Death Transformed: How the Black Death Impacted the Dying in the 14th Century

Death Transformed: How the Black Death Impacted the Dying in the 14th Century

Tyler Klinsky

From 1348 to 1350, Europe was consumed by a deadly plague that left one-third to one-half of the population dead. All aspects of society at the time were impacted in some way by a large number of deaths. People lived in fear of this invisible foe, bodies littered the streets, resulting from the overwhelming amount of death all at once. Cemeteries and churches could not continue traditional ways of burying the dead and death was no longer celebrated as a community event with friends and family. Bodies were collected from houses and from the streets and buried in mass graves, with no bells, no singing, and no one to accompany the dead as they were buried in their final resting place. Sometimes bodies remained at the place of death for days until the body collector eventually reached that part of town, the smell of rotting corpses could be smelled across the city. The dying suffered alone, friends, family, and even doctors were too afraid to be in contact with the infected, no priests would visit for last confessions and the infected would die with no one at their side. How did the Black Death impact the practices and experiences surrounding death? This essay will argue the Black Death dehumanized the traditional funerary practices, methods of handling the dead, and the experiences of the dying in society. The Black Death disrupted the normal functions surrounding death by no longer allowing for funerary traditions and as a result, new methods of handling and burying the dead were practiced. The abandonment of friends and family as the dying suffered added to the dehumanization of society’s experience as a whole. The term dehumanizing is used in this context to show how the infected were treated like animals and their bodies were disposed of in inhuman ways that would be considered criminal in the present time.

Historiography

The Black Death, also known as the bubonic plague, was one of the deadliest pandemics in human history. It is estimated that the disease killed one-third to half of the population in Europe during the 14th century (Horrox) from 1348-1350, and its impact on the population and treatment of the dead was significant and important to be researched. The historiography of the Black Death has been shaped by various factors, including the availability of primary sources, and the methodological approaches of historians from secondary sources. Although these sources have various points and information they come together for supporting information.

The first article that explores the gruesome realities of the Black Death is “The Black Death in English Towns” by author Richard Britnell. This article offers a glimpse into the horrors of the Black Death, from the mass graves that were used to dispose of the bodies of the dead to the role of “body collectors” who were tasked with gathering the corpses and disposing of them. The author explains the dangers the “body collectors” faced and the horrific jobs they were expected to complete. In this article, the methodologies of archeology and social history, are shown from the included examples of how the dead were collected and buried and how society adapted to a large number of dead. In the second source “The Politics of Burial in Late Medieval Hereford” written by Ian Forrest, the author expands on how the social and cultural development of burials was impacted because of the Black Death. The religious practices that impacted how bodies were buried during this time of great death are also included in the article. The author includes information on how the large number of bodies piled in the cities and families abandoning each other became the new normalcy in cities.

The third secondary source “Plague Violence and Abandonment from the Black Death to the Early Modern Period,” by author Sam Cohen, examines the ways in which the sick and dying were abandoned as the fear of the plague grew and the violence created between family members tore society apart from within. The article also includes social methodology examples, of the violence in society, the refusal by doctors to treat the sick, and the abandonment of loved ones caused no hope of traditional burials and funerary practices. The final article, “The Black Death, 1348”, written by John Carey on Eyewitness to History, provides a variety of information on the topics surrounding the responses to the Plague. Further information on the ways bodies were disposed of and the social responses to the impending danger, inform the readers why there was no concern for the health status of neighbors, friends, and sometimes family members as well. Again like the other articles this one contains archeological and social methodologies are included in this article.

All four secondary sources contribute to the overall thesis of the paper, providing information that the plague impacted the ways in which society dealt with death during the plague and how it affected the many principles that contributed to death. These principles include the new methods of burying the dead, and how the experiences of the dying were no longer peaceful because they were suffering alone and believed to be dying with sin. I agree with the author’s overall thesis and points because it contributes to the thesis of this paper however, the only holes I have found were small the amount of information on the experiences of the dying moments before death and how the stress of giving confession before death was so important to the citizens, along with the hopes of a “good death” not being possible during this time. Although they are secondary sources rather than primary sources it is unrealistic to expect first-hand experiences to be included, however, It would have been helpful to have more general information on how the victims came to terms with the inevitable death and help reinforce the overall thesis. Instead of continuing where they left off, I will fill the holes of important points and information that each article did not include and will reinforce their information with the completed research from the primary sources included in this essay.

Funerary traditions

The Black Death impacted traditional funerary practices in society, as a result of a large number of people dying, no longer were services held in the households of the dead for people to come to say their final goodbyes. Traditional gifts were not able to be sent because of fear of transmission through the gifts “No one shall dare or presume to give or send any gift to the house of the deceased,” (Chiappelli, P.197). No longer were family members attending funerals because of the ordinances preventing them, however, they were too afraid to risk attending, one source noted, “It was rare for bodies of the dead to be accompanied by more than 10 or 12 neighbors to church” (Boccaccio, p. 31). As the death toll started to increase the more the traditional funerary activities changed, no longer mourners or criers to honor the dead. No longer could the sounds of bells be heard or prayer groups be seen, the fear of death had traditional practices in a chokehold, as one author describes the experience, “No prayer, trumpet or bell summoned friends or neighbors to the funeral, nor was massed performed” (Boccaccio, P. 23). The fear of death played a great role in disrupting the normal religious and community traditions.

Regardless, if someone was too scared to leave their house no longer was there any notification that a person has passed, without any bells, tolled, invitations sent, posters hung, or chairs set up in the streets there was no way to know when someone had died as one author points out, “mourners should not gather in the houses of the dead, nor should banners or seats be placed in the streets, nor should other customary observances be present,” no longer was there any way of honoring the death of a friend or family member, even the customary religious practices were also provoked, instead “crowds should not be invited, but instead, people should pray for the dead and attend vigil and mass”(Muisis, P. 53). The religious practices surrounding death also broke down as a result and other activities were done by living members of society to fill the time normally spend doing religious works.

Members of society quarantine themselves and blocked out all the death-related obligations of attending funerals, ringing bells, and partaking in mourning groups that they were previously held. The Black Death was impactful on traditional funerary practices that normally brought friends and family together to honor the dead, instead, the accustomed practices were altered as a result of the epidemic, and these experiences as a whole were dehumanizing to all cities struck by the plague across Europe.

Impact on Burial Practices

The great plague in Europe during the 14th century resulted in one-third to half the population dead, the traditional methods of burial were unable to keep up with the large number of people dying on a daily basis, and a change in the way of burial was needed. The known tradition of burying loved ones as a family event with friends in attendance was no longer a possibility considering the dangerous circumstances and the great fear of contracting the disease. The conventional way in which bodies were buried was substituted with a more efficient way to account for the dramatically large amount of death. No longer were the dead buried in single graves with other dead family members, instead, mass graves were dug and the bodies of the dead were placed with strangers. Also, as a result, bodies were disposed of in inhumane ways without receiving blessings or last goodbyes from family members. One way of disposal as described by Horrox was, “the townspeople dumped as many of the bodies they could in the sea” (Mussis, P.17). Eventually, of all the people dying the bodies could not be disposed of as quickly because not as many people were working. This caused rotting bodies to be in the streets for days and rather than the corpses of the dead being taken from their houses by a hearse with their families, the bodies were left on the streets until a body collector reached them for pick up. One author explains how the long time between death and burial caused “movement of the bones within the corpse” (Forrest, 1117). This movement was referred to as “Bone Float” and was another side effect of the bodies not being buried in a timely matter.

Experiencing the large number of bodies in the streets is described by the author Boccaccio, “the bodies of the dead were extracted from their houses and left lying outside their front doors” and “Funeral biers would be sent for and it was by no means rare for one of these biers to be seen with two or three bodies at a time” (Boccaccio, P.32). By the time the body collectors reached the rotting bodies they were not in good shape, Buboes might burst, leaking rancid pus. Flea bites that transmitted the deadly bacteria Yersinia pestis could become infected. The terrible stench of rotting flesh was unable to be blocked out from the nostrils of the collectors. Instead of bodies being buried in caskets like today’s standards, the bodies were exposed to mud and bugs in the soil. One author included, “a third of all burials, whether in one of the trenches or in an ordinary grave was in a coffin”(Britnell, 205). Buried like animals with no “Grave Markers” as the author also mentions, no way of identifying where loved ones were laid to rest. The job was disgusting and dangerous for these body collectors, they knew the risks, however, someone needed to complete the job. Clothing and any belongings from a diseased person could transfer the disease to one of these body collectors, which increased the risk of the job. After the bodies were collected no longer was single graves a possibility because of the sheer amount of bodies needed to be disposed of.

A new way of burying bodies in large trenches rather than singular graves was called “mass graves”. This was described by the chronicler Bocaccio, “when all the graves were full, huge trenches were excavated in the churchyards, new arrivals were placed by the hundreds, each layer of corpses being covered by a thin layer of soil till the trench was filled to the top” (Boccaccio, P. 33). There was also new regulations referred to as ordinances in some cities in Europe, such as Pistoia in 1348. Some of these ordinances were created to affect the way in which people were buried and handled, in Pistoia, “The bodies of the dead should not be removed from the place of death until enclosed in a wooden box” (Chiapelli, P.196). These ordinances were created to stop the stench of the dead to contaminate or infect the person handling them. Other regulations were created in Pistoia regarding the requirements for burials. One requirement created was that “each grave shall be dug two and a half armlengths deep” (Chiapelli, P.196). This was done to stop the stench of the rotting bodies to reach the surface of the ground. The Black Death caused many inhuman ways of transporting and burying bodies to be seen during the 14th-century plague.

Dying alone

The plague during the 14th century caused a wave of fear to encompass all of Europe, the disease was an invisible enemy that could not be seen but, was very much felt. With no one at the bedside of the infected moments before death, the desire for a painless sin-free “good death” was no longer possible for the victims of the Black Death. The hope of the last confession as an attempt to clear the sins of the infected was no longer possible in Europe during the 14th-century Black Death. The fear caused the abandonment of dying friends and family as people search for a safe place to escape the disease. The hope to be cleared of sin was no longer a possibility many of the priests were too afraid to visit the dying, but in some cases, “the priests, panic-stricken, administered the sacraments with fear and trembling” (Mussis, P.22). Not everyone was so lucky, in some parts of Europe many people died without giving a confession, in hopes of having a clean slate while entering the afterlife.

Not only were priests abandoning the sick and their duties, family, and friends no longer cared for their loved ones, “when one person lay sick in a house no one would come near, even dear friends would hide themselves away” and the children’s cries were loud as one author describes, “Oh father, why have you abandoned me? Mother where have you gone? Do you forget I am your child?” (Mussis, P. 22). Instead of people caring for their neighbors like they once did, they avoided them at all cost. Instead of hiding some people, “formed small communities, living entirely separate from everybody else. They shut themselves up in houses where there were no sick, eating the finest food and drinking the best wine very temperately, avoiding all excess, allowing no news or discussion of death and sickness, and passing the time in music and suchlike pleasures” (Carey, 2020). The ways in which society interacted with one another were altered. In some cases people would have survived if they received some type of help or care from another person, whether it be food or water brought to them, the abandonment aided in the cause of death in some cases. The dying suffered alone with no one at their bedside, and the hope of a “good death” was no longer possible, without family members surrounding the dying members to be made comfortable, the sick often were treated terribly by loved ones who at one time promised to always be there for them, one author described the experience, “the sick are treated like dogs by their families-they give them food and drink, then flee the house” (Heyligen, P. 44). It was a dehumanizing experience for those infected.

The fear caused by The Black Death increased the abandonment of the dying, the social construct continued to collapse and doctors and physicians would no longer visit the infected and let the disease run its course. Author Sam Cohen includes information on the social breakdown of medical care during the plague, “the same connection between ferocious contagion and the social consequences, causing physicians not to visit the stricken” (Cohen, 2017). Living and dying were the same thing during the Black Death, everyone suffered regardless of being infected or not, the fear caused abandonment from loved ones, and the chances of receiving a final confession in hopes of a traditional “good death” was unlikely, the social breakdown of no one caring for other and medical personal abandoning their duties of helping the sick aided in the death toll being so tremendous. The abandonment added to the inhumanity of the experiences caused by The Black Death in all parts of society.

Conclusion

The period of the Black Death in the 14th century was a dehumanizing experience for all members of society. The traditional funerary practices and methods of handling the dead were no longer a possibility. The great number of people sick and dying prevented community get-togethers to honor the lives of those who passed, instead, people were buried without friends or family in attendance. A large number of dying caused “mass graves” to be the new method for burial because it was a faster way of burying a large number of corpses at once and was more space efficient, now three to four bodies could fit the same space of one traditional grave. The fear of the plague caused the abandonment of friends and family in society, the infected died alone without doctors tending to them or priests present to clear their sins before death. The main points contribute to the argument that the Black Death was a dehumanizing experience for those who lived in Europe during the epidemic.

References

Britnell, R. (1994). The black death in English towns. Urban history, 21(2), 195–210. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44613912

Carey, J. “the black death, 1348.” eyewitness to history. Last modified august 25, 2020. http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/plague.htm

Cohn, S. (2017). Plague violence and abandonment from the black death to the early modern period. Annales de démographie historique, 2 (134), 39–61. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26627248

Forrest, I. (2010). The politics of burial in late medieval hereford. The english historical review, 125(516), 1110–1138. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40963124

Era 5 – Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons in U.S. History

New Jersey Council for the Social Studies

www.njcss.org

Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons in U.S. History

The relationship between the individual and the state is present in every country, society, and civilization. Relevant questions about individual liberty, civic engagement, government authority, equality and justice, and protection are important for every demographic group in the population. In your teaching of World History, consider the examples and questions provided below that should be familiar to students in the history of the United States with application to the experiences of others around the world.

These civic activities are designed to present civics in a global context as civic education happens in every country. The design is flexible regarding using one of the activities, allowing students to explore multiple activities in groups, and as a lesson for a substitute teacher. The lessons are free, although a donation to the New Jersey Council for the Social Studies is greatly appreciated. www.n j css.org

Era 5 The Development of the Industrial United States (1870–1900)

The development of the industrial United States is a transformational period in our history. The United States became more industrial, urban, and diverse during the last quarter of the 19^th century. The use of fossil fuels for energy led to mechanized farming, railroads changed the way people traveled and transported raw materials and goods, the demand for labor saw one of the largest migrations in world history to America, and laissez-faire economics provided opportunities for wealth while increasing the divide between the poor and rich. During this period local governments were challenged to meet the needs of large populations in urban areas regarding their health, safety, and education.

Activity #1: The Granger Movement in America (1875) and the Yellow Vests in France (2019)

The Patrons of Husbandry, or the Grange, was founded in 1867 to advance methods of agriculture, as well as to promote the social and economic needs of farmers in the United States. The financial crisis of 1873, along with falling crop prices, increases in railroad fees to ship crops, and Congress’s reduction of paper money in favor of gold and silver devastated farmers’ livelihoods and caused a surge in Grange membership in the mid-1870s. Both at the state and national level, Grangers gave their support to reform-minded groups such as the Greenback Party, the Populist Party, and, eventually, the Progressives.

The social turmoil that the Western farmers were in was mainly a result of the complete dependence on outside markets for the selling of their produce. This meant that they had to rely on corporately owned railroads and grain elevators for the transport of their crops. To make matters worse, “elevators, often themselves owned by railroads, charged high prices for their services, weighed and graded grain without supervision, and used their influence with the railroads to ensure that cars were not available to farmers who sought to evade elevator service.” In 1871, Illinois created a new constitution allowing the state to set maximum freight rates but the railroads simply refused to follow the mandates of the state government.

The Grangers became political by encouraging friends to elect only those officials with the same views. Furthermore, while Republicans and Democrats had already been bought out by corporations looking to curry favor in the government, Grangers vowed to create their own independent party devoted to upholding the rights of the general populace.

On Independence Day, 1873 (known as the Farmer’s Fourth of July), the Grangers read their Farmer’s Declaration of Independence, which cited all of their grievances and in which they vowed to free themselves from the tyranny of monopoly. The Supreme Court decision in Munn v. Illinois stated that businesses of a public nature could, in accordance with the federal constitution, be subject to state regulation. Following this ruling, several pieces of legislation, collectively known as the Granger Laws, were passed. Unfortunately, many of these laws were repealed.

Though the organization did not last, it demonstrated the effects that monopolies have on society. It subjugated these individuals to its whims, and then forced them to take action against it.

The Yellow Vests Protest in France

Donning the now-famous fluorescent waistcoats that are mandatory in French cars, the Yellow Vests staged 52 consecutive weeks of protests against economic hardship, mounting inequality and a discredited political establishment. They manned roundabouts across the country night and day, took to the streets on every Saturday since November 17, and at their peak in December even stormed the Arc de Triomphe in central Paris, amid scenes of chaos not witnessed since May ’68. The movement had an indelible mark on France, forcing the government into billions of euros of tax breaks.

“The picture that emerged was that of a movement made up largely of workers and former workers in a situation of financial insecurity, with relatively few unemployed,” said Gonthier. Yellow Vests were present across France, but strongest in small towns and rural areas. They came from all walks of life, but liberal professions were underrepresented, while small business owners and employees, craftspeople and care workers formed the bulk of the movement. About two thirds of respondents earned less than the average wage, and a slightly higher percentage registered as having a “deficit of cultural resources and social links”. This in turn “conditioned the way they defined themselves, and helped distance them from traditional social movements”, Gonthier added.

Another defining feature was the high proportion of women, who made up roughly half the Yellow Vests, whereas social movements traditionally tend to be male-dominated. Gonthier said this reflected the significant mobilization of women in care work, “most notably hospital workers from a public health sector that is plunging deeper into crisis”. They included a high number of single mothers who couldn’t go out and protest, or were scared away by the police’s heavy-handed response, but who supported the movement online.

Questions:

Are monopolies harmful to a growing economy or are they a necessary ‘evil’?
Is it inevitable that an oppressed people will revolt and attempt to destroy that which has kept them down?
How can governments best address poverty and inequality?
If a significant minority feels oppressed, do they have a right to overthrow their government by protest or violence if they cannot get satisfaction through the process of elections?
Do you support the Grangers, Yellow Vests, both or neither?

The Granger Revolution

The Grange Movement

A Brief Essay on the Grange Movement

Who are France’s Yellow Vest Protestors and What do they Want?

The Yellow Vest Movement Explained

Activity #2: Munn-Wabash Railroad in Illinois and the Trans-Siberian Railroad in Russia

Route of the Wabash Railroad in the Midwest

The Wabash Railroad Company went bankrupt and was sold. The new Toledo and Wabash Railroad Company was chartered October 7, 1858. The Wabash and Western Railroad was chartered on September 27 and acquired the Indiana portion on October 5. On December 15, the two companies merged as the Toledo and Wabash Railway, which merged with the Great Western Railway of Illinois. The right of continuous transportation from one end of the country to the other is essential in modern times to that freedom of commerce. The Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate commerce among the States and with foreign nations. If Illinois or any other state within whose were permitted to impose regulations concerning the price, compensation, or taxation, or any other restrictive regulation it would be harmful to commerce between states.

The Trans-Siberian Road in Russia

Trans-Siberian Railroad Crossing a large river in Siberia

The construction of the longest railway in the world was launched in April 1891 and was completed in 1894. Three years later the section between Vladivostok to Khabarovsk with a length of 772km was opened in November 1897. The Central Siberian Railway from the River Ob to Irkutsk with a length of 1839km was built in 1899. The construction involved more than 100,000 workers, including prisoners, and the work was carried out by hand using shovels, axes, crowbars, saws. Despite the many challenges of the taiga, mountains, wide rivers, deep lakes, and floods, the tracks were built with amazing speed – around 740km per year.

Questions:

Does the protection of technology for the efficiency of commerce justify federal regulations over state regulations?
If a corporation is losing money, do they have a right or obligation to raise rates to become profitable?
Do authoritarian governments have an advantage or disadvantage in the construction of large infrastructure projects?

Consolidation of Railroads in Four States

The Supreme Court Strikes Down Railroad Regulation

Interstate Commerce Act (1887)

Construction of the Trans-Siberian Railroad

History of the Trans-Siberian Road

Activity #3: The Debt Crisis of the U.S. Government in 1894 and Inflation in Weimar Germany in 1923.

No crisis of the Cleveland presidencies exceeded the magnitude of the financial panic that gripped the nation at the start of his second term in 1893, and which presaged a depression that still lingered when he left office in March 1897.

The Constitution granted Congress the power “to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures.” (Article 1, Section 8) Article I, Section 8, and Clause 2 The Congress shall have power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. In the 14^th Amendment, Section 4, it states that “the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law … shall not be questioned.”

In the century preceding 1893, Congress experimented with two central banks, a national banking system, laws regulating so-called “wildcat banks,” paper money issues, legalized suspension of specie payments, and fixed ratios of gold and silver. Gold and silver rose to prominence as the predominant monies of the civilized world because of their scarcity and value. Under the direction of Alexander Hamilton, the federal government adopted an official policy of bimetallism and a fixed ratio of 15 to 1 in 1792.

In 1875, the newly-formed National Greenback Party called for currency inflation through the issuance of paper money tied, at best, only minimally to the stock of specie. The proposal attracted widespread support in the West and South where many farmers and debtors joined associations to lobby for inflation, knowing that a reduction in the value of the currency unit would alleviate the burden of their debts.

When President Cleveland assumed office on March 4, 1893, the Treasury’s gold reserve stood at the historic low of $100,982,410 — slightly above the $100 million minimum required for protecting the supply of greenbacks. The Panic of 1893 began when the gold reserves fell below $100,000,000. Stocks fell and factories closed with many going bankrupt. Unemployment rose to 9.6%, nearly three times the rate for 1892. By 1894, the unemployment rate was almost 17%. The Sherman Silver Purchase Act was repealed in support of gold as a stable currency.

Cleveland’s position on sound money was not supported by his Democratic Party. The Gold Standard Act of 1900 resulted in a stable gold standard and economic growth. Cleveland’s position on sound money worked.

Hyperinflation in Germany

Under the Treaty of Versailles Germany was forced to make a reparations payment in gold-backed Marks. On June 24, 1922, Walter Rathenau, the foreign minister was assassinated. The French sent their army into the Ruhr to enforce their demands for reparations and the Germans were powerless to resist. More than inflation, the Germans feared unemployment. A cheaper Mark, they reasoned, would make German goods cheap and easy to export, and they needed the export earnings to buy raw materials abroad. Inflation kept everyone working.

The price increases began to be dizzying. Menus in cafes could not be revised quickly enough. For example, a student at Freiburg University ordered a cup of coffee at a café for 5,000 Marks. He had two cups but when the bill came, it was for 14,000 Marks. When the 1,000-billion Mark note came out, few bothered to collect the change when they spent it. By November 1923, with one dollar equal to one trillion Marks, the breakdown was complete. The currency had lost meaning and value.

