Laurel Thatcher Ulrich'S Analysis Of A Diary Recorded By Martha Ballard

Laurel Thatcher Ulrich analyzes the value and historical contribution of a diary recorded by Martha Ballard in her book “A Midwife’s Tale.” This book can be categorized under three genres of history; social history, women’s history, and geographical history. In her book, Ulrich provides her audience her own transcriptions of Martha’s diary and uses primary sources to make historical connections that support her interpretations. The primary sources she provides are various maps and illustrations of the geographical regions Martha had traveled, other diaries kept by Martha’s clients, court and church records, medical manuals, and newspapers to create a broader context of the world Martha Ballard lived in and provide a deeper understanding of the political, social, and economic changes of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.

Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, an American historian also draws upon her own knowledge to build on the framework of Ballard’s diary. Ulrich has made significant contributions through her research on early America as well as the history of women and is a professor at Harvard University. Her book, “A Midwife’s Tale: The Life of Martha Ballard, Based on Her Diary, 1785-1812,” was originally published in 1990 by A. Knopf, Inc., New York. It had earned itself the Pulitzer prize as well as the Bancroft prize among other awards for its contributions to women’s labor history. Ulrich’s “A Midwife’s Tale” is just as much a literary piece as it is a lesson on historical analysis by a seasoned historian. Ulrich directly provides the primary sources she uses and includes her analysis and methods of interpretation of those sources for historians after her.Martha Ballard’s diary itself has been said to be a trivial collection of day to day tasks over the course of 27 years. Until Ulrich’s analysis, historians who had come across the diary dismissed it as exactly this, “Yet it is in the very dailiness, the exhaustive repetitious dailiness, that the real power of Martha Ballard’s book lies” (Ulrich, 9).

Martha Ballard’s diary consists of thousands of entries over the course of 30 years detailing her deliveries as a midwife, healing practices, observations accompanying physicians, as well as her domestic duties during the late eighteenth century to early nineteenth century. Her diary records her time living in Hallowell on the Kennebec River in what is Maine and despite her sometimes short and opaque entries, Ulrich strives to reveal the period of change that had taken place from 1785 to 1812 in early New England. It is mentioned by Ulrich that Martha had grown up and lived during a time of political turmoil and uncertainty. Born in 1735, she had experienced the creation of a new government as well as the wars and power struggle which accompanied it. This is somewhat problematic because historians have long failed to look beyond such matters of the time. American history is rich with the experience and successes of famous figures and wars, but Ulrich argues that diminishing historical value that can be gained from the most ordinary and mundane sources can cause a historian to miss out on the most illuminating discoveries. Ulrich provides an example of this as she draws from Martha Ballard’s diary the social changes that were materializing during the American revolution and post-revolution landscape. From her entries, Ulrich determines that there were changes in family life as well as marriage customs alluding to the sexual transformation that was to come (27).

Ulrich describes various opportunities of sexual freedom and experimentation that had been taking place in Hallowell. As described on page 149, Martha Ballard had been summoned to an illegitimate birth and her son Jonathan had been named the father. This instance led Ulrich to ask a series of questions regarding family, fornication, and the contrasts we see in seduction literature. Ulrich’s analysis on this one entry did eventually point out some inconsistencies in what historians previously understood to be relatively true. It was thought that women would become somewhat of a social pariah if they committed an act of fornication, let alone have a child out of wedlock. Using a record from the Lincoln County Court of General Sessions, Ulrich draws the conclusion that sexual behavior had become a “private concern” in Hallowell and premarital pregnancy was not confined to Maine but occurred throughout New England (149). She does not deny that some women do lose their “good name” and provides a story of this occurring however, she describes an old system of justice where old women encouraged young women to give the names of the fathers.

Ulrich’s use of sources in this section support the answers she provides for the questions posed however, she does fail to address further the issue of Martha Ballard failing to record a father intentionally and does not research how common an issue this was among other midwives.The use of healing practices and its relation to evolving medicine, importance of religion, and the division of labor between men and women is also revealed from Ulrich’s analysis.From the diary, Ulrich discovers the roles women and children had in Hallowell and how they supported the roles of men. In some cases, encroaching and finding themselves participating in what is referred to as men’s activities. To support this, Ulrich uses other primary sources such as surviving ledgers and court documents to tell us of men’s activities but as she explains, “One might conclude from such a record that Kennebec women had no role in economic life beyond their own house-holds” (29). Ulrich does discuss that women did not have a political life as her research and Ballard’s diary suggests, but they did have a community life (76).

To round out this unfinished narrative, Ulrich uses Martha’s diary to shed light on the participation of women in New England society that would otherwise be forgotten. Domestic roles of women are automatically assumed when we draw upon our knowledge of frontierswomen. Ulrich emphasizes that Ballard’s diary does more than reflect an era, it restores lost substructure and fills in missing work done by women (27). Without Martha’s diary this work wouldn’t have any chance to be commemorated as a great feat in American history. Both women and men contributed to the well-being and sustainability of Hallowell. Ulrich also analyzes the role of Ballard’s children in the household and realized that her children also carried the burden of domestic duties. This in turn allowed Martha Ballard to build upon her work as a midwife thus allowing historians to analyze the ways in which rural women acquired their own economic independence. Ulrich’s use of sources on this aspect of New England life completely changes the previous assumption that other historians had held. The initial reason Martha Ballard’s diary was brushed over is because of these previous assumptions.

Ulrich also includes Ballard’s entries regarding a rape in the town and her testimony. Its obvious importance being from a woman’s perspective, Ulrich can see how such an occurrence affected the other women in the community, including Ballard as well as the legal system that had been in effect. She uses The Trial of Atticus Before Justice Beau For a Rape by Dr. Obadiah Williams to discuss the “informal power of reputation” (120). From this source she can understand attitudes the public had held regarding rape and factors that had determined whether or not a woman would be considered credible or deemed a liar. Though rape was a capital crime, women who did claim they were raped did not receive the benefit of the doubt and could be dismissed.

Ultimately Ulrich’s interpretation is entirely of her own and though it may be one of the most developed analysis’ on Martha’s diary, it is just one single interpretation. Ulrich’s primary challenge was to seek what would have been forgotten or lost from history if the diary had not been analyzed and the rabbit hole she fell down was a revelation which challenged what had been previously understood about the role of women in early America. Ulrich’s use of sources provides the necessary support to Martha Ballard’s written accounts. I like that Ulrich is honest with her audience about the difficulty of Ballard’s diary. Knowing the amount of time it took Ulrich to compile her sources to build the context in which Ballard’s diary takes place, I can appreciate that it was because just reading the source alone, you most definitely would not get the same interpretation and analysis. It makes you understand as a historian that cross referencing even just one primary source with another primary source can make a dramatic difference in the story being told. (What gets saved and preserved from notes). “The problem is not that the diary is trivial but that it introduces more stories than can easily be recovered and absorbed” (25). She is talking about the lack of context.