The History Book Club discussion

Hello Everyone,

For the week of July 22nd - July 28th, we are reading Chapter Five of The Metaphysical Club.

Our motto at The History Book Club is that it is never too late to begin a book. We are with you the entire way.

The fifth week's reading assignment is:

Week Five - July 22nd - July 28th- Chapter Five
Agassiz (97 - 116)

We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.

This book was kicked off on June 26th. We look forward to your participation. Amazon and Barnes and Noble and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, or on your Kindle. Make sure to pre-order now if you haven't already. Please also patronage your local book stores.

This weekly thread will be opened up on July 22nd or earlier

There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us. It is never too late to get started and/or to post.

Bentley will be leading this discussion. Assisting Moderator Kathy will be the back up.

Welcome,

~Bentley


TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL

by Louis Menand


REMEMBER NO SPOILERS ON THE WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREADS - ON EACH WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREAD - WE ONLY DISCUSS THE PAGES ASSIGNED OR THE PAGES WHICH WERE COVERED IN PREVIOUS WEEKS. IF YOU GO AHEAD OR WANT TO ENGAGE IN MORE EXPANSIVE DISCUSSION - POST THOSE COMMENTS IN ONE OF THE SPOILER THREADS. THESE CHAPTERS HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION SO WHEN IN DOUBT CHECK WITH THE CHAPTER OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY TO RECALL WHETHER YOUR COMMENTS ARE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFIC. EXAMPLES OF SPOILER THREADS ARE THE GLOSSARY, THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE INTRODUCTION AND THE BOOK AS A WHOLE THREADS.

Notes:

It is always a tremendous help when you quote specifically from the book itself and reference the chapter and page numbers when responding. The text itself helps folks know what you are referencing and makes things clear.

Citations:

If an author or book is mentioned other than the book and author being discussed, citations must be included according to our guidelines. Also, when citing other sources, please provide credit where credit is due and/or the link. There is no need to re-cite the author and the book we are discussing however.

If you need help - here is a thread called the Mechanics of the Board which will show you how:

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/2...

Glossary - SPOILER THREAD

Remember there is a glossary thread where ancillary information is placed by the moderator. This is also a thread where additional information can be placed by the group members regarding the subject matter being discussed.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

Bibliography - SPOILER THREAD

There is a Bibliography where books cited in the text are posted with proper citations and reviews. We also post the books that the author used in his research or in his notes. Please also feel free to add to the Bibliography thread any related books, etc with proper citations. No self promotion, please. And please do not place long list of books on the discussion threads. Please add to the bibliography thread where we love to peruse all entries. Make sure you properly cite your additions to make it easier for all.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

Book as a Whole and Final Thoughts - SPOILER THREAD

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

Table of Contents and Syllabus:

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

by Louis Menand

Welcome folks to the discussion of The Metaphysical Club.

Message One - on each non spoiler thread - will help you find all of the information that you need for each week's reading.

For Week Five - for example, we are reading and discussing the following:

Week Five - July 22nd - July 28th- Part Two -Chapter Five
Agassiz (97 - 116)

Please only discuss Chapter Five through page 116 on this thread. However from now on you can also discuss any of the pages that came before this week's reading - including anything in the Preface or Introduction or anything in Chapter One, Chapter Two, Chapter Three and/or Chapter Four. However the main focus of this week's discussion is Chapter Five.

This is a non spoiler thread.

But we will have in this folder a whole bunch of spoiler threads dedicated to all of the pragmatists or other philosophers or philosophic movements which I will set up as we read along and on any of the additional spoiler threads - expansive discussions about each of the pragmatists/philosophers/philosophic movements can also take place on any of these respective threads. Spoiler threads are also clearly marked.

If you have any links, or ancillary information about anything dealing with the book itself feel free to add this to our Glossary thread.

If you have lists of books or any related books about the people discussed, or about the events or places discussed or any other ancillary information - please feel free to add all of this to the thread called - Bibliography.

If you would like to plan ahead and wonder what the syllabus is for the reading, please refer to the Table of Contents.

If you would like to write your review of the book and present your final thoughts because maybe you like to read ahead - the spoiler thread where you can do all of that is called Book as a Whole and Final Thoughts. You can also have expansive discussions there.

For all of the above - the links are always provided in message one.

Always go to message one of any thread to find out all of the important information you need.

Bentley will be moderating this book and Kathy will be the backup.

Make sure that you are familiar with the HBC's rules and guidelines and what is allowed on goodreads and HBC in terms of user content. Also, there is no self promotion, spam or marketing allowed.

Here are the rules and guidelines of the HBC:

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/5...

Please on the non spoiler threads: a) Stick to material in the present week's reading.

Also, in terms of all of the threads for discussion here and on the HBC - please be civil.

We want our discussion to be interesting and fun.

Make sure to cite a book using the proper format.

You don't need to cite the Menand book, but if you bring another book into the conversation; please cite it accordingly as required.

Now we can begin week five...

Chapter Summaries and Overview

Chapter Five: Agassiz

Part 2, Chapter 5 - Agassiz, Section One

Louis Agassiz was a protégé of two of the leading scientific minds in Europe before
the age of twenty-five. One was the French Paleontologist, George Cuvier. The
was the Prussian Naturalist, Alexander von Humboldt.

In this section we are introduced to Louis Agassiz - another influential person in William James' life. Louis Agassiz. is an extremely intelligent man who is greatly respected by experts in the field of science. We learn of Agassiz' past and how he came to Harvard. This knowledge is essential, because the reader will understand how Agassiz views the world around him and why.

Part 2, Chapter 5 - Agassiz, Section Two

As shocking as some of you will find the beliefs of this period including Agassiz's - Louis Menand is giving us an up close and personal view of the distortions and false hypotheses that physicians and scientists as well as lay people believed about the races at that time.

This chapter will give you a very detailed idea of the thoughts regarding races in the years prior to the Civil War.

Many of the men of pragmatism were youths in this era. It shows
how people used scientific research to get the answers they wanted. Science of this fashion was not true science. It was all based on the assumptions and beliefs of the sciences, and many published their answers in a way that was acceptable to the public or raised public awareness of a situation but were nonetheless outrageous yet believed at that time.

The reader is being introduced to not only the beliefs and ideas of the great men before the Civil War; the reader is getting information about the leaders in science that will be replaced with pragmatism, and the thinkers of the age after the Civil War.

Part 2, Chapter 5 - Agassiz, Section Three

In this section Menand discusses polygenism. Polygenism was not liked very much in the South. Many Southerners and Northerners found a problem with it because it seemed to contradict Genesis and the story of creation.

However, not all Southerners thought this way. Others used the theory of polygenism as a way to explain that the phrase in the United States Constitution, "all men" did not include black people, because the Constitution was written to protect a particular species of man, meaning Caucasian men.

The reader is informed that polygenism is not widely respected or believed; however, it was the basis used for segregation in the United States. We learn that Agassiz will have a lasting effect on the people in the United States.

We know that Agassiz' findings are irrelevant and unscientific, but in his time he was a leader to the scientific world and his views were thought to be authoritative. The author has set the reader up for how Agassiz will influence the young William James.

