September 2013 – Page 5 – U.S. to 1877

September 17, 2013

Sweet Carolina (Chapter 11 Taylor)

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

In Chapter 11 of American Colonies Taylor discusses the life of the colonists and the beginnings of the Carolina colonies. Carolina was started in defiance of the Spanish, a way for the English to try and assert their dominance. Taylor made an interesting point about how back in 1607 the English had to hide their colonies but then in 1670 when Charleston was founded they did it to challenge the Spanish and show that they were no longer scared. This was bold but also somewhat foolish and the Lord Proprietors found themselves needing to grow in numbers quickly. To do this they promised freedom of religion and large portions of land to draw settlers to come to Carolina.

Originally Carolina was under the control of 8 Lords Proprietors. It became apparent to the colonists living in Carolina though that these 8 men were not well suited to be leading the colony. The Lord’s Proprietors weren’t able to effectually lead the people and didn’t have any power in the colony. After they lost their power changes were made to the colony, such as a state sponsored religion and soon there was a revolution. The revolutionaries decided they wanted the crown to control them, so in 1729 the crown bought out 7 of the 8 Proprietors

Slavery was also a large attraction for plantation owners in the Carolinas. The Lords Proprietors promised the plantation owners total power over the slaves. After the Stono Rebellion, which was brought up in a previous post here http://sites.davidson.edu/his141/contrasting-slave-systems-in-colonial-america-inhuman-bondage-ch-6/, the slave owners became much more strict in their dealings with the slaves. Rice was the large cash crop of the region and this demanded numerous workers. Because of the large amount of slaves, the owners lived in constant fear of rebellion. Taylor makes this point using a quote from a slave owner about how they wished their slaves weren’t so dangerous and cumbersome.

Taylor also mentions Georgia in this chapter but he glazes over it. They were the colony that no one really wanted to be a part of but it was necessary. This is how Taylor portrays it. He does try to make the point that it is not the hoodlum colony that many people in modern times have made it out to be but it is still used primarily as a place for beggars and dissenters and as a buffer zone to stop slaves from fleeing into Florida as easily.

September 17, 2013

Discussing British Aggression and the Overlooking of Georgia

A major theme in American Colonies in this week’s reading is England’s emergence as a major imperial power in the mid-17th century. Two of England’s earliest attempts at colonizing the “New World”, Jamestown and Roanoke, were relatively low risk endeavors and went widely unnoticed by the French, the Spanish, and the Dutch. Although Roanoke failed miserably, Jamestown’s survival followed by moderate success and establishment of additional settlements in Virginia officially marked England’s entrance into the “New World”. When compared to the empire the Spanish had forged in present day Mexico and Florida, England’s territory in Virginia and Massachusetts was diminutive. However, England’s confidence grew significantly as the 17th century drew onward and in 1670 they founded Charles Town on the mouth of the Ashley River in present day South Carolina. This was a bold statement by the English because it defied Spanish claims to the coast and was much closer to the major Spanish city of San Agustin than the English settlement of Jamestown.
As Taylor describes the Lords Proprietor that controlled the Carolina territory and their methods of attracting settlers and actually settling the massive amount of land they impulsively “claimed”, he portrays the English as these daring up-starts who are directly challenging the Spanish for superiority in the Americas. Taylor also depicts the English as a country determined to thrive in the Americas and through their relentless recruitment of Englishmen to the Carolina territory, they were able to construct a colony formidable enough to prevent the Spanish from continuing their attacks. I consider Taylor’s representation of the English’s sharp rise in aggressiveness toward claiming and settling land in the Americas relatively easy to comprehend and overall quite effective. However, I found Taylor’s section regarding the establishment of Georgia less than adequate.
I understand there is tremendous skill required to write concisely but I found Taylor’s section on the colony of Georgia to be lacking significant depth. Despite providing a history (even a brief one) of Native people and their experiences prior to European arrival in previous areas of focus, Taylor offered no information about Native people and their existence in Georgia before it became a British colony. Despite Taylor’s decision to leave Natives out, I did not find his section on Georgia completely distasteful. I appreciate the distinctions he made between Georgia and the rest of the British colonies. For example, he discussed the trustees’ decision to forbid the importation or possession of slaves until 1751. He also described the difference in crop cultivation, most colonies grew tobacco, indigo, or rice but Georgia produced hemp, flax, mulberry, and grapes during the early years of the colony. Perhaps the most noticeable difference he described was the colony of Georgia’s attempt to prohibit rum consumption on the grounds that it “deterred hard work and moral uplift”.
Lastly, I would like to comment on a Georgia’s role as a British colony in the 17th century. As my classmate Evan Farese mentioned, Carolina was initially intended as a buffer zone between Virginia and Florida. Following the economic success in the Carolinas, the crowned deemed it necessary to create Georgia as a buffer zone between the Carolinas and Spanish Florida. Although it was not a glamorous one at the start, Georgia did play a very important role in the English expansion in the Americas.

