More than Companions: Relationships Between Women Faculty at Monticello Female Seminary

HISTORIANS OF LGBTQ+ CULTURE in the United States have described cities as early havens for “queer” subcultures. As the US segued from an agrarian to an industrial society in the nineteenth century, single people moved to urban centers and formed communities. The ethos of the era dictated the gender segregation of these social groups, creating an environment that provided opportunities for people with same-sex sexual orientations to form supportive subcommunities in which they could live openly.1Some scholars argue that nineteenth-century LGBTQ+ citizens could also thrive in rural areas and small towns via an “open secret” approach to their sexuality. Neighbors would adopt a “don't ask, don't tell” policy, electing to remain ignorant of the sexuality of residents who contributed to the public good.2 Although a far cry from the mutual supportiveness of LGBTQ+ collectives in cities, same-sex couples in rural towns could in this way experience a measure of acceptance.The present article furthers scholarship of nineteenth-century LGBTQ+ residents in smaller communities by documenting the lives of four women academicians associated with Monticello Female Seminary in the small town of Monticello (now Godfrey) in Madison County, Illinois.3 Historians and archivists have a responsibility to center stories that have been marginalized by historic power structures.4 This article makes the case for including the featured women—Philena Fobes, Sarah Eaton, Harriet Haskell, and Emily Alden—in an archive of the county's LGBTQ+ history, that is, recognizing them as “antecedents” of today's community. History is one currency of social legitimacy: Acknowledging the antecedents of a community in a specific location bolsters a shared history of place and provides a foundation for the members’ current participation in local society.It is the author's hope that readers in the position to do so will embark on similar projects to bring to light LGBTQ+ history in their own communities. To that end, a description of the development of the current project and the author's approach to researching this topic follows.The genesis of this article can be traced to the summer of 2022, when Roman Housewright, a Colgate University student home for the summer between their junior and senior year, contacted the Madison County Archival Library about volunteering in the archives. Housewright was majoring in history, with a focus on gender and sexuality, and pursuing double minors in LGBTQ studies and in Russian and Eurasian studies. Given Housewright's credentials, library staff saw this as an opportunity to begin developing an archive of local LGBTQ+ history. Housewright was eager to initiate the project.The author suggested that Housewright begin by exploring the relationship between Harriet Haskell and Emily Alden, principal and teacher, respectively, at Monticello Female Seminary from 1868 to 1907. Multiple local historians believed that Haskell and Alden's long-term relationship was likely an LGBTQ+ partnership. As will be demonstrated later in this article, Haskell and Alden made public statements about the closeness of their relationship, and authors of published histories of the seminary and of the town of Godfrey arguably implied that the women were more than mere colleagues or friends. However, existing scholarship to this point had never directly addressed the nature of Haskell and Alden's relationship. Housewright's education in LGBTQ+ studies equipped them to interpret the historical data with scholarly insight. Additionally, primary source materials in the form of writings by Alden were readily available. As they explored the Haskell-Alden relationship, Housewright encountered descriptions of the relationship between Philena Fobes and Sarah Eaton. Fobes was Haskell's predecessor as principal of Monticello; Eaton taught at the seminary during Fobes's tenure. Housewright affirmed the Haskell–Alden relationship as a potential nineteenth-century “queer” partnership and identified the Fobes–Eaton relationship as another strong candidate. They summarized their research and moved on to other projects for the nascent local LGBTQ+ archive before returning to school at the end of the summer. The author built upon Housewright's preliminary research to develop the present article.Upon embarking on this project, the author encountered difficulties intrinsic to describing the social identities of historical figures. People's behaviors can be discerned through their documented words and actions, but primary sources suggesting LGBTQ+ identities have sometimes been censored by past gatekeepers uncomfortable with these implications.5 This may have been the case for Fobes and Eaton: Although their relationship survived lengthy separations, very few letters between them have been found to date. In addition, approximately one-quarter of a page in an extant letter Eaton received from her father has been cut away and is missing. It is obvious that a specific passage has been deliberately excised since the cut edges are crisp and the section is taken from the middle of the page.6 Even when records have not been redacted or otherwise suppressed, the social and physical dangers incurred by explicitly affirming an LGBTQ+ identity often inhibited historical figures from leaving evidence for historians.7As an additional complication, the concept of sexual identity in Western culture is arguably a late nineteenth-century construct; that of gender identity is an even more recent development.8 Attempting to determine whether a person in the past, given the option, would identify themselves as a member of the LGBTQ+ community is presumptuously speculative. Although behaviors can and do transcend time and culture, the social discourse and values of one's environment mediate