Utah Valley University Digital Collections
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
large ( > 500x500)
Volume III Utah Valley State College Journal of History 2005 U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E 1 9 4 1 Crescat Scientia I Mailed manuscripts should be sent to: Crescat Scientia c/o Dr.Keith Snedegar, Utah Valley State College Department of History and Political Science, 800 West University Parkway, Orem Utah 84058. Call (801) 863-8487, Fax (801) 863-7013. Crescat Scientia is an annual publication of the UVSC Department of History and Political Science. Issues are available for distribution during the Spring semes-ter of each academic year.To obtain subscription information or to obtain back copies of Crescat Scientia, please contact the History department. © 2005 Utah Valley State College Department of History and Political Science.All rights reserved. General Guidelines for Submission For students interested in submitting a manuscript for review and possible publication, the following guidelines provide an overview of the requirements. For more specific information, please contact the UVSC History Department or visit the History Department’s web page. To submit a manuscript, provide a complete version of the manuscript with cover sheet. Please note that any desired alterations should be made prior to sub-mission. Editors will check for spelling errors and layout problems, not for substan-tial revision opportunities. Submissions should be written in accordance with the Turabian style of citation.The cover sheet should have a running head, author’s name, permanent street address, email address, and a phone number.The body of your manuscript must have no markers which may identify the author (IE: name, class, professor etc). Submit a hard copy as well as one copy of the paper on disk. The disk version of your paper must be in Microsoft Word®. On a separate sheet of paper, provide a brief biographical sketch of yourself including things such as the degree you are working toward, previous degrees received, future plans (graduate school,work), awards the paper has won, other areas of personal interest, etc. Please deliver your paper, disk, and biographical information, sealed in a manil-la envelope, to the History Department addressed to:“Editor-In-Chief, c/o History Department RE:Academic Journal Submission” Works submitted must be thematically concentrated in the discipline of histo-ry. Length of submissions may be anywhere between five and fifty pages and must not have been previously published. II Crescat Scientia UVSC Journal of History Editor-in-Chief Tiffany L. Knoell Assistant Editors Amber Frampton Brittany A. Lassater Eric Smith Faculty Advisor Dr.Keith Snedegar, History Department Chairman Published annually for the Utah Valley State College Department of History and Political Science Office of the Editor-In-Chief Utah Valley State College, Department of History and Political Science, 800 West University Parkway, MS 185, Orem, Utah 84057 Phone: (801) 863-8487. Fax: (801) 863-7013 U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E 1 9 4 1 IV Dear Reader, For too long, professors have considered themselves the essential movers of a college education. Undergraduates were viewed as the passive recipi-ents of our civilizing mission, which was deemed effective insofar as it resembled a colonization of the student mind. (Note the passive tense.) But really the students are the active agents.They are the ones who invest time and effort in the acquisition of knowledge. Especially in the humani-ties, the professor’s chief job is not to get in the way of learning. Bigger and better than ever, this third issue of the UVSC Journal of History serves as a medium for student free agency. Here we find discovery and error, independence and imitation—but no plagiarism, I hope! Of course free agency means taking responsibility for proofreading and printing as well as for the historical scholarship itself. Join me in congratulating Tiffany Knoell, her editorial team, and the con-tributing authors.Their work expresses the meaning of the collegiate enterprise more eloquently than anything a mere professor could say. May knowledge grow! Keith Snedegar Faculty Advisor U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E 1 9 4 1 VI Acknowledgments This journal is the work of many hands, but it is those behind the scenes who provide the encouragement and support necessary to see such a task come to fruition.The faculty and staff have been instrumental in soliciting the submissions required for the completion of this journal, although there are a few who stepped above and beyond the effort requested of them. Special thanks go to Dr. Kathren Brown, Laura Coffman- Jones, and Dr.Keith Snedegar.Without their support, this journal would be a much diminished publication. Thanks also go to those students who stepped forward and submitted their works.Although it is impossible to publish all submissions received, those who make the effort are to be commended and encouraged to con-tinue writing and supporting Crescat Scientia. Thank you. U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E 1 9 4 1 VIII Crescat Scientia UVSC Journal of History VOLUME 3 2005 CONTENTS Editor’s Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tiffany L. Knoell 1 The Perfect Famine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Courtney Burns 3 Ethos and the Power of Music in Ancient Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Amberly D. Page 17 A House Uniter or a House Divider? A Historiographical Survey of the 1858 Illinois Senate Campaign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Luke E. Peterson 29 Lincoln and the Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the Civil War . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ted Memmott 41 Woman as Technology in the Weimar Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Liberty P. Sproat 55 Impacts Associated with Rapid Growth in Emery County, Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kris Torp 77 Sharpening the Sword in Defense of Islam:The Evolution of Jihad from the Seventh Century to Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lee Koelliker 97 The Hispanic Heritage of Southern Utah: From Eighteenth Century Expansion to Twentieth Century Livestock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Emily R.Wade 115 Utah Freemasonry’s Formal Exclusion of Mormon Membership, 1925 . . . . . . . . . . .Nord Derek Anderson 131 Plato’s Theory of the Ideal State and the U.S. Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Thomas Mesaros 153 BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .163 Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .165 U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E 1 9 4 1 Editor’s Note 1 Nothing that is worth doing can be achieved in our lifetime; therefore we must be saved by hope. Nothing which is true or beautiful or good makes complete sense in any immediate context of history; therefore we must be saved by faith. Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we must be saved by love. – Reinhold Niebuhr1 I think a movie said it best: "You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view."2 The essence of history is perception.Whether you are the conqueror or the conquered, the revered or the forgotten, your perception of events, past or present, drives your reality. It is left to students of history to provide the dates and places upon which historical events are hung; it is up to the reader to draw their own conclusions. This journal, as a student-driven publication, is an extraordinary creation. Each individual who contributed, regardless of their role, has left on the journal a unique imprint which will distinguish this edition from any other. For those whose works were not selected for this journal: keep writ-ing. Submit frequently. Do not allow a single rejection to stifle your cre-ative spirit. For those whose works were selected: please accept my warmest congratulations.You have taken your first step into a larger world.3 Tiffany L. Knoell Editor-In-Chief 1 Thomas Cahill,How the Irish Saved Civilization:The Untold Story of Ireland's Heroic Role from the fall of Rome to the Rise of Medieval Europe (New York: Doubleday, 1995), vii. 2 Lawrence Kasdan and George Lucas,The Art of Return of the Jedi (New York: Ballantine, 1983), 56. 3 Carol Titelman, ed.,The Art of Star Wa rs (New York: Ballantine, 1979), 79. U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E 1 9 4 1 More than 150 years have passed since the Irish potato famine, run-ning approximately from 1845-1852,1 caused more than one million deaths and over one-and-a-half million emigrations.This lapse of time, though, has not created a sense of forgetfulness or casualness about those years or those who died.To the contrary, not only does the land itself bear the markers of crude shelters dug into the sides of ditches and the "hungry grass" which covers the thousands of buried dead, but the memory and family histories of the Irish themselves persistently breeds "an intimacy with suffering"2 which continues to affect the Irish and their relationship to the British.3 According to Don Mullan, a former director of the Irish advocacy group Action, "Deeply rooted in the Irish psyche is the memory of the famine.When we look at pictures of people starving,we know we are looking at ourselves just a few short generations ago."4 This intimacy with the famine is not merely of grief and frustration over a failed crop. Rather, it stems from a larger accounting of the famine which recognizes the role played by the United Kingdom in the deaths of so many Irish. It was not the failure of the potato crop that alone caused the Irish famine. Beginning in 1845, the convergence of a susceptible plant, a pathogen, environmental conditions, and social injustice combined to create a per-fect famine. Plant pathologists, when discussing the factors of plant disease, often use a triangle to aid in describing the factors needed for an outbreak of disease.5 This so-called disease triangle consists of a plant susceptible to a THE PERFECT FAMINE Courtney Burns 1 Douglas C. Daly, "The Leaf That Launched a Thousand Ships," Natural History 105, no. 1 (1996): 25. 2 Douglas C. Daly, "Famine's Ghost," Natural History 105, no. 1 (1996): 6. 3 Gail L. Schumann, "The Irish Potato Famine and the Birth of Plant Pathology," in Plant Diseases:Their Biology and Social Impact. Internet. <http://www.apsnet.org/online/feature/lateblit/chapter1/Top.htm; Internet>. 4 Daly, "Famine's Ghost," 6. 5 Schumann. 4 Crescat Scientia pathogen, the introduction of that pathogen into the plant, and environ-mental conditions favorable to that pathogen.6 In Ireland, these three fac-tors would come together in the form of the potato,Phytophthora infes-tans, and the damp Irish climate that has proved to be so favorable to potato farming and yet so devastating in spreading disease. The potato, a vegetable so freely associated with the island of Ireland, did not originate in Ireland but rather in the highlands of South America, particularly along the border of Peru and Bolivia.7 Discovered by the Spanish Conquistadors who were searching for gold in the sixteenth cen-tury, the potato was introduced into Europe around 1570.8 Acceptance of the potato as a food source was slow in coming, though the poor of Europe soon found advantages in an underground food source protected from the trampling of the numerous invading armies of the time.9 It is uncertain when the potato was first introduced into Ireland, but the cool and wet conditions of Ireland, similar to conditions of the highlands of South America10 that too often stunted grain production quickly propelled the potato into premier food status.11 The potato, though, did not become the primary food source of many in Ireland simply because it was suited to the climate. It was necessity that caused the food culture of Ireland to become a "monoculture." Like many of the peasants of Europe, the Irish were tenants paying rents to primarily absentee landlords in Britain.12 In particular, three developments would affect the system of rent of Ireland and would thereby require a change in the crop production in order to meet rent requirements as well as meet the food requirements for the survival of Irish families. First, penury laws, which required that any improvements made on the land would result in an increase in rent without necessarily providing an additional ability to pay the increased rent.13 Second, a downturn in the economy in the early nineteenth century would further increase pressure on the tenant's ability to pay rent.14 And third, the allowance of subdivision of property among one's children (as opposed to the English practice of primogeniture, which gave inheritance rights only to the first-born) provided increased revenue to the landlords while at the same time providing less land to individual 6 Ibid. 7 Schumann. 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid. 11 Daly, "The Leaf That Launched a Thousand Ships," 25-26. 12 Eileen Moore Quinn, "Entextualizing Famine, Reconstituting Self:Testimonial Narratives From Ireland," Anthropological Quarterly 74, no. 2 (2001): 74. 13 Quinn. 14 Ibid. The Perfect Famine 5 families.15 The decrease in available land can be most directly seen in rela-tionship to the change in population in Ireland which, from 1800 to 1845, grew from about 4.5 million to about 8 million.16 The bulk result of these developments required not only the use of profit garnering grains, dairy, and animal products for the paying of rents, but also the parallel development of a food crop that could be grown easi-ly (easily because of the additional labor output required to grow an addi-tional crop) on increasingly smaller patches of land.17 This need of an easi-ly grown crop that could feed an entire family throughout the year would be met in full by the potato which, in addition to providing substantial nutritious value "including protein, carbohydrates, and many vitamins and minerals, particularly vitamin C,"18 allowed the Irish to produce, on half the land, the same amount of calories in potatoes as would have been pro-duced in grains.19 By the beginning of the famine, potatoes would make up about 60 percent of the Irish food culture with about 3.3 million Irish in complete reliance on the potato as a food source.20 This would prove to be a dangerous yet impressive feat for the potato, as an individual would con-sume about one ton of potatoes a year with an adult consuming about fourteen pounds of potatoes a day.21 Most potato growers, including those of Ireland, do not begin growing potatoes from seeds, but rather follow the process called vegetative propa-gation in which small pieces of potatoes are planted.22 The result of vegeta-tive propagation is that the offspring plant is genetically identical to the parent plant.23 If seeds, or sexual propagation, are used, each plant will vary genetically in the same way children coming from the same two par-ents genetically differ.24 Genetic uniformity, though, has great advantages particularly in a food crop where uniformity in color and taste are impor-tant. 25 Additionally, the use of potato pieces is beneficial because the pota-to pieces carry larger food reserves than seeds, allowing the shoots from potato pieces to grow faster than seed shoots.26 Along with these advan-tages, a genetically uniform potato crop carries with it a distinctly danger-ous disadvantage: genetic uniformity makes the entire crop uniformly 15 Ibid. 16 Schumann. 17 Quinn, 74. 18 Schumann. 19 Ibid. 20 Daly, "The Leaf That Launched a Thousand Ships," 26. 21 Daly, "The Leaf That Launched a Thousand Ships," 26. 22 Schumann. 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid. 26 Ibid. 6 Crescat Scientia susceptible to pest and pathogens.27 In particular, the introduction of an alien pathogen into the alien crop of potatoes in Ireland would begin the spiraling downfall of the Irish people. The disease that would be the impetus of the Irish famine was first spotted near Philadelphia during 1843, spreading to Western Europe by 1845, and was probably introduced by infected potatoes imported from either North or South America.28 Its exact cause was unknown, although many put forward their own ideas of possible causes.Among these causes were "a poisonous miasma borne on the air, industrial pollution, volcanic exhalations, gases from the recently introduced sulfur matches, electricity in the atmosphere, the use of guano as a fertilizer, and an aerial taint origi-nating from outer space."29 Unusually rainy weather30 as well as the theory that the famine was, in fact, "a healthy lesson delivered by providence that would prepare [the Irish] for the adoption of superior Anglo-Saxon values and institutions"31 would be put forth as possibilities.A few scientists would explain that the disease was caused by a fungus, but these voices were quieted in favor of the more popular idea that it was the inability of the potatoes to eliminate excess water that was causing them to rot.32 This would be proven wrong much too late by science.The actual cause, which would be discovered later,was a fungus-like pathogen called Phytophthora infestans which causes the potato disease commonly known as late blight. When Phytophthora infestans infests a susceptible plant it begins by first attaching itself to the leaves or stem of the plant.33 From these small infection sites, the pathogen infiltrates the cells and begins absorbing nutri-ents from the plant.34Within three to five days of the initial infection, this lack of nutrients will cause brown lesions to appear on the leaves and stem as the plant begins to die.35 In less than three weeks the entire potato plant can be reduced to a slimy mass.36 The potato plant would prove to be particularly susceptible to Phytophthora infestans for two reasons. First, the pathogen originated in the central highlands of Mexico where it attacked plants of the same genus as the potato.37 The potato plant itself, though, had never come in contact with the pathogen, meaning that it had 27 Ibid. 28 Daly, "The Leaf That Launched a Thousand Ships," 28. 