Brad's comments (member since Dec 08, 2007)

Brad's comments from the History of the American Revolution group.

Hello everyone:

I just wanted to make another promotion for my group blog entitled American Creation (http://americancreation.blogspot.com) It is a group history blog where we discuss a number of topics relating to the American Revolution. Anyway, for those of you with a real interest in this topic, I thought you might be interested in checking out the blog. It is updated almost daily, so there's a lot more debate/discussion over there than there is here.

You won't go wrong. It's excellent!

A Midwife’s Tale: The Life of Martha Ballard, Based on Her Diary, 1785-1812. By Laurel Ulrich. (New York: Random House Inc., 1990. Pp. 352.)

Laurel Ulrich’s A Midwife’s Tale is essentially the personal history of a typical New England woman, living and adapting to the inevitable changes brought on by the creation of the American republic. Martha Ballard’s story is then used by Ulrich to portray a larger history of the era. By an in-depth look into the diary of Martha Ballard (along with several other supporting documents), Laurel Ulrich is able to shed light on the day-to-day responsibilities of women, mothers, daughters, midwife’s, families, and communities that all coexisted in the years immediately following America’s war for independence.

As a work of micro history, Martha Ballard’s diary cannot, by itself, disclose all of the social and cultural traditions her day. This diary can, however, serve to augment other sources of historical significance, allowing us to come to a better understanding of this unique historical era. Laurel Ulrich’s ability to weave the diary of Martha Ballard with other historical documents, gives the modern reader a better understanding of how and why Martha Ballard’s story is relevant and worth learning.

Laurel Ulrich’s application of the diary of Martha Ballard is used to address a wide variety of topics that were prevalent in the early American republic. First off, Ulrich recounts the role of a midwife in eighteenth century America by discussing the types of medicines used, the variety of ailments that were common, and the medical prowess of the practitioners. Above all, Ulrich makes it clear that to care for the health of others was the duty of all women during this time. “It would be a serious misunderstanding to see Martha Ballard as a singular character, an unusual woman who somehow transcended the domestic sphere to become an acknowledged specialist” (62). Instead, Ulrich insists that Martha Ballard was representative of the majority of women in the early American republic. Martha Ballard was a midwife, but also a wife and mother, which meant she had her “womanly” duties to attend to as well.

Ulrich also uses Martha Ballard’s diary to shed light on the economic practices of this period. Martha Ballard’s diary was not only an account of the daily events that took place, but was also a way to record debts owed and payments received (85). In addition, Martha Ballard’s entries help to demonstrate just how intricate the neighborhood trade economy was in eighteenth century America. Ulrich mentions how Martha Ballard relied heavily on the labor of her children, neighbors, and hired hands. In fact, when the Ballard’s add improvements to their home, Ulrich explains that this was done because, “the house was every bit as much a workplace as the sawmill” (83).

One of the main issues addressed in A Midwife’s Tale deals with the sexual standards of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. As a midwife (and a mother), Martha Ballard regularly dealt with issues ranging from sexual promiscuity to rape. In fact, Ulrich devotes the majority of chapter three to the alleged rape of Rebecca Foster, and the convoluted court case that followed. Along with her involvement in “Mrs. Foster’s ravishment,” Martha Ballard was regularly involved in the births of children out of wedlock. Ulrich mentions that sexual activity outside of marriage not only carried a stiff social stigma, but also “accounted for more than a third of criminal actions” (148). Martha’s role in such cases was often to record the name of the father in her diary, essentially making it a legal record. Ulrich explains that it was common for midwife’s to ask for the name of the father during labor, believing that a woman would never lie “in the height of her travail” (149).

In terms of its historical value, Ulrich’s A Midwife’s Tale provides wonderful insight into what Martha Ballard might have called the mundane activities of everyday life. The combination of Martha Ballard’s diary with other historical sources can help us come to a better understanding of what life was like for a “common” wife, mother, and midwife. It also presents a personal description of the sexual practices, family relations, and economic issues that affected nearly every citizen during the early years of the American republic.

***This was copied and pasted from my blogsite, so I apologize if the format is bad.***

Nearly every American has seen this painting. In fact, it has become one of the best selling pieces of art in recent years. Thousands of homes, churches, office buildings, etc. have adorned their walls with this extremely powerful portrayal of America's first president kneeling in prayer. As is common with the legacy of our Founding Fathers, Americans today gain a sense of pride, reverence, and even patriotism when witnessing poignant recreations such as this painting.

