Moving History Forward: American Women Activists, the Search for a Usable Past and

the Creation of Public Memory, 1848-1998

By Nicole M. Eaton

B.A., Brandeis University, 2001

M.A., Simmons College, 2004

A.M., Brown University, 2005

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

in the Department of History at Brown University

Providence, Rhode Island

May 2012

© Copyright 2012 by Nicole M. Eaton

This dissertation by Nicole M. Eaton is accepted in its present form

by the Department of History as satisfying the

dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Recommended to the Graduate Council

Date ______Mari Jo Buhle, Advisor

Date ______Steven Lubar, Reader

Date ______Michael Vorenberg, Reader

Approved by the Graduate Council

Date ______Peter M. Weber, Dean of the Graduate School

iii

Nicole Eaton, Curriculum Vitae December 15, 1978, New York, NY

Education

Brown University, Providence, RI Ph.D., History, May 2012 A.M., History, May 2005 Simmons College, Boston, MA M.A., Gender/Cultural Studies, May 2004 Brandeis University, Waltham, MA B.A. with honors in Fine Arts, May 2001 Syracuse University, Study Abroad Program Florence, Italy, Spring 2000

Awards

Coordinating Council for Women in History Ida B. Wells Graduate Student Award, 2008 Carrie Chapman Catt Center for Women and Politics, Iowa State University Carrie Chapman Catt Prize for Research on Women and Politics, Honorable Mention Award, 2007 The Huntington Library John Brockway Huntington Foundation Fellow, 2007 Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College Margaret Storrs Grierson Scholar-in-Residence, 2007 Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University Dissertation Grant, 2007 Brown University University Dissertation Fellowship, 2008- 2009 Robert W. Morse Endowed Travel Fellowship, 2007-2008

Teaching Experience

Simmons College, Adjunct Professor “Monuments and Memorials,” Graduate Seminar, Summer 2011 “Cold War Culture,” Graduate and Undergraduate Seminar, Fall 2010 Brown University, Graduate Assistant “Practice of History Workshop” Graduate Seminar, Fall 2008 Bristol Community College, Co- Instructor “Future History: Online Primary Sources in the American History Classroom,” TAH Grant Program, Graduate Seminar, Spring 2007 Brown University, Summer Studies, Co-Instructor “A-Bombs, Milkshakes and Love-Ins, 1940-1970,” 2009 and 2010 “Women’s History Through Popular Culture, 1945 to the present,” 2007

iv

Brown University, Teaching Assistant “Europe Since the French Revolution,” Prof. Joan Richards, Spring 2007 “U.S. Politics and Society Since 1945,” Prof. Robert Self, Fall 2006 “Civil War and Reconstruction,” Prof. Michael Vorenberg, Spring 2006 “American History Survey to 1877,” Prof. Michael Vorenberg, Fall 2005 Simmons College, Teaching Assistant “Women and Art,” Prof. Joyce Cohen, Fall 2003 “Women in U.S. History Since 1890,” Prof. Laura Prieto, Spring 2003

Presentations

Organization of American Historians, Annual Meeting, 2009 Paper entitled, “The Historical Is Political: Second Wave Feminism and the Popular Use of the Past” Mellon Graduate Workshop, Brown University, 2008-2009 Paper entitled, “Women, Public Memory and National Heritage Since 1976” New England Historical Association Fall Conference, 2008 Paper entitled, “Transforming the Landscape of History: Rose Arnold Powell and the Mount Rushmore Memorial” Schlesinger Library’s Summer Seminar on Gender History: Sequels to the 1960s, Radcliffe Institute For Advanced Study, Harvard University, 2008 Paper entitled, “The Historical is Political: Second Wave Feminism and the Search for a Usable Past” Annual Women’s Studies Conference at the University of Connecticut, 2008 Paper entitled, “‘Women’s History is Woman’s Right’: The Power of the Past in Creating a Politics of Empowerment” Graduate Humanities Forum, Annual Conference, University of Pennsylvania, 2008 Paper entitled, “‘Enough About History, Let’s Hear about Herstory’: The Search for a Usable Past and the Creation of a Feminist Identity during the Women’s Liberation Movement”

Professional Service

Planning Member, The 3rd Annual Interdisciplinary Graduate Student Conference, Brown University, 2007 Graduate Student Reader, Brown Undergraduate Journal of History , History Department, Brown University, 2007 and 2008 Judge, National History Day Contest, Lincoln School, Providence, RI, 2005 - 2008

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project would not have been possible without generous financial assistance.

In particular, I would like to thank the Graduate School and Department of History at

Brown University. There is no better way to think about history than deep in the sources and I was fortunate to have been given the space and time to really get to know my material through the generosity of two residential fellowships. The months I spent researching as a John Brockway Huntington Foundation Fellow at The Huntington

Library and as a Margaret Storrs Grierson Scholar-in-Residence at the Sophia Smith

Collection, Smith College greatly improved this project. In addition, I would like to thank the Schlesinger Library and the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study for supporting my research with a dissertation grant. Finally, this dissertation was awarded an Ida B. Wells

Graduate Student Award from the Coordinating Council for Women in History and a

Carrie Chapman Catt Prize for Research on Women and Politics Honorable Mention

Award from the Carrie Chapman Catt Center for Women and Politics, Iowa State

University that allowed me to continue my research and writing at crucial junctures.

I appreciated the many archivists and public historians who took the time to offer advice and guidance on collections and sources that made researching 150 years of history a somewhat more manageable undertaking. In particular, I would like to thank

Cathy Cherbosque at the Huntington Library, Vivien Rose of the National Park Service,

Sarah Hutcheon and Ellen M. Shea at the Schlesinger Library, Kathy Jans-Duffy of the

vi

Seneca Falls Historical Society, Jennifer Krafchik of the Sewall-Belmont House and

Museum and Amy Hague of the Sophia Smith Collection as well as the staff of the

Library of Congress, New York University, University of Rochester, Smithsonian

Institution Archives and the Rockefeller Library at Brown University.

I feel fortunate to have had so many dedicated mentors shepherding this project.

Michael Vorenberg helped shape my thinking about historical memory and provided feedback on the final draft of this dissertation. Steven Lubar directed my prelim field in public history, laying crucial groundwork for my research, and read multiple drafts of this dissertation, always with patience and encouragement that I greatly appreciated. Lastly, I am deeply grateful to my advisor, Mari Jo Buhle whose dedication to the field of women’s history has been an inspiration. It is a testament to Mari Jo’s long career that she is cited in this work as both a primary and secondary source and it is an honor to have been part of her last cohort of graduate students. Mari Jo shared and encouraged my interest in the history of women’s history and gave me free rein to think big. This dissertation was undoubtedly improved by her insightful commentary and unfailing faith in the project and my ability, even when I had doubts.

Additionally, I am grateful to fellow researchers, historians and panelists who offered helpful feedback on my research including Rosalyn Baxandall, Judith Bennett,

Julie Des Jardins, Kathy Peiss and Lisa Tetrault. I would also like to thank Nancy Cott and the workshop participants of the Schlesinger Library’s Summer Seminar on Gender

History as well as Corey D.B. Walker and the members of the Mellon Graduate

Workshop at Brown University for reading early chapter drafts of this dissertation. I am grateful to Nancy Scott of Brandeis University for introducing me (many years ago) to

vii

the history of women in art, an interest reflected in parts of this dissertation. I owe a special thank you to Laura Prieto for teaching me historical method, encouraging me on this path to the Ph.D. and for continuing to be a source of guidance both professionally and personally.

Friendships throughout graduate school helped sustain me through the researching and writing of this dissertation. I would especially like to thank my “wingwomen,” Lara

Couturier, Jessica Foley, Paige Meltzer and Stacie Taranto without whom I would not own a complete collection of Susan B. Anthony coins. I am grateful to have had such a wonderful writing group for their camaraderie as well as helpful criticism of my work.

Additionally, over the course of this project, Natalina Earls, Christopher Jones, Mark

Robbins, and Gabe Rosenberg provided companionship and feedback on drafts. Thanks are owed as well to my oldest and dearest friend, Liz Sherer, for the use of her couch on research trips to D.C.

Lastly, thank you to my family. From two pounds to now, my parents Richard and

Judith Eaton have tried their best to give me every opportunity to succeed in life, even with such premature beginnings. A special thanks to my mother for accompanying me to

Seneca Falls and Rochester. To my brother Jason Eaton for his humor and role model as a writer and to my aunt Janie Gustafson who lovingly cared for my son each week so I could write. To Nathan Eaton Brooks—you who made me a mother—thank you. I love you to the moon and back. Free to be, Nate, free to be. And finally, to my husband and best friend David Brooks who has provided emotional and technical support for this project, and indeed, every scholarly endeavor since our first year in college, I owe a deep debt of gratitude and love.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter One Introduction: On Creating a Usable Past, Women’s Rights and the Politics of History...... 1

Chapter Two Queen, Amazons and Founding Mothers: Women’s Rights and the Search for “Worthy Acts of Women” ...... 41

Chapter Three Claiming the Mantle of the Pioneers: Competing Memories in the Fight for Suffrage and the Equal Rights Amendment...... 94

Chapter Four “Lest they be a Sex Lost to History”: Preserving Women’s Rights between the First and Second Waves...... 146

Chapter Five The Historical is Political: Second Wave Feminism and the Search for a Usable Past...... 206

Chapter Six Demanding Recognition in Our History: Women, Public Memory and National Heritage since 1976 ...... 264

Epilogue From The Dinner Party to the Tea Party: Reproductive Rights and Recent Controversies in the Feminist Usable Past...... 322

Bibliography...... 333

ix

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION: ON CREATING A USABLE PAST, WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND THE POLITICS OF HISTORY

“The past is an inexhaustible storehouse of apt attitudes and adaptable ideas; it opens of itself at the touch of desire; it yields up, now this treasure, now that, to anyone who comes to it armed with a capacity for personal choices. If, then, we cannot use the past our professors offer us, is there any reason why we should not create others of our own?” --- Van Wyck Brooks, “On Creating a Usable Past,” 1918

This dissertation grew out of unchecked curiosity. While conducting research for a seminar paper at the Schlesinger Library, I came across a folder labeled, “Women’s

Rights Centennial, 1948.” I wondered what such a commemoration entailed. It seemed an odd time for such a celebration, with the lack of a mass women’s movement. I was intrigued but the material was unrelated to my seminar paper and I had a train to catch. I did not open the folder. Months passed without a return research trip and still I thought about that slim folder. What kind of historical memory was constructed in 1948, a time of contradictory messages about American feminism? What meaning did the pioneers of the women’s movement hold for future generations? What other feminist historical traditions existed?

And yet, if I am to truly trace the origins of this project, the roots of this dissertation were most likely planted even earlier when I viewed the Smithsonian exhibit,

From Parlor to Politics: Women and Reform, 1890-1925 as a young girl. When the exhibit opened in 1990, it pioneered ways of exhibiting women’s social history and political culture. When I saw the exhibit, I took for granted its innovation but nonetheless

1

was struck by the objects and imagery on display. My memory of the exhibit is of women dressed in white, wearing sashes for suffrage. I recall my mother—who had recently begun taking me to women’s political rallies—saying, “You and I, we would have been suffragists and marched for women’s votes.” That moment stays with me because it encapsulates on a personal level much of my academic interests, namely the relationship between women’s past and women’s social activism. While all viewers of the exhibit undoubtedly took away different meanings, for me the message was clear, and I was able to make connections between contemporary feminist concerns and women’s history.

Of course, at the time, I did not know of the long fight for historical recognition by American women activists. I did not know about the powerful connection that countless feminists had drawn between the past and present in their social protest. I did not know, for example, of Elsie Hill and her “crusade in the interest of the neglected women of history.” 1 When Hill, a teacher and suffragist, was debating one of her male students on the question of woman suffrage in 1914, she had an epiphany about the importance of women’s history. When the student argued women did not deserve the vote because they had never done anything worthwhile, she realized “that the only women I remembered from my own school days were Isabella, and Elizabeth and Pocahontas and

Molly Pitcher, and right there I began to understand for the first time some of the causes that lead to the average man’s real opinions about women.” From that moment Hill

“determined to find out just what the children of today are being taught about the women

1 Winifred Mallon, “The Forgotten Women of History,” The Suffragist . August 1, 1914, pg. 7.

2

of history.” 2 Hill and members of the College Equal Suffrage League lobbied for change in schools by demanding that discussion of women’s influence be included in text books.

Similarly, I did not know about Mrs. Raymond Brown, managing director of the

Woman’s Journal and former president of the New York State Woman Suffrage

Association, who undertook in 1927 what would prove to be a disappointing search.

Looking for picture art that depicted women in historical scenes for the magazine’s cover,

Mrs. Brown surveyed museums, historical associations, state houses and private collections all over New York. Yet her canvassing of art work turned up, with few exceptions, only the information that woman—and her part in nation-building—was virtually no where to be found in paintings commemorating American history. Mrs.

Brown and the Woman Citizen Corporation, armed with this new knowledge, decided to do something about women’s historical invisibility and over the next year commissioned twelve paintings that portrayed women’s contributions to the progress of the country from the first landing of the Pilgrim Mothers to Susan B. Anthony’s Trial for Voting, including representations of Sacagawea, Anne Hutchinson, Mary Lyon, Clara Barton and scenes of the Underground Railroad and Temperance reformers. 3

Finally, I did not know about feminist Caroline Sparks, who, 50 years after Mrs.

Brown’s historical hunt, was likewise impelled to make women’s past visible. While in

D.C. for a march for women’s equality in 1977, Sparks accidentally stumbled upon a statue of women’s rights pioneers in the crypt of the U.S. Capitol, previously not

2 Ibid.

3 Account taken from “Milestones in the March of American Women,” clipping, Christian Science Monitor , 1928, Clippings (General) Vol. 4, Susan B. Anthony Ephemera Collection, Henry R. Huntington Library, San Marino, CA (hereafter: HL) and “Milestones in Women’s Progress,” Woman’s Journal , August, 1927, pg. 35.

3

knowing of its existence. Discovering the statue inspired Sparks to develop a Feminist

Walking Tour of Capitol Hill, in order to allow women to learn about women’s fight for equality. She related how almost 20 years later, “women still tell me that they ‘stumble’ upon the statue, never having known its story.” 4 The tours were “deliberately designed to tell women they have and can change history. We’re standing in a long line of women who went before us.” 5

This dissertation demonstrates that Elsie Hill, Mrs. Brown and Caroline Sparks were not unique in their quests. Instead, “Moving History Forward: American Women

Activists, the Search for a Usable Past and the Creation of Public Memory, 1848-1998” argues that history has been a fundamental part of women’s activism for social change and re-examines the history of American feminism through a new lens of historical memory. Like Hill, Brown and Sparks, reform-minded women have argued that women’s historical contributions have been overlooked. While Hill chose to enact change through the school system, Sparks through offering walking tours, and Mrs. Brown literally painted in the historical gaps, women activists have chosen to rectify the problem through various means including educational initiatives, historical writing, the building of archives and memorials, holding exhibitions, organizing commemorations and using the past in political protest. Yet, no matter how they did it, in constructing a usable past, women activists forged powerful links between past, present and future.

4 U.S. Congress, Senate, Caroline H. Sparks, Ph.D., Chair of the 75th Anniversary Women’s Rights Festival and March and Co-Chair of the “Move the Statue” campaign, speaking on the Relocation of the Portrait Monument, 104th Cong., 1st sess., Congressional Record S10563 (July 24, 1995).

5 Sarah Peasley, “The Feminist Walking Tour,” The Washington Post , September 22, 1989, pg. B5.

4

Combining social, cultural and political history, “Moving History Forward” explores the place of the past in the struggle for women’s rights. Questions of gender, historical memory, and social movements are at the heart of this study. “Moving History

Forward” investigates, for example: what has a feminist usable past looked like? How has the search for a usable past created a collective memory among women activists? How has history been used to claim political rights? How has history shaped the political imagination? What have been the successes and failures of creating a public history for women?

While women’s history is at the center of this project, hoping to move the discussion of women and history beyond written texts, the subject of inquiry is neither women’s historiography 6 nor the creation of women’s studies as an academic field. 7 As such, this dissertation examines history as pertaining not only to textual and documentary

6 For works on women and historiography see Nina Baym, American Women Writers and the Work of History, 1790-1860 (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1995); Natalie Zemon Davis, “Gender and Genre: Women as Historical Writers, 1400-1820” in Beyond Their Sex: Learned Women of the European Past , edited by Patricia Labalme (New York: 1980), 153-82; Julie Des Jardins, Women and the Historical Enterprise in America :Gender, Race, and the Politics of Memory, 1880-1945 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003); Ellen Carol DuBois, Woman Suffrage and Women's Rights (New York: New York University Press, 1998), 210-238; Joan Scott “American Women Historians, 1884- 1984”in Gender and the Politics of History (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999); Kathryn Kish Sklar, “American Female Historians in Context, 1770-1930,” Feminist Studies 3, no. 1/2 (Autumn 1975): 171-184. Bonnie G. Smith, “The Contribution of Women to Modern Historiography in Great Britain, France, and the United States, 1750-1940,” The American Historical Review 89, no. 3 (Jun., 1984): 709- 732; Bonnie G. Smith, The Gender of History: Men, Women, and Historical Practice (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998). Mary Spongberg, Writing Women's History since the Renaissance (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002).

7 Examples of the scholarship on women’s studies include: Eileen Boris and Nupur Chaudhuri, ed. Voices of Women Historians: the Personal, the Political, the Professional (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999); Marilyn J. Boxer, When Women ask the Questions: Creating Women’s Studies in America . (Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998); Ellen Carol Dubois, et all, Feminist Scholarship: Kindling in the Groves of Academe (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985); Florence Howe, ed. The Politics of Women’s Studies: Testimony from Thirty Founding Mothers . (New York: Feminist Press, 2000); Jean F. O'Barr, Feminism in Action: Building Institutions and Community through Women’s Studies (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1994); Joan Wallach Scott, “Feminism’s History,” Journal of Women’s History 16, no 2 (2004): 10-29. Deborah Gray White, ed. Telling Histories: Black Women Historians in the Ivory Tower (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008).

5

sources but instead expands the idea of history to include, as David Glassberg explains,

“how various versions of the past are communicated in society through a multiplicity of intuitions and media.” 8 Through an exploration of popular, movement and public history, we can better see what the past has meant on a more personal level. The dissertation, then, attempts to understand the role of the past in everyday acts of activism, how historical memory works in action—not in theory.

To understand the creation of a usable past for women activists, this study explores the shifting boundaries between the personal, the popular and the public uses of history. In order to investigate the changes and continuities in how successive generations of activists formed a historical consciousness, “Moving History Forward” spans 150 years. Whether as amateur historians, political protestors or historic commemorators, the past shaped the political imagination of women activists. “Moving History Forward” focuses on nationally recognized leaders like Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton,

Alice Paul, Carrie Chapman Catt, Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan as well as lesser known women such Lillie Devereux Blake, Rose Arnold Powell, Betita Martinez, and C.

Delores Tucker.

“Moving History Forward” investigates what historian James Green has termed,

“movement history,” activists finding inspiration and instruction in the past. 9 Green defines movement history as “various sorts of historically conscious work by movement

8 David Glassberg, Sense of History: The Place of the Past in American Life (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2001), 9. In his discussion, Glassberg is drawing on Robert Redfield’s notion of the “social organization of tradition.”

9 James Green, Taking History to Heart: The Power of the Past in Building Social Movements (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2000), 1.

6

activists” that demonstrates “how people make their own history.” 10 This project, then, attempts to understand how women activists have engaged with the past and have participated in the making of history at the grassroots level. It explores history on the street, or more accurately, on the picket line, in the museum, in the archive, in the art studio, at the printing press and at the political rally.

The use of history by women activists has cut across generations. For example, the same impulse for a usable past inspired suffragists to uphold banners proclaiming

Susan B. Anthony’s quote “Failure is Impossible” and second wave feminists to carry banners that declared “Alice Paul We’re Here” when marching for the Equal Rights

Amendment. 11 In the same manner, the desire for historical traditions compelled suffragists to annually host Foremother’s Dinners and second wave feminists to observe

Women’s Equality Day and International Women’s Day. Further, the drive for reenactment crossed generations, for example, the National Woman’s Party recreation of the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention when the ERA was unveiled in 1923 shared much in common with the desire of second waver feminists to dress up as suffragists when marching in favor of the ERA in the 1970s. Thus have the threads of memory weaved in and out of the history of women’s activism. The particular demands of each generation have changed but the ever-present need of the past has remained a constant of American feminism.

10 Green, 3, 12.

11 See for example, photo showing suffragist Florence Jaffray “Daisy” Harriman holding a banner with the words “Failure Is Impossible,” Bain Collection, Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress and a photograph of five women carrying a banner which reads “Alice Paul We’re Here,” May 16, 1976, Folder: National Woman’s Party: Photographs: Identified groups, Alice Paul Papers, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA (hereafter: SL).

7

Movement history is only one part of the story, however. As historian Laurel

Thatcher Ulrich argues, “Well-behaved women make history when they do the unexpected, when they create and preserve records, and when later generations care.” 12

Alongside the search for a usable past has been the push to create a public history of women to preserve women’s history. As one scholar has written, public history is important because “It promises a society in which a broad public participates in the construction of its own history.” 13 Thus when women activists were not using history in their protest, they were protesting for history, demanding the inclusion of women in

American collective memory.

“Moving History Forward” explores how public history intersects with movement history. As feminist poet Adrienne Rich has written, “I believe strongly that visible testimony to the history of women’s struggle has an important role to play in carrying that struggle forward. It is the erasure of our past which makes it so uphill a path in the present.” 14 As her quote suggests, the preservation of women’s past had important ramifications for inspiring women’s activism. However, while exploring the overlap between public history and movement history, this dissertation illuminates the significant distinctions between history meant for public consumption and activist history created for social protest and movement-building. When women activists worked to create archives,

12 Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, Well-Behaved Women Seldom Make History (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007), 229.

13 Ronald J. Grele, “Whose Public? Whose History? What is The Goal of a Public Historian?” The Public Historian 5 (Winter 1981): 40-48.

14 Rich quoted by Charlotte Conable, U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Parks, Recreation, and Renewable Resources, The National Hostel System Act of 1980 and the Women’s Rights National Historic Park in New York: Hearing Before Subcommittee on Parks, Recreation, and Renewable Resources of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate Ninety-sixth Congress second session on S. 2263, A Bill to Provide For the Establishment of the Women’s Rights National Historic Park…September 8, 1980 (Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 1981), 118.

8

monuments and memorials they assisted in creating a history that presented women’s history to the larger public, not just activists. Not surprisingly, tensions surfaced in the creation of these historic sites over the relationship to the politics of feminism.

Most of the history discussed in this dissertation can be called popular history. I conceive of popular history as an overarching category that encompasses both movement and public history. Popular history is meant to entertain or instruct, but most of all, in this dissertation, it refers to history that is meant to inspire. It is for and of the people, not professional historians or academics. It is the type of history that allows people to engage on a personal level and find meaning in the past for the present. Unlike movement history it can be either political or non-political. The difference between two films can help illuminate this distinction. The documentary film the Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter

(1980) used oral history to explore women factory workers during World War II. This film rescued these largely forgotten historical heroines to make connections with the contemporary women’s labor movement that helped inspire women activists. In contrast, the Hollywood film, Swing Shift (1984) similarly explores women’s factory work during

WW II but catered to a non-activist audience by presenting a fictionalized story full of romance. Both films express the popular feminism of the times through engagement with the past yet the different tone and approach of the films illustrate the contrast between politically motivated and non-political popular history.

The popular history explored in this dissertation demonstrates how ordinary people have found extraordinary power in seeing their struggles as part of a collective past. For example, the popular search for a usable past manifested itself in the unearthing of historical symbols that were used to represent contemporary issues over identity and

9

politics. Many of these symbols could be found in feminist poster art that was popularized by women’s liberation groups and the feminist art movement. 15 The posters helped solidify common imagery, as for example, a poster advertising a Midwest Lesbian

Conference and Music Festival from 1974 makes clear. 16 The poster, “in celebration of amazons,” utilized the symbol of the labrys, a harvest tool and weapon believed to be used by amazons. The labrys became recognized as a symbol of lesbian feminist strength and determination. While largely mythical, the labrys and amazons were adopted as history, representing the desire to uncover a heroic and proud lesbian past. 17

As a social movement, feminism is not unique in turning to history as muse and educator. After many liberation struggles, activists have attempted to reconstruct and redefine their own history. 18 As historian Linda Gordon has suggested, “This turning of reality inside-out is a way of supplying the vision of a changed future, even if it is described in fantasies about the past.” 19 The feminist search for a usable past was part of a long effort by activists to deploy historical knowledge. Activists in other movements such as abolition, labor, civil rights, black power and gay liberation all found inspiration,

15 For more on the symbolism of women’s history in the feminist art movement, see Michelle Moravec, “Historicity and the Feminist Art Movement,” catalog essay for Doin’ It In Public , Otis Art Institute, part of Pacific Standard Time (Los Angeles: The Getty Institute, forthcoming).

16 The “In Celebration of Amazons” poster can be found at the CWLU Herstory Project, the online archives of the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union: http://www.cwluherstory.org/.

17 See for example, the labrys on the cover of Mary Daly, Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1978), and reference on page xvii.

18 Gerda Lerner, Why History Matters: Life and Thought (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 53.

19 Linda Gordon, “What Should Women’s Historians Do: Politics, Social Theory, & Women’s History,” Marxist Perspectives 3 (Fall 1978): 129.

10

empowerment and a collective identity through history. 20 Similarly, women activists in other countries, most notably in the British and Dutch suffrage movement focused energies on creating a strong historical memory. 21

The search for a usable past focused on recovering a lost heritage and forgotten heroines. The focus on historical role models has been a consistent and conscious act among women activists since the beginning of an organized movement for women’s rights in the United States in the 1830s and 1840s. A pantheon of feminist figures and significant events in the history of women emerged as activists created public rituals and invented traditions. Activists self-identified in part through the discovery of these foremothers and this knowledge bonded women together in a shared feminist community.

However, popular history or movement history often celebrated women in the past uncritically, focusing simply on uncovering role models for inspirational purposes.

Scholar Berenice Fisher, in her exploration of the meaning of role models, has written about the “very powerful longing for someone to guide us through the historical contradictions we face.” However, she warns, “With all our hearts, we want our role

20 For the abolition movement, see Mitchell A. Kachun, Festivals of Freedom: Memory and Meaning in African American Emancipation Celebrations, 1808-1915 (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press), 2003; Elizabeth Rauh Bethel, The Roots of African-American Identity: Memory and History in Free Antebellum Communities ( New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997) and Jeffrey Kerr-Ritchie, Rites of August First: Emancipation Day in the Black Atlantic World (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2007). For gay liberation, see for example, John D’Emilio, Making Trouble: Essays on Gay History, Politics, and the University (New York: Routledge, 1992) and for labor history see James Green, Taking History to Heart: The Power of the Past in Building Social Movements (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2000). For civil rights and black power, see for instance, Scott A. Sandage, “A Marble House Divided: The Lincoln Memorial, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Politics of Memory, 1939-1963,” The Journal of American History 80, no. 1. (June 1993): 135-167; William L. Van Deburg, New day in Babylon: the Black Power Movement and American Culture, 1965-1975 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992).

21 See Laura Mayhall, “Creating the ‘Suffragette Spirit’: British Feminism and the Historical Imagination,” in Archive Stories: Facts, Fictions, and the Writing of History , edited by Antoinette Burton (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005), 232- 350 and Maria Grever, “The Pantheon of Feminist Culture: Women’s Movements and the Organization of Memory,” Gender & History 9, no. 2 (August 1997): 364-374.

11

model to be out there. But, even though we may find a variety of people to help us in this struggle, and even though we may adopt some of them as role models, these people and the models we make of them are not the same.” 22 Activists had to find a balance between a past that touched the heart with unearthing women’s history with all its historical complexity. This basic contradiction often made it difficult to reconcile competing tensions among activists about which women to honor, what meaning these women held for contemporary activism or even whether to celebrate role models at all.

Three main themes suggest the ways that American women activists constructed a political and historical identity: challenging women’s historical invisibility; using the past in social protest; and creating a gendered public history. “Moving History Forward” thus explores how activists used the past in their social protest as well as how these women worked to reshape the larger cultural landscape. In articulating feminist interpretations of history, activists claimed the right to a past of their own. These women gave their own meaning to history, proclaiming loudly that history matters. In fighting women’s exclusion from the historical record, activists constructed arguments about the nature of history and women’s contributions to society. While Jane Austen famously declared that history was a strictly masculine affair with “hardly any women at all,” women’s rights advocates redefined history to include feminine accomplishments.

History was a fundamental part of creating a women’s political culture. Just as women were entering the public sphere and claiming political rights, they were also forging a gendered historical consciousness. Understanding this relationship between claiming the public, the political and the historical tells us much about the transition to

22 Berenice Fisher, “Wandering in the Wilderness: The Search for Women Role Models,” Signs 13, no. 2 (Winter 1988): 218.

12

new roles for women. By questioning women’s historical invisibility, women’s rights advocates reinterpreted the significance of female influence, in the process constructing an argument about women’s capabilities that bolstered demands for greater rights.

A Usable Past, Invented Traditions and Les Lieux de Mémoire

This work draws on a wide array of scholarship concerning cultural politics, social history, intellectual history, public history and collective memory. However, while engaging with the recent scholarship on memory studies, in many ways, this dissertation addresses an older question concerning “a search for a usable past.” It was just three months after the House of Representatives passed the Anthony Amendment granting woman suffrage in 1918, that literary critic Van Wyck Brooks first wrote about a “usable past.” In his foundational essay, Brooks asks the important question, “is this the only possible past?” According to Brooks, “If we need another past so badly, is it inconceivable that we might discover one, that we might even invent one?” 23 In creating a usable past, people in the present must find what is important to them in history and by doing so, he argues, “we might throw an entirely new face not only over the past but over the future also.” “Knowing that others have desired the things we desire and have encountered the same obstacles,” Brooks declares, directs the present “that in some degree time has begun to face those obstacles down and make the way straight for us.” 24

Foreshadowing later discussions of collective memory, Brooks questions, what should

“we elect to remember?” He suggests that “The more personally we answer this

23 Van Wyck Brooks, “On Creating a Usable Past,” Dial, April 11, 1918, pg. 339.

24 Brooks, 341.

13

question…the more likely we are to get a vital order out of the anarchy of the present.” 25

Brooks critiqued American literature based on his belief in the lack of an American national culture. He argued the paucity in culture resulted because there was no sense of being part of tradition or having a cultural memory. 26 Although Brooks’ essay focuses on rethinking the literary canon, he perceptively describes the search for meaning in the past that contemporary women suffragists were undergoing as they fought for the vote.

In the two decades following the publication, Brooks’ ideas about a usable past entered scholarly and popular lexicon. 27 Notably, the phrase resonated with the Old and

New Left as both the Depression era and the Sixties generations were marked by a profound need to engage with history. Holger Cahill, Director of the New Deal Federal

Art Project (FAP), and folklorist Constance Rourke, editor and designer for The Index of

American design, a FAP project meant to categorize Americana, labeled the search for a national art heritage a “usable past.” 28 Certainly by 1964 when Warren Susman wrote about “History and the American Intellectual: Uses of a Usable Past,” investigating “the cultural consequences of special attitudes toward the past and the uses of history within a culture,” Brooks’ indelible phrase was a mainstay of historical inquiry. 29 Susman’s article was a harbinger of the revival of the phrase as New Left history took shape in the late

25 Brooks, 340.

26 Virginia Tuttle Clayton, Elizabeth Stillinger, Erika Doss, Deborah Chotner, Drawing on America’s Past: Folk Art, Modernism, and the Index of American Design (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003), 1.

27 For a brief discussion of the usage of the phrase a usable past see, Casey Nelson Blake , “The Usable Past, the Comfortable Past, and the Civic Past: Memory in Contemporary America,” Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 3 (August, 1999): 423-435.

28 Clayton, Drawing on America’s Past, 1.

29 Warren I. Susman, “History and the American Intellectual: Uses of a Usable Past,” American Quarterly 16, no. 2 (Summer 1964): 243.

14

1960s. 30 The 1968 anthology, Towards a New Past: Dissenting Essays in American

History , edited by Barton J. Bernstein adopted a variation on the phrase, and the essays explored how empowering historical knowledge could be. 31

Over the past few decades, scholars of American history have shifted their inquiry from studying a usable past to a focus on memory studies. As David Thelen has suggested, “The historical study of memory opens exciting opportunities to ask fresh questions of our conventional sources and topics to create points for fresh synthesis.” He further contends that “questions about the construction of memory can illuminate how individuals, ethnic groups, political parties, and cultures shape and reshape identities—as known to themselves and to others.” 32 “Moving History Forward” thus asks new questions about the history of women’s rights by focusing on the construction of historical memory.

The complex relationship between memory and history was first formally investigated by Maurice Halbwachs in 1925 but a posthumous article, “Historical

Memory and Collective Memory” in 1950 was more widely influential. Halbwachs’ work introduced the now commonplace notion that collective memory is “constructed” amidst a perpetual political battleground. 33 The burgeoning literature on memory in the 1960s

30 See Paul Buhle, History and the New Left: Madison, Wisconsin, 1950-1970 (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990).

31 Barton J .Bernstein. ed. Towards a New Past: Dissenting Essays in American History (New York: Pantheon Books, 1968).

32 David Thelen, “Memory and American History,” The Journal of American History 75, no. 4 (March 1989): 1117, 1118.

33 Maurice Halbwachs, The Collective Memory , trans. Francis J. Ditter Jr. and Vida Yazdi Ditter (New York: Harper and Row, 1980). See also Kirk Savage, “History, Memory, and Monuments: An Overview of the Scholarly Literature on Commemoration,” National Park Service, 2006, http://www.nps.gov/history/history/resedu/savage.htm.

15

and 1970s, turned into a verifiable “memory boom” in the U.S. in the 1980s and 1990s.

The boom was likely inspired by two occurrences: scholars and survivors grappling with the meaning of the Holocaust and the astonishing public embrace of the Vietnam

Veterans Memorial, dedicated in 1982. 34 In the field of American history, much of the scholarship focused on memory and war, specifically, the Civil War in American memory.

Building on Halbwachs’ insight, numerous academic studies have reminded us that history is not simply what happened in the past but how we elect to remember what happened. 35 Fundamental to this historiography is the notion of “Invented Traditions,” the symbolic construction of historic customs to serve particular ideological ends. 36 In the foundational text, The Invention of Tradition, Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger edit a collection of essays that explore the practices, rules or rituals that “establish continuity with a suitable historic past.” In his introductory essay to the volume, Hobsbawm suggests the important relationship between social change and the symbolic use of the past. He argues that invented traditions “use history as a legitimator of action and cement of group cohesion.” Understanding the process behind the creation of historic rituals is a worthwhile project for the historian because, as Hobsbawm notes, the study of invented traditions “throws a considerable light on the human relation to the past, and therefore on the historian’s own subject and craft.” 37

34 Ibid.

35 For one thought-provoking example, see Michel-Rolph Trouillot, Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1995).

36 See Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, ed. The Invention of Tradition (Cambridge University Press, 1992), especially Eric Hobsbawm, “Introduction: Inventing Tradition,” 1-14, quote found on page 1.

37 Hobsbawm, 12.

16

American historians have applied these ideas to enhance our understanding of nationalism, identity and politics. One such work, Michael Kammen’s extensive, Mystic

Chords of Memory, examines the formation of the American historical tradition. He investigates the relationship between collective memory and national identity by tracing the evolution of a uniquely American historical consciousness. In the juxtaposition of invented traditions and national myth-making with memory, Kammen delineates the ideological myths that bind us as a nation. As he writes, “societies in fact reconstruct their pasts rather than faithfully record them, and that they do so with the needs of contemporary culture clearly in mind—manipulating the past in order to mold the present.” 38 In another foundational text, Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American

Memory, David Blight examines the relationship between race and reconciliation during

Reconstruction, specifically the interplay between race and memory in the emergence of

Lost Cause mythology. Blight investigates how reformers and veterans, politicians and writers, ex-slaves and white supremacists refought the Civil War in the aftermath of emancipation.

This competition between varying historical actors outlined by Blight and

Kammen suggests how memory is in the end highly politicized. And Blight reminds us that the construction of memory, is above all else, an extremely messy development. But it is the historian’s job to untangle the twisted knots of knowledge and sweep aside the jumble of history to uncover why representations of the past are worth the fight. Because what looks like a muddle of memory is often a fascinating struggle for power—whether as it is in this dissertation, between citizens and the government or between women

38 Kammen, 3.

17

activists, the past is always prologue for present politics. This insight helps us understand, for example, that the battles over historical memory fought by American women activists were not only symbolic but had significant cultural and social ramifications for the present and future of women’s activism.

Within the field of memory studies, another highly influential concept has been

Pierre Nora’s notion of ‘lieux de mémoiré,’ or sites of memory. 39 These memory sites include museums, archives, cemeteries, festivals, anniversaries and monuments. 40 Nora explores the distinction between memory and history in understanding the nation but his ideas can be useful for understanding the relationship between social movements and the usable past, for as Nora argues, “The quest for memory is the search for one’s history.” 41

He writes, “Those who have long been marginalized in traditional history are not the only ones haunted by the need to recover their buried pasts. Following the example of ethnic groups and social minorities, every established group, intellectual or not, learned or not, has felt the need to go in search of its own origins and identity.” 42 Memory sites, according to Nora, are composed of three interrelated aspects: the material, the symbolic, and the functional. For this project, that conceptualization is helpful in understanding the relationship between the historical imagination and the actions of women activists. For example, it helps illuminates how the historical consciousness feminists forged led to a desire to leave behind physical traces of memory such as archives and memorials, as well

39 Pierre Nora, “Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire” Representations , no. 26 (Spring 1989): 7-24.

40 Nora, 12.

41 Nora, 13.

42 Nora, 15.

18

as the significance of commemorations and symbolic protests. As Nora reminds us,

“there must be a will to remember.” 43

American scholars have taken Nora’s concept and broadened them to examine not only national identity but how memory can “serve as a source of opposition to power.” 44

Scott Sandage, John Bodnar and James Green have written persuasively how memory intersects with the politics of race and class. This scholarship is a reminder that women’s movements are not the only social movements to rely on history as a form of symbolic politics. Sandage, in particular, offers a useful model for understanding how social movements rely on collective memory as strategies of protest in his article, “A Marble

House Divided.” As Sandage has shown, the civil rights movement has utilized the

Lincoln Memorial as a site of protest, or in Nora’s phrasing, a “site of memory.” Sandage explores how the 1939 Marian Anderson concert in front of the Lincoln Memorial entered into the collective memory of civil rights protest and how activists reinterpreted the official meaning of the statue to fit the needs of the movement. Thus the 1963 March on Washington was part of a long tradition of symbolic protest that appropriated historical imagery to further political gains.

In his article, Sandage draws heavily on Bodnar’s distinction between official and vernacular memory. In Remaking America: Public Memory, Commemoration, and

Patriotism in the Twentieth Century, Bodnar explores how marginalized groups sought to forge their own meaning in national commemorations. As popular participation increased during the twentieth century, citizens began demanding that the history of all people be

43 Nora, 19.

44 Hue-Tam Ho Tai, “Remembered Realms: Pierre Nora and French National Memory,” The American Historical Review 106 (June 2001): 906-922.

19

remembered. Bodnar explores the creation of public collective consciousness through the intersection of official and vernacular memory. He recognizes vernacular culture as originating from diverse and marginalized groups or memory from the bottom up while official culture reflected authority and the needs of the state and memory from the top down. Examining local, state, and national historical commemorations, Bodnar asks key questions about the competing forces that have shaped public memory. He stresses growing class tensions in the history of preservation efforts and commemorative anniversaries. 45 Certainly, tensions in the women’s movement in the fight to create a gendered public history resonate with the struggles between vernacular and official culture that Bodnar identifies.

Another valuable case study in understanding history and social movements is

Taking History to Heart: The Power of the Past in Building Social Movements in which activist and historian James Green examines the relationship between memory and class politics. He suggests the importance of labor history to political protest and movement building. 46 Taking History to Heart highlights how movement history represents the intersection of history and identity. Exploring his own experience and that of other labor activists, Green demonstrates “how people make their own history.”47 As such, “Moving

History Forward” relies on Green’s definition of movement history, as “various sorts of

45 John E. Bodnar, Remaking America: Public Memory, Commemoration, and Patriotism in the Twentieth Century (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992).

46 See David W. Blight, Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001); Kirk Savage, Standing Soldiers, Kneeling Slaves: Race, War, and Monument in Nineteenth-Century America (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1997); Green, Taking History to Heart: The Power of the Past in Building Social Movements ; Scott A. Sandage, “A Marble House Divided: The Lincoln Memorial, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Politics of Memory, 1939-1963,” The Journal of American History 80, no. 1 (June 1993): 135-167.

47 Green, 3, 12.

20

historically conscious work by movement activists” and explores what Green has described as “the role of historical consciousness in movement building and in the mysterious processes that create human solidarity.”48

While historical memory and “invented traditions” have become central concepts in the larger field of U.S. history, those concerns have remained largely unexplored in studies of feminism and women’s history. Like the study of history forty years ago, studies of American collective memory have mainly focused on masculine centered events such as wars and national civic commemorations. Historians such as Bodnar,

Kammen, Green and others overlook gender as a category of analysis in studies of public memory. This dissertation, therefore, stands at the intersection of the scholarship on

American women’s social activism and the study of memory and joins the small but growing literature on gender, public history and historiography.

“Moving History Forward” traces how women activists have established counter- traditions of their own. As Maria Grever argues, examining “feminist ‘lieux de mémoiré’ may shed another light on western women’s movements.” 49 In her article, “The Pantheon of Feminist Culture: Women’s Movements and the Organization of Memory,” Grever outlines a useful theoretical framework for analyzing the relationship between feminism and the politics of memory. While focusing on international movements and specifically on Dutch feminists, Grever conceives of her “typology of memory” as applicable to all western women’s movements. Grever distinguishes between three types of feminist memory: ritualized memory (commemorations, traditions and feminist iconography)

48 Green, 1.

49 Grever, 372.

21

frozen memory (materialization such as statues and coins and symbols) and continued memory (canonized texts, institutions and organizations and historiography). Her categories raise questions of the relationship of memory to feminist identity and helps answers why certain women, and not others, became part of the pantheon of feminist culture. Grever’s brief article provides a sturdy foundation on which to build the theoretical grounding of this dissertation. 50

While the writing of history is usually considered a masculine endeavor, recent scholarly work has shown how women have contributed to modern historiography. As

Grever has commented, “Knowledge of the feminist past is generally not self-evident. It must be explained and acquired again and again.” 51 Part of the reason for this problem has recently been explored by scholars interested in the “gender of history.” Literary scholar Nina Baym pioneered the study of women’s historical writing in her book,

American Women Writers and the Work of History, 1790-1860 .52 Baym explores the cultural work of women writing history in the early years of the nation leading up to the

Civil War. She argues that female writers of history in this era helped dismantle the intellectual and cultural boundaries that separated the domestic and public spheres. These amateur historians were claiming the right of women to know and make sense of the world outside the home and in the process helped construct a national identity. She writes, “The very act of writing history was itself, self-reflexively, the act of inserting

50 Grever, 364-374.

51 Grever, 364.

52 Nina Baym, American Women Writers and the Work of History, 1790-1860 (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1995).

22

women into history, as record keeper and referee if not as major player.” 53 Baym’s focus is on history written by women—and only one chapter is devoted to history written about women’s history.

However, historians Ellen DuBois and Julie Des Jardins have both examined the writing of women’s history between 1880 and 1940, a period DuBois considers an important missing link in women’s historiography in terms of the political sensibilities of women’s history. In “Making Women’s History: Historian-Activists of Women’s Rights,

1880–1940,” DuBois asks important questions concerning why groups pushing for rights turn to history. She explores “why and how political insurgence is related to the historical impulse; why a group pushing its way into civil society and political recognition becomes hungry for a history of itself and for a recognized place in the larger past.” 54 DuBois argues that this history sheds light on the larger problem concerning the link between politics and history, the past and future. Des Jardins has taken a more in depth examination of the rich tradition of women’s involvement in the historical enterprise by examining the relationship between race, gender and the historical practice. An important foundation for this dissertation, Des Jardins suggests that some women historians “made history a conscious instrument of woman’s rights in the twentieth century.” 55 While historiography has been an important medium for engagement with the past, it is only one means by which women activists explored history. This dissertation thus broadens the scope of history beyond the written word to include nontraditional forms of historical

53 Baym, 215.

54 Ellen Carol DuBois, Woman Suffrage and Women’s Rights (New York: New York University Press, 1998), 211.

55 Julie Des Jardins, Women and the Historical Enterprise in America: Gender, Race, and the Politics of Memory, 1880-1945 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003), 177.

23

expression such as protest, parades, commemorations, museum exhibits, national parks and other memorials to highlight the various ways activists have found meaning in the past.

Beyond American women’s historiography, Bonnie Smith and Mary Spongberg have chronicled a rich tradition of women historians in Europe as well as the United

States. In Writing Women’s History Since the Renaissance , Spongberg suggests in the nineteenth century, the woman question “created new interest in women as an historical category.” 56 Spongberg traces how the relationship between women’s politics and women’s history continued throughout the twentieth century and achieved it fullest form in the 1960s and 1970s during the women’s liberation movement through the production of radical history. And in “The Contributions of Women to Modern Historiography in

Great Britain, France and the United States, 1750-1940,” as well as her book The Gender of History: Men, Women, and Historical Practice, Smith researches the relationship between women and modern historiography by examining more in depth how the professionalization of history has been tied to ideas about femininity and masculinity, outlining specifically, the “gender of history.” Smith’s work reveals the significance of understanding how gender has shaped conceptions of amateur and professional history— and this argument can be stretched further to add how gender shapes historical memory and historical consciousness. Gender has informed not only what has been considered

56 Mary Spongberg, Writing Women's History since the Renaissance (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002), 130.

24

historically significant in terms of historical writing but also larger conceptions of historical identity and memory. 57

History is a form of storytelling and therefore, the question of narrative concerns not only the historian but the activist as well. Francesca Polletta has researched the importance of narrative to political movements and illuminates the role storytelling plays in social activism. 58 As pioneering women’s historian Gerder Lerner has argued,

“Women’s History, [is] the essential tool in creating feminist consciousness in women.” 59

It was the realization that the world was not created by men alone that helped spur women reformers to demand more rights. In her large body of work on women’s history,

Lerner has illustrated that history offered powerful lessons concerning both women’s progress and women’s oppression that according to Lerner, created a “feminist consciousness” that allowed women as a group to resist patriarchy. 60 Similarly, Lisa

Tetrault, in her examination of the woman suffrage campaign during Reconstruction, has explored the significance of origins stories to the movement for women’s rights.

Specifically, by uncovering the context behind the writing of the History of Woman

Suffrage , Tetrault addresses interesting questions about the politics of memory. 61 She

57 Bonnie G. Smith, “The Contribution of Women to Modern Historiography in Great Britain, France, and the United States, 1750-1940,” The American Historical Review 89, no. 3 (June 1984): 709-732; Bonnie G. Smith, The Gender of History: Men, Women, and Historical Practice (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998).

58 Francesca Polletta, It was like a Fever: Storytelling in Protest and Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006).

59 Gerda Lerner, Why History Matters: Life and Thought (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 211.

60 See for example, Gerda Lerner, The Creation of Feminist Consciousness: From the Middle Ages to Eighteen-Seventy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993).

61 Lisa Tetrault, Memory of a Movement: Woman Suffrage and the Creation of a Feminist Origins Myth, 1865-1900 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, forthcoming).

25

unravels the threads of memory to suggest how the narrative surrounding the Seneca

Falls Convention, created 40 or 50 years after the meeting, became the founding myth upon which suffragists Stanton and Anthony cemented their leadership of the women’s movement. Tetrault’s work provides an important foundation for this dissertation in understanding the relationship between memory, narrative and power in the struggle for women’s rights. Building on the insights of Lerner, Tetrault and Polletta, “Moving

History Forward” seeks to understand how and why stories of women’s history have been important to women activists.

With the growth of women’s public history sites in the 1980s, there emerged a body of academic literature that investigates the significance of these changes to the historic landscape as well as tracing the history of women’s involvement in the preservation movement. Heather Huyck helped pioneer women’s public history scholarship with her article, “Beyond John Wayne: Using Historic Sites to Interpret

Western Women’s History.” 62 Since then, the field has grown considerably over the years as reflected by the publication of two essay collections published in 2003: Restoring

Women’s History through Historic Preservation and Her Past Around Us: Interpreting

Sites for Women’s History . Both books explore how women have been remembered in the built environment. 63 One of the essays in Her Past Around Us , “Immortalizing

Women: Finding Meaning in Public Sculpture,” by Eileen Eagen addresses a significant question for “Moving History Forward.” Eagen explores the possibility of how (and

62 Heather Huyck, “Beyond John Wayne: Using Historic Sites to Interpret Western Women’s History,” OAH Magazine of History 12 (Fall 1997): 7-11.

63 Gail Dubrow and Jennifer Goodman, ed. Restoring Women’s History through Historic Preservation , (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 2003); Polly Welts Kaufman and Katharine T. Corbett, ed. Her Past Around Us: Interpreting Sites for Women’s History (Malabar, Fla.: Krieger, 2003).

26

whether) to commemorate “imperfect heroines.” She asks, “Can movements and individuals be commemorated in ways that recognize flaws as well as strengths? How can contemporary values and beliefs be incorporated into past narratives and their symbols?” Eagen highlights the difficulties of finding a balance between past and present sensibilities, a challenge which women activists have grappled with for over a 150 years. 64

Two other works on gender and historic preservation, in particular, have informed this project. In her article, “Gender Politics and the ‘Invention of Tradition,’” as well as her book Domesticating History: The Political Origins of America’s House Museums ,

Patricia West locates the history of historic preservation with women’s efforts and demonstrates how much of this history has been about politics. In the process, West highlights how historic preservation is never neutral. For example, West argues that in

1912 the historic site Orchard House was engulfed in debates between anti-suffrage and pro-suffrage women. In the end, the antis won out, and instead of interpreting the house to reflect the radical abolition and women’s rights past of Louisa May Alcott, it was enshrined as the home of the author of juvenile fiction such as Little Women . West’s work, along with other scholars such as James Lindgren, shed light on how gender has shaped the history of preservation. 65 Finally, in The Power of Place: Urban Landscape as

Public History, Delores Hayden explores place memory and urban preservation. Her

64 Eileen Eagan, “Immortalizing Women: Finding Meaning in Public Sculpture” in Kaufman and Corbett, Her Past Around Us , 46-47.

65 See Patricia West, Domesticating History: the Political Origins of America’s House Museums (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1999); Patricia West, “Gender Politics and the ‘Invention of Tradition,’” Gender and History 6 (November 1994): 456-67; James Michael Lindgren, Preserving Historic New England: Preservation, Progressivism, and the Remaking of Memory (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995).

27

work illuminates how communities define and preserve their own history which has great relevance for understanding a sense of place as used by women activists in this dissertation. Hayden defines the power of place as “the power of ordinary urban landscapes to nurture citizens’ public memory, to encompass shared time in the form of shared territory.” 66 Her work expands our understanding of preservation and public history through a careful analysis of race, gender and ethnic dynamics as she asks important questions about identity and memory that have relevance for this dissertation:

“Why are so few moments in women’s history remembered as part of preservation? Why are so few women represented in commemorative public art? And why are the few women honored almost never women of color?” 67

Project Overview

“The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman,” Stanton claimed at the symbolic birthplace of American feminism, the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848. 68 With those words, Stanton helped establish an important foundation for women’s movements in the United States in utilizing the power of the past to shape political demands in the present. Recognizing the potential of women’s history, within two years of the convention, Stanton was already

66 Hayden, 9.

67 Hayden, 7.

68 Elizabeth Cady Stanton, “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions,” in The Concise History of Woman Suffrage: Selections from History of Woman Suffrage, ed, Mari Jo Buhle and Paul Buhle (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2005), 94.

28

writing the history of the movement for women’s rights. 69 Women’s rights activists have continued, in various forms, and with different concerns and emphasis, to engage both with women’s history in general, and feminist history in particular. On the occasion of the 150 th anniversary of the first women’s rights convention that heard Stanton’s

Declaration of Sentiments, then first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton spoke on the importance of keeping the memory of the movement for women’s rights alive: “Because we must tell and retell, learn and relearn, these women’s stories, and we must make it our personal mission, in our everyday lives, to pass these stories on to our daughters and sons.” Clinton continued by stating that it was vital to remember the struggle for women’s rights, that these rights were not simply handed over but fought for and won.

“Because we cannot—we must not—ever forget that the rights and opportunities we enjoy as women today were not just bestowed upon us by some benevolent ruler. They were fought for, agonized over, marched for, jailed for and even died for by brave and persistent women and men who came before us.” 70

Stanton’s and Clinton’s speeches provide convenient and symbolic beginning and endpoints for this project as the dissertation is divided into five chapters that span over

150s years of history but are connected by common themes and questions. “Moving

History Forward” explores three main ideas: how women activists challenged women’s historical invisibility; used the past in social protest; and created a gendered public history. As a basic outline, Chapters Two, Three and Five discuss movement history and

69 Nancy Isenberg, Sex and Citizenship in Antebellum America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998), 1.

70 U.S. Congress, Senate, Remarks of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, on the occasion of the150th Anniversary of the First Women’s Rights Convention, Seneca Falls, NY, July 16, 1998, reprinted, 105th Cong., 2nd sess. Congressional Record 17411 (July 27, 1998).

29

the use of historical symbols in women’s social protest while Chapters Three, Four and

Six focus on public history initiatives and public memory. But within that overarching framework, the chapters are connected by several thematic strands. First, movement memory was shaped by a sense of place, most notably, the town of Seneca Falls figured prominently in the feminist imagination. 71 Second, the significance of role models to women activists and the rediscovering of heroines hidden from history is a reoccurring subject in all five chapters. 72 Third, the importance of the pioneers of the movement— namely Stanton, Mott and above everyone else, Anthony—weaves in and out of the narrative. Chapters Three, Four and Six, in particular address this issue by examining controversies and contests over monuments to the foremothers. Fourth, the inclusion of women’s history in national celebrations—specifically the Centennial and Bicentennial of American Independence bookend the narrative as the commemorations are examined in the first and final body chapters. Finally, the question of who gets to claim the past, what meaning to prescribe to the history as well as who is included in the historical canon animates the entirety of the feminist search for a usable past and thus this dissertation. 73

Despite the Declaration of Independence’s wording that “all men are created equal,” women since the beginning of the Republic have challenged that notion. Most famously Stanton declared “all men and women are created equal” during the Seneca

71 For overviews of the commemorations held in Seneca Falls, see Vivien Ellen Rose, “Seneca Falls Remembered: Celebrations of the 1848 First Women’s Rights Convention,” CRM 21 (1998): 9-15 and Judith Wellman, The Road to Seneca Falls: Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the First Woman’s Rights Convention (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004), 228-240.

72 Sheila Rowbotham, Hidden From History: Rediscovering Women in History from the 17 th Century to the Present. 1st American ed. (New York, Pantheon Books, 1975).

73 A note on terminology: the usage of the word feminist is utilized only after the 1910s and then only applied with historical specificity. See Nancy Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 1987).

30

Falls Convention. 74 While traditionally seen as the beginning of the women’s movement, recent scholarship suggests that the 1848 meeting was actually the culmination of years of agitation and change on the part of women. 75 Chapter Two thus discusses the creation of a historical consciousness among women’s rights advocates and argues that history was an important form for testing gender boundaries and prescriptions.

History aided in the development of a political identity for women. The women’s rights movement reacted against cultural ideals, what historians have labeled “the cult of true womanhood.” During the nineteenth century, ideas circulated in society about women’s role in the home as advice manuals, literature, sermons and medical texts all touted separate spheres for men and women. 76 Female reformers brought to the forefront not only a discussion of men’s and women’s rights but the larger implied meaning of what it therefore meant to be a man or a woman. What differentiated the movement for women’s rights as compared to other forms of social activism such as abolition, charity and temperance work was the reformer’s rejection of the creed that women should be selfless and instead promoted individualistic goals such as educational, economic and political opportunities. 77 Reformers advocated a whole program of social change

74 Elizabeth Cady Stanton, “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions,” in The Concise History of Woman Suffrage: Selections from History of Woman Suffrage, ed, Mari Jo Buhle and Paul Buhle (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2005), 94.

75 See for example, Bonnie S. Anderson, Joyous Greetings: The First International Women’s Movement 1830 – 1860. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000); Lori D. Ginzberg, Untidy Origins: A Story of Women’s Rights in Antebellum New York (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005).

76 Barbara Welter, “The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820–1860,” American Quarterly 18 (Summer 1966): 151-174.

77 See Sylvia D. Hoffert, When Hens Crow: The Women’s Rights Movements in Antebellum America (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995).

31

including dress reform, abolition, temperance, women’s property rights, co-education, equal pay, and suffrage.

Beginning in the 1830s and 1840s and continuing into the 1890s, female reformers argued for new public roles for women by uncovering examples of women’s accomplishments in history. In their speeches and writings they lionized queens, amazons and founding mothers as heroines who illustrated their claims that women could have influence outside the home and were capable of public leadership. For example, after referencing female queens and warriors from “Semiramis to Victoria,” one reformer proclaimed at the Seneca Falls Convention, “The world has seen woman in power.” 78

Later during the 1876 Centennial, suffragists rewrote historical narratives of the

American Revolution to highlight women’s contributions, and in the process, realized the importance of documenting the movement’s history. The creation of a female centered commemorative tradition began in the 1890s with the celebration of Foremother’s

Dinners that highlighted women’s role in the founding of the nation.

In challenging women’s historical invisibility, the search for a usable past focused less on domesticity and the private sphere and instead brought to light women’s public achievements that were left out of masculine-centered historical accounts. In taking history into their own hands, nineteenth-century reformers sought to transform thinking about women’s sphere. However, throughout their engagement with the past, reformers struggled to define women’s place in history. They vacillated between depicting women’s past achievements as illustrations of women’s abilities and arguing for women’s freedom from their historical oppression by men.

78 Proceedings of the Woman’s Rights Convention, Held at Rochester, NY, August 2, 1848 (New York, NY: Robert J. Johnston, Printer, 1870), 6.

32

An exploration of the nineteenth century woman movement’s search for a usable past provides insight into how reformers reconciled their place in the public sphere and their place in history. Fissures in the antebellum movement erupted during

Reconstruction as federal amendments to the Constitution redefined the meaning of citizenship. Debate ensued over the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments which defined citizens and voters as exclusively male. When the Fifteenth Amendment passed Stanton and Anthony founded the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA), committed to the passage of an amendment granting woman suffrage and to a movement controlled and defined by women. Several months later, New England Suffragists also formed a national organization, the American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA). Thus two national suffrage organizations existed by the end of 1869, competing for adherents and strategic leadership. 79 Conflicts over the memory of the movement would frame suffrage protest of the United States Centennial in 1876 and inspire the writing of the History of Woman

Suffrage in the 1880s.

Chapter Three turns to the early decades of the twentieth century when the final struggle for the vote was underway. It was only in 1890 that the two branches were reconciled and reunited as the National American Woman Suffrage Association

(NAWSA). The years 1896-1910, commonly referred to as the doldrums because of the lack of progress made in state and federal suffrage campaigns, have recently been reinterpreted by historians as a time of significant growth and renewal for the movement.

During these years, NAWSA took important steps to creatively reinvent the organization in order to attract mass support without which victory in 1920 might not have been

79 Ellen Carol DuBois, Feminism and Suffrage: The Emergence of an Independent Women’s Movement in America, 1848-1869. 2nd ed. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999).

33

possible. But as part of this reorganization, there was a gradual but considerable narrowing of the movement both in terms of goals and membership which was reflected in their engagement with history. 80 Whereas the nineteenth century woman movement built a wide-ranging iconography of significant and strong women, the next generation of activists narrowed their historical interests largely to the pioneers of the movement themselves. As the early twentieth century suffrage movement turned inwards, documenting the history of the movement itself helped “votes for women” become a popular and mainstream cause.

This chapter examines the varied ways suffragists used the past during the fight for suffrage and after the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment: in movement building, by proclaiming victory, in constructing monuments and through continuing women’s activism post-suffrage. Beginning around 1913, the “new suffragists” helped revitalize and transform the movement. Two such suffragists, Alice Paul and Lucy Burns organized the Congressional Union in 1913, later known as the National Woman’s Party (NWP) by

1916. Supporting a more radical and feminist organizational approach to suffrage work than NAWSA and a focus on a federal amendment, the divergent philosophical views between the two groups would lead to disagreements and fissures in the movement over the best approach to securing the vote. Borrowing tactics from the militant British suffragettes, members of the Congressional Union participated in parades, pickets, hungers strikes and other forms of civil disobedience. 81 In exploring alternative uses of

80 Sara Hunter Graham, Woman Suffrage and the New Democracy (New Haven Conn: Yale University Press, 1996).

81 Christine Lunardini, From Equal Suffrage to Equal Rights: Alice Paul and the National Woman’s Party , 1910-1928 (New York: New York University Press, 1986), 6.

34

history in the suffrage movement, the chapter deepens our understandings of the reciprocal relationship between historical memory and social activism by detailing the conscious effort it took to turn history into a usable past.

After seventy-five years of women’s activism, the Nineteenth Amendment granting women the right to vote became law on August 26, 1920. History symbolized new directions for activists as represented by the creation of the League of Women

Voters and the campaign for the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). After the victory,

NAWSA dissolved as an independent organization and Carrie Chapman Catt founded the

League of Women Voters to train women in their new civic responsibilities. In 1923, the

National Woman’s Party proposed an amendment that would amend the Constitution to secure full legal equality for women. This proposed amendment opened up new fissures in the movement especially concerning the impact on women’s labor protections. This controversy over women’s economic rights as articulated in the ERA debate testified to the difficulty of translating feminist conceptions (often contradictory and multifaceted) into law and social policy and practice. 82 Suffragists were determined to document their own history, not so much to uncover a lost heritage but rather to record and celebrate their own success. However, building memorials to the suffrage victory ensnared suffragists in even more conflicts over collective memory.

A question that has challenged historians is what happened to women’s activism after the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. For many women, history became the plane upon which to reframe ideas about women’s politics, feminism and women’s place in society. As historian Nancy Cott has suggested, rather than marking 1920 as the end of

82 See Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism .

35

an era, the decades following suffrage should be seen as a period of crisis and transition.

What historians previously viewed as the demise of feminism in the 1920s was really the end of the suffrage movement and the early struggle of modern feminism. Thus too great a focus on women’s electoral politics has obscured surrounding continuities in women’s political behavior, especially women’s work in voluntary organizations. At the same time, earlier feminist ideals were appropriated and domesticated through psychology, consumerism and advertising. The culture of modernity and urbanity absorbed issues of women’s emancipation but transformed the original goals. The struggle was to find a language, organization and goals adequate to the paradoxical situation of modern women

– individuals who are women, who inhabit the same worlds as men but not in the same way. 83 Engaging with the past was one way women activists could come to terms with these contradictory notions.

Chapter Four therefore describes attempts at preserving women’s history in the

1930s and 1940s when the suffrage struggle was receding from public consciousness amidst an increasingly antifeminist climate. If Chapter Three looks at some of the successes of the woman’s movement in creating a usable past, Chapter Four explores a number of failures. This chapter examines Rose Arnold Powell’s unsuccessful crusade to include Susan B. Anthony on Mount Rushmore, Mary Beard’s failed World Center for

Women’s Archives (WCWA) and the depoliticized centennial celebration of the Seneca

Falls Convention in 1948. The three case studies acknowledge the continuing efforts in fostering women’s history—in national monuments, collections of documents and public programming and commemorative anniversaries—but suggest the real limits of creating a

83 Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism , 8.

36

public memory in the absence of a mass women’s movement. The case studies further illuminate the ongoing question among women activists about what type of history to preserve: only the history of the movement or a more encompassing and diverse past.

Chapter Five argues that the history of women was central to the way second wave feminism emerged in the late 1960s and 1970s when there was a resurgence of feminist activism as a mass social movement. 84 Turning once again to the subject of creating movement history, this chapter explores the ways a feminist usable past functioned in political protest, cultural representations and consciousness raising. Three main themes of biography, commemoration and invented traditions animate this chapter.

With origins in the labor movement, the civil rights movement and the New Left, the second wave of feminism addressed questions of women’s rights for a new generation. The founding of the National Organization for Women (NOW) in 1966 and the Women’s Strike for Equality in 1970— the largest march for women’s rights since the suffrage movement—heralded the institutional and organizational strength of this next wave of women’s activism. The women’s liberation movement challenged cultural definitions of womanhood and manhood, created new social, cultural and political opportunities for women and reshaped the legal landscape of the nation. Women

84 For scholarship on second wave feminism, see Wini Breines, The Trouble between Us: An Uneasy History of White and Black Women in the Feminist Movement (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006); Rosalyn Baxandall, “Re-visioning the Women’s Liberation Movement’s Narrative: Early Second Wave African American Feminists,” Feminist Studies 27, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 225-245; Rosalyn Baxandall and Linda Gordon, eds. Dear Sisters: Dispatches From the Women’s Liberation Movement ( New York: Basic Books, 2000); Alice Echols, Daring To Be Bad: Radical Feminism in America, 1968-1975 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988); Sara Evans, Tidal Wave: How Women Changed America at Century’s End (New York: Free Press, 2003); Sara Evans, Personal Politics: The Roots of Women’s Liberation in the Civil Rights Movement and the New Left (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1979); Ruth Rosen, The World Split Open: How the Modern Women's Movement Shaped America (New York: Viking, 2000).

37

discovered that personal problems such as housework, child rearing, sexuality, language and history could be political issues ripe for collective action.

Out of this activism came demands from female students and scholars for women’s studies programs at colleges and universities. By the mid-1970s, hundreds of colleges were offering courses in women’s studies. Female academics created new scholarly fields of inquiry as they began to examine women’s historical experience.

Second wave feminists helped spark a revolution in historical consciousness and women’s history became a vital part of the movement with popular history helping to shape a feminist identity. However, tensions evolved between the new professional women’s history forming and the popular history-making prominent in the women’s liberation movement. As historian Bonnie Smith has suggested, some women historians insisted that women’s history was “invented” in the 1970s in part because of the professional disdain and embarrassment over history that focused exclusively on “women worthies.” 85 This chapter helps recover much of this popular history, highlighting non- academic women’s history as a subject worthy of scholarly inquiry.

The history of feminism does not end with the waning of the women’s liberation movement. Historians have begun challenging the story of feminism’s decline in the

1980s and 1990s, asserting that feminism experienced a revival in new forms. 86 Women’s activism flourished through groups and institutions such as schools, churches and Emily’s

85 Bonnie Smith, The Gender of History, 38. See also the discussion of the tension between academic feminism and the political movements that inspired it in Joan Wallach Scott, “Feminism’s History,” Journal of Women’s History 16, no 2 (2004): 10-29.

86 Sara Evans, Tidal Wave: How Women Changed America at Century’s End (New York: Free Press, 2003).

38

List. Reproductive Rights debates, the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas Hearings and the

Global Women’s Movements have all strengthened this recent feminism.

As visual symbols of this continued activism, public history initiatives had more success during this period. Chapter Six thus moves the focus once again from movement history back to the creation of a women’s public history beginning in the late 1970s and continuing into the 1990s. Memorials and historic sites helped bring questions of equal rights into the public consciousness at the same time that a negative historical memory of feminism was taking root in the years after the second wave.

The three case studies in this chapter—celebrating America’s birthday during the

Bicentennial, the campaign to move the Portrait Monument (a statue of Stanton, Anthony and Mott originally given to Congress in 1921 but hidden from view) and the establishment of the Women’s Rights National Historical Park at Seneca Falls revisit and conclude stories explored in previous chapters. In many ways, this upsurge in public history initiatives was similar to the wave of memorials that were assembled after the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. However, unlike the suffragists, second wave feminists spent much less effort documenting their own history and instead continued to push for the preservation of the history of the nineteenth century movement. Whereas these large-scale public history projects were more successful than the failed proposals in the 1930s and 1940s, even the success of these ventures show the limits of a gendered public history. Constructing “official” history often conflicted with demands for a more explicitly feminist viewpoint, questions of race and divergent political views fractured feminist coalitions and lack of public attendance and financial support threatened even the modest gains made.

39

For over 150 years, history has shaped women’s activism and protest because the past formed a large part of these women’s identity as feminists. Women’s history was used as political symbols, rallying points and exemplars on picket lines, in marches, in conventions and in consciousness-raising sessions. And since women’s history was largely excluded from national memory, women’s rights advocates demanded a public history. Activists desired to shape popular historical consciousness through memorials, preservation efforts, historic sites and archives in order to place the history of women within the larger history of America. Instead of each generation having to reinvent the wheel, advocates pressed for official narratives and insisted that national institutions insert a feminist viewpoint into the canonized American past. Yet challenges arose when attempting to integrate women’s history into the wider culture as it was not always clear which women or what events to include. Issues of race, class, sexuality and ideology fractured women’s activism and shaped questions of historical interpretation and commemoration. Thus an examination of the political uses of the past will advance knowledge of women’s organizations, political protest and social movement dynamics.

