January 29: Race, class, & disability in the early United States
Read:
1) Nielsen, A Disability History of the United States, pp. 40-65 and 75-77 (ch. 3, section on”Indigenous Nations and Communal Response” through ch. 4, section on “Race and (In)competent Citizenship,” plus ch. 4, section on “Citizenry and the New Nation”)
2) Dea H. Boster, “An ‘Epeleptick’ Bondswoman: Fits, Slavery, and Power in the Antebellum South,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 83, no. 2 (Summer 2009): 271-301 (Blackboard)
3) Excerpts from Simon P. Newman, Embodied History: The Lives of the Poor in Early Philadelphia (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2003), pp. 111-113 and Peter Linebaugh and Marcus Rediker, The Many Headed-Hydra: Sailors, Slaves, Commoners, and the Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic (Beacon Press, 2000), pp. 160, 163-164 (Blackboard)
Please respond to one of the following questions:
1) These readings provide different perspectives on the lives of people with disabilities in early America. Pick one of the following characteristics—race, class, occupation, sex, region, or type of impairment or disability—and use at least two (preferably all three) readings to discuss how those characteristics shaped the lives of people with disabilities in early America.
2) Alternatively, you can summarize in several sentences (or possibly a short paragraph each) your “muddiest points” in at least two (preferably all three) readings.
I would say that the issue of class spans across all of the readings. In the third reading, the excerpts on the poor and the pirates, it shows how class is in direct correlation to disability. The “Poor in Early Philadelphia” article states that the lower class were shorter due to poverty and thus could not make it into the continental army (instead they were left the seafaring life). In “Epeleptick Bondswoman” article, it seemed like they were enslaved (thus creating the binary opposition between classes of masters and slaves) for being disabled (in this sense their bodies were different than the white people) but they ultimately used the master’s fears against him and were able to control their lives a bit. Many slaves were able to stay with their families after exhibiting their “affliction with fits.”
Nielsen also draws a class line between those who are disabled and slaves and those who are disabled due to serving in the revolutionary war. She states that many people believed that slavery was an aid to those with disabilities, excluding the Revolutionary War Vets. The vets who came back with a disability were heralded as heroes and given pensions to pay for their needs. The slaves on the other hand could only be handled by enslaving them further. Much fighting was done by the abolitionists to prove that slavery only further disabled them, but it fell on deaf ears. The comment that compared the African American slave woman to the white woman (as a justification of her being “unsound”) was absolutely absurd and could be done with 2 people of any differing ethnicity. Nielsen says very early on that, “The experiences of people with disabilites in colonial America varied tremendously according to one’s familial resources (economic as well as physical)…” (Chapter 3)
In the early Republic and throughout the antebellum era, race and disability intersected to create a complex web used to both justify, and challenge the institution of slavery. As Nielsen points out, the intellectual tradition surrounding citizenship and who deserved to be of the new nation while couched in terms of racial differences hinged on conceptions of unfitness and disability. Policymakers and intellectuals used the perceived and constructed lack of cognitive function amongst African Americans to legitimize chattel slavery. Coincidentally, African Americans fitness as slaves also came to be justified using the terminology of disability. In the slave markets, buyers focused intently on finding defects that could impair productivity. Disability became central to the slave experience throughout the antebellum era. As Boster points out, impairments (whether real or otherwise) became the key to negotiations between the slaves and their owners. In the author’s case study, the slave Virginia and others successfully challenged the institution by playing on the contemporary perceptions of epilepsy. Moreover, on a broader level, abolitionists used the rhetoric of disability in their calls for the end of slavery in the South. In all cases, disability incontrovertibly merged with race to shape the lives of slaveholders, the slaves, and anti-slavery advocates and had an indelible impact on the entire era.
