Margot Minardi. Making Slavery History: Abolitionism and the Politics of Memory in Massachusetts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 240 pp. $49.95, cloth, ISBN 978-0-19-537937-2.
Reviewed by Jef Fortney
Published on H-CivWar (March, 2012)
Commissioned by Hugh F. Dubrulle (Saint Anselm College)
According to Margot Minardi in Making Slav‐ Historical narratives written by Jeremy Belk‐ ery History, the history of the American Revolu‐ nap and other early historians in the wake of the tion taught in classrooms for generations, com‐ Revolution emphasized the extent to which aboli‐ plete with a runaway slave as frst martyr and an tionism based on “popular sentiment” ended slav‐ African poet as international celebrity, “owes as ery in Massachusetts--while ignoring the large much to Massachusetts activists and historians in number of “Bay Staters (who) did not share his the nineteenth century as it does to Crispus At‐ [Belknap’s] antislavery views” (p. 20). Further tucks or Phillis Wheatley themselves” (p. 12). Mi‐ complicating this issue were accounts of census nardi embraces the framework of historical mem‐ takers instructed to conduct their counts in such a ory to revisit “the fundamental question of recent way that slaves would not be recorded in the 1790 social history--‘who makes history?’”--including census. Moreover, a law passed in 1788 banning who disappeared, who reappeared, and what this “African or negro” people from living in Massa‐ meant for understanding ideology and identity in chusetts undermined the historical concept of lib‐ Massachusetts (p. 11). Over the course of fve erty for all races espoused in Belknap’s historical chapters, Minardi investigates stories about slaves narrative (p. 29). Yet, Balknap’s interpretation of and the founding of the country which were told emancipation and liberty by popular, Revolution‐ and retold to ft the political as well as social moti‐ ary sentiment was propagated in spite of these in‐ vations of the purveyor of each story. These in‐ convenient facts, frmly placing itself within the clude the often disguised or accentuated presence popular memory of Massachusetts’ white citizens. of blacks in paintings, the carefully chore‐ Minardi skillfully demonstrates that the sig‐ ographed memorial dedications, the vigilantly nifcance of these events was not that historians framed sensibility of Phyllis Wheatley, and the continued to extol a slanted and incomplete histo‐ disappearance and resurgence of Crispus Attucks. ry for ensuing decades, but that this history dic‐ H-Net Reviews tated the beliefs and actions of Bay Staters in fu‐ ends. For whites, Wheatley could be used to rep‐ ture encounters with the slave question. No resent the highest examples of white gentility and longer were they able to examine the Missouri black respectability within socially mandated question independently or in an unbiased way; frameworks. For blacks and abolitionists, Wheat‐ their history, as they saw it, dictated that as heirs ley’s sophistication and elegance demonstrated of a tradition of liberty they were obligated to the potential for a post-abolition society. There‐ lead the charge against slavery. When facing the fore, the ways Attucks and Wheatley, among oth‐ question of whether Massachusetts was any dif‐ ers, “made history were constrained by the ways ferent from Missouri, this history obligated Bay in which others made history out of them” (p. Staters to answer emphatically, “Yes!” 100). Nearly everything known about Wheatley While sanctifying their own benevolent ac‐ originated from the rehearsed observations of tions following the Revolution, Minardi demon‐ others. Anecdotes about Wheatley frequently ap‐ strates that Bay Staters commemorated the actual peared in biographies which reveal perceptions of black population only within a selective frame‐ racial norms in Massachusetts. Each biographer work of subservience and deference towards characterizes Wheatley as a credit to her race. Yet, white Americans. A clear example comes from in the stories they present, it is clear that Wheat‐ ley’s masters’ descendants argued that Wheatley’s Primus Hall, a free black who enlisted in the 5th respectability originated with her humble and Massachusetts Regiment in 1776 and was present modest demeanor which led to her habit of ac‐ at the surrender of General Burgoyne at Saratoga. cepting inherent exclusion from white social en‐ Hall himself was noted for his habit of regaling gagements (such as afternoon tea) until she re‐ anyone present with stories of his wartime en‐ ceived invitations from her betters. This model of deavors; however, printed materials after his reverence leading to respectability repeatedly ap‐ death “reveal the persistence of the idea that pears in anecdotes regarding historical remem‐ black men’s primary role in the Revolution was a brances of “respectable” free blacks. Yet, Minardi servile one” (p. 65). An oft-recited story of George notes that multiple interpretations of the histori‐ Washington insisting that the bedless Primius Hall cal accounts were drawn to ft varying goals. The share his straw became the primary public recol‐ same accounts that white readers associated with lection