Critical Analysis of Jonathan Earle’s ‘John Brown’s Raid on Harper’s Ferry’

Jonathan Earle’s “John Brown’s Raid on Harper’s Ferry”: A Critical Analysis

By the time Jonathan Earle wrote “John Brown’s Raid on Harper’s Ferry,” slavery was a common practice. Indeed, it has had an impact on many Americans’ lives; some think it’s a terrible thing, some don’t mind slavery, and still others don’t care. The book “John Brown’s Raid on Harper’s Ferry” by Jonathan Earle was created to express these opinions, particularly with regard to whether or not John Brown was a terrorist. Was John Brown a Terrorist? will be the focus of this paper’s effort at a critical analysis of the play. One of the most significant motivations to doing anything is faith. John was brought up by his parents who instilled in him. His father introduced him to the leather tanning business, but he was not a very good businessman. He started a few businesses but all failed. This made him look for work elsewhere, and it is here he interacted with slaves. He started a movement to protect the slaves and was successful. He had the conviction that he was the messiah meant to deliver the slaves. He was a divine mission and his purpose in life. He believed that slavery was a sin that needed to be atoned for (Jewett & Lawrence 172). This belief that his mission was a calling motivated him to become an abolitionist. It also justified the means to which he was to deliver the slaves from slavery; without bloodshed, there is no remission of sins (Jewett & Lawrence 172).It explains Pottawatomie.

John intended to start an armed slave revolt and invade slaveholders. He was an active supporter of an armed uprising as a way to end slavery (Vander 77). This revolution would be a country-wide revolt, and he would invade the South (Vander 77) where he would get fresh supplies and demoralize slaveholders. He hoped that holding Harper’s Ferry for a while would attract more volunteers, in fact, he had imagined that on the first day of the raid he would have motivated about five hundred recruits.

Before the raid itself, he had taken up residence about 4-kilometers from Harper’s Ferry. He had with him 20 men, 16 white men and 4 slaves who he trained for military action. In his attempts to recruit more Africans to the cause, he approached Fredrick Douglass, a northern abolitionist, who at the time was the liaison officer to the slaves. They had met earlier in 1498 and Fredrick had agreed to work with Brown provided they used Guerilla warfare to free the slaves so when Brown approached him for the Harper Ferry raid he declined. Douglass was doubtful of the plan’s success (Paridis 36). “An attack on the federal government would array the whole country against us. You will never get out alive.” Douglass warned (James 203). The move to a spot closer to Harper’s Ferry was a strategic one.

He, however, put too much faith on the rebellion of the slaves in Harper’s Ferry. On the first day of the raid, things worked well for Brown and his men. They successfully took the town and cut off any means of the town getting News to Washington. However, Brown’s gamble on the slaves taking up arms did not work. The slaves refused to take up guns, and the people of the town revolted. Within two days all of Brown’s men were either killed or captured. His biggest flaw believed that charisma and faith would suffice (Gilpin 36).

Before recent terror activities, Americans had viewed terrorism as a European and Middle East problem (Russo 13). But the last attacks like the Pentagon bombing has illustrated that terror is not a new concept in America. John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry would fit the definition of terrorism- the use of force, threats or intimidation as a political weapon (Russo 14). Questions have been raised as to whether the use of force is necessary; a question whose answer is highly controversial. This makes the problem of John Brown being a terrorist also very contentious. Many argue that John’s death was heroic or laudable (Russo 13), but his means are not agreeable to many. While people who empathize with the victims of slavery are large of the take that John was not a terrorist their view seems to shift because of the Pottawatomie massacre. Brown had not the slightest regret about the murders he ordered for. Mrs. Doyle, the wife and mother of three of the men Brown killed, commented “If a man stood between him and what he thought was right, he would take that man’s life as coolly as he would eat breakfast.” (Jewett & Lawrance 172). In one of John’s last notes, he predicts that slavery would be purged through bloodshed. Also, John believed that he was a calling from God; it was his purpose in life to get rid of slavery. This can be taken about other terrorists who use faith to justify their deeds just as John Brown did. Perhaps if one focuses on the means used by John one would view him as a terrorist.

