One Giant Penis in Charleston

One Giant Penis in Charleston

Symbols, Signs, and Brothels in Charleston History

Charleston PenisBrothels have used signs and symbols to attract customers, identify a house discreetly, or create a recognizable public image. The symbols varied by place and period; no single mark was universal. In Charleston, hearts in shutters and a phallic carving above the doorway at 22 State Street have prompted speculation about local brothel signals. These details make for a compelling story, but a suggestive symbol is not, by itself, proof that a building was a brothel or that its owners intended the symbol as advertising.

Heart-shaped cutouts in shutters are often described in Charleston as signals connected with houses of prostitution. A heart can suggest love, romance, or sexual availability, while shutters could provide privacy and control over what passersby saw. Hearts also appear as decorative motifs, so their presence alone may not establish a building’s use.

Charleston brothelsOne of the clearest examples of suggestive brothel signage comes from San Francisco’s Barbary Coast. In his 1933 history of the district, Herbert Asbury described a brothel known as “At the Sign of the Red Rooster.” Outside of a prominent building stood a large scarlet rooster figure with a red light burning in its beak; a sign identified the establishment by name. Asbury also described red lights outside brothels and painted signs bearing a house’s name or information about its workers. His account shows that some U.S. brothels used openly suggestive imagery but may not actually establish a nationwide custom.

While Phallic images have a long history in communication, their meanings often depended on the context.

charleston brothel markingsIn ancient Roman settings, phallic carvings and amulets could represent sexuality, fertility, good fortune, or protection from the “evil eye.” The popular claim that carved penises in Pompeii acted as arrows pointing customers to brothels is both accepted, and disputed by historians.

The prominent Phallic carving above the doorway at 22 State Street in the historic district of Charleston remains unconfirmed as an actual brothel symbol. The property is identified as the Johnson–Poinsett Tenements, built around 1841; that description notes the central archway and unusual stucco phallic carving, but does not identify the carving as a brothel marker. However, that does not prove or disprove its use over the last 185 years. We simply don’t know.

Given Charleston’s reputation as the Las Vegas of the colonial period. It should not come a surprise that brothels were clustered in several parts of Charleston over time. For the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the strongest documented concentration of brothels was in the area around King, Queen, Beaufain, and Logan Streets. A 2024 Clemson historic-preservation thesis mapped brothel addresses using city directories. It found this area to be the densest red-light district in the city, with brothels spreading north and east in some periods of Charleston’s history.

A Sanborn map’s notation “F.B.,” meaning “female boarding,” could serve as a discreet label for a brothel. In the early twentieth century, Beresford Street—renamed Fulton Street in 1942—became known as the heart of the local red-light district. The neighborhood’s reputation and records were often a more reliable way of identifying brothels than any one architectural feature.

The history of prostitution’s legal status in Charleston is complicated. Local authorities at times tolerated prostitution and attempted to regulate it – often charging for local licenses and medical exams administered by the police. During the Civil War, Union-occupied cities often used the same process that required sex workers to obtain licenses and undergo regular medical examinations.

Like most other social issues, Charleston’s toleration for prostitution did not end all at once. During World War One the Navy experienced the side effects of the trade as many of the sailors in Charleston had fallen victim to illness. By 1941, U.S. military leaders had learned their lesson and pressured City Council to remove the vice from the Beresford Street area, and the property owners later sought a new street name.

The state-level legal change followed: a local property-history account reports that South Carolina ratified legislation making prostitution illegal on May 17, 1942. That distinction matters: 1941 marks the city’s crackdown on the district; 1942 marks the reported statewide criminalization, rather than the first appearance of laws regulating prostitution.

Today these symbols in Charleston’s architecture still invite questions about Charleston’s past relationship with the sex trade. Hearts on shutters remain part of local speculation; phallic imagery has varied meanings across American cultures.

At 22 State Street, the striking outline of a two-story penis carved above the door may be a lead—but it is not a conclusion. The truth is we simply don’t know why someone felt the need to carve such a symbol, and we probably never will.

 

Book a History Tour with Cooper and explore even more about Charleston’s amazing story!

Find more educational resources on our History Education Page
The story of James Island

The story of James Island

 James Island, a big island with an even bigger history!

 

James Island is often said to have been named for James, Duke of York, who later became King James II of England. However, there is no primary evidence that is true.

