The early botanical medical movement as a reflection of life, liberty, and literacy in Jacksonian America (original) (raw)
Related papers
Early American Studies, 2017
The role science played in the early abolitionist movement has been almost entirely overlooked. This article demonstrates the ways Benjamin Rush, one of the early republic's most prominent physicians and leading abolitionists, deployed scientific and medical ideas to advance his vision of a slave-free, white yeoman republic. In 1792 Rush famously argued that blackness was itself the symptom of a disease that slavery only made worse: if slaves were freed and taught proper Christian, republican values, blacks would eventually turn white. Rush also made several other lesser-known medical and scientific arguments that further bolstered his antislavery and political views. Both political and chattel slavery stifled the body's natural desire for liberty, predisposing both black and white bodies to disease, he argued; in addition, he contended that yeoman farmingrather than slavery-required the ideal amount of physical exertion, which not only kept the body healthy but also created the conditions for responsible republican citizenship. This essay ultimately argues that Rush's scientific ideas, and not just his scientific stature, added legitimacy to a particular vision of American nationhood that appealed to many white abolitionists in the early republic: the idea that slavery would eventually disappear, as would former slaves themselves.
An aristocracy of talent": the South Carolina physician-naturalists and their times
Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association, 2014
During the natural history movement of the 18th and early 19th centuries, Charleston as a center was rivaled in the United States only by Philadelphia, New York, and Boston. Prominent physician-naturalists included Alexander Garden (for whom the gardenia is named), John Edwards Holbrook ("father of American herpetology"), and Francis Peyre Porcher (whose Resources of Southern Fields and Forests helped Confederates compensate for drug shortages). The Charleston physician-naturalists belonged to an "aristocracy of talent" as distinguished from the "aristocracy of wealth" of lowcountry planters, who probably did more than any other group to perpetuate slavery and propel the South toward a disastrous civil war. None of the physician-naturalists actively opposed slavery or secession, a reminder that we are all prisoners of the prevailing paradigms and prejudices of our times.
Antislavery Science in the Early Republic: The Case of Dr. Benjamin Rush
Early American Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2017
The role science played in the early abolitionist movement has been almost entirely overlooked. This article demonstrates the ways Benjamin Rush, one of the early republic's most prominent physicians and leading abolitionists, deployed scientific and medical ideas to advance his vision of a slave-free, white yeoman republic. In 1792 Rush famously argued that blackness was itself the symptom of a disease that slavery only made worse: if slaves were freed and taught proper Christian, republican values, blacks would eventually turn white. Rush also made several other lesser-known medical and scientific arguments that further bolstered his antislavery and political views. Both political and chattel slavery stifled the body's natural desire for liberty, predisposing both black and white bodies to disease, he argued; in addition, he contended that yeoman farmingrather than slavery-required the ideal amount of physical exertion, which not only kept the body healthy but also created the conditions for responsible republican citizenship. This essay ultimately argues that Rush's scientific ideas, and not just his scientific stature, added legitimacy to a particular vision of American nationhood that appealed to many white abolitionists in the early republic: the idea that slavery would eventually disappear, as would former slaves themselves.
Unsettling Medicine: The Social Dimension of Nineteenth-Century American Medical Practice
C19: The Society of Nineteenth-Century Americanists Fourth Biennial Conference Penn State University, 2016 Saturday, March 19, 2016. Chair: Sari Altschuler, Emory University Rebecca Rosen, Princeton University, “The Bodies of Others: Slavery and Anatomy in the Early Republic” Patrick Prominski, Michigan State University, “Seasoning and Snakebites: Popular Authors and the Professionalization of the Physician on the American Frontier, 1815-1830” Anna Mae Duane, University of Connecticut, “Tending to ‘the Little Bushman’: Uplifting Medicine at the New York Colored Orphan’s Asylum” Emily Waples, University of Michigan, “Sick Time: Toward a Temporal Poetics of American Medicine”
Medical Liberty: Drugless Healers Confront Allopathic Doctors, 1910–1931
Education, medicine and psychotherapeutics offer exemplary sites through which liberty and its dreams are realized. This article explores the social history of medical freedom and liberty in North America during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The National League for Medical Freedom (NLMF) and the American Medical Liberty League (AMLL) offered fierce resistance to allopathic power. Allopathic liberties and rights to medical practice in asylums, clinics, courts, hospitals, prisons and schools were never certain. The politics of these liberties and rights represents a fascinating story that neither intellectual nor social historians have fully appreciated.
Self-Health: The Politics of Care in American Literature, 1793-1873
2016
I would like to thank my committee for seeing me through this process, especially my chair, Scotti Parrish, whose deep and careful analyses have helped shape my thinking, whose example as a scholar and teacher has encouraged me, and whose kindness has sustained me. Kerry Larson energized my interests in the nineteenth century, and I'm indebted to his keen readings and expert diagnostics. Alex Stern brought her invaluable expertise and intellectual rigor to bear upon this project. My thanks to Gregg Crane for lending his eye to this dissertation's earlier stages, and to Danny Hack for lots of things, not least of which is agreeing to read this. Research for this dissertation was generally supported by fellowships from Rackham Graduate School and the Institute for the Humanities. I'm deeply and happily beholden to the intellectual community at the University of Michigan for including me and energizing me these past six years. Sid Smith has been an invaluable mentor from the very beginning. June Howard helped me to formulate my interests; Scott Lyons offered reassurance during a time of some despair. I thank the 2015-2016 Institute fellows for their generous engagement with my work; the members of my cohort, especially Adam Sneed, a dear friend since day one, for their companionship; and the faculty and students in the Medical Humanities Path of Excellence at the University of Michigan Medical School for welcoming me among them. And I'm especially grateful to my students for all of their insight and energy, for challenging me and for reminding me why I'm here. I wake daily with devout thanksgiving for my transcendent teachers-for Claudia Skerlong, who showed me that thinking critically about literature is one way of loving it, and for Paul Kane, whose example made me want to pay it forward; it was Paul who pointed me in the direction of Ann Arbor, for which I will remain ever thankful. I owe more than I can express to my mother, Kim Young. As a feminist, teacher, and parent, she remains my primary example of the joyful negotiation of work and care. This is for her. My family has been a constant source of support and encouragement. My father, David Waples, is a paragon of unflagging intellectual curiosity; no matter how many degrees I earn, I doubt I will ever read so many books. Sharon Knapp has taught me much about the importance of maintaining the happy pursuit of creative labor. Pat Keller took care of me, and so many others, during her too-short and selfless life; my work endeavors to honor her memory. And thanks to my brothers, Greg, Bret, and Nathan, for being a few of my favorite people. This is a project about the politics of self-care, but I could not have completed it without the care of Dr. Jennifer Griggs and the staff at the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center. To that end, I am immensely grateful to the Graduate Employee Organization for ensuring that I have had what so many others in this country do not: access to quality, affordable health care. Finally, I cannot write about care without acknowledging my deep debt of gratitude to Anthony LoSapio, who has cared for me, in large ways and small, for all of these years.