Nia Gavia
Mr. Thomas
U.S History per. 9
4 December 2014

Civil War Causes

Most people know of the heroes of the civil war. But what about its instigators?  Those that in their fight for change unwittingly served as catalysts for what may have been an unavoidable battle for freedom.  Many people have debated over the years of what really caused the Civil War.  Some say Bloody Kansas, and others say the election of Abraham Lincoln.  The more appropriate question is not what but who started the Civil War.  The civil war was the effect of many different causes, but the main instigators were Harriet Beecher Stowe, Dred Scott, and John Brown. All three of these abolitionist pioneers stirred the already boiling pot of slavery by initiating conflict.
 

            One of the first sparks in the flame of Civil War was a small unassuming woman named Harriet Beecher Stowe. She was disgusted by the Fugitive Slave Law and wanted to open the eyes of northerners to the horrors of slavery.  The book was about a lovable slave name uncle Tom who was savagely beaten to death by his owner.  With sentences such as “Scenes of blood and cruelty are shocking to our ear and heart. What man has nerve to do, man has not nerve to hear,” Harriet Beecher Stowe forced northerners to slavery's right in its face so that they could ignore it no longer. Within the first year of its publishing several hundred thousand copies were sold.  This enraged Northerners and many of them vowed that they would never have anything to do with the fugitive slave law. According to the North American Pageant history book slaveholding Southerners condemned her as a "vile wretch in petticoats," and called her book unfair. These varying opinions helped to further divide the north and south which is why "The little woman who wrote the book that made this great war "is among those that helped to start and are arguably to win the Civil War.

One man helped start the  Civil War by trying to take justice into his own. This man was John Brown.  John Brown was a daunting abolitionist that move to Kansas with part of his family. Enraged over the proslavery raids in Lawrence, he and several followers in May 1856 attacked five proslavery men and in a gruesome display chopped them to bits.  This infuriated the Southerners who believed that abolitionists must encourage this behavior and thus in that same year a small-scale Civil War began in Kansas. John Brown's version of vigilante justice did not end there. In 1859 he led an  unsuccessful attack on Harpers Ferry hoping to help the slaves to  acquire weapons and rise against their oppressors. This attack led to his capture, and subsequent hanging.  John Brown was seen in the north as a martyr and in the south as a murderer.   It is clear to see how that could have increased tensions between the north and south and led to Civil War.

Yet another of these Civil War pioneers was Dred Scott. Dred Scott had one simple ambition: to fight for his own personal freedom.  His case had far larger repercussions, however.  Dred Scott was a black slave and it live with his master in Illinois and Wisconsin territory these territories were dubbed free lands and thus he believed that his five-year stay there warranted his freedom. The court ruled that dread Scott was a black slave and because of this was not truly a citizen so could not sue in federal court. They also tried to solve the issue of slavery once and for all by stating that slaves were merely property, the Missouri compromise had been unconstitutional, and that the Constitution protected slave owners rights at all times. This infuriated anti- slavery Northerners who argued that this was just an opinion and not a rule, which in turn crossed the proslavery southerners leading to even more conflict and tension.
It has been clear from the very beginning what should started the Civil War: slavery.  But a more interesting question would be who caused the Civil War. Anti-slavery abolitionists such as John Brown, Dred Scott, and Harriet Beecher Stowe unwittingly began the Civil War. These men and women serve to show a large message that one individual can spark an entire movement.

       This photo and quote are an encapsulation of the American spirit. This picture glorifies the beauty of nature and sparks the desire to explore that is the backbone of early Americans. It also shows the beauty of nature and pulls at the inner desire to discover it in a deeper sense. The path represents exploration and moving forward to better understand nature. The quote exemplifies the transcendental spirit of finding your way.

    I chose this quote and photo because it really embodies the American spirit of adventure and exploration and the transcendentalist spirit of transcending beyond the industrial world in order to experience nature.The transcendental movement was about exploring the land as well as the inner self.  This quote sort of relates back to manifest destiny, as Americans beleived it was their duty to forge on and discover new lands. Like that idea, Emerson urges people to go out into the unknown and forge a path or others.

         

The War of 1812: Sectionalism to Nationalism

Nia Gavia
Mr. Thomas
October 31, 2014

War of 1812: Sectionalism to Nationalism

I. Pre 1812: Division 

The war within: Federalist versus Republican War Hawks
Hamiltonians,the upper class merchants, admired and benefitted from british commerce. They saw Britain as a useful potential ally. Their greatest fear was losing their biggest resource and wanted to solve the disputes in a more diplomatic manor. The lower class american war hawks hated Britain's lack of respect for the new American power and the impressment of U.S ships. They believed the war would establish American dominance, stop British harassments permanently, and allow the country to expand. For more go to: http://www.roadmaptolastbesthope.com/_images/_volume1/_chapter6/Chapter6_Debate.pdf

Madison: the mind of a genius and the personality of a chair
James Madison was an unassuming bookish man. He was a brilliant minded individual, but one that lacked a personable quality and had trouble connecting with his people. He was also facing the disapproval of the people after his Embargo act of 1807, and constant controversy from the Federalist party. For more go to: http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/jamesmadison

II. Post 1812: Unity

Madison: Zero to hero

After the war of 1812 Madison's efforts during the war to communicate with the people brought him great support and love . The success of the war also boosted his approval ratings. Also his opposition, the Federalist party, was practically nonexistent by the end of the war.

One nation,indivisible 

Surprisingly the war of 1812 brought both parties together as both the wealthy merchants and the poor farmers pitched in to save their country. To defend Baltimore, the British merchants were willing to sink their ships, their main source of income, in order to prevent the British fleets from entering their ports. 
For more see: http://www.history.com/topics/war-of-1812 

Nia Gavia
U.S History Period 9
August 13, 2014


The History and Mystery of Early Man

The history of early man has sparked many debates and much controversy for many decades. Little evidence remains of the early adventures of man, and much of what remains is purely speculation. Among the wild theories and outlandish suggestions made by both historians and everyday bloggers, three main theories have stood the test of time. These theories have been accepted by some and strongly refuted by others, continuing an age old controversy surrounding a simple question: who were the first humans, and how did they get here?

The first widely accepted theory was deemed the Bering land bridge theory. This was the idea that 13,500 years ago, the cold temperatures caused the Earth's oceans to freeze. These  large deposits of ice on land, caused sea levels to drop,exposing the sea bed between Siberia and Alaska. This in turn allowed early man to literally walk to the New World. The the discovered locations of the Clovis points in the in the area suggested to be the Land Bridge validates the timing of the bridge, therefore suggesting that it could possibly have been the way that early Americans travel from Asia to the Americas.This concept was widely accepted for many years, and was substantiated by similar spear points found in Clovis, New Mexico. These points, deemed Clovis points, led to the Bering Land Ridge theory evolving into the Clovis first theory, stating that the Native Americans crossed to the Americas through the land bridge, then became cut off from other peoples when the glaciers melted and raised sea levels. The points and the timing seemed for a long time to fit perfectly in a logical way. But this theory did nit remain unchallenged.

Many researchers were so satisfied with the Clovis first, that they did not endeavor to look further than the timing suggested in the theory for Clovis points. But eventually researchers, like Jim Adovasio decided to investigate further into the past. Using undisturbed bear caves from ancient times, Dr. Adovasio discovered the existence of native American passage into the Americas before 13,500 B.C,  possibly debunking the Clovis theory. New theories developed, one of which being that the early humans may have traveled by sea along the Alaskan coast. Scientific research proved the theory to be plausible, but little to no evidence has surfaced suggesting a sea voyage. This new theory shook the foundation of what most people believed at the time, but carbon dating, archeological digging, and DNA evidence began to chip away the Clovis theory bit by bit. This theory did begin to gain ground, but surprisingly, another more radical theory was on its way.
A historian was studying Clovis points, and remembered a kind if spear point existed that had been made in Europe long before Clovis people. Since no points were found in Asia, where it was thought the people originated, he began to tamper with the idea that the first Clovis point came from Europe instead. This idea was immediately attached, and seem very far fetched, but similarities in spear points found in Europe and Cactus Hill seemed to tie the theory together. With all three theories gaining significant numbers of followers, it is hard to determine which had more ground.
Looking at all of the evidence, I am inclined to believe the coastal sea voyage theory. The Clovis theory has been thoroughly disproven. DNA evidence, carbon dating, and the clovis points themselves have proven that the timeline surrounding the theory is very wrong. The Solutrean theory has its merits, but its basis, that the spear points found in Europe and cactus hill match the Clovis point, does not seem strong enough to be plausible. The points are not similar enough to be the strong point keeping the theory alive. The last remaining theory is plausible using tools from the age, and it would explain the lack of evidence.even though that is the theory I agree with most strongly, there are still many questions that I have surrounding the mystery of early man.