29 Daly, "The Leaf That Launched a Thousand Ships," 30. 30 Schumann. 31 Michael De Nie, "The Famine, Irish Identity, and the British Press," Irish Studies Review 6, no 1 (1998): 34. 32 Daly, "The Leaf that Launched a Thousand Ships," 30. 33 Schumann. 34 Ibid. 35 Ibid. 36 Ibid. 37 Daly, "The Leaf that Launched a Thousand Ships," 27-28. The Perfect Famine 7 no built-up or built-in resistance to the pathogen.38 Additionally, as already stated, Irish farmers used the technique of vegetative propagation resulting in genetically identically potato plants throughout the region.This meant that if one plant proved to be susceptible to the pathogen all the plants would be susceptible.39 These two factors, a susceptible plant and an intro-duced pathogen,would mean the beginning of an epidemic in Ireland. Not even the combination of an unprepared plant and deadly pathogen could have caused a complete or island-wide epidemic.The third side of the disease triangle, favorable environmental conditions,was required not only for the survival of the pathogen Phytophthora infestans, but also for its reproduction and spread throughout Ireland. In order to take root,Phytophthora infestans requires the presence of water on the surface of the plant's leaves or stem.40 Additionally, high tem-peratures (over 68 degrees Fahrenheit) will slow the germination process by fifty percent.41 Therefore, an initial infestation of this pathogen requires a cool, damp environment.These conditions are also required for repro-duction and spread of the pathogen.Without a moist and cool climate, the pathogen Phytophthora infestans will dry out and die. 42 This moisture is particularly important as the pathogen is primarily spread by air currents which can speed the drying process.43 Furthermore, a wet climate allows for the pathogen to be washed into the soil where it infects and destroys the tubers themselves.44 Beginning in the summer of 1845, the weather in Ireland turned cold and wet for weeks at a time,45 cooperating wholly with the pathogen, completing the disease triangle and creating an epidemic of serious magnitude, considering the extent to which the potato was depended on in Ireland. Prior to its arrival in Ireland, the pathogen Phytophthora infestans infected crops along the northeastern coast of the United States and in Europe before affecting the potato crops of Ireland.Yet one does not hear of the great famine of New England or France or the Netherlands. Even today, infestations of late blight continue to affect potato crops throughout the world and yet go largely unnoticed. In the United States alone it is esti-mated that combined efforts to fight and losses due to late blight alone 38 Ibid., 28. 39 Schumann. 40 Ibid. 41 Ibid. 42 Ibid. 43 Ibid. 44 Ibid. 45 Daly, "The Leaf that Launched a Thousand Ships," 29. 8 Crescat Scientia cost about four hundred million dollars a year.46 The developing world, which depends on the potato much in the same way that Ireland once did,47 spends more than three hundred million dollars a year on the fungi-cide used to protect potatoes against late blight.48 Despite these huge num-bers, though, one rarely, if ever, hears or reads reports in popular newspa-pers or news magazines about the costs and losses due to the late blight disease. Despite the costs or losses, an epidemic caused by Phytophthora infestans rarely affects the average person. Likewise, an epidemic that took place one-hundred-and-fifty years ago did not alone cause a famine and the deaths of over one million people. Nevertheless, an epidemic that destroys a crop that so wholly makes up the food culture, as the potato did in Ireland, has the possibility of inflicting a famine of deadly proportions. But as has already been exam-ined, the potato as monoculture became such out of necessity.This was not necessity born out of laziness or the inability to plant other crops, for other crops were indeed planted, but rather necessity because these other crops were required by absentee landlords in payment for the use of the land on which the Irish inhabited and farmed. In fact, a brief look at Irish exports during the famine years shows that the Irish did, in reality, pro-duce enough food to feed not only the entirety of the Irish population, but a population twice its size.49 During the years of famine, the numbers of livestock exported to Britain increased (except for pigs, although the exportation of bacon and ham did increase).50 In 1845, the first famine year, over 26 million bushels of corn were sent from Ireland to Britain.51 During "Black '47," the deadliest year of the famine, the Irish exported 33 percent more calves than they did the previous year.52 During the first nine months of 1847, over eight hundred thousand gallons of butter were exported to England.53 All this while thousands of Irish died from lack of food or causes related to lack of food. It was not a lack of means to feed the population or even the destruction of the primary food source that caused the Irish famine. 46 Marcia Wood, "Wild Potato's Genes May Blunt Late Blight," Agricultural Research 52, no. 8 (2004): 11. 47 Douglas C. Daly, "The Blight Is Back" Natural History 105, no. 1 (1996): 31. 48 Daly, "Famine's Ghost," 6. 49 See "The Great Irish Famine" as approved by the New Jersey Commission on Holocaust Education at the secondary level prepared by the Irish Famine Curriculum Committee, James Mullin, Chairman: Moorestown, NJ (1998). Internet. <http://www.nde.state.ne.us/SS.irish/irish_pf.html>. 50 Ibid. 51 Ibid. 52 Ibid. 53 Ibid. The Perfect Famine 9 The actual cause of the uncommonly deadly Irish famine was a lack of will on the part the British to do enough to save the population of Ireland from starvation and disease.This lack of will was essentially two-fold. First, the British had subjected the Irish to long-term discrimination and racial stereotyping which culminated in persevering attitudes in the mid-1800s of the Irish as a population not worth saving. Second, government policies and politics prevented many of those who would have done more from doing so as well as giving power to those who would do less or nothing at all. While many ideas on race revolve around difference in physical mani-festations, by the 1840s race had long been defined by the British as including "biological traits and characteristics."54 This inclusion of traits and characteristics into the British understanding of race had long allowed the Irish to be categorized as a race distinct from the British as demonstrated in their so-called "negative" traits of religion, class, and race.55 The Statutes of Kilkenny were enacted in 1366 in an attempt to maintain the distinct-ness of the English race and culture in Ireland.56 Under the Statutes of Kilkenny, marriage between Irish and English became a capital offense.57 This view of racial distinctness was further exacerbated when, in the 1530s, the king of England broke from the Catholic Church in Rome58 While the Irish remained Catholic, the English followed their King and became Protestants. Religion would further define the distinctness between English and Irish as English Protestants and Scottish Presbyterians were brought into Ireland to settle and colonize the island.59 Penal laws introduced in the 1690s serve as further evidence of the English attempts to repress the Irish.Among the dictates of the laws was the barring of Catholics from receiving an education, entering a profes-sion, voting, attending church services, and purchasing or leasing land.60 By 1829, the bulk of these laws would be abolished, but the effect of the laws was to place the Irish in a position as not to be able to enjoy their new-found rights.61 The right of voting, for example,was given to the Irish by the Reform Act of 1832 but only if they were landholders of property worth at least 10 pounds per year.62 The stipulation of landholding was a 54 De Nie, 27. 55 De Nie, 27. 56 See "The Great Irish Famine." 57 Ibid. 58 Ibid. 59 Ibid. 60 Ibid. 61 Ibid. 62 John A. Phillips and Charles Wetherell, "The Great Reform Act of 1832 and the Political Modernization of England," American Historical Review 100, no. 2 (1995) 414. 10 Crescat Scientia requirement outside of the means of the Irish population who had previ-ously been forbidden of gaining an education, entering a profession, or purchasing land.With few Irish in possession of sufficient education or profession with which to purchase land and with no land already in the hands of the Irish, the British had little to fear from giving them the right to vote so long as this right was determined by land ownership. In fact, after being given the so-called right to vote, only one man in twenty from the entire population of Ireland, Protestant or Catholic,was allowed to vote after the Reform Act of 1832.63 Therefore, despite being given the right to vote, voting would initially be outside the means of the Irish popu-lation. In 1845, on the eve of the beginning of the Irish famine, Frederick Douglass, prominent spokesperson for the American anti-slavery move-ment, arrived in Ireland and bore witness of the condition of the Irish.64 On arriving, he wrote to publisher William Lloyd Garrison that he had believed reports on the Irish printed in American newspapers to have been exaggerated, but that witnessing the "painful exhibitions of human misery, which meet the eye of a stranger almost at every step" had con-vinced him otherwise.65 As his trip progressed, Douglass began to feel ill at ease in asking the Irish to address oppression in the United States when the Irish had "so many wrongs to redress and so much suffering to relieve at home."66 Additionally, Douglass compared the oppression of the Irish to the oppression of the African American saying that all that was lacking by the Irish was "a black skin and wooly hair, to complete their likeness to the plantation Negro."67 As was previously mentioned, the British defined the Irish as a distinct race as shown in their so-called negative traits of religion, class, and race. This was a popularly held definition which, no doubt, played a role of sup-port in the enacting of the above statutes and laws while at the same time being reinforced by these same statutes and laws. By the 1840s these nega-tive racial stereotypes would become so damning as to impede any feel-ings of sympathy that should have called for mass aid to be sent to save the dying Irish.The reports in the popular British press of the time indi-cate how the Irish were viewed, particularly during the famine years. One of the first proofs of the Irish being racially distinct and inferior from the English was the Irish desire to be attached to the Roman Catholicism and 63 "Democracy, One Day," Economist 353, no 8151 (1999): 19. 64 Patricia Ferreira, "All But 'A Black Skin and Wooly Hair': Frederick Douglass's Witness of the Irish Famine," American Studies International 37, no. 2 (1999): 69. 65 Ferreira, 77. 66 Ibid. 78. 67 Ibid. 79. The Perfect Famine 11 the "foreign despot at its head."68 In September of 1848, a famine year, the Quarterly Review published an article which stated that "all the civic and political and even social evils of Ireland (except only what may be of Celtic origin) may be traced to the condition and influence of the Roman Catholic religion in that country."69 Another common theme of the time was that the Irish were racial dis-tinct as shown in their natural laziness.The Quarterly Review reported that "the root of all the misery of Ireland is the aboriginal idleness of the people-that hatred of regular labour which has always characterized them since history began."70 This belief that the Irish were naturally lazy would be especially damning during years of the famine as the British had very specific ideas on deserving and undeserving poor and what the treatment of these groups should be.As shown in an article printed 5 December 1846, the Illustrated London News referred to the undeserving or unwill-ing poor as those who were "desirous and eager to work, but cannot pro-cure sufficient to enable them to supply even their moderate and neces-sary wants."71 For these poor the London News proclaimed that the sup-porting of these individuals "is cheerfully borne, and the whole mind of the nation is so deeply impressed with the absolute necessity, the para-mount justice, and the Christian charity of a wisely, and indeed liberally, administered Poor Law."72 The deserving poor, as quoted in the London News,were those "whose greatest dread is being set to work."73 On 24 January 1849, the Times offered the following solution to the burden placed upon society by these deserving poor: "We beg to suggest, a measure for starving out the whole race, by cutting off their supplies."74 While this solution was not aimed directly at the Irish, the Irish who were seen as naturally lazy were certainly considered to be a part of this race of deserving poor to be starved out of existence, as was indeed occurring at the time in Ireland. In addition to the racial stereotypes that prevented a popular support for Irish aid, the government of England proved to be a hindrance in pro-viding relief to the Irish during the years of the Irish famine.When the potato crop failed in 1845, the British government under the rule of Sir Robert Peel acted to introduce relief measures and as a result no lives were lost from 1845 to the fall of 1846.75 Unfortunately, even in the guise 68 De Nie, 29. 69 Ibid. 70 De Nie, 29. 71 Ibid., 30. 72 Ibid., 30-31. 73 Ibid., 31. 74 Ibid. 75 Christine Kinealy, "How Politics Fed the Famine," Natural History 105, no. 1 (1996): 33. 12 Crescat Scientia of relief the British would continue to discriminate against and oppress the Irish. One of the prime means of discrimination at the time was to use hunger in order to win converts by demanding a renouncing of Catholicism before relief could be secured.76 This practice, known at "souperism",77 required changing one's own religion in order to receive the soup being handed out by relief efforts, efforts largely controlled by the Protestant churches.78 The act of renouncing one's religion at this time coined the phrase "he took the soup", a phrase that continues to be an insulting expression indicating a turncoat.79 Additionally, the surrendering of property before becoming eligible for aid was widely enforced by the British aid system.This practice greatly benefited English landlords wishing to cash in on the advantages of the pasturage system.80 Even with the impressive result of no loss of life during the first year of famine, historians are at odds with whether this was a result was due to intentional intervention by Peel specifically on the behalf of the Irish, or whether it was simply the luck of an easy Irish winter combined with spillover benefits from measures meant to protect and benefit England. Directly at the heart of this debate is Peel's work to repeal the Corn Law, laws which stipulated that large taxes be paid on crops imported into the United Kingdom.81With the Corn Law in place, any crops brought into Ireland to relieve the famine would be subject to these high taxes.82 Specifically drawn into the question of Peel's intent is a speech given to the House of Commons on 16 February 1846 in which he states:When you are again exhorting a suffering people to fortitude under their privations, when you are telling them, 'These are the chastenings of an all-wise and merciful Providence, sent for some inscrutable but just and beneficent purpose - it may be to humble our pride, or to punish our unfaithfulness, or to impress us with the sense of our own nothingness and dependence on His mercy;' when you are thus addressing your suffering fellow-subjects, and encouraging them to bear without repining the dispensations of Providence, may God grant that by your decision of this night, you may have laid in store for yourself the consolation of reflecting that such calamities are, in truth, the dispensations of Providence - that they have not been caused, they have not been aggravated by laws of man, restricting in the hour of scarcity the supply of food!83 Boyd Hilton, of Trinity College, Cambridge, offers an interpretation of this speech and the selection quoted above which claims that Peel was directly arguing for the ideology of free trade outside of the emotional claims of 76 Quinn, 74. 