Hero: “A person who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities.”. That is the definition of a hero. Many people argue whether John Brown fits that description, or is the opposite. John Brown was an abolitionist Missouri settler, former businessman, and had arguably gone mad, dedicating his life to the abolishment of slavery. This essay sheds light on whether he was a hero or a terrorist, and does justice to John Brown’s story. A story that many misunderstand, and take advantage of to call him a villain. However, John Brown was certainly a civil war hero. To start off, John Brown played a major role in helping free slaves. Not only was he a huge operator of the underground railroad, but he also freed slaves by hand. As illustrated in documents C and A, we have direct evidence from document A that in his letter he liberated multiple slaves. As for document C, we find that he had ordered pikes to be made for a revolt. This man was not afraid of the battles. He went right to Missouri himself (Doc A), leading the campaign that freed the enslaved. In fact, he went as far as to give the slaves resources, such as the pikes, and help them fight for their right even if he wasn't there …show more content…
However, that claim isn’t valid. John Brown, like all of us, was a person. Additionally, he insisted he never wanted anyone to get hurt, he just needed to abolish slaves (Doc F). Like anyone, if you were put to death and they knew it, they would panic. Anyone would have the urge to lie because your life was on the line. Additionally, he never intended to hurt people, but it was necessary. All the major leaders knew this, that's why they put their trust in him. They knew that even after he died, he'd be a martyr to fight for and a figure to lead, eventually bringing about what needed to happen to abolish
This would create a productive discussion between readers, not the sporadic, vague, non-committal suggestions the author currently included. McPherson only begins to touch upon an idea for an argument in the last two pages, where he looks into the suggestion of whether or not John Brown was a terrorist or not. However, he leaves this answer up in the air with the statement that what one person believes counts as terrorism, another believes is an act of heroism – yet another open-ended thought with no assertions as to what a firm answer may be. For me, this was the only part in which I was truly made to think deeper into the impact of an individual’s actions as a symbol beyond the Civil War. It was only after that I was able to look back and dig through the essay to find the vague assertion of the broader impact that was woven through the narratives of these individuals’ lives. I understand that these topics are incredibly subjective and sensitive, but that is why, more than any other reason, that McPherson should be writing towards a clear answer in this hotly debated topic as opposed to subtle
Tony Horwitz’s book titled, “Midnight Rising: John Brown and the Raid That Sparked the Civil War” is about the crucial invasion in U.S. history that resulted the start of the Civil War and describes how John Brown helped plan the invasion of Virginia. At the start of the book, Horwitz begins with depicting John Brown’s early life including childhood to adulthood. John Brown was born on May 9, 1800 in the unfriendly peaks of Torrington, Connecticut. When he was eight years old, his mother passed away which made him go through a drastic trauma such as feeling nervous and awkward towards other women.
In this chapter of Davidson and Lytle’s After the Fact: The Art of Historical Detection, the authors use the raid on Harpers Ferry in 1859 and in particular the attack’s leader, John Brown, a radical abolitionist, to explain the massive increase in tension between the North and the South before the dawn of the American Civil War. After explaining the main premise of the raid and its immediate outcome, Davidson and Lytle use historical records and analyses made by historians from the 20th century to explore the possible reasons and motivations behind John Brown’s infamous attack that would define him as a martyr to some and an insane criminal to others. The attack goes down in history as the triggering event behind the American Civil War; Harpers
John Brown should be remembered as a villain and a hero because he took armed possession of the federal arsenal and launch a massive slave insurrection to free the nation’s 4 million slaves.
Brown's attack on Harper's Ferry affected American culture more than can ever be understood. Tension between the North and South was building in the 1850's. Slavery among many other things was dividing the country into two sections. Brown was executed on December 2, 1859 for his murderous out-lash on society. Was his mind so twisted and demented that he would commit cold-blooded murder? The answer is no. John Brown was a man with a goal and a purpose. When he said that abolition could not be achieved without blood he was right. It is one of histories great ironies; John Brown's struggle preceded the Civil War by only 17 months. Thousands of people were killed in the Civil War, yet John Brown is still looked on as a criminal. He was not a criminal but a hero, fighting for what was right. He was a man ahead of his time.
In the 1850’s the Kansas Civil War, known as “Bleeding Kansas,” started and John Brown started becoming involved in this war leading a small group of men. He had remained fighting to create Kansas as a free state and led a raid known as the Pottawatomie Massacre in May 1856. This event turned into more of a show of their power than for getting revenge. With the involvement people changed their views on the abolition of slavery, “... many were losing faith in the electoral process as a means of destroying slavery- The Civil War was to prove them right- while some were increasingly inclined to believe that John Brown’s projected invasion...must be tried” (Boyer 7-8). He returned to Iowa and started on his next project, launching an attac...
As a child in elementary and high school, I was taught that President Abraham Lincoln was the reason that African slaves were freed from slavery. My teachers did not provide much more information than that. For an African American student, I should have received further historical information than that about my ancestors. Unfortunately, I did not have the opportunity or desire to research slavery on my own until college. And with my eagerness and thirst for more answers concerning my African American history, I set out to console my spirit, knowledge, and self-awareness of my ancestors’ history. I received the answers that my brain, mind, and soul need. Although Abraham Lincoln signed the 13th Amendment of the United States Constitution, courageous African American slaves were the real heroes and motivation of the movement.
