john brown essay questions

• Search Menu
• About OAH Magazine of History
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

The bigger picture, teaching the lesson, reflections and conclusions.

• < Previous

Interpreting John Brown: Infusing Historical Thinking into the Classroom

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Bruce A. Lesh, Interpreting John Brown: Infusing Historical Thinking into the Classroom, OAH Magazine of History , Volume 25, Issue 2, April 2011, Pages 46–50, https://doi.org/10.1093/oahmag/oar003

• Permissions Icon Permissions

John Brown has been subject to constant reinterpretation in the century and half since he led the 1859 attack on the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry. In this photograph by John H. Tarbell, an unnamed African American man in Ashville, North Carolina is holding a copy of Joseph Barry's The Strange Story of Harper's Ferry , published a year earlier. Judging by the man's age, he was alive in 1859, and quite possibly enslaved. One can only wonder at his interpretation of John Brown. (Courtesy of Library of Congress)

On the cusp of his December 1859 execution for treason, murder, and inciting a slave rebellion, John Brown handed a note to his guard which read, “I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land can never be purged away but with blood.” Although the institution of slavery was purged in the crucible of the American Civil War, John Brown's determination to expose and end chattel slavery still resonates. The multiple legacies of slavery and questions about the efficacy of violence as a tool for change in a democratic society continually bring historians and teachers back to the complicated life of John Brown. When students consider Brown's contributions to the American narrative, lines between advocacy and criminality, contrasts between intensity and obsession, and differences between democratic ideals and harsh reality are brought to the surface. To this day, artists, authors, historians, political activists, and creators of popular culture maintain a fascination with the antebellum rights-warrior and his death.

This continuing interest in John Brown presents a great teaching opportunity. Not only can we help to situate John Brown within the context of his era, but we can explore how historical interpretations of the man and his actions have changed over time. The lesson I describe in this article asks students to consider Brown's biography, multiple artistic representations of the abolitionist, as well as historical and contemporary viewpoints in order to develop an evidence-based interpretation of how this controversial historical figure should be commemorated. Students conduct an analysis of the diverse, and often conflicting, historical sources, and then apply their interpretations to the development of a historical marker that would be placed at the Harper's Ferry National Historical Park. In this sense, Brown provides a unique opportunity for students to examine a figure whose actions, and their attendant meanings, tell us as much about antebellum America and the origins of the Civil War as they do about our own time.

Challenging students to develop an interpretation of John Brown ties into my broader philosophy about history instruction. Research on history education, going back nearly a century, indicates that few students retain, understand, or enjoy their school experiences with history ( 1 ). This dismal track record stems from a teaching method that relies primarily on the memorization of names and dates. To limit the study and assessment of history to a student's ability to regurgitate these facts hides the true nature of the discipline. History, at its core, is the study of questions and the analysis of evidence in an effort to develop and defend thoughtful responses. For students to truly be engaged with the past, they must be taught thinking skills that mirror those employed by historians. Recent research suggests that students are more capable of evaluating historical sources, using them to develop an interpretation, and articulating their interpretations in a variety of formats. When doing so, students become powerful thinkers rather than consumers of a predetermined narrative path ( 2 ).

Asking questions about causality, chronology, continuity and change over time , multiple perspectives , contingency , empathy , significance, and motivation enable students to use the substantive information to address essential historical issues. In addition, students must be taught to approach historical sources with the understanding that they are repositories of information that reflect a particular temporal, geographic, and socio-economic perspective. Analyzing a variety of historical sources—be they diaries, artifacts, music, images, or monographs—enables students to scrutinize the remnants of the past and apply this evidence to the task at hand. Employing these historical thinking skills in a classroom setting empowers students to use the names, dates, and events to develop, revise, and defend evidence-based interpretations of the questions that drive the study of history ( 3 ).

Given the path illuminated in the scholarship and my own experiences with teaching history to high school students for eighteen years, I planned the John Brown lesson with an emphasis on source work and student development of evidence-based explanations focused on a key historical question. At the conclusion of the lesson, my students are asked to determine how John Brown and his life should be commemorated. Engaging in many, though not all, of the considerations involved in public history, my students set out to interpret Brown's life for a twenty-first century audience. To do so, they must get to know the individual, his actions, and how Brown was seen by both his contemporaries and historians from his time to the present.

Born in the first year of the nineteenth century to a devoutly Calvinist family, John Brown credits witnessing a slave being beaten with a shovel as the origin of his devotion to the anti-slavery cause. Unlike most of the abolitionists that arose in the 1830s, Brown was dedicated to both the abolition of chattel slavery and racial equality. This commitment was exemplified in his 1838 decision to escort a free black to sit in his family pew. This bold act led to his family's expulsion from the church. In a fruitless attempt to become economically solvent, Brown moved to Springfield, Massachusetts in 1846 to develop his wool business. In Springfield, Brown befriended, lived among, and attended church alongside African Americans. Brown's sincere empathy for the plight of the slave was reflected in a letter written by abolitionist Frederick Douglass after meeting Brown. Douglass, who made a trip to Springfield expressly to meet Brown, stated that Brown was “in sympathy, a black man, and as deeply interested in our cause, as though his own soul had been pierced with the iron of slavery.” During this meeting, Brown revealed what he called his “Subterranean Pass Way.” Using the Appalachian Mountains as a base, this plan envisioned a rebellion that would arm slaves, encourage their revolt, and direct people northward to freedom. It was in Springfield where Brown first revealed the elements of what would become the final act of his life: a raid on the South to promote a slave rebellion.

In 1849, Brown moved his family to North Elba, New York to live on a communal farm created by abolitionist Gerrit Smith ( Figure 2 ). Living with black families was a clear indication of Brown's commitment to a biracial society. In 1851, reacting to the Fugitive Slave provisions of the Compromise of 1850, Brown returned to Springfield and established the League of Gileadites. Dedicated to protecting escaped slaves from slave catchers, the League was a concrete expression of Brown's visceral distaste for federal complicity with the institution of slavery. Brown vehemently expressed his passion for equality in May of 1858, when he presented his “Provisional Constitution and Ordinances for the People of the United States” to an anti-slavery convention in Ontario, Canada. Essentially a new constitution for a slavery-free United States, the document stated that:

In 1848, John Brown learned of abolitionist Gerrit Smith's offer of free land to blacks in the Adirondacks. The next year, Brown moved his family to North Elba, New York to join this experiment. Though he soon left for “Bloody” Kansas, he considered North Elba his home and asked to be buried there. In 1935, the John Brown Memorial Association dedicated this statue, designed by Joseph P. Pollia, just north of the gravesite, now part of the John Brown Farm State Historic Site: < http://nysparks.state.ny.us/historic-sites/29/details.aspx > (Courtesy of photographer David Blakie, < http://davidblaikie.ca/ >)

Whereas slavery, throughout its entire existence in the United States, is none other than a most barbarous, unprovoked, and unjustifiable war of one portion of its citizens upon another portion-the only conditions of which are perpetual imprisonment and hopeless servitude or absolute extermination-in utter disregard and violation of those eternal and self-evident truths set forth in our Declaration of Independence:

Therefore, we, citizens of the United States, and the oppressed people who, by a recent decision of the Supreme Court, [The Dred Scott Decisions] are declared to have no rights which the white man is bound to respect, together with all other people degraded by the laws thereof, do, for the time being, ordain and establish for ourselves the following Provisional Constitution and Ordinances, the better to protect our persons, property, lives, and liberties, and to govern our actions ( 4 ).

This was a clear statement of Brown's opposition to slavery and his dedication to equality. Yet for Brown, it was not words, but actions, that seared his name into the pantheon of American history. Speaking to the community of former slaves in Canada, Brown announced his plan to invade the American South and foment a slave rebellion using the mountains of western Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Alabama to provide cover for his uprising. It would be this uprising that occupied much of his travel, speaking, and fundraising between 1858 and his death in 1859.

Brown's first overt public action took place in May of 1856. In Kansas, Brown led a group of men on a raid that killed five proslavery men along the Pottawatomie Creek. Though Brown claimed not to have participated in the actual murders, the brutality of the act has come to symbolize the violence that struck Kansas territory as a result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. Violence as a tool for change was again employed by Brown in 1858 in Missouri. Brown entered Vernon County, just across the Kansas border, and attacked several proslavery farmers, stole horses and wagons, and secured the freedom of eleven enslaved persons. His raid led to the deaths of several farmers, and consequently a bounty of $250 was placed on his head by President James Buchanan and his name was splashed over newspapers across the nation. After traveling more than a thousand miles over eighty-plus days, Brown delivered the newly liberated former-slaves into the hands of Canada and freedom.

Secretly funded by six abolitionists from Massachusetts, armed with thousands of pikes purchased in Connecticut, driven by his deep disdain for slavery, and supported by twenty-one other men, Brown headed to western Maryland to reconnoiter for his final attempt to foment a rebellion aimed at destroying the institution of slavery. The raid on the federal arsenal in Harper's Ferry, Virginia was initiated on the evening of October 16, 1859. In what quickly developed into a rout, more than half of Brown's followers were killed and the remaining eight, including Brown, were captured the following day. Indicted, found guilty, and sentenced to die, John Brown was hanged in Charlestown, Virginia on December 2, 1859 ( 5 ).

John Brown of Osawatomie spake on his dying day: ‘I will not have to shrive my soul a priest in Slavery's pay; But let some poor slave-mother whom I have striven to free, With her children, from the gallows-stair put up a prayer for me!’ John Brown of Ossawatomie, they led him out to die; And lo! a poor slave-mother with her little child pressed nigh: Then the bold, blue eye grew tender, and the old harsh face grew mild, As he stooped between the jeering ranks and kissed the negro's child! The shadows of his stormy life that moment fell apart, And they who blamed the bloody hand forgave the loving heart; That kiss from all its guilty means redeemed the good intent, And round the grisly fighter's hair the martyr's aureole bent! ( 6 )

The notion of Brown consecrating his sacrifice for slaves with a kiss to the cheek of a slave child found visual form in the 1860 painting, John Brown on His Way to Execution by Louis Ransom. It was further popularized by an 1863 Currier and Ives colored lithograph entitled John Brown , and subtitled Meeting the slave-mother and her child on the steps of Charlestown jail on his way to execution. Thomas Noble's John Brown's Blessing appeared in 1867, a redrawn Currier and Ives, John Brown—The Martyr debuted in 1870. Finally, in 1884, Thomas Hovenden painted his memorialization of the mythical kiss in his Last Moments of John Brown (See cover image) ( 7 ). This introductory element of the lesson fertilizes the pedagogical ground for growing a deep and meaningful investigation of Brown.

Based on an 1859 painting by Louis Ransom, this Currier & Ives lithograph is entitled John Brown. Meeting the slave-mother and her child on the steps of Charlestown jail on his way to execution . A precursor of Thomas Hovenden's 1884 painting on the cover of this issue, it offers a darker, more symbolic depiction of the mythical event. To Brown's left, we see his elderly jailer, a wealthy slaveholder, and a militia member dressed in an aristocratic uniform. To his right stands the embodied spirit of the American Revolution somberly assessing the scene and a soldier pushing back an enslaved woman who suckles her light-skinned child, perhaps the product of a rape by her master. Behind her stands a broken and neglected statue of Justice. (Courtesy of Library of Congress)

A one-page biographical reading, assigned for homework, is used to structure class discussion of Brown's upbringing, his early efforts to address slavery in Springfield, Massachusetts, and the events leading up to his attack on the federal arsenal in Harper's Ferry. Emphasis is drawn to Brown's religious beliefs, his role in “Bleeding Kansas,” his raid into Missouri, and finally the ill-fated Harper's Ferry Raid. To firmly place Brown's actions within the growing sectional mentality of the 1850s, I discuss with students the various sectional reactions to Brown's failed raid. With the contrasting images of Brown fresh in their minds, I inform students that it is their task to determine how Brown should be memorialized historically.

To deepen their analysis of Brown, students are assigned one of several readings. Selected to represent contrasting interpretations of the man and his actions, these readings are intended to complicate students’ investigation. I traditionally select six sources from the list of “Further Readings” located at the end of the article, but I have provided all of the potential sources on the online version of the lesson materials. Historiographically, the discussion of Brown has evolved from the hero-worship of James Redpath and Oswald Garrison Villard to critical analysis of his mental state as found in the work of Bruce Catton and James C. Malin.

Students are organized so that all of the six sources are represented within a group. Each student then presents the interpretation of John Brown expounded by their source. Next, to assist students in better understanding each perspective, I identify some relevant background information of the various authors and the time period in which they wrote. It is important to ensure that students consider authorship, context, and subtext as they derive information from a historical source. By confronting the milieu in which Malcolm X spoke about Brown, or how personal biography impacts Villard's telling of the Brown story, students are forced to consider the sources not as words, but as a perspective informed by and reflecting the social, cultural, economic, and political background of the author and the time period of its construction. Exposing the subtext of each source illuminates for students how John Brown has been interpreted differently and empowers them to develop their own evidence-based interpretations of the past.

Since I teach a forty-five minute class period, my lesson usually breaks in the midst of students sharing the evidence provided by their sources. At times, I will ask students, as homework between day one and two of the lesson, to consult one Northern and one Southern editorial found at < http://history.furman.edu/editorials/see.py >. These articles, and the context and subtext that influence their perspectives, help complicate, but also deepen, our final discussion on how to commemorate John Brown.

