Republican Wives,
Republican Mothers[1]
Extra Credit Option –
Learning Module 1 – History 102 / Online
Overview:
In this activity, you will
be asked to consider the rights of women in Revolutionary America. To prepare,
read “Republican Ideology” and “Women & the Limits of Republican
Citizenship,” in Chapter 6.
In this activity, you will
learn two approaches to “female education” in the early years of this nation, the
first Benjamin Rush and the second by “A Matron from Connecticut.”
Links to these two
documents are shown below.
Timing: Must be submitted on or before September 13. Send as an attachment to 10susanoliver@gmail.com. Be sure to include your full name and class
(History 102) in the subject section of the email form.
Assessment: Up to 30 points.
Documents:
Requirements:
·
Part I (20 pts): Submit answers to the following questions for
each of the documents.
Questions:
1.
What is the author’s attitude regarding the
value of education for the future generation?
2.
What are the specific characteristics that
this education should include? Is it the
same for sons and daughters? Provide one
example, either as a quotation or specific item.
3.
How does education relate to the larger issue
of securing a strong nation, according to the author?
·
Part II (10 pts): Write a short reflection
that compares the attitudes of each author toward a woman’s role as a
citizen in the new nation of the United States? Is this role still considered important
today?
Female Education - Benjamin Rush, 1787[2]
Philadelphia physician
Benjamin Rush (1745‑1813), a member of Benjamin Franklin's intellectual
circle, won prominence as both a scientist and a patriot. He served in the
Continental Congress and signed the Declaration of Independence. An enlightened
spirit, he ardently supported education. A Princeton graduate who had studied
medicine in Pennsylvania and Edinburgh, Rush taught chemistry at the University
of Pennsylvania, helped found Dickinson College, and served as a trustee of the
new Young Ladies Academy in Philadelphia, opened in 1786. There, in July of
1787, at the close of quarterly examinations, he gave an important speech on
women's education.
Decrying European models of women's education, full of aristocratic
pretense, Rush posited that the women in the new American republic demanded a
new type of education—one not available in England and France, whose influence
he spurned. American women needed a utilitarian education. They had to be
trained to manage efficient households, to be "stewards" and
"guardians" of a husband's property. As mothers, they had to raise
virtuous citizens, to train their sons "in the principles of liberty and
government." Women's education, in Rush's argument, had both social value
and patriotic purpose. To achieve his goals, Benjamin Rush proposed a curriculum
far more academic than the offerings of adventure schools. It included
spelling, speaking, grammar, writing, arithmetic, bookkeeping, geography, history,
astronomy, and some natural philosophy (science). Rush also favored
instruction in singing, to lighten domestic life; dancing, at least until
Americans perfected the art of conversation; serious reading, to replace the
current passion for novels; and religion. He rejected drawing, for which women
would have no time, and, in a blast at deleterious European influence, spurned
the teaching of French.
This significant lecture, it should be noted, was directed toward
men ("Gentlemen"), presumably the fathers of students and trustees of
the Philadelphia Academy. At the end of the lecture, Rush shifted briefly to
the daughters ("young ladies") in his audience. But men were his main
focus, for the address on women's education was really about men—‑specifically,
educated professional men like himself and the other trustees. Such men now
found a multitude of obligations and "avocations" in public life.
They had to work full‑time for "the advancement of their
fortunes." With their exodus from family life, women had to pitch in and
take charge, a duty for which many were apparently at present too ignorant.
Benjamin Rush, in short, directed his argument toward the male members of a
specific social class those who would assume leadership roles and set social
standards in the new republic. He presented not only a plan for "a
peculiar and suitable education" for women, but a response to a major
social development: the emergence of American elite.
Gentlemen,
I have yielded with
diffidence to the solicitations of the Principal of the Academy, in
undertaking to express my regard for the prosperity of this seminary of
learning by submitting to your candor a few thoughts upon female education.
The first remark that I
shall make upon this subject is that female education should be accommodated
to the state of society, manners, and government of the country in which it is
conducted.
This remark leads me at
once to add that the education of young ladies in this country should be
conducted upon principles very different from what it is in Great Britain and
in some respects different from what it was when we were a part of a
monarchical empire.
