The Significance of John Brown's Raid

The Significance of John Brown's Raid

The Meteor of the War

On the night of October 16, 1859, 21 men (including five African Americans), led by abolitionist John Brown, made their way across the covered B&O Railroad bridge leading into Harper's Ferry. Their target was the United States arsenal and armory at Harper's Ferry. Brown hoped that slaves would join him, and he could arm them with the captured guns and the 1,000 pikes. Unfortunately for Brown, slaves did not join him. In fact, the first man killed during the raid was Heyward Sheperd, an employee of the B&O and a former slave. The first raider killed was Dangerfield Newby, a former slave who wanted to free his wife and kids. Militia men trapped Brown's men at the arsenal's engine house and Hall's Rifle Factory on October 17. By October 18, 90 U.S. Marines, led by Robert E. Lee and accompanied by J.E.B. Stuart, arrived from Washington. Lee offered the militia the chance to storm the engine house, but they believed that the paid soldiers should risk their lives. Lieutenant Israel Greene gathered 12 marines for the storming party. After a failed negotiation attempt by Stuart, Greene and his men attacked. They broke through the door with sledge hammers and a ladder used as a battering ram. Greene was the first one in, followed by Private Luke Quinn who was killed immediately. The next Marine, Private Matthew Rupert, was shot in the face. Greene beat Brown with his sword and the Marines overwhelmed the remaining raiders. The final confrontation lasted only three minutes, and John Brown's raid was over.

The raid ended with ten raiders, five townspeople, and one marine killed. Brown and five other men were captured, tried, and executed for the charges of treason against the state of Virginia, murder, and attempting to incite a slave insurrection (five others escaped and were never captured). With 22 killed and very little building damage, John Brown's raid may not look like a significant event, however some historians consider it to be one of the most important forces that resulted in the Civil War.

The only charge against Brown and his conspirators that required the death penalty was attempting to incite a slave insurrection. Slave insurrections had happened in Virginia before; in fact, Nat Turner's Rebellion was much deadlier with 100-200 rebels killed and 55-65 whites killed, so why didn't Herman Melville call them meteors of the war? For one, John Brown's raid was unlike the other insurrections. Although five African Americans, including two former slaves, participated in the raid, the majority of the participants were northern abolitionists. Southerners didn't only see the raid as a slave insurrection, they also saw it as a northern invasion. To make matters worse, it was discovered that six prominent northerners had funded Brown's men. The South was not only fearful of future slave rebellions, but also future northern invasions. As a result, southern states began to militarize, which was the beginning of the Confederate Army.

John Brown's raid also effected the election of 1860. On February 27, 1860, Abraham Lincoln gave his Cooper Union Address in New York. In this address, Lincoln referenced Brown's raid in his moderate stance against slavery. Following the speech, the Republican Party believed they had found their nominee, and ten months later, he was elected president of the United States. Without John Brown's raid, it is unlikely that the one-time Congressman from Illinois would have been considered for the nomination, and without Lincoln's election, the onset of the war and the end of slavery would have been prolonged.

Although many northerners, including Lincoln, did not agree with the methods John Brown used in 1859, they all agreed that the peculiar institution of slavery needed to end. Without Brown, the war to end slavery may have begun much later than 1861, and slavery in America would have persisted. Today, the engine house, now called John Brown's Fort, is considered to be one of the most important buildings in the United States by Howard University. Northern politicians may not have believed that Brown's violence was the right way to end slavery, but ultimately it was the driving force behind its end.

Cover Image Credit:

Popular Right Now

I'm The Girl Who'd Rather Raise A Family Than A Feminist Protest Sign

You raise your protest picket signs and I’ll raise my white picket fence.

Social Media feeds are constantly filled with quotes on women's rights, protests with mobs of women, and an array of cleverly worded picket signs.

Good for them, standing up for their beliefs and opinions. Will I be joining my tight-knit family of the same gender?

Nope, no thank you.

Don't get me wrong, I am not going to be oblivious to my history and the advancements that women have fought to achieve. I am aware that the strides made by many women before me have provided us with voting rights, a voice, equality, and equal pay in the workforce.

SEE ALSO: To The Girl Who Would Rather Raise A Family Than A Feminist Protest Sign

For that, I am deeply thankful. But at this day in age, I know more female managers in the workforce than male. I know more women in business than men. I know more female students in STEM programs than male students. So what’s with all the hype? We are girl bosses, we can run the world, we don’t need to fight the system anymore.

Please stop.

Because it is insulting to the rest of us girls who are okay with being homemakers, wives, or stay-at-home moms. It's dividing our sisterhood, and it needs to stop.

All these protests and strong statements make us feel like now we HAVE to obtain a power position in our career. It's our rightful duty to our sisters. And if we do not, we are a disappointment to the gender and it makes us look weak.

Weak to the point where I feel ashamed to say to a friend “I want to be a stay at home mom someday.” Then have them look at me like I must have been brain-washed by a man because that can be the only explanation. I'm tired of feeling belittled for being a traditionalist.


Because why should I feel bad for wanting to create a comfortable home for my future family, cooking for my husband, being a soccer mom, keeping my house tidy? Because honestly, I cannot wait.

I will have no problem taking my future husband’s last name, and following his lead.

The Bible appoints men to be the head of a family, and for wives to submit to their husbands. (This can be interpreted in so many ways, so don't get your panties in a bunch at the word “submit”). God specifically made women to be gentle and caring, and we should not be afraid to embrace that. God created men to be leaders with the strength to carry the weight of a family.

However, in no way does this mean that the roles cannot be flipped. If you want to take on the responsibility, by all means, you go girl. But for me personally? I'm sensitive, I cry during horror movies, I'm afraid of basements and dark rooms. I, in no way, am strong enough to take on the tasks that men have been appointed to. And I'm okay with that.

So please, let me look forward to baking cookies for bake sales and driving a mom car.

And I'll support you in your endeavors and climb to the top of the corporate ladder. It doesn't matter what side you are on as long as we support each other, because we all need some girl power.

Cover Image Credit: Unsplash

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

We Can't Get Rid Of All Our Guns, But We Can Regulate Bullets

We won't take away all your guns. We'll just make sure the things that do the killing - the bullets - won't get into the hands of the wrong people.


Nearly 400 million civilian-owned firearms are in the United States, and the gun debate is more prevalent than ever.

The question we always hear is whether or not we should be further regulating our firearms. What is often left all too forgotten, is that it's the bullets that do the killing, not the guns.

Regulating the sales of guns themselves is, of course, very important. However, with so many guns already in the possession of Americans, regulating the sale of guns themselves can only do so much.

Bullets differ in weight and velocity, but many can shatter bones and leave gaping wounds. They are obviously extremely destructive, but they are as easy to purchase as a pack of gum in many states. In these states, large retailers are selling bullets, and bullets can also be bought online. No questions asked.

In 2013 it was reported that about 10 billion rounds are produced in the U.S. every year, however, there are far fewer producers of this ammunition than there are producers of firearms, making the ammunition industry easier to regulate.

The idea of regulating bullets is not only doable, but it is far more likely that it will gain support from Americans then would banning all guns. The Gun Control Act of 1968 required all retailers to log ammunition sales and prohibited all mail-order purchases, however, this was lifted by President Reagan.

Today, it would be very possible to implement similar regulations. Strict control of the production and sale of outwardly dangerous bullets would be simple with the use of technology and due to the fewer number of producers of bullets than of firearms.

In states like Massachusetts and New Jersey, it is required that you have a license or permit to purchase bullets. This is a common-sense law that should, and can, be enacted nationwide.

We have two extremes to this gun debate; banning all guns or keeping what people see as our Second Amendment right.

Debates, protests, and fighting over this topic has gotten us little to nowhere. Yet, what we keep forgetting is that we all can agree on something; we all just want to feel safe and protected.

Common sense control of bullets is a sort of middle ground that reminds us as Americans that what we need the most is safety in our country, while also feeling like our rights have not been infringed upon.

We won't take away all your guns. We'll just make sure the things that do the killing - the bullets - won't get into the hands of the wrong people.

Related Content

Facebook Comments