After sharing and taking notes, students are asked to consider how they feel John Brown and his actions should be commemorated. Small group discussions of the topic eventually become a large group debate. It is key to this phase of the lesson that students base their interpretations on the evidence they have confronted. Issues of authorship and context add to our discussion about what John Brown means to the telling of American history and how his efforts should be memorialized.

At the conclusion of the lesson, students are asked to apply the evidence they have examined to one of two assessments. The first option is to complete a historical marker that is to be placed at the entrance of the Harper's Ferry National Historic Park. The second is to select five items that would be displayed in the museum at the same park, explain why they were selected, and how these items help to describe John Brown and account for his actions. These assessments place students in a position where they must adhere to the basic historical facts in order to develop and defend an interpretation of the choice they made about commemorating John Brown. Either iteration of the assessment requires students to identify what historical sources informed their decisions and how these sources influenced their choices.

Students have a hard time wrapping their minds around John Brown. Go figure, so do historians. Brown has been the subject of hundreds of books, articles, documentaries, and other forms of historical interpretation. My students, just as historians, are drawn into the complexities of Brown's personality and the actions he takes over the course of his life.

When crafting their interpretations for the historical marker, students tend to run in one of three directions. A large number take a middle of the road approach. After examining the multiple images and textual viewpoints of Brown, they stick to what they see as the pertinent facts. Gone are incendiary adjectives or overt ideological typecasting of Brown and his actions. In many ways, their markers are reminiscent of those produced by the National Park Service for many historical figures and events. The second third stress Brown's actions in both Missouri and Harper's Ferry, but do not address his beliefs. They reflect in their analysis that they are unwilling or unable to determine if he was crazy, obsessively focused, or simply devoted to his cause. The final third interpret and represent Brown as a madman whose actions intentionally set the nation barreling towards civil discord.

What strikes me about this lesson is that students come to see history as alive and interpretive, rather than inert and handed down from some central authoritative body. Most instruments that measure student achievement in history would simply ask students to select the response in a multiple choice question that correctly identifies the impact of Brown's actions. This is achieved within the first five minutes of my lesson. Instead, it is the pastness of Brown that captures their interest and generates in-depth analysis, far beyond a discussion that establishes the basis for an answer to a multiple-choice question. The power and depth of the discussion generated about Brown has been the impetus for me to apply this structure to other historical figures and events. Individuals such as Nat Turner, Daniel Shays, or Eugene Debs and events such as the Haymarket Affair, Busing in Boston, or the Tet Offensive become ripe for deep historical investigation once I realized that my students could do so. The depth of connection my students make with these watershed events and transitional figures far outweighs the time it takes to plan or execute such investigations.

At the same time, the power of images to quickly connect students to a topic is also readily evident when I teach this lesson. The images empower students to become more critical in their analysis of the textual sources they are asked to read. Because the images are so stark, both in contrast to one another as well as individually, students look for similar differences within the text. This transfer of critical reading from the more comfortable image analysis to the more difficult text is a key ingredient for students as they evolve their abilities to think historically. When students are taught to be aware that historical sources are not simply repositories of information, but instead vehicles for communicating an author's perspective on an individual, event, or historical idea, they are enabled to begin crossing the bridge from the “unnatural act of thinking historically” towards a mindset more parallel to that employed by historians.

Ultimately, what my students enjoy is the opportunity to examine the past rather than having it examined for them. The occasion to apply historical thinking skills to determine how to commemorate the life and actions of one of the most divisive figures in American History empowers students to examine multiple sources of historical evidence, develop, revise, and defend evidence-based interpretations, and grapple with key questions of the past. Just as John Brown taught us that challenging the norms of American society is a difficult endeavor, so too is challenging the manner in which we approach teaching history.

J. Carelton Bell and David F. McCollum, “A Study of the Attainments of Pupils in United States History,” Journal of Educational Psychology 8 (1917): 257–74; James P. Shaver, O.L. Davis, Jr., and Suzanne Helburn, “The Status of Social Studies Education: Impressions from Three NSF Studies,” Social Education (February 1979): 150–53; James B. Schick, “What do Students Really Think of History?” The History Teacher , 24 (May 1991): 331–42; T he Nation's Report Card: U.S. History 2006. National Assessment of Educational Progress at grades 4, 8, and 12 (Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, United States Department of Education, 2006); Anne Neal and Jerry Martin, Losing America's Memory: Historical Illiteracy in the 21st Century (Washington, D.C.: American Council of Trustees and Alumni, 2000); Dale Whittington, “What Have 17-Year Olds Known in the Past?” American Educational Research Journal 28 (Winter 1991): 759–80.

Bruce VanSledright. The Challenge of Rethinking History Education: On Practices, Theories, and Policy (New York: Routledge, 2010); Nikki Mandell and Bobbie Malone. Thinking Like a Historian: Rethinking History Instruction, A Framework to Enhance and Improve Teaching and Learning (Madison: Wisconsin Historical Society Press, 2007); Keith Barton. “Research on Students’ Historical Thinking and Learning.” AHA Perspectives Magazine , October 2004, 19–21.

Sam Wineburg, Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2001); Bruce VanSledright, I n Search of America's Past: Learning to Read History in Elementary School (New York: Teacher's College Press, 2002); Suzanne M. Donovan and John D. Bransford, eds. How Students Learn: History in the Classroom (Washington DC: The National Academies Press, 2005); Lendol Calder, “Uncoverage: Toward a Signature Pedagogy for the History Survey.” Journal of American History , March 2006, 1358–1370.

“John Brown's Provisional Constitution,” University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, < http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/johnbrown/brownconstitution.html .>.

David Reynolds, John Brown, Abolitionist: The Man Who Killed Slavery, Sparked the Civil War, and Seeded Civil Rights (New York: Vintage Books, 2005). Jonathan Earle, John Brown's Raid on Harper's Ferry: A Brief History with Documents (New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008).

John Greenleaf Whittier, “Brown of Ossawatomie,” The Lost Museum, < http://chnm.gmu.edu/lostmuseum/lm/144/ .>.

James C. Malin, “ The John Brown Legend in Pictures, Kissing the Negro Baby,” Kansas Historical Quarterly 8 (1939): 339–441, < www.kancoll.org/khq/1939/39_4_malin.htm .>.

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Email alerts

Citing articles via, affiliations.

• Online ISSN 1938-2340
• Print ISSN 0882-228X
• Copyright © 2024 Organization of American Historians
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

By: History.com Editors

Updated: June 27, 2023 | Original: October 27, 2009

John Brown was a leading figure in the abolitionist movement in the pre-Civil War United States. Unlike many anti-slavery activists, he was not a pacifist and believed in aggressive action against slaveholders and any government officials who enabled them. An entrepreneur who ran tannery and cattle trading businesses prior to the economic crisis of 1839, Brown became involved in the abolitionist movement following the brutal murder of Presbyterian minister and anti-slavery activist Elijah P. Lovejoy in 1837. He said at the time, “Here, before God, in the presence of these witnesses, from this time, I consecrate my life to the destruction of slavery !”

Brown was born on May 9, 1800, in Torrington , Connecticut, the son of Owen and Ruth Mills Brown. His father, who was in the tannery business, relocated the family to Ohio , where the abolitionist spent most of his childhood.

The Brown family’s new home of Hudson, Ohio , happened to be a key stop on the Underground Railroad , and Owen Brown became active in the effort to bring former enslaved people to freedom. The family home soon became a safe house for fugitive enslaved people.

The younger Brown left his family at 16 for Massachusetts and then Connecticut , where he attended school and was ordained a Congregational minister. By 1819, though, he had returned to Hudson and opened a tannery of his own, on the opposite side of town from his father. He also married and started a family during that time.

Did you know? John Brown declared bankruptcy at age 42 and had more than 20 lawsuits filed against him.

Family and Financial Problems

Initially, Brown’s business ventures were very successful, but by the 1830s his finances took a turn for the worse. It didn’t help that he lost his wife and two of his children to illness at the time.

He relocated the family business and his four surviving children to present-day Kent, Ohio . However, Brown’s financial losses continued to mount, although he did remarry in 1833.

With a new business partner, Brown set up shop in Springfield, Massachusetts , hoping to reverse his fortunes. In addition to finding some business success, Brown quickly became immersed in the city’s influential abolitionist community.

He also became more familiar with the so-called mercantile class of wealthy entrepreneurs and their often ruthless business practices. It is in Springfield that many historians believe Brown became a radical abolitionist.

By 1850, he had relocated his family again, this time to the Timbuctoo farming community in the Adirondack region of New York State. Abolitionist leader Gerrit Smith was providing land in the area to Black farmers—at that time, owning land or a house enabled Black men to vote.

Brown bought a farm there himself, near Lake Placid, New York , where he not only worked the land but could advise and assist members of the Black communities in the region.

Bleeding Kansas

Brown’s first militant actions as part of the abolitionist movement didn’t occur until 1855. By then, two of his sons had started families of their own, in the western territory that eventually became the state of Kansas .

His sons were involved in the abolitionist movement in the territory, and they summoned their father, fearing attack from pro-slavery settlers. Confident he and his family could bring Kansas into the Union as a “free" state for Black people, Brown went west to join his sons.

After pro-slavery activists attacked at Lawrence, Kansas , in 1856, Brown and other abolitionists mounted a counterattack. They targeted a group of pro-slavery settlers called the Pottawatomie Rifles.

What became known as the Pottawatomie Massacre occurred on May 25, 1856, and resulted in the deaths of five pro-slavery settlers.

These and other events surrounding Kansas' difficult transition to statehood, made even more complicated by the issue of slavery, became known as Bleeding Kansas . But John Brown’s legend as a militant abolitionist was just beginning.

Over the next several years, Brown’s efforts in Kansas continued, and two of his sons were captured — and a third was killed — by pro-slavery settlers.

The abolitionist was undaunted, however, and Brown still advocated for the movement, traveling all over the country to raise money and obtain weapons for the cause. In the meantime, Kansas held elections and voted to be a free state in 1858.

Harpers Ferry

By early 1859, Brown was leading raids to free enslaved people in areas where forced labor was still in practice, primarily in the present-day Midwest. At this time, he also met Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass , activists and abolitionists both, and they became important people in Brown’s life, reinforcing much of his ideology.

With Tubman, whom he called “General Tubman,” Brown began planning an attack on slaveholders, as well as a United States military armory, at Harpers Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia ), using armed freed enslaved people. He hoped the attack would help lay the groundwork for a revolt, but historians have called the raid a dress rehearsal for the Civil War .

Brown recruited 22 men in all, including his sons Owen and Watson, and several freed enslaved people. The group received military training in advance of the raid from experts within the abolitionist movement.

John Brown's Raid

The operation began on October 16, 1859, with the planned capture of Colonel Lewis Washington, a distant relative of George Washington , at the former’s estate. The Washington family continued to own enslaved people.

A group of men, led by Owen Brown, was able to kidnap Washington, while the rest of the men, with John Brown at the lead, began a raid on Harpers Ferry to seize both weapons and pro-slavery leaders in the town. Key to the raid’s success was accomplishing the objective — namely the seizure of the armory — before officials in Washington, D.C., could be informed and send in reinforcements.

To that end, John Brown’s men stopped a Baltimore & Ohio Railroad train headed for the nation’s capital. However, Brown relented and let the train continue—the conductor ultimately notified authorities in Washington about what was happening at Harpers Ferry.

It was during the efforts to stop the train that the first casualty of the raid on Harpers Ferry occurred. A baggage handler at the town’s train station was shot in the back and killed when he refused the orders of Brown’s men. The victim was a free Black man—one of the very people the abolitionist movement sought to help.

John Brown's Fort

Brown’s men were able to capture several local slaveowners but, by the end of the day on October 16, local townspeople began to fight back. Early the next morning, they raised a local militia, which captured a bridge crossing the Potomac River, effectively cutting off an important escape route for Brown and his compatriots.

Although Brown and his men were able to take the Harpers Ferry armory during the morning of October 17, the local militia soon had the facility surrounded, and the two sides traded gunfire.

There were casualties on both sides, with four Harpers Ferry citizens killed, including the town’s mayor. A militia made up of men from the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad arrived in town and assisted local residents in countering Brown’s attack.

Brown was forced to move his remaining men and their captives to the armory’s engine house, a smaller building that later became known as John Brown’s Fort. They effectively barricaded themselves inside.

The militia attack was able to free several of Brown’s captives, although eight of the railroad men died in the fighting. With no escape route and under heavy fire, Brown sent his son Watson out to surrender. However, the younger Brown was shot by the militia and mortally wounded.

Robert E. Lee and the Marines

Late in the afternoon of October 17, 1859, President James Buchanan ordered a company of Marines under the command of Brevet Colonel (and future Confederate General) Robert E. Lee to march into Harpers Ferry.

The next morning, Lee attempted to get Brown to surrender, but the latter refused. Ordering the Marines under his command to attack, the military men stormed John Brown's Fort, taking all of the abolitionist fighters and their captives alive.

In the end, John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry ended in failure.

John Brown's Body

Lee and his men arrested Brown and transported him to the courthouse in nearby Charles Town, where he was imprisoned until he could be tried. In November, a jury found Brown guilty of treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Brown was hanged on December 2, 1859, at the age of 59. Among the witnesses to his execution were Lee and the actor and pro-slavery activist John Wilkes Booth . (Booth would later assassinate President Abraham Lincoln over the latter’s decision to issue the Emancipation Proclamation .)

After he was executed, his wife, Mary Ann (Day) took John Brown's body to the family farm in upstate New York for burial. The farm and gravesite are owned by New York State and operated as the John Brown Farm State Historic Site , a National Historic Landmark.