There are several
circumstances in the situation, employments, and duties of women in America
which require a peculiar mode of education.
I
The early marriages of our women, by
contracting the time allowed for education, renders it necessary to contract
its plan and to confine it chiefly to the more useful branches of literature.
II
The state of property in America renders it
necessary for the greatest part of our citizens to employ themselves in
different occupations for the advancement of their fortunes. This cannot be
done without the assistance of the female members of the community. They must
be the stewards and guardians of their husbands' property. That education,
therefore, will be most proper for our women which teach them to discharge the
duties of those offices with the most success and reputation.
III
From the numerous avocations to which a
professional life exposes gentlemen in America from their families, a
principal share of the instruction of children naturally devolves upon the
women. It becomes us therefore to prepare them, by a suitable education, for
the discharge of this most important duty of mothers.
IV
The equal share that every citizen has in the
liberty and the possible share he may have in the government of our country
make it necessary that our ladies should be qualified to a certain degree, by a
peculiar and suitable education, to concur in instructing their sons in the
principles of liberty and government.
V
In Great Britain the business of servants is
a regular occupation, but in America this humble station is the usual retreat
of unexpected indigence; hence the servants in this country possess less
knowledge and subordination than are required from them; and hence our ladies
are obliged to attend more to the private affairs of their families than
ladies generally do of the same rank in Great Britain. . . . This circumstance
should have great influence upon the nature and extent of female education in
America.
The branches of literature
most essential for a young lady in this country appear to be:
I
A knowledge of the English language. She
should not only read but speak and spell it correctly. And to enable her to do
this, she should be taught the English grammar and be frequently examined in
applying its rules in common conversation.
II
Pleasure and interest conspire to make the
writing of a fair and legible hand a necessary branch of female education. For
this purpose she should be taught not only to shape every letter properly but
to pay the strictest regard to points and capitals....
III Some knowledge of figures and bookkeeping is absolutely necessary
to qualify a young lady for the duties which await her in this country. There
are certain occupations in which she may assist her husband with this
knowledge, and should she survive him and agreeably to the custom of our
country be the executrix of his will, she cannot fail of deriving immense
advantages from it.
IV An acquaintance with geography and some instruction in chronology
will enable a young lady to read history, biography, and travels, with advantage,
and thereby qualify her not only for a general intercourse with the world but
to be an agreeable companion for a sensible man. To these branches of knowledge
may be added, in some instances, a general acquaintance with the first
principles of astronomy and natural philosophy, particularly with such parts of
them as are calculated to prevent superstition, by explaining the causes or
obviating the effects of natural evil.
V
Vocal music should never be neglected in the
education of a young lady in this country. Besides preparing her to join in
that part of public worship which consists in psalmody, it will enable her to
soothe the cares of domestic life....
VI Dancing is by no means an improper branch of education for an American
lady. It promotes health and renders the figure and motions of the body easy
and agreeable....
VII The attention of our
young ladies should be directed as soon as they are prepared for it to the
reading of history, travels, poetry, and moral essays. These studies are
accommodated, in a peculiar manner, to the present state of society in
America, and when a relish is excited for them in early life, they subdue that
passion for reading novels which so generally prevails among the fair sex. I
cannot dismiss this species of writing and reading without observing that the
subjects of novels are by no means accommodated to our present manners. They
hold up life, it is true, but it is
not yet life in America.
VIII It will be necessary to connect all these branches of education
with regular instruction in the Christian religion. For this purpose the
principles of the different sects of Christians should be taught and explained,
and our pupils should early be furnished with some of the most simple arguments
in favor of the truth of Christianity. A portion of the Bible (of late
improperly banished from our schools) should be read by them every day and such
questions should be asked, after reading it, as are calculated to imprint upon
their minds the interesting stories contained in it....
IX. If the measures that have been recommended for inspiring our
pupils with a sense of religious and moral obligation be adopted, the
government of them will be easy and agreeable. I shall only remark under this
head that strictness of discipline
will always render severity unnecessary
and that there will be the most instruction in that school where there is the
most order....
