Codex of Calixtinus Stolen from Spanish Cathedral

One of the most widely-known illuminated codices has been stolen, just like in the movies!

    

The Codex of Calixtinus, a unique illuminated book from the 12th century under the auspices of Pope Calixtinus II from which it gets its name. The book describes the life of St. James the Apostle, whose remains supposedly washed up on the shores of northwestern Spain near the town named for the Saint, Santiago de Compostela (Santiago means "St. James" in Spanish). The Codex, which related the life and times of St. James, turned up missing from a safe in the cathedral of Santiago de Compostela on July 5th. However, clergy did not report the theft publicly until July 11th.

     After St. James' remains washed up outside the Spanish village, Santiago de Compostela became the third most important medieval pilgrimage site in the 12th century Christian world; surpassed by only Jerusalem and Rome. For over a century Christian pilgrims would journey from all over the continent to see St. James and the Codex, and to worship at its holy sites. For the reason, the Codex Calixtinus is actually one of the most important books (codex really just means 'book') of the Medieval period. It describes not only St. James, but gives instructions on how to reach the holy sites around Santiago de Compostela, poisonous rivers to avoid, even areas of Basque control to avoid and unscrupulous French ferrymen that overload boats in order to steal their drowned passengers belongings.

      Unscrupulous seems to be a fitting word for the theft of the Codex, which was removed from the safe without force; the keys left swinging in the safe door. The ornate Spanish cathedral (pictured above) did not practice tight security, preferring as many churches do, to rely on good faith and the honor system. However, access to the Codex was strictly controlled, with only two priests ever able to remove the book from the safe. Both priests are resolved of wrong-doing but investigators say that this points to the fact that it was most likely an 'inside job'. Richard Oram, a rare-book collector and director of the University of Texas at Austin's Harry Ransom Center, the largest collection of rare books in the U.S., says, "Any expert, or even someone with basic knowledge, would be able to instantly identify [the Codex] and know that it was stolen...it would be impossible to sell." He went on to relate his own experience with library theft, in which a volunteer stole 300 volumes from the Ransom Center. ""The general rule of thumb is that 60% or 70% of library thefts are by patrons, but the dollar value of the thefts tilts disproportionately toward employees."

    

This is the second high-profile historical artifact theft in as many weeks as the Maryland Historical Society attempts to get its affairs in order after a renowned Presidential historian and his accomplice stole  over 60 documents, including some signed by Abraham Lincoln, potentially worth millions of dollars. Barry Landau has one of the largest collections of Presidential memorabilia outside of the Presidential libraries, but with his latest heist revealed, he may be audited on the rest of his collection for origin of procurement, value, and authenticity.

    


 

 

Linda Burfield Hazzard and her "Starvation Heights"

 

At the house that has been dubbed “Starvation Heights” in Olalla, Washington, seven identical evergreen trees stand on the spot where seven bodies are supposed to be buried.  Vanilla bottles that the good doctor’s husband drank to get drunk during this time of Prohibition lay littered and broken in the woods behind the house.  Cutlery, they say, is moved from the kitchen’s cabinets to sit in the center of the kitchen room by the people who starved to death here.  The myths and the facts about this place swirl together until you can’t tell who are the ghosts and who are the real people, just like you couldn’t tell then.  

 

Doctor Linda Burfield Hazzard was an anomaly among physicians.  First, she was a woman, but she also claimed that she had a revolutionary cure for all types of diseases.  Fasting. Hazzard claimed that fasting, or specifically tailoring one’s diet to the limitations of one’s body, could cure all types of disease. Most doctors of this era called fasting cures quackery. She believed that other men in the field of science were too linked to giving drugs or other popular remedies, rather than letting the body heal itself, her own method. 

 

Hazzard provided tailored eating regimes at her home, which she called “Wilderness Heights.” Her method was supposed to rid the body of its toxins.  Hazzard’s patients, who stayed at her sanitarium for weeks or months, would only be given tomato, asparagus and orange juice. From the beginning, Hazzard’s methods were criticized, or in her words “persecuted.” 

 More than 40 patients died of starvation or other related causes under her care. Autopsies were performed on their bodies. When Hazzard autopsied the bodies herself, her patients always died from their diseases. When other doctors autopsied the bodies, however, they always died from starvation.  