Slavery would ultimately come to an end in the United States in 1865, six years after Brown’s death, following the Union’s defeat of the Confederacy in the Civil War. Although Brown’s actions didn’t bring an end to slavery, they did spur those opposed to it to more aggressive action, perhaps fueling the bloody conflict that finally ended slavery in America.

American Battlefield Trust. “John Brown’s Harpers Ferry Raid.” Battlefields.org . Bordewich, F.M. (2009). “John Brown’s Day of Reckoning.” Smithsonianmag.com . “John Brown.” PBS.org .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

MA in American History : Apply now and enroll in graduate courses with top historians this summer!

• AP US History Study Guide
• History U: Courses for High School Students
• History School: Summer Enrichment
• Lesson Plans
• Classroom Resources
• Spotlights on Primary Sources
• Professional Development (Academic Year)
• Professional Development (Summer)
• Book Breaks
• Inside the Vault
• Self-Paced Courses
• Browse All Resources
• Search by Issue
• Search by Essay
• Become a Member (Free)
• Monthly Offer (Free for Members)
• Program Information
• Scholarships and Financial Aid
• Applying and Enrolling
• Eligibility (In-Person)
• EduHam Online
• Hamilton Cast Read Alongs
• Official Website
• Press Coverage
• Veterans Legacy Program
• The Declaration at 250
• Black Lives in the Founding Era
• Celebrating American Historical Holidays
• Browse All Programs
• Donate Items to the Collection
• Search Our Catalog
• Research Guides
• Rights and Reproductions
• See Our Documents on Display
• Bring an Exhibition to Your Organization
• Interactive Exhibitions Online
• About the Transcription Program
• Civil War Letters
• Founding Era Newspapers
• College Fellowships in American History
• Scholarly Fellowship Program
• Richard Gilder History Prize
• David McCullough Essay Prize
• Affiliate School Scholarships
• Nominate a Teacher
• Eligibility
• State Winners
• National Winners
• Gilder Lehrman Lincoln Prize
• Gilder Lehrman Military History Prize
• George Washington Prize
• Frederick Douglass Book Prize
• Our Mission and History
• Annual Report
• Contact Information
• Student Advisory Council
• Teacher Advisory Council
• Board of Trustees
• Remembering Richard Gilder
• President's Council
• Scholarly Advisory Board
• Internships
• Our Partners
• Press Releases

History Resources

John Brown’s final speech, 1859

A spotlight on a primary source by john brown.

Brown’s plan soon went awry. Angry townspeople and local militia companies trapped his men in the armory. About twenty-four hours later, US troops commanded by Colonel Robert E. Lee arrived and stormed the engine house. Five of Brown’s party escaped, ten were killed, and seven, including Brown himself, were taken prisoner. Brown was tried in a Virginia court, although he had attacked federal property.

The trial’s high point came at its end when Brown was permitted to make a speech, which appears on this broadside printed in December 1859 by the abolitionist newspaper, the Liberator . In his address, Brown asserted that he "never did intend murder, or treason, or the destruction of property, or to excite or incite Slaves to rebellion, or to make insurrection," but rather wanted only to "free Slaves." He defended his actions as righteous and just, saying that "to have interfered as I have done—In behalf of His despised poor, was not wrong but right."

Brown also told the court that he was at peace with his actions and their consequences, proclaiming: “Now if it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice and MINGLE MY BLOOD FURTHER WITH THE BLOOD OF MY CHILDREN, and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments—I submit; so LET IT BE DONE.”

Brown’s speech convinced many northerners that this grizzled man of fifty-nine was not an extremist but rather a martyr to the cause of freedom.

The Virginia court, however, found him guilty of treason, conspiracy, and murder, and he was sentenced to die. Brown was hanged on December 2, 1859, and his body was buried on his family farm at North Elba, New York.

A full transcript is available.

In the first place, I deny every thing but what I have already admitted, of a design on my part to free Slaves. I intended, certainly, to have made a clean thing of that matter, as I did last winter, when I went into Missouri, and there took Slaves, without the snapping of a gun on either side, moving them through the country, and finally leaving them in Canada. I desired to have done the same thing again, on a much larger scale. That was all I intended. I never did intend murder, or treason, or the destruction of property, or to excite or incite Slaves to rebellion, or to make insurrection.

Questions for Discussion

Read the document introduction, examine the transcript, and the image, and apply your knowledge of American history in order to answer the questions that follow.  

• Illustrations and descriptions of John Brown published in magazines and newspapers during his lifetime and following his execution frequently describe a fiery, violent, wild-eyed radical. How closely do those descriptions match the words in his speech?
• How did John Brown use Biblical scripture to explain and justify his actions?
• Why was it particularly appropriate that John Brown’s final statement to the court was reprinted in the Liberator ?
• Imagine that you are the prosecuting attorney for Virginia. Create a short final statement to the jury summarizing your reasons for bringing the case against John Brown.
• John Brown has been referred to by some as an honorable man and true patriot and by others as a radical terrorist. Which is most appropriate? Defend your answer using historical facts.

A printer-friendly version is available  here .

Stay up to date, and subscribe to our quarterly newsletter..

Learn how the Institute impacts history education through our work guiding teachers, energizing students, and supporting research.

Home — Essay Samples — History — Historical Figures — John Brown

Essays on John Brown

John brown essay topics for college students.

As a college student, choosing the right essay topic is crucial. It not only sets the tone for your entire paper but also allows you to explore your creativity and personal interests. This page aims to provide you with a variety of essay topics related to John Brown, ensuring that you find the perfect topic for your next assignment.

Essay Types and Topics

Argumentative essay topics.

• The impact of John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry
• The role of violence in John Brown's abolitionist activities
• John Brown's legacy and its relevance in modern society

Paragraph Example:

An argumentative essay on John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry must carefully examine the historical context and the impact of this event on the abolitionist movement. As such, it is important to consider the various perspectives and debates surrounding this pivotal moment in American history. This essay seeks to provide a balanced analysis of the raid and its implications.

It is evident that John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry ignited intense debates about the moral and ethical implications of using violence to achieve social change. While opinions on Brown's actions remain divided, it is undeniable that his legacy continues to inspire discussions about the nature of activism and the pursuit of justice.

Compare and Contrast Essay Topics

• John Brown and Frederick Douglass: A comparative analysis
• The impact of John Brown's actions compared to other abolitionists
• John Brown's ideology versus other prominent figures in the abolitionist movement

Descriptive Essay Topics

• A day in the life of John Brown
• The landscapes and settings associated with John Brown's activities
• The emotional impact of John Brown's legacy on local communities

Persuasive Essay Topics

• Why John Brown should be celebrated as a hero
• The relevance of John Brown's principles in contemporary social justice movements
• Challenging misconceptions about John Brown's character and motivations

Narrative Essay Topics

• An eyewitness account of John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry
• A fictional retelling of John Brown's life from the perspective of a supporter
• The impact of John Brown's legacy on future generations

Engagement and Creativity

When selecting an essay topic, consider your personal interests and the aspects of John Brown's life and impact that intrigue you the most. By choosing a topic that resonates with you, you can engage more deeply with the subject matter and produce a more compelling essay.

Educational Value

Each essay type offers unique opportunities for developing critical thinking and writing skills. Argumentative essays encourage you to analyze historical events and engage in persuasive writing, while descriptive essays allow you to hone your descriptive abilities. Compare and contrast essays help you develop analytical thinking, and narrative essays enable you to explore storytelling techniques and personal reflection.

John Brown Hero

John brown: a terrorist and a patriot, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Discussion on Whether John Brown Was a Terrorist

The life of john brown and his role in the anti-slavery movement, john brown – a slavery abolitionist with terrorist methods, john brown: the battle between martyr and madman, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Review of a Plea for John Brown by Henry David Thoreau

The life of john brown and his impact on civil rights movement, john brown's life and fight against slavery.

May 9, 1800

December 2, 1859 (aged 59)

Involvement in Bleeding Kansas; Raid on Harpers Ferry, Virginia

Abolitionism

Brown was born on May 9, 1800, in Torrington, Connecticut. At young age, Brown witnessed an enslaved African American boy being beaten, that moment created his own abolitionism. Brown experienced great financial difficulties from the 1820s to the 1850s.

Brown established the League of Gileadites, a group for protecting Black citizens from slave hunters. Brown believed in using violent means to end slavery. In 1856, became involved in the conflict, known as Pottawatomie massacre.

In 1858, Brown liberated a group of enslaved people from a Missouri. By early 1859, Brown was leading raids to free enslaved people. In 1859, Brown led 21 men on a raid of the federal armory of Harpers Ferry in Virginia, but they were defeated by military forces led by Robert E. Lee. Brown was captured, and on November 2 he was sentenced to death.

Brown was hanged on December 2, 1859, at the age of 59.

Six years after Brown’s death, slavery ultimately came to an end in the United States in 1865. Brown’s action helped to hasten the war that would bring emancipation.

Relevant topics

• Frederick Douglass
• Alexander Hamilton
• Harriet Tubman
• Mahatma Gandhi
• John Proctor
• Abigail Adams
• Anne Boleyn

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

John Brown | Summary and Analysis

Summary and analysis of john brown by bob dylan.

           John Brown is an interesting anti-war lyric which describes the horrors of war and the ease with which young men find themselves trapped in one. The idea of being a hero in the battlefield is as tantalizing as it is fatal. This idea of heroism in often driven by a false sense of bravado and machismo which drives men to a situation where they find themselves “ a-tryin kill somebody or  die tryin “. It is too late when they discover  that all the power and glory is nothing more than political puppetry  where the strings are pulled by powerful, interested players. This aspect is further explored in the summary and analysis of John Brown in the section John Brown Summar and Analysis.

John Brown uses colloquial diction to interrogate the ideas of war, honour and masculinity and show what happens when people go to fight a ‘ good old fashioned war ‘.

Got No Time? Check out this Quick Revision Infographic on our Facebook Page by clicking the link below.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=848959309243734&substory_index=0&id=353002535506083&ref=bookmarks

John Brown | Analysis,  Stanza 1

John Brown went off to war to fight on a foreign shore His mama sure was  proud of him Hestood straight and tal in his uniform and all His mama’s face broke out all in a grin “Oh son,  you look so fine,  I’m glad you’re a son of mine You make me proud to know you hold a can Do what the captain says, lots of medals you will get And we’ll put them on the wall when you come home”

This lyric opens with a certain John Brown going off to fight “ a war on a foreign shore “. The name of the place of battle isn’t known. It isn’t even required anyway. A war is a war, wherever it maybe. Brown’s mother is happy to watch him hold a gun. She wants her son to bring home some medals which they can put up on the wall when he returns. That she is so sure of his return is indicative of either a motherly optimism for her son or a complete ignorance of the realities of war on her part. We come to know that the latter is actually the case by the time we reach the end.

The idea of ‘glory ‘ and the embodiment of it in the form of the medal in the imagination of the mother (and a large group of people) is emphasized right in the beginning of the lyric. This must be kept in mind when the soldier speaks out towards the end against the very idea of ‘glory’ and its physical  embodiment in the form of medal seems to be nothing more a piece of metal.

John Brown | Analysis,  Stanzas  2- 3

As that old train pulled out, John’s ma began to shout Tellin’ everyone in the neighbourhood “That’s my son that’s about to go, he’s a soldier now, you know”  She made well sure her neighbours  understood She got a letter once in a while and her  face broke into a smile As she showed them to the people from  next door And she bragged about her son with his  uniform and gun And these things you called a good old-fashioned war  Oh, good old-fashioned war! Then the letters ceased to come, for a long time they did not come They ceased to come about ten months or more Then a letter finally came saying, “Go down and meet the train Your son’s a-coming home from the  war”

The son decides to fight the good old-fashioned war and his mum goes around telling everyone of her brave son. The romanticization of war and valour finds its expression in the mom’s treatment of the letter her son sends her. Not only does she treat the letter as a means of personal communication but also as a sign of his son’s valour and sacrifice – his red badge of courage. As often is the case, the letters cease to come and when she gets the message that her son has eventually returned, she rushes to meet him. At first she doesn’t see her son ( the readers know why)  and is hardly able to believe her eyes when she does:

John Brown | Analysis,  Stanza 4

Oh his face was all shot up and his hand was all blown off And he wore a metal brace around his waist He whispered kind of slow, in a voice she did not know While she couldn’t even recognise his face! Oh, lord, not even  his face! “Oh tell me, my darling son, pray tell me what they done How is it you come to be this way?” He tried his best to talk but his mouth could hardly move And the mother had to turn her face  away

The brutality of the war is all too evident. Dylan minces no words while providing the gruesome picture of a son whose  “ face is all blown up ” and whose “ hand is all blown off ” and who has to wear a metal brace around his waist. The debilitating effects of the war and the long-term consequences of it is a sad reality which many war veterans have to deal with in their day-to-day lives after a good old-fashioned war . By the time John Brown returns, he has become a different man : one who is thoroughly disillusioned by the idea of heroism , one who can hardly move his mouth and whose  mother can barely recognise him. What follows next is the condemnation of the idea of glory by the very person who was a constituent pawn in the making of it :

John Brown | Analysis,  Stanza 5

Don’t you remember ma, when I went off to war You thought it was the best thing I could do?  I was on the battleground you were  home acting proud You wasn’t there standing in my shoes “ “Oh and I thought when I was there, God,  what am I doing here?  I’m a-tryin’ to kill somebody or die tryin’ But the thing that scared me the most was when my enemy came close and I saw  that is face looked just like mine” Oh, lord, just like mine “   “And I couldn’t help but think, through the thunder rolling and stink That I was just a puppet in a play And through the roar and smoke this string is finally broke And a cannonball blew my eyes  away.”