But how accurate is it? Did Washington really pray at Valley Forge?

Officially known as The Prayer at Valley Forge, artist Arnold Friberg chose to capture what he called, "The spirit of 1776" by painting this picture for the American bicentennial festivities of 1976. Since then, Friberg's painting has become one of the top selling pieces of American art and has inspired a countless number of "copycat" artists, who have capitalized on creating similar pieces of art. The painting has also become a source of controversy between Christian conservatives and secularists, who seem to be caught up in a constant battle over America's founding legacy.

So what are the facts surrounding the "Prayer at Valley Forge?"

The original story of George Washington kneeling in prayer comes from a source that is questionable to say the least. The story allegedly originated from a young man named Isaac Potts, who is the supposed eyewitness to this event. It is said that Potts was riding along one day when he came across General Washington, hidden in the woods and caught up in deep prayer. Potts, who was originally against the war, stated that he experienced a change of heart upon seeing the General in prayer. The story then went unreported for roughly 40 years until Potts allegedly revealed his experience to his pastor, Reverend Nathaniel Snowden. Reverend Snowden then purportedly copied what Potts had told him in his journal, in the hopes that the story would be protected for posterity. Here is an excerpt from Snowden's journal:



I tied my horse to a sapling & went quietly into the woods & to my astonishment I saw the great George Washington on his knees alone, with his sword on one side and his cocked hat on the other. He was at Prayer to the God of the Armies, beseeching to interpose with his Divine aid, as it was ye Crisis, & the cause of the country, of humanity & of the world.

Such a prayer I never heard from the lips of man. I left him alone praying. I went home & told my wife. I saw a sight and heard today what I never saw or heard before, and just related to her what I had seen & heard & observed. We never thought a man c’d be a soldier & a Christian, but if there is one in the world, it is Washington. She also was astonished. We thought it was the cause of God, & America could prevail.

The powerful imagery of General Washington beseeching God to bless and protect his army is moving to say the least. The problem with the story, however, is that there is little to no proof of its veracity. First off, it is highly unlikely that Reverend Snowden ever knew or associated with Isaac Potts. Family history records have proven that the Potts family did not move to the Valley Forge area until 1800 (Washington was dead by then). Also, it is worth noting that Reverend Snowden's journal account records the name of Potts's wife to be Sarah, when in fact her name was Martha. In addition, Snowden's journal states that he heard the story from a man named "John," not Isaac Potts. Simply put, Reverend Snowden's journal is too unreliable to support the Valley Forge story.

Along with the questionable journal entries, it is worth noting that Isaac Potts never had a change of heart when it came to the war. In addition, several critics of Snowden claimed that the Reverend recanted his story when presented with the evidence.

So why would Snowden lie?

It is a known fact that a number of religious leaders from several different churches attempted to "claim" George Washington as their own. After all, Washington was a living legend in his time. To have the religious endorsement of America's general and first president would be extremely impressive in the eyes of the common citizenry. As a result, scores of religious leaders of the 18th century have distorted the true nature of Washington's faith.

While it is true that Washington was known for attending church with some regularity, and that he held organized religion "in high regard," it is important to recognize the fact that Washington was far from being an orthodox believer. First off, though Washington attended several religious services over the course of his life, he refused to be confirmed a member of any one denomination. Washington strongly opposed an orthodox allegiance in religious affairs (as he did in political affairs as well). It is also an established fact that Washington refused to take communion of any kind when attending church services. In fact, a number of religious leaders expressed disappointment at the fact that Washington would not participate in communion. During communion, it was common of Washington to simply walk out of church in the middle of the ceremony.

Perhaps the most damning piece of evidence against the Valley Forge painting is the simple fact that George Washington refused to pray on his knees. Historians and biographers of Washington have pointed out the fact that Washington would choose to stand instead of kneel when praying. In fact, Washington made it clear to his military advisers that he detested anything that brought a man to his knees.

Despite these facts, the "Prayer of Valley Forge" has received incredible publicity and attention over the years. In 1866, artist John McRae was commissioned by the United States to create an engraving of this event.