As earlier stated John Brown is a man with a controversial story. While there are a story and an angle which when looked at John Brown will be seen to be a terrorist, there is also evidence that would suggest that he was not a terrorist. First of all, there is no evidence to suggest that he took any of the lives in Pottawatomie although this does not absolve him of the responsibility of giving the order. This view would allow for speculation as to whether he wanted to take the lives or his circumstances forced him to about his intentions were still pure. Another argument that would justify that he is not a terrorist is the comparison of the five lives he took at the massacre and the hundreds of slave lives that were lost to the slave trade. Then one would argue that John did a ‘small’ bad deed to prevent a bigger one from happening, for the ‘greater good’ kind of thing. Slave ships arrived with hundreds of dead slaves but dying before arriving was better than getting to the destination alive (Petrulionis 133). This argument justifies John’s means by stating that it was wrong for a fellow human being to treat another as a slave. John is therefore seen as deliverer more than a murderer especially in the eyes of those who empathized with slaves. Compared to how John handled Pottawatomie and how he handled the Ferry raid, he is seen to have learned from Pottawatomie. What people use to justice him being a terrorist a mistake? He grows to manage things with far much less bloodshed; the Ferry raid was not a massacre, and he made an effort to take as little lives as possible. Most evidence shows that people in America do not consider John, a terrorist. He is described as a compassionate martyr (Russo14).

In my own opinion, John was not a terrorist. Slavery is a dehumanizing activity that only seeks to serve the ego of the slave owner. It leads to unnecessary loss of life and mental torment to the slaves. In many cases, most slaves lose their identity because they are taken from their homes and shipped to other continents. I am of the view that all human beings are equal and should be treated as such. So John had the right conviction about slavery, and his intentions seemed noble. Although I empathize with the Doyle family and every other that fell victim of John’s mission to free slaves, I also condemn the fact that the families in a way chose to support slavery. John should be seen as a person who died for the right cause and whose efforts should be emulated although not in their entirety.

In conclusion, reading John’s story opens one’s eyes to the way the world is structured. People will always try and justify their cause, and it is what you believe in that moves you to what to believe in. People who are pro-slavery tend to portray John as nothing more than a terrorist more and in my view the ones who continually mention Pottawatomie only as a massacre. On the other hand, people who empathize with the slave acknowledge that it was a massacre but one that served a higher purpose of shaping the history of America with regards to slavery. It is one event that led to the abolition of slavery and should be remembered as such. The issue of slavery is still relevant today because we still have slavery going on around the world today. There have been reports of abductions and people being sold into slavery all around the globe. Even after the abolition of slavery, black Americans have undergone dehumanizing treatment due to their skin color; they are referred to as ‘negro’ a term which originated from slavery times. ‘John Brown’s Raid on Harper’s’ reminds the human race that slavery is dehumanizing and that sacrifices have been made; John two sons were killed, wars have been started to make sure slavery is stopped. With a global crisis, it is essential to educate the public on matters of slavery so that future generations view each other as equal so that no is views themselves as inferior or superior. If parents raised their children and instilled in them the virtue that everyone is equal, perhaps a few generations to come the world can finally get rid of problems that were caused by and could cause slavery again.

Works Cited

Gilpin, R B. John Brown Still Lives!: America’s Long Reckoning with Violence, Equality, &. Change. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011. Internet resource

Jewett, R., & Lawrence, J. S.Captain America and the crusade against evil: The dilemma of zealous nationalism. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 2003

McPherson, James M. Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era. Oxford University Press, USA, 2003. Internet resource.

Paradis, James M. African Americans and the Gettysburg Campaign. Lanham, Md: Scarecrow Press, 2005. Print.

Rodriguez, Junius P. Slavery in the United States: A Social, Political, and Historical Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, 2007. Print.

McPherson, James M. Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era. Oxford University Press, USA, 2003. Internet resource.

Petrulionis, S. H. To set this world right: The antislavery movement in Thoreau’s Concord. Ithaca ,N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2006

Russo, P. A., & Finkelman, P. Terrible swift sword: The legacy of John Brown. Athens: Ohio Univ. Press. 2005

Vander, Hook S. Frederick Douglass: Fugitive Slave & Abolitionist. Edina, Minn: ABDO Pub. Co, 2011. Print.