Rock Chalk Jayhawk

Since I was hoping KU would win last night's collegiate sporting contest, I apparently was supposed to be out and about after the game, shooting off fireworks and shouting "rock chalk Jayhawk!"

I never get these memos.

All the excitement did, however, inspire me to finally look up the origins of the chant and to confirm those of the term Jayhawk itself.  "Rock chalk Jayhawk" comes from a chant for the University Science Club all the way back in 1866.  The science geeks' chant was merely "rah rah Jayhawk, KU."  It wasn't until later that an English professor with too much time on his hands proposed changing the "rah rah" to "rock chalk," referring to the limestone around campus.  Since "rock chalk Jayhawk" makes no sense whatsoever, it was immediately and enthusiastically embraced by the KU community.  You can listen to the chant here.  From what I've heard, hearing it in Allen Fieldhouse (where KU plays basketball) is something of a spiritual experience. 

Far more important than the chant is the origin of the term Jayhawk.  There is, of course, no such bird.  Jayhawk refers to anti-slavery advocates working to make sure that Kansas was established as and remained a free territory and then state.  Lawrence, sometimes called "the Berkeley of the plains" was a free-stater stronghold, a legacy about which the town is extremely proud.  Since Kansas was established as a free state, thank the deity of your choice (and thank you, John Brown), it was natural that KU's mascot become the Jayhawks in honor of that legacy.  It's fascinating to me how Lawrence is now Kansas's Democratic stronghold as well; apparently holding on to the legacy of freedom and progressivism is more important than party identity.

Given the history of the University of Kansas Jayhawk, I take great pleasure in pointing out that KU's last three opponents in the NCAA tournament - Davidson, North Carolina and Memphis - are from the old Confederacy.  Hee hee hee.

Comments

[Zeke]

Davidson may be in a former slave state, but one of its many advantages over KU is that, well, one doesn't have to live in Kansas to go here. I think that makes us more than even.

[Sir Charles]

Stephen,

Congratulations.

With respect to John Brown, Lawrence, and "Bleeding Kansas," not to mention matters theological and spiritual, if you haven't read it, you must read "Cloudsplitter" by Russell Banks, a fictional account of John Brown's life. It is one of those books where the fictional element seems to make it more true than any straight biography possibly can be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudsplitter

[bdub]

As a life long Missouri fan (and Iowa State grad, which only intensified my hatred of all things KU), at least I can sit back, relax and take joy in remembering Missouri's victory from the football season.

God, I hate KU.

[Neil the Ethical Werewolf]

I left Lawrence in May 1988 at the age of 8, the month after Danny Manning led the Jayhawks to their last NCAA championship. And though my family was moving to North Carolina, which has more college basketball awesomeness than any other state, I stuck it out as a Kansas fan all the way.

Thanks for putting this up, Stephen -- last night was sweet.

[Toast]

Since "rock chalk Jayhawk" makes no sense whatsoever

I always assumed "rock" referred to the basketball ("the rock") and "chalk" referred to drawing up plays on the blackboard. Thanks, though. Very educational.

[Ari]

"Free-soilers" not "free-staters." (I hate myself for being such a huge pedant. I really do. Maybe there's a support group or something.) Also, you shouldn't thank John Brown for securing Kansas as free soil. The Pottawatomie Creek murders were a huge setback for abolitionists broadly and for free-soilers in Bleeding Kansas particularly. (There I go again. Someone stop me, please. I need help.)

[dtah]

while we're on the subject of mistaken origins of "rock chalk jayhawk," i always assumed it referred to the slang for favorite ("chalk") which, due to ku's (according to cheer) awesomeness, ku would always be in a position to rock. or something.

[Sir Charles]

Ari,

That's the kind of pedantry we want to encourage around here -- and you're right -- the Pottawatomie Creek murders were not a boon to the abolitionist cause.

Strangely enough Maryland, which harbored great sympathy for the Confederate cause is "the Free State."

[Stephen]

Ari,

Isn't Free-Soiler a term more accurately applied to a member of that political party rather than everyone who thought Kansas should be admitted as a non-slave state? I know that the Kansas State Historical Society, in particular, uses the term Free-Stater to describe such people, and even draws a distinction between them and abolitionists - obviously abolitionists were both, but Free-Staters needn't be.

As far as John Brown's legacy, I believe one's assessment of it depends upon how much one accepts the American south's mythology about the Civil War. If the Civil War really is due to the big, mean and nasty Northerners and their aggression toward the south, then John Brown probably didn't help much. I, however, believe that Northerners, Free-Soilers, Free-Staters, abolitionists and everyone else were far too accommodating of the south's temper tantrums and inability to grow up with the rest of the world - a practice that has, unfortunately, continued without much modification or interruption since the end of the Civil War.

[Sir Charles]

You're very feisty for a guy with a Masters in Divinity.

I like that.

[Ari]

Stephen, I've never done this before, but I'm going to reply on Brown by linking to something I wrote. I really am sorry about that. This appears to be thread in which I cover myself in shame. Also, I won't argue with the Kansas historical society, but no, free-soilers was the name commonly in currency at the time. Then as now, Free-Soilers, spelled with upper-case letters, would have referred to the political party. Having said that, let me back off a bit. Perhaps inside Kansas -- I've not done research there and so can't know -- people used the term free-stater. But nationally, that was not the term in use.

[Ari]

I seriously can't believe I just did that. I'm the world's biggest tool. "Look at me. I've written something on this subject. I crave attention." Gah.

[Ari]

Finally, who one blames for the coming of the war -- by the way, like you, I blame what was then called the Slave Power -- is not the key variable in arguing the impact that Brown had on abolitionism narrowly, anti-slavery politics more broadly, or the cause of a free Kansas. I know that people have made the case you're making (see the linked review above), but those people are both wrong on the merits and the morality. The thing is, one can believe, as I and you both do, that the northern Whigs and Democrats were too willing to compromise on core issues on the road to the war. But getting from there to seeing Brown in a favorable light is a really huge leap. Particualrly, again, because Brown became an albatross for the abolitionists.

Maybe a counterfactual* will help make this case. Imagine that Charles Sumner had been caned by Preston Brooks and Brown had not killed around the same time. The outrage about the crime against Kansas -- the effort to railroad through the pro-slavery Lecompton Constitution -- the repugnant Fugitive Slave Act, and the caning of Sumner likely would have mobilized hundreds of thousands of people to embrace anti-slavery politics, and, in some cases, outright abolitionism. Instead, a kind of moral equivalence ruled the day, with Kansas, Sumner, and the Fugitive Slave Law on one side of the docket, along with the Slavocracy that lurked behind each of those things, and Brown, with the abolitionists he ostensibly represented, on the other. In sum, anti-slavery poltiics continued to appear, to most whites in the North, outside the mainstream for much longer because of Brown.

* Really, a counterfactual? It's shark-jumping day for Ari.