Although the currency was worthless, Germany was still a rich country — with mines, farms, factories, forests. The backing for the new Rentenmark was the value of the land for mortgages and bonds for the factories. Since the factories and land couldn’t be turned into cash or used abroad the value of one Rentenmark was equal to one billion of the former Marks. People lost their savings and homes.

Questions:

Is a sound currency policy, where the dollar is backed by gold or some other form of credit, always the best policy for governments to follow?

2. Does the financial debt of a country matter if its economy is growing? Does it matter in times of war or the recovery from a natural disaster?

3. In a financial crisis, a depression, does everyone suffer equally or are some more affected than others?

4. Which problem should the government address first? High Unemployment of 8% or rising inflation of 5%? Why?

5. Is foreign investment in a country’s economy necessary to maintain a balance of payments?

6. Based on the U.S. Constitution, is the debt of our government limited or unlimited?

The Panic of 1893 and the Election of 1896

Price Stability and the Fed

The Weimar Republic

The German Hyperinflation, 1923

Hyperinflation in Germany

Activity #4: The debate over Laissez-faire Economics

Historians often call the period between 1870 and the early 1900s the Gilded Age. This was an era of rapid industrialization, laissez-faire capitalism, and no income tax. Captains of industry like John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie made fortunes. They also preached “survival of the fittest” in business.

By the late 1800s, however, monopolies, not competing companies, increasingly controlled the production and prices of goods in many American industries.

Workers’ wages and working conditions were unregulated. Millions of men, women, and children worked long hours for low pay in dangerous factories and mines. There were few work-safety regulations, no worker compensation laws, no company pensions, and no government social security.

Starting in the 1880s, worker strikes and protests increased and became more violent. Social reformers demanded a tax on large incomes and the breakup of monopolies. They looked to state and federal governments to regulate capitalism. They sought legislation on working conditions, wages, and child labor.

Railroad builders accepted grants of land and public subsidies in the 19th century. Industries facing strong competition from abroad have appealed for higher tariffs. American agriculture benefited with land grants and government support. State governments helped finance canals, railroads, and roads.

It is difficult to separate government intervention, regulation, and laissez-faire in American history. It is likely even more difficult to find the proper balance between government and free enterprise. Perhaps the most serious violations occurred during this era in America’s history with land grants to railroads, regulating the rates railroads could charge, mandating time zones, and allowing paper currency.

Questions:

Why is limited government and laissez-faire economics popular in the United States over time and today?
Should the federal government regulate education and schools or should this be left to the local and state governments?
Does laissez-faire economics bridge or widen the income gap between the social classes?
Who benefits the most from increasing government regulation?

Laissez-faire Economics in Practice

Social Darwinism and Laissez-faire Capitalism in America

Defending the Free Market from Laissez-faire?

Era 4 – Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons of in U.S. History

New Jersey Council for the Social Studies

www.njcss.org

Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons in U.S. History

Era 4 Civil War and Reconstruction

The Civil War put the constitutional government of the United States to its severest test. It challenged the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches of government as well as the federal system of power with state and local government. The activities below provide an opportunity to learn about the breakdown of a democratic political system, the conflict between geographic regions and different subcultural, and the competitive ideas for reconstruction. Students will learn about the hope regarding equality for black Americans through the 13^th, 14^th, and 15^th Amendments and the resistance leading to disenfranchisement, segregation, and debt peonage.

Activity #1: The Dred Scott Decision (1857), Magna Carta (1215), and Johnson-Reed Immigration Act (1924)

Did the Supreme Court have jurisdiction to hear the case? The law suit was properly in federal court only if a “citizen” of one State was suing a “citizen” of another State. Sanford was a citizen of New York. Even if we assume, with Scott, that the law made him a free man, was he then a “citizen” of Missouri? If Scott was a “citizen” and jurisdiction was proper, then what about the basic issue on the merits? Did the law make Scott a free man?

Was the Dred Scott Decision a failure of the Judicial system in the United States because it violated the fundamental principle in the Magna Carta regarding the rule of law and the individual rights and liberties of all people, regardless of their estate or condition. Article 39 of the Magna Carta, secured a promise from the monarchy that “no free man shall be arrested or imprisoned, or disseized or outlawed or exiled or in any way victimized, neither will we attack him or send anyone to attack him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.” In the fourteenth century, Article 39 was redrafted by Parliament to apply not only to free men but also to any man “of whatever estate or condition he may be.”

The Supreme Court’s conclusion: It “is the opinion of the Court that the act of Congress, which prohibited a citizen from holding and owning property of this kind . . . is not warranted by the Constitution and is therefore void; and that neither Dred Scott himself, nor any of his family, were made free by being carried into this territory, even if they had been carried there by the owner with the intention of becoming a permanent resident.”

How do the principles of the Magna Carta and the precedent of the Dred Scott decision apply to the restrictive immigration decisions legislated by Congress in the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 and the Johnson-Reed Immigration Act of 1924? Does the United States, or any country, have the authority to restrict immigration based on race, ethnicity, or geographic location? Aliens in the United States do not have a right to a court-appointed attorney, Miranda rights, the right to a jury trial, or the right to see all the evidence against them. However, they have the protection of the Due Process of Law clause.

But one constitutional right that applies to aliens in removal proceedings is Due Process. According to the Supreme Court: “The Due Process Clause applies to all “persons” within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent. Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, (1886)

Questions:

Did the U.S. Supreme Court have the authority to issue an obiter dictum regarding Mr. Dred Scott?
Did enslaved persons who received freedom also become citizens of the state where they lived? Would their status as citizens change because of their race or ethnicity if they moved to another state?
Does Article 39 of the Magna Carta apply to free blacks who were arrested as fugitives?
Do people living in America, who are not citizens, entitled to rights in addition to the due process of law and should they also receive the equal protection of the laws of the United States?
What about people living in America who entered illegal or have expired documents?
Should birthright citizenship, everyone born in the United States or one of its territories, be considered a full citizen regardless of the status of their immigrant parent(s)?

Associate Justice Stephen Breyer’s Address to the Supreme Court Historical Society on June 1, 2009

Slavery and the Magna Carta in the development of Anglo American Constitutionalism

The Immigration Act of 1924 (Johnson-Reed Act)

The 1924 Act that Slammed the Door on Immigrants and the Politicians who Pushed it Back Open

Activity #2: Secession of Southern States (1861) and the Secession of Bangladesh from East Pakistan (1971)

The question is whether the Southern states possessed the legal right to secede. Jefferson Davis, president of the new Confederate States of America, argued that the Tenth Amendment was the legal basis for secession. The U.S. Constitution is silent on the question of secession. Therefore, secession is a right reserved to the states and is supported by the ‘compact theory’ regarding the right to nullify a federal law.

Another argument in support of the right of secession involves the states of Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island because these states included a clause in their constitutions that permitted them to withdraw from the Union if the government should become oppressive. Virginia cited this provision when it seceded in 1861. The Constitution is also based on the principle that all the states are equal and no state can have more rights than another. The right of secession cited by these three states must extend equally to all the states. This is an interesting question for debate and discussion.

In 1971, the Pakistan army launched a brutal campaign to suppress its breakaway eastern province. A large number of people lost their lives, an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 died. The Bangladesh government puts the figure at three million. Bangladesh seceded because of the oppressive genocide against their population. It is now more than 40 years since they became an independent country.

Questions:

Do the “opt out’ clauses by Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island support secession at a later date from an early agreement to join into the common government or the Union?
If a government violates the natural rights of life, liberty, property, or the pursuit of happiness against a specific group of people or a state, do they have the right to secede?
Would you support the secession of Bangladesh if less than 1,000 people were killed?

The Secession of East Pakistan in 1971 and the Question of Genocide

The Secession of Bangladesh in International Law: Setting New Standards?

Activity #3: Emancipation Act of 1863, 13^th Amendment, Civil Rights Act of 1866

Historians and constitutional scholars question if the Emancipation Proclamation was constitutional. This is a different question than asking if the Proclamation was justified. The debate over constitutionality is based on the question if it was lawful to own another human being if you lived in a state that was loyal to the Union. The Supreme Court in Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842) upheld the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793 stating that Pennsylvania could not prevent the return of a fugitive slave to its owner. Consequently, The Thirteenth Amendment was necessary to make the Emancipation Proclamation constitutional.

On January 5, 1866, a few weeks after the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment, Senator Lyman Trumbull, from Illinois, introduced the first federal civil rights bill in our history. President Andrew Johnson vetoed the bill, opposing laws for the equality of African Americans as compared to the natural progression for this to happen over time. The veto message incensed Congress, who had evidence of widespread mistreatment of African Americans throughout the South by both private and public parties. Congress overrode Johnson’s veto on April 9, 1866, and elements of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 eventually became the framework for the Fourteenth Amendment. The constitutional question relates to the argument if the Act applies only to states that discriminate or if it applies to both state governments and private citizens.

Questions:

Does the U.S. Constitution need to explicitly state that all human beings are guaranteed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?
Did the Civil Rights Act of 1866 go too far or was it too limited in prohibiting discrimination?
Should the Thirteenth Amendment have included a provision for reparations for enslaved persons and a provision for compensating slave owners for their losses?

Emancipation Proclamation (National Archives)

Was the Emancipation Proclamation Constitutional? (Illinois Law Review)

Origin and Purpose of the Thirteenth Amendment (Cornell Law School)

The Civil Rights Act of 1866

Racial Discrimination and the Civil Rights Act of 1866

Activity #4: 14^th Amendment and the Miranda Decision

The 14th amendment explicitly contains an equal protection clause. Miranda warnings and other amendments were not only created to protect certain individuals but all individuals. Equal protection is a foundational principle in our society. No one should have their rights unjustly taken away from them; and no one should be allowed to get away with crimes because of their ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, etc. Everyone is under the rule of law.

An uneducated or uninformed individual may be pressured by authorities in an interrogation and confess to a crime they did not commit in order to stop the questioning. The right to remain silent and the right to an attorney ensures that all individuals get equal protection regarding of their situation or circumstance.

Questions:

Does Miranda provide adequate protections for accused persons?
Does the right to remain silent benefit an innocent person who is detained or accused?
Should a detained or accused person have to specifically state and document their request to remain silent?
Do the police have to stop questioning after a person states their intention to remain silent?
If the police need information two or three weeks after the initial detainment, do they need to repeat the Miranda warning a second time?
Should Miranda warnings apply to juveniles in school or only in matters involving questions by the police?

Miranda v. Arizona, 1966

Fourteenth Amendment(Cornell Law)

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology(Northwestern University School of Law, 1996)

Era 3 – Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons in U.S. History

New Jersey Council for the Social Studies

www.njcss.org

Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons in U.S. History

Era 3 Westward Expansion

Concept of Self-Government

In the late 17^thcentury the colony of New Jersey was divided between East Jersey with a capital city in Perth Amboy and West Jersey with a capital city in Burlington. The situation was chaotic with arguments over property investments and the selection of governors. In 1702, a decision was made for New Jersey to become a royal colony with the appointment of Edward Hyde, Lord Cornbury.

In the first 50 years of the 19^th century the United States expanded its territory from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean and from Canada to the Rio Grande River. The expansion of territory also challenged the fundamental principles of democracy in the United States with the debt of purchasing land, wars with other countries, determining the meaning of equality, the migration of populations, and conflicts between the branches of government. In this era, teachers and students will discover that these conflicts in our government are not unique.

Activity #1: Orders of Nullification and Conflicts over Laws – United States (1832) and Catalonia(2017)

One of the challenges facing sovereign states is when the right of self-determination conflicts with the rule of law, especially constitutional law. The people of South Carolina opposed the Tariff of 1828, the law of the land, because of the economic harm to their citizens. On November 24, 1832, the state legislature adopted the Orders of Nullification which included the following statement, …”and that the people of this State will henceforth hold themselves absolved from all further obligation to maintain or preserve their political connection with the people of the other States; and will forthwith proceed to organize a separate government, and do all other acts and things which sovereign and independent States may of right do.”

In 2017, the state of Catalonia, one of Spain’s wealthiest states, filed a petition for independence following the sentencing of nine of their citizens to jail for protests against the government and charges that the government does not tax the people of Catalonia equally with other citizens in Spain.

Questions:

Do the people of a territory have the legal right to withdraw from a compact or union?
If a federal government violates the rights of the people it promises to protect, does this justify a right to withdraw from the compact or union?
What states or territories have attempted to separate from a federal union? (Quebec,

Activity #2: Missouri Compromise (1820) and European Union (1992)

Missouri applied for statehood in 1819 allowing for slavery. Congress was already divided and there was a competitive debate over human rights and how Missouri’s application would tip the balance of an equally divided legislature of 11 free states and 11 slave states. The last state admitted was Louisiana in 1812. Illinois was admitted on December 3, 1818 and Alabama on December 14, 1819. The compromise was that Maine (part of Massachusetts) would be admitted as a free state and Missouri as a slave state, providing that slavery would be banned north of the latitude line 36^o30’.

The European Union was created in 1993 with the signing of the Maastricht Treaty. Today it has 27 states. In 2009 the Lisbon treaty amended the constitution and adopted the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the acceptance of this charter and human rights is a requirement for membership. However, Hungary and Poland do not embrace the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the same manner as the other member states.

The newly elected leaders in Poland and Hungary have taken strong positions against abortion and the equality of individuals identifying as LGBTQ. The constitutional question before the Court of Justice is similar to the Dred Scott v. Sanford case of 1857 which challenged the legal authority of the Missouri Compromise and prohibiting slave property in states.

Questions:

Why was the United Kingdom allowed to leave the European Union?

Should states without an ‘opt out’ clause be allowed to leave the European Union? What conditions should be considered?

How does the secession of one state impact its own people and the other states in Europe?

Under Article 7 of the Treaty of the European Union, can a state leave if it is suspended?

Is it possible for member states to end diplomatic relations with another member state?

Activity #3: The U.S. Election of 1824 and the Election of 2018 in Germany with the Green Party

After eight years of government by the Democratic-Republican Party, in 1824, the Democratic-Republican Party splintered as four separate candidates sought the presidency. The election tested the Twelfth Amendment. Since no candidate received a majority of the electoral vote, it was decided by the House of Representatives. Although Andrew Jackson received the most popular votes and the most electoral votes, he did not become president. At this time, several states did not have a popular vote for president and electors in some states were chosen by state legislators.

In 2018, the Green Party in Germany became the second strongest political party. After years of government by the Social Democratic Party and the Christian Democratic Party, the Green Party has rallied the citizens of Germany around environmental issues, specifically climate change. They also have positions against racism and support immigration. The parliamentary system of government selects the chancellor or leader of Germany through alliances of the political parties elected.

Questions:

How would you describe a competitive democracy?

Are political parties supporting a single issue with limited experience in diplomacy or political administration qualified to govern in countries defined as the G20?

Why do populist movements emerge? Is there strength based on the issues or the charisma of an individual?

How do new voices and political leaders gain support withing their countries?

Does the Electoral College in the United States provide protection against third parties? Is this appropriate for a 21^st century democracy?

Do you think the Democratic and Republican parties will be the leaders of the two-party system of government in the United states at mid-century, the election of 2048 or 2052?

Presidential Election of 1824: A Resource Guide (Virtual Programs & Services, Library of Congress) (loc.gov)

Activity #4: Gag Rule and Democratic Centralism in the Soviet Union

The ‘gag rule’ was a legislative tactic employed by southern members of Congress beginning in the 1830s to prevent any discussion of enslavement in the House of Representatives. The silencing of enslavement opponents was accomplished by a resolution first passed in 1836 and renewed repeatedly for eight years.

The suppression of free speech in the House was naturally deemed offensive to northern members of Congress and their constituents. What came to be widely known as the gag rule faced opposition for years, most notably from former president John Quincy Adams. The gag rule was finally rescinded in December 1844.

Democratic Centralism is essential to the internal political debates withing the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. To what extent is debate permitted withing the Soviet Congress influencing policy and implementing changes? In the 1920’s there was dissent within the Communist Party regarding the proletariat and farmers. In December 1927, the opposition voices led by Leon Trotsky were expelled from the Congress, a ‘gag rule’ as debate was ended. In the 1980s, some voices within the Communist Party called for reforms and supported market forces in the economy and more democracy. The principle of democratic centralism challenged the authority of Gorbachev in a failed attempt to overthrow his authority. Eventually, democratic centralism changed the government as the former Soviet Union collapsed.

Questions:

Is a single party system, two-party-system, or a multi-party system the most practical way to govern in the 21^st century?

In a democracy, should the majority have the right to limit or suppress debate on controversial issues?

What is the most effective way for people to change their government: public protests or elections?

How effective is a strong leader with charisma in today’s government?

To what extent is the news media (including social media) a political influence or force in the United States?

What type of government does Russia have today and what type of government does the United States have today?

Is a parliamentary system of government more effective than the two-party system of representative government that the United States has?

Era 2 – Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons in U.S. History

New Jersey Council for the Social Studies

www.njcss.org

Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons in U.S. History

Era 2 Revolution

Concept of Self-Government

The 18^th century was a unique time in world history as this was a time when the concept of government changed in Europe from the authority of the divine right of kings to the authority of the social contract and sovereignty of the people. This period is unique in western civilizations because of its focus on natural rights, limited government, and enlightened ideas.

Activity #1: What is the pursuit of happiness? – United States (1776) and Tanzania (1967)

The Ujamaa concept was the centerpiece in Tanzania’s Declaration of Independence (1967) and the concept of natural or inalienable rights is the centerpiece of America’s Declaration of Independence (1776). This is an opportunity to analyze how the pursuit of happiness was defined in the 18^th century and in the 20^th century. To what extent has time and history changed our understanding of equal opportunity, empowerment, property, and the means to establish social justice and independence?

Questions and Activity:

Compare how America and Tanzania defined equality, property, and opportunity for their people in different centuries.
Are there unique advantages or disadvantages in each document?

Activity #2: The Development of Democracy – United States (1785)and Canada (1867)

The Land Ordinance of 1785 is considered a hallmark for considering future states as equals to the original 13 states which declared independence from Great Britain. Equality is a fundamental principle in democracy. Under the Land Ordinances of 1784, 1785, and 1787, slavery was abolished, religious and civil liberties, and an education about democratic values provided opportunities for all citizens.

Although Canada was settled around the same time as the thirteen American colonies, the colonies in Canada were divided culturally and politically. Lower Canada was settled by France and the majority of the people professed the Roman Catholic religion and Upper Canada was influenced by England and the Protestant religion. In the Unification of Upper and Lower Canada in 1867, there was a debate about future territories and democracy.

Questions and Activity:

Compare and contrast the fundamental ideals of democratic government in the United States and Canada regarding the structure of government, role of education, concept of equality and opportunities for all citizens, end the separation of powers in both governments.

Does one country emphasize direct democracy over indirect democracy or do both countries have similar governments?

Land Ordinance of 1785 – Ohio History Central

The History of Upper and Lower Canada

An Act of Union (1867)

The Road to Democracy in Canada

Activity #3: Gradual Abolition of Slavery – New Jersey (1804)and Jamaica (1833)]

What was the force behind the emancipation of enslaved persons in the 19^th century? Was the movement to end slavery motivated by the abolitionist movement, economics, legislation, resistance, or something else? Liberty is considered a natural or inalienable right and for millions in North America, this basic right was denied. The Atlantic slave trade ended in 1807 but slavery continued and the population of enslaved persons continued.

Questions:

What is the role of civic responsibility and empowerment in the movement to abolish slavery in the British colonies in the Caribbean and in the United States of America?
One defense of slavery in opposition to those who would abolish it was the claim that slaves were private property essential to a slaveowner’s way of life and livelihood. Therefore, to abolish the institution of slavery was to force an owner of slaves into a life of having to work for wages or hire people and pay them wages. Thus, the slaveowner would be enslaved by a law abolishing slavery. Does this claim of individual freedom through the ownership of property have any constitutional support?

Use the links below for evidence to support your thesis or claim.

Jamaica The Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery in NJ (Feb. 15, 1804)

Jamaica and the Atlantic World Legislating Slavery in New Jersey

Emancipation in Jamaica Resources for the Abolition of Slavery in New Jersey

The Emancipation Act of 1833

Activity #4: Equality for Enslaved Persons – United States (1865)and Brazil (1883)

The history of the United States was determined by compromises regarding the legislature, property, and the importation of slaves. A controversial compromise was over the counting of enslaved persons in the 13 independent states for purposes of representation and taxation. An agreement was reached to count enslaved persons for the purpose of taxation and representation as only three-fifths of the population. This method of determining representation in the House of Representatives continued until the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery.

Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution states: “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.” The “other Persons” were slaves. The Southern states wanted to count the entire slave population, which would increase their number of members of Congress. The Northern delegates and others opposed to slavery wanted to count only free persons, including free blacks in the North and South.

The Continental Congress debated the ratio of slaves to free persons at great length. Northerners favored a 4-to-3 ratio, while southerners favored a 2-to-1 or 4-to-1 ratio. Finally, James Madison suggested a compromise: a 5-to-3 ratio.

Slavery was essential to the Brazilian economy. 40 percent of the 10 million enslaved African brought to the New World ended up in Brazil. The institution of slavery in Brazil was supported by a majority of white citizens and the Roman Catholic Church. Gradual abolition began in 1871 for children born to enslaved women. Unfortunately, with no plan for assimilation into Brazilian slavery continued into the 20^th century with informal agreements for food and housing.

Questions:

Should the decisions about equality and freedom be determined by governments or by the vote of the citizens?
How should decisions be made about the protection of property when property conflicts with human life and personal liberty?
If automobiles are harmful to the environment should government have the authority to ban them without compensation?

Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, 1865

Golden Law of 1883 in Brazil

Era 1 – Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons in U.S. History

New Jersey Council for the Social Studies

www.njcss.org

Engaging High School Students in Global Civic Education Lessons in U.S. History

Era 1 Colonization and Settlement

Concept of Self-Government

Throughout most of world history, the ownership of property was challenged by trespassers, squatters, and invaders. The amount of autonomy for citizens, especially the wealthiest citizens and the protection of the rights of others is an issue that goes beyond New Jersey and the American colonies. The desire for protection and rule by law often leads people to a decision involving the exchange of some independence for the authority of a government to provide for order and protection. As a result of this ‘social contract’ there is competition between the authority of the state and the independent lives of private citizens.

Activity #1: Self-Government or State Government? – China (221 B.C.E.) and New Jersey (1702 C.E.)

Compare the account of Queen Anne’s Instruction to Lord Cornbury (Green. Words That Make NJ History, p.20) with the account in China in 221 B.C.E following the chaos of the warring states and the unification of independent Chinese states under Chu De (Shi Huangdi).

Questions:

How effective are these instructions in bringing order to chaos in the colony of New Jersey?
How did Chu De (Shi Huangdi) bring order and unity to China?
How important is self-government to people if the government is not willing or able to protect their property and lives?
In a large country like the United States, how would our leaders restore order today in the event of chaos and disorder?

Activity #2: Protection of Property – New Jersey (18^th century) and South Africa (19^th century)

In the colony of New Jersey during the 18^th century there were frequent cases of trespass, stealing, and claiming land. The reason for this was that titles to property were confusing, lost, and in many cases gave non-owners permission to live or work on a particular tract of land. Although rent was required, it frequently was not paid which resulted in vigilantes or mobs removing offenders and having them imprisoned for theft or treason for disobeying the Crown.

The migration of people in the Natal province in southern Africa provides another case study over the titles to property and riots that resulted over a shortage of land with thousands of people fleeing for their safety. Research the Mfecane Invasion and how this despotic leader gained control of property and redistributed it to the Zulu. The conflict resulted in the migration of Boers and Bantu to areas outside of the vast resources in Natal.

Read the account, Land Riots and the Revolution in NJ and compare it with the Mfecane Invasion in southern Africa.

Questions:

Should a government have the authority to collect money to improve property and collect taxes on property without their consent?
Are people without property entitled to the same economic and political rights as people with property?
When rulers or invaders gain control of property, what recourse do innocent people have?

Activity #3: Should Citizens Determine Justice? – Vatican City (1633) and Salem, Massachusetts (1692-93)

Throughout history, the individual liberty of individuals regarding their freedom to express ideas, defend scientific evidence, and express diverse opinions has frequently been challenged by the state or other powerful institution in the community or state. In Salem, Massachusetts in 1692-93, more than 200 men and women were accused of being witches and the mass hysteria led to the conviction and execution of 20 women in the Salem Trials. The hysteria was motivated by the fear of the devil in unexplained incidents in the community. The religious bias of the judicial system resulted in injustice.

In Naples, Italy the scientific research of Copernicus challenged the Biblically based teaching in the Book of Joshua 10:13 that the earth was the center of the universe. Compare the hysteria in support of the Aristotelian view of the universe with the persecution of Giordano Bruno and the house arrest of Galileo Galilei with the hysteria and the religious bias that supported injustice in the Salem trials..

Questions:

Has the evolution of our system of justice improved since the Salem trials of the 17^th century?
Does biased or false testimony in a trial violate the principle of equal justice for all?

Activity #4: The Debate Over Freedom of Religion – Massachusetts (1630-1650) and China (1850-1867)

Throughout history, people have been persecuted for their religious beliefs. In many cultures, religious institutions are an important part of the culture. However, when individuals or groups express beliefs different from those accepted by the majority and when new populations migrate into a country or culture, they have frequently been persecuted. Although the freedom to worship is considered as a fundamental right by the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (1948), there continue to be examples of persecution and conflict.

Read the accounts of the persecution and exile experienced by Anne Hutchinson & Roger Williams in colonial America and compare their accounts to the religious zeal expressed in the Taiping Rebellions in China (1850-1867).

Have a separate group read about the experience of Quakers in West Jersey and Puritans and Presbyterians in East Jersey in the late 17^th century. Discover the reasons for the adoption of religious liberty in Concessions and Agreements of West Jersey and restrictions against atheists in East Jersey. Read the accounts of persecution against Christians and others for their beliefs by the Taliban in Afghanistan and the reaction of groups in Afghanistan to the mass killings of Hazara, a Shiite community.

Questions:

To what extent can freedom be restrained?
Is it possible to maintain the separation of church and state and legislate morality that is inherent in the religious teachings of specific faiths?
Do you think the separation of church and state is essential to a democracy when citizens believe in different faiths or are atheists without faith in any deity or religion?

Book Review: A Brief History of France: People, History, and Culture, by Cecil Jenkins

A Brief History of France: People, History, and Culture, by Cecil Jenkins (Philadelphia, PA: Running Press. 2011)

Reviewed by Dr. Thomas Hansen, Ph.D

In 15 information-filled chapters, Jenkins gives us a decent amount of French history in a short book. Chapter One is called “Cro-Magnon Man, Roman Gaul and the Feudal Kingdom,” and the last chapter is called “France in the New Global Order.” By chapter 6 we are already reading about Napoleon, so if that is any indication of the coverage here you know that means most of the book is about the last few hundred years and not about Cro-Magnons or Romans or Celts. If you want more emphasis on those guys, you have to seek a different book.

Jenkins is a great writer, and he not only uses clever turns of phrase. He also uses a great deal of humor and fun in his writing. The book is enjoyable to read. I hold a BA in French Language & Literature, but I found a huge amount of information here I had not expected and had not known about before reading the book.

The book is really quite funny, at points. For example, on page 28, Jenkins explains, “Again, the old practice of dividing estates among the sons, which had created so many problems with the royal succession, caused continual private wars among the minor nobles who had often little else to do but strike knightly attitudes.”

This striking-a-pose reference is typical of the funny ways Jenkins tells us in more modern terms what went on in the French past. See, also, the mention of Philippe IV’s “cold good looks (p. 33) and the “déjà vu all over again” discussion on page 72 and the bitchiness notes on page 75.

Without giving too much of the actual content away, I will say here that the framework of French history gives Jenkins a wonderful playground to exercise in. He enjoys writing about this topic, obviously, and the reader will enjoy finding out about some of the more interesting and sometimes weird passages of time within the French world.’

Teachers of social studies and of history will probably like the book because of its approach and clever language. More advanced students—especially those who know something of French history—may like this also. It is not a very basic review of French history, however. It does demand some overall familiarity with the topic so that the reader can follow what is happening. I have read some other similar books recently on history of countries I knew little about and feel for those who read this one if they are not somewhat versed in French history.

This is a brief history, indeed, and best for those who need a good review and an exciting read about the topic. I recommend the book especially for Francophiles who want another perspective. This point of view is certainly refreshing.

Book Review: Britain Begins by Barry Cunliffe

Britain Begins by Barry Cunliffe (London: Oxford University Press. 2013)

Reviewed by Dr. Thomas Hansen, Ph.D

The author tells the story here of both England and Ireland because they cannot be separated easily. Since the very beginning of humans’ time in that part of the world, both lands and cultures were connected. It is that united history that leads the way in this incredible story of the sometimes icy, sometimes verdant northern reaches of civilization.

The reader will find here exciting and revealing chapters in the history of movements throughout the pre-historic, Celtic, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Norman, and modern times of the isles. There are clear and helpful illustrations, and there is enough information here to fill any semester-long course on the history of England, or rather Albion, as it was first called by those who were using formal language.

The author paints rich stories onto a canvas of what was once a chilly ice-covered region and which came to be a world power. The author makes use of language, tools, science, history, and other major fields to tell about the different eras of the isles.

The years of the Celts are very intriguing ones, indeed. Cunliffe speaks of the idea that there were two entirely distinct waves of movement among them—including Iberia, Britain, Ireland, Scotland, Brittany, and Wales (pp. 248-249). He also speaks to the idea that the Celts started in the north and later in one era migrated as a large group southward to Brittany (p. 428). He has a number of additional theories related to this and other good examples of “movement.”

Another very interesting idea is that language, culture, and tools were shared up and down the west coast of Europe and up between the isles—a sort of “Atlantic” civilization (p. 344) emerging over time among the Celts. This explains linguistic and other hints pointing to migrations and movements up and down the coast—as opposed to some earlier notions of “Spanish” Celts trudging only northward to the further reaches of what came to be the UK.

Cunliffe talks about the notion of Celts moving southward—starting in Scotland and Ireland and coming down into Europe along the Atlantic. The author uses many different sorts of proof to advance this theory, at the same time he asks additional questions.

Teachers will be able to use this big book in a variety of ways. First and foremost, it is important personal reading for any teacher interested in social studies in general and in the history of English-speaking people specifically. Understanding the history of northwest Europe is helpful in understanding the intricate connections among the Celts and Europeans, the British and the Irish, and the Scandinavian and Germanic stock among the English.

Another important use is for helping students understand the power of “movement” among peoples, the conflicts created and agreements forged, and the resulting cultural and linguistic differences and similarities resulting from peoples coming into contact. The notion of movement relates also to the traveling ideas, tools, traditions, names, weapons, foods, trades, and books, later. Any standards and benchmarks related to movement are connected through teacher use of this book as a reference and resource.

Yet another good use of this volume is a textbook for a college-level course in history, of course. Because it covers so very much information, it could also be used as a summer reading project for advanced rising college freshman students needing timely non-fiction reading.

Those four uses of the book can be joined by another one I propose here: coffee table teaser. It would be interesting to set this in plain view and see who would pick it up and want to start reading it. It has a beautiful green cover. There are in fact many photos, drawings, and illustrations inside. The cover just might draw in some unsuspecting readers.

Book Review: !Brigadistas! An American Anti-Fascist in the Spanish Civil War edited by Miguel Ferguson, Anne Timmons, Paul Buhle, and Fraser Ottanelli

!Brigadistas! An American Anti-Fascist in the Spanish Civil War edited by Miguel Ferguson, Anne Timmons, Paul Buhle, and Fraser Ottanelli (Monthly review Press, 2022).

(Review by Anika Amin, St. Ann’s, Brooklyn)

¡Brigadistas! is a graphic novel about the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939). It tells the story of three friends from Brooklyn, New York who travel to Spain where they join the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. The book was super descriptive and did not include unnecessary details. This made it comprehensive but still clear and intelligible. The moments about the effects of the war and the regular people it affected were extremely powerful. The descriptions of the war’s effects on children and people who were not soldiers made the graphic novel very impactful. There could have even been more of these moments included to reinforce the significance. Overall it was informative, clear, and very powerful. Although it was very clear, it could have made it easier to read if it had chapters or sections. Breaking up the text and providing landmarks throughout the story could have also made it easier to follow. Additionally, depending on the target age group, some of the terms and concepts could have been explained more to keep the writing flowing. Overall it was great to read and it presented important and difficult topics in an understandable way.

British Exacerbation of the Great Hunger 1845-1852

British Exacerbation of the Great Hunger 1845-1852

Brian Sugrue

An Gorta Mór is the Irish word for Great Hunger, but most people know this event as the Irish Potato Famine. The Great Hunger began in 1845 when a disease in plants, that was caused by mold and fungus, spread among the crops. This plant disease is called Phytophthora infestans and it spread swiftly across the island nation. Potato crops were ruined for the next several years and this was especially devastating considering the main source of food for the Irish were potatoes. At the time Ireland was a colony that was controlled by Great Britain and due to this they were forced to be subject to the rules implemented by the British. Great Britain, being Ireland’s colonizer, took it upon themselves to send soldiers over to Ireland and implement new laws in order to help the issue from getting more out of hand. The rules subjected upon the Irish by the British hurt the country of Ireland and its people at a time when they needed as much help as possible. Life in Ireland had become so unbearable that many looked to leave the country, but unfortunately emigration was not accessible to all people. By the end of the Great Hunger there were approximately one million Irish people who had died during the famine years and another one million who were forced to seek refuge in other countries.

The Great Hunger in Ireland occurred in 1845 and lasted until 1852. Throughout the seven years things didn’t seem to get any better, but the British government insisted they were doing what needed to be done to fight this mass hunger. During this famine, if people were supplied with food and the proper resources, there would not have been widespread death across the country. The help England was claiming to give actually had the opposite effect and made problems in Ireland worse. Workhouses provided jobs that paid less than the cost of food, and landlords were being given the incentive to evict poor tenants. On top of this, Britain had not stopped exporting mass amounts of food from Ireland back to England. So when the British are claiming they are helping the issue, why are they making decisions that have the opposite effect?

The actions of the British government tell a bit of a different story to this ‘famine’.What were these decisions being made by the British government that were continually harming the already struggling Irish people? Weren’t the British supposed to be the ones helping Ireland through this dreadful period of history? By looking at the history of the Great Hunger, authors – Cormac O’Grada, Christine Kinealy, Jill Sherman, Peter Gray, Edna Delaney, Peter Solar, Tom Yager, and Mark McGowan – all give crucial details into the problems going on during the famine and what made it worse. These historians paint a picture of how a beautiful country like Ireland turned into a place of death and poverty. The heavy impact the new laws and relief measures had on the people as well as lack of care for Irish citizens’ welfare on the part of the British government is also discussed. I will also be using my sources to describe the first hand accounts of the Irish who struggled during this time. The authors actively contest the whitewashed stories behind the Great Hunger and use first hand accounts as well as written evidence to show British culpability. The argument states that the actions taken by the British government show that they knew what they were doing. Some of the authors go in depth about how the British government ended up seeing this as a solution for population control, because if people died then less would need to be fed and taken care of.

In this writing I use scholarly sources to reshape people’s thinking on the Great Hunger. Drawing from a few sources, I will use firsthand accounts of people who survived the Great Hunger, published books on the Great Hunger’s history, journals about laws enacted in Ireland, and articles about how the laws impacted Irish citizens to show how England exacerbated this famine. Ireland has dealt with a few famines throughout its history but nothing compared to the Great Hunger of 1845. Ireland had experience in how to help make the famine more manageable, but there were other factors at play that continuously made the issue worse. If Ireland had been properly supplied this famine would have ended in much less death. Other nations/groups of people saw the struggle not getting better and donated to the cause, such as the Choctaw Native Americans. In contrast the British Crown went out of their way to not help the Irish get donations. When the Ottoman Sultan offered to send money for famine relief, the representatives of the Queen rejected them, stating that they couldn’t donate that much due to the fact that it was much higher than the amount the Queen donated. This would be seen as an insult to donate more than the Queen. The actions of the British were the reason the death toll went up as high as it did and they continued to act in their best interest. This has been viewed for years as a tragedy that couldn’t be avoided, but diving deeper into this topic allows readers to see the man made factors that helped exacerbate this problem.

By looking at the significance of the laws put in place by the British government and the food being transported from Ireland to England, it is clear that this famine was very much exacerbated by the British. In general people believe this was a famine caused by a disease in the potatoes, but the lengths the British went to in order to ‘help’ Ireland actually ended up making everything worse and leading to more death. By looking at scholarly sources the reader can see that the British didn’t act in the best interest of the Irish and instead ignored the problem at hand. British bias towards the Irish drove the government to pass the Poor Relief Act, The Temporary Relief Act, or the Poor Law Extension Act which were said to be effective measures in fighting the famine but they were all ineffective. The treatment of the Irish people by Britain will always be remembered by those who survived those traumatic years, but in order to learn from history the story must be true and unbiased. In order to understand the trauma and hardships caused by the British government, one must look into the actions that harmed the Irish and how the people were affected by them. By looking at the living conditions brought upon the Irish by Britain’s relief and the laws enacted by the government it is clear that this famine was amplified by England.

Exacerbating the Famine

Ireland is no stranger to food shortages, as the Irish have experienced sixteen different food shortages from the year 1800 to 1845. But when the blight arrived in Ireland in 1845, this happened to be the first food shortage that affected the entire country of Ireland. “By late 1845 Ireland had lost about half of its potato crop to the blight. The English still believed the food shortage would not last. They thought that if the Irish people needed more help, Ireland should use its own tax revenue”( Sherman, 2017, p.18). In the beginning of the famine, government officials in England did not believe that the blight was as bad as people were saying and they thought this whole thing is an Irish problem. This was initially seen by the British government as an Irish issue that required action from no one but the Irish. What was going on in Ireland was being overlooked by those in England. It was assumed that if the British were to help the Irish by giving them government assistance, the Irish would rely too heavily on handouts and things would never get better in the country.

Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel had a harsh view of the Irish people and felt they were exaggerating when talking about how bad the blight was. When scientists told him that this should not to be taken lightly and that they weren’t overreacting, he chose to believe that they were still overreacting and that this wasn’t a big deal. When the Irish did look to see what the British were doing they were shocked and horrified to see them making things worse:

“In the midst of all this suffering, the Irish began to examine the actions of the British government. Food continued to be exported out of Ireland. British owners of Irish land were still entitled to the crops grown on that land. Their businesses relied on these crops. And British policy did not prevent the export. Starving Irish people became furious as they watched boatloads of grain depart from their docks for England. Food riots erupted at ports such as Youghal and Dungaran in southeast Ireland”(Sherman, 2017, p.22).

Ireland was growing enough food to feed its people but they had to watch this food get shipped out of the country.The fact that Britain wasn’t taking this issue seriously was clear when seeing that they continued to transport food from Ireland back to England. During a famine the goal is to get enough food to feed the entire country, but if the English government decided to keep that food they were exporting in Ireland, then the majority of people would have been fed.

Allowing Britain to export food out of Ireland hurt the poor in the country for years and allowed many people to starve to death. The exportation of food out of Ireland, made this whole issue of not having enough food worse. Importing food would help this mass hunger, but taking food away from the starving people when they could be surviving off that food is helping nobody. In the beginning it was the blight that caused Ireland’s food shortage, but as time went on it was the policies that were implemented by Britain that made the issue worse. It was said that the weak policies “did not help much” and that “stronger action by the British government could have prevented some suffering”( Sherman, 2017, p.34). The British government made efforts to start soup kitchens and public works projects to provide food and work to those who were affected the most in Ireland. The problem with these public works was they weren’t well funded and they weren’t long term solutions. Members of Parliament in England blasted the politicians who were going out of their way to do less to help the suffering Irish because it was inhumane and England would be looked down on if the problem got more out of hand. Christine Kinealy in her works “The Great Irish Famine: Impact, Ideology, and Rebellion” points out: “The decision to make public works unproductive divided members of the Whig Party and caused a rift between the Irish Executive and the Treasury, a division that developed as the Famine progressed” (Kinealy, 2002, p.38).

There were certain members of parliament who were doing what they could to not help this famine die down. Decisions like this enraged the Irish people because they were expecting help from the country that has power over them. Instead Whig policy was focused on getting poor people off the land “and if it took mass death to achieve that directive, so be it”(McGowan, 2017, p.87). The intentions of the British government, led by the Whig party, were not that of wanting to give much help to the Irish. By overlooking mass death, the British were willing to undersupply the Irish and do less to help them. Since these were not citizens of England they were very comfortable with death amongst the Irish.

One man testified that when his grandfather talked about the public relief efforts, he would say “that there were so many making for the poorhouses that there wasn’t accommodation for half of them”(Ó Gráda, 2001, p.134). The decision to make these relief efforts not well funded or well organized hurt many Irish who were struggling. Many Irish looked to these different relief efforts put in place by the British but when people saw how little supply there was, some turned on each other to survive. Decisions like these came about due to a new thought amongst some British, which stated how this famine was an opportunity to bring about a regeneration of Ireland. The issue was that this was based on British views and was built around getting rid of religion and culture in Ireland.

Throughout the famine years politicians would expect lots of crops to be grown during the farming seasons. In Ireland they were producing enough food to feed the majority of the country but many people were still starving and unable to get access to food. Britain showed how seriously they took this problem:

“In autumn 1846, the Treasury decided that a portion of the modest amount of grain imported by the government should be sent in the first place to Scotland, despite the greater destitution in Ireland. This action caused considerable alarm amongst relief officials in Ireland. It was also an early example of decisions being made in London which ignored advice from relief officials on the ground”( Kinealy, 39).

This was a huge indicator to the Irish that they were not being taken seriously. People were starving and struggling to survive, but the British government continued to claim that this was not a big deal and that if the Irish needed help they should help themselves. Since this issue wasn’t taken seriously, people assumed that this was an Irish problem which required solutions made by the Irish government.

After debates about what to do, in the Autumn of 1845 Prime Minister Robert Peel decided to implement a Temporary Relief Committee with the goal of feeding the poor. He also shipped in 100,000 pounds of Indian Corn into Ireland with the thought that this food will replace potatoes in Ireland. These relief efforts were not put into place immediately because Prime Minister Peel felt that there was enough time to wait before the impacts of the shortages were to be felt in the following Spring and Summer. He expected the cheap Indian corn to take the place of the potato on the Irish palate. The relief efforts were better than nothing, but this was also seen as temporary relief. The British government expected this to get Ireland back up on its feet, but that was not the case. Prime Minister Peel was replaced in 1846 by Prime Minister John Russell. This then led to new relief efforts under the Russell administration.

When Prime Minister Russell came into power he introduced new relief efforts that were vastly different from the measures in which Peel put into place. Robert Peel’s measures were already not much help for the poor Irish, but when Russell’s relief efforts replaced the old ones it was clear that this would hurt the Irish. Russell’s measures meant much less food being provided for them and access to places to stay and eat were going to be more restrictive than they were before. These new measures also made Public Works the centerpiece of the help offered, but the measures were made to be unproductive. The most important part of the relief systems that was changed after the transition of leadership, the government still did not import food into Ireland.

During a famine, importing food would have been one of the best things they could have done. The only reason Peel’s relief efforts were more successful than Russell’s was because the new administration was clearly trying to make relief efforts in Ireland as unproductive as possible.

The Whig government had made the Public Works much harsher than it was before. Some big issues with the Public Works were that there were delays in people getting paid, people got paid low wages that did nothing against inflation, and changes in working hours to 6am to 6pm with a pay cut penalty for being late.“Despite daily reports to Trevelyan recounting instances of death from starvation of people dependent on the relief works, the Treasury insisted that the wages paid were adequate. The lowness of the wages contrasted with the high level of administrative expenses for the public works”( Kinealy, 40). The Irish thought that Public Works should be properly funded and the workers should be paid enough to survive during the famine. The pay was less than the cost of food for poor people and the jobs didn’t make much sense in terms of economic relief or famine relief. The thought process of adding jobs was also ineffective because the British would have Irish workers build things such as roads but these roads wouldn’t go anywhere. The jobs were not meant to help boost job growth or the economy, they were instead put there to provide some type of work for the Irish. The British government used the excuse that they were spending a lot of money on these relief systems but they should be using some of that money to properly pay the poor, hard working people. When the British realized the public works were failing they decided that:

“At the beginning of 1847, in recognition of the failure of the public works, the government decided to abandon them and replace them with a new relief measure based on the provision of free food in a number of specially established soup kitchens. The legislation, known as the Temporary Relief Act or ‘Soup Kitchen Act’, opposed current orthodoxy which viewed the provision of gratuitous relief as both ideologically flawed and expensive”( Kinealy, 41).

This is another example of the British doing something nice but it is not getting a lot of applause because members of the Whig party thought this would cost Britain too much money. They also had their own biases, in which they believed that the thought of generously helping the Irish was erroneous. Even though the British government was actively talking about helping the Irish, there were members of the government who allowed their biases to get in the way of providing relief to people who were struggling.

In the year 1847, when looking at the crops across the country, there was very little blight to be found, but the potato and there wasn’t as much corn being grown. The new policies instituted by the British marked a turning point because in their minds this was where responsibility shifted from Britain to Ireland. This led the British to feel that the Irish would finance relief efforts on their own from now on. As time went on more evictions occurred and more people were in poverty each day. During the Great Hunger land prices started to drop which allowed wealthy businessmen from Britain to seize this golden opportunity. As they started to buy up all the land, the landowners immediately either evicted the tenants or raised rent so they would have to move out. If families couldn’t afford these high prices then they would be left homeless and their homes would be knocked down so the land could be used. By increasing rent on farmers there was a now homelessness problem which made the poverty/death rate rise. By evicting families from their home or land, they were effectively giving them a death sentence because being evicted meant they lost everything. Experts claimed that “ultimately, there is history to blame: the creation of the landlord class”( Solar, 2015, p.73). Without the land they couldn’t support their family in any way, because that land gave them a home and a source of income. By putting responsibility of the poor on landlords they created a divide amongst those trying to survive in Ireland.

The further incentive for landlords to evict, was a raucous product of the new Poor Law Relief. From when this started in 1847 to the peak in 1850, there were 100,000 Irish men, women, and children stranded without a home. The evictions didn’t stop in 1850 either, “many more were illegally evicted or voluntarily surrendered their holdings in an effort to become eligible for relief, forced to do so by the harsh regulations of the new Quarter-Acre Clause which deemed that anybody occupying more than this quantity of land was not eligible to receive relief. Homelessness and social dislocation, therefore, became a major source of distress and death in the latter years of famine”(Kinealy, 44-45). Families who didn’t leave their homes or land suffered consequences. Many families had the roofs burned off their homes because the soldiers knew that a home without a roof wouldn’t help a family during the brutal Irish winter. At this point thousands have died or are in poverty, but the British still felt it was right to continue shipping food out of the country. Shipping food out of Ireland made the hunger worse, but when Irish families were being kicked off their land things were thrown more into turmoil.

The brutal winter that came also interfered with importation of foods from the United States to Ireland, which led England to look to other European countries for help. Unfortunately due to other European countries also being hit with blight the English couldn’t look to them for Irish aid. The Irish were struggling during the winter because there wasn’t more help on the way but evictions also started to rise leaving more people homeless. Scholars said that “evictions reached massive proportions during the winter which is commonly regarded as the Famine’s worst”( Yager, 1996, p.30). During the worst time of the year people are being kicked out of their homes and left homeless. People who refused to leave had the roof burned off or were forcefully removed. Many had no choice but to give up their homes because when they were formally evicted, landlord’s hired men to burn roofs or destroy the affected dwellings there. They would then, as soon as the tenants’ effects had been removed, have soldiers or police who were likely to quell any thought of resistance. During this brutal winter, many soldiers burned the roofs off people’s homes in order to ensure people don’t stay on the land. The winters in Ireland had been ruthless, so not having a roof over their homes would ensure they would freeze to death if they stayed. Tenants were evicted in the dead of winter and ended up losing their lives due to the unbearable conditions. But even through all of that, British Home Secretary Sir George Grey communicated that landlords were not going to get into any trouble with the government for destroying people’s homes.

Landlords were able to brutally evict people without having to fear for any consequences from the government. But landlords were acting in response to the Irish Poor Law, which put the government’s responsibilities of famine relief on landlords. Local newspapers stated that the good landlords were turning into not so good ones because they used cruel and heartless methods of removal. Landlords were put in a situation where they were responsible for stuff the government should have taken care of. When these landlords’ livelihoods were turned upside down, they decided to help themselves, but not all turned to burning roofs or having soldiers remove the tenants. Some landlords went to efforts to pay for their tenants to emigrate instead of forcefully evicting them. Many weren’t lucky enough to have someone pay for them to emigrate, but even those who were lucky enough experienced the brutal times at sea on ‘coffin ships’.

Mass immigration caused by England

The Great Hunger in Ireland started a mass exodus from the country starting in 1845. It’s estimated that more than one million people emigrated from Ireland due to the horrible living conditions. The cost of leaving the country was often too great to help entire families, so oftentimes only one person was given the money to leave. But there were many who continued to live a life of horrors even after getting onto the boat:

“The horrors of famine did not end on leaving Ireland as disease and mortality were rampant on board the ships, especially during the long journeys to America or Australia. Moreover, on arrival, the survivors were frequently subjected to degrading periods of quarantine or anti-irish prejudice. Because the demand to leave Ireland was so high, vessels which had previously been considered unseaworthy were utilized, leading to the sobriquet ‘coffin ships”(Kinealy, 58-59).

There were so many people trying to leave Ireland that ships were overcrowded and unsanitary.

They were called coffin ships because this was essentially a coffin for the Irish who rode in it. These ships were not well supplied with food or water and often were riddled with disease so many people died at sea. The use of unseaworthy boats were only just the start to the fright at sea. Many Irish were treated like cargo and this resulted in examples of Irish people suffocating on boats exiting Ireland. Emigration to North America was a lifeline for so many Irish people and unfortunately many didn’t get the opportunity to leave famine-stricken Ireland.

When emigrating out of Ireland, the treatment of the Irish was horrendous and they were often judged based on their appearance. If they appeared to look poor, hungry, or in any sign of poverty they were looked down upon, almost as if they were sick. The health officers at ports would inspect the Irish to determine if they have ‘Irish fever’ but would run into trouble with the emigrants because they tended to hide themselves on instinct. It is also very important to note that those who were emigrating had basically nothing with them most of the time so they were not prepared for setbacks or delays on departures. People would come to the port expecting the ship to depart but oftentimes would have to scramble to find somewhere to stay when the departure is delayed. These desperate emigrants were also often victims of devious practices. These practices were commonly used on the Irish, because they were very vulnerable due to desperation from their recent living conditions and many weren’t educated enough to understand otherwise. Many of the thieves practiced stealing the Irish people’s baggage and made them pay for its return. Half-fare children’s tickets were often sold to illiterate adults who would be turned away when trying to get on the boat. Frauds also sold worthless out-of-date tickets that were altered to the gullible or desperate. These little immoral practices piled on to the hard time the Irish already were enduring. People saw an opportunity to pick on the Irish who were already poor and suffering. Many people lost their possessions while traveling to new places because their bags would get stolen and they wouldn’t have the money to get it back. A lot of people didn’t have more money to use after paying for the boat out of the country. It was very common for families to use their savings to get however many of their children out of the country. It was seen as the only way to give their kids a good future, but what they didn’t know about was the conditions on board the boats.

The conditions on the ships were unsanitary and caused a lot of deaths. These ships were often not supplied well and provided horrible living conditions of passengers on board. Depending on where these boats were going, Irish emigrants had to endure long journeys through rough seas with little supplies:

“The food, de Vere continued, was seldom sufficiently cooked because there were not enough cooking places. The supply of water was hardly enough for drinking and cooking-washing was impossible; and in many ships the filthy beds were never brought up on deck and aired, nor was the narrow space between the sleeping-berths washed or scraped until arrival at quarantine. Provisions, doled out by ounces, consisted of meals of the worst quality and salt meat; water was so short that the passengers threw their salt provisions overboard – they could not eat them and satisfy their raging thirst afterwards. People lay for days on end in their dark dose berths, because by that method they suffered less from hunger”(Kinealy, 85).

In the eyes of Prime Minister Peel emigration was seen as the most humane method for helping the country, which he believed to be overpopulated. He thought it was wrong to evict the people, but believed that having them emigrate was the only solution. This was also seen as the cheapest solution for England because employing them in a workhouse cost a lot more over time. The British and sometimes landlords often paid for Irish to leave the country because it was half the cost of what it would be to provide famine relief for them. Authors christine Kinealy and Gerard Moran discuss why the British believed encouraging emigration to the Irish was the best solution:

“But how different from such an Ireland with which we have to deal – bare, naked, and unimproved! – no capital in the hands of its people – its population unskilled – its natural advantages unemployed – such an Ireland is incapable of supporting its present population”(Kinealy, 2018, p. 347).

By the time this was decided within the government, they were tempted to ship people off in order to save their money. This again showed the English government looking to help in a way that will cost them the least amount of time and money. The British government thought getting the population to decrease would be the easiest and cheapest way to end this issue. On top of encouraging emigration from the country, members of the House of Lords named Mr. Murray, Mr. Shafto Adair, and Colonel Torrens used pamphlets to get people to consider leaving the country. These pamphlets that they handed out “urged strongly in the pamphlet titles… the necessity of encouraging emigration[1] ”(Kinealy, 346). The British politicians went out of their way to encourage emigration because it was beneficial to the English. By encouraging emigration the British would only have to pay half the cost to ship them than it would to provide them famine relief. But what these politicians didn’t consider were the horrendous conditions at sea. By not taking this into consideration, they allowed other countries to see how inhumane these people were treated. This often sparked concern in other countries when boats would show up with half naked Irish men, women, and children.

There was often outrage at ports when seeing men, women, or children naked or barely clothed on these crowded ships. On top of that they were also very sick and all stuck in a small space where this illness was able to spread among the passengers. This made people who already looked and were very ill from the conditions in Ireland even worse than before. There had sometimes been women who were fully naked when the boats docked and they would wrap her in a sheet before they brought her ashore. The conditions were inhumane and many lost their lives in the pursuit to save their own.

Firsthand accounts

Those who felt the effects of this hunger the most were those of the lower classes. The people who were part of that quarter lost were farmers, farm laborers, elderly people, and those who depended on smaller farms. “However, the famine’s impact was uneven; poverty and death were closely correlated, both at local level and in cross section”(Ó Gráda, 123). This was a tragedy that unfortunately impacted mainly lower-class people and for years things kept getting worse. Since things continuously got worse, people were always on the move in order to find food, money, or anything to help their families. Some were on the move because they didn’t have a home meanwhile others would have one family member go out to get resources while the others hide in the home. Many died on the roadside while out looking for food, and others died while waiting for their family member to return. One man described the conditions of the bodies found on his journey as “emaciated corpses, partly green from eating docks (weeds) and nettles and partly blue from the cholera and dysentery”(Kinealy, 76). The bodies were all sorts of different colors due to the conditions from weather, quality of food, and the lack of food intake. Many wouldn’t be buried out of fear that those who would be around the body would get sick. It also was physically too much for some people to do proper burials for their family members. Many of the people were very sick and had little strength to do anything due to lack of food and water. “The people had neither the material nor the strength to make coffins nor dig graves. When a person died they got a plank and tied the feet of the corpse to one end of it and the head to the other end, and the hands together, then two men took hold of it at each end and carried it to a bog nearby where the water was deep and threw it in”(Kinealy, 78). These burials were unfortunate for family members who couldn’t give their loved ones a proper burial. The death count got so high that graveyards didn’t have enough plots to bury people. Trenches were dug in graveyards to fill the demand needed for deaths. They would fill every inch of the trench with bodies then fill it in with dirt. The living conditions England brought upon the Irish prevented them from being able to bury their dead.

Some Irish who journeyed through the country searching for help of any kind stumbled across terrifying scenes when looking at huts or other homes. One man described his experience looking into what seemed to be an abandoned home:

“A cabin was seen closed one day a little out of town, when a man had the curiosity to open it, and in a dark corner he found a family of the father, mother, and two children, lying in close compact. The father was considerably decomposed; the mother, it appeared, had died last, and probably fastened the door, which was always the custom when all hope was extinguished, to get into the darkest corner and die, where passers-by could not see them. Such family scenes were quite common, and the cabin was generally pulled down upon them for a grave”(Kinealy, 76).