The soldier relates the brutality of the war where parents send off their children, not realising the full consequences of it. Far from being an arena for glory,  it simply turns out to be a hell-hole where people spend their time “ tryin to kill somebody or die trying “. Above all, it is the rending away of humanity which is the most brutal component of war as it denies the humanity of the very people involved in it which is expressed by the narrator :

But the thing that scared me the most was

when my enemy came close

And I saw that his face looked just like mine”

The soldiers are mere puppets following their master’s order as a consequence of which  soldiers like her son come home maimed, blinded and devastated. Some do not even return at all. The idea of glory and bravery are simply hollow words which act as the means of procuring cannon fodder :

 As he turned away to walk, his ma was still in shock At seein’ the metal brace that helped him stand But as he turned to go, he called his mother close And he dropped his medal down into her hand.

His mother finally wakes to the shock and the horror of the gruesome realities of war when she sees her son unable to stand without the aid of the waist brace. She sees no glory, no bravery, only devastation.

However, as he walks away, he turns to his mother and drops into her hand all that the war was worth: some piece of metal. By the time we reach the end of the narrative,  he is no longer the John Brown we saw we met at the first stanza . In fact, the first line is the only place where his name is explicitly mentioned . By the end,  he is just another handicapped soldier who has been chewed up  and spit out by the bloody system and is nothing more than a damaged good. The compensation : some stray piece of metal to hang on your wall as a useless showpiece.

John Brown |   About the Author

   Like a Rolling Stone, A Hard Rain’s Gonna Fall, Don’t Think Twice It’s Alright , Blowing in the Wind…   has been the ubiquitous folk singer-songwriter  whose gruffy voice and robust lyrics can grip oneself  in dimly lit alleyways and late night gigs when least expected. Born Robert Allen Zimmerman, the kid who got hold of his first guitar aged 14 went on to become one of the greatest song writers of his time.

Dylan released his first album in 1962 which didn’t receive much attention. However, it was The Freewheeling Bob Dylan in 1963 that made him “viral” before it was cool. The 60s saw his meteoric rise as the leading voice of protest music. Many of his popular songs like Masters of War ,   Hard Rain’s a gonna fall come from this period. His songs like Blowin’ in the Wind, Only a Pawn in their Game , The Times They are A-Changin’ were  at the forefront of anti-war and Civil Rights movements. Mid 60s saw him gradually shift from folk to rock music, gaining a new fan base on  one hand and drawing considerable ire from his ex-fans on the other. The 1965 Newport Folk Festival even saw him  getting booed by his folk-fans in a grand folk-you gesture which was as ineffective as the hopeless pun you just read.

Dylan married Sara Lowndes in 1965,  got in a near-fatal motorcycle accident in 1966 and made a comeback with Nashville  Skyline in 1969, launching country rock as an altogether new genre. Like a boss.

A songwriter whose lyrics border on poetry, Dylan was one of the greatest artists to combine the realms of music and literature. He received three Grammys in 1988 and a special citation from Pulitzer  Prize in 2008 . The jury for Spain’s Prince of Austrius Prize for Arts described him as a “ living myth in the history of popular music and a light for a generation that dreamt of changing the world “.

Dylan won the 2016 Nobel Prize in Literature, becoming the first ever musician to do so.

The Darkling Thrush | Summary and Analysis

Birches by robert frost | summary and analysis, related articles, catch the moon summary.

To An Athlete Dying Young | Summary And Analysis

Brownies by zz packer | summary & analysis.

The Soul of Laploshka | Summary and Analysis

This helped a lot in my assignment. Thank you! 🙂

Such clarity in explanation ????

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Adblock Detected

John Brown and Self-Deception

Students will explor

Essential Question

• Why is self-deception destructive to a healthy civil society? 

Guiding Questions

• When can an individual or a group justifiably decide to break the law? 
• How can people become so deceived by ideas that they will commit horrific acts against others?   
• How can one prevent themselves from being deceived by harmful ideas?  

Learning Objectives

• Students will analyze the story of John Brown to identify examples of self-deception.    
• Students will compare primary sources from John Brown and other historic examples to explain the dangers of self-deception in a civil society.  
• Students will apply an understanding of the consequences of self-deception to their own behaviors. 

Expand Materials Materials

Student resources, john brown and self-deception narrative.

• Primary Source Activity Handout and Graphic Organizer
• Scaffolded Primary Source Activity Handout and Graphic Organizer

Teacher Resources

• Analysis Questions 
• Virtue in Action  
• Journal Activity
• Sources for Further Reading  
• Virtue Across the Curriculum  

Expand Key Terms Key Terms

• Self-deception: Acting on a belief that a false idea or situation is true. Being deluded or deceived by ideas that endanger the humanity of others and movements that are unjust. 
• Abolitionist: A person who favors the abolition of a practice or institution, such as slavery.
• Equivocate:  To use unclear language, especially to deceive or mislead someone.
• Consecrate:  To make or declare something sacred.
• Deceive: To make someone believe something that is not true.
• Popular sovereignty:  A political policy under which residents of a territory voted on whether slavery would be allowed or not.
• Inciting: E ncourage or stir up (violent or unlawful behavior).
• Insurrection: A v iolent uprising against an authority or government.
• Oration: A formal speech.
• Sectionalism:  Loyalty to one’s own region or section of the country, rather than to the country as a whole.

Expand More Information More Information

Procedures  .

• The following lesson asks students to consider the vice of self-deception and how it can cause an individual to fail to act with integrity.  Students will engage with the story of John Brown, as they consider the essential question: Why is self-deception destructive to a healthy civil society? 
• The main activity in this lesson requires students to read and analyze a narrative that explores John Brown’s decisions that led him to self-deception. Students may work individually, in pairs, or small groups as best fits your classroom. The analysis questions provided can be used to help students comprehend and think critically about the content. As the teacher, you can decide which questions best fit your students’ needs and time restraints.   
• The lesson includes a variety of activities and suggestions for your classroom. Time estimates are included in the activities, so that you can decide what’s most appropriate for your teaching.  
• The excerpt from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” contains terminology that is no longer used because the terms are recognized to be offensive or derogatory. These terms are retained in their original usage in order to present them accurately in their historical context for student learning.
• Lastly, the lesson includes sources used in this lesson for further reading and suggestions for cross-curricular connections. 

Expand Warmup Warmup

• Scaffolding Note : You may use this activity to prepare your students and introduce the vocabulary and ideas discussed in this lesson. 
• Is it ever morally permissible to disobey the law? Explain your answer.   
• Scaffolding Note: You may wish to have students write their response first, then share with a shoulder partner before leading a brief share-out with the class. 
• Time estimate: 5 minutes

Expand Activities Activities

• Transition to the John Brown and Self-Deception Narrative . Students will learn and analyze the story of John Brown to understand how he fell for self-deception while trying to end slavery.  
• Scaffolding Note: It may be helpful to instruct students to do a close reading of the text. Close reading asks students to read and reread a text purposefully to ensure students understand and make connections. For more detailed instructions on how to use close reading in your classroom, use these directions . Additional reading strategies are provided for other options that may meet your students’ needs. 
• Equivocate: To use unclear language, especially to deceive or mislead someone. 
• Consecrate: To make or declare something sacred. 
• Deceive: To make someone believe something that is not true 
• Popular sovereignty: A political policy under which residents of a territory voted on whether slavery would be allowed or not.  
• Inciting: Encourage or stir up (violent or unlawful behavior). 
• Insurrection: A violent uprising against an authority or government. 
• Oration: A formal speech.  
• Sectionalism: Loyalty to one’s own region or section of the country, rather than to the country as a whole.
• Scaffolding Note: If there are questions that are not necessary to your students’ learning or time restraints, then you can remove those questions.  
• What ideals encouraged John Brown to dedicate his life to abolitionism?  
• When John Brown dedicated his life to the destruction of slavery, what means did he use to achieve his goal? Were there other means at his disposal that were less violent? What other courses did abolitionists use to work for the end of slavery in the United States? 
• What is the difference between acting according to uncompromising principles and acting according to the classical idea of prudence, or practical wisdom? Which course guided Brown, and did it benefit his cause?  
• Why did John Brown move to Kansas? What actions against slavery did he take while he was there? Were his actions justified? Explain your answer.  
• What was Brown’s plan to rid the country of slavery? Was it a realistic plan? Were there other alternatives that he could have pursued to help end slavery? Had he deluded himself into thinking that it was the right and only path? Explain your answers.  
• Did the raid on Harper’s Ferry go according to plan? Were innocent people swept up in the violence and lost their lives? Did Brown consider the loss of life tragic or necessary to achieve his goals? Explain your answer.  
• Did Brown express any remorse for killing people or breaking the law? Did his righteous vision cloud his judgment regarding the rightness or wrongness of his actions? Explain your answer.  
• Did Brown consider the consequences of his raid for human lives? Did he consider the consequences if he had actually succeeded in raiding Harper’s Ferry and starting a race war in the South? Did he consider the consequences of fueling tensions between the North and South because of his violent plan? Explain your answers. 
• Why was John Brown considered by some to be a hero and by some to be a villain? Why is his life and legacy still debated as a hero or villain? 

Estimated time: 50 minutes

• Students will read statements from John Brown, Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King, Jr.  Then students will complete the following graphic organizer related to Brown, Lincoln and King’s views on just and unjust laws.
• Scaffolding Note: A scaffolded version of the primary sources is also available with shorter excerpts and space for note-taking. Scaffolded Primary Source Activity Handout and Graphic Organizer

Estimated time: 45 minutes

Expand Wrap Up Wrap Up

Assess & reflect, virtue in action  .

• How can you be mindful to avoid self-deception while remaining true to your values?  
• Scaffolding note: Use the concentric circles discussion strategy for this discussion. This strategy involves students standing in two concentric circles facing one another and responding to a question in a paired discussion. When prompted by the teacher, one of the circles rotates so each student now faces a new partner.  
• Estimated time: 10 minutes

Self-Deception Journal Activity  

• President Abraham Lincoln was strongly dedicated to the principle of natural rights for all human beings. Although the abolitionists pressed for immediate action, Lincoln was also firmly dedicated to the constitutional rule of law and would not break it to do what was right. The Emancipation Proclamation (1863) demonstrated that Lincoln wanted the slaves to be free while acting under presidential authority in the Constitution.  
• Compare and contrast the goals and methods of John Brown and Abraham Lincoln. Did Brown or Lincoln demonstrate the virtue of prudence, or practical wisdom, in achieving his goal?  

Expand Extensions Extensions

Sources & further reading  .

• Carlton, Evan. Patriotic Treason. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2006.
• Horowitz, Tony. Midnight Rising: John Brown and the Raid that Sparked the Civil War.     New York: Henry Holt, 2011.  
• Oates, Stephen. To Purge This Land with Blood: A Biography of John Brown. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, 1984.  
• Peterson, Merrill D. John Brown: The Legend Revisited. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2002.  
• Reynolds, David. John Brown, Abolitionist: The Man Who Killed Slavery, Sparked the Civil War, and Seeded Civil Rights. New York: Knopf, 2005.  

Virtue Across the Curriculum  

• Playwright Robert Bold dramatizes the struggle between King Henry VIII of England and his chancellor Thomas More. How does Thomas More preserve both his moral conscience and his dedication to the rule of law? What sacrifice does More and his family make for his obedience to conscience and law? How do More and his daughter, Margaret, demonstrate great courage? Note: The 1966 film version of this play is rated G.  
• Transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau wrote this essay as a response to the Mexican-American war and the abhorrence of slavery. According to Thoreau, what is the relationship between one’s personal integrity or conscience and the law?  
• Protesting the treatment of Indians in South Africa https://bit.ly/42E3hbA  
• Explaining his tactics for fighting British rule in India https://bit.ly/43Q6YMn  
• A nonviolent protest at a salt mine https://bit.ly/3P6KTVx
• Lincoln (2012), Directed by Ste ph v en Spielberg  
• Plato, Crito  
• Mark Twain, Joan of Arc

Student Handouts

John brown and self-deception primary source analysis, john brown and self-deception scaffolded primary source, john brown’s last speech, 1859, related resources.

John Brown and Harpers Ferry

Was John Brown a righteous crusader or violent radical?

John Brown: Hero or Villain? DBQ

Use this Lesson alongside theJohn Brown and Harpers Ferry Narrative to allow students to fully evaluate John Brown's approach to abolitionism. Facilitation Notes: Use available classroom technology to display a United States map so that they are within view throughout the lesson. Also, write theKey Questionon the board so that it is in view throughout the lesson.

John Brown: APUSH Topics to Study for Test Day

John Brown was a radical abolitionist who believed that the only way to abolish slavery was to arm slaves and to spur their insurrection. To successfully respond to John Brown APUSH questions, it is important to know the effects John Brown’s actions had on pro and antislavery voices, and to look especially at his raid on Harpers Ferry.

Who is John Brown?

John Brown was a northern abolitionist who moved about the country supporting antislavery causes, which included giving land to fugitive slaves and participating in the Underground Railroad. He was unsatisfied with the results of the peaceful protests of the mainstream abolitionist movement and became a violent radical for the cause. In 1855, Brown and his sons moved to Kansas where they took part in guerrilla warfare during the Bleeding Kansas crisis, murdering five pro-slavery settlers.

John Brown’s actions in Kansas brought him national attention. He moved to Virginia and began hatching an elaborate plot to fund an army that would raid Harpers Ferry , arm slaves, and begin an uprising. Brown led 21 men on his raid, where they attacked and occupied the federal armory for two days. Brown’s army was surrounded and many of his men were killed. Brown himself was eventually captured, charged of murder, conspiring, and treason, and hanged.

Important years to note for John Brown:

• 1856: John Brown murders five proslavery settlers in Kansas during the Bleeding Kansas crisis
• 1859: John Brown raids Harpers Ferry

Why is John Brown so important?

John Brown was a divisive figure. His ideas attracted many abolitionists who were no longer content with the institution of slavery and grew impatient for emancipation. He remained, however, a radical figure, and his methods, especially after the Harpers Ferry attack, were condemned by mainstream abolitionists. Southern Democrats and other pro-slavery Americans, however, were convinced that Brown was acting on the behest of Republicans, and that his Harpers Ferry raid was just the beginning of an advanced abolitionist plot to overthrow the system of slavery. John Brown’s actions likely hastened the coming of war, as they emboldened northern abolitionists and convinced those with an interest in slavery that if republicans took control of the government slavery in the South would be ended.

What are some historical people and events related to John Brown?

• Bleeding Kansas: The crisis that followed the passing of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Fighting ensued as Kansas citizens fought over whether or not the territory would be a free or slave state.
• Robert E. Lee: Led the military forces that captured Brown at Harpers Ferry.

What example question about John Brown might come up on the APUSH exam?

“The newspapers seem to ignore, or perhaps are really ignorant of the fact, that there are at least as many as two or three individuals to a town throughout the North who think much as the present speaker does about him and his enterprise. I do not hesitate to say that they are an important and growing party. We aspire to be something more than stupid and timid chattels, pretending to read history and our Bibles, but desecrating every house and every day we breathe in. Perhaps anxious politicians may prove that only seventeen white men and five Negroes were concerned in the late [raid on Harpers Ferry]; but their very anxiety to prove this might suggest to themselves that all is not told. Why do they still dodge the truth? They are so anxious because of a dim consciousness of the fact, which they do not distinctly face, that at least a million of the free inhabitants of the United States would have rejoiced if it had succeeded. They at most only criticize the tactics.” -“A Plea for Captain John Brown” by Henry David Thoreau, 1859 ( Source ) Thoreau’s assessment of Harpers Ferry seems to support A) the Democrats’ assertion that slavery should be a matter of popular sovereignty. B) the Republicans’ conviction that John Brown’s actions were fair and just. C) the South’s fears that the North aimed not to contain slavery, but to end it. D) the North’s concern that the South would secede over John Brown’s actions.

The correct answer is (C). After John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry, Southern Democrats and others with a stake in the institution of slavery feared that it was a sign of the insurrection to come. Republicans insisted that they did not condone Brown’s actions, but abolitionists like Thoreau came out in support of Brown and stoked the South’s fears that, should the northern Republicans win Congress and the White House, slavery would be ended.

Sarah is an educator and writer with a Master’s degree in education from Syracuse University who has helped students succeed on standardized tests since 2008. She loves reading, theater, and chasing around her two kids.

View all posts

More from Magoosh

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Witnesses and Testimony at the Trial of John Brown

The Trial of John Brown Charlestown, Virginia October 25 to November 2, 1859

From “The Life, Trial and Execution of Captain John Brown, Known as “Old Brown of Ossawatomie,” with a Full Account of the Attempted Insurrection at Harpers Ferry”.   New York:   Robert M.De Witt, Publisher, 1859  

Oct. 25, 1859.

The Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Judge Richard Parker on the bench, assembled at two o'clock. The Grand Jury were called, and the Magistrate's Court reported the result of the examination in the case of Capt. Brown and the other prisoners. The Grand Jury retired with the witnesses for the State. At five o'clock they returned into Court and stated that they had not finished the examination of witnesses, and they were therefore discharged until ten o'clock to-morrow morning. It is rumored that Brown is desirous of making a full statement of his motives and intentions, through the press, but the Court has refused all further access to him by reporters, fearing that be may put forth something calculated to influence the public mind, and to have a bad effect upon slaves, The mother of Cook's wife was in the Court House throughout the examination.

Coffee says that he had a brother in the party, and that Brown had three sons in it. Also that there were two other persons, named Taylor and Hazlitt, engaged, so that, numbering Cook, five have escaped, twelve were killed, and five captured, making twenty-two in all.

Capt. Brown's object in refusing the aid of counsel is, that if he has counsel he will not be allowed to speak himself, and Southern counsel will not be willing to express his views.

The reason given for hurrying the trial, is, that the people of the whole country are kept in a state of excitement, and a large armed force is required to prevent attempts at rescue.

The prisoners, as brought into the Court, presented a pitiable sight --Brown and Stephens being unable to stand without assistance. Brown has three sword-stabs in his body, and one saber-cut over the heart. Stephens has three balls in his head, and had two in his breast and one in his arm. He was also cut on the forehead with a rifle bullet, which glanced off leaving a bad wound.

Oct. 26, 1859.

Brown has made no confession; but, on the contrary, says he has full confidence in the goodness of God, and is confident that he will rescue him from the perils that surround him. He says he has had rifles leveled at him, knives at his throat, and his life in as great peril as it now is, but that God has always been at his side. He knows God is with him, and fears nothing.

Alex. R. Boteler, member elect for Congress of this district, has collected from 50 to 100 letters from the citizens of the neighborhood of Brown's house, who searched it before the arrival of the marines. The letters are in the possession of Andrew Hunter, Esq., who has a large number of letters obtained from Brown's house by the marines and other parties. Among them is a roll of the conspirators, containing forty-seven signatures; an accurately traced map from Chambersburg to Brown's house; copies of letters from Brown, stating that as the arrival of too many men at once would excite suspicion, they should arrive singly; a letter from Merriam, stating that of the twenty thousand wanted, G. S. was good for one-fifth; also a letter from J. E. Cook, stating that the Maryland election was about to come off, the people will become excited, and we will get some of the candidates that will join our side.

The Circuit Court, Judge Parker presiding, met at 10 o'clock. The Grand Jury were called, and retired to resume the examination of witnesses. The Court took a recess awaiting the return of the Grand Jury.

M. Johnson, United States Marshal of Cleveland , Ohio, arrived this morning. He visited the prisoners, and identified Copland as a fugitive from justice in Ohio.

The excitement is unabated, and crowds of persons from the surrounding country are here. The event is regarded as proving the faithfulness of the slaves, and no fears are entertained of them; but a military guard is kept up, fearing an attempt to rescue the prisoners.

Consternation among the slaves is caused by the fear of being seized as Colonel Washington's were, and they firmly believe the object of the prisoners was to carry them South and sell them. Not a single slave has yet been implicated as even sympathizing with the insurrectionists. Those carried off have all been captured and returned to their masters.

Cannon are stationed in front of the Court House, and an armed guard is patrolling around the jail.

Capt. Brown has consented to allow Mr. Botts and his assistant, Mr. Green, to act as his counsel, they assuring him that they will defend him faithfully, and give him the advantage of every privilege that the law will allow.

Stephens declares that he does not desire to be defended by Northern counsel, preferring Southern, and that the Court should name them. There is a decided sympathy for Stephens; not only on account of his sufferings, but that he has shown none of that vindictiveness and hardihood that characterizes Brown. His regret is regarded as caused by the consequences of his folly, and the examination yesterday indicated that the other prisoners have lost their confidence in Brown, and are not disposed to follow him in his defiant course.

At 12 o'clock the Court reassembled.

The Grand Jury reported a true bill against the prisoners, and were discharged.

Charles B. Harding, assisted by Andrew Hunter, represents the Commonwealth; and Lawson Botts and his assistant Mr. Green, are counsel for the prisoners.

A true bill was read against each prisoner:

• First: For conspiring with Negroes to produce insurrection.
• Second: For treason in the Commonwealth; and,
• Third: For murder.

The indictment was as follows:

Judicial Circuit of Virginia, Jefferson County, to wit.

--The Jurors of the Commonwealth of Virginia, in and for the body of the County of Jefferson, duly impaneled, and attending upon the Circuit Court of said county, upon their oaths do present that John Brown, Aaron C. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, and Edwin Coppie, white men, and Shields Green and John Copland, free Negroes, together with divers other evil-minded and traitorous persons to the Jurors unknown, not having the fear of God before their eyes, but being moved and seduced by the false and malignant counsel of other evil and traitorous persons and the instigations of the devil, did, severally, on the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth days of the month of October, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and fifty-nine, and on divers other days before and after that time, within the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the County of Jefferson aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, with other confederates to the Jurors unknown, feloniously and Traitorously make rebellion and levy war against the said Commonwealth of Virginia, and to effect, carry out, and fulfill their said wicked and treasonable ends and purposes did, then and there, as a band of organized soldiers, attack, seize, and hold a certain part and place within the county and State aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction aforesaid, known and called by the name of Harper's Ferry, and then and there did forcibly capture, make prisoners of, and detain divers good and loyal citizens of said Commonwealth, to wit: Lewis W. Washington, John M. Allstadt, Archibald M. Kitzmiller, Benjamin J. Mills. John E. P. Dangerfield, Armstead Ball, John Donoho, and did then and there slay and murder, by shooting with firearms, called Sharpe's rifles, divers good and loyal citizens of said Commonwealth, to wit: Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, Fontaine Beckham, together with Luke Quinn, a soldier of the United States, and Hayward Sheppard, a free negro, and did then and there, in manner aforesaid, wound divers other good and loyal citizens of said Commonwealth, and did then and there feloniously and traitorously establish and set up, without authority of the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia, a Government, separate from, and hostile to, the existing Government of said Commonwealth; and did then and there hold and exercise divers offices under said usurped Government, to wit: the said John Brown as Commander-in-Chief of the military threes, the said Aaron C. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, as Captain; the said Edwin Coppie, as Lieutenant, and the said Shields Green and John Copland as soldiers; and did then and there require and compel obedience to said officers; and then there did hold and profess allegiance and fidelity to said usurped Government; and under color of the usurped authority aforesaid, did then and there resist forcibly and with warlike arms, the execution of the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and with firearms did wound and maim divers other good and loyal citizens of said Commonwealth, to the Jurors unknown, when attempting, with lawful authority, to uphold and maintain said Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and for the purpose, end, and aim of overthrowing and abolishing the Constitution and laws of said Commonwealth, and establishing in the place thereof, another and different government, and constitution and laws hostile thereto, did then and there feloniously and traitorously, and in military array Join in open battle and deadly warfare with the civil officers and soldiers in the lawful service of the said Commonwealth of Virginia. and did then and there show and discharge divers guns and pistols, charged with gunpowder and leaden bullets, against and upon divers parties of the militia and volunteers embodied and acting under the command of Colonel Robert W. Baylor, and of Colonel John Thomas Gibson, and other officers of said Commonwealth, with lawful authority to quell and subdue the said John Brown, Aaron C. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, Edwin Coppie. Shields Green, and John Copland, and other rebels and traitors assembled, organized, and acting with them, as aforesaid, to the evil example of all others in like case offending, and against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth.

Second Count.

And the Jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do further present that the said John Brown, Aaron C. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, Edwin Coppie, Shields Green, and John Copland, severally, on the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth days of October, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and fifty-nine, in the said County of Jefferson, and Commonwealth of Virginia, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, not having the fear of God before their eyes, but moved and seduced by the false and malignant counsels of others, and the instigations of the devil, did each severally, maliciously, and feloniously conspire with each other, and with a certain John E. Cook, John Kagi, Charles Tidd, and others to the jurors unknown, to induce certain slaves, to wit: -- Jim, Sam, Mason, and Catesby, the slaves, and property of Lewis W. Washington, and Henry, Levi, Ben, Jerry, Phil, George, and Bill, the slaves and property of John H. Allstadt, and other slaves to the Jurors unknown, to rebel and make insurrection against their masters and owners, and against the Government and the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia: and then and there did maliciously and feloniously advise said slaves, and other slaves to the Jurors unknown, to rebel and make insurrection against their masters and owners, and against the Government, the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia to the evil example of all others in like cases offending and against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth.

Third Count.

And the Jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, further present that the said John Brown, Aaron C. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, Edwin Coppie, Shields Green, and John Copland, severally, on the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth days of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty-nine, in the county at Jefferson and the Commonwealth of Virginia aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction aforesaid, in and upon the bodies of Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, Fontaine Beckham, Luke Quinn, white persons, and Hayward Sheppard, a free negro, in the peace of the Commonwealth then and there being, feloniously, willfully, and of their malice aforethought, did make an assault, and with firearms called Sharpe's rifles, and other deadly weapons to the Jurors unknown, then and there, charged with gunpowder and leaden bullets, did then and there feloniously, willfully, and of their malice aforethought, shoot and discharge the same against the bodies severally and respectively of the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, Fontaine Beckham, Luke Quinn, and Hayward Sheppard; and that the said John Brown, Aaron C. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, Edwin Coppie, Shields Green, and John Copland, with the leaden bullets aforesaid, out of the firearms called Sharpe's rifles, aforesaid, shot and discharged as aforesaid, and with the other deadly weapons to the jurors unknown, as aforesaid, then and there feloniously, willfully, and of their malice aforethought did strike, penetrate and wound the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, Fontaine Beckham, Luke Quinn, Hayward Sheppard, each severally; to wit: the said Thomas Boerly in and upon the left side; the said George W. Turner in and upon the left shoulder; the said Fontaine Beckham in and upon the right breast; the said Luke Quinn in and upon the abdomen, and the said Hayward Sheppard in and upon the back and side, giving to the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, Fontaine Beckham, Luke Quinn, Hayward Sheppard, then and there with the leaden bullets, so as aforesaid shot and discharged by them, severally and respectively out of the Sharpe's rifles aforesaid. and with the other deadly weapons to the Jurors unknown, as aforesaid, each one mortal wound, of which said mortal wounds they the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, Fontaine Beckham, Luke Quinn, and Hayward Sheppard each died; and so the Jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do say that the said John Brown, Aaron O. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, Edwin Coppie, Shields Green, and John Copland, then and there, them the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, Fontaine Beckham, Luke Quinn, and Hayward Sheppard, in the manner aforesaid, and by the means aforesaid, feloniously, willfully, and of their malice aforethought, did kill and murder, against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth.