self-knowledge of any sort. Some scholars assert that nineteenth-century “romantic friendships” between women defy dichotomous gay-straight characterization and instead existed on a continuum of sexuality, a description that foreshadows the performativity and fluidity of sexual identity as understood by twenty-first-century queer theorists.9 In short, understanding same-sex relationships of the past is inherently tricky.Recognizing these challenges, the author sought out the subjects’ own writings and contemporary of their and and a a of the and and of their extant writings about their It was found that of the four women made public affirming her as the person in her The is in the of this article with of Fobes, Eaton, Haskell, and Alden, about education and social environment in the nineteenth-century The article with a of the of the in the of “queer” women featured in this article were the of the In the century, citizens in this of society the to as an for to but education of as a than that of received a education that them for or received for and in to to citizens of the formed United States of one of the for women in more and for early in the nineteenth century, as or were by who could people who would never an one of the of these in in the school to in Female the for women in the United in women a more education than any to but was far than provided at As the women featured in this Fobes, Sarah Eaton, Haskell, and Emily at Monticello Female Seminary in the of Monticello (now the town of of in Madison The seminary in deliberately on the as of the by in Female Seminary in Western Female Seminary in in and in in in from as of or early in at additional in the United States during the nineteenth to a that the Female Seminary for a school for by people for the education of that the primary on the development of and the to women in that women be equipped for this from who to and a the to of a seminary by in It and for and Godfrey of the of and the to the with was and other in the Philena Fobes from Seminary in and from Female Seminary in to as the the time the school in the of and and and and and and The seminary also a for who were on a the end of the school year, had to of Monticello with an by women from to through the of The of at that time was of a culture found and In the and from and the in the for opportunities in the and and were to as The of Monticello Female Seminary a to in the for local women to than from the the time out in the United Monticello was one of a small of or and featured on women for and in the of the the women had the public for and other and They had the as during the and and and with time on their and women The had been The late nineteenth-century an and the of the a more the of education and the of and the public school the of a in the had a of as to the of the and of women in women than their this to the and more to the for as the of as a of time and that women not have the for that women were for would in or with that women likely to and have the of the in an It was that women with not to for and who their had to and since single women could in the as the the about by and more were in including the of the as the as a in and had since women could not at or the and rural of the and women often in couples could in the or for a a who had made a to could even a in the in a as the of the century, when social to the and of women with the sexuality of The social of the century, and women in social with opportunities for or physical the and between and women were In relationships between women often and sometimes of and in the social at one another with and and of the women this to their closeness were and were “romantic friendships” between single women sometimes one or but they could not for to in this of society at this time in history had of to was to and for her and her a “romantic a in her opportunities as made for women of the and middle as the The nascent women to demonstrated by their for from to The was in the and of relationships between as a in the of the century, a about women in in the of published in that Western society had been about same-sex relationships between that in women to in had never been between friendships” and on the of an with a a more to develop a that the with to and was and with an in and same-sex is about the to which the lives of It is that as social of relationships between women between at were Some women the of their “romantic about with they to Some women the of their sexuality. the of that from to have relationships with other but few identified themselves as even the concept was to historians that of of for one between nineteenth-century women of to the sexual that the The author this position for a of but the is to the of this of a relationship is not an measure of sexual any the or of in any partnership is than short, to society nineteenth-century relationships between culture that between and women as to the social relationships between these relationships the of the culture historians similar Fobes, of Fobes and was in Fobes at the Female and the Female Seminary in at Seminary in in Eaton was in on was the of the Eaton and and in Eaton was by her father and at Seminary in her education at a school in her father her to the of a Eaton the at Seminary as Female in the of in her taught It is likely that this is Fobes and Eaton other of the the at associated with a and as an and the other by and Fobes to at Monticello Female Seminary when in were women in the of even by the in the Monticello was the of to develop that in between and Fobes's specific for the position at Monticello have been found to date. to in the often the as a or a to ignorant from Some women out of a of The that Fobes's had moved to a community very may have the of the However, to Fobes from Eaton by a of Fobes her at including a to principal in Eaton as a on the In Seminary