77 Ibid., 72. 78 Ibid. 79 Ibid. 80 Ibid., 75. 81 See "The Great Irish Famine." 82 Ibid. 83 Boyd Hilton, "Peel, Potatoes, and Providence," Political Studies 49, no. 1 (2001): 106. The Perfect Famine 13 sufferers of famine.84 Hilton makes his argument by examining the para-graphs which precede the passage quoted above. In these paragraphs Peel argues that Britain has such natural advantages as to dispel any fear that free trade should cause and that exposure to free trade should be seen as "healthful breezes of competition."85 As further proof that Peel was not overly influenced by the Irish famine, Hilton points to passages in which Peel calls for the repeal of the Corn Laws now during a time of "compara-tive prosperity, yielding to no clamour, impelled by no fear"86 as proof that the repeal of the laws was not meant to lessen Irish troubles, but to strengthen English economy at a time when it could afford to take the chances of free trade policies.87 Hilton also points to an earlier public comment made by Peel as further proof that Peel had no great love or con-cern for the Irish: "if there be any part of the United Kingdom which is to suffer by the withdrawal of protection, I have always felt that part of the United Kingdom to be Ireland."88 Arguments that follow this course make claims that Peel was not interested in stunting the effects of the Irish famine, and thereby infer that it would not have mattered which party had held the power of government, the famine would have taken the same toll on the Irish people. Interpretations made by Iain McLean, of Nuffield College, Oxford, and Camilla Bustani LLP claim that Peel was arguing for the repeal of the Corn Law not specifically in favor of the ideology of free trade but more particu-larly in favor of evangelical discourse that argues that man must not inter-fere in God's plan.89 Peel's argument, according to his above statement, is that the Corn Laws should be repealed because regulating the supply or price of food is an interference with Providence, particularly during times of famine.90 Furthermore, McLean and Bustani argue that the emotionality of the claim was not merely directed at the salvation of those in the House of Commons who he believed to be meddling in the plans of God, but was specifically driven by concern for Ireland.91 McLean and Bustani point pri-marily to the first half of the speech in which Peel provides details about the Irish famine as proof that it was indeed the Irish famine that caused him to call for the repeal of the Corn Laws.92 In the summer of 1846, Peel was forced to resign due to the unpopularity of the repeal of the Corn 84 Hilton, 106. 85 Ibid., 107. 86 Ibid. 87 Hilton., 107-108. 88 Ibid., 109. 89 Iain McLean and Camilla Bustani, "Peel, Potatoes, and Providence," Political Studies 49, no. 1 (2001): 110. 90 Ibid. 91 Ibid., 111. 92 McLean and Bustani, 110. 14 Crescat Scientia Laws within his own party.93 Before resigning as Prime Minister, Peel stood before Parliament and offered the following condemnation and per-haps strongest indicator of Peel's own inclinations concerning the Irish: "Good God, are you to sit in cabinet and consider and calculate how much diarrhea, and bloody flux, and dysentery a people can bear before it becomes necessary for you to provide them with food?"94 If McLean and Bustani are corrected in their interpretations, the removal of Peel from power had the deadliest of impacts on the future of the Irish people. Regardless of what might have been, the new government, with John Russell as Prime Minister,would reduce critical relief efforts.Assistance had previously been available in the form of moneys and food to public works, which subjected the starving Irish to hard, often pointless95 labor paid for through the taxation of Irish landlords and donations from private charities with little financial contribution from the British government.96 The bureaucracy set up by Russell's government to oversee this relief work proved to be inefficient in creating jobs and in paying wages in a timely manner.97 The result would be half a million dead from 1846-1847.98 In the fall of 1847 the British government would declare the Irish famine to be over and that no more financial assistance would be forthcoming from Britain for Ireland.99 This declaration from the government was due in part to a financial crisis in England that made taxation and "foreign" spending unpopular.100 Also impacting Russell's action was an election result seen as not entirely favorable to Russell which convinced him that he had "done too much for Ireland, and [had] lost the elections for doing so."101 The popular economic theory of laissez-faire, or non-intervention, would seal the fate of the Irish as far as the British government was con-cerned. 102 British Treasury Secretary in charge, Charles Edward Trevelyan, was a particularly adamant proponent for the principle of laissez-faire opposing any expenditure or increases in taxes.103 As a strong believer in Malthus' theory that to aid the poor of the population would only increase the population and thereby make matters worse,Trevelyan felt that the famine in Ireland was "the direct stroke of an all-wise Providence" that 93 See "The Great Irish Famine." 94 Ibid. 95 Ibid. 96 Kinealy, 33. 97 Ibid. 98 Ibid. 99 Ibid., 34. 100 Ibid. 101 Kinealy, 34. 102 Quinn, 74. 103 See "The Great Irish Famine." The Perfect Famine 15 would cure overpopulation in Ireland.104 In 1848, one year after the worst year of the Irish famine, Queen Victoria would knight Trevelyan for his services in Ireland.105 In 1850, still in the midst of the Irish famine, a British parliamentary committee of enquiry looking into the famine to that point would declare that "a neglect of public duty has occurred and has occasioned a state of things disgraceful to a civilized age and country, for which some authority ought to be held responsible, and would have long since been held respon-sible, had these things occurred in any union in England."106 This neglect of duty and responsibility lies with the British people in general and, more specifically, its government.While the forces of nature combined in creat-ing an epidemic of enormous consequence, the discrimination, racism, and inaction by the British people and government turned an ecological disas-ter into a human tragedy.When Frederick Douglass was in Ireland, he observed that the oppression of the Irish Catholic was a terrible indict-ment against the English that would require ages to overcome.107 Taking a similar stance, novelist Edith Martin wrote that "the Famine yielded like the ice of the northern seas, it ran like melted snow into the veins of Ireland for many years afterwards."108 Indeed, more than one-hundred-and-fifty years later, the British have still not accepted responsibility and the Irish have not forgotten. 104 Ibid. 105 Ibid. 106 Kinealy, 35. 107 Ferreira, 75. 108 Kinealy, 35. U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E 1 9 4 1 The power of music was legendary in Ancient Greece. Orpheus, known as the mortal son of Apollo, sang and played the lyre to such per-fection that "nothing could withstand the charm of his music".1 When his beloved wife, Euridice, died of a poisonous snake bite, he is said to have traveled deep into the Stygian realm seeking to free her soul. Upon hearing Orpheus sing and play, ghosts wept and, for the first time, even the cheeks of the Furies were wet with tears. Hades himself could not resist and released Euridice.Although affected by the music, the god of the under-world would not be influenced enough to let her go without a condition. Orpheus was to lead Euridice back to the realm of the living without look-ing at her until they both reached the surface. Orpheus resisted the urge to look back at her until he reached the sunlight of the living world, but in his happiness he assumed too quickly that they were safe.When he looked back at his wife, Euridice was still within the shadow of the underworld and she was swept away yet again.2 Although this story does not have a happy ending, it demonstrates the mystical power the ancient Greeks asso-ciated with music. Aristotle identified three different uses for music: recreation, intellectu-al development, and habituation which involved purification by repetitive exposure.3 Music has always been a means of recreation and entertain-ment, but the power of music was used for more than pleasure and an effect upon the emotions.There are few aspects of life wherein the Greeks did not use music to some degree. Music was of prime importance in all religious practices, as well as social and working environments.4 It was also used as a healing tool.5 It is no coincidence that Apollo was considered the 1 Thomas Bulfinch,Bulfinch's Mythology (New York, NY: Crown Publishers, 1948), 185. 2 Ibid., 186. 3 The Politics of Aristotle, trans. and ed. Peter L Phillips Simpson (Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press, 1997), 159. 4 John G. Landels,Music in Ancient Greece and Rome (London: Routledge, 1999), 1. 5 M.L.West. Ancient Greek Music (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), 31-32. ETHOS AND THE POWER OF MUSIC IN ANCIENT GREECE Amberly D. Page 18 Crescat Scientia god of healing as well as the god of music.Apollo and his alleged son, Orpheus, both were regarded as great physicians as well as musicians;6 not so much a coincidence as an inevitable association in ancient Greek cul-ture. According to ancient Greek belief, the true power of music lay in habituation.7 Aristotle stated that music acts as a tool by which one may learn virtues. Just as a gymnast repetitively lifts weights to tone and strengthen muscle, a person exposed repeatedly to the same type of music may, over time, acquire virtues according to the music's character.8 Certain tones and vibrations were supposed to purge the body and purify the soul by retuning and returning it to its natural order or harmony. ...music too, in so far as it uses audible sound,was bestowed upon us for the sake of harmony.And harmony, which has motions akin to the revolutions of the soul within us,was given by the Muses to him who makes intelligent use of the Muses, not as an aid to irrational pleasure..., but as an auxiliary to the inner revolution of the soul, when it has lost its harmony, to assist in restoring it to order and concord with itself.9 In order for the true healing powers of music to work, a patient must be exposed consistently to the same sounds and vibrations for an extend-ed period of time.The same concept was applied to the development of virtues. By exposing oneself consistently to the same type of music, one may develop certain virtues or character traits. Aristotle explained in his discourse on politics that habituation is caused by imitation.10 Most music is imitative of some virtue or quality or even of a person, place, event, or idea.This can be seen in Beethoven's Sixth Symphony, which is also known as the Pastoral Symphony. It is so called because it brings to mind and is a musical imitation of the country side, each movement portraying a different aspect.This is only one exam-ple among many.Aristotle said, There exist in rhythms and melodies likenesses, most closely approximating to the realities, of anger and mildness, of courage and moderation and their opposites, and of all other dispositions, as the facts make clear; for our souls are altered when we hear such things. Habituation in feeling pain and pleasure in likeness is close to being affected in the same way by the realities themselves: for instance, if someone enjoys the sight of and image of something because of its appearance and for no other reason, he must also find pleasure in the sight of the actual object whose image he is looking at.11 6 Bulfinch, 185. 7 Andrew Barker,Greek Musical Writings:Volume 1, the Musician and his Art (Cambridge, Mass: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 173. 8 Ibid., 173. 9 Warren D.Anderson, Ethos and Education in Greek Music:The Evidence of Poetry and Philosophy (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1966), 68. 10 Barker,GMW, 175. 11 Ibid., 175. Ethos and the Power of Music 19 This power of music to affect one's character is now called ethos.The ancient Greeks respected it, but they also feared this power for the nega-tive effects it could have. Plato stated, in a translation by Warren D. Anderson that, "Music, the most celebrated of all forms of imitation (literal-ly, "images"), is the most dangerous as well.A mistake in handling it may cause untold harm, for one may become receptive to evil habits."12 In Plato's Republic (397-401b), Socrates discusses with his companions, Glaucon and Adeimantus, the nature of the best political structure.13 The power of music to affect one's moral character (ethos) is discussed at length.They finally concluded that music in their politically perfect city must be regulated such that only music which would improve and elevate the moral character of the citizens is practiced and performed.14 The idea of ethos was originally developed by Damon of Oa, a music theorist of the fifth century BC.15 Damon is best known in Plato's Republic as a great music theorist, but he is also remembered as a teacher and men-tor to Perikles, an important Athenian statesman.16 While Damon's primary pursuits were in music, he was also interested in politics and taught his student accordingly.According to Wallace, professor of Classics at Northwestern University, Damon was ostracized because he not only advised Perikles, but he also proposed many of the statesman's measures.17 This protected the politician, but caused problems for Damon.Wallace said, "The accusation that Damon proposed 'most' of Perikles' measures echoes Athenian complaints against the practice of politicians using surro-gates." 18 The priest Plutarch suggested that Damon used music as a screen to camouflage his involvement with Perikles,19 but his ideas on music had long-lasting effects. Damon studied and classified the different harmoniai. These were the 'tunings' or scales made up of differently spaced intervals which, when combined with certain rhythms and ranges, made up the modes. He attributed a different behavior or psychological state to each harmoniai, but it is unclear which effects he attributed to each harmoni-a i.20 It is in the writings of Aristotle and Plato where we find the effects of 12 Anderson,“Ethos”, 74. 13 Plato: The Republic, trans.Tom Griffith, ed.G. R. F. Ferrari, Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought, (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 86-92. 14 Ibid. 15 Robert W.Wallace, "Damon of Oa:A Music Theorist Ostracized?" in Music and the Muses: The Culture of 'Mousike' in the Classical Athenian City, ed. Penelope Murray and Peter Wilson (Oxford, NY: Oxford, 2004), 251. 16 Ibid. 17 Ibid., 252. 18 Ibid., 253. 19 Ibid., 251. 20 Robert W.Wallace, E-mail correspondence with the author, February 14, 2005. 20 Crescat Scientia harmoniai connected to habituation.Wallace explained that Damon prob-ably did not promote his findings publicly. Damon studied the behavioral and hence political implications of music systematically, describing and naming different harmoniai, rhythms, and metrical feet, and correlating these with conduct and ethos.The earliest and best sources for Damon's philosophical activi-ty give no sign that he promoted certain types of music for their positive ethical consequences.21 While Damon may not have promoted them, politicians who recog-nized the possible political value of ethos took an interest in his discover-ies. He claimed that changes in musical styles are always accompanied by radical changes in the laws of the state. Damon of Oa was ultimately ostra-cized due to the political connections to his research of music.22 The way in which ethos is defined has changed over the centuries.The word 'ethos' originally meant "accustomed place."23 It is known in modern times as musical phenomena: a means for conveying ethical attitudes.24 One might define ethos as the moral nature, character, or guiding belief of a person or group of people. However, the classicist Warren D.Andersen defined ethos as "An ancient Greek musical term, describing a concept important in the relationship between ancient Greek music and educa-tion". 25 He also indicates that while ethos is a conductor of virtues, it does not have virtue in and of itself: "Ethos should be taken as an attribute not merely of persons, but also of musical phenomena, which are then consid-ered as vehicles for conveying ethical attitudes, not as having any kind of moral nature in themselves."26 The definition has evolved, but this new defi-nition is not so different from the old one. One of the methods by which music is supposed to convey ethos is through mimesis, or by imitation.27 Socrates, in Plato's Timaeus, explained that ...so much of music as is adapted to the sound of the voice and to the sense of hearing is granted to us for the sake of harmony; and harmony, which has motions akin to the revolutions of our souls, is not regarded by the intelligent votary of the Muses as given by them with a view to irrational pleasure, which is deemed to be the pur-pose of it in our day, but as meant to correct any discord which may have arisen in the courses of the soul, and to be our ally in bringing her into harmony and agreement with herself.28 21 Ibid., 267. 