In early America whether or not someone was considered able-bodied often depended on the person’s race According to Nielsen, African-Americans were automatically considered impaired in some way some people even going so far as to say that African-Americans resistance to slavery was a sign of disability. Although they used this perceived impairment as justification for slavery, Bolster’s story of the epileptic bondwoman illustrates that slave owners were also afraid of disability. I believe that this was partly because disabilities such as epilepsy gave the slaves a way to take control of their own fate. For example, slaves were often fake epileptic fits to avoid being sold, and those that were sold often brought in much lower revenue than their able-bodied counterparts. Also, Bolster says that abolitionists used the fits of the slaves to exemplify the brutal treatment slaves were suffering. Thus slaveholders were afraid of disability both because it often impeded their ability to make money off of their slaves and because it could be used to potentially overthrow the institution itself.
The three readings required for this post show a clear distinction of how social class shaped the lives of individuals with disabilities in America.
The book A Disability History of the United States describes how Indigenous North Americans believed in the balance of body, mind, and spirit. It was the general belief that a “limitation” was to be embraced and that it could also lead to a contribution. An example given was a person of insight might have a stutter. He might need someone with the gift of speech to aide him, however; his gift was still valued. Reciprocity or the ability to give back in some way to the community defined competency The body was never seperate from the spirit and mind. After Europeans arrived in North America, the word disability became more of a defining factor. It was at this point that social class became a factor in the way “disabilities were viewed and treated.” European colonization in North America left the indigenous nations very weak from disease and starvation. The class distinction of the value of a “warrior” became important at this point. A strong warrior was considered more valuable than those with lost limbs or abilities. In the early 1600’s Europeans brought slaves to North America. Slaves were considered disabled by definition. In early colonization, the idea of a disability would result in harsh consequences unless you were, for example a war hero. When George Washington put on his glasses and said he was “blind without spectacles.” he was honored. Others of a lower class would not have been.
In the article, Embodied History” The Lives of Poor in Early Philadelphia. The author tells the story of those chosen to be seafarers rather than soldiers. The seafarers were shorter and of the “lower sort.” These men were far less literate than those who worked on land. Illiteracy showed their low social standing but years working at sea scarred and maimed their bodies so in effect they became disabled. Seafarers also were more susceptible to contagious disease. They were often imoortalized in songs and poems but led a very harsh life.
An Epeleptick Bondswoman: Fits, Slavery, and Power in the Antebellum South tells the story of Virigina a slave convicted of arson and sentenced to die. Virginia was later pardoned because of a doctor’s orders because of her epileptic fits. This article depicts the cultural or class significance of epilepsy in the antebellum south. Many slaves were afflicted by the disorder though few understood it. Famous Underground Railroad worker Harriet Tubman was reputed to have epilepsy. The article reviews the effects and trauma of an enslaved person. How constant stress, physical punishment, and harsh surroundings can lead to epileptic type seizures was evident but not accepted at the time. An interesting point in the article was that many slaves faked “epileptic fits” to gain control there situation or to alter a sale.
In A New Disability History of the United States and An ‘Epeleptick’ Bondswoman: Fits, Slavery, and Power in the Antebellum South one similar characteristic between the two is race. In the section “Race and Incompetent Citizenship” it talked about how African Americans were considered disabled. This affected them because people looked down on them as humans. It also said they justified slavery because they considered them to be disabled. In order to make people believe their argument Samuel George Morten published an article in the journal Crania Americana that he had proved that European ancestors had larger skulls which meant that they had bigger brains and higher IQs. In the article An ‘Epeleptick’ Bondswoman: Fits, Slavery, and Power in the Antebellum South African Americans with disabilities were not considered good. They would not allow anyone to sale a slave that had a disability that would prevent them from not doing their job. For example slaves that had epilepsy within one month after they were bought the owner was allowed to return the salve and be refunded.
It seems to be that class has a lot to do with how Disabilities are viewed in early America. Pulling from an earlier reading and discussion, those viewed as disabled in the 16- and 1700’s were required by law to be shipped back to wherever they had been born, as they were the responsibility of the community to take care of. This law assumes that there is no one at the place of their current residence that has the funds or, indeed, the inclination to take care of the disabled. Thus, it becomes an issue of class; if the person who becomes disabled is of a high class, they are more likely to be taken care of and less likely to be of concern to the community. If the person who becomes disabled is low class, it falls to the community to take care of the person, and is then an issue.
