Uncategorized – Page 11 – American History to 1877

February 16, 2014

Imperial Wars and Crisis

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 18, Taylor shows how the colonies went from being completely a part of the British Empire that was used to further expand it and conquer new land to becoming their own people who would make decisions according to their own interests rather than for the crown. Taylor describes the cause of the colonies’ wanting separation from the crown to be the colonial elite finding a new confidence and ability to challenge the crown. They found this new confidence after the seven years war when the British nearly suffocated the colonists by constricting the trade laws and taxes which drastically negatively changed the colonists’ way of life. Finally, many of them felt it necessary to challenge the crown in order to resume life the way they wanted to, and not according to how the British wanted.

The British were forced to impose these new, harsher policies onto the colonials because it was the only way to keep up in the race against the French and Spanish in North America and to keep control over the indians. However, there is no avoiding the inevitable; the British imposed these new policies to have more control over the colonies, but all they did was bring the colonials together against tyranny and attempt to rebel in order to return to their favored way of life. Olivia makes a great point in her post about how Britain lacked a middle class, causing there to be no opportunity for improvement of way of living for the poor people in Britain, where as, in America, the people previously in indentured servitude, the new settlers, etc. were able to acquire land, some becoming very rich and others becoming middle class. This allowed the American Economy to be more stable with more opportunities for the American people to become more wealthy and improve their way of living. This discovery of a unique economy gave the colonists the confidence to step up against the crown.

Reading this chapter, I enjoyed seeing the different aspects of war, economic aspects, and social aspects that lead up to american colonists believing in their own independence. It is an idea of great importance to think about because had this not happened, things would not be the same for the American people. We may not have gained our independence or even just have been taken over by another empire such as the french. Thinking about all of these events that all had to come together to lead to American Independence is what makes this reading so interesting and much easier to read.

February 16, 2014

The Changing Role of the Indians

As Taylor says, both the French and English realized that the help of the Indians would be essential in the battles over colonial territory. The Indians could prove most useful and to lose their support would also hinder a side greatly. The French were out numbered and tried very hard to win the favor of the Indians. The English were less friendly, but non the less tried to gain favor as well. The support of the Indians gave to the Indians a bit of power, at least until their services were no longer needed.

The Indians were able to gain some power as their services were needed. Both the French and English saw that the Indians were essential and so they had to ask for help. This help came in a few forms, mostly better trade agreements for the Indians. Many tribes helped both sides. Taylor mentions that Indians had to ask themselves which trade would prove more favorable before choosing a side. The English had better goods for decent prices, but they were not as welcoming as the French, who were not as well off trading wise. So the Indians basically had to choose between better goods, or better relations.

The Indians thrived at gorilla warfare, a type of warfare that many were resistant to change to. The officers of the British armies much preferred the open field battles they were used to and often fell easily to the Indians attacking in the woods. For this reason the English worried about the use of Indian soldiers. The Indian advantage of the French could not, however, overcome the superior numbers of the English and their colonists.

As the war progressed and ended the Indians lost any of the power they may have gained by allying with either power. As Wang points out in the last post, the Colonists started to see all Indians as the enemy, even those who were in good relations with them. Colonists would openly attack or kill Indians of any tribe for any reason. Such men also would be free from persecution. This new attitude towards the Indians on the colonial front meant almost constant bloodshed and increasing costs to the British empire. The colonists’ desire for new land and their attitude towards the Indians, led them to take more and more land.

The Indians profited initially from the conflict between the French and English, but as time passed their power was diminished to an even lower margin than before the conflict began. This change of power showed the Indians the true intentions of the colonists and gave insight to the future relations with them. Parliament tried to stop the conflicts by restricting the growth of the colonies westward, but that was not enough to deter the desires of the colonists. The Seven Years War, and the following conflicts, set the fate of the Indians as one filled with conflicts with the English and, to a lesser extent, the French colonists.

February 16, 2014

Britain’s Rise To Power

In Chapter 18 of American Colonies, Taylor focuses on Britain’s conflicts and wars, particularly with the French and Spanish. He clearly outlines Britain’s ascent to power in the New World, paying particular attention to their dominance of the trade industry with the native peoples. As Taylor states, the British simply offered superior goods to the French and Spanish at extremely fair prices. While the French treated the native people with more respect, tribes were forced to barter with the British in order to procure their superior merchandise.

I feel as if the post “Colonial Origins of the American Dream,” does a good job on focusing in on Taylor’s main argument in this chapter. Throughout the narrative, Taylor clearly highlights the rise of British dominance in the New World. After the 7 years war with the French, the British clearly set themselves apart from the French and Spanish as the premiere colonial power. Ultimately, the British invested the most capital into establishing a firm base of colonies in North America, and inevitably they reaped the rewards. Their trade industry flourished and their capital increased, which allowed the British army and navy to reach a new level of dominance.

Taylor does a particularly good job of highlighting the role of Native Americans in Chapter 18. I found the change of their allegiances to the British and the French fascinating, as well as their eventual decline in power. Previously, I failed to realize how much the Native Americans played the British and the French off of each other in order to maintain relevance in North America. As Taylor shows, the Natives played a key role in advising the French and British military leaders. Moreover, although many Native Americans shifted their allegiance to the French, without the expertise of native guides the British never would have mastered warfare in North America. However, with the defeat of the French, Native Americans lost much of their power, as they now relied solely on the British for trade opportunities. Something the British ruthlessly exploited to their benefit.