22 Ibid., 267. 23 The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2001 ed., s.v. "Ethos", by Warren Anderson and Thomas J. Mathieson, 403. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid. 26 Ibid. 27 Andrew Ford, "Catharsis:The Power of Music in Aristotle's Politics," in Music and the Muses:The Culture of 'Mousike' in the Classical Athenian City, ed. Penelope Murray and Peter Wilson (Oxford, NY: Oxford, 2004), 320. 28 Plato,Timaeus,trans.Benjamin Jowett.Internet.<available from http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html> Ethos and the Power of Music 21 In other words, the soul of a man might drop from its accustomed place and fall into disorder. Music, by mimesis, is able to amend this disorder and bring the soul once again to agreement with itself. Some Hellenes believed that the human soul is in the condition of a fallen god and that its true nature could only be achieved through purifica-tion. 29 Aristides Quintilianus, a fourth century theorist, expounded on this idea and compared the harmonia of the human soul to the harmonia of the universe. "Musical mimesis is especially powerful ... because it is not a simple imitation of things but is rather an imitation of life itself, capable of raising the soul once again to the harmonia of the universe."30 The soul is naturally attracted to whatever is akin to one or another of its parts. Because of this natural tendency, mimetic arts, particularly music, may strongly affect the soul for either the positive or the negative.31 Prolonged exposure to music mimetic of the good qualities in the soul will reinforce and develop those qualities even to the point that the bad qualities inher-ent to the soul depart. Unfortunately, the mimetic power of music serves evil as well as good.32 Music mimetic of negative qualities will enhance the evil resident in the individual out of balance, diminishing the good quali-ties in the soul.This fear of the power of music is clearly exhibited by Plato in a Socratic discussion with Glaucon. "So is this the reason, Glaucon, why musical education is the most important, that rhythm and attunement are what most penetrate the inner soul and grasp it most powerfully, bring-ing good order, and make a person well-regulated if he is educated correct-ly and the opposite if he is not?"33 Although ethos has been a topic of study for over a century, it remains a troublesome subject, and may remain forever in the domain of philosoph-ical dispute due to a dearth of evidence.The Greeks were among the first to begin transcribing their music in a written from and were actually scorned for it.34 Only approximately fifteen fragments of transcribed music remain from that time and place.35 However there are now many notable sources in which ethos was closely scrutinized and many different avenues of study were touched upon. Some important sources available include 29 Thomas J. Mathieson, "Harmonia and Ethos in Ancient Greek Music," The Journal of Musicology 3 (1984): 364-79, 267. 30 Ibid. 31 Thomas J. Mathieson, Apollo's Lyre: Greek Music and Music Theory in Antiquity and the Middle Ages (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1999), 544. 32 Aristides Quintilianus on Music: In Three Books, trans. and ed.Thomas J. Mathieson (New Haven:Yale Univeristy Press, 1983), 127. 33 West,Ancient Greek Music, 248. 34 Egert Polhmann and Martin West.Documents of Ancient Greek Music (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2001), 1. 35 K. Marie Stolba,The Development of Western Music:A History (Boston, Mass: McGraw- Hill, 1998), 8. 22 Crescat Scientia Aristides Quintilianus's De Musica, Claudius Ptolemy's Harmonics, and the writings of ancient philosophers like Aristotle and Plato. Aristides Quintilianus was an important music theorist of ancient Greece who authored his treatise on music sometime in the late third or early fourth century A.D.36 Along with Aristoxenes37 and Claudius Ptolemy,38 who were also influential music theorists, he provided a sys-tematized and somewhat technical philosophical treatment of music.39 His work was influenced extensively by Plato and Aristotle and is an important reference for scholars interested in the music theory of Ancient Greece as well as the educational application of ethos.According to Aristides Quintilianus, "the harmonia of music may create a like harmonia in the soul, and this in turn creates a particular ethos."40 It was believed that the universe is a harmony expressible by numbers and that harmony in music, also expressible by numbers and imitative of the harmony of the universe, could return the soul to its natural state of perfection.41 Aristides Quintilianus inherited a version of this idea from the Pythagoreans, follow-ers of Pythagoras (c. 569-475 BC). Aristides Quintilianus explained that the soul without the body is sim-ple and free of gender orientation, but desiring a body of either the femi-nine or the masculine form.42 Once the soul is clothed in its human body, it must be identified with the masculine or the feminine. However, he allows that some souls which desire for a certain gender are denied. "For example, whenever souls do not gain by nature such a body, they remodel it with their own changes and alter it into a thing similar to themselves."43 Music and the different components of music will imitate either a femi-nine, masculine, or medial character. 36 Thomas J. Mathieson,“Aristides Quintilianus”,Grove Music Online ed. L Macy Internet.<available from, http://www.grovemusic.com >, accessed 03/05/05. 37 Warren D.Anderson, Music and Musicians in Ancient Greece (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994), 138. 38 Andrew Barker, Scientific Method in Ptolemy's Harmonics (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 1. 39 Quintilianus, 1. 40 Mathieson,Harmonia, 268. 41 Giovanni Comotti, Music in Greek and Roman Culture, trans. Rosaria V. Munson (Baltimore, MD:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979), 27. 42 Quintilianus, 130. 43 Ibid. Ethos and the Power of Music 23 For it is possible in the first place to see each nature singly in visible things: dividing freshness and what naturally belongs to adornment-color and figure-by femininity, and somberness and tending to thought by masculinity; and again in audible things: according smooth and gentle sounds to the feminine part and harsher sounds to the opposite part.And ... it is necessary to declare in general con-cerning all things that as many of the sensible things as entice to pleasure and naturally happen to slowly soften the will, these we must judge as in the feminine part; and as many as move the thought and arouse activity, these we must afford to the masculine portion; and, in truth, the things that do neither or both by mixture, these we must declare to be medial.44 Naturally,music conveying a feminine ethos could be good or evil.Aristides Quintilianus attributed soberness and tendency to thought to the mascu-line aspect, but the Nurse of Euripides' play,Medea, also attributes rude-ness to the masculine sex: "Wert thou to call the men of old time rude uncultured boors thou wouldst not err...."45 Quintilianus attributed fresh-ness, color, and figure to the feminine, but characteristics such as weakness and foolishness could also be associated with the feminine aspect as Euripides also shows in Medea: "I will do so; nor will I doubt thy word; woman is a weak creature, ever given to tears,"46 and "...small is the class amongst women-(one maybe shalt thou find 'mid many)-that is not inca-pable of wisdom."47 In Thomas J. Mathiesen's "Harmonia and Ethos in Ancient Greek Music," the author establishes a method based on the sys-tem of Aristides Quintilianus by which one may distinguish a piece accord-ing to gender attributes.The elements of rhythm, diction, and mode may each convey a different ethos, but the music these elements combine to create is always identifiable as masculine, feminine, or medial. Plato and Aristotle both recognized the importance and the influence of music on one's character and in a society. Plato, ever a communalist, concerned himself with how music would affect the behavior of society and what types of music should be allowed in an enlightened civilization.48 In many of his writings, Plato recognized the role mimesis played in the forming of habits.49 Students were strongly encouraged to pursue an instru-ment early in their education because of its habit-forming qualities and its ability to instill a virtue of temperance. Plato said that music has decisive importance for elementary education because rhythm and mode "sink deep into the soul" and remain fixed there.50 Modern scientific research 44 Ibid., 131. 45 Euripides,Medea,Internet.<available from http://classics.mit.edu/Euripides/medea.html>, accessed March 2,2005. 46 Ibid. 47 Ibid. 48 Plato, 116-117. 49 The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians,“Ethos”, 405. 50 Anderson, Ethos, 179. 24 Crescat Scientia confirms this theory. Even now, parents enroll their children in music les-sons, and music programs are a regular part of high school curriculum for these very reasons.The discipline required by music training instills strong character traits, and it is proven that a youth involved in music training of some kind is much more likely to be a better student and develop good habits.51 Musical mimesis will aid in creating good or bad habits, or simply influence one strongly for positive or negative depending on how strongly the music imitates the desirable atttributes. Since music is mimetic we must, Plato says, be particularly careful to judge it not by pleasure, but by another criterion altogether.We should, moreover, seek out such music as bears a likeness to the imi-tation of the good talking rightness rather than pleasure to be our standard, since the success of mimesis depends on its rightness. Good music accordingly represents the soul of a good man under external influences.52 Aristides Quintilianus further claimed that all of the parts of music - pitch, scale, mode, rhythmic pattern - are like the order of the universe and, through mimesis,music may make the order of the soul like the order of the universe.53 This is reaching perfection, or attaining godhood. By using harmonia in the aforesaid ways-either presenting a harmo-nia to each soul by similarity or by contrariety-you will disclose the inferior ethos lying hidden, heal it, and instill a better one.54 The Greek modes were an important element of the harmonics having an effect on the soul.The modes consisted of different tunings for instru-ments or musical scales with different proportions or intervals between the tones.55 Some were thought to be too chromatic in their harmonia and were avoided as one would avoid developing bad habits.56 Instruments were eventually invented that could modulate or switch modes in the mid-dle of a piece;57 this was also considered to be a source of bad harmonia because it caused a shift from one ethos to another.58 Sources give conflicting accounts of mode and it is impossible to say for certain how many different modes there were at any given time, but Claudius Ptolemy 51 Leslie Bunt, "Music Therapy",Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy Internet. <Available from http://www.grovemusic.com>, accessed 03/07/05. 52 Anderson, Ethos, 103. 53 Mathieson, Harmonia, 268. 54 Ibid., 368. 55 Landels, 88. 56 Eric Csapo, "The Politics of the New Music," in Music and the Muses:The Culture of 'Mousike' in the Classical Athenian City, ed. Penelope Murray and Peter Wilson (Oxford, NY: Oxford, 2004), 236. 57 Ibid., 212. 58 Barker,GMW, 132. Ethos and the Power of Music 25 describes seven species of tonoi, or mode, in his treatise,Harmonics.59 These were named after the different places and people with whom they originated.60 Three common modes included the Dorian, the Phrygian, and the Lydian61. Each mode was based around a system of tetrachords (four-note scales) in which the two outer tones were fixed an interval of a fourth apart but the two inner tones were variable.62 Two types of modes with which society is still familiar are the Major and Minor keys or scales. We know major keys to be more bright and extroverted than their aloof and often sorrowful counterpart, the minor keys.The reason for these dif-ferent effects is the soul's natural resonance with harmony, or musical ratios. Indeed, our souls are thoroughly affected together with the actuali-ties of the melody, recognizing as it were the kinship of the ratios of its own constitution and modeled by the movements peculiar to the specific character of the mele, so that sometimes they are led to pleasures and relaxations and other times stimulated and awakened, sometimes turned to rest and moderation and other times to mad-ness and divine suffusion, and so on, when the melos itself modu-lates and leads our souls to the dispositions established from the similarity of the ratios.63 This excerpt from Ptolemy explains the therapeutic benefits of music and may indicate the roots of music therapy in classic Greek culture.Aristides Quintilianus also seemed to support the idea of music as therapy. He divid-ed the soul into different parts, each associated with a different mood.64 A mode was attached to each part of the soul and was supposed to be imita-tive of that particular mood.The modes could then lead the soul back to its correct condition by means of mimesis.65 The modes are most easily identifiable by the scalar pattern of the tones, but there was no such thing as perfect pitch in ancient Greece.66 Relative pitch was the rule, but mode did not always refer only to the scale pattern; it also indicated starting pitch.67 Higher pitches require more tenseness in the voice or the strings of an instrument while lower pitches are usually more relaxed. Classicist M.L.West said, "Certainly the modes appear to have been marked in some cases by differences of 59 K. Marie Stolba,The Development of Western Music:A History. (Boston, Mass: McGraw- Hill, 1998) 16. 60 Gioseffo Zarlino,On the Modes: Pa rt Four of Le Istitutioni Harmoniche, 1558. trans. Vered Cohen. ed. Claude V. Palisca.( London, UK:Yale University Press, 1983) 2. 61 West, Ancient Greek Music, 179-181. 62 Comotti, 80. 63 Mathieson, Apollo's Lyre, 483. 64 Ibid. 65 Ibid. 66 Anderson, Ethos, 17. 67 Ibid., 14. 26 Crescat Scientia tessitura-differences in the degree to which high or low singing was required."68 He continued, "The meaning of 'tense' and 'slack' in this con-text is made plainer by Aristotle's remark that the tense harmoniai are not easy for old men to sing; nature offers them the slack ones instead. Clearly a 'tense' mode involved more high notes and was taxing for that reason."69 Often the modes were identified according to which instrument they were played on or what kind of a rhythm was used. M.L.West further observed that "no doubt there were other differential characteristics that do not appear from the bare scales. Some types of rhythm were probably felt to go with one mode rather than another."70 The differences between the modes involving range, rhythm, and instruments are due to the origins of each mode from a different group of people, some associated with differ-ent cults. For instance, the kithara, a stringed instrument like a lyre,was associated with Apollo, the god of wisdom.71 The aulos, an oboe-like wind instrument,was associated with Dionysus, the god of wine and revelry.72 As a result of these differences,music of a frenzied nature was played on the aulos and music of a calm nature was played on the kithara. There were some ancient Greek philosophers and teachers who opposed the theory of ethos as it has been described.The Hibeh Papyri were discovered in Egypt around 1905 provide some of the opposing evi-dence. 73 These writings were attributed to Hippias of Elis, a contemporary of Socrates.74 Hippias scorned the idea that moral effects could be attrib-uted to harmonies and would not accept the idea that music could express the qualities of inanimate objects, particularly if the music used no words.75 "They realize that the chromatic will not produce cowardice, any more than the enharmonic will produce bravery, in those who employ it,"76 the papyrus reads, but Hippias also said, "Certain persons pretend to knowl-edge outside their proper fields without realizing it."77 It would appear that Plato's position on ethos was sharply under attack for his lack of personal music experience, but there seems to be little evidence that Hippias exhib-ited any real musical talent himself. In the Greco-Roman period, 68 West, Ancient Greek Music, 178. 69 Ibid., 179. 70 Ibid., 178. 71 Martha Maas: "Kithara",Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy Internet. <Available from http://www.grovemusic.com>, accessed 03/07/05. 72 The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2001 ed., s.v. "Greece" by Thomas J. Mathieson, Dimitri Conomos, George Leotsakos, and Sotirios Chianis/Rudolph M. Brandl, 662. 