From today’s readings, we have two examples of low class disabled and disabilities. First, the case of Virginia, the fifteen-year-old slave girl, who was found to have epilepsy. She committed arson, and was originally to be hanged. Her owner instead elected to have her sold back to the community, trying to make a profit off her instead of losing her. When she displayed epilepsy, things changed drastically; the people didn’t want her. They were afraid of this disease, this curse, this thing they did not understand. Could it be transmitted? No one knew. Her sale value zeroed out, and all anyone wanted was to get rid of her, and so she was sent back home. Her class, her slave status, had a lot to do with that. The community might have been more willing to help had she been high born and white, regardless of the arson (which, indeed, might have had something to do with her slave status).
Second, we have the accounts of various poor sailors, many turned pirate. Many of their disabilities were a result of their class; sailors often had diseases and injuries that rendered them “disabled” in some way or another. Again, had they been of a different class, they likely would not have become disabled.
In A Disability History of the United States we learn that the racist ideology of slavery held that Africans were by definition disabled, simply because of their supposed inherent mental and physical inferiority. Using this fallacy to legitimize slavery, the slaveholders argued that the bodies and minds of those they enslaved were disabled to such an extent that slavery was a service to those they took charge of. Furthermore, slaves who exhibited a discernible disability such as blindness, physical abnormalities or cognitive impairment were considered worth more dead than alive. The life of those with disabilities who were also slaves due of their race was most likely to end in brutality or murder.
In An “Epeleptick” Bondswoman it is made clear that slaves, especially those with disabilities were frequently used as clinical subjects in Southern medical schools. Only on rare occasions was the test subjects identified by race, however the test subjects work and adjectives used to describe the patients alluded to their enslaved status. The physicians conducting the tests implied that the results, if successful, could be used to treat white patients, never those whom the trials were conducted on.
This leads me to believe that the lives of those who were of an “inferior race”, suffering from a disability were either of little value or used to enhance the health of those of the “superior race”. Consequently, a slave with a notable disability living in early America was extremely vulnerable and likely to die an early death.
In all three readings there is a combination of both, class and race throughout the stories, which surprises me about how disability was used as a “positive” effect. “Fits, Slavery, and Power in the Antebellum South” tells a story about Virginia and her epileptic fits. Many physicians did not understand the causes of epilepsy and many slaveowners feared the outcome of it, which provided an odd positive outcome for slaves. It would let slaves gain some type control of their life and help prevent selling them. I thought that was one of the most interesting matters of all. Nowadays from what I have been told it is sometimes a positive effect but as well as negative effect as some people do not let people with disabilities be independent. Slaveowners would first look at how “effective” their slaves would be meaning they would look for any disability, especially epilepsy.
Next, we have “Embodied History” The Lives of Poor in Early Philadelphia” talking about sailors whom suffered from severe injuries due to labor that was required from them. Their severe injuries led to disabilities that many people believed to be contagious and dangerous. These men were very short and were illiterate compared to those who lived on land. The key that is based upon in this case of these sailors is class and how they were very poor, almost completely illiterate said it all about their social class.
Nielsen recounts instances in early America in which people with disabilities were denied equal opportunities as those that served the newly formed nation’s best interests. Included among the disabled were women and all non-whites indicating the strong sexist and racist discriminating practices of the time. This all is nothing uncommon of the era, but in contrast, in the reading about sailors and pirates we can see a greater environment of equality among the crew regardless of race or disability. Spoils were distributed evenly among the crew and the maimed and disabled received coin set aside by their fellow mates when service was no longer possible.
Any type of impairment changes the way a person lives his/her life, but other circumstances can direct how great the change is. One example from the readings is the loss of a limb. In “Disability History,” if a slave lost his/her leg, he/she might have been left to die out in the woods (pg. 63). On the other hand, if a soldier lost his leg while fighting he would have been considered a hero and may have been able to receive a pension without too much trouble. According to “Embodied History,” Pirates who were permanently injured were also cared for. These examples show that the people around a person who is disabled impact how much the disability affects the person as much as the actual impairment does.
