I want to call your attention to Paul Harvey's interview at Religion in American History with Rebecca Goetz, Assistant Professor of History at Rice University and author of the brand new The Baptism of Early Virginia: How Christianity Created Race (Johns Hopkins, 2012). I am really looking forward to reading this book and perhaps incorporating some of Goetz's ideas into my Colonial America course next semester and even my U.S. Survey lecture on early Virginia. Here is a taste of Paul's interview with Rebecca:
1) Rebecca, talk about the path that led
you to this topic in the first place, and to early American
history more generally. Of all the things you could have done/studied
at Harvard, how did you end up with this topic and approach? Who
were your main influences in grad. school, and how did they influence
you?
When I went to college, I was going to
be a double major in Spanish and Political Science. I came out the other end a
double major in German and History. Go figure! I credit Jim Leamon, my
undergraduate mentor, with convincing me that being a history major would be a
good way to go. I just loved his class on colonial New England, and after I
took that in the first semester of my sophomore year, I was a convert. I ended
up writing a senior thesis on the Revolutionary War diary of a Massachusetts
soldier named William Dorr. I was interested in why his diary was almost
identical to several others. (The answer to your question is most likely
pension fraud--getting a pension was difficult if you didn’t have direct
evidence that you had participated in a particular campaign. This was
especially true of Dorr’s campaign--Benedict Arnold’s March to Quebec in the
winter of 1775-1776.) I had so much fun writing that thesis that I knew I
wanted to keep doing history professionally.
I thought I would go to Harvard to study
soldiers’ diaries. And my advisor, Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, was a recognized
expert on colonial diaries. But I got sidetracked in my second year of graduate
school. I took Joyce Chaplin’s research seminar on race in early America. As I
was selecting a topic, I happened upon William Waller Hening’s early
nineteenth-century edition of Virginia’s colonial laws. Almost immediately I
noticed that early Virginia lawmakers conflated what moderns would call religious
and racial descriptors. So they used the words “English” and “Christian”, and
later in the seventeenth century, “white,” interchangeably. They also conflated
words like “black,” “tawny,” and “savage” with “pagan” or “heathen.” Though
sometimes Hening introduced these categories in his marginal notes, it was
pretty clear that he was picking up on seventeenth-century categories. And so I
wondered: what did English people think they were doing when they used the
words “English” and “Christian” interchangeably?
This was the early 2000s, so race,
class, and gender were hot topics. In seminar everyone was talking about the
obligatory “Foucault footnote” (my book doesn’t have one!). Kathleen Brown’s
deeply influential book Good Wives, Nasty Wenches, and Anxious Patriarchs:
Gender, Race, and Power in Colonial Virginia (1996) was only a few years
old. But what bothered me about a lot of that literature was that religion was
incidental....a mere cultural artifact that illustrated the influences of other
analytical categories (e.g. race and gender) on the creation of race. Yet
Hening’s Statutes suggested to me that religion, in this case
Christianity, was hardly incidental...it was fundamental. So I wrote a seminar
paper about how Christianity created race in early Virginia. I remember
finishing it and thinking to myself, “I’ve barely scratched the surface here.”
and I went to see Joyce. I asked her if this would make a good dissertation,
and she said yes, and the rest as they say is history.
When I started talking to people about
my dissertation, I had an uphill battle convincing people that the topic was
both justified and doable. One of the prime objections was there was no
religion to speak of in early Virginia. Luckily Ed Bond had just come out with
his Damned Souls in a Tobacco Colony: Religion in Seventeenth-Century Virginia (2000) and I started referring people to that. (Bond’s book is
really overlooked, I think. He makes a strong case for religion *mattering* in
early Virginia and I think he does a great job showing how an Anglo-Virginian
Anglican piety developed by the late seventeenth century.) I don’t have to
spend as much time doing that anymore; I think scholars are pretty convinced
that religion matters in the early Chesapeake, even if it matters in a
different way than say. in New England. Others were sceptical that I would find
sources. I have a fond memory of explaining to a senior scholar in my field
that I would find evidence of the Christian construction of race in county
court records. She looked puzzled and said, “Oh, you’ll never find anything
like that.” But I thought, if Kathleen Brown found gender in the archives, I’ll
find race and religion. And I did. I found more evidence than I was able to
include in the manuscript!
No comments:
Post a Comment