73 Herbert M. Schueller.The Idea of Music:An Introduction to Musical Aesthetics in Antiquity and the Middle Ages (Kalamazoo, MI:Western Michigan University, 1988), 28. 74 Ibid. 75 Ibid., 28-29. 76 Barker,GMW, 184. 77 Anderson, Ethos, 148. Ethos and the Power of Music 27 Philodemus was also an important critic in the field of ethos.78 He criti-cized the theories of the Pythagorians who are known to have calculated numbers and ratios and the relationship between music and the universe: Even granting that the movement of the sun and moon and the dis-tance between them have analogies with the movement (and spac-ing) of musical sounds, and that the zodiac (is comparable) to the system of division on the monochord, the fact of relationship is not established, since many factors which bear upon determining the nature of the analogy show the greatest conceivable difference.79 He also accuses early theorists of being insensible regarding musical theo-ry and called them ignorant of celestial phenomena.80 He criticized the idea of different parts of the soul and music's effect thereon: These people divide up the parts of the soul in the most absurd way in the world. For one thing, it is not "right" to look on the forms of... melodic composition, which are in the realm of music, but music conceived wholly with relation to its end. For another, the parts of the soul are not arranged... as they claim; it is obvious foolishness to say that one part is settled and ordered while another is restrained and passionate.81 Ethos in music was and continues to be a subject for philosophical dis-pute. There are few original or primary sources and a majority of what is known has been pieced together from the words of ancient philosophers. However, scientists and musicologists have returned to the study of the effects of music. It is now a scientifically proven fact that music aids in learning and healing therapy.82 This concept has its critics, but music is a science as well as an art form which has thrived over the thousands of years since the Hellenes introduced it to the world. It is not easy to under-stand the nature of the power the ancient Greeks attributed to music, but it is interesting to observe how similar some of their ideas about music are to modern-day thought.The Greeks showed wisdom beyond their time in the field of philosophy; their observations concerning music show wisdom which continues to be, in many ways, beyond our own. 78 Ibid., 153. 79 Ibid., 155. 80 Ibid. 81 Ibid., 169. 82 Leslie Bunt, "Music Therapy",Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy Internet. <Available from http://www.grovemusic.com>, accessed 03/07/05. U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E 1 9 4 1 From the close of his life at Ford's Theatre to the present day, histori-ans have wrestled with the question of how to judge Abraham Lincoln. For the general populace, he has always remained "Honest Abe" and "the Great Emancipator." A number of historians, however, have questioned the validi-ty of this accepted image. For a number of reasons, the 1858 Illinois Senate Election Campaign between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas has consistently served as a focal point in the controversy over how Lincoln ought to be judged. The historian Phillip Paludan has noted that each of the major scholars who have treated the Lincoln-Douglas 1858 campaigns have "all demon-strated the ways in which Americans have turned to Lincoln over the years to support their political positions or to anoint and exemplify their hopes and dreams."1 Paludan further argues that this tends to produce a number of "alternate Lincolns" according to the particular agenda that the individ-ual historian is attempting to promote.2 This unique trademark of histori-ans who have treated the issue of the Lincoln-Douglas 1858 Senate cam-paign allows for a separation of these authors into three distinct schools of thought. Some have used the Illinois Senate campaign of 1858 in an attempt to dispel the generally accepted image of Lincoln as "Honest Abe" and expose the 'true Lincoln' for what he really was: a demagogue, an opportunist, a racist, and the architect of an unnecessary war. A handful of scholars who point to the moral basis of Lincoln's argu-ments as made throughout the course of the debates have also utilized the 1858 campaign to defend the traditional image of "Honest Abe" as the "true Lincoln" and to underscore his legal and moral brilliance. Led by historian 1 Phillip Shaw Paludan. "Emancipating the Republic: Lincoln and the Means and Ends of Antislavery" In We Cannot Escape History, ed. James M. McPherson, (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1995), 45. 2 Ibid. A House Uniter or a House Divider? A Historiographical Survey of the 1858 Illinois Senate Campaign Luke E. Peterson 30 Crescat Scientia Harry V. Jaffa, these scholars have also used Lincoln comments from the 1858 campaign in order to justify a new method of interpreting the U.S. Constitution. Finally, several recent historians have sought to answer the claims raised by both Lincoln detractors and Lincoln defenders, without attempt-ing to impose any given value judgment on Lincoln or Douglas.These scholars have also sought to understand the importance of the event in its own right, without seeking to advance a particular agenda. The "Needless War" Heroes Lincoln was immediately memorialized after his death with a number of popular histories which lauded the President for his moral stature and for leading the nation through its darkest crisis. John G. Nicolay and John Hay, Lincoln's personal secretaries, wrote a popular biography of Lincoln which was published originally in serial form in Century Magazine.The his-tory comprised several volumes when finished and utilized a tremendous wealth of documents, photographs, and first-hand accounts collected over the course of many years. Others followed in their footsteps, including Ida Tarbell, a prominent female journalist, who wrote a two-volume biography that was published in serial form in McClure's magazine at the turn of the century.Tarbell's work provided a more progressive look at Lincoln. After World War I, the first school of Civil War revisionists began to question the heretofore accepted image of Lincoln.These historians devel-oped a view of the Civil War as an "avoidable conflict" or "needless war" and, in order to explain this claim, they inevitably turned to Lincoln and the 1858 Illinois Senate Campaign. Authors such as Nathaniel Stephenson, Edward Channing, Max Farrand, Philip Auchampaugh, and Robert R. Russel began to speculate in the 1920s on choices that, perhaps, could have pre-empted the Civil War and thus avoided what had been termed a senseless loss. Even Frederick Jackson Turner began to speculate over the necessity of the war.As ques-tions began to mount, this newly-emerging school began to turn its atten-tion to the man who presided over "the needless war",Abraham Lincoln. It is worth noting that this move in the revisionist school was led primarily by Southerners who found their outlet in The Journal of Southern History. The historian Avery Craven had labeled the Civil War "the work of pious cranks and politicians" and certainly chief in both categories was Lincoln himself.3 Craven contended that neither slavery nor sectional eco-nomic and cultural differences were sufficient causes to make war inevitable.With the same broad brush Craven painted the target for blame 3 Avery Craven "Coming of the War Between the States:An Interpretation." The Journal of Southern History 2, no. 3 (August 1936): 305. A House Uniter or a House Divider? 31 not on slavery, but on the moral inflexibility and self-centered aspirations of a few. Craven, in his 1936 article, "Coming of the War Between the States," painstakingly outlined the evolution of the abolitionist movement as an artificial force representing the views of a vocal minority which found its political vehicle to legitimization in the Republican Party.4 Craven finds the point of no return on the road to the Civil War in the Senate campaign of 1858. He argues that the Republicans were on the verge of accepting Douglas' popular sovereignty doctrine when Lincoln "prevented himself and his party from being thrust aside by a desperate appeal to old moral foundations." Craven criticizes Lincoln for his moral inflexibility, as expressed in the "house-divided" speech, which he claims removed the last chance for peaceful resolution.5 By Craven's judgment, there was little difference in application between Douglas' "popular sover-eignty" and Lincoln's containment and "eventual extinction" policy. His condemnation of Lincoln springs from the fact that he rejected a system which produced the same end that he sought, simply because it was "not born of moral conviction."6 Adding to the notion of Lincoln as inflexible spoiler was George F. Milton. Milton was an authority on the life of Stephen A. Douglas. He viewed the "little giant" as the architect of a program which represented the last hope for peace; popular sovereignty.7 Milton similarly condemns the "house-divided" doctrine as one of the major causes of the Civil War, though not the ultimate one. He charged Lincoln with having developed a doctrine that was nothing more than a "rotten plank" destined to give way to sectional warfare.8 James G. Randall, widely considered the leading Civil War historian of the time,was also associated with the "needless war" revisionist school. Randall was an exceptional scholar and not only utilized a wide variety of primary and secondary sources in doing his research, but also thoroughly scrutinized these sources to ascertain their validity.Through the 1930s Randall demonstrated an increasing sympathy with revisionist history, which culminated in a full embrace of the doctrine in 1940 in his article The Blundering Generation. Here Randall examines the causes of the war in terms of human emotion, proclaiming that the influence of such events as "the Sumter maneuver, the election of Lincoln, abolitionism, slavery in Kansas, cultural and economic differences..." can be considered the true causes for war only if "...one omits the elements of emotional unreason and overbold leadership."9 4 Ibid, 317. 5 Ibid, 319. 6 Ibid. 7 George Fort Milton "Stephen A. Douglas' Efforts for Peace." The Journal of Southern History 1, no. 3 (August 1935): 261. 8 Ibid, 270. 9 J.G.Randall "The Blundering Generation." The Mississippi Valley Historical Review,27,no.1.(June 1940):15. 32 Crescat Scientia Randall takes a much more broad view of the underlying cause of the war, attempting to discern the "mind of America" in the antebellum period and expose the doctrines and prejudices which lead to the "needless war".10 He prefers to place the blame on the American mindset rather than on any one leader. Craven and Milton, on the other hand, placed the blame for the war squarely on Lincoln's moral inflexibility in 1858. Randall also tends to be an apologist for Lincoln, on whom he wrote an extensive biog-raphy. He prefers to place blame on more polemic political figures in both parties and points to the moderate nature of Lincoln's stand on slavery.11 The "needless war" school died off towards the beginning of the 1950's, but a revival of this movement seems to have recently re-appeared on the scene.The new revisionist school, led by Thomas DiLorenzo and Robert Johannsen, is focused less on the causes of an unnecessary war and more on debunking its architect than their predecessors. DiLorenzo, a self-professed Libertarian and economics professor spe-cializing in economic history, is most concerned with revealing, as the title of his book indicates,The Real Lincoln (2003). DiLorenzo takes earlier revisionist doctrine espoused a step further by accusing Lincoln of con-spiring to drag America into the war in order to further his goal of central-izing government power to the benefit of northern industrial interests.12 But DiLorenzo does not stop there; he seeks to fully revamp the American image of Abraham Lincoln on all fronts. In doing so, he frequently turns to the Lincoln-Douglas Debates of the 1858 campaign to support his claims. In supporting the claim of Lincoln's power centralizing agenda, DiLorenzo describes the Lincoln-Douglas debates as more of a referendum on the issue of state sovereignty versus federal primacy than one on the morality of slavery.13 Johannsen utilizes the Lincoln-Douglas debates to make precisely the same argument, citing Douglas himself: "Lincoln goes for consolidation and uniformity in our government while I go for main-taining the confederation of the sovereign states."14 DiLorenzo further utilizes the Lincoln-Douglas debates to argue that the "Great Emancipator" was, in fact, a racist opposed to social and political equality for African Americans.15 DiLorenzo claims that the Lincoln's purported views of racial inferiority on the part of non-white races is contradictory to the Declaration of Independence, which Lincoln also cites to underline his opposition to the institution of slavery. 10 Ibid, 16. 11 James G.Randall,Lincoln, the President,Vol.I, (Urbana:University of Illinois Press,2000),75. 12 Thomas J DiLorenzo,"The Great Centralizer." Independent Review 3,Issue 2 (Fall 1998):243. 13 Thomas J DiLorenzo,The Real Lincoln (New York:Three Rivers Press, 2003), 56. 14 Robert Johannsen,Lincoln, the South, and Slavery:The Political Dimension (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1991), 92. 15 DiLorenzo,The Real Lincoln, 11. A House Uniter or a House Divider? 33 DiLorenzo asserts that this apparent hypocrisy indicates that Lincoln was not concerned with the morality of slavery and, instead, used the "slavery as evil" argument only to further his power-centralizing agenda.16 DiLorenzo often takes on a polemic tone in his work, and in less for-mal articles he often resorts to name calling with those who disagree with his viewpoint.The second edition of The Real Lincoln even has an after-word solely for the purpose of responding to criticisms of his work. Lincoln's Defenders Despite the "needless war" revisionist school, the vast majority of Americans still view Lincoln as "Honest Abe." It is this popularity, com-bined with Lincoln's propensity to make moral claims, which leads so many historians to reinterpret Lincoln as the spokesman of their agenda. For these defenders/renovators of Lincoln, the 1858 Senate campaign is an essential focal point due to its emphasis on moral issues. It is during this campaign that we are given the most complete illustration of Lincoln's views on public policy, political and moral theory, and the Constitution. These elements have become the bricks and mortar for constructing a new defense of Lincoln and making him larger than life. This paper will treat only the most prominent historian to come to Lincoln's defense, noted political scientist and historian, Harry V. Jaffa. Jaffa' work is so pivotal to those who have sought to defend Lincoln that this school might well be called the 'Jaffa School.' Jaffa wrote the seminal work on the Lincoln-Douglas debates,Crisis of the House Divided (1959), in direct response to the "needless war" authors. In this book, Jaffa subjects the debates to intense scrutiny, analyzing every aspect of their content in order to respond to the claims of Craven, Milton, and Randall. Only a few historians have seriously attempted to challenge Jaffa; these are, notably, DiLorenzo and Johansen. Jaffa's work is also a careful historiography of the Civil War revisionist treatment of the 1858 Illinois Senate campaign. He focuses much attention on analyzing the statements of these other historians paragraph by para-graph. He bolsters his research with primary documents, some recently made available at the time that the book was written. 16 Ibid, 12-13. 34 Crescat Scientia Focusing on the moral substance of the debates, Jaffa gave careful attention to Lincoln's interpretation of the constitution. Jaffa argued that the U.S. Constitution must be understood in conjunction with the Declaration of Independence and its espousal of unalienable universal rights.17 Jaffa, in his in-depth analysis of Lincoln's constitutional interpreta-tion, laid out an intricate method for using the Declaration of Independence as the framework for interpreting and understanding the Constitution. He was so successful in making this case that he is credited as being one of the primary architects of a new school of constitutional thought known as Liberal Originalism.18 In essence, he argued that the fundamental point of contention in the debate is this question of how to best understand the Constitution, with opposing proposals being offered by Lincoln and Douglas. Douglas, as the advocate of popular sovereignty, made the case that the will of the majori-ty is supreme in any matter not expressly forbidden by the Constitution.19 Lincoln, on the other hand,was the proponent of a system whereby 'popu-lar will' cannot override the universal laws on which the nation was found-ed; i.e. that all men are created equal.20 Jaffa thus roundly criticized and rebuked the "needless war" revision-ists for their opposition to Lincoln's morally anchored platform. Jaffa states that it was the viewpoint of Lincoln that to "...attempt to legitimize the extension of slavery was impossible without denying the Negro's humanity or without denying the moral right of humanity or both."21 According to Jaffa, by taking a moral stand against popular sovereignty, Lincoln was not removing the middle ground for compromise as the Civil War revisionists had claimed, but was rather affirming the only context in which the gov-ernment can properly operate.This stance was assumed presumably out of a respect for universal precepts of equality and justice.22 Jaffa so strikingly and successfully utilized the Lincoln-Douglas debates to innovate and create a new field of political and constitutional thought that he now stands as a category unto himself among historians.Timothy Sandefur, a legal scholar, has declared Jaffa's conclusions to be some of the most fundamental underpinnings of the legal theory of Liberal Originalism.23 17 Harry V. Jaffa Crisis of the House Divided:An Interpretation of the Issues in the Lincoln- Douglas Debates (Chicago: Chicago Press 1959), 308. 