It should not surprise us
that British customs with respect to female education have been transplanted
into our American schools and families.... It is high time to awake from this
servility—‑to study our own character—to examine the age of our country—and
to adopt manners in everything that shall be accommodated to our state of
society and to the forms of our government. In particular it is incumbent upon
us to make ornamental accomplishments yield to principles and knowledge in the
education of our women.|
A philosopher once said,
"let me make all the ballads of a country and I care not who makes its
laws." He might with more propriety have said, let the ladies of a country
be educated properly, and they will not only make and administer its laws, but
form its manners and character. It would require a lively imagination to
describe, or even to comprehend, the happiness of a country where knowledge and
virtue were generally diffused among the female sex. Our young men would then
be restrained from vice by the terror of being banished from their company....
A double-entendre in their presence
would then exclude a gentleman forever from the company of both sexes and
probably oblige him to seek an asylum from contempt in a foreign country.
The influence of female
education would be still more extensive and useful in domestic life. The
obligations of gentlemen to qualify themselves by knowledge and industry to
discharge the duties of benevolence would be increased by marriage; and the
patriot, the hero, and the legislator would find the sweetest reward of their
toils in the approbation and applause of their wives. Children would discover
the marks of maternal prudence and wisdom in every station of life, for it has
been remarked that there have been few great or good men who have not been
blessed with wise and prudent mothers....
To you, therefore, young
ladies, an important problem is committed for solution; and that is, whether
our present plan of education be a wise one and whether it be calculated to
prepare you for the duties of social and domestic life. I know that the
elevation of the female mind, by means of moral, physical, and religious
truth, is considered by some men as unfriendly to the domestic character of a
woman. But this is the prejudice of little minds and springs from the same
spirit which opposes the general diffusion of knowledge among the citizens of
our republics. If men believe that ignorance is favorable to the government of
the female sex, they are certainly deceived, for a weak and ignorant woman will
always be governed with the greatest difficulty.
A Matron of Connecticut, 1801
The outspoken author of
The Female Advocate (1801), who identified herself only as "a matron"
of Connecticut, was arguably the most impressive defender of women's rights in
the new republic. In her brief but impassioned pamphlet, she assaulted sexual
inequality, mocked male superiority, and demanded female empowerment. She also
showed how republican ideology might be used to transform women's lives.
Asserting that both sexes had been equally endowed with "quality
of genius, of talent, of morals, as well as intellectual worth," the Connecticut
matron complained that "men engross all the emoluments, offices, honors,
and merits of church and state." She assaulted her readers with a torrent
of rhetorical questions ("Why ought the one half of mankind, to vaunt and
lord it over the Other?" "But why is the fair book of knowledge
hidden from our research?"). In the fashion of her day, the matron placed
her faith in education as the basic prerequisite for equality. Only a
"well‑informed mind," she contended, would enable women‑hitherto
powerless, vulnerable, and demeaned‑to "possess some command over
ourselves." In the following excerpts, she explores some of the social
inequities (from the perils of seduction to the "extreme
wretchedness" of widowhood) that women's access to education might remedy.
Much and often has the
world exclaimed against masculine women. Before I offer any sentiment on this
exclamation, I would wish to hear the word properly and fairly defined. If by
the epithet "Masculine," be meant a bold, assuming, haughty, arrogant,
all sufficient, dogmatic temper and spirit, I would wish totally and entirely
to discard it from the society of the fair sex. I would wish the term to be
applied, where I think it is appropriate, by long established custom. I am
quite willing that the other sex should share it altogether to themselves. But
if by the word "Masculine," be meant a person of reading and letters,
a person of science and information, one who can properly answer a question,
without fear and trembling, or one who is capable of doing business, with a
suitable command over self, this I believe to be a glory to the one sex,
equally with the other. The sole reason why the epithet is disgraceful, in the
estimation of many, is because custom, which is not infallible, has gradually
introduced the habits of seeing an imaginary propriety, that all science, all
public utility, all superiority, all that is intellectually great and
astonishing, should be engrossed exclusively by the male half of mankind. But
may I not securely say, that it is a point of great consequence, that we should
have an equal share in science, of that degree of education, at least, which
enables us, in some measure, to have command over ourselves, and become
superior to those base artifices of the many, by which numerous females,
through the want of suitable privileges in education, have been the dupes of
men inferior to themselves, in every other respect but this single advantage,
of education.
