John Brown: Freedom Through Terror
This essay takes a deep dive into the life and legacy of John Brown, using thorough historical and critical analysis
This paper was written by Samuel Sugiura: a high school junior at the Hackley School in New York
The bloodiest conflict in United States history was, perhaps, also one of the most inevitable. The Civil War did not find its start in the assassination of a world leader nor the rise of a dictator, but rather a conflict that could only be resolved with the the total assertion of one side or the other: with either a completely emancipated nation, or pro-slavery one. The nation was on edge in every aspect, and waiting for a catalyst. Even Congress, a place of reasoned debate, could not withstand the emotional intensity of the debate, which was, to quote President Buchanan, “long, excited, and occasionally violent.” The country grew more and more polarized by the day. This polarization is key to understanding the environment under which John Brown came to be, and by proxy the man he became. This build-up to this environment is best analyzed via 3 different compromises: The Compromise of 1787, The Missouri Compromise, and The Compromise of 1850. The Compromise of 1787 was the reaction to a debate that broke out during the advent of America. The question posed was: should slaves count for votes? The northern states, who had already banned slavery in a process known as the “first emancipation,” did not want them to count, and the slave-reliant southern states wanted them to count. In the end, they chose a “⅗ compromise.” Though this resolution avoided an outright conflict, it created the first of many divides caused by slavery. The second compromise, The Missouri Compromise, happened as a result of Jefferson’s 1803 Louisiana Purchase. This purchase upset the balance of power between slave and free states that had been maintained for the past 2 decades. Debates were bitter, and exposed the deep sectionalism within the country at the time. Eventually, two decisions were made. The first was the formation of 2 states: Maine for the north, Missouri for the south. The second was to ban slavery in any territory gained from the Louisiana purchase above the southern border of Missouri. In other words, there was, as Jefferson put it at the time “a geographical line, coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political” dividing the country. It is during this time, a time of literal and metaphorical political division, that John Brown grew up. His actions, more so than almost any other figure of the time, were deeply marked by this division. These actions, simultaneously those of a terrorist and of a freedom fighter, were the catalyst, though not the cause, of the Civil War.
John Brown’s extreme and uniquely moral abolitionist beliefs began their formation in his childhood. He was born May 4th, 1800 to Owen and Ruth Mills Brown. There are several aspects about his youth that came to shape his beliefs. First, as previously mentioned, were the very circumstances under which he grew up. Brown grew up in a radicalized society. Notable officer, Charles Griffin, referred to him as “a pawn” to his surroundings. Second, was his mental illness that he inherited from his mother’s side. From this, one can potentially conclude that Brown’s actions can be explained by his mental state - he was simply a troubled man. Third was the fact that, even in his youth, he was fervently religious, even briefly studying to become a minister. Brown believed that he was sent by God to punish slaveholders and express his rage. Of course, as is common in historical analysis, no one factor can explain John Brown’s actions, and it is more than likely that a combination of all three are the cause of his extreme actions. As a young boy, his unique personality continued to be exacerbated through surrounding factors. For example, he claimed he first came to realize the evils of slavery at age 12, when he saw the mistreatment of an African boy. Additionally, he said “I will die fighting for this cause,” in reference to the abolitionist movement. Such conviction of a cause to the point of transcendence of the fear of death is (not exclusively, but most definitely can be) a sign of mental illness. To summarize, his youth shaped his belief in three key ways: religious devotion, extreme sociopolitical tensions, and mental illness.
These sociopolitical tensions increased once more during the annexation of the Republic of Texas. This posed an immediate problem for northerners: this was 525,000 square miles of land, most of which would have been land that was part of slave states. Again, northern Congressmen and, notably, some democrats, attempted to stop the addition of more slave states. The measure failed, but to many democrats represented an attack on slavery. And indeed, in a sense it did; during the 1848 election, a new party was formed around antislavery: the Free Soil Party. The final compromise to stop this division came in 1850, but it was too little too late, as history has shown. However, what is of greater interest to this paper, and the final piece of context to understand John Brown, is Stephen Douglas’s Kansas-Nebraska Act, which passed 4 years later. This replaced the Missouri Compromise’s line with “popular sovereignty,” which allowed the people in the states to decide whether it should be a free or slave state - and it is with this that John Brown’s legacy truly begins.
The clashes between Free Soilers and “Border Ruffians” (a name given to pro slavery Missourians) began almost immediately, as the fate of the state hung in the balance. These clashes included five of John Brown’s sons, who asked their father for help. He arrived in 1855, with arms from Illinois and Ohio, and, after learning of the Caning of Charles Sumner in Congress he, filled with loathing for slavery and religious fervor, led a group to Pottawatomie Creek in Kansas and hacked 5 Border Ruffians to death. For this crime, he was wanted for years. However, as with most crimes of such nature that took place in Kansas at the time, he was never tried for his crimes. Whether this was an act of terror or freedom fighting is less opaque than his future actions. The brutal nature of the attack, combined with Brown’s belief that slavery was, to quote historian David Reynolds “a state of war against blacks—a system of torture, rape, oppression and murder,” make it clear that his attack was designed to inspire fear. Of course, that is not to say that his overarching goal wasn’t the freedom of slaves, but rather that he, in his fight for said freedom, used terrorism as a part of his methods. In this sense, he was almost entirely unique in his white abolitionist (or just any abolitionist, for that matter) contemporaries; his hatred for slavery was so great that he was willing to commit wild acts of violence. Importantly, it was this conviction that got the attention of many important people in the abolitionist movement, including figures like Frederick Douglass. The support of these figures would become key to what would become the single most important moment in his life.