Fourth Count.

And the Jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, further present that the said John Brown, Aaron C. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens and Edwin Coppie and Shields Green, each severally on the seventeenth day of October, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and fifty-nine, in the County of Jefferson and Commonwealth of Virginia aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, in and upon time bodies of certain Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, and Fontaine Beckham, in the peace of the Commonwealth, then and there being feloniously, willfully, and of their malice aforethought, did make an assault, and with guns called Sharpe's rifles, then and there charged with gunpowder and leaden bullets, did then and there feloniously, willfully, and of their, and each of their malice aforethought, shoot and discharge the same against the bodies of the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, and Fontaine Beckham and that the said John Brown, Aaron O. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, Edwin Coppie, and Shields Green, with leaden bullets aforesaid, shot out of the Sharpe's rifles aforesaid, then and there, feloniously, willfully, and of their malice aforethought, did strike, penetrate, and wound the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, and Fontaine Beckham, each severally, viz.: the said Thomas Boerly in and upon the left side; the said George W. Turner, in and upon the left shoulder and breast, and the said Fontaine Beckham in and upon the right breast, giving to the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, and Fontaine Beckham, then and there, with leaden bullets aforesaid, shot by them severally out of Sharpe's rifles aforesaid, each one mortal wound, of which said mortal wounds they the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, and Fontaine Beckham then and there died; and that the said John Copland, then and there, feloniously, willfully, and of his malice aforethought, was present, aiding, helping, abetting, comforting and assisting the said John Brown, Aaron O. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, Edwin Coppie, and Shields Green in the felony and murder aforesaid, in manner aforesaid to commit. And so the Jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths, do say that the said John Brown, Aaron O. Stephens, alias Aaron D. Stephens, Edwin Coppie, Shields Green, and John Copland, then and there them, the said Thomas Boerly, George W. Turner, and Fontaine Beckham, in the manner aforesaid and by the means aforesaid, feloniously, willfully, and of their and each of their malice aforethought, did kill, and murder against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Lewis W. Washington, John H. Allstadt, John E. P. Dangerfield, Alexander Kelly, Emanuel Spangler, Armstead M. Ball, Joseph A. Brua, William Johnson, Lewis P. Starry, Archibald H. Kitzmiller, were sworn in open Court this 26th day of October, 1859, to give evidence to the Grand Jury upon this bill of indictment.

Teste: Robert T. Brown, Clerk.

A true copy of said indictment.

Teste: Robert T. Brown, Clerk of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, in the State of Virginia. Which bill of indictment the Grand Jury returned this 26th day of October.

A true bill. Thomas Rutherford, Foreman.  

October, 26, 1859.

The prisoners were brought into court, accompanied by a body of armed men. They passed through the streets, and entered the Court House without the slightest demonstration on the part of the people.

Brown looked something better, and his eye was not so much swollen. Stevens had to be supported, and reclined on a mattress on the floor of the court-room, evidently unable to sit. He has the appearance of a dying man, breathing with great difficulty.

Before the reading of the arraignment, Mr. Hunter called the attention of the Court to the necessity of appointing additional counsel for the prisoners, stating that one of the counsel (Faulkner) appointed by the County Court, considering his duty in that capacity as having ended, had left. The prisoners, therefore, had no other counsel than Mr. Botts. If the Court was about to assign them other counsel, it might be proper to do so now.

The Court stated that it would assign them any members of the bar they might select.

After consulting Capt. Brown, Mr. Botts said that the prisoner retained him, and desired to have Mr. Green, his assistant, to assist him. If the Court would accede to that arrangement, it would be very agreeable to him personally.

The Court requested Mr. Green to act as counsel for the prisoner, and he consented to do so.

Capt. Brown then rose and said: I do not intend to detain the Court, but barely wish to say, as I have been promised a fair trial, that I am not now in circumstances that enable me to attend a trial, owing to the state of my health. I have a severe would in the back, or rather in one kidney, which enfeebles me very much. But I am doing well, and I only ask for a very short delay of my trial, and I think I may get able to listen to it; and I merely ask this, that, as the saying is, "the devil may have his dues," no more. I wish to say, further, that my hearing is impaired, and rendered indistinct, in consequence of wounds I have about my head. I cannot hear distinctly at all; I could not hear what the Court has said this morning. I would be glad to hear what it said on my trial, and am now doing better than I could expect to be under the circumstances. A very short delay would be all I would ask. I do not presume to ask more than a very short delay, so that I may in some degree recover, and be able at least to listen to my trial, and hear what questions are asked of the citizens, and what their answers are. If that could be allowed me, I should be very much obliged.

Mr. Hunter said that the request was rather premature. The arraignment should be made, and this question could then be considered.

The Court ordered the indictment to be read, so that the prisoners could plead guilty or not guilty, and would then consider Mr. Brown's request.

The prisoners were compelled to stand during the arraignment, but it was with difficulty, Stevens being held upright by two bailiffs.

The reading of the indictment occupied about twenty minutes; each of the prisoners responded to the question, "Not Guilty," and desired to be tried separately.

Mr. Hunter -- The State elects to try John Brown first.

Mr. Botts -- I am instructed by Brown to say that he is mentally and physically unable to proceed with his trial at this time. He has heard today that counsel of his own choice will be here, whom he will, of course, prefer. He only asks for a delay of two or three days. It seems to me but a reasonable request, and I hope the Court will grant it.

Mr. Hunter said he did not think it the duty of the prosecutor for the Commonwealth or for one occupying the position, to oppose anything that justice required, nor to object to anything that involved a simple consideration of humanity, where it could be properly allowed; yet, in regard to this proposition to delay the trial of John Brown two or three days, they deemed it their duty that the Court, before determining matters, should be put in possession of facts and circumstances, judicially, that they were aware of in the line of their duties as prosecutors. His own opinion was, that it was not proper to delay the trial of this prisoner a single day, and that there was no necessity for it. He alluded in general terms to the condition of things that surrounded them. They were such as to render it dangerous to delay, to say nothing of their exceeding pressure upon the physical resources of the community, growing out of circumstances connected with affairs for which the prisoners were to be tried. He said our laws in making provisions for allowing, in the discretion of the Court, briefer time than usual in cases of conviction, for such offenders, between the condemnation and execution, evidently indicates, indirectly, the necessity of acting promptly and decisively, though always justly, in proceedings of this kind. In reference to Brown's physical condition, he asked the Court not to receive the unimportant statements of the prisoner as sufficient ground for delay, but that the Jailer and physician be examined. As to expecting counsel from abroad, he said that no impediment had been thrown in the way of the prisoners' procuring such counsel as they desired. but, on the contrary, every facility had been afforded, able and intelligent counsel had been assigned them here, and he apprehended that there was little redskin to expect the attendance of those gentlemen from the North who had been written for. There was also a public duty resting upon them to avoid, as far as possible, within the forms of law, and with reference to the great and never-to-be-lost-sight-of giving a fair and impartial trial to the prisoners, the introduction of anything likely to weaken our present position, and give strength to our enemies abroad, whether it issues from the Jury in time, or whether it comes from the months of the prisoners or any other source. It was their position that had been imperiled and jeopardized, as they supposed by enemies.

Mr. Harding concurred in the objection of Mr. Hunter, on the ground of danger in delay, and also because Brown was the leader of the insurrection, and his trial ought to be proceeded with on account of the advantage thereby accruing to the trial of the others.

Mr. Green remarked that he had had no opportunity of consulting with the prisoner, or preparing a defense. The letters for Northern counsel had been sent off, but not sufficient time has been afforded to receive answers. Under the circumstances, he thought a short delay desirable.

Mr. Botts added that at present the excitement was so great as perhaps to deter Northern counsel from coming out; but now that it had been promised that the prisoners should have a fair and impartial trial, he presumed that they would come and take part in the case.

The Court stated that if physical inability were shown, a reasonable delay must be granted. As to the expectation of other counsel, that did not constitute a sufficient cause for delay, as there was no certainty about their coming. Under the circumstances in which the prisoners were situated, it was rational that they should seek delay. The brief period remaining before the close of the term of the Court, rendered it necessary to proceed as expeditiously as practicable, and to be cautious about granting delays. He would request the physician who had attended Brown to testify to as his condition.

Dr. Mason thought Brown was able to go on understandingly with the trial. He did not think his wounds were such as to affect his mind of recollection. He had always conversed freely and intelligibly about this affair. He had heard him complain of debility, but not of hardness of hearing.

Mr. Cockerel, one of the guards of the jail, said that Brown had always been ready to converse freely.

The Court refused to postpone the trial and the whole afternoon was occupied in obtaining a jury for the trial of Brown, who was brought into court on a cot.  

Afternoon Session, 2 o'clock.

The jailer was ordered to bring Brown into court. He found him in bed, from which he declared himself unable to rise. He was accordingly brought into court on a cot, which was set down within the bar. The prisoner laid most of the time with his eyes closed, and the counterpane drawn up close to his chin. The jury were then called and sworn. The jurors were questioned as to having formed or expressed any opinion that would prevent their deciding the case impartially on the merits of the testimony. The Court excluded those who were present at Harper's Ferry during the insurrection and saw the prisoners perpetrating the act for which they are about to be tried. They were all from distant parts of the country, mostly farmers --some of them owning a few slaves, and others none. The examination was continued until 24 were decided by the Court and counsel to be competent jurors. Out of these 24, the counsel for the prisoner had a right to strike off eight, and then twelve are drawn by ballot out of the remaining sixteen. The following were the questions put to the jurors:

• Were you at Harper's Ferry on Monday or Tuesday?
• How long did you remain there?
• Did you witness any of the proceedings for which this party is to be tried?
• Did you form or express any opinion from what you saw there with regard to the guilt of innocence of these people?
• Would that opinion disqualify you from giving these men a fair trial?
• Did you hear any of the evidence in this case before the Examining Court?
• What was your opinion based on?
• Was it a decided one, or was it one which worm yield to evidence, if the evidence was different from what you supposed?
• Are you sure that yon can try this case impartially from the evidence alone, without reference to anything you have heard or seen of this transaction?
• Have you any conscientious scruples against convicting a party of an offense to which the law assigns the punishment of death, merely because that is the penalty assigned?

The following were finally fixed upon as the twelve Jurors.

• Richard Timberlake,
• Joseph Myers,
• Thomas Watson, jr,
• Isaac Dust,
• John C. McClure,
• William Rightsdale,
• Jacob J. Miller,
• Thomas Osborne,

"A record of the personal services of our American women in the late Civil War"

"what to the slave is the fourth of july" frederick douglass's reflections in 1852.

Grant Remembers the Surrender and Victory at Vicksburg

Was John Brown a Terrorist?

John Copeland and Lewis Leary were the last two men to join John Brown’s small band gathering on a Kentucky farm in October 1859. Both free Blacks, they arrived just one day before Brown launched his raid on the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry. Copeland and Leary were natives of North Carolina, related by marriage, who moved to Oberlin, Ohio, a town founded around a college in 1833 that became a haven for abolitionists by the 1850s. They met Brown in 1858 and decided at the last minute to join his ill-fated effort to seize weapons at the arsenal and distribute them to enslaved persons he hoped to recruit from nearby plantations. Leary suffered a fatal gunshot during the raid, and Copeland, who insisted that he was merely doing what George Washington had done during the American Revolution — fighting for his freedom — was hanged two months to the day after the raid.  

Blacks began attending Oberlin College in 1835 following an influx of students from Lane Theological Seminary in Cincinnati who struck a unique bargain with the financially struggling college in 1834. These “Lane Rebels” left Cincinnati after Lane’s trustees banned anti-slavery activities on campus. They agreed to enroll at a newly formed theological school at Oberlin on three conditions: One, the board would respect students’ freedom of speech. Two, the college would not interfere with the theological school’s administration, and third, Oberlin would accept Black students. In 1835, Oberlin fulfilled that  last commitment by admitting two students of color, Gideon Quarles and Charles Henry Langston. 

Oberlin served as a station on the Underground Railroad. Local abolitionists took advantage of state legislation protecting those accused of being fugitive enslaved persons until a newly elected Democratic state legislature repealed a law granting fugitives the right to seek a writ of habeas corpus in Ohio courts. When John Price, a fugitive enslaved person, was arrested in September of 1858 and held in a Wellington, Ohio jail, a sizable bi-racial group of students and Oberlin townspeople seized Price and smuggled him to freedom. President James Buchanan insisted that the perpetrators of the jailbreak be prosecuted. Although 37 people were indicted, Charles Henry Langston was one of only two men tried for aiding Price’s escape. Langston was convicted but received a light sentence when the judge responded emotionally to Langston’s arguments about the injustice of slavery. It is unknown — likely unknowable — why Leary and Copeland decided to join Brown’s ill-fated mission in Virginia; but perhaps it was the successful rescue of John Price that inspired them. 