40

CHAPTER 2 QUEENS, AMAZONS AND FOUNDING MOTHERS: WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND THE SEARCH FOR “WORTHY ACTS OF WOMEN”

In 1859, in a talk entitled “The True Woman,” Susan B. Anthony shared her thoughts on the condition of women. As she made her case for women’s rights, Anthony reproachfully questioned why women’s accomplishments were not better known. “Why is it that the pages of all history glow with the names of illustrious men, while only here and there a lone woman appears, who like the eccentric camel, marks the centuries?”

Male historical writers make “a goodly show” of men’s achievements but “no writer will a little time bestow” on the “worthy acts of women.” 87

Anthony was not alone in her frustrations that women were invisible in history: as reformers began organizing for women’s rights, the search for women’s history went hand in hand. They questioned women’s historical invisibility and worked to include women in national memory by constructing a usable past for women. Reformers fought to changes laws, customs and attitudes towards women and history helped frame the discussion. This historical consciousness formed an important cultural context for women’s reform. In speeches, lectures, articles, and commemorations, history shaped an emerging political culture for women. In the nineteenth century, history emerged as a site of contest concerning a range of social issues. From slavery to westward expansion to sex

87 Susan B. Anthony, “The True Woman,” 1859, as quoted in Sylvia D. Hoffert, When Hens Crow: The Women’s Rights Movements in Antebellum America (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995), 42.

41

roles, the past was increasingly politicized in nineteenth-century America and female reformers tapped into this interest in historical tradition. 88

This chapter seeks to understand the meaning women’s rights advocates attached to history. What did it mean for reformers to claim a historical identity for women? How was history an expression of desires for the present? How was the past constantly renegotiated and in flux? Understanding how the past both informed and inspired women’s protests reveals a new dimension of the presence of the past in the lives of nineteenth-century reformers.

The past provided fertile ground for re-imagining constructions of womanhood.

Beginning in the 1830s and 1840s, female reformers argued for new public roles for women by uncovering examples of women’s achievements in the past. In taking history into their own hands, nineteenth-century reformers sought to transform thinking about women’s sphere. Engaging with history became an important means of challenging the

“cult of true womanhood.” 89 Historical models of a more assertive womanhood dramatized women’s rights arguments. As one commentator phrased it, “the history of the world shows from Queen Elizabeth and Queen Isabella down to Madame Dudevant and Mrs. Stowe, that capacity is not a question of sex.” 90 Illustrations of powerful women in the past contrasted with the popular image of woman as passive helpmate fit only for the domestic sphere.

88 For more on historical tradition see Michael Kammen, Mystic Chords of Memory: The Transformation of Tradition in American culture (New York: Knopf, 1991).

89 Barbara Welter, “The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820-1860,” American Quarterly 18, no. 2 (Summer 1966): 151-174.

90 Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage, ed. History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 3: 1876-1885 (Rochester, NY: Privately published, 1886), 111.

42

The search for a usable past undertaken by women’s rights advocates refuted claims that women had no history. Reformers asserted that history had not been made by men alone. As women’s rights advocate Mary Newbury Adams proclaimed in 1893 at the

Chicago World’s Fair, “Too long we have been kept on history written and illustrated by men’s lives.” 91 In challenging women’s historical invisibility, reformers brought to light women’s achievements that were left out of masculine-centered historical accounts.

Women’s rights advocates pointed to the silences in historical narratives and the absences in the historic landscape that left out women’s experiences. Also at the World’s Fair where Adams offered her critique, suffragist Lillie Devereux Blake protested the complete lack of historical attention given to women’s contributions to the country. As

Blake complained, “The whole history of our country has been written from man’s standpoint, and women, however great, how-over noble, have been ignored.” 92

Women’s rights reformers desired more than recognition of women’s historical roles as mothers and wives. They sought acknowledgment of women’s varied public roles because the history that was left out distorted understandings of women’s abilities.

Reformers looked for foremothers who illustrated women’s influence outside the home: warriors, queens, patriotic forebears and feminist foremothers occupied the historical thinking of the pioneers of the woman movement. Activists celebrated queens, amazons, and founding mothers as heroines who demonstrated women’s capacity for leadership.

91 Mary Newbury Adams, “Influence of Great Women,” in The Congress of Women Held in the Women's Building, World's Columbian Exposition, Chicago, U.S.A. 1893 , Mary Kavanaugh Oldham Eagle, ed., (Chicago, Ill: Monarch Book Company, 1894), 346.

92 Lillie Devereux Blake, “Our Forgotten Foremothers.” in The Congress of Women Held in the Women's Building, World’s Columbian Exposition, Chicago, U.S.A. 1893 , Mary Kavanaugh Oldham Eagle, ed., (Chicago, Ill: Monarch Book Company, 1894), 34.

43

These historical predecessors stood for courage, heroism, leadership and fortitude, typical nineteenth century masculine values.

From the antebellum era when women’s rights advocates first began engaging with the past to the end of the nineteenth century with the passing of the first generation of reformers, women increasingly began demanding control of their own history. During the antebellum era, the search for a usable past was primarily a search for foremothers who represented women’s ability to govern or achieve greatness. However, during the

1876 United States Centennial, women’s rights leaders were discovering founding mothers, constructing new narratives of the Revolution and creating a historical memory of the women’s rights movement by writing their own history. And by the 1890s, women’s rights advocates began forming female commemorative traditions and articulating sophisticated critiques of masculine accounts of history by demanding reevaluation of the standard origins tale of the country’s founding.

The past helped incite a spirit of female protest. Early advocates of women’s rights such as Frances Wright and Mary Wollstonecraft inspired activists in their work.

For example, when they published a history of the movement in the 1880s, Anthony,

Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Matilda Joslyn Gage dedicated the History of Woman

Suffrage (HWS) to the memory of Wright and Wollstonecraft. 93 Heroines from the

American past such as Pilgrim Mothers and Revolutionary heroines such as Abigail

Adams and Mercy Otis Warren motivated reformers to challenge narratives of national history that left out women’s intellectual and material contributions to the founding of the country.

93 See Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage, “Dedication,” in History of Woman Suffrage , Vol. 1: 1848-1861 (New York, NY: Fowler and Wells, Publishers, 1881), 3.

44

Throughout their engagement with the past, reformers struggled to define women’s place in history. They vacillated between depicting women’s past achievements as illustrations of women’s abilities and arguing for women’s freedom from their historical oppression by men. Many historians have focused on how reformers saw women as oppressed in the past, only enlightened through the work of the nineteenth century woman movement. 94 For instance, in 1897, in an article entitled, “The Status of

Woman, Past, Present and Future,” Anthony refers to the “the helpless, dependant, fettered condition of woman when the first Woman’s Rights Convention was called…” 95

However, what has been overlooked by historians is how women’s rights advocates also constructed historical narratives that placed women as agents of historical change. These two views coexisted in women’s rights rhetoric. Reformers were quick to claim women’s historic oppression when it suited their purpose but they could also just as easily contradict that line of reasoning and turn their arguments against their critics and promote a view of women’s accomplishments in the past. Thus at times women were seen as oppressed throughout history, but at other times, history provided evidence of women’s abilities. It was in this ambiguity—the dynamic tension between these positions—that reformers struggled to define women’s place in history.

“The World has Seen Woman in Power”: Women’s Rights and Women Worthies

94 See for example Mary Beard, America Through Women’s Eyes (New York: Macmillan Company, 1933) and Mary Beard, Woman as Force in History; a Study in Traditions and Realities (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1946).

95 Susan B. Anthony, “The Status of Woman, Past, Present and Future,” The Arena , May 1897, pg. 903, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Division of Rare Books & Special Collections, Library of Congress (hereafter: LOC).

45

During the antebellum era, historical foremothers, or women worthies, became important symbols of a new womanhood. 96 Specifically, women warriors and rulers played an important role in women’s rights rhetoric. Women’s rights advocates uncovered women’s distinctive experience in history apart from traditional narratives that placed men at the center of historical inquiry. Reformers appropriated male historical language and claimed for women the virtues associated with men. Reframing women’s historic experience argued for women’s fitness for public life. Historical figures that defied feminine stereotypes of true womanhood emerged as heroines of the burgeoning women’s movement. Significantly, these historical predecessors expanded the realm of possibility of what women could accomplish by illustrating women’s aptitude for governing and greatness.

The historical imagination of women’s rights advocates shaped the bonds of womanhood. The search for a usable past helped activists develop a consciousness of women as a group, thereby strengthening both women’s political identity and the solidarity of a shared sisterhood among white, middle class reformers. 97 In carving out new roles for women, female reformers turned to history for inspiration, instruction and exemplars. At the same time, women in the past acted as foils to elevate the status of women in the present. In what would be a repeated theme, reformers were quick to position themselves favorably compared to women in history. As Lucretia Mott declared,

“But more noble, moral daring is marking the female character at the present time, and

96 For more on the term “women worthies” see Natalie Zemon Davis, “Women’s History in Transition: The European Case,” Feminist Studies 3, nos. 3-4 (Spring/Summer 1976): 83-103.

97 For more on the relationship between women’s history and feminist consciousness see Gerda Lerner, The Creation of Feminist Consciousness: From the Middle Ages to Eighteen-Seventy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 247-273.

46

better worthy of imitation.” 98 Female historical figures provided important inspiration but the notion of evolution and progress (which culminated with contemporary womanhood) was never far removed from discussions of the past.

Debates over women’s rights were reflected in the historical record as ideological battles over women’s proper sphere played out on the pages of history. Beginning in the antebellum era, biographies of historical women became a popular genre of women’s literature. Such biographical accounts performed important cultural work in antebellum society. Women were encouraged to learn history as an appropriate form of educational reading that would promote Republican values and direct women’s attention away from the dangers of the novel. 99

Antebellum era biographies, however, tended to be written by more conservative women. These works were shaped by Victorian values and focused on women’s spirituality to show women’s moral superiority to men. 100 Examples of this type of historical writing include Elizabeth Ellet’s Women of the American Revolution (1848) ,

Sarah Josepha Hale’s Woman’s Record (1852) and Lydia Maria Child’s five-volume

Ladies Family Library (1832-1835). 101 These types of books were important means of

98 Lucretia Coffin Mott, “Speech of Lucretia Mott, Philadelphia, 1849,” in History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 1: 1848-1861, edited by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage (New York, NY: Fowler and Wells, Publishers, 1881), 369.

99 Nina Baym, American Women Writers and the Work of History, 1790-1860 (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1995), 13; Mary Kelley, Designing a Past for the Present: Women Writing Women’s History in Nineteenth- Century America (Worcester, Mass: American Antiquarian Society, 1996), 320.

100 Baym, 219.

101 Lydia Maria Child, Good Wives (Boston: Carter, Hendee and co., 1833); Lydia Maria Child, History of the Condition of Women, in Various Ages and Nations. 2 Vols. (Boston: John Allen & Co., 1835); Elizabeth Ellet, Women of the American Revolution (New York: Baker and Scribner, 1848); Sarah Josepha Hale, Woman’s Record; or, Sketches of All Distinguished Women, from “The Beginning” till A. D. 1850. Arranged in Four Eras--With Selections from Female Writers of Every Age (New York: Harper, 1852).

47

challenging assumptions about women’s role in the past even though these histories stayed consistent with contemporary sex prescriptions. 102 For example, Lydia Maria

Child was an abolitionist but not an advocate of women’s rights and Ladies Family

Library aimed to oppose the woman movement. 103 Ladies Family Library presented an overview of illustrious women from both the ancient and modern worlds. The five-part series was a compilation of various texts and sources presenting conservative depictions of women in history. The first two volumes included the memoirs of Madame Guyon and

Lady Russell, Madame Roland, Madame de Staël but instead of focusing on these women’s intellectual accomplishments or rumors of sexual promiscuity, Child represented these women as martyrs or paragons of domesticity. The third volume in the library entitled Good Wives assembled the biographies of forty-two women from Panthea to Madame Lafayette to argue women’s historical worth came from their roles as selfless wives. As Child warned, “Our mothers were help-mates indeed; and so are many of their daughters; but it is well to be on our guard, lest the household virtues become neglected and obsolete.” 104 In the final two-volume set that concludes the library, History of the

Condition of Women, in Various Ages and Nations, Child presents a clear argument against women’s rights. “Many silly things have been written, and are now written, concerning the equality of the sexes; but that true and perfect companionship which gives

102 Mary Spongberg, Writing Women’s History since the Renaissance (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002), 127-128.

103 Baym, 217.

104 Baym, 224 -225.

48

both men and women complete freedom in their places, without restless desire to go out of them, is as yet imperfectly understood.” 105

Ironically, biographies written to oppose women’s rights provided much of the basis for women’s rights advocates’ knowledge about the past. However, the historical imagination of women’s rights reformers broke free of the restraints of true womanhood.

History in women’s rights rhetoric often provided examples that responded to charges about the unfeminine nature of reformers. In the 1830s, the writings of the Grimké sisters on both abolition and women’s rights drew heavily on Old Testament women to legitimate their activism. With example such as Miriam, Deborah and Esther, the Grimké sisters highlighted historical women who took public action for just causes. 106 When in

1849 reformer Lucretia Mott asked the question: “Why should not woman seek to be a reformer,” she turned to the past for answers. She looked to the classical past and argued,

“Woman was not wanting in courage in the early ages. In war and bloodshed this trait was often displayed. Grecian and Roman history have lauded and honored her in this character.” 107

The use of history in women’s rights rhetoric performed two main functions: on one hand it answered critics about women’s innate abilities, making it possible to view women’s accomplishments as relatively normative. On the other hand, history worked toward creating a vibrant woman’s culture that bonded women’s’ rights advocates together in a shared cause and gave women a sense of a group consciousness. Elizabeth

105 Baymn, 227.

106 Baym, 223.

107 Lucretia Coffin Mott, “Speech of Lucretia Mott, Philadelphia, 1849,” in History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 1: 1848-1861 , edited by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage (New York, NY: Fowler and Wells, Publishers, 1881), 369.

49

Cady Stanton, looking back on matriarchal history, argued that the repeated misleading assumptions about women’s abilities have been so often repeated as to be taken as truth.

“Thus, the assertion that women have always been physically inferior to men, and consequently have always been held in a subject condition, has been universally believed.” She noted that “This view has furnished the opponents to woman’s emancipation their chief arguments for holding her in bondage” and “The worst feature of these assumptions is that women themselves believe them, and feel that to strive for their own emancipation is simply an attempt at the impossible.” But viewing progress,

Stanton optimistically stated that “Fortunately, historical research has at last proved the fallacy of these assumptions and all the arguments that grow out of them.” 108

Alongside the recovery of women from history, there developed a historical battle of the sexes that was often fierce and violent. Women’s rights advocates celebrated women in history who represented “the contest between men and women for the mastery.” In contrast to the ideals of the “cult of true womanhood,” females such as

Clytemnestra and Medea, notorious in Greek mythology for murdering husbands who betrayed them, became symbols of an ancient and longstanding battle between the sexes.

Referencing infamous man-killing women expressed a subtle irony about perceived notions of women as the gentler sex. As Stanton noted, “Very dark shadows indeed do such figures as those of Ildico, Fredegunde, and Brunhilde cast across the pages of

108 Elizabeth Cady Stanton, “The Matriarchate, or Mother-Age: Address of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, read by Susan B. Anthony to the National Council of Women of the United States, Assembled in Washington, DC, Feb 25, 1891,” in Rachel Foster Avery, ed. Transactions of the National Council of Women of the United States, Assembled in Washington D.C., February 22 to 25, 1891 (J.B. Lippincott & Co., Philadelphia, PA, 1891), 218-219.

50

history.” Stanton cited the German legends of Hellja and Gialp and Griep as further proof of the struggle between men and women for power. 109

Women’s rights reformers seized on these feminine historical and mythical icons as evidence of embattled womanhood. One famous illustration was the statue of Zenobia, created by women’s rights advocate and sculpture Harriet Hosmer. Zenobia was a female conqueror who challenged masculine authority and was eventually defeated and captured by the Roman Emperor in 272 A.D. Hosmer depicts Zenobia as a warrior queen in chains, perhaps as a metaphor for nineteenth-century womanhood. The sculpture, which was viewed by thousands of people in New York, Boston and Chicago between 1864 and

1865, gave visual expression to the contest between men and women. 110

Amazonian figures and the notion of a lost matriarchy fueled the imagination of women’s rights reformers and provided inspiration for an alternative view of sex roles.

Women’s rights accounts of female warriors and rulers gave new meaning to the legends.

In their search for foremothers, reformers morphed ancient myths about amazons into historical fact. Stanton contended that “The old legends of contests between men and women for supremacy are not such idle fancies as some would have us believe.” 111 Editor of the suffrage newspaper National Citizen and Ballot Box and a founding member of

NWSA, Matilda Joslyn Gage devoted sustained attention to the matriarchate in her historical examination of women, the church and the state. 112 The notion of a matriarchy

109 Stanton, “Matriarchate,” 226.

110 Alicia Faxon, “Images of Women in the Sculpture of Harriet Hosmer,” Woman’s Art Journal 2, no. 1 (Spring - Summer 1981): 28.

111 Stanton, “Matriarchate,” 226.

112 Matilda Joslyn Gage, Woman, Church and State a Historical Account of the Status of Woman through the Christian Ages, with Reminiscences of Matriarchate (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company, 1893).

51

presented a utopian vision of the organization of society and supplied an alternative to assumptions about masculine rule. By developing ideas about matriarchy, women’s rights advocates argued that patriarchy was not universal or inevitable. 113

In conjunction with exalting matriarchal prehistory, reformers lauded more modern historical figures that exemplified female leadership. The martial imagery associated with female warriors such as Joan of Arc peppered the rhetoric of activist women. Joan of Arc, the heroic virgin martyr, was an historical figure who expressed the passion of women’s rights advocates. As a symbol, she captivated women’s rights reformers for over seventy-five years. Especially popular in the women’s temperance movement, Joan of Arc became a natural symbol of the larger women’s movement due to her associations with martyrdom, female strength and faith in convictions. 114 In an 1848 temperance speech, Martha Hayhurst used the memory of Joan of Arc to inspire women to leave their homes and participate in the reform movement. Arguing there was nothing improper about women getting involved in public affairs to end suffering, she looked to the past to prove her point, stating that “Our hearts thrill at the mention of those women who were ‘last at the cross and earliest at the grave’ of the crucified Nazarine. We commend her whose prayers and entreaties once saved her native Rome from pillage. We

113 Cynthia Eller, The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why an Invented Past Will Not Give Women a Future (Boston: Beacon Press, 2000), 32.

114 For a later use of Joan of Arc as symbol, see for example, Frances Willard’s comment, “But in my thoughts I always liken the Woman's Christian Temperance Union to the Joan of Arc, whom God raised up for France, and who in spite of their muscle and their military prowess beat the English and crowned her King!...To the martyrdom of public rebuke and criticism they will surely lead us, a sacrifice not easy for gentle hearts to bear; doubtless, also, with some of us to the actual martyrdom by which a national history grows sacred and heroic…” Frances Elizabeth Willard, “Address of the President,” in Minutes of the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union, at the Tenth Annual Meeting, in Detroit, Michigan, 31 October-3 November, 1883 (Cleveland, OH: Home Publishing Company, 1883), 53.

52

admire the heroism of a Joan of Arc, as it is embalmed in history and song.” 115 The same year, in one of her first public address in 1848 during the Seneca Falls Convention,

Stanton referenced Joan of Arc, declaring, “Now is the time for the women of this country, if they would save our free institutions, to defend the right, to buckle on the armor that can best resist the keenest weapons of the enemy — contempt and ridicule.” 116

Stanton, Hayhurst and numerous other female reformers used the example of Joan of Arc to defend women’s involvement in the public sphere. Referencing the virgin martyr symbolized the almost religious fervor women’s rights advocates felt for their cause. Stanton made the analogy clear when she pronounced, “The same religious enthusiasm that nerved Joan of Arc to her work nerves us to ours.” Stanton used Joan of

Arc as a symbol to elevate the women’s rights cause, arguing that “In every generation

God calls some men and women for the utterance of truth, a heroic action, and our work to-day is the fulfilling of what has long since been foretold.” 117 The use of the figure of

Joan of Arc had significant cultural resonance that helped argue the notion of women’s rights being on the right side of history and most significantly, a god-ordained and respectable endeavor.

Like exploration of the matriarchate, illustrations of women leaders normalized the idea of female rule. These historical foremothers stepped out of the past to respond to

115 Martha Hayhurst, “Address to the Women and Men of Chester County, Pennsylvania,” in History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 1: 1848-1861 , edited by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage (New York, NY: Fowler and Wells, Publishers, 1881), 345.

116 Elizabeth Cady Stanton, “Address of Elizabeth Cady Stanton,” in The First Convention Ever Called to Discuss the Civil and Political Rights of Women, Seneca Falls, N.Y., July 19, 20, 1848, by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, Martha C. Wright, Mary Ann McClintock and Jane C. Hunt (Seneca Falls, NY: 1848), 8.

117 Stanton, “Address of Elizabeth Cady Stanton,” 8.

53

questions about women’s fitness for government and the inevitability of patriarchy. It was popular among reformers to include a litany of female rulers in their speeches as justification of women’s capabilities. During the Seneca Falls Convention, for example,

Rebecca Sandford, a young bride on her way west, delayed her trip in order to attend the meeting. She asked to speak a few words and when she reached the platform, she spoke about women’s equality with men. She argued that woman’s talents, energy and intellect were as capable as man’s to assume civic responsibility. As evidence of women’s ability, she argued that women’s aptitude for leadership should not be surprising considering that already “The world has seen woman in power.” 118

Female rulers served as a verifiable proof of women’s suitability for life outside the home and examples of female leadership offered a view of women with power.

Historical reference provided an explicit argument in defense of women’s equality.

Sandford used the past as her guide, stating that “From Semiramis to Victoria we have found the Women of History equal to the emergencies before them! and more than equal

— their perceptions accurately measuring the consequences of the future by the influences of the present; their judgment, their elevation and their will, using their prerogatives to change and improve their epoch!” 119 Gage echoed Sandford’s phrasing during the 1852 women’s rights convention in Syracuse, N.Y. when she commented that

“Although so much is said against the unfitness of woman for public life, it can be seen,

118 Proceedings of the Woman’s Rights Convention, Held at Rochester, NY, August 2, 1848 (New York, NY: Robert J. Johnston, Printer, 1870), 6.

119 Ibid.

54

from Semiramis to Victoria, that she has a peculiar fitness for governing.” 120 According to Sandford and Gage, female rulers, like female warriors, justified contemporary women’s demands for greater freedom and political involvement.

The existence of female rulers pointed to the extreme irony of women’s unequal status: while having as a sex been severely circumscribed by notions of ideal womanhood that denied women full-opportunity for growth and education, queens and empresses had managed to be among the most revered and respected of leaders. During the 1851

Worcester Convention, Wendell Phillips, abolitionist and women’s rights advocate, expressed his disbelief at the very idea of denying statesmanship to women. He exclaimed, “What, to the sisters of Elizabeth of England, Isabella of Spain, Maria

Theresa of Austria”? He continued, “Oh no, you cannot read history, unless you read it upside down, without admitting that woman, cramped, fettered, excluded, degraded as she has been, has yet sometimes, with one ray of her instinctive genius, done more to settle great questions than all the cumbrous intellect of the other sex has achieved.” 121

Phillips’ comments speak to the larger significance of monarch imagery in women’s rights rhetoric. Examples of female leadership underscored the constructed nature of women’s sphere and helped defend demands for higher education and entry into the professions and public life. For example, reformer Lucy Stone, when advocating for woman suffrage in a hearing before the New Jersey Legislature in 1867, utilized female ruler imagery when defending women’s desire to hold office. “Why should not a woman

120 Matilda Joslyn Gage, “Address of Matilda Gage to the National Woman's Rights Convention, Syracuse, NY, Sept. 8, 1852,” in The Proceedings of the Woman’s Rights Convention, Held at Syracuse, September 8th, 9th and 10th, 1852 (Syracuse, NY: J.E. Masters, 1852), 39.

121 Wendell Phillips, “Speech of Wendell Phillips to the 1851 Women’s Rights Convention, Assembled in Worcester, MA,” in The Proceedings of the Woman’s Rights Convention, Held at Worcester, October 15th and 16th, 1851 (New York, NY: Fowlers and Wells, Publishers, 1852), 55.

55

be President of the United States?” she asked. “The names of Elizabeth of England, of

Catherine of Russia, of Isabella of Spain, of Maria Theresa of Austria — each of these proves woman’s capacity to govern.” Stone argued that the ability to govern—and by extension the ability to participate politically by voting—was not limited to one sex. She facetiously asked, “Are American women alone incompetent for great responsibilities?”

And answered her own query with, “If so, alas, for free institutions!” 122

The search for women worthies in history helped create a greater subjectivity to both women’s place in the past and present. Imagery of strong women as warriors and rulers defied cultural conventions that depicted women as helpmate and subordinate.

Exceptional women pictured in history demonstrated that women had indeed played historically significant roles. The search for foremothers thus took on larger meaning to represent the achievement of the female sex more broadly. Attention to the past in the speeches and writings of antebellum reformers set the stage for future engagements with history to defend women’s rights. In the wake of Reconstruction, the nation began to pay more attention to the woman question and idealized representation of female historical figures took on greater social and political resonance. Especially as the country approached its centennial birthday, average Americans experienced history in new ways.

Women’s rights advocates capitalized on the interest in the past and turned their attention to the founding mothers. In doing so, reformers offered new narratives of women’s role in the building of the nation.

122 Lucy Stone, “Woman Suffrage in New Jersey, a Speech by Lucy Stone at a Hearing before the New Jersey State Legislature, Mar 6, 1867,” in Lucy Stone, Woman Suffrage in New Jersey: An Address Delivered by Lucy Stone, at a Hearing Before the New Jersey Legislature, March 6th, 1867 (Boston, MA: C.H. Simonds and Co., 1867), 15.

56

“Determined to Foment a Rebellion”: Protest and History during the 1876 Centennial

In the 1870s, armed with a new spirit of confrontational protest, women’s rights advocates attempted to reshape the meaning and significance of the American

Revolution. In the wake of Reconstruction and the approach of the United States

Centennial, the question of citizenship occupied center stage in the national discourse. 123

Suffragists questioned the narrative of American history that left out women’s contributions to democracy and the founding of the country. 124 The National Woman

Suffrage Association (NWSA), in particular, used the impending celebration of the nation’s birth to publicize their cause. Through acts of commemoration, women’s rights reformers increased their criticism of the unfulfilled promise of the American experiment.

During the Centennial and the other commemorative events leading up to the anniversary, suffragists framed their political protest in the language and images of the colonial revival. By drawing a comparison between the contemporary situation of women and the colonists, suffragists could more concretely dramatize women’s rights arguments and place their position within a trajectory of American progress and patriotism.

Beginning in 1873 with the centennial of the Boston Tea Party, suffragists turned to the past to make three important arguments in defense of women’s rights: taxation without representation was as unfair to contemporary women as it was to the American colonists;

123 The women’s rights movement split over the question of Negro and female citizenship. When Congress passed the Fifteenth Amendment granting Black men the right to vote in 1869, some women’s rights leaders objected that women were left out of the expansion of suffrage rights. Those suffragists, who included Stanton and Anthony, founded the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA). The rival organization—the American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA)—drew women from the other side of the debate, including Lucy Stone and Antoinette Brown Blackwell who supported granting Black men the vote even if that meant women were left out of the Reconstruction Amendments. See Ellen Carol DuBois, Feminism and Suffrage: The Emergence of an Independent Women’s Movement in America, 1848-1869. 2nd ed. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999).

124 Because of the shift in the movement to a singular focus on woman suffrage, throughout the rest of the chapter I will use the term suffragist.

57

women deserved the vote because they had helped defend and build the nation; and finally, the country could only truly honor the founding generation and fulfill the promise of the Revolution by granting women full rights and responsibilities of citizens.

From the beginning of the women’s rights movement, reformers had a complex relation to patriotic history. On one hand, they took inspiration from the language of the founding fathers. 125 On the other hand, reformers heavily criticized the founding principles of the country as laid out in the Declaration of Independence. In the

Declaration of Sentiments modeled after Jefferson’s text, Stanton had corrected the sex bias in the founding document by declaring “All men and women are created equal.” 126 A decade later, in 1858, Stanton constructed an argument that positioned woman suffrage as the fulfillment of the American Revolution. That year she refused to participate in the preservation of George Washington’s home by declining an offer to be a Lady Manager of the Mount Vernon Association. Stanton argued that the memory of Washington would be better honored by granting greater freedoms than restoring the dilapidated walls of his final home, declaring “What mightier monument can we raise to the memory of

Washington than to complete the pure temple of Liberty, whose foundations he laid in suffering and blood!”127 This linkage between women’s rights and the Revolutionary generation would be taken up with vigor during the nation’s centennial celebrations.

125 For use of the language of the founding fathers, see Hoffert, 32-52.

126 Elizabeth Cady Stanton, “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions,” in The Concise History of Woman Suffrage: Selections from History of Woman Suffrage, ed, Mari Jo Buhle and Paul Buhle (Urbana :University of Illinois Press, 2005), 94-95.

127 “The Purchase of Mount Vernon,” unidentified newspaper clipping, letter from Elizabeth Cady Stanton to Mary Morris Hamilton, August 27, 1858, Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. 1, pg. 76, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

58

The centennial protests marked a shift in how women’s rights advocates engaged with the past. During the antebellum era history began to serve a political purpose. The centennial commemoration crystallized that burgeoning historical consciousness, forging an ineligible link between the past and political reform among women activists. But unlike the antebellum era historical rhetoric focused on highlighting exceptional women from history, the commemorative events of the 1870s inspired suffragists to examine the lives of more ordinary American women. The Centennial prompted suffragists to rethink traditional narratives that left out women’s place in the founding of the nation and even to write their own history of the women’s rights movement.

The events of the Revolution and the Civil War framed suffrage activism during the Centennial, suggesting the importance of historical consciousness in shaping women’s political protest. Inspired by women’s recent bravery during the Civil War, suffragists made bold claims about women’s contributions to the American Revolution.

Suffragists inserted women into the events of the Revolution as active participants.

Claiming women’s valor in times of war helped their defense of women’s fitness for citizenship. For example, on April 19, 1875, the New York Woman Suffrage Society celebrated the centennial of the Battle of Lexington by offering a reappraisal of women’s role in the birthing of the nation. Suffragists constructed a new narrative of

Independence, one in which freedom was achieved through suffrage and women’s battle for the vote was analogous to the Revolutionary fight. Suffragists told a traditional tale of martial bravery but added a significant twist. They changed the familiar story to include women as war heroines. They remembered the Revolution as “a struggle in which the men and women of the land bore an equal share of hardship, of sacrifice, and of

59

suffering.” Suffragists painted a picture of injustice, accusing that “the men secured only to themselves the liberty” for which all had fought. Blake honored the “noble conduct” of the women at the Battle of Lexington and throughout the Revolution by protesting that

“The American women of that era were worthy of comparison with the heroes of the

Revolution, and yet their reward…was a mockery of the freedom gained.” 128

With the centennial of the Boston Tea Party in 1873, one of the first commemorative events leading up to the nation’s birthday celebration, suffragists utilized the past to illustrate their arguments concerning women’s citizenship. Inspired by the memory of the Boston Tea Party, suffragists based their protest on the very principle that defined the American Revolution: taxation without representation. While taxation without representation was an early claim of the women’s movement—it was included as one of the demands of the Declaration of Sentiments in 1848—the issue took on greater meaning after the Civil War. Leagues across the country, including New York City,

Rochester, San Francisco and Chicago formed to bring greater attention to the problem and organized protests by women who refused to pay their property taxes. 129 An Anti-Tax

Convention was held in Worcester, Massachusetts to protest taxation without representation and encourage women to refuse to pay real estate taxes for the year of

1872. The meeting was attended by well-known reformers Stephen and Abby Foster,

Sarah Wall and Marietta Flagg. 130 Other highly celebrated protests helped galvanize the national women’s rights community’s campaign in demanding voting rights alongside the

128 “The Celebrations at Lexington,” The New York Times, April 20, 1875, pg. 1.

129 “Tea Party Teachings,” clipping, New York Herald , Dec. 17, 1873, Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 7, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

130 “Report of the Anti-Tax Convention in Worcester,” unidentified clipping, nd. Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 14, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

60

obligation of paying property taxes. Most famously was the case of Julia and Abbie

Smith of Glastonbury, CT. 131 Beginning in 1869, when the sisters appeared before a town meeting to publicize the fact that they were refusing to pay taxes on their farm, the

Smith’s seven-year protest achieved notoriety for the cause of no taxation without representation. Due to increased publicity surrounding the centennial of the Boston Tea

Party, the Smith case helped illustrate the justice of women’s rights claims.

The Boston Tea Party anniversary was a prologue for the upcoming national

Centennial, combining past and present in political reform. Because of the Tea Party commemoration, questions of taxation without representation and woman suffrage took on renewed urgency in light of historic events. The New England Suffrage Association organized a Woman’s Tea Party for the anniversary and Lucy Stone spoke at Faneuil Hall to a packed crowd, declaring that “the principle involved, which made that Tea Party so worthy of celebration, hangs unsettled in the scale to-day.” She demanded of her audience, “Sisters, who of you will join in a pledge that when the Fourth of July, 1876, comes, we will take no part in its centennial celebration, if at that time we are, as now, held politically below the pardoned rebels, below the enfranchised slaves, and on the same level with idiots, lunatics and felons?” 132 Similarly, the New York Woman’s

Suffrage Society held a mass meeting open to all tax paying women of New York at the

Union League Theater on December 16, 1873. The meeting was organized by Clemence

S. Lozier, president of the association and Lillie Devereux Blake, secretary, and attended

131 For a detailed discussion of the Smith sisters and the issue of taxation without representation, see Linda Kerber, No Constitutional Right to be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship (New York: Hill and Wang, 1998), 81-123.

132 Lucy Stone, “The Tea-Party Twenty Years Ago,” The Woman’s Journal , December 16, 1893, pg. 394.

61

by an estimated 600 people including many well-known women’s rights leaders, notably

Anthony, who made one of her first public appearances since being convicted for illegal voting. 133 In opening the assembly, Lozier declared: “One hundred years ago our ancestors precipitated a rebellion by refusing to pay a tax, on Tea, imposed against their will. At the end of a century 20,000,000 of their daughters are suffering precisely the same wrong; taxation without representation; and it behooves us as their descendants to demand that the freedom for which our forefathers struggled shall be given to us also!”

She dramatically continued, “And to demand our right that the coming Centennial of

‘American Independence’ shall find us enfranchised, or freed from taxation and responsibility to a government which denies us personality and citizenship.”134 Blake drew laughter from the crowd when she decreed that they should “throw overboard the tax collectors in a figurative sense.” She related how in Seneca Falls women protested what they saw as unjust laws by pelting the tax collectors with quotations from the

Constitution. 135

As they looked back on the past, suffragists explored the lives of the founding mothers in ways that accentuated women’s fitness for full citizenship. Lozier remarked on women’s involvement in the early movement, highlighting in particular the significance of Mercy Otis Warren, “one of the foremost of the band of good women who

133 Following the split in the movement, in the 1870s, NWSA pioneered new strategies for gaining the vote. Called the “new departure,” women’s rights reformers experimented with radical tactics based on the premise that the 14th Amendment already enfranchised women, which resulted, most notably, in Anthony’s arrest and subsequent trial for illegally voting in 1872. “One For Susan,” unidentified newspaper clipping, 1873, Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 9, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

134 “The New York Woman’s Suffrage Society” flyer, Dec. 16, 1873, Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 5, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

135 “Tea Party Teachings,” clipping, New York Herald , Dec. 17, 1873, Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 7, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

62

had stood forward in the achievement of independence and had begun her work more than 100 years ago.” 136 By highlighting Warren and other women’s service in the founding of the nation, suffragists made important claims not only about women’s right to citizenship but their responsibilities as citizens.

Women’s rights advocates emphasized the important role women had played in the Revolution and probed the past for tales of women’s valor and patriotism. In one meeting held to commemorate the anniversary in Chicago, women discussed how 103 years ago there was another tea party before the “masculine tea party of Boston Harbor” in which a ladies’ league agreed not to use tea until the tax on tea was repealed. While the men involved in the famous Boston Tea Party destroyed the King’s tea, the women destroyed their own tea and thereby exhibited more self-denial and sacrifice. From this meeting, the Chicago women formed an anti-tax league, declaring such an act, “the only fitting celebration of the Boston tea-party.” They drew parallels between the “state of bondage”—or the tyranny of taxation without representation—of the women of today and the male colonists under English rule. 137

When drawing up the league’s founding resolutions, the women challenged perceived notions about the past and made bold claims about women’s historical significance to the Boston Tea Party. The group rewrote the popular historical narrative to illustrate their arguments concerning women’s rights. The new organization openly claimed that the actions of the women of 1770 formed “the original ‘tea party,’ the real origin of the male tea-party in Boston Harbor three years afterwards.” The women of

136 Ibid.

137 “Tea and Taxes, clipping, Chicago Tribune , Dec. 17, 1873, Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 9, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

63

1873 looked to their foremothers’ deeds and found inspiration for their own contemporary struggles against injustice, declaring “it behooves us, their descendants, to honor their foresight, and show ourselves worthy of their self-sacrifice,” by forming an

Anti-Tax League to protest against the injustice of taxing women while denying them representation. 138

History thus fueled the imagination and indignation of the suffragists. It provided the language and rhetoric to illustrate the paradox of women’s unequal citizenship.

Although this period of suffrage activism often resulted in more radical and forceful protest tactics, linking Revolutionary history with the demand for the vote and representation for taxation was also an early attempt at de-radicalizing the movement and presenting the message for the masses. Suffragists powerfully argued that “women of

1876 feel political degradation no less than did the men of 1776.” 139 By drawing a comparison between the contemporary situation of women and the colonists, suffragists could more concretely dramatize women’s rights arguments and place their position within a trajectory of American progress.

As the Centennial approached in 1876, organizers of the Philadelphia Exhibition looked to commemorate the past while at the same time celebrating the present and showcasing America’s modernity and prosperity. Organizers of the exhibition realized that they had an unprecedented opportunity to reshape public memory. 140 The mood of the festivities was one of reconciliation and national healing suggesting that many in the

138 Ibid.

139 “National Woman Suffrage Parlors,” Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 102, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

140 Gary B. Nash, First City: Philadelphia and the Forging of Historical Memory (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 265.

64

country were ready to forget the strife of Reconstruction and social tensions surrounding

Native Americans and the 1873 depression. The domestic revival of colonial history inspired by the anniversary was a constructed nostalgic view of the past, seen largely as a benchmark of American progress.

The Centennial celebration was successful largely because of women’s labor. The

Women’s Centennial Committee formed an army of fundraisers for the Centennial, raising over a million dollars. It was spearheaded by Elizabeth Duane Gillespie, great- granddaughter of Benjamin Franklin. 141 To raise money for the exhibition, women across the country held Centennial Tea Parties and sold Martha Washington medals and other souvenirs. 142 Theses tea parties, complete with historical costume, were first held to celebrate the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party which set off a rage of colonial inspired teas all over the country. 143

After the nationwide network of Women’s Centennial Committees raised funds for the celebration—in part because of a promise of a women’s exhibit in the Main

Exhibition Hall—they were told that there would be no space after all. Headed by

Gillespie, women eventually raised enough funds for a separate Women’s Pavilion, the first building at a world’s exhibition entirely planned, funded and managed by women. 144

For many advocates of women’s rights, the hard fought victory of the Women’s Pavilion rang hollow. Stanton complained that the building was an afterthought that in no way

141 Nash, 272.

142 Jeanne Madeline Weimann, The Fair Women (Chicago, Ill.: Academy Chicago, 1981), 2.

143 Joseph Miller Wilson, The Masterpieces of the Centennial International Exhibition , vol. 3 (Philadelphia: Gebbie and Barrie, 1878), clvii-clviii.

144 Weimann, 1-4.

65

reflected women’s situation and accomplishments. But, she argued, if the building was to have been “grandly historic,” the walls should have been adorned with “the yearly protest of Harriet K. Hunt against taxation without representation…framed copies of all the laws bearing unjustly upon women—those which rob her of her name, her earnings, her property, her children, her person…” 145 Ironically, Women’s Day at the Centennial was celebrated on November 7, Election Day, a day most men would be occupied with other matters, which only served to emphasize women’s unequal status. Many suffragists felt women should only participate in the Centennial by protesting women’s historical legal and political slavery. The American Woman Suffrage Association and Lucy Stone, following up on her Boston Tea Party promise of remonstration during the Centennial, arranged an exhibit case on “Protests of Women Against Taxation Without

Representation” but the female organizers of the Women’s Pavilion placed it in a location outside the view of the public, an act which further alienated suffragists from the official celebration. 146

The Centennial thus brought to the front competing understandings of women’s advancement among reformers that was reflected in different historical visions promoted during the commemoration. Many of the centennial women who helped fundraise and organize the commemoration were greatly concerned with the woman question, arguing for dress reform and married women’s property rights among other legal and cultural barriers against women. They also published the New Century , a weekly newspaper that

145 Theodore Stanton and Harriot Stanton Blatch, ed. Elizabeth Cady Stanton As Revealed in Her Letters, Diary, and Reminiscences , Vol. 1 (New York, NY: Harper & Row, 1922), 268.

146 See Mary Frances Cordato, “Toward a New Century: Women and the Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition, 1876,” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 107, no. 1 (Jan. 1983): 129-32.

66

promoted women’s advancement and which served as the organ for the Third Woman’s

Congress held in 1876. 147 Centennial women supported female involvement in the public sphere because it helped women expand their horizons and become better informed wives and mothers, therefore improving family life. They looked to balance respectability and femininity with modern ideas about women’s expanded sphere. 148

However, the choice of the more domesticated Martha Washington as the emblem of ideal American womanhood by the centennial women stood in contrast to suffragist chosen foremothers of Abigail Adams and Mercy Otis Warren who represented female rebellion. Centennial women emphasized historical pageantry, costumes and heirlooms in contrast to suffragists for whom history was more political than nostalgic. . At the heart of the difference between the more radical suffragists and the moderate centennial women was the question of enfranchisement. In addition, the centennial women wavered on their stance of accepting direct social protest and ultimately did not associate with the women’s rights movement. 149

Suffragists refused to join the national celebration and protested the anniversary as a mockery of American democracy. They scoffed at the notion of celebrating liberty when they argued women were not free and pointed out the hypocrisy of a commemoration that celebrated the spirit and principles of the Declaration of

Independence. Activists protested that during “this great day of national triumph and

147 Cordato, 119-120.

148 Cordato, 126.

149 Karal Ann Marling, George Washington Slept Here: Colonial Revivals and American Culture, 1876- 1986 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1988), 25, 42, 51.

67

national aspiration, the possibilities of a better future for women were forgotten.” 150

Instead, suffragists led a counter-movement that promoted an alternative vision of

American history and liberty. Far from a celebration, some women proposed wearing crape upon their arms during the Centennial as a sign of mourning. They pointed out that the women of the nation, “half of the people are not free.” As Matilda Gage queered,

“We ask you if women are not also citizens—part of the people?” She suggested that

“The fitting celebration for the Congress of the United States, to crown itself and the country with glory, is to prove our national principles by securing to woman protection in the exercise of her right of self-government.”151 NWSA argued that woman suffrage was a right of citizenship and saw in the anniversary an opportunity to complete American democracy.

Suffragists were equally aware of the memory-making potential in the celebration and asserted their political demands on a grand scale befitting the auspicious occasion.

Suffragists constructed their own meaning from the commemoration that differed widely from the official sponsored celebration. Suffragists called the Centennial “the grand protest” and used the commemoration as a platform for their cause. 1876 was not only a year for national celebration; it was also an election year where the political stakes were high and suffragists glimpsed political opportunities. As NWSA leadership explained,

“The underlying principles of government will this year be discussed as never before;

150 Sarah Langdon Williams, “Ballot-Box, Retrospect, July 4, 1876,” in History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 3: 1876-1885 , edited by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage (Rochester, NY: Privately published, 1886), 52.

151 Matilda Joslyn Gage, “Arguments before the Committee on the District if Columbia of the United States Senate and House of Representatives upon the Centennial Woman Suffrage Memorial of the Woman Citizens of this Nation,” (Washington D.C.: Gibson Brothers, Printers, 1876), pg. 4-5, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

68

both foreigners and citizens will query as to how closely this country has lived up to its own principles.” 152 NWSA members hoped to pressure Democrats and Republicans to add a woman suffrage plank in their platforms and also demanded seats for women at the conventions.

To take advantage of the commemoration and the election year, a committee consisting of Stanton, Anthony, Gage, Blake and Sara Spencer set up headquarters in

Philadelphia during the festivities at 1431 Chestnut Street. In the headquarters, NWSA held parlors for informal conversations and visits, held organizational conventions, kept a centennial autograph book, had rooms filled with books, prints, speeches, photographs of distinguished women and illustrations of women’s condition. 153 Public receptions were held Tuesday and Friday evenings of each week while the parlors were open every day from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. 154 Looking back on the events of 1876 later in life, Stanton expressed pride that “we felt we had accomplished a great educational work.”155

The pinnacle of women’s rights centennial protest occurred on July 4 when

Anthony led a demonstration at the Independence Hall ceremonies in which suffragists insisted on representation during the celebration. As Stanton later recalled, “Those

152 Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 14, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

152 “National Woman Suffrage Association circular, 1876,” Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 96, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

153 “National Woman Suffrage Parlors,” Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 120, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

154 “Headquarters,” Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 120, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

155 Stanton and Blatch, 262.

69

interested in women’s political rights decided to make the Fourth a woman’s day.” 156 By claiming this major civic holiday as a space for women, NWSA appropriated a male democratic ritual and thereby asserted women’s right to public culture and through extension public citizenship. Whereas much of nineteenth century public spaces were coded as masculine or feminine that served to connote sex differentiation, suffragists helped redefine the boundaries of civic culture. Events such as the Fourth of July were stalwarts of male ritual that glorified men’s roles as citizens, statesmen and soldiers. 157

By inserting themselves into the celebration, NWSA created a female spectacle of their own, protesting the male domination of the national commemoration.

Stanton, Anthony and Gage drafted “A Declaration of Rights for Woman” that outlined fully their reasoning for protesting the commemoration. They had over a thousand copies printed for wide distribution. Anthony had hoped to present the declaration as part of the official celebration but was denied. No woman appeared on the program and Anthony was told there was no space available. But they decided since women as taxpayers helped pay for the celebration their voices would be heard. Anthony,

Gage, Spencer, Blake and Phœbe Couzins forced their way through the crowds and made it to the front of the stage where they preceded to hand a surprised and outraged presiding officer their declaration. As they exited, the women handed out copies to the audience and eventually assembled on a musician’s platform in front of Independence Hall. In the shadow of the Liberty Bell and a statue of Washington, Anthony read aloud the

156 Stanton and Blatch, 259.

157 My discussion of gender and public space has been greatly informed by Mary Ryan, Women in Public: Between Banners and Ballots , 1825-1880 (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990), especially pages 17-57.

70

declaration to a crowd of onlookers. 158 The choice of location was an act imbued with great symbolism. Staging their protest at Independence Hall where the Declaration of

Independence was signed emphasized that women were denied the democratic ideals of liberty and equality enshrined at that site. 159 The protest continued with a five-hour meeting held in the First Unitarian Church, which concluded with the singing of Frances

Dana Gage’s “One Hundred Years Hence.” A hymn which would inspire generations of women activists, the lyrics looked towards the future after celebrating the events of the past: “Then woman, man’s partner, man’s equal shall stand, While beauty and harmony govern the land, And to think for oneself will be no offense, The world will be thinking, a hundred years hence.” 160

Like the Declaration of Sentiments written 28 years before, “A Declaration of

Rights for Woman” utilized the language of the American Revolution to make an argument for the right to vote. Both documents were inspired by the Declaration of

Independence and share a vision of the past that emphasized women’s historical oppression. “A Declaration of Rights for Woman” echoed the words from Seneca Falls which had posited that “The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment

158 Stanton and Blatch, 265.

159 Charlene Mires, “In the Shadow of Independence Hall: Vernacular Activities and the Meanings of Historic Places,” The Public Historian 21, no. 2 (Spring 1999): 52.

160 Ida Husted Harper, The Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony, Volume 1 (Indianapolis: Hollenbeck Press, 1898), 479; See also Eleanor Flexner , and Ellen F. Fitzpatrick, A Century of Struggle: The Woman’s Rights Movement in the United States. Rev. ed. (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1996), 164.

71

of an absolute tyrranny over her.” 161 The statement issued from Philadelphia made the accusation specific to the history of the United States, arguing “The history of our country the past hundred years has been a series of assumptions and usurpations of power over woman, in direct opposition to the principles of just government, acknowledged by the United States as its foundation.” 162 However, the tone of complaint about the oppressor being all mankind in 1848 had shifted to the state – the problem of an all-male government by 1876. 163 The women’s declaration contained as many counts and articles of impeachment as those made by the Colonists against King George in 1776. Mirroring the demands of the Revolutionaries, the women felt it would be fitting to read their declaration after the Declaration of Independence was read “as an impeachment of them and their male descendants for their injustice and oppression.” 164

Yet unlike the Declaration of Sentiments , the Centennial manifesto also offered a narrative of historical progress. The “Declaration of Rights for Woman” included a variation on the lists of complaints of male oppression, insisting that “To all these wrongs and oppressions woman has not submitted in silence and resignation.” Suffragists claimed foremothers for their insurgence, and citing the example of Abigail Adams, quoted her famous demand that “We will not hold ourselves bound to obey laws in which we have no voice or representation.” Drawing a linear account from Adams to the

161 Elizabeth Cady Stanton , Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions, in The Concise History of Woman Suffrage: Selections from History of Woman Suffrage, ed, Mari Jo Buhle and Paul Buhle (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2005), 94.

162 National Woman Suffrage Association, “Declaration of Rights,” in The Concise History of Woman Suffrage: Selections from History of Woman Suffrage, ed, Mari Jo Buhle and Paul Buhle (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2005), 300.

163 Flexner, 164.

164 Stanton and Blatch, 262.

72

present, suffragists inserted themselves into the heroic tale of women’s rebellion and triumph. The suffragists were the agents of change in this tale and they made it clear that the desire for women’s rights had been steadily increasing over the past 30 years. These demands, they argued, were inspired by “a higher motive than the pride of sex” but were necessary for the national good. 165

As they had done with the centennials of the Boston Tea Party and the Battle of

Lexington, suffragists challenged the meta-narrative of American history by making women important historical actors in the events of the Revolution. Such claims worked to sustain arguments about women’s fitness for citizenship in the present. The “Declaration of Rights for Woman” declared that “Woman has not been a heedless spectator of the events of this century, nor a dull listener to the grand arguments for the equal rights of humanity.” Emphasizing the rhetoric of Republicanism, the declaration described women’s contributions to the nation: “From the earliest history of our country woman has shown equal devotion with man to the cause of freedom, and has stood firmly by his side in its defense. Together, they have made this country what it is.” Thus women did not deserve to be handed their rights but had earned suffrage through their duties and responsibilities over the course of the century. During the national commemoration, women’s rights leaders made clear how women had helped shaped the country. As suffragists wrote: “Woman’s wealth, thought and labor have cemented the stones of every monument man has reared to liberty.” 166

165 National Woman Suffrage Association, “Declaration of Rights,” 302-303.

166 National Woman Suffrage Association, “Declaration of Rights,” 303.

73

As suffragists waged their centennial protest, they continued to look to women’s history as important symbols for their movement. They turned to founding mothers who demonstrated women’s patriotism and valor. Most significantly, Abigail Adams and

Mercy Otis Warren figured as heroines in the suffrage imagination. Adams and Warren represented early foremothers for the struggle for women’s rights. Revolutionary foremothers stood as exemplars signifying women’s longstanding involvement in the public sphere, intellectual capacity and political value. For example, when NWSA issued the call for the Centennial meeting, organizers stated that “That with Abigail Adams, in

1776, we believe that ‘the passion for liberty cannot be strong in the breasts of those who are accustomed to deprive their fellow-creatures of liberty’; that, as Abigail Adams predicted, ‘We are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by laws in which we have no voice or representation.’” 167 And when describing the

Centennial Autograph book in NWSA headquarters, the newspaper The Ballot Box drew a parallel between today’s women who advocated equal rights for women and earlier foremothers, stating that the women of 1876 represented “the highest political thought of the women of this generation, just as Abigail Adams and Mary [Mercy] Otis Warren did theirs.” 168 Such comparisons performed important cultural work by situating suffragists as modern successors of well-regarded historical predecessors, Adams and Warren.

167 “Call For The May Anniversary, 1876,” in History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 3: 1876-1885 , edited by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage (Rochester, NY: Privately published, 1886), 20.

168 Clipping, Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 14, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

168 The Ballot Box , clipping, July 1876, Susan B. Anthony Scrapbook, Vol. V, pg. 120, Susan B. Anthony Collection, Rare Books and Special Collections, LOC.

74

Women’s rights advocates demanded historical representation and protested women’s inclusion in the commemoration as merely symbolic. In particular, one women’s rights advocate, “Beth from San Francisco” critiqued the use of the allegorical woman to represent independence, asking “Why should the emblem of Liberty in the

United States be a female figure, would it not be more appropriate to have a masculine figure?” Calling the celebration a mockery of America’s “half-freedom,” this suffragist scoffed at the added insult of having the allegorical figure of female liberty on American money since “In government and finance Woman has been least recognized. This emblem seems to us a burlesque on the situation.” 169 Beth’s comments suggest the longing many women must have felt for a more substantial representation of women’s contributions to the nation during the Centennial.

As suffragists waged their protest for full citizenship they simultaneously crafted an argument in favor of women’s historicity. At the Centennial celebration on July 4,

1876, Phoebe Couzins spoke emotionally of all the women who had built the country from “the self denying and heroic pilgrim and Revolutionary mothers, of the work of woman in the Antislavery cause.” She admonished “the base ingratitude of this Nation to its Women” that throughout the grand centennial celebrations “not a tribute, not a recognition, in any shape, form or manner was paid to woman.” She objected that the nation “has taxed its women and asked the women, in whose veins flow the blood of their

169 “Well the United States of America has had it’s Centennial birthday,” by Beth, San Francisco, Cal. The Woman’s Journal , July 22, 1876, pg. 239.

75

pilgrim and revolutionary mothers, to assist by money, individual effort and presence, to make it a year of jubilee for the proclamation of a ransomed male nationality.” 170

Other women’s rights advocates also critiqued how women were largely left out of national memory during the commemoration. In one scathing commentary, suffragist

Sarah Langdon Williams wrote that “whether, from carelessness, willfulness, or wickedness, their [women’s] grand services and weary struggles in the past and hopes and aspirations for the future were left entirely out of the account.” Noting the unbalanced attention to the male sex, she railed that “certain it is that our orators were too much absorbed in the good done by men and for men, to once recur to the valuable aid, self-denying patriotism and lofty virtues of the nation’s unrepresented women.” Williams gratefully acknowledged the exceptions and offered up the few examples of orators who mentioned women in their addresses, afterwards, stating that “Think of it, ye who disparage the ability of woman! This little tribute we record with gratification.” 171 In demanding historical recognition, Williams and other commentators staked a claim for women not only in the national narrative but in the body politic as well.

Inspired by the Centennial, the publication of the multi-volume History of Woman

Suffrage evolved into the grand example of suffragists’ concern with history. Amidst all the demands for historical recognition during the Centennial, Stanton, Anthony and Gage were compelled to write their own history and construct a usable past for the

170 Speech of Phoebe Couzins, July 4 th , “Woman’s Work in the War,” The Ballot Box , Toledo, Ohio, August 1876 Vol. 1, No. 5, pg. 17.

171 Sarah Langdon Williams, “Ballot-Box, Retrospect, July 4, 1876,” in History of Woman Suffrage , vol. 3: 1876-1885, edited by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage (Rochester, NY: Privately published, 1886), 51-53.

76

movement. 172 When suffragists demanded a place in the national narrative it is not surprising that interest in securing their own past surfaced. As they set up camp in

Philadelphia during the summer of 1876, they planned to write a brief history of the movement. They estimated the project would be completed within a year but it took another decade to complete the history, which expanded into a three multi-volume work, containing an unprecedented mix of primary documents interspersed with commentary.

The work was dedicated to the memory of early advocates of women’s rights including

Frances Wright and Mary Wollstonecraft, inspiration to early women’s rights reformers. 173

Beginning with the publication of the first volume in 1881, the History of Woman

Suffrage culminated the search for a usable past spurred by the nation’s birthday celebration. Stanton, Anthony, and Gage had two main objectives in writing the history.

Firstly, amidst the booming memory business surrounding the Civil War they wanted to ensure women’s war sacrifices and subsequent denial of the vote during Reconstruction would be added to the narrative. In many ways, the history served as a monument to

Union women’s work during the war. The editors argued women’s patriotic efforts during the war entitled them to suffrage and the full rights of citizens. 174 Secondly, they desired to tell a story about the movement’s evolution as part of the celebration of the nation’s progress during the Centennial. The History of Woman Suffrage proclaimed the

172 For more on the writing of the History of Woman Suffrage , see Lisa Tetrault, “The Memory of a Movement: Re-imagining Woman Suffrage in Reconstruction America, 1865-1890,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2004.

173 See Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage, “Dedication,” in Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage , ed. History of Woman Suffrage , Vol. 1: 1848- 1861 (New York, NY: Fowler and Wells, Publishers, 1881), 3.

174 Tetrault, 48.

77

historical significance of the women’s rights movement. The three suffrage leaders wanted to make clear the improvement in women’s lives and credit this development to the movement. Women had made great advances since the antebellum era. By the 1880s, they had access to higher education, property rights, control of their own wages, entry into many professions, and in some cases, even suffrage. Stanton, Anthony and Gage wanted to ensure this history was known.

The History of Woman Suffrage would become the basis of myth and history for future generations of women activists, placing Stanton, and most of all Anthony, as the grand foremothers of the movement. The first three volumes published told a grand tale focused on creation, persecution and resurrection of the movement. 175 The first volume creates an origins story for women’s rights, locating Seneca Falls as the birthplace of the movement. Stanton and Anthony, in establishing an origins story, intended to underwrite their authority and leadership of the movement. In the second volume, the History of

Woman Suffrage tells a specific saga of women’s betrayal during Reconstruction, how women were asked to step aside and wait for the vote because it was “the Negro’s

Hour.” 176 The editors argued that by advocating black suffrage over woman suffrage, the

American Woman Suffrage Association broke with legacy of Seneca Falls – the true path in the triumphant narrative.177 The third volume opens with a chapter on “The Centennial

Year,” when after the doldrums of postbellum America, The National Woman Suffrage

Association, led by Stanton and Anthony, were ready to arouse the women of the country

175 Tetrault, 39.

176 Tetrault, 52.

177 Tetrault, 67.

78

to achieve the full rights of citizens. 178 Therefore, by controlling the memory of the movement, Stanton and Anthony used the power of historical narrative to intervene in postwar politics surrounding questions of race and sex. In the process, they cemented their leadership of a divided movement.

The events surrounding the 1876 Centennial thus provided women’s rights advocates with various opportunities to intervene in public memory. From the writing of history to acts of commemoration, suffragists attempted to construct a new civic symbolism that honored women’s contributions. In their explorations of the past, suffragists brought together questions of women’s rights, American history and national identity as they probed women’s absence from the country’s origin stories. Building on their work during the Centennial, in the following decade, suffragists created ceremonies and rituals of their own that helped further shape a political culture and a historical identity for women.

Pilgrim’s Progress: Suffrage, Invented Traditions and Foremother’s Dinners

On December 23, 1892, a dinner was held that would begin a twenty year tradition among suffragists in expressing pride in the female sex through celebrating the colonial past. The object of the event was to commemorate the heroism of the Pilgrim

Mothers on the anniversary of the landing of the Mayflower. The occasion was held in protest of the annual dinners that celebrated the deeds of the Pilgrim Fathers in which the

178 Tetrault, 57.

79

achievements of the foremothers “were unsaid and unsung at the masculine tables.” 179 By celebrating women’s achievements that were left out of history, reformers challenged women’s historical invisibility. And in doing so, they established the beginning of a female centered commemorative tradition.

The scene at this first dinner was festive. Lillie Devereux Blake and Elizabeth

Cady Stanton led a march from the reception room to the dining room to the tune of “Ta- ra-ra boom do ay,” and when a man attempted to enter the festivities, voices cried out, “A

Man? a man indeed? No man will be allowed here to-day. This is a foremother’s feast.” 180 Blake, a devoted advocate for women’s rights who had participated in the

Centennial protests, was the driving force behind these dinners. She was president of the

New York State Woman Suffrage Association from 1879 to 1890 and the New York City

Woman Suffrage League from 1886 to 1900. Under her leadership, the dinner was sponsored by the New York City Woman Suffrage League and was attended by members of women’s clubs including Sorosis, Colonial Dames, Daughters of the American

Revolution, Daughters of 1812, Columbian Daughters, King’s Daughters, Woman’s

Press Club and the Society of Political Study among others.

Suffragists’ Foremother’s Dinners had much in common with the burgeoning hereditary society movement in the 1890s. The founding of the Colonial Dames of

America and the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) had occurred just two years earlier in 1890 with the founding of the National Society of The Colonial Dames of

179 The annual Forefathers’ Day celebrations held by the New England Society of Brooklyn began in 1880. For more on these dinners see John Seelye, Memory’s Nation: the Place of Plymouth Rock (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998), 486-509.

180 “In Honor of Pilgrim Mothers,” New York Times , December 24, 1892, pg 8.

80

America the following year. Like suffragists’ critiques of the Forefather’s Dinners, the

DAR had its origins in women’s objections at a dinner of the Sons of the American

Revolution in 1890. When women were treated as guests at the dinners and not members,

Mary Lockwood and other snubbed women asked, “why is not the patriotism of the country broad and just enough to take women in, too? It is a noble for the descendents of the Revolutionary sires. But were there no mothers of the Revolution? Were these sires without dams? I trow not.” Like the colonial revival surrounding the United States

Centennial in 1876, the women who formed the DAR believed it was “time to bring forward some of the women of ‘‘76’ lest the sires become puffed up by vain glory.” 181

In their quest for a usable past, suffragists echoed similar sentiments to the DAR in critiquing the masculine bias of the past. However, unlike the DAR, suffragist

Foremother’s Dinners functioned more as political propaganda than genealogical celebration. The dinners were carefully orchestrated public events meant to publicize and highlight women’s historic role in order to secure women’s equality. In her toast, Stanton, never one to shy away from hyperbole, commented that the occasion was the most significant one in the history of the country for it marked the first time the deeds of the

Pilgrim Mothers were commemorated. Stanton remarked that even though she was carried ashore on the hands of two men, it was in fact a woman who took the first step onto Pilgrim Rock. Other toasts, given by Rev. Anna Howard Shaw and Carrie Lane

Chapman further explored the heroism of the early foremothers, Isabella Hooker gave a

181 “Women Worthy of Honor,” The Washington Post , July 13, 1890, pg. 12.

81

nod to the Pilgrim Fathers and a final toast brought the proceedings up to the present day by exploring women in law. 182

How suffragists told history during the Foremother’s Dinner mapped their political agenda of equality between the sexes. Stanton and Blake shared a common belief that women’s equality rested on women’s and men’s similarity not sex difference or female moral superiority. 183 This belief differed from the women of the DAR who stressed woman’s distinctive nature and her importance in the domestic sphere. As one representative described, “While we are Daughters of the American Revolution, we are not revolutionary in out tendencies. This is in no sense a suffrage movement. A very large proportion, we are sure, of the thinking women of our time are very far from desiring any wider range of responsibilities.” 184 In contrast, these Foremother’s Dinners laid claim to men’s and women’s common nature and shared role in creating both the private and public realms of the nation. By emphasizing women’s historic role, Stanton and Blake thus defied notions of women’s biological and mental inferiority and instead articulated views on the vital contributions women had made in the building of the country. History thus became part of the argument for women’s rights in the present.

Unlike women’s singular protests during the Centennial, the Foremother’s

Dinners evolved into an ongoing commemorative event, a yearly tradition. These rituals or invented traditions— the interaction between past and present in the creation of rituals—were central components of creating a political identity for women. The

182 Ibid.

183 Grace Farrell, Lillie Devereux Blake: Retracing a Life Erased (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2002), 102-103.

184 Mary S. Lockwood , ed. The American Monthly Magazine , Volume V, July to December (Washington D.C.: National Society of the Daughters of the Revolution, 1894), 13.

82

Foremother’s Dinners attempted to forge connections with an imagined past. Yet like all invented traditions the continuity with the past was fundamentally fabricated to align with present ideals and goals. 185 Through these events, women activists rewrote the symbolic meanings of American womanhood. History helped bolster arguments for giving women a voice in government by redefining understandings of women’s citizenship.

Like the Centennial protest, the Foremother’s Dinners represented early attempts by women’s rights advocates to redefine masculine forms of civic celebration. Women turned the tables and men were “banished” to the balcony just as women were at the

Forefather’s Dinners. 186 For most of the nineteenth century men had claimed political anniversaries such as the Fourth of July and Washington’s Birthday as public celebrations, while women had typically claimed family celebrations such as Christmas and Thanksgiving as paeans to domesticity and the private sphere. 187 In contrast to the relatively new national holiday of Thanksgiving, a domestic ceremony primarily designed by women that glorified family, femininity and the home, the suffragist celebration of the Pilgrim past was a public commemoration that served to expand women’s sphere by claiming political rights for women.

The Foremother’s Dinners represented suffragists’ continued interest in harnessing the power of the past for political purpose. Suffragists’ interpretation of their foremothers’ role was the same as the use of women rulers and warriors in antebellum women’s rights rhetoric. The Pilgrim Mothers re-imagined by suffragists became

185 See Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, ed. The Invention of Tradition (Cambridge University Press, 1992), especially Eric Hobsbawm, “Introduction: Inventing Tradition,” 1-14.

186 Lillie Devereux Blake, “Honor to the Pilgrim Mothers,” The Woman’s Tribune , January 5, 1895, pg 1.

187 Thanksgiving became a national holiday in 1863. For more on the gendered culture of holidays, see Mary Ryan, Women in Public , 39- 41.

83

symbols not of maternal devotion but of feminine courage, determination and nation- building prowess. As Blake related, “A noble band they were, those Pilgrim mothers, and we honor them all, not alone the heroines of the Mayflower, but the pioneer women from all lands whose constancy and fidelity have made possible the success of free institutions in this country.” Feminine contributions to the founding of the country were given equal attention, uplifting women from the sidelines of history. This historic role was used to give legitimacy to contemporary women’s political aspirations: “because we are the daughters of these brave women,” Blake argued “we demand our freedom today.” 188

Blake once also jokingly repeated Fanny Fern’s witty observation that “These women had not only to endure all that the Pilgrim fathers had to endure, but they had to endure the Pilgrim fathers also.” 189

During these annual meetings, the women constructed arguments about the masculine bias of history. The clubwomen bemoaned the historical inequity that failed to recognize women’s accomplishments. In one meeting, Blake noted the discrimination found in the absence of the names of the 39 Pilgrim Mothers on the commemorative tablet displayed in front of Plymouth Rock. 190 Dr. Anna Howard Shaw advocated a

Monument to the Pilgrim Mothers since even their graves were only marked by an anonymous “W” signifying a wife was lying there as well. As Shaw told the assembled

188 Lillie Devereux Blake, “Honor to the Pilgrim Mothers,” The Woman’s Tribune , January 5, 1895, pg 1.

189 Lillie Devereux Blake, “Our Forgotten Foremothers,” in The Congress of Women Held in the Women's Building, World’s Columbian Exposition, Chicago, U.S.A. 1893 (Chicago, IL: W.B. Conkey Company, 1894), 33.

190 “Privileges Before Rights,” New York Times , December 23, 1902, pg 7.

84

audience, “There never was a country as forgetful as this of its women, and never was a country which was as much helped by its women.” 191

By highlighting these forgotten women from history, suffragists made important arguments about women, domesticity and historical visibility. “This forgetfulness of all that women have done for our country is only of a piece with the usual proceedings at those masculine feasts. Year after year they have assembled to do honor to men alone,”

Blake argued. She quoted an address from one of the men’s New England dinners, which stated that “Men settled and built up the country, men struggled and labored; these good men were the progenitors of a great race.” Blake wryly commented, “As if men alone did everything — settled the country, founded the families and reared the children.” 192

Framing women’s acts as worthy of public achievement upset normal boundaries between the private/public divide of men’s and women’s spheres. As such, suffragist celebrations offered a reevaluation of what was considered historically significant.

A frequent speaker at these commemorations, Stanton commented on the many domestic sacrifices that history and memory did not record. “We hear much of Elder

Brewster and his eloquence in exhortation, prayer and praise, but nothing of Mrs.

Brewster and her twelve children shut up in a slow sailing craft, nursing, no doubt, through chicken-pox, whooping cough and the measles…” However, Stanton was quick not to confine the historical identity of these foremothers to only the domestic sphere but placed their influence in all realms of activity such as government, religion, education and civil and political rights. Citing the work of Revolutionary Foremothers Abigail

191 “Praise Pilgrim Mothers,” New York Times , December 23, 1911, pg 5.

192 Blake, “Our Forgotten Foremothers,” 33.

85

Adams, Hannah Lee Corbin and Mercy Otis Warren, Stanton noted that these women pioneered many of the broad principles of liberty incorporated into the founding ideals of the country.