18 Timothy Sandefur "Liberal Originalism:A Past for the Future" Harva rd Journal of Law and Public Policy 27, (Spring 2004): 497. 19 Jaffa,House Divided, 310. 20 Ibid, 313-315. 21 Ibid, 313. 22 Ibid, 328-329. 23 Sandefur, Liberal Originalism, 497. A House Uniter or a House Divider? 35 The 'Objective' Authors The last field of historians that should be addressed consists of those who approach the 1858 Illinois Senate Campaign with a claim of objectivi-ty. These authors have studied a few distinct aspects of the debates, prima-rily in response to the questions raised by Craven, Milton, Randall, DiLorenzo, Jaffa, and others.The elements studied by these authors can be broken down into two additional subcategories: issues of constitutionality and legality, and issues of political impact and consequence. Following the impressive claims of Jaffa, several authors have sought to more thoroughly engage the issue of Lincoln's interpretation of the Constitution. Jaffa set a standard that has been much explored since 1959. Thomas J. Pressly wrote an impressive treatise in which he explored some of the possible incongruities in Lincoln's 1858 appeals to the Declaration of Independence, and his treatment of Southern secession as an act of trea-son. While Lincoln had clearly affirmed his support for the claim of the uni-versal equality of man as supported by the Declaration of Independence, he has also, at differing times in his political career, both opposed and sup-ported the "Right of Revolution" found in the same document.24 According to Pressly, Lincoln finally rejected the South's "Right to Revolution" on the basis that it had no reasonable claims of violations to their universal natu-ral rights as necessitated by the Declaration of Independence.25 One author who added significantly to the constitutional inquiry springing from Jaffa's analysis of the 1858 Senate Race was Gary J. Jacohbson. Jacohbson set about comparing the concept of judicial review espoused by Lincoln with that of the noted legal scholar John Hart Ely. Jacohbson undertook this task with the express purpose "to suggest the distance we have traveled in a century of jurisprudence."26 In making the comparison between Ely and Lincoln, Jacohbson is able to clarify Lincoln's view on judicial review and explain its origin. He argues that Lincoln had never given thought to the question of judicial review until forced into it by the Dred Scott decision.27 Jacohbson contended, therefore, that many of Lincoln's arguments were experiments in coming to a full but gradual real-ization of his own stand on the issue. Lincoln, Jacohbson argued, held the view that the decisions of the court might be held as final and effective, but not permanent.According to Jacohbson, Lincoln considered the Constitution subject to interpretation, particularly if the decision was in opposition to the natural rights granted 24 Thomas J. Pressly "Bullets and Ballots: Lincoln: and the 'Right of Revolution'" The American Historical Review 67, no. 3 (April 1962): 649. 25 Ibid, 658-659. 26 Gary J. Jacohbson "Abraham Lincoln 'On this Question of Judicial Authority':The Theory of Constitutional Aspiration." The Western Political Quarterly 36, no. 1 (March 1983): 52. 27 Ibid, 55. 36 Crescat Scientia by the Declaration of Independence. If such was the case, the decision must respected as final for the moment, but one could still hope and maneuver towards a repeal of said court decision.28 Robert M. Spector wrote an article in 1971 that explored the differ-ences between the constitutional interpretation of the infamous Chief Justice Roger B.Taney with Lincoln's mode of constitutional interpretation. Spector argued throughout the article that the two men actually had much in common in their constitutional and political views, and that Taney him-self abhorred slavery as an institution as much as Lincoln.29 Once again using the "House-Divided" speech as a point of reference, Spector demon-strated that the disagreement between Taney and Lincoln was not one over the morality of slavery, but a question of the proper method of interpreting the constitution. He argued that Taney was a strict constructionist going by the letter of the law and what he perceived as the original intent of the founding fathers while Lincoln used a looser construction to argue what the intent of the founding fathers may have been and should have been.30 Finally, in issues of political impact and causality, few authors have attempted to address whether the 1858 Illinois Senate Campaign truly pro-duced some of the consequences claimed by the "needless war" revision-ists, and whether Lincoln truly had revolutionized Republican thought. One historian who has ventured into this area is Jean Baker. Baker wrote an excellent article which explores the philosophical roots of, and consequences of, the political arguments made by Lincoln and Douglas. Baker noted that while the arguments offered by both sides certainly make moral appeals, they are by their very nature partisan arguments.31 He con-tended that Lincoln had a clearly defined argument that drew primarily upon Jeffersonian concepts of individual liberties, which Lincoln had sim-ply extended to African Americans.32 Douglas, on the other hand,was far less clear as to the philosophical origins for his popular sovereignty. Douglas' ideals were far more appealing to Republican notions of a cooler democracy, where 'popular will' would reign, though an emphasis on order through respect of law must be paramount.33 Baker argued that Douglas' appeal to Republican principles was, by 1858, an outdated notion.The rise of liberalism under Jackson had created an ever increasing trend toward individual liberty as the paramount value of antebellum society.34 28 Ibid, 54-55. 29 Robert M. Spector "Lincoln and Taney:A Study in Constitutional Polarization." The American Journal of Legal History 15, no. 3 (July 1971): 211-212. 30 Ibid, 213. 31 Jean Baker "From Belief into Culture: Republicanism in the Antebellum North." American Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Autumn, 1985): 532. 32 Ibid, 533. 33 Ibid, 533-534. 34 Ibid, 535. A House Uniter or a House Divider? 37 Don E. Fehrenbacher has contributed most substantially to the ques-tion of the political impact of, and consequences stemming from, the 1858 Illinois Senate campaign. Fehrenbacher has written several articles on ante-bellum issues, and is notable for his analysis of primary documents and careful questioning of the validity of secondary sources. Laying the foundation for Bakers' work which would come some twenty years later, Fehrenbacher wrote "The origins and purpose of Lincoln's 'House Divided' speech" an excellent article which does much to explain the philosophical underpinnings of Lincoln's political position. Here Fehrenbacher argued that in order to fully understand the signifi-cance of the "House Divided" speech, it was necessary to understand the context in which it was given. Fehrenbacher noted that the speech was given as an informal acceptance speech after the Illinois Republican party had adopted a resolution endorsing Lincoln as their "first and only choice for the United States Senate."35 Fehrenbacher explained that this unique resolution was a reaction by the Illinois Republican Party to claims from eastern Republicans that they should not stand in the way of Douglas' re-election. His popular sovereignty policy had made Douglas very popular among even some of the more abolitionist Republicans.36 According to Fehrenbacher this fact is significant for several reasons. It meant that Lincoln was transformed into a nationally recognized leader of the Republican Party virtually overnight.37 Such a strong resolution in favor of a candidate opposing one of the most popular Senators in the nation was an incredible boon to Lincoln. It is doubtful that Douglas would have agreed to the Lincoln-Douglas debates had Lincoln not received such a resounding endorsement. Lincoln wanted to debate Douglas throughout the state, but Doulgas only reluctantly agreed to seven debates after this Republican endorsement.38 It is essential to a complete understanding of Lincoln's intended point in the "House Divided" speech.39 Fehrenbacher also examines a document which he claims was mistak-enly attributed to May of 1858, as another key to understanding Lincoln's intent.40 Lincoln, he argues, had long been planning this speech and had begun his authorship in December of 1857, possibly in anticipation of challenging Douglas in 1858.41 Lincoln, Fehrenbacher argues, used his more eloquent introduction to establish his belief that the issue of slavery would be decided in an absolute term; either the nation would become all slave 35 Don E. Fehrenbacher "The Origins and Purpose of Lincoln's 'House Divided' Speech." The Mississippi Valley Historical Review 46, no. 4 (Mar. 1960): 615. 36 Ibid, 617. 37 Ibid. 38 Ibid, 616. 39 Ibid, 619. 40 Ibid, 640. 41 Ibid, 638-639. 38 Crescat Scientia or all free.42 The second section of the speech, he maintains, outlined Lincoln's partisan conspiracy claim that Douglas, in creating room for slav-ery's expansion,was actually an agent for pro-slavery factions working to erode the moral high ground that prevented a universal adoption of slav-ery. 43 Fehrenbacher further asserts that this was an attempt by Lincoln to demonstrate the folly of Republican support for Douglas, and to establish himself as a moderate, though morally absolute, pioneer in the Republican Party.44 In "Lincoln, Douglas, and the 'Freeport Question", Fehrenbacher addressed the impact of the "Freeport question" on the 1860 election. In this article, he challenged the traditionally held belief that Douglas's answer to Mr. Lincoln's second question at the Freeport debate (which focused on whether territories must enforce the Dred Scott decision and allow slavery in their boundaries) lead to victory for Douglas in Illinois, but cost him the presidency. It is argued that Douglas, by answering that any territory may in effect ban slavery through "unfriendly legislation", cost himself the support of Southern Democrats and thus the 1860 election. Fehrenbacher instead argued strongly that the impact of Douglas' answer was far less significant. He reasoned first that Douglas' answer cannot be reasonably construed as a turning point in his Illinois victory, and therefore the argument is a moot point for three main reasons.45 First, he noted that with regard to the answer costing Douglas the election and splitting the Democratic Party, the issue had already been much debated and the Democratic Party was clearly on shaky ground for a few years prior. He fol-lowed this argument with the contention that Douglas' response actually received wide praise and approval by both northern and southern Democrats.46 Fehrenbacher made the final point in saying that it was Douglas' opposition to the Lecompton Constitution for Kansas, which was a concrete issue that ultimately cost him the election and promoted the split within the Democratic Party.47 Conclusion The 1858 Illinois Senate Campaign has been the subject of continuous revision and revisitation precisely because it was unlike any other Senate campaign in American History. So much of the antebellum period culmi-nates in this last great scene prior to the opening acts of the Civil War; the 42 Ibid, 623-624. 43 Ibid, 630. 44 Ibid, 642. 45 D. E. Fehrenbacher "Lincoln Douglas, and the Freeport Question" The American Historical Review 66, no. 3 (April 1961): 605. 46 Ibid, 608-609. 47 Ibid, 610-611. A House Uniter or a House Divider? 39 characters, questions, morals, plans, and politics that shaped an era were all squeezed onto this tiny Illinois stage. Each of these elements demands con-tinual re-examination so that they might be better understand as the rea-sons and causes behind the war. Despite the great division among the historians who have written about the Lincoln-Douglas campaign, it is clear that there is a universal acceptance of one important fact; that the 1858 Illinois campaign was far more than a Senate race between two political giants.The moral content of the candidates' debates also lends potent significance to the event. It is this focus on morality that serves as both the divider and uniter of the scholars who have treated the subject of the Lincoln-Douglas campaign.The Civil War revisionists saw the 1858 campaign as the last great chance for peace and then claim that peace was destroyed by Lincoln's unnecessary moraliz-ing. The defenders of Lincoln saw in the 1858 campaign not only a defense of Lincoln as a moral crusader, but also discovered an entirely new way of understanding and interpreting the U.S. Constitution. Finally, the neutral authors who have sought simply to answer the many questions raised by detractors and supporters of Lincoln have done much to clear the issue of distortions and misrepresentations. Whatever the conclusion of the authors, it is likely that this momen-tous event of the antebellum era will be visited again and again in order to shape and color our understanding of these two men, their era, and the principles that would govern the nation, for generations to come. U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E 1 9 4 1 Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War as a means of protecting the Union against spies and traitors.This was a very controversial action at the time and even today there is some debate as to whether or not the suspension was in violation of the Constitution. Over the years, scholars have taken both sides of the issue. The power to suspend habeas corpus is found in Article 1, Section 9, of the Constitution, which deals with the powers of Congress. In spite of this, some constitutional experts have argued in favor of the president having the suspension power. The experts' arguments are not convincing in light of research showing that the Framers of the Constitution purposely gave the power to suspend habeas corpus to the legislative branch, not the executive branch, of the government. Before Lincoln's time, there had been cases favoring Congress as the proper branch of government to suspend habeas corpus.This would suggest, therefore, that Lincoln's suspension did violate the Constitution. The phrase "habeas corpus" is Latin for "produce the body." In practi-cal application, this meant that if a person were wrongfully imprisoned he could ask that a writ of habeas corpus be issued on his behalf, and as a result of this, he would be able to go before a judge.The judge would then determine whether the imprisonment was just or whether the prisoner should be set free on principle.The concept of Habeas Corpus, like the concepts of due process and trial by jury, originated in the English Magna Carta.1 In England, the Habeas Corpus Act went into effect in 1679.This was the culmination of hundreds of years of struggle to expand the origi-nal common law writ that first came about in the fourteenth century.2 In the early history of English habeas corpus, the royal courts used it to win struggles for jurisdiction against the local courts.The writ had also 1 William F. Swindler,Magna Carta: Legend and Legacy (New York:The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1965), 148. 