For over 15 years, I have been a member of a history book club — affectionately known to its members as the Hysterical Book Club. Members rotate selecting a book and hosting a monthly dinner/discussion. Last month’s selection was Tony Horowitz’s Midnight Rising: John Brown and the Raid That Sparked the Civil War . Horowitz, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist who died in 2019, was a skilled storyteller who knew how to leave his readers shaking their heads at the “too good to be true” stories woven throughout American history. He concludes Midnight Rising with that kind of tale. Lewis Leary, the free Black man from North Carolina who joined Brown at the last minute, left his home, wife and infant daughter in Oberlin without telling his wife where he was going. Upon learning of his death, supporters of Brown raised some money to provide support for Lewis’s widow Mary, who later married Charles Henry Langston. The couple moved to Kansas, where Mary raised her grandson. She took the boy to Osawatomie, KN , where Brown and several of his sons slaughtered a group of pro-slavery settlers and fought unsuccessfully to protect the town from being burned by pro-slavery forces..  She told him the tale of John Brown in Kansas and at Harpers Ferry, showing him a bullet-riddled shawl she said her first husband had worn during the raid. The boy, named for his grandfather, became one of the most gifted American poets of the twentieth century, Langston Hughes. His ode to the Brown Raid, “October the 16” begins: 

You will remember

Chapter 14 in T eaching American History’s Documents and Debates in American History and Government, vol. 1, 1493-1865 , asks American history students to consider how John Brown should be remembered. Indeed, the chapter’s first Discussion Question asks: Was John Brown a martyr, a madman, or both? It is perhaps an unanswerable question — one destined to be debated forever in book clubs and American history classrooms.  We debated it in my history book club, and our only conclusion was that it might help students reach a conclusion to separate the question into two questions. First, was he a terrorist in Kansas when he dragged pro-slavery settlers from their beds and killed them with broadswords—yet not a terrorist in Harpers Ferry, because he was fighting for the liberation of an oppressed people? Second, did he achieve martyrdom by his efforts to free enslaved people and   dying for the cause? Or, by embracing violence as a tactic of abolitionism, did he cross an imaginary line dividing noble cause and terrorism? 

The documents in this chapter, John Brown’s Raid , cleverly engage students in the timeless question—Do the ends justify the means? They include a fascinating correspondence between abolitionist Lydia Maria Child and pro-slavery Governor Henry Wise of Virginia; opposing assessments of Brown by Horace Greeley and Frederick Douglass; and the lyrics of John Brown’s body — a testimony to his martrydom.  Document E, an excerpt from Abraham Lincoln’s Cooper Union Address in 1860, helps students appreciate context. Did Lincoln structure his remarks at Cooper Union to protect his chance to win  the Republican nomination for President? 

Documents in this chapter include:

A. Lydia Maria Child, Governor Henry Wise of Virginia, and John Brown, Correspondence, October 1859

B. D. H. Strother, A Southern Planter Arming His Slaves to Resist Invasion, November 19, 1859

C. Horace Greeley, “The Whole Affair Seems the Work of a Madman,” October 19, 1859

D. Frederick Douglass, “John Brown Not Insane,” November 1859

E. Abraham Lincoln, Cooper Union Address, February 27, 1860

F. William W. Patton, Lyrics to John Brown’s Body, December 16, 1861

We have also provided audio recordings of the chapter’s Introduction, Documents, and Study Questions . These recordings support literacy development for struggling readers and the comprehension of challenging text for all students.

Teaching American History’s We the Teachers blog will feature chapters from our two-volume Documents and Debates with their accompanying audio recordings each month until recordings of all 29 chapters are completed in August of 2021. In today’s post, we feature Volume I , Chapter 14: John Brown’s Raid on Harpers Ferry.  On July 27, we will highlight Chapter 28: Carter and Reagan Respond to an Economic Crisis , from Volume II of Documents and Debates in American History . We invite you to follow this blog closely, so you can take advantage of this new feature as each recording becomes available.

The Progressive Challenge to the Founders' Principles

W. e. b. du bois and the niagara movement, join your fellow teachers in exploring america’s history..

Easy Insightful Literature Notes

John Brown Poem Summary & Analysis

John brown by bob dylan: about the song.

John brown is an anti-war song composed and performed by the American singer-songwriter and Nobel laureate Bob Dylan. The song is an expression of the singer’s deep-rooted sense of pacifism. Bob Dylan is known for upholding American folk music and his work is seen to be highly influenced by the poets of Modernism and Beatnik movements. His songs are generally easy to follow with a deep philosophical meaning. He received the Nobel Prize in Literature in 2016 for his outstanding contribution in creating new poetic expressions in the American song tradition.

John Brown is, as previously mentioned, an anti-war lyric. It tells the story of an American mother who sends her son John Brown to war on some foreign land. The song follows the young soldier and his mother’s lives. The singer shows us the true fate of the American soldiers who are stationed in foreign countries for war. He also questions the very nature of war and shows us that there is no nobility in warfare, thereby strengthening the idea of pacifism.

The song was written in October 1962, and has since been performed live on several occasions. It is not however released in any of the singer’s albums but is a standalone piece. It was released under different names around the early 60’s and an official version was released in 2010. The song length is 4:20 in the official version and it consists of twelve verses.

The song does not follow the typical poetic metres, but depends on the vocal and intonational changes to establish ‘poetic cadence.’ Bob Dylan has a North Central American accent with a touch of the mid-west drawl. This makes up for the harmonious melody in his songs and provides for the metre and internal rhyme.

You can listen to the song here:

Verse-wise Explanation of the Song

John Brown went off to war to fight on a foreign shore His mama sure was proud of him He stood straight and tall in his uniform and all His mama’s face broke out all in a grin

At the very start of the song Bob Dylan establishes a story. It starts with John Brown going off to war on a foreign shore. His mother was proud that he was going to serve his nation. On the day he was leaving, he stood straight and tall wearing his uniform. Here the words ‘straight’, ‘tall’ and ‘uniform’ all indicate that John Brown was proud to be a soldier and his body language showed it. His mother smiled as she bade him farewell.

“Oh son, you look so fine, I’m glad you’re a son of mine You make me proud to know you hold a gun Do what the captain says, lots of medals you will get And we’ll put them on the wall when you come home”

In the second verse of the song, we see the mother of John Brown talking to her son. She says to her son that he looks very good in his uniform and that she is very glad to have been his mother. She is expressing how proud she is for her son. Serving in armed forces is considered as one of the most dignified and noble professions in the world. John Brown’s mother is happy that her son will be serving his nation. She tells him to do what his captain says and he will get lots of medals. And when John Brown will come home from war, she will put them up on the wall for display. The mother here is ignorant of the realities of war. She has a firm belief that her son is going to come home unscathed from the war. She is too proud to realize that war is no game and that she might never see her son again.

As that old train pulled out, John’s ma began to shout Tellin’ everybody in the neighborhood “That’s my son that’s about to go, he’s a soldier now, you know” She made well sure her neighbors understood

In the third verse we yet again witness the mother’s pride over her son. As John Brown is going away to war in an old train, his mother is shouting out farewell to him. She is flaunting and boasting and wants everyone to know that her son is a soldier and that he is going away to fight in the war. Here we are acquainted with John Brown’s mother’s viewpoint: she is not just delighted that her son is a soldier, but also wants to boast about it to the people that she has raised a soldier, a brave boy who is off to fight for what she believes is a good cause.

She got a letter once in a while and her face broke into a smile As she showed them to the people from next door And she bragged about her son with his uniform and gun And these things you called a good old-fashioned war Oh, good old-fashioned war!

In the fourth verse we see that John Brown is away at war and his mother is at home. She receives a letter from him once in a while. Her face breaks into a smile reading them. She shows the letters to her next-door neighbours as well and brags about her son. Wearing a uniform and having a gun are those great feats her son has achieved. She brags about the good old-fashioned war as if it were just some event. The mother has no idea about the realities of war.

Then the letters ceased to come, for a long time they did not come They ceased to come for about ten months or more Then a letter finally came saying, “Go down and meet the train Your son’s a-coming home from the war”

After a while the son’s letters to his mother stopped coming. For a long time John Brown did not write to his mother. It could be either because he was in action or was incapable for holding correspondence. The mother did not receive a letter for about ten months or more. Then one day a letter come for John Brown’s mother saying that her son was coming home from war, and that she should go down and meet him at the train.

She smiled and went right down, she looked everywhere around But she could not see her soldier son in sight But as all the people passed, she saw her son at last When she did she could hardly believe her eyes

After reading the letter, the mother went right down to meet her son John Brown who has returned home from war. She looked for him everywhere at the train station but could not find her son amid the crowd. Here ‘her soldier son’ probably indicates that the mother expected to see a refined soldier in her son as he returned home. When all the people passed, she finally found her son. But when she saw him she could not believe her eyes. There was something unforeseen there.

Oh his face was all shot up and his hand was all blown off And he wore a metal brace around his waist He whispered kind of slow, in a voice she did not know While she couldn’t even recognize his face! Oh, lord, not even recognize his face!

The seventh verse of the song is the description of John Brown’s state after he returns home to his mother from the war. We see that his face is all shot up and one of his hands is blown-off. He has undergone a lot of physical harm in the war. His arm is amputated and his face bears scars from bullet and grenade wounds. He wears a metal brace around his waist to support himself in walking. He seems to be lucky even to be alive after receiving such injuries in the battle. But his torment is not limited to physical harm. He has also undergone mental trauma. When he speaks his voice is slow and unrecognisable, even to his own mother. This suggests both his pain and his horrific experience in the war. He is so altered in physical appearance that even his own mother is unable to recognize his face. The focus is on the evils of war. And this stanza may be marked as the climax of the narrative.

“Oh tell me, my darling son, pray tell me what they done How is it you come to be this way?” He tried his best to talk but his mouth could hardly move And the mother had to turn her face away

John Brown’s mother is in utter disbelief after seeing the state in which her son has returned from war. She asks her son how he came to be this way, and what happened to him. She was both shocked and concerned to see her son in such a broken state. John Brown tried his best to to talk and answer to his mother about what all he has been through, but he was hardly able to move his mouth. His mother could not bear to look at her son’s distress and pain and had to turn her head away.

“Don’t you remember, ma, when I went off to war You thought it was the best thing I could do? I was on the battleground, you were home acting proud Thank God you wasn’t there standing in my shoes”

John Brown seems to condemn his mother’s act of pursuing him to be a soldier. His mother thought joining the army was the best thing he could do. But she was wrong. He did not find it a noble thing at all. He was on the battlefield fighting in the war whereas back at home his mother was feeling proud of her soldier son. All the illusions are now shattered. John Brown is relieved and thanks God that his mother wasn’t there in that situation to watch the horrors of war he has seen.

“Oh, and I thought when I was there, God, what am I doing here? I’m a-tryin’ to kill somebody or die tryin’ But the thing that scared me most was when my enemy came close And I saw that his face looked just like mine” Oh, lord, just like mine!

In the tenth verse of the song John Brown is telling his mother his experiences in the war. He says that when he was in the battlefield he wondered why he was even there. He was just trying to kill somebody in a do-or-die situation. It was a realisation that war is chaotic, insane and irrational. He further says that the thing that scared him the most was when his enemy came very close to him and he saw that it was just another human being. He didn’t even know why he was supposed to kill that person. Here Bob Dylan talks about the universal fraternity and how wars are just men trying to kill one another. It is at the end only a loss of human lives. The expression ‘scared me the most’ is ironic and satiric in tone and delivers a stern message regarding the reality of war.

“And I couldn’t help but think, through the thunder rolling and stink That I was just a puppet in a play And through the roar and smoke, this string is finally broke And a cannonball blew my eyes away”

Amidst the chaos of war John Brown was thinking that he was just a puppet in the hands of warmongers who were playing with them. Whether he lived or died did not matter. All that mattered to them was the victory and defeat. Bob Dylan here compares war with a puppet show – an apt metaphor indeed. Soldiers just follow orders and kill people when they are asked to without the slightest consideration or remorse. However, his string of thought was broken as a cannonball came through the smoke and roar and blew his eyes away.

As he turned away to walk, his ma was still in shock At seein’ the metal brace that helped him stand But as he turned to go, he called his mother close And he dropped his medals down into her hand

John Brown has finished telling his mother how he received the injury. Now he turns to walk away from her. His mother was still in shock after seeing the metal brace that helped him stand. When she sent her son away to war she saw him as a young handsome youth wearing a uniform, but now she was seeing a broken man returned to her in bits and pieces. She was still in shock to realise her loss. And just as John Brown turned to go, he called his mother close to him and he dropped his medal in his mother’s hand. This is an overwhelming scene. The act of John Brown placing the medal on his mother’s hand leaves us questioning if a simple medal, an empty token of pride, was worth the suffering he went through and the damage he will carry throughout his life.

We serve cookies on this site to offer, protect and improve our services. KNOW MORE OK

John Brown University

• Cost & scholarships
• Essay prompt

Want to see your chances of admission at John Brown University?

We take every aspect of your personal profile into consideration when calculating your admissions chances.

This school does not require essays or the essay prompts are not available yet.

Sign up to be notified of any changes.