From my perspective the issue of race and disability was prominent throughout all of the readings. Most of my muddiest points would come from Nielsen’s A Disability History of the United States. A Disability History of the United States showed how the idea of being disabled was used to cover up racism in early United States. Some points that I found to be quite disturbing were, “The general idea that Africans brought to the United States were by definition disabled and that holding them as slave was beneficial to those in need of care.” This gave me the idea that in early America, being a certain race, nationality or the mere fact of having impairment shaped the lives of people in a very negative and degrading way. In early America being disabled was considered a curse or a crime in my opinion. I say this because according to the text “Old men, women and children were considered valueless and often times killed, also black slaves were thrown overboard due to the fact that they had some form of impairment.” This suggests that in that timeframe society was less accepting of people who were disabled or have some type of impairment. Slaves with disabilities were considered something of little or no value and were often time mistreated, abused and killed. Being disabled or African in early America was certainly not a privilege it was more seen as a curse, something demonic, or something meaningless to society.
Rather than look at race, class, occupation, sex, etc., I would like instead to briefly analyze what I perceive to be the underlying theme throughout all four of these documents, that is: poverty. In the case of disability, the theme of poverty defies constraints such as race and sex. It seems that poverty, in history, is often one of the causes of disability.
In A Disability History of the United States, the reader is presented with a strange set of logical points and sub-points. Disability was defined as the inability to labor, or more precisely, the inability to contribute to the economy. White war veterans, like the blind, deaf, for example, were not truly considered disabled if they could still work, produce and contribute to the economy in some way. Yet women and American slaves were considered disabled even though they could work, and in fact, worked a great deal. Because they were “disabled,” they were ineligible to become full voting, property holding citizens. Even though they could work, they themselves were not contributing to the economy, because, in both the cause of a white woman or slave, they were not their own masters and therefore did not have access or rights to the fruit of their labor. In short, they were considered disabled because they were not white men; able-bodied had little to do with the classification.
In An Epeleptick Bondswoman, it is suggested that there is a correlation between epilepsy and the trauma inflicted on slaves. Again, in this case, poverty (within and as a result of slavery) was the cause for a disability.
In the documents concerning sailors and pirates, we see a continuation of this theme of poverty, disability and subjugation. Interestingly, the historian here brings literacy into the argument. Poverty has often been associated with illiteracy. Whether we view poverty in terms of a comparatively small economic income, or as no personal income whatsoever (as in the case of women and slaves), poverty is seen here as the cause of one’s illiteracy, and by extension, the cause of one’s future economic plight, for without literacy and a decent education, even white men could be subjected to gruesome and dangerous work aboard a ship which could potentially, and very likely, leave them disabled in someway.
In these documents, poverty is in someway linked to disability, often as the direct cause. Today, however, we see instead disability as a cause for poverty. But what of the wealthy disabled person? They’ve access to the equipment and healthcare professionals they require. They might even have a private driver, assistant, nurse, and/or tutor, depending on the type of disability they have. All of this access and possibility can result in a person who can function fully in his/her society. If we refer back to the social model of disability, which states that disability has much to do with one’s societal interactions, capabilities and perceptions, we must ask ourselves: is poverty still a major cause of disability today?
In the reading of Nielson the African American’s often seemed to be judged more harshly for their disabilities. When the ships would come in with disabled individuals the caption would have to pay a bond of $500 for each declared person and $1000 for each individual undeclared, that might become a public charge. To avoid these high fees they would dispose of these individuals that got ill and/or showed any signs of disabilities on the long voyage over to the US. The reading even pointed out that sharks would follow the ships to the ports because it was so common. The final determination was made by the port officials. Although, as pointed out in Boster article the owners of these slaves would beat and force them to do things that where no medically safe and often caused these individuals to have some kind of disabilities. As the epileptic fits or even having problems after the birth of a child. Although, in Linebaugh it did not seem to matter what the disability was because on the private ships they seems to strive for equality. The often divided up food and loot no matter what a persons disability might be. These readings showed me that the idea of disabilities was different from one area to another. What someone capability mattered in some areas and not others, although the jobs being preformed where equally physically demanding.