September 17, 2013

In Chapter 6 of Inhuman Bondage, Davis attempted to demonstrate how African slavery differed from region to region in the New World. He explored the origins and development of slavery in the northern, Chesapeake, and southern colonies.

Slavery initially generated significant resistance in the northern colonies. Davis cited a clash between slavery and religious ideology, particularly from the Puritans and Quakers. While antislavery sentiments existed in the English settlements in the north, the Dutch lacked the white labor supported by an influx of immigrants, and therefore looked to Africa for slavery from an early stage. Davis conveyed that although the northern colonies had low percentages of slave populations, a significantly greater percentage of labor came from African slaves. However, Davis’s central theme pertaining to the North was that although slavery existed, the North did not rely on slave labor like its southern counterparts.

Davis depicted a chronic progression of slavery and racial relations in the Chesapeake region. Initially, Africans experienced a form of servitude very similar to white laborers. However, as the proportion of white servants declined, African slavery increased at a remarkable rate, and racial distinction became more prevalent. Davis noted the distinguishing factor of Virginia slavery consisted of the dramatic natural increase in slave population. While this growth benefitted planters economically, the resulting fear among whites had a tremendous social and political impact. Essentially, whites of different status began to unify over race in resistance to the growing black population. Davis then cited an Edmund S. Morgan argument claiming that racism played a vital role in forming republican ideology in America.

The South featured a totally unique brand of slavery. At the outset, slaves experienced more freedom and equality, as Davis mentioned a source that implied blacks possessed the ability to vote at one point. The South, expressed vividly by South Carolina, relied heavily upon slave labor. In fact, slave population significantly outnumbered white population in the region, resulting in more social and cultural unity among slaves than in any other colonial region. However, slaveowners, particularly in South Carolina following the Stono Rebellion, subjected their slaves to extremely harsh treatment.

Davis pointed out a key characteristic regarding North American slavery. With the exception of South Carolina, no colonies formed with the intent of exploiting slave labor. It appeared to be a gradual and fairly universal movement in the colonies. While the slavery differed among the colonies, several important and somewhat surprising similarities existed. For example, contrary to my prior knowledge, colonists used slaves in a variety of ways and a hierarchy formed among slaves.

My least favorite aspect of Davis’s style was the lack of organization within the chapter. While he divided it regionally, I think he could have done a clearer job of breaking up the chapter. In addition, I found it a little confusing as he jumped from one topic to another within a region.

September 17, 2013

Carolina (Chapters 7 and 11)

In Chapters 7 and 11 of American Colonies a major theme is the idea that the land in the New World is land that is not owned by anyone and therefore it can be given away by the British. The British landed in South Carolina for the first time in 1670. Three ships carrying 200 colonists had sailed from Barbados to the mouth of the Ashley River, where they would found Charles Town, named for King Charles II. This represented the founding of Carolina, a land further south than Virginia. This meant even hotter summers and more miserable humidity. For a group sailing from the crowded heat of the small island of Barbados though, the wide open empty space and less intense climate of Carolina was inviting. The space was given by the King to a council called the Lords Proprietor which was a member of 8 Lords who were to govern over the new space. Essentially, this made sure that the King would not have to be bothered by the trivial matters of starting a colony, but ensured that people he trusted would take care of it. And so Carolina was formed as the newest British colony in the new world.