Are we not sensible, my female friends, and have we not often heard it
observed, by the other sex, as an objection to our possessing peculiar advantages
for scientific improvements, that they cannot so easily command the ascendancy
over us; but why should we wish them to have this dominion, if we are not
sensible that that is often, and may I not say, almost always, the reason and
foundation of our ruin. A young lady of the greatest purity of mind, yet
uneducated, is frequently a victim to the arts of seduction: differently
advantaged by knowledge, the seducer would have respected her virtues, and
conducted with becoming deference. Thus, a second advantage would be the
consequence of female education. It would reform the men, or at least prevent,
or restrain, many of those artifices, which are now too successfully used, with
innocent, uneducated, and unsuspecting females....
But why is the fair book
of knowledge hidden from our research? Why it is no farther disclosed to our
view? Do we deserve the reproach of those men, who, in all the pride of
scholastic literature, depreciate our natural talents? ... Plutarch, speaking
of the sexes, says, "The talents and virtues are modified by the
circumstances, but the foundation is the same.". . .
Why then may not all the
seeming difference between the sexes, be imputed solely to the difference of
their education and subsequent advantages? Here let us draw a just and plain
parallel between the education of a sister and her brother. Perhaps they are
sent to the same school, till the age of ten, or twelve years. Here the advantages
of their improvement are the same, and their actual augmentation of mind is
equal, unless there be a real superiority of genius, in the female youth,
which is a case not unusual. Behold the arbitrary distinctions where are,
next, made between them. The brother is taken from a common school, and
transmitted to an academy, or a collegiate life; next becomes a divine, a
lawyer, or physician; the whole term of time including usually from seven to
nine years. But how is the time of his sister occupied, after she is taken from
her early school? Immediately she is removed from every mean of literary
improvement, and almost as effectually immured in a house, as a Roman Catholic
Nun. She is admitted to walk in no road of preferment, and has before her, no
incentive to aspire to public utility, by superior enlargement of mind. No!
That is not the path for her to walk. Science and public utility are exclusively
appropriated to the males. See the invariable sister's fate! If she be not sent
to a nunnery, she is at least confined to domestic labor, and utterly secluded
from all public concerns.
If not thus limited, she
must have what the world calls a polite education: such as dancing, music,
embroidering, altering and adjusting the fashion of her apparel. I have heard
it, and I think very justly, observed, as an apology for females when
frequently conversing, and being more disposed than the men, to talk of
fashion, dress, amusements, and the polite customs of the fair world, that the
former were precisely following the natural and almost necessary effect of
their appropriate education. A young Miss is taught to esteem it of the utmost
consequence to her success in life, that she be dressed fashionably, and
observe the external graces. It requires but a small share of sagacity for her
to discern, that unless she pay more attention to outward ornaments, than intellectual
endowments, she will not be noticed by the other sex, on whom is her dependence
for a partner, or, shall I say, "master," for life. For high intellectual
endowments, she would rather be avoided, in the view of a connection for life,
as these would be qualities incompatible with that arbitrary sovereignty, which
the man would wish to have fully established in his domestic empire. To such a
man, when she is united by the dearest ties, how are the best of her days, and
the prime of her life to be devoted? In a way truly, which I acknowledge to be
highly beneficial; in the employments of the house and the nurturing of
children, and imbruing their tender minds with the early precepts of true
wisdom. But beneficial as it may be, does not this confined mode of living, and
devoting our rolling years, afford sufficient arguments, why females do not
advance in literary acquisitions, and the knowledge of men and manners, and the
concerns of more public utility so far as the other sex....