I think that class largely helped shape the lives of people with disabilities in early America. Nielson talks about the slave trade and all the Africans who were forced into that life. Slave owners labeled all the Africans that were brought to North America as being disabled, this was done to justify why the slaves needed to be taken care of by there slave owner. These slaves were seen as worthless if they could not perform some sort of labor. As on the ship Le Rodeur, they were thrown over board because they “were worth more dead than alive”. As a disabled person, if you were family had the financial means, you were most likely taken care of well. However if you did not you led a hard life with little assistance.
Newman speaks about the life of seaman as being hard, the majority of them has disabilites, such as blindness, disease scars, missing limbs, as well as other disformities due to injuries out at sea. He speaks about the education of most of the seaman and how they are unable to write even their own names. I think that because of their class they are pushed into working these harsh jobs at sea causing all or their disabilites.
in Boster’s article epilepsy was common and medical doctors believed that they could treat it but not all families could afford it so they had to resort to herbal remedies. Thus showing again that class plays a big part in what type of care they received for their disabilities.
In two of the readings, one issue I found particularly striking was the fate of women, both white and African American, and how they were viewed in relation to disability.
In the “Epileptick Bondswoman” reading, it is noted that “[f]its that originated from such conditions as…menstrual dysfunction occasionally were called ’symptomatic epilepsy,’ (Boster, p. 276).” Additionally it was noted later in that reading that “one twenty-five-year-old bondswoman named Sarah was identified in the printed broadside as having ‘had fits for last six months at menstrual time’ (Boster, p. 296).” While the reading discussed many other instances of “epilepsy” I wanted to draw attention to these to because it is striking in that this is a category that would only affect females, thus perhaps making a female slave less valuable. Was Sarah an example of malingering, or was she perhaps suffering from something like endometriosis, which would make her be in a lot of pain? While the text does not provide the answers for this, in either case, a male would not be thought less valuable at auction because of this, making the female slave even more vulnerable and less economically valuable than her male counterparts.
In the Nielsen reading, it was seen that if a slave child with disabilities was born, “their mothers’ reproductive worth was questioned (Nielsen, p. 62).” A female slave’s worth was partially based on her ability to reproduce more slaves, and if a disabled child was born, the mother could then be considered less valuable.
Also, in the Nielsen reading, it is notable that advocates for female education in listing in the consequences of leaving women uneducated that it would ‘tortured into a debility that would leave their existence wretched (Nielsen, p. 52).’” Women, considered inferior, were considered to be both inferior and disabled by some.
Later on, it was noted that at the Seneca Falls Convention advocates argued for their right to equality on the basis of “their own civic fitness (Nielsen, p. 52).” In this case, women and their male supporters can be seen to try to differentiate women from the disabled, leaving those with disabilities still considered inferior to other categories. Equality for women did not mean equality for all.
Women, both slave and free, were considered less valuable than their respective male counterparts. However, in the fight to become considered equal, some did so by trying to differentiate themselves from disabled persons, attempting to elevate the equality of females at the expense of disabled persons.
In the reading about the slaves, the slaves were being punished based on their epilepsy. Sometimes, their punishments for having this disability would be as extreme as being put in jail or be hung. Once acquiring epilepsy, though, the society would see them as a product unable to be resold because of their “brokenness”. It makes you curious how the townspeople could not see epilepsy as a “representation of slavery” (Boster, 273). One such case of epilepsy caused by slavery is the story of Harriet Tubman. Her “hired master threw a heavy object at a different slave, and accidentally struck her” (Boster, 282) which caused serious brain injury. Before being struck, the slave master had no issues with her, but once she was “ruined”, she was unable to be used or sold to another owner. She ended up having to deal with this disability for the rest of her life. Epilepsy seemed to be a very common thing among slaves of this time period. The townspeople had many remedies, but they did not necessarily make sense or work. For example, “setting a setton (a thread or wire placed subcutaneously to create a sinus) in the neck” (Boster, 277).
