created amongst slaves due to the constant physical reshuffling and potential for any leaders to be sold out (15). With factors such as these restricting them, Genovese indicates how slaves struggled to generate any significant momentum for a slave revolt in North America.

Though slave revolts struggled to gain momentum within North America, in places like Brazil this was not the case during the 19^th century. Genovese elaborates on how a factionalized and weakened political system opened the door for a series of slave revolts in Bahia from 1807-1835. These revolts occurred as a result of the tensions between the bourgeois and landowners, which created the perfect climate for African slaves to take acquire a strong foothold in revolts, desertions, etc. (23).

For every potential successful rebellion, Genovese describes a number of gruesome results of failed rebellions. In describing “The Great Rebellion” in Berbiece, Genovese indicates how the defeat of the revolting slaves led to mass executions “conducted with all the cruelty Europeans invariably attribute to nonwhite savages” (34). The article also depicts how even when slaves showed moderation in the rebellions, they were still put down in cold blood regardless of how violent they were (35). In how Genovese describes these retaliations, it almost like he is casting the whites as the savages the slave owners believed slaves to be. He casts their brutality towards the slaves, who were merely fighting for their freedom, as something comparable to the brutality which we today associate with mass genocides.

Throughout our semester so far we have discussed a number of different types of rebellions and riots that were used to express the positions of the rebels. Yet, within all these various rebellions, the participants took a number of steps before reaching any type of violent gathering. They spoke to officials, wrote petitions to their representative bodies, and so on. Yet, the slaves mentioned in Genovese’s piece were not able to take any steps as these. As underprivileged and silent people, the slaves typically had no voice where they could express their problems with freedom. It could be guessed that by speaking out as an individual, a slave would face a harsh punishment. Without the ability to speak for themselves, the African slaves were left with only one option in terms of expressing their position, rebellion. Yet, unlike white revolts, where even an unsuccessful rebellion had some positive influence, slaves were faced with a much more negative result. By the eighteenth and nineteenth century revolts for slaves were almost suicidal, as the retaliation was so brutal (49). Without this “social right,” African slaves were left with little to no options to express their hatred for their position in society.

October 21, 2013

Resisting Slavery

I think this Tuesday’s readings certainly differed from the readings of the previous week on Cherokee women but each provided valuable information on different aspects of slaves’ experience in the Americas. I’m going to begin with Genovese’s chapter Slave Revolts in Hemispheric Perspective because it is easier to tie into last week’s reading. Genovese does a good job highlighting some of the major differences that allowed for large-scale slave revolutions in some areas of the Atlantic and explaining why such revolutions were not as prominent in other areas. While Genovese certainly approached the issue from a Marxist angle, she engaged other societal constructs in a meaningful manner: the shooting ability of white militias in the United States, the population ratios within a given community, and exploring how varying religious beliefs influenced behavior. Situating slave rebellions within the concept of class struggle sets the stage for rebellion, proceeding to use secondary factors as either additive or subtractive elements towards slaves’ tendency towards revolution made it a more complete piece than I expected when I read the phrase “worldwide capitalist production”(1). My only criticism is the thing that ties Genovese’s work to last week’s readings. My issue is that she focuses almost exclusively on the African influences in slave culture and lacks a discourse on contributions from enslaved Native Americans. Moreover, given the importance of women in Cherokee communities and the enslavement of some Cherokee women, her study also fails to engage gender as a contributing factor in rebellion.

Reid’s analysis provided a far more detailed analysis of a specific incident and area that of Genovese, and successfully navigates and explains the complex political framework that dealt with runaway and freed slaves in Maryland and Pennsylvania. Moreover, while Genovese posits revolution as the ultimate form of resistance in slave communities, Reid explores personal struggles and resistances to slavery in the form seeking freedom by fleeing to free territories. However, as Reid clearly articulates the struggle for freedom did not end upon reaching the north or even being freed by one’s master, the struggle was perpetual and later compounded by the decision in Prigg v. Pennsylvania. I think her engagement free African-Americans continued experience with slavery provided a different perspective on the issue of slavery and contributes to a more complete assessment of slavery’s far-reaching effects in United States society prior to the Civil War.