to at in County, a of for in but had by the time her one extant letter to Fobes letter is one of of Fobes–Eaton at the Eaton her letter with an for was not to Fobes's letter have that was to so time had since one of letters had have to to and a for be very to be with to in Eaton about her and her on has the with this have at time have an for in Seminary or in the may do to be with very and not on is have these and could not is to have do not be is and in the of the page will more have to that Fobes's be these is by the and could not The that the women had not other for a of they had one another since their time as colleagues at had not been It also that Eaton is about her physical to This is to her Eaton not her and instead her Fobes's of and of and an between the women that and the her Eaton in a at but more to be Fobes than as an opportunity position the would do as the have to and about the form of that Eaton has would to that is to is in the letter at the later by the women would be colleagues at Fobes is and about Eaton the Monticello In her Fobes Eaton the and the and Eaton about the of will Fobes with the hope this of for a Eaton taught at her of was to and when the was in The that the Monticello the that could in her to the that Eaton with Fobes her Godfrey and had deliberately to Monticello in with a at the as It was for a to an of in the when Fobes on the in As and Fobes and a as and to they found her and In Monticello was an Fobes the and in a to the other at the the school on women to had by when Fobes but her from her as Eaton for her with the Fobes to a of in by her Monticello for a few Fobes's of the seminary more the of another in Fobes the school through the from Monticello in to and found the Seminary for Fobes, at Monticello the The seminary a but Fobes and her had to from who with the Fobes from Monticello in and moved to her article on as Fobes and her Eaton, to to the This is not as Eaton four before Fobes's their in this may be to their relationship as In about a in Fobes and Eaton moved to Eaton in that Fobes and Eaton in before to and that they to live can be as suggesting that Fobes and Eaton as a source records documenting the in the and found to by the present author are suggesting that Fobes Eaton at the Seminary in sources that Eaton her with Seminary when for and moved to and Eaton were in women were at in the In the Eaton and her Eaton were as in Philena Fobes's on Eaton a on don't who but is that Fobes was the The is and which is of of the one at was with and to her or the of her with has been to in this a of for from in described her in her letter to Fobes, and her in The that the was during her her will and to her Eaton her Eaton and Fobes of her However, Eaton was not as an as Eaton of her and In the that Fobes Eaton, these were to be given to Eaton. It is that Eaton not any specific to be given to her Fobes survived Fobes her the of her at about in be one to be given to Fobes and the other to be in for Eaton In an would be about a but not a The to her Eaton of was by the to Fobes, who was when Eaton her Fobes had the was to to Eaton was in her and were later Fobes moved the home of and Fobes's in of on was at about to in Fobes the of her to her will also to of her and a small of and and to and and their is not Fobes her from her in to approximately also of in and which to have to her was by the time from As about from Eaton in The of her that Fobes's was in and that Fobes may have her but not and through was in in to Eaton. was the member of her of and one had been in were in a in and her in The Fobes at the time of her were later in with the that Fobes's was to even had moved away before her that Fobes and Eaton had made to be by and Fobes's are with The and of the the and of the and the are Fobes's is that and her of and a Eaton provided for her in her records was from for Fobes's will with her for to be in her It is likely that the of Fobes's and primary her from They to and had directly to suggesting that they and to the between the and Eaton other for They when they were in their and they at of of their lives relationship separations, the than they and for They other and were when Fobes for Eaton to the at Eaton to a of and a her are of the for other in their extant letter to Fobes that had to that could not or would not Fobes and about Fobes's Fobes's letter also with the form of and her to Eaton in of and can also be as suggesting that the women a for Fobes in her will strong evidence that Fobes was the person in her The that the women were that their the closeness Fobes her own very public their the that the women other as their that at of Fobes's also them as a Alden was in to Alden and Emily father was a her when Alden was an Alden's father on Haskell was in on before Alden's were Haskell, a and the Seminary in as a and Alden as at Seminary in Haskell in Alden the seminary with her the that had not her that they shared a home and from their is at later in this to Alden with the Haskell in in women taught at when the Haskell Alden also to to the at Philena Fobes in Monticello Female the Haskell the position in had about a at was the of the about her at a for one at an the Monticello Haskell to have a Alden was as a at Monticello at the Haskell the position with an of Western women to their own in to Fobes's focus on As Fobes and Haskell the women in their with the of their at identified themselves as or the Alden taught a of including and history, and In the Haskell as The recent of in an early at had of Monticello by the was by the of to Haskell's and her as an on the of in the in a to the of the Monticello staff and the but of their were with the seminary and the of and library The was at the school early for the Haskell was in a local a few later as seminary will be at and will a to and of Monticello also to the of in the of to the school to the to in