After the 1856 events in Pottawatomie, Brown spent the next year in the east, and, starting in 1857, he began collecting arms and funds. First, he ordered thousands of 6 foot pikes from a Connecticut forgemaster. With an order of this size, it was already evident that his plans for emancipation were beginning to move past local actions of violence, and moving towards mass scale uprisings. And this becomes evermore evident the closer one moves on the timeline to Harpers Ferry. By the start of 1858, he had both formulated and verbalized his plan during a month-long stay at Frederick Douglas’ house. During this stay, he expressed the desire to create a country completely free of slavery and, despite his obvious sympathy, Frederick expressed extreme doubts and told Brown that it was tantamount to a suicide mission. Later on in the first half of the same year, he met with many famous black leaders, especially those connected to the underground railroad to recruit free black people that were willing to join him in his mission. His high standing with people like Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman (the former even saying “[John Brown’s] own soul had been pierced with the iron of slavery) meant that he had much easier access to these movements. He had the men he needed, and very soon after he got the funds, too. After a meeting with the Reverend Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Theodore Parker, George Stearns, Samuel Gridley Howe, Franklin Sanborn, and Gerrit Smith, a group of wealthy northern abolitionists that became known as the Secret Six, he had now found the financial backers he needed for his mission. By this time, he was completely committed to his goals, despite the worry and complaints of Douglass and Tubman, he went out west one last time to raise more funds and find more raiders. During this time, he killed one more slave owner and freed 11 slaves before heading back to say his last goodbyes to his wife and daughters (all his sons, minus one, had elected to join him in his mission).
On Sunday, October 19, 1859, John Brown and 21 other men began their raid on Harpers Ferry in West Virginia. After cutting the telegraph lines, the men make their way in. Despite their best efforts, they were unable to start a real slave revolt, as many of them simply ran for freedom. After a quick skirmish, which was nearly fatal for Brown, he, alongside his perpetrators, were arrested. Ironically, for the most important act of his life, the specific acts of the raid are not so important to his story nor to the question of terrorism or freedom fighter. The importance of the raid was not necessarily the raid itself, but John Brown's subsequent arrest and trial, for this gave him the ability to speak widely of his actions and beliefs. The trial itself was completely unnecessary other than for the sake of tradition, and as such Brown treated it more as a press release. He used his unique opportunity to stir fear, hatred, and sectionalism in the country. He, to quote the New York Times, “put the South on trial.” Unsurprisingly, he was sentenced to death. As the guards led him to the gallows, he handed them a prophetic note: “I John Brown am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land: will never be purged away; but with blood.”
John Brown’s goals were, without a doubt, terroristic in nature. As previously stated, his hatred for slavery superseded his own will to live, and as such he wanted to inflict the most pain and fear in slave holders possible. Indeed, in some of his last words, he speaks of “crimes” of a “guilty land.” However, it is also undeniable that he was a freedom fighter in the purest sense; there was no distance, metaphorical or physical, that he would not cross to achieve his goals. He was, therefore, a freedom fighter that used terrorism as his goal. And indeed, no one could correctly claim that he was unsuccessful; he, more so than any other figure, coalesced the tension, hatred, fear, and paranoia of the time in such a way that stirred both sides in an irreversible way. Again, this is not to say he caused the Civil War, but rather that he clawed open the outer shell of peaceful pretenses that the country had been maintaining. Indeed, this did not have solely abstract ramifications, seeing as it likely swayed the results of the 1860 election. The Democrats had the popular vote, but they split over the issue of slavery, giving Lincoln the win. All in all, it is fair to say that Brown was a manifestation of the tensions that afflicted America at the time, and gave the country the push it needed to start the civil war.
Works Cited:
Floyd, John B. "Official Report of John Brown's Raid upon Harper's Ferry, Virginia, October 17-18, 1859." The Quarterly of the Oregon Historical Society, vol. 10, no. 3, 1909, pp. 314–24. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20609805. Accessed 5 Apr. 2024.
Griffin, Charles J. G. "John Brown's 'Madness.'" Rhetoric and Public Affairs, vol. 12, no. 3, 2009, pp. 369–88. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41940446. Accessed 5 Apr. 2024.
Guelzo, Allen C. Fateful Lightning: A New History of the Civil War and Reconstruction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Horwitz, Tony. "The 9/11 of 1859." The New York Times, The New York Times, 2 Dec. 2009, www.nytimes.com/2009/12/02/opinion/02horwitz.html.
https://go-gale-com.hackleyschool.idm.oclc.org/ps/retrieve.do?resultListType=RELATED_DOCUMENT&searchType=ts&userGroupName=nysl_me_hackley&inPS=true&contentSegment=&prodId=BIC&docId=GALE|K1631000941&it=r
Magazine, Smithsonian. "John Brown's Day of Reckoning." Smithsonian.Com, Smithsonian Institution, 1 Oct. 2009, www.smithsonianmag.com/history/john-browns-day-of-reckoning-139165084/.
McGuire, William, and Leslie Wheeler. "John Brown." American History, ABC-CLIO, 2024, americanhistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/246091. Accessed 4 Apr. 2024.
Finkelman, Paul. “A Look Back at John Brown.” National Archives and Records Administration, National Archives and Records Administration, 2011, www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2011/spring/brown.html.
Margaritoff, Marco. “John Brown: The Abolitionist Who Gave His Life to End Slavery and Helped Start the Civil War.” All That’s Interesting, All That’s Interesting, 17 Feb. 2022, allthatsinteresting.com/john-brown.