Most folks want to know right off the bat - what is the title about? Here is a good posting explaining that.

The Metaphysical Club

by John Shook

The Metaphysical Club was an informal discussion group of scholarly friends, close from their associations with Harvard University, that started in 1871 and continued until spring 1879.

This Club had two primary phases, distinguished from each other by the most active participants and the topics pursued.

The first phase of the Metaphysical Club lasted from 1871 until mid-1875, while the second phase existed from early 1876 until spring 1879. The dominant theme of first phase was pragmatism, while idealism dominated the second phase.

Pragmatism - First Phase:

The "pragmatist" first phase of the Metaphysical Club was organized by Charles Peirce (Harvard graduate and occasional lecturer), Chauncey Wright (Harvard graduate and occasional lecturer), and William James (Harvard graduate and instructor of physiology and psychology).

These three philosophers were then formulating recognizably pragmatist views. Other active members of the "Pragmatist" Metaphysical Club were two more Harvard graduates and local lawyers, Nicholas St. John Green and Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who were also advocating pragmatic views of human conduct and law.

Idealist - Second Phase:

The "idealist" second phase of the Metaphysical Club was organized and led by idealists who showed no interest in pragmatism: Thomas Davidson (independent scholar), George Holmes Howison (professor of philosophy at nearby Massachusetts Institute of Technology), and James Elliot Cabot (Harvard graduate and Emerson scholar). There was some continuity between the two phases.

Although Peirce had departed in April 1875 for a year in Europe, and Wright died in September 1875, most of the original members from the first phase were available for a renewed second phase.

By January 1876 the "Idealist" Metaphysical Club (for James still was referring to a metaphysical club in a letter of 10 February 1876) was meeting regularly for discussions first on Hume, then proceeding through Kant and Hegel in succeeding years.

Besides Davidson, Howison, and Cabot, the most active members appear to be William James, Charles Carroll Everett (Harvard graduate and Dean of its Divinity School), George Herbert Palmer (Harvard graduate and professor of philosophy), and Francis Ellingwood Abbott (Harvard graduate and independent scholar).

Other occasional participants include Francis Bowen (Harvard graduate and professor of philosophy), Nicholas St. John Green, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., and G. Stanley Hall (Harvard graduate and psychologist).

The Metaphysical Club was a nine-year episode within a much broader pattern of informal philosophical discussion that occurred in the Boston area from the 1850s to the 1880s.

Chauncey Wright, renowned in town for his social demeanor and remarkable intelligence, had been a central participant in various philosophy clubs and study groups dating as early as his own college years at Harvard in the early 1850s.

Wright, Peirce, James, and Green were the most active members of the Metaphysical Club from its inception in 1871.

By mid-1875 the original Metaphysical Club was no longer functioning; James was the strongest connection between the first and second phases, helping Thomas Davidson to collect the members of the "Idealist" Metaphysical Club.

Link to the Hegel Club:

James also was a link to the next philosophical club, the "Hegel Club", which began in fall 1880 in connection with George Herbert Palmer's seminar on Hegel. By winter 1881 the Hegel Club had expanded to include several from the Metaphysical Club, including James, Cabot, Everett, Howison, Palmer, Abbott, Hall, and the newcomer William Torrey Harris who had taken up residence in Concord.

This Hegel Club was in many ways a continuation of the St. Louis Hegelian Society from the late 1850s and 1860s, as Harris, Howison, Davidson, and their Hegelian students had moved east.

The Concord Summer School of Philosophy (1879-1888), under the leadership of Amos Bronson Alcott and energized by the Hegelians, soon brought other young American scholars into the orbit of the Cambridge clubs, such as John Dewey.

The "Pragmatist" Metaphysical Club met on irregular occasions, probably fortnightly during the Club's most active period of fall 1871 to winter 1872, and they usually met in the home of Charles Pierce or William James in Cambridge.

This Club met for four years until mid-1875, when their diverse career demands, extended travels to Europe, and early deaths began to disperse them. The heart of the club was the close bonds between five very unusual thinkers on the American intellectual scene.

Chauncey Wright and Charles Sanders Peirce shared the same scientific interests and outlook, having adopted a positivistic and evolutionary stance, and their common love for philosophical discussion sparked the club's beginnings. Wright's old friend and lawyer Nicholas St. John Green was glad to be included, as was Peirce's good friend William James who had also gone down the road towards empiricism and evolutionism. William James brought along his best friend, the lawyer Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who like Green was mounting a resistance to the legal formalism dominating that era. Green brought fellow lawyer Joseph Bangs Warner, and the group also invited two philosophers who had graduated with them from Harvard, Francis Ellingwood Abbott and John Fiske, who were both interested in evolution and metaphysics.

Other occasional members were Henry Ware Putnam, Francis Greenwood Peabody, and William Pepperell Montague.

Activities of the "Pragmatist" Metaphysical Club were recorded only by Peirce, William James, and William's brother Henry James, who all describe intense and productive debates on many philosophical problems.

Both Peirce and James recalled that the name of the club was the "Metaphysical" Club. Peirce suggests that the name indicated their determination to discuss deep scientific and metaphysical issues despite that era's prevailing positivism and agnosticism. A successful "Metaphysical Club" in London was also not unknown to them. Peirce later stated that the club witnessed the birth of the philosophy of pragmatism in 1871, which he elaborated (without using the term 'pragmatism' itself) in published articles in the late 1870s. His own role as the "father of pragmatism" should not obscure, in Peirce's view, the importance of Nicholas Green. Green should be recognized as pragmatism's "grandfather" because, in Peirce's words, Green had "often urged the importance of applying Alexander Bain's definition of belief as 'that upon which a man is prepared to act,' from which 'pragmatism is scarce more than a corollary'." Chauncey Wright also deserves considerable credit, for as both Peirce and James recall, it was Wright who demanded a phenomenalist and fallibilist empiricism as a vital alternative to rationalistic speculation.

The several lawyers in this club took great interest in evolution, empiricism, and Bain's pragmatic definition of belief.

They were also acquainted with James Stephen's A General View of the Criminal Law in England, which also pragmatically declared that people believe because they must act. At the time of the Metaphysical Club, Green and Holmes were primarily concerned with special problems in determining criminal states of mind and general problems of defining the nature of law in a culturally evolutionary way.

Both Green and Holmes made important advances in the theory of negligence which relied on a pragmatic approach to belief and established a "reasonable person" standard. Holmes went on to explore pragmatic definitions of law that look forward to future judicial consequences rather than to past legislative decisions.
(Source: http://www.pragmatism.org/research/me...)

Discussion Ideas and Themes of the Book

While reading the book - try to take some notes about the ideas presented along the following lines:

1. Science
2. Religion
3. Philosophy
4. Psychology
5. Sociology
6. Evolution
7. Pragmatism

There are very good reasons why this book is not only called The Metaphysical Club but also after the colon: A Story of Ideas in America and the purpose of our discussion of this book is "to discuss those ideas".

Don't just read my posts - but jump right in - the more you post and the more you contribute - the more you will get out of the conversation and the read.

Discussion Ideas:

Remember we are discussing major ideas and events right off the bat:

Ideas:
Metaphysics
Pragmatism
Polygenism
The Metaphysical Club
Natural History
Monogenism
Theory of Recapitulation

Events:
The American Civil War
Ice Age

People:
Louis Agassiz
William James
French Paleontologist, George Cuvier
Prussian Naturalist, Alexander von Humboldt
Abbot Lawrence
Elizabeth Cabot Cary
Samuel George Morton
Josiah Nott
George Gliddon
Samuel Cartwright
Abraham Lincoln
Samuel Gridley Howe

Groups
Twentieth Regiment of Massachusetts Volunteers

Government:
The Constitution
Bill of Rights
Emancipation Proclamation
American Freedman's Inquiry Commission

Places
Harvard
Lawrence Scientific School

Chapter Abstracts - Chapter Five

Chapter abstracts are short descriptions of events that occur in each chapter.

They highlight major plot events and detail the important relationships and characteristics of characters and objects.

The Chapter Abstracts that I will add can be used to review what you have read, and to prepare you for what you will read.

These highlights can be a reading guide or you can use them in your discussion to discuss any of these points. I add them so these bullet points can serve as a "refresher" or a stimulus for further discussion.

Here are a few:

New Abstracts:

Part 2, Chapter 5 - Agassiz - Sections One and Two

* Louis Agassiz was the protege of Curvier and von Humboldt.

* Harvard decided to ask Agassiz to stay on to teach.

* Agassiz met Morton when he arrived in the United States.

* Monogeism and polygenism were introduced as origin theories.

* Morton and Agassiz discussed the development of races, finding blacks to be the lowest ranked. (Folks this was the fallacy at that time and what they falsely believed)

* Josiah Nott feared interbreeding of blacks and whites would cause the extinction of the world. (Folks this was the fallacy at that time and what they falsely believed)

Part 2, Chapter 5 - Agassiz - Sections One and Two

* Polygenism was not liked in the South.

* Cartwright helped to integrate polygenism by linking it to Christianity.

* President Lincoln enacted the Emancipation Proclamation.

Discussion Questions for Chapter Five - think about some of these questions while you are reading:

New Questions:

1. Why did Agassiz's second wife, Elizabeth Cabot Cary, open up a school in their home?

2. How did Dr. Samuel Cartwright help to integrate polygenism in the South?

3. Explain the difference between monogenism and polygenism and what these "isms" had to do with segregation in the South and why was all of this such an injustice?

4. It is curious that the main characters in this story are men and that the great thoughts of America seem to come only from men at that period in time. What was the lot of women during this time period? Why do you think this book focused on the ideas of men rather than including more women thinkers? Why do you think women were unable to become a part of the Metaphysical Club? Do you think the author believes women did not contribute anything of value at this time? Why or why not?

5. While many people do not realize this, the North was not united in its views before the start of the Civil War with the South. Why didn't the Unionists and the Abolitionists get along during this time? Why do you think the North still decided to take up arms and fight the South during the war? Do you think the South should have seceded as a result of the war? Why or why not?

6. The question of slavery is often one that is treated on moral grounds these days as opposed to the grounds on which it was judged before slavery was abolished. Why do you think some people believed that slavery was okay? Do you think slavery was a necessary evil for society to have during that time? Why do you think that slavery is still allowed in certain parts of the world today and that the world leaders do not do more about stopping it in the countries where it still occurs?
http://www.alternet.org/story/142171/...
https://www.freetheslaves.net/SSLPage...
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm...

7. The inequality of races was something many scientists set out to prove during the early days of America. Why do you think other races were immediately seen as being inferior? Do you think it's fair to start a scientific discussion with an answer already in mind? Why or why not? Do you think people still believe that races and the genetics of different races lead to inequality or the presumed
superiority of whites? Why or why not?

8. Explain what Agassiz meant when he said, "They will mexicanize the country." Who were they and why did he have this view?

Some quotes from Chapter Five that might be the basis for discussion. Feel free to do a copy and paste and then post your commentary about each or any of them below. Be civil and respectful and discuss your ideas. Also read what your fellow readers are saying and comment on their posts if you agree or disagree and cite sources that help substantiate your point of view.

a) "The lesson of his career is that since everything we do we do out of some interest, we had better be clear about what our interests are."
Part 2, Chapter 5, Section 1

b) "'Time,' as he put it, 'does not alter organized beings.'"
Part 2, Chapter 5, Section 1

c) "Evolution is simply the incidental by-product of material struggle, not its goal."
Part 2, Chapter 5, Section 2

All, "we are open for discussion of Chapter Five" - opening this up a couple of days early so that folks who read ahead can begin discussion on any aspect of Chapter Five without further delay.

At this point we can also discuss any aspect that came before in the Preface, Chapters One through Chapter Four since these pages were previously discussed in the non spoiler threads that came before.

Hmm . . . reading this part just reminds me of how misinformation and misinterpretation of facts can lead to scientific CERTAINTY. The plot thickens . . . this same belief structure was used 100 yrs. later by Hitler to justify his behavior in wiping out over 6 million Jews.

You know . . . you'd think that with all that (Caucasian superiority) the Human race would have learned something . . . instead it just keeps repeating the same errors of judgement . . . How pathetic!

My soapbox will remain at my side throughout the reading of this book . . . You've been warned!

Very true Tomerobber - there is no end to the stupidity of man.

Soapboxes are good for discussion (smile). Fanatics, zealots, dictators always latch on to a belief system to remove opposition, to create their fantasy world and maintain power over others. Hitler was no exception.

But to take an outcome and fit in the facts allegedly "scientifically" is still surprising. Sad commentary on very bright men who at the same time did some amazingly stupid things.

This is the key figure for this chapter - Louis Agassiz - at the height of his celebrity status at the chalkboard:


Louis Agassiz was born in 1807 in Switzerland and gained notoriety from hard work and high energy. He always had a way of being in the right place at the right time and received many promotions because of this.

How are the rest of you doing - are you catching up - let me know how I can help

Tomerobber wrote: "Hmm . . . reading this part just reminds me of how misinformation and misinterpretation of facts can lead to scientific CERTAINTY. The plot thickens . . . this same belief structure was used 100 yr..."

It seems so obvious to us how stupid some of this was -- but what made people at the time think it was so scientifically true? That is one question I am looking for an answer. And I wouldn't say that us in the modern age are immune from this either.

Probably not Kathy - many times studies are paid for by sponsors of products or of prescription drugs to try to see if they can come up with a specific outcome.

But considering how bright some of these men were who were promoting these so called scientific findings - it is hard to fathom on what basis some of them could possibly believe these travesties

Yes, Bentley. That would be the trick if we could look into their minds and see what they really thought, and how, and why. But I guess that will always be part of the mystery of history.

Indeed Kathy - we could be time travellers (smile).

All, there are so many of you who signed up for this book and I do hope you pop in and post - there are so many good discussion topics in this chapter and the sky is the limit.