 

Many outside the sanitarium tried to explain why these patients stayed even when they were near death, but could only postulate that it was Hazzard’s charisma or black magic. 

 

In 1911, two British heiresses, Dora and Claire Williamson, came to America for Hazzard’s treatment. Hazzard seized the opportunity of the sisters’ wealth to build the starvation sanitarium of her dreams.  Claire would never return home, dying under Hazzard’s care at  final weight of 50 pounds.  Hazzard notated Claire’s cause of death as cirrhosis and stole her rings and dresses. 

 

After Claire’s death, Hazzard told a weak Dora that her dead sister wanted her to remain permanently at Hazzard’s home.  Dora resisted Hazzard, but was severely starved, as well, and could not care for herself.  Hazzard applied for guardianship for Dora. Later, at her trial, the prosecution team would say that Hazzard wanted to keep Dora under her care so that she, Hazzard, would gain control of the sisters’ estate.  

 

Hazzard was called to trial in Port Orchard, Washington on charges of manslaughter in Claire’s death.  The prosecution proved that Hazzard had written Claire’s will, as well as the last entry in Claire’s diary.  With ample evidence to prove her guilty, Hazzard was convicted of manslaughter in 1912 and sentenced to the state penitentiary in Walla Walla.  

 

Hazzard served two years, but was released with a full pardon from the governor in 1915.  In 1920, she came back to Olalla, built a huge sanitarium and continued practicing her starvation practices.  Perhaps she got the ultimate comeuppance for her wrongdoings when she died of a starvation diet in 1938. 

People's History of the United States: Part 7

Chapter 6: The Intimately Oppressed

    

In Chapter 6 of A People's History, Howard Zinn devotes time to articulating the plight of the unacknowledged in history; that of women. In fact, he states that, "the very invisibility of women" in the annals of history is a sign of their submerged status.

     In fact, Zinn points out one very important distinction between societies that seem to make women subservient in their roles as wife, child-bearer, and custodian to the home and offspring, and those societies that seem to place women in nearly equal standing to men in a more egalitarian family unit. That distinction is the concept of private property. "Societies based on private property and competition, in which monogamous families becom practical units for work and socialization, found it especially useful to establish this special status of women."(103)      He points out that earlier societies, in the Americas and elsewhere, that held materials as common property, and in which extended families often lived in the same place, held a much more equitable role for women with men. They were essential in upholding traditions and customs in their teching of subsequent generations, and given special importance of stewards of large family units. The need to distinguish oneself within a power structure by material gain is a much more masculine mentality, and thus wasn't as important to these societies. It wasn't until white societies brough "civilization" and competition that it became necessary for women to be subjugated, even commodified by men according to their physical attributes and demeanors of "obedience" or "disobedience". Women essentially become a material commodity in the patriarchal societies of private possessions and competition.

     As is the purpose of People's History, Zinn points out that the schoolbook history we're often taught is somewhat different from the truth. In bringing "civilization" to the New World, the Virginia colony also brought the first instance of the sex trade. The first settlers were primarily men, soldiers, merchants, and laborers that came to settle and build a colony. In 1619, the first year black slaves came to the colony, a ship from England arrived in Jamestown with 90 women. These women, the vast majority of which were teenaged girls, were brought as indentured servants to be the child-bearers, sex slaves, housekeepers, and general companions to the men of the colonies. Described as "agreeable persons, young and incorrupt" (i.e. virgins), these young girls were paid for by male colonists for the fee of transportation. They would serve a term of "service" to their owners, after which period they would again be free to pursue a life of their own. They were expected to be obedient to their masters and mistresses, and Zinn writes of a number of situations in which colonial courts beat, incarcerated, or publicaly humiliated those that weren't.

     If white women were objectified in such a way, black slave women were moreso, often giving birth aboard slave ships shackled to corpses that had not survived the journey across the Atlantic. As girls came of age masters were free to rape and beat them wih impunity, and such treatment was actually considered necessary by many white slaveowners so as to break their spirit and make them more obedient.

     Even free white women, not brought for indentured servitude, faced special challenges. The earliest women settlers were often treated with respect because they were so sorely needed, and enjoyed some equality. But as survival became more certain, and more women arrived in the young colonies, ideas held over from England and the Christian teachings again relegated them to a role of subservience. Zinn relates the writings of one woman about her rights in the colonies, saying, "The husband's control over teh wife';s person extended to chastisement...but he was not allowed to give her permanent injury or death."(106) In fact, there are many examples of women that gave birth out of wedlock, a crime called "bastardy", in which mothers were severely punished while fathers were untouched by the law.

