You raise an important point. I have an ancestor who may or may not have trafficked human beings. By the standards of the 18th century, he was just a businessman, but I don't know what to say about him.
One of my predecessors, Rosemary Callin, wrote a short memoir about her grandmother, Elizabeth (Berlin) Callin (my 3rd-great-grandmother) in 1973, and described the family this way: "William was a powerful man, six feet tall. The boys had to be in the fields around sunup. He had a big, black whip. I don't know whether it was Elizabeth or her mother-in-law who would say pleadingly, "Now, William, don't whup 'em." It was a brutal age."
I think it's important for readers to understand the context of "spare the rod/spoil the child" and just how much more violent people were, if they're going to understand that family. In this case, I think Rosemary's comment was concise, and her anecdote served the purpose of painting a picture.
But I'm on the fence about how and when to include that kind of comment in my own writing. "It depends."
Allopathic is a new word for me 🙂. I do indeed find it a challenge to tell some stories.
I found a useful quote: “The historicist wants to understand the world, the presentist to change it. There are different goals: the historicist wants knowledge, the presentist justice. The historicist wants to be a scientist, the presentist a politician.”
Presentism is the practice of judging historical figures by the moral and ethical standards of the present day.
I aim to be a historicist but might not always succeed.
I'm not familiar with the presentism and historicist terms but I am aware of the practice of presentism under the label "reparative semantics." I'm not a general proponent of it.
"The present is no more exempt from the sneer of the future than the past has been." Cassius J. Keyser, Columbia University Professor of Mathematics. (b. 1862 d. 1947)
I've used that quote before here, but it immediately comes to mind whenever there's an issue like this that hinges on a well-after-the-fact accusation that applies the "they shoulda known betta (SKB)" standard of contemporary knowledge and attitudes.
I queried ChatGPT with a series of prompts to determine a realistic SKB date. After providing some detailed timeline milestones from 1860 on, it mentioned the release of "The Flexner Report," commissioned by the Carnegie Foundation, in 1910 as "pivotal" for American medical education. The report "assessed and condemned most American medical schools as unscientific and substandard" (quote marks to denote the quote is from ChatGPT; ChatGPT did not used quote marks to indicate it was quoting from the report).
Also, "The report called for rigorous training based on biology, chemistry, anatomy, and laboratory science ... "
ChatGPT concluded: "After this, homeopathy's presence in accredited medical institutions collapsed rapidly."
p.s. The Karnes School in St. Louis has some pretty interesting history, especially for European and Jewish immigrants in the early 20th century. https://theclio.com/entry/178473
We need to judge people by the context of the day. It sounds to me like Dr. Putnam was an amazing woman dedicated to helping people. No doubt she helped many. Medical knowledge was so limited at the time that treating disease with tiny amounts of the same disease surely sounded just as reasonable as living disease-causing organisms too small to see. That was the principle behind the smallpox vaccine, which clearly worked.
I mean, people believed that tuberculosis was caused by dead relatives coming to claim their kin, pus was a sign of healing, blood-letting would re-balance the humours, hand-washing was ridiculous, and other ideas we think are crazy today. And these techniques were practiced by trained doctors.
Even if a doctor believed in germ theory, he couldn't cure any disease -- the first disease with a cure was diphtheria in 1900. I read the Wikipedia article -- the medical history and lifestyle questions the homeopathic doctors asked were probably quite helpful.
You raise an important point. I have an ancestor who may or may not have trafficked human beings. By the standards of the 18th century, he was just a businessman, but I don't know what to say about him.
It's a tough problem with a lot of edge cases.
One of my predecessors, Rosemary Callin, wrote a short memoir about her grandmother, Elizabeth (Berlin) Callin (my 3rd-great-grandmother) in 1973, and described the family this way: "William was a powerful man, six feet tall. The boys had to be in the fields around sunup. He had a big, black whip. I don't know whether it was Elizabeth or her mother-in-law who would say pleadingly, "Now, William, don't whup 'em." It was a brutal age."
(from https://mightieracorns.substack.com/p/silk-or-satin)
I think it's important for readers to understand the context of "spare the rod/spoil the child" and just how much more violent people were, if they're going to understand that family. In this case, I think Rosemary's comment was concise, and her anecdote served the purpose of painting a picture.
But I'm on the fence about how and when to include that kind of comment in my own writing. "It depends."
For me, the answer is nearly always context. If I can place an action or behavior into a viable historical or cultural context, that’s my go to move.
Allopathic is a new word for me 🙂. I do indeed find it a challenge to tell some stories.
I found a useful quote: “The historicist wants to understand the world, the presentist to change it. There are different goals: the historicist wants knowledge, the presentist justice. The historicist wants to be a scientist, the presentist a politician.”
Presentism is the practice of judging historical figures by the moral and ethical standards of the present day.
I aim to be a historicist but might not always succeed.
I'm not familiar with the presentism and historicist terms but I am aware of the practice of presentism under the label "reparative semantics." I'm not a general proponent of it.
"The present is no more exempt from the sneer of the future than the past has been." Cassius J. Keyser, Columbia University Professor of Mathematics. (b. 1862 d. 1947)
I've used that quote before here, but it immediately comes to mind whenever there's an issue like this that hinges on a well-after-the-fact accusation that applies the "they shoulda known betta (SKB)" standard of contemporary knowledge and attitudes.
I queried ChatGPT with a series of prompts to determine a realistic SKB date. After providing some detailed timeline milestones from 1860 on, it mentioned the release of "The Flexner Report," commissioned by the Carnegie Foundation, in 1910 as "pivotal" for American medical education. The report "assessed and condemned most American medical schools as unscientific and substandard" (quote marks to denote the quote is from ChatGPT; ChatGPT did not used quote marks to indicate it was quoting from the report).
Also, "The report called for rigorous training based on biology, chemistry, anatomy, and laboratory science ... "
ChatGPT concluded: "After this, homeopathy's presence in accredited medical institutions collapsed rapidly."
p.s. The Karnes School in St. Louis has some pretty interesting history, especially for European and Jewish immigrants in the early 20th century. https://theclio.com/entry/178473
Thanks for the story and noting the concern.
We need to judge people by the context of the day. It sounds to me like Dr. Putnam was an amazing woman dedicated to helping people. No doubt she helped many. Medical knowledge was so limited at the time that treating disease with tiny amounts of the same disease surely sounded just as reasonable as living disease-causing organisms too small to see. That was the principle behind the smallpox vaccine, which clearly worked.
I mean, people believed that tuberculosis was caused by dead relatives coming to claim their kin, pus was a sign of healing, blood-letting would re-balance the humours, hand-washing was ridiculous, and other ideas we think are crazy today. And these techniques were practiced by trained doctors.
Even if a doctor believed in germ theory, he couldn't cure any disease -- the first disease with a cure was diphtheria in 1900. I read the Wikipedia article -- the medical history and lifestyle questions the homeopathic doctors asked were probably quite helpful.
I learned about the pitiful state of medical knowledge for my post on my great-grandmother's dead babies. If you are interested, you can read it here: https://grandmasgrannysfamilyalbum.blogspot.com/2025/03/dead-babies-in-city.html
Thanks for introducing me to your ancestor.
I should've read through all the comments before I posted mine ... apologies for not mentioning yours, we were on the same track. :)