In Nothing but Freedom, Eric Foner compares slave societies, including Haiti, the British West Indies, and the American South, and their process of emancipation. Foner devotes the first chapter of his book to discuss Haiti and the British West Indies in order to juxtapose these slave societies with the American South. Foner notes that by analyzing emancipation in other settings in order to illuminate the American experience, certain patterns stand out. Foner describes these patterns as “the effort to create a dependent labor force, the ideological conflict over changing definitions of labor and property, the impact of metropolitan policies, the place of the society in the larger world economy, and the uses of state in bolstering the plantation regime” (38). In both the Caribbean and the American South, emancipation raised the interrelated question of labor control and access to economic resources (43). In both, whites, determined to maintain the plantation system post-emancipation, obsessed over labor and attempted to prevent freedmen from leaving the plantations. For example, throughout the Caribbean, taxation was employed to “limit the freedmen’s access to land, to restrict the economic progress of the peasantry, and to induce blacks to labor for wages” (25). Similarly, in the American South, the solution to the labor problem was the system of sharecropping, which “evolved out of an economic struggle in which planters were able to prevent blacks from gaining access to land” in order to force blacks to remain on plantations (45). Furthermore, the American South attempted to create a dependent labor force by encouraging immigration. As in the Caribbean, many planters “concluded that indentured servants would admirably meet this need” and the West Indies experimented with Indian, “coolie,” labor to meet this labor shortage (47). Thus, the state interfered in order to support the plantation system. In addition, Southern states passed the Black Codes in an attempt to create a labor system, which could be enforced by the state (49). With Redemption, the state again stepped forward as an instrument of labor control. The right to property and the terms of credit were redefined during Redemption in the interest of the planter class. Foner concludes, “As in the Caribbean, American freedman adopted an interpretation of the implications of emancipation rather different from that of their former masters” (44). For blacks, the desire for land “reflected the recognition that, whatever its limitations, land ownership ensured the freedmen a degree of control over the time and labor of themselves and their families” (44). For example, following emancipation in Haiti, the rise of a black peasantry occurred, centered on this idea of freedom from the plantations and autonomy. Furthermore, Foner notes “like their Caribbean counterparts, southern freedman did not believe the end of slavery should mean a diminution of either the privileges or level of income they had enjoyed as slaves” (57). This essentially amounted to the right of subsistence. Conflicts over the legal definition of contract rights and property relations are familiar legacies of emancipation in both the Caribbean and the American South. For example, the matter of fencing was an explosive political issue in parts of the South because it “directly involved the laborer’s access to economic resources and alternative means of subsistence” (62). Plantation owners attempted to prevent freedmen from grazing their livestock on privately owned lands. Similarly in the West Indies, customary property rights no longer applied; rather, “if blacks wanted access to the provision grounds, they must pay for the privilege” (19). Essentially, the ultimate similarity between the post-emancipation experiences of these slave societies was the legal code and government policies were modeled with one idea in mind: “to maintain the plantation economy” (24).

I’ve posted the draft that we made today for your group contract on Writeboard. Use the same password we’ve been using for the other Writeboards in the class. You can either edit the contract directly (being sure to enter your name at the bottom before saving changes), or add comments to discuss with other group members what you think should be changed. If you’d like to look at an example group project from another class at another University, look here for some ideas about how to draft your contract.

I’m very glad to see that you all have the ball rolling on your project and have started to do some spadework to identify what sorts of events you will put on your timeline.

Since it sounds like you all found the tutorial pretty straightforward and don’t foresee computer problems, the real challenge is going to be deciding what to put on the time line. All of you have already noted that this is the real work for your group, but so far there have been several different criteria proposed for deciding what gets on and what gets left off: (a) appealing to a young audience; (b) appealing to an audience that already knows a lot about the battle; (c) making sure small things that usually get forgotten are included; (d) connecting local events with national events. And perhaps even more might be mentioned. These may not be mutually exclusive criteria, but sometimes they may not fit together well. Above all, the problem with running with several different criteria of what gets on could result in a timeline that becomes a jumble of dates that appear arbitrarily selected to the viewer–the sort of timeline that critics of timelines love to denounce as just a bunch of facts.