The location of Carolina was very helpful from the King’s perspective. Charles II’s main interest in the New World was the tobacco output that Virginia was supplying and until Carolina was founded, there was essentially nothing between Jamestown and San Agustin, the Spanish colony. Carolina acted as a buffer between the two colonies as it was in fact much closer to San Augustin than Jamestown. The location of Charles Town was also a bold statement by the British who essentially said that they weren’t scared to claim any land they wanted in the New World, no matter how close it was to Spanish colonies. This claim was challenged by the Spanish who attacked up the coast and eventually destroyed Port Royal, a town even further south than Charles Town. The amount of British colonists coming into Carolina was far to great, especially in comparison the amount going into San Agustin. The Spanish quickly became far outnumbered and stopped attacking. The population of South Carolina grew up to 6,600 by 1700.

How did they get all these settlers to go to South Carolina and increase the population so much? They incentivized. They were prepared to offer each colonist 150 acres for each member of his family if he would make the voyage over to Carolina. Even if you couldn’t afford to make the journey yourself, you could become an indentured servant, where you would pledge to serve someone for four to seven years if they payed your way across the Atlantic. After a servant was freed, they were given land and tools and became a member of the New World. Many young men found their way across the ocean in that way. The British justified giving away all the land they wanted to, not realizing that some of it may belong to Natives who were already there. What shocks me as a reader is how Indians did not revolt as the British forged further and further in to their land. While the land that the British were giving away seemed to have no owner, I’m sure it had some very important meaning to Indians of the area.

I think that the founding of the Carolinas was important for the British because it sent a message to the Spanish and it allowed British yet another place to populate in the New World. The New World was also a place in which many enslaved people found a home. By 1700, out of the 6,600 people living in South Carolina, 2,800 were black. I think that my classmate Funderburg raises a good point about how eventually the white’s goal became to make the African slaves angry at the Indians as the British feared that one day the enslaved people would join forces with the Natives and overthrow the whites.

September 17, 2013

Contrasting Slave Systems in Colonial America (Inhuman Bondage Ch. 6)

Most history books focus on slavery as a Southern colony decision, a system where wealthy plantation owners use harsh techniques to keep their slaves obedient. Davis, however, explains the use of slaves in the other colonies, and the difference between the slave systems in the Southern colonies.

I had never heard of the rather large slave culture in the Middle Colonies, as Davis describes. While the English on the mainland may have been leery of slavery, the Dutch influence in New York allowed for slavery to develop. The Dutch, lacking the rush of emigrants that other countries had, needed laborers, and turned to free and enslaved blacks for that force. Some worked in fields, but many blacks worked in factories, too. Since there was no one staple crop in the North, those colonies did not rely on an entirely slave labor economy. Many blacks worked side-by-side with indentured servants and other whites, as well, making it a more preferable life.

Even though there were slaves in Northern colonies, the slaves in the South still lived a harsher life, with far less of a chance of ever finding freedom. Davis mentions how many Southern planters feared buying slaves from the West Indies and preferred to buy directly from Africa. This reminded me of Davis’s point from the earlier chapter that in the West Indies, the Africans had a stronger culture and a more tight-knit community. This would cause fear in plantation owners’ minds that these slaves would be more likely to organize a revolt. Just as Matt mentioned in his last post (http://sites.davidson.edu/his141/inhuman-bondage-4-5/), I also had never thought of the slave culture in South America and the Caribbean. That culture, however, is important in the reasoning behind the slave trade in the American colonies. If the colonists had not feared these revolts, most slaves would have probably come from the Caribbean, which would have changed the culture of the slave-labor colonies.

Davis also comments on the difference in slave systems in Virginia and South Carolina. Although South Carolina was the only colony that intended to have slaves, they had a more open system. More blacks had a chance of gaining their freedom. When the whites and the blacks mixed, the white owners would sometimes free their mixed children. Just as Davis compared the slave lifestyle between the West Indies and North America, he hints that slave life in South Carolina would be more preferable than life in Virginia, where plantation owners controlled with the whip. The Stono Rebellion caused slave life in South Carolina to change, but in early colonial life the slave systems in the Southern colonies were not as similarly harsh as I previously thought.