Stanton thus constructed a history of women that both celebrated women’s contributions to society and offered a searing critique of women’s political inequality in the United States. In her first toast given in 1892, she blasted those who would “smile in derision” at such a significant event because for the first time, woman—who Stanton argued as mother of the race was the driving force of civilization—was given proper respect as one-half the people of the country. 193 In choosing to memorialize their foremothers, Stanton suggested that “This shows that the daughters of the Pilgrim

Mothers are learning the a, b, c of self-respect and self-assertion. If we had been apt pupils, we should have learned the lesson of self-glorification from our forefathers long ago.” She noted that at their dinners, men fondly boasted to the world their great deeds as well as their trials and tribulations in crossing the Atlantic and settling in the New World.

“But,” Stanton observed, “you would never suppose from their speeches that noble women had shared all their dangers and struggles without ever tasting the liberties they enjoyed.” 194

Stanton’s speeches were not only about the past; her argument concerning history was intended to further women’s equality in the present. Her historical survey put forth the fundamental notion that “political equality is no new idea in the minds of women,”

193 For more on feminism and theories of civilization, see Louise Michele Newman, White Women’s Rights: the Racial Origins of Feminism in the United States (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999).

194 Elizabeth Cady Stanton, “Our Foremothers,” address at the Foremothers Celebration given by the New York City Woman Suffrage Association, December 23, 1892, printed in The Woman’s Tribune , December 31, 1892, pg. 261.

86

tracing such desires to the sixteenth century. Building on the ideas she had previously outlined in The History of Woman Suffrage , Stanton encouraged her audience to peruse the volume to “read of the many heroic deeds of women.” She continued her toast by fashioning comparisons between her generation’s experience in the Civil War and the challenges faced by their foremothers during the Revolution. “With man the daughters of the Pilgrim mothers have just gone through another war for freedom…and yet they are still denied the liberty for which they too have fought and died.” She concluded her speech with a plea for activism. Since their foremothers “struggled bravely for the material necessities of our young civilization let us be as faithful in proclaiming the moral necessities of the time in which we live: demanding equal rights for all our people, men and women, of every color and nationality.” 195

In these historical speeches, Stanton put forth ideas concerning the evolution of human society. Building on theories of social Darwinism popular at the time, she constructed a timeline of evolutionary progress in which the ultimate resolution was perfect equality of the sexes. Under her historical model, humanity had begun as a matriarchy in which property and ancestry were descendent through maternal lines and women were the organizers of religion, government, health and the home. The

Matriarchate was followed by the Patriarchate in which society was dominated by men.

Yet, in contrast to Stanton’s earlier claims in which she had declared that “The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman,” by the 1890s she had revised her views of the past, suggesting a more nuanced history of patriarchy. “Man never has been able to keep woman in what he considers her

195 Ibid.

87

sphere, and never will be,” Stanton argued. “There is something pathetic in his struggles and disappointments.” She foresaw a next phase in human history in which society would be reorganized: “But there is a good time coming for both man and woman. Having alike had a taste of freedom and slavery in the Matriarchate and the Patriarchate, the signs of the times all show that we are on the threshold of the Amphiarchate.” 196 Equality of the sexes was therefore part of the evolutionary process and the march of human history.

The Foremother’s Dinners became forums for discussing all aspects of the women’s rights struggle. It was common for the dinners to include speeches on a variety of topics such as women in law, in medicine, in business and at the ballot box. At times, international topics were explored with guest speakers discussing municipal suffrage in

Sweden and radical British Suffragism. 197 As the years went by new subjects such as women voting in the Western states became a featured topic. When Mrs. Minerva Welsh from Colorado spoke at a 1908 Dinner, Blake introduced her by saying “There is one woman among us who is superior for she is a free woman and we are still slaves.” Welsh related how western women were “nearer the condition of the Pilgrim mothers. We went through the trials of frontier life with the men, and they appreciated more the value of woman’s help.” 198 The commemorative dinners thus created a space to explore interests and concerns, as for example when western women were granted suffrage, topical questions surfaced such as whether voting made women mannish.

196 “Mrs. Stanton on Our Foremothers,” The Woman’s Journal , December 29, 1894.

197 “Praise Pilgrim Mothers,” New York Times , December 23, 1911, pg 5.

198 “Men, Not Women, Gossips, She Says,” New York Times , December 23, 1908, pg 8.

88

The final dinners signaled the fading of the pioneer generation of women’s rights reformers and the rise of a new generation of suffragists who would bring new styles of political activism and historic commemoration to the forefront of the movement. The changing discussions reflected the evolving nature of the woman movement. In one of the last such events in 1910, the invited speaker Inez Milholland was a harbinger of changes to come. She spoke on the tactics of militant suffrage and the British suffragettes. She told the assembled crowd, “We can only emulate them, though such methods as they have used are not necessary here—yet.” 199 Milholland’s speech foreshadowed the militant turn among some American suffragists in the coming years. Milholland and her generation of suffragists would continue the search for a usable past begun by their nineteenth century forebears but would redefine in their own ways the importance of women in history.

Conclusion

A year after she began the Foremother’s Dinners, Lillie Devereux Blake spoke passionately about the importance of women in history in a speech entitled, “Our

Forgotten Foremothers,” a powerful meditation on women and historical invisibility. She gave that speech at the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago, a place where history was remade. The fair commemorated the 400 th anniversary of Columbus but the event provided the impetus for rethinking all aspects of America’s historical identity.

199 “Woman Suffrage Wants Sacrifices,” New York Times , December 23, 1910, pg 12.

89

Most famously, Frederick Jackson Turner delivered his foundational thesis, “The

Significance of the Frontier in American History,” to a gathering of historians. 200

While less well-known than Turner’s groundbreaking thesis, women’s history was also a popular topic during the commemoration and was part of the important historical work accomplished at the exposition. The fair brought together many of the historical themes that had long occupied women’s rights advocates since the antebellum era: an interest in female rulers and powerful women, staking a claim for women in national commemorations (and thus national identity) and questioning women’s absence from the historical record while simultaneously forging a memory of women’s historic role. As

Mary Newbury Adams, chair of the Historical Committee of the Exposition at Chicago argued, “This century needs the history of womanhood in civilization.” 201 Both Adams and Blake presented their speeches at the World’s Congress of Representative Women, a convention held during the Fair for discussing of women’s issues. The Congress was held in the Women’s Building, a project designed and run solely by women, to counteract the dismissal of women’s interests during the 1876 Centennial Philadelphia Exposition.

Building on all the historical work done by women reformers throughout the nineteenth century, Blake questioned the masculine bias surrounding the past and insisted that women were active participants in history. In her speech Blake protested the complete lack of historical attention given to women’s contributions to the country. As

Blake complained, “The whole history of our country has been written from man’s

200 Frederick Jackson Turner, “The Significance of the Frontier in American History,” Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1893 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1894), 5-37.

201 Adams, “Influence of Great Women,” 346.

90

standpoint, and women, however great, how-over noble, have been ignored.” 202 Blake criticized that the memory of men who worked to build the nation had been perpetuated in the names of cities, rivers and mountains, but no one bothered to record women’s roles and deeds. “And we have become so accustomed to this policy of silence,” Blake argued,

“that we are prone to submit to it, without even a protest, ourselves even forgetting to give honor where honor is due.” 203

Blake began her talk with Queen Isabella of Castile, who she considered to be the foremother of the country. Waxing eloquently about Isabella’s intellect and the importance of her explorations of the New World, Blake resented “how completely has she been forgotten in all the celebrations and festivities of this commemorative year!

Orators speak of the great enterprise of Columbus, poets rhymed in his honor, but

Isabella, the woman who made his expedition possible, was scarcely mentioned.” She recounted how she had undertaken a futile search to find a portrait of Queen Isabella but only found endless pictures of Columbus, depicted in every possible fashion. Blake complained that “nowhere could we find a likeness of Isabella at any price. High and low through the city and up and down the land, we searched in vain.” In the end, Blake had her own image of Isabella painted, enlarged from a small picture in a book, commenting,

“Thus was this great woman forgotten.” 204

Yet Blake concluded her speech on an optimistic note, stating that “But turning from the scenes of the past, let us look forward to the swiftly coming time of our

202 Blake, “Our Forgotten Foremothers,” 34.

203 Ibid.

204 Blake, “Our Forgotten Foremothers,” 32.

91

emancipation. The forgetfulness of the past is rapidly giving way to the acknowledgments of the present.” Blake recognized that the exploration of the past reflected the changing status of women in America. She noted that “Where our ancestors had oppression and subordination, we have opportunity and almost equality. The end is nearly in sight, and the time will surely come when the deeds and the achievements of the foremothers will be applauded with those of the forefathers…” 205

Queen Isabella became such an important symbol for reformers that leading up to the World’s Fair, a group of women’s rights advocates formed the Queen Isabella

Association to honor her contributions. The women rewrote the Columbus narrative and insisted on Queen Isabella’s right to be regarded as co-discoverer of America. They raised money to commission sculpture Harriet Hosmer to create a statue of the queen as a reminder of a woman’s role in Columbus’ voyage. Hosmer described her work on the sculpture as a “labor of love,” “Because I am a woman, and so feel glad to give due honor to one of my own sex. Men, you know, do not often pay this acknowledgment to a woman’s service, so it seems especially appropriate for women to do so.” 206 The statue was to have a dual purpose. On one hand, it was meant to depict in historical likeness the form of the queen. But on the other hand, the sculpture was meant to represent the female sex more broadly, as a monument “to embody the ideal of woman’s sympathy and helpfulness in all heroic action.” 207 Isabella Beecher Hooker, Vice-President of the association hoped that after the celebration the statue could be housed in the Capitol

205 Blake, “Our Forgotten Foremothers,” 35.

206 H. C. Upton. “The Statue to Queen Isabella, How Miss Hosmer Will Represent Her Giving Her Jewels to Columbus,” Chicago Daily Tribune , October 6, 1889. pg. 3.

207 “Shall Queen Isabella Have a Statue,” The Woman’s Tribune , January 25, 1890, pg. 28.

92

Rotunda in Washington D.C. to remind the congressmen that it was a “woman who made it possible for them to be there.” 208 While the statue was never displayed in the Rotunda, later generations of women’s rights activists would work to make Hooker’s dream of a public memorial to a woman in the U.S. Capitol a reality.

The past thus inspired women’s activism in important ways. The search for a usable past shaped nineteenth century women’s rights rhetoric and protest. History gave meaning to their demands. Activists like Blake, Adams and Hooker redefined the terms upon which history would be judged. The search for women’s history went hand in hand with demanding increased political rights. Throughout the nineteenth century, women’s rights advocates placed woman and not man as the main subject of history. By doing so, reformers staked a claim in the nation’s past and future. Historical imagery informed discussions concerning women’s fitness for citizenship, an evolving women’s rights ideology and the attainment of social power. The study of the search for a usable past, therefore, provides insight into how women’s rights reformers came to terms with both their place in the public sphere and their place in history.

208 Isabella Beecher Hooker, “Speech by Isabella Beecher Hooker to the National Council of Women of the United States, Assembled in Washington, DC, Feb 25, 1891,” in Rachel Foster Avery, ed. Transactions of the National Council of Women of the United States, Assembled in Washington D.C., February 22 to 25, 1891 (Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1891), 324.

93

CHAPTER 3 CLAIMING THE MANTLE OF THE PIONEERS: COMPETING MEMORIES IN THE FIGHT FOR SUFFRAGE AND THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT

Towards the end of her long life, suffragist Alice Paul reflected on the importance of women’s history to her activism. She recalled growing up never hearing the name of

Elizabeth Cady Stanton or Susan B. Anthony. Although she knew about Lucretia Mott as a famous Quaker, Paul claimed she knew nothing about her work in the woman movement. “But I meant, nobody knew it. Nobody who had just an ordinary college education had ever been told a thing about these [women] or ever heard of it [the woman movement]. And the woman movement wasn’t enough developed so that people were talking about the generation before them.” If Paul’s comments are hard to believe in places (her own mother Tacie Perry Paul was a suffragist who often attended suffrage meetings with her daughter in tow), Paul’s remarks offer insight into her beliefs about the power of the past.

While fighting for suffrage and equal rights, Paul constructed a movement memory through organizing historical pageants, birthday celebrations of the pioneers and later holding meetings in front of a memorial to Stanton, Anthony and Mott. Of course, her selected memory also serves to highlight her own importance in the collective memory of the women’s movement. Paul shared these thoughts with Amelia Frye during an oral history. 209 Frye immediately termed Paul’s tactics “consciousness-raising” in the

209 Frye discusses the oral history in two articles, see: Amelia R. Fry “Suffragist Alice Paul’s Memoirs: Pros and Cons of Oral History,” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 2, no. 2 (Summer 1977): 82-86 and

94

language of 1970s feminism, what Frye defined as “of women about women.” While

Paul did not know anything about consciousness-raising, she affirmed that the history of the pioneers helped change impressions about women’s rights: “I think when you think of this period, not only did it—as you can see very easily—in a very short time, change the feeling of people toward accepting an amendment to the Constitution.” 210

Paul’s remarks suggest the conscious effort it took to turn history into a usable past. As is often the case, there is a loss of memory that occurs between generations of women. Since women’s achievements were not broadly celebrated in the wider culture, the record of women’s past needed to be searched for over and over again. Thus each generation had to rediscover and find new meaning in women’s history. An exploration of women’s rights agitation in the early twentieth century reveals the growing interest in commemorating the history of suffrage pioneers. Paul’s comments illuminate the vital role women’s history—specifically veneration of feminist foremothers—played in constructing solidarity among women activists and in garnering popular support for women’s rights. History helped inspire activism among a new generation and Paul’s comments reflect the importance that younger activists placed on history. Twentieth- century suffragists desired role models for their activism and found inspiration from the foremothers of the movement. Like the search for female warriors, queens and founding mothers in the nineteenth century women’s rights movement, veneration of the suffrage pioneers in the early twentieth century suffrage movement bonded suffragists together in

Amelia R. Fry, “The Two Searches for Alice Paul,” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 7, no. 1 (1983): 21-24.

210 Alice Paul, Conversations with Alice Paul: Woman Suffrage and the Equal Rights Amendment. An Interview conducted by Amelia Fry, The Suffragists Oral History Project, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 1976, pp. 512-513.

95

a heroic fight for the vote. Solidifying a usable past for women helped leaders like Carrie

Chapman Catt and Alice Paul to transform the fledging suffrage struggle into a successful mass movement.

Despite Paul’s statement to the contrary, the nineteenth century woman movement was highly conscious of the importance of creating a movement history. 211 As a result, suffragists like Paul had access to seminal works such as the History of Woman

Suffrage and The Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony . These texts served as illustrations of the important work that had gone before and laid the foundation for the mythos that surrounded the pioneers of the early movement. 212 But as Paul recalled, the work of establishing these touchstones required giving new meaning to the events of the past.

With a canon of feminist foremothers established, competing factions of the women’s movement focused on laying claim to the mantle of the pioneers and preserving their contributions to the suffrage struggle. Building on the search for a usable past begun in the nineteenth century, suffragists continued to critique women’s exclusion from the historical record. However, in the early twentieth century, the movement shifted away from searching for a usable past towards claiming a usable past. Emphasis was placed on a different type of historical work—documenting the history of the movement. This turn

211 See chapter two of the dissertation as well as Lisa Tetrault, “The Memory of a Movement: Re-imagining Woman Suffrage in Reconstruction America, 1865-1890,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2004 and Lisa Tetrault, Memory of a Movement: Woman Suffrage and the Creation of a Feminist Origins Myth, 1865-1900 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, forthcoming).

212 For more on the importance of this historiography see Julie Des Jardins, Women and the Historical Enterprise in America: Gender, Race, and the Politics of Memory, 1880-1945 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003) and Ellen Carol DuBois, “Making Women’s History: Historian-Activists of Women’s Rights, 1880-1940,” in Woman Suffrage and Women’s Rights (New York: New York University Press, 1998) , 210-238.

96

began in the 1880s with the publication of The History of Woman Suffrage but culminated in the final decades of the suffrage struggle. 213

Whereas previously women’s rights reformers cast a wide net in their use of female symbols—ranging from Amazons to Pilgrim Mothers— increasingly twentieth- century suffragists focused their use of history to the pioneers of the movement. The focus was no longer on rescuing lost figures from history such as Queen Isabella during the 1893 World’s Fair. With few exceptions such as the National American Woman

Suffrage Association’s (NAWSA) celebration of Sacajawea or the National Woman’s

Party’s (NWP) referencing of Joan of Arc imagery, a narrower vision of women’s history began to emerge among suffragists, heralding the single-minded focus on suffrage in the movement. 214

In this mainstreaming of suffrage activism, more radical and nonconformist figures such as Stanton largely disappeared from the rhetoric on the pioneers and the more reputable and highly-regarded Anthony became the patron saint of the movement. 215 Especially after the 1895 publication of The Woman’s Bible , more conservative suffragists considered Stanton too radical and tried to dissociate her from

213 There were earlier written histories of the movement, for example, Paulina Wright Davis, A History of the National Women’s Rights Movement for Twenty Years (New York: Journeymen printers’ co-operative association, 1871) but the HWS stands as the grand example of this genre.

214 See Wanda S. Pillow, “Searching for Sacajawea: Whitened Reproductions and Endarkened Representations,” Hypatia 22, no. 2 (Spring 2007): 1-19 and Ronald W. Taber, “Sacagawea and the Suffragettes: An Interpretation of a Myth,” The Pacific Northwest Quarterly 58, no. 1 (Jan. 1967): 7-13. On Joan of Arc imagery see Linda Ford, Iron-Jawed Angels: The Suffrage Militancy of the National Woman’s Party, 1912-1920 (Lanham: University Press of America, 1991), 33, 236, 249. An interesting discussion of Joan of Arc imagery in the British suffrage movement from which the National Woman’s Party drew much inspiration can be found in Lisa Tickner, The Spectacle of Women: Imagery of the Suffrage Campaign, 1907-14 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988).

215 Sara Hunter Graham, Woman Suffrage and the New Democracy (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1996), 42-44.

97

the organization to avoid her views damaging the reputation of the suffrage campaign.

NAWSA wanted to change negative images of the movement but also did not want to disavow the heritage of the pioneers. This internal conflict contributed to Anthony becoming the dominant symbol of the movement. Anthony’s preeminent status became more deeply embedded in movement memory with the publication of her biography and was sealed after the pioneer’s death in 1906. 216

In the decades before and after the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, women’s history was used to forge a new political identity for women. The past powerfully shaped a burgeoning women’s political culture. In order to communicate more effectively to the public it was necessary for women to construct a political language that spoke to women’s experience. Politics was dominated by masculine imagery such as the common-man, the frontiersman and the statesman-soldier. Suffrage iconography helped transform traditional ideas about gender and highlighted women’s new political role. 217 Suffragists incorporated themselves into male-centered rituals to lay claim to public space and the rights of active citizenship. This form of publicity and propaganda brought the ideas of the movement into the parlors of everyday Americans, helping to change negative impressions of woman suffrage.218 Both NAWSA and NWP leadership consciously turned to the past in shaping political objectives. Paul’s comments help us realize the underlying (and underappreciated) historical consciousness implicit in this suffrage iconography.

216 Graham, 46-52; Des Jardins, 196-198.

217 Edith Mayo, “Introduction to Woman Suffrage,” in Doris Stevens, Jailed for Freedom: American Women Win the Vote ed. Carol O’Hare (Troutdale, Oregon: NewSage Press, 1995), 23-24.

218 See Margaret Finnegan, Selling Suffrage: Consumer Culture & Votes for Women (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999).

98

Suffragists used history in three distinct ways: in political protest and spectacle, in shaping movement memory, and in acts of remembering meant for public consumption.

By focusing on the use of history within the National American Woman Suffrage

Association, later the League of Women Voters, and the Congressional Union (CU), later the National Woman’s Party, we can better understand how historical memory shaped the organizational cohesion of the women’s movement in the early twentieth century. The production of history thus reflected the conflicting dynamics of the movement as

NAWSA and NWP battled over strategy, ideology and memory. Disagreements over the direction of the movement as expressed through conflicts over historical memory echoed the division between the National Woman Suffrage Association and the American

Woman Suffrage Association during Reconstruction.

After winning the vote, suffragists used the past in two distinct ways: NAWSA chose to simultaneously declare victory and close the chapter on the movement’s history to shift energies to new social issues while the NWP preferred to keep the past alive to use as ongoing inspiration in continuing the struggle for women’s rights. History was used to symbolize new directions for women activists in the form of the League of

Women Voters and the campaign for the Equal Rights Amendment. In addition, attempts at memorializing their victory led suffragists to even greater conflicts over public memory.

“Across the Years You Echo Yet”: Historical Memory and the Anthony Amendment

Since the 1893 World’s Fair, the women’s movement had undergone many changes resulting in new organization, larger membership, shifting ideas about how to

99

win the vote and the construction of a movement memory. While traditionally the period from 1896 – 1910 has been known as the Doldrums because suffragists made little progress on either the state or federal level, it was also a vibrant period of growth and renewal. Beginning in 1890 with the reconciliation between NWSA and AWSA and the creation of a united suffrage organization, the National American Woman Suffrage

Association, the movement underwent a transformation that turned the suffrage struggle into a mass movement. 219 During this time, history and memory served both educational and propaganda purposes as a new narrative emerged that presented a sanitized version of the past designed to sell suffrage work as respectable. 220 Through commemoration of the pioneers, especially Susan B. Anthony, NAWSA and the Congressional Union (later the

National Woman’s Party) sanctioned official narratives to give public meaning to suffrage ideology.

In 1900, Carrie Chapman Catt succeeded Anthony as president of NAWSA, signaling the rise of a younger generation of suffragists and a new direction for the organization. Catt brought greater efficiency to NAWSA’s organizational tactics. Under her leadership, policy making became more oligarchic and less democratic while the goals of the organization became narrow and restricted. While this strategy proved effective, the price of this victory was high. Suffrage work evolved into an impersonal and professionalized bureaucracy but this came at the cost of a loss of control at the local and state levels and as well as a move away from the movement’s democratic and radical

219 For more on this history see Sara Hunter Graham, Woman Suffrage and the New Democracy.

220 Graham, 33 and 43.

100

origins. Eventually, NAWSA excluded blacks, working women, and socialists and during

World War I, feminists, radicals, and some pacifists were also barred. 221

The past figured prominently in suffrage rhetoric because it allowed for the possibility of changing perceptions about women’s abilities. The question of the lack of female greatness haunted the movement and suffragists realized that history could be used to refute such claims. Like the glorification of female rulers and warriors in the rhetoric of the antebellum women’s rights movement, twentieth-century suffragists heralded women’s past achievements. Many advocates of suffrage argued that women’s accomplishments were not better known because of how history was taught. Prof. Earl

Barnes expressed this idea when he suggested the “absurdity” that when he asked schoolchildren in Rochester, New York, the hometown of Susan B. Anthony, to write about their role models not a single child chose the city’s most famous resident. He claimed this result was because society was only just beginning “to realize that a woman may be something great and splendid and magnificent in life. Because we are only just beginning to realize that it is a mistake to write a United States history that gives 499 pages to men and a half a page to women.” 222

Suffragists turned to the school system as an institutional space for changing the hearts and mind of the nation. Through debates on suffrage and critiques of textbooks that overlooked women, suffragists sought to revolutionize what American children learned about women. Through NAWSA’s Committee on Education, suffragists brought

221 Graham, 149.

222 Prof. Earl Barnes, speech entitled “The Educative Value of Political Life,” in Paper Read Before the Seneca Falls Historical Society For the Year 1908 , Proceedings of the Sixtieth Anniversary of the Woman’s Rights Convention Held in Seneca Falls in July 1948, 60th Anniversary Folder, Seneca Falls Convention Anniversary Celebrations, National Park Service, from the files of Women’s Rights National Historical Park, Seneca Falls, New York (hereafter: WRNHP).

101

women’s history into the classroom by distributing pictures and organizing talks about women’s rights pioneers. Suffragists also supplied schools with books containing suffrage speeches, poems, and tracts while simultaneously investigating the content of textbooks to understand how women’s accomplishments were presented to students. 223 In their effort to find suitable text books, members of the Committee on Education spent six months writing letters to 400 superintendents of schools and twenty-six school book publishing houses inquiring about the place of women in their 1909 texts. While some respondents declared women were not ignored in their books because Betsy Ross, Molly

Pitcher, Martha Washington and Dolly Madison were often included, many others replied they had “given the subject no thought.” From this survey, Pauline Steinem, chairman of the committee, concluded that the lack of recognition given to women was not intentional but the result of “the masculine point of view” that dominated society. She argued the impression conveyed by school text books “is that this world has been made by men and for men.” 224

While suffragists worked to change public consciousness about women’s history, the past had its most profound impact within the movement. History was a vital tool for movement building and NAWSA organized outreach programs to educate activists about women in history. The woman suffrage movement is notable for the conscious attention paid to the writing of women’s past, including the history of the movement itself. That

Stanton began writing and preserving the history of the movement within just a few years

223 Ida Husted Harper, ed. History of Woman Suffrage , vol. 5: 1900-1920 (New York, NY: National American Woman Suffrage Association, 1922), 224.

224 Ida Husted Harper, ed. History of Woman Suffrage , vol. 5: 1900-1920 (New York, NY: National American Woman Suffrage Association, 1922), 263.

102

after the Seneca Falls Convention further underscores this point. 225 The writing of the first three volumes of the History of Woman Suffrage between 1880 and 1886 punctuated the value of history to the movement. Biographies and autobiographies of suffrage pioneers most notably, Eighty Years and More (1898) by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and The

Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony by Ida Harper (1899) were influential texts for the new generation of suffragists.

Telling stories of the suffering of the pioneers framed the suffrage struggle as a moral obligation, and reminded younger activists that the privileges currently enjoyed such as access to higher education and property rights were due to earlier activism.

Beginning in 1902, the year the fourth volume of the History of Woman Suffrage debuted edited by Anthony and Harper, NAWSA created circulating suffrage libraries that included books on feminist thought, biographies of famous women and histories of the movement. 226 Similarly, lectures about women’s rights pioneers educated suffragists about movement history. 227 Suffrage Correspondence Schools educated suffrage campaign workers about women’s issues and several of the lessons were devoted to women’s history in the United States and the world. In reviewing the past struggles of the

225 Elisabeth Griffith, In Her Own Right: The Life of Elizabeth Cady Stanton (New York: Oxford University Press, 1984), 87.

226 By the early twentieth century suffragists had a wide array of written material on women from which to build their circulating libraries. The 1890s in particular was an especially fruitful period of women’s historical scholarship ranging from Alice Earls’s patriotic histories to works on feminist thought such as Women and Economics (1898) by Charlotte Perkins Gilman. See Julie Des Jardins, Women and the Historical Enterprise for more on the production of women’s historical writing.

227 Graham, 40.

103

pioneers, the lesson queried, “HOW CAN WE WOMEN OF TODAY PAY THIS

DEBT?” 228

Memory-making was also good business sense. NAWSA leadership capitalized on the memory of the pioneers as important sources for fundraising. Within the movement there was already a tradition of using Anthony’s popularity to raise funds. As early as 1896 it was suggested that “Aunt Susan B. Anthony’s birthday be called

‘Woman’s Day’ throughout civilized lands” and that day would be “a grand woman’s holiday.” The purpose of the day would be for all women to “gratefully drop into her ward contribution box a dime or nickel for the cause of woman.” 229 The yearly celebration of Anthony’s birthday set up a precedent for annual commemorations of her birth after her death in 1906 that cemented the suffrage leader’s place in the historical memory of the movement. Invoking her memory became a central tenet of suffrage ideology, as for example, in the establishment of the Susan B. Anthony Memorial Fund.

Promotional material quoted Anthony’s declaration that “If I have lived to any purpose, carry on the work I have to lay down,” and declared “This dying charge imposes on every believer in equal rights a solemn duty to help raise, as this great Leader’s memorial, a fund through which to vindicate her life purpose.” The Anthony Memorial Fund asked women to recognize their “debt of gratitude” to the pioneer who secured the “improved status of women to-day” by donating a generous contribution to the cause. 230

228 “New York State Woman Suffrage Party, Suffrage Correspondence School,” Folder 8, Box 12, Suffrage Collection, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, Northampton, MA (hereafter: SSC).

229 “Proceedings of the Twenty-eighth Annual Convention of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, 1896,” pp. 13-14. Folder 12, Box 4, Suffrage Collection, SSC.

230 “Susan B. Anthony Memorial Fund,” Folder 12, Box 17, Elizabeth Boynton Harbert Collection, HL.

104

Images of the pioneers graced an array of suffrage commodities such as calendars, postcards, ribbons, photographs, and pins among a host of other material objects that served to popularize the cause. 231 These items emphasized a common pantheon of feminine heroines that created a sense of community among women activists. In particular, suffrage calendars were a popular means of celebrating the past history of the movement. One popular calendar was the Woman’s Century Calendar (1899) assembled by Carrie Chapman Catt. The calendar included photographs of Susan B. Anthony,

Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Elizabeth Blackwell, Antoinette Brown

Blackwell, and Lucy Stone among other trailblazers for women’s rights. It also outlined milestones in the history of the struggle for women’s rights over the last century. These landmarks in women’s history made up a narrative of progress that emphasized the important work of the woman movement. The year 1800 was positioned as a time of

“Ignorance” and “Repression” while 1900 promised to be a year full of “Liberty” and

“Equality.” 232 Yet another publication, the Birthday Calendar (Perpetual) of Suffrage

Women arranged by Jane A. Stewart contained quotes and photos of famous suffragists.

Birthdays of noted women’s rights reformers from Mott in January to Wollstonecraft in

April and so forth presented a cyclical framework for celebrating women’s accomplishments. 233 The Susan B. Anthony Calendar of 1918 included quotations from

231 Finnegan, 116.

232 Carrie Chapman Catt , ed. Woman’s Century Calendar (New York: National American Woman Suffrage Association, 1899), ephSBA Box # 11, Susan B. Anthony Ephemera Collection, HL.

233 Birthday Calendar (Perpetual) of Suffrage Women, 1904, arranged by Jane A. Stewart, ephSBA Box # 11, Susan B. Anthony Ephemera Collection, HL.

105

Anthony’s life and speeches. The focus solely on Anthony suggests once again her towering status in the suffrage imagination. 234

Aside from selling suffrage through consumer goods, actual artifacts of the pioneers gave their deeds a tangible presence to a younger generation of activists. Relics of the foremothers provided a powerful link with the past, a kind of living historical memory. For example, in a 1911 speech on “The New Democracy,” Anna Howard Shaw, president of NAWSA, described how she had in her possession a small flag worn by

Anthony which was taken from her open coffin to be presented to the next president of

NAWSA. The flag had four diamond stars representing Nevada, Utah, Wyoming and

Colorado, the four states where women could vote. Shaw described her pride in recently taking the flag to Tiffany’s to add another star to mark the suffrage victory in Washington

State. Telling such stories elevated the often mundane work involved in securing suffrage by adding a dose of sentimentality and drama. Shaw’s maudlin tale expressed the importance of persistence, emphasizing the continuing suffrage victories after Anthony’s death. The Anthony flag represented the continuity between past and present and the ongoing success of the movement. 235

The drama and emotion of the pioneers’ struggles provided a dramatic discourse that functioned as movement mythology. The reverence for relics of the pioneers was highlighted in December 1916 when a room devoted “to the perpetual memory of Susan

B. Anthony” was dedicated in the new NAWSA headquarters on Rhode Island Avenue in

234 The Susan B. Anthony Calendar, 1918 . Quotations from her Life and Speeches Compiled by Grace Hoffman White (New York: Barse & Hopkins Publishers, 1917), ephSBA Box # 11, Susan B. Anthony Ephemera Collection, HL.

235 “Greater Than Lincoln,” New York Times , February 14, 1911, pg. 3.

106

Washington D.C. The Susan B. Anthony memorial room displayed many of the pioneer suffragist’s personal belongings. NAWSA intended to use this Anthony collection of relics as the basis to build a suffrage museum in the future. 236 The possessions held the power to inspire and invoke the spirit of the pioneers.

Again and again, Anthony’s memory was privileged over the other pioneers, and as the narrative went, it was Anthony standing alone against the establishment. The perpetual emphasis on Anthony further elevated her stature in the movement as suffragist extraordinaire, solidifying her iconic status. At the dedication ceremony for the Anthony

Memorial Room, Dr. Shaw explained “We are here today to dedicate this particular room—may I say, this particular house—to the service to which Miss Anthony, more than any other person, devoted herself, and seemingly, alone.” Shaw’s comments underscore an object lesson for the women in the movement—that persistence paid.

“Year after year Miss Anthony used to come down here to Washington, and stay the whole winter through, fighting a lonely and yet a magnificent fight.” 237 Shaw sketched a trajectory that led from Anthony’s solitary figure to the masses of women currently involved in the cause.

Attention to the past implied that suffragists today were on the right side of history and during the annual meetings of the National American Woman Suffrage

Association, devotion to the foremothers was readily apparent. References to the pioneers peppered the speeches and the iconography of the assembly. In typical fashion, attendees of the 1907 NAWSA convention in Chicago were greeted by a bust of Susan B. Anthony,

236 “Will Honor Miss Anthony,” The Washington Post , December 15, 1916, pg 5.

237 “Dedicate Anthony Room,” The Washington Post , December 18, 1916, pg 3.

107

its pedestal draped with the American flag. The same platform was adorned with a portrait of Lucy Stone who it was said “looked down on the speakers in serene benediction.” 238 Suffragists attending the 1902 NAWSA Convention were welcomed “in the name of our never-forgotten pioneers, a Mott, a Stone, a Gage, a Griffing, a Garrison, a May, a Foster, a Douglass, a Phillips, we reverently welcome you.” 239

The emphasis on history helped build a constituency by bonding activists together with a shared, heroic past. Associating contemporary activism with the longer trajectory of the movement mobilized women for action and built a collective identity for twentieth- century suffragists. Noting the sacrifice of the pioneers, one speaker declared at the 1902

Convention that “the paths were marked out that have been trodden with bleeding feet for half a century.” 240 At that same convention, Carrie Chapman Catt closed her address with remarks meant to rally the women to action, stating, “We of a younger generation have taken up the work where our noble and consecrated pioneers left it.” 241 This type of reverence for the pioneers speaks to how historical memory shaped the collective identity of suffragists.

The power of the past in movement-building was illustrated at the NAWSA

Convention of 1908, which celebrated the 60th anniversary of the Seneca Falls

Convention. The commemorative nature of the meeting was emphasized with references to the “Spirit of 1848” and the distribution of reprinted copies of the “Declaration of

238 Harper, ed. History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 5, 193-194.

239 Harper, ed. History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 5, 26.

240 Harper, ed. History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 5, 25.

241 Harper, ed. History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 5, 30.

108

Rights” ratified at the Seneca Falls Convention. 242 During the anniversary, Shaw spoke on the swelling of new recruits and the progress of the cause. Significantly, she ended her speech with talk of the suffering of the pioneers. She affirmed the importance of the forbears of the movement stating that “the path has been blazed for us” because the pioneers “have shown us the way.” 243 Their trials contrasted with the promise of triumph in the near future. Weaving a history with an approaching heroic conclusion, Shaw declared to her audience, “Who shall say that our triumph is to be long delayed? It is the hour for us to rally.” 244

Like NAWSA, Anthony figured prominently in the political imagery of the

Congressional Union and National Woman’s Party. In meetings, celebrations and protest,

Anthony was given due honor as pioneer leader to the cause. A 1915 cover of The

Suffragist, the organ of the Congressional Union, featured a Nina Allender cartoon, “Lest

We Forget.” It depicted a solitary Anthony walking up the Capitol steps in 1875 juxtaposed with 1915 when a never-ending line of women leading to Congress, including college graduates, voters and those women still denied suffrage, pay tribute to

Anthony. 245

How the CU conceptualized Anthony as symbol represented the organization’s distinctive approach to the suffrage campaign from NAWSA. The CU formed in the

1910s because there was growing dissatisfaction with how NAWSA was running the

242 “40th Annual Convention of the National American Woman Suffrage Ass’n,” Folder 12, Box 17, Elizabeth Boynton Harbert Collection, HL.

243 Harper, ed. History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 5, 242.

244 Harper, ed. History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 5, 242.

245 Nina Allender, “Lest We Forget,” cartoon, The Suffragist , February 20, 1915, cover.

109

movement. The emphasis on individual state campaigns appeared impractical, slow and out of date to younger activists who wanted to shift suffrage work towards attaining a federal amendment and more militant tactics. 246 Two such suffragists, Alice Paul and her close friend Lucy Burns had a troubled relationship with NAWSA beginning with their leadership of the Congressional Committee. Paul and Burns founded an independent organization, the Congressional Union that focused on the federal campaign exclusively.

Increasingly, tensions between Paul and NAWSA leadership became irreconcilable and the two organizations stopped cooperating.

While the NAWSA tradition fondly recalled Anthony as “Aunt Susan” who was patron saint or mother to the movement, the Anthony in the memory of the National

Woman’s Party was a far more rebellious figure. As suffragist Ethel Adamson commented, “She certainly was a militant in her day—Thank God we’re her ‘spiritual children.’” 247 Recalling Anthony’s strident tactics such as illegally voting and protesting the 1876 Centennial legitimized the NWP’s politics, especially the focus on the drive for a federal amendment. Anthony provided motivation and validation for CU and NWP strategies in aggressively forcing the suffrage question. As The Suffragist touted, “it was the inspiration that came of the unnerving vision of Susan B. Anthony—her realization that politicians must be forced, not cajoled” 248

It is not surprising that the CU’s more radical imagining of Anthony reflected the organization’s bolder approach to suffrage work than NAWSA. The three main tactics

246 Christine Lunardini, From Equal Suffrage to Equal Rights: Alice Paul and the National Woman’s Party , 1910-1928 (New York: New York University Press, 1986), 2-3.

247 Ford, 24.

248 “Susan B. Anthony, 1820-1918,” The Suffragist , February 16, 1918, pg. 8.

110

employed by the new suffragists were drawn directly from the radical British movement including: publicity through such means as suffrage parades and picketing, demanding a federal amendment and holding the political party in power responsible for enacting such an amendment. The Congressional Union declared political warfare on the Democratic

Party in the nine western states in which women were already enfranchised.

In highlighting her more radical speeches and actions, the venerable pioneer was transformed into a figure that represented a usable militant past for the Congressional

Union to claim. Anthony appeared as a revolutionary figure during the organization’s first national convention held in Washington, D.C., December 6 -13, 1915. A pageant presented at Convention Hall on December 13 featured ten episodes in Anthony’s life as well as friezes that symbolized the progress women had made in politics. Produced at the cost of $5,000, the pageant included the participation of over 400 people dressed in elaborate costumes. 249 The pageant promoted the CU agenda and was a not so subtle reminder to Congress of how long women had been demanding the vote. The theme was

“not suffrage” but “the national amendment.” 250 The organizer of the pageant, Hazel

MacKaye related that “Susan B. Anthony was such a great militant spirit. In the pageant will be seen several illustrations of her militancy.” In case the message of the pageant might be lost on the audience, MacKaye stated, “I know of nothing better that we could do than imitate her spirit of militancy. She frequently took the law in her own hands when necessary and it was her doctrine up to the day she died.” 251 The pageant celebrated

249 “Rich Pageant At Hand,” The Washington Post , December 12, 1915, pg. 16.

250 “Pageant of the Life of Susan B. Anthony,” The Suffragist, December 18, 1915, pg. 5 .

251 “Militants in Pageant,” The Washington Post , October 31, 1915, pg. E17.

111

Anthony’s militancy in the past as a call for militancy in the present. The strategy of militancy proved to be appealing to many suffragists and the CU eventually formed into the National Woman’s Party (NWP) in 1916. Membership in the NWP was to be limited to enfranchised women, and its sole purpose would be to promote the federal amendment. 252

The National Woman’s Party brought its historical message to the public through the use of political performance in the form of organized protests, parades and pageants.

As part of its policy of holding the Party in power responsible, the NWP held regular picket lines in front of the White House. On February 15, 1917 there was a special Susan

B. Anthony Day picket which served as a reminder that women had been fighting for suffrage legislation to pass Congress since it was first introduced in 1878. Dozens of suffragists stood outside in the snow and sleet holding banners with quotes by Anthony made especially for the occasion. One flag declared that women sought the vote not for selfish reasons but “For the Highest Good of Every Citizen, For the Safety of the

Republic And As A Glorious Example To The Nations Of The Earth.” As Doris Stevens recalled, those words were “still as applicable today as when she first spoke them.” 253 Yet another banner read “all governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed.” After braving the cold, the sentinels joined the Anthony birthday celebration underway at National Woman’s Party headquarters. 254

252 For more on this history, see Lunardini, From Equal Suffrage to Equal Rights .

253 Stevens, 64.

254 “Quote Miss Anthony,” The Washington Post, February 16, 1917, pg. 7.

112

Anthony as symbol validated the Congressional Union’s drive for a federal amendment. In 1914, the CU focused efforts on the Bristow-Mondell Amendment, which they christened popularly as the “Susan B. Anthony Amendment.” As Paul later recalled,

“We thought if we could identify it [the Nineteenth Amendment] in any way in their minds with some heroic woman who had been outstanding, it would help.” 255 The amendment was named after Anthony because she first introduced similar legislation in

1878 despite the probability that it was most likely Stanton who wrote the text. 256

Tellingly, the Congressional Union established a Susan B. Anthony memorial fund which was created for the sole purpose of financing the campaign for the amendment. On

February 28, 1915 the organization publicized the fund with a meeting that included a dramatic reading of a short play on Anthony’s life by pageant organizer Hazel MacKaye.

The play was then made available to suffragists around the country to be used in propaganda work. 257

The past also represented lessons to be learned and Paul and the National

Woman’s Party saw in suffrage history a powerful reminder of the price women had paid for putting aside their fight during wartime. Amidst increasing international tensions and foreshadowing of war, the NWP recalled Reconstruction when women—who had stopped agitating for their cause and instead supported the home front—were then denied the vote despite the expansion of suffrage to African American men. As suffragist Vivian

Pierce argued, “History repeats itself. The modern suffragist in her desire to help in the

255 Alice Paul, Conversations with Alice Paul: Woman Suffrage and the Equal Rights Amendment, 512-513.

256 Ford, 24.

257 “Suffragists Honor Leader,” The Washington Post , February 28, 1915, pg 13.

113

democratization of the whole world must remain faithful to the real democracy which shall enfranchise women equally with men.” The past stood as a warning, a mistake the

NWP was eager not to repeat. Pierce declared that “Experience proved the wisdom of

Miss Anthony’s desire that women work steadfastly for suffrage, not abandoning the cause no matter what stressful circumstances might engage their attention outside this issue.” 258

Increasingly, movement memory based on the events surrounding the Fifteenth

Amendment pitted white women against African Americans. As Pierce stated, “A tragic and heartbreaking lesson was learned when women were told in 1862 to stand aside;

‘This is the negro’s hour.’” 259 The racist undertone was echoed on the picket line when a special “Lincoln Day” was held on the president’s birthday in 1917. In response to

Wilson’s announcement of support granting Puerto Rico more self-government, one banner read “After the Civil War women asked for political freedom. They were told to wait—this was the Negro’s Hour. In 1917 American women still ask for freedom. Will you, Mr. President, tell them to wait—that this is the Porto Rican’s Hour?” 260 The idea of the “Negro’s Hour” functioned as a reminder that women’s rights were too often ignored, yet this belief was framed as a divisive narrative that would help rationalize the NWP ignoring the demands of African American suffragists to focus on racial problems after the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment.

258 Vivian Pierce, “The Ninety-seventh Anniversary of Susan B. Anthony,” The Suffragist , February 17, 1917, pg. 7-8.

259 Ibid.

260 “Silent Watch at the White House Continues,” The Suffragist, February 17, 1917, pg. 5.

114

A usable past helped sustain women’s activism throughout the long, hard fight for woman suffrage. With victory achieved suffragists rejoiced in their new political liberties and paid tribute to the pioneers for the victory. On the occasion of the Ninety-Eighth anniversary of her birth, the newspaper The Suffragist printed a poem “To Susan B.

Anthony, 1820-1918” which encapsulates the Woman’s Party glorification of the suffrage saint. Penned by suffragist Buelah Amidon, the poem celebrates Anthony as inspiration to keep persevering in the NWP’s Congressional lobbying for the Anthony

Amendment. “Sometimes we do not seem to walk / Alone upon our way; / We hear soft- falls through the rooms/ Barred to you yesterday; / And, weary, do we dream brave words, / Like star-shine through the gray?” Amidon concludes her ode to Anthony with the lines, “Across the years you echo yet / The cry of women to be free. You see them march, you hear them sing / Now, in your sprit, conquering.” 261 The poem suggests the endurance of Anthony’s vision among the new generation of suffragists and the power of historical memory in sustaining women’s activism. In a eulogy to Anthony, one suffragist exclaimed, “Her fight was for the future. The vast and beckoning future, because of her, is about to become ours.” 262 But the future of the women’s movement was by no means clear. As suffragists struggled to redefine goals, history would play a central role in the debate over feminism in the 1920s.

“Blood-Red Memories, Alive and Pulsing”: Public Memorials to Woman Suffrage

261 Buelah Amidon, “To Susan B. Anthony, 1820-1918,” The Suffragist , February 16, 1918, pg. 9.

262 “Susan B. Anthony, 1820-1918,” The Suffragist , February 16, 1918, pg. 8.

115

Even before the Nineteenth Amendment was signed, officially ending the long fight for suffrage on August 26, 1920, suffragists were already engaged in a new campaign—the battle over public memory. As early as 1908, Catt was thinking ahead about preserving the movement’s history when she cautioned that “We must keep careful record of our progress for the story is an important one.” 263 In quick succession, suffragists published histories of the movement. A slew of National Woman’s Party inspired histories gave the militant side of the story, including Jailed for Freedom by

Doris Stevens (1920) and Inez Irwin’s The Story of the Woman’s Party (1921). Not to be left out, Catt released a NAWSA account of the campaign in 1923, Woman Suffrage and

Politics: The Inner Story of the Suffrage Movement.264 At the same time, she paid Ida

Harper to complete The History of Woman Suffrage Volumes 5 and 6. 265 How the story was told held great political consequence for defining the future of feminism. Therefore, suffragists battled over how the victory narrative would be constructed, especially who laid claim to the mantle of the pioneers.

The rivalry seen in written accounts between NAWSA and the NWP was mirrored in the creation of physical memorials. The battle over memory reflected the continuing tensions between the two organizations after the passage of the Nineteenth

Amendment. In 1919 NAWSA donated a portrait of Anthony and a host of suffrage relics

263 Graham, 41.

264 Doris Stevens, Jailed for Freedom (New York: Boni and Liveright, 1920); Inez H. Irwin, The Story of the Woman’s Party (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1921); Carrie Chapman Catt, and Nettie Rogers Shuler, Woman Suffrage and Politics: the Inner Story of the Suffrage Movement ( New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1923).

265 Ida Husted Harper, History of Woman Suffrage , Vols. 5-6: 1900-1920 (New York: J.J. Little and Ives, 1922). See Des Jardins, 186-193.

116

to the Smithsonian’s National Museum and the NWP bequeathed to Congress a statue of the suffrage pioneers in 1921.

While connected as acts of memory with similar subjects, the differing form and meaning of the memorials signified the two organizations’ opposing paths for the future.

Part of the political message of the Smithsonian collection was NAWSA leadership declaring the struggle over. By depositing the relics in the Smithsonian, NAWSA symbolically closed the door on the campaign for women’s rights. In contrast, when the

National Woman’s Party commemorated the suffrage victory, it did so in a way that made clear that the work of the women’s movement was ongoing. As a clear political gesture, instead of donating the sculpture to a museum to be relegated to the dustbin of history, the National Woman’s Party chose the Capitol—an active, present space— signifying that women were ready to take their place at the seat of power.

The creation of a suffrage collection at the National Museum marked a new departure for the Smithsonian in honoring women’s political activism. One excited

Washington resident remarked, “Isn’t it simply great to have Aunt Susan the first history- making woman in the National Museum.” It was the first exhibit in the museum established for a “woman who made her own fame.” One newspaper described the novelty: “There are exhibits of women as wives of great men, men who have made history, but Miss Anthony herself made history and the acceptance of her portrait marks a new epoch in the museum’s records, even as Miss Anthony’s life work marked one in the lives of all the women of the world.” 266 Because the Nineteenth Amendment was still making headlines, many Smithsonian officials believed that the contemporary and

266 “Historical Suffrage Exhibit, in Honor of Miss Susan Anthony,” Chicago Sunday Press and the Women’s Press , July 13, 1919, pg. 3a.

117

controversial political issue had no place in a history museum. 267 It took quite a bit of effort for Helen Gardener, the vice chair of NAWSA, to convince curators at the museum to exhibit the Anthony portrait and relics, which she hoped would be the beginning of a large women’s history collection. 268

The suffrage exhibit organized by NAWSA suggested that since the vote was won, the women’s movement was now a part of history. 269 The museum, by its very nature as a treasure house of artifacts, represented a space of the past. The assembled relics froze the movement in time, presenting a triumphal narrative of a finished struggle.

The movement’s history was best symbolized through the suffrage saint, Susan B.

Anthony. Aside from the Anthony portrait, the collection included an array of relics that represented treasures and mementos from Anthony’s life. NAWSA donated Anthony’s leather purse, cup and saucer, gold watch and chain, silver cup, a tea kettle, a cameo of

Anthony carved in Italy, and her famous red shawl. The collection also included bound volumes of the newspaper The Revolution , photographs along with several framed addresses. 270 The most famous relic was the table on which the Declaration of Sentiments was written, given to Anthony by Stanton. It was not until 1924 that a painting of Stanton

267 Steven Lubar and Kathleen M. Kendrick. Legacies: Collecting America’s History at the Smithsonian (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press in association with the National Museum of American History, Behring Center, 2001), 108-109.

268 Helen Gardener to W. de C. Ravenel, July 4, 1919, Record Unit 305, Accession # 64601, Smithsonian Institution Archives, Washington, DC (hereafter: SIA).

269 Lubar, 108-109.

270 Received of Helen H. Gardener, June 25, 1919, Record Unit 305, Accession # 64601, SIA; Received from the National American Woman Suffrage Association, June 26, 1919, Record Unit 305, Accession # 64601, SIA.

118

joined the Anthony portrait in the National Museum, suggesting once again the privileging of Anthony over other pioneers.

Gardener demanded that the collection exclude the history of the National

Woman’s Party. NAWSA donated the artifacts “to show the origin and development of the greatest bloodless revolution ever known.” Gardener, however, made it clear that the story told was to celebrate only suffrage history approved by NAWSA, commenting to a

Smithsonian official that “all of us would want to make very definite, and that this

Exhibit shall be kept free now, and at all times, from anything that might connect it in any way with the lawlessness of a few women who never were a part of the National and

International movement.” She envisioned a dignified display to match what she perceived to be the respectable history of the campaign which she argued “until about four years ago without even the shadow of discreditable conduct traced to those who were engaged in the work.” 271 The comment again underscores her belief that the outrageous conduct of the NWP should be written out of the history of the campaign. By denying the National

Woman’s Party a place in the Smithsonian collection, NAWSA hoped that the NWP’s role would be forgotten by future generations and NAWSA history enshrined in public memory.

Not only did Gardener discredit the contributions of militant suffragists she also expressed concern that the National Woman’s Party would literally steal their history. In

1922 Gardener wrote the Smithsonian inquiring about rumors that Alice Paul was going to acquire the table upon which the bill of rights for women was written. “I knew she was fully capable of sending them a letter signed by Mrs. Catt,” Gardener warned Lucy

271 Helen Gardener to W. de C. Ravenel, July 4, 1919, Record Unit 305, Accession # 64601, SIA.

119

Anthony, niece of Susan B. Anthony. Gardener assured the Smithsonian that “there never could be any question as to either of us permitting that association of women to withdraw any article whatsoever, that we never had approved of any of their methods, plans, nor conduct, and that we did not wish to be in any way whatsoever associated with them.” 272

The donation of the suffrage collection at the National Museum was not neutral in intent or content but instead contained a specific account of the suffrage campaign loaded with political meaning.

While NAWSA symbolically closed the chapter on the movement by donating relics to the Smithsonian, the NWP memorial declared the opposite—that the vote signified the start of the struggle for women’s equality. In 1921, the NWP presented a statue to the nation that was meant to symbolize the ongoing work of the movement.

Sculpted by Adelaide Johnson, the marble sculpture depicted Susan B. Anthony,

Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott. It was not intended to be a memorial to a movement past, but a monument to a current movement, one continuing to press for rights. As one National Woman’s Party cartoon made clear, the Nineteenth Amendment was just the beginning. The cartoon depicted Susan B. Anthony saying to today’s women,

“Everything but the Vote is Still to be Won.” 273

The Woman’s Party dedicated the statue on February 15, 1921, the 101 st anniversary of the birth of Susan B. Anthony, with a ceremony typical of the pomp and pageantry of the NWP. When the statue was unveiled, it was a “moment of awesome

272 Helen Gardener to Lucy Anthony, May 5, 1922. Record Unit 305, Accession # 64601, SIA.

273 Nina Allender cartoon, “Everything but the Vote is Still to be Won,” Equal Rights , February 24, 1923, cover.

120

beauty,” accompanied by light and music. 274 The dedication, according to Hazel

MacKaye, was to “strike a note of prophecy” “because the work of these women, in one sense complete, has in a deeper sense just begun.” 275 The statue was not simply a monument of the three pioneers, “in its deepest significance it is a monument to women past, present and to come.” 276

Not surprisingly, because of the ideological differences represented in the memorial ceremonies, the rivalry between NAWSA and the NWP continued. Catt and

NAWSA had no interest in having a statue of the pioneers as a memorial. On the bequest of Ida Harper, NAWSA signed over busts of Anthony, Stanton and Mott, which had been on display during the 1893 World’s Fair to form the basis of The Woman Movement sculpture. 277 At the end of her life, Paul recalled “these little petty divisions that were so unworthy.” Paul remembered that no one from NAWSA even attended the dedication.

After the ceremony she found a bouquet of flowers delivered by the organization but delivered by a courier and Paul remembered, left poetically, forgotten in a corridor. 278

The memorial presented an alternative narrative of American history that put women at the center. Like the donation of suffrage relics to the Smithsonian, the Woman

Movement , as a first national memorial to women in the U.S. Capitol, represented a new kind of American monument. Paul recalled towards the end of her life, “It was one of the

274 Hazel MacKaye, “The Memorial Ceremonies,” The Suffragist , January-February, 1921, pg. 340.

275 Ibid.

276 Sara Bard Field, The Speech of Sara Bard Field, presenting to Congress on behalf of the women of the nation, the marble busts of three suffrage pioneers, Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Stanton Cady, Susan Brownell Anthony, (San Francisco: privately printed by John Henry Nash, 1921), 2, Rare Books, HL.

277 Alice Paul, Conversations with Alice Paul, 352.

278 Alice Paul, Conversations with Alice Paul , 353-354.

121

really big things we did, because it was starting women to have a feeling of respect for women and by putting statues of women in the Capitol when it had always been a Capitol of men.” 279 In 1921, the only other statue of a woman in the Capitol was of Frances

Willard, but as one commentator noted, “Her statue was the gift of her State, and not in any way a national memorial.” 280 The real novelty of the memorial was its construction of sex and history. Instead of depicting women as abstract ideals such as “Pioneer

Mother,” “Liberty,” or “Columbia” the suffrage memorial portrayed real women as historic figures. Further, the suffrage memorial inserted an explicitly feminist viewpoint into the pantheon of national heroes adding an unabashed celebration of women and their achievements to the Rotunda.

While beloved reformer Jane Addams presided over the ceremonies in hopes of uniting all women, it was a more militant activist who dominated the proceedings. 281 Sara

Bard Field, radical suffragist best-known for driving a petition cross-country to President

Wilson, gave the main speech at the dedication. She recalled later in life that at the time, she believed “the vote was power” and her speech at the ceremony reflected that idea. 282

She presented the statue not as a peace offering but a declaration of war, informing the

House Speaker “if you thought you came here tonight to receive… merely the busts of three women who have fought the good fight and gone to rest, you were mistaken.” She warned, “You will see that through them it is the body and the blood of a great sacrificial

279 Alice Paul, Conversations with Alice Paul, 265.

280 “Suffrage Pioneers,” The Washington Post , February 14, 1921, pg. 6.

281 Alice Paul, Conversations with Alice Paul, 353.

282 Sara Bard Field , Sara Bard Field: Poet and Suffragist . An Interview conducted by Amelia Fry, The Suffragists Oral History Project, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, July 12, 1962.

122

host which we present—the body and the blood of Revolution, the body and the blood of

Freedom herself.” 283 She noted that the Woman’s Party was not giving Congress a passive statue to sit in Statuary Hall in “a chaste repose like Death itself” but an active memorial filled with “blood-red memories, alive and pulsing” of the unceasing labor of the pioneers on entrenched custom and superstition.284 Her speech echoed the note of prophecy sought by Hazel MacKaye when Field declared that the statue showed the

“renewed dedication of the women of this Land to the vast work of a greater freedom which lies before us.” 285 The dedication was in the words of Crystal Eastman, a piece of

“Quaker defiance.” 286 Field’s speech gave notice that the NWP was not giving up the fight.

Yet despite the protest inherent in Field’s speech, the dedication of the memorial was a dignified affair. Mrs. Harding, wife of President-elect Harding joined the committee of 100 women who organized the suffrage memorial, showing the growing respectability of the movement since the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. 287 The tension between the radicalism represented by Field’s speech and the show of decorum of the overall dedication and subsequent convention was critiqued by some supporters. As

Eastman commented, “Supremely neglectful of respectability during the long fight, Alice

283 Sara Bard Field, The Speech of Sara Bard Field , 7.

284 Sara Bard Field, The Speech of Sara Bard Field, 3.

285 Sara Bard Field, The Speech of Sara Bard Field, 4.

286 Crystal Eastman, “Alice Paul’s Convention,” reprinted in Crystal Eastman on Women and Revolution edited by Blanche Wiesen Cook (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978), 58.

287 “Mrs. Harding on Committee,” The Washington Post , January 25, 1921, pg. 7.

123

Paul saw to it that the victory celebration should be supremely respectable.” 288 Eastman noted wryly that the groups who “had scorned and condemned” the pickets and hunger strikes such as the Daughters of the American Revolution, the Daughters of the

Confederacy, the Congress of Mothers and the General Federation of Women’s Clubs, all

“came now with their wreaths and their flowers and their banners to celebrate the victory.” 289

But achieving such consensus came at a price. All doubtful subjects like birth control and the Negro Question, “were hushed up, ruled out or postponed.” Nothing was allowed to alarm “the mildest Maccabee or dismay the most delicately reared daughter,”

Eastman complained. Birth control advocates were finally given a hearing but the decision was approved too late to appear on the official program. 290 Because of the competing interests between southern white women and black women, contemporary race issues surrounded the historic commemoration. Paul did not allow any black women to speak at the ceremony even though the National Association of Colored Women’s

Clubs (NACWC) lobbied for the honor. Instead Paul only invited representatives from the NACWC to lay a wreath at the statue, again a decision that came too late to be included in the program. 291

African Americans had fought hard for woman suffrage and desired recognition for their effort in the official victory celebration. Women leaders such as Ida B. Wells-

288 Eastman, 60.

289 Eastman, 59-60.

290 Eastman, 60.

291 Document 10: Letter from Mary White Ovington to Alice Paul, 4 January 1921in How Did the National Woman’s Party Address the Issue of the Enfranchisement of Black Women, 1919-1924?, by Kathryn Kish Sklar and Jill Dias (Binghamton, NY: State University of New York at Binghamton, 1997).

124

Barnett, Adella Hunt Logan and Mary Church Terrell among hundreds of other African

American clubwomen worked tirelessly to pass the Nineteenth Amendment granting the vote to all women despite racism in the movement. 292 Like white suffragists, African

American suffragists found inspiration from the past. Notably W.E. B. Du Bois had served as a member of the Elizabeth Cady Stanton centennial committee. 293 Aside from the pioneers lauded in the wider movement, African American women celebrated black heroines such Phillis Wheatley, Sojourner Truth, Harriet Tubman, and Frances Harper, often naming women’s clubs after these foremothers.294

The irony of commemorating three women involved in both the suffrage and abolition movements was not lost on detractors. As suffragist and co-founder of the

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NACCP), Mary White

Ovington argued to Paul, “no white woman can today represent the colored women of this country.” Ovington declared that “it is surely eminently proper that a meeting which has as one of its objects the honoring of the great feminists of the nineteenth century should have on its program a representative colored woman.” She pushed Paul to support

African American women’s voting rights. Ovington warned Paul that, “when your statue of Lucretia Mott, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton is unveiled and it is realized that no colored woman has been given any part in your great session, the

292 For more on this history see Rosalyn Terborg-Penn, African American Women in the Struggle for the Vote, 1850-1920 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1998), 97-135.

293 Terborg-Penn, 102.

294 Terborg-Penn, 88.

125

omission will be keenly felt by thousands of people throughout the country.” 295 When the battle went public, the NWP received negative publicity from former allies. Aside from

Eastman’s critique in The Liberator , suffragist Freda Kirchwey criticized Paul’s decision in an article in The Nation . Kirchwey noted the shortcomings of a too narrow focus on women’s rights versus human rights, declaring, “We revere the names of the pioneers to who you will do honor while here, not only because they believed in the inherent rights of women, but of humanity at large, and gave themselves to the fight against slavery in the United States.” 296 Turning a blind eye to the problems of race and the Nineteenth

Amendment, Kirchwey argued, made the Woman’s Party out of touch with progressive reform. 297

Alice Paul’s memorial also faced resistance from Congress, but for very different reasons. When the NWP first attempted to deliver the statue they were told to wait until

Congress determined the appropriateness of accepting the monument on the premise that there were already too many statues in the Capitol and that the memorial was “bad art.” 298

When officials refused the statue when it arrived from Italy, many suffragists suspected it was due to anti-suffrage sentiment. 299 As Paul stated in a press release, “The

295 Document 10: Letter from Mary White Ovington to Alice Paul, 4 January 1921in How Did the National Woman’s Party Address the Issue of the Enfranchisement of Black Women, 1919-1924?, by Kathryn Kish Sklar and Jill Dias (Binghamton, NY: State University of New York at Binghamton, 1997).

296 Freda Kirchwey, “Alice Paul Pulls the Strings,” The Nation , March 2, 1921, pp. 332-33.

297 See also the discussion of the convention in Nancy Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism , 66-72.

298 National Woman’s Party Franklin 7120, release Wednesday Morning, Feb. 9 1921, pg 1, Vertical Files, Suffrage monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, The Sewall-Belmont House and Museum, Washington, D.C. (hereafter: NWP); quote from “Accepts Suffrage Statue,” New York Times , February 11, 1921, pg. 9.

299 “Suffrage Memorial Halted At Capital,” New York Times , February 9, 1921, pg. 15; National Woman’s Party Franklin 7120, release Wednesday Morning, Feb. 9 1921, pg 1, Vertical Files, Suffrage monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

126

enfranchisement of one-half the people of this country, is an event worthy of national commemoration. It is time that victory be accepted, that the bitterness of opposition to women’s freedom end, and that they be allowed to honor duly the early leaders who made that freedom possible.” 300 Paul convinced Congress to accept the monument temporarily. In her speech at the dedication Field goaded the Speaker of the House, declaring, “Mr. Speaker, we women who are uniting in this Presentation do not feel we are so much honoring these rebel leaders as we are honoring Congress itself by committing these busts to its keeping.” 301 Because Congress only begrudgingly accepted the suffrage memorial, Field insisted that the statue was a great honor. However,

Congress did not share Field’s sentiments. In response, the mainly all male congress quickly placed the women’s monument not in the Capitol Rotunda as intended but in the basement crypt – a powerful symbolic gesture. On February 16, the statue was removed to the basement and the inscription on the memorial was whitewashed, as it supposedly

“offended the ideas of certain conscientious politicians.” 302 The statue was meant to signify women’s entrance into government but placing the women’s memorial in the basement (out of sight and thereby out of mind) spoke symbolic volumes, signaling there was still much work to be done for women’s equality.

Creating memorials to the pioneers was one way suffragists sought to find a place for the suffrage movement in American memory. The feuding in the movement continued during the memorialization process as suffragists jealously fought over relics, monuments

300 National Woman’s Party Franklin 7120, release Wednesday Morning, Feb. 9 1921, pg 2, Vertical Files, Suffrage monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

301 Sara Bard Field, The Speech of Sara Bard Field, 3.

302 “Who Removed Legend From National Women’s Memorial?” The Washington Times, The National Daily , November 6, 1921, Vertical Files, Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

127

and narratives. However, through the competition, both the NAWSA and NWP memorials expanded ever so slightly the boundaries of national identity in public commemoration. The Smithsonian collection and The Woman Movement sculpture attempted to reshape what the nation valued by carving out spaces for women’s achievements in American history. Despite differences in form and meaning, both memorials deemed that women’s history was important and worth recording. Just as the

Nineteenth Amendment forced the nation to rethink women and politics, the creation of suffrage memorials compelled federal institutions to rethink the nature of national memory. However, as suggested by the fate of the suffrage statue, there was more work to be done. It was quickly apparent that a women’s voting block would not materialize.

Ultimately, neither the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment nor the memory work would achieve any substantial change in women’s political power. It would be left for future generations of women activists to find a place for the women’s memorial in the

Capitol. And both the LWV and the NWP would struggle to carve out new paths for women’s activism that would both honor and build on the legacy of the suffrage campaign.

“Our Best Tribute Is To Finish the Work They Began”: History and the Future of the Women’s Movement

The differences in how NAWSA and the NWP chose to commemorate the suffrage victory signaled the opposing directions the organizations would take in the

1920s. Those memorials reflected contrasting beliefs about the meaning of enfranchisement for women and as such, memory was never far removed from the debate. Specific plans to conceive the next steps occurred for both groups during

128

conferences held to celebrate the victory and reinvent the organizations. The celebrations were organized around significant anniversaries that marked milestones in movement history. The conventions formally ended the suffrage campaign and addressed questions of what women ought to do with the ballot and where suffragists should go from there.

Exploring the creation of suffrage monuments in conjunction with commemorative events offers a glimpse into how historical memory worked in forwarding women’s social activism in the 1920s. The usable past was put to good use, redirecting energies and goals of the movement after the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment.

NAWSA and the NWP had differing visions of victory that conflicted over whether the work of the women’s movement was past or present. Paul warned her fellow suffragists that “There is danger that because of great victory women will believe their whole struggle for independence ended. They have still far to go.” 303 As she characterized the challenge, NWP members had a choice to “furl its banner forever, or … fling it forth on a new battlefront.” 304 In contrast, NAWSA attempted a metamorphosis into a new entity in the form of the League of Women Voters by saying farewell to the movement for women’s rights. 305 In keeping with NAWSA ideology, the vote was part of a vision of women’s reform often described as municipal housekeeping, in which suffrage was the goal of the women’s movement because it would enable women to

“clean up” government and fix the nation’ problems. In short, women needed the vote to

303 Alice Paul, “Editorial ,” The Suffragist , January-February, 1921, pg. 339.

304 Quoted in Lunardini, 159.

305 For more on the history of the League of Women Voters, see Louise M. Young, In the Public Interest: The League of Women Voters, 1920-1970 (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1989).

129

carry out good works. 306 Therefore, with the suffrage victory, women could concentrate on their civic responsibilities and move beyond political organizing. However, unlike

NAWSA’s expediency vision of women’s reform, the NWP favored a justice argument which culminated in the campaign for the Equal Rights Amendment. Because of this divergence, NAWSA women clung to the ideals of protective legislation while the NWP worked to dismantle it. This fundamental and irreconcilable conflict had significant repercussions for women’s activism post-suffrage.

As suffragists battled over the future of the movement, agendas were draped in the mantle of the pioneers. NAWSA and the NWP came to dissimilar conclusions about the revised role of women’s activism and not surprisingly, how they continued to construct usable pasts reflected those differences. The divisions begun during the suffrage campaign had consequences for the prevention of a more unified movement once the

Anthony Amendment was law. Selective readings of the past helped define what would be the issues of concern for women. For example, in an editorial in The Suffragist , Paul recalled that the pioneers of the movement had set forth to obtain far more than the vote.

Their vision would not be fulfilled unless women had full equality. She quoted in particular one resolution passed at the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 to admonish her readers not to view the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment as the end of the movement for women’s rights. “Resolved, that the women of this country ought to be enlightened in regard to the laws under which they live, that they may no longer publish their degradation by declaring themselves satisfied with their present position, nor their

306 For more on the expediency argument, see Aileen S. Kraditor, The Ideas of the Woman Suffrage Movement, 1890-1920 ( Garden City N.Y.: Doubleday, 1971).

130

ignorance, by asserting that they have all the rights they want.” Paul argued, “This resolution still applies to the women of today.” 307

From the very beginning of the League of Women Voters Catt invoked the pioneer past to give legitimacy to the fledging organization. It was literally created as a

“living memorial” in honor of all the women who fought for suffrage. 308 NAWSA organized two conventions to celebrate the suffrage victory and define new objectives. 309

The first meeting, on March 24, 1919, was the jubilee convention held during the 50 th anniversary of the organization in St. Louis. It was during this convention that the League of Women Voters was first proposed. In an address to the assembled members, Catt noted the need for a fitting memorial. One she hoped would be “dedicated to the memory of our brave departed leaders, to the sacrifices they made for our cause, to the scores of victories won.” To truly honor the pioneers, speeches and tributes would not be enough, nor would a monument from marble suffice because “only a few would see [it] and fewer comprehend.” She believed instead that every suffragist should desire “a memorial whose benefits will bless our entire nation and bring happiness to the humblest of our citizens.”