2 Ibid., 201. Lincoln and the Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the Civil War Ted Memmott 42 Crescat Scientia been used to combat competition within the Chancery courts and eventu-ally the Prerogative courts. Later, Elizabeth I and the Stuart kings began the imprisonment of political agitators without a hearing, and habeas corpus began to be used to combat the action of imprisonment in the following way:The unlawfully detained individual was to be produced, and then the courts were to set him free pending the formal trial, unless the court itself ordered his recommittal to prison.3 This application of habeas corpus, as a safeguard of personal liberty, is what we are familiar with today. It was important to many of the Framers at the Constitutional Convention that the new government provided for the right of habeas cor-pus so citizens could get a timely trial in the case of a questionable detain-ment. The Framers were accustomed to having this right, as most of the colonial charters allowed for it.4 On August 20, 1787, Charles Pinckney of South Carolina proposed, "The priviledges and benefit of the writ of habeas corpus shall be enjoyed in this government in the most expedi-tious and ample manner."5 This statement is the way by which the Constitution borrowed habeas corpus from the Magna Carta.The Framers gave the power to suspend habeas corpus to the legislative branch of the government, not to the executive branch; as shown by the ultimate place-ment of the clause in Article 1 of the Constitution. The Civil War began on April 12, 1861, with the Confederates firing on Fort Sumter off the coast of South Carolina. Shortly after this, a pro- Confederate Baltimore mob blocked the passage of Union troops to the capital.This worried President Lincoln, so he asked his Attorney General, Edward Bates, whether there was a way to bypass normal judicial proceed-ings to counter the mob more swiftly. Bates, contrary to what Lincoln wanted to hear, said that the judicial proceedings could not be bypassed legally. Despite this, on April 27th, Lincoln issued an order authorizing the commander of the Union Army, General Winfield Scott, and his officers to suspend habeas corpus along the military line separating Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia.6 Specifically, the letter sent to General Scott gave the general and his officers the authority to suspend habeas corpus in the interest of the public safety, at any point where resistance occurred.7 Initially, the authorization given to General Scott did not attract much attention from those, in either the North or the South, who should have had a stake in the crisis.This changed, however, with the arrest of John 3 Ibid., 202. 4 William F. Duker,A Constitutional History of Habeas Corpus (Westport,CT: Greenwood Press, 1980), 115. 5 Eric M. Freedman,Habeas Corpus: Rethinking the Great Writ of Liberty (New York: New York University Press, 2001), 12. 6 Daniel Farber,Lincoln's Constitution (Chicago:The University of Chicago Press, 2003), 158. 7 The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, eds. Roy P. Basler, Marion Dolores Pratt, and Lloyd A. Dunlap,Vol. 4,The Abraham Lincoln Association: Springfield, Illinois (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1953), 347. Lincoln and Habeas Corpus 43 Merryman.8 Merryman, who was the lieutenant of a secessionist drill com-pany, was arrested for taking part in the destruction of a railroad bridge for the purpose of inhibiting the Union army. Under orders from General Scott, Captain Samuel Yoke, who was in charge of protecting the railroad, arrested Merryman and had him imprisoned at Fort McHenry in Baltimore, Maryland.To counter this, Chief Justice Roger Taney (who was on circuit as a federal district judge, but acting as a Supreme Court Justice from cham-bers) issued a writ of habeas corpus on May 26, 1861, directing General George Cadwalader, the commandant of the fort, to release the prisoner to stand before him [Justice Taney] in court.9 The next day, a military officer acting on behalf of the president, returned the writ to the Chief Justice and refused to produce John Merryman.10 After this turn of events,Taney ruled that the president had acted outside of the law. He warned the president against contradicting the oath he took to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Lincoln, preoccupied with the seriousness of the impending war, ignored Chief Justice Taney's ruling.11 Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, and Chief Justice Taney's reac-tion to it, aroused much discussion. Perhaps surprisingly, Lincoln received considerable criticism of his suspension of the writ from those within his own Republican Party. In the December 1861 session of Congress, Republican Senator Lyman Trumbull of Illinois introduced a resolution ask-ing Secretary of State,William H. Seward, "whether in the loyal States of the Union, any person or persons have been arrested and imprisoned and are now held in confinement by orders of him or his Department; and, if so, under what law said arrests have been made."12 In the Congressional debates that followed, Republicans mostly con-tended amongst themselves over the issue. Some of the Democratic sena-tors from the border states crossed party lines to speak out in support of Senator Trumbull's resolution, but most of the Democrats from the North were content, for the time being, to let the Republicans debate the embar-rassing issue without interfering.They did not want to risk being labeled as unpatriotic when the Republicans were handling their usual role for them.13 In spite of the political infighting amongst the congressional Republicans over the issue of Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, 8 David H. Donald,Lincoln (London: Jonathan Cape Random House, 1995), 299. 9 Duker, 147. 10 Ex Pa rte Merryman, 17 Fed. Cas. 144, 1861. 11 Donald, 299. 12 Mark E. Neely, Jr.,The Fate of Liberty:Abraham Lincoln and Civil Liberties (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 189. 13 Ibid. 44 Crescat Scientia eventually there emerged a written Republican defense of Lincoln's policy. This defense came from Horace Binney, a prominent Philadelphia lawyer, and it was entitled The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus under the Constitution. Binney published it privately in Philadelphia a few days into the new year of 1862.This provoked the Democrats to respond with pam-phlets of their own that contested Binney's claims. Binney's defense of Lincoln's policy caused the Democratic opposition to unite.14 One of the prominent Democrats who responded to Binney's pam-phlet was Charles Heebner Gross. Binney had presented several arguments for why he thought Lincoln's suspension was in accordance with the Constitution. Ignoring the placement of the suspension clause in Article 1 of the Constitution, his first point was that "suspending a privilege" was an executive act, and because of this it must be made by the president. Binney's reasoning for this assertion is somewhat vague. He claimed that the wording itself that was used ("suspending a privilege") indicated that the power belonged to the executive branch. Charles Gross asserted in his pamphlet that suspending a privilege was not necessarily an executive act. In his own words, "It may be either an executive or a legislative act.The words themselves determine nothing, one way or the other, on this point."15 Another of Binney's arguments was that Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania, one of the most influential Framers of the Constitution had, in his written motion proposing the suspension clause of the Constitution, crossed out the word "legislature" on the 28th of August 1789. Binney claimed this meant that the power was intended to be given to the execu-tive. According to Gross, this was not the case. Gross stated that the word "legislature" had been previously omitted by Pinckney in his proposal because he did not think there would be any doubt as to which branch of the government should exercise the power. Gross then argued that, in Pinckney's next motion on August 20th, he reinserted the word "legisla-ture" to avoid all "shadows of doubt." Gross went on to reason that when Gouverneur Morris omitted the word in his motion eight days later, it was because he thought the issue had been made sufficiently clear by that juncture.16 On July 4th, Lincoln attempted to justify his actions in the suspending of habeas corpus. In a special message to Congress, he made an argument for necessity by asking, "Are all the laws but one to go unexecuted, and the 14 Ibid. 15 Charles Heebner Gross,A Reply to Horace Binney's Pamphlet on Habeas Corpus (Woodbridge,CT: Research Publications, 1990. Originally printed in Philadelphia, 1962), micro-fiche, 5-6. 16 Ibid., 21. Lincoln and Habeas Corpus 45 government itself go to pieces lest that one go violated? Even in such a case,would not the official oath be broken if the government should be overthrown, when it was believed that disregarding the single law would tend to preserve it."17 Lincoln seemed to admit that he was violating the Constitution, but that it was necessary for the preservation of the Union. In the same speech, he stated, "But the Constitution itself is silent as to which or who is to exercise the power [of suspension]."18 This quotation contra-dicted the first one, in that the first one admitted that a law had been bro-ken for the sake of the Union, and the second quotation claimed that no law had been broken. The Constitution is not silent on the issue of who has the power to suspend habeas corpus. In Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2, the Constitution reads, "The priviledge of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspend-ed, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." The part of the Constitution that is quoted did not specifically say that the power was given to Congress, but it is well known that Article 1 of the Constitution is related to the powers of the legislative branch of the government; it is Article 2 that relates to the powers of the executive branch. Congress eventually settled the controversy by enacting a statute on March 3, 1863, that gave President Lincoln the authority to suspend the writ of habeas corpus throughout the country whenever he felt that the public safety required it.19 Under the authority of the statute, a military offi-cer could respond to a writ of habeas corpus by simply stating that the person was detained on the authority of the president.The wording of this part of the statute was purposely vague about whether Congress was allowing the president to use its power, or whether it was his rightful power to avoid additional controversy.20 There is no evidence to suggest that Congress was conceding that the Constitution gave the suspension power to the president. In the opening sentence of the statute, the authority to suspend habeas corpus is given to the president, and the careful wording used was, "during the present rebel-lion." The sentence indicated that Congress delegated the power to the president temporarily, without making a large issue out of it.21 In attempting to interpret the Constitution, it is helpful to consider it from the point of view of the Framers as they were the ones responsible for the content and wording of the document.When we look at the 17 Speeches of Abraham Lincoln: Including Inaugurals and Proclamations, ed.G. Mercer Adam (New York:A.L. Burt Company, 1906), 328. 18 Ibid., 329. 19 Congress, 37th Cong., 3rd sess., 1863. 20 Farber, 159. 21 Congress, 37th. 46 Crescat Scientia Constitution in the context of the time and place that it was written, it helps us to have the perspective needed to understand their intent. Charles Pinckney of South Carolina was perhaps the most outspoken advocate of habeas corpus at the Constitutional Convention. On August 20, 1787, he gave his opinion at the Convention of which government branch should have the suspension power. Part of his motion on that day was as follows, "The writ of habeas corpus shall be enjoyed in this govern-ment in the most expeditious and ample manner: and shall not be suspend-ed by the legislature except upon the most urgent and pressing occasions, and for a limited time not exceeding [blank] months."22 He seemed very matter-of-fact about the legislature being the proper branch of government having the power to suspend habeas corpus; and by implication seemed to suggest that the branch of government vested with suspension power was not an issue. Pinckney's motion was sent to the Committee of Detail without debate. Others gave their opinions on the subject at the Convention. John Rutledge of Virginia opposed allowing the suspension at all; he did not think a suspension would ever be necessary at the same time through all the states. (From Rutledge's quote it seems that he may have thought a state should be able to suspend habeas corpus within its borders, but there is no record of him having said as much). James Wilson of Pennsylvania doubted that the suspension would be necessary in the exec-utive or the legislative branch, because of a judge's ability to keep the accused in prison by denying bail.23 Although opinions in the preliminary discussions varied, the consen-sus was that the suspension should not be allowed or, if allowed, should be given to the legislature. None of the delegates that were present suggested that the executive branch should possess the power, and Wilson's sugges-tion that the power to suspend was unnecessary because of the role of judges,was an aberration.24 The Committee on Style at the Convention placed the clause regarding the suspension of habeas corpus in Article 1, which exclusively deals with the powers of Congress. Later, when the subject of the suspension power came up in the state ratification debates, those present seemed to accept that Congress should possess this important power.25 In the state conven-tions of Pennsylvania, Massachusetts,Virginia, Rhode Island, New York, and North Carolina, there was much discussion over habeas corpus, but it was not over which branch of government should possess the power. Rather, 22 Freedman, 12. 23 Duker, 128-129. 24 Ibid., 129. 25 Farber, 161. Lincoln and Habeas Corpus 47 the discussion was over the possibility of the suspension clause being in violation of states' rights. Some of the delegates, including Patrick Henry, were worried about the federal government having the right to suspend habeas corpus but, ultimately, the suspension clause had enough support to become part of the Constitution.26 Many years after the Convention, Chief Justice Roger Taney gave his opinion regarding what the intent of the Framers had been concerning the branch of government that should have the power to suspend habeas cor-pus. In his opinion in Ex Pa rte Merryman (May 1861), Chief Justice Taney stated, "If the president of the United States may suspend the writ, then the constitution of the United States has conferred upon him more regal and absolute power over the liberty of the citizen, than the people of England have thought it safe to entrust to the crown; a power which the queen of England cannot exercise at this day."27 Although Lincoln's actions in suspending habeas corpus were uncom-mon, they were not unprecedented. One similar instance occurred in 1777, when the Continental Congress recommended that disloyal persons in Pennsylvania and Delaware be arrested. In accordance with the recom-mendation of the Continental Congress, the Pennsylvania legislature passed a statute approving the measure and indemnifying the state executive. Meanwhile, the prisoners obtained a writ of habeas corpus from a Pennsylvania court (the exact court was not named in the secondary source), which the state executive ignored.28 Although this example came before the creation of the Constitution, it still has value as a precedent in the argument over which branch of the government should be able to sus-pend habeas corpus. Unlike Lincoln,Thomas Jefferson refused to suspend habeas corpus when he had the opportunity during the Aaron Burr conspiracy of 1806- 1807. Instead, he deferred to Congress.29 Apparently, Lincoln did not see Jefferson as establishing irrevocable precedent on the topic. In 1805, toward the end of his vice-presidency, Burr began to plan a vast conspiracy that would make him the president of his own country. He planned to remove the western states from the American union, and com-bine them with Mexico to form his own empire.30 The grand schemes that Burr planned never had a realistic chance. Fewer than five hundred men supported his plans.To get their support he 26 Duker, 133-134. 27 Ex Pa rte Merryman. 28 Farber, 160. 29 George M. Dennison, "Martial Law:The Development of a Theory of Emergency Powers, 1776-1861." The American Journal of Legal History 18 (Jan. 1974): 56. 30 Milton Lomask,Aaron Burr:The Conspiracy and Years of Exile, 1805-1836 (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 1982), 4. 