September 16, 2013

Inhuman Bondage (ch 6)

In this chapter of Inhuman Bondage, Davis is sure to emphasize the complexity of the institution of colonial slavery. Davis is always careful of traditional boundaries and conceptions, and nothing changes in his conception of the colonist’s treatment of enslaved peoples. One of Davis’s more interesting points was that “the lives of white workers who did emigrate, and who were typically bound to work for a master for seven years, were not significantly different from the lives of most slaves.” (127). Additionally, Davis makes sure to point out the discrepancies between slavery in the different regions while also maintaining that it is inaccurate to think of slavery not existing in the north—for example, “black slaves performed one-third of all physical labor in New York city.”

Another interesting argument Davis makes in this chapter is that the origins of racism happened when slavery become more exclusively black. This, when combined with “white workers increasingly [resenting] the competition from slave workers” (131) made for a dangerous mentality. Later on, racial solidarity would allow for racism against black people in full force, despite the somewhat more tolerant treatment slaves had experienced at the outset of their use in American colonies.

Sperry wrote a blog post that talked about our first reading in Inhuman Bondage and the cruel treatment that slaves faced when being brought the North America. I find it very interesting that the same enslaved people that faced such bad treatment on the way over may have found better treatment in their new “master’s” home depending on where they ended up. I had never considered the regional differences in slave treatment prior to this reading. Davis is similar to Taylor in that he does not use very many long quotes from primary sources, but rather shorter examples in the form of quotes.

September 16, 2013

American Colonies (ch 7 & 11)

In this reading, Taylor emphasizes the increased politicization of the colonies and the ironic social mobility that planters experienced in Virginia at the expense of increasing popularity of using African slaves. Racial solidarity was the common theme throughout both chapters. In Virginia, the Common Planters and Great Planters forgot their differences as Great Planters adopted the customs of “condescension” in order to secure political office. In addition, after Bacon’s rebellion, white immigrants became less common in the Chesapeake, meaning that African Slaves were more utilized. Racial solidarity occurred between the Great Planters and Common Planters in order to attempt to quell a potential rebellion from the African Slaves. Taylor described the Chesapeake whites as “newly obsessed with racial difference.”

Meanwhile, in the Carolinas, something similar was happening on a racial level. The white planters attempted to pit the Indians and the African Slaves against one another; Indians were often paid to bounty hunt escaped slaves, and according to Taylor, “Ultimately, the colonists hoped to pit the Africans against the Indians.” The concept of white solidarity is important in realizing the increased exclusive “Africanization” of slavery as Indian slaves become much used.

This Taylor reading also struck me as focused on the politicization of the colonies. Although Taylor does not have too many primary-source quotes to support it, it appears as though Taylor thinks it important to note that the colonies are no longer merely religious or even religiously focused. For example, the Lords Proprietor in Carolina “assured religious tolerance” in order to attract people. This means that colonies have become more businesses than anything else. Even Georgia, which started out as an idealistic, planned colony, eventually succumbed to the economic pressure to use slavery. Taylor Simmon’s post on 9/11 about the week three readings referenced the two main focuses of chapters 7 and 11. Taylor mentions the “city on a hill” the Puritans attempted to create with their colony. This clear, religious purpose has obviously faded by the time Carolina was established. Additionally, Taylor also says that the relationship with the Indians was not a fearful one, which has also clearly changed by the contentious time period of the 1690’s.

September 15, 2013

Chesapeake and Carolina – Late 17th and Early 18th Centuries

Chapter 7 of American Colonies features Taylor’s description of the development and progression of the Chesapeake Colonies. Colonists in the Chesapeake region sacrificed their quality of life for economic success. Shorter life expectancy, limited opportunity to create a family, and strenuous work permeated the region; a cost many Englishmen willingly accepted to reap the benefits of the tobacco boom during the middle of the 17th century. However, the period of economic prosperity eventually subsided, and political inaptitude resulted in unrest. Essentially, the majority of leaders lacked the experience or qualities to lead, and an imbalanced and corrupt society caused a discontented society. In addition, Governor Berkeley basically controlled trade, policy, and land distribution, and exploited his power with favoritism.

Bacon’s Rebellion in 1676 aptly demonstrated the societal issues. Disputes over the distribution of land and the permission to invade native peoples’ lands led to the major conflict. While Bacon and the rebellion died fairly quickly, distinct changes followed, including the removal of Berkeley from office.