Catt proposed a League of Women Voters, arguing “would not such a League express the

307 Alice Paul, “Editorial ,” The Suffragist , January-February, 1921, pg. 339.

308 Kathryn H. Stone, 25 Years of a Great Idea: A History of The National League of Women Voters (Washington, DC: National League of Women Voters, 1946), 6.

309 Memory also marked the second meeting, the fifty-first annual convention of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, assembled in Chicago, February, 12-15, 1920. It was called the victory convention even though it would be another six months before the Nineteenth Amendment was ratified. The Victory Convention saw the formal dissolution of NAWSA (except for a small board to handle assets and records) and the first national congress of the League of Women Voters. The convention was framed around honoring the pioneers and their vision.

131

spirit of our movement and our common feelings of gratitude upon this occasion more clearly than any other form of Memorial?” 310

Catt championed the League as the logical next step to help “Finish the Fight,” forging a powerful connection between memory and women’s politics in the post- suffrage era. 311 The League represented a narrow interpretation of the suffrage past—a legacy from the single focused political machine that NAWSA had become by the final decades of the votes for women campaign. The League was to be an advocacy group intended to help newly enfranchised women understand the democratic process. Because attaining the vote had been such a struggle, Catt and NAWSA leadership wanted to make sure the vote was put to good use. With suffrage, women had new found power to shape legislation; therefore the League focused on training women in their role as active citizens with rights and responsibilities. In the spirit of “municipal housekeeping,” the vote was a means to help clean up government. As such, the League was conceived of as a nonpartisan organization in order to avoid becoming entangled in party politics and government corruption. 312 Thus the LWV stayed away from partisan politics instead focusing on voter education and lobbying for political issues and legislation. Animosity remained between the Woman’s Party and Catt and Maud Wood Park, President of the

LWV who distrusted Paul’s tactics. On the question of reconciliation with the NWP,

310 Carrie Chapman Catt, “The Nation Calls An Address To The Jubilee Convention Of The National American Woman Suffrage Association,” March 24, 1919, St. Louis, Carrie Chapman Catt Papers, Folder 6, Box 3, SSC.

311 Ibid.

312 Stone, 25 Years of a Great Idea, 6-7.

132

LWV members declared it “hardly possible.” The non-partisanship of the LWV stood at odds with the strident politics of the Woman’s Party. 313

As both a memorial and plan for the future, the LWV connected the past and present of women’s activism. Like the Smithsonian donation, the creation of the LWV signaled this branch of the women’s movement particular vision for women’s politics and women’s history. As a whole, these memorials put forth the notion that the Nineteenth

Amendment was the end of an era. As the call to the convention expressed the idea,

“Turning to the past, let us review the incidents of our long struggle together before they are laid away with other buried memories.” 314 The phrasing “laid away” and “buried memories” suggest the finality of the cause, the desire to put the movement to rest. This understanding was punctuated with the official dissolution of NAWSA. Catt and

NAWSA leadership viewed the dawning decade of the 1920s as the time to enjoy women’s newfound political liberties and turned their attention to the use of the vote. The victory narrative put forth envisioned the Nineteenth Amendment as an epochal historical moment, with suffrage as the culmination of the long and noble struggle of the pioneers.

To honor their work, the LWV was founded to teach women to put the vote to good use.

The convention discussed important issues of the day including, “Protection of Women in

Industry,” “Child Welfare” “Food Supply and Demand” and “Social Hygiene.” 315

313 “Suffragists in Winning Mood,” Los Angeles Times , February 13, 1920, pg. 12.

314 “Call to the Victory Convention of the National American Woman Suffrage Association 1869-1920,” in National American Woman Suffrage Association: Victory Convention (1869-1920) of the National American Woman Suffrage Association (Chicago, ILL.: Englewood Print Shop, 1920), 7.

315 National American Woman Suffrage Association: Victory Convention (1869-1920) of the National American Woman Suffrage Association (Chicago, ILL.: Englewood Print Shop, 1920), 13.

133

In contrast, Anthony’s memory “that echoed yet” during the votes for women campaign was rekindled and repurposed by the National Woman’s Party to inspire women to work for a new goal of equal rights. As opposed to NAWSA, the NWP kept on in its present form but instead shifted their focus from suffrage to equal rights. Because

Paul and the NWP viewed the Nineteenth Amendment as only the first step for women’s rights, the organization quickly got to work on an even more ambitious campaign for an

Equal Rights Amendment, replacing the slogan “Votes for women” with “Equal Rights.”

On the occasion of the 75 th anniversary of the Seneca Falls Convention in July 1923, the

Woman’s Party adopted a form of the proposed equal rights amendment to the

Constitution which stated: “Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the

United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction.” Renaming their organ The

Suffragist to Equal Rights , the newspaper celebrated, “Already one victory of world-wide moment has been achieved, a mile-stone passed that was clearly seen by those who blazed the path through the wilderness.” But the editorial cautioned readers that “there are other victories, for more momentous, far harder of attainment, that bespeak the consecration of the valiant hearted.” This new path for equal rights was portrayed as a natural outcome of the suffrage struggle and the inevitable path forward. Quoting

Anthony’s famous declaration, the thread of history would lead the way because “out of the past the cry comes Forward! Failure is Impossible.” 316

Paul and the NWP positioned themselves and the Equal Rights Amendment—not

NAWSA or the new LWV—as the true heirs of the pioneers. The NWP defended their belief, stating, “It may seem forward, unashamed, for the members of the National

316 “The Mantle of the Pioneers,” Equal Rights , June 30, 1923, pg. 156.

134

Woman’s Party to feel that the mantle of the pioneers has in similar fashion descended upon their shoulders.” 317 But the NWP did indeed locate the origin of the proposed amendment, or “equal rights movement,” with the pioneers, declaring “The veneration in which we hold Susan B. Anthony, Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the other inspired founders of the Equal Rights movement in America makes it appear overbold for us unworthy moderns to claim association with them. Yet the fact remains that the

National Woman’s Party is the disciple of the pioneers, in the quest for the true emancipation of women.” 318 By claiming to be the disciples of the pioneers, political ambition was cloaked in a usable past that allowed the NWP to rationalize their choice and have the authority to define the new feminist agenda. The organization issued a challenge to their fellow activists, asserting, “Those who can hear these words and comprehend their meaning, and who are then ready take up the burden at whatever cost may follow and carry it forward, are those upon whose shoulders the mantle of the pioneers has fallen.” 319

Seneca Falls appeared in NWP mythology as sacred space. 320 It was a place steeped in feminist history that held the power, Paul hoped, to inspire women activists to embrace the Equal Rights Amendment. The little town in upstate New York was billed as

“the most historic place in our country in the development of the woman movement” and

317 Ibid.

318 Ibid.

319 Ibid.

320 Paul was not alone in commemorating Seneca Falls. For an overviews of commemorations of the Seneca Falls Convention, see Vivien Ellen Rose, “Seneca Falls Remembered: Celebrations of the 1848 First Women’s Rights Convention,” CRM 21 (1998): 9-15 and Judith Wellman, The Road to Seneca Falls: Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the First Woman’s Rights Convention (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004), 228-240.

135

it was loudly proclaimed that Seneca Falls would “become a shrine to which women will come from all over the world.” 321 As Paul later recalled, “We took Seneca Falls and brought it up-to- date.” 322 The National Woman’s Party’s usurpation of Seneca Falls attempted to claim the space as a site of origins, the birthplace of a grand movement for women’s equality. Staking ownership of Seneca Falls legitimized the NWP’s single-issue feminist vision over NAWSA/LWV’s reform path for women’s politics. Paul rewrote history, naming the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention as a meeting for “equal rights” rather than “woman’s rights.” 323 In spinning her origins tale, Paul followed in the footsteps of

Stanton and Anthony who had themselves laid claim to the power of Seneca Falls in order to cement their leadership of the movement in The History of Woman Suffrage .324

Alice Paul was a savvy politician and a master of political spectacle and she arranged the 75 th commemoration of the Seneca Falls Convention around the unveiling of the ERA. Seneca Falls thus represented a usable past for the proposed amendment.

Because of the divisive nature of the proposed program, Paul draped her agenda heavily in the mantle of the pioneers in order to silence the debate. By linking the ERA with the legacy of the pioneers, she elevated her own authority and sanctioned the proposed amendment. The Equal Rights Amendment was written into history, appearing as the logical next step in a trajectory of forward progress for women that began in 1848 in

Seneca Falls. Constructing a usable past for the amendment was a conscious decision. As

Paul explained, “We tie up this amendment to the 1848 movement. It is easier to get

321 “Women Open Fight For Equal Rights,” New York Times , July 21, 1923, pg. 8.

322 Alice Paul, Conversations with Alice Paul , 361.

323 “Women Adopt Form For Equal Rights,” New York Times , July 22, 1923, pg. 1. See also Rose, 12.

324 See Lisa Tetrault, “The Memory of a Movement.”

136

support for something with tradition behind it and which has grown respectable with age than for something new-born from the brain of the Woman’s Party.” 325 The far reaching program for women’s rights outlined in 1848 was an inherited memory that Paul put to good use.

Paul affirmed the righteous of her agenda by connecting it directly with the memory of the pioneers specifically Lucretia Mott who Paul believed embodied the spirit of the equal rights program. As Paul stated, “We are going to call this amendment the

Lucretia Mott amendment, just as we called the suffrage amendment the Susan B.

Anthony amendment, because to Lucretia Mott more than anyone else the feminist movement in the United States owed its start.” 326 The reason for naming the amendment after Mott and not for example, Stanton is unclear. As with Anthony, Paul associated with Mott because of her Quaker beliefs. Stanton was also an unlikely candidate as a namesake for the amendment in part because of the strict control her daughter Harriot

Stanton Blatch held over her mother’s memory. Paul and Blatch held differing views concerning the future of the movement that influenced their respective interpretations of the past. Paul advocated single-issue feminism and sought to unite all women around a common issue, in this case, the Equal Rights Amendment, a strategy she believed had worked for the suffrage movement. In contrast, Blatch, like her mother before her, desired a politically inclusive movement that fought for a range of social issues. 327

Further, Stanton’s radical views on sex, marriage and Christianity could have made the

325 “Women Adopt Form For Equal Rights,” New York Times , July 22, 1923, pg. 1.

326 Ibid.

327 Ellen Carol DuBois, Harriot Stanton Blatch and the Winning of Woman Suffrage (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997), 248.

137

ERA appear too radical or nonconformist. Perhaps, most of all, stains of Stanton’s racism would have tainted the new women’s rights initiative. Mott’s memory was most often invoked by suffragists to counter accusations of racism in the movement. 328 Mott’s abolitionist credentials helped connect women’s rights to a broader program of equality.

After the controversy at the unveiling of the suffrage memorial, during which the NWP was criticized for ignoring the concerns of black women, it would make sense for Paul to choose a figure like Mott who symbolically added legitimacy to the ERA as an amendment intended to improve the lot of all women regardless of race or creed.

Throughout the anniversary, the Woman’s Party organized acts of historical remembrance, merging past and present, in order to capture the spirit of the pioneers and capitalize on the political potency of the Seneca Falls narrative. During the celebration, fifty women acted out the events that took place 75 years earlier. The reenactment of the

Seneca Falls Convention included a procession of 300 banner bearers in the purple, white and gold of the National Woman’s Party, clearly linking the past with the present. 329 It was estimated that over 10,000 people attended the pageant 330 and it helped raise $9,000 for the cause. 331 The pageant proved to be such good propaganda it was later reproduced in Colorado in the Garden of the Gods with an added presentation of the history of pioneer women. 332 The NWP also held a ceremony to dedicate a bronze plaque on the

328 Carol Faulkner, Lucretia Mott’s Heresy: Abolition and Women’s Rights in Nineteenth-Century America , (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011), 215.

329 “Women Adopt Form For Equal Rights,” New York Times , July 22, 1923, pg. 1.

330 “Pageant By Women In Garden of Gods, The Washington Post , August 24, 1923, pg. 6.

331 “5,000 Pay Tribute to Susan B. Anthony,” New York Times , July 23, 1923, pg. 13.

332 “Pageant By Women In Garden of Gods, The Washington Post , August 24, 1923, pg. 6.

138

spot of the former Wesleyan Chapel where the 1848 convention was held. The lower floor of the building, remade into a theater and currently used as a garage, was also the location of Woman’s Party headquarter during the convention. 333 Also during the 1923 commemoration, an exhibit displayed relics from 1848 including two chairs owned by

Elizabeth Cady Stanton. 334 Such artifacts, the material remains left of the pioneers, as well as the landmarks celebrated around town, framed the convention. They were markers of memory, of time and place, of a heroic history that positioned the Equal

Rights Amendment as the fulfillment of the Seneca Falls Convention. A cartoon in Equal

Rights , picturing the women of today under a banner “Seneca Falls, 1848-1923,” stated this idea plainly, with a caption that read: “Our Best Tribute Is To Finish the Work They

Began.” 335

The NWP purposely echoed the Declaration of Sentiments from the Seneca Falls

Convention throughout the commemoration in order to fold the Equal Rights Amendment into history as completing the work begun in 1848. In Equal Rights , the NWP included their “Declaration of Principles” modeled after the Declaration of Sentiments, which was included on the following page. 336 This comparison between the two documents highlighted both the progress women had made since 1848 and the Woman’s Party claim that more work was needed. As Paul stated, “Whereas, only one point in the equal rights program of 1848, that of equal suffrage, has been completely attained; and, whereas, the

333 “Women Plan Meetings in Historic Building,” New York Times , July 15, 1923, pg. 24.

334 “Relics of 1848 Exhibited at Seneca Falls,” Equal Rights , July 28, 1923, pg. 187.

335 Nina Allender, cartoon, “Our Best Tribute Is To Finish the Work They Began,” cover, Equal Rights , June 16, 1923.

336 “Declaration of Principles,” and “Declaration of Sentiments” Equal Rights , Saturday, February 17, 1923, pp 5-6.

139

National Woman's Party, as stated in its declaration of principles, is dedicated to the same program as that adopted on this spot seventy-five years ago.” 337

Despite not having attended the Seneca Falls Convention, Anthony as the militant patron saint of suffrage was not forgotten during the commemoration and controversy arose over the use of her memory during the NWP conference. Anthony’s premier status was heralded when three hundred women who had attended the convention in Seneca

Falls then made a pilgrimage to Anthony’s grave in Rochester. However, Stanton’s children Harriot Stanton Blatch and Theodore Stanton bitterly and loudly objected to the privileging of Anthony’s memory over that of their mother, who they pointed out was the reason Seneca Falls became the cradle of American feminism. 338 As Theodore Stanton wryly commented in a New York Times editorial, “The facts are that Miss Anthony had no more to do with the convention of 1848 than the man in the moon.” 339

Linking Anthony to the ERA draped the equal rights campaign in respectability and gave it a ready-made usable past for the NWP to garner consent for the controversial legislative proposal. The Anthony pilgrimage commenced when NWP members drove in an automobile caravan from Seneca Falls and then marched in a procession to the gravesite. They were joined by a thousand women from Rochester women’s organizations who also attended the ceremony at Mount Hope Cemetery. In all, more than 5,000 people were present. The women’s groups carried banners and wreaths as tributes of gratitude to Anthony which were left on the grave. The National Woman’s

337 “Women Adopt Form For Equal Rights,” New York Times , July 22, 1923, pg. 1.

338 See Ellen Dubois, Harriot Stanton Blatch , 249; Harriot Stanton Blatch “Suffrage Anniversary: Part Taken by the Various Founders of the Movement,” New York Times , Jul 2, 1923, pg 14.

339 “TS,” letter to the editor, New York Times , July 19, 1923, pg. 14.

140

Party delegation carried one banner with the text of the Equal Rights Amendment and another with Anthony’s famous declaration “Failure is Impossible.” 340 As Alva Belmont declared at the suffragist’s burial place, “We here pledge the single-minded devotion of the Woman’s Party to the equal rights cause to which Miss Anthony devoted sixty years of unswerving labor.” 341

In a performance weighted in symbolism, Paul and National Secretary of the

NWP Anita Pollitzer kneeled by Anthony’s grave, a public act of reverence that suggests the political importance of historical memory on the campaign for equal rights. 342 The photograph of the two women in front of Anthony’s grave was widely reproduced. While it was certainly a sincere gesture of gratitude on the part of Paul, it was also a calculated act of propaganda that visually framed Paul as Anthony’s successor and the ERA as the rightful inheritance of the suffrage movement. As Belmont explained, in proposing the constitutional amendment “it is our purpose to carry on the work of Susan B. Anthony, drawing strength and inspiration from her example, until the last discrimination against woman has been wiped off the statute books and eradicated from the customs of our land.” 343

By emphasizing the relationship to the pioneers, the NWP unveiled the Equal

Rights Amendment in a blaze of glory, connecting it to a heroic past and an outwardly uncontested future. But anticipating the ensuing debate, a cartoon in Equal Rights

340 “5,000 Pay Tribute to Susan B. Anthony,” New York Times , July 23, 1923, pg. 13.

341 Ibid.

342 “Anita Pollitzer and Alice Paul at Susan B. Anthony gravesite, July 19-23, Rochester, N.Y.” National Woman’s Party Records, Group II, Container II :276, Folder: Group Photographs Nos. 145-149, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

343 “5,000 Pay Tribute to Susan B. Anthony,” New York Times , July 23, 1923, pg. 13.

141

depicted “Miss 1848” holding a banner with a quote from Lucretia Mott who exclaimed to “Miss 1923” that “It Must Not Take Another Seventy-Five Years!” 344 After the anniversary convention, a delegation of 200 women presented the amendment to

President Coolidge in a two-day conference which ended with a ceremony in the crypt of the U.S. Capitol with women representing every state laying wreaths of flowers upon the statue of Anthony, Stanton and Mott. 345 The memorial, while banished from the seat of power and hidden in the basement, was continuously resurrected by the NWP to bring ongoing attention to the movement’s past and present work.

Conclusion

Despite wrapping the Equal Rights Amendment in the mantle of the pioneers, the amendment would prove to be divisive among women activists in the 1920s. Especially over the labor question, memory would not be enough to unite women activists together under the banner of the Equal Rights Amendment. Both the non-partisan (and depoliticized) work of LWV and the single-minded focus of the National Woman’s Party on the contentious Equal Rights Amendment would contribute to the fracturing of a vibrant women’s movement. These conflicts continued into the ensuing decades. For example, on the 118th anniversary of Susan B. Anthony’s birth in 1938 women’s organization for and against the amendment came together to honor the pioneer. In some respects, history could act as a unifier as both the National Woman’s Party, the sponsor

344 Nina Allender cartoon, “Miss 1848 to Miss 1923,” Equal Rights June 30, 1923, cover.

345 “Equal Rights Plea To Go To President,” The Washington Post , October 22, 1923, pg. 4.

142

of the amendment, and the League of Women Voters, opposing it, placed wreaths on the memorial in the crypt of the Capitol. 346 However, the sharp divisions between the women over the ERA and a host of other social and political issue speak to how the organizations found different meaning from the same past. It would not be until the very end of Paul’s long life that the amendment would be embraced. It would be left to another generation of women to fully support the ERA, which would itself become part of a usable past, a project of historical memory connecting Paul and the suffrage movement to the second wave of feminism.

The politics of memory shaped the groundings of early twentieth-century feminism. Thus when memory is placed at the center of the history of woman suffrage, an old story takes on new meaning, suggesting the presence (and power) of the past to social movements. The multiplicity of uses for the past in the suffrage movement serves as a reminder about the fluidity of historical memory. Suffragists’ alternative ways of using history whether it was declaring success, building a memorial, moving on to new ventures or keeping movement history alive in order to build on it, reveals the significance of the past for women activists.

In the construction of invented traditions, political protest, and the creation of public memorials, suffragists used history to build, sustain and then transform the movement for women’s rights. The production of history reflected the conflicting strategy and ideology of the movement as NAWSA and NWP battled over how best to work for women’s rights. During the “Votes for Women” campaign, the deep chords of historical memory both bonded suffragists together and later helped divide them. History

346 “Susan B. Anthony Honored in Nation’s Capitol,” Equal rights , March 1, 1938, pg. 219.

143

helped build the movement and sell suffrage, especially the federal amendment, to the public. Once suffrage was won, suffragists looked to secure a place for the movement’s history by constructing memorials that worked to reshape the national narrative. At the same time, the past inspired new directions. Different readings of movement history supported fresh visions for the future of the movement. In constructing usable pasts, both organizations found inspiration for their social activism after the passage of the Anthony

Amendment.

The absence of a strong women’s movement, along with world events, jeopardized the growth of historical memory, the seeds for which activists had fought so hard to sow. Thus in 1943, nearing the end of her life and looking back on the tragedy of the two world wars, Carrie Chapman Catt foretold that “the women’s movement will be forgotten and almost buried in the great tragedies that have succeeded it.” She concluded,

“So I think it is very important to put all the memorial collections available into museums and libraries while we are still alive. There may be some persons who desire to investigate in the direction of the woman movement and there should be source materials to aid them.” 347 Catt’s comments highlight the concern many women activists shared in the years when the suffrage victory was receding from public consciousness. The memory work accomplished in the flush of victory in the 1920s was just the start of the push to memorialize the work of the women’s movement. As memory of women’s rights faded, the task to ensure historical recognition became more urgent even as it became even more difficult. In the 1930s and 1940s, women activists would continue to search for and attempt to preserve a usable past. However, attempting to keep feminism in the

347 Quoted in Dubois, “Making Women’s History,” 230.

144

public’s consciousness would lead to new debates over historical memory and the battle over women’s history would continue in the ensuing decades without resolution.

145

CHAPTER 4 “LEST THEY BE A SEX LOST TO HISTORY”: PRESERVING WOMEN’S RIGHTS BETWEEN THE FIRST AND SECOND WAVES

In 1946, aging and near blind women’s rights advocate Ida Clyde Clarke compiled a list of “Women in Bronze” or memorials erected to honor women and sent it to Carrie Chapman Catt, just months before Catt’s death. The letter was in response to

Clarke’s learning of Catt’s generous gift of $1000 that assured the preservation of Susan

B. Anthony’s home in Rochester. The previous year in 1945, the 25 th anniversary of the

Nineteenth Amendment inspired the move towards a completion of a dream long held by many American suffragists—turning Anthony’s house into a memorial. In her desire to see the house made into a “national shrine” Clarke pledged to Catt, “There is nothing I would not do within my limited power to serve this worthy cause.” 348

Clarke saw the importance of the Anthony home as a national memorial to women—for as her list demonstrated, there were no memorials which she deemed were national in scope and importance. Clarke had contacted agencies in every state and was often amused as the responses—which ranged from ignorance of any such memorials to discovering a memorial to a baker woman in Louisiana, a garden statue of Eve or monuments to women of the confederacy. Some states in the West had statues to the

Pioneer Mother or Indian women. Other states had statues of notable local women such

348 Ida Clyde Clarke to Mrs. Catt, September 20, 1946, Susan B. Anthony Memorial, Inc. Papers, Folder 13, Box 6, Rare Books Special Collections and Preservation, Rush Rhees Library, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, 14627 (hereafter: UR).

146

as Wyoming’s statue of Esther Morris. Yet none of these statues or memorials satisfied her quest to find a national monument dedicated to women. Clarke and other women who shared her desire pinned their hopes for such a monument in the effort to purchase and restore Anthony’s home. As the director of the committee, Mrs. Howard declared, “This will be a place dedicated to the memory of the ‘woman movement.’” 349

With suffrage won and thus one of the major obstacles to political equality removed, many women’s rights advocates such as Clarke focused on women’s historical visibility. These women helped document women’s historic role and in the process created the beginnings of an institutional base for preserving women’s past. This desire to correct the masculine bias in history was a popular and important endeavor after the

Nineteenth Amendment. Successful public history initiatives during this era included the preservation of Anthony’s home by NAWSA affiliated women and the introduction of the Anthony stamp in 1936, spearheaded by the NWP. This historical work built on the labor done in the aftermath of suffrage, such as the donation of relics to the Smithsonian

Institution in the 1920s and the dedication of The Woman Movement memorial in the

Capitol in 1921. 350 While the memory work in the 1920s was celebratory, accomplished in the flush of victory, the preservation efforts in the 1930s and 1940s were undertaken to battle the historical amnesia surrounding the memory of the movement.

However, this chapter explores some of the less successful ventures into the creation of collective memory by looking at women working apart from mainstream women’s organizations to explore both the limitless ambitions of women activists as well

349 Mrs. Howard to Mrs. Catt, September 12, 1946, Susan B. Anthony Memorial, Inc. Papers, Folder 13, Box 6, UR.

350 See chapter three of this dissertation.

147

as the limits of pubic memory. The three case studies in this chapter—one on including women in civic memorials through the campaign to place Anthony on Mount Rushmore, one on the preservation of women’s history in archives, especially the World Center for

Women’s Archives (WCWA) and one on the commemoration of that past during the

Centennial of the Seneca Falls Convention—demonstrate the importance of history to women activists in the 1930s and 1940s. These examples highlight the difficulties in creating a public history for women before mass support for such measures grew with the advent of second wave feminism in the 1970s. Further, these case studies suggest the challenges of achieving a consensus among women concerning the type of history that should be remembered and what the meaning ascribed to that history should be.

Anxiety about the lack of a historical identity for women reflected concerns about women’s ambiguous role in society. In saving women’s history, these women helped preserve feminist activism in the absence of a mass women’s movement. Historical work became increasingly important as the value of suffrage seemed doubtful when the anticipated women’s voting block did not materialize and the inclusion of women into the electorate did not “clean up” politics. As a 1926 Life magazine cartoon lampooned the woman voter: sitting atop a pile of political garbage (“Tea Pot Dome Scandal,”

“Veteran’s Bureau,” “Prohibition Muddle”) with a cobwebbed broom, a portrait of Susan

B. Anthony behind her head, and a caption that read, “Let’s see – what was it I was going to do when I got into politics?” 351 Feminists were also concerned that the younger generation little cared or knew anything about the struggle for the vote, and therefore were taking women’s political rights for granted. Further, economic depression and the

351 Life magazine, August 10, 1926, Clippings (General) Vol. 4, Susan B. Anthony Ephemera Collection, HL.

148

rise of fascism abroad made many organizations concerned about women’s future advancement, making it imperative to secure women’s accomplishments in the past.

Understanding this history sheds light on early attempts at creating a women’s public history. Women activists found new means to preserve women’s history, such as building monuments to Anthony, creating women’s history archives and commemorating the history of women’s political progress. Taken together, this work sought to carve out and create spaces to showcase the history of women’s contributions. These endeavors all attempted to bring attention to the important role women had played—and would continue to play—in shaping American democracy. The creation of memorials, historic sites, archives and sacred space for commemoration worked to expand the national narrative and argued that women’s history was worth remembering. Yet choosing the best ways to address the historical oversight and deciding whose history would be told was a complex and contested issue. The lack of consensus over the meaning of women’s history mirrored the lack of cohesion of any organized women’s movement. Whether to promote a more inclusive vision of women’s history or to focus only on preserving the past of great women leaders opened up a dialogue on the meaning of feminism, citizenship and the very significance of history. Deciding what constituted a usable past for women challenged activists as increasingly it became apparent that women’s history and women’s politics consisted of multiple voices and viewpoints.

Transforming the Landscape of History: Anthony and the Mount Rushmore Memorial

On the evening of October 21, 1936, sixty-year old Rose Arnold Powell, advocate for women’s rights, was walking on Sixteenth Street to cross to Fuller Street in the

149

nation’s capital. We will never know for sure what went through her head when she stepped off the curb and was hit by the fender of a speeding taxicab. But we can imagine.

Perhaps she thought of her life’s great work: her tireless crusade to include the face of

Susan B. Anthony on Mount Rushmore in order to gain national recognition for her heroine, and more broadly, for the significance of the women’s movement to American democracy. 352

Like so many days and nights before, on this particular evening in October Powell was coming home from a meeting concerning her work on Anthony. 353 This unfortunate accident, which Powell survived, nonetheless had disastrous consequences for her campaign, underway for more than three years. While it is doubtful that her dream ever would have been realized, her persistence had created some impetus by 1936. Her accident, coming right before a crucial report to Congress, and which left her in the hospital for 17 days and with weeks of recuperation, derailed the campaign enough that

Powell was never able to regain the momentum. 354 However, she would continue to lobby unabated for the inclusion of Anthony on Rushmore until her death in 1961.

Powell’s campaign, while unsuccessful, nevertheless provides a useful case study for examining one vision of women’s history that flourished in the 1930s. Powell

352 Brief discussion of Powell’s campaign can be found in John Taliaferro, Great White Fathers: the Story of the Obsessive Quest to Create Mount Rushmore (New York: Public Affairs, 2002), 312-318; Lelia J. Rupp and Verta Taylor, Survival in the Doldrums: the American Women’s Rights Movement , 1945 to the 1960s (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987), 112-115 and Simon Schama, Landscape and Memory (New York: A.A. Knopf: Distributed by Random House, 1995), 385-411.

353 Account of the accident can be found in Powell’s journal, entry for November 12, 1936, pp. 154-155, vol. 2, Box 1, Rose Arnold Powell Papers (hereafter: RAP), SL.

354 Powell had gotten the Anthony Bill reintroduced in the spring of 1937 but because of the accident, Powell was unwell and not able to “make the necessary effort to get it reintroduced in the Senate.” See “Notes on the Mount Rushmore Struggle,” begun July 13, 1945 by Rose Arnold Powell, Folder 1, Box 1, RAP, SL.

150

passionately argued for the recognition of women in national memorials. Powell’s campaign highlights racial tensions within the women’s movement, as she imagined women’s history through the lens of a feminist past that glorified great women leaders in order to uplift white women. Further, her battle offers insight into the contradictions that erupt when movement memory intersects with national historical narratives.

Powell’s Rushmore campaign suggests how women activists attempted to insert women’s accomplishments into the national narrative by appropriating traditionally masculine forms of civic remembrance. Historic house museums and national monuments in the twentieth century almost universally celebrated male political history and patriotism. 355 Women like Powell worked to literally transform the historic landscape of the nation. She desired to forge a powerful representation of women’s rights by linking in the public mind a strong heroine with a grandiose public monument. A national monument honoring Anthony would have legitimized collective memories of the suffrage struggle by sealing the suffragist’s place in the canonized American past. History carved into stone has permanence. By demanding Anthony be included on Rushmore, Powell hoped to ensure Anthony’s work would be part of the national consciousness for all time.

Despite her familiarity as a women’s symbol, Anthony became a more complex icon after enfranchisement because of the lack of agreement over what she—and the women’s movement—now represented. The early decades of the twentieth century were a time of great transition and redefinition for the movement. 356 There was little agreement

355 Patricia West, Domesticating History: the Political Origins of America’s House Museums (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1999), 50.

356 See Kristi Andersen, After Suffrage: Women in Partisan and Electoral Politics before the New Deal (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1996); Nancy Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987); Susan Ware, Beyond Suffrage , Women in the New Deal (Cambridge, Mass.:

151

about how women’s activism should evolve as NAWSA and the NWP followed divergent paths through the founding of the League of Women Voters and advocacy of the ERA. 357 From citizenship laws to voter education to peace activism to labor questions, finding an issue as powerfully symbolic as suffrage was impossible. 358 As

Anna Howard Shaw stated in 1919, “I am sorry for you young women who have to carry on the work in the next ten years, for suffrage was a symbol, and now you have lost your symbol. There is nothing for the women to rally around.” 359 However, many individual women agreed on the importance of preserving the history of the movement. “Now that the pioneering has been accomplished along most lines of women’s present interests, the women pioneers themselves are coming in for an increased measure of attention,” reported the New York Times in 1928. 360 While the NWP looked to the ERA as the new symbol, this legislation proved to be more a divider than a unifier. A safer symbol could be found by looking to the past rather than the future—in the dependable historical figure that personally embodied the suffrage amendment: Susan B. Anthony.

Powell’s campaign was part of a larger movement of Anthony veneration. During the 1920s and 1930s, Susan B. Anthony Memorial Committees were formed across the country, creating a small community of white, middle class activist women, committed to

Harvard University Press, 1981) and Still Missing: Amelia Earhart and the Search for Modern Feminism (New York: W.W. Norton, 1994).

357 See chapter three of this dissertation.

358 For more on women’s activism in the 1920s, see Nancy Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism .

359 Susan Ware, Holding Their Own : American Women in the 1930s (Boston: Twayne, 1982), 87.

360 “Deeds of the Pioneer Woman,” New York Times , February 19, 1828, pg. 89.

152

preserving the legacy of the women’s rights movement. 361 Most of these groups were affiliates of the NWP’s Committee on Pioneers of the Woman Movement. The committees worked to promote national celebrations of Anthony’s birthday on February

15, getting Anthony elected to the Hall of Fame in New York and having her name honored in public spaces such as schools, libraries, play grounds, highways, and parks, or as Ethel Adamson, chairman of the Committee on Pioneers, described, “in every way in which the names of Washington and Lincoln are now so widely honored.” 362

Outlining a rudimentary notion of a gendered public history, Adamson explained the purpose of the committee was to secure Anthony’s “rightful place in history from the popular public point of view.” The Committee on Pioneers was interested in shaping public consciousness about women’s history and women’s rights. In order to reaffirm women’s new status as political beings, evidence of women’s progress needed a place in the nation’s history. Adamson stated, “Men have never fully valued the achievements of women. Therefore if women’s names are to go down in history women themselves must first do honor to their own great and inspired sisters, and thus compel such recognition from men.” She declared, “Unless women actively bring to public recognition the great work of women leaders and women heroes, such recognition will surely be long delayed and perhaps never adequately established. Contemporaneous records in the past have either wholly neglected, or greatly minimized, all their achievements.” 363

361 Groups formed in Washington D.C., Rochester, N.Y., Baltimore, M.D., Minnesota, M.N., Upland, C.A., Adams, M.A., Middletown, N.J., as well as other areas with NWP affiliation.

362 “Report of Susan B. Anthony Memorial Committee,” by Mrs. Robert Adamson, Chairman, Folder 3, Box 1, Mary Beard Papers, SL.

363 Ibid.

153

Small in numbers but large in terms of dedication to their cause, these committees blurred the boundary between women’s volunteerism and social activism as they turned preservation and commemoration into tools for women’s political action. These

“Anthony women” viewed the past as an important part of the women’s movement and connected their historic work with political organizing. The women associated with the

NWP, for example, most often used Anthony as a symbol to fight for the passage of the

ERA. Many of these women, like Adamson, were veterans of the suffrage movement.

Similarly, the Susan B. Anthony Forum, headed by Powell, had its origins in the suffrage struggle, originally founded in 1912 as the Anthony League by Anna E. Hendley. 364

However, as a late-comer to women’s rights, Powell had not been involved in the suffrage campaign. 365 As she recalled, “I confess…that I knew nothing of the woman movement and the long struggle for suffrage until after the amendment was part of the

Constitution. When the awakening came, my deep desire was to help finish the job.” 366 In her mid-forties, after reading an autobiography of Dr. Anna Howard Shaw that contained chapters on Anthony and Ida Harper’s Life of Susan B. Anthony (“again and again the tears would roll down my cheeks,” she recalled), she “caught the zeal” of the woman

364 The forum was reorganized after the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment and in 1924 became the Susan B. Anthony Foundation with the objective of building a monument to Anthony in D.C. and revising school curriculum to include the history of women’s rights. However, Powell fought with members over tactics, and on Anthony’s birthday, 1934, she founded the Susan B. Anthony Forum to continue her vision.

365 Another late-comer to women’s rights Una R. Winter was in her sixties when her consciousness was transformed and she began working for Anthony’s legacy. As an active leader in the Susan B. Anthony Memorial Committee of California, Winter worked to secure a memorial to Anthony in the form of a tree in Sequoia National Park, getting suffrage history into public schools, creating a memorial library for Anthony materials in the West as well as compiling lists of women’s collections around the country and internationally. For more, see the Una R. Winter collection at the Huntington Library.

366 Rose Arnold Powell to Mary Beard, April 23, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

154

movement. 367 At first, Powell associated herself with the NWP and supported its crusade to pass the ERA. But by 1936, Powell voiced her doubt about the NWP’s version of the

ERA and distanced herself from the organization. 368 Powell objected to the particular notion of equal rights outlined by the NWP, which she contended was not strong enough.

Powell, therefore, subscribed to a militant feminism, surpassing even the NWP in singular devotion to the cause. 369 Powell thus became a convert to women’s rights, and with the fervor of those often converted to a cause—at times reaching towards the fanatical—she resigned from her job with the Internal Revenue Service and began a thirty year campaign of tireless advocacy to gain historical recognition for Susan B. Anthony and the woman movement. As Powell once confided in her diary about her uphill battle,

“How hard it is to make people appreciate her! Like wading through molasses.” 370

Powell saw her historical work as an integral part of the women’s movement by helping to transform the nation’s consciousness about women’s rights. She explained her feelings towards revering the past versus activism for the present day to historian Mary

Beard, “life is a three-ring performance, featuring the past, present and future, each of which must have due consideration if we see our problem whole.” 371 Powell demanded

367 See article by Jacqueline Larkin, Minneapolis Tribune, “For Rose Arnold Powell, at 80, the Banner Yet Flies for Women’s Rights,” August 5, 1956, clipping and “Notes on the Mount Rushmore Struggle,” begun July 13, 1945 by Rose Arnold Powell, both documents found in Folder 1, Box 1, RAP, SL.; “tears roll down my cheeks,” Rose Arnold Powell to Mary Beard, April 9, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

368 Rose Arnold Powell to Hatton W. Summers, Chairman, Judiciary Committee of the House, March 1, 1936, Folder 94, Box 5, RAP, SL.

369 Rose Arnold Powell to Alice Paul, Oct. 17, 1946, RAP, Box 5, Folder 94, SL. While she resigned membership with the NWP for many years, she kept up correspondence and eventually rejoined the organization. As late as 1960, right before her death, Powell was a member of the NWP. See membership card in Folder 1, Box 1, RAP, SL.

370 Rose Arnold Powell Diary, Entry February 6, 1932, Vol. 1, Box 1, RAP, SL.

371 Rose Arnold Powell to Mary Beard, September 4, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

155

that schools teach women’s history, libraries carry books about women and insisted that the birthdays of important women such as Anthony be recognized in order to create

“national balance.” She argued, “Women should eulogize and monument their heroines as men do their heroes…Why should children be given an unbalanced idea of democracy by harping only on great men?” 372

Powell set her sights on the new national shrine to democracy as the most fitting memorial for her “emancipator of womankind.” Originally Powell envisioned a memorial to Anthony in the nation’s capital between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln

Memorial, completely devoted to Anthony’s memory. But beginning in 1933, Powell focused her energies solely on including Anthony on Rushmore. She recalled, “The stupendous nature of the task involved to get recognition in the Memorial for a woman burst upon my thought. Like Moses, I felt utterly inadequate for the undertaking.” 373 She maintained that there was much at stake: “The recognition historically of the Woman

Movement, and its great leader -also our own national identity in the commemoration of a particular period- all this they would sink with out a trace!” 374 Powell argued that the memorial could not be a true “Shrine of Democracy” unless it recognized the important contributions of the woman movement: “It represents the common task of nation building in which both men and women took part . To leave the unprecedented half century in which Miss Anthony labored, unrepresented as far as women are concerned, would

372 Reprint typed manuscript from Equal Rights , Dec. 2, 1933, “Do Women Advertise Themselves Enough” by Rose Arnold Powell, Folder 6, Box 2, Women’s Rights Collection, SSC.

373 “Notes on the Mount Rushmore Struggle,” begun July 13, 1945 by Rose Arnold Powell, Folder 1, Box 1, RAP, SL.

374 Rose Arnold Powell to Mary Beard, July 14, 1936, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

156

proclaim a lie to posterity: that there was no great woman leader during that period in our national development.” 375

Due to Powell’s persistence, prominent women such as Catt and Beard gave their endorsement to the memorial. 376 She drummed up support for her project from women’s organizations including the National Council of Women, the General Federation of

Women’s Clubs, the National Congress of Parents and Teachers, the National Federation of Business and Professional Women’s Clubs and the National Woman’s Party among others. While these groups all endorsed the mission, as Powell complained, “none of the organizations took the work seriously and pushed it as a project.” 377 Other groups chose not to assist Powell either because of financial difficulties imposed by the Depression or because they felt there were more pressing women’s issues that deserved their attention.

Despite the lukewarm reception of the project, Powell’s campaign highlights an important point—the virtual absence of women in American collective memory. In a changing society that was rapidly forgetting the women’s movement historical reformers such as Powell wanted to secure a collective memory of the movement. She understood the powerful political potential of symbols in the public sphere. For example, in response to Beard’s criticism of the “horror” of mountain carving as a memorial form, Powell replied: “If men think mountain carving majestic, let us demand it for a woman who is

375 “Questions and Answers Regarding the Mount Rushmore National Memorial,” Folder 84, Box 5, RAP, SL.

376 See for example, the letter from Mary Beard to Gutzom Borglum, May 23, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

377 “Notes on the Mount Rushmore Struggle,” begun July 13, 1945 by Rose Arnold Powell, Folder 1, Box 1, RAP, SL.

157

the peer and more, of the men they seek to honor.” 378 Powell explained: “The untold millions who will view the memorial will have something routed out of their subconscious minds if they see the figure of a woman there – the age-long concept of the inferiority of women. The power of suggestion through symbols is tremendous, and women must utilize this psychological principle to the utmost.” 379

We can see her desire for a monument for Anthony in the Capital and her inclusion on Rushmore as a battle over what scholars today call “sacred space,” places

“invested with special meaning within the structure of the civil religion that helps constitute a given social order.” 380 Monuments in public spaces teach the political lessons of those in power. 381 As Powell believed, a new conception of the woman citizen—the female voter—demanded new civic lessons inclusive of women. Leaving women absent from the historical record naturalized unequal power relations between the sexes.

Anthony, Powell declared, “belongs in this group of leaders by right of achievement, but men would rob her of this honor because she is a woman. They have always fought women’s representation in traditionally masculine groups. There is no aristocracy of sex in a true democracy. This is the principle Susan B. Anthony’s life really represents.” 382

It was in a dedication ceremony in 1927 that President Calvin Coolidge first called Mount Rushmore a “national shrine,” and it was this aspect of the memorial—the

378 Mary Beard to Rose Arnold Powell, March 27, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

379 Rose Arnold Powell to Mary Beard, April 9, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

380 Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1998), 37.

381 Levinson, 10.

382 “Questions and Answers Regarding the Mount Rushmore National Memorial,” Folder 84, Box 5, RAP, SL.

158

public and popular symbolism—that fueled Powell’s ambitions. The brainchild of Doane

Robinson, superintendent of the South Dakota State Historical Society, the sculpture on

Mount Rushmore was intended to increase tourism in the Black Hills and was to figure

Western heroes such as George Armstrong Custer, Buffalo Bill Cody, Lewis and Clark and Sioux warriors. When sculptor Gutzon Borglum first signed onto the project he conceived of the idea of depicting patriotic figures that would appeal to a wider audience and increase support for the project. Fulfilling his own personal desire to create a massive sculpture of Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, eventually it was agreed that

Mount Rushmore would be the canvas for the faces of the four presidents that grace the mountain today: Lincoln, Washington, Teddy Roosevelt and Thomas Jefferson. 383

Powell’s insistence on Rushmore as the choice for memorializing Anthony underscores her view of history. Rushmore was envisioned as an “eternal” monument of heroism and sacrifice that represented the ideals of the nation. By demanding the inclusion of Anthony, Powell protested the exclusion of women from these categories of honor and made an argument for the historical significance of the woman movement during a period when the Nineteenth Amendment appeared a failure, even a joke.

Rushmore was a monument that celebrated patriarchy, upheld notions of “great man” history and carved into national memory a vision of manifest destiny. 384 The irony was most likely lost on Powell that introducing Anthony into the project both challenged and reaffirmed the meaning behind the monument. On one hand, Powell’s celebration of

Anthony as a great woman, leader and American fit within the “great man” history

383 For more on the history behind Mount Rushmore, see John Taliaferro, Great White Fathers.

384 Albert Boime, “Patriarchy Fixed in Stone: Gutzon Borglum’s ‘Mount Rushmore’” American Art 5, no. 1/2 (Winter - Spring 1991): 142-167.

159

emanating out of the Rushmore monument. And Powell openly embraced the ideas of white, racial superiority that the memorial represented. Yet including Anthony in the memorial would have unsettled the patriarchal image being carved into stone, thus unsettling and questioning the narrative of American greatness.

Demands for Anthony to be depicted alongside American presidents, the very essence of masculine leadership, blurred the distinction between ideals of traditional masculine men and feminine women, so pervasive in public art of the 1930s. American public art has overlooked women in favor of images of heroic men. Women, when depicted, usually emerged in allegorical form. Influenced by the New Deal and the Great

Depression, the 1930s produced a style of public art which expressed cultural tensions over women’s work and feminism by reaffirming traditional notions of gender. 385

Powell’s drive to place a woman at the center of American political history in a public sculpture—and in such a massive endeavor—was clearly at odds with the national trend.

The narrative Powell put forth rested upon certain ideals and thinking that glorified specific constructions of citizenship, patriotism and Americanism. In her quest to valorize Anthony, Powell utilized a “great man” theory of history premised upon masculine assumptions of greatness. Her most frequent strategy was to liken Anthony to

Washington and Lincoln, a trio she called the “Three Great Emancipators.” Drawing on imagery popularized in the Harper biography of Anthony as the “great Liberator of women,” Powell pointed out that all three leaders were born in February, and “All three stand out in the history of our country as liberators—apostles of freedom.” 386 Powell

385 See Barbara Melosh, Engendering Culture: Manhood and Womanhood in New Deal Public Art and Theater (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1991), especially pages 204-211.

386 Ida Husted Harper, Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony, Volume II (Indianapolis and Kansas City

160

claimed that in the woman movement, Anthony was the “acknowledged general. Like

Washington, she had remarkable powers of organization and leadership.” 387 Powell argued for the similarity between the characters of Lincoln and Anthony: “Each possessed a passion for justice and a hatred of tyranny and oppression. Rugged, fearless, honest, they unflinchingly followed the path of duty as they saw it. Simply, unselfishly, they brought mankind a large sense of freedom and a fuller measure of justice.” 388 With such language and rhetoric, Powell appropriated martial imagery and grandiose ideals of honor and heroism to elevate Anthony’s legacy as not just significant for women but for the nation.

Powell’s vision of women’s history was far from inclusive and worked to obscure the problematic relationship between women’s rights and race. While calling on

“common sisterhood,” she used race as a foil and constructions of womanhood to privilege whiteness. Drawing on one of the longstanding myths of women’s history—that the nation sacrificed women for African Americans during Reconstruction—Powell resurrected the Fifteenth Amendment controversy to bolster her claims. In the 1870s and

1880s, white women activists, including Anthony, wrote of feelings of injustice that black men received the vote before women. As Anthony recalled, “What words can express her [the white woman’s] humiliation when, at the close of this long conflict, the government which she had served so faithfully held her unworthy of a voice in its councils, while it recognized as the political superiors of all the noble women of the

The Bowen –Merrill Company, 1898), 952-953; Rose Arnold Powell, “American Emancipators Honored Together,” The Christian Science Monitor , February 15, 1956, RAP, Folder 81, Box 5, SL.

387 Ibid.

388 Ibid.

161

nation the negro men just emerged from slavery, and not only totally illiterate, but also densely ignorant of every public question.” 389 This tale of treachery and inequality was so often told, canonized in Harper’s biography of Anthony and the History of Woman

Suffrage , it endured into the twentieth century. In a letter sent to 100 prominent women,

Powell asked: “Shall white women again be sacrificed and be denied representation in the

Mount Rushmore National Memorial?” She demanded, “Where Lincoln, ‘the Great

Emancipator,’ is honored, there, on a corresponding level of equality, the liberator of millions of women of the white race belongs. How can we be satisfied with less?” 390

The burgeoning association of Lincoln with black politics stirred up memories of competition between women’s rights and the rights of African Americans. During the

1930s, Lincoln became an increasingly popular symbol of the enduring values of democracy. 391 At the same time, the national symbol of Lincoln became appropriated by

African American activists to further their demands for civil rights. 392 “Shall the negro again be boosted over the heads of white women?” Powell asked. “That is what will happen when Lincoln is honored in the [Rushmore] Memorial and Susan Anthony is shut out. The man has undying fame and glory for unshackling black chattels. The woman would be degraded for doing a much bigger job at emancipation than he did. All the

389 As cited in Newman, White Women’s Rights , 65.

390 Letter from Rose Arnold Powell to 100 Prominent Women, December 20, 1940, Folder 88, Box 5, RAP, SL.

391 For a useful overview of Lincoln as symbol, see Merrill D. Peterson, Lincoln in American Memory (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994).

392 See Scott Sandage, “A Marble House Divided: The Lincoln Memorial, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Politics of Memory, 1939-1963,” Journal of American History 80, no. 1 (June 1993): 135-167 and Barry Schwartz, “Collective Memory and History: How Abraham Lincoln Became a Symbol of Racial Equality,” The Sociological Quarterly 38, no. 3 (Summer 1997): 469-496.

162

women she liberated would be degraded with her - to a level below negro; in fact, deprived of all national identity in this historic commemoration.” 393

Powell viewed Anthony as the great white hope and the inherited movement memory of “white women’s rights,” advanced a legacy that eschewed interracial cooperation in favor of racial inequality. 394 One of the earliest protests of the civil rights movement was a 1939 concert given by Marian Anderson in front of the Lincoln

Memorial. The performance was enmeshed in controversy as the Daughters of the

American Revolution had refused Anderson permission to perform in Constitution Hall because of her race. With the assistance of Eleanor Roosevelt among others, in protest, a concert was organized at the Lincoln Memorial. Writing of the concert, Powell exclaimed, “This event ‘burned me up.’” 395 It is not surprising that Powell sided with the

DAR in the controversy—Anthony was after all a member. Yet Powell’s insistence on continuing to frame feminist activism as a division between women’s rights and civil rights for African Americans resulted in an ambivalent relationship with African

American women, who as a whole, were largely left out of Powell’s vision of history.

Powell constructed Anderson’s plight as apart from the struggles faced by white women and ignored the difficulties she faced concerning racism as an African American and the long history of activism by black women to secure women’s rights. She saw Anderson first as an African American and only second as a woman. Commenting on Anderson’s ability to hold a concert at the Lincoln Memorial, while white women were still denied

393 Rose Arnold Powell to Mr. Fred. W. Sargent, Chairman, Mount Rushmore National Memorial Commission, December, 4, 1936, Folder 87, Box 5, RAP, SL.

394 See Newman, White Women’s Rights.

395 Powell wrote this phrase underneath the editorial she wrote about the event in her scrapbook, RAP scrapbook, Volume 10, Box 5, RAP, SL.

163

rights, Powell explained: “I could not help but feel that the Negro race has had a much better break than white women have had in their long struggle for justice.” At the end of the editorial, Powell stated, “Marian Anderson, you are a fortunate woman.” 396

Powell does not so much appear against civil rights (at least not openly), but rather she objected to African Americans achieving these rights first —before equal rights for women were accomplished, or as she claimed, “The Negro has many champions, some in very high places, but for some reason much of the ‘unfinished business’ of the pioneers of the woman movement has been laid on the shelf…Therefore, the Negro hasn’t as much cause to wail as women have.” 397 This competitiveness suggests how the memory of a nineteenth century debate continued to shape the mindset of at least some women activists into the mid-twentieth century. Movement memory often inspired women yet as this example shows, how stories are told, and the meaning attached to them could have destructive consequences that inhibited the growth of a stronger and united women’s movement. Like the writing of the History of Woman Suffrage in the 1880s,

Powell’s campaign in the 1930s contributed to the whitening of women’s history, and thereby, the narrowing of the movement for women’s rights. 398

To imagine Anthony engraved into a national shrine argued for a public citizenship for women independent of domesticity, offering instead a new narrative of

American history that recognized women’s historical influence in the public sphere.

396 “Fight For Freedom,” unidentified clipping, by Rose Arnold Powell, letter to the Editor of the Post, April 13 [1939], Rose Arnold Powell Scrapbook, Volume 10, Box 5, RAP, SL.

397 “Woman’s Stake vs. Negro’s Stake,” unidentified newspaper clipping, by Rose Arnold Powell, [n.d.] RAP scrapbook, Volume 10, Box 5, RAP, SL.

398 For more on whiteness and the construction of narrative in The History of Woman Suffrage , see Lisa Tetrault, Memory of a Movement: Woman Suffrage and the Creation of a Feminist Origins Myth, 1865- 1900 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, forthcoming).

164

Indeed, Anthony on Rushmore would have been feminism writ large, a permanent symbol of women’s political potential. Thus it is not surprising that the prospect of

Anthony, or any woman on Rushmore for that matter, received a fate similar to The

Woman Movement which took its place in the Capitol crypt rather than the Rotunda.

Recognition of women’s new citizenship in memorial form would have acknowledged the permanence of women’s political gains, making it more difficult to so effectively contain feminism. Women’s status as political beings might have been written into the

Constitution but that did not mean that women’s new role would have to be sculpted into national memory. Instead, public art valorized not the woman politician but traditional gender ideology that continued to situate (and thus contain) women in the domestic sphere. However, Powell’s version of history premised upon great leaders, while popular, was not the only way of thinking about women’s past in the 1930s. As it became clear that women’s history needed to be preserved, the creation of women’s archives sparked debate about what kind of history should be collected. The competing narratives put forth during this period of preservation questioned the elite construction of the past, opening up a space for dialogue concerning the meaning and importance of women’s history.

The Creation of the World Center for Women’s Archives

Through her historical work on Anthony, Powell corresponded with reformer and historian Mary Beard. 399 Like Powell, Beard focused years of her life trying to transform

399 For more on Mary Beard see Nancy Cott, ed. A Woman Making History: Mary Ritter Beard through her Letters (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991); Julie Des Jardins, Women and the Historical Enterprise in America: Gender, Race, and the Politics of Memory, 1880-1945 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003), 225-240; Ann Lane, Mary Ritter Beard : a Sourcebook (New York: Schocken Books, 1977); Bonnie G. Smith, “Seeing Mary Beard,” Feminist Studies 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1984): 399- 416.

165

historical memory. For Beard, memory was central to her understanding of the importance of women’s history. As she explained, “What we think with is MEMORY.

Men have so much of themselves but none of women. Women try to capture the memory of men and throw their own aside.” 400 In this respect, Beard’s thinking in many ways mirrored that of Powell. Both women saw the need of a historical consciousness and educational awareness about women’s role in society in the past and present. Both women saw in history a tool for transforming assumptions about women’s inferiority.

Through the writing of histories about women and creating women’s archives, Beard sought to use the past as a means of enacting social change for women: “If we can help them to realize their dual personality in history, we shall lift them out of the shadows as historic ghosts into the full-bodied historic persons they have always been, whatever the laws might affirm about what they were or ought to be in any place or time.” 401

While the two women shared basic similarity in thinking concerning the importance of memory and history, in many respects, their understanding of women’s past could not have been more different. Beard founded the WCWA as a clearing house to organize, supply and construct knowledge about women in the past and present. Unlike

Powell’s Rushmore proposal, the WCWA was not intended as a commemorative memorial but a vital force for progressive social change. In her progressive era faith in the political nature of history, Beard believed a new narrative of history was needed for these present times—an account that would free women from their historical

400 Mary Beard to Mira Saunders, May 16, 1939, Charles Francis Saunders Papers, Folder 5, Box 2, HL.

401 Mary Beard to Margaret Storrs Grierson, June 27, 1943, Folder 10, Box 1, Mary Ritter Beard Papers, SSC.

166

invisibility. 402 Beard sought in her writing to make clear just how much women had indeed been a “force in history.” 403 She saw in her historical work a means for raising women’s consciousness: ‘What I have been trying to do for years is to awaken women to the reality of their historic power…to incite women to realize who and what they have been, with a view to their realizing better who they are and what they are now doing.’404

In Depression-era America, an understanding of women’s power in the past was essential if women’s labor were to be valued in contemporary society. Because Beard was interested in constructing a usable past, the WCWA sponsored educational outreach programs. She acted as historical consultant for a radio series on the history of American women. Such programs not only assisted in publicity for the archives but worked to challenge popular conceptions about women’s history among average Americans. Unlike

Powell, Beard articulated a vision of history that imagined both a different past and future for women, including women of different classes and races. However, like Powell, Beard never saw her dream for women’s history fulfilled. Similar to Powell’s Rushmore campaign, Beard’s treasured WCWA would ultimately fail.

While Powell based her notion of history from suffrage foremothers, Beard attempted to construct an alternative conception of women’s past that moved away from history as seen through the lens of the nineteenth century woman movement. While

402 During the Progressive Era, the idea of the political implication of history gained ascendance among U.S. historians. This is opposed the notion of history as objective or neutral. See Peter Novick, That Noble Dream : the “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 239-240.

403 See Beard’s historical works, especially On Understanding Women (Longmans, Green and co., 1931), America through Women’s Eyes (New York, Macmillan Co. 1933), and Woman as Force in History; a Study in Traditions and Realities (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1946).

404 Quote from letter, Mary Beard to Florence Cross Kitchelt, March 17, 1950, found in Cott, ed. A Woman Making History , 315.

167

maintaining a faith in women’s rights, Beard nevertheless sought to create a usable past distinct from the constructions of history outlined by the pioneers. This break with official history signified more than a difference in historical perspective. While Powell and the women in NWP sponsored Anthony Memorial Committees saw their historical reform as continuing the work of the woman movement (just as they saw the ERA as a natural continuation of the Nineteenth Amendment), Beard saw her efforts as separate.

Beard’s work was not an endeavor to breathe life into a dying movement but rather a challenge to begin a new women’s movement, one in which a new history would be central to feminist politics. As the title of an address to the National Association of Deans of Women made clear: “The New Feminism—my interpretation of history.” 405

Beard’s thinking only gradually evolved away from standard historiography. Her ideas about women’s history shifted through research for her books and her work with the

WCWA. She certainly had an interest and an admiration for the history of women’s rights. 406 Beard even wrote to Borglum at Powell’s behest to advocate sculpting Anthony on Rushmore (albeit begrudgingly). 407 As late as the mid-1930s, Beard’s correspondence with Powell suggests her appreciation of a suffragist-inspired history. In response to

Powell’s retelling of the battles for woman suffrage, Beard replied, “My blood of course surges hotly through my veins as I go over again the feminist story as you set it down.

You do it to perfection. I got my blood to boiling originally by reading the four-volume

History of Woman Suffrage where so much of the story is to be found and your version

405 Mary Ritter Beard, “The New Feminism,” Yearbook 1935 , National Association of Deans of Women, Folder 8, Box 2, Mary Beard Papers, SSC.

406 For example, Beard attended the Susan B. Anthony exhibit at the Congressional Library, Mary Beard to Rose Arnold Powell, April 11, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

407 Mary Beard to Gutzom Borglum, May 23, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

168

heats it to a terrific temperature once more.” 408 That the interest was genuine is suggested by the fact that Beard wrote Powell to inquire about procuring the complete set of the

History of Woman Suffrage because she so dearly wanted to own it. 409

Beard became increasingly suspect of historical truths in which women played a minor role in history and it was her involvement in the suffrage movement that helped open her eyes. She resisted the claims made by the pioneers in which women had been subjected by men and only liberated through the women’s movement. However, Beard’s historical analysis greatly simplified how reformers engaged with the past. The nineteenth century woman movement had struggled to define women’s place in history.

Women’s rights advocates did indeed bemoan women’s second class status in the past.

But in fact, reformers vacillated between arguing for women’s historical oppression by men that kept women from fulfilling their potential and portraying women’s past achievements as examples of women’s abilities. Reformers presented women as agents of historical change as illustrated by their emphasis on queens, amazons and founding mothers. It was largely the next generation of activists whom narrowed their historical interests solely to the pioneers in order to record and celebrate their own efforts. 410 In this new solidified narrative of women’s history, the foremothers of the movement rescued women from their historic oppression and the competing narrative of woman’s force in history dropped away. Beard objected that this narrative was taken as gospel, which she believed denied a long history of women’s power. She recalled, “As for my personal faith

408 Mary Beard to Rose Arnold Powell, April 28, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

409 Mary Beard to Rose Arnold Powell, July 10, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

410 See chapters two and three of this dissertation.

169

that the quest for realistic intelligence in history is highly rewarding, I acquired this faith after I had joined suffragists at their wailing wall which was but a creature of their imaginations, unlike that barrier of actual stone which the Jews cling to in their Zion.” 411

According to Beard, women’s rights pioneers constructed historical accounts that were misleading and destructive to the way society understood women’s role in history.

She took to task the popular narrative that explained history as a progressive tale in which women were subject to men and only freed by the work of the women’s movement. This constructed history valorized women’s rights and presupposed a past in which women played no real role until the Seneca Falls Convention. Beard believed that the pioneers’ propagandist narrative encouraged society in false impressions. She suggested, “Surely the formula of 1848 at Seneca Falls interpreting long history as the rule of Man the

Tyrant over Woman his Subject-victim has done enough injury to both sexes’ minds for a hundred years later to overcome.” 412 This Beard argued contributed to the entrenched notion that “that women had been nothing in long history,” leading to assumptions that shaped gender experiences in a negative manner. “So why shouldn’t men feel ‘superior’? she asked. “And why shouldn’t young women begin to have an inferiority complex?” 413

She explained, “To appreciate what it signifies to have no history, let us try to imagine what it would be like to know nothing even of men’s past! …Women alone are supposed to be able to manage without knowing themselves; with knowing men only.” 414

411 Mary Beard to Margaret Storrs Grierson, August 6, 1947, Folder 11, Box 1, Mary Beard Papers, SSC.

412 Mary Beard to President Wright, March 28, 1950, Folder 12, Box 1, Mary Beard Papers, SSC.

413 Mary Beard to Rose Arnold Powell, July 3, 1948, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

414 Mary Ritter Beard, “A Changing Political Economy As It Affects Women,” copyrighted 1934 by National Headquarters AAUW, pg. 6, Folder 13, Box 2, Mary Beard Papers, SSC.

170

Beard thus departed from the mainstream by arguing that women had been an equal force in history, that they were principal agents of change and not simply participants. It is telling that in 1940 she entitled the revised edition of her history, On

Understanding Women (1931) , Woman: Co-Maker of History , so strongly did she believe in women’s share of history. 415 The title is no doubt influenced by her work for the

WCWA, when the phrase “co-maker of history” was used repeatedly in her writing.

Beard, Powell and earlier women’s rights advocates all insisted that women did in fact play a major role in history that men ignored. Indeed, earlier written accounts such as

Otis T. Mason’s Woman’s Share in Primitive Culture (1895) and Anna Garlin Spencer’s

Woman’s Share in Social Culture (1913) presented women’s contributions to society, but

Beard went further, emphasizing the totality of women’s influence in all areas of history and contributing a critique of feminist history that hid women’s accomplishments from view. 416 While Powell inherited the dual vision of women’s history, her focus on

Anthony eclipsed broader ideas about women’s contribution to history. For Beard, the history of women demonstrated not women’s continual oppression but instead how women had been a historic and powerful force. While she could admire the women’s rights past, she could at the same time critique much of what she saw as the underlying misrepresentations created by the movement. For Beard, the narrative of feminist history popularized since Seneca Falls was not sacred—as it was to women like Powell—but simply one more example of the dynamic nature of historical narrative.

415 Cott, A Woman Making History , 49.

416 Cott, A Woman Making History , 33. See Otis Tufton Mason, Woman’s Share in Primitive Culture (London and New York: Macmillan, 1895) and Anna Garlin Spencer, Woman’s Share in Social Culture (New York and London: M. Kennerley, 1913).

171

It was her work for the WCWA that brought Beard’s ideas to a wider audience.

The archives had its origins in the global tensions that surfaced in the 1930s. In 1935, the

Hungarian-born feminist-pacifist activist, Rosika Schwimmer drew up a plan for an international suffrage and peace archive. In this sketch, she outlined several reasons for the importance of such an archive at this time, such as the increased militarization of women’s lives and the increasing curtailment in many countries of women’s political rights achieved after the First World War. As Schwimmer maintained, “It is at this period of retrogression in women’s rights and pacifist activities that it becomes of utmost importance to assemble the facts of women’s struggle and achievements during the last century at least, so that historians of the future will find it possible to establish the truth about today.” 417 Beard took up active participation in Schwimmer’s project, acting as

Chair of the WCWA and eventually taking control of the center. 418

Not surprisingly, given the background of the women heading up the project, the

WCWA would have a political objective. 419 Beard championed the WCWA because she hoped it would “recapture the imaginative zest of women for public life.” 420 “There are serious defeats for women in the world today that must be turned into victory,” Beard

417 Rosika Schwimmer, “An International Feminist-Pacifist Archive: Sketch of a Plan for its Organization and Reasons for the Plan,” Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

418 Sponsors of the organization included Mary McLeod Bethune, Alice Stone Blackwell, Harriot Stanton Blatch, Pearl Buck, Carrie Chapman Catt, Fola LaFollette, Eleanor Roosevelt, Georgia O’Keeffe, Alice Paul and Frances Perkins among a long list of other socially and politically prominent supporters.

419 Two women in particular shared Beard’s vision for the WCWA and played an important role. Marjorie White, the Archives Secretary, had a long involvement in women’s rights and later devoted herself to writing a history of woman from “Eve to Eternity.” WCWA Chairman of the Board of Directors, Inez Haynes Irwin, co-founded the College Equal Suffrage League with Maud Wood Park and was on the National Advisory Council of the NWP. In 1921, she wrote a victorious account of the NWP’s suffrage battle in Story of the Woman’s Party . Irwin continued her feminist historical writing with Angels and Amazons: A Hundred Years of American Women , published in 1933.

420 Mary Beard to Rose Arnold Powell, August 10, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

172

explained in her introductory speech about the Center. “By knowing ourselves better we shall be better equipped to recover and advance.” 421 This relationship between past and future advancement became a central principle. Beard’s historical work, both in her writing and in her leadership of the WCWA, was aimed at inspiring her contemporaries to continue what she believed to be their historic role of social leadership. 422

The wide array of support for the archives made Beard hopeful that a new feminist movement could coalesce around the project. As she declared, “We have every feminist faction represented even in this short list of sponsors and as this list grows day by day the united front stands out as a true new woman movement.” She explained, “We also have women of the businesses and professions, labor leaders, and members of many races. It is our intention to make this movement the source of a really equal education— that is an education in the history of women no less than in the history of men.” 423

While Beard intended the WCWA to further women’s social change, she abhorred the label feminism because she believed it limited the scope of her historical vision.

When corresponding with Powell, Beard pushed her to move beyond memorials:

“Reverencing our pioneers is important. But work in our own time for our own time is equally vital, is it not?” 424 Certainly, Powell saw her work in creating monuments as activism to help the present but for Beard, such activities did not go far enough. As Beard

421 “Feminist Archives Planned by Group,” New York Times , October 18, 1935, pg. 8.

422 Amy E. Hague, “Never…Another Season of Silence”: Laying The Foundation of the Sophia Smith Collection, 1942-1965, in Revealing Women’s Life Stories, Papers from the 50th Anniversary Celebration of the Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, Northampton, Ma, September 1992 , c. 1995, pg. 36, Box 1, Series I, File 2, Margaret Storrs Grierson Papers, Smith College Archives, Smith College, Northampton, MA.

423 Mary Beard to Miss Alice Henry, April 5, 1938, Folder 24, Box 2, Mary Ritter Beard Papers, SSC.

424 Mary Beard to Rose Arnold Powell, August 10, 1935, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

173

explained, instead of confining interests to “feminist” materials, “I am interested also in the broader and more social history of women… In my opinion, to restrict concern with women to “feminism” is to narrow knowledge of women to excess.” 425 Her insistent critiques—for example, her statement “I regret in fact that the long, wide, and meaningful history of women is usually ignored by concern with American ‘feminism’ which was an important but only a feature of women’s historic self-expressions,” suggest how deep was Beard’s desire to broaden the parameters of women’s history. 426

Beard took a more holistic view of history—seeing it for its full radical potential rather than its antiquarian aspects. Working with the WCWA allowed Beard to use history in a specific application for social change. The WCWA in its very structure of organizing, supplying and creating knowledge seemed a better path for applying understanding of the past to present concerns. The WCWA was not imagined as a neutral repository or as a commemorative memorial to the past. Archives are important sites of collective memory and political and social identity. 427 And indeed, the WCWA was conceived as a vital clearing house for knowledge to inform women’s politics. An important phase proposed for the center was an educational component “designed to keep it a contemporary as well as a reference source of information on feminine advances.” 428

As Beard explained, “Papers. Records. These we must have.” She saw a direct

425 Mary Beard to Una Winter, May 1, 1947, Folder 13, Box 1, Una Richardson Winter Papers, HL.

426 Mary Beard to Una Winter, August 13, 1947, Folder 13, Box 1, Una Richardson Winter Papers, HL.

427 For more on archives, memory and identity, see for example, Kenneth Foote, “To Remember and Forget: Archives, Memory, and Culture,” American Archivist 53 (Summer 1990): 378-392; Elisabeth Kaplan, “We Are What We Collect, We Collect What We Are: Archives and the Construction of Identity” American Archivist 63 (Spring/Summer 2000): 126-151; James O’Toole, “The Symbolic Significance of Archives,” American Archivist 56 (Spring 1993): 234-255.