48 Crescat Scientia lied to those very young men, saying that he was leading them in an attack against Mexico and that the plan was a secret mission sponsored by President Jefferson's government. In December of 1806 (over several days' time), troops from several states systematically crushed most of Burr's expedition. On January 17, 1807, Burr turned himself over to the state authorities of Mississippi.31 Before Burr and his followers had been defeated, the federal govern-ment did not know what to expect from the uprising. President Jefferson, not wanting to underestimate Burr and his followers, proclaimed that "a treasonable conspiracy threatened the Union." Jefferson ordered General James Wilkinson in New Orleans, to do what was necessary should the city be threatened.Wilkinson thought that he might need more power to pro-tect the city, so he urged President Jefferson to suspend the writ of habeas corpus. Jefferson refused to suspend habeas corpus for the reason that only a legislature could possess that power.32 Apparently, Jefferson accept-ed that the power could only be exercised by a legislature, such as Congress, and he never even considered attempting it himself. There is another related incident that involved Andrew Jackson before he was president, when he was the commanding general (and thereby a representative of the executive branch of the federal government) at New Orleans during the War of 1812. On February 28, 1815, Jackson ordered all who were of French nationality to evacuate New Orleans and go to Baton Rouge; he did not want anyone in the city who would not help defend it. Three days later, a man named Louis Louaillier who was a member of the House of Representatives of Louisiana, wrote an article for the Louisiana Courier criticizing the Jackson order, and suggesting that he should reverse it. Jackson had Louaillier arrested two days after the article was published.33 Judge Dominick A. Hall of the United States District Court for the state of Louisiana, heard about what Jackson had done and issued a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of the prisoner.34 When Jackson heard this, he immediately suspended the writ. Next, he sent an officer to have the judge arrested and to obtain the original writ of habeas corpus. In the meantime, Jackson convened a court-martial to try Louaillier.The court-martial acquit-ted the prisoner of all the charges. 31 The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, eds.Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert E. Bergh,Vol. 11, The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association (Washington D.C., 1904), 128. 32 Dennison, 57. 33 Life of Andrew Jackson,Vol.2,ed.James Parton (New York:Houghton,Mifflin and Co.,1860),312. 34 Arrest and Trial of E.L. Louallier.(Woodbridge,CT: Research Publications, 1983. Originally printed in 1843), microfiche, 2. Lincoln and Habeas Corpus 49 Jackson disagreed with the ruling of the court-martial and defended his actions, stating that under martial law every man in the designated area was in essence a soldier, and Louaillier was certainly guilty by this reason-ing, as a soldier would be granted less leniency in a case of this sort than an ordinary citizen.35 Next, the United States District Court ordered Jackson to prove why he should not be held in contempt of court for "wresting an original document from the court" (the writ of habeas cor-pus in the Louaillier case), for disobeying the writ of habeas corpus, and for putting the judge in prison. Jackson refused to answer the court.36 The judge fined Jackson $1000, and he paid it out of his own pocket. The value of this precedent certainly did not support the executive, in this case, Jackson, as having the right to suspend habeas corpus. Not only did the court disapprove of Jackson's actions in suspending habeas corpus, and his other illegal actions, but they fined him a very large sum of money.37 The records are not clear on the point, but it is possible that Jackson himself did not think he was justified in his actions because he paid the fine without incident. Jackson had never been one to back down from a fight if he thought he was justified in his actions, and he did back down in response to the fine. There were several occasions when habeas corpus was suspended by the legislature as it was intended to be; such as the case of Shays' Rebellion, an uprising led by Daniel Shays in 1787.The Massachusetts General Court initiated this rebellion by raising poll and land taxes in an effort to pay off the large debt of the state.These taxes were hardest on farmers and the urban poor, who then petitioned the State Legislature for relief from these taxes that they could not afford to pay.When the legisla-ture did nothing to help them, several western counties rebelled against the state.38 Armed mobs roamed the countryside, closing the courts and prevent-ing the foreclosing of farms. Daniel Shays raised a small "army" and marched, albeit unsuccessfully, on an arsenal at Springfield.The state militia crushed this revolt relatively quickly.39 In the midst of this crisis, however, the state legislature suspended habeas corpus rather than the state gover-nor. 40 Although this example is on the state level, it is an example that a legislature suspending habeas corpus was the normal course of action. 35 Ibid., 12. 36 William G. Sumner,Andrew Jackson as a Public Man:What he was, what chances he had, and what he did with them (New York: Haskell House Publishers Ltd., 1968), 46. 37 Farber, 160. 38 Paul Finkelman and Melvin I. Urofsky,A March of Liberty:A Constitutional History of the United States,Vol. 1 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 89. 39 Ibid. 40 Farber, 160. 50 Crescat Scientia Dorr's Rebellion was an uprising in Rhode Island, where a state legisla-ture again suspended habeas corpus. In 1776, all of the new states except Rhode Island and Connecticut adopted a constitution with a democratic government. For many years, Rhode Island kept its original government that had derived from the royal charter of 1663 and by the 1840s the writ-ten government badly needed revision.Among its many defects were the problems that it only allowed for narrow suffrage and it did not provide for equal representation in the legislature.41 In October 1841, many who were frustrated at the inadequacies of the old constitution held a convention to c
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.
|Title||Crescat Scientia: Journal of History, Volume III, 2005|
|Description||Crescat Scientia is an annual publication of the UVU Department of History and Political Science. It features articles written by students in Utah Valley State College's History and Political Science department. This is Volume III, 2005.|
|Author||Burns, Courtney; Page, Amberly D.; Peterson, Luke E. Memmott, Ted; Sproat, Liberty P.; Torp, Kris; Koelliker, Lee; wade, Emily R.; Anderson, Nord Derek; Mesaros, Thomas;|
|Creator||Utah Valley State College (now Utah Valley University) Department of History and Political Science|
|Publisher||Utah Valley State College (now Utah Valley University) Department of History and Political Science|
|Contributors||Knoell, Tiffany L.|
|Owning Institution||Utah Valley State College (now Utah Valley University)|
|Subject||History--Periodicals; Utah Valley State College--Students--Periodicals; History--Periodicals; Utah Valley University--Students--Periodicals;|
|Physical Description||178 p.; 21 cm.;|
Utah Valley State College
Journal of History
U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E
1 9 4 1
Mailed manuscripts should be sent to: Crescat Scientia c/o Dr.Keith Snedegar,
Utah Valley State College Department of History and Political Science, 800 West
University Parkway, Orem Utah 84058. Call (801) 863-8487, Fax (801) 863-7013.
Crescat Scientia is an annual publication of the UVSC Department of History
and Political Science. Issues are available for distribution during the Spring semes-ter
of each academic year.To obtain subscription information or to obtain back
copies of Crescat Scientia, please contact the History department.
© 2005 Utah Valley State College Department of History and Political Science.All
General Guidelines for Submission
For students interested in submitting a manuscript for review and possible
publication, the following guidelines provide an overview of the requirements. For
more specific information, please contact the UVSC History Department or visit the
History Department’s web page.
To submit a manuscript, provide a complete version of the manuscript with
cover sheet. Please note that any desired alterations should be made prior to sub-mission.
Editors will check for spelling errors and layout problems, not for substan-tial
revision opportunities. Submissions should be written in accordance with the
Turabian style of citation.The cover sheet should have a running head, author’s
name, permanent street address, email address, and a phone number.The body of
your manuscript must have no markers which may identify the author (IE: name,
class, professor etc). Submit a hard copy as well as one copy of the paper on disk.
The disk version of your paper must be in Microsoft Word®. On a separate sheet of
paper, provide a brief biographical sketch of yourself including things such as the
degree you are working toward, previous degrees received, future plans (graduate
school,work), awards the paper has won, other areas of personal interest, etc.
Please deliver your paper, disk, and biographical information, sealed in a manil-la
envelope, to the History Department addressed to:“Editor-In-Chief, c/o History
Department RE:Academic Journal Submission”
Works submitted must be thematically concentrated in the discipline of histo-ry.
Length of submissions may be anywhere between five and fifty pages and must
not have been previously published.
UVSC Journal of History
Tiffany L. Knoell
Brittany A. Lassater
Dr.Keith Snedegar, History Department Chairman
Published annually for the Utah Valley State College Department of History
and Political Science
Office of the Editor-In-Chief
Utah Valley State College, Department of History and Political Science,
800 West University Parkway, MS 185, Orem, Utah 84057
Phone: (801) 863-8487. Fax: (801) 863-7013
U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E
1 9 4 1
For too long, professors have considered themselves the essential movers
of a college education. Undergraduates were viewed as the passive recipi-ents
of our civilizing mission, which was deemed effective insofar as it
resembled a colonization of the student mind. (Note the passive tense.)
But really the students are the active agents.They are the ones who invest
time and effort in the acquisition of knowledge. Especially in the humani-ties,
the professor’s chief job is not to get in the way of learning.
Bigger and better than ever, this third issue of the UVSC Journal of History
serves as a medium for student free agency. Here we find discovery and
error, independence and imitation—but no plagiarism, I hope! Of course
free agency means taking responsibility for proofreading and printing as
well as for the historical scholarship itself.
Join me in congratulating Tiffany Knoell, her editorial team, and the con-tributing
authors.Their work expresses the meaning of the collegiate
enterprise more eloquently than anything a mere professor could say.
May knowledge grow!
U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E
1 9 4 1
This journal is the work of many hands, but it is those behind the
scenes who provide the encouragement and support necessary to see
such a task come to fruition.The faculty and staff have been instrumental
in soliciting the submissions required for the completion of this journal,
although there are a few who stepped above and beyond the effort
requested of them. Special thanks go to Dr. Kathren Brown, Laura Coffman-
Jones, and Dr.Keith Snedegar.Without their support, this journal would be
a much diminished publication.
Thanks also go to those students who stepped forward and submitted
their works.Although it is impossible to publish all submissions received,
those who make the effort are to be commended and encouraged to con-tinue
writing and supporting Crescat Scientia.
U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E
1 9 4 1
UVSC Journal of History
VOLUME 3 2005
Editor’s Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tiffany L. Knoell 1
The Perfect Famine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Courtney Burns 3
Ethos and the Power of Music
in Ancient Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Amberly D. Page 17
A House Uniter or a House Divider?
A Historiographical Survey of the
1858 Illinois Senate Campaign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Luke E. Peterson 29
Lincoln and the Suspension of
Habeas Corpus during the Civil War . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ted Memmott 41
Woman as Technology
in the Weimar Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Liberty P. Sproat 55
Impacts Associated with Rapid
Growth in Emery County, Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kris Torp 77
Sharpening the Sword in Defense
of Islam:The Evolution of Jihad
from the Seventh Century to Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lee Koelliker 97
The Hispanic Heritage of Southern Utah:
From Eighteenth Century Expansion to
Twentieth Century Livestock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Emily R.Wade 115
Utah Freemasonry’s Formal Exclusion
of Mormon Membership, 1925 . . . . . . . . . . .Nord Derek Anderson 131
Plato’s Theory of the Ideal State
and the U.S. Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Thomas Mesaros 153
Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .163
Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .165
U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E
1 9 4 1
Editor’s Note 1
Nothing that is worth doing can be achieved in our lifetime; therefore we
must be saved by hope. Nothing which is true or beautiful or good makes
complete sense in any immediate context of history; therefore we must be
saved by faith. Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished
alone; therefore we must be saved by love.
– Reinhold Niebuhr1
I think a movie said it best: "You're going to find that many of the truths
we cling to depend greatly on our point of view."2 The essence of history is
perception.Whether you are the conqueror or the conquered, the revered
or the forgotten, your perception of events, past or present, drives your
reality. It is left to students of history to provide the dates and places upon
which historical events are hung; it is up to the reader to draw their own
This journal, as a student-driven publication, is an extraordinary creation.
Each individual who contributed, regardless of their role, has left on the
journal a unique imprint which will distinguish this edition from any
other. For those whose works were not selected for this journal: keep writ-ing.
Submit frequently. Do not allow a single rejection to stifle your cre-ative
spirit. For those whose works were selected: please accept my
warmest congratulations.You have taken your first step into a larger
Tiffany L. Knoell
1 Thomas Cahill,How the Irish Saved Civilization:The Untold Story of Ireland's Heroic
Role from the fall of Rome to the Rise of Medieval Europe (New York: Doubleday, 1995), vii.
2 Lawrence Kasdan and George Lucas,The Art of Return of the Jedi (New York: Ballantine,
3 Carol Titelman, ed.,The Art of Star Wa rs (New York: Ballantine, 1979), 79.
U T A H V A L L E Y S T A T E C O L L E G E
1 9 4 1
More than 150 years have passed since the Irish potato famine, run-ning
approximately from 1845-1852,1 caused more than one million deaths
and over one-and-a-half million emigrations.This lapse of time, though, has
not created a sense of forgetfulness or casualness about those years or
those who died.To the contrary, not only does the land itself bear the
markers of crude shelters dug into the sides of ditches and the "hungry
grass" which covers the thousands of buried dead, but the memory and
family histories of the Irish themselves persistently breeds "an intimacy
with suffering"2 which continues to affect the Irish and their relationship
to the British.3 According to Don Mullan, a former director of the Irish
advocacy group Action, "Deeply rooted in the Irish psyche is the memory
of the famine.When we look at pictures of people starving,we know we
are looking at ourselves just a few short generations ago."4 This intimacy
with the famine is not merely of grief and frustration over a failed crop.
Rather, it stems from a larger accounting of the famine which recognizes
the role played by the United Kingdom in the deaths of so many Irish. It
was not the failure of the potato crop that alone caused the Irish famine.
Beginning in 1845, the convergence of a susceptible plant, a pathogen,
environmental conditions, and social injustice combined to create a per-fect
Plant pathologists, when discussing the factors of plant disease, often
use a triangle to aid in describing the factors needed for an outbreak of
disease.5 This so-called disease triangle consists of a plant susceptible to a
THE PERFECT FAMINE
1 Douglas C. Daly, "The Leaf That Launched a Thousand Ships," Natural History 105, no. 1
2 Douglas C. Daly, "Famine's Ghost," Natural History 105, no. 1 (1996): 6.
3 Gail L. Schumann, "The Irish Potato Famine and the Birth of Plant Pathology," in Plant
Diseases:Their Biology and Social Impact. Internet.
|Rights||The right to download or print any of the pages of the materials posted on the Digital Collections is granted by the copyright owner only for personal or classroom use. The author retains all proprietary rights, including copyright ownership. Any reproduction or editing by any means mechanical or electrical without the express written permission of the copyright owner is strictly prohibited. Please contact us for more information.|
|Copyright Status/Owner||Copyright 2014 by authors|
|Genre||Periodicals; Electronic reproductions;|
|Collection||Utah Valley University Departmental Publications|
|Contributor Metadata||McIntyre, Catherine|
|Metadata Entry Date||2014-01-16|
|Metadata Entry Tool||CONTENTdm Project Client, version 6.4|
|File Size||5,031,103 bytes|