But to return from this
digression to the importance and justness of admitting the idea of an equality
between the sexes; how greatly doth a man of science misjudge in choosing a
companion for life, if he selects one from the class of ignorant and untaught,
that he may, by this mean, the more securely retain his favorite supremacy. Is
it not a total blindness to the ideas of refined happiness, arising from a
reciprocity of sentiments and the exchange of rational felicity, as well as an
illiberal prejudice, thus to conduct? Shall the woman be kept ignorant, to
render her more docile in the management of domestic concerns? How capable is
such a person of being a companion for a man of refinement? How miserably
capable of augmenting his social joys, or managing prudently the concerns of a
family, or educating his children? Is it not of the utmost consequence, that
the tender mind of the youth receives an early direction for future usefulness?
And is it not equally true, that the first direction of a child necessarily
becomes the immediate and peculiar province of the woman? And may I not add,
is not a woman of a capacious and well stored mind, a better wife, a better widow,
a better mother, and a better neighbor; and shall I add, a better friend in
every respect? ...
... When women, no longer
the humble dependent, or the obsequious slave, but the companion and friend, is
party to an attachment founded on mutual esteem, then, and not till then, does
man assume his intended rank in the scale of creation. Why should women be
called the weaker sex, when it is acknowledged, that they take much more care
of their reputation, than the men?
As I observed before, that
a woman of information, and one viewed by her husband as a companion, made the
better wife and better widow, I beg leave to state a supposition, as I imagine
to the point. Suppose one who has from her youth been indoctrinated and
habituated to sentiments of female inferiority, one who has never been suffered
to have an opinion of her own, but on the reverse, has been taught, and
accustomed to rely, and implicitly believe, right or wrong, on her parents,
guardians, or husband. What will be the consequence of all this, in a situation
when deprived of the counsel of either or all of them, she is necessitated to
act for herself, or be exposed to the fraudulence of an unfriendly world?
Perhaps she is left a widow, with a large property, and a flock of small
dependent children? But where have they to look for protection, or on whom to
rely, but on their insufficient, helpless mother? How poorly capable is she to
fill the vacancy, and act to her tender babes and orphans, in their bereaved
situation, as is absolutely necessary, both as father and mother? How incapable
also is she of assisting in the settlement and adjustment of the estate; how liable
to fraud, and how probable to be injured by unreal or exaggerated debts.
... No less unhappy is the
consequence that follows the unfortunate wife, who has been kept in her leading
strings all her days, and has no idea of taking the management of any business
upon her unassisted self. Her husband views himself her guide and protector,
treating her more as a child, or riper servant, than as a companion and
friend. The good‑hearted woman has lived all her days in ease and
affluence, having never tasted the bitter cup of poverty, nor affliction. She
thinks that her mountain standeth strong, and she shall never be moved. But
perhaps through her ignorance, or her husband's extravagance, they live far
beyond their abilities.... The consequence is that the unhappy family is left
destitute of the comforts, yea, of the very necessaries of life. Alas, the
unhappy woman! What a sudden transition from affluence to poverty, from
prosperity to extreme wretchedness. All this, not infrequently ends in a state
of insanity, as well as total ruin....
Perhaps these lines may chance to meet the eye of one, whose soul may yet be
troubled, not withstanding all his stock of science, with spleen of criticism,
and prejudiced jealousy against our sex. Surely such will say, what miserable
language is this! What bad grammar! Surely she does not round her periods! She
had better been at her needle work, or the distaff! Friend, I will spare you
all this labor of criticism. I acknowledge all my want of literary improvement;
but yet I am not willing to ascribe it to want of mental powers, but the
disadvantages attending my education. . . . Should any presume to say, that
some man of letters has hidden behind the curtain, to guide the movements of my
pen, this I shall positively deny, and subjoin with the Authoress of the
"Gleaner."* My "nearest friend is totally ignorant of this performance,
and is an utter stranger to every line, till he may see it from the
press."
[2] Benjamin
Rush, "Thoughts upon Female Education, Accommodated to the Present State
Of Society, Manners, and Government . . .
“In Frederick Rudolph, ed., Essays
on Education in The Early Republic (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1965), pp. 27‑40.
[3] The “Female
Advocate” is Judith Sargent Murray. In
her writings, she advocated equality for women. Today, scholars of women’s
history and women’s studies consider her to be a feminist. The Female Advocate, Written by a Lady (New Haven, CT: Thomas Green & Son,
1801), pp. 21‑40 passim.