428 “Feminist Archives Planned by Group,” New York Times , October 18, 1935, pg. 8.

174

connection between the documentary evidence and the creation of a feminist identity.

“Without documents no history. Without history no memory. Without memory no greatness. Without greatness no development among women.” 429

The WCWA exemplified new ways of understanding history more broadly defined. During this time, there was a widespread breakdown of agreement over the meaning of the American past. 430 History was understood in relation to the present—in essence a national search for a usable past was underway. This search for national symbols, heritage and history explored questions concerning American values and a shared heritage. For example, there was great interest in historical novels such as

Margaret Mitchell’s Gone With the Wind. The Depression generation initiated a revolution in historic preservation and turned to the past, “by a pressing need to find answers to the riddles of today.” 431 Amidst depression and international tensions, the country looked to the past to make sense of the present, inspiring a collective movement to preserve national history, much of it funded by the government in the form of WPA

Guides, the Federal Theater Project, the creation of the National Archives in 1934 and in

1935 the passage of an act to preserve historic sites of national significance. As Chairman of the Board of Directors of the WCWA, Inez Haynes Irwin noted in 1933, “The idea of collecting source materials on every aspect of life and labor is a new idea in America.” 432

429 Quote from letter, Mary Beard to Dorothy Porter, March 31, 1940, found in Cott, ed. A Woman Making History , 48.

430 Novick, 239.

431 Alfred Haworth Jones, “The Search for a Usable American Past in the New Deal Era, American Quarterly 23, no. 5 (Dec., 1971): 715.

432 Inez Haynes Irwin to Anson Phelps Stokes, February 23, 1939, Folder 2, Box 1, Mary Beard Papers, SL.

175

The WCWA should in many respects be seen as part of this larger national undertaking to reexamine the social history of the common man. In the early twentieth century, the Rand School Library, later the Tamiment Library, was beginning to collect materials on the history of the working class. Around the same time, the New Negro

History Movement was transforming awareness of African American history.

Spearheaded by Carter Woodson, the Association for the Study of African American Life and History (ASALH) was founded in 1915 and in 1926 Woodson initiated a movement to annually observe black history through a Negro History Week in February. 433 The

WCWA attempted to push these ideas even further to realize the overlooked history of the common woman. Interestingly, just as the WCWA was forming, Mary McLeod

Bethune became the first national president of the ASALH in 1936, a sign of the burgeoning interest in women’s historical experience during these years. 434 The 1930s and 1940s also marked the beginnings of the professionalization of women’s history, most notably, in the creation of the Berkshire Conference of Women Historians. 435

Building on ideas Beard first advocated in her writing, the collecting practices of the WCWA worked to alter everyday notions of what was considered historically significant. In a discussion of the need for a separate women’s archive apart from the

Congressional Library, Irwin suggested, “We are ready to admit at once there has probably been no deliberate, conscious discrimination against women by the heads of the manuscript division.” She went on to explain, “But the discrimination occurred through

433 Kammen, 441-443.

434 Nina Mjagkij, Organizing Black America: an Encyclopedia of African American Associations (New York: Garland, 2001), 59.

435 Des Jardins, 218.

176

the prime political character of the Congressional Library itself. It has not pretended to range into the wide field of social history for its documents—into the field where women’s interests and contributions to civilization have been so largely exercised. …” 436

While some women who focused on historical work—such as Powell—believed that men were purposefully keeping women out of the historical record (by not including them in public memorials, for example), the labor of the WCWA served to bring to light a new way of understanding the causes of women’s historical invisibility.

Thus while women like Powell envisioned transforming American history by forcing the inclusion of great women leaders, Beard and the WCWA had a broader project—rehabilitating the assessment of women’s activities that took place outside the realm of what was traditionally considered pertaining to politics, and thus of historical value. This new way of conceptualizing women’s past was especially important given both the general searching for new understanding of the American past as well as the increasing antifeminist sentiment in the 1930s that attempted to circumvent women’s political gains due to increased economic pressures. A usable past that highlighted women’s historical worth was essential if women’s labor was to be valued in contemporary society. In short, a main objective of the WCWA was: “To encourage recognition of women as co-makers of history.” 437

While the archives accepted papers from prominent women such as Carrie

Chapman Catt and Eleanor Roosevelt, those were not the documents most valued. Beard had a broad vision for the Center, one that focused on a diversified presentation of

436 Inez Haynes Irwin to Anson Phelps Stokes, February 23, 1939, Folder 2, Box 1, Mary Beard Papers, SL.

437 World Center for Women’s Archives, Bulletin 1, February, 1940, Folder 2, Box 1, Mary Beard Papers, SL.

177

women’s history. Beard’s background as a labor and social reformer in the early 1900s, active in such organizations as the Equality League of Self-Supporting Women and the

New York Trade Union League, shaped her vision for collecting women’s history. 438 In the creation of a Labor Collection, Beard envisioned a women’s history inclusive of the lives of working-class women, an outgrowth of Beard’s long term interest in the subject as both a historian and activist. Women labor union leaders such as Rose Schneiderman donated their papers and the WCWA was given the papers of Leonora O’Reilly, which

Beard considered one of the center’s prized collections. Beard sought out material on the history of Native American women, as well as collections of Jewish and Catholic women.

Beard attempted to uncover a history beyond the traditional nineteenth century Anglo past in order to move away from a narrow definition of women’s rights focused on legal and political rights to a more searching critique of power relations between the sexes. 439

The collecting efforts of African American women’s history typify the central way Beard hoped the WCWA could use the past for women’s activism by using history to combat and fight racial oppression and discrimination. 440 In striking contrast to

Powell’s vision of women’s history, the WCWA made preserving race history a central goal in 1938 when work began on a Negro Collection in conjunction with the National

Council of Negro Women (NCNW), headed by Mary McLeod Bethune. Coming out of the New Negro History movement, the NCNW was also at this time making concerted efforts to document its history. Beard invited its members to contribute to the WCWA.

438 Cott, A Woman Making History , 11.

439 Des Jardins, 232.

440 Des Jardins, 235.

178

Beard argued the importance of the project, “Many women and men deny the validity of a separate archive for women. I maintain however that only by dramatizing women can women be recognized as equally important with men. And I now maintain that only by dramatizing the hopes and achievements of Negro women per se can they be recognized as equally important with Negro men.” 441

In the context of the volatile race relations of the 1930s, Beard’s position contrasted with much of the organized women’s movement which tended to avoid interracial cooperation, harking back to her involvement in the suffrage movement when

Beard insisted on desegregated marches. 442 Dorothy Porter was appointed as chairperson of the archives for the WCWA and immediately began collecting and organizing programs out of the NCNW headquarters in Washington D.C. 443 In conjunction with the

WCWA, the NCNW organized two projects. The first in 1939 was a display of Negro women’s history for the Washington unit of the WCWA. The second was an exhibit for the American Negro Exposition in Chicago in 1940. 444

After the closure of the WCWA, the archivists of the NCNW maintained its interest in historical matters and the Archives Committee evolved into the NCNW’s

National Archives for Negro Women’s History. The premium placed on history is suggested by activist and educator Vivian Carter Mason in a letter written to Bethune in

1944, in which she maintained the importance of recording black women’s history

441 Mary Beard to Sue Bailey Thurman, March 25, 1940 in Cott, A Woman Making History , 198.

442 Mary Beard to Juanita Jackson Mitchell, March 1, 1939 in Cott, A Woman Making History , 182.

443 Des Jardins, 235.

444 Linda Henry, “‘Promoting Historical Consciousness’ The Early Archives Committee of the National Council of Negro Women,” Signs 7 no. 1 (Autumn 1981): 252.

179

because others “have very deficient memories when it comes to us.” 445 Sue Bailey

Thurman who was responsible for creating and editing the Aframerican Women’s Journal worked tirelessly to support and promote a historical consciousness within the organization. The archive was of particular importance to her, declaring “The dream that brought us all together was a sense of history,” she later recalled. 446 Through the journal, exhibits and radio programs, Thurman highlighted the history of such notable women as

Phyllis Wheatley, Sojourner Truth and Harriet Tubman. At the same time, Thurman made a concerted effort to promote participation among the public to search through their attics and trunks to uncover the lost or hidden history of black women.

Because history was conceptualized for its power for social change, the WCWA created educational outreach programs. Through her work with the WCWA, Beard also acted as historical consultant for the radio series Women in the Making of America which was later renamed Gallant American Women . As part of the educational outreach of the

WCWA, the program assisted in publicity for building collections as well as helping in challenging perceptions about women’s history among the larger society. The radio program was created by Eva Hansl and written by Jane Ashman and co-sponsored by the

United States Office of Education and the Women’s Activities of the Department of the

National Broadcasting System in cooperation with the Works Progress Administration and the WCWA. Hansl, an author and journalist who wrote for the New York Tribune and the New York Times, created the series to make a case for women’s public role. As the

Christian Science Monitor reported: “For the First Time in History the Part Women Have

445 Henry, 254.

446 Henry, 254.

180

Played in Building America is on the Air.” 447 The radio series not only introduced valuable historical knowledge to a wide audience in an easy to digest format but also functioned as publicity for the WCWA by spreading the word to the public that the center wanted from individuals “any and all letters, diaries, family records, and other documents pertaining to women which may throw light on their contribution to any phase of

American life or thought.” 448 As Beard explained, “The public at large does not realize the extent to which written history eliminates the story of women.” 449

It is not surprising that women’s history hit the air waves since in the 1930s radio became the dominant cultural force in America life. Between 1930 and 1937 the percentage of homes with a radio grew from 40 percent to 80 percent. 450 Women were major consumers of radio and a 1936 CBS survey found that women listened to the radio more often and for longer than did men. 451 First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt was a popular radio personality, “projecting a powerful model for women’s participation in public life.” 452 However, most often, stations limited women’s programs to matters relating to the home, family and consumer products. The most typical example of this gendered radio culture is the creation of daytime radio soap operas. 453 As a representative of the

447 Enid B. Kiernan, “Radio Series Is Glorifying Women’s Contribution,” The Christian Science Monitor , N.D. [most likely 1939], clipping, Federal Theater Project Records, SL.

448 Ibid.

449 Ibid.

450 Jason Loviglio, Radio’s Intimate Public: Network Broadcasting and Mass-Mediated Democracy (Minneapolis: University Of Minnesota Press, 2005), 6.

451 Douglas B. Craig, Fireside Politics: Radio and Political Culture in the United States, 1920-1940 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), 244.

452 Loviglio, 28.

453 Craig, 245.

181

American Association of University Women declared to NBC, “Programs concentrated on the history and achievements of women are all too rare.” 454 And women of the “Not

Listening” club demanded broadcasts that “deal with history rather than blubber.” 455

Roosevelt criticized NBC in 1935 for the emphasis on domesticity in women’s programming, arguing instead the need for discussions of “public questions past and present.” Most women, she claimed, chose not to discuss such matters because they were uninformed not because they did not want to, making it all the more important for broadcasts directed at women to include politics, economics and world affairs. 456

The very popularity of radio made the medium an important vehicle for social change. Eva Hansl realized this, and through Women in the Making of America , attempted to use radio programming to negotiate women’s tenuous access to public life.

Roosevelt thus got her wish for a NBC program that dealt with women’s political questions both in contemporary and historical terms. Women in the Making of America and Gallant American Women addressed obstacles facing women in society and discussed these issues in an historical perspective. In over 45 broadcasts, the shows covered a wide range of topics including: women in medicine, science, fashion, sports, business, agriculture, industry, historic preservation and arts and crafts, as well as women as explorers, aviators, peace activists, homemakers, librarians and curators and wives of great Americans as well as broad thematic shows on “Freedom of Citizenship” and

“Freedom of Education.” In one episode, “Women in Politics and Government,” the

454 Frances Valiant Speek of the American Association of University Women to NBC, July 7, 1939, Folder Correspondence A-Z, Box 1, Eva Hansl Papers, SSC.

455 World Center for Women’s Archives, Bulletin 1, February, 1940, Folder 2, Box 1, Mary Beard Papers, SL.

456 Craig, 247.

182

relationship between past and present as envisioned by the program is clearly evident.

The problem of decreasing representation of women in politics, the apathy of the woman voter, and the common question of what women had done with the vote, is addressed through a discussion of historical precedents and current examples. For example, the critiques of Eleanor Roosevelt as an activist first lady are framed through the history of

Abigail Adams and viewers are introduced to the achievements of contemporary women such as the first female labor secretary, Frances Perkins as well as historical figures such as writer and Revolutionary War historian, Mercy Otis Warren and others. 457

To many people, men as well as women, the wide scope of women’s contributions to American society in the past proved a surprise. One listener wrote to share how his barber turned him on to the program and how he and his wife were now avid listeners. As he admitted, “I did not realize the part that women play in the making of America until this program brought it home to me.” 458 Another listener commented,

“If there is one thing my wife and I have quarreled over in the past, it has been about the part that women have taken in the making of America.” He explained how the program had changed his views: “I have always maintained that they gave practically nothing toward the making of this country, but the other afternoon she forced me to listen to your program ‘Women in the Making of America’ and it certainly bore out what she had claimed.” He acknowledged his errors and pledged to continue to listen. “I think there will be no more dissention in our family about the part that women have taken in the

457 This episode can be listened to online at the Talking Hands Radio Archives, University at Albany, State University of New York: http://www.albany.edu/talkinghistory/arch2003july-december.html.

458 Samuel Miller, Elizabeth, N.J. to NBC, July 25, 1939, Folder Correspondence A-Z, Box 1, Eva Hansl Papers, SSC.

183

making of America, for I shall continue to listen to this program and become enlightened.” 459 Ten school teachers wrote to relate how over eighty children in the fourth and fifth grades of their school, “expressed themselves one hundred percent in favor of the program,” and looked forward to listening again. “Most all of them expressed themselves as surprised to learn how hard it had been for women to achieve their rights.

They expressed the desire to learn about the different women mentioned.” 460

The positive response of the public towards Women in the Making of America , suggests that perhaps the work of the WCWA opened up a space for imagining an alternative future by presenting an alternative reading of the past. This certainly was what

Beard and Hansl intended. At the same time, Beard hoped these radio programs would enable women to undertake the task of popular history making by inspiring them to search for the past in their own homes and local communities. 461 The WCWA received fan mail from readers informing the archive of historic materials in private possession, as did one listener who wrote about unpublished letters he had from the woman movement in the 1830s, including Theodore Weld and the Grimké sisters. 462 However, Beard was never fully happy with the history portrayed on the radio, and she criticized and mocked

459 George DuBois, NYC to NBC, July 27, 1939, Folder Correspondence A-Z, Box 1, Eva Hansl Papers, SSC.

460 Letter from Los Angeles City School District (signed by 10 teachers), May 19, 1939, Folder Correspondence A-Z, Box 1, Eva Hansl Papers, SSC.

461 Des Jardins, 230.

462 World Center for Women’s Archives, Bulletin 1, February, 1940, Folder 2, Box 1, Mary Beard Papers, SL.

184

the simplicity and drama of the series. 463 Despite Beard’s criticisms, Women in the

Making of America nonetheless provided an unprecedented opportunity to present women’s history to the public. Airing women’s history over the radio gave life to a history that was not normally discussed and thus not known by most Americans.

Unfortunately, the WCWA would not survive long enough to have the impact

Beard had hoped. Only months after the radio series began airing, the WCWA officially disbanded because of a financial crisis. The increasing escalation of world tensions made fundraising on the eve of WW II a challenge and the lack of funds became too much of an obstacle. The irony of the situation was clear: the growth of totalitarianism in Europe, which is what impelled Rosika Schwimmer to begin preserving women’s records, eventually contributed to the financial demise of the WCWA. 464 However, just as likely the dissolution of the archives was caused not only by a financial crisis but a “crisis of identity.” Beard envisioned the WCWA as an institution to unite women by highlighting their differences, but ultimately tensions between feminist organizations, labor activists and black women plagued the fledgling archives. 465 In addition, squabbles among office staff, debate over whether the archives should be located in New York or Washington

D.C. and disagreement over Beard’s leadership that emphasized research and document collecting over books and publishing contributed to the downfall of the WCWA. 466

463 See for example, Mary Beard to Mira Saunders, May 16, 1939, Charles Francis Saunders Papers, Folder 5, Box 2, HL, in which Beard calls the show “ghastly” and writes that she caught it “in time to save it from the banal chatter about this drama’s being merely a movement from ‘slavery to actuality.’”

464 Anne Kimbell Relph, “The World Center for Women's Archives, 1935-1940,” Signs 4, no. 3 (Spring 1979): 599.

465 Des Jardins, 237-239.

466 Cott, 219.

185

After the break up of the archives, Beard hoped other venues would continue the work. She declared: “But our movement designed to keep women ‘on the record’ of history will not die. It has gained an impetus in the short years of its career which will perpetuate the idea and effect in the years ahead a ‘revival of learning’ about women, on the scale of our dream, we are confident.” 467 Despite—or perhaps because of the demise of the WCWA—the 1940s became a golden age of women’s archives. The WCWA had advanced and popularized the idea that women’s history needed to be preserved and that women had made vital contributions to American democracy. In the aftermath of the

WCWA’s demise, there was no central organization to take on the responsibility of coordinating such a project. Over the decade, numerous women’s archives were created or expanded including the National Council of Negro Women Archives Committee

(continued and expanded projects begun in 1938), the Sophia Smith Collection at Smith

College (1942), the Women’s Rights Collection at Radcliffe College (1943) the NWP’s

Florence Bayard Hilles Feminist Library in Washington D.C. (1943) and the Susan B.

Anthony Memorial Library of California (holdings compiled between (1941 and

1950). 468 These collections continued to collect women’s past, making women’s history accessible to the public and providing invaluable resources for researchers and activists searching for women’s history not found in books or other repositories.

The discussion of whether women’s archives should be memorials to suffrage and explicitly feminist in their collecting philosophy or instead continue with the WCWA’s

467 Mary Beard to Mira Saunders, November 4, 1940, Charles Francis Saunders Papers, Folder 5, Box 2, HL.

468 The purchase of Anthony’s House in Rochester in 1945 can also be considered part of this “golden age” of women’s archives—the house served as a memorial and a site for NAWSA documents and memorabilia.

186

mission to preserve women’s social history spoke to the diverse understandings of history being debated by women activists. Questions about the meaning of women’s history which surfaced in the 1930s—to whom it belonged, who in history was significant and to what ends the past could be activist—continued to be asked without resolution into the

1940s. Within just a few years of the opening of these archives, the centennial of the

Seneca Falls Convention opened up similar questions to a broader audience as the meaning of women’s history took on renewed importance in the wake of WW II.

The Sprit of 1848

The debate over the meaning of women’s history was not limited to memorialization and collecting. The questioning also surfaced in the matter of historic commemoration. Few other historic events have captured the feminist imagination like the Seneca Falls Convention. 469 Most recently, the NWP had held a triumphant commemoration in 1923 in wake of the suffrage victory. During that anniversary, Alva

Belmont had predicted that “Seneca Falls will become a shrine to which women will come from all over the world.” 470 However, Belmont’s prophecy had not come true. By

1948, there was much historical rehabilitation needed in the public memory concerning the Seneca Falls Convention and the history of women’s rights. As Pearl Buck stated in

1941, “Women are ignorant of their own past and ignorant of their own importance in that past.” She related how “In curiosity a few months ago I asked a haphazard score of

469 For overviews of commemorations of the Seneca Falls Convention, see Vivien Ellen Rose, “Seneca Falls Remembered: Celebrations of the 1848 First Women’s Rights Convention,” CRM 21 (1998): 9-15 and Judith Wellman, The Road to Seneca Falls: Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the First Woman’s Rights Convention (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004): 228-240.

470 “Women Open Fight for Equal Rights ,” New York Times , July 21, 1923, pg. 8.

187

women of my acquaintance if they had ever heard of Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Only one had even heard her name, and she had no recollection of more. Yet only a generation ago

Elizabeth Cady Stanton was called the greatest woman in the United States, and by some the greatest in the world. ”471

The 1948 Centennial suggests the limits of the historical work of the previous decades in penetrating the national consciousness concerning the importance of women’s history. The anniversary was to have been a triumph for the women’s movement.

However, while the celebration drew national attention it ultimately had very little impact, despite the importance of the event to American feminists. Further, the dialogue surrounding the occasion highlights the increasing tension between generations of women activists within the changing context of women’s citizenship in the postwar era.

1948 was an unusual year for such a celebration. In some respects, it seemed a rather auspicious time to be focusing on women, coming so soon after World War II and women’s notable contributions to the war effort—in essence proving that women could indeed do a man’s job. 472 In the immediate aftermath of the war, it was still uncertain what the conflict would mean for women. As women entered “their second century of progress,” major questions were how to achieve greater involvement in government and how women could overcome the “physical and psychic strain” and find balance as workers, mothers and homemakers. 473 It is all too easy to recall the years following the war in the light of the subsequent antifeminism so prevalent in the 1950s. But the

471 Pearl Buck, Of Men and Women (New York: The John Day Company, 1941), 180.

472 For more on the paradox of women’s wartime roles see Karen Anderson, Wartime Women: Sex Roles, Family Relations, and the Status of Women during World War II (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1981).

473 Malvina Lindsay, “Feminine Stocktaking,” The Washington Post , February 18, 1948, pg. 12.

188

ideology of the “feminine mystique” was not really consolidated until somewhere between 1952 and 1955. 474 For a period, it seemed as if a new surge of women’s activism might flourish and take root in the years after World War II. Yet, the backlash towards women’s wartime role was already underway and the first signs of Cold War domestic imagery were beginning, creating cultural ambiguity surrounding women’s citizenship. 475

The shift was heralded by the bestselling, Modern Woman: The Lost Sex by

Marynia Farnham and Ferdinand Lundberg published in 1947, just one year before the centennial of the Seneca Falls Convention. While not adverse to women’s political rights such as suffrage, the book advocated a retreat to domesticity and severely attacked feminism. Modern Woman offers antifeminist interpretations of women’s history and presents a more conservative use of the past. Feminist foremothers figured prominently in their analysis, most notably Mary Wollstonecraft, who Farnham and Lundberg insisted suffered from a case of “penis-envy.” 476 They argued “That Mary Wollstonecraft was an extreme neurotic of a compulsive type there can be no doubt. Out of her illness arose the ideology of feminism” 477 Farnham and Lundberg attacked feminist writings which they believed distorted the past, stating “In their frustrated rage they not only libeled men of the past but they also libeled women.” 478

474 Susan Douglas, Where the Girls Are: Growing up Female with the Mass Media (New York: Times Books, 1994), 49.

475 For more on Cold War ideology and women’s roles see Elaine Tyler May, Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War (New York: Basic Books, 1988).

476 Marynia Farnham and Ferdinand Lundberg, Modern Woman: The Lost Sex (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1947), 149.

477 Farnham and Lundberg, 159.

478 Farnham and Lundberg, 442.

189

Ironically, Farnham and Lundberg referenced Beard’s writings on the subject, especially her book, On Understanding Women. 479 Like Beard, Farnham and Lundberg protested the ways feminists constructed narratives that misrepresented women’s role in history. In particular, they critiqued the feminist trope that posited women were historically oppressed by men. According to the authors, “feminists looked upon themselves as the first women who had ever accomplished anything.” 480 They argued that

“Mary Wollstonecraft and her feminist successors, indirectly inflating their own stature, thoroughly ignored women of the past” because to have included women’s achievements in their histories “would have damaged, somewhat, the feminist contention, made in all seriousness, that men had always blocked women from undertakings of a professional, cultural or scientific character.” 481 But in contrast to Beard who argued that such historical accounts contributed to the false notion “that women had been nothing in long history,” leading to men having superiority complexes and women inferiority complexes and forming misunderstanding about women’s proper sphere, Farnham and Lundberg critiqued feminist narratives to make a very different point. 482 They insisted that feminist history distorted the fact that paths were open for women’s achievements through history and women were not historically oppressed by men as feminists claimed. If women achieved less it was because it was their nature to be subordinate to men and content as wives and mothers. 483 Farnham and Lundberg contended that such historical narratives

479 Ibid.

480 Ibid.

481 Farnham and Lundberg, 446.

482 Mary Beard to Rose Arnold Powell, July 3, 1948, Folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

483 Farnham and Lundberg, 447.

190

convinced the public to devalue motherhood and domesticity in favor of women’s individual achievement. 484

A sign of changing times, Modern Woman heralded a shift in historical understanding of feminism. The authors characterized the 1848 convention as an example of critiquing “the double standard” which allowed feminists “to engage in lecherous and sensual activities.” 485 With such popular representations of feminism, it is not surprising that disagreement broke out about how to observe the anniversary. Was the commemoration to be a celebration of American womanhood showcasing progress since

1848? Would it be a paean to women’s retreat back to the home? Or was it to be a pointed reminder of the problems besetting women in the United States? Was the occasion to be used as a call for action? And if so, for what ends? The conflicting messages targeted at women framed the way Seneca Falls was to be remembered in 1948.

What, then, was the meaning and legacy of Seneca Falls and women’s rights in

1948? In this year, women’s politics became a newsworthy story again. Women demonstrated in Washington for return of price controls and against the high price of meat. Margaret Chase Smith was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1948, symbolizing the hope for women’s growing influence in public life. As one article on the centennial intoned, “An upsurge of women’s participation in the political life of the United States would warm the hearts of those who promoted the first Women’s Rights Convention.” 486

484 Mari Jo Buhle, Feminism and Its Discontents: A Century of Struggle with Psychoanalysis (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998), 175-177.

485 Farnham and Lundberg, 196.

486 “Suffrage Won After Long Fight,” The Christian Science Monitor , March 8, 1948, Folder 101, Box 5, RAP, SL.

191

But as another article concluded, “The politically wise today know that women can be a force when they want to be but the big questions still is… Do women know it?” 487

Some women like Powell anticipated the celebration might have a great impact.

She declared, “I am convinced that a great awakening is needed by the women’s organizations of today as to the deep significance of the Woman Movement, and I hope those who attend the celebration will get a baptism of the ‘holy fire’ that burned so steadily in the hearts of our blessed pioneers.” 488 Similarly, historical writer Alma Lutz urged organizers to make the spirit of the convention “live again, and relate it to conditions today.” 489 Feminist Ramona Barth wrote in the Nation that she hoped the commemoration would prompt women to “unveil not only marble statues to their memory but the inner motives of the first feminists” which would be “helpful in the redefinition of feminism so much needed today.” 490

A conference sponsored by the Department of Labor and The Women’s Bureau,

“The American Woman—Her Changing Role as Worker, Homemaker and Citizen” to commemorate the 100 th anniversary of the Seneca Falls Convention set the tone for the centennial year. Representatives of 30 clubs, trade unions and professional groups gathered in Washington, D.C., February 17-19. Frieda Miller, director of the Women’s

Bureau, made clear that the assembly was not a call to action for a new women’s movement. “This conference will not yield a 1948 declaration of women’s rights. Women

487 Mary Hornaday, “Distaff Side Gains Foothold in U.S. Party Organizations,” The Christian Science Monitor , March 8, 1948, Folder 101, Box 5, RAP, SL.

488 Rose Arnold Powell to Emily Knight MacWilliams, June 18, 1948, Folder 101, Box 5, RAP, SL.

489 Alma Lutz letter to Mrs. MacMillan, Folder 1, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, Seneca Falls Historical Society, Seneca Falls, New York (hereafter: SFHS).

490 Ramona Barth, “The Feminist Crusade,” The Nation , July 17, 1948, pp. 71-73.

192

have gone too far and achieved too much to make that kind of action necessary or appropriate.” Instead, the intent was to clarify the position of working women in the postwar era. 491

The Women’s Bureau conference was full of contradictions which spoke to the conflicting messages targeted at American women. This paradox was evident in President

Truman’s address. He stated that even though Miss Miller had said in her remarks that women here “represented workers, homemakers, citizens,” he wanted to reverse the order and say that women were instead “homemakers, workers, citizens. If it were not for the homemakers, we would have neither the citizens nor the workers.” Befitting the postwar economic turn towards consumption, and the de-emphasis on women’s politics, Truman framed women’s organizations’ most potent “weapon” as women’s powerful role as consumer—not voter or politician. Yet on the other hand, he acknowledged that women still had “many unfinished tasks” like equal pay for equal work, ending discrimination against women such as the right to serve on Federal juries, issues currently before

Congress. 492 The conference helped counter antifeminist charges that “millions are charged with selfishness, neglect of citizenship responsibilities, indifference to mankind’s pressing problems and failure to use to full advantage the political power they fought to

491 Genevieve Reynolds, “The Club Women Enter Political Arena,” The Washington Post , February 8, 1948, pg. S2.

492 Harry S. Truman, “Remarks at the Opening Session of the Women’s Bureau Conference, February 17, 1948,” found at John T. Woolley and Gerhard Peters, The American Presidency Project [online], Santa Barbara, CA, available from World Wide Web: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=13106.

193

attain.” 493 Dr. Mary McLeod Bethune, president of the National Council of Negro

Women, spoke about peace as the great challenge before women today. 494

The centennial provided an opportunity for feminist stocktaking. For example,

Susan B. Anthony II, Anthony’s grandniece, an activist in the Communist Party, looked back at the past and came to unsettling conclusions. “The crusade for women’s rights, launched with a shout a century ago, has subsided to clubroom murmurings and a few pieces of commemorative statuary. The truth is that the American woman movement has collapsed.” 495 Aside from criticizing women like Powell and their focus on memorials,

Anthony blasted American women for what she saw as wasted opportunities. American women “take pride in voting just as their menfolk do and staying out of politics. A nasty game, they call it. Oh, my Great-aunt Susan! We need somebody like you now.” 496 Like

Powell, Anthony hoped that the anniversary would reignite the women’s movement, declaring it “time for women to take stock,” in this centennial year, the “year of the so- called American woman movement, which once packed political dynamite.” 497

Unlike the 1923 commemoration, where the Equal Rights Amendment was unveiled, no specific policy initiative was endorsed during the 1948 Centennial. The apolitical nature of the commemoration was largely the result of the affair being managed by local organizers who determined to control the proceedings and keep the anniversary

493 Adelaide Kerr, “Century of Achievement Is Marked,” The Washington Post , February 22, 1948, pg. S3.

494 Genevieve Reynolds, “Crusader With Market Basket,” The Washington Post , February 20, 1948, pg C1.

495 Susan B. Anthony II, “We Women Throw Our Votes Away,” Saturday Evening Post , July 17, 1948, clipping, Folder 23, Box 2, RAP, SL.

496 Ibid.

497 Ibid.

194

out of the hands of major women’s organizations such as the NWP (which had organized the 75 th commemoration in 1923). 498 No women’s organization was invited to participate in the program (officially due to time constraints but most likely to avoid controversy). 499

While this action made the occasion more open to a range of women’s groups and women’s political viewpoints, it ultimately had the effect of making the centennial apolitical. Emily Knight MacWilliams, Chairman of the Women’s Rights Centennial

Committee in Seneca Falls and Martha Taylor Howard, organizer of the Rochester celebration (and director of the Susan B. Anthony House there) saw in the anniversary an opportunity to showcase women’s progress and honor the history of the pioneers. “We are attempting to conform the centennial to the spirit and dignity of the First Convention without reference to controversial legislation,” MacWilliams revealed to Powell. 500

The celebration was a carefully orchestrated event that eschewed controversial subjects. There was a deliberate attempt to avoid any reference to the ERA or any other contentious proposals. A speech given by Eunice Hilton, dean of women at Syracuse

University, was typical in its message. Hilton argued “we still have some unfinished business, but it must not be done by tossing bricks through windows or parading up and down with placards.” 501 The anniversary message intoned the time for radicalism had passed. Instead, MacWilliams and Howard focused on what they perceived as dignified and respectable means of commemoration – afternoon tea was held, a performance

498 Rose, “Seneca Falls Remembered,” 12-13.

499 Emily Knight MacWilliams to Rose Arnold Powell, June 21, 1948, Folder 101, Box 5, RAP, SL.

500 Ibid.

501 Doris Greenberg, “Merger of Male, Female Civic Groups Urged At Women’s Rights Celebration in Rochester, New York Times , July 22, 1948, pg. 20.

195

organized and a new women’s stamp unveiled. The Centennial Committee presented a pageant, “Woman Awakened” that showcased the “spirit of womanhood” through a display of the early history of women leading up to the Seneca Falls Convention. 502 More than 3,000 people attended the celebration and it became an opportunity for promoting local tourism and civic pride. 503

Many of the speakers like Hilton and Anna Lord Strauss, great-granddaughter of

Lucretia Mott and president of the League of Women Voters, were social feminists who opposed the ERA and supported extending protective legislation to men and women.

Strauss declared in her speech, “I believe firmly that we as women will win more opportunities, not in promoting a woman’s bloc or proclaiming a new ‘woman’s movement’ but by taking full advantage of those opportunities now open to us. In this new century let us think in terms of women’s opportunities instead of women’s rights .

Better still, let us think of ourselves as citizens first and our role as women second.” 504

This quote was reprinted in the press, and it was noted the “emphasis was on the future instead of the past.” While Strauss “conceded” some discrimination still existed particularly, economically, these were only minor stumbling blocks that would gradually disappear as more women took advantages of the opportunities already available.

Drawing on the work of Beard, the ideas of the pioneers were questioned by some during the celebration. Earlier in the year Hilton gave a speech in anticipation of the centennial and declared that “The grave feminists of Seneca Falls—and I admire them

502 “Woman Awakened,” program, Folder 12, Box 37, Doris Stevens Papers, SL.

503 “Woman Rights Parley Draws 3000 Throng,” The Washington Post , pg. 14.

504 “Summary of talk by Miss Anna Lord Strauss,” Folder 1, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, SFHS.

196

all—who did us such a noble service unwittingly also did us a disservice.” Citing Beard’s book, Woman as Force in History , Hilton stated that the Declarations of Sentiments issued during the Seneca Falls Convention perpetrated myths that women were oppressed by men through history. “Have we, through a lack of knowledge of our history, accepted too easily and too literally the thesis of subjection?” She asked her audience, “As a result, have we concentrated upon ourselves as a sex as opposed to the masculine sex, fighting that sex, instead of as the feminine sex working with the masculine sex and recognizing that both groups have problems and bear discrimination in society?” Hilton’s usable past suggested that women should let go of their “martyr complex” and work towards social change that benefitted both sexes. 505 Hilton made a case for a move away from separatism, the basis for women’s political activism for generations. She stated that “we must make a conscientious effort to bring men and women together to end discriminations against all groups.” 506 Her message was intended to promote cooperation between the sexes and extend protective legislation to both men and women.

During the centennial, old rivalries resurfaced rekindling animosity over historical memory between NAWSA and the NWP that had raged over the creation of memorials in the 1920s. Questions over ownership of movement history and responsibility for the suffrage victory were still being debated in 1948. In particular, controversy swirled when the United States Post Office issued 115 million stamps with images of Lucretia Mott,

Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Carrie Chapman Catt. 507 Some women’s rights advocates,

505 Doris Greenberg, “Asks Women Void Martyr Complex,” New York Times , May 30, 1948, pg. 22.

506 Doris Greenberg, “Merger of Male, Female Civic Groups Urged At Women’s Rights Celebration in Rochester, New York Times , July 22, 1948, pg. 20.

507 “Woman Rights Parley Draws 3000 Throng,” The Washington Post , pg. 14.

197

notably, Mary Beard, Alma Lutz, Katherine Devereux Blake (daughter of Lillie Devereux

Blake) and members of the NWP objected to the inclusion of Catt on the stamp, especially her prominent place of honor in the center. 508 The main protest came from

Nora Stanton Barney, Stanton’s granddaughter who was “especially incensed.” 509

Originally, it was planned that there would only be two portraits of Stanton and Mott. 510

When Catt’s portrait was introduced Barney felt it was “an insult to the original pioneers.” 511

The inclusion of descendants in the celebration—Susan B. Anthony II, Anna Lord

Strauss and Barney—was a testament to the continuity of women’s activism across generations that brought a genealogical legitimacy to the proceeding but also invited personal rivalry. The stamp controversy testifies to the difficulties that occur when personal memory and collective memory collide. With Catt added, the 1948 stamp became a “Century of Progress Stamp” instead of a “Centennial Stamp,” since Catt was not involved in the Seneca Falls Convention. 512 As Barney noted with scorn, “Why Mrs.

Catt should be given the place of honor on the Seneca Falls stamp when she wasn’t even living at the time is beyond the comprehension of all of us.” Barney objected to the narrative that honored Catt’s (and thus NAWSA’s) contributions to the suffrage victory

508 Nora Stanton Barney to Mrs. L.R. Garnsey, June 24, 1948, Folder 5, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, SFHS; Mabel Griswold, National Secretary National Woman’s Party to Nora Stanton Barney, June 17, 1948, Folder 5, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, SFHS.

509 Nora Stanton Barney to Mrs. L.R. Garnsey, June 14, 1948, Folder 5, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, SFHS.

510 Only six other women’s portraits had been given places of honor on United States stamps: Jane Addams, Louisa May Alcott, Susan B. Anthony, Spain’s Queen Isabella, Frances Willard and Martha Washington. See Kent B. Stiles, “News of the World of Stamps,” July 18, 1948, New York Times , pg. X21.

511 Nora Stanton Barney to Mrs. L.R. Garnsey, June 19, 1948, Folder 5, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, SFHS.

512 Ibid.

198

over that of Alice Paul, Lucy Burns (and the NWP) and above all, her mother, Harriot

Stanton Blatch. Barney argued her mother deserved a place on the stamp over Catt because Blatch was born in Seneca Falls and initiated the revival in NY State which “had been deader than a dodo for twenty years.” Barney blamed the League of Women Voters who, she claimed, belittled the work of the Women’s Political Union and the National

Woman’s Party. “Personally, I think it would be better to have no stamp at all than to have one that means nothing, and which is indeed an insult to my grandmother and to my mother,” Barney railed. 513 Local organizers attempted to diffuse the situation by pointing out that the stamp was out of their control. But as one organizer, Mrs. L.G. Garnsey related to MacWilliams about the situation, “Am interested to see that Mrs. Barney and the National Woman’s Party think there is still time to shove Mrs. Catt off the stamp.” 514

Domestic anticommunist concerns shaped the parameters of discussion during the centennial. The previous year, the House Un-American Activities Committee opened hearings to investigate communists in Hollywood; President Truman established a

Loyalty- Security Program for all federal employees, and Congress passed the Taft-

Hartley Act curtailing labor rights and forcing unions to purge communists. During the celebration when an anti-war manifesto was distributed some women called out epithets like “American communists.” 515 Organizers kept a close reign on discussion and there was much debate concerning choice of speakers. Lutz had suggested Pearl Buck as a speaker as well as Bette Davis (who wanted to make a movie of Lutz’s biography of

513 Nora Stanton Barney to Mrs. L.R. Garnsey, June 14, 1948, Folder 5, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, SFHS.

514 Mrs. L.G. Garnsey to Emily Knight MacWilliams, June 21, 1948, Folder 5, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, SFHS.

515 Doris Greenberg, “‘Citizenship First’ Urged for Women,” New York Times , July 21, 1948, pg. 20.

199

Stanton) and Helen Hayes who was also interested in Stanton’s life. 516 Careful screening occurred to avoid inviting any communist sympathizers. There was concern that Strauss

“did not have the right ideas” meaning she was “pink” and “too liberal.” There was also unease about Barney, who it was worried, had “advanced ideas.” 517 As the Communist

Party represented some of the most progressive reform for women at this time, attempting to silence communist women limited the possibility of social change resulting from the celebration.

While the events in upstate New York were carefully scrutinized to avoid difficult subjects, controversy still infiltrated the celebration. Organizers attempted to suppress

Rosika Schwimmer’s speech on peace as a women’s issue but her words still circulated.

In her speech, Schwimmer noted that “Not only is this great anniversary a time for pride but it is also for stocktaking.” Schwimmer made peace the theme of her talk, highlighting that the centennial fell in the “third year of the atomic era.” Harking back to the notion of municipal housekeeping, Schwimmer envisioned a different role for the American woman. Whereas an ideology of domesticity was gaining ascendency as a bulwark against the perils of communism, Schwimmer located the homemaker as a political being who would clean up the world. Bringing back arguments made during the suffrage campaign, Schwimmer argued that women needed political power to ensure world peace.

She declared, “Woman’s function of home-maker, we once dreamed, would extend into

516 Alma Lutz letter to Mrs. MacMillan, Folder 1, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, SFHS.

517 Mrs. Howard to Emily Knight MacWilliams, Folder 1, Box 1A, Collection 36 A, SFHS.

200

politics….let us go back to the task of building that safe, decent and wholesome home for the entire human family to which we once pledged ourselves.” 518

Alternative visions of women’s history and social activism thus found a space during the anniversary. Activists, with more radical ideas than the local organizers, circulated a petition to make their beliefs known, a “Declaration of the Women of 1948 to the Women of 2048,” a statement that echoed the “Woman’s Declaration of Rights” from the 1876 Centennial by addressing a later generation of women, symbolic daughters. In the document, they rejected the growing cold war consensus of American prosperity.

They protested, “instead of living in beautiful houses, eating abundantly, and facing the future unafraid,” America is “drawn and anxious in mass and individual fear…Because a pall of atomic fear blankets our land in 1948, because death stalks our land in 1948.”

Signed by 34 women, including Anthony, Barney, Buck, Mrs. Clifford Durr, Dr. Alice

Hamilton, Dorothy Parker and Margaret Sanger, the activists articulated a vision for a women’s movement inclusive of race and class. Unlike the “Woman’s Declaration of

Rights,” the 1948 petition revealed a consciousness of race and class oppression influenced by the thinking of communist ideology. “We will liberate our sex and various races, from the economic, political and social bonds that still cripple us, 100 years after the women of 1848 started their long battle to loosen them,” the petition declared. 519

Like the suffragists who challenged narratives of American history during the

United States Centennial, progressive women similarly challenged assumptions about

518 “Hundred years of Struggle for Women’s Rights,” Peace News , July 23, 1948, Folder 5, Box 1, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection, SSC.

519 “Declaration of the Women of 1948 to the Women of 2048,” Folder 12, Box 37, Doris Stevens Papers, SL.

201

American life and women’s roles. Like Schwimmer, the women who signed the petition believed that in the postwar era women’s rights took on new urgency because of the cold war climate. Women’s liberation was not for themselves alone, but for the greater good.

“For we, the women of 1948, can only free our land, and our world of war and poverty, if we are free to do it,” they declared to the next generation of American women, the women if 2048. In a final nod to their past, the declaration ended with Susan B.

Anthony’s famous inspiration, “Failure is impossible.” 520

A very different kind of commemoration was held at Stanton’s grave in

Woodlawn Cemetery in the Bronx, New York. In stark contrast to the Rochester and

Seneca Falls celebrations, this rally was organized by Betty Millard and the communist organization, the Congress of American Women (CAW). The people participating were overwhelmingly “pink” if not “red” with “advanced ideas.” Over fifty people attended including Barney and Anthony, both members of the CAW, and the nephew of Frederick

Douglas, Haley Douglas. As Barney reminded the audience assembled at the gravesite,

Stanton had “wanted far more for women than the right to vote” and reaffirmed Stanton’s

1898 statement that “it is time for agitation on the broader question of philosophical socialism.” 521 Unlike the dignified portrayals of the pioneers in the celebration held in

Seneca Falls, in Woodlawn, Stanton was resurrected as a radical who would have blessed the work of the CAW. Unlike the upstate events, this occasion highlighted the anniversary as an opportunity to publicize a radical view of women’s rights, even if it was a position that most Americans at the start of the Cold War would have found

520 Ibid.

521 Kate Weigand, Red Feminism: American Communism and the Making of Women’s Liberation (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001), 61-62.

202

uncomfortable and even dangerous. The event held out hope for a renewed awakening of the women’s movement.

The 1948 Centennial of Seneca Falls represents a transitional moment in

American feminism. On one hand, the anniversary mirrored new ideas about women’s citizenship gaining ascendancy in the postwar era: women’s equality was to be hailed as a cherished ideal yet women’s politics was to be contained within acceptable and non- threatening boundaries of the domestic sphere detached from actual positions of power and removed of talk of “rights.” At the same time, radical and progressive visions of social change coexisted. The range of views represented was a harbinger of the debate about women’s history that would erupt again over the subsequent decades with the advent of the women’s liberation movement.

Conclusion

The suffrage movement represented high tide for creating a usable past for women activists. From the writing of the History of Woman Suffrage to the sculpting of

The Woman Movement , suffragists created a strong historical record despite obstacles such as the sculpture being hidden from view and the necessity of self-publishing the history. But with the suffrage struggle receding from public consciousness amidst an increasingly antifeminist climate, the 1930s and 1940s became a period of contradictory impulses in terms of creating historical memory. The three cases studied in this chapter—

Powell’s Rushmore campaign, Beard’s WCWA and the Seneca Falls Centennial—have highlighted the varied ways women’s history circulated in the public. The case studies acknowledge the continuing efforts in fostering women’s history—in national

203

monuments, collections of documents and public programming and commemorative anniversaries—but suggest the real limits of creating a public memory in the absence of a mass movement. The case studies further illuminate the ongoing question among women activists about what type of history to preserve: only the history of the women’s movement or a more encompassing and diverse past.

This popular history attempted to find a space for raising consciousness about women’s past in the national memory. The place of “women in the making of America” both historically and in the present was constantly being renegotiated. As the WCWA proclaimed after its demise, the movement to collect women’s history must carry on,

“lest they be a ‘sex lost to history.’” 522 The historical work among activists in the 1930s and 1940s sought to create public discussion of women’s rights when women’s role in society was unclear. The centennial, the WCWA and the Rushmore campaign brought to the surface a question that is still contested today: is women’s history always “feminist” and who gets to define what is feminist about women’s history?

Despite the publicity surrounding the 1948 Centennial, the history of the Seneca

Falls Convention was not considered historically significant enough for preservation. In the 1950s, Wesleyan Chapel, the building where the meeting was held was used as a filling station and in the 1960s a Laundromat. 523 By the 1950s, women’s history became a rare public initiative so the dominant historical image of women was more likely to be the fictional Scarlet O’Hara that glorified domestic womanhood rather than any real life historical figure that represented women’s rights. The public took a “Frankly, my dear, I

522 November 25, 1940 letter from WCWA, INC. Folder 23, Box 2, Mary Beard Papers, SSC.

523 Gerda Lerner, “The Meaning of Seneca Falls: 1848-1998,” Dissent 45, no. 4 (Fall 1998): 35.

204

don’t give a Damn” approach towards women’s politics, creating cultural amnesia around women’s history. It would be left to a new generation to revise narratives that left out women and demand a place for women’s history in the national consciousness. However, despite the failures at the time, women’s efforts at historic preservation in the 1930s and

1940s, especially the creation of women’s archives, would become an important foundation for the next generation of women activists in the 1960s and 1970s when they went looking for their historical roots.

205

CHAPTER 5 THE HISTORICAL IS POLITICAL: SECOND WAVE FEMINISM AND THE SEARCH FOR A USABLE PAST

In the twenty years since the 1948 Centennial of Seneca Falls, women’s history had been receding from national consciousness. Women’s history was kept alive by a small number of devoted women in the NWP and people working in women’s archives. 524 But for most Americans, women’s history and politics were absent from their lives and the historical work accomplished after suffrage had largely disappeared from memory. As Mary Beard warned in a 1950 radio address, women’s lack of knowledge about their own “historic force” was increasing as educators limited women’s education to domestic responsibilities. “If women should take this restriction lying down, then it would be women themselves, who, in their ignorance or inertia, would shut themselves off from their own history – to become little women on the mental age of children. If ignorance is bliss, surely it is not folly to be wise.” 525

In 1963, Betty Friedan, a journalist with roots in the labor movement who was struggling with the confinements of postwar domesticity, would echo Beard’s concerns about women’s education in her groundbreaking book, The Feminine Mystique . Friedan

524 For more on women’s history and the NWP see Lelia J. Rupp and Verta Taylor, Survival in the Doldrums: the American Women’s Rights Movement, 1945 to the 1960s (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987) and a good discussion of women’s archives can be found in Julie Des Jardins, Women and the Historical Enterprise in America: Gender, Race, and the Politics of Memory, 1880-1945 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003).

525 “What Nobody Seems to Know about Woman,” radio address by Mary Beard, Broadcast N.B.C. June 3, 1950, folder 27, Box 2, RAP, SL.

206

derailed the tendency “in recent years to laugh at feminism as one of history’s dirty jokes.” 526 Born a year after the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, Friedan’s statement that “The fact is, that to women born after 1920, feminism was dead history,” attests to how well founded Beard’s fears were. Friedan argued that in the absence of role models with which to identify, psychology and culture began “twisting the memory of the feminists into the man-eating phantom of the feminine mystique, shriveling the wish to be more than just a wife and mother. 527 Similarly, founder of the feminist group New

York Radical Women, Shulamith Firestone pointed out in the women’s liberation essay collection, Notes from the First Year , that “there is a suspicious blank in the history books” when it comes to the suffrage movement. “Little girls are taught to believe that all their rights were won for them a long time ago by a silly bunch of ladies who carried on and made a ridiculous display, all to get that paper in the ballot box.” 528 Gloria Steinem too, founding editor of Ms . magazine, recalled learning from text books in the 1950s that women had simply been “given the vote.” She explained, “I did not learn that several generations of our foremothers had nearly brought the country to a halt” and as it were

“suffragists were often portrayed as boring, ludicrous bluestockings when they were in history books at all.” From these depictions then, suffragists were “certainly no heroines

526 Daniel Horowitz, “Re-thinking Betty Friedan and The Feminine Mystique: Labor Union Radicalism and Feminism in Cold War America,” American Quarterly 48 (March 1996):1-34.

527 Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique (New York: W.W. Norton, 2001), 80, 100 and 102.

528 Shulamith Firestone, “The Women’s Rights Movement in the U.S.: A New View,” Notes from the First Year (New York: The New York Radical Women, 1968), Documents from the Women's Liberation Movement, An On-line Archival Collection, Special Collections Library, Duke University, http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/wlm/notes/#newview.

207

you would need in modern America where we were, as male authorities kept telling us resentfully, ‘the most privileged women in the world.’” 529

As these remarks attest, the generation of American women known as second wave feminists would have to rediscover women’s history all over again. Thus it is not surprising that feminists focused on the lack of historical knowledge as they pursued a new program for women’s equality. By 1968 the country was undergoing dramatic upheavals as social movements from civil rights to the New Left were demanding greater political freedoms. At the same time, the activists involved were beginning to ask new questions not only about the present and future but about their past. This was particularly true of the women’s liberation movement. As one early feminist poster declared: “Our

History Had Been Stolen From Us.” 530 Or as yet another famous poster from the Chicago

Women’s Liberation Union stated, “The history of women is a world to be fought for.” 531

Part of what makes the second wave unique is the relative far-reaching success the movement had in revolutionizing popular historical consciousness about women’s history as compared to previous generations. By the time second wave feminists came of age, there was really no easy way to learn about women’s history. It was not covered in standard curriculum and there were few specialized courses on the topic. Most importantly, that women’s history had to be rediscovered suggests how ultimately unsuccessful the preservation efforts by previous generations of women activists were in

529 Gloria Steinem, Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1983), 282 and 286.

530 Ruth Rosen, The World Split Open: How the Modern Women’s Movement Changed America (New York: Viking, 2000), 225.

531 An image of the “The history of women is a world to be fought for” poster can be found at the CWLU Herstory Project, the online archives of the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union: http://www.cwluherstory.org.

208

penetrating national consciousness. A few relics in museums, some dusty tomes and letters in libraries and archives, a postage stamp and a memorial hidden from view in the basement of the Capitol were not enough to forge a place for women’s history in

American collective memory. The second wave search for a usable past thus underscores the challenge of each generation having to discover women’s history anew.

However, as part of the typical loss of memory between generations of women, second wave feminists did not always give enough credit to the groundwork their predecessors had laid for them. Just as Alice Paul and other suffragists had to consciously turn the history they inherited from their foremothers into a usable past relevant to their generation, so too did second wave feminists have to navigate their own path through history. Feminists in the 1960s and 1970s did not in fact “discover” women’s history even if it felt like it at the time. They gained a valuable legacy from previous generations of women activists. First coined in 1968, even the phrase “second wave” evokes the longer historical roots of the movement. 532 Books such as the History of Woman Suffrage and Eleanor Flexner’s A Century of Struggle (1959) provided documentation of what had come before. 533 Further, feminists in the 1960s were handed the Equal Rights

Amendment from former suffragists still active in the NWP. Most importantly, pioneers of the movement served as powerful symbols of what women’s organizing could accomplish. As journalist Janice Law Trecker decreed in 1971, “The passion for women’s history is more than just a desire for a female heritage; it is also a search for

532 Martha Weinman Lear, “The Second Feminist Wave,” March 10, 1968, New York Times , pg. SM24.

533 Ellen DuBois “Eleanor Flexner and the History of American Feminism,” Gender & History 3 (Spring 1991): 81-90 and Leila J. Rupp, Eleanor Flexner’s “‘Century of Struggle’: Women’s History and the Women’s Movement,” NWSA Journal 4 (Summer 1992): 157-169.

209

ways in which a successful female revolution might be constructed.” 534 Activists looked to the past to understand the mistakes, missteps and obstacles of previous women’s movements. It was this historical legacy—both the canonized and thus ready-made heroines and the unresolved tensions surrounding race and class, for example, that would shape the historical consciousness of the movement.

The resurgence of interest in women’s history was powerfully illustrated by the dramatic growth of women’s archives, sites of memory that connected second wave feminists with previous generations of women activists. The search for women’s past was fueled in part by the publication of “Women’s History Sources: A Guide to Archives and

Manuscript Collections in the United States,” 2,500 pages that revealed over 18,000 women’s history collections, many of them lost or hidden. Archives represented an important legacy passed on to second wave feminists. The seeds planted to uncover and preserve women’s history in the 1930s and 1940s grew and blossomed with the next generation. The Elizabeth and Arthur Schlesinger Library on the History of Women in

America at Radcliffe College, the Sophia Smith Collection at Smith College and the

National Archives for Black Women’s History in Washington D.C. (formerly the

National Council of Negro Women Archives Committee) were all founded after the demise of Beard’s WCWA but only expanded due to the next feminist wave. For example, the Schlesinger Library, at the start of the women’s movement in 1970 had 247 visits but because the movement inspired interest, visits increased to more than 4,000 by

534 Janice Law Trecker, “Woman’s Place is in the Curriculum,” Saturday Review , October 16, 1971, pg. 86, Folder 1, Box 10, Education Collection, SSC.

210

the end of the decade. And whereas the library only had 8,000 volumes in 1968 by 1980 it had over 20,000. 535

Whereas the first wave of feminism inspired the building of collections at the

Smithsonian and the women’s archives that developed out of Beard’s WCWA, the second wave not only built upon those collections but attempted an archival experiment in the grand spirit of Beard’s effort. Founded by activist and heiress Laura X (nee, Murra but dropped her father’s name in protest), The Women’s History Research Center in

Berkeley, CA, popularly known as the “herstory archive” flourished between 1969 and

1974. The archive, first run out of her house and then a church basement, collected books, documents, diaries, photographs, and oral history. Laura X started the archive after a UC-Berkeley professor doubted whether there was enough material on women to fill a quarter’s course. She spent most of her inheritance creating the archive in order to prove that professor wrong. 536

Laura X was not a trained historian, and her campaign had more in common with the popular history emerging in the movement than it did with the burgeoning field of women’s history in academia. Yet, her concern about collecting material with a historical purpose highlights this generation’s historical consciousness. This chapter, therefore, explores how feminists during the women’s liberation movement like Laura X connected the history of women to political activism through political protest, cultural representations and consciousness raising. Historical politics—the various battles

535 Nan Robertson, “Libraries on History of Women Busy and Growing,” New York Times , January 5, 1981, pg. A1.

536 Megan Marshall, “The Women’s History Boom: Transforming a Profession from the Inside,” Slate , September 4, 2007. See also the Records of the Women’s History Research Center at the Schlesinger Library.

211

feminists fought in reclaiming women’s past—emerged as a critical issue that went to the core of how second wave feminists envisioned a liberated society.

While “the personal is political” was a fundamental notion of second wave feminism, in many respects, an important foundation for the movement was appreciating that the historical is political, as witnessed by the phenomenal growth of women’s studies. Yet while the history of the academic pursuit of women’s history—including the creation of women’s studies departments in universities—has recently begun to be written, historians have largely overlooked the immense popular interest in women’s past. 537 How feminism has influenced academia is much better understood than how the search for women’s history more broadly shaped feminism as a social movement and what women’s history has meant to individual women activists. The revolution in historical consciousness has been seen largely as a result of second wave feminism, located primarily within academia, but instead, should be understood more broadly as a vital part of the movement and situated within the larger culture.

Focusing on the place of the past and historical memory in women’s social protest, this chapter explores three main themes of biography, commemoration and invented traditions. In many ways, the second wave search for a usable past parallels the use of history by the nineteenth century woman movement. Like the emphasis on women worthies during the antebellum era, activists in the 1960s and 1970s looked for historical

537 Examples of this scholarship include: Eileen Boris and Nupur Chaudhuri, ed. Voices of Women Historians: the Personal, the Political, the Professional (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999); Marilyn J. Boxer, When Women ask the Questions: Creating Women’s Studies in America (Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998); Ellen Carol Dubois, et all, Feminist Scholarship: Kindling in the Groves of Academe (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985); Florence Howe, ed. The Politics of Women’s Studies: Testimony from Thirty Founding Mothers (New York: Feminist Press, 2000); Jean F. O’Barr, Feminism in Action: Building Institutions and Community through Women’s Studies (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1994); Deborah Gray White, ed. Telling Histories: Black Women Historians in the Ivory Tower (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008).

212

role models that helped shape their feminist consciousness. From Ms . magazine to Judy

Chicago’s The Dinner Party uncovering and then celebrating “lost women” of history was a popular feminist endeavor. Further, like suffragists during the 1876 Centennial, second wave feminists also harnessed the power of the past in their political protest.

Looking at the commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Nineteenth Amendment during the Women’s Strike for Equality in 1970, a seminal event of women’s liberation, highlights generational differences about the past and present. Contest over how to celebrate the suffrage anniversary and conflict over women’s liberation complicated traditional ways of representing history by older women’s organizations. Then, building on the success of the Women’s Strike for Equality, the final section examines how feminists used invented traditions in creating a movement history that helped unify women activists in their fight for gender equality. Like the annual celebration of

Foremother’s Dinners by suffragists in the 1890s, second wave feminists invented traditional holidays to further their cause. From Susan B. Anthony’s birthday to

International Women’s Day to recalling the Seneca Falls Convention during the 1977

International Women’s Year celebration, feminists organized around a host of historical symbols. Taken together, the case studies in this chapter suggest how the history of women shaped the movement culture of second wave feminism.

While there are important similarities between the first and second wave search for a usable past, there are also significant differences. Historical politics is part of a long effort by women activists since at least the nineteenth century, but the particular second wave articulation of history grew out of a movement specific to the 1960s. Feminists looked to history for inspiration and for understanding of present conditions as did other

213

oppressed groups demanding change in the 1960s. The second wave search for a usable past was part of a larger movement that made uncovering the history of oppressed groups the agenda for a generation. The movements for civil rights, Black Power, labor, Chicano liberation and Gay liberation all articulated powerful connections between the past and present in social protest. 538 As Betita Martinez, an organizer for the civil rights group,

SNCC, wrote, “This is the age of newfound heritages.” 539 There was a shift in the 1960s to make history meaningful and non-elite in its orientation, breaking away from the consensus model that had prevailed during the 1950s. 540

In addition, activists during the women’s liberation movement had a more intimate relationship to the past than their nineteenth century predecessors, in part because of the practice of personal politics. It was in consciousness-raising that the historical truly became political. The widespread practice of consciousness-raising in creating a personal and collective identity for women was closely linked with the search for feminist origins. The study of history joined activists in a shared collective identity and a common purpose by recognizing the empowering possibilities inherent in knowing the history of women. For example, the women’s liberation group, New York Radical

Feminists, was originally established as the Stanton Anthony Brigade in 1969, named

538 See for example, John D’Emilio, Making Trouble: Essays on Gay History, Politics, and the University (New York: Routledge, 1992); James Green, Taking History to Heart: The Power of the Past in Building Social Movements , (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2000); Scott A. Sandage, “A Marble House Divided: The Lincoln Memorial, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Politics of Memory, 1939- 1963,” The Journal of American History 80, no. 1 (June 1993):135-167; William L. Van Deburg, New Day in Babylon: the Black Power Movement and American Culture, 1965-1975 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992). For an overview on the white ethnic search for a usable past, see Matthew Frye Jacobson, Roots Too: White Ethnic Revival in Post-Civil Rights America (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006).

539 Elizabeth (Betita) Martinez, “History Makes Us, We Make History,” in The Feminist Memoir Project , ed. Rachel Blau DuPlessis and Ann Snitow (New York: Three Rivers Press, 1998), 120.

540 See Peter Novick, That Noble Dream for more on historiography during this period.

214

after the women’s rights pioneers. And as one of the founding resolutions of the organization declared, “We are dedicated to a revival of knowledge about our forgotten feminist movement.” 541 The importance of history to women’s liberation groups suggests how knowledge of women’s past assisted the development of a feminist consciousness among activists.

History appears as a common interest among feminists even as the particular constructions of the past was informed by the specific concerns of individual women. The women’s movement was diverse and multifaceted, composed of multiple feminisms and activists working for divergent if overlapping goals. Therefore, while the recovery of women’s history was a shared feminist goal, what activists chose to remember about the past and the heroines they celebrated, represented individual political choices and differences among women over race, ethnicity, class and sexuality. Especially concerning issues of race and class, feminists began to realize the long history of rifts between women.

This chapter illustrates how history was used as a vehicle for social change by examining how the past helped solidify a feminist identity and create both a historical and political consciousness among second wave feminists. As activists and graduate students

Ann Gordon, Mari Jo Buhle and Nancy Schrom wrote in a groundbreaking essay on women’s history in 1971, “today, women with renewed caste-consciousness are returning to historical questions in a search for their collective identity and for analysis of their condition.” 542 Understanding the creation of feminist narratives allows for a more

541 “Introduction to the New York Radical Feminists,” Folder 1, Box 10, Delores Alexander Papers, SL.

542 Gordon, Ann D. Mari Jo Buhle and Nancy E. Schrom Women in American Society; an Historical Contribution (Cambridge, Mass.: Radical America, 1972), 3.

215

nuanced picture of second wave feminism to emerge—one that encompasses the movement’s expansive vision for societal change that was so far reaching that in order to change the present, the past needed to be transformed as well.

“Yes, Virginia, there IS a Her-story”: Popular History-Making and the Discovery of “Lost” Women

“Eli Whitney was a woman.” Or so claimed a 1970s flyer advertising the

Women’s Heritage Calendar and Almanac . As the leaflet went on to explain: “It’s true.

The inventor of the cotton gin was a woman. It wasn’t Eli Whitney, as you learned in school. It was Catherine Greene, widow of Nathaniel Greene, Revolutionary War general. HIStory books never tell you that. HERstory will…And HERstory, page after page of it, is what you’ll find in the Women’s Heritage Calendar and Almanac.” 543 As the advertisement promised, “We think they make such attractive gifts even male chauvinists will thank you.” 544 This new product, full of history and humor, was the work of

Women’s Heritage Series, Inc. a press “committed to women’s liberation,” built by self- declared women wanting “to do their thing, in their own way, to help build the movement, to educate, to raise consciousness and, above all, to affect change.” 545 They considered items such as the Almanac “rudimentary tools” of women’s liberation to “help convert multitudes.” As the editors explained in the introduction to the first edition,

543 “Women’s Heritage Calendar and Almanac” Flyer, Folder 5, Box 16, Women’s Liberation Collection SSC. “Yes, Virginia, there IS a Her-story,” quote is taken from the introduction of the first edition of the Women’s Heritage Calendar and Almanac (Santa Monica, CA: s.n., 1970), Folder 5, Box 3, Delores Alexander Papers, SL.

544 “Women’s Heritage Calendar and Almanac” Flyer, Folder 5, Box 16, Women’s Liberation Collection SSC.

545 Ibid.

216

women need this “for our own sense of worth.” “We produced it because we believe women need it like crazy – as a morale booster, a self-image lifter, permanent reference and… a heritage for our daughters.” 546 The demand for such items is evident in the fact that a second feminist calendar appeared in 1971: The Liberated Woman’s Appointment

Calendar edited by Lynn Sherr and Jurate Kazickas. 547 These women’s liberation calendars were similar to ones circulated during the suffrage movement such as the

Woman’s Century Calendar (1899) or Birthday Calendar (Perpetual) of Suffrage

Women .548 Second wave feminists thus consciously or unconsciously echoed earlier attempts at popularizing women’s history through the selling of historical commodities. 549

The Women’s Heritage Calendar and Almanac is just one example of the outpouring of popular history-making. In redefining the political, historical questions surfaced alongside the search for what it meant to be a modern woman. Like previous generations of women activists who turned to history, feminists in the 1960s and 1970s attempted to “liberate” history from masculine definitions to ensure “Herstory” was finally told. 550 As Sheila Rowbotham noted in 1974, the enthusiasm for women’s history

546 Introduction, Women’s Heritage Calendar and Almanac , Folder 5, Box 3, Delores Alexander Papers, SL.

547 Jurate Kazickas and Lynn Sherr, The Liberated Woman’s Appointment Calendar and Survival Handbook 1971 (New York: Universe Books, 1970).

548 Carrie Chapman Catt , ed. Woman’s Century Calendar (New York: National American Woman Suffrage Association, 1899), ephSBA Box # 11, Susan B. Anthony Ephemera Collection, HL and Birthday Calendar (Perpetual) of Suffrage Women Arranged by Jane A. Stewart, ephSBA Box # 11, Susan B. Anthony Ephemera Collection, HL.

549 See Margaret Finnegan, Selling Suffrage: Consumer Culture & Votes for Women (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), 116 and chapter three of this dissertation.

550 Feminist Robin Morgan is credited with popularizing the term “Herstory,” according to the Oxford English Dictionary. See Robin Morgan, Sisterhood is Powerful (New York: Vintage, 1970), 640.

217

among women activists was part of the larger feminist “challenge to masculine cultural hegemony. History is part of the way in which we have been defined by men.” 551

Uncovering women’s history was a political act. According to Rowbotham, the inclination towards such movement history, even if a romanticized version of the past, served an important function: “The strength of this impulse is that it is defiantly popular.

It refuses to address itself to a limited audience. Its enthusiasm is important because it insists that history belongs to an oppressed group and is an essential aspect in the cultural pride of the group.” 552

The emphasis on biography in the calendars highlights how the popular search for a usable past focused largely on the rediscovery of feminist heroines. As historian Gerda

Lerner argued “Today’s women need to learn from the experiences and knowledge of their foremothers; they need to discover heroines.”553 Popular history formed the language and imagery of the women’s liberation movement. For example, popular feminist poster art often featured historical themes, portraying courageous heroines from the past. Posters of Susan B. Anthony, Amelia Earhart, Emma Goldman, Eleanor

Roosevelt, Agnes Smedley, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucy Stone, Sojourner Truth,

Harriet Tubman, and Mary Wollstonecraft resurrected the lost history of feminist rebels and used them as political symbols. 554 In art and literature, in magazine articles and calendars, in political buttons and posters, and in the dialogue that happened through

551 Sheila Rowbotham, Hidden From History: Rediscovering Women in History from the 17 th Century to the Present . 1st American ed. (New York, Pantheon Books, 1975), 6.

552 Rowbotham, 6.

553 Weigand, 2.

554 Rosen, 225.

218

consciousness raising groups and during social protest, the recovery of female figures from history framed feminist discourse. Examining how feminists sought to uncover stories of foremothers “hidden from history” suggests how the discovery of history helped create a politics of empowerment.

Like the search for women worthies undertaken by women’s rights advocates during the antebellum era, second wave feminists similarly rummaged through history uncovering “lost women.” Both first and second wave feminists thus emphasized the importance of biographies of historical women in their construction of a usable past.

However, nineteenth-century reformers lionized well-known women in history such as women warriors and female rulers to argue that women had and should continue to play a role in the public sphere. The argument was about historical recognition in that these women had been ignored. In contrast, while the second wave search for a usable past shared a similar impulse to the celebration of women worthies, the emphasis on lost women implied that these figures were not just overlooked but hidden from history – unknown and forgotten, having vanished from collective memory.

Thus at the same time that the women of the second wave were making history, they were also rediscovering history. In this sense, feminists found the very act of making these women visible empowering. The sense of discovery and the dialogue that was constructed between past and present resulted in activists having a more personal relationship to the past. Uncovering historical figures allowed feminists to recognize themselves in history. The recovery of lost women went hand in hand with collectively seeing personal problems as political and consciousness-raising. Therefore, both the personal and the historical were political to this generation of American feminists.

219

Storytelling in social movements sustains groups as they fight for social change, helps them construct collective identities and connects reform to a laudable past and a victorious future. 555 Consequently, historical calendars like Women’s Heritage Calendar and Almanac tapped into the movement’s quest for self-definition and individuals’ search for self-discovery. To aid this effort, women’s presses such as Women’s Heritage

Corporation, a publishing company that produced the Women’s Heritage Calendar , were sprouting up to publish works on women’s history. These presses were an important contribution to women’s consciousness-raising by providing the source material for the movement.