October 17, 2013

An Expansion of Women's History

This past week, we read Theda Perdue’s Cherokee Women. I found it very interesting because I have not read many direct accounts of Native American life and society structure, and unsurprisingly ones I have read tended to focus on men. As Michael Lameroux points out in his post, this book fits into what I have seen from a few other books in my history classes in the past year or so. For example, last year I read Woody Holton’s Abigail Adams, which focused on how John Adams’ wife Abigail took an active and often equal role in their marriage. I also read Maya Jasanoff’s Liberty’s Exiles, which spent a good deal of time on Molly Brant, a woman of the Mohawk tribe who wielded great power in her community during the Revolutionary era, in great part due to her romantic relationship with the British Superintendent of Indian Affairs. However, those books focused on women of the upper echelons of their respective societies, and also ones who likely would not have had as much power were it not for their husbands’ positions. Perdue’s book, on the other hand, exposes the importance of the roles of a wider swath of Cherokee women.

Perdue begins by establishing that the Cherokee did have defined gender roles, which she describes as “theoretically rigid” but in reality not so, due to men’s propensity to help. Women’s duties included agricultural chores, which seems to have been typical of native societies who depended heavily on crops. (18) Another example of a similarly structured society is that of many western African cultures, where agricultural tasks were similarly seen as women’s work to the point that men who participated were lesser than their peers. However, Perdue makes it clear that things were much more fluid among the Cherokee, pointing out that men were often expected to help in these agricultural duties rather than discouraged. Perdue also points out the important role of the menstrual cycle in Cherokee society. Cherokee women derived power from the menstrual cycle as it was so tied to pregnancy and childbirth. Perdue’s account of the myth of the “stone man” shows that this reverence for women’s menstruation was a deep-rooted part of Cherokee culture.

If I had one issue with the book, it is that I am a bit worried about the primary source material Perdue uses to make these claims. In the introduction, Perdue outlines the difficulties of finding reliable primary source material on Native American women, noting that many of the early accounts of Native American life come from Europeans who lacked context for what they saw and likely misinterpreted a lot. That, combined with the fact that historians have neglected women in general until relatively recently, makes this a difficult subject to research. However, after the introduction, Perdue does not remark much on those concerns. I think that it is difficult to make definitive claims with such limited source material, and believe Perdue should have done more to justify why her sources were worthwhile and good enough to back up her claims.

October 17, 2013

"Hear that, Ed? Bears. Now you're putting the whole station in jeopardy."

As both Ian and AJ have commented, this book shocked my preconceived perception about Cherokee women. I, too, began this book with the notion that women maintained a submissive role to the men in Cherokee society as they did in European societies. A combination of menstrual power, farming techniques, and the ability to birth children, positioned women atop the gender ladder in Cherokee society. In conjunction with Ian’s claim, Perdue even goes so far as to say women were dangerous because they maintained the ability to bring about unknown change (34). Furthermore, Perdue discusses those Cherokees who crossed the traditional gender roles. As I read her description of the events, I came to the same conclusion as Perdue. Men who farmed were not taken seriously because they could neither fight nor bear a child, yet women who proved victorious on the battlefield showed their power to be proficient in nearly all aspects of life important to the Cherokees. Another aspect of the Cherokee society that Perdue brings up concerns the opposite of the classic Disney portrayal of Native Americans. Hunting was not nearly as important to the tribe as I anticipated it would be; however, farming various foods, especially corn, provided most of the tribe’s sustenance. This dependence on farming further elevated the status of women.

The concept of marriages in Cherokee culture also varied significantly from European marriages. Although the two cultures were similar in the reverence for childbearing ability, Cherokee women were revered for this ability and they derived much of their power from it (55). Perdue’s description of infidelity astonished me. As she states, married women were not given complete freedom to intermingle with other men; however, the attitude was drastically different than if a man cheated on a woman. Part of this attitude change derived from the lack of support men had to tell on their wives. In Cherokee culture, according to Perdue, it seemed in the man’s best interest to never speak of his wife’s infidelity. Additionally, when a man did decide to take action, an implausible experiment was the only way to punish his wife (reviving a dead fly and burrowing the fly in the woman’s body).

I wasn’t a big fan of the rest of Perdue’s book. Once she got away from the initial information about Cherokees (maybe I liked it because it was new and unique), Perdue describes the Indian encounters with Americans in extreme detail. Because Cherokee women adopted much different roles and lost much of their power due to this American invasion, I think the book loses some of its mystique during the chronicles of Cherokee maltreatment. Cherokee women adopted many western characteristics, such as religious beliefs and domestic roles. Interestingly though, the United States initially sought to maintain somewhat peaceful relations with the Cherokees and respected many of their customs, laws, and traditions. At least during Washington’s presidency, the overall American goal was to coexist with the Cherokees in a symbiotic relationship. As Perdue points out, Washington’s ideas severely hurt women because the American view of women was drastically different than the Cherokee. Washington didn’t even include women in his address to the Cherokee chief (112). Unfortunately for women, the American perception eventually became more of the norm within Cherokee culture and women’s power diminished severely as did the Cherokee nation itself.

October 17, 2013

My Kind of Women

This week’s reading was centered on Cherokee Women and their role within Native American society. Theda Purdue’s “Cherokee Women” is the first piece regarding Native Americans (specifically the Cherokee Tribe) I have ever seen that serves as a gender study, truly making this piece one of a kind. Echoing the statements made by both AJ and Ian, this book presents an often ignored aspect of American history as it not only tells the story of a group of women but women who make up one of the “minority” groups of the United States at this time. Now when I say minority group I mean a group of people that to this day continues to be treated as second class citizens that throughout American history has constantly received the short end of the stick. Having a small bit of knowledge regarding Cherokee tribal life (not necessarily women in the Cherokee tribe) I found myself constantly intrigued by the accounts demonstrating the power of women and the respect that they garnered within the tribe. This account more specifically shows that women were the backbone of tribes as they controlled property and dictated how family life would take place, meaning they in many ways decided where the family lived.

“Women in the United States” (regardless of where or how they lived) is a category of history that I believe men in particular today pay little attention to due to false information being presented due to the state of women in Europe. AJ and Ian’s comments regarding their thoughts of women in early America doing what their husbands told them and raising the children prove this point (I think at least). So often we forget the significant roles women such as Abigail Adams and Martha Washington played in influencing their husband’s policy or putting their minds at ease regarding an issue. David McCullough’s book John Adams provides more insight to the role of Mrs. Adams in her husband’s life; but that is a blog for another day. Ultimately, what I am trying to show by this little tangent is that this view of women simply remaining quiet and doing as they were told is not true that many men have is simply untrue. This is not to say though that all women with European origin were outspoken voices.

Cherokee women simply are “persistent” according to Purdue and I cannot think of a better world to describe these women she focuses her work on. Despite the numerous changes the Cherokee tribe has experienced over the years due to white people expansion out west women have always remained a force in the community. Even when it appears that whites desire to lessen the role of the Cherokee Women, these women find a way to hold on to some sort of power/control. Ian comments on this specifically in his blog but the way in which women ran family life simply is fascinating I feel. Their ability to call the shots regarding if a sick child should be abandoned or if they wanted a divorce from a husband (a power men and women in the Cherokee tribe shared) was unheard of in many cultures across the world. Today, seeing the power women in the tribe had back in the 18^th, 19^th, and even early 20^th Century it becomes obvious to me why white men tried to lessen the role of the Cherokee Woman as soon as they possibly could; if white men removed Cherokee women from tribal roles, their own wives would not get ideas of amassing some degree of power. Also by removing women (the backbone of tribal life) from dealings with the white men it becomes simpler I feel to take advantage of the Cherokee due to the men not knowing how to trade like the woman could. Simply put these woman, who weren’t afraid to take charge, ran the show in Cherokee tribes.

October 17, 2013

Cherokee Balancing Act

In Cherokee Women, Theda Perdue presents the story of a people which has received scant coverage in recent writing: Native women. Perdue asserts that recent literature regarding Native cultures has skipped over the female population because it assumed that since women were not prevalent among Native sources then they did not contribute much to Native society. Perdue counters that this primary source absence is due to men controlling all the documents and literature in society so that women were victims of neglect in respect to being mentioned. One of Perdue’s overarching arguments, however, is that men and women cooperate to create a balancing system between their roles and beliefs in society.

As Perdue states early on, “women balanced men just as summer balanced winter.” This indicates how women and men were similar in that they occupied powerful roles in society but ones that were separate so that they would not intrude or disturb each other. Native Americans like virtually all other civilizations at the time imposed gender norms on their people which held that men engaged in war and hunted while women stayed at home and farmed the land to nourish their family. This explanation implies a semblance of equality between the sexes but it neglects to mention what Ian and AJ have both addressed- women enjoyed an almost dominating role over men because they were connected to, among other things: corn, babies and the home. As I will show, women could cross into various spheres. They both made the apt claim that women, unlike in most Western societies, held the capacity to wield substantial power over men and engage in behavior men may not have found possible. I also agree with AJ’s assertion that the work “distanced itself from other reads by presenting it in a manner that makes it manageable to the average history reader.” Perdue definitely organizes her work in a very categorical method, outlining the basics of a situation then delving into the specifics of the topic as a segue into the next topic.

The men and women in society saw gender as “an affirmation of cosmic order and balance” so that if they did not fill their own roles the society would not function correctly or to its potential. This is shown in the Cherokees’ reaction to men who attempted to fill the position of women, resulting in joking and being compared to bears, a sign of ineptitude and incongruence. Women, on the other hand, were afforded the ability to alter their identity into men. Women who became warriors were seen as particularly powerful because they overcame their innate weakness and the limitations traditionally ascribed to females. Such women “possessed extraordinary power: through war and menstruation she had male and female contact with blood.” Women were elevated into supreme positions as War Women and beloved women, these positions according them the power to live and interact in any circle of society, whether it be farming, fighting, birthing children, or maintaining the home. This balance between men and women can thus be seen as a system of women exercising much influence in daily life, in spite, of their absence from the period’s primary sources.

October 16, 2013

A Culture of Persistence

Theda Perdue’s “Cherokee Women” is one of the few academic works that assesses how women were affected by European imperialists and explorers in a more traditional society. A well-regarded work that tells a story that is relatively unknown to most; “Cherokee Women” details a drastically different view of the role and impact of Cherokee women in their society during colonial and European expansion. I personally liked this book because unlike some of the other pieces we have read this semester, this work clearly had its depth of research but distanced itself from some of our other reads by presenting it in a manner that makes it manageable to the average history reader. Like Ian stated in his previous post, this was somewhat of an eye-opening read for me because it illustrated such a different type of female than the usual colonial and European perspective we run into so often. The submissive or obedient women is often the picture painted by colonial and European history, a picture I obviously went into this book imagining and a picture I surely did not see. Unlike the patriarchal society we are often accustomed too and often find in our history texts involving this time frame, Perdue describes Cherokee females as holders of power and influence in their traditional matrix of societal power.

First, before I get into my opinions of Perdue’s interpretations of Cherokee female society and its significance to our understanding of our nation’s history and unique cultural and gender studies, I want to quickly comment on the interesting choice in cover art for the book. Even though most of her work is documenting the experienced changes in Cherokee women through their contact with colonial expansion and eventual removal, Purdue does also tell a story about the Cherokee people and their continued valued in culture and tradition. I found the cover art to be interesting and clever because she chooses to portray a woman from each of the seven Cherokee clans to mark her central claim, that Cherokee women are the people and are the culture. Moving forward, my first instinct after reading this work was to compare it to the only other work I have read regarding and detailed matrilineal societies and the strong role of women in a traditional culture. My first experience was with the early civilizations in Western Africa that placed a high emphasis on their matrilineal culture and a higher emphasis on the special powers of the women that make it work. I like Ian’s quote and its general blanketing of Perdue’s explanation of Cherokee women’s power, it reads “I have this to say that the women rules the roost and wears the breeches and sometimes will beat their husbands within an inch of their lives.” Each gender provided different roles within societies structure that needed to be filled, neither was subservient to the other, rather a tribe coming together and balancing roles throughout its people.

Perdue strongly argues that “the story of most Cherokee women is not cultural transformation…but remarkable cultural persistence.” If historians were to look at “other indices of cultural change, including production, reproduction, religion, and perceptions of self, as well as political and economic institutions,” then a very different portrait is painted of these Cherokee women during and after contact with the new world and that is one of cultural persistence. Obviously, she cannot deny the profound negative effects that contact with Europeans had on women and nicely articulates the diminished influence women had in terms of trade, possessions and political status due to this contact. I want my last point to focus on her pretty convincing argument about cultural persistence. Despite the negative impacts of encroachment by whites, may it be takeover of institutions or relocation to the west, “a distinct culture survived removal, rebuilding, civil war, reconstruction, allotment and Oklahoma statehood.” She quietly touches on the continuing influence of the role of the women towards the end of the 20th century to prove her point on the persistence of this different culture. She ends quite persuasively in my opinion, and states the fate of Cherokee women has been one of “persistence and change, conservatism and adaptation, tragedy and survival.” I believe that this is a nice look into matrilineal roles and there control of trade and social functions, how this was changed as war and economics adapted and how they affected certain European and Indian relations and dominant European viewpoints.