Ideally, your timeline will interpret and communicate something about the events on it simply by virtue of what sorts of events you select. The inclusion of a single date can sometimes dramatically change the way people look at another date. Consider, for example, a timeline that only has dates about the Battle of Sabine Pass on it, and then compare that in your mind with a timeline that includes the effective date of the Emancipation Proclamation and shows that this was before the battle. How different would the impression left by the second timeline be? That’s just an example–but the point is that as you have your discussions about what to include, it’s good to consider who your audience is and, even more importantly, what you want to tell them. It sounds like you’re already doing this somewhat, and once you get some rough answers fixed in your mind, it will be easier to decide what to leave off–not because it’s uninteresting, but because it doesn’t contribute to your primary objectives for the timeline.

My “next steps” for this week were to learn more about the timeline program by watching the tutorial and to look up newspaper articles contemporary to Dick Dowling for potential significant dates relating to him.  Although most of the articles that I found while searching the America’s Historical Newspapers database were already mentioned in Muir’s article, a few presented new, interesting information.  Hopefully at least some of these new dates can be incorporated into our timeline.

Some of the more amusing articles that I found thanked Dowling for giving someone an alcoholic beverage like eggnog for the New Year in 1859 or “kiss me quick and go” in 1860.  I also found an article describing Dowling adding gas lighting to the Shades.  Another article that I found- dated March 16, 1860– describes the fire that forced Dowling to temporarily shut down the Bank & Bacchus.  It apparently cost him an estimated $5,000 in damages, which must have been a huge amount at the time.  Following that fire, however, Dowling placed many ads in the Telegraph proudly stating the opening date of the Bank & Bacchus as January 30, 1860.  Perhaps of more historical significance were his involvement in the start of the Irish Military Company, also in 1860, and his being called to a “Public Meeting” that would “consult on the measure that should be adopted by the State of Texas in view of the election of Abraham Lincoln” in November of that same year.  While that last article may just list any and all citizens of Harris County, our own William Marsh Rice was also invited to the same meeting, leading me to believe that it was only significant figures specifically invited in the newspaper.  I also found several articles praising the Battle of Sabine Pass in 1863, but they may have already been found for the first library assignment.  Neither the database nor Fondren Library have any copies of the Houston Telegraph for late 1867, so the records of his catching yellow fever and his obituary remain elusive as ever.

Moving forward, I would like to look into whether or not we can use the articles from America’s Historical Newspapers in any way since they are copyrighted.  Additionally, I would very much like to find Dowling’s elusive obituary.  That article should not be as difficult to find as it seems to be at the moment, and it would be a good addition to the timeline.  The articles that I did manage to find should help us pin down significant dates for Dowling as well as what was significant about Dowling during his pre-Civil War lifetime.

During class on March 29, my group, the Timeline Group, met to discuss how we were going to approach the project and assign different tasks to each member. We concluded that for our first step, it would be vital to check for which events we have primary sources for. Thus, instead of deciding which events are significant to the Dowling story and his memory first, we believe it is more important to find which dates we actually have sources for. My group believes this way we can eliminate any extraneous information and events. Furthermore with this knowledge, we can proceed more easily into deciding which events and dates will actually go onto the timeline. We agreed that for this blog post, as part of our next action, each of us would watch the video on how to build a timeline using Google Docs and the SIMILE software. In addition, Clarissa agreed to do additional research on Dowling’s personal life, Victor would read through library assignments #1, and I would look through the blog posts related to the Houston public library archives. These steps are instrumental in deciding which events and dates we have primary sources for, and thus should go on the timeline.

The timeline tutorial written by Brian Croxall is extremely helpful in demonstrating how simple the software is to use. The tutorial illustrates how we can separate the timeline into different categories, including possibly biography, memorial services, and Civil War related events. However, we could also categorize the events into those that discuss his life, his Irish heritage, his role as a Houstonian, and the notion of Dowling as a Civil War hero. This decision is one our group must make in order to enhance the effectiveness of our timeline.