The emphasis on history in magazines like Ms ., for instance, reflected the larger awareness of the past typical of the women’s movement. Ms . hit newsstands in 1972 and quickly became a commercial success. Ms. typified the popular feminism spreading in the women’s movement. 556 The magazine functioned as an important forum for a cross- section of feminist ideas and included articles on the women’s movement, women’s issues, personal reflection, fiction and education. Notably, Ms . ran frequent pieces that dealt with women’s history. However, compared to scholarly journals such as Feminist

Studies founded in the same year, the articles in Ms. reflected a popular historical consciousness that sought to bring feminist history to a mass audience. 557 For example,

Ms. featured a regular column, “Lost Women.” The articles highlighted the lives of

555 Francesca Polletta, It was like a Fever: Storytelling in Protest and Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006), 3.

556 Amy Erdman Farrell, Yours in Sisterhood: Ms. Magazine and the Promise of Popular Feminism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998), 1-2 and 5.

557 Farrell, 123.

220

historically significant women alongside the column “Found Women” on the lives of contemporary women.

The emphasis in these columns was on biography, fostering a faith in individuals working for social change. 558 Ms . editors looked for compelling narratives, full of anecdotes and personal stories with which readers could connect. Readers could be inspired by Harriet Tubman in her fight against slavery and by Zivia Lubetkin’s experience in the Warsaw Ghetto. Readers could be titillated by the scandals of crusading journalist Anne Royall, treated to the mystery of the notorious dancer Mata Hari and absorbed into the romance and adventure of women pirates, Anne Bonney and Mary

Read. Readers could learn about social history through the lives of Catharyna Brett, eighteenth century mill owner, about psychoanalysis with the case of Anna O., and the history of family and sexuality with the biography of Dorothy Reed Mendenhall who revolutionized childbirth in America.

The emphasis on women’s history was an important component of creating a feminist consciousness through the pages of Ms . One of the earliest columns featured a quiz by Gerda Lerner entitled, “So You Think You Know About Women’s History,” which began with a challenge to readers to name ten women who made contributions to

American history, beyond “presidents’ wives, writers or opera singers.” Lerner then asked of the readership, “if this was difficult, try naming ten men. Easy? Does that suggest something to you?” She went on to inform the quiz takers that “There is a good deal wrong with the history you were taught…it is time to change the narrow, male

558 Farrell, 123.

221

centered view of the past…Women have a right to their history, too.” 559 Part search for a usable past, part entertainment, Ms. brought popular historical politics to a mass audience. The women’s history that could be found within the pages of Ms. offered readers a glimpse into the past that many women might not have known. This history worked to connect readers with a feminist identity by painting a rich heritage for women’s creative, intellectual, social and political accomplishments. However, like most popular history, the articles in Ms . offered limited analysis of the past to further social change in the present. While lively narrative in features like “Lost Women” uncovered role models for entertainment and inspiration, the columns used history for storytelling.

Therefore, Ms. history never went beyond compensatory history to offer a more nuanced examination of gender inequalities in a historical perspective. Further, while class, race and sexual history were explored, the critical theory for understanding the significance of those differences was largely absent. 560

Outside of the pages of popular magazines, activists grappled with questions of historical identity with more complexity. Women activists were saying enough to both gender discrimination and historical invisibility, suggesting just how important it was for feminist activists to develop a historical consciousness alongside a political consciousness. As activist Betita Martinez wrote:

This is the age of newfound heritages When black calls back to African queens and Nat Turner When brown calls back to Cuauhtemoc and Zapata When red calls back to so many bravehearts

559 Gerda Lerner, “So You Think You Know About Women’s History,” Ms . September 1972, Vol. 1 No. 3. pp. 32, 33 and 115.

560 See also discussion in Judith M. Bennett, History Matters: Patriarchy and the Challenge of Feminism (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006), 65-66.

222

But who do I call back to? 561

Just as many women felt the need to start separate movements to address questions of gender, so too did women demand a new kind of history focused solely on women.

As feminists began to explore personal politics, the re-examination of gendered assumptions prompted questions about history and the lessons about the past they had been taught growing up, in particular, how gender norms were instituted through the models girls were taught from history. Therefore, as women began to re-examine long held beliefs, notions of ideal womanhood in the past and present became a problem to address. As Martinez wrote:

What did you men with your history books ever give me Except a token female who never fought for her kind? Except ‘our women,’ always ‘our women,’ In postures of maternity, sadness, devotion, Tears for the lost husband or son ‘our women,’ nothing but shadows reflections of someone else’s existence BASTA! 562

In questioning cultural expectations and historical representations, women activists like

Martinez imagined new conceptions of womanhood apart from traditional images of mother and helpmate. Martinez desired role models that were not “shadows,” or

“reflections” but real-live, full-blooded historical actors. Such demands for new symbols of strong and powerful women spoke to the feminist desire for greater sense of self and independence. The poem, written in 1970, reflects Martinez’s emerging feminist consciousness after having participated in New York Radical Women. She “knew a

561 Martinez, 115, 120.

562 Martinez, 120.

223

Chicana feminism needed to be born” and worked to create a Chicana feminism to fight both sexism in the Chicano movement and the whiteness of the women’s movement. 563

For many Chicana activists, history helped rationalize their feminist organizing in response to accusations that they were betraying the Chicano liberation movement.

Chicana feminists countered such arguments by drawing on the long history of Chicana and Mexican women’s activism. This type of comparison located present day activism as part of an indigenous Chicana feminism and not as a recent, “outside” development prompted by the women’s liberation movement, perceived by many Chicano activists as white and middle class. Popular figures fueled the imagination such as sixteenth-century

Indian princess, Malintzin, known as the mother of the Mexican people, seventeenth- century Mexican nun and writer Sor Juan Inés de la Cruz, Dona Josefa Ortiz de

Dominguez, an activist in the Mexican independence movements of the early 1800s, female soldiers or “Las Adelitas” of the Mexican Revolution, Mexican feminists of the

1920s and 1930s and Chicana labor organizers such as Dolores Huerta. Celebrating historic figures provided vital alternatives to traditional ideals of Mexican-American womanhood as well as validating feminist struggles.564

The past provided important models for women of color that feminism was not solely the province of white women. For instance, The Woman Warrior: Memoirs of a

Girlhood Among Ghosts by Maxine Hong Kingston, published in 1975, explores questions of identity, sexuality, gender, power, culture, assimilation and generational

563 Ibid.

564 Benita Roth, Separate Roads to Feminism: Black, Chicana, and White Feminist Movements in America’s Second Wave (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 161.

224

conflict. 565 In her memoir, Kingston popularized the tale of Fa Mu Lan, a woman warrior, a role model of female empowerment re-imagined for a new generation. The story of the folk heroine overturned traditional ideals of Chinese womanhood and the book gave voice to a burgeoning feminist consciousness among Asian American women.

When members of the Combahee River Collective, a black lesbian feminist organization, defined a politics of identity based on the intersection of race, class, sexuality and gender, history provided important precedents in exploring the creation of a broader feminist agenda. When the women looked to the past, they found strength in knowing that their current struggle was part of a longer movement. As they declared in

1977: “Contemporary Black feminism is the outgrowth of countless generations of personal sacrifice, militancy, and work by our mothers and sisters.” It was important to members to reclaim this history—which they believed was overlooked by society and by the wider feminist movement. The significance of this history was proclaimed by the group’s choice of name, a historic event that celebrated the importance of collective action, taken from the 1863 Combahee River raid led by Harriet Tubman that freed 750 slaves. “There have always been Black women activists,” the statement declared. “Some known, like Sojourner Truth, Harriet Tubman, Frances E. W. Harper, Ida B. Wells

Barnett, and Mary Church Terrell, and thousands upon thousands unknown—who have had a shared awareness of how their sexual identity combined with their racial identity to make their whole life situation and the focus of their political struggles unique.” 566

565 Maxine Hong Kingston, The Woman Warrior: Memoirs of a Girlhood Among Ghosts (New York: Vintage Books, 1975).

566 “Combahee River Collective Statement,” reprinted in Susan Ware, ed. Modern American Women: a Documentary History (Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2002), 251.

225

Yet some women saw danger in romanticizing the past. 567 In 1971, author Toni

Morrison discussed in the New York Times how black women, like white women, looked back to history for inspirational role models. Morrison related how Nefertiti, the Egyptian queen, had great appeal mainly because “she existed (and there are so few admirable heroines in our culture), was a great beauty and is remote enough to be worshipped.”

According to Morrison, while there was interest in heroines like Sojourner Truth, “there is a desperate love for Nefertiti, simply because she was so pretty.” It was this romanticizing of history that Morrison felt could harm more than help black women’s sense of self. She reckoned, “I suppose at bottom we are all beautiful queens. But for the moment it is perhaps just as well to remain useful women. One wonders if Nefertiti would have lasted 10 minutes in a welfare office, in a Mississippi gas station...” Morrison concluded, “And since black women have to endure, that romanticism seems a needless cul de sac , an opiate that appears to make life livable if not serene but eventually must separate us from reality.” Morrison argued black women did not need an idealized past because black women already had inner strength and fortitude. They did not need to be misled by false idols that did not have the power to change present realities. 568

As suggested by Morrison’s criticism, popular feminist history was not always complex or even accurate—but it was inspirational. Rather than old “bluestockings” who were “certainly no heroines” as Gloria Steinem recalled from her youth, the heroines re- imagined by second wave feminists were lively, proud and stirring role models who

567 Critiques of the feminist emphasis on role models circulated, especially among academics. See for example, Berenice Fisher, “Wandering in the Wilderness: The Search for Women Role Models,” Signs 13, no. 2 (Winter 1988): 211-233 and Berenice Fisher, “Who Needs Woman Heroes?” Heresies 3, no. 1, Issue 9 (1980): 10-13.

568 Toni Morrison, “What the Black Woman Thinks About Women’s Lib,” New York Times , August 22, 1971, pg. SM14.

226

provided examples from the past of what women could accomplish. In particular, feminists explored the efforts of women workers to improve their lives and discovered how generations of women activists before them had redefined the political. One working-class icon to capture the feminist imagination was Emma Goldman. Goldman’s face and words appeared on buttons and tee-shirts (often with the misquoted phrase “If I can’t dance I don’t want to be in your revolution”). 569 This new consciousness of women’s labor history was reflected, for example, in the choice of name of the Boston- based radical women’s group, “Bread and Roses,” after the slogan for the 1912 textile strike in Lawrence, Massachusetts. 570 By the early 1980s, helped along by the documentary, Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter and the popular Hollywood film, Swing

Shift (1984), a little known propaganda poster was rediscovered. The image of a female wartime factory worker on the poster declared, “We Can Do It!” and escaped into popular culture, securing iconic status as an image of female empowerment. 571

Yet another well-known feminist poster featured an overworked mother from the turn-of-the-century alongside a picture of a struggling modern working mother from 1976 with the caption: “$acred Motherhood.” The image was inspired by a 1908 poster calling for shorter work hours for women. 572 Another poster portrayed a striking Lawrence Mill

569 Thank you to Kathy Peiss for sharing her Emma Goldman button with me. The story behind the misquoted statement associated with Goldman can be found in Alix Kates Shulman, “Dances With Feminists,” Women’s Review of Books , Vol. IX, no. 3, December 1991 found at The Emma Goldman Paper online: http://sunsite3.berkeley.edu/Goldman/Features/dances_shulman.html.

570 The group is best known for starting the first women’s center in the United States. It should be noted a few “Bread and Roses” celebrations sprung up as well, notably at Simmons College where this annual tradition still continues.

571 T Rees Shapiro, “Image inspired WWII’s Rosie the Riveter,” The Washington Post , December 30, 2010, p. B5.

572 “$acred Motherhood” was created in 1908 by Chicago Daily News cartoonist Luther Bradley for exhibition at a joint conference of the Women’s Trade Union League and the Chicago Federation of Labor

227

worker in 1912 with the words “8 hours a day, abolish child labor,” next to an image of a working women in 1972 with the caption, “Free Abortion, child care, equal pay.” As activist and historian Ruth Rosen has noted of this poster, “The message couldn’t be clearer; if they could win their goals, so could we.” 573

Much of the interest in working-class history among activists was rooted in an ethnic revival to discover the world of their mothers and grandmothers. 574 This “ancestral impulse” of many second wave feminists signaled a revival of a lost history based on both sacred and secular heritage. 575 Lives of working-class immigrant foremothers, many of them Irish and Jewish such as Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, Emma Goldman, Leonora

O’Reilly, Clara Lemlich and Rose Schneiderman provided valuable symbols of female rebellion for a new generation in search of feminist roots. The reissue of classic texts of the immigrant experience such as the 1975 release of Anzia Yezierska’s novel the Bread

Givers (1925) helped along this interest in ancestral role models. 576

Perhaps no single feminist project better represents the popular search for a usable past than Judy Chicago’s monumental installation The Dinner Party, which fused women’s history and art into an expression of women’s culture. 577 Chicago’s work was

See The Electronic Encyclopedia of Chicago, Chicago Historical Society, http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/11224.html.

573 Rosen, 226.

574 For more on the feminist ethnic revival, and the broader white ethnic revival, see Matthew Frye Jacobson, Root Too: White Ethic Revival in Post-Civil Rights America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006).

575 Jacobson, 272.

576 Jacobson, 271-272.

577 See Jane Gerhard, “Judy Chicago and the Practice of 1970s Feminism,” Feminist Studies 37 (Fall 2011): 591-618.

228

an artist’s exploration of genius and creativity in the past, a quest to uncover role models.

Chicago related the project “developed directly out of my concern that as long as we women had no sense of our past, we could have no future.” She argued “Our ignorance of women’s history has been instrumental in maintaining our repression. The lack of respect for women by men is based on the fallacy that we’ve never achieved anything.” 578

Completed in 1979, after five years of work, the collaborative venture was originally envisaged “as a reinterpretation of the Last Supper” from the vantage point of women who have “prepared the meals and set the table throughout history.” 579 With The Dinner

Party , women finally took their place at the table as the work included place settings for

39 women ranging from Sappho to Virginia Woolf as well as 999 names of other women who made history. As one viewer responded after seeing the piece, Chicago “took history and put into art—put the whole history of women into art.” 580

The Dinner Party is useful in understanding both the significance as well as the limitations of second wave popular history-making. While the work glorified an overlooked women’s heritage, the piece’s domestic focus relied on essentialist notions of womanhood and put forth an approach to history that favored universalism—issues symptomatic of much of the popular expression of women’s history and the more general problems of identity and representation with which women’s liberation as a social movement had to come to terms. In its wide reaching scope, the project was as ambitious as Beard’s WCWA, sharing a basic similarity in thinking about women’s past. However,

578 Grace Glueck, “Judy Chicago and Trials of ‘Dinner Party’” New York Times , April 30, 1979, pg. D10.

579 “I want to help make a mark on history,” brochure, Folder 12, Box 15, Judy Chicago Papers, SL.

580 Nan Robertson, “4,500 Guests, Most of Them Women, Answer ‘The Dinner Party’ Invitation,” New York Times , October 18, 1980, pg. 52.

229

in its focus on the popular, the work’s simplistic form had more in common with the

1930s radio series, Women in the Making of America .581

The Dinner Party used domestic imagery to make women’s public achievements that had been obscured by history more generally known, in many ways a visual representation of personal (and historical) politics. Chicago suggests that the intention of the work was “to educate a large portion of the society to women’s history, women’s contributions and women’s historic condition through the creation of an easily understandable work of art.” 582 Indeed, The Dinner Party was, above all else, a popular work of art—setting unprecedented attendance figures when it premiered at the San

Francisco Museum of Modern Art when one hundred thousand people saw the exhibit. 583

The work resonated strongly with many women who went to see it. One gray-haired woman was brought to tears after a viewing at the Brooklyn Museum in 1981. She explained the reason for her tears: “because women have been eliminated from history…because it’s so exciting to see them here…but it’s painful too…this was done with such loving care, by women working together in a woman’s way.” 584

In constructing a common female imagery as universal to women’s experience,

Chicago put forth a simplified vision of women’s history. The Dinner Party was similar to Rose Arnold Powell’s Mount Rushmore campaign in the 1930s that celebrated great

581 See chapter four of this dissertation.

582 Ibid.

583 Amelia Jones, “The Sexual Politics of The Dinner Party A Critical Context,” in Reclaiming Female Agency , ed. Norma Broude and Mary D. Garrard (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005), 412.

584 Eleanor Wachtel, “This is Judy Chicago,” Homemakers , November, 1981 as quoted in Feminist Foremothers in Women’s Studies , Psychology and Mental Health , ed. Phyllis Chesler, Esther D. Rothblum and Ellen Cole, (Binghamton, New York: Haworth Press, 1996), 137.

230

women through monumental sculpture and compensatory history. Both Powell and

Chicago tested the boundaries of gender and greatness in the past. Yet, in contrast to

Powell’s dream that relied on masculine art form—mountain carving—Chicago’s second wave vision subverted questions of masculine achievement by elevating traditional women’s art of needlework and porcelain as high art. However, like Powell’s project,

Chicago’s sculptural interpretation of women’s history had a complicated relationship with race. As lesbian feminists and feminists of color have argued, the tendency among many feminists was to construct the female experience as implicitly white, middle class and heterosexual. Chicana and African American women severely criticized the representations of women of color in the work. 585 One outraged viewer, Estelle Chacon, wrote in 1978 after she and a group of Hispanic women from the National Political

Caucus visited the Dinner Party studio: “I am truly sad that like men historians that have constantly overlooked the achievements of our Chicanos…Chicago, who claims to hurt about the omission of women in history, turns and hurts millions of Hispanas by not considering, not even one of us, to be honored guest at her Dinner Party.” 586

Despite criticism, the significance of The Dinner Party rests on the role it played in forging a feminist historical consciousness. The work should be viewed not only as popular art but as popular history. While critics have justifiably criticized Chicago’s romanticized historical narrative, within the context of 1970s feminism, The Dinner

Party , like Ms. “Lost Women” columns and the Women’s Heritage Calendar, served

585 See for example, Alice Walker’s critique in “ One Child of One’s Own—A meaningful Digression within the work(s),” in Alice Walker, In Search of Our Mother’s Gardens (San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983), 382- 384.

586 Jones, 421.

231

important functions as tools in feminist consciousness-raising. All these forms of popular history made women’s history accessible and easily digestible to the public. Placing the work alongside other popular expressions of women’s history underscores the political nature of the project. In Chicago’s own words, “Our intention, however, was not to define women’s history, but to symbolize it—to say that there have been many women who have done many things, and they deserve to be known.” 587

Women’s Strike for Equality and the 50 th Anniversary of Women’s Suffrage: Generational Divides and the Politics of History

For second wave feminists, history provided symbolic rallying points for many of the movement’s marches and protests. Many feminist antiwar activists protested collectively as the Jeannette Rankin Brigade, named after the first female congresswoman and a symbol of women’s peace activism. And during the second Miss America demonstration in Atlantic City in 1969, for example, radical feminists protested the objectification of women by carrying posters of strong female role models from history.

Women held signs labeled “Our Heroines” above photos of Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth

Cady Stanton, Sojourner Truth, Lucy Stone, among other nineteenth-century foremothers. 588

However, it was the following year, for the fiftieth anniversary of the Nineteenth

Amendment granting woman suffrage that second wave feminists most successfully harnessed the power of the past in political protest. Earlier that year for the anniversary,

587 Preface to “The Dinner Party Bibliography,” Folder 19, Box 15, Judy Chicago Papers, SL.

588 Photos of protestors during the 1969 protest carrying signs with historical women, from the personal collection of activist and historian Jo Freeman, can be found online at http://www.jofreeman.com.

232

the Smithsonian had opened an exhibition, Women and Politics . The exhibit displayed relics suffragists had donated in the 1920s. The final panel on contemporary feminism was left open-ended, questioning the movement’s future with a large mirror topped with a red question mark. 589 The main event of the commemoration, the Women’s Strike for

Equality, held on August 26, 1970, helped answer that question. This event signaled the advent of a new feminist political and historical consciousness and a transition between an older and younger generation of women activists.

During the Women’s Strike for Equality and the other commemorative events following the anniversary, second wave feminists framed their political protest in the imagery of the suffrage movement. Suffrage was a mainstay of the second wave usable past partly because of the legacy of first wave feminists. The triumphant narrative— retold in written histories and archival sources—left behind by suffragists offered an invaluable precedent of feminist protest. But certainly historical happenstance in the timing of the fiftieth anniversary of the Nineteenth Amendment occurring just as the women’s liberation movement was gaining momentum ensured a vital place for the suffrage past in the second wave historical imagination. As women’s history receded from national consciousness, the militant suffragists celebrated by the NWP disappeared from collective memory. As recently as 1964, the dominant cultural image of the suffragist was Mrs. Banks in Disney’s Mary Poppins which depicted the women’s movement in a satirical fashion. 590 But during women’s liberation, a new empowered image of the suffragist re-emerged. Events like the anniversary of the Nineteenth

589 “Women’s Suffrage Revisited,” New York Times , May 25, 1970, pg. 57.

590 See Laura E. Nym Mayhall, “Domesticating Emmeline: Representing the Suffragette, 1930- 1993,” NWSA Journal 11 (Summer 1999): 1-24.

233

Amendment helped overturn stereotypes that suffragists were a “silly bunch of ladies who carried on and made a ridiculous display, all to get that paper in the ballot box.” 591

Like suffragists who turned to Revolutionary foremothers during the U.S.

Centennial, the use of the past by second wave feminists suggests the importance of historical consciousness in shaping women’s political protest. By drawing a comparison between the contemporary situation of women and the suffragists, feminists found inspiration in their foremothers’ fight for their rights and at the same time gave legitimacy to the burgeoning women’s liberation movement by grounding the movement with historical roots. From coast to coast, women staged protests that looked to the past while anticipating and demanding future change. 592 The Women’s Strike functioned much like the March on Washington for the civil rights movement, by focusing national attention on the women’s movement and bringing activists together in solidarity all over the country. In New York City somewhere between 20,000 and 50,000 women staged the largest women’s rights rally since the suffrage movement. Activists placed plaques in

Duffy Square and the Grand Army Plaza to designate spots where women felt statues of

Susan B. Anthony and Sojourner Truth should be placed. 593 Airline stewardesses protested job termination due to pregnancy with signs that read “Women Suffra-jets.” 594

591 Shulamith Firestone, “The Women’s Rights Movement in the U.S.: A New View,” Notes from the First Year (New York: The New York Radical Women, 1968), Documents from the Women's Liberation Movement, An On-line Archival Collection, Special Collections Library, Duke University, http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/wlm/notes/#newview.

592 Sara Evans, Tidal Wave: How Women Changed America at Century’s End (New York: Free Press, 2003), 40-41.

593 Linda Charlton, “Women Seeking Equality March on 5th Ave. Today,” New York Times , August 26, 1970, pg. 44.

594 Claudia Levy and Alex Ward, “Women Rally To Publicize Grievances,” The Washington Post , August 27, 1970, pg. A1.

234

In Los Angeles, NOW sponsored a vigil in front of the Federal Building and, in a powerful symbolic echo, combined past and present in their protest. The demonstration reenacted the 1917 picket of the White House for woman suffrage. Half of the women wore costumes representing the suffragists while the rest of the protesters wore contemporary clothing. The intertwining of historical and modern politics was clearly articulated not only in the use of militant suffrage colors of purple, white and gold but also in the two banners the protesters displayed: one a replica of the suffrage banner,

“How long must women wait for liberty?” and one that made clear the corresponding current demand—“How long must women wait for equal rights?” One participant later recalled, “In that way the link between the two movements would be made clear. And the historical significance of the day for both movements would be emphasized.” 595

In Boston, the protest slogan for the strike, “Women’s Rights Day: The

Unfinished Struggle” again expressed the longer historical consciousness of the movement. In a special exhibit, photographs of women in history were hung alongside contemporary images of the new women’s movement with the phrase, “Women in revolt: the same movement, the same cause.” 596 Historical comparison also highlighted just how little progress women had made since winning the vote. Women in Boston declared, “On

August 26, 1920, women won the right to vote…But on August 26, 1970….women are still paid less than men for the same job, are still discriminated against by state and

595 Shirley Bernard, The Women’s Strike: August 26, 1970 (Ph.D. Dissertation, Union Graduate School, Antioch College, 1975), 14. Holdings of Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

596 Copy of Exhibit Photographs, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

235

federal laws. Still do not have day care centers. Are still portrayed by the media as decorated, mindless objects and women are still compelled to bear unwanted children.” 597

Also organized out of Boston was the Historical Caravan, a commemorative event that exemplifies the way second wave feminists created public rituals that connected past and present in political protest. Between August 22 and August 26, a caravan of women traveled throughout the region stopping at places of historical significance for women.

The coalition committee included Melnea Cass of the Women’s Service Club, theologian

Mary Daly, historian Elisabeth Dexter, Pat Knight, executive director Boston Y.W. C.A., scholar-activist Pauli Murray, Boston Regional Director US Women’s Bureau Dorothy

Pendergest, and historian Elizabeth Schlesinger. 598 In the words of organizer Ramona

Barth, the caravan honored a “day of dedication to America’s first feminists.” 599 Writer, long-time feminist, and early supporter of NOW, Barth, almost 60 years old in 1970, helped connect younger activists just beginning to search for feminist roots. Assisted by octogenarian, popular historical writer, and former suffragist Alma Lutz, the pair was well experienced with historic commemoration as Lutz had consulted on the 1948 centennial of the Seneca Falls Convention, the same event Barth had covered in The

Nation . Ironically, during the tour Barth and Lutz upheld a giant banner advertizing the book “Voices of the New Feminism.” 600 Youth was not a requirement for women’s

597 “Women’s Rights Day” Flyer, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

598 Coalition Committee, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

599 “Caravans and Commemoratives ,” The Journal of the Unitarian Universalist Association , Vol. 1 No. 12, Sept. 15, 1970, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

600 Grand Finale North Adams, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

236

liberation and the interplay between generations of activists forged connections across time.

The route taken by the historical caravan suggests the importance of a specifically feminist past on the political imagination of second wave activists. Beginning at the

Boston State House, in front of the statue of one of the movement’s earliest foremothers,

Anne Hutchinson, Betty Friedan, the so-called mother of the contemporary movement, articulated the demands of the women’s strike—from equal education and employment to free 24-hour day care and free abortions on demand. Hutchinson was lauded as a

“troublemaker” who “held early consciousness-raising sessions” to challenge women’s roles. Barth honored her memory, declaring, “we of women’s liberation say, ‘RIGHT

ON.’” 601 From the State House, the caravan travelled around Massachusetts continuing on to Margaret Fuller’s birthplace in Cambridge, Lexington to honor Abigail Adams and then Lucy Stone’s birthplace in Worcester. Afterwards, one car went to Nantucket to honor Lucretia Mott, one car went to North Adams to commemorate Anthony’s birthplace and another car went to Albany, NY to honor Stanton. The emphasis on individual women’s lives was yet another example of the search for “lost women.” The caravan highlights the significance of historical role models to second wave feminists.

In keeping with the emphasis on the suffrage anniversary, the caravan route followed a simplified map of women’s history, searching for role models for the new feminism but visiting mainly sites that honored white middle-class women’s rights pioneers. On one hand, the choice of honorees reflected the dominant narrative that had gained ascendency since the writing of the History of Woman Suffrage . Yet the

601 Ramona Barth, “Tribute to Anne Hutchinson,” Testimonial at Ann Hutchinson statue, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

237

organizers of the caravan, some of whom were African American, were conscious of race and the importance of honoring black women. Describing a photograph that depicted

Melnea Cass alongside Betty Friedan and the Governor of Massachusetts kicking off the caravan, Barth related that “I think the photos are important because of the black women in our caravan as much as the governer!” Barth hoped to emphasize black women’s history especially Sojourner Truth and Pauli Murray gave $25 to have an image of Truth blown up to make sure she was especially celebrated. 602 In addition, the lives of Fuller and Stanton illustrated the connection between abolition and women’s rights, a telling comparison for activists engaged with both the civil rights and women’s liberation movements. In honoring Fuller, Barth exclaimed, “Long before Gunnar Myrdal and black power focused attention on the oppressed you made the black-woman parallel.”

Tellingly, in 1970 the Margaret Fuller House was a black community center and the black women in the caravan especially related well with the people inside the house. 603

The caravan suggests the political possibility of public history, showing how sites of memory could be used as sites of protest. By choosing to organize around historical spaces, the caravan highlighted women’s place in the historic landscape. The caravan invoked the power of place for women activists. Like suffragists who believed Anthony

“across the years echoed yet,” during the final fight for suffrage, second wave activists similarly found inspiration from the past. In Albany, Barth spoke to Stanton across the years, commenting that “you felt ‘trapped’ long before Betty Friedan put her finger on the problem.” Barth continued, “We of Women’s Liberation today no longer sigh and

602 “I think these photos are important” document, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

603 “At the Margaret Fuller House,” document, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

238

groan, Liz. Like you, we rage and act. Thank you for your role model.” 604 During the dedication at the Albany Statehouse in honor of Stanton, Barth objected that the site of the Seneca Falls Convention was now a gas station signifying the lack of respect given to women’s historic landmarks. But Barth applauded that the mahogany table upon which

Stanton wrote the Declaration of Sentiments was in the Smithsonian. 605

Attention to history during the Women’s Strike for Equality was not only pomp and ceremony. While inspirational for the activists involved, it was hoped the sense of the past would give the strike a veneer of respectability in the eyes of the public. As one organizer in Philadelphia revealed, “This isn’t a bra-burning male-hating affair…We will present a positive image of women’s liberation and rights and not all this sensationalism.” 606 In contract to the more radical and sensational Miss America protests, the Women’s Strike for Equality was meant to give the emerging women’s movement legitimacy and focused more on the demands of liberal feminists.

Historic commemoration or not, the demands of present-day feminists—job equality, free day-care and free abortions—were beyond the pale for many Americans.

Counter-protests were held that demonstrated the strong opposition evolving against the women’s movement. The protest and celebration made clear how difficult it was to ascribe feminist meaning to women’s history as not all women agreed with the politics being associated with the commemoration. Most notably, in Los Angeles, the organization, Happiness of Womanhood (HOW) made clear that “women’s libbers” did

604 Ramona Barth, “Elizabeth Cady Stanton,” Tribute Albany State House, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

605 Ibid.

606 “Lib Strike Activities Revealed,” by Joe Nicholson, Jr. Los Angeles Times , August 25, 1970, pg. F3.

239

not speak for all women. 607 In New York City women from MOM/WOW held a

“Women’s Preserve Femininity Day,” declaring “Men our Masters, Women our

Wonders,” the slogan for which the group was named.608 The following year on the 51 st anniversary of suffrage HOW held a small “satin pillow” rally. Instead of demanding women’s rights to commemorate the Nineteenth Amendment, HOW celebrated traditional womanhood, using satin pillows to symbolize the relaxation women could enjoy as housewives. 609 Women’s history often functioned to support progressive women’s politics but from the nineteenth century onwards, more conservative women have taken issue with feminist narratives of women’s history and constructed their own meanings from women’s past when fashioning their political and social positions.

Many long-standing women’s reform organizations with middlebrow or more conservative politics were similarly alarmed by the women’s liberation movement. The new connection between women’s history and second wave feminism was problematic and most such groups chose not to participate in the nationwide commemoration of the

Nineteenth Amendment spearheaded by second wave feminists. 610 For instance, Mrs.

Saul Schary, executive secretary and forthcoming president of the 23 million-member

National Council of Women wondered since so many women’s liberationists “are just so unattractive” if “they’re completely well.” She objected, “There’s no discrimination

607 Lee Dye, “‘Women’s Lib’ Marchers Greeted by Cheers and Jeers,” Los Angeles Times , August 27, 1970, pg. 1.

608 Freda Leinwand, photograph, “Anti-Women’s Rights Demonstration, New York, August 26, 1970, Folder 2, Freda Leinwand Photographs, unprocessed collection, SL.

609 Jean Murphy, “Lib Forces Disrupt ‘Satin Pillow’ Rally; Trio Denied Permission to Speak” Los Angeles Times , August 27, 1971, pg. D4.

610 Lacey Fosburgh, “Traditional Groups Prefer to Ignore Women’s Lib,” New York Times , August 26, 1970, pg. 44.

240

against women like they say there is” because gender roles were natural and could not be blamed on men or society. 611 Mrs. Joe Chittenden, director of research for the General

Federation of Women’s Clubs (GFWC) commented, “do they really think the American woman is oppressed? And chained to the home? The idea frankly embarrasses me.” 612

Conflict between older women’s organizations and the new feminism was evident in the historical caravan. The procession ended in Adams, Massachusetts where a ceremony, organized by the League of Women Voters, was held for the new women’s rights stamp. The stamp itself made the connection between past and present clear: alongside suffragists of the past was pictured a voting woman of 1970. The League was celebrating its fiftieth anniversary alongside commemorating the Nineteenth Amendment.

However, Barth complained that women’s liberation was ignored during the commemoration that celebrated more traditional women’s organizing over more radical critique of women’s equality. She noted, “Ours was a voice crying in the wilderness here with the League of Women Voters having their day. However it was a voice.” 613

The protests and counter protests held on Women’s Equality Day suggest the need for caution when automatically linking women’s history with feminism. Some groups such as the DAR, the GFWC, the LWV, the National Council of Women, the National

Federation of Business and Professional Women’s Clubs (NFBPW), and the Woman’s

Christian Temperance Union, had long taken interest in promoting and celebrating women’s history, often commemorating pioneer foremothers or great women leaders

611 Ibid.

612 Ibid.

613 “The Grand Finale,” document, Folder 12, Box 6, Shirley Bernard Papers, SL.

241

such as Anthony. Many of these women positioned themselves in contrast to the younger, more radical feminists. Lucille Shriver, director of the NFBPW which was founded in

1919 and had 177, 500 members in 1970, stated, “We’re going to be dignified and ladylike. We’re going to stay on the job and continue working in our established way to improve women’s status. We’re not exhibitionists, and we don’t carry signs.” 614 The tension between defining women’s history versus feminist history that had begun with previous generations, intensified with women’s liberation, opening the question of who gets to claim women’s past alongside changing conceptions of American womanhood.

The suffrage commemoration thus highlights generational divides among women activists. As a reporter for the New York Times noted, a generation gap existed between second wave feminists and their mothers “who let the revolution go.” Young activists skipped the previous generation and looked further into the past for inspiration. They revered instead “the founding grandmothers and maiden granddaughters who have languished for nearly half a century in the historical garret.” 615 Therefore, older women’s relationship to the new feminism was not always straightforward. These women often struggled to reconcile their activism with the radical sensibilities of women’s liberation.

Some women like Dorothy Kenyon, who spoke at the 1948 Seneca Falls Centennial and who was still practicing law at age 82, recognized that second wave feminists were reinventing the wheel. She recalled, “We did all those things. I went swimming nude and

614 Lacey Fosburgh, “Traditional Groups Prefer to Ignore Women’s Lib,” New York Times , August 26, 1970, pg. 44.

615 Marylin Bender, “Liberation Yesterday—The Roots of the Feminist Movement,” New York Times , August 21, 1970, pg. 41.

242

worse things than that.” But Kenyon pointed to the difference between the generations,

“we did them privately. They do that publicly and I think that’s a mistake.” 616

However, in some respects, the commemoration bridged the generations. Women such as Barth and Lutz who were active in women’s rights during the 1940s and 1950s continued to organize with the advent of women’s liberation. Older women reformers who actively supported the new movement testified to the longevity of the feminist cause.

Alice Paul and her cohort had handed over the ERA to the new generation of feminists. 617

Ironically, Paul, a master of harnessing history for political gain and continuing with her single-minded quest for the ERA, did not want to look back on the anniversary, stating

“I’d rather talk about now. I think it’s a good idea to forget the past.” 618

The conflict between women’s groups during the suffrage commemoration echoed tensions that had been evident in the last significant women’s rights anniversary, the centennial of the Seneca Falls Convention in 1948. That celebration was a largely unsuccessful and apolitical event due in part to the antifeminist climate of the postwar era and the lack of a mass women’s movement. During that event radical voices had to fight to find a space in the commemoration. 619 The celebration and protest in 1970 represented a tipping of the scale in the opposite political and social direction. That the anniversary garnered such attention testified that a new feminist movement had come of age.

616 Ibid.

617 Lelia J. Rupp and Verta Taylor, Survival in the Doldrums: the American Women’s Rights Movement , 1945 to the 1960s (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987), 184.

618 Marylin Bender, “Liberation Yesterday—The Roots of the Feminist Movement,” New York Times , August 21, 1970, pg. 41.

619 See chapter four of this dissertation.

243

While historians have recognized the importance of the Women’s Strike for

Equality, the fact that it was held on the fiftieth anniversary of the Nineteenth

Amendment has mainly been seen as incidental. But while symbolic, the choice of day was significant. Holding the event on a historic date marked the beginning of a wide- spread strategy of feminist groups consciously using the power of the past to inspire activism and call attention to women’s issues in the present. Holding rallies to commemorate August 26, what became known as “Women’s Equality Day,” became a yearly tradition of the second wave of feminism, used to bring attention to the ERA and a whole program for women’s rights. Due to the renewed attention given to the anniversary, and pressure from women politicians such as Bella Abzug and the National

Women’s Political Caucus, in 1971, Congress officially recognized August 26 as

Women’s Equality Day. Building on their work during the Women’s Strike for Equality, throughout the 1970s, feminists continued to rely on invented traditions to construct a movement history that looked back to the past in an effort to create social change in the present.

“Our Heritage is Our Power”: Invented Traditions and the Making of Movement History

Building on the success of Women’s Equality Day, from the late 1960s well into the 1980s, feminists marked historical occasions, opening up spaces where a feminist identity could be affirmed and political ideals debated. Historic celebrations have allowed

Americans to construct a history of their own that defines their place in a collective past and when feminists did not find their history reflected in traditional national holidays,

244

they invented their own traditions. 620 Activists created a feminist calendar of historic dates used for both political protest and solidifying a women’s culture. Specifically, the organizing of political protests in memory of suffragist foremothers, the commemoration of International Women’s Day (IWD) along with the symbolic use of Seneca Falls during the International Women’s Year Conference in Houston, Texas highlight the power of the past in shaping political organizing among second wave feminists. From Susan B.

Anthony’s Birthday on February 15 to International Women’s Day on March 8, these red letter days were highlighted in popular works such as the Women’s Heritage Calendar and became powerful formats for spreading feminist ideas, bringing attention to women’s issues and garnering publicity.

In celebrating Anthony’s birthday, second wave feminists were following a nineteenth-century tradition first begun during Anthony’s lifetime and continued by women of the NWP into the 1960s. Interestingly, some of those early celebrations were used to raise money for the suffrage campaign. NOW continued the tradition and capitalized on the history by using Anthony’s birthday as a fundraiser. As the invitation for a 1970 event declared, “Come to my 150 th Birthday Party…and help carry on my life’s work.” 621 Feminists in the 1970s used Anthony’s birthday to make claims similar to previous generations of women’s rights advocates by pointing out how the United States honored its men but not its women. One cartoon pictured Anthony on a paper one dollar

620 Matthew Dennis, Red, White and Blue Letter Days: An American Calendar (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002), 1.

621 Invite, Susan B. Anthony Birthday Party, February 15, 1970, Folder 6, Box 14, National Organization for Women: New York City Chapter Records (hereafter: NOW-NYC), Tamiment Library/Robert F. Wagner Labor Archives, Elmer Holmes Bobst Library, New York University Libraries, New York, NY (hereafter: NYU).

245

bill, saying “Forget George,” alongside a caption “Celebrate My Birthday.” 622 As a symbol, Anthony represented the continuity of the feminist project. Second wave feminists often saw themselves as the embodiment of Anthony’s vision and committed themselves to finishing what she started. A flyer for a Women’s Equality Day celebration made this point with the exclamation, “Susan B. Lives!” 623

That Anthony was perhaps the most popular feminist historical symbol is reflected in the fact that she was chosen to be the first woman depicted on U.S. currency.

In 1979 Anthony’s face graced the silver dollar, demonstrating how the feminist search for a usable past was beginning to transform the national consciousness. Like women’s rights advocates in the 1930s who worked to put Anthony on U.S. stamps, placing

Anthony’s likeness on money was the realization of the feminist goal to have women leaders recognized in civic memorials. Such recognition of women’s history worked to create a new image of America inclusive of women’s political and public roles. As Frank

Gasparro, the engraver of the coin summarized, the Anthony dollar was significant because it was “part of a social movement. This new dollar is more than a coin; it’s an issue.” 624 Yet, the selection of Anthony revealed the class and race bias that privileged

Anthony as a universal feminist icon. The subsequent unpopularity and poor circulation of the Anthony coin (due in part because Anthony was relegated to a large and bulky coin) prevented the full recognition of a woman in the pantheon of great Americans.

622 Memorandum American Friends Service Committee, February 7, 1979, Folder 7, Box 104, Women’s Action Alliance Records, SSC.

623 Invite, Moving Forward Party, August 25, 1972, Folder 8, Box 14, NOW-NYC, NYU.

624 Ed Reiter, “The Man Behind the Susan B. Anthony Dollar,” New York Times , July 1, 1979, pg. D38.

246

Another suffragist foremother, Alice Paul, master of using historical symbols such as Seneca Falls and Anthony to promote the ERA, became herself a living symbol of the amendment, embodying the long history of the struggle for equal rights. 625 But it was in death that Paul was used the most strategically. On Women’s Equality Day, August 26,

1977, around six weeks after Paul passed away, activists staged a demonstration in

Washington D.C., modeled after the 1913 suffrage march. Like the earlier parade, protesters were asked to wear white and don sashes in traditional suffrage colors of purple, white and gold. While they commemorated the anniversary of the Nineteenth

Amendment and honored the living suffragists and the recently deceased Paul, the purpose of the rally was to garner support for the ERA. 626 The former New York

Congresswoman Bella Abzug, in her trademark hat, proclaimed “Alice Paul was a troublemaker. She was not [men’s idea] of a lady. Yet she was the mother of us all. She had the outrageous idea that women should be allowed to vote.” 627 In this eulogy, the imagery echoed descriptions of Anthony, Paul’s own inspiration. 628 Yet another rally was held to honor Paul at the 1977 International Women’s Year Conference in Houston,

Texas where Dolores Huerta of the United Farm Workers, Luz Gutierrez of La Raza

625 Paul first introduced the ERA in 1923, unveiled at Seneca Falls. See chapter three of this dissertation.

626 Marjorie Hunter, “Carter Gives Support as Women March in Capitol for the E.R.A.,” New York Times , August 27, 1977, pg. 8.

627 Ibid.

628 Anthony is often described as “the mother of us all,” as in the Virgil Thomson/Gertrude Stein opera about Anthony of the same title.

247

Unida Party and other feminists such as Kate Millett and Flo Kennedy attended the event. 629

Remembering Paul helped inspire activists to keep working for the ERA despite the obstacles. The amendment became a project of memory and politics, connecting second wave activists with the work of feminist foremothers who had gone before them.

One campaign button depicted a drawing of women dressed in early twentieth-century costume holding an ERA sign with the caption “…it’s about time!” 630 The full scope of

Paul veneration occurred on July 9, 1978 when the Alice Paul Memorial March was held in D.C. on the first anniversary of Paul’s death. The commemoration provided the opportunity for one of the largest women’s rights demonstrations held up to that time with over 300 women’s groups attending. The rally was planned to garner support for the

ERA at a crucial point. By 1978, the ERA, which had seemed unstoppable, was still three states short of passing and the seven year deadline for ratification was running out. It was hoped that the event would convince legislators that support for the ERA was strong in order to extend the deadline. 631 Paul as icon symbolized the need to keep pushing for ideas that might at first seem radical and unachievable.

While middle-class figures such as Anthony and Paul were popular symbols in political protest, many second wave feminists found in the past working-class heroines.

Due to rapid production of books on women’s history, this often overlooked labor history was being rediscovered alongside the total breadth of women’s history. For example, the

629 “Rally Honors Alice Paul,” Daily Breakthrough , Saturday, Nov. 19, 1977, National Commission on the Observance of International Women’s Year Records (hereafter: IWY), unprocessed collection, SL.

630 “E.R.A....it’s about time!” button, National Woman’s Party Button Collection, NWP.

631 Leslie Bennetts, “Supporters of the Equal Rights Amendment Gathering for March in Washington Sunday,” New York Times , July 7, 1978, pg. A10.

248

history of women’s demonstrations such as the New York Shirtwaist Strike of 1909 and the 1912 textile strike in Lawrence, Massachusetts provided important precedents. Over the decade a spade of women-centered documentaries brought this history to a wider audience. Union Maids (1976) showcased the role of three women in the CIO labor movements in the 1930s, With Babes and Banners (1978) explored the formation of the

United Auto Workers, focusing on the contributions of the Women’s Emergency Brigade and Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter (1980) used interviews of five women to document women factory workers during World War II. This filmmaking resurrected these largely forgotten heroines of the recent past to make vital comparisons with the current women’s labor movement that helped to further inspire this activism.

But the most visible sign of the feminist search for labor history can be seen in the reintroduction of International Women’s Day celebrations. Originally a socialist holiday in the United States, IWD began in 1909 to observe women’s rights and affirm the class dimension of woman suffrage. 632 As late as 1970, American newspapers reported that the holiday was “celebrated chiefly in socialist countries.” 633 But within a few years, that would change and the event would again be observed in the United States despite the communist associations of the event amidst the Cold War. In 1969, feminist Laura X revived the celebration in Berkeley, California after learning about IWD from Old Left

Communist activists. Word of the celebration spread and in the 1970s, women’s liberation groups all over the country recognized March 8 as a feminist holiday. 634

632 Mari Jo Buhle, Women and American Socialism , 1870-1920 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1981), 223-223.

633 James F. Clarity, “Soviet Women Get Flowers, No Day Off,” New York Times , March 9, 1970, pg. 5.

634 Weigand, 152-153.

249

Second wave feminists reinvented this “invented tradition” from the early twentieth century and used the event to call attention to a range of contemporary women’s issues. Unlike in communist countries where the day was used as a sort of

Mother’s Day or Valentine’s Day for women, perhaps more in line with the early twentieth-century socialist custom of IWD, the American feminist observance was purely political. Some feminists used the day to celebrate sisterhood and reaffirm solidarity among all women. Other activists saw IWD as an opportunity to protest injustice, as for example, when members of Bread and Roses decided to take over a Harvard University building and create one of the first women’s centers in the United States on International

Women’s Day, 1971. Similarly, in 1974, demonstrators chose the date to “make trouble for the sexists New York Times ” by picketing in front of the Times Building because of the paper’s poor coverage of women’s news and its refusal to use “Ms.” as a title. 635

Not surprisingly given the roots of the holiday, many IWD demonstrations focused on women’s labor issues. One such observance sponsored by the NYC Coalition of Labor Union Women & the New York Chapter of NOW made clear the historical continuities of women’s labor struggles. The flyer for the event cited two important precedents in the legendary March 8, 1857 demonstration in which women garment workers supposedly spontaneously protested the 12-hour work day, low wages and unfair work conditions and March 8, 1908 when women needle trade workers marched for the

8-hour work day, woman suffrage and an end to child-labor. 636 Underneath those dates

635 “Gazette News,” Ms . June 1974, Vol. II. No. 12, pg. 22.

636 Information about the event on March 8, 1980 is taken from the flyer, “Celebrate International Women’s Day,” Folder 42, Box 103, Women’s Action Alliance Records, SSC. For more on the history behind the myth of the 1857 protest, see Temma Kaplan, “On the Socialist Origins of International Women’s Day, Feminist Studies 11, no. 1 (1985): 163-171.

250

and descriptions read, “March 8, 1980: The political challenge facing women continues...” The program included a tribute to the victims of the 1911 Triangle

Shirtwaist fire and speakers and performances on unionizing the unorganized, reproductive freedoms, the ERA, affirmative action, Third World women’s struggles and peace as a women’s issue. The hopes for the day were expressed in a poem:

Our history has been stolen from us. Our foremothers died from overwork, in childbirth, from industrial poison and fire. Our geniuses organized despite their disenfranchisement, the company spy system, the blacklist, police brutality. We must discover a past that reveals their contributions. We must create a future adequate to our needs, our aspirations.

This poem powerfully speaks to the importance of the past to the feminist imagination in inspiring and sustaining women’s activism. Like the Foremother’s Dinners celebrated by suffragists in the 1890s, invented traditions enabled activists to create ritual observances that helped maintain their activism over many years. While symbolic, such celebrations were an important aspect of women’s liberation that allowed feminists to turn popular history-making into political protest.

Time and again the feminist usable past was put to the test of unifying American women. It was hoped that a shared heritage could help unite activists. This desire was especially evident during the 1977 International Women’s Year Conference, a landmark event of the American women’s movement, held between November 18 and 21 in

Houston, Texas and attended by 2,000 delegates and 18,000 additional observers. The conference originated out of U.S. women’s participation in the United Nations sponsored conference honoring the International Year for Women in 1975. Because congressional guidelines mandated that the conference be broadly inclusive and provided funding for

251

low-income women, the Houston conference represented the first time such a large cross- section of American women had met under federal sanction to discuss concerns about women. 637 As Presiding Officer of the National Commission on the Observance of

International Women’s Year (IWY), Bela Abzug declared in her welcoming remarks to participants: “You are part of history-in-the-making.” As Abzug noted, this historic achievement was made possible because “Women are on the move all over this nation,” making the women’s movement too diverse and widespread to ignore. 638 Houston was a momentous opportunity to solidify the women’s movement and enact concrete change.

With so many diverse groups of women making up the conference, and the movement as a whole, an important aspect of the International Women’s Year

Conference was showcasing women’s force through a unified movement. One critical means of achieving and presenting this unity was through depictions of women’s history.

As one participant in the Utah commission commented, “Perhaps in the study of history, if no where else, we can find a way to bring ourselves together.” 639 History was used to inspire activists by placing their struggles and achievements within a longer trajectory of feminist activism and to showcase to the rest of the country a cohesive movement. The event was launched in a symbolic gesture that gave a nod to this history: a relay began on

September 29, 1977, from Seneca Falls, New York to Houston, Texas. Millicent Brady

Moore, a descendant of Susan Quinn Brown, an attendee of the 1848 women’s rights

637 Evans, 140.

638 Bela Abzug, “Welcome to the National Women’s Conference,” printed in the program, American Women on the Move , Carton 1, Shelah Leader Papers, unprocessed collection, SL.

639 Remark made by Louise Knauer, visiting professor of women’s history, University of Utah, during the June Utah State Meeting, quoted in “Brief summary of the Workshop presentation: ‘Women in Utah History: Participants and Preservers,’” IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

252

convention, handed the lighted torch to the first runner. The runners would cover a distance of 2,610 miles and would carry the torch with them as they ran. 640 The relay, beginning as it did in Seneca Falls, the symbolic birthplace of American feminism, along with popular pins with the slogan, “Seneca Falls 1848—Houston, 1977,” made the connection clear. The conference would be the Seneca Falls Convention for this next generation of women activists.

The women in Houston were there to “move history forward,” by reclaiming the forgotten past, by pushing beyond the limitations of the previous women’s movement and enacting more widespread and long-lasting change. The runners carried with them a new

Declaration of Sentiments entitled, “…To Form a More Perfect Union …” written by

Commissioner Maya Angelou. The document was signed by thousands of delegates. The declaration responded to the past while outlining future needs of the movement. As the statement began, “We American women view our history with equanimity. We allow the positive achievement to inspire us and the negative omissions to teach us.” 641 This manifesto was typical of the views about women’s history prevalent in Houston. The examination of the past provided inspiration that individual women, like those women assembled in Houston, could enable change. When Angelou declared, “We recognize the accomplishments of our sisters, those famous and hallowed women of history and those unknown and unsung women whose strength gave birth to our strength,” she expressed

640 “The Torch Relay,” from National Commission on the Observance of International Women’s Year, The Spirit of Houston: The First National Women's Conference (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, March 1978), pp. 193-203, available online at Women and Social Movements in the United States , 1600-2000 , http://womhist.alexanderstreet.com/dp59/doc16.htm.

641 Maya Angelou, “To Form a More Perfect Union,” 1977, from National Commission on the Observance of International Women’s Year, The Spirit of Houston: The First National Women's Conference (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978), p. 195, available online at Women and Social Movements in the United States, 1600-2000 , http://womhist.alexanderstreet.com/dp59/doc17.htm.

253

the optimism that anyone could make history that characterized much of the momentum and energy of the International Women’s Year Conference. 642

Throughout the conference, activists constructed a history that was determinedly hopeful—a narrative of women’s past full of unfinished issues that could be resolved by this generation. Susan B. Anthony II, the grandniece of the women’s rights pioneer, who was involved in the 1948 Seneca Falls Centennial, was also active in Houston. She had triumphantly walked the last mile of the opening torch relay with her arms linked with feminist leaders, Bella Abzug, Betty Friedan and Billie Jean King. In a letter to her mother, Anthony related how the power of the past helped shaped debate during the

Women’s Year Conference. During heated discussions over whether to endorse the ERA,

Anthony began her comments by simply saying, “I am Susan B. Anthony.” She recalled how the crowd of over 4,000 people erupted into cheers with that pronouncement.

Anthony continued her talk by stating that she “felt the ERA was the fulfillment of Aunt

Susan’s life work – and that IN this battle too-FAILURE IS IMPOSSIBLE.” She confided to her mother, “So it was a great moment – of history – For as I said in my talk I truly felt her [Anthony’s] benign spirit hovering over the coliseum where we met.” 643

History was everywhere in Houston. The gavel NAWSA presented to Susan B.

Anthony in 1896 was used to open and close the conference. 644 The official briefing book for the conference was meant to assist journalists by dispelling “myths about women”

642 Ibid.

643 Susan B. Anthony II to her mother, November 22, 1977, Folder 90, Box 4, Dr. Susan B. Anthony Papers, UR.

644 This gavel was a replica of the one given to Anthony at the first International Conference of Women in 1888 (also the 40th anniversary of the Seneca Falls Convention), on loan from the Smithsonian Institution November 20, 1977, Daily Bulletin , Carton 1, Shelah Leader Papers, unprocessed collection, SL.

254

and offering reference in historical and factual data because the “facts of women’s lives have remained for many years hidden from history.” 645 The souvenir program, American

Women on the Move, was characteristic of the use of historical rhetoric and imagery. The cover featured a photo of a woman marching with an American flag in a 1910 woman suffrage parade in New York City. The following page showcased photos of nine suffrage pins, including “votes for women” slogans and images of heroines, Lucy Stone,

Anna Howard Shaw and Susan B. Anthony. The program included the “Declaration of

American Women, 1977,” which like Maya Angelou’s “…To Form a More Perfect

Union …” was a contemporary homage and response to the 1848 Declaration of

Sentiments. “In more than a century of struggle from Seneca Falls 1848 to Houston 1977, we have progressed from being non-persons and slaves,” the document declared. “But despite some gains made in the past 200 years, our dream of equality is still withheld from us and millions of women still face a daily reality of discrimination, limited opportunities and economic hardship.” Summarizing many of the goals of the conference, the declaration outlines how “Man-made barriers, laws, social customs and prejudices continue to keep a majority of women in an inferior position without full control of our lives and bodies.” 646 This modern document of rights was preceded in the booklet by an example of a historical precedent of the Declaration of Sentiments issued at the Seneca

Falls Convention, 129 years earlier.

645 “Introduction,” The National Women’s Conference Official Briefing Book , IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

646 “Declaration of American Women, 1977,” printed in the program, American Women on the Move , Carton 1, Shelah Leader Papers, unprocessed collection, SL.

255

Seneca Falls was a favored symbol of the meeting not only because it was envisioned as the birthplace of women’s rights in 1848 but also because the ERA was unveiled there in 1923—creating a direct connection between Seneca Falls and the goals of the modern movement. Building on the symbolism begun with the torch relay, the stage area was called “Seneca Falls South.” The program declared, “Seneca Falls South commemorates the history of the women’s movement. It will reflect the energy and excitement which has been characteristic of the movement for more than 100 years.” 647

The stage featured a wide variety ranging from self defense classes to feminist art to talks by Jean Stapleton and Marlo Thomas. Seneca Falls South was home to The Women’s

Library (featuring literature by and about women) and presentations on “Finding Our

History: Studies in American Women” and “The Politics of Women's Studies.” 648

The attention to history was not simply symbolic—much of it was mandated. One of the goals Congress set forth for the conference was the task of recognizing the contributions of women to the country’s development. To meet that federal stipulation, state commissions that preceded the Houston conference closely examined history as an important component for defining current perceptions of women’s roles. As Virginia

Steward of the Midwest Women’s Historical Collection commented for the Illinois State

Conference, “Women have been largely omitted from traditional written accounts of

American history, resulting in stereotypes of women’s achievements and capabilities which have limited women’s self-awareness and denied them real opportunity.” 649

647 Seneca Falls South schedule, printed in the Daily Breakthrough , Saturday, Nov. 18, 1977, IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

648 Ibid.

649 Final Report of the Illinois International Women’s Year Conference, p. 21, IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

256

The state conferences provided important motivation and financial resources for supporting local women’s history, and most significantly, beginning an awareness for the need of public history initiatives. In this way, IWY state commissions functioned as publicity and infrastructural support for the burgeoning popular women’s history movement. Around the country, IWY state meetings held panels and lectures on women’s history, organized history and art exhibits, screened documentaries, and sponsored slide presentations and performances that recognized women’s contributions, especially at the local level. The Michigan Committee, for example, commissioned a booklet of 25 women from the state who made important contributions to history. The publication was made widely available to the public and to libraries state-wide in order that the work sponsored by IWY would become a lasting tribute. 650 As part of the celebration, the New

Jersey State Library held an exhibit, “New Jersey’s First Feminists” and the Missouri

State Conference included slide shows on “St. Louis Women in History and “Black

Women in Missouri History.” 651 Illinois sponsored an International Women’s Year Oral

History Project in order to make “Illinois history more inclusive,” by capturing the voices of women participating in the conference. 652 In Utah, the local history journal, Utah

History Quarterly , prepared a special women’s issue. 653

650 Final Report of the Michigan International Women’s Year Conference, p. 7, IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

651 Final Report of the New Jersey International Women’s Year Conference, p. 2, and Missouri State Meeting Program, IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

652 Final Report of the Illinois International Women’s Year Conference, pp. 20-21, IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

653 Proposal, Women in Utah History Task Force, p. 4, IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

257

Whereas states such as Utah were bitterly divided over issues such as the ERA, during the State Meeting, history functioned as an important unifying factor and in the process helped create a dialogue about the important historic contributions of women.

The Women in Utah History Task Force was organized to investigate important questions: “is a valid inclusion of women in the written and taught record a basic right?

Does the neglect or the inaccurate portrayal of women in Utah history adversely affect their sense of responsibility for the collective good and justice of all individuals? Does the depiction of a Utah past without women provide rationalizations for a Utah future which does not involve women at all levels, in all roles?” 654 Discussions focused around the history of women in family and religious life, women and economic changes and women in politics, the professions, and in the arts and letters. 655 The task force made a push to empower women to write and collect their own history by holding a workshop on how to use oral history, how to care for material culture artifacts, how to donate materials to archives and how to use personal documents and photographs in the writing of history. 656 Because of such meetings, from Utah to New York, women all around the country were discovering local history as part of International Women’s Year.

Before International Women’s Year, Gloria Steinem recalled worrying whether

“we could make a history that was our own.” However, after the conclusion of the conference, she learned from Houston that women could indeed make history by celebrating diversity and enabling social change as a group. Yet, the message of

654 Proposal, Women in Utah History Task Force, p. 2, IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

655 Utah State International Women’s Year, May 20, 1977 Memo, p.1, IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

656 “Brief summary of the Workshop presentation: ‘Women in Utah History: Participants and Preservers,’” IWY, unprocessed collection, SL.

258

cooperation and empowerment gleaned from Houston had been a difficult one to achieve and it was not guaranteed that it would be remembered. Through uncovering women’s history, feminist activists were extremely aware of how easily history could be lost from memory. As Steinem questioned, “Will this lesson be lost again?” 657

Conclusion

When Judy Chicago proclaimed, “Our heritage is our power,” she articulated the vital role women’s history played in shaping the movement culture of second wave feminism. Limiting the politics of women’s history solely to academia obscures the ways in which countless individual activists searched, embraced and wrestled with historical questions of women’s past to shed light on women’s present condition. The surge of interest in women’s history during women’s liberation suggests how the movement created the beginnings of a popular history of women, highlighted, for example, by the marketing of the “Herstory” game.” Unveiled for the United States Bicentennial, and developed by an artist, a teacher and historians, in the late 1970s, Ms . and women’s organizations sold “Herstory,” a board game to “learn about women, about us—about you.” The advertisement proclaimed, “Order ‘Herstory’…and start filling in the historical blanks for yourself, your children, your friends, your community.” One could “discover the facts about women’s lives that you never learned in school: you’ll discover women’s history in much the same way women lived it. You move forward and backward according to whether womankind progressed or lost ground during each period in the nation’s chronology.” Participants could learn about “ordinary” women of various classes

657 Steinem, 291.

259

and their roles as workers, homemakers and creators as well as ‘great’ American women of all races who stood out as leaders.” One could learn about the struggle for equality through the development of legal rights, suffrage, ERA, dress reform and birth control as well as ‘ball and chain’ setbacks.” 658

The “Herstory” game and other forms of feminist-inspired popular women’s history produced during the women’s liberation movement stood in sharp contrast to other mainstream commercialized images of women’s history circulating in the wider culture, most notably, Virginia Slims ads that intoned to a generation of American women, “You’ve Come a Long Way, Baby!” 659 The advertising campaign capitalized on feminist themes, co-opting the interest in history and equality among women. The ads typically contrasted modern liberated women with women from the past who were oppressed by men (by not being able to smoke) until suffragists demanded their rights.

The ad campaign implies women already had all political rights and full social equality by equating women’s liberation with the freedom to smoke cigarettes. Modern women were so free they could now enjoy cigarettes made just for women. The use of history in the Virginia Slims ads affirmed the status quo by suggesting American women were, “the most privileged women in the world,” a sentiment strongly contested by second wave feminists who, in contrast, created a popular women’s history used instead to express the need for social change. 660

658 “Herstory” Advertisement, Folder –Smithsonian, Carton 1 and “Herstory” WC3C May 22, 1976, Folder – To file – WCTC, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

659 Philip Morris. “You’ve come a long way, baby,” 1976 can be viewed at http://tobaccodocuments.org/pollay_ads/Virg02.15.html.

660 Gloria Steinem, Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1983), 282 and 286.

260

Understanding that knowledge is indeed power, feminists fought to create a politics of empowerment through discovering a history of their own. As Gerda Lerner declared in 1979, “Women’s History is woman’s right—an indispensable heritage from which we can draw pride, comfort, courage and vision. It is a heritage to which we are entitled and which we will, at long last, no longer be denied.” 661 Thus when activists in the women’s liberation movement searched for “lost women” role models and established invented traditions in social protest they articulated the power of the past to shape the present. It testified to the renewed interest women had in knowing their collective past, especially the roots of feminist activism. So much so that when scholar Berenice Fisher critiqued the feminist emphasis on role models she was surprised at the many pained responses she received. She recalled that many colleagues were hurt by her criticism.

“Role models or heroic women had played an important part in these women’s liberation.

Why was I trying to invalidate their experiences?” 662

Acts of unearthing feminist foremothers had personal and political consequences for activists that enabled them to forge a feminist collective identity and build a grassroots women’s movement. For example, in 1979, Lerner organized The Summer

Institute in Women’s History at Sarah Lawrence which was an important feminist educational experiment, “designed to facilitate the integration of women’s history into the programs and consciousness of women’s groups.” 663 The Institute was based upon the belief that women’s history was necessary for women to understand their collective past

661 “Women’s History Woman’s Rights,” by Gerda Lerner. The Baltimore Sun , Thursday, October 18, 1979, Gerda Lerner Papers, Folder 17, Box 17, SL.

662 Fisher, “Wandering in the Wilderness,” 213.

663 Barbara Omolade to Laverne Love, January 23, 1979, Women’s Action Alliance Collection, Folder 2, Box 101, SSC.

261

and common heritage and was a major force in advocating for Women’s History Month.

As one woman who attended the institute reflected how the experience changed her consciousness, “My lack of women’s history consciously and educationally was earth shattering. Once I realized I was capable of filling in the void, I became dedicated to spreading the word like a religious zealot…I am anxious to continue to learn …and enable women to care about their history.” 664 As this example demonstrates, women activists forged political and personal meaning from engagement with historical politics.

The resulting success of second wave feminism in gaining historical visibility was due in part because the movement came of age during an era when African American, gay and lesbian, ethnic, and labor activists were similarly fighting for historical recognition. This change was part of a revival of progressive instrumentalism to “use history as a way of altering society.” 665 Rethinking the past had a profound impact on forging new conceptions of American self as well as feminist identity. The dual factors of having a powerful mass movement for women’s rights alongside a tidal wave of other social reform likewise working on transforming historical consciousness, enabled feminists in the 1970s to achieve more far reaching historical change than previous generations of women activists.

The search for feminist origins and the rediscovery of a past hidden from history both inspired and challenged feminists in the 1960s and 1970s. Tensions evolved over academic versus popular history, between liberal and conservative women and between

664 Evaluation 1, Catholic woman between the age of 51 and 60, Women’s Action Alliance Collection, Folder 12, Box 101, SSC.

665 Carl N. Degler, “Remaking American History,” The Journal of American History 67, no. 1 (June 1980): 19.

262

feminists of different generations, races, classes and sexual orientations. The debates surrounding historical questions mirrored present divides among American feminists as divisions over class, race, sexuality and ideology challenged an imagined sisterhood both in the present and in history. Increased understanding of women’s difference occupied the women’s movement in the 1980s, raising important questions concerning power relations among women, influencing the writing and celebrating of women’s past. A re- examination of the popular roots of the modern search for a feminist past can serve as a reminder of both the political potential of women’s history and the inherent difficulties in creating an all-encompassing and unifying movement history.

This popular search for women’s past also helped transform the historical landscape of the nation. As will be discussed in the following chapter, in large part because of the demands for women’s history that proliferated in the 1970s, there emerged a gendered public history. Since the women’s liberation movement, women’s historic sites have been preserved in higher numbers, museums have begun regularly featuring exhibits on women’s history (with a proposed National Women’s History Museum in the works) and Women’s History Month is celebrated in schools and libraries around the country. However, the waning of widespread observance of many feminist invented traditions contributed to the weakening of a vibrant feminist identity and to an overall lack of a collective memory of women’s history. Without a mass women’s movement to give political meaning to this usable past, does women’s history run the risk of becoming too touristy, too quaint or too academic?

263

CHAPTER 6 DEMANDING RECOGNITION IN OUR HISTORY: WOMEN, PUBLIC MEMORY AND NATIONAL HERITAGE SINCE 1976

When Abigail Adams penned her now famous statement in 1776 to “remember the ladies,” she could not have imagined that she would be memorialized for posterity in a twenty-first century civic sculpture. When the Boston Women’s Memorial, composed of statues of Adams along with slave and poet Phillis Wheatley and abolitionist and suffragist Lucy Stone, was installed on the Commonwealth Avenue Mall in Boston in

2003, the statues of the women joined the pantheon of heroic men that graced Boston’s rich historic landscape. Both in content and in form, the memorial deconstructed notions of traditional memorials that served to overturn gendered assumptions about the past.

Instead of standing on pedestals in masculine “heroic idleness,” the women were depicted using their pedestals for work, suggesting that women were active makers of history who had long since come off their symbolic pedestals. 666 By highlighting women’s contributions to American history, the Boston Women’s Memorial represented an important new direction in including women in the national heritage.

This chapter explores how coalitions of women activists and public historians began working with state and federal agencies to ensure that the United States would preserve the history of American women. The Boston Women’s Memorial and other similar monuments attempted to make women’s history more widely visible. The three

666 Judith Dupre, Monuments: America’s History in Art and Memory (New York: Random House, 2007), 11.

264

case studies in this chapter—the effort to include women’s history in the Bicentennial, the fight to relocate the Portrait Monument , a statue of suffrage pioneers hidden from view since the 1920s to the Capitol Rotunda, and the establishment of the Women’s

Rights National Historical Park (WRNHP) in Seneca Falls, NY— were public history initiatives meant to integrate the history of women into national memory. The struggle to establish sites of memory sought to give permanence and value to women’s history.

This is a story about the successes and challenges of institutionalizing a gendered historical memory in the last decades of the twentieth century. Like earlier women searching for historical roots, second wave feminists found inspiration in feminist foremothers. And like their forebears, once second wave feminists uncovered hidden history, they demanded a place for it in the national narrative. The movement’s search for a usable past in the 1970s turned into a fight to create usable historical space in the 1980s and 1990s. Compared to movement history used in political protest and consciousness- raising, public history was meant to introduce women’s history to non-activists.

Certainly, from the start of women’s liberation, activists had promoted public history. For instance, during the 1970 Women’s Strike for Equality, feminists placed plaques around

NYC to designate spots they felt statues of feminist pioneers should be placed and a historical caravan travelled throughout Massachusetts bringing visibility to women’s historical sites. 667 However, while still a political endeavor, the emphasis shifted from discovery of women’s history to preservation of that past.

