John Brown was a fervent abolitionist whose unwavering commitment to ending slavery made him one of the most polarizing figures in American history. Born in 1800, he was deeply religious and viewed slavery as a moral abomination that required immediate and forceful opposition. Unlike many of his contemporaries, who sought political or legal solutions to abolish slavery, Brown believed in direct action, including armed resistance. His militant tactics and willingness to use violence set him apart from other abolitionists of his time, ultimately leading to his execution in 1859. He is often described as radical given his extreme methods and unyielding stance. But was he actually radical in his approach? Or was it necessary in order to effect much needed social change?
For some folks, John Brown is considered a radical abolitionist because he advocated for and engaged in violent resistance to end slavery, believing it to be a moral imperative that justified armed insurrection. Unlike many abolitionists of his time, who favored gradual emancipation or political solutions, Brown saw slavery as an evil that required immediate and forceful eradication.
His radicalism was most evident in two key events:
-
The Pottawatomie Massacre (1856): In response to pro-slavery attacks in "Bleeding Kansas," Brown and his followers murdered five pro-slavery settlers, demonstrating his willingness to use violence in the struggle against slavery.
-
The Raid on Harpers Ferry (1859): Brown led an armed assault on the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, aiming to incite a widespread slave rebellion. The raid failed, and Brown was captured, tried for treason, and executed. However, his actions and martyrdom intensified national tensions, contributing to the onset of the Civil War.
Brown's unwavering commitment to ending slavery through direct action, his belief in racial equality, and his willingness to die for the cause made him considered a radical figure in the abolitionist movement. Let's break down both of the events above.
The Pottawatomie Massacre (1856) and John Brown’s Role
The Pottawatomie Massacre was a violent episode in the struggle over slavery in Kansas, part of the larger conflict known as “Bleeding Kansas.” On the night of May 24, 1856, John Brown and a small band of followers brutally executed five pro-slavery settlers in Franklin County, Kansas. This act of violence was a response to escalating tensions between pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions in the territory, and it cemented Brown’s reputation as a militant abolitionist willing to use extreme measures to combat slavery.
At the time, Kansas was the epicenter of a fierce battle over whether it would enter the Union as a free or slave state. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 had allowed settlers to determine the status of slavery through popular sovereignty, leading to violent clashes between abolitionists and pro-slavery forces. Brown had moved to Kansas in 1855 with several of his sons to support the anti-slavery cause, and he was outraged by recent events, particularly the pro-slavery attack on Lawrence, Kansas, on May 21, 1856. This attack, known as the Sack of Lawrence, involved the destruction of an anti-slavery newspaper’s printing press and the burning of a hotel.
In response, Brown planned a retaliatory strike against pro-slavery settlers. On the night of May 24, Brown, along with his sons and a few supporters, descended upon the homes of pro-slavery settlers along Pottawatomie Creek. Armed with broadswords and rifles, they dragged five men from their homes and executed them in cold blood. The victims—James Doyle, William Doyle, Drury Doyle, Allen Wilkinson, and William Sherman—were accused of supporting slavery, though none were known to be slaveholders. The brutal nature of the killings, including the use of swords to hack the men to death, sent shockwaves through Kansas and the nation.
Brown never publicly admitted to leading the massacre, but accounts from his sons and supporters confirmed his involvement. He justified the killings as necessary to defend the anti-slavery cause and to send a message that pro-slavery aggression would not go unanswered. The massacre escalated the violence in Kansas, leading to more bloodshed as both sides retaliated. Pro-slavery forces condemned Brown as a murderer, while some abolitionists, though uncomfortable with his methods, saw him as a necessary force in the fight against slavery.
The Pottawatomie Massacre solidified Brown’s image as a radical willing to use violence to achieve his goals. It foreshadowed his later raid on Harpers Ferry in 1859, where he attempted to spark a large-scale slave uprising. While his actions in Kansas were widely debated, they contributed to the growing national tensions that would eventually lead to the Civil War. Brown’s unwavering commitment to abolition and his belief in direct action made him both a hero and a villain, depending on one’s perspective. The massacre remains one of the most controversial events in the fight over slavery, highlighting the deep divisions that plagued the United States in the years leading up to the Civil War.
As a side note for those who may be wondering, the Pottawatomie Massacre was not directly carried out by or against the Pottawatomie people. Instead, it was named after the Pottawatomie Creek, near which the killings occurred.
While the Pottawatomie people were indigenous to the region and had a long history in the Midwest, they were not directly involved in the event. The name of the massacre comes solely from the location where the killings took place.
John Brown’s Role in the Raid on Harpers Ferry (1859)
John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry was a defining moment in the struggle over slavery in the United States and one of the key events leading up to the Civil War. On the night of October 16, 1859, Brown led a group of 21 men in an armed assault on the federal armory at Harpers Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia). His goal was to seize weapons, arm enslaved people, and incite a large-scale rebellion against slavery. Though the raid ultimately failed, it solidified Brown’s place in history as a militant and a martyr for the anti-slavery cause.
Brown had long believed that slavery could only be ended through direct action. After his violent involvement in “Bleeding Kansas,” he turned his attention to a larger plan—one that would strike at the heart of the institution of slavery. He developed a strategy to capture the Harpers Ferry armory, distribute weapons to enslaved people, and lead them into the mountains, where they would wage guerrilla warfare against slaveholders. Brown spent months gathering weapons, raising funds, and recruiting supporters, including five Black men. He hoped that the raid would spark a widespread slave uprising, forcing the federal government to take action against slavery.
On the night of October 16, Brown and his men seized the armory with little resistance, cutting telegraph lines and taking hostages, including Lewis Washington, the great grandnephew of George Washington. However, Brown’s plan quickly unraveled. The expected mass uprising of enslaved people never materialized, and local militia forces soon surrounded the armory. A prolonged standoff ensued, during which Brown and his men engaged in sporadic gunfights with town residents and soldiers.
By the morning of October 18, U.S. Marines, led by Colonel Robert E. Lee and Lieutenant J.E.B. Stuart, stormed the armory. They quickly overwhelmed Brown’s forces, killing ten of his men, including two of his sons. Brown himself was wounded and captured.
Brown’s trial in Charles Town, Virginia, was swift. Charged with treason, murder, and inciting a slave insurrection, he was found guilty and sentenced to death. On December 2, 1859, he was hanged. His execution made him a martyr in the North, where abolitionists viewed him as a hero willing to die for the cause of freedom. In the South, he was seen as a dangerous radical who confirmed white fears of slave revolts and Northern aggression.
While the raid on Harpers Ferry was a military failure, its impact was profound. It deepened the sectional divide between North and South, heightened tensions over slavery, and pushed the nation closer to civil war. Figures such as Frederick Douglass, who had declined to join the raid, later praised Brown’s unwavering commitment to abolition. Henry David Thoreau compared him to Christ, calling him a moral visionary.
John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry remains one of the most significant events in American history, a bold but doomed attempt to challenge slavery through force. His legacy endures as a symbol of uncompromising resistance against oppression.
How Did Brown's Plan to Raid Harper's Ferry Fail?
John Brown’s plan at Harpers Ferry unraveled due to a combination of factors, including lack of sufficient support, poor communication, and timely warnings. While there were no confirmed "snitches" in the traditional sense of someone betraying him directly, a series of unfortunate events contributed to the failure of the raid.
Essentially, Brown's plan was to seize the U.S. arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia), and arm enslaved people to incite a rebellion. However, his efforts quickly faltered due to both logistical missteps and the fact that many of the enslaved people he hoped would join the revolt did not arrive in time or were not prepared to take part.
First, Brown was relying on a mix of enslaved people and abolitionists, but the support from enslaved people did not materialize as he had hoped. His plan was to inspire an uprising, but many enslaved people were hesitant or unable to join. Brown had hoped that his raid would trigger a larger uprising, but it became clear that the surrounding enslaved population was not ready to revolt on such short notice.
Second, Brown's plan was to execute his raid on the night of October 16-17, 1859, but things went wrong almost immediately. His forces were too small and poorly equipped. In the early hours of the raid, they took control of the federal armory and surrounding areas, but there was a delay in mobilizing enslaved people and additional fighters.
Third, word of Brown’s actions spread quickly, and the local community, including pro-slavery forces and militias, responded quickly. Brown’s group was surrounded and cut off from potential reinforcements. Local militias and the nearby U.S. Army, led by Colonel Robert E. Lee, arrived to quell the insurrection. Brown and his men were trapped in the armory's engine house, where they were eventually captured.
Unlike Nat Turner's Rebellion and Guinea Sam's Rebellion (also known as the 1822 Denmark Vesey conspiracy), no direct "snitch" was responsible for the raid's failure - at least that we know of. As mentioned above, it is likely that word of Brown's plans had simply spread unintentionally to the wrong people. Brown had made preparations for the raid, including a secret network, but the coordination was less than ideal. His raid was anticipated by some of the local people and authorities, suggesting that information may have been leaked or that suspicions about Brown's plans were growing.
One of the main factors leading to the failure was simply the inability to rally sufficient support and execute the raid effectively. Additionally, local authorities were already on alert, and the element of surprise was lost.
In summary, while there was no singular snitch that betrayed Brown, the raid was poorly planned, lacked adequate support, and was undermined by the timely arrival of militia and federal troops. The raid’s failure marked the end of Brown’s violent campaign to end slavery, but it also solidified his legacy as a martyr for the abolitionist cause.
John Brown as Militant Freedom Fighter
An alternative view of John Brown is to see him not as a radical, but as a militant abolitionist or a freedom fighter. Instead of emphasizing his extremism, this perspective frames Brown as someone who took decisive action against an unjust system in a time of deep moral crisis.
From this standpoint, Brown’s use of violence is interpreted as a necessary response to the brutality of slavery, rather than as irrational extremism. Unlike many abolitionists who relied on moral persuasion or political action, Brown believed slavery was so entrenched that only direct, forceful resistance could dismantle it. His actions, particularly the Harpers Ferry raid, can be compared to those of resistance movements throughout history that have fought oppression.
Additionally, some argue that Brown’s willingness to sacrifice his life for the liberation of enslaved people aligns him with other historical figures who engaged in armed struggle for justice, such as Nat Turner, Toussaint Louverture, or even figures from later resistance movements. In this view, Brown was not a reckless radical, but a man ahead of his time, acting in defense of human rights in a society that refused to recognize the full humanity of millions.
Ultimately, calling Brown a radical depends on the perspective of the observer. To those who saw slavery as a moral abomination, his actions were not radical but necessary. To those invested in maintaining the status quo, he was dangerous. His legacy, then, is shaped by whether one views the fight against slavery as requiring gradual change—or immediate, decisive action.
Read more about John Brown in the Hoodoo Almanac 2025, where you can find a QR code inside the book that leads you to a free download of his own words.