October 16, 2013

The Power of the Cherokee Women

Theda Purdue’s “Cherokee Women” is a piece that asserts a somewhat unheard of view regarding the power of women during colonial times. Radically different from the colonial/European view of the subservience of women, Cherokee females actually possessed a significant matrix of power within their society. One abstract way in which Cherokee women possessed power over the rest of their culture was during menstruation (30). Cherokee’s viewed menstrual blood as that of an unborn child, which could bring about unknown change in society. They feared this change because they did not know whether it would be good or bad, making the unknown their true tormentor (34).

With the common European and colonial portrayal of women in mind, I was shocked to read about women possessing this type of power within society. At first I thought it might just be an abnormality but, as I read further, Purdue asserts more claims regarding the power of Cherokee women. They alone had the right to abandon a new born if it was sickly, if anyone else did then it would be constituted as murder (33). To really cap it all off, Purdue quotes an eighteenth century trader named Alexander Longe which says “I have this to say that the women rules the roost and wears the breeches and sometimes will beat their husbands within an inch of their lives” (45). This statement alone encompasses the entirety that was Women’s power in the Cherokee nation. They were not subservient to men but instead, a balancing factor, with both genders performing their duties as needed to better the tribe as a whole. Unfortunately for the Cherokee women, as Europeans took more of a foothold within the American lands these equal rights began to shift into more of a reflection of European culture. Cherokee women lost their right to actively participate in government, farm, and have that same power they had before European arrival.

As there have not been any other posts this week to respond to, I would like to take this time to comment on how Perdue’s piece compliments my own research on the Cherokee nation. Her description of the Cherokee’s adoption of a republican directly corresponds to efforts of the people to show themselves as cultured in an attempt to avoid removal. This same idea connects to the alteration of women’s power within the tribe, as this shift is simply another way in which the Cherokee people hoped to portray themselves as peaceful and sophisticated individuals, rather than the savages that some whites coined them as. Throughout the beginning to mid nineteenth century, the Cherokee openly expressed these changes within their own newspaper, The Cherokee Phoenix, in what could be viewed as a plea to both the United States Government and the rest of the nation to cease their efforts in removal. It is clear how important this land was to the people, as they were willing to radically alter their own customs to conform to white standards in order to maintain their place in the country. Unfortunately, the very people who spurred these publicized efforts into existence ended up signing over the Cherokee land to the United States, disregarding the will of the rest of the tribe for what they viewed as a lost effort.

October 10, 2013

A non-thinker having rethought

As many in this class can attest, I possess borderline ignorant qualities regarding my stubbornness and argumentativeness (that’s a word). I like to be right. And I like to argue…just to argue. When in the course of human events, however, it becomes necessary for one to readjust his thinking for truthiness and justice. This I have done.
In class Tuesday, I defended the point that Rochester, New York was a relatively appropriate location for Paul Johnson’s book, but I would have preferred a comparative model with another city going through similar changes. Maybe Pittsburgh, PA? Or Wheeling, VA (West Virginia after the Civil War)? Or a southern city like Nashville, TN? I change my mind. I now believe, along with many of my esteemed colleagues, that Mr. Johnson nailed it. While I cannot bring myself to proclaim Rochester as “The Heart and Soul of the United States”, I will acknowledge its “melting pot” atmosphere that supposedly makes America, America. Rochester was an American microcosm. Although the city grew rapidly, Johnson alludes his readers to a strong and dignified (albeit brief) history of the area by describing the first land owners, their prominence, and the reform of government. Additionally, as we stated in class, Rochester was a sufficient blend of country folk and city dwellers. The farmers and shopkeepers combined to give Rochester the beliefs and interests of both kinds of people. Furthermore, “Clinton’s Big Ditch”, enabled the city to stay connected with major sea ports and the areas west of the Appalachian Mountains. Rochester was a byproduct of the Erie Canal (Since Ian gets to talk about hometowns, my hometown’s creation and usefulness is similar to that of Rochester. The Virginia and Tennessee railroads linked at Roanoke, and the “Star City” was born). Charles Finney accrued a mass following to believe his teachings of revised Christianity. The white collar increase amongst grocers, lawyers, and boatsmen is an incredible jump from the number of religious men in these professions merely seven years earlier. I also like Johnson’s claim that wealthier men went to church as a political move. I imagine that these men saw a rising interest in religion and wanted to show their constituents that they were part of this good behavior as well. Furthermore, women were given unintentional rights as they were allowed to pray with the men. Finney does mention some of the more traditional church goers were against this practice of intermingling men and women, but as they came to find out, men and women can pray together without satan breathing a fiery wrath upon them. Yet, this step allowed women to gain more respect and “helped to transform [their husbands] into nineteenth century husbands.” (108) The nineteenth century husband swore off alcohol, did not abuse his family members, and continued to work hard. Most of these husbandry social norms continue to this day. his, I have done.