Later, the Valley Forge Park Commission was given a grant to create a statue of McRae's engraving, which was to be placed at the entrance to Valley Forge Park. The Park authorities refused, stating that there was ample evidence to suggest that the Washington prayer story was a hoax. Despite the decision of park authorities, tours were conducted until roughly 1930, which took travelers to various locations where Washington had allegedly knelt in prayer.

Despite your personal feelings, the Prayer at Valley Forgehas become an important symbol for millions of Americans. Even though the story behind the painting is an utter fraud, it is important to recognize the fact that Washington was, in the end, a man of prayer. As a revolutionary leader it would be natural for a man of Washington's status to refuse kneeling in prayer. Though not an orthodox follower of Christianity, Washington should be remembered as religious individualHis Excellency: George Washington

Hello everyone:

Just wanted to let you all know about a new blog that has been making some major noice on the "blogosphere" lately. American Creation (http://americancreation.blogspot.com) is a group history blog that is dedicated to understanding the role religion played in America's founding. The contributors are mostly history graduate students and others interested in the topic.

Anyway, check it out. If you are interested in the topic I can try to get you added as a contributor...if you are interested in blogging!

That's right, HBO is currently in the initial processes of their newest miniseries, which will be based on David McCullough's book, 1776. My question to you all is this: who would you cast for the important roles -- i.e. George Washington, Nathaniel Greene, etc?

For those of you that are interested in the religious aspects of America's founding, I invite you to check out a new blog called American Creation (www.americancreation.blogspot.com) where we engage in some excellent discussions on the topic. The blog also features a number of highly qualified contributors, most of whom are Ph.D. professors or grad students.

Check it out!

Carly, we'd love to have you. All I need is your email address so I can send you the invitation. After that, you will have complete access to the blog and will be able to make any posting you like.

We look forward to seeing you!

For those of you that are interested in the history of the American Revolution, and also enjoy blogging, we are looking for a few additional contributors to our blog (www.americanrevolutionblog.blogspot.com)

Anyway, the link is on the main page of this group. Check it out and let me know if you are interested.

Brad

I've heard good things about this book! Let me know what you think!

After watching the first three episodes, I have to say that I am very pleased with this miniseries overall. I thought episodes #1 & #2 were very well done, but I absolutly detested #3. A number of historical errors.

I'm just curious to know how many of you watched last night's premiere of HBO's new miniseries "John Adams."

If so, what did you think? What did you like/dislike about it?

I'm just curious to know who you all think was the most underrated of all the Founding Fathers. This was a poll question on our website last week, but I wanted to know what you all thought.

By the way, please visit our blog at this address:
www.americanrevolutionblog.blogspot.com

We seem to have a lot more discussion there than anywhere else, so if you are interested, please join us there!

Sorry it took me so long everyone, but the blog feed for our blog: (www.americanrevolutionblog.blogspot.com) is fixed. You can now subscribe.

Hello everyone!

I am writing to find out if any of you would be interested in joining our American Revolution Blog as a contributor. We are looking for people with a love and interest in the history of the American Revolution (and colonial America in general) to join us. Our blog is updated every day with new postings, so it is a very active blog to say the least.

Anyway, if you would like to join us as a contrubutor, we would LOVE to have you! The blog address is: www.americanrevolutionblog.blogspot.com

Please check it out and let us know!

That's odd. I'll look into it. Thanks for the heads up!

Hello everyone!

We're glad to see that so many of you have an interest in the history of the American Revolution.

We'd like to also let you know about our blog (which is updated with much greater frequency than our goodreads group). The link is:

www.americanrevolutionblog.blogspot.com

Stop by and check it out! If you like it, please join us!

Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has come under fire this past month for some comments he made in a recent debate. Historians on the web have been literally piledriving Huckabee for his historial faux pas regarding the signers of the Declaration of Independence. Huckabee stated the following:

"When our founding fathers put their signatures on the Declaration of Independence, those 56 brave people, most of whom, by the way, were clergymen, they said that we have certain inalienable rights given to us by our creator, and among these life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, life being one of them."

More than a few bloggers have assaulted Huckabee for this statement. Here are a few:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...

http://boston1775.blogspot.com/2007/12/f...

http://positiveliberty.com/2007/10/david...

Check them out and let me know what you think.

I enjoyed "Founding Brothers" a great deal as well. Have you read his new book, "American Creation?" Most reviews say that it is a repeat of "Founding Brothers" and I tend to agree. I was a little disappointed with the book.

I want to second everything Patrick said...welcome to the group!