the Haskell Haskell and to the from from to from The for the seminary was on the was on the the at Haskell her and their also of her at Monticello in Alden was in of history, and and of senior also as and school by were of Monticello and the Haskell in of Haskell by was at the was a few in when sources that Haskell and Alden had and shared since as at The home and was in Alden's which the of the description to a Haskell's that Haskell that during the of their at they and had a home and a and in a article about Alden's in and that the women had been for of these of the to the that they to a in between and The of these statements that the women the time they to be an descriptions of the were published the of as a and the of the As “romantic friendships” was It is likely that was Haskell Eaton who provided the to in The or about the is way to whether the on the of the local community of women or that social of relationships had not Madison County, at Monticello on at the of the of was had been for to the point that and the Monticello had her The Library letters in which Haskell in her these this Haskell's of her and was her to her but to home in leaving to the was at about person with the in would be about was a in Godfrey and in and of in had The the at from Haskell's received Haskell's which had to her to to Monticello Although Haskell and Alden had shared a for from the of Haskell's that their were in Haskell's and Haskell's to for in the Alden from Monticello of physical to her Female with the of moved to and the of her with her and a of Haskell of which on one to the Haskell's The page who her and who her more and the Alden this of is for and Monticello for has been with the from and from have so that to these any the of the one who has been the one who has been of is a than a It is but is as a of one so that for to this crisp of on the by in the and place this in in as are to be in their but and in It has as as also any of a has been for been with her by and by at home and through and as an the of the and the in which was that this was Alden's way of her the of which is in the the for of the Alden's with as Haskell's of and at one point to her her readers her for Haskell's could be and of which Alden far by Haskell's time to Alden to Haskell's at one point was not a but was a to a also an may for was and It Alden that and women of do not measure to the Alden's is a the of for the of is that Alden not in her to Haskell during her but as one of a Alden and Haskell's and also out of the for these may in the Alden's project was in a to Monticello for a to their principal and Alden on Haskell and including about their shared in her but is to from her readers that was the person in Haskell's the one who her and who was her and who was at Monticello Seminary for her also about Haskell and about her of her was published by the Monticello in In a of a for a for Haskell, Alden the that was Haskell's when was of from was in to be with that the women were is between them is However, Alden about her for Haskell as as in a letter to on a about with the of are has been as other person in the since was away from The passage that Haskell's Alden the of a a and The letter was in the that Haskell and Alden shared their Alden was about to the year, on of a by at the time of her was at about to in a but far of Haskell's was in in her and letter between other about Haskell and Alden provides additional their relationship. and Monticello Seminary in the In a letter (now to who is her The do not that Alden's and Haskell's about was is a they of on in a at The that these Monticello that Alden and Haskell had a and as Haskell believed in more than in women for could arguably be that since Alden and Haskell were in their about her The that Alden and Haskell one of and not any other Monticello that and them as a and Alden in when they were and the of their lives to one of approximately the their shared are that they themselves Haskell's as about her upon Haskell in published and and in In these Alden her in Haskell's as the who her more than The and the and of Alden's are the behaviors of a contemporary about the women upon their long-term home and a to Haskell between Monticello they Alden and Haskell as a Haskell and Alden themselves as have about to a relationship. with this in her article in the the obvious of and the double in which physical is in that sexual experience is not the for who their sexual also that people in may not to their relationship for a of understanding historical of between women on the of the and actions, their to the concept of a identity culture, and their of with other same-sex Sarah that is as an identity that not scholars from documenting the sexuality of historical is that sexual identity was an to Philena Fobes, Sarah Eaton, Harriet Haskell, or Emily of the women in the of urban environment that LGBTQ+ community in the nineteenth their for one Alden extant of her to and for of the women affirmed the of her relationship with her whether through will public statements or published letter from Fobes to Haskell with an that may a of Haskell and Alden's will have a in for the that are not to the and the between and and Alden will a in at the of this article, historians interpret the “romantic friendships” between women that the nineteenth-century US as a sexuality on a continuum between and current about sexual identity the that people on one of a gay-straight argue that sexuality is and In this the a The instead whether these women who are to the development of Monticello Female Seminary can be of a “queer” history of Madison County, The author that a of the between Philena Fobes and Sarah Eaton and between Harriet Haskell and Emily Alden that the couples were more than They were their the local archive the they themselves on their and to one another and to the of the LGBTQ+ community in history.