Overall, I feel as Taylor does a fantastic job of describing Britain’s ascent to prowess in the New World. Although, as mentioned in other posts, he forsakes his previous style of a social narrative for more of a direct military history in Chapter 18, I find the change of pace refreshing. He clearly allows the reader to understand how economics, native relations, and social policy played a role in Britain’s domination of North America. Additionally, in this chapter he does a good job of foreshadowing colonial independence, paying particular attention to taxes and the free spirit of the 13 colonies.

February 16, 2014

Military History in the New World

This is the first time Taylor describes the New World’s conflicts in great details. Like Rebecca said in her previous posts, American Colonies reads more like a social history, but this chapter shifts gear and presents us with the standard military history. Moreover, this chapter sets the stage for the Independence War, like Max suggested in his post. For someone who is not really familiar with colonial American history while reading the first couple of pages, I was hoping that the Native American would rise up and take advantage of the chaotic situation to claim their land. Instead, the conflict prepared for more British colonization and eventual dominance in the region via the American Revolutionary War.

The huge disparity in number of soldiers between France and England made the natives play an important role in the balance of power within North America. They were skilled at guerrilla warfare so they dominated the forest passages between the rival empires. They also exploited the strategic position between the French and the British colonies by receiving favorable prices and presents from both sizes. The French were more diplomatic and generous with the Indians because they needed them as allies to counter the British colonial numbers. However, the British offered better trade goods in better qualities and prices, obligating more Indians to make peace with British officials to obtain more goods. Therefore, the French lost the war without enough combatants; it was 75,000 French men versus 1.2 million English soldiers.

After the English defeated the French, they treated all Indians as their enemies and believed it was a waste of money to sell low priced goods to them. In 1761, British colonial forces invaded the Cherokee country, one of the largest tribe with 40 villages in the southern Appalachian Mountains. As British colonizers enjoyed their victories, English Parliament had to institute more taxes to compensate for the massive debt it incurred. Consequently, it tightened its policies to the colonizers. As some of the colonists travelled back to their homeland, they realized how much liberty and freedom they had enjoyed over the years. The imperial war actually made the British colonizers realize their own power and ideal of establishing a free society. Again, from defeating the French and colonizing the natives, the British colonizers had gained tremendous confidence in their own ability to survive in the New World. Therefore, the war to fight for independence was inevitable.

February 16, 2014

The American Revolution: An Ironic Conception of “Independence”

In Chapter 18: “Imperial Wars and Crisis, 1739-75,” Taylor outlines the Seven Years War and discusses the ways in which the conflict led to the Revolutionary War. As my specific interest area in history does not pertain to war, I appreciated that the brevity with which Taylor discusses the actual war and its battles. The majority of the chapter provides an in-depth analysis of the global and territorial implications of the war, in addition to an explanation of the colonies’ political, social, and economic climate that incited the American Revolution. Contrary to my high-school history courses, Taylor offers a complex template of the Revolution’s causes. He asserts that the conflict was not simply a disagreement in governance and taxation, but derived from a fundamental difference between Britain and the colonies’ socio-economic structures. This, in turn, facilitated the creation of a collective American mentality that clashed with the British way of life.

Taylor attributes the colonists’ preoccupation with and perception of “independence” as the focal point of divergence in colonial and British ideology. America’s economic structure was unique to Britain, because most white men were able to own land and had the opportunity of social mobility. Even indentured servants eventually gained their freedom, and were provided with a small plot of land as compensation for their years of servitude. As indentured servitude was replaced with enslavement of Africans, white landowners formed a middle-class that was a buffer between wealthy elites and slaves. Conversely, Britain lacked a middle-class. Its social structure was stratified between the very rich and very poor, and left virtually no opportunity for upward mobility. Thus, the concept of independence became synonymous with American society, and colonists resented any infringement on their independence by the British crown and Parliament. In Taylor’s words, “the colonists clung to independence as a precious state in a world where dependence was the norm” (441).

Matt’s blog post, however, recognizes the troubling irony that existed within colonists’ emphasis on independence and their pursuit of sovereignty from Britain—American society depended upon African bondage for survival. While Matt acknowledges the value of the American Revolution in the creation of the United States of America, he makes the important distinction that “it should not be thought of as morally righteous in nature.” Although white colonists were accorded a level of independence that was not as achievable in Britain, their prosperity was reliant upon the oppression of slaves and Natives. Oftentimes history courses glorify the American Revolution as a courageous tale of Americans’ united conquest over an imperial oppressor. This narrative fails to recognize the hypocrisy with which our nation was founded. I do not mean to undermine the Revolutions’ import and do not take for granted the sacrifice of our country’s forefathers that are responsible for my independence and good fortune. Rather, both narratives must be told in efforts to ensure that slavery is not ignored as a minor blemish on American history. Taylor does just this, and consequently, provides an effective and fascinating tale of the precursor to the American Revolution.

Taylor, Alan. American Colonies. New York: Penguin Group, 2001.

February 16, 2014

War War War

This chapter focuses on the imperial policy of Britain. As I read, it seemed to me that a lot of tension was occurring in North America. Between the English, French, Spanish, and the Indians, some sort of war was almost always occurring. Taylor mentioned the Seven Years War, one of the first in America. This war began as a competition between France and Britain. They constantly tried to outdo each other by building bigger forts. Here we first hear about George Washington. It is cool to see how the presidents come to power, because I know very little about them. It is ironic that his first battle was a failure and that he barely made it out alive.

Leadership is extremely important in war. Taylor talked about Edward Braddock, a leader for the British. He was known to be arrogant, and said about the Indians, “These savages may, indeed, be a formidable enemy to your raw American militia, but upon the king’s regular and disciplined troops, sir, it is impossible to believe they should make any impression.” (429) This inexperienced