My disagreement with Johnson is that he rarely mentions blacks. He mentions them briefly when describing the barrel making process, a violent encounter with a police officer over gambling, and the African Methodist Church. Johnson does not make a claim (unless I missed it) about an increase or decrease in black religion revival. Maybe this is due to a lack of surviving sources. I think to truly capture an American city, Johnson should have studied the reaction of blacks if possible. This would have been especially interesting because all slaves were freed in New York in 1827 with a majority of them having been freed with the gradual abolition Act of 1817 in the wake of the War of 1812. This new emancipation was an experiment in and of itself, much like Charles Finney’s sermons on initially radical religious teachings.

October 10, 2013

Tell Us What to Do and We Will Do It: The Poor Community of Rochester

Like Ian and Ben I too think that Paul Johnson made a great decision using Rochester as the focus of his study. As Ben and Ian both point out Rochester is a city that has a significant amount of diversity due to its ties to major cities through waterways as well as ties to the agriculture community due to its location out “west” making it unlike any other city in the United States at this time. The diversity seen in Rochester grants those who live in or around the city a perspective on relations between those with wealth and those without wealth. It has become painfully obvious through class discussions that wealth, regardless of how one defines it, has turned into political power in the United States. Now this blog isn’t going to head in a direction that many of my other entries have taken in that I am not going to talk about the abuse of power by the wealthy simply because they can do it without any repercussions. However, I can’t deny that this concept appears once again due to the fact that many wealthy “Rochesterians” imposed a sense of religion on the poor of their community because they believed a void or morality existed.

Tension undoubtedly existed between the upper and lower classes of Rochester and by the decision to impose religion on the “poor” by the wealthy did not ease these tensions I would argue with no knowledge of the state of Rochester. I think these tensions would become amplified as the “wealthy” are openly declaring themselves intellectually, financially, and morally superior through their decision to push religion on those beneath them. If I were say a factory worker of Rochester I would take this idea of imposing religion on me as the ultimate insult. What would make matters even worse for me as a factory worker at this time is that those in the upper class honestly believed they were doing me and the “poor” community a favor. However, I could not be more wrong in my thoughts of how a “poor” resident of Rochester would respond. Rather than spark revolution where the “wealthy” would be forced out of power, the poor of Rochester become unified with the wealthy, to an extent, due to the lower class’s decision to embrace the changes imposed upon them. Revivals are highly attended by those from or near Rochester and temperance was widely accepted in the community. I am baffled by the acceptance of this religious movement by the “poor” of Rochester as it seemingly goes against every other movement that had taken place in the United States when “the poor” were told what to do.

So what made the poor embrace the morality changes that they were told to make? Perhaps seeing how rebellions and skirmishes out west resulted for the poor when they defied the wealthy influenced their decision. Maybe members of the poor community took the old adage of “if you can’t beat them, join them” to heart and saw success, a success that was clear enough to other poor community members that they too changed. Regardless of the answer to the question I pose, Rochester successfully finds a way to unite members of the community making them a unique city. Ian’s commentary of Rochester as it exists today continues this idea of a unified city due to the holistic family feel the community has. Whether it be a store like Wegmen’s or a family law practice unity exists. Now the question that I would like to be investigated further is what the wealthy get from a unified community? It would seem that the upper class community would lose power with a more prominent middle class but I don’t see that happening. My thought is backed up by the fact that the Wegman family still runs a highly profitable store without outsiders coming in and wrangling power from them.