James Island SCJames Island helped shape Charleston through agriculture, harbor defense, and the enduring culture of its people. Across the Ashley River from the peninsula, this South Carolina sea island supported the city long before bridges connected their neighborhoods. Its story reaches from ancient Indigenous communities to Revolutionary War soldiers, celebrated musicians, and families who transformed emancipation into landownership.

The origins of James Island begin with the coastal landscape. Sea level changes over thousands of years helped shape South Carolina’s sea islands, leaving higher ground surrounded by tidal waterways and marshes. These environments provided shellfish, fishing grounds, and transportation routes that attracted people long before European settlement.

Archaeological discoveries near Lighthouse Point reveal a community living around Charleston Harbor approximately 4,500 years ago. Shell deposits, pottery, and evidence of houses show that this landscape already supported human life. Centuries later, the Stono people used the island seasonally. English settlement after 1670 disrupted their territory, and colonial pressure forced the Stono chief to relinquish claims to the island in 1684.

In 1671, colonial officials ordered a settlement called James Towne on James Island. No evidence of that planned town has been found. Instead, scattered farms developed beside creeks and rivers, creating a rural community whose connections with Charleston depended on boats.

James Island became part of the agricultural network that sustained Charleston’s expanding economy. Early activities included raising livestock, cutting timber, fishing, and growing provisions. Indigo became an important cash crop during the eighteenth century, followed by valuable Sea Island cotton after the American Revolution.

These products linked island fields with Charleston’s merchants, waterfront warehouses, and Atlantic trade. Food supported the growing population, while export crops generated business for shippers and traders. The island’s waterways made these exchanges possible before road connections existed.

slavery on james island That prosperity depended on slavery. According to the town’s historical summary, James Island had 21 plantations, 1,533 enslaved people, and 193 white residents in 1860. Enslaved Africans and their descendants supplied much of the labor and agricultural knowledge behind plantation production.

James Island also controlled important approaches to the city. Fort Johnson guarded the harbor, while inland routes connected neighboring islands with the mainland. During the British campaign against Charleston in 1780, the island formed part of the advancing army’s route.

One famous visitor arrived as a soldier. Thaddeus Kościuszko, the Polish military engineer who served the American cause, led troops at Dills Bluff on November 14, 1782. His force attacked a British woodcutting detachment but encountered stronger resistance than expected. Captain William Wilmot was killed, and Kościuszko narrowly escaped. The encounter was the Continental Army’s final combat action in South Carolina.

During the Civil War, James Island again became essential to Charleston’s defenses. Fort Johnson fired the signal shot that opened the bombardment of Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861. Confederate victory at Secessionville in June 1862 blocked a Union advance toward the city. Fortifications across the island helped prolong Confederate control of Charleston.

The celebrated 54th Massachusetts Infantry also fought at Grimball’s Landing in July 1863, shortly before its assault on Fort Wagner.

Gullah on james island James Island contributed to Charleston’s cultural identity through its Gullah communities. Their religious traditions, music, language, and family networks preserved African influences across generations, despite slavery and later segregation.

Composer George Gershwin visited a Black church on James Island during his 1934 stay in the Charleston area. Charleston author DuBose Heyward helped introduce him to local Gullah culture while they worked on the opera Porgy and Bess. Gershwin lodged on nearby Folly Beach, but his encounters with the Gullah on James Island became the foundation of the opera’s musical development.

Locally significant residents deserve attention alongside famous visitors. Simeon Pinckney, formerly enslaved and a Union veteran, purchased twenty acres on the island in 1877. His achievement illustrates how Black families pursued independence through property ownership after emancipation.

After the Civil War, James Island remained largely agricultural. Freed families established communities at Sol Legare and Grimball, buying land, building churches, and supporting schools.

Later bridges, paved roads, and residential development brought the island into Charleston’s suburban expansion. Farms became neighborhoods, and daily travel increasingly replaced the older dependence on boats. Yet historic landscapes still explain the city’s deeper foundations.

Understanding James Island means recognizing the people who fed Charleston, defended its approaches, enriched its culture, and built communities beyond the peninsula. Its history gives Charleston’s familiar streets a wider context, connecting the celebrated port city to the surrounding land and the generations whose work sustained it.

Book a History Tour with Cooper and explore even more about Charleston’s amazing story!

