One thing I thought of at one point but failed to fit in:
We were talking about the lack of consistency in Protestantism and how John Brown would be repulsed by Protestant churches today. Yes he would, but the real kicker is that there’s no normative authority in Protestantism to even be able to say who is right between John Brown and modern Protestants.
Who are the real Protestants? Brown, your lesbian episcopal priest, or someone else entirely? There is nothing that can tell you this, even in principle, because for them it’s going to come down to scriptural interpretation. And they’re all already using that and have no authority to arbitrate their disagreements.
Future Confederate General Albert Sidney Johnston led an expedition to Utah Territory in 1857 to police the Mormons. Of all people, William Clarke Quantrill was part of that expedition. There are so many weird coincidences with Mormonism.
I don’t know about the Mormons, but in the Indians’ case it had more to do with the Union not treating them right than anything else. A lot of them switched sides again once they figured out the Confederacy couldn’t really help them either.
That marriage history is pretty standard for the time. Childbirth was dangerous and the mating pattern was essentially serial monogamy. "Till death do us part" was not just something people said.
When he got married the first time, he was 20 and she was 19. That seems pretty normal to me, especially for the time. How normal was it for the second marriage to be to a 16-year-old? I know times were different, but that seems borderline out of the ordinary even for back then.
What I wonder is how many of those teenage girls were getting married to men who were also teenagers, or in their early 20s. And how many were getting married to 30-somethings like Brown who were on their second marriage.
Statistically, would have had to be rather common. Young men needed to reach majority to marry without parental permission. Let alone saving up a nut to support a wife.
One thing I thought of at one point but failed to fit in:
We were talking about the lack of consistency in Protestantism and how John Brown would be repulsed by Protestant churches today. Yes he would, but the real kicker is that there’s no normative authority in Protestantism to even be able to say who is right between John Brown and modern Protestants.
Who are the real Protestants? Brown, your lesbian episcopal priest, or someone else entirely? There is nothing that can tell you this, even in principle, because for them it’s going to come down to scriptural interpretation. And they’re all already using that and have no authority to arbitrate their disagreements.
Is it just whomever can best twist scripture to support their point?
Surely we won't die. Right?
Yes, ultimately it gets decided at the barrel of a gun. Just like Kansas, the Civil War, English Civil War, Münster, etc.
Getting kicked from the garden was a real bitch and a half, wasn't it?
Haha!
This was a great episode. I learned so much about something I knew very little: Kansas!
Terribly instructive stuff.
Ironically, Deseret under Brigham Young was mildly pro Southron.
Future Confederate General Albert Sidney Johnston led an expedition to Utah Territory in 1857 to police the Mormons. Of all people, William Clarke Quantrill was part of that expedition. There are so many weird coincidences with Mormonism.
Orrin Porter Rockwell is the Mormon gunfighter and bodyguard for BY you were reaching for.
Yes! I couldn’t remember his name.
Family legend is that we are distantly related.
It’s weird which factions were mildly pro Southron too. The Civilized Tribes in the Indian Territory at the beginning of the war also tended pro Confederacy (which you can hear about in part 7 btw: https://jasonmcginty.substack.com/p/american-guerrillas-pt-7-blood-on).
I don’t know about the Mormons, but in the Indians’ case it had more to do with the Union not treating them right than anything else. A lot of them switched sides again once they figured out the Confederacy couldn’t really help them either.
The Oklahoma civilized tribes were also planters with slaves. In fact the last unit in the field to lay down arms was Cherokee and Seminole.
https://www.history.com/articles/stand-watie-cherokee-confederate-civil-war-general
Yep, I talk about Watie extensively in part 7. He has an interesting history even before the war.
That marriage history is pretty standard for the time. Childbirth was dangerous and the mating pattern was essentially serial monogamy. "Till death do us part" was not just something people said.
When he got married the first time, he was 20 and she was 19. That seems pretty normal to me, especially for the time. How normal was it for the second marriage to be to a 16-year-old? I know times were different, but that seems borderline out of the ordinary even for back then.
The average woman's age at marriage in 1850 was 15-18, cityfolk and the wealthy got married in their 20s.
What I wonder is how many of those teenage girls were getting married to men who were also teenagers, or in their early 20s. And how many were getting married to 30-somethings like Brown who were on their second marriage.
Statistically, would have had to be rather common. Young men needed to reach majority to marry without parental permission. Let alone saving up a nut to support a wife.