     Puritan New England was of particular guilt in the subjugation of women int eh early colonies. A well-known Boston minister, Reverand Joseph Cotton, demanded wives, "be subject to your husbands in all things." It was in Massachusettes that Anne Hutchinson, an eloquent and intelligent woman that spoke against church and government concerning their treatment of women, was one of the first activists for women's rights in the New World. She held meetings and gathered popular support within her circles of influence. She was put on trial by the church for heresy, saying that people were capable of interpreting the Bible for themselves. She was also put on trial by the Massachusettes Bay Colonial government for sedition. When she was expelled from the colony in 1638 to Rhode Island, 38 families followed her. Indians there that had been defrauded of their land rights by the local government thought they were enemies and slaughtered them all. The only woman that had spoken up for Hutchinson in Massachusettes was hanged for sedition.

     The legends of particular women, however, were somewhat elevated by the colonies entry into the Revolutionary War. Abigal Adams, Martha Washington, and Dolly Madison were wealthy and aristocratic women that wielded some influence in the political arena and have been heavily caricatured by historians. More interesting, however, are women like Margaret Corbin, Deborah Garnet, and "Molly Pritcher" were lower-class, rough-hewn women that many historians have recharacterized as prettified ladies. These revolutionary characters in women's liberation served to open the way for further movement in women's rights and equality. Thomas Paine, one of the great intellectual and rhetorical instigators of the Revolutionary War argued for women's equality. Margaret Fuller and Elizabeth Caty Stanton, some years later, were two of the best known activists for women's sufferage and  equality. There was still some way to go, however, in fighting Puritanical and ingrained social prejudice against women in 19th and 20th centuries.

    

It was in 1851 that an aged black woman that had been born a slave stood up against a handful of white ministers and told them, "Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted and gathered into barns and no man could head me! Ain't I a woman? I would work as much and eat as much as a man, when I could get it, and bear the lash as well! Ain't I a woman?"(124) This was Sojourner Truth, and is popularly believed to be the beginning of a very public campaign for women's sufferage in America, one that wouldn't be granted for another 75 years, and almost 200 years after those first young girls were sold as indentured slaves to white male settlers.

People's History of the United States: Part 6

Chapter 5: A Kind of Revolution

    

One of the most pervasive misconceptions about our early history revolves around the folklore of the Revolutionary War. In primary grades we learn about our folk heroes and founding fathers, from George Washington and Benjamin Franklin to Paul Revere. Later, in the secondary grades we learn more about the various battles and personalities that came to the fore, but always with the implicit understanding that almost everyone in the colonies wanted the Revolution. In fact, in a number of textbooks the message isn't implicit at all, stating that "from all corners of the American colonies men came to pledge their loyalty to Independence." (American History, Pearson Hall). The truth is somewhat more discouraging.

     Howard Zinn points out in the previous chapter that much of the resistance to the crown came not from the general population but from wealthy land-owners and the colonial elite. As the Continental Congress openly declared war against the British crown, there were a number of ways in which these instigators would rally the poor and middle-class to their cause. Black slaves and Native Americans were obviously non-starters since they had nothing to lose by joining the conflict (not to mention that many native tribes learned their lesson about taking sides in a white man's war during the French and Indian wars, in which their British allies left them high and dry afterward).

     Far and away the most common reason for joining the rebel militias was simply a way out of poverty. It's not a new story (in fact it's still around today), but many of the poorest whites would join the militia for regular food, some compensation, and a title. In one excerpt a lieutenant injured at the battle of Bunker Hill describes the terms of his enlistment as one of convenience. Tired of being a simple "Labourer", he enlisted as a Lieutenant (because he brought two friends to enlist as Privates), and hoped that his Captain might die in battle so that he could rise in rank and see his "pay, rations, and station improve."(78)

     Those that attempted to remain neutral in the coming war were often coerced into taking one side or another through military preparation. Connecticut passed a law that required military service of men between 16 and 60. Those that refused or attempted to desert were jailed; the conditions of their release being fighting for the rebels. In this way, as Zinn states, "the mechanism of their conversion to democracy was the militia." (79) In other places men were merely impressed into the military, bound to join or suffer the consequences, which ironically was one of the chief grievances by in the Declaration of Independence; the impressment of colonists into the British military. Conscription with exlusions to people of wealth was common practice throughout the colonies, requiring military service unless the individual could pay 5 pounds and find a substitute. Often this mean that the wealthiest would simply pay a vagrant or criminal to be their substitute, along with the 5 pound fee, and be off the hook.