Let us know what you think of Louis Agassiz. What were his strengths and weaknesses?

Here is an excerpt from the chapter:

Harvard had been contemplating the establishment of a school of science since 1845, the year before Agassiz's arrival on the scene, but no funds had been raised.

When it became known that Agassiz might be interested in remaining in the United States after his Prussian money ran out, John Lowell and Edward Everett, the president of Harvard (and former governor of Massachusetts), persuaded the mill-twin industrialist Abbott Lawrence to donate fifty thousand dollars to found the school and to guarantee the salary for a new academic appointment intended specifically for Agassiz.

The offer was made in the summer of 1847; Agassiz accepted in the fall, and he began his career as a Harvard professor in the spring of 1848. The collapse that year of the liberal revolutions in Europe, one consequence of which was the closing of the Swiss academy where Agassiz had been teaching, led to a minor exodus of European scientific talent to America, and essentially sealed Agassiz's decision to become an expatriate.

I thought it interesting that in 1845, Harvard at that time did not have a school of science? But then I reviewed the previous presidents at Harvard and found some interesting tidbits and a possible connection to Agassiz.

You have to go back at Harvard to Kirkland who was much beloved but got Harvard into a fiscal mess for which he resigned.

Here he is:



TERM OF OFFICE: 1810-1828

By all accounts, John Thornton Kirkland (1770-1840) was a remarkable man whose special touch conjured up a golden age for all who walked the Yard on his watch. He was the epitome of the gentleman scholar. For no other Harvard president have graduates penned so many affectionate tributes.

Writing to President Eliot in 1871, historian-diplomat George Bancroft, Class of 1817, recalled that among all the varied individuals who had crossed his path, he had encountered “few who were [Kirkland’s] equals, and no one who knew better than he how to deal with his fellow-men. [. . .] There was not in his nature a trace of anything that was mean or narrow. [. . .] He opened the ways through which [the University] has passed onward to its present eminent condition [. . .].”

Leading by example came second nature to Kirkland. Even as a Harvard tutor (1792-1794), he adopted the then-unorthodox approach of treating students as gentlemen in hopes of inspiring them to become gentlemen. Kirkland left no significant literary legacy. Yet his own virtues - clarity and imagination of thought, charm in conversation, sensitivity to beautiful language, and more - inspired an outpouring of student writing.

Despite Kirkland’s polished manner, the Yard (which Kirkland did much to enhance) was not entirely placid. One Sunday evening in 1818, a fierce food fight broke out in recently built University Hall (then partly used as commons for all four Classes). The disciplining of four sophomores prompted classmates (including Ralph Waldo Emerson) to swear allegiance against such "tyranny" under a Rebellion Tree.

In spring 1823, the Great Rebellion - a much more complex student uprising - put institutional reform on the front burner. Accordingly in 1825, the University adopted 13 chapters of Statutes and Laws that changed the curriculum, the classroom (including the introduction of sections and grades), and faculty structure. The new laws also required the president to deliver an annual report to the Board of Overseers. In addition, the Kirkland years saw the establishment of two professional schools - Divinity (1816) and Law (1817) - as well as the completion of Divinity Hall (1826), Harvard’s first Cambridge building outside the Yard.

Kirkland’s undoing began in 1826, when newly elected Corporation Fellow Nathaniel Bowditch launched a review that found Harvard a fiscal fiasco. The Corporation approved wide-ranging economies, including docked pay for the president and pay cuts for professors. In 1827, Kirkland suffered a paralytic stroke. On March 27, 1828, his fiscal nonchalance finally provoked a tongue-lashing from Bowditch. To everyone’s surprise and dismay, Kirkland resigned the next day. Heartbroken seniors penned him a farewell encomium of unexampled love and gratitude.
==========================

So we discover that beloved Ralph Waldo Emerson was a student at Harvard during Kirkland's presidency and he was a bit of an quiet activist then (smile). Obviously, Harvard had some money woes and Kirkland did not help matters much.

Here is some more information on Kirkland who did a lot for Harvard:

http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/H...

Then to make matters worse - the next President was Josiah Quincy. Though Kirkland was loved; Quincy very soon thereafter became the opposite.



Term of office: 1829-1845
On June 2, 1829, the University grandly installed Josiah Quincy (1772-1864) as its 15th president. The dazzling Commencement Day ceremony proved a false harbinger. For if John Thornton Kirkland was Harvard’s best-loved chief executive, Josiah Quincy soon plummeted to the opposite pole.

According to his son, Quincy had hoped to create a Harvard that produced “high-minded, high-principled, well-taught, well-conducted, well-bred gentlemen.” Unfortunately, Quincy never got his finger on the inner pulse of student life. Within five years, his rough touch tripped off one of the most destructive and divisive student disorders in Harvard history.

During the winter of 1833-34, an argument between a student and a tutor (possibly a professor) prompted disciplinary action against several students. Classmates protested in word and deed, breaking the tutor’s windows and furniture, and ringing the College bell at night. By May 29, the College felt compelled to send the entire sophomore Class home.

Having found no one to charge for some $300 in window damage, Quincy called on the Middlesex County grand jury to investigate. The interjection of outside authority proved a fatal violation of ancient academic protocol. The ensuing student riots produced mounds of broken glass and furniture, bomb damage in the chapel, a black flag fluttering over Holworthy Hall, and an effigy of Quincy dangling from the Rebellion Tree (so designated by student rioters of 1818). The grand-jury investigation yielded no actionable results. Undergraduate enrollment nosedived, as many existing students left and prospective students looked elsewhere.

To make matters worse, Quincy took the grading system (introduced by the reforms of 1825) and transformed it into a rigid and much-hated “Scale of Merit,” which consisted of an eight-point spread applied to every recitation in class, with various demerits for behavioral infractions. Quincy himself kept score.

On the positive side, Quincy championed academic freedom and produced a valuable “History of Harvard University” (1840). While researching this two-volume work in the Harvard Archives, Quincy discovered an original sketch of the VERITAS seal in College record books from the winter of 1643-44. For reasons unknown, the motto had never before been used. Meanwhile, Harvard had adopted two other mottoes. Atop a huge tent in the Yard on Sept. 8, 1836, a white banner publicly displayed the VERITAS seal for the first time during the Harvard Bicentennial (which also brought the first singing of “Fair Harvard”). The Harvard Corporation officially adopted the motto in 1843, setting off a four-decade tug of war between VERITAS (“Truth”) and the previous motto CHRISTO ET ECCLESIAE (“For Christ and Church”).

With Quincy’s support, Harvard also established its first research division, the Astronomical Observatory, in 1839. Six years later, Quincy retired and returned to Boston.

============================
Well that was interesting - at the very least we know how Veritas was resurrected as its motto - thanks to Quincy. But it does not seem he helped Harvard's financial mess if he was turning away prospective students due to his philosophy.

However prior to being President of Harvard - he was mayor of Boston:

Quincy left Boston the cleanest, most orderly, and best governed city in the United States. He became known as “The Great Mayor.” Quincy’s various projects, however, came with a large price tag, and he left the city the most indebted in the United States. This was the primary reason that he was denied reelection in 1828.