Find more educational resources on our History Education Page
Why Thomas Jefferson Shipped a Dead Moose to France

Why Thomas Jefferson Shipped a Dead Moose to France

Why Thomas Jefferson Shipped a Dead Moose to France

Thomas Jefferson imageIn 1787, Thomas Jefferson found himself involved in one of the strangest scientific arguments in early American history. The future president was living in Paris, representing the young United States in France, when he decided that the best way to settle an international debate was to ship a dead moose across the Atlantic Ocean.

Not a drawing of a moose. Not a written description. An actual moose.

In an attempt to defend America’s reputation, Thomas Jefferson arranged to have the animal’s skin, skeleton, and antlers of a very large Moose sent from New Hampshire to France.

One of Europe’s most respected naturalists at the time was a French scientist named  Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon. Buffon was the author of the hugely influential Histoire naturelle, a massive study of the natural world.

Buffon argued that animals in the Americas tended to be smaller and weaker than animals in Europe. According to his theory, the climate and environment of the New World caused animals to “degenerate.” It was not exactly a flattering review of America.

Other European writers pushed the idea even further, suggesting that humans living in America might also become weaker or less capable over time. Thomas Jefferson strongly disagreed.

Jefferson was an amateur scientist and obsessive collector of information about plants, animals, geography, weather, and just about anything else that could be measured. In his Notes on the State of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson directly challenged Buffon’s claims.

His basic argument was simple: American animals were not all smaller, and Jefferson had just the animal to prove it- the moose.

Thomas Jefferson and the mooseThe American moose presented a rather large problem for Buffon’s theory because a full-grown moose is difficult to describe as small, weak, or unimpressive, and Thomas Jefferson wanted Buffon to see one for himself.

In January 1786, Jefferson wrote to contacts in America asking them to obtain specimens of North American animals. He particularly wanted a moose, including its skin, skeleton, and antlers.

Eventually, New Hampshire political leader and Revolutionary War general John Sullivan took on the assignment. Sullivan apparently took Thomas Jefferson’s request very seriously.

According to Jefferson’s later description, Sullivan essentially organized a winter campaign to get the animal. Hunters traveled through deep snow, located a herd, killed a moose in the wilderness, and then had to cut roughly 20 miles of road so the carcass could be moved out.

Once Sullivan finally had the moose packed and ready for shipment, the captain who was supposed to carry the box to Europe sailed without it.

Sullivan wrote Thomas Jefferson in May 1787, explaining that the box containing the moose skin, skeleton, and antlers had been left behind, either accidentally or deliberately. He immediately began making new arrangements to send the unfortunate animal through Boston or New York and eventually onward to France.

For a short time, Jefferson believed the entire shipment had been lost. Imagine explaining that diplomatic crisis: “The good news is that relations with France remain excellent. The bad news is that we appear to have misplaced the moose.”

Fortunately, the shipment eventually resurfaced. By late September 1787, Thomas Jefferson finally had his prize in Paris. On October 1, Thomas Jefferson arranged for the specimen to be delivered to Buffon.

The specimen was not exactly in showroom condition. The long trip had damaged the skin, and much of the moose’s hair had fallen out. Still, the skeleton demonstrated what Thomas Jefferson wanted Buffon to understand: this was an enormous North American animal.

According to Jefferson, Buffon was convinced.

Thomas Jefferson and his gift of a moose

Years later, Thomas Jefferson remembered Buffon admitting that he had been misinformed about several American species and saying that he intended to correct the errors in a future volume of his work. Buffon died in 1788 before making the substantial published corrections Jefferson hoped to see.

It Was Never Really About the Moose. This strange episode in history makes more sense when you remember how new the United States was.

The Revolutionary War had ended only a few years earlier. Americans were trying to convince Europe that the United States was not simply an uncivilized backwater at the edge of the world. Thomas Jefferson believed Buffon’s theory was part of a larger European misunderstanding of America.

Jefferson’s response was wonderfully eighteenth-century: gather measurements, write several thousand words of argument, recruit a Revolutionary War general, send hunters into the snowy wilderness, kill a moose, strip it to the bones, put everything in a box, ship it across the Atlantic, and deliver it to one of Europe’s leading scientists.

Today we might send an email. Thomas Jefferson sent a moose.