As part of my next action, I was assigned to peruse the blog posts discussing the articles located in the Houston public library archives. Many of the posts acknowledge that by the 1990s, press focus on the statue had shifted almost entirely to focus on Dowling’s Irish heritage. Craig confirms this conclusion, stating, “The documents of the archive, especially news clippings post-1905 show a gradual shift in public opinion away from the triumphant image of Dick Dowling as ‘The Hero of Sabine Pass’ to Dick Dowling as ‘the model Irish citizen’ and downplaying his Confederate past”. Furthermore, during the rededication of the Dowling statue in 1997, the focus was on Dowling’s Irish history and civic contributions to Houston. Hence, there appears to be a lot of information pertaining to the erection of the statue in 1905 as well as the rededication statue in 1997 in the archives. Adam notes that the statue was moved from City Hall in 1940 after City Hall burned down to Sam Houston Park where it stood until 1957 when it was moved to storage. One year later, the Dowling statue was placed in its current location in Hermann Park. In addition, Kat in her blog post, commented on several articles within the archives that addressed the Davis Guards, including the names of the members and those who deserted. Also, there is information available on the planning process for the Dowling statue courtesy of the secretary’s notes in the archives. Thus, most of the blog posts pertain to the original planning and erection of the statue in 1905, the rededication ceremony in 1997, and Dowling’s legacy.

My assigned “next action” for our Timeline group was to revisit the class’s first Library Assignments in order to determine whether or not it would be feasible to include any of data in our timeline and, if so, which articles to use. It seems that most of the articles the class found either discussed the Dowling statue directly, recapped the Battle of Sabine Pass, or described some small event related to Dowling’s memory. For example, one such small event was the presentation of a diamond medal to Dowling’s daughter on in 1889 in honor of her father’s heroism. This is something that could certainly be included in our timeline, but might be a bit too frivolous depending on what we decide to focus on. Of course, it would fit right in to a timeline dedicated to events related to Dowling’s memory in general, but otherwise it may be best to leave it out.

It does seem to me that our group is best suited to deal with these smaller events; otherwise, they might be left out. The first Library Assignment gives us a lot of events to choose from, but it might be hard to justify some of them. These are the kind of events we might want to include along side other, more significant events from the same time period in US history, if only to show what was going on while Dowling was being remembered.

Some of the other articles are less explicit in the events they describe; for example, one article in 1929 complains about the lack of a monument honoring Dowling at St. Vincent’s Cemetery, where his unmarked grave was at the time. Although I don’t think we should include an item in the timeline for this specific article, it might be helpful to link to articles like this one when discussing relevant events (i.e. the dedication of a monument at the cemetery a few years later).

I think it might be best to include smaller events in our timeline because it will allow us to present a fuller version of Dowling’s history; after all, if someone outside of our class is viewing our timeline, it’s more likely that the less significant events would be new to them than the same old details about the Battle of Sabine Pass or the Dowling statue’s unveiling. The real challenge is in presenting these events so that they are relevant, which could probably be done by providing enough context in the form of other historical events.

I also took a look at the tutorial for using the timeline software. It seems relatively easy to use, and definitely customizable enough for our needs. I have no doubts about our ability to master the technical aspect of the timeline’s creation, but we certainly have a bit to think about in the way of the information we want to represent.

Bruce Levine constructs an argument in his book Confederate Emancipation that focuses on the reasons why Confederate officials did or did not consider emancipation through military participation for blacks in the South.  He clearly describes when, how and why these decisions were made and how they changed over the course of the war.  However, at the same time he creates different causal arguments about the outcome of the war not directly related to his main argument.  These additional arguments and discussions somewhat hamper the clarity of the realization of his thesis.

His main argument revolves around the thought that there was a limited time frame during which the idea of “emancipation” was considered.  His landmarks of time are primarily a countdown the passing of “a black troops law between the end of 1864 down through March and April of 1865” (14).  To Levine, this was in part created because of the desperation of the Confederates after the fall of Atlanta (39).  Even so, he cites a realization “that the Confederacy was outnumbered and outgunned from the start” in early 1861 as a reason for the beginning of a dialogue about arming slaves (38).  This somewhat startling and important causal answer  to the outcome of the Civil War colors the rest of his argument, and since he places no footnotes on the paragraph, perhaps feeling it is an accepted fact, it brings to question the way in which he portrays the motivations of Confederate officers.  

The rest of his argument of allowing blacks to fight for the Confederacy is certainly well-reasoned and researched.  Prior to the fall of Atlanta, however, it is somewhat dubious to state that the Confederacy was constantly in fear of losing and felt themselves to be the underdog.  The eleventh hour of the war certainly brought about changes to what Confederate officers were willing to do in order to win the war, yet the reasons for what occurred before that “desperate” phase would have been better served if they were somehow removed from different, fundamental questions of causality in the Civil War.