     Still other colonists wanted nothing to do with the war, recognizing it as a transfer of power from one wealthy elite to another. This was particularly true int he South, where most of the colonial militas were absorbed with preventing slave uprisings (in South Carolina nearly 50% of the population were slaves). However, The British saw opportuntiy in this, and one of the British miliary commanders, Lord Dunmore in Virginia, offered freedoms to any blacks that offered to serve in the British military.

     The Revolutionary War served a secondary purpose, other than ultimately winning the colonies independence (with critical help from the French); it subverted the internal class conflicts between the wealthy landowners and poor, armed whites. It gave the conflict an vicarious outlet in the killing, looting, and pillaging of British Loyalists and armies; all in the anme of independence. However, that's not to say that there weren't eruptions of this class conflict from time to time. Zinn highlights several mutinies among militiamen and civilians against the colonial elite during this time. Twice the Continental Congress in Philadelphia was marched upon by poor militiamen that had not received pay from the struggling colonial coffers; once succeeding in driving the governance form their newly established statehouse. There are also a number of uprisings against wealthy colonials and merchants accused of stockpiling commodities to drive up prices during wartime. 

     If there's one significant truth to the end of the Revolutionary Way it is the idealism that pervaded over nepotism and avarice during the construction of the new American government. Alexander Hamilton and many supporters advocated Senate and Presidential positions for life (some even goin as far to suggest a lineage of inheritance, like with the British throne). Instead, and as hypocritical as this may seem in modern times, perpetuated as it was by wealthy, slave-owning aristocrats, the foundation was laid for public service, publicly funded schools, and a central government that was ostensibly formed for governance of the people. Though the Revolutionary War was fought and died for by the people with the least to lose by continued British rule, it did become a startling model of democratic principle (not right away, of course) and set a humanistic precedent that would defy all contemporary odds in ultimately becoming a world power.

    

Archeologists in City of Acre Uncover a Historic Crossroads

A Hellenistic pier, an entire medieval Crusader city, and remnants of a Napoleanic siege beneath modern-day Acre.

    

The city of Acre is written about primarily as the main port of the Christian Crusaders in the Holy Land from 1104, when it was taken by King Baldwin of Jerusalem in the First Crusade, to 1229 when it fell to Egyptian Mameluks during a bloody siege. Today Acre is still a thriving port of 56,000 individuals, and although it was named as UNESCO's first  World Heritage Site in 2001, it remains an out-of-the-way landmark compared to more popular sites like Jerusalem and Masada.

     The Israel Antiquities Authority approved archeological work in the mid-1990's, and in the subsequent 15 years or so an entire subterranean Crusader city has materialized. Hidden beneath the ruins of Acre when it was burnt to the ground by invading Egyptian Muslims, the structures are nearly perfectly preserved. Head Israeli Archeologist at the Acre site, Eliezer Stern, says "It's like Pompeii of Roman times — it's a complete city...one of the most exciting sites in the world of archaeology." In fact, the finds in the city span nearly 2,000 years and position Acre as a crossroads in some of the most critical moments in western civilization; including the rise of the Mediterranean in the Hellenistic Age, the European occupation of the Holy Lands during the Crusades, and Napoleans’ Imperial campaigns at the end of the 18th century.

Among the uncovered structures are shops and storefronts that used to sell clay figurines and ampoules of holy water, which were popular souvenirs for medieval pilgrims.  Brothels, residential apartments, and well-preserved cobblestone streets all show a thriving Crusader stronghold. A fortress belonging to the Order of the Hospitallers was uncovered complete with a pillared dining hall, barracks, and dungeon. The Knights Templar, an Order that was constantly at odds with the Hospitallers during their century long reign in the Holy Land, also inhabited a fortress in Acre. Archeologists uncovered this fortress to find that a subterranean passage lead from the dungeon to the sea wall of the port; no doubt used by Europeans to escape to ships during the land-ward invasion of the Egyptian Mamelukes.

