Today was proof of the fact that there is always something new to learn and a new perspective to take into consideration. I enjoyed both of our morning lectures in College Hall because of the new information and viewpoint they added to topics that have already been written about extensively.
David Waldstreicher set out to discuss Franklin and his attitudes towards slavery as being in conflict with the three very important roles in his life—as a leader, a scientist, and a politician. At the conclusion of Waldstreicher’s lecture, I became convinced that above all Franklin was a politician who was able to put a spin on most anything depending on his audience and the role he was playing at the time. During the years of his printing business Franklin owned slaves, sold ads for the sale of slaves, and probably acted as a middle man for the sale of slaves by using his print shop for transactions. Any printing he did for the anti-slave publications was done anonymously. As time progressed, his views shifted depending on the circumstances. In the 1760’s when England was critical of slavery, Franklin blamed England for the problem—forcing the necessities of slavery on the colonies because of economic hardship. In the 1770’s he criticized slavery to his anti-slavery friends, but only in private correspondence. In France, Franklin encouraged people to think of him as the anti-slavery Quaker, but in 1781-82, he asks Britain for compensation for the run-away slaves during the Revolutionary War. Franklin played his various roles well, and he may very well have earned his title as president of the Abolitionist Society in 1787, but his actions did not consistently demonstrate his abolitionist beliefs. So rather than agree with Waldstreicher that Franklin’s views on slavery demonstrated a conflict in his three dimensions, I think they illustrated that of all of his dimensions, the role of politician trumped the others. This was a great talk.
The second lecture, also, provided fodder for thought. Robert Engs made the point quite well that it wasn’t Lincoln who emancipated the slaves, but they emancipated themselves. He presented four questions as a focal point for his talk. Would the slaves rebel if given a chance? Did slaves want freedom? Will they fight for freedom? Will they know what to do with freedom once they have it? To this, Engs answered yes, yes, yes, and yes, and he gave examples to support all of these “yeses”, giving the statistic that during the Civil War over 400,000 escaped slaves provided manpower for the Union effort. They proved without a doubt that they “wanted” to be free by enlisting regardless of the fact that they were denied enlistment bonuses and they endured and continued to fight even when white members of their own regiments fired on them, and in spite of the fact that Confederates massacred black prisoners rather than treat them as prisoners of war. The blacks consistently returned from battle with more troops than they started with, proving that they had a personal stake in winning the war, not only for themselves, but for all their people. Their desire was for the same things as the whites: land, education, political power, and autonomy, or the four houses as Engs called them, farm, school, church, and home. I think in the classroom this would be a perfect opportunity to point out that all humans have the same basic needs, and the slaves were no different. They proved their true desire for freedom through their actions, and knew what to do with it once they got it.
In the afternoon we made our last trip into Philadelphia, visiting the Second National Bank, the Underground Museum, Franklin Square, and Carpenter Hall where the First Continental Congress met. Photos to follow.
Inside Carpenter Hall. Benjamin Franklin’s Green Tree Insurance Emlem beside chairs
In the Franklin Underground Museum: chair that converts into a step ladder
Franklin’s conveyance to the Constitutional Convention when he was too frail to walk.
Reproduction of a desk from Franklin’s house. He wrote home and asked Debra to send him an item from the little drawer on the right.
Nancy:
Engs’ Lincoln didn’t free the slaves point is now widely accepted.
I guess that’s why you’re dragging people like me all over the east coast. In the last couple of years, my history knowledge has gone from about a zero to at least a 2 or 3 on a ten point scale.