And somewhere along the way, that poor dead animal became part of America’s campaign to convince Europe that the new United States was much bigger, stronger, and considerably harder to dismiss than many Europeans imagined.

 

Book a History Tour with Cooper and explore even more about Charleston’s amazing story!

Find more educational resources on our History Education Page
Women in the Revolutionary War

Women in the Revolutionary War

Women, the real heroes of the Revolutionary War

women in the revolutionary warWomen who traveled with the Continental Army played an essential role in the Revolutionary War. Commonly called camp followers, they were usually soldiers’ wives, partners, children, servants, laundresses, nurses, cooks, or sutlers who sold food and small necessities. The name can make them sound like spectators. In reality, their work helped transform an improvised force into an army able to remain in the field. They marched with the baggage and handled labor that kept soldiers fed, clothed, cleaner, and ready for duty.

Most women did not enter army life for adventure. The Revolutionary War destroyed homes, divided communities, and removed wage earners from households. Women from occupied areas often had nowhere safe to remain. Others could not support children after their husband enlisted, especially when military pay arrived late or not at all. Following the army offered rations, work, protection, and contact with a husband.

Revolutionary War baggage trainsDuring Revolutionary War marches, commanders required women to remain with the baggage train behind the fighting formations. Most walked while carrying bedding, clothing, cookware, personal property, and sometimes infants. Army wagons were reserved for ammunition, tents, hospital stores, provisions, and official baggage, so orders often prohibited women from riding. Although necessity sometimes overruled policy. Illness, pregnancy, young children, or exhaustion could lead to travel by horse or wagon.

The most common paid work for women in the Revolutionary War involved laundry, mending, and hospital service. Laundry demanded hauling water, finding fuel, tending fires, boiling clothing, drying garments, and using scarce soap. Clean shirts and bedding reduced filth, lice, discomfort, and health risks. Mending preserved uniforms and blankets the supply system could not easily replace. Women serving as nurses changed bedding, cleaned wards and chamber pots, prepared food, and cared for weak patients.

At home, women cooked for their own families, but Revolutionary War conditions sometimes required them to feed larger groups. They gathered water and firewood, managed limited rations, baked bread, and cooked over open fires. At Yorktown, Sarah Osborn washed clothing, prepared beef, bread, and coffee, and carried food to soldiers working in the trenches. Her effort allowed men to keep digging defenses and standing duty. Sutlers also sold provisions and necessities when supplies were delayed or inadequate.

Women traveling with the army were not independent civilian visitors. During the Revolutionary War, they followed military routines and obeyed regimental or general orders. Commanders often limited the number of women attached to units, regulated their selling of goods, and removed women considered disruptive. Women accused of theft, prostitution, or unlicensed trading could be arrested, tried, expelled, or physically punished. They lived inside the army’s disciplinary system without receiving the status or rights of enlisted soldiers.

Continental Army leaders had mixed views of women during the Revolutionary War. George Washington and other officers complained that families slowed marches, crowded wagons, consumed provisions, and complicated discipline. These concerns grew during campaigns, when speed and a lighter baggage train mattered. Yet officers recognized that laundresses, nurses, cooks, and sutlers supplied necessary services. By assigning work, issuing rations, and regulating women instead of excluding them, military leaders revealed a dependence on female labor.

Revolutionary War payCompensation for Revolutionary War women often consisted of food rations, small wages, or payment for assigned work. Some women received reduced rations compared with soldiers, and laundresses could be attached to a set number of men. Payment remained uncertain because the Continental Army frequently lacked money and supplies. A woman might complete exhausting labor and still receive late or incomplete wages. Conditions also depended on rank, race, freedom, and personal connections. Officers’ wives generally had better wages and shelter, while enslaved women and women with no social or political connection could be forced to work for no or very low compensation.

The impact of women on Revolutionary War army life was greater than their numbers suggest. They preserved clothing, improved sanitation, supported hospitals, stretched food supplies, maintained households, and cared for children traveling with the troops. They preserved family ties and ordinary life in unstable camps. They understood that every meal prepared, shirt washed, blanket repaired, and patient tended allowed another soldier to drill, march, build defenses, or stand guard.