      Acre's sea wall, which is being renovated and restored, has also been the site of significant archeological finds. Workers uncovered a Hellenistic pier, the pylons still intact beneath the mud and sand of the cities bay. Since the city was held by Alexander the Great during his campaign through Asia, it's possible that the pier was built by his men to ship supplies for continuing his war effort. Also found embedded within the wall and on the harbor's sea floor were sunken ships and fortifications from Napolean's armies, who lead a failed siege of the city during his asian campaign in 1799.

     The finds beneath modern-day Acre are some of the most significant of the world of Archeology, and the people of Acre understand that their history is perhaps their most valuable asset. Much of the underground city will be opened up to tourism in the next month, and several other sites have already been available to visitors. Shelley-Anne Peleg, who serves as a liason between the archeologists and local residents, cautions that further work and tourism must be done "in a way that doesn't take over the city and overpower the people who live here."


    

    

    

   

The Leather Man keeps his secrets nearly 150 years after his death

The East Coast’s Leather Man seems more like an urban legend than anything else.  In the late 19thcentury, a man dressed entirely in a leather suit made from discarded shoe leather walked a circuit of 365 miles every 34 days around New York and Connecticut.  He rarely spoke and when he did, it was in broken English.  He set up a series of lean-tos as he made his way around the states. He also lived in a series of caves, many of which haven’t yet been rediscovered.  

But the Leather Man was no urban legend.  Misidentified for many years as Jules Bourglay, a Frenchmen, Connecticut and New York residents seemingly had no end to the tales they would tell about the Leather Man.  His nods and grunts allegedly would confirm these tales’ truth. A prominent Leather Man scholar in the 1950’s estimated that the tales of the Leather Man ran into the hundred thousands, even though most of these people had never seen the vagabond.

One explanation to the Leather Man’s habits was that he was bereft by his life’s circumstance. Bourglay had lived in Lyons, France and had fallen in love with Margaret Laron, a leather merchant’s daughter.  Margaret’s father did not approve of Bourglay because he was a wood carver, but her father agreed to let Bourglay marry his daughter if he became a leather purchaser. Bourglay was doing well with the firm, but one day the price of leather dropped overnight and Jules had bought too much leather.  He had ruined his father-in-law-to-be’s leather company. 

After that, Jules started wandering the streets of the city and was put under physician care. Somehow—this is where the Connecticut residents loose the trail—Jules came to Harwinton, Connecticut wearing an outfit of leather patches. He continued on his trail for nearly a third of a century through Westchester County, New York and western Connecticut. His schedule was so exacting that people supposedly set their watches by him—he was only late once during an 1888 blizzard.

Not surprisingly, Connecticut and New York lore turned out to be fabricated.  Jules Bourglay was not actually even the Leather Man at all. Turns out that the name Jules Bourglay was printed and later retracted from a newspaper in 1884.

Recently, the Leather Man was in the news again.  In March, a team of historians and anthropologists went to the Leather Man’s assumed gravesite in the Sparta Cemetery in Ossining, New York. The grave was next to Route 9 and marked with a small plaque bearing the wrong name. 

The team was interested in unearthing the man’s identity and why he did what he did. They wanted to see whether or not the quiet man was autistic. Dissenters said that a man who was so private in life should be able to stay that way in death.

And he could.  The Leather Man kept his secrets. When researchers dug up the grave where the Leather Man was buried, all they found were coffin nails. His body had already decomposed.

Even though they couldn’t find much of him, the researchers still reburied the Leather Man’s coffin nails and dirt with a new headstone, coffin and a brass plate to mark the grave. His secrets will probably be safe for eternity.   

People's History of the United States: Part 4

Chapter 3: Persons of Mean and Vile Condition

           

This continent’s first poor were described by the Virginian landed aristocracy as “persons of mean and vile condition”. In fact, in most correspondence it’s fairly obvious that these people of “the Worser Sort of European lineage” (Irish, Scot, Italian and Polish, among others) were openly disdained by the wealthy, land-owning, and numerically inferior upper class in the colonies. In 1676, the first of a number of poor white uprisings took place in Jamestown, Virginia. So successful was the uprising, named the Bacon’s Rebellion for its instigator Nathaniel Bacon, that the governor of the colony needed to flee the capitol as it burned and England was forced to send over a thousand troops across the Atlantic.