And according to the following article he was brought in to calm down the student body:

One of Quincy’s major challenges as president was the taming of the perennial student rebellions. Immediately after his election as president, Quincy informed the student body that the campus would no longer be a haven for lawbreakers. He challenged the students to improve their behavior and in doing so became most unpopular.

Here is an article with a bit more information on Quincy:

http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/H...

What an amazing chapter! I am not sure if I can put into words how stunned I am by these beliefs put forth in this chapter. It is almost hard to believe that scientist could have thought this way. The conclusion they could draw from the evidence they had on hand is remarkable. There certainly were no parameters for a scientific study in those days. It seems that if you had the credentials you could say about anything and get away with it. I wonder how this false science effected Holmes. Did he really believe the conclusion as fact? The conclusions drawn from these studies is laughable by today's standards. Men of learning who took this serious were amazing. A good scientist always questions their results but it seems that these men were just beyond that. It appears they used science to back up their outdated philosophical and religious ways of thinking and not the other way around. I am sure the southern states just loved this guy. He backed up their beliefs with what we call junk science today.

And then to bring us up to the time of Agassiz's appointment we meet another one of Harvard's Unitarian Presidents (Kirkland and Quincy were two more - and now we have Edward Everett (1846-1849)

http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/H...



Edward Everett’s arrival opened a 23-year span of five presidencies and one acting presidency in which death and resignation left no one in office much longer than seven years.

With his many years of experience in high-level state, national, and international affairs, Everett (1794-1865) did not relish the prospect of running a university. (Perhaps his experience as a tutor, Overseer, and the first Eliot Professor of Greek Literature factored in as well.) By shrewdly appealing to Everett’s reputation as a prominent public speaker (who could keep his oratorical skills in tune by lecturing on international law and diplomacy at the Law School), U.S. Sen. Daniel Webster (Whig-Mass.) persuaded Everett to take the job. He lived to regret it.

Students rained down a storm of clever pranks that swamped his patience - and Everett was not one to suffer in silence. “When I was asked to come to this university, I supposed I was to be at the head of the largest and most famous institution of learning in America,” he declared one day at Morning Prayers. “I have been disappointed. I find myself the sub-master of an ill-disciplined school.”

At Everett’s behest, the institution officially became the “University at Cambridge,” with nary a breath of “Harvard.” Everett also lost no time in getting the Harvard Corporation to abolish the recently adopted VERITAS motto and reinstate CHRISTO ET ECCLESIAE. (Alumni raged over this until 1885, when VERITAS prevailed.) When the City of Cambridge incorporated in 1846, Everett designed the municipal seal, featuring the image of Gore Hall (1841-1913), home of the College Library and a local landmark.

Despite its brevity, Everett’s term brought a major research component to the University: the Lawrence Scientific School, funded in 1847 by merchant-manufacturer Abbott Lawrence and opened in 1850. The School awarded its last degrees in 1910. The building itself survived until May 7, 1970, when fire claimed it on a site now occupied by the Science Center.

Everett began talking about resigning in 1847. In the following year, he wrote a letter of resignation, which was accepted on Feb. 1, 1849. Everett departed as the ninth and final President to live in Wadsworth House. In 1852, he became U.S. secretary of state in the Fillmore administration. He later ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. vice presidency.

At the dedication of Gettysburg National Cemetery on Nov. 19, 1863, Everett delivered a two-hour principal address, remembered now, if at all, as the upbeat to a two-minute speech by the 16th president of the United States.

I am still working on explaining the excerpt I selected from the chapter because it is chock full of information if you look beneath the surface and understand the people and the events of this period and their associations so I am going to work a bit more on message 21 for awhile.

We are learning that Ralph Waldo Emerson and some of his friends caused a great deal of rebellion on the campus of Harvard. In fact, Emerson swore revenge against tyranny under a Rebellion tree in Harvard yard which probably was part of the rebellious nature of the student body years later when the Great Rebellion took place in 1823 under Kirkland. We also learn that even when Quincy was President after Kirkland that he was hung in effigy from the same Rebellion Tree so earmarked by Ralph Waldo Emerson and his cohorts. And it seemed that even under Everett who followed Quincy things were still not in order and the students disciplined.

Clayton wrote: "What an amazing chapter! I am not sure if I can put into words how stunned I am by these beliefs put forth in this chapter. It is almost hard to believe that scientist could have thought this way. ..."

Clayton isn't this chapter amazing. The beliefs of this period are stunning. There were the Northerners who became Unionists by default and the Southerners who became the Confederacy and the Abolitionists who even Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr, called stark raving mad. And the North and major cities like Lawrence were founded and named after Abbott Lawrence who started the firms cotton mills in Lawrence and bought out the mills in Lowell - who do you think was making money hand over fist from the cotton plantations and the folks who worked in these factories did not want the slaves becoming freemen and flooding the market with even cheaper labor than they were and the Lawrences of the North did not want their applecart upset either in terms of the production of cotton and the cotton picking done by the slaves in the South. All of them I think wanted to believe that the slave was inferior to maintain the status quo for everyone and at first even Lincoln did not want to rock the boat with the South. And as you are aware - even after the Civil War - pushing for equal rights for African Americans was very slow in coming and not until Lyndon Johnson was a meaningful Civil Rights bill passed. Was all of America racist - racism is always a term which is bandied about when talking about the outlandish notions that folks believed. I do not think we could say that all of America was racist but they were certainly exhibiting stupidity and ignorance. But if you were in the South sitting on one of those beautiful verandas sipping a Mint Julep or a glass of sweet tea surrounded by acres and acres of beautiful property in a Gone with the Wind plantation landscape - then I can see why you would not want your way of life to change and I can also understand the Northerners who manufactured the cotton - but it is just unconscionable that they could not see that they wanted to believe these fallacious and faulty beliefs to continue the way things were at the expense of other human beings. Hard to fathom but it was a different time then.

As far as Holmes - hard to tell but he did claim that many of the soldiers went to bed or started out as Unionists and woke up one morning stark raving mad Abolitionists. It wasn't just the South - remember Lowell was the one who invited Agassiz to speak at his group and present a series of lectures and Lowell was friends with Everett (all learned men of their day)

So it was not just the South.

The next President of Harvard after Everett was Sparks!

http://www.harvard.edu/sites/default/...


Jared Sparks - President of Harvard University 1849-1853

TERM OF OFFICE: 1849-1853

Jared Sparks (1789-1866) stepped up to the presidency as soon as Edward Everett stepped down on Feb. 1, 1849.

Students could not have been more delighted: Sparks had found favor as the first McLean Professor of Ancient and Modern History (1838). But no second golden age was at hand to rival that of President Kirkland.

Even after transferring many onerous tasks to a regent, Sparks did not enjoy his presidential duties. They never left him time enough for historical research. By Oct. 30, 1852, unstable health prompted Sparks to submit a letter of resignation. He agreed to remain until Feb. 10, 1853, when James Walker succeeded him.

