Founding Mothers & Fathers: Gendered Power and the Forming of American Society

by Mary Beth Norton

In this pioneering study of the ways in which the first settlers defined the power, prerogatives, and responsibilities of the sexes, one of our most incisive historians opens a window onto the world of Colonial America. Drawing on a wealth of contemporary documents, Mary Beth Norton tells the story of the Pinion clan, whose two-generation record of theft, adultery, and infanticide may have made them our first dysfunctional family. She reopens the case of Mistress Ann Hibbens, whose church excommunicated her for arguing that God had told husbands to listen to their wives. And here is the enigma of Thomas, or Thomasine Hall, who lived comfortably as both a man and a woman in 17th century Virginia. Wonderfully erudite and vastly readable, Founding Mothers & Fathers reveals both the philosophical assumptions and intimate domestic arrangements of our colonial ancestors in all their rigor, strangeness, and unruly passion.



"An important, imaginative book. Norton destroys our nostalgic image of a 'golden age' of family life and re-creates a more complex past whose assumptions and anxieties are still with us."--Raleigh News and Observer

Genres: History, Nonfiction, American History, Womens, American Revolution, Gender Studies, American

512 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1996

Reviews

[Caitie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Okay, so this was more like three and a half stars. Many parts of this book dragged on and on. At some parts I just kept thinking “okay I get it, let’s move on.” I enjoyed reading about how women put themselves into the public sphere, even though at the time it was frowned upon, even before the revolutionary war. Don't get me wrong, because like I said, it was plenty interesting. But this author was so long winded. History (and as a history major I feel like I can say this) can become significantly less interesting when, at times, the author can come off as long winded--which makes their writing seem very dry. History shouldn't be dry, it already has a reputation as that. So all in all, I did enjoy this, but some parts fell flat.

[Joann · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5. This book is like a textbook, very, very thorough and, for me, a chore to read. After reading it, I know full well I would have failed horribly in this time and, if I did happen to have an earlier life then, probably ended up in the stocks or was burned. What a restrictive time, not just for women who had plenty of rules assigned to them, but for men, children, and servants. Everyone. Incredible.

[Bops · Rating 4 out of 5]

i am learning up for my new job

[Carly · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author, Mary Beth Norton, wrote this book, Founding Mothers & Fathers: Gendered Power and the Forming of American Society, as a comparative analysis of the New England society compared to the Chesapeake during the seventeenth century of colonial America. The author’s purpose is to examine the “Filmerian system by deploying a gendered analysis of power relationships in society, religion, and politics to offer insight into the initial development and operation of colonial governments, the maintenance of social order, and the experiences of individual men and women.”
The author proved her thesis by dividing the book into three sections to focus on “gendered power as operated in families,” “gendered power within communities,” and “gendered power by political authority.” Norton then shows a comparison of the two different regions with New England adopting a Filmerian society while the Chesapeake region developed their own Lockean system. The first section “emphasize[s] the constant interplay of community, state, and family.” The second section of the book focuses on “exposing the behavioral norms of men and women, and with understanding the rules of nonhierarchical associations.” Finally, the last section of the book “considers the gendered consequences of the colonists’ varying political experiences in New England and the Chesapeake” with a focus on differences between Filmerian and Lockean systems.
Beginning in her introduction, Norton states that her principal sources for the study of Filmerian gendered power came from an analysis of court records. Trying to find primary sources when the colonists were without newspapers, magazines, or printed materials is difficult and can leave much room for interpretation and creative analysis. Norton and her team analyzed over 8,000 cases from colonial America. First, that is an astonishing number of cases to study and second it is very difficult for another scholar to find the exact references from her notes section if the reader is unfamiliar with studying court cases. While one understands that there is a lack of primary source material for this period, it could be argued that using only court documents to support a thesis could yield bias results. If you are only studying the people that broke the laws of that society, you are missing the other half of the story with the citizens that are not in court documents.
A strength in Norton’s book Founding Mothers & Fathers would be her tremendous amount of work and detail categorizing different case studies into her three sections and then into the different subsets of the chapters. She spent an enormous amount of effort on her research to give us a book on gendered power. Additionally, throughout historiography, it was rare to see historians focus studies on gender, especially when there are so few primary sources. This reader also appreciated the extra explanation of colonial era vocabulary to get in the proper mindset for reading this book.
A weakness in the work would be the blurred lines between the Filmerian and Lockean societies presented through the three different sections. There seemed to be many occasions where New England portrayed a Filmerian system and then the Chesapeake portrayed Filmerian and Lockean case studies at the same time and the analysis kept shifting. These vague examples created confusion on which region followed which theorists. Furthermore, Norton presents too many names from the multitude of cases she reviewed. The names become confusing and take away from the argument of the politics and societies.
Overall, Norton’s book supported her thesis on comparing New England Filmerian society to the Chesapeake Lockean society through a comparison of their social structure and politics. The multitude of case studies analyzed to fit into her overarching thesis could be somewhat of a stretch, and some of the information about the colonies could be missing when you only study the personnel with records, but she presented her arguments in great detail to prove her thesis.

[Karen · Rating 3 out of 5]

A bit dry and academic yet fascinating. I can see where others are coming from when they say that it feels repetitive at times, but I'm not sure there's a way to avoid this. The records from 350-400 years ago are limited primarily to court records and the writings of a handful of men, so the same or similar examples have to be used to discuss gendered matters of family, community, and state. I enjoyed reading of both people I knew (eg: Anne Hutchinson) and those I didn't (eg: Margaret Brent, Thomas(ine) Hall), and the Filmerian and Lockean worldviews that dictated their circumstances. One thing I love about history is learning that people are essentially the same over time; the Pinions might have their own reality TV show now. Additionally, there are lessons to be learned here of the dangers of relying too heavily on religion for law & order, or on religious men (or chiefly men) for leadership, that we'd do well to learn before we repeat these errors. I fear we've already started.

[Alyssa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating. A little dense at times but given the subject matter I think that's allowed. Many of the court cases discussed were interesting and unexpected, and Norton ties them all together so neatly. Glad I picked this one up.

[Joyce M. Tice]

Started this today. Already I am SO GLAD I was not born in the 17th century. For a woman nothing earlier than the late twentieth century was tolerable.

[Jennifer · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the book that got me interested in gender policy and income security. At 17, I had no idea this book would be life-changing. :-)

[Becky · Rating 3 out of 5]

I can appreciate the importance of this book to the fields of women's history and gender studies, but I didn't particularly enjoy reading it.