In the 1980s, less than 3 percent of the nation’s two thousand national historic landmarks highlighted women’s history. In order to increase women’s visibility in the

667 Linda Charlton, “Women Seeking Equality March on 5th Ave. Today,” New York Times , August 26, 1970, pg. 44.

265

memorial landscape, activists helped establish new national historic sites such as the

Eleanor Roosevelt National Historic Site which President Jimmy Carter signed into law in 1977 to create a historic site “to commemorate . . . the life and work of an outstanding woman in American History.” 668 And in 1982, despite initial opposition from the

National Park Service, Congress established the Mary McLeod Bethune Council House

National Historic Site. 669 To further rectify women’s lack of representation, in 1989, a group of women’s historians organized the Women’s History Landmark Project. In its first few years in existence, the group recommended fifty landmarks for preservation including the building of the former Triangle Shirtwaist Factory and “Paulsdale,” the home of Alice Paul. Over the next few years, the number of sites devoted to women nearly doubled but still only accounted for 5 percent of all national historic landmarks. 670

Ironically, initiatives for memorials accelerated only after the movement’s strength began waning. Like the writing of the History of Woman Suffrage after

Reconstruction, and the efforts to memorialize Anthony on Rushmore and create the

WCWA in the 1930s, the public history projects in the 1980s and 1990s suggest the importance activists placed on preserving history in times of transition. When energies were not focused on organizing, fighting for historical recognition offered an important vehicle for women’s activism when feminists needed to regroup but maintain visibility.

An examination of a gendered public history helps to locate women’s history at the center of debate about American heritage and citizenship in the late twentieth century.

668 http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/presidents/eleanor_roosevelt_valkill.html.

669 Leah Y. Latimer, “Bethune Home Is Center of Historical Site Debate,” The Washington Post , May 26, 1982, pg. DC3.

670 Page Putnam Miller, “Women’s History Landmark Project: Policy and Research,” The Public Historian 15, no. 4 (Autumn 1993): 82-83.

266

Women activists and historians argued that women’s history mattered not just for women, but for all Americans. This change was part of a larger movement that opened up the national narrative to include not only women’s history but black, ethnic, working class and gay and lesbian history. A testament to this historical consciousness was the publication of Howard Zinn’s, A People’s History of the United States (1980), a radical rethinking of American history. 671 This new way of seeing the past, for example, shaped protest during the Bicentennial when Americans formerly excluded from the national heritage, including women activists, demanded a place in the commemoration.

Out of the interest in popular history, along with a high rate of unemployment for historians in the mid-1970s came the origins of a public history movement, a shift in the historical profession that would greatly influence efforts to institutionalize women’s history. The movement was organized through the University of California at Santa

Barbara and financially backed by the U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian,

Wells Fargo Bank and the US Army Centre of Military History. However, tensions arose between practitioners already involved with grassroots community history and the movement’s corporate and federal sponsorship. 672 Women’s public history was not immune to these growing pains and debate about how to reconcile popular history with the new professionalism surfaced, for example, in the establishment of the WRNHP.

Part of the contested “History Wars” of the 1980s and 1990s, revising the canon of American history to include women often faced fierce conservative resistance.

Interpretations of public memory became a central battleground of American politics as

671 Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States (New York: Harper & Row, 1980).

672 Jill Liddington, “What Is Public History? Publics and Their Pasts, Meanings and Practices,” Oral History 30, no. 1 (Spring 2002): 85.

267

what kind of history the government should sponsor came under increased scrutiny. To conservatives, American history became symbolic of the moral decline of the nation.

Tensions often surfaced in discussions of women’s public history projects, for example, in the creation of the WRNHP as well as the drive to relocate the Portrait Monument .

In order to garner widespread support, it was often difficult to balance a heritage framework with the feminist political origins of women’s history. The distinction between recognizing women’s accomplishments and memorializing feminism is subtle but significant. To make these sites palatable to the American public, women’s history often had to appear less overtly feminist. In attempting to divorce contemporary feminist politics from these sites, tensions developed between commemorating women’s history as heritage and the desire to create spaces to be used for feminist activism. This tension underscores the difference between movement history and public history.

In addition, unresolved issues of race, class and ideology resurfaced in the process of creating official memory, mirroring and amplifying debates circulating among second wave feminists. Some African American feminists, especially, waged heated debates to win recognition for black women’s history in national memorials. Struggles over the relocation of the Portrait Monument in the Capitol in 1997 brought questions of racism in the women’s movement to the forefront. The issue of diversity in women’s history and the women’s movement continued to be a challenge in the 1980s and 1990s.

The importance of women’s public history is intrinsically tied up with the complex history of American feminism in the 1980s and 1990s. While the study of women’s public history in this period does not change the overall history of the antifeminist backlash, it does complicate the narrative and points to the irony of the

268

situation: the period that witnessed the biggest growth in women’s public monuments and historic sites was also a period in which the women’s movement lost ground, antifeminism increased and feminism became an ever more unpopular word. Despite the feminist backlash, in between the Bicentennial of the United States in 1976, the opening of the WRNHP in 1982 and the restoration of the Portrait Monument to the Capitol

Rotunda in 1997, the government took unprecedented steps to integrate women’s history into the national consciousness. At the same time, the problem of how to address the inequity of women’s historic representation in the United States was not easily resolved.

In many ways, the wave of historical transformation that occurred in the 1980s and 1990s was the culmination of the dreams of generations of women activists. The late twentieth century public history movement shared many similarities with the earlier period of historical reform that occurred between the 1920s and 1940s. Like the historical work attempted in the early twentieth century, the activities undertaken in the 1980s and

1990s followed a successful mass movement for women’s rights that inspired a desire for historical recognition. Both waves generated a backlash that sought to de-legitimatize women’s newly won rights. Like earlier advocates such as Mary Beard and Rose Arnold

Powell, women in this period desired “a space of their own” to give institutional weight to women’s history. And like Beard and Powell, modern representatives for women’s history encountered real obstacles in their pursuit of creating sites of memory.

“We the Women”: Gendering the Bicentennial

One of the first shots fired in the various battles to create a public history for women centered on the 1976 Bicentennial that made questions of representation and

269

American heritage a focus of national discourse. The women’s movement brought a feminist consciousness to these celebrations of the past. For example, in 1975, Winnie

Newman recalled her outrage, “when I looked under Abigail Adams in the encyclopedia, it read: ‘see John.’” 673 Newman commemorated America’s Independence by staging a play to introduce children to women’s overlooked role in the Revolution. Newman, as well as countless activists, historians and public officials, used the celebration to further advance rapidly changing conceptions about American history. Many activists saw the nation’s birthday as an opportune time for social action. Early American history was dusted off and imbued with new meanings. From conservative anti-busing advocates in

Boston to anti-consumerism protesters around the country, activists appropriated symbols of the American revolutionary past in their protest. 674 Like suffragists during the 1876

Centennial, second wave feminists used the Bicentennial to address questions about both women’s rights and the place of women’s history in the national narrative.

History saturated American culture as federal and corporate funds created unprecedented opportunities for exploring the past. Americans were watching The Adams

Chronicles and CBS highlighted glimpses of the past in 732 “Bicentennial Minutes.” 675

The National Archives launched a program “to bring American history alive during the

Bicentennial year.” 676 The National Park Service spent three years and $100 million

673 Kim Lem, “Playwrights Stress Role of Women,” New York Times , August 24, 1975, pg. 88.

674 J. Anthony Lukas, “Who Owns 1776?” New York Times , May 18, 1975, pg. SM110.

675 Richard F. Shepard, “TV Makes History With Adams Saga,” New York Times June 5, 1975, pg. 48 and “Shell’s $10 Million Puts History on TV,” Bicentennial Times , Volume 1, Number 8, pg. 8 Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

676 “National Archives Program Brings U.S. History Alive During Bicentennial Period,” Bicentennial Times , Volume 3, March 1976, pg. 14, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

270

expanding history programming. 677 Historical fiction such as Alex Haley’s Roots (1976) and Gore Vidal’s 1876 (1976) topped the New York Times Bestseller List.

A major concern of bicentennial organizing was the portrayal of unity after the turbulent 1960s. Americans attempted to celebrate the nation’s 200 th birthday just as the meaning of America seemed uncertain. In the wake of social movements, Vietnam,

Watergate and recession, the Bicentennial came at a time when the long-term impact of these changes was unknown. 678 To achieve national accord, the organizing body, the

American Revolution Bicentennial Administration (ARBA), desired the greatest possible citizen participation. The ARBA turned over planning to local governments and voluntary groups, focusing celebrations more on the local rather than the national. 679 The emphasis on local celebrations allowed for vernacular expression of history to flourish. 680

Working at the local rather than the national level enabled women’s contributions to more fully emerge. The diffuse structure contributed to greater participation of

677 “Park Service Put Over Three Years of Work, $200 Million in Wide-Ranging Bicen Show,” Bicentennial Times , Volume 2, July 1975, pg. 3, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

678 Even though the official bicentennial theme song intoned “Get into America,” most Americans were ambivalent about the anniversary. For more on the ambivalence surrounding the Bicentennial see Christopher Capozzola, “It Makes You Want to Believe in the Country: Celebrating the American Bicentennial in an Age of Limits,” in America in the Seventies , edited by Beth Bailey and David Farber (University Press of Kansas, 2004) and Natasha Zaretsky, No Direction Home: the American Family and the Fear of National Decline, 1968-1980 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007), 143-171. For a comparative view, see Lyn Spillman, Nations and Commemoration: Creating National Identities in the United States and Australia (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997).

679 Federal preparations for the commemoration had begun years in advance when the American Revolution Bicentennial Commission (ARBC) was established in 1966. Then in 1972, Nixon was accused of stacking the supposedly bi-partisan ARBC with Republicans for political gain and state and community organizations complained about being shut out of the planning. In the face of these scandals and criticism, Nixon disbanded the organizing body and replaced it with ARBA. For more, see Capozzola, 31-32.

680 John Bodnar, Remaking America: Public Memory, Commemoration, and Patriotism in the Twentieth Century (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992), 232.

271

minorities in the celebrations, especially women, ethnic and Native American groups. 681

The decentralized structure offered women real opportunities to question interpretations of the commemoration. Women activists challenged the lack of diversity in the national narrative by bringing attention to gender stereotyping and lesser-known historic women.

Due to public perception that the Nixon administration was ignoring women in the planning, women’s groups demanded greater representation. Rita Hauser, a member of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, argued, “It is essential to have a program for women that is meaningful coming out of your commission. This is important for the [presidential] election [in 1972] and will also spare you attacks from the women’s groups if you fail to recognize them in a serious way.” 682 To offset criticism from women’s groups, in 1972, journalist Perdita Huston was appointed as coordinator of women’s participation. Huston related, “In the past, national celebrations have tended to focus on great leaders and historic events, the activities of armies or congress; in effect they have institutionalized our heritage.” She highlighted how the “Bicentennial celebration seeks to personalize our heritage by focusing on the activities of local communities and the contributions these local communities have made to the overall

American community.” 683

681 See for example articles such as “Ethnic Accent Strong in ’75 Preparations,” “Major Thrust Given Black Participation,” “Native American Interest Shows Significant ’75 Gains” Bicentennial Times , Volume 2, December 1975, pg. 3, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration, as well as “Ethnic/Racial Recognition A Bicentennial Hallmark, “Celebration Places Focus on Native Americans,” and especially “Women Playing a Major Role in Commemoration,” Bicentennial Times , Volume 3, July 1976, pp. 14-15, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

682 “Documents Link Politics to the '76 Fete,” New York Times , August 20, 1972, pg. 57.

683 January 1973 Memorandum from Perdita Huston to Rev. Keppler, Festival Proposal Draft, page 1, Bicentennial –Early Meetings 72 73 Folder, Carton 1, Women’s Coalition For the Third Century Records (hereafter: WCTC), unprocessed collection, SL.

272

Many women activists and public historians participated because the ARBA was an important means of getting federal funding into women’s history. 684 Huston held a series of meetings to explore women’s participation. The hallmark of these gatherings was the political diversity represented by organizations ranging from the conservative

Daughters of the American Revolution to the populist Peoples Bicentennial Commission.

In the second meeting held in December, 1973 senior officers from almost 60 women’s groups endorsed a proposal for the creation of a National Women’s History Center.

Representing a longstanding goal of women activists since Beard’s WCWA, the

National Women’s History Center proposal outlined a repository for gathering, cataloguing and disseminating sources on women’s history. It was hoped the institution would serve as a public forum “to overcome the past neglect of women’s contributions to national life.” 685 The assembled women argued that “far too little is known about the contributions women have made to the building of our Nation. Women historians, librarians and archivists across the nation feel that the Bicentennial could provide the occasion for updating women’s history and that a National Women’s History Center would be vital in these efforts.” 686 Although never realized, the proposal for the center came about due to the rare opportunity in which there was a strong women’s movement demanding change and national attention focused on the importance of history.

During the meetings, tensions evolved over the meaning of the commemoration for women. Dr. Mary Barry, an educator representing the Afro-American Bicentennial

684 Pat Kepler to Linda De Pauw, February 17, 1974, page 1, Heritage Project Endorsements Folder, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

685 “Leaders of Women’s Groups Chart Projects For Bicentennial,” Bicentennial Times , Volume 1, Number 2, pg. 2, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

686 Ibid.

273

Corporation, for example, claimed that the proposals were “so insignificant, they were almost an insult” adding to the impact of a disorganized and embattled administration. 687

Huston agreed more was needed to ensure women’s representation but denied the proposals were “insignificant, pie-in-the-sky or fluff.” 688 Many feminists desired a more radical program than the moderate ARBA put forth. The meeting resulted in a split, with the creation of what Huston called a “feminist splinter group.” 689

The women of the splinter group desired a coalition that would allow women to determine their own agenda. 690 There was an irreconcilable tension between working within a federal commission and feminist goals of self-determination. After the 1972

ARBA meeting, women activists called a separate meeting for September 10, 1973 when eleven organizations met in Independence Hall in Philadelphia to officially form the

Women’s Coalition For a Third Century (WCTC). 691 The WCTC lobbied for the inclusion of women’s history in the Bicentennial. 692 The organization’s logo, a play on

687 Eugene L. Meyer, “Women’s Groups Demand Half of Top Bicentennial Jobs,” The Washington Post , December 9, 1973, pg. A17.

688 Ibid.

689 Ibid.

690 Women’s Coalition For The Third Century Information Sheet, page 1, loose material, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

691 The WCTC was comprised of various organizations including: Federally Employed Women, The Grail, Professional Women’s Caucus, Leadership Conference of Women Religious, National Coalition of American Nuns, National Organization for Women (NOW President Wilma Scott Heide was vice-president of WCTC), National Women’s Political Caucus, The United Presbyterian Church U.S.A – Council on Women, and the Church and Church Employed Women, Women’s Equity Action League, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, National Black Feminist Organizations, as well as individual members and other cooperating groups.

692 The WCTC worked on several initiatives such as the establishment of a National Women’s Archives, and the promotion of women’s history in all facets of American culture including television, libraries, revisions of textbooks and children’s literature, the publications of an encyclopedia on American women. See “Heritage ‘76,” page 2, History-Heritage Folder, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL. The group also sponsored a conference on Women in the Era of the American Revolution held in July 1975 at

274

the year 76 with the symbol for woman next to the seven, represents how the WCTC imagined bringing women into the heart of the Bicentennial. The WCTC took a holistic view of both feminism and American history. The group promoted “the empowerment and active participation of women from all classes, races and creeds,” and pledged to

“speak out against all discriminations, for they are all indeed connected.” 693

The WCTC sought to overturn cultural assumptions about women’s historical significance by encouraging women to interpret their own history. President, Rev.

Patricia Budd Kepler stated, “while we are celebrating our history, we will also be making it.” 694 The WCTC argued that “the vital role of women in the total development of the Nation has not been fully recognized in the written histories, the educational systems, or the consciousness of our people.” 695 To help realize women’s full participation into American society, they stated, “We are taking responsibility and leadership for the interpretation of the past.” 696 These historical reformers contributed to a burgeoning public history movement based on community history and self- empowerment. The WCTC Task Force on History publicized projects that non- professionals could do to help recover women’s past. As the list reassured prospective participants, “Remember that everybody is an historical personage; nobody is a

George Washington University and organized by member Linda Grant De Pauw, see Task Force on History, “Projects Already Endorsed,” Carton 1, loose material, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

693 Ibid.

694 Plenary Session, WC3C, October 13 & 14, held at Emanuel College, Boston 1974, page 1, Carton 1, loose material, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

695 “Heritage ‘76,” page 1, History-Heritage Folder, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

696 Women’s Coalition For The Third Century Information Sheet, page 2, loose material, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

275

nobody.” 697 Continuing with the theme of all women’s historical importance, the guide encouraged bringing letters of women thought to be of “no interest” to local historical societies. 698

The Bicentennial became a stage on which the drama over shifting conceptions of modern womanhood played out in the public realm. On one hand, at a time when perceptions of women’s work was rapidly changing, the Bicentennial promoted nostalgic imagery of women’s domestic roles by bringing attention to traditional crafts and women’s work such as cooking, needle work and especially quilting, which became a national obsession. 699 Living History presentations around the country showcased early

American life through demonstrations of women’s work such as spinning and baking. 700

Yet, on the other hand, tribute was paid to women’s economic role in the past which brought new attention to the division between the private and public spheres and the home as a site of women’s labor. 701 The attention given to women’s history allowed for a more nuanced picture of women’s historic role to emerge and helped fuel the desire among many women for a vibrant woman’s culture through the revival of knitting and quilting.

697 The document included suggestions for building local library collections, agitating for schools to integrate women’s history into curriculums, writing newspaper columns on women, for encouraging older women to write their own autobiographies, for all women to keep diaries and for younger women to research and write biographies of older women. The list also suggested gaining professional training in conducting oral history interviews and tracing family history.

698 Task Force on History – Projects Non-Professionals Can Do To Help Recover Women’s History, Carton 1, loose material, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

699 “Quilting: Another Hallmark of the Bicentennial,” Bicentennial Times , Volume 3, September 1976, pg. 7, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

700 “National Parks Treat Visitors to History,” Bicentennial Times , Volume 3, August 1976, pg. 3, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

701 Zaretsky, 157-158.

276

Because the commemoration occurred at the peak of the second wave of feminism, demands of women activists helped ensure an upsurge in popularity of women’s history. CBS aired The American Parade, a three-year, 13-part, prime-time epic, including a segment called “We the Women” which described the ongoing liberation of the American woman. The importance of protest in broadening American political participation was explored in We the People , a Smithsonian exhibit, which included the history of woman suffrage. 702 The attention given to women’s history—even if it was only on a surface level—does suggest how by the mid-1970s, calls by women activists and historians were being heeded. Bicentennial officials carefully assured,

“Unlike the 1876 Centennial celebration, when women still were battling for the right to vote, the Bicentennial observance will have full women’s representation,” and confirmed that “women’s call for equal representation in the Bicentennial has not gone unheeded.” 703

The founding mothers, previously little-noticed supporting characters, for a short time, took on more prominent roles in the nation’s cultural imagination. Even Disney included Betsy Ross and suffragists in its bicentennial production, “America on

Parade.” 704 But whereas most Americans already knew of Ross, bicentennial events highlighted lesser known women such as Abigail Adams, Mercy Otis Warren and Phillis

702 Hollie I. West, “Historic Reflections: A Bicentennial Array In the American Spirit; Reflecting The American Character,” The Washington Post , June 4, 1975, pg. B1.

703 “Calendar of Events,” March-May 1975, page 9, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

704 James T. Wooten, “Disney Will Join in Bicentennial,” New York Times , February 19, 1975, pg. 11.

277

Wheatley. 705 Ms. featured an article by Linda Grant De Pauw on “The Forgotten Spirit of

’76: Women of the Revolutionary Era.” 706 The ARBA highlighted “courageous women of the Revolution,” in an issue of the Bicentennial Times .707 The ARBA recorded over

160 projects involving women. For example, in New Mexico, the National Council of

Negro Women sponsored a Black history project which disseminated information on

Black women’s historical contributions. The Women’s Film Project produced a film on the history of women in the U.S. called The Emerging Woman and The Twin Cities

Women’s Film Collective along with Meridel LeSueur created a film, My People are My

Home , which chronicled the twentieth century from a Midwestern woman’s perspective. 708

The second wave revival of the founding mothers during the Bicentennial echoed suffragists’ search for women of the Revolution during the Centennial. 709 Suffragists had framed their political protest in the language and imagery of the colonial revival. Abigail

Adams, in particular, took on new meaning as a feminist symbol during the Bicentennial, a role she had debuted in 1876. When suffragists organized during the Centennial, they

705 “Lesser-Known Women of the Revolution Brought to the Fore by the Bicentennial,” Bicentennial Times , Volume 3, October 1976, pg. 4, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration. Wheatley garnered renewed attention as suggested by the Phillis Wheatley Poetry Festival, an official event of the Bicentennial Commission during which 20 black women poets read their work alongside Wheatley’s poems during the 4-day affair. “20 Black Women Poets to Honor Phillis Wheatley,” New York Times , November 2, 1973, pg. 54.

706 Linda Grant De Pauw, “The Forgotten Spirit of ’76: Women of the Revolutionary Era,” Ms . July 1974, pp. 51-56.

707 The women included Mercy Otis Warren, Phillis Wheatley, Abigail Adams, Deborah Sampson, Sybil Ludington, Margaret Corbin and Molly Pitcher among others, see “Courageous Women of the Revolution” Bicentennial Times , Volume 3, October 1976, pg. 8, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

708 Press materials on “The Emerging Woman” and “My People are My Home,” Folder – “women + media,” Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

709 See chapter two of this dissertation.

278

too had found in women’s history important symbols for the movement and had expressed outrage over women’s historic invisibility. Thus during America’s birthday celebrations both generations of women activists found inspiration in Revolutionary heroines. Both first and second wave activists claimed foremothers in their protests and used the examples to challenge narratives that ignored women’s historical contributions.

In the mainstreaming of women’s history, however, it was often difficult to find a place for feminist viewpoints. Winnie Newman, the woman who staged the bicentennial play to introduce children to women’s history claimed, “Abigail Adams was the first exponent of the equal rights amendment.” 710 Yet, although a member of the Women’s

Political Caucus of Nassau County, Newman assured the press that she was not a radical feminist and that the material was nonpolitical. “We try to provide female models that we feel have been overlooked. This would inspire both sexes of all ages.” 711 This tension between feminist inspired history and public presentations that downplayed connections to politics was an anxiety that would continue to trouble women’s public history initiatives.

Combining history with patriotism was often a difficult balance. Museums and historic sites attempted to educate and entertain Americans about the founding of their country, as for example, in The World of Franklin and Jefferson, an exhibit that toured

New York, Paris, Warsaw, London, Mexico City, Chicago and Los Angeles between

1973 and 1977. 712 The immensely popular exhibition was seen by millions of people but

710 Kim Lem, “Playwrights Stress Role of Women,” New York Times , August 24, 1975, pg. 88.

711 Ibid.

712 Exhibit was organized by the United States Information Agency and the ARBA, with funding from IBM.

279

was criticized by some as “an elaborate and expensive exercise in nostalgia.” One critic complained, the only things missing were “a brass band and a couple of hot-dog stands to make the atmosphere of a Fourth of July celebration complete.” 713

In contrast to the blockbuster The World of Franklin and Jefferson which reaffirmed traditional representations of American history, the exhibit Remember the

Ladies: Women in America 1750-1815 , represented the burgeoning interest in presenting women’s history to the public. Presented by the Plymouth Antiquarian Society and the

Pilgrim Society, it was billed as the first wide-ranging exhibit on the historic role of women during the Revolutionary era. The exhibition opened on June 29, 1976 in

Plymouth, Massachusetts and then traveled for a year to Atlanta, GA, Washington, D.C.,

Chicago, IL, Austin, TX and New York City. 714 The exhibit was organized by Conover

Hunt, former director of the DAR Museum in D.C. and historian Linda Grant De Pauw, professor at George Washington University, and was accorded official recognition by the

ARBA as a major national Bicentennial exhibition. 715 The importance of the exhibit was underscored by the committee of patrons that included Betty Ford, Joan Kennedy, Nancy

Kissinger, and Jacqueline Onassis, among others. 716 The exhibition was conceived of by

713 Hilton Kramer, “A ‘Franklin and Jefferson’ Package at Met,” New York Times , March 5, 1976, pg.16.

714 It traveled to the High Museum in Atlanta, GA; the Corcoran Gallery in Washington, D.C.; the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago, IL; the Lyndon Baines Johnson Memorial Library in Austin, TX; and the New York Historical Society in New York City. The exhibit cost about $550,000 and was sponsored from grants from the Phillip Morris Corporation and Clairol with additional funding coming from the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. See Judy Klemesrud, “Mrs. Ford Helps ‘Remember the Ladies,’ of Revolutionary Era,” New York Times , June 30, 1976, pg. L43.

715 “Founding Women Honored in ‘Remember the Ladies,’” Bicentennial Times , Volume 3, June 1976, pg. 13, Commemorative Reprints, American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.

716 A catalogue of the exhibition was published by Viking Press and edited by Jacqueline Onassis, one of her first publishing projects. See Stephen Birmingham, “The Public Event named Jackie,” New York Times , June 20, 1976, pg. 173.

280

Mabel “Muffie” Brandon, a descendant of Mayflower passenger William Bradford.

Brandon dreamed up the idea for the show after an unsuccessful attempt to save

Revolutionary War heroine Mercy Otis Warren’s house in Plymouth. 717

Remember the Ladies commemorated the heroism of American women during the

Revolution, challenging gendered notions about patriotism, labor and family life. The exhibit explored women’s multifaceted roles “from seamstress to gunsmith to smuggler and spy” and uncovered forgotten stories about women’s heroism during the war. The exhibit overturned images of women’s place in the Revolution, for example, highlighting that women “made guns as well as flags.” Showcasing over 213 objects such as period costumes, diaries, portraits, needlework and art, the exhibit brought attention to women’s role in domestic life, commerce and the actual fighting in the Revolution. Museum visitors could learn about Abigail Adams, Martha Washington, Mercy Otis Warren as well as the lives of working women, slave women and Native American women. 718

Although not an explicitly feminist exhibit, Remember the Ladies intervened in the public culture over women’s changing status using history to point out the shortcomings of the American Revolution and the need for change in the present. On one hand, as an exhibit organized by society women and local heritage groups, there was an antiquarian emphasis suggested by the focus on decorative objects and fine arts. But on the other hand, the exhibit worked to overturn assumptions about the gendered nature of

American history. The organizers of the exhibition conceived of history as an important

717 Brandon was intrigued by the correspondence between Warren and Adams, and the idea of the exhibit was inspired after hearing a paper about Abigail Adams at a historical conference. As a society woman, Brandon was able to bring a lot of high-profile patronage and publicity to the exhibit. Margaret Carroll, “America’s Liberty Belles,” Chicago Tribune , January 24, 1977, pg. A3.

718 Remember the Ladies Brochure, Folder – To file – WCTC, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

281

tool for improving women’s status. It was hoped that by highlighting women’s contributions to the Revolution, the exhibit would “have a profound impact upon women in America today.” History would serve as a guide to help modern women understand

“their roles and the historical patterns which dominate their status today.” 719

While The World of Franklin and Jefferson celebrated the American experiment,

Remember the Ladies subtly questioned the promise of equality as laid out by the founding fathers. An underlying thread in the exhibition was declension. Promotional materials declared that when Abigail Adams wrote to “remember the ladies” she was

“talking to us,” asking for “a place in history for the American woman” and thereby possibly “a continuing liberation of the feminine spirit through an appreciation of the past.” Framing the Revolution as a missed opportunity for women’s equality, the exhibition explained that “although the Declaration of Independence promised equality for all, the equal potential of women which was so aptly proven during the Revolution was soon to be forgotten.” 720 De Pauw promoted the notion that the Colonial era constituted a “golden age” for American women. She argued that women “were more liberated than at any time since,” because they could work in the same occupations as men, had equal pay and more legal freedom and political rights than women had today. 721

The controversy that surrounded the exhibition suggests the difficulties of presenting women’s history in public. During the opening, First Lady Betty Ford drew

719 Mabel Brandon to Patricia Kepler, February 29, 1976, Folder – To file – WCTC, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

720 Remember the Ladies Brochure, Folder – To file – WCTC, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

721 Judy Klemesrud, “Mrs. Ford Helps ‘Remember the Ladies,’ of Revolutionary Era,” New York Times , June 30, 1976, pg. L43.

282

mild boos from a small group of anti-E.R.A. demonstrators in the crowd of about 1,000 people gathered for the event. At the heart of the controversy was the meaning of equality both in the past and the present. In her remarks Ford stated that: “We’re here to honor the unsung women who helped to win our national revolution and to focus attention on the unfinished business of our revolution for full freedom and justice for women.” Protesters on both side of the issue broke out in chants of “Go away ERA” and “ERA, all the way,” after Mrs. Ford read a letter to President Ford from a 6 ½ year old girl who asked, “Why can’t women be equal? Men are. Why can’t women? Men say women can’t be equal.

That’s not fair to girls and women.” 722 By focusing attention on a new view of conceptualizing women’s role in the past, the exhibit upset notions about women’s place in the present, as suggested by the presence of ERA protesters at the opening. Further, the meaning women like Betty Ford read into the history suggests that representations of female strength, heroism and power deeply resonated both with women with a feminist consciousness and women committed to sustaining traditional gender roles. By highlighting changing understanding of women’s equality, the exhibit could not help but be implicated in contemporary debate over the ERA and other feminist issues.

The images of women’s Revolutionary past circulating in the popular culture were given widely different interpretations by very liberal women as well as more conservative women. Older models of celebrating American history that relied on women’s preservation efforts with the history of women on the periphery continued to be asserted. The DAR gave a “Gift to the Nation” when they refurbished the second floor of

Independence Hall in Philadelphia. The Colonial Dames of America restored an historic

722 Ibid.

283

house museum originally built in 1799 in New York City, named the Abigail Adams

Smith museum after President John Adams’s daughter who once lived on the grounds.

This more traditional means of commemoration reflected the women’s social values.

When asked if she thought anything was wrong with America, Emma K. Mitchell, a

Colonial Dame, related: “Well, I’m very against abortion, and I don’t like girls and boys living together before they’re married. But I’m always proud of America.” History for the

DAR and the Colonial Dames was inextricably linked with patriotism and domesticity.

While some women saw in the past a vehicle for protest, these women viewed history as celebration. Mitchell explained, “What we are trying to do is keep the memories of the

Revolutionary War alive so that young people won’t forget their heritage.” 723

In contrast, many feminists thought not enough was done to recognize women during the commemoration. The WCTC criticized “that women will be heard during the

Bicentennial celebration,” even thought the ARBA “has not yet recognized the contributions of women to history, nor funded women’s projects adequately.” 724 Letty

Cottin Pogrebin, an editor at Ms. complained that she felt like “a wallflower at the

Bicentennial Ball. Betsy Ross and Molly Pitcher were good ‘helpers’ but they just don’t inspire patriotic ecstasy. Indeed, the whole masculine, militaristic flavor of the celebration turns me off.” Like the suffragists during the Centennial, Pogrebin saw the commemoration as a time for protest not celebration, suggesting women should use the

Bicentennial “to challenge the American dream, not celebrate it.” She concluded that

723 Judy Klemesrud, “In Bicentennial Year, the Colonial Dames Have a Lot to Cheer About Here,” New York Times , May 1, 1976, pg. 36.

724 Press Release, Women’s Coalition for the Third Century, Folder – Original copy, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

284

“Asking men to Remember the Ladies just won’t do. We must speak for ourselves, fight for ourselves, invent our own futures.” 725

On the official Bicentennial anniversary, July 4, 1976, women activists looked back to the women’s protest at the 1876 Centennial. As the Philadelphia Ledger reported during America’s first birthday celebration, the women’s demonstration was in part “so that the women of 1976 may see that their predecessors of 1876 did not let the centennial year of Independence pass without protest.” 726 In recording their memories of the events, suffragists declared “their work was not for themselves alone, nor for the present generation, but for all women of all time.” 727 One can imagine, then, that suffragists would be pleased to know that 100 years later their impeachment of the government inspired another generation. Also in the city of brotherly love, at the First Unitarian

Church, Women’s groups under the Women’s Rights Centennial Committee held a service in commemoration of the 1876 protest. Karen DeCrow, president of NOW read the “Declaration of Women’s Rights.” 728 After a ceremonial process to Independence

Hall to pay tribute to the reading of the 1876 protest, C. Delores Tucker, Secretary of

State of Pennsylvania spoke after the tribute, using milestones in women’s history to illustrate her goals for the future. 729 The program included a song written by Frances

Dana Gage in 1876: “Then woman, man’s partner, man’s equal shall stand,/While beauty

725 Letty Cottin Pogrebin, “Sexism Rampant,” New York Times , March 19, 1976, pg. 32.

726 Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage, ed. History of Woman Suffrage, vol. 3: 1876-1885 (Rochester, NY: Privately published, 1886), 42.

727 Stanton, Anthony, and Gage, 30.

728 John Kifner, “2 Counterrallies in Philadelphia,” New York Times , July 5, 1976, pg. 14.

729 Women’s Rights Centennial Committee, Schedule of Events, Folder – To file – WCTC, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

285

and harmony govern the land,/And to think for oneself will be no offense,/The world will be thinking, a hundred years hence.” Activist Martha Lavell responded to Gage in “A

Hundred Years Hence—1976,” her attempt to move history forward. She dreamed: “We look for a time when at last hand in hand/Men and Women as equals together may stand,/

And if love as a value is more than pretense,/ The world will be richer, a hundred years hence.” 730

More than Dirty Laundry: Seneca Falls as Historic Site

The 1976 Bicentennial helped popularize and promote women’s history among the general public, beginning the transformation between a purely activist history and a public history of American women. If the plan coming out of the Bicentennial for a

National Women’s History Center was a missed opportunity for building a permanent space for promoting women’s history, then the creation of the Women’s Rights National

Historical Park in Seneca Falls, N.Y. represents the major successful women’s public history initiative undertaken during these years. 731 During the fiftieth anniversary of the

Nineteenth Amendment in 1970, activist Ramona Barth protested that the location of the

Seneca Falls Convention was a gas station and garage. A little more than a decade later, when the historic site opened in 1982, Seneca Falls, long a sacred space for feminist activists, became a place of national historical significance, as mandated by the federal government. This type of official recognition for women’s history, especially a history so

730 Centennial of Women’s Rights, 1876-1976 Program, Folder – To file – WCTC, Carton 1, WCTC, unprocessed collection, SL.

731 For more on women and the history of national parks, see Polly Welts Kaufman, National Parks and the Woman’s Voice: a History (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2006).

286

intertwined with modern feminism, symbolized the powerful potential of second wave feminism to reshape the historic landscape. The success second wave feminists had in creating the WRNHP stands in sharp contrast to the efforts made after the passage of the

Nineteenth Amendment when the push for memorials ended largely in disappointment.

In constructing public history sites in Seneca Falls, organizers struggled to find a common ground between recognizing women’s contributions to American society and fully embracing feminist narratives of women’s history. Historians at the WRNHP had to reconcile tensions between scholarly standards of public history and audience demands for popular history. In short, they had to find a balance between the past and the present.

At the heart of this problem was the question of the park’s relationship to feminism and the contemporary women’s movement. Even though the park evolved out of the women’s movement that that did not mean it was necessarily a historic site for the movement.

The meaning attached to the historic park, especially how it was framed politically, took on great significance as perceptions about the power of feminism began to shift in the early 1980s. The establishment of the NWRHP dramatizes in stark relief the changing fortunes of the women’s movement. The site never would have been created without the strength of the women’s movement but the precarious situation surrounding the final opening of the park demonstrates the challenges of the conservative backlash on feminist-inspired visions of women’s history. With the election of Ronald Reagan, it was clear that a backlash against feminism was jeopardizing recent gains of the women’s movement. When feminists staged the Women’s Strike for Equality in 1970, the possibility of social change had immense momentum. But in 1980 when a march was held to honor the tenth anniversary of the strike, the national conversation about

287

feminism had changed so drastically that the parade was held to boost morale in the face of steady resistance. Former suffragist Sylvia Seaman related, “We never dreamed 10 years ago we would have such opposition to the equal rights amendment and to abortion for poor women. We never dreamed we would be left high and dry in 1980.” 732

Seneca Falls in the 1980s, turning to the feminist past in order to escape present economic woes, looked strikingly different from the town in 1848, the year of the famed convention. That summer, Seneca Falls was at the crossroads of economic and social change. It lay on the country’s major east-west transportation route, put on the map by the Erie Canal and railroads. The town’s mills were typical of the early Industrial

Revolution. The town was named after a 43-foot waterfall which provided waterpower for local industry. 733 Just a few years before in 1843, a meetinghouse was built in a “very plain style,” made of brick, forty feet wide by sixty feet long. Wesleyan Chapel, the largest religious building in the town, quickly became a popular site for reform meetings including the Seneca Falls Convention held on July 19-20, 1848. 734

The opening of the WRNHP in 1982 represented the culmination of the long history of Seneca Falls in the feminist imaginary and the beginning of its recognition in the national consciousness. Seneca Falls represented the women’s rights heritage and as second wave feminists searched for a usable past, Seneca Falls took on even greater meaning. In 1977, the location was introduced to the public as the start of the torch relay leading up to the International Women’s Year Conference in Houston, Texas. The

732 Georgia Dullea, “For Family’s Three Generations of Feminists, a Memorable Day; ‘Left High and Dry in 1980’ ‘It changed Attitudes’ New York Times , Aug 25, 1980, pg. B5.

733 Judith Wellman, “The Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention: A Study of Social Networks,” Journal of Women’s History 3, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 14.

734 Wellman, Road to Seneca Falls , 130.

288

continued significance of Seneca Falls to activists was confirmed when in 1983 the

Seneca Women’s Encampment for a Future of Peace and Justice purposely chose a nearby location to hold their camp to protest nuclear weapons and patriarchal society. 735

The Seneca Falls Convention became part of the origins story of women’s rights, popularized as the birthplace of American feminism, first by Stanton and Anthony and then later by subsequent generation of suffragists and women activists looking to harness the power of the past by transforming Seneca Falls into sacred ground. 736 Since the

1870s, the small town in upstate New York had become a site for pilgrimages among women’s rights reformers. Commemorations of the convention were held in 1882, 1906,

1915, 1923 and 1948, solidifying the space’s symbolism for women activists. 737

However, until the advent of second wave feminism, Seneca Falls was left out of history books and school curriculum, ignored by the media and deemed too insignificant for historic preservation. Whereas in 1923, NWP leader Alva Belmont had predicted that

“Seneca Falls will become a shrine to which women will come from all over the world,” the event was considered so immaterial by the 1950s that Wesleyan Chapel, the building

735 See collection of the Women’s Encampment for a Future of Peace & Justice housed at the Schlesinger Library.

736 Lisa Tetrault, “The Memory of a Movement: Re-imagining Woman Suffrage in Reconstruction America, 1865-1890,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2004 and Lisa Tetrault, Memory of a Movement: Woman Suffrage and the Creation of a Feminist Origins Myth, 1865-1900 (Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, forthcoming).

737 For overviews of commemorations of the Seneca Falls Convention, see Vivien Ellen Rose, “Seneca Falls Remembered: Celebrations of the 1848 First Women’s Rights Convention,” CRM 21 (1998): 9-15 and Judith Wellman, The Road to Seneca Falls: Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the First Woman’s Rights Convention (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004), 228-240. See also discussion in chapters three and four of this dissertation.

289

where the convention was held, was used as a filling station and in the 1960s a

Laundromat.738

If Seneca Falls itself was a symbol of American feminism, then the Laundromat on the site of Wesleyan Chapel represented women’s unequal citizenship. The irony that the site of the first organized women’s rights convention was now a public laundry crystallized to many activists the lack of gendered historical spaces in the United States.

As feminist artist Judy Chicago, famous for her monumental art work depicting women’s history, The Dinner Party, commented to a reporter, “Do you realize that the site in

Seneca Falls, N.Y., where the first feminist convention was held in 1848, is now a laundromat?” 739 Chicago, who was running into difficulties housing and exhibiting The

Dinner Party in the late 1970s, viewed the problem “as a metaphor for the way women’s achievements are regarded in our society.’” She drew a connection between her art and the fate of the feminist landmark in Seneca Falls. Chicago and countless female activists since the nineteenth century have argued women’s historical invisibility. That the site of the symbolic birthplace of American feminism was turned into a laundry deeply angered women activists. Former U.S. representative and Wells College President Sissy

Farenthold argued, echoing Chicago’s sentiments, “I think it’s indicative of how careless this society has been about the history of women.” 740 The difficulty women faced in

738 “Women Open Fight for Equal Rights ,” New York Times , Jul 21, 1923, pg. 8; Gerda Lerner, “The Meaning of Seneca Falls: 1848-1998,” Dissent 45, no. 4 (Fall 1998): 35.

739 Grace Glueck, “Judy Chicago and Trials of ‘Dinner Party’; Pays Homage to Women Project Beset With Problems, New York Times , April 30, 1979, pg. D10.

740 Laurie Bennett, “We Need to Preserve the History of Women’s Rights,” August 24, 1978, Finger Lakes Times , Folder 10, Box 1, Collection 36 A, SFHS.

290

recovering their history, Farenthold stated, “speaks to the lack of status and priority that anything dealing with women’s rights has been given.” 741

The very idea for the national park originated when Ralph Peters and his wife

Marjorie Smith, visiting Seneca Falls from Seattle, WA, were shocked to discover how neglected the town’s historic sites were. “We felt dismay and loss seeing that these historically significant places had not been preserved,” said Peters. 742 When they saw a sale sign on Stanton’s former home, Peters decided to purchase the house and hold it until women’s organizations could afford to take it over. To aid this effort, local citizens founded the Elizabeth Cady Stanton Foundation (ECSF) in 1978, inspired by feminist ideals that the Seneca Falls historic sites could be vehicles for understanding the longer history of women’s rights and help continue the fight for women’s equality in the present. 743 The preservation project quickly evolved beyond simply restoring Stanton’s home. Nancy Dubner, the director of the western New York office for lieutenant governor developed plans for an entire historic direct that would tell the whole story of the early women’s rights movement rather than commemorate a single individual. 744 At the same time, the conversation shifted from a local question to a countrywide issue when

741 “Wells’ president angry: Laundry marks historic site,” n.d, unidentified clipping, Folder 2, Box 1A (overflow box 1), Collection 36A, SFHS.

742 Barbara Moynehan, “Seneca Falls Rises: From Laundromat to Women’s Rights National Park,” Ms . January 1980, pg. 26.

743 Judith Wellman, “’It’s a Wide Community Indeed’: Alliances and Issues in Creating Women's Rights National Historical Park, Seneca Falls, New York,” in Restoring Women's History Through Historic Preservation edited by Gail Lee Dubrow and Jennifer B. Goodman (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003): 234-235.

744 Moynehan, “Seneca Falls Rises,” 26.

291

the National Park Service identified Seneca Falls as a possible site for a national historic park. 745

The establishment of the park was only possible because the support of the local townspeople. In the end, it was a community effort that brought the park into existence, notably the strong relationship between local and national leaders and coalitions formed between public historians, town residents, engaged citizens and government institutions. 746 This outcome, however, was not certain when the idea for the park first evolved. Originally, most residents knew nothing of the town’s history, washing their clothes in the coin-op laundry on Fall Street unaware of the site’s historic significance.

Many townspeople at first had ambivalent feelings towards feminism and had to come to terms with the area’s emerging historical identity. The turnabout occurred when the people recognized that the town’s past was the key to its future economic growth. 747 The town of 8,500 embraced women’s history as it became clear that a historic park could help revive the town’s economy hit hard by declining manufacturing jobs. As one Village

Trustee put it, most local merchants “don’t give a hoot” about feminism, but saw the financial rewards. “I mean, if you’ve got Old Faithful in your town, you are in favor of geysers.” 748

745 Wellman, “’It’s a Wide Community Indeed,’” 236-238.

746 Judith Wellman clearly outlines the evolution of these coalitions in her article, “It’s a Wide Community Indeed.”

747 Patricia Haines, “Seneca Falls: Explorations of Community and History,” October 7, 1982, pg. 1. Folder III A. Grand Opening, WORI Celebrations, WRNHP.

748 “Birthplace of Women's Rights Hopes for Its Day; A Household Word Husband Is Undecided Stanton Park Was Set Up,” The New York Times , Aug 13, 1981, pg. B2.

292

The women’s rights history under discussion in Seneca Falls, however, was far more controversial than geysers and it represented a new departure for the federal government in forging a national memory. What does or does not get preserved from the historic landscape signifies, collectively, what is deemed culturally significant through which civic ideals are defined. When the Congressional act creating the WRNHP was signed into law on December 20, 1980, the Seneca Falls Convention—previously an event largely known only to women activists—was deemed “an event of major importance in the history of the United States.” 749 Previously, only six of the 200 historic sites and 2,000 landmarks in the United States commemorated women’s history. Historic sites such as the park were places where debates about equal rights and women’s history could be presented to the public. This signified a major milestone in rethinking American collective memory and in granting national recognition for women’s history.

When legislation for creating the national park was debated in 1980, a central theme was the park’s relationship to the modern women’s movement and the ERA. The language of the law alluded to the significance of the Seneca Falls Convention in terms of the present day struggle of modern feminism, citing that the convention “marked the formal beginning of the struggle of women for their equal rights.” 750 In December of

1980, the ERA was still under debate and Seneca Falls symbolized a clear trajectory of progress for American women. As Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan argued, “One of the

749 Ninety-Sixth Congress of the United States, Authorizing Legislation Pubic Law 96-607, Title XVI, Signed December 28, 1980, Sec. 1601 (a), I. Folder Congressional Legislation for Women’s Rights National Historic Park, WORI Formation, WRNHP.

750 Ibid.

293

most important social forces of our time is women’s struggle for equality, and, as such, it is incumbent upon us to pay tribute to the early leaders of this movement.” 751

Throughout the congressional hearings, the creation of the park was linked to current political discussion concerning women’s roles in the past and present. And like the much-hoped for passage of the ERA, the establishment of a national monument to women’s rights was seen as the culmination of feminist struggles. When Rhoda Jenkins, honorary trustee of the Elizabeth Cady Stanton Foundation and great-granddaughter of

Stanton testified, she poignantly linked her family history to national memory and contemporary politics. Jenkins hoped the park would “be a place that will call attention to this long history of women’s rights and the thoughts and feelings of women.” She spoke to the role the park could play in changing conceptions about the fight for equal rights.

She believed “that a park certainly is going to influence the whole trend of what is going on,” by evoking “the past and help us understand the forward movement of our society.” 752 It was not just history in the abstract that women like Jenkins felt was so important, but the material manifestations of that past, the physical reminders of women’s activism which held the power to inspire. Thus it was having an actual space, in this case the historic sites of Seneca Falls that was needed to make women’s history visible.

751 Statement of Hon. Daniel Patrick Moyniham, a U.S. Senator from the State of New York, U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Parks, Recreation, and Renewable Resources, The National Hostel System Act of 1980 and the Women’s Rights National Historic Park in New York: Hearing Before Subcommittee on Parks, Recreation, and Renewable Resources of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate Ninety-sixth Congress second session on S. 2263, A Bill to Provide For the Establishment of the Women’s Rights National Historic Park…September 8, 1980 (Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 1981), 42.

752 Testimony of Rhoda Jenkins, U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Parks, Recreation, and Renewable Resources, The National Hostel System Act of 1980 and the Women’s Rights National Historic Park in New York: Hearing Before Subcommittee on Parks, Recreation, and Renewable Resources of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate Ninety-sixth Congress second session on S. 2263, A Bill to Provide For the Establishment of the Women’s Rights National Historic Park…September 8, 1980 (Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 1981), 114.

294

What one scholar has called the “sea of maleness,” which typifies historic memorials suggests how the establishment of a historical space devoted to commemorating women’s history worked to overturn gendered norms of monuments. 753

The park represented a new departure. It was hoped that in giving material form to the memory of women’s activism through the women’s rights park, the past would become tangible and thereby relatable and understandable to the public. One of the major supporters of the park, actor and activist Alan Alda, recognized the “power of place” in the struggle for women’s equality. 754 He believed that “This country very much needs a physical reminder of the birth of feminism in the United States…a place where people can go and be inspired by those women who were part of the first wave of feminism.” 755

However, political upheaval would have grave consequences for the park. Jimmy

Carter signed the WRNHP into law on December 28, 1980, one of his last acts in office.

But the political sea change that ushered Reagan into the presidency signaled a precarious situation for the WRNHP. Whereas the 1960s and 1970s saw resurgence in preservation, highlighted by the passage of the 1966 Historic Preservation Act and helped along by the

Bicentennial, the recent conservation efforts became vulnerable to reversal in the 1980s.

Conservatives saw preservation as a constraint on private accumulation and Reagan’s

Interior Secretary James Watt called for “zerobudgeting” for historic preservation. 756

753 “Sea of maleness” quotation taken from Martha Norkunas , Monuments and Memory: History and Representation in Lowell, Massachusetts (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2002), 95.

754 For more on the notion of the power of place see Dolores Hayden, The Power of Place: Urban Landscape as Public History (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1995).

755 Alan Alda interviewed, Elizabeth Cady Stanton Foundation Newsletter , January-February 1981 Vol. II No. 1 pg. 3, Folder 2, Box 1A (overflow box 1), Collection 36A, SFHS.

756 Mike Wallace, Mickey Mouse History And Other Essays on American Memory (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996), 204.

295

While the Nixon administration felt pressure to at least make a show of listening to feminist demands during the Bicentennial at the height of the women’s movement by

1980 Reagan had no such concerns. Watt did not support preservation in Seneca Falls and quickly froze all funding for land acquisition. Because the park existed only on paper and the Congressional legislation did not guarantee funding, the ECSF focused on buying

Stanton’s home to give to the Park Service. They lobbied Congress for funds in 1981 because individual contribution up to that point totaled only $8,000. 757 The foundation approached Alda to assist with fundraising, who quickly donated $11,000 to help purchase and preserve Stanton’s home. Alda saw in Seneca Falls a place “to take seriously the challenge of actually trying out democracy.” He related he was interested in helping the preservation effort because “It can keep us going and keep us inspired.” 758

However, the Park Service resisted such “presentist” interpretations of history, preferring to see the women’s rights narrative as “heritage,” safely ensconced in the distant past and divorced from contemporary politics. The process of preserving women’s rights history in a national park raises questions about the dynamics of historical form.

What happens to the politics of searching for a usable past when that history becomes established, when it is no longer just the search for history but the construction of permanent historical narratives? When such history is no longer oppositional but positioned for the mainstream? Certainly, these tensions had been felt in academia by feminist historians who struggled with the difference between writing activist and

757 Wellman, “’It’s a Wide Community Indeed,’” 240.

758 Alan Alda interviewed, Elizabeth Cady Stanton Foundation Newsletter, January-February 1981 Vol. II no. 1 page 3, Folder 2, Box 1A (overflow box 1), Collection 36A, SFHS.

296

scholarly history. 759 In the transformation from politically inspired history to historic landmark, the past changed from the personal to the public, from the activist to the non- partisan and from movement oriented to national in scope.

This strain between the political history and the public history of Seneca Falls is clearly evident in the opening of the WRNHP. Because the park opened amidst the final heated year of ERA debate, the park was inextricably tied up with the campaign for the amendment. Activists wanted to make the past relevant to the present, drawing connections between the events that occurred in 1848 and the current fight for equal rights. As it had in 1923, Seneca Falls represented a usable past for the Equal Rights

Amendment. Both NWP and second wave feminists saw the ERA as the fulfillment of the Seneca Falls Convention. The Equal Rights Amendment was thus written into history, positioned as the final step in a trajectory of progress for women’s rights. 760

The feminist political origins of the WRNHP were not easily reconciled. Alda supported preserving Seneca Falls because of the important symbolism it held for the

ERA. Yet Judy Hart, the superintendent for the park, attempted to ban Alda from speaking on the ERA, pointing out the difficulty of launching a political campaign from there. But history without politics was not for Alda and he refused to attend the opening if he could not discuss the ERA. It was only after heated debate that Hart changed her mind. “The Park Service is very, very nervous about this turning into a political thing,”

759 See for example, Linda Gordon, “What Should Women’s Historians Do: Politics, Social Theory, & Women’s History,” Marxist Perspectives 3 (Fall 1978): 128-36.

760 See chapter three of this dissertation.

297

related Stanton Foundation President, Lucille Povero, “They don’t want to see this become a rallying point for the second push for the E.R.A.” 761

This tension between feminism and public women’s history was also evident in another Seneca Falls historic site, the National Women’s Hall of Fame. The memorial museum was conceived of by local women who wanted women’s contributions to

American history to be honored. The Women’s Hall of Fame opened in Seneca Falls in

1979, after a ten year campaign to find a permanent headquarters and raise adequate funds. However, even though a place dedicated to promoting women’s history, the organizers were careful to assure the public that the Hall of Fame was “not a feminist organization.” Anne Bantuvanis, one of the founders of the hall, told the Los Angeles

Times , “We don’t support pro-abortion or anti-abortion or pro-ERA movements.” 762 In attempting to make women’s history more broadly known, the women were quick to depoliticize women’s history, arguing that “It’s important for people to understand women’s history. That’s not political at all.” 763 The group maintained it was not radical in its views: “This is just a hall, a place of honor. As individuals we have our own beliefs, but we don’t want to become bogged down with an organizational viewpoint.” 764

When the WRNHP finally opened on July 17, 1982, Gerda Lerner proclaimed,

“The nation has, at long last, found a place of honor for its women’s rights pioneers.” 765

761 “Women’s Rights Park Opens Upstate,” New York Times , July 19, 1982, pg. B2.

762 Mike Stanton, “National Monument to Women’s Rights,” Los Angeles Times , October 4, 1979, pg. G6.

763 “‘Hall’ Banks on Women’s Achievements,” Los Angeles Times , Aug 22, 1982, pg. F16.

764 Mike Stanton, “National Monument to Women's Rights,” Los Angeles Times , Oct 4, 1979. p. G6.

765 Gerda Lerner, “Convocation on the Occasion of the Opening of the Women’s Rights Historic Park,” pg. 5, Folder III A. Grand Opening, WORI Celebrations, WRNHP.

298

The park’s opening was marked by a dramatic re-enactment of the Seneca Falls

Convention, ceremonies by the Women’s Hall of Fame and a scholarly conference on women’s history attended by over 400 people, including historians such as Ellen DuBois,

Tom Dublin and Mary Beth Norton. The conference was held, in part, to answer the accusation by Secretary of the Interior James Watt that women had no history. 766 The conference explored the links between history and contemporary concerns, with the theme of the “dynamic between historical knowledge, everyday lives.” The academic side of this public history event gave validation to the idea of “the value of the Seneca

Falls Park as a vehicle for helping the public understanding [of] that history.” 767

The organizers of the WRNHP looked to the opening weekend to garner widespread public support to gain funding from Congress. Coordinators were concerned that unless they could demonstrate the park’s viability, “this first monument to women in

American history could fall prey to the current Congressional budget mood, and disappear into archival oblivion,” as was the fate of so many previous women’s history public initiatives. 768 A motley crowd of between 3,000 and 5,000 people ascended on the town. 769 Side-by-side stood fans of M.A.S.H., Park Service representatives, both pro- and anti- ERA activists, scholars, townspeople and tourists. 770 However, the event was

766 Edith Mayo, copy of “Suffrage Leaders Return to Capitol Rotunda: An Exercise in Making Women Visible in the Public Sector,” written August 1997 for the Organization of American Historians newspaper, Vertical File Portrait Monument- Sojourner Truth Issue, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

767 Patricia Haines, “Seneca Falls: Explorations of Community and History,” October 7, 1982, pg. 4, Folder III A. Grand Opening, WORI Celebrations, WRNHP.

768 Patricia Haines, “Seneca Falls: Explorations of Community and History,” October 7, 1982, pg. 1, Folder III A. Grand Opening, WORI Celebrations, WRNHP.

769 Wellman, 244.

770 Patricia Haines, “Seneca Falls: Explorations of Community and History,” October 7, 1982, pg. 2, Folder III A. Grand Opening, WORI Celebrations, WRNHP.

299

bittersweet for many activists. Judith Wellman has noted, “Ironically, the country lost the

ERA but gained Women’s Rights National Historic Park.” 771 The Equal Rights

Amendment had failed to pass just a few weeks before on June 30, 1982. As Alda told the New York Times , “What beat us is hatred of women. People don’t care about equality, because they don’t care about women.” 772 Despite desires that the park not become enmeshed in the politics of the ERA, many activists attended the opening to call for a second effort to pass the amendment. Activists held signs that declared “ERA Will

Return,” and “Reagan Hates Women.” Another sign specifically referenced the local women’s rights past by invoking the Anthony legacy: “Susan Would B. For the ERA.” 773

Like previous invocations of women’s history since the nineteenth century, Alda attempted to move history forward by rewriting traditional narratives. His speech on opening day was a people’s history of American women, “‘public history Alda-style.” As one commentator described the address, “You could almost feel the stirring of the historical imagination, the spirit of 1848 coming alive, at least for that moment.” 774 In many respects, it was a popular referendum on the new social history that focused on women. He spoke of “ghosts” of powerful women in the past who “haunt the margins of our history books,” declaring “But the day is past when the history of women can be written in invisible ink.” In his triumphant narrative, Alda compared Wesleyan Chapel to

771 Wellman, “‘It’s a Wide Community Indeed,’” 247.

772 “Women’s Rights Park Opens Upstate,” New York Times , July 19, 1982, pg. B2.

773 Freda Leinwand, “Seneca Falls, NY, 1982,” photograph, Folder 16, Freda Leinwand Photographs, unprocessed collection, SL and “Women’s Rights Park Opens Upstate,” New York Times , July 19, 1982, pg. B2.

774 Patricia Haines, “Seneca Falls: Explorations of Community and History,” October 7, 1982, pg. 2, Folder III A. Grand Opening, WORI Celebrations, WRNHP.

300

Independence Hall. “These modest buildings of Seneca Falls that we dedicate today are as much a part of the soul of our democracy as those revered halls in which white, propertied men granted themselves freedom, liberty and democracy. Maybe more so,” he suggested as Wesleyan Chapel heard calls for both the abolition of slavery and equal rights for women. “We must never let them fade from our memory.” 775

Alda posited Seneca Falls as a source to help Americans move history forward and advance women’s equality. “Without memory of the people who have gone before us, we are constantly forced to start from scratch each time we try to move forward,” he argued. Invoking the legacy of feminist pioneers, Alda passionately proclaimed, “With their strong voices in our ears, America will finally declare one day that “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex.” He concluded, “With their wisdom in our hearts, this country will understand that an Amendment to our Constitution guaranteeing equality of rights is not a symbolic gesture….but an urgently needed legal instrument.” 776

The creation of the WRNHP symbolized the crest of the second wave of feminism’s search for a usable past. As a national monument, it broke new ground in institutionalizing a collective memory of women’s rights. From opening day, the parameters of the park would eventually be drawn to include a Visitor Center opened

1982, the restored Stanton House opened in 1985, the preserved remnants of the

Wesleyan Chapel, opened in 1993 after a national design competition and the M’Clintock

House which opened to the public in 2004. Despite hard working community leaders and

775 Alan Alda’s Speech, July 17, 1982, Folder III A. Grand Opening, WORI Celebrations, WRNHP.

776 Ibid.

301

Park Service employees, lack of funding and poor attendance figures (averaging only 90 visitors a day even in the peak season) suggest the continued challenges for the site. 777

Putting ‘Truth’ Back Into History: Race, Feminism and the Politics of Memory

In the years following the opening of the WRNHP, uproar over a public monument revealed the critical role history plays in defining feminist identity and how feminist identity defines history. The creation of the WRNHP helped establish precedent for commemorating the history of women in national memorials. As more activists became concerned with preserving the past, questions over the politics of memory became more complex. In 1995, controversy erupted over the proposal to relocate the

Woman Movement sculpture of Anthony, Stanton and Mott. Renamed the Portrait

Monument , the campaign to move the statue from the basement crypt of the U.S. Capitol to a more visible location in the Rotunda underscored the sexism in American society.

When some African American women activists demanded the inclusion of Sojourner

Truth, longstanding debates over racism in the women’s movement made national headlines.

The uproar over the memorial became a lightening rod that exposed simmering tensions in the women’s movement. In essence, the fight over memory suggests just how much the history of women matters, prompting the question, what is “true” history? In the desire to rewrite the past, women activists sought to give credibility to their own versions of truth, history and politics. Contemporary debates over gender, race, equal rights and family values were draped in the mantle of feminist pioneers.

777 Linda Greenhouse, “A Quiet Place to Start a Revolution,” New York Times , August 18, 2006, pg. F1.

302

Certainly, the symbolic meaning attached to the pioneers of the movement had always been contested. Even Stanton and Anthony had rewritten their own versions of history to bolster their authority and cement their leadership status. 778 NAWSA and the

NWP clashed during the final years of the suffrage movement and throughout the following decades over ownership of the past. It was as part of that battle over historical memory that in 1921 the NWP forced on an unwilling Congress a statue to commemorate woman suffrage. Instead of the intended place of honor in the Rotunda, the statue languished for seven decades, first in the basement broom closet, and later behind a pillar, facing the wall of the crypt in the U.S. Capitol. 779 Women’s groups lobbied

Congress in 1928, 1932 and 1950 to relocate the statue.780 Women activists, especially the NWP, continued to use the statue as a touchstone for women’s politics. Notably, in

1969, Shirley Chisholm, who counted Anthony as one of her idols, was shown in the

Washington Post paying her respect to the pioneers in front of the monument. 781 The final push to move the statue began in 1990 when activists celebrated the 70 th anniversary of the Nineteenth Amendment and the commemoration brought renewed attention to the forgotten statue. But it was only in 1996 that legislation passed to give the monument a more prominent location and in 1997 the statue was finally relocated to the Rotunda. 782

778 See Tetrault, The Memory of a Movement .

779 See chapter three of this dissertation.

780 U.S. Congress, Senate, Relocation of the “Portrait Monument,” 104th Cong., 1st sess. Congressional Record S10563 (July 24, 1995).

781 Elizabeth Shelton, “Shirley Chisholm: ‘Our Full Share Now,’” The Washington Post , April 28, 1969, pg. B1.

782 For an overview of the statue controversy, see Courtney Workman, “The Woman Movement: Memorial to Women’s Rights Leaders and the Perceived Images of the Women’s Movement,” in Myth, Memory, and the Making of the American Landscape , edited by Paul A. Shackel (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2001).

303

Keeping the statue in the basement became a metaphor for the current state of women’s rights. Like the Laundromat on the site of the Wesleyan Chapel, the statue in the crypt symbolized the lack of value given to women’s accomplishments in society. In addition, the drive to move the statue occurred amidst enormous backlash against women’s rights and the ascendancy of conservative politics that favored “family values” over feminist ideals. In the mid-1990s, feminists were alarmed at the increasing curtailment of women’s constitutional right to reproductive freedoms, lack of funding for violence against women and continued inequity in equal pay. As one politician framed the issue, the refusal to move the statue “is symbolic of this Congress’ assault against women. If women cannot gain a reasonable place in the Capitol rotunda, what can we expect legislatively?” She added, “women gained the right to vote 75 years ago, but we still have a long way to go, even to get out of the basement.” 783

The drive to move the statue was rooted in the belief that the U.S. Capitol needed to become a less masculine space both literally and figuratively. Towards the end of her life, Alice Paul, the originator of the memorial in 1921, recalled, “It was one of the really big things we did, because it was starting women to have a feeling of respect for women and by putting statues of women in the Capitol when it had always been a Capitol of men.” 784 The irony of the situation—a mainly all-male Congress refusing to move a women’s memorial—was not lost on activists and feminists quickly pointed out the underlying issues about gender, politics and power. Feminist activist Caroline Sparks

783 U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Representative Jane Harman of California speaking on Women Still Have a Long Way to Go, 104th Cong., 1st sess, Congressional Record H9596 (September 28, 1995).

784 Alice Paul, Conversations with Alice Paul, 265.

304

observed that when one entered the Rotunda it was apparent that the statues were “all these powerful male figures, and the women are simply absent.” 785 The design of the room with its exclusivity of male statues “creates the impression that history was forged by men and men alone.” 786 Sparks jokingly expressed her outrage, “It’s not nice to put your forefathers in the living room and your foremothers in the basement.” 787

The debate over the statue inspired numerous parodies, however, the jokes, while humorous, emphasized real stereotypes feminists faced. One satirical flyer listed the top ten reasons why Congress was delaying moving the sculpture, mocking perceptions of women and politics. “We can’t move it because the next thing you know they’ll want us to pass the ERA,” ran one explanation. Yet another rationale hinted that perhaps

Congress felt that women had used up their quotas on memorials: “we already tried to honor Susan B. Anthony with a dollar coin and no one even used it.” And finally, satirizing the dialogue on family values, “A woman’s place is in the basement. It’s this kind of move that is tearing at the moral fiber of this great nation.” 788

Much of the discussion circulated around how inappropriate or “ugly” the statue was, reviving the old nickname for the memorial of “Three Ladies in a Bathtub.”

Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney replied to criticism by stating that “calling the statue

‘unattractive’ belittles the accomplishments of the women who are depicted. Mr. Lincoln

785 Cindy Loose, “They Got the Vote, but Not the Rotunda,” Washington Post , August 19, 1995, clipping, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

786 “Bring the Women Up from the Crypt,” Washington International Sept/Oct 1992, clipping, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

787 Cindy Loose, “They Got the Vote, but Not the Rotunda,” Washington Post , August 19, 1995, clipping, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

788 “Top Ten Excuses Used to delay Moving The Statue To The Rotunda,” Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

305

is not in the Rotunda because of his beauty. He is there because of his contributions to the nation.” 789 In an attempt to add humor to the situation, feminists joked that Congress was

“waiting to replace ‘ugly’ statue with new design featuring Elle McPherson, Cindy

Crawford, and Claudia Schiffer.” 790 Comedy aside, feminists complained that focusing on trivial cosmetic concerns disparaged American women. These debates mirrored earlier criticism levied at the statue when it was first unveiled in the 1920s. As one activist complained, “the resistance met recently is almost like history repeating itself.” 791

For many women activists, the statue symbolized the unfulfilled promise of

American feminism. In 1990, a coalition of women’s groups, led by the Feminist

Institute, the Alice Paul Foundation, the NWP and other women’s organizations launched a campaign to move the statue. On August 26, 1990, the 70 th anniversary of suffrage, activists and politicians assembled in the crypt. “We want to use this opportunity to get the message across to the public that this statue, hidden by a pillar, is symbolic of the trivialization of the women’s movement,” said Rosemary Dempsey, a vice president of

NOW. Activists used this history as a referendum on the state of contemporary women’s issues. Dempsey argued that there were important lessons to be taken from the history that the statue represented: “In many areas of women’s rights, we lag behind several countries in the Western world, especially in the right to reproductive freedom, the Equal

Rights Amendment, parental leave laws and daycare facilities.” 792 After the attempt to

789 Quotation taken from Workman, 54.

790 “Top Ten Excuses Used to delay Moving The Statue To The Rotunda,” Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

791 Cindy Loose, “They Got the Vote, but Not the Rotunda,” Washington Post, August 19, 1995, clipping, Vertical File, Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

792 Ibid.

306

move the statue failed in 1990, activists regrouped for the 75 th anniversary in 1995.

Activists Joan Meacham and Karen Staser, co-founders of the National Museum of

Women’s History (NMWH), helped organize the second drive, now named the Woman

Suffrage Statue Campaign (WSSC), which lobbied for relocation. The statue captured the imagination of women across the country. In order to move the statue, supporters built a grassroots movement with over 80 organizations supporting the campaign. 793

Five years later the motivation behind the campaign remained the same: feminists wanted heroines included alongside other American heroes such as George Washington,

Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King. The significance placed on the monument was the connection drawn between historical representation and political recognition. As

Edith Mayo, curator at the National Museum of American History, explained the importance of moving the memorial, “Historical visibility means empowerment in the present.” 794 One of the movement’s leaders, Caroline Sparks related that “We felt then, and we still feel, that we need public symbols that depict women who have participated in the creation of our Nation. We are concerned that visitors to the Capitol Rotunda are left with the impression that women had nothing to do with the founding of the Nation.” 795

Without knowing it, Sparks echoed sentiments that had been expressed by women activists for over 150 years. Historical reformers such as Rose Arnold Powell had also argued for the importance of representing women in public memorials. As Staser stated,

793 Groups like Coalition of Labor Union Women, Democratic National Committee, National league of Women Voters, Republican National Committee and National Federation of Republican Women, National Women’s History Project and the National Museum of Women’s History.

794 Raj Kamal Jha, “Cry of Liberation for Suffragists,” The Washington Post , August 27, 1990, pg. B1.

795 U.S. Congress, Senate, Caroline H. Sparks, Ph.D., Chair of the 75th Anniversary Women’s Rights Festival and March and Co-Chair of the “Move the Statue” campaign, speaking on the Relocation of the Portrait Monument, 104th Cong., 1st sess., Congressional Record S10563 (July 24, 1995).

307

“We communicate what’s important to remember to future generations by what we choose to memorialize, particularly in the heart of the nation’s Capitol. And we say much about who we are by what we don’t display.” 796 In the 1990s, only about 5 percent of the nation’s 2,300 National Historic Landmarks were dedicated to women. Like Powell sixty years before, these proponents of women’s memorials saw the importance of symbols in changing people’s consciousness.

The resistance to moving the statue focused on several fronts, notably aesthetics, financial, logistical and attitudes towards women and feminism. Critics argued that the

13-ton sculpture weighed too much, making it difficult and too costly to move. Some lawmakers also objected that the statue of Roger Williams would have to be moved to make way for the memorial. Republican Representative Sue Myrick among others opposed the use of spending federal funds to move the statue. She offered a compromise position to place the statue of Esther Morris in the Rotunda as a less expensive option

(but also a less powerfully symbolic image of the feminist past). The criticism over finances really was about value—and whether women’s history was worthy of funds.

Ultimately, the suffrage statue would be relocated through private donations.

Many politicians did not seem to appreciate the importance of the monument or what it represented for today’s women. When queried about the statue, House Speaker

Newt Gingrich reportedly assured women that he was “in favor of suffrage.” 797 In response to such comments, feminists circulated humorous flyers with jokes, for

796 Press Release, The Woman Suffrage Statue Campaign, July 20, 1996, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

797 Cindy Loose, “They Got the Vote, but Not the Rotunda,” Washington Post, August 19, 1995, clipping, Vertical File, Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

308

example, “This thing commemorates the 19 th what,” and “since when have women had the right to vote…who authorized that?” 798 The WSSC encouraged supporters to write to

Gingrich demanding action. Congresswoman Maloney wrote an appeal to Gingrich to schedule a vote, “Again, Mr. Speaker, American women ask the same question they asked President Wilson: how long must we wait?” 799 One woman who described herself as a conservative Republican who stayed at home with her son to “put into practice the

‘family values,’ always talked about among politicians,” wrote to Gingrich to voice her support of the statue. She perceptively noted, “Images like that are very powerful. If they weren’t we would have no need for the Lincoln Memorial, Jefferson Memorial, Spiro

Agnew bust, etc.” She concluded, “What an honor it would be to one day visit the Capitol with my son and not only see the many statues that he can relate to his father but also a statue that he can relate to his mother.” 800

Regardless of age or political beliefs, many women could unite around a common symbol and the importance of promoting women’s history. Another Republican supporter of Gingrich, a 14-year old girl, wrote expressing how displeased she was with his refusal to take action on moving the statue. She complained she did not learn in school about women. But from her mother, “I have learned that women, in fact, have contributed in abundance to the development of civilization. Everyday, I am learning more and more of hidden accomplishments made by women in the past.” She informed the Speaker of the

798 “Top Ten Excuses Used to delay Moving The Statue To The Rotunda,” Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

799 Press Release, “Maloney Appeals to Gingrich Move Suffrage Statue,” September 21, 1996, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

800 Patty McWhorter, Marietta GA to Newt Gingrich, August 3, 1995, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

309

House: “this statue is part of our history whether you would like to believe or not. It should not be hidden from general public by being buried in the basement of the Capitol as if it were nothing of value. This statue represents half of America’s population. I cannot understand and will not accept any excuses to not move the statue.” 801

When legislation passed in 1996 to move the statue, the work for activists had only just begun. As was the case with the WRNHP, the legislation did not grant funding and as a result did not guarantee a positive outcome. Supporters organized a fundraising drive, the One Dollar Campaign. The WSSC urged members of women’s organizations and the general public to donate a dollar, eventually raising the necessary $75,000 by private donors. 802 For example, after hearing her mother read an op-ed piece, 9-year old

Arizonian Arlys Angelique Endres was inspired to publicize the cause, ultimately raising

$2,000 for the campaign. 803 When the statue was finally relocated to the Rotunda in 1997,

Staser commented that “It took longer to move the statue than to win the right to vote.” 804

Until the legislation passed, the fight focused on women activists and politicians but beginning in 1997, a new complication entered the fray when some African American feminists protested the move. They demanded relocation be halted until Sojourner Truth

801 Sara Kathleen [last name blacked out] to Mr. Gingrich, August 4, 1995, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

802 On Dollar Campaign info sheet, Woman Suffrage Statue Campaign, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

803 Janice K. Bryant, “Unfinished In the Battle Over a Feminist Monument, 150 Years of Racial Tension,” On the Issues – The Progressive Woman’s Quarterly , Fall 1997, Vertical Files Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

804 Ellen Goodman, “The Work is Still Unfinished,” unidentified clipping, N.D. Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

310

could be carved into the unfinished block of marble. 805 Janette Hoston Harris, historian and head of the National Congress of Black Women (NCBW) Sojourner Truth

Commission declared, “If we are to write history correctly, we cannot allow this statue to go forth without the inclusion of Sojourner Truth. We are writing history for the future.

To deny Sojourner Truth her rightful place in history would be an affront to all women.” 806

Whereas previously the campaign was notable for the mainly bipartisan unity among supporters, the controversy surrounding Sojourner Truth illustrates the complications of identity politics. Suddenly, the terrain of the debate shifted and it was now a struggle between women activists. From the start of the relocation campaign, organizers had conceived of the statue as a universal icon representative of every woman and the needs of all women despite the memorial’s portrayal of three white, middle-class women. “All women are included in the women’s movement,” Rep. Patricia Schroeder and co-sponsor of the event had declared. “Minority women get a double whack of discrimination. We have been fighting for all the minorities, including black women and

Native American women.” 807 Either knowingly or unknowingly, history as symbol often transcends particulars of historical truth—for example the perceived racism of Stanton— for purposes of political expediency or the lack of complexity that comes with memorialization.

805 For more on the symbolism of Sojourner Truth see Nell Irvin Painter, Sojourner Truth: a Life, a Symbol (New York: W.W. Norton, 1996).

806 Dorothy Gilliam, “Measuring a Statue by Its Truth,” Washington Post , March 22, 1997, copy of article, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

807 Raj Kamal Jha, “Cry of Liberation for Suffragists,” The Washington Post , August 27, 1990, pg. B1.

311

The protest in support of adding Truth was part of a long history of racial tension among women activists. Since the Civil War, the women’s movement had been divided over issues of race. Foreshadowing the debate over adding Truth, in 1921, during the original dedication of the statue, Alice Paul and the NWP did not let African American women speak at the ceremony. 808 Suffragist and co-founder of the NACCP, Mary White

Ovington had cautioned Paul that when the statue is unveiled “and it is realized that no colored woman has been given any part in your great session, the omission will be keenly felt by thousands of people throughout the country.” 809 Not surprisingly, African

American activists in the 1990s would echo Ovington’s arguments about race and representation. Going even further, they demanded not just a share in white women’s history but full historical visibility. The civil rights and Black Power movements had encouraged African American activists to search for symbols of their own. Tellingly, while Shirley Chisholm paid homage in front of the Portrait Monument in 1969, when inaugurating her presidential campaign in 1972 she chose Sojourner Truth’s gravesite. 810

Historical animosity was rekindled during the second wave of feminism when many women of color protested that the movement focused only on white, middle-class women, as for example as seen in the debate over Judy Chicago’s The Dinner Party and this strain continued into the 1990s. In 1995, for instance, on the 75 th anniversary of the

Nineteenth Amendment, feminists held a reenactment of the famous 1913 march for

808 See chapter three of this dissertation for more on this issue.

809 Document 10: Letter from Mary White Ovington to Alice Paul, 4 January 1921in How Did the National Woman’s Party Address the Issue of the Enfranchisement of Black Women, 1919-1924?, by Kathryn Kish Sklar and Jill Dias (Binghamton, NY: State University of New York at Binghamton, 1997).

810 Elizabeth Shelton, “Shirley Chisholm: ‘Our Full Share Now,’” The Washington Post , April 28, 1969, pg. B1.

312

suffrage. The African American women’s organization, the Delta Sigma Theta Sorority was refused permission to march on a false belief that the group had not participated in the original parade. This was particularly offensive considering the irony that it was during the 1913 parade that black suffragists, including the Deltas, were asked to march in the back. It was only after archival research proved that the sorority had indeed marched, that the Deltas were allowed to participate. 811 As one activist declared in 1997,

“the movement remains stained with racism.” 812

With this legacy of rifts, some African American feminists saw the sculpture as a monument to white women’s rights. Like Powell in the 1930s, the memory of the nineteenth century debate over the Fifteenth Amendment continued to inspire women activists to right battles fought long ago. But unlike Powell who found different meaning in the controversy, African American feminists in the 1990s referred to the racism over the Fifteenth Amendment debate as a reason to add Truth to the memorial. As C. Delores

Tucker, Chair of the NCBW, revealed on the radio broadcast, Democracy Now! “We shall not be left out of history again.” Tucker explained that in the nineteenth century,

Truth sided with white feminists over black men only to be later betrayed by the white women. Because of this betrayal, Tucker argued that white feminists today should not betray her again: “Why is it so impossible for them [the women of the Woman Suffrage

Statue Campaign] to say all right if she [Sojourner Truth] stepped back and gave up her

811 Janice K. Bryant, “Unfinished In the Battle Over a Feminist Monument, 150 Years of Racial Tension,” On the Issues – The Progressive Woman’s Quarterly , Fall 1997, Vertical Files Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP. See also Paula Gidding, In Search of Sisterhood: Delta Sigma Theta and the Challenge of the Black Sorority Movement (New York: Morrow, 1988).

812 Janice K. Bryant, “Unfinished In the Battle Over a Feminist Monument, 150 Years of Racial Tension,” On the Issues – The Progressive Woman’s Quarterly , Fall 1997, Vertical Files Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

313

right and supported the right of feminists rather than the black men. Why it is they can’t leave it [the suffrage statue] there right now until we get the proper statue [with Truth added] placed in the Rotunda?” 813 Tucker questioned her opponents, “How can you do that when you know the history? And then you want to leave her out and say that this represents the suffragette movement. That symbol does not. It represents three white feminists….” 814

Both white and black feminists saw in the statue an opportunity to redress historical wrongs. African American feminists who opposed moving the statue until

Truth was added literally wanted to re-sculpt history. But not all black women were in agreement. Many black women’s organizations supported the Women Suffrage Statue

Campaign, including the National Council of Negro Women, the Delta Sigma Theta

Sorority, the Black Women’s Agenda, and the National Association of Colored Women’s

Clubs. The Congressional Black Caucus voted unanimously in support of HR216, the legislation authorizing the statue’s relocation. One vocal supporter was Adele Logan

Alexander, assistant professor of History at George Washington University, and granddaughter of suffragist Mary Church Terrell. Calling herself, “something of a purist,”

Alexander believed it was “wrong to start trying to re-create a piece of art—created in the past—into an image we have today.” In contrast, Harris of the NCBW argued that “our mission should be to correct history.” She questioned “if we’re not correcting history, what are we preserving for our future?” She likened the statue to new black history books which helped balance out the history presented in standard texts which showed black

813 “Suffrage Statue,” radio debate between Joan Meacham and C. Delores Tucker on Democracy Now! aired April 15, 1997 available at http://www.democracynow.org/1997/4/15/suffrage_statue.

814 Ibid.

314

history as a history of slavery. “But,” Harris declared, “we have done much more than that.” 815

The Woman Suffrage Statue Campaign attempted a compromise but ultimately the two groups could not reconcile before the statue was relocated. One historian bemoaned that “these women [in the suffrage statue] would take the hit for the fact that this has been a racist society, I mean, this is a fight to get a statue into a room full of slaveholders.” Considering that Stanton and Mott met at an antislavery convention and all three women were involved in the abolition movement, she pointed out that “Ironically, the statue would be the most prominent tribute to anti-slavery activities in the Capitol.” 816

Although the WSSC supported the plan to add a separate statue of Truth, they complained that the NCBW raised their complaints too late for them to take timely action. The WSSC claimed that the NCBW was formally invited to join the endeavor on three occasions over two years and they waited until one month after the legislation had passed to make their demands. 817 As a compromise, Staser and the WSSC favored adding a separate statue of Truth but only after the Portrait Monument was relocated because the legislation authorizing the move had a one year limit for putting the statue on view. The

815 Janice K. Bryant, “Unfinished In the Battle Over a Feminist Monument, 150 Years of Racial Tension,” On the Issues – The Progressive Woman’s Quarterly , Fall 1997, Vertical Files Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

816 Ann Gordon quoted in Ellen Goodman, “The Work is Still Unfinished,” unidentified clipping, N.D. National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

817 “Talking Points On Return of ‘Portrait Monument’ to Rotunda And National Outreach of Statue Campaign,” National Museum of Women’s History, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

315

WSSC worried that delays to add Truth could derail the whole endeavor. However,

Harris called Staser’s suggestion to add Truth afterwards as “an attempt to pacify us.” 818

The notion of “Truth” in history was more than a clever pun on Sojourner’s name: it was the conceptual framework for the debate. The NCBW argued that “Segregation is

No Answer!” 819 and “Don’t leave TRUTH out of Women’s History!” Tucker argued:

“This is a struggle about Truth and for Truth,” “a struggle about and for a different kind of truth – the truth that America’s national symbols ought to tell about its past history, and about its present values” 820 Both sides of the controversy raised doubts about the veracity of the pageant of American history told through the male sculptures in the

Rotunda. But like academic historians, women activists discovered the difficulties of creating a new collective memory. More dramatic than rewriting history textbooks, physically changing the nation’s sites of memory exploded questions of gender and race.

Previously, the statue had been conceived as either a monument to women’s progress or a reminder of the history of the unequal power relations between men and women. Once black feminists voiced their objections the statue took on new meaning, representing the complex history of unequal power relations between women.

After the Portrait Monument was relocated in 1997, the NCBW continued lobbying for a bust of Truth and in the process constructed a forceful argument for the

818 Dorothy Gilliam, “Measuring a Statue by Its Truth,” Washington Post , March 22, 1997, copy of article, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

819 C. Delores Tucker, “Demanding an Accurate Portrayal of the Women’s Movement in History…The Struggle for Truth,” National Congress of Black Women, Portrait Monument- Sojourner Truth Issue, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

820 Ibid.

316

important role African American women played in the suffrage struggle. 821 The

Sojourner Truth Crusade argued, “Once again, our history has been altered to make

African Americans invisible. But seldom has the omission been so glaring.” The NCBW argued that “Omitting Sojourner Truth…is the equivalent of memorializing the

Declaration of Independence without Jefferson or the Revolutionary War without

Washington.”822 In 2009, the efforts of the NCBW paid off, and after raising $500,000, a bust was installed, making it the first sculpture of a black woman in the U.S. Capitol.

The controversy over the statue reveals how deeply personal history was for these women activists. Possessive pronouns such as “we” and “our” peppered the language of the debate, which resonated with the subjective importance given to the past. History was less about yesterday than today. The statue garnered such controversy precisely because the stakes were so high. History was not abstract or remote but intrinsically tied to these women’s sense of identity. The historical significance of the statue was amplified because of the public nature of memorials. This was not only history for activists but for a wider audience. In this sense, the statue mattered because it had the possibility to communicate women’s historical achievement to people who did not already know the story. Placing the memorial in the Rotunda symbolically gave official recognition to women’s equal status (or so it was hoped). Thus whether the statue of the three pioneers was or was not going to be moved—or whether Truth was or was not going to be added—it was seen as an extension of the value given to these groups in the present.

821 See Rosalyn Terborg-Penn, African American Women in the Struggle for the Vote, 1850-1920 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1998).

822 Document in support in Sojourner Truth memorial, National Congress of Black Women, July 3, 2002, Portrait Monument- Sojourner Truth Issue, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

317

Conclusion

On the centennial of the Statue of Liberty in 1986, Gabrielle Bernard of

Cambridge, MA wrote to the New York Times criticizing their coverage of the event. She was disappointed that in all the coverage, nothing was said of the importance of the statue to American women: “Men will probably never understand how famished women are for female symbols. We are inundated with male monuments. We claim that woman in the harbor as one of us.” 823 Yet for other women, idealized abstractions like the Statue of

Liberty were not enough to fulfill the desire for women’s historical visibility. For example, activists of the WSSC demanded the “right to see real women honored…for real accomplishment.” 824 Karen Staser protested that “The Statue of Freedom, the Statue of Liberty: these are icons, not real women that girls and women can look up to.” She declared, “We want real women, not icons.” 825

Despite differing opinions on representations of women in memorials, both

Bernard’s and Staser’s comments suggest the longing many women had for a more public celebration of female heritage. It may not be a coincidence that in the 1980s and 1990s, public memorials took up so much energy of women activists. Like the 1920s and 1930s, in the aftermath of a mass movement, activists struggled to continue their activism despite backlash and the quickening of historical amnesia about feminism. Constructing

823 “Statue of Liberty Stands Also as a Powerful Feminist Symbol,” New York Times , July 15, 1986, pg. A28.

824 Faxed info sheet, Woman Suffrage Statue Campaign, September 21, 1996, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

825 James Brooke, “Suffragists (in Marble) Win a Niche in the Capitol,” New York Times , September 27, 1996, pg. A18.

318

public memorials was a concrete way to continue to give publicity to women’s issues and ensure historical recognition for the movement. The efforts of these women not only established the WRNHP and the relocation of the Portrait Monument but also other public monuments such The Boston Women’s Memorial in 2003 and the sculptures of

Jeannette Rankin, Maria Sanford, Sarah Winnemucca, Sacajawea and Mother Joseph, Po’

Pay included in the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, when it opened in 2008. The following year, those five statues were joined by the bust of Sojourner Truth.

At the heart of the struggles over creating a women’s public history was the question of representation and access to resources. In constructing a public history for women, activists faced new difficulties: the complications of constructing “official” history, concerns for the legitimacy of the professional field of women’s history, the complexities of federal bureaucracy and the challenges of fully realizing a multicultural vision of women’s past. In many respects, the long desired national recognition of women’s history was a double-edged sword. On one hand, federal support gave important legitimacy to the endeavor, often making the construction of these sites and memorials possible. But on the other hand, in creating “official” history, women’s past had to meet bi-partisan demands, which at times conflicted with demands for explicitly feminist viewpoints. The extent of government assistance and public support varied considerably over the years, and it often took significant battles to win even moderate support.

Interestingly, after both the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920 and during the decline of second wave feminism, activists turned to the nineteenth century past to symbolically represent the accomplishments of the women’s movement. Instead of memorializing contemporary women leaders such as Alice Paul or Carrie Chapman

319

Catt in the 1920s or for example, Betty Friedan or Gloria Steinem in the 1990s, earlier foremothers such as Stanton and Anthony continued to be the choice for feminist memorials. The politics of memory and the dynamics of social movements made memorializing the distant past an easier option, although the controversy surrounding the suffrage statue demonstrates how even that approach to commemoration was a complex and messy process. It remains to be seen how second wave feminists will attempt to preserve their own history or how future feminists will commemorate that movement.

A women’s public history helped respond to criticism that women did not have a history. While women activists involved in movement politics quickly discovered the rich but unrecognized history of women through the ages, most Americans still knew little of this past. Memorials made visible women’s vital contributions to American democracy.

The memorials, historic sites and public history initiatives undertaken since 1976 argued for women’s historical worth and thus intervened into debates about women’s equality.

Like academic historians who learned that one could not just take an “add women and stir” approach to history, women activists and public historians faced similar difficulties in creating new narratives of American history that were inclusive to women.

From the very beginning of an organized movement for women’s rights in the

United States, women activists have desired a heritage for their social activism. Up until the institutionalization of women’s history in the 1980s and 1990s, however, each generation was forced to rediscover women hidden from history. With the creation of public history initiatives such as the inclusion of women in the Bicentennial commemoration, the establishment of the WRNHP and the relocation of the Portrait

Monument , future generations of women activists looking for role models for their

320

activism might find the path to historical empowerment an easier one to navigate. Yet, one wonders, if it is the oppositional act of discovery that has captured the zeal of women activists over so many generations. Does the symbolic power of history come from each generation finding new meaning from the past? When women’s history becomes established in national memory does it hold the same power to inspire?

321

EPILOGUE FROM THE DINNER PARTY TO THE TEA PARTY: REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS AND RECENT CONTROVERSIES IN THE FEMINIST USABLE PAST

During her lifetime, birth control advocate Margaret Sanger was no stranger to scandal. But when Sanger’s memory was resurrected in 2011, 45 years after her death, it unleashed a new firestorm. On a Sunday morning in October on CBS’s “Face the

Nation,” reporter Bob Schieffer asked GOP Presidential Candidate and Tea Party Activist

Herman Cain if he stood by his allegations that he had made 6 months previously that

Planned Parenthood was “planned genocide” with the purpose “to kill black babies.”

Cain replied, “If people go back and look at the history and look at Margaret Sanger’s own words, that’s exactly where that came from. Look up the history.” 826 Cain’s accusations reframed the abortion debate using race as a divider among women and brought misleading ideas circulating in the anti-abortion community to the wider

American public. As the most recent biographer of Sanger has argued, “her name is employed as a despised symbol.” Such allegations represent “purposeful propaganda” meant to discredit Planned Parenthood, one of the most important providers of women’s reproductive healthcare in the United States. 827 This debate engenders a new image of

Sanger who since the women’s liberation movement has been a feminist icon, celebrated widely from Judy Chicago’s The Dinner Party to feminist t-shirts declaring “Margaret

826 Glenn Kessler, “Fact checker: Herman Cain on Abortion,” The Washington Post , Nov 6, 2011, pg. A.7.

827 Jean Baker, Margaret Sanger: A Life of Passion (New York: Hill and Wang, 2011), 3.

322

Sanger Is My Homegirl.” This latest refashioning of Sanger is the most highly publicized in a long line of recent controversies concerning historical memory, feminism and reproductive rights.

As the polarizing debate over Sanger’s image suggests, the battle for women’s history is underway. Feminist icons beware: even well-established heroines could expect a political make-over. Just as women were finding a place in American collective memory, the meaning behind these historical figures has became increasingly contested.

Two organizations in particular, Feminists for Life (FFL) and the Susan B. Anthony List have sought to rehabilitate the historical memory of the pioneers of the women’s movement, especially Susan B. Anthony, in order to create a usable past for an anti- abortion feminism. The Anthony List was created in 1993 to fund pro-life women running for office and was named after the women’s rights pioneer because the organizers believed that Anthony embodied an anti-abortion legacy for women concerned with women’s welfare but were uncomfortable with a feminism associated with pro- choice politics. Similarly, Anthony is the patron saint of the feminist vision embodied by

FFL, founded in 1972. FFL’s search for a usable past culminated with the purchase of

Anthony’s birthplace in 2006, which opened to the public in 2010. Like other women activists before them, anti-abortion feminists have challenged women’s historical invisibility, used the past in social protest and created a gendered public history.

The battle fought over historical memory by FFL and the Anthony List raises the question of who gets to claim women’s history. Events like the 1970 Women’s Strike for

Equality helped associate the women’s rights past with the politics of women’s liberation, including reproductive rights. Thus recent historical interventions by anti-abortion

323

feminists are attempts at reclaiming women’s history for women with more conservative views on certain social and political issues. Like HOW, LWV and the GFWC, organizations uncomfortable with the suffrage commemoration held during the Women’s

Strike for Equality, Feminists For Life resented the idea that mainstream feminists spoke for all women and intensified efforts to lay claim to the women’s rights past. As conservative activist Nina May argued in 1997, “So how could a handful of women, changing history for all women and men, embracing philosophies, beliefs and values as conservative women do today, be co-opted by a movement [women’s liberation] that openly disdain all they represented by today’s standards?” 828 Like other women activists for over 150 years, anti-abortion feminists made women’s history central to their political activism and laid claim to the past as a basis of their feminist identity.

At the center of FFL’s vision was the belief they were following the true meaning of feminist history, what they called the “pro-woman, pro-life legacy.” 829 FFL worked alongside other women’s organizations for the passage of the Violence Against Women

Act, enhanced child support enforcement laws and for a time in the 1970s to ratify the

ERA but differed from most self-identified feminist groups in their opposition to abortion. Their arguments rested on the notion that nineteenth-century pioneers were anti- abortion. While Anthony stands as the patron saint of the movement, FFL honors a wide array of women in history, including Jane Addams, Louisa May Alcott, Elizabeth

Blackwell, Fannie Lou Hamer, Graciela Olivarez, Alice Paul, Elizabeth Cady Stanton,

828 Nina May, “A Renaissance of Womanhood,” Paradigm Magazine , Spring 97, pg. 6, Vertical File Suffrage Monument, National Woman’s Party Collection, NWP.

829 “Feminists for Life Celebrates our Pro-Woman, Pro-Life Legacy,” The American Feminist ,Volume 11, Number 1, Spring, 2004, 1.

324

Frances Willard, Mary Wollstonecraft and Victoria Woodhull. As FFL President Serrin

Foster stated, “Most people have no idea how Alice Paul and other suffragists suffered for our right to vote. Even fewer know they opposed abortion.” 830 Promotional material juxtaposed photos of Anthony and Stanton with slogans exclaiming, “Reclaim your feminist roots” and “uncompromising feminists refuse to choose.” 831 Suzanne

Schnittman, Ph.D. in American History, who served on the Board of Directors of FFL of

New York argued, “If we honestly examine the words of our feminist foremothers, we see a dedication to the full woman in all her strengths and a celebration of life, born and unborn. Digging to find those sources provides us with a lifelong but joy-filled challenge.” 832

Legal historian Reva Siegel has analyzed how anti-abortion strategy has shifted away from the moral question of when life begins to reframing abortion as a women’s issue. Instead of emphasizing the fetus, the new rhetoric emphasizes that abortion harms women. 833 Ellen Kennedy Johnson, an instructor of English Literature made such an argument when she explained the importance of women’s history to her politics. She related, “People misunderstand how abortion rights actually further women’s oppression and the rhetoric surrounding them limit women’s freedom of choice. That’s why a closer reading of the writings of our feminist foremothers is imperative to the real understanding

830 “Alice Paul Refused to Choose between women born and unborn,” The American Feminist , Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2004, 27.

831 Images can be found at http://www.feministsforlife.org/SBA/SBAtransfers.htm.

832 Laura Ciampa, “Inspired by Our Feminist Foremothers,” The American Feminist , Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2004, 6.

833 Reva Siegel, “The Right’s Reasons: Constitutional Conflict and the Spread of Woman-Protective Antiabortion Argument,” Duke Law Journal Vol. 57 (2008): 1641-1692.

325

of what accounts for equal rights for women.” 834 And as Rachel M. MacNair, Ph.D., argued “the very words that are used by today’s abortion advocates were understood by the nineteenth-century feminists as reasons to understand abortion not as a woman’s right but as a wrong against women.” 835

The emphasis on women, while arguably a practical strategy of the movement, does not detract from the fact that members of FFL drew real inspiration from the past.

Women who felt strongly about the politics of abortion could find comfort in a heritage for their views. FFL member Ashli E. McCall of Quincy, Florida argued that she had been “duped by the pseudo feminist, abortion-supporting movement.” She claimed that

“It cost me a child and most of my self-worth. I believe that you can’t be a feminist and

‘prochoice,’ and I’m encouraged that the foremothers of the feminist movement understood this.” 836 Like suffragists and second wave feminists, the women who joined

FFL discovered historical role models and took inspiration from the past. Marjorie

Dannenfelser, Chair of the Board of the Susan B. Anthony List explained that Anthony

“believed in womanhood, acted to advance the best in it and trusted that it would prevail

…the truth of Susan B. Anthony’s mission sustained her…And it sustains me.” 837

Likewise Sally Winn, Vice President of FFL, has stated that “Elizabeth Cady Stanton is a profound yet real role model to me. As the founder of the women’s movement and mother of seven she suffered the same struggles so many of us face in boldly answering

834 Laura Ciampa, “Inspired by Our Feminist Foremothers,” The American Feminist , Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2004, 10.

835 Ibid.

836 “Impact of Suffragists Felt a Century Later,” The American Feminist , Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2004, 12.

837 Ibid.

326

the call of duty to elevate the status of women while maintaining an unwavering dedication to her beloved role as mother.” 838 And as Tish Farrell, a member from

Wilmington, Delaware stated how the early women’s rights pioneers were central to her anti-abortion feminist vision. She recalled, “Their words of wisdom are timeless and have helped me discover who and what I am… They are the epitome of what it means to be an authentic feminist and we are blessed to have them as our foremothers.” 839

Farrell’s phrasing of “authentic” feminism touches on the question of historical truth that was so central to the arguments made by the National Congress of Black

Women during the debate over the Portrait Monument relocation campaign. Thus like other women activists, FFL finds empowerment in their fight for historical recognition.

As Schnittman has argued: “Debunking the myth that nineteenth-century women’s rights supported abortion is a constant challenge, especially for historians faced with prejudice and political correctness.” 840 Both groups questioned dominant narratives of women’s history which they argued propagated a false historical memory. In the case of the

NCBW, they pointed out the omission of facts which gave a distorted picture of black women’s activism. The arguments put forth by FFL are more complicated: their case rests on the interpretation of historical sources based on modern understandings and political ideology. FFL has been critiqued for taking quotations out of context and viewing nineteenth-century questions from a presentist mindset. As Stacy Schiff argued in the New York Times , “Anthony the pro-lifer hails from a different land, the treacherous

838 Laura Ciampa, “Inspired by Our Feminist Foremothers,” The American Feminist , Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2004, 7.

839 Ibid.

840 Ibid.

327

province of cutting and pasting, of history plucked from both text and time.” 841 Just as it would be difficult to know if Anthony would in fact “B. for the ERA” as one proponent of the amendment argued, it is equally impossible to know for certain Anthony’s belief on the late twentieth-century debate on a women’s right to choose.

FFL’s alternative search for a usable past culminated in August 2006 when Carol

Crossed, on the Board of Directors of FFL of New York, purchased Anthony’s birthplace in North Adams, MA. FFL President Serrin M. Foster stated that “Susan B. Anthony challenged us to address the root causes that drive women to abortion—the same problems that face women who parent today.” She commended Crossed’s work to “keep the memory of Susan B. Anthony alive, and giving birth to a new legacy. We hope that this purchase will renew interest in the early American feminists.” 842

When the Susan B. Anthony Birthplace Museum opened on February 14, 2010, this venture into public history re-opened the debate over the place of abortion in defining

American feminism and the importance of the past to women activists. As the mission statement explains, Anthony “was a pioneering feminist and suffragist as well as a noteworthy figure in the abolitionist, opposition to Restellism, and temperance movements of the 19th century. 843 Alongside displays on suffrage, abolition and Quaker life, the Anthony birthplace includes an exhibit on early feminists opposing “Restellism,”

841 Stacy Schiff, “Desperately Seeking Susan,” New York Times , October 13, 2006, pg. A.27.

842 “Pro-Life Feminist Purchases Birthplace of Susan B. Anthony,” press release, available at http://www.feministsforlife.org/news/SBABirthplacePurchased.htm.

843 http://www.susanbanthonybirthplace.com/mission.shtml.

328

an older phrasing and euphemism for abortion. The museum offers a travelling exhibition wall on this topic to rent to schools, libraries, museums, and other venues. 844

With the inclusion of “Restellism,” the museum’s interpretation of Anthony’s legacy differs from traditional presentations, for example, the displays on Anthony’s life at the Official Susan B. Anthony House, the historic site in Rochester, NY. However, when that site was purchased for memorial purposes in 1945, it too was a contested historical space, embroiled in a battle for women’s history and the meaning of American feminism. Anthony’s memory and thus her home was caught in the crossfire between rival fractions of the suffrage movement, the NWP and NAWSA and their disagreements about the future of the movement, the ERA and which organization could claim the suffrage victory. The terms of the debate have shifted but the contest over who gets to interpret the meaning of women’s history at public history sites continues.

These recent memory skirmishes crystallize why the history of women has mattered to women activists for over 150 years. Whatever the cause, the past provides inspiration that activists are fighting on the right side of history. As such, in order to give political authenticity to their views, anti-abortion activists have draped their cause in the mantle of the pioneers. Significantly, FFL follows in a long tradition of women activists mobilizing the past including second wave feminists, Alice Paul and the NWP and even

Stanton and Anthony before them. The past has been used for everything from justification, inspiration and propaganda but no matter the reason, the battles over women’s history demonstrates a basic premise of this dissertation—that activists turn to history when fighting for change in the present. For a recent humorous example, a scholar

844 http://www.susanbanthonybirthplace.com/restellismTravelWall.shtml.

329

commentating on contemporary women’s politics and the “war on women,” looked back on women’s activism one hundred years ago, and declared, “My bet is that the women of

1912 expected us to carry on their work for justice, freedom and equity. And if they could do it in corsets, we can do it in Spanx.” 845 Such comments illustrate how historical comparison can put things in perspective and help rally the troops.

The reason women need to stand up for justice today—even in Spanx—is because of new assaults on women’s reproductive rights. For instance, on March 8, 2012,

International Women’s Day, The House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution held a hearing to discuss the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA), which would make it illegal for any person that is not a parent to escort a young woman across state lines for an abortion. Significantly, the bill is the most recent in a succession of attempts by Republicans to criminalize doctors who offer abortions, thereby further curtailing women’s constitutionally protected rights. 2011 was, in many ways, a landmark year for curbing women’s reproductive choices. State legislators introduced over 1,100 articles of anti-abortion legislation and enacted 135 of them by end of the year. Seven states either defunded or attempted to defund Planned Parenthood. 846

Interestingly, FFL complicates the current political narrative surrounding the

“war on women,” because the very fact that these anti-abortion feminists exist suggest the inadequacy of the label, unless, of course, we designate the controversy as a civil war between women. And that marches us right back into the quagmire of identity politics.

845 Gina Barreca, “A Century Later, Male Politicians Still Don’t Get It,” Hartford Courant , March 21, 2012.

846 Laura Bassett, “On International Women’s Day, Congress Debates Measure To Limit Reproductive Rights,” The Huffington Post , March 8, 2012.

330

The most recent example of the challenge of speaking for women as an overarching category (both politically and historically) occurred on March 8, 2012, which marked the

101 st anniversary of International Women’s Day. The date provided impetus for advocates on both side of the abortion debate to reengage. The commemoration occurred during escalating tensions surrounding GOP demands for curbs on abortion rights. The timing of the celebration therefore posed an opportune time for pro-choice advocates to rally opposition against such measures.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) has suggested that these recent attacks on women’s reproductive health have motivated many women to get involve in politics and take a stand by protesting. “The whole thing has touched a nerve like I've never seen,” she said. “There’s too much of it coming at us in too many ways. Right to choose; Title

X; the defunding of Planned Parenthood, the number one primary health provider for women across this country of low means; the attacks on contraception – they’re trying to turn us back to a primitive age when contraception and access to it are not available.” 847

Rep. Maloney, a staunch advocate for women’s rights including reproductive choice, has made celebrating women’s history an important part of her agenda. She was involved in the campaign to relocate the Portrait Monument in the 1990s and recently introduced the

Susan B. Anthony Birthday Act which, if passed, would designate the third Monday in

February as a day to celebrate Anthony’s legacy. It would also be the first Federal holiday to celebrate the birthday of a woman. 848 However, it is likely that this measure

847 Ibid.

848 http://maloney.house.gov/issue/susan-b-anthony-birthday-act.

331

has as much chance of passing as did Rose Arnold Powell’s hoped for legislation in the

1930s adding Anthony to Mount Rushmore.

From the first rumblings of an organized movement for women’s rights to contemporary debates over women’s equality, the past has indeed been prologue.

Activists have continually challenged and reconstructed historical narratives, attempting to find their place in history. The same historical symbols have been re-appropriated and put towards different ends as demonstrated by the contrasting images of Margaret Sanger.

And overtime, for example, Anthony’s memory has stood for suffrage activism

(including suffrage militancy), the ERA (in the 1920s and well as the 1970s), and supporting and opposing abortion. One wonders if Judy Chicago would have given

Anthony a place at her dinner party if the suffragist had been a widely recognized symbol of anti-abortion politics.

Despite the problematic terminology, this most recent “war on women” gives us fresh insight into why claiming a feminist legacy matters. It enables us to glimpse the political opportunities and surmise the personal stakes in the debate. It reminds us to pay attention to the use of history. The search for a usable past is a central component of many social movements whether progressive or conservative. And this is not limited solely to women’s movements as witnessed by recent Tea Party activism. Thus, in the quest to find inspiration and create legitimacy, the past has held unbelievable power— because the historical imagination knows no bounds.

332

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Archival and Manuscript Collections

Henry R. Huntington Library, San Marino, CA (HL) Elizabeth Boynton Harbert Collection Susan B. Anthony Ephemera Collection Rare Books Charles Francis Saunders Papers Una Richardson Winter Papers

Library of Congress, Washington, DC (LOC) Rare Books & Special Collections Division Susan B. Anthony Collection Manuscript Division National Woman’s Party Records Prints and Photographs Division Bain Collection

National Park Service, from the files of Women’s Rights National Historical Park, Seneca Falls, New York (WRNHP) Seneca Falls Convention Anniversary Celebrations WORI Celebrations WORI Formation

National Woman’s Party Collection, The Sewall-Belmont House and Museum, Washington, D.C. (NWP) National Woman’s Party Button Collection National Woman’s Party Collection

Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA (SL) Delores Alexander Papers Mary Beard Papers Shirley Bernard Papers Judy Chicago Papers

333

Federal Theater Project Records Shelah Leader Papers Freda Leinwand Photographs Gerda Lerner Papers National Commission on the Observance of International Women’s Year Records Alice Paul Papers Rose Arnold Powell Papers Doris Stevens Papers Women’s Coalition For the Third Century Records Women’s Encampment for a Future of Peace & Justice Records Women’s History Research Center Records

Seneca Falls Historical Society, Seneca Falls, New York (SFHS) Collection 36 A

Smithsonian Institution Archives, Washington, DC (SIA) Record Unit 305, Accession # 64601

Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, Northampton, MA (SSC) Mary Ritter Beard Papers Carrie Chapman Catt Papers Education Collection Eva Hansl Papers Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection Suffrage Collection Women’s Action Alliance Collection Women’s Liberation Collection Women’s Rights Collection

Smith College Archives, Smith College, Northampton, MA Margaret Storrs Grierson Papers

Tamiment Library/Robert F. Wagner Labor Archives, Elmer Holmes Bobst Library, New York University Libraries, New York, NY (NYU) National Organization for Women: New York City Chapter Records

Rare Books Special Collections and Preservation, Rush Rhees Library, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York Dr. Susan B. Anthony Papers Susan B. Anthony Memorial, Inc. Papers

Legislative Debates and Public Hearings

U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Subcommittee on Parks, Recreation, and Renewable Resources. The National Hostel System Act of

334

1980 and the Women’s Rights National Historic Park in New York: Hearing Before Subcommittee on Parks, Recreation, and Renewable Resources of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. United States Senate Ninety-sixth Congress second session on S. 2263, A Bill to Provide For the Establishment of the Women’s Rights National Historic Park...September 8, 1980. Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 1981.

U.S. Congress. Senate. Caroline H. Sparks, Ph.D., Chair of the 75th Anniversary Women’s Rights Festival and March and Co-Chair of the “Move the Statue” campaign, speaking on the Relocation of the Portrait Monument. 104th Cong., 1st sess. Congressional Record S10563 (July 24, 1995).

U.S. Congress. Senate. Relocation of the “Portrait Monument.” 104th Cong., 1st sess. Congressional Record S10563 (July 24, 1995).

U.S. Congress. House of Representatives. Representative Jane Harman of California speaking on Women Still Have a Long Way to Go. 104th Cong., 1st sess. Congressional Record H9596 (September 28, 1995).

U.S. Congress. Senate. Remarks of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, on the occasion of the150th Anniversary of the First Women’s Rights Convention, Seneca Falls, NY, July 16, 1998. Reprinted, 105th Cong., 2nd sess. Congressional Record 17411 (July 27, 1998).

Convention Reports

Avery, Rachel Foster, ed. Transactions of the National Council of Women of the United States, Assembled in Washington D.C., February 22 to 25, 1891 . Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1891.

Eagle, Mary Kavanaugh Oldham, ed. The Congress of Women: Held in the Woman's Building, World’s Columbian Exposition, Chicago, U. S. A., 1893. Chicago, ILL: Monarch Book Company, 1894.

Minutes of the National Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, at the Tenth Annual Meeting, in Detroit, Michigan, 31 October-3 November, 1883 . Cleveland, OH: Home Publishing Company, 1883.

National American Woman Suffrage Association: Victory Convention (1869-1920) of the National American Woman Suffrage Association . Chicago, ILL: Englewood Print Shop, 1920.

The Proceedings of the Woman’s Rights Convention , Held at Rochester, NY, August 2, 1848, Rochester, NY . New York, NY: Robert J. Johnston, Printer, 1870.

335

The Proceedings of the Woman’s Rights Convention, Held at Syracuse, September 8th, 9th and 10th, 1852, Syracuse, NY. Syracuse, NY: J.E. Masters, 1852.

The Proceedings of the Woman's Rights Convention, Held at Worcester, October 15th and 16th, 1851, Worcester, MA . New York, NY: Fowlers and Wells, Publishers, 1852.

Stanton, Elizabeth Cady, Lucretia Mott, Martha C. Wright, Mary Ann McClintock and Jane C. Hunt. The First Convention Ever Called to Discuss the Civil and Political Rights of Women, Seneca Falls, N.Y., July 19, 20, 1848 . Seneca Falls, NY: 1848.

Newspapers and Periodicals

The American Feminist The American Monthly Magazine The Arena The Baltimore Sun Bicentennial Times The Boston Globe Chicago Sunday Press and the Women’s Press Chicago Tribune The Christian Science Monitor Daily Breakthrough Dial Elizabeth Cady Stanton Foundation Newsletter Equal Rights Finger Lakes Times Hartford Courant Homemakers The Huffington Post The Journal of the Unitarian Universalist Association Life Los Angeles Times Minneapolis Tribune Ms . The Nation The National Citizen and Ballot Box New York Herald The New York Times On the Issues Magazine Paradigm Magazine Peace News Saturday Evening Post Saturday Review Slate

336

The Suffragist Washington International The Washington Post The Woman’s Journal The Woman’s Tribune Women’s Review of Books

Websites

The American Presidency Project, University of California, Santa Barbara, www.presidency.ucsb.edu.

CWLU Herstory Project, the online archives of the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union, www.cwluherstory.org.

Democracy Now! www.democracynow.org.

Documents from the Women's Liberation Movement, An On-line Archival Collection, Special Collections Library, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/wlm/.

The Electronic Encyclopedia of Chicago, Chicago Historical Society, www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org.

The Emma Goldman Paper online: http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/goldman.

Feminists for Life, www.feministsforlife.org.

The Gerritsen Collection, http://gerritsen.chadwyck.com.

National Park Service, www.nps.gov.

The personal collection of activist and historian Jo Freeman, www.jofreeman.com.

The Susan B. Anthony Birthplace Museum, www.susanbanthonybirthplace.com.

The Talking Hands Radio Archives, University at Albany, State University of New York, www.albany.edu/talkinghistory.

Tobacco Documents Online, http://tobaccodocuments.org.

Women and Social Movements in the United States, 1600-2000, http://womhist.alexanderstreet.com.

337

Oral History

Field, Sara Bard. Sara Bard Field: Poet and Suffragist . An Interview conducted by Amelia Fry, The Suffragists Oral History Project, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, July 12, 1962.

Paul, Alice. Conversations with Alice Paul: Woman Suffrage and the Equal Rights Amendment . An Interview conducted by Amelia Fry, The Suffragists Oral History Project, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 1976.

Published Works

Primary Sources

Beard, Mary. America Through Women’s Eyes . New York: Macmillan Company, 1933.

------. On Understanding Women . Longmans, Green and Co., 1931.

------Woman as Force in History; a Study in Traditions and Realities . New York: The Macmillan Company, 1946.

Buck, Pearl. Of Men and Women . New York: The John Day Company, 1941.

Catt, Carrie Chapman, and Nettie Rogers Shuler. Woman Suffrage and Politics: the Inner Story of the Suffrage Movement . New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1923.

Child, Lydia Maria. Good Wives. Boston: Carter, Hendee and co., 1833.

------. History of the Condition of Women, in Various Ages and Nations. 2 Vols. Boston: John Allen & Co., 1835.

Daly, Mary. Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism . Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1978.

Davis, Paulina Wright. A History of the National Women’s Rights Movement for Twenty Years. New York: Journeymen printers’ co-operative association, 1871.

Dos Passos, John. The Ground We Stand On: Some Examples of the History of a Political Creed . New York: Haracourt, Brace, 1941.

Ellet, Elizabeth . Women of the American Revolution . New York: Baker and Scribner, 1848.

Farnham, Marynia and Ferdinand Lundberg. Modern Woman: The Lost Sex . New York: Harper & Brothers, 1947.

338

Field, Sara Bard. The speech of Sara Bard Field, presenting to Congress on behalf of the women of the nation, the marble busts of three suffrage pioneers, Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Stanton Cady, Susan Brownell Anthony . San Francisco: privately printed by John Henry Nash, 1921.

Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique . New York, NY: Norton, 1963. (Cited from the 2001 edition, New York: W.W. Norton).

Gage, Matilda Joslyn. “Arguments before the Committee on the District of Columbia of the United States Senate and House of Representatives upon the Centennial Woman Suffrage Memorial of the Woman Citizens of this Nation.” Washington D.C.: Gibson Brothers, Printers, 1876.

------. Woman, Church and State a Historical Account of the Status of Woman through the Christian Ages, with Reminiscences of Matriarchate . Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company, 1893.

Gordon, Ann D. Mari Jo Buhle and Nancy E. Schrom Women in American Society; an Historical Contribution . Cambridge, Mass.: Radical America, 1972.

Hale, Sarah Josepha. Woman’s Record; or, Sketches of All Distinguished Women, from “The Beginning” till A. D. 1850. Arranged in Four Eras--With Selections from Female Writers of Every Age. New York: Harper, 1852.

Harper, Ida Husted. The Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony. 3 vols. Indianapolis: Bobbs –Merrill Company, 1898, 1908.

------. Ed. History of Woman Suffrage , Vols. 5-6: 1900-1920. New York: J.J. Little and Ives, 1922.

Irwin, Inez H. The Story of the Woman’s Party . New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1921.

------. Angels and Amazons: A Hundred Years of American Women . Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, Doran, 1933.

Kazickas Jurate, and Lynn Sherr. The Liberated Woman’s Appointment Calendar and Survival Handbook 1971. New York: Universe Books, 1970.

Kingston, Maxine Hong. The Woman Warrior: Memoirs of a Girlhood Among Ghosts . New York: Vintage Books, 1975.

Mason, Otis Tufton . Woman’s Share in Primitive Culture . London and New York: Macmillan, 1895.

Morgan, Robin. Sisterhood is Powerful . New York: Vintage, 1970.

339

Notes from the First Year. New York: The New York Radical Women, 1968.

Rowbotham, Sheila. Hidden From History: Rediscovering Women in History from the 17th Century to the Present . 1st American ed. New York, Pantheon Books, 1975.

Spencer, Anna Garlin. Woman’s Share in Social Culture . New York and London: M. Kennerley, 1913.

Stanton, Elizabeth Cady, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage, eds. History of Woman Suffrage , Vols. 1-3. New York: Fowler and Wells, 1881.

Stanton, Theodore and Harriot Stanton Blatch, eds. Elizabeth Cady Stanton As Revealed in Her Letters, Diary, and Reminiscences, 2 vols. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1922.

Steinem, Gloria. Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions . New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1983.

Stevens, Doris. Jailed for Freedom. New York: Boni and Liveright, 1920. (Cited from the 1995 edition, Carol O’Hare, ed. Troutdale, Oregon: NewSage Press).

Stone, Kathryn H. 25 Years of a Great Idea: A History of The National League of Women Voters . Washington, DC: National League of Women Voters, 1946.

Stone, Lucy. Woman Suffrage in New Jersey: An Address Delivered by Lucy Stone, at a Hearing Before the New Jersey Legislature, March 6th, 1867 . Boston, MA: C.H. Simonds and Co., 1867.

Turner, Frederick Jackson. “The Significance of the Frontier in American History.” In Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1893 , 5-37. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1894.

Walker, Alice. In Search of Our Mother’s Gardens . San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983.

Women’s Heritage Calendar and Almanac . Santa Monica, CA: s.n., 1970.

Wilson, Joseph Miller. The Masterpieces of the Centennial International Exhibition, vol. 3. Philadelphia: Gebbie and Barrie, 1878.

Secondary Sources

Anderson, Bonnie S. Joyous Greetings: The First International Women’s Movement 1830– 1860. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

340

Anderson, Karen. Wartime Women: Sex Roles, Family Relations, and the Status of Women during World War II . Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1981.

Andersen, Kristi . After Suffrage: Women in Partisan and Electoral Politics before the New Deal. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1996.

Baker, Jean. Margaret Sanger: A Life of Passion . New York: Hill and Wang, 2011.

Baym, Nina. American Women Writers and the Work of History, 1790-1860 . New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1995.

Baxandall, Rosalyn. “Re-visioning the Women’s Liberation Movement’s Narrative: Early Second Wave African American Feminists.” Feminist Studies 27, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 225-245.

Baxandall, Rosalyn and Linda Gordon, eds. Dear Sisters: Dispatches From the Women’s Liberation Movement. New York: Basic Books, 2000.

Bennett, Judith M. History Matters: Patriarchy and the Challenge of Feminism . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006.

Bernstein, Barton J., ed. Towards a New Past: Dissenting Essays in American History . New York: Pantheon Books, 1968.

Bethel, Elizabeth Rauh. The Roots of African-American Identity: Memory and History in Free Antebellum Communities . New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997.

Blake, Casey Nelson. “The Usable Past, the Comfortable Past, and the Civic Past: Memory in Contemporary America.” Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 3 (August, 1999): 423-435.

Blight, David W. Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory . Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001.

Bodnar, John. Remaking America: Public Memory, Commemoration, and Patriotism in the Twentieth Century . Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992.

Boime, Albert. “Patriarchy Fixed in Stone: Gutzon Borglum’s ‘Mount Rushmore.’” American Art 5, no. 1/2 (Winter - Spring, 1991): 142-167.

Boris, Eileen and Nupur Chaudhuri, ed. Voices of Women Historians: the Personal, the Political, the Professional . Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999.

Boxer, Marilyn J. When Women ask the Questions: Creating Women’s Studies in America . Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998.

341

Breines, Wini. The Trouble between Us: An Uneasy History of White and Black Women in the Feminist Movement . New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Buhle, Mari Jo. Feminism and Its Discontents: A Century of Struggle with Psychoanalysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998.

------. Women and American Socialism, 1870-1920 . Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1981.

Buhle, Mari Jo, and Paul Buhle, ed. The Concise History of Woman Suffrage: Selections from History of Woman Suffrage . 2 nd ed. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2005.

Buhle, Paul. History and the New Left: Madison, Wisconsin, 1950-1970. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990.

Capozzola, Christopher. “It Makes You Want to Believe in the Country: Celebrating the American Bicentennial in an Age of Limits.” In America in the Seventies , edited by Beth Bailey and David Farber, 29-49. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2004.

Chesler, Phyllis, Esther D. Rothblum and Ellen Cole, ed. Feminist Foremothers in Women’s Studies, Psychology and Mental Health . Binghamton, New York: Haworth Press, 1996.

Clayton, Virginia Tuttle, and Elizabeth Stillinger, Erika Doss, Deborah Chotner. Drawing on America’s Past: Folk Art, Modernism, and the Index of American Design . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003.

Cook, Blanche Wiesen, ed. Crystal Eastman on Women and Revolution . New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.

Cordato, Mary Frances. “Toward a New Century: Women and the Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition, 1876.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 107, no. 1 (January 1983): 113-135.

Cott, Nancy F. The Grounding of Modern Feminism . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987.

------, ed. A Woman Making History: Mary Ritter Beard through her Letters . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991.

Craig, Douglas B. Fireside Politics: Radio and Political Culture in the United States, 1920-1940 . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000.

342

Davis, Natalie Zemon. “Women’s History in Transition: The European Case.” Feminist Studies 3, nos. 3-4 (Spring/Summer 1976): 83-103.

Degler, Carl N. “Remaking American History.” The Journal of American History , Vol. 67, no. 1 (June. 1980): 7-25.

D’Emilio, John. Making Trouble: Essays on Gay History, Politics, and the University . New York: Routledge, 1992.

Dennis, Matthew. Red, White and Blue Letter Days: An American Calendar . Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002.

Des Jardins, Julie. Women and the Historical Enterprise in America: Gender, Race, and the Politics of Memory, 1880-1945 . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003.

Douglas, Susan J. Where the Girls Are: Growing up Female with the Mass Media . New York, NY: Three Rivers Press, 1994.

DuBois, Ellen Carol. “Eleanor Flexner and the History of American Feminism.” Gender & History 3 (Spring 1991): 81-90

------. Feminism and Suffrage: The Emergence of an Independent Women’s Movement in America, 1848-1869 . 2nd ed., Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999.

------. Harriot Stanton Blatch and the Winning of Woman Suffrage . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997.

------. Woman Suffrage and Women’s Rights . New York: New York University Press, 1998.

DuBois, Ellen Carol et all. Feminist Scholarship: Kindling in the Groves of Academe . Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985.

Dubrow, Gail Lee, and Jennifer B. Goodman. Restoring Women's History through Historic Preservation . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003.

DuPlessis, Rachel Blau and Ann Snitow, ed. The Feminist Memoir Project . New York: Three Rivers Press, 1998.

Dupre, Judith. Monuments: America’s History in Art and Memory . New York: Random House, 2007.

Echols, Alice. Daring To Be Bad: Radical Feminism in America, 1968-1975. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988.

343

Eller, Cynthia. The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why an Invented Past Will Not Give Women a Future . Boston: Beacon Press, 2000.

Evans, Sara. Personal Politics: The Roots of Women’s Liberation in the Civil Rights Movement and the New Left . New York: Alfred Knopf, 1979.

------. Tidal Wave: How Women Changed America at Century’s End . New York: Free Press, 2003.

Farrell, Amy Erdman. Yours in Sisterhood: Ms. Magazine and the Promise of Popular Feminism . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998.

Farrell, Grace. Lillie Devereux Blake: Retracing a Life Erased . Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2002.

Faulkner, Carol. Lucretia Mott’s Heresy: Abolition and Women’s Rights in Nineteenth- Century America. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011.

Faxon, Alicia. “Images of Women in the Sculpture of Harriet Hosmer.” Woman’s Art Journal 2, no. 1 (Spring - Summer, 1981): 25-29.

Finnegan, Margaret. Selling Suffrage: Consumer Culture & Votes for Women . New York: Columbia University Press, 1999.

Fisher, Berenice. “Wandering in the Wilderness: The Search for Women Role Models.” Signs 13, no. 2 (Winter, 1988): 211-233.

------. “Who Needs Woman Heroes?” Heresies 3, no. 1, Issue 9 (1980): 10-13.

Flexner, Eleanor, and Ellen F. Fitzpatrick. A Century of Struggle: The Woman’s Rights Movement in the United States . Rev. ed., Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1996.

Foote, Kenneth. “To Remember and Forget: Archives, Memory, and Culture.” American Archivist 53 (Summer 1990): 378-392.

Ford, Linda. Iron-Jawed Angels: The Suffrage Militancy of the National Woman’s Party, 1912-1920. Lanham: University Press of America, 1991.

Fry, Amelia R. “Suffragist Alice Paul’s Memoirs: Pros and Cons of Oral History.” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 2, no. 2 (Summer, 1977): 82-86.

------. “The Two Searches for Alice Paul.” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 7, no. 1 (1983): 21-24.

344

Gerhard, Jane. “Judy Chicago and the Practice of 1970s Feminism.” Feminist Studies 37 (Fall 2011): 591-618.

Gidding, Paula. In Search of Sisterhood: Delta Sigma Theta and the Challenge of the Black Sorority Movement . New York: Morrow, 1988.

Ginzberg, Lori D. Untidy Origins: A Story of Women’s Rights in Antebellum New York. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005.

Gordon, Linda. “What Should Women’s Historians Do: Politics, Social Theory, & Women’s History.” Marxist Perspectives 3 (Fall 1978): 128-36.

Graham, Sara Hunter. Woman Suffrage and the New Democracy . New Haven Conn.: Yale University Press, 1996.

Green, James. Taking History to Heart: The Power of the Past in Building Social Movements. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2000.

Grele, Ronald J. “Whose Public? Whose History? What is The Goal of a Public Historian?” The Public Historian 5 (Winter 1981): 40-48.

Grever, Maria. “The Pantheon of Feminist Culture: Women’s Movements and the Organization of Memory.” Gender & History 9, no. 2 (August, 1997): 364-374.

Griffith, Elisabeth. In Her Own Right: The Life of Elizabeth Cady Stanton . New York: Oxford University Press, 1984.

Hague, Amy E. “‘Never…Another Season of Silence’: Laying The Foundation of the Sophia Smith Collection, 1942-1965.” In Revealing Women’s Life Stories, Papers from the 50th Anniversary Celebration of the Sophia Smith Collection , Smith College, Northampton, Ma, September 1992 , 9-27. Northampton, MA: Smith College, 1995.

Halbwachs, Maurice. The Collective Memory , trans. Francis J. Ditter Jr. and Vida Yazdi Ditter. New York: Harper and Row, 1980.

Hayden, Dolores. The Power of Place: Urban Landscape as Public History . Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1995.

Henry, Linda. “‘Promoting Historical Consciousness’ The Early Archives Committee of the National Council of Negro Women.” Signs 7 no. 1 (Autumn 1981): 251-259.

Hobsbawm, Eric and Terence Ranger, ed. The Invention of Tradition . Cambridge University Press, 1992.

345

Hoffert, Sylvia D. When Hens Crow: The Women’s Rights Movements in Antebellum America . Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995.

Horowitz, Daniel. “Re-thinking Betty Friedan and The Feminine Mystique: Labor Union Radicalism and Feminism in Cold War America.” American Quarterly 48 (March 1996): 1-34.

Howe, Florence, ed. The Politics of Women’s Studies: Testimony from Thirty Founding Mothers . New York: Feminist Press, 2000.

Huyck, Heather. “Beyond John Wayne: Using Historic Sites to Interpret Western Women's History.” OAH Magazine of History 12 (Fall 1997): 7-11.

Isenberg, Nancy. Sex and Citizenship in Antebellum America . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998.

Jacobson, Matthew Frye. Roots Too: White Ethnic Revival in Post-Civil Rights America Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006.

Jones, Alfred Haworth. “The Search for a Usable American Past in the New Deal Era.” American Quarterly 23, No. 5 (December 1971): 710-724.

Jones, Amelia. “The Sexual Politics of The Dinner Party A Critical Context.” In Reclaiming Female Agency , ed. Norma Broude and Mary D. Garrard. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005.

Kachun, Mitchell A. Festivals of Freedom: Memory and Meaning in African American Emancipation Celebrations, 1808-1915 . Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2003.

Kammen, Michael. Mystic Chords of Memory: The Transformation of Tradition in American Culture . New York: Knopf, 1991.

Kaplan, Elisabeth. “We Are What We Collect, We Collect What We Are: Archives and the Construction of Identity.” American Archivist 63 (Spring/Summer 2000): 126- 151.

Kaplan, Temma. “On the Socialist Origins of International Women’s Day.” Feminist Studies 11, no. 1 (1985): 163-171.

Kaufman, Polly Welts. National Parks and the Woman’s Voice: a History . Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2006.

Kaufman, Polly Welts, and Katharine T. Corbett. Her Past Around Us: Interpreting Sites for Women's History . Malabar, Fla.: Krieger, 2003.

346

Kelley, Mary. Designing a Past for the Present: Women Writing Women’s History in Nineteenth- Century America. Worcester, Mass: American Antiquarian Society, 1996.

Kerber, Linda. No Constitutional Right to be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship . New York: Hill and Wang, 1998.

Kerr-Ritchie, Jeffrey. Rites of August First: Emancipation Day in the Black Atlantic World . Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2007.

Kraditor, Aileen S. The Ideas of the Woman Suffrage Movement, 1890-1920. Garden City N.Y.: Doubleday, 1971.

Lane, Ann. Mary Ritter Beard: a Sourcebook . New York: Schocken Books, 1977.

Lerner, Gerda. The Creation of Feminist Consciousness: From the Middle Ages to Eighteen-seventy . New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

------. “The Meaning of Seneca Falls: 1848-1998.” Dissent 45, no. 4 (Fall 1998): 35-41.

------. Why History Matters: Life and Thought . New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Levinson, Sanford. Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies . Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1998.

Liddington, Jill. “What Is Public History? Publics and Their Pasts, Meanings and Practices.” Oral History 30, no. 1, (Spring, 2002): 83-93.

Lindgren, James Michael. Preserving Historic New England: Preservation, Progressivism, and the Remaking of Memory . New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.

Loviglio, Jason. Radio’s Intimate Public: Network Broadcasting and Mass-Mediated Democracy . Minneapolis: University Of Minnesota Press, 2005.

Lubar, Steven and Kathleen M. Kendrick. Legacies: Collecting America’s History at the Smithsonian . Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press in association with the National Museum of American History, Behring Center, 2001.

Lunardini, Christine. From Equal Suffrage to Equal Rights: Alice Paul and the National Woman’s Party, 1910-1928 . New York: New York University Press, 1986.

Marling, Karal Ann. George Washington Slept Here: Colonial Revivals and American Culture, 1876-1986 . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1988.

347

May, Elaine Tyler. Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War Era . New York: Basic Books, 1988.

Mayhall, Laura E. Nym. “Creating the ‘Suffragette Spirit’: British Feminism and the Historical Imagination,” 232- 350. In Archive Stories: Facts, Fictions, and the Writing of History , edited by Antoinette Burton. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005.

------. “Domesticating Emmeline: Representing the Suffragette, 1930-1993.” NWSA Journal 11 (Summer 1999): 1-24.

Melosh, Barbara. Engendering Culture: Manhood and Womanhood in New Deal Public Art and Theater . Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1991.

Miller, Page Putnam. “Women’s History Landmark Project: Policy and Research.” The Public Historian 15, no. 4 (Autumn 1993): 82-88.

Mires, Charlene. “In the Shadow of Independence Hall: Vernacular Activities and the Meanings of Historic Places.” The Public Historian 21, no. 2 (Spring 1999): 49- 64.

Mjagkij, Nina. Organizing Black America: an Encyclopedia of African American Associations . New York: Garland, 2001.

Moravec, Michelle. “Historicity and the Feminist Art Movement.” Catalog essay for Doin’ It In Public , Otis Art Institute, part of Pacific Standard Time. Los Angeles: The Getty Institute, forthcoming.

Nash, Gary B. First City: Philadelphia and the Forging of Historical Memory . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.

Newman, Louise Michele. White Women’s Rights: The Racial Origins of Feminism in the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Nora, Pierre. “Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire.” Representations, no. 26 (Spring 1989): 7-24.

Norkunas, Martha. Monuments and Memory: History and Representation in Lowell, Massachusetts . Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2002.

Novick, Peter. That Noble Dream: the “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession . Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

O’Barr, Jean F. Feminism in Action: Building Institutions and Community through Women’s Studies . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1994.

348

Onosaka, Junko R. Feminist Revolution in Literacy: Women’s Bookstores in the United States . New York: Routledge, 2006.

O’Toole, James. “The Symbolic Significance of Archives.” American Archivist 56 (Spring 1993): 234-255.

Painter, Nell Irvin. Sojourner Truth: a Life, a Symbol . New York: W.W. Norton, 1996.

Peterson, Merrill D. Lincoln in American Memory . New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Pillow, Wanda S. “Searching for Sacajawea: Whitened Reproductions and Endarkened Representations.” Hypatia 22, no. 2 (Spring 2007): 1-19.

Polletta, Francesca. It was like a Fever: Storytelling in Protest and Politics . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006.

Relph, Anne Kimbell. “The World Center for Women's Archives, 1935-1940.” Signs 4, no. 3 (Spring 1979): 597-603.

Rose, Vivien Ellen. “Seneca Falls Remembered: Celebrations of the 1848 First Women’s Rights Convention,” CRM 21 (1998): 9-15.

Rosen, Ruth. The World Split Open: How the Modern Women’s Movement Changed America . New York: Viking, 2000.

Roth, Benita. Separate Roads to Feminism: Black, Chicana, and White Feminist Movements in America’s Second Wave . Cambridge, UK and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Rupp, Leila J. “Eleanor Flexner’s ‘Century of Struggle’: Women’s History and the Women’s Movement.” NWSA Journal 4 (Summer 1992): 157-169.

Rupp, Leila J., and Verta A. Taylor. Survival in the Doldrums: The American Women’s Rights Movement, 1945 to the 1960s . New York, NY and Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1987.

Ryan, Mary. Women in Public: Between Banners and Ballots, 1825-1880 . Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990.

Sandage, Scott. “A Marble House Divided: The Lincoln Memorial, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Politics of Memory, 1939-1963.” Journal of American History 80, no. 1 (June 1993):135-167.

Savage, Kirk. “History, Memory, and Monuments: An Overview of the Scholarly Literature on Commemoration,” www.nps.gov/history/history/resedu/savage.htm.

349

------. Standing Soldiers, Kneeling Slaves: Race, War, and Monument in Nineteenth- Century America . Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1997.

Schama, Simon. Landscape and Memory . New York: A.A. Knopf : Distributed by Random House, 1995.

Schwartz, Barry. “Collective Memory and History: How Abraham Lincoln Became a Symbol of Racial Equality.” The Sociological Quarterly 38, no. 3 (Summer 1997): 469-496.

Scott, Joan Wallach. “Feminism’s History.” Journal of Women’s History 16, no 2 (2004): 10-29.

Seelye, John. Memory’s Nation: the Place of Plymouth Rock . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998.

Siegel, Reva. “The Right’s Reasons: Constitutional Conflict and the Spread of Woman- Protective Antiabortion Argument.” Duke Law Journal 57 no. 6 (2008): 1641- 1692.

Sklar, Kathryn Kish. “American Female Historians in Context, 1770-1930.” Feminist Studies 3, no. 1/2 (Autumn 1975): 171-184.

Sklar, Kathryn Kish, and Jill Dias. How Did the National Woman’s Party Address the Issue of the Enfranchisement of Black Women, 1919-1924? Binghamton, NY: State University of New York at Binghamton, 1997.

Smith, Bonnie G. “The Contribution of Women to Modern Historiography in Great Britain, France, and the United States, 1750-1940.” The American Historical Review 89, no. 3 (June, 1984): 709-732.

------. The Gender of History . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998.

------. “Seeing Mary Beard.” Feminist Studies 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1984): 399-416.

Spillman, Lyn. Nations and Commemoration: Creating National Identities in the United States and Australia . Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Spongberg, Mary. Writing Women’s History since the Renaissance . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.

Susman, Warren I. “History and the American Intellectual: Uses of a Usable Past.” American Quarterly 16, no. 2 (Summer 1964): 243-263.

350

Taber, Ronald W. “Sacagawea and the Suffragettes: An Interpretation of a Myth.” The Pacific Northwest Quarterly 58, no. 1 (January 1967): 7-13.

Tai, Hue-Tam Ho. “Remembered Realms: Pierre Nora and French National Memory.” The American Historical Review 106 (June 2001): 906-922.

Taliaferro, John. Great White Fathers: the Story of the Obsessive Quest to Create Mount Rushmore . New York: Public Affairs, 2002.

Terborg-Penn, Rosalyn. African American Women in the Struggle for the Vote, 1850- 1920 . Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1998.

Tetrault, Lisa. Memory of a Movement: Woman Suffrage and the Creation of a Feminist Origins Myth, 1865-1900 . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, forthcoming.

Thelen, David. “Memory and American History.” The Journal of American History 75, no. 4 (March 1989): 1117-1129.

Tickner, Lisa. The Spectacle of Women: Imagery of the Suffrage Campaign, 1907-14. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.

Trouillot, Michel-Rolph. Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1995.

Van Deburg, William L. New Day in Babylon: the Black Power Movement and American Culture, 1965-1975. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.

Wallace, Mike. Mickey Mouse History And Other Essays on American Memory . Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996.

Ware, Susan. Beyond Suffrage, Women in the New Deal . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1981.

------. Holding Their Own: American Women in the 1930s . Boston: Twayne, 1982.

------, ed. Modern American Women: a Documentary History . Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2002.

------. Still Missing: Amelia Earhart and the Search for Modern Feminism . New York: W.W. Norton, 1994.

Weigand, Kate. Red Feminism: American Communism and the Making of Women’s Liberation . Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001.

Weimann, Jeanne Madeline. The Fair Women . Chicago, Ill.: Academy Chicago, 1981.

351

Wellman, Judith. “’It’s a Wide Community Indeed’: Alliances and Issues in Creating Women's Rights National Historical Park, Seneca Falls, New York,” 234-235. In Restoring Women’s History Through Historic Preservation edited by Gail Lee Dubrow and Jennifer B. Goodman. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003.

------. The Road to Seneca Falls: Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the First Woman’s Rights Convention . Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004.

------. “The Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention: A Study of Social Networks,” Journal of Women’s History 3, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 9-37.

Welter, Barbara. “The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820-1860.” American Quarterly 18, no. 2 (Summer 1966): 151-174.

West, Patricia. Domesticating History: the Political Origins of America’s House Museums Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1999.

------. “Gender Politics and the ‘Invention of Tradition.’” Gender and History 6 (November 1994): 456-67.

White, Deborah Gray, ed. Telling Histories: Black Women Historians in the Ivory Tower. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008.

Workman, Courtney. “The Woman Movement: Memorial to Women’s Rights Leaders and the Perceived Images of the Women’s Movement.” In Myth, Memory, and the Making of the American Landscape , edited by Paul A. Shackel. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2001.

Young, Louise M. In the Public Interest: The League of Women Voters, 1920-1970 Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1989.

Zaretsky, Natasha. No Direction Home: the American Family and the Fear of National Decline, 1968-1980 . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007.

Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States . New York: Harper & Row, 1980.

Unpublished Works

Bernard, Shirley. “The Women’s Strike: August 26, 1970.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Union Graduate School, Antioch College, 1975.

352

Tetrault, Lisa. “The Memory of a Movement: Re-imagining Woman Suffrage in Reconstruction America, 1865-1890,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2004.

353