The Sparks years, however brief, had their share of surprises. Sparks’s easygoing ways and “distinguished manners” (Samuel Eliot Morison) inspired more students from the South to come to Harvard. At one point, Southerners made up almost a third of the student body.

Over at the Medical School (long by then resettled in Boston), the most famous murder in Harvard history took place on Nov. 23, 1849, when John White Webster killed faculty colleague George Parkman in a dispute over a loan for which Webster provided subsequently compromised collateral. Webster was hanged for the crime on Aug. 30, 1850.

Shortly after taking office, Sparks received a letter from Sarah Pellet, a young woman who wondered whether she might be admitted to the College. On April 25, 1849, Sparks responded, indicating the practical difficulties of having a solitary woman among so many men. But his final remarks held out brighter hopes: “It may be a misfortune, that an enlightened public opinion has not led to the establishment of Colleges of the higher order for the education of females, and the time may come when their claims will be more justly valued, and when a wider intelligence and a more liberal spirit will provide for this deficiency.”

Sparks’ name is now most often invoked because of a single Harvard structure. Instead of moving to Wadsworth House in the Yard, he lived in his own dwelling at 48 Quincy St. The building was moved to 21 Kirkland St. in 1968. Today, Jared Sparks House serves as the residence of the Pusey Minister in the Memorial Church. In 1849, Sparks also moved the President’s Office from Wadsworth House to University Hall, where it remained until 1939.

This is a very interesting source: (the following is totally edited by Herbert F. Vetter)

From 1810 until 1933 all of the presidents of Harvard University were Unitarians—a span of 123 years.

PREFACE

From 1810 until 1933 all of the presidents of Harvard University were Unitarians—a span of 123 years.

Who were these leaders of higher education in the United States of America?

The following online illustrated stories seek to answer that question.

For delightfully longer biographies, see the classic Three Centuries of Harvard 1636-1936 by Samuel Eliot Morison, and Harvard Observed by John T. Bethell.

My initial source of information for this undertaking is the huge leather-bound, gold-embossed set entitled The Harvard Book, published in 1876.

These two rare volumes were a gift of Mrs Roderick Stebbins, a parishioner in Milton, Massachusetts.

Other sources to be acknowledged with special appreciation include, in addition to the remarkable Harvard University Archives: Views of Harvard by Hamilton Vaughan Bail and Harvard: An Architectural History by Bainbridge Bunting.

I especially appreciate the review of the text by Conrad Wright and Alan Seaburg of Harvard.

Herbert F. Vetter, Minister at Large, Emeritus The First Parish in Cambridge, 2006

Table of Contents

1810-1828 - John Thornton Kirkland

1825-1845 - Josiah Quincy

1846-1849 - Edward Everett

1849-1853 - Jared Sparks

1853-1860 - James Walker

1860-1862 - Cornelius Conway Felton

1862-1868 - Thomas Hill

1869-1909 - Charles W. Eliot

1909-1933 - Abbott Lawrence Lowell

Harvard Unitarian Acting Presidents

1810, 1828-1829 - Henry Ware

1862, 1868-1869 - Andrew Preston Peabody

RECOMMENDED READING
(Source for all of the above - http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/H...)

by Samuel Eliot Morison

by John T. Bethell (no photo)

by Bainbridge Bunting (no photo)

Bentley wrote: "Clayton wrote: "What an amazing chapter! I am not sure if I can put into words how stunned I am by these beliefs put forth in this chapter. It is almost hard to believe that scientist could have th..."
Just a side note if you would like to get a different perspective on the south and what it was really like rather than the Margaret Mitchell stereotype I would just reading the Cotton Kingdom by Fredrick Law Olmsted. I may have mentioned this book earlier. Olmsted certainly paints the south in a different light. It was written just prior to the war and was a first hand account of his travels throughout the southern states.

ALL ABOUT UNITARIANISM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religio...

In addition to the 11 presidents and acting presidents above - here are some other famous Unitarians:

Famous Unitarians

John Quincy Adams - US president

Louisa May Alcott - children's writer

P. T. Barnum - circus owner

Béla Bartók - composer

Dorothea Dix - social reformer

Ralph Waldo Emerson - writer and thinker

Elizabeth Gaskell - novelist

Edvard Greig - composer

Sylvia Plath - poet

Mary Wollstonecraft - feminist

Christopher Reeve - actor

Tim Berners-Lee - creator of the world wide web

Pete Seeger - musician

Lord Bullock - historian

Dictionary of Unitarian and Universalist Biography

http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/

Famous Unitarian Universalists

http://www.famousuus.com

Unitarian Universalists of America

http://www.uua.org

Curious as to why Harvard has so many Unitarians as Presidents? Does anybody know?

Clayton wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Clayton wrote: "What an amazing chapter! I am not sure if I can put into words how stunned I am by these beliefs put forth in this chapter. It is almost hard to believe that scienti..."


Terrific Clayton and thank you.n I am sure that many group members will add this to their long list of to be read books. Looks worthwhile.

Just remember to also add the author's link - you almost had it.


by Frederick Law Olmsted

Remember folks that the Civil War was from 1861 to 1865.

So let us continue with the Unitarian Presidents of Harvard. But before we go forward let us spend a bit more time with Sparks.

We discussed the role of women during this period of time and how they were viewed and treated as a minority. Here is a letter written by a young woman who had lofty ambitions of going to Harvard and how these lofty goals were shot down by Sparks.

A Solitary Female at Harvard?

Harvard University
Cambridge, April 25th, 1849

Miss Sarah Pellet,

Your letter, making inquiry whether you could be admitted into this University upon presenting the proper credentials of character and scholarship, was duly received.

I am not aware that any law exists touching this point, and, as it is a novel case, it would be decided by a vote of the Corporation.

As the institution was founded, however, for the education of young men, and all its departments arranged for that purpose only, and its rules, regulations, and internal organization, discipline, and system of teaching designed for that end, I should doubt whether a solitary female, mingling as she must do promiscuously with so large a number of the other sex, would find her situation either agreeable or advantageous.

Indeed, I should be unwilling to advise any one to make such an experiment, and upon reflection I believe you will be convinced of its inexpediency.

It may be a misfortunate, that an enlightened public opinion has not led to the establishment of Colleges of the higher order for the education of females, and the time may come when their claims will be more justly valued, and when a wider intelligence and a more liberal spirit will provide for this deficiency.

Very respectfully yours,
Jared Sparks

—From The Harvard Book: Selections from Three Centuries, edited by William Bentinck-Smith, Harvard University Press, 1953.

Editorial Note: In 2006 Harvard College, for the third year in a row, admitted more female than male students.

by Samuel Eliot Morison



-----------------------------

What was the role of bright women during this period of time and how were they treated?

