Notesale: Turn your study into money

Document Preview

Extracts from the notes are below, to see the PDF you'll receive please use the links above

---

Evaluate the strengths and limitations of this interpretation, making
reference to other interpretations you have studied
...
Yet by no
means had they wholeheartedly or unreservedly embraced the Compromise of
1850
...
’ (1988)

This interpretation by Richard Sewell deliberates the Southern views on the 1850
compromise; something which many Southerners weren’t fully ‘embrac[ing]’ due to the
many concessions which they believed outweighed that of the North’s
...
When discussing the
line ‘rejected disunion’, Sewell is referring to the vote which the states had to undertake in
order to decide whether they would separate from America’s union where they could elect
for themselves whether Southern states would be free or slave states: this was, however,
rejected and the South remained apart of the union
...
He incorporates the Compromise into the
rejection of the disunion as, essentially, it is based off the factors of the Compromise that
the ‘rejection of disunion’ was decided
...
As stated in the interpretation,
Southerners had not ‘wholeheartedly or unreservedly embraced the Compromise’;
particularly within Southern groups of fireeaters who radicalised any negative thoughts
about the compromise with violence and threats (such as threatening succession due to the
fugitive slaves not being returned to the South despite the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850)
...
Therefore, the
interpretation obtains strengths as it accounts for those against the union and for
succession; labelling them as those who don’t ‘wholeheartedly’ or ‘unreservedly’ agree with
the Compromise
...
For example, there is only a mention of the Southern viewpoint which
leaves us with nothing more than question marks as to the Northern or Unionist views on
the decision not to leave the union (which was, in fact, a positive viewpoint as it destined

more control over their states being free or slave)
...
Another weakness of Richard Sewell’s interpretation is that it only seems to
regard the negative views of the compromise; not accounting for the Southern states
accepting parts of the compromise (such as the Fugitive Slave Act which promised the
return of fugitive slaves) which suggests that the interpretation doesn’t provide the whole
picture
...




---