of the man--not as a story of Revolutionary reverence, the abolitionist Liberator interpreted soldiers ignoring racial identities, but rather of a as ties of love binding master and slave--“an indi‐ generous General George Washington looking cator of the transformation to come” following kindly upon a servant. Thus, “the mainstream emancipation (p. 106). press could praise Hall’s faithfulness as a servant and his association with Washington, but Hall’s Akin to Wheatley, selective and varying com‐ work on behalf of ‘liberty of the race’ would at memoration of Crispus Attucks allowed abolition‐ best pass unnoticed and at worst be scorned” (p . ists to coopt the largely forgotten fgure as a mar‐ 68). It would take ffty years and an ofcial act of tyred symbol of ties between free blacks and of Congress to acknowledge Hall’s contribution to the fght for American liberty. This shift occurred the Revolution as a soldier and not servant. during the tumultuous 1850s amid fears of the slave power and discontent regarding the fugitive Aside from Hall, the variable historical status slave law. An explosion of works in print and por‐ of better-known fgures like Phillis Wheatley and trait recast Attucks as the frst martyr for liberty, Crispus Attucks demonstrate the ways in which embracing artistic representation identical to black and white Bay Staters selectively shaped John Trumbull’s iconic The Death of General War‐ and reshaped historical memory to ft various ren at Bunker Hill (1786). These images of Attucks
2 H-Net Reviews charging British soldiers and lying wounded in Making Slavery History with and against Joanne the arms of comrades complete with accounts of Pope Melish’s Disowning Slavery (1998) and black heroism in the Revolution were aimed at Shane White and Graham J. White’s Stylin’: “rehabilitating black men’s image from the femi‐ African American Expressive Culture from Its Be‐ nization of romantic racism” (p. 148). William ginnings to the Zoot Suit (1998) for a more com‐ Cooper Nell, a black activist in Massachusetts, rec‐ prehensive perspective. ognized that these images served the purpose of This book takes an important step forward in connecting blacks--both past and present--with the feld of historical memory. Those critical of the the act of fghting for American liberty. Therefore, applicability of this genre will be hard-pressed to exploiting the “mutually generative relationship ignore the signifcance of memory on beliefs and between the past and the present,” Nell and other subsequent actions of Bay Staters in the Revolu‐ activists employed Massachusetts’ Revolutionary tion to the Civil War. Minardi conclusively demon‐ history to further an abolitionist agenda (p. 171). strates that for these people, memory--passed Sources for Minardi’s work range from tradi‐ through biased stories, memorials, and staged cel‐ tional historical accounts to portraits, pamphlets, ebrations--infuenced how they found their own and monuments themselves. Monument dedica‐ historical identity. Once this identity was con‐ tions, as well as the construction of the monu‐ structed, the weight of history guided Bay Staters’ ments themselves, Minardi argues, represented opinions and actions regarding slavery. Essential‐ the eforts of sons and grandsons of revolutionar‐ ly, the constant presence and burden of history ies to make their own history out of “parchment aided in forming new history. Skillfully written in and stone” (p. 74). Examining the careful planning a sweeping and engaging manner, this books de‐ of each aspect of memorial celebrations, specif‐ serves a wide readership among scholars of slav‐ cally those at Bunker Hill, reinforces the notion ery, memory, and the antebellum and early re‐ that celebrating and creating history frequently public periods. At the same time, this work could collided. easily be incorporated into undergraduate cour‐ If anything, the only major drawbacks to this ses and appreciated by general readers. work are the author’s brevity and laser-like focus on constructed history infuencing future histori‐ facts cal events. To be sure, these features are in many ways commendable, only becoming shortcomings ing to the extent that the bigger picture of state and in which national historical context takes a back seat to , one memory. For example, the presence of slavery in Massachusetts is adeptly chronicled, but absent identical are the economic connections between Massachu‐ shapes setts, slavery, and the national economy. Econom‐ as ic considerations probably infuenced conscious e eforts to make slavery “disappear.” Additionally, Minardi’s exploration of emerging African Ameri‐ O can identity in the North within the context of turning to reinterpreting historical accounts leaves readers in wanting more on African American culture. Therefore, this reader would recommend reading
3 H-Net Reviews
If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-civwar
Citation: Jef Fortney. Review of Minardi, Margot. Making Slavery History: Abolitionism and the Politics of Memory in Massachusetts. H-CivWar, H-Net Reviews. March, 2012.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=33448
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
4