No doubt there were other planned rebellions that were put on hold or never 
got off the ground due to  the Turner fiasco, but I doubt if any new facts 
will do much to change Nat Turner from a religious fanatic who saw blood on 
the corn and interpreted an eclipe as the sign he should listen to the 
voices he heard.

 I realize not everyone sees him that way,  but it's  downright scary to 
read  a former teacher's posting that she could see:

"...  a teacher asking the children to compare Nat Turner to George 
Washington or Thomas Jefferson who both advocated freedom for the colonies 
and fought/wrote so that they jeopardized their lives to make it happen. Nat 
Turner did the same, had many supporters in Virginia and elsewhere, but 
unlike George Washington he was not successful in defeating "The British" 
and paid the
price that would have been paid by George and Thomas had the war not been
won."

Sure, for highschoolers, but  4th graders?   Would they be asked to read 
Turner's confession?

Gus




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Henry Wiencek" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 6:52 AM
Subject: [VA-HIST] Nat Turner and unchanging history


Charles L. Dibble writes that "factual history - is fixed." Yes and no. Nat
Turner provides an excellent example. We know some of the basic facts of his
uprising, but not all of them; and when we learn new facts, the meaning of
the event changes.  Lyle writes that the Turner uprising provides "an
amazingly good definition of futility. . . . No real plan, just a sort of
generalized instruction to slaughter."  But I recently heard a fascinating
lecture by a historian who is finding convincing evidence that Turner was
not a lone nut, as many have thought, but part of a network of conspirators
across the South planning to rise up in a very well planned, coordinated
assault against the slave power. Turner jumped the gun, fouled up the whole
plan, and everybody else ran for cover.  No general uprising took place.  We
will have to await publication of the research to judge its accuracy, but if
this historian is right, we get a whole new view of what happened, and the
event changes.

Henry Wiencek
Charlottesville