Where are the Ladies?
The Female Experience in Federalist America
Karen Klebbe
AHTC Summer Institute 2008
The Constitutional Convention
I came to the AHTC 2008 Summer Institute on the Constitutional Convention knowing the basics: a group of privileged men, reverently referred to in US History as “The Framers,” met in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787, scrapped the sub-par Articles of Confederation, and essentially reinvented the American government. I came away with far more knowledge and insight about the Convention itself, the Framers, and the political geography of the time. It was a satisfying mental meal, yet I was not sated. There was a course missing, women. Naturally they were absent; there were no female delegates to the Convention. Such an idea in 18th century America (or anywhere) would have been preposterous. Being female, I would not have been in the room, though I may have been allowed to clean it once the attendees went back to their boarding houses every evening. Or perhaps I would have done their laundry, cooked their meals, or raised their children. What is preposterous is the exclusion of the lives of people who played integral roles in the lives of the Framers, as mothers, wives, daughters, and lovers. Women’s history is not a sidebar in a textbook, not to be studied only in the month of March, and not a sub-category of History. Women’s history is as much History as the Constitutional Convention. After all, someone had to make dinner.
There is not an equal abundance of primary sources produced by women during the Federalist Era as there are by men. The primary sources in existence are often by upper-class women. They had the best chance of literacy and the time to write letters or diaries (certainly with great thanks to the servants and slaves who did the dirty work of keeping a house running and children fed). My interest in social and women’s history led to Martha Ballard’s day-book.
Martha Ballard began her day-book in 1785 at the age of fifty and seven years into her midwifery practice in Hallowell, Maine. Martha kept her day-book faithfully until less than a month before her death in 1812. While often called a diary, her book’s purpose was to record the events of her day and less about her feelings towards those events. She had a bustling midwifery practice and kept track of her 816 deliveries as well as payments for those services in the day-book. Abigail Adams also left us copious records of her life in the letters she wrote to her husband and while Martha’s contemporary, Abigail was in no way her equal. Abigail married an incredibly influential man and moved in social circles Martha would never dream to inhabit. Women such as Abigail Adams left many records of their lives in their own voices through correspondence and diaries. Women like Martha Ballard often left no record of their lives except for handed down recipes and hand-made christening gowns. Martha’s day-book offers an extraordinary glimpse into the life of an ordinary 18th century New England woman, one far removed from the political, social, and physical geography of the Constitutional Convention.
Monday, September 17, 1787, was the final day of the Constitutional Convention. While members of the Convention debated the number of constituents each member of the House should represent and whether or not to sign the Constitution, Martha Ballard came home from tending Mrs. Goodwin. Martha was called to the Goodwin house on Saturday evening because Mrs. Goodwin was “unwell.” She was there all day Sunday, finally returning home on Monday, leaving Mrs. Goodwin “about house.” Fanny Cox came to the Ballard house (“Fanny Cox rode behind me.”) and Martha’s husband, Ephraim, left to survey land for Mr. Pitts. All in all, not a terribly busy or seemingly interesting day.
Upon further investigation into the day-book, one learns that Mrs. Goodwin was in her last trimester of pregnancy, anywhere from 32-36 weeks along. Perhaps she was experiencing false labor. Perhaps she was genuinely feeling unwell. Perhaps she was just sick of being pregnant. Whatever the case, Martha was with Mrs. Goodwin for about a day and half. Martha attended Mrs. Goodwin after the birth of her daughter on October 21, 1787. Martha did not make it to the house in time to deliver, but cared for mother and infant post-delivery, for which she “received a handsom reward from mr. Goodin” for her services.
September 17, 1787, was the first mention of Fanny Cox in Martha’s day-book. We do not know who she was or why she came to the Ballard house. She is mentioned nine more times in the day-book, mostly visiting and spending the night. The last entry that mentions Fanny Cox is July 6, 1797. Martha and Fanny Cox had at least a ten year friendship.
Ephraim Ballard, Martha’s husband, was a surveyor and often away from home (“mr Ballard gon to Survey for mr pitts”). Simply by examining other days (September 11, 13, 14, and 25) on the same page as the September 17 entry, it becomes clear that Ephraim was often away on business. By digging a little deeper into the diary, one learns Mr. Pitts married Martha’s niece, who lived with them, five years later. Did Mr. Pitts meet his future wife at the Ballards? Did Martha and Ephraim approve of the marriage? This is a prime example of the intricate web of social and familial relationships—all from a one-sentence entry.
I will certainly use Martha’s day-book in my unit about the Constitutional Convention, in parallel to James Madison’s extensive notes. The two side-by-side build a compelling contrast between two worlds which almost could not be further apart. Both of these worlds are equally part of capital-H-History and are more complete when paired with the other. My students will each take one day of the summer of 1787, analyzing Madison’s notes for that day and the entry in Martha’s day-book. Surely, both will raise plenty of questions; however, I believe Martha’s day-book will raise more, for her account exists in far less detail. This can be an interesting exercise of brainstorming all the questions a few sentences evoke. Ultimately, I want students to understand why we bother to look at primary sources such as the day-book. Through much guiding and analyzing, students should come away from the exercises with an appreciation of history from the view point of the common (wo)man and that without Martha Ballards, there would be no need for a Constitutional Convention. It would also be an interesting exercise to compare a day in Martha’s day-book to a letter by Abigail Adams from around the same date, comparing and contrasting the lives of two Federalist women.
Martha Ballard’s day-book is a wonderful juxtaposition to Madison’s notes from the Constitutional Convention. Madison’s notes are rich in detail; Martha’s day-book is sparse. Madison’s notes revolve around the political dealings of a few highly educated, privileged and politically influential men. Martha’s day-book cycles with the seasons of Mother Nature and the labor of ordinary women. Madison’s notes are a gift of insight into secret dealings which have impacted every aspect of American life for the last 221 years. Martha’s day-book is no less a gift, as it gives historical voice to those who have traditionally spoken in whispers, if at all.
Further Inquiry: