Women’s Education in the Antebellum Period

The rise of women’s education during the antebellum period was born out of desire and necessity. While women fervently wanted to be educated, they used the situation of the times to gain society’s approval. Due to the antebellum rise in technology and population growth men were forced to join the economic bustle, and wives were left to assume the daily household duties and finances. This cultural switch finally gave women a platform to prove their capability and potential. Women who previously held no responsibility in the home other than reproduction were given an opportunity by the male dominated society to prove their worth. The feminist movement of the antebellum period produced a revolutionary change in the way women were regarded and the manner in which future generations would live their lives. These brave women forged the way for women’s schooling and ability to hold a profession. Yet they did not do so on their own accord. Women of the time had to fight! mounting male opposition and sometimes use a bit of trickery to deceive the all-powerful men. This history of women’s education will show that the fate of the minds of women has always been a decision for men to make.

The expansion of women’s minds and activities began during the Colonial and Puritan era. The male Puritans had decided that the women could worship the Lord better if they could read scripture, so the men taught them to read. Women could study scripture, but were forbidden to read or publish anything else. Hungry for the knowledge women consumed these readings and any others available to them. Even under the watchful eye of the nearest male the literacy rate of women was a surprising eighty percent.2 This number most likely correlates to the New England region, as literacy rates in the southern United States were extremely pale in comparison. However, this Colonial period is also responsible for sowing the seeds of the moral guardianship that will later belong to the female race. The Great Awakening, a revival of religious fervor from 1700 to 1750, allowed females a platform to voice their spiritual views, which were extremely well received. Men were taking notice of the pious opinions and moral nature of women. Abigail Adams and other upstanding women of the time advocated for women’s rights and furthered the notion of the “Republican motherhood."3

This term explained the notion that the women of today will cultivate the leaders of tomorrow and is the common theme of the years that followed.

The introduction of these progressive ideas fostered growth of women’s education throughout the colonies. Urbanization and industrialization forced men to leave the home and get jobs in the new economy. By 1815 many people sought ways to take advantage of the expanding economic opportunities while dealing with the subsequent social repercussions.4 The departure of men from the home left a hole in the domestic environment which women were forced to fill. Duties previously performed by men were now female priorities. Husbands started to spend much of their time outside of the home and away from the children. Women remained the sole caretaker, educator and disciplinarian of the children and the idea of Republican motherhood took hold. The men subsequently decided that if the women were to properly nurture their heirs then they must be properly educated to do so. This decision was a turning point in the women’s battle for a formal education. Mrs. Sarah Joseph Hale, a pioneer in the advocacy of women’s education, captured the sentiment of the entire movement in her statement: “Men will never be wise while women are ignorant."5 Mothers became the moral and intellectual template that their children would follow, and they were eager for the job.

Women realized the full implications that this freedom would bring and planned to utilize their power to the fullest extent. Women used their moral obligation to their children as an excuse to cultivate themselves. Previously many matriarchs had not ventured far from the home, now they had duties they must fulfill. These ladies claimed that taking care of the needy in town was their moral obligation to do so. They argued that it was their responsibility to attend the theater to become cognizant of the arts and pass it on to the children.6 Women welcomed their new status of cultural guardian as it provided them an outlet as well. Although there were as yet no formal schools for the women, they soaked up all knowledge possible and took classes when available. The maturation of women’s abilities and knowledge and hunger for more paved the way for formal schools for females and the advent of female educators.

“She must compare, imagine, calculate and reason as to the best kind of house to seek…and the way of managing it… and the best for economy, convenience and comfort...- Catharine Beecher7

As the education of women progressed a large amount of debate existed among men on the amount of education needed and exactly what kind of education they allowed women to receive. In Reflections on Courtship and Marriage, Benjamin Franklin stated that since a woman is destined to become a wife and mother her education should cultivate the qualities that will guarantee her capability in those roles.8 While attempting to be as politically correct as possible, Franklin was merely stating that the women’s role was to satisfy her husband and should be prepared to do that but nothing further. Another opinionated figure of the time, Benjamin Rush believed that women must be educated in the domestic economy because it was now their duty to execute it.9 While husbands had previously seen to the budget, supplying and bill paying of the household, the women must assume the job as the men were now removed from the home. To do so properly women must be educated in mathematics, simple economics and the like. Unfortunately this shift of responsibility was still seen as a service role, however and not a step up on the ladder of equality. A benchmark of prevalent male attitude and a goal for the women to overcome, Rush once stated that women “are good servants, who will do well with good looking after."10

The popular male opinion of women was that women had limited faculties that prevented them from ever becoming a man’s equal. Men honestly believed that the female race was inferior and would never be able to achieve the same status as they. The men of this period also placed a great deal of pride on being the patriarch of a family, and perhaps suffered a bit from a wounded ego due to the fact that the women had assumed some of their previous titles and were performed the jobs surprisingly well. Subsequently men attempted to keep a close eye on the women and the women in their place. Although the women of the antebellum period were smarter than the men gave them credit for. Females argued that men were smarter because they had been given more advantages and preference, and with tongue firmly planted in cheek, claimed that since there was no way that women could catch up with the men, then there would be no harm in trying. These spectacular women were though, and they ! were trying hard.

“All men say that whatever secures the most good with least evil to all concerned is right." -Catharine Beecher11

By the mid-1830’s a phenomenon was noticed throughout America: women had begun to create bonds against the men who refused to let them hold positions in society. These women joined together and formed societies and organizations to advocate the causes they believed in.12 Women wanted suffrage for all, the abolition of slavery and the ability to educate the daughters of all. The groups established networks that would later be responsible for the establishment of the first schools for women in the United States. These developing bonds and institutions among women were the first of its kind for the female race. While female proponents of issues past had assumed platforms to spread their word, never before had a grassroots movement excited such action among women like the feminist movement. Women, armed with their ability to do anything, set out with specific goals in mind and were determined to achieve them.

Academies and seminaries for females were gaining popularity and credence in the United States. Seminaries, as female learning institutions were called, often began in one-room with few pupils until popularity spread, and more public schools were opened. Emma Willard shares the spotlight with Catharine Beecher and Sarah Hale for breaking the ground in the field of female learning institutions. Ms. Willard did not believe that female education had been given a chance and wanted to create a place that was dedicated solely for that purpose.13 She was determined to develop a school beyond these one-room cubicles where girls could obtain a proper education. One male proponent of the reform movement DeWitt Clinton agreed with Willard that “Beyond initiatory instruction, the education of the female sex is utterly excluded from the contemplation of our laws."14 These convictions led to the creation of the first formal female seminaries where pioneers like Catharine Beecher would achieve their dreams.

“Ambition was a little engine that knew no rest." -Herndon15

Catharine Beecher opened the Hartford Female Seminary in 1823 after years of trial and hard work. At the age of twenty she began to teach herself in the hopes that eventually she would be prepared enough to become a teacher. She learned the piano and having mastered the “lower branches” of education, mainly reading and writing, she proceeded to the “higher branches."16 The higher branches included arithmetic, algebra, geometry, and logic. Beecher took a particular interest in arithmetic and constantly bothered her mentor with questions. She wanted to know why problems were solved in a certain way, and not simply that they just were. She applied this learning technique in her classes and it proved to be extremely successful. She wrote a manuscript of her arithmetic teaching style, which was subsequently published and then even more triumphant. Prof. Olmstead of Yale College lauded the manuscript “ giving it a decided preference over those in common use” and offered to write a piece in it to give the textbook more credibility.17 The textbooks in circulation today are a distant derivative of Ms. Beecher’s work.

The first school Catharine taught in was typical of the early female seminaries. The school began in a single room above a store and consisted of seven ladies over the age of twelve. As the popularity of female schools increased and enrollment had reached its capacity the location was moved to a larger chamber, and finally to the basement of a church. The class had grown to over one hundred girls in a single space with absolutely no classroom materials. Ms. Beecher and her assistant eventually had to divide the girls into groups based on their capability and proceed with the education of the higher branches, but including some classics as well. Recitation was the main monitor of progress for students at the time. Since time was limited among the separate groups, Beecher would measure how much the student had memorized on her own as a marker of how well she was advancing. While all of the efforts were surly noble in theory, Ms. Beecher realized she was not doing her! students justice and sought alternative means of educating them.

The connections established through the camaraderie of the feminist movement proved an invaluable aid at this crucial time in history. Beecher had drawn a plan for a site that would house one hundred and fifty students, a lecture room, and six recitation rooms. She proposed this plan to the leaders of the Hartford, Connecticut and received laughter in return. Unwillingly to give up quickly she sought out the more influential women in society and all that she desired was arranged. Four years after starting a small one-room school Catharine Beecher had achieved one of the first female seminaries in the United States.18

“A well balanced mind is the greatest and best preparation for her varied and complicated duties. - Catharine Beecher19

The curriculum of women’s education was a topic of debate in the early years, but eventually came to a general consensus. Curriculum tended to include courses that would provide for a well-rounded mother and wife. “Natural Science” courses such as philosophy and astronomy were available along side the usual reading, writing and arithmetic. In Godey’s Lady Book, Sarah J. Hale argues that a familiarity of chemistry will improve a wife’s skills in the kitchen, again emphasizing the domestic role of the woman.20 An ad in the Athens, Georgia newspaper, Southern Banner, advertised courses at Athens Female Academy for spelling, reading, arithmetic, history, chemistry, Latin and Greek, etc. These would be the kinds of courses most regularly taught at female seminaries. The Academy also offered courses in drawing and painting for an additional charge.21 While curricula varied among the seminaries, there was a definite dissimilarity between what was being taught to the boys and girls.

The feminist movement seriously threatened to make vast changes in the educational system and subsequently in gender and societal roles. The institutions of boys and girls of the time reflected this fear and in result differed greatly on what courses would be taught. The academies of the young men of the time were institutions focused primarily on Latin and Greek to provide a more worldly and aristocratic male species. Classical languages and theological studies had proven to lead to the power and advancement of males, and therefore they were deemed “too hard for the delicate structure of the female brain."22 Women’s studies focused on sciences and concrete subjects. By 1840, the subjects of philosophy, chemistry and astronomy were dominating the studies at female seminaries.23 Men argued that women needed discipline and should therefore be educated in the “solid” sciences rather than the classical studies of the men.24 Almira Phelps, a popular female educator of the time, supported the men’s beliefs and felt that scientific studies best suited women because they made them “more interesting companions to men of science, and better capable of instructing the young."25 Even within their own network women could not escape the ties to the home and husband.

“The differences [between the sexes] may be exaggerated or lessened, but to obliterate them it would be necessary to have all the evolution over again on a new basis." - author unknown26

As a way of discrediting the female education reform movement, male scientists of the 19th century had conjured up numerous excuses why females were unable to handle the stresses of being educated. Doctors argued that intense intellectual labor caused serious and detrimental effects on the female body. Women were unique due to their biological ability to reproduce and to prepare to do so, menstruate. Doctors of the time believed that there was a mind-body linkage in the female body so that there was a constant flow of energy and blood. If the brain of a woman was using a large amount of blood and energy to think then the reproductive systems would be neglected and result in damage.27 Damage to the reproductive system could result in reproduction and fertility, which would not be acceptable since that is the woman’s sole reason for being.

A distant cousin of phrenology was also used to prove the superiority of men over women. Male superiority was viewed as a genetic predisposition due to larger brains and ability to retain more information. To prove this thesis researchers actually attempted to weigh brains and argue evolutionary predispositions. Doctors used the limited variations they did observe, differences that could just as easily vary from man to man, to further prove that women were genetically unable to withstand the rigor of being educated.28

“Why should the sister be debarred from the generous education of the brother?” -Horace Mann29

Irreverent to the insecurities and rebuttals from the male world, the female education reform movement plunged steadily ahead. The advent of women’s collegiate education, although not fully realized until 1865 with Vassar College, was subtly introduced beginning in 1837 with Oberlin College. Originally a male school, the idea of the university is that men would pay for their schooling with work and chores on the campus and surrounding land. Shortly after the inception of this the board of the college realized there was no one to perform the traditional duties of a house. Therefore the first female students were accepted into a formal university. More often than not this milestone is misrepresented as liberation of the female student who finally received her validation. In actuality these women were viewed as a “domestic workforce” necessary for the school’s survival.30 Regardless, these women were grateful for the opportunity of education and therefore took care of the household duties.

The average week of the ladies was set up to facilitate these chores. Mondays were set aside for laundry and mending of the men’s clothes. The rest of the week was spent cooking, cleaning after the men and studying in their spare time. The education of ladies always came secondary to the duties of maintaining the school. Not surprisingly, even secondary institutions like Oberlin followed the decisive academic gender split so common of the day. Oberlin’s ladies were separated in a department that specialized in religion, French, and literature, and shut out from the men’s studies, which included Greek, Latin and Hebrew. Oberlin College was not shy to admit that their goal was to train the women to serve as “discrete, genteel, pious, and frugal wives for ministers."31 Throughout the entire Oberlin experience there was never a comment recorded about the quality of the learning environment of the female. This omission further justifies the motives of the men when allowing the coeducation of their institution.

“…a tremendous untapped resource for national development, and one that men had not permitted to flower." -Horace Mann32

Arguments were made that the presence of women assured the mental tranquility of the male students and provided an environment conducive to male learning. Antioch was another example of an early coeducational college, which existed for the same purposes. Although Antioch refused to allow women until the 1850’s it did not mean that they were ready to treat them as equals. School officials admitted that women were admitted so that these maturing men did not get the wrong image of women that might lead to a “preoccupation with sexual fantasy and excessive introversion."33 Leaders believed that if they allowed the sexes to coexist that natural interaction between the men and women would evolve. Yet it was also mature interactions that the officials feared. School officials were aware of the potential danger of men and women cohabitating on the same land, even in the Victorian era. Therefore all students, but especially the ladies were forced to abide by a litany of rules and regulations to ensure proper behavior. Women students were not allowed to live off campus so that they would be guaranteed an appropriate education under the watchful eye of school officials. Visits to the rooms of the opposite sex were prohibited although the ladies were allowed a parlor within the dormitory to receive guests, usually men. A housemother who closely monitored the actions within oversaw these exchanges. Common areas, such as quads and the “glen” were scheduled on opposing days so that no unsupervised mingling could occur. These and many other poli! cies were established to assure that women were safely contained from any unnecessary interaction and influence of the males, and that the males could not be accused of tainting any of the ladies.34

Even after all of these rules and impediments to learning, the women at Antioch had one benefit on their side, Horace Mann. A leader at Antioch and a firm supporter of the advancement of women’s education, Mann often spoke of the injustices of the female gender and to the amount of improvement educated women would add to society. He was an avid critic of the shortcomings of the female education system and believed women to be best suited to educate children due to their mild temperaments and intrinsic ability to cooperate with children.35 Mann’s presence at Antioch and voice during the feminist movement gave much needed credibility to validating the female education reform.

“No woman is well educated who has not all the acquisitions necessary for a good teacher.” -A.E Winship36

Horace Mann, Catharine Beecher, Sara Willard and countless others had worked extremely hard to actualize the ambitions of scores of determined women and they were successful. Female seminaries and coeducational academies were flourishing and steadily improving. From these schools scores of educated women emerged ready to put their skills to use. The demand for teachers at the time provided a natural niche for these eager women to fall into. Finally believing that they could carve out a place in the man’s world they obtained jobs, only to watch the men quit and assume other roles. Men, who were leaving the profession for more “rewarding positions in industry”, believed that women were naturals as female educators due to their sensitivity and reluctance to use physical force.37

Regardless of the circumstances, women fit perfectly into the mold of an educator. Society soon came to accept women as teachers believing that they possessed an inherent quality that made them “constitutionally fitted by her Creator for the duties of a teacher."38 Women’s natural inclination to be a mother and moral guardian provided for the education for eternity of the next generation of the human race anyway, and their feminine quality made them more accessible and affectionate. Local counties also approved of the entrance of female educators. School districts could expand their budgets because women made one-half to one-third what male teachers received.39 By the mid-19th century almost teachers in service were female. The beginning of the Civil War saw that women as educators had become an accepted norm and this bore great significance for the female race. Women had conquered a field formerly dominated by men and had proven that they were capable of being educated and performing an important function for society.

Women’s education was also strictly limited to white women. While there were initially no definite laws prohibiting the education of slaves eventually the practice was outlawed. Of the four million slaves in the United States only about five percent were literate and this was the result of moonlight schools.40 These schools were actually informal gatherings to further the education of the race and were strictly prohibited. Severe punishment consisting of beatings, sometimes to the death, would result if discovered. Although no formal education would be allowed for African-American females in the South until after the Civil War, in 1851 a small step forward was made in the advancement of Negro women of the North. Myrtilla Miner, a white educator, established a teacher’s training school for African-American women in Washington, D.C.41 This school was a haven for freed women to gain an education and perform a duty that society could respect.

Many forces drove the expansion of women’s education during the Antebellum Period; however, it is significant to reinforce that due to economical changes, women were forced to transform into a role that was normally shared by men only. A role that required women to not only perform the daily functions of motherhood but also included the fatherly functions of operating a household. Although it is important to remember that the assumption of these new duties and the following advancements in education were only allowed after the approval of male society. It is fair to say though, that this role was eagerly consumed by women of this era, for most women hungered for the opportunity to be educated and be able to contribute to society. The women who took advantage of these unique circumstances during this time period served as pioneers for women of many generations to come. These women helped create the idea that it just might be possible for a world to exist where men and ! women are treated equally and both genders are given the same opportunities in society.

1. Anne Firor Scott, What, Then, is the American: This New Woman?,” Journal of American History 65, No. 3 (1978): 679.

2. Linda Eisenmann, Historical Dictionary of Women’s Education in the United States. (Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1998), xiii.

3. Eisenmann xii.

4. Anne Firor Scott 680.

5. Glenda Riley, “Origins of the Argument for Improved Female Education,” History of Education Quarterly 9, Issue 4(1969): 460.

6. Riley 456.

7. Catharine Beecher, Educational Reminiscences and Suggestions (New York: J.B Ford and Company, 1874), 5.

8. Jill K. Conway, “Perspectives on the History of Women’s Education in the United States,” History of Education Quarterly 14, issue 1 (1974): 3.

9. Conway 3.

10. Thomas Woody, A History of Women’s Education in the United States Vol.IV, Book I (New York: 1929), 303.

11. Beecher 5.

12. Scott 679.

13. Riley 462

14. Woody 305.

15. Scott 685.

16. Beecher 27-29.

17. Beecher 29.

18. Beecher 33.

19. Riley 460.

20. Riley 462.

21“Athens Female Academy,” Southern Banner, 7 December 1833, col.6, p.26.

22Janice Law Trecker, “Sex, science and Education,” American Quarterly 26, No. 4 (1974): 353.

23Kim Tolley, “Science for Ladies, Classics for Gentlemen,” History of Education Quarterly 36, no 2 (1996): 130.

24Tolley 131.

25Tolley 131.

26Trecker 362.

27Trecker 356.

28Trecker 359.

29 Rury and Harper 485.

30 Conway 6.

31JohnRury and Glenn Harper, “The Trouble with Coeducation: Mann and Women at Antioch, 1853-1860.” History of Education Quarterly 26, no. 4 (1986): 484.

32Rury and Harper 485.

33Rury and Harper 484.

34Rury and Harper 488-489.

35Rury and Harper 485.

36Riley 466.

37Riley 464-466.

38Riley 465.

39Steven Mintz, Moralists & Modernizers (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995), 110-111.

40 Eisenmann xiv.

41Beverly Guy-Sheftall, ”Black Women and Higher Education: Spelman and Bennett Colleges Revisited.” The Journal of Negro Education 51, vol. 3 (1982): 278.

For additional information, please visit these sites: