complexity – U.S. to 1877

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 his latest post, Sherwood explores the possibility of a relationship between evangicalism and the witch trials of colonial New England. I agree with his conclusion that the relationship is most likely one of contribution on the part of evangicalism. The nature of the sermons at this time pertified churchgoers by evoking a sense of inpending doom and of the closeness of the devil (think of “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”) which would have made the presence of witches in their communities seem more plausible. In combination with the uncertainty and turmoil of the region at this time which we discussed in class, the religious fervour could have easily led a New England colonist to see an illness or the death of an important farm animal as a result of witchcraft than of simple misfortune.

I also think that it is important to look at the effects that the outbreak of witch trials had on the development of the Great Awakening which occured several years later. In chapter 15 of American Colonies, Taylor describes the divide between evangelicals and rationalists which accompanied the proliferation of religious dominations at this time. He writes that reationalists “…rejected the supernatural mysteries and overt emotionalism of evangelical worship” (Taylor 344). Rather than seeing God’s wrath or the Devil’s work in any misfortune, the rationalists looked to science and reason. As the antithesis to evangelical thought, rationalists didn’t believe that God interfered in the world. Therefore, I contend that the witch paranoia of the late 1600s was at least partially responsible for the divide that began to form during the Great Awakening. After the flurry of convictions and executions, government officials were likely embarrassed and wanted to distance themselves from the influence of such intensely emotional religion. As a result they, and others who disapproved of the witch hunting, could have gravitated toward rationalism. In addition, the witch hunting could have been used as support against evangicalism, furthering the opposition to its spread and helping to develop the more moderate and conservative sect of the movement. The relationship between the witch trials and evangicalism is a complex one in which both the witch paranoia and evangicalism influenced the other. It is important not to overlook one’s influence on the other and I would be interested to hear what other people think about this relationship.

Taylor aims to show the more complex side of early American life and not display it so one-sided as many other accounts do. Robbie notes in his post that, Taylor recognizes many groups of people contributed to the colonization of America, not just Europeans, but Natives and Africans, too. I agree with Robbie’s point that the history of America “cannot be developed through a single story line,” because there are too many different groups of people that contributed to the colonization of the New World to only focus on one. More importantly, the path the English took to colonize hinged on the actions of the other European colonizers and the Indians. Taylor forces his readers to consider that the Natives are not always weak and subordinate, and the Europeans do not always easily conquer and colonize.

For example, Taylor portrays the French as more of a tool of the Natives instead of the other way around, as I previously would think. Once the French and Indians established a trade of furs and European goods, the Indians began to dominate the exchange. They “became adept at driving a hard bargain” and when they received higher payment for their furs, the Indians became lazier with their work, while the French still had to hunt and fish to supply the trade (Taylor 97). The French, in starting trade relations with different Indian tribes, were also forced into an unspoken alliance with these tribes. As a result, the Indians expected the French to help in intertribal wars, and the French had to deal with their own casualties as the enemy Indians attacked French villages in retaliation.

In his account of the history of New Spain, Taylor is thorough in his descriptions of the failures of this colonization, not just its successes. While many Spaniards, like tailor Diego de San Lorente, thought they would have a life of riches in Mexico, most early Spanish settlements failed. Eventually, the Spanish began to establish more successful towns and develop strong military protection. Taylor still mentions, however, the opinion of the Spanish king’s prime minister in 1631, who questioned whether the difficulties that came with New World colonization actually strengthened the Spanish empire or only made the homeland weaker (Taylor 66).

Taylor writes one of the more powerful accounts of early American history because he does not write solely from the perspective of the successful European colonizers. He notes the powerful role some Indians did have at the time, details the many failures of the first colonizers, and makes readers notice that the early days of colonization created cultural conflicts that still exist in our country.

Tag: complexity

Witchcraft and the Religious Divide

Chapters 3 & 5 Reading