Women did more than follow the Continental Army. The Revolutionary War depended on supply, health, movement, discipline, and endurance as much as battlefield courage. Women met those needs while facing hunger, harsh weather, disease, military punishment, and enemy attack. Their work strengthened the army’s ability to remain in the field through campaigns and winter encampments. By sustaining the needs and morale of the soldiers, they became part of the military system itself. Their contribution to the Revolutionary War was not secondary; it was essential to the fighting force, impactful, and most often forgotten.

 

Book a History Tour with Cooper and explore even more about Charleston’s amazing story!

Find more educational resources on our History Education Page
Johns Island Stud is horse racing history

Johns Island Stud is horse racing history

Johns Island Stud: Charleston’s Early Thoroughbred Horse Racing Legacy

johns island horse racing Long before Kentucky became famous for Thoroughbred horses, Charleston had an important racehorse breeding center of its own. The Johns Island Stud was established around 1750 at Fenwick Hall, a plantation on John’s Island owned by Edward Fenwick Sr. It became one of the best-known horse breeding programs in America and helped introduce carefully selected English racing bloodlines to the American South.

Today, Fenwick Hall stands near the intersection of Maybank Highway and River Road, close to the Stono River. Drivers crossing Johns Island pass within a short distance of a place that once held expensive imported horses, large brick stables, grazing land, and a private racecourse.

Edward Fenwick Sr. was part of Charleston’s wealthy planter class and a member of the Chivalry. But he was also serious about improving racehorses. He traveled overseas and imported stallions and mares from England, including the foundational bloodlines of the modern Thoroughbred.

This work on Johns Island began decades before Kentucky developed the organized breeding industry that later made the Bluegrass State famous. Racing existed in early Kentucky by the 1780s, but Fenwick was already importing, breeding, tracking pedigrees, and testing racing stock at the Johns Island Stud by 1750. His horses and their descendants later helped other breeders in the Carolinas, Virginia, and Kentucky improve their own bloodlines – laying the foundation for the modern Thoroughbred industry.

John's Island RacingHorse racing was more than a sport in colonial Charleston. It was part of the city’s social calendar. Fenwick helped organize the South Carolina Jockey Club, and races brought planters, merchants, visitors, gamblers, and horsemen together. Before the Revolution, major Charleston races were held at the Newmarket Course (located directly beneath the ramps of Interstate 26 near its King Street exit). Race days became public spectacles, while dinners, parties, business deals, gambling, and social gatherings surrounded the racing schedule. In a city built around trade and personal connections, the racetrack became another place where wealth, politics, and status were displayed for all to see.

The success of the Johns Island breeding operation depended heavily on enslaved Black horsemen. While many of the jobs on the Johns Island Stud would have been the responsibility of enslaved labor. Two enslaved men, Sharper and Toney, would stand out as the stud’s most famous jockeys. Their work would have required skill in riding, conditioning, handling, and understanding valuable racehorses. Like modern American jockeys, they worked in a sport controlled by wealthy white owners while receiving little recognition in the written record.

The Revolutionary War changed everything for the Johns Island Stud. Edward Fenwick Sr. died in 1775, and his son Edward Fenwick Jr. took over. The Fenwick family supported the British cause, creating serious political and financial problems after independence. Although, because of the British sympathies, British General Sir Henry Clinton used Fenwick Hall as his Charleston headquarters during the British occupation of Charleston in 1780. The main house survived the war, but racing in Charleston was interrupted, property was lost, and Fenwick Jr. would face confiscation of his property because of his Loyalist ties.

The Johns Island stud was revived after the war, but the damage had been done. Financial losses connected to the Revolution and confiscation forced Fenwick Jr. to sell much of his prized racing stock in 1788. That sale helped spread the Johns Island bloodlines to other American breeders. Suddenly, the breakup of the Johns Island Stud expanded high-quality horse breeding far beyond Fenwick Hall.

The Johns Island Stud horses raced both at the course at Fenwick Hall, part of which is now Maybank Highway, and at the Newmarket course before the Revolution, but after the war the South Carolina Jockey Club created the Washington Race Course. It opened in 1792 on land that is now Hampton Park. The one-mile loop, the road that encircles the park today.

Hampton Park Race TrackWashington Race Course became the center of Charleston’s famous Race Week. Thousands came for racing, food, betting, parties, dinners, and balls. The horses and breeding traditions developed by families such as the Fenwicks helped create the horse culture that made this later track possible. The Johns Island Stud itself was not located at Hampton Park, but created the foundation of breeders and Jockey Club leaders who built Charleston’s racing tradition.