            The Bacon Rebellion was largely a response to the inaction by the Jamestown elite in protecting homesteaders further to the west and under constant threat of Indian invasion. The city’s rich preferred a poor white buffer between themselves in the east and the unsettled lands in the west, populated as they were by hostile Indian tribes. However, that was not the only reason for the poor colonists to revolt. Farmers and ranchers in the area wrote often about merchants monopolizing much of the trade in the colonies, and being given special treatment if they were English.

            The great discrepancy between the few wealthy families in control and the multitudes of poor in the colonies was largely due to two influences. Most poor were fleeing other nations that had begun to crack down heavily on the impoverished; whipping or mutilating beggers, making theft a capitol punishment, etc. The reason that these nations had instituted such a crackdown is the same as why imperialism became such a fad around the 17th and 18th centuries; they’d run out of room in their homelands but, because of the onset of the Industrial Age, desperately needed it. Major urban centers were overrun with displaced rural poor, and so they had only one solution; make being poor in the city so unbearable that they’ll cross an ocean to avoid it.

            Though a common conception, and one we’ve wholeheartedly carried with us into the 21st century, is that these poor were able to work themselves into prosperity and wealth from the bottom classes. However, cited by Zinn are several sources that say that only very rarely did a man create wealth after arriving in the colonies. The vast majority of the wealthy had arrived with it, and had been put in a place of power to preserve and build upon that wealth; almost always on the backs of black slaves or indentured white servants pulled form the ranks colony’s poor.  By 1700 the class division had become systemic, with several dozen wealthy families in control of the entire colony of Virginia.

            In this lies the very misconception (one that is even perpetuated today) that the nation has always held a democratic essence in which all people, of lowest or highest means, are represented. However, in these early statehouses the governing bodies, though run democratically, were held year-to-year by an small group of merchant aristocrats made decisions “for the good of the colony” that ultimately benefited only one another. It is the same pageant that is played today, albeit on a much grander and more intricate scale, on Capitol Hill and on Wall Street.

It is a perpetuation of the idea that through the opaque lens of conservation of American values, the rich continue to get richer and the poor continue to get poorer; of a financial and political caste system that hides behind the twin towers of capitalism and democracy. I suppose that was Howard Zinn’s point in writing this book; so that we can learn about what America’s real values have been, and go about changing them to the values we’ve all been told about.

People History of the United States: Part 5

Chapter 4: Tyranny is Tyranny

In the 18th century there was a steadily growing middle class within the English colonies of the New World. They were independent farmers, craftsmen, and merchants that were described as a “middling sort…enjoy and are fond of freedom…the meanest among them demands respect even from the greatest.” This was the birth of the middle-class identity that has become such a fundamental piece of the American identity. However, in order to secure this new middle-class’ loyalty and obedience it was necessary for the ruling upper-classes to provide concessions by exploiting displace Indians, blacks, and poor whites. Then they found an even greater implement in controlling the middle-class: new nationalism and words like liberty and equality. In fact, these were so successful that they were able to mobilize a revolution against the English.

            The Revolutionary War, according to Zinn, was an example of trading one tyranny for another (hence the title of the chapter). He points to the end of the French and Indian War (also called The Seven year’s War) in which the British had effectively eliminated French opposition in the New World, and would turn to the colonies to pay debts incurred by the conflict, as well as tightening control over the increasingly independent colonists.

There’s also the matter of the elite classes within the colonies worried about losing power and wealth to more British arrivals. Zinn writes that “the upper 5% of Boston’s taxpayers controlled 49% of the taxable assets in the city.” (60) Wealth was even more concentrated in New York and Philadelphia. The colonial elite that had before been able to sit back and watch their wealth pile up were now forced to watch it taken for war debt. The solution was to foment feelings of unrest, pooling the collective angst of the poor who had always been exploited, and the middle-class who were paying high taxes on commodities and trade taxes. The lion’s share of the wealth, however, was being paid by the wealthiest in the cities. Samuel Adams, one of the most famous, was also one of the first to incite rebellion, targeting those wealthy individuals that held Boston offices in the name of the English.