Notable differences occurred following the rebellion in an effort to satisfy the commoners. Changes in policies regarding taxes, native peoples, and land distribution all appeased the common planter. Another noteworthy transition occurred in labor. A decline in white indentured servants due to the impact of Bacon’s Rebellion led to planters looking to Africa for laborers. The dramatic influx of African slaves resulted in a fear of revolt among whites. This fear unfortunately caused severe restrictions to be placed on slaves, and a shared identity and mindset among all whites. This shared identity masked the growing economic inequality between the great and common planters.

The Carolina colonies Taylor depicted differed from the other colonies due to its large land grants, Indian relations, and slave quantity. The massive amount of land offered attracted an elite more dignified than its Chesapeake counterpart. The elite men lived luxurious lives and took pride in expressing their fortune with grace and dignity. The achievement of such success directly resulted from mastering the exploitation of other peoples, namely the African slaves and Indians. Carolina planters amassed an unparalleled amount of African slaves and incredibly secured such a dramatic population imbalance by manipulating the surrounding native peoples through trade. Essentially the colonists offered arms to the natives in return for deerskins and slave capturing. When it became apparent that deerskin trade did not provide a stable economic base, planters turned to the cash crops of rice and indigo. These crops relied upon a steady dose of slave labor, which the planters ensured through severe repression.

I found Taylor’s descriptions of the dynamic change of the Chesapeake colonies and the exploitation carried out by Carolina planters very interesting. I think Taylor successfully portrayed the attitudes and desired appearances of the colonists. However, I did notice a lack of attention paid to the sentiments African slaves and native peoples, especially considering the immense roles both played in the Carolinas.

September 13, 2013

The big picture

We, like Taylor, have been approaching colonial American history in a regional manner – jumping from North to South to Middle colonies as they developed. This has been largely because these regions developed separately from one another – in any given year, someone in Plymouth mightn’t know what someone in Jamestown was up to. This week, that begins to change, as the British colonies in North America begin to cohere. In the spirit of that cohesion, I thought it might be worthwhile to give you all a “big picture” view of what we’ve been studying – so here are two visualizations. The first is a timeline of European colonialism in North America from 1492 to the American Revolution. The different colors represent different imperial powers – Red is Spain, Purple is Dutch, Blue is England, Maroon is Sweden and Green is French:

The second is a map of North America circa 1700, which shows all of the different areas claimed (as distinct from actually settled) by different European powers. Hopefully, together these two documents will give you a sense of what’s been happening across colonial North America, rather than just in each separate region.

September 11, 2013

Inhuman Bondage, Chapters 4 and 5

In the reading from Inhuman Bondage, a section in chapter 4 relates to a subject that we have discussed in another of my classes, Popular Music of the United States. This section refers to the fact that the Portuguese enjoyed hearing the native African music. They “enlisted the slaves to perform at plays and other types of public entertainment, even at royal functions” (94). In contrast, the British forced the slaves to dance to bagpipe music on the ships in an effort to force cultural assimilation. Ironically, the British as well as other European nations became much more interested in authentic African culture and music, especially from the mid 1800s to 1920s. In New York City, young Scottish and Irish men imitated African culture as a means of social critique in a form of musical theater called minstrelsy. They used the African American’s situation to highlight the discrimination they faced as Scotch-Irish. However, the original purpose of minstrelsy changed to fit an upper middle class audience in both America and Europe. Minstrelsy troops attempted to portray an authentic view of slave life on plantations through skits and music, but often there was more Scotch-Irish and European influence than African, and life on plantations was always idealized. It is interesting that the Portuguese displayed this interest in African culture so much earlier than the emersion of minstrelsy and that this interest remained prominent in both America and Europe until the early 1900s. It is also ironic that although the British attemped to assimilate the Africans’ music, their ancestors were later intrigued by an imitation of authentic African culture.

On a separate note, I think the issue that “mihan” raises the in post about the “Curse of Ham” is very interesting. It seems common for Europeans to use religion as a means of justifying slavery as well as colonization, but it also appears that in this way, they possibly twist the meaning of their religious texts merely to suit their own intentions.