Today, Fenwick Hall survives, but the original racehorse stable is gone. A related carriage-house and stable structure survives in altered form, while the private racecourse has disappeared into the modern Johns Island landscape. What remains is the larger story: Charleston was breeding elite racehorses before Kentucky became America’s best-known horse center, and that history began on Johns Island, in a field beside the Stono River at Fenwick Hall.

 

Book a History Tour with Cooper and explore even more about Charleston’s amazing story!

Find more educational resources on our History Education Page
Slaves in Charleston…Three Days of Freedom

Slaves in Charleston…Three Days of Freedom

Three Days of Freedom: Christmas, a Slave, and Charleston

Slave ChristmasChristmas in historic Charleston carried two different meanings. For wealthy families, the season brought dinners, visiting, music, and celebration. For slaves, Christmas meant three days of freedom. A short break from labor, freedom of movement, gifts, special food, alcohol, and opportunities to earn money.

Across South Carolina, a three-day Christmas holiday for enslaved individuals was very common, generally beginning December 24 and ending December 26. Some plantations allowed more time and others less. Essential chores continued, but regular field labor was suspended. For slaves who worked under constant supervision, those three days created an unusual space to rest, socialize, celebrate, and reconnect with family.

Although in Charleston, freedom of movement for a slave was not uncommon. Outside of Charleston, enslaved people usually needed permission to leave a plantation, household, or workplace. During Christmas, owners of these slaves would issue written passes for visits to relatives on neighboring plantations or in nearby communities. Because families could be separated by ownership, a Christmas visit carried enormous importance. For many slaves, the holiday offered one of the few chances in the year to see family.

slave familyCharleston records preserve powerful examples. In 1840, the Charleston Courier described an enslaved man named Fortune who received a Christmas ticket to visit his family on Wadmalaw Island. South Carolinian John Andrew Jackson used the relaxed movement of Christmas to escape bondage in 1846. Traveling toward Charleston, Jackson presented himself as someone visiting another plantation for the holiday. Once in the city, he joined enslaved men working on the wharves, earned money, and eventually found passage north. His story shows how slaves could sometimes turn a temporary privilege into something more permanent.

Money was another important part of the Christmas holiday. Historical evidence shows that enslaved workers who normally labored without wages could sometimes earn cash through extra work during the Christmas recess. In Charleston, where slaves worked on docks, streets, workshops, markets, and in private homes, this gave some people a rare measure of economic control. Even a small amount of money could be used for food, clothing, gifts, travel, or savings.

Gift giving also linked slaveholders and the people they enslaved. In Charleston in 1759, printer Peter Timothy announced that part of the proceeds from a publication would go to Felix, his enslaved assistant, to increase Felix’s “Christmas Box.” The Christmas box was an English custom in which servants or workers received money, leftovers, or small gifts. Slave children were often invited to the main house with a large stocking to be filled with fruit and gifts by the owners.

slaves dancingSome enslavers supplied fresh meat or foods uncommon in ordinary rations, and enslaved communities prepared communal meals with music and dancing. On some plantations, the slaves were invited into the house for a celebratory Christmas dinner prepared by the family, including whiskey, rum, cider, brandy, and other drinks.

With freedom came opportunity. This became especially visible during Charleston’s Christmas scare of 1765. Isaac Huger reported that his wife had overheard enslaved men discussing what authorities interpreted as a possible uprising. Lieutenant Governor William Bull mobilized militia and patrols, while prominent Charleston slaveholder Henry Laurens later suggested the alarm had been exaggerated. The episode exposed how nervous slaveholders became when slaves received temporary freedom to assemble, travel, dance, feast, and speak beyond ordinary supervision.

Christmas in Charleston was therefore a season of contradiction. Slaves could receive gifts, travel with permission, earn money, eat better food, drink alcohol, dance, and visit family. For three days, the rigid routines of slavery could loosen. But the system remained intact. The deeper meaning of the holiday lies in how enslaved people used a narrow opening inside an oppressive system to strengthen family ties, build community, celebrate survival, and sometimes move closer to freedom itself.

 

Book a History Tour with Cooper and explore even more about Charleston’s amazing story!

Find more educational resources on our History Education Page