In one account a mob of of people lead by a local shoemaker ransacked the home of a wealthy British merchant, and then the home of a rich elite that ruled several colonies in the name of England. This was essentially the same popular anger and “wealth redistribution” that would take place in France during the Revolution, and similarly, it was incited by the wealthy that saw an incredible weapon in the discontent of the lower classes. As Zinn writes, “We have here the forecast of the long history of American politics, the mobilization of lower-class energy by upper-class politicians, for their own purposes. By directing the lower classes to vent their frustrations on British-supporting wealthy locals, they were protecting themselves and making it increasingly difficult for the British to tighten controls.

After the riots of the 1767 Stamp Act the privileged instigators were given pause. The mob that took to that streets of Boston that evening were insatiable as they ransacked one wealthy homestead after another, looting shops and even raiding the Lieutenant Governor’s mansion. The individuals inciting the fury became concerned that the riots may turn on their own homes, their own wealth. In response to these types of riots the British gradually began to deploy more troops to Boston; thousands that impressedpeople’s homes and businesses into quartering them. In 1770 impressment, continued taxation, abuses by British officials, and further instigation on the part of wealthy anti-British upper-classmen resulted in a march on the customhouse. British soldiers, intimidated by the mob, fired on them, killing seven. This was the Bostom Massacre and gave rise to even further anti-British sentiment.

By 1773 the Boston Committee of Correspondence had formed to organize anti-British actions and sentiment. The Boston Tea Party was one. The Sons of Liberty, a group of middle and upper-class colonials emphasized restraint in the destruction of private property, but not in the seizure or coercion of British officials. There still remained, however, the fact that the mods were made up of primarily lower and lower-middle-class individuals while the rich often incited them with fiery speeches, but did not take part. This didn’t go unnoticed, but it was Patrick Henry and Thomas Paine that closed the divide. They were widely published and spoke often about the need to unite to rise against the British. Paine was especially adept at stirring rebellion against the British with early nationalistic rhetoric, although he was also directly financed by one of the richest men in Pennsylvania, Robert Morris.

As the British took harsher steps toward retaliation and control, many of the upper-class revolutionaries understood that they would need to put some skin in the game. The result was the Declaration of Independence. It was the product of the meeting of this relatively small group of wealthy, well-connected men (formally convened as the Continental Congress) explicitly stating their intent to secede from British control that initiated the Revolutionary War, whether the common people that were not being incited to riot in the streets wanted it or not. It also created a new opportunity to build wealth; the seizure of all property belonging to the wealthy British officials and British-supporters in the colonies. It’s this motivation that may have been enough to sway those wealthy colonists that did not want to put stake in the war. Whatever the case, by 1776 everyone had to choose a side as the colonies descended into a full-scale revolution.

When your mom says her fried chicken is world famous, she means it

I didn’t know much about soul food beyond the Kentucky Fried Chicken versions of fried chicken, cornbread and mashed potatoes.  More authentic than the Colonel’s, the term “soul food” was coined during the Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s as a cultural marker uniting African Americans.  The cuisine itself, however, which closely resembles southern cooking had its origins in Africa in the 14thcentury and can be traced to many Native American tribes, as well. Turns out, pork bellies, grits, collard greens and other staples have a more extensive history than beginning in somebody’s mother’s kitchen.

The European exploration of Africa in the 14thcentury caused the African exposure to many of the ingredients used in soul food today.  Moroccans brought turnips, the Spanish brought cabbage and explorers from the Americas brought corn. As the slave trade began to increase, African cooking methods used on ingredients plentiful in Africa were transported to new places with new and different available ingredients. 

In the United States, slaves cooked with the greens they could find or that were unwanted, such as collards, mustard, kale and dandelion, as well as turnip and beets.  Slaves were given undesirable parts of slaughtered cow and pig, too, such as pig feet and ears, beef tongue, chitterlings (intestines) and tripe. In addition, slaves hunted for other meats, such as rabbit and raccoon.

The slaves used what they had to work with, seasoning the pieces of meat with garlic, thyme, onion and bay leaves. To cook, slaves would use open fire pits or fireplaces, usually with large pots or cast iron skillets.

An African-American food tradition emerged in these years as slaves would verbally share their recipes with each other. The non-specificity of these recipes forced southern cooks to rely on their own senses, as well as the tradition in recipes that suggest adding a “pinch” of salt or to bake until “golden brown.” 

