Copyright by Sara Melissa Pullum-Piñón 2002
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Copyright by Sara Melissa Pullum-Piñón 2002 The Dissertation Committee for Sara Melissa Pullum-Piñón Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Conspicuous Display and Social Mobility: a Comparison of 1850s Boston and Charleston Elites Committee: _________________________________ Shearer Davis Bowman, Supervisor _________________________________ Neil Kamil _________________________________ Susan Marshall _________________________________ Gunther Peck _________________________________ James Sidbury Conspicuous Display and Social Mobility: a Comparison of 1850s Boston and Charleston Elites by Sara Melissa Pullum-Piñón, B.A., M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May, 2002 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my colleagues at the University of Texas for their encouragement and support. My advisor, Dave Bowman, was consistently generous with his time and advice, from the beginning to the end of this long haul. I also thank my other committee members, especially Neil Kamil, for their ongoing advice as the project took shape. My time in graduate school was enriched by my collaborations with Myron Gutmann, who shared with me many opportunities for interdisciplinary study. The archives I visited during this research generously shared their materials and knowledge with me, making this work possible. Most helpful were the Massachusetts Historical Society, the South Carolina Historical Society, and the College of Charleston. Finally, I would like to thank my parents, who have encouraged me throughout this endeavor, influencing me personally and intellectually as only close friends can. My husband, Enrique Piñón, has been my staunchest ally in this process, believing in my abilities without question and remaining unhesitant to say so. I dedicate this work to him. iv Conspicuous Display and Social Mobility: a Comparison of 1850s Boston and Charleston Elites Publication No._____________ Sara Melissa Pullum-Piñón, Ph.D. The University of Texas at Austin, 2002 Supervisor: Shearer Davis Bowman This dissertation compares the conspicuous display of elites in Boston and Charleston during the 1850s. The analysis stems from an interest in the regional differences of the Northern and Southern United States in the years just prior to the Civil War. The two regions had many similarities, including a substantial and ongoing Atlantic influence. Yet at the same time, the differences engendered by the “peculiar institution” of slavery in the South ran deep. Members of the social and economic elite of both the North and South acted within unique belief systems and sets of personal behavior limits. The major questions of this work arise from the notion that a comparative approach can illuminate both similarities and differences. If the slave society of the South engendered a culture in which social mobility operated differently than it did in v the North, what were the broader ramifications? Did Bostonians and Charlestonians understand class identity in the same way? How did individuals of those cities determine the social status of others and project their own? Did the South’s patriarchy, perhaps stronger than that of the North, influence the expression of power through display? And, finally, how did members of the elite use conspicuous display as an interface with lower classes, including slaves, servants, and the recipients of charity? This research examines five elite families in each city, using their habits of conspicuous display to illuminate regional differences and similarities. The social structure of each city was different, with varying criteria for membership in the uppermost class. However, for those families at the top of the social ladder, public presentation was an important component of identity. Through a comparison of elite families in each city, this study tests the theses of Thorstein Veblen and Eugene Genovese. It asks whether conspicuous display of wealth and style operated differently in the antebellum North and the South, as Genovese argues. It also tests the application of Veblen’s systems of social display of wealth as a means of class affirmation to an earlier era of American history than Veblen himself intended. vi Table of Contents Introduction...............................................................................................................1 PART ONE: THEORY AND BACKGROUND 5 Chapter One: Boston and Charleston in the 1850s.................................................5 Chapter Two: Elite Families in Boston and Charleston in the 1850s...................31 Chapter Three: Social Mobility and Conspicuous Consumption in 1850s America ........................................................................................................65 PART TWO: BOSTON AND CHARLESTON FAMILIES 89 Chapter Four: Conspicuous Display among Children and Young Adults.............89 Chapter Five: The Public and the Private: Social Life and Conspicuous Display........................................................................................................115 Chapter Six: Conspicuous Display and Gender ..................................................143 Chapter Seven: Consumption, Class, Slavery, and Charity ................................164 Conclusion: The Nature of Conspicuous Display in Boston and Charleston......192 Bibliography ........................................................................................................200 Vita… ..................................................................................................................209 vii Introduction This research stems from an interest in the regional differences of the Northern and Southern United States at the time of the Civil War. The two regions had many similarities, including a substantial ongoing Atlantic influence. Yet at the same time, the differences engendered by the “peculiar institution” of slavery in the South ran deep. Slavery had continued into the nineteenth century in the South, though it had faded in the North, due to profound economic structural differences between the two regions. The effects of that continuation permeated in large and small ways the economic and cultural life of Southerners. The character of Southern slavery has generated considerable debate, from the antebellum era to the present. The way in which contemporaries understood the institution varied with their location, race, and class membership. Twentieth century historical work has offered additional analyses, all also considerably influenced by the social and cultural perspectives of the writer. Some historians have attracted criticism with their apparent willingness to believe in the benign character of slavery that many slave owners preferred to offer for public consumption. Others have denied that Southern planters had any exceptional aspects that differentiated them from bourgeois American capitalists. The most productive answer, perhaps, lies somewhere between those two extremes. Whether the slave South was truly a pre-modern state in the mold of European feudalism,1 or an amalgam of purely for-profit enterprises in which 1 Eugene Genovese, The Political Economy of Slavery: Studies in the Economy and Society of the Slave South (New York: Pantheon Books, 1965). 1 slaves were no more than economic tools,2 it was certainly different for having race-based slavery. By comparing two regions that many contemporary citizens believed were innately incompatible, I hope to gain a better sense of the workings of both societies. Members of the social and economic elite of both the North and South acted within unique belief systems and sets of personal behavior limits. In that sense, regional differences went far beyond economic mechanisms, shaping even the smallest gesture of individuals. Systematic comparison brings similarities and differences between two subjects into better focus, suggesting causality and influence within each setting where it was not previously apparent. Isolating the characteristics of the North and South in relief to each other highlights their originality. At the same time, the comparative method does not deny the presence of either contrasting or analogous evidence.3 George Fredrickson suggests two strains of intent in recent comparative history: the study of the particularities of specified societies and the elucidation of a set of more generalizable theories.4 This research leans significantly to that latter sociological tradition, in that one of its goals is to find meaning that extends beyond the actual historical subject of these two antebellum cities. Through a historical comparison of two antebellum regions, I hope to find a better understanding of the application of a particular set of sociological theories about class membership and the outward expression of group identity. 2 Robert William Fogel and Stanley L. Engerman, Time on the Cross: The Economics Of American Negro Slavery (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1974). 3 Shearer Davis Bowman, Masters and Lords (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), pp. 15- 16. 4 George Fredrickson, The Comparative Imagination: On the History of Racism, Nationalism, and Social Movements (Berkeley: The University of California Press, 1997), pp. 23-24. 2 The major questions of this work arise from the notion that the examination of a set of related qualities of an important city