Other books:

by John Gorham Palfrey (no photo)

by Edward Everett (no photo)

by Jared Sparks (no photo)

by Jared Sparks (no photo)

by Jared Sparks (no photo)
Note: There are about 10 volumes that Sparks put together of primary sources and this is all FREE ON YOUR KINDLE

all by Jared Sparks (no photo)

by Richard Katula (no photo)
Edward Everett (1794 - 1865) was America s first Ph.D., a United States Congressman, Governor of Massachusetts, Ambassador to England, President of Harvard University, Secretary of State, a United States Senator, and a Vice-Presidential candidate. In the midst of this distinguished career, he was also a famous and profound orator, delivering hundreds of orations across the nation, and at least five of the most important speeches in American history. In this book, Everett's training as an orator and his career on the public stage are reviewed in the context of his times, often referred to as the Golden Age of American oratory. Through analyses of a number of his most illustrious orations such as the Phi Beta Kappa Society oration in 1824; his 4th of July oration at Worcester, Massachusetts; his eulogy to John Quincy Adams in 1848; his speech that saved Mount Vernon, 'The Character of Washington,' delivered 137 times from 1856 1860; and his Gettysburg Oration, delivered just prior to Lincoln's illustrious Gettysburg Address - Everett is seen as a transformational figure. The book concludes that while unknown to most Americans, Everett's rhetoric of idealism, optimism, sentimentality, and conciliation provided the rising nation - America - with its sense of identity and its core principles.

by Ronald F. Reid (no photo)
Reid addresses the historical and oratorical paradoxes that have influenced perceptions of Everett's career. Reid reconstitutes the role of epideictic rhetoric in the United States from the end of the Revolutionary War to the eve of the Civil War and reinstates Everett in the pantheon of great American orators. In the process, he treats the reader to a penetrating analysis of the role of public persuasion in the United States during a critical period in its history.

Other books:

by John Gorham Palfrey (no photo)

by Edward Everett (no photo)

by Jared Sparks (no photo)

by Jared Sparks (no photo)

by Jared Sparks (no photo)
Note: There are about 10 volumes that Sparks put together of primary sources and this is all FREE ON YOUR KINDLE

all by Jared Sparks (no photo)

by Richard Katula (no photo)
Edward Everett (1794 - 1865) was America s first Ph.D., a United States Congressman, Governor of Massachusetts, Ambassador to England, President of Harvard University, Secretary of State, a United States Senator, and a Vice-Presidential candidate. In the midst of this distinguished career, he was also a famous and profound orator, delivering hundreds of orations across the nation, and at least five of the most important speeches in American history. In this book, Everett's training as an orator and his career on the public stage are reviewed in the context of his times, often referred to as the Golden Age of American oratory. Through analyses of a number of his most illustrious orations such as the Phi Beta Kappa Society oration in 1824; his 4th of July oration at Worcester, Massachusetts; his eulogy to John Quincy Adams in 1848; his speech that saved Mount Vernon, 'The Character of Washington,' delivered 137 times from 1856 1860; and his Gettysburg Oration, delivered just prior to Lincoln's illustrious Gettysburg Address - Everett is seen as a transformational figure. The book concludes that while unknown to most Americans, Everett's rhetoric of idealism, optimism, sentimentality, and conciliation provided the rising nation - America - with its sense of identity and its core principles.

by Ronald F. Reid (no photo)
Reid addresses the historical and oratorical paradoxes that have influenced perceptions of Everett's career. Reid reconstitutes the role of epideictic rhetoric in the United States from the end of the Revolutionary War to the eve of the Civil War and reinstates Everett in the pantheon of great American orators. In the process, he treats the reader to a penetrating analysis of the role of public persuasion in the United States during a critical period in its history.

by Quincy, Josiah (no photo)
Another free kindle edition - This memoir comprises the most important events in the life of a statesman second to none of his contemporaries in laborious and faithful devotion to the service of his country. John Quincy Adams (1767-1848) was a diplomat, politician, and President of the United States (1825-1829). His party affiliations were Federalist, Democratic-Republican, National Republican, and later Whig. He is most famous as a diplomat involved in many international negotiations, and for formulating the Monroe Doctrine. As president he proposed a grand program of modernization and educational advancement, but was unable to get it through Congress. Late in life, as a Congressman, he was a leading opponent of the Slave Power, arguing that if a civil war ever broke out the president could abolish slavery by using his war powers, a policy followed by Abraham Lincoln in the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863.

And here is the next Unitarian President of Harvard


James Walker - President of Harvard University 1853-1860

TERM OF OFFICE: 1853-1860

In James Walker (1794-1874), Harvard gained a president whose great words fell short of commensurate deeds. “President Walker’s inaugural address was one of the most solid, sensible, and prophetic orations ever delivered on such an occasion,” notes Harvard historian Samuel Eliot Morison. “Unfortunately, Dr. Walker was one of those wise persons, not uncommon in academic circles, who cannot get things done. He was too tired or indifferent to advance his own theories effectively.”

Even so, Harvard continued to grow in important new directions. In 1858, two-story Boylston Hall rose to serve the physical sciences (the third story was added in 1871), and the first Appleton Chapel (demolished in 1931) was completed. In the same year, Harvard received $50,000 from Francis Calley Gray that established a Museum of Comparative Zoology. In 1859, Abbott Lawrence made his second $50,000 donation to the Lawrence Scientific School. The same year found Harvard’s new Gymnasium (on the site of today’s Cambridge Fire Department Headquarters) under the supervision of professional boxing teacher A. Molyneaux Hewlett, the first black person to serve on the Harvard staff, who remained until his death in 1871.

Perusing the 1856-57 catalog, students would find Harvard’s first music course (“Vocal Music”). March 1857 brought less harmonious tidings, when the faculty approved the introduction of written final examinations and, of course, bluebooks. With firm faith in old-school classroom recitations as the true measure of mastery, Greek Professor Evangelinus Apostolides Sophocles was soon burning bluebooks he had never read.

Troubled by arthritis, Walker submitted his resignation on Oct. 29, 1859, but remained in office until Jan. 26, 1860, a few weeks before the election of his successor.

Peabody seemed to admire Walker. This is what he wrote:

In the presidential office, Dr. Walker’s mere presence was a power, alike on public occasions and meetings of the Faculty. On all matters appertaining to the courses of study, the choice of instructors, and the management of affairs, whether strictly academic or secular, his advice, while in form mere counsel, had in its self-evidencing wisdom the authority of the imperative command. His influence on the students, collectively and individually was intensely stimulating to industry, ambition, high moral resolve, and religious purpose, and there were and still are many who regard their having been in college under his presidency as a ground for lifelong gratitude.

Note: You can read Andrew Preston Peabody's book FREE on line: - Harvard Graduates I Have Known - http://archive.org/stream/harvardgrad...

Here is the Unitarian write-up:

http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/H...

I wasn't fully aware of the role of pre-Darwinian science in the support of racism until reading the chapter on Agassiz. Now that we have fully analyzed the human genome and studied some elements of Neanderthal DNA, we realize that we have interbred and most humans contain two to four percent Neanderthal DNA in our genes. If there are any pure homo sapiens the are native Africans. So if purity is to the mark of racial supremacy, the Africans should be the ubermench. Ironic.

Here is an on line reference; I'm not aware of any publications:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/d...

Jeffrey wrote: "I wasn't fully aware of the role of pre-Darwinian science in the support of racism until reading the chapter on Agassiz. Now that we have fully analyzed the human genome and studied some elements ..."