Many didn’t have the strength to venture for help and unfortunately died in their huts. It was custom for the last person alive to shut the door so people walking by couldn’t see the dead bodies. An occurrence like this also provided a place for the family members to be buried at a time when people were afraid to go near the dead. The scenes in this cabin were horrendous, but it describes how a lot of families were found and the conditions in which people died.

One man who worked for the relief committee in Killane described the reactions of some poor when they noticed favoritism among who was given help and who was not:

“A man half starved, and considerably more than half naked, bare head, bare legs, and arms, nothing to cover him but the skeletons of an old pair of breeches and waistcoat…[who] seized me by my coat with the grasp of death” (Delaney, 2012, p.108). There were examples of Irish men and women who would go to famine relief institutions and would either get nothing or would see workers giving some people more resources than others. Actions like this caused a lot of commotion because everyone was desperate and starving yet some people would get special treatment.

Another story describes a man’s experience meeting a traveler looking to get help: “Going out one cold day in a bleak waste on the coast, I met a pitiful old man in hunger and tatters, with a child on his back, almost entirely naked, and to appearance in the last stages of starvation; whether his naked legs had been scratched, or whether the cold had affected them I knew not, but the blood was in small streams in different places, and the sight was a horrid one. The old man said he lived seven miles off, and was afraid the child would die in the cabin, with the two little children he had left starving, and he had come to get the bit of meal, as it was the day he heard food relief was being given out. The officer told him he had no time to enter his name in the book, and he was sent away in that condition. A penny or two was given to him, for which he expressed the greatest gratitude”(Kinealy, 76).

Parents had to walk several miles with very little energy in hopes of getting something that would help the family. This man was lucky enough to get at least some money, but many often had to make the journey with nothing to show for it. It is very important to note that without much food or water it is very hard for people to gain the energy to do things, so walking for many miles is a sign of desperation on the part of the Irish. The living conditions were made so poor that people did anything they needed to survive. They even took risks when going on these journeys for example, in the last quote the man had to leave two of his kids at home, and he had fears that they wouldn’t be alive by the time he got back.

This same old man was seen again by the same person but this time his journey had not gotten him anything. This is an example of when some Irish started to understand that with barely any help there was little to no hope. “The next Saturday we saw the old man creeping slowly in a bending posture upon the road. The old man looked up and recognized me. On inquiring where the child was, he said the three were left in the cabin, and had not taken a ‘sup or a bit’ since yesterday morning, and he was afraid some of them would be dead upon the hearth when he returned. He was so weak that he could not carry the child and had crept seven miles to get the meal. He was sent away again with a promise to wait till next Tuesday, and come and have his name on the books. This poor man had not a penny nor a mouthful of food, and he said tremulously, ‘I must go home and die on the hearth with the hungry ones” (Kinealy, 76). People like him sacrificed and gave a lot just to be rejected multiple times by British soldiers. This shows how bad the relief system was in Ireland because people were being denied relief multiple days in a row. People went there because they had nothing, but they were often disappointed to find the only source of help couldn’t do anything. If people have no water or food and the relief system has barely enough to help them then can they be expected to survive? Another man by the name of Denis M’Kennedy, who worked for the Board of Works, dropped dead and was later spotted on the roadside. After the body was recovered a doctor performed a post-mortem examination on him and was shocked because “he had never seen a body so attenuated from lack of food”(Delaney, 100). The conditions of the bodies were mortifying to the doctors who had to examine them. When examining the bodies doctors could see how the Great Hunger impacted their bodies.

Another story from the Great Hunger tells of people who were so starved that eating food could kill them. Some people had been starved for so long that their bodies couldn’t handle certain amounts of food. The bodies of the Irish often struggled to absorb nutrients in foods and their hearts weren’t able to keep up with the body’s increased metabolic rate. The story went:

‘Carthy swallowed a little warm milk and died’ was the simple statement of one man’s death from starvation in Skibbereen. One man connected with the Quaker Society of Friends said, ‘If they get a full meal it kills them immediately.’ When the Indian meal came out, some of them were so desperate from starvation that they didn’t wait for it to be cooked properly, they ate it almost raw and that brought on intestinal troubles that killed a lot of them that otherwise might have survived”(Kinealy, 77).

The conditions of life brought upon the Irish were unlivable. People were so starved that eating killed them and their desperation drove them to often eat uncooked food. Other times they drank or ate anything they could because there was not food and water always readily available. There were often times where those who did have more access to resources tried to be generous but experienced frightening encounters. This story is about a woman whose family left out soup for poor people that were traveling to find food:

“The house was near the road and a pot of stirabout was kept for any starving person who passed the way. My mother Mary was a young girl at the time and alone in the house one day when a big giant of a fellow staggered in. He wolfed his share of stirabout and made for the door, but there was a tub of chopped raw cabbage and porridge for the pigs. He fell on his knees by the tub and devoured the stuff till she was in a fright, then he reeled out to the road and was found dead there a short time after”(Kinealy, 77).

This is another example of someone being so starved and desperate for food that he died due to scarfing down the first bit of food he saw. The people who survived the Great Hunger saw a whole different side of their countrymen because of how the laws and lack of help from Britain affected them. By removing mass quantities of food and not helping those struggling in the country, Britain made living conditions in Ireland unbearable for the Irish. There were families who had to “[survive] on a single meal of cabbage, supplemented by seaweed”(Delaney, 100).

Families had to be fed portions meant to serve one person and had to survive off meals like that. Meals like this led to starvation among many and made people very desperate. These first hand accounts show how the conditions of life brought on by the British were detrimental to the Irish people’s physical, mental, and overall health as well as a first hand view of the impact Britain had in exacerbating this famine.

The year 1852 marked the end of the Great Hunger in Ireland, but life did not go back to normal very quickly. The mass amounts of death and emigration meant there were less people to feed and the harvests were starting to be enough to feed people. But the biggest reason the famine came to an end was when England finally stopped exporting food out of Ireland. Throughout the next several years there would be rebellions against the British until they gained their independence in 1922. However, the history of the Great Hunger has been formed through British interpretations and has ignored the evidence suggesting that Britain is responsible for making the Great Hunger much worse than it should have been.

Conclusion

The eventual end to the Great Hunger came due to food not being exported out of Ireland, the recovery of the new harvest, and there were now less mouths to feed across the country. But this dark period didn’t end simultaneously across the country. Some counties suffered longer than others and some recovered quicker. The British could have played a different role in history, but instead worried more about themselves and let prejudice get in the way of doing what was right. They did make efforts to help the Irish but they were poor attempts at help that only did more harm than good. Choctaw Native Americans did what they could to help, but they could only donate so much meanwhile, some had their help rejected by the British government. The rejection of help was very telling of a country that didn’t want to help another in need. Famine relief was put in place as a placeholder until they could pass off the responsibility of relief onto the Irish. Rejecting help from another country and not making famine relief that is beneficial showed the intentions of the British government. The forced exportation of abundances of food that were produced in Ireland was adequate enough to prevent a famine threatened by potato failure.

These actions by the British illuminate the actual problems that exacerbated this famine. The Great Hunger could have resulted in much less death if the British had not stolen mass quantities of food from Ireland. But this also adds to our understanding of why this problem went on for years and only seemed to get worse. Generally it is thought that the British helped the Irish and that the problem in Ireland had to do with the potatoes. Though scholarly sources and first hand tellings of the Great Hunger paint a different picture of a country begging for help from a country that was not looking to get involved. England initially took a more hands off approach to famine relief but only changed course when there was pressure put on the government. They also did not do anything to make sure these famine relief efforts were long term and effective. This is shown through scholarly sources that show statements made by government officials and through multiple authors’ writings of the impact Britain’s laws had on the issue at hand. Through this research it becomes clear that this issue got worse over the years because England’s sad excuse for help actually made life worse for those already suffering. Britain deserves more blame for the famine getting out of control than they do credit for providing any sort of relief. The Great Hunger in Ireland was not a story of not being able to grow enough food, but instead is a story of British exacerbation of a famine.

A topic such as the Great Hunger would be a great topic to teach when learning about genocide. In school the only genocide students learn is about the holocaust and sometimes Native Americans which leaves many students not knowing that there were many more genocides that occurred in history. The fact that there have been so many in history is horrific so if we show our students more examples then we can start to teach the next generations of students about being good citizens and preventing tragedies like that from happening. As the old saying goes those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it and if schools don’t teach about more genocides then students will grow up not knowing much about genocides or how impactful they have been on so many lives. Coming out of high school I didn’t think there were many genocides besides the Holocaust and Native American removal because we weren’t taught about any others in school. Genocides also give students a deeper look into extremism and the forms of government that allows this kind of tragedy to happen. That being said this can also be used to show different forms of abuse of power by governments when teaching about different forms and levels of government.

Topics such as this can lead to conversations about discrimination and oppression and how governments have used their law making powers to push those discriminatory or oppressive laws. In the example of the Great Hunger the British Parliament made laws they knew would make the effects of the famine worse which can be compared to laws made in other countries including the U.S. that were harmful towards a specific group of people. The British government treated the Irish as if they were an inferior race which is a similar school of thought used against people of color that has been seen for years in American society.

Another interesting topic a teacher could teach the Great hunger with would be British Colonialism and how it’s impacted other nations/groups of people. The British have settled all over the world and have had impacts on the histories of many different countries. When teaching about the Great Hunger the teacher could have the class examine the effects of British Colonialism across the globe. Colonialism shapes people’s ideas of race, class, gender, and sexuality and all of these ideas are relevant in modern society. These are all topics that have some sort of controversy surrounding them in today’s society, so teaching students about the origins of the schools of thought would help them understand the world they live in. The topics of race, class, gender, and sexuality are all impacting our government today because laws are being made to protect the rights of those who are of different races, classes, genders and sexualities. By looking at British colonialism students can examine how those of different races, classes, genders, and sexualities were treated by governments in the past. There are a plethora of different topics that can be taught using the Great Hunger and it can open doors to really interesting and informative discussions which will only benefit the students.

References

Delaney, Enda. The Great Irish Famine – A History in Four Lives Personal Accounts of the Great Irish Potato Famine. Dublin: Gill Books, 2012. https://b-ok.cc/iread er/11743229.

Gráda, Cormac Ó. The Great Irish Famine. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995.

Gráda, Cormac Ó. “Famine, Trauma and Memory.” Béaloideas 69 (2001): 121. https://doi.org/1 0.2307/20520760.

Gray, Peter. “Was the Great Irish Famine a Colonial Famine?” East/West: Journal of Ukrainian Studies 8, no. 1 (2021): 159–72. https://doi.org/10.21226/ewjus643.

Kinealy, Christine. The Great Irish Famine: Impact, Ideology and Rebellion. Basingstoke:Palgrave, 2002.

Kinealy, Christine, Jason King, and Gerard Moran, eds. History of the Irish Famine. Routledge, 2018.

McGowan, Mark G. “The Famine Plot Revisited: A Reassessment of the Great Irish Famine as Genocide.” Genocide Studies International 11, no. 1 (2017): 87–104. https://doi.org/10.3 138/gsi.11.1.04.

Sherman, Jill. The Irish Potato Famine: A Cause-and-Effect Investigation. Minneapolis: Lerner Publications, 2017.

Solar, Peter. “Why Ireland Starved and the Big Issues in Pre-Famine Irish Economic History.” Irish Economic and Social History 42, no. 1 (2015): 62–75. https://doi.org/10.7227/iesh.42.1.4.

Yager, Tom. “Mass Eviction in the Mullet Peninsula during and after the Great Famine.” Irish Economic and Social History 23, no. 1 (1996): 24–44. https://doi.org /10.1177/033248939602300103.