The third reading also shows the reader how certain disabilities back then could cause people many issues depending on the job they possessed or the class they were born in. This reading discusses how seafarers tended to be more illiterate, disfigured, and (depending on their social class) not of a normal stature. There job was very dangerous. “The incidence of contagious disease was higher among seafarers than among the population as a whole” (Newman, 112). All of these conditions prove the rough situations these seafarers lived through.
Race largely shaped how people with disabilities were viewed. In A Disability History of the United States Nielsen states that Africans were by definition disabled for their “supposed inherent mental and physical inferiority, their supposed abnormal and abhorrent bodies, to legitimize slavery” (42). They went so far as to say slavery was a kindness to these people because they needed to be under someones care. They were labeled as disabled to justify slavery. However, those who were truly disabled or “too disabled” were considered to have no economic value and were either spared abduction or unable to be re-sold. In Boster, epilepsy prevented Virginia from being sold because “epileptic fits effectively prevented the sale of slaves because the owners of slaves with known cases of epilepsy could not provide ‘guarantees of health’ to prospective buyers” (296). Slave owners were afraid of malingering and used violence to try and prove the falseness of seizures.
To characterize the lives of people with disabilities in early America would be hard to do.
In the reading of An “Epeleptick” Bondswoman, I found it very interesting that the word epiletic had many meanings. According to the reading, 19th century indicated that it meant”was used to describe the thoes of religious ecstasy,but could also imply anxiety,uncontollability,frustration,and irrationality.” (p.278). We now know that this is not true, and that epilepsy is indeed a medical condition. I wonder what Samuel Leech would think about this. I’m sure that Simon Newman who wrote Embodied History: The Lives of the poor in Early Philadelphia would chomp at this a bit. He would probably say that epilepsy was due to the fact of being poor or being a slave. Even Nielsen would agree that Colonial America would have been shaped different due to “consequences of ableism” as stated on p.48 of A Disability History of the United States.
All three readings provide different perspectives on the lives of people, but also have very similar views when it comes to disabilities.
In the readings I found that society (class) seemed to be a major deciding factor for “shaping” the lives of the people in early America. In Boster’s “Epeleptick” Bondswoman, it states that southern physicians claimed that physical trauma to a person had nothing to do with the fits, while physicians in the north at this time argued that, “antislavery activists and ex-slaves often took the opposite position, using epilepsy to represent the cruelty of the institution and gain control over the slavery debate in the mid-nineteenth century.” I found this interesting that people would use this as leverage in debate.
I felt that society also shaped the lives of those that were born and raised in a sense of poverty a this time. Men looking for job and food were risking their state of health to gain these positions on the ships as sea-farers. Although life on land would not have provided much differences than that of a ship (Ex: food, board, position) their physical safety would have been greatly spared. In Newman’s excerpts he speaks of the ways that the men at sea were marked physically by accident, but that most injury and death came from disease and illness. Yet at this time although the risk was very high these men took these positions so that they would have somewhat of a chance for survival against the angst of poverty.
Race is used by Nielsen to show how Americans felt and treated people with disabilities between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries. African slaves. Although African Americans underwent rigorous physical and medical testing to qualify as viable slaves, their ‘viability’ became non-existent in America. According to Nielsen, “ Slave traders were in the business to make money. This meant that they sought to enslave people with bodies and minds considered fit for work, people who could command a good price…[In] slaving raids, “ old men and women as well as children were considered valueless and often killed”. This likely included those with physical disabilities that made them ineligible for slavery’.” Pg. 43.
Derogatory and demeaning terms were used to describe both the African American and native tribes of America in order to deprive them of equal civic and community life. (Nielsen Pg. 57) African Americans and American native tribes did not loose their strive for humanity despite years of suppression. Colonial America used race as away to disable other races yet without these races, the comfort of living they enjoyed would be flawed.