It was interesting reading. I had not realized how much "science" was abused as well as religion in support of racism.

Nice information on DNA.

Jeffrey wrote: "I wasn't fully aware of the role of pre-Darwinian science in the support of racism until reading the chapter on Agassiz. Now that we have fully analyzed the human genome and studied some elements ..."

Very interesting point Jeffery and thank you for the reference.

Where is the thread for the next week's discussion?

It is coming today.

I got a little behind in the reading and so am late to this party -- and what a party! I don't think I've ever read a chapter quite like this about American history, and it has bowled me over. I am left wondering if this information is available in current American high school history classes.

Thanks for all the extra research and info you have provided about Harvard, Bentley. It reminded me of the book "Caleb's Crossing" about how, in 1665, the first American Indian, Caleb Cheeshahteaumuck, graduated from Harvard. In 2011, Harvard also awarded a posthumous degree to a second Native American, Joel Iacoomes, who had attended the Harvard Indian School with Caleb. The Harvard Gazette stated that giving this posthumous honor was in keeping with the fundamental mission of Harvard --

“It is fitting that we honor Joel Iacoomes as Harvard marks the 375th anniversary of its founding,” said Harvard President Drew Faust. “With the presentation of this degree, we also recognize some of the commitments that were fundamental to the founding of Harvard: a commitment to a diversity of students, a commitment to the communities in which the College was founded, and a commitment to the power of education to transform lives.”

Harvard was founded in 1636. Its charter of 1650 specifically cited Harvard’s role in the education of “English and Indian youth.” The Harvard Indian College, which Iacoomes attended, was founded in 1655. Iacoomes’ classmate and fellow Wampanoag, Caleb Cheeshahteaumuck, graduated from Harvard in 1665.

Complete article here:
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story...

Several related articles can be found here:
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/tag/c...

If I remember correctly, the Harvard Indian School was closed after Caleb and Joel graduated. The experiment didn't go as well as hoped, and both the Native Americans were mostly isolated from the rest of the student population during their stay.

Luckily, science hadn't really been introduced to Harvard at that time, so no one knew that there might be cranial proof of inferiority in the 'species.' I enjoyed Menand's comment on the theory that everyone was born where they should be:

"In America, of course, the civilizations had long since intersected. Black people had been forcibly resettled in a part of the planet where God had intended only white people to live. (And, evidently, Native Americans. The presence of Native Americans in a temperate climate was an embarrassment to polygenists and mongenists alike: if God had created these people in North America, Caucaian from Europe had no business displacing them; on the other hand if climate was a factor in the evolution of the races, the alleged disparity between Causcasian and Native American capacity was inexplicable.)"

by Geraldine Brooks

Bentley wrote: "Remember folks that the Civil War was from 1861 to 1865.

So let us continue with the Unitarian Presidents of Harvard. But before we go forward let us spend a bit more time with Sparks.
...
What was the role of bright women during this period of time and how were they treated?..."

The question of female influence and participation is interesting. Menands is not discussing the role of women, he has taken on the subject of the Club and its members. It will be interesting to see if that changes as we progress through this incredible story.

Gender issues are very complicated. Gender and race issues are not unrelated. If we could root out the basic cause why so many men, then and now, especially white men, need to control, subjugate, dominate, negate, and objectivize women as well as people of any other color (especially black), then maybe science could invent a vaccine that would eliminate it.

Psychology would say it is grounded in fear of failure -- of performance, of masculinity, of cultural expectations. I think people, both men (and probably women, but we haven't heard much from them) found the scientific 'proof' of Agassiz & cohorts a wonderfully comforting justification for their reactions to their own fears and guilt. I think that's why these cranial studies and the monogenism and polygenism theories were so massively accepted and adopted into popular thinking. Science said so! It must be so!

This kind of rationalization was perfectly suited for the mess people had gotten themselves into. I don't believe for a minute that people didn't know it was wrong to enslave, or to objectify other humans as animals. But Denial can be an insidious weapon against Truth, and I am beginning to believe that the citizens of the United States were caught in a mob-like denial of their own participation in such inhuman behavior.

Some of the same sort of behavior goes on today among citizens who would continue to deny the legitimacy of a black president, or the validity of a woman having control of her own body. It's mind-boggling if you think of it.

And the obvious question that comes to mind is -- what is the male dominated agenda-driven (money) field of science feeding us now by way of information that we are blindly accepting as Truth?

Janice - I agree - this book is simply amazing and astounds me on every page with facts that I think Americans conveniently forget or never knew were the facts. I doubt that it is because even though it is true - it is not politically correct and sensitive - never mind that we are filling the heads of our children with folklore (smile).

You are welcome - I will still be adding a bit more on it to this chapter - and was tied up this week myself with business obligations.

Don't forget when mentioning another book that we are not discussing to cite it.

by Geraldine Brooks (Note: Novel)

It is odd that our history has all of these philanthropic endeavors where we are assisting others - yet segregate them from ourselves.

So true Janice and I think that is why some of these scientists were simply trying to redesign science and its findings as they went along.

Clayton wrote: "Just a side note if you would like to get a different perspective on the south and what it was really like rather than the Margaret Mitchell stereotype I would just reading the Cotton Kingdom by Fredrick Law Olmsted. I may have mentioned this book earlier. Olmsted certainly paints the south in a different light. It was written just prior to the war and was a first hand account of his travels throughout the southern states..."

I'd just like to take exception to this comment about Gone With the Wind. I'm sure Olmsted's account has the objective perception of someone who is not native to the area. Mitchell, however, wrote her own Southern version of Thackerey's Vanity Fair... pointing out the failings of humans as they cling to the vanities that support their culture and society. Those stereotypes became stereotypes through the rigid CERTAINTY of opinion that was necessary to maintain an impossible lifestyle that allowed for the justification of slavery while the white man & woman sipped mint juleps. Mitchell portrayed the South as it had reached the shattering point and could no longer sustain its chosen stereotypical lifestyle. Gone with the Wind is in fact a story about the breakdown of the stereotypes that had built the South.

by Margaret Mitchell

by William Makepeace Thackeray

Janice you make some good points too - some historical fiction is mighty accurate about mankind - although when visiting those plantations and sitting on their verandas - I could almost picture myself sipping and having one of those mint juleps! I could understand why they clung so tightly to their certitudes as did many Northerners at the time - frankly because their livelihoods (though they were the industrial arm) also depended very much on that cotton.

And who was going to pick it.

Don't forget to cite Thackerey.

by William Makepeace Thackeray

Bentley wrote: "Janice you make some good points too - some historical fiction is mighty accurate about mankind - although when visiting those plantations and sitting on their verandas - I could almost picture mys...

Don't forget to cite Thackerey..."

Done. So far, I'm getting it right about half the time. I am, however, highly trainable. :)

You are also very funny. (smile)

Hmmmmm . . . . are we still discussing this book? There is no thread started for the discussion that was supposed to happen last week . . . if not I'll just finish reading the book and not wait for further input . . . .