John Brown is one abolitionist who stands out amongst the rest and has been noted as one of the most important men in the process of abolishing slavery. It was Brown’s work that sparked the revolts and fighting that would occur between the North and the South after his time. Brown can be considered a hero on account of his actions in Kentucky and Virginia. After the Turner revolt, the topic of slavery took over American politics (3,91). Congressman David Wilmot suggested that legislation prohibit slavery in new territories that were conquered from the victory in a war with Mexico (3,91).
By researching and explaining John Brown’s deontological ethical perspective for the abolishment of slavery I now understand that something that at first seemed like terrorism against his own country was just a man standing up for what he believed in. He stood up for the rights of his fellow people! No one would like their rights, belongings, and families ripped from them to become owned by another human that has no proof of being superior to them and John Brown understood that. He did what he had to do as a follower of Christ and a strong willed American to find a resolution to the corrupt system of
Abraham Lincoln deserves the accolade “The Great Emancipator”. The title “Great Emancipator” has been the subject of many controversies. Some people have argued that the slaves themselves are the central story in the achievement of their own freedom. Others demonstrate that emancipation could result from both a slave’s own extraordinary heroism and the liberating actions of the Union forces. However, my stance is to agree that Abraham Lincoln deserves to be regarded as “The Great Emancipator” for his actions during and following the Civil War.
John Brown became a legend of his time. He was a God fearing, yet violent man and slaveholders saw him as evil, fanatic, a murderer, lunatic, liar, and horse thief. To abolitionists, he was noble and courageous. John Brown was born in 1800 and grew up in the wilderness of Ohio. At seventeen, he left home and soon mastered the arts of farming, tanning, and home building.
John Brown was an American abolitionist, born in Connecticut and raised in Ohio. He felt passionately and violently that he must personally fight to end slavery. This greatly increased tension between North and South. Northern mourned him as a martyr and southern believed he got what he deserved and they were appalled by the north's support of Brown. In 1856, in retaliation for the sack of Lawrence, he led the murder of five proslavery men on the banks of the Pottawatomie River. He stated that he was an instrument in the hand of God. On October 16, 1859, he led 21 men on a raid of the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia. His plan to arm slaves with the weapons he and his men seized from the arsenal was thwarted, however, by local farmers, militiamen, and Marines led by Robert E. Lee. Within 36 hours of the attack, most of Brown's men had been killed or captured. Brown was hanged on Dec. 2, 1859. He became a martyr for many because of the dignity and sincerity that he displayed during his popular trial. Before he was hanged he gave a speech which was his final address to the court that convicted him. And he was thankful to Bob Butler for letting him send that text in electronic form. "This court acknowledges, too, as I suppose, the validity of the law of God. I see a book kissed, which I suppose to be the Bible, or at least the New Testament, which teaches me that all things whatsoever I would that men should do to me, I should do even so to them. It teaches me, further, to remember them that are in bonds as bound with them. I endeavored to act up to the instruction. I say I am yet too young to understand that God is any respecter of persons. I believe that to have interfered as I have done, as I have always freely admitted I have done, in behalf of his despised poor, I did not wrong but right. Now, if it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingles my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I say let it be done." (http://members.
A number of the decisions and actions undertaken not only during the course of Jackson’s presidency, but also as a pre-political individual alone, depict a man certainly capable of a villainous description. While one could attempt to describe Andrew Jackson as a hero, one would be required to ignore repeatedly documented events and personal accounts to the contrary. However, a successful counterargument resides in the fact that, in trivial terms, history is not black-and-white. Oftentimes, history is perceived through two viewpoints. The first observes history where morals and beliefs are not entered into the equation. To use American history as a template, many historical figures, such as Thomas Jefferson or Abraham Lincoln, are represented as unblemished and faultless; the focus is primarily placed on intelligent, influential quotes and political achievements. The second viewpoint represents the same individuals as flawed and human, straying far from the untarnished and blameless leaders of the first example; through the second point-of-view, personal dealings and character reside at the core. Neither of these methods of studying history is necessarily false, as neither promotes false information. However, within itself, history is unbiased, and the legacy of America’s seventh president lies in between these two often-employed viewpoints. As
Abraham Lincoln is widely regarded as “The Great Emancipator,” His legacy as the man who freed the slaves, and the savior of the Union is one that fails to be forgotten. He is thought of as a hero, and one of the few to tackle slavery, a problem that has existed in many parts of the world at one time or another. Although Lincoln is credited with ending slavery, his political motives for confronting this issue and his personal views do not make him worthy of all the recognition he receives; the driven abolitionists and daring slaves deserve a much greater portion of the credit.
A Hero’s Call What is a hero? There are many versions of a hero/ comic book, myths, movie or maybe just in everyday life. The most outstanding thing is that they all have perseverance when going through a conflict. In the book “The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian” by Sherman Alexie depicts a story of a poor boy named Arnold Junior living on his Spokane reservation.