Q for Questions

John brown questions and answers isc class 11 and class 12, short questions, part – 1.

(a) In what way does John Brown become a victim of so-called glorious war? Discuss with close reference to the text.

Answer : There are many persons who regard war as something glorious and those who fight it as heroes. They believe that war may be destructive but it is essential to finish the enemy. Wars, in their eyes, are never obsolete.

In the poem ‘John Brown’ the poet shows how young soldiers like John Brown are nurtured on the illusion of heroism in fighting the war. John Brown’s mother takes pride in false sense of heroism and encourages her son to join the army, fight bravely and win medals. So John Brown is soon enamoured of military glory. He joins the army leaves for the battlefield. His mother, seeing him in the uniform, enflames his fervour for heroism.

Oh, son , you look so fine, I’m glad you’re a  son of mine You make me proud to know you hold a gun Do what the captain says, lots of medals you will get…….

Thus,  John Brown inspired by heroic ideals goes to the front. He obeys his mother and tries to fulfil her ambition. When he returns home, his mother goes to the railway station to receive her son. She fails to recognise him. How can he be his son? In place of a young, dashing handsome young man, he is a cripple with badly disfigured face. Brown is now a totally helpless creature. He has lost his eyes and one of his hands. He wears a metal brace which provides him support to stand erect. He can hardly open his jaw. What he speaks is so low that it is mostly incomprehensible.

In this way, the poet shows how John Brown becomes a victim of the so-called glorious war.

(b) What do you think of John Brown’s mother?

Answer : John Brown’s mother is quite ignorant about the horrors of war. Like many other people, she is under the illusion that wars are glorious and soldiers are real heroes. That is why, she wants her son to become a soldier. She wants him to be a good soldier who fights for the sake of his country. Her desire is to see his medals of victory won by him during the war. She is oblivious of the horrible side of war.

Never does she ever think that her son may have to lose his life or precious limbs. When her son is about to leave for the battle front, she makes it a point to make her neighbours know that her son has become a soldier and is going to war. Her over-enthusiasm is vivid. However, when her son returns as a hopeless cripple she is shocked. She is far from happy on seeing the medals dropped on her hand by her disgruntled son. Thus, she is shown as the representative of all those who falsely glorify war.

(c) What experience of war does John Brown relate to his mother?

Answer : On returning from the war front in pathetic condition, John Brown tells his mother is a low voice his experience of war. He reminds his mother how she thought that the best thing that had happened was his going to the war. He says she felt proud of him as he was fighting. He wishes she should have been in his place.

The son continues to speak. He says that he wondered what he was doing in the war, trying to kill someone or die doing so. What frightened him the most was when the enemy soldier stood in front of him. He saw that his face resembled his .There was no difference at all.

In the midst of  explosive sounds of shells bursting and stink from the dead bodies he realized that he was just a puppet in a play. He had no will of his own. Through the roaring sound and smoke a cannonball took his eyes away.

The son, while turning to go away, calls his mother to come close. As she comes nearer he quietly drops the medals he has won into her hand. It is the most pathetic moment in the poem.

Part – 2

(a) ‘John Brown’ underlies the idea that soldiers are mere puppets in the horrible show of any war. Discuss.

Answer : John Brown is a young soldier. He is encouraged by his mother to become a soldier and go the the battle field. She wants him to prove his heroism and win medals. She believes that soldiers are true heroes. Sadly, she in unaware of the horrors of war. She comes to realise the destructive side of war only when her soldier-son returns home in a miserable condition. He has lost his eyes and one of his hands. He has to wear a metal brace around his waist to support himself. His jaws do not open easily. When he speaks he speaks so low that it becomes difficult to understand what he speaks.

On being being asked by his mother what happened to him in the war, John Brown remind her that when he was going to the war it was she who thought that it was the best thing that he could do. He was fighting while she was at home, pretending to be proud of the fact since she was not in his place. On the battlefield, he soon realized the meaninglessness of war. He called upon God and asked himself what he was doing there. He was trying to kill someone. When an enemy soldier came face to face before him, he was shocked and puzzled. The enemy soldier had clear resemblance with him. His face looked like his. He could not think of killing him. At that time he could not help thinking in the midst of continuous gun-roar and stink that he was just a puppet in the show. He was being manipulated by others. He was fighting without knowing any reason. This realisation was quite saddening. Thus the poem ‘John Brown’ reveals that ordinary soldiers are just pawns in the hands of others. They are made to fight in the name of patriotism, nationalism, democracy, so and so forth. Sometimes they wonder what they are fighting for.

(b) In what way does the poem reveal irony of life?

Answer :  Irony refers to the gap between what we assume and what happens in reality. This is the great irony of life that what happens is often contradictory to our expectations . In the poem ‘John Brown’ the young soldier John Brown’s mother has high hopes of her son’s heroic capabilities She wants him to join the army, fight for the glory of the country and win medals for heroism on the battlefront. When her son is about to go to war she tells every neighbour that her son is going to the battlefield. When her son is fighting, she continues to brag about his valorous acts.

However, she is stunned when her son returns as a cripple. He has lot his eyes and one of his hands. His jaws hardly open. What he speaks is in whispers. As he turns away, he drops his medals on the palm of his mother. This act is ironic and pathetic. The irony of fate is that he has won a lot of medals but has to pay a heavy price for them.

(c) ‘John Brown’ is a modern ballad. Comment.

Answer : ‘John Brown’ is a ballad and embodies many features of the traditional ballad, but in its construction it is modern. It is episodic and is set in no specific time and place. It has twelve verses. Each verse has a quatrain, but there is no set rhyme scheme which makes it modern in style. In some stanzas rhyming words are used, as in stanza 8 (‘way’: ‘away’), stanza 11(‘play’ : ‘away’) and stanza 12 (‘stand’ : ‘hand’). The rhyme varies with the mood, as in stanza 11:

“And I couldn’t help but think, through the thunder rolling and stink That I was just a puppet in a play And through the roar and smoke , this string is finally broke And a cannonball blew my eyes way.”

The subject matter   of ‘John Brown’ is war, but its anti-war stance is against the spirit of the traditional ballad which often eulogies heroism related to war. Here a young man, John Brown, joins the army to the pride of his mother. He goes off to war to fight. But he soon loses his fervour. He realizes that war is futile. Even then he fights. His encounter with the enemy-soldier makes him realize the common bond of humanity with him. When he returns home, he is a changed man. His face is disfigured. He has lost his eyes and one of his hands. He wears a metal brae which enables him to stand erect. He cannot open his jaws. So his speech is incomprehensible. Thus, war turns a healthy, energetic young man into a cripple.

The ballad ends on an ironic note. John Brown puts his medals in the hand of his mother who is already in a shock. There medals are the sign of John Brown’s valour, but we wonder if they are any worth.

Long Questions

Question 1 : ‘John Brown’ by Bob Dylan debunks the belief in heroism surrounding war. Discuss with close reference to the text.

Answer : Most of the people have romantic notions about war. They believe that wars must be fought. It is during the war that ones proves one’s valour and heroic spirits which get the approval of everyone. It is thought that a war hero is an honoured and revered person. Such views have been challenged by many writers. G.B.Shaw shatters the allusion about heroism in his play ‘Arms and the Man’.

‘John Brown’ by Dylan shows how the notion of romanticism surrounding war is false and hypocritical . John Brown is a handsome young man. It is his mother who wants to see her son in the military uniform. Like other young men of his age, Brown too is enamoured of military glory. So he joins the army and goes to the battlefield. His mother only enflames his fervour for heorism:

“Oh, son , you look fine, I’m glad you’re a  son of mine You make me proud to know you hold a gun Do what the captain says, lots of medals you will get……”

John Brown’s experience of war, however, dampens his heroic spirits. He soon realizes that he is used as a mere puppet for someone to fight for them. His control is in somebody else’s hand. Even he is unaware of the purpose behind the war. When he finds an enemy before him he finds his face like his own. He must have pictured in his mind the horrible picture of enemy soldiers. He is puzzled as to why he should kill a man who seems to be very much like him.

At last, when John Brown returns home, his mother goes to the railway station to receive his son. When she sees him, she fails to recognise his face. His face is badly disfigured. He has lost his eyes and one of his hands. He wears a metal brace which enables him to stand erect . He can hardly open his jaw. What he speaks is so low that it is mostly incomprehensible.

John Brown puts the medal he has won into the hand of his shocked mother. Thus, the poet seems to shatter the romantic illusion of heroism and machismo surrounding war.

Question 2 : ‘John Brown’ is a modern ballad. Discuss it with close reference to the text.

Answer : A ballad is a story in verse. It was originally intended to be sung to an audience. Its subjects have mostly been deeds of the simplest kind – a memorable feud, a thrilling adventure, a family disaster, love, war, and the like. The traditional ballad was written in the Ballad Measure using quatrains with a variable metre. A ballad opens in a dramatic way, introduces the subject and builds up the suspense which is kept towards the end. The end often provides a message, either directly or indirectly. Or it enriches us with a novel experience.

‘John Brown’ is a ballad and embodies many features of the traditional ballad, but in its construction it is modern. It is episodic and is set in no specific time and place. It has twelve verses. Each verse has a quatrain, but there is no set rhyme scheme which makes it modern in style. In some stanzas rhyming words are used, as in stanza 8 (‘way’ : ‘away’), stanza 11 (‘play’ : ‘away’) and stanza 12 (‘stand’ : ‘hand’). They rhythm varies with the mood, as in stanza 11:

“And I couldn’t help but think, through the thunder rolling and stink That I was just a puppet in a play And through the roar and smoke, this string is finally broke And a cannonball blew my eyes away.”

The subject matter of ‘John Brown’ is war,  but its anti-war stance is against the spirit of the traditional balled which often eulogises heroism related to war. Here a young man, John Brown , joins the army to the pride of his mother. He goes off to war to fight. But he soon loses his fervour. He realizes that war is futile. Even then he fights. His encounter with the enemy-soldier makes him realize the common bond of humanity with him. When he returns home, he is a changed man. His face is disfigured. He has lost his eyes and one of his hands. He wears a metal brace which enables him to stand erect. He cannot open his jaws. So, his speech is incomprehensible. Thus, war turns a healthy, energetic young man into a cripple.

The ballad ends on an ironic note. John Brown puts his medals in the hand of his mother who is already in a shock. These medals are the sign of John Brown’s valour, but we wonder if they are any worth.

Thus, ‘John Brown’ as a ballad is modern in construction and in conception, even though it embodies some recognizable features of the traditional ballad.

Question 3 : Discuss ‘John Brown’ as an anti-war poem.

Answer : ‘John Brown’ is certainly an anti-war poem, though the poet denies that it is so. There is no doubt that the poet does not openly give expression to the horrors of war, but the condition in which the young soldier (John Brown) returns is clearly something which forces us to think how horrible a war can be:

Oh his face was all shot up and his hand was all blown off And he wore a metal brace around his waist He whispered kind of slow………..

The poet’s own views should be taken into account, but what matters is what the text says. The focus remains on the young man ‘John Brown’ who proudly goes off to war. His mother is proud of the fact that her son is going to the battlefield, and she brags about it. However, when her son returns, she shocked to see him. She is unable to recognize his face. He is all shot up. His face is disfigured. He has lost his eyes and one of his hands. He wears a metal brace which helps him stand up. He can hardly open his mouth. What he speaks slowly is mostly incomprehensible.

John Brown’s experience of war is of disgust and horror. He says that it was on the battlefield that he realized that he was a mere puppet. His control was in somebody else’s hands. The worst thing he discovered was that he did not know what he was fighting for. When the enemy-soldier came and stood before him, he found his face similar to his. He realized that they shared an invisible bond of humanity. We are reminded of the soldier in ‘The Man He Killed ‘ By Thomas Hardy, who had similar feelings under similar circumstances:

Had he and I but met By an old ancient inn We should have sat down to wet Right many a nipperkin

When John Brown drops his medals down into the hand of his mother, he seems to be making a powerful anti-war statement.

Thus, despite the denials of the poet himself, ‘John Brown’ is basically an anti-war poem. It is, of course, about human nature and human tragedy as well.

• Avalon Statement of Purpose
• Accessibility at Yale
• Yale Law Library
• University Library
• Yale Law School
• Search Morris
• Search Orbis

PARAMOUNT ADVERTISING

With Paramount’s powerful portfolio of iconic brands, premium content and legacy of creative innovation, Paramount Advertising develops strategic and collaborative solutions that connect our partners to our diverse, passionate fan base. Our leadership in advanced advertising, creative marketing expertise, audience insights and scale across all platforms paired with our capabilities in performance marketing and shoppability allow us to provide reach, attribution and transactional simplicity, while optimizing an advertiser’s audience across the depth and breadth of Paramount's portfolio.

LATEST NEWS AND INSIGHTS

A Force of Nature

Our content and creative capabilities are your pathway to cultural relevance. Learn how we partnered with Mastercard and The GRAMMYs for a one-of-a-kind performance with SZA, telling the right story with the right person at the right time.

The Golazo Effect

For years we’ve heard, “soccer is finally coming to America,” but now, we can conclusively say, it’s arrived. Explore the growing interest in the world’s most popular sport and how CBS Sports Golazo Network has built fandoms in its first year with unparalleled coverage of worldwide soccer.

The Changing Face of Popularity

Fame, impact, and pushing boundaries is the recipe for popular, fan-driven content. Explore what's driving breakthrough moments of popularity and how brands can better connect with audiences in our latest LinkedIn newsletter.

Get In Touch

• Subscribe to our newsletter