Southern food also influenced soul food, much of which is influenced by Native American food. The mainstay of the Native American diet was corn, usually ground into meal or limed with salt to make hominy.  This was the cornerstone of popular southern dishes like grits and cornbread, as well as moonshine liquor.

Native Americans also used all parts of the animal that they hunted.  The Native Americans hunted rabbits, squirrels, opossums and raccoons, eating the animal’s brain, liver and intestine. Southern food followed this waste-not-want-not tradition in creating chitterlings, or chit’lins, which are deep fried intestines of pigs, livermush, pork brains and eggs. The fat was saved and used for frying. 

As slave cooks began to work in the plantation house, much of their cuisine preparations and ingredient staples began to fuse with traditional southern methods. Slave cooks used ingredients like berries, apples, peaches and nuts in pies and puddings.  They also used all the parts of the food—they turned stale bread into bread pudding, fish leftovers into croquettes and the liquid of greens into gravy.  They also put fried chicken and boiled sweet potatoes on the family’s table. 

Post-slavery, southern poor whites and blacks continued to cook almost the same dishes, with a few variations in technique. In the 1960’s, African-Americans claimed their culinary history, and with it, the variations and techniques created by their ancestors, name their particular version of southern cooking “soul food.”   

  

 

 

 

The World's Columbian Exposition set a precedent that America was not enough

The World’s Columbian Exposition, otherwise dubbed The Chicago World’s Fair, held in 1893 was nothing if not spectacular.  It was filled with huge buildings built to look like ancient Rome in white plaster surrounding a lagoon in the Parisian style.  Thousands of foreign dignitaries flocked to the fair and Chicago outshone Paris’ Eiffel tower with a glittering Ferris wheel.

But Chicago’s fair set a Midwest-wide precedent not only that America had to borrow cultural attractions from Europe and elsewhere, but also that Westerners (as opposed to East Coasters) had no culture worthwhile enough to build a fair around.  

The World’s Columbian Exposition was designed to celebrate the 400thanniversary of Christopher Columbus’ landing in America. America had a lot of pride at stake in the performance of this exhibition—Paris had recently put on a hugely successful World’s Fair, unveiling the stunning Eiffel Tower as the pièce de résistance.

The fair was also a matter of civic pride to Chicago.  Eastern cities had basically been calling their midwestern counterpart--which had recently claimed the honor of America’s second largest city, after New York—a backcountry city with a taste for blood that grew larger than it should have.  New York, Washington, D.C., St. Louis and Chicago all put in bids to host the great fair in their cities.  Chicago won.  In 1890, President Benjamin Harrison signed the act that said Chicago would hold the fair.  

The fair was planned and created in a mere three years.  Prominent architects including Louis Sullivan and Richard Morris Hunt designed the buildings that would house the exhibition’s events. They were under the control of the prominent Chicago architecture firm, Burnham & Root.

In some ways, New York still won during the architect selection process. Burnham first selected only eastern architect—with a single one from Kansas City—and none from Chicago.  The eastern men were only tepidly interested, and Burnham & Root had to use all their powers of persuasion to convince the men to take the journey west to examine the fair’s spot.  The fair committee urged Burnham to select Chicago architects, as well, which he later did.   

These were not your typical state fair buildings, however.  One became the largest structure standing in the world—for the time being—and others included huge beamed roofs, steel and stone.  Two of the great stone buildings still house the Chicago landmarks the Field Science Museum and the Art Institute of Chicago.  

Exhibitions included the latest inventions in science and technology, as well as pavilions from 46 other nations. One of the most popular amusement rides, called “Street in Cairo” introduced American audiences to belly dancing. In addition, a nostalgia symbols of Americana, the Ferris wheel was first produced and introduced at this fair.   

The exposition closed on October 30, 1893, but its legacy did not end here.  Other cities throughout the Midwest and the United States tried to recreate Chicago’s “White City,” using white plaster substances called staff to construct neoclassical buildings efficiently and cheaply.  In essence, the Chicago Fair created a long-held attitude that Americana culture wasn’t enough for their great fairs—only European replicas shipped across the ocean and recreated in wood and plaster would suffice.

It wasn’t all bad, however.  The fair helped Chicago continue its city planning, sprucing up the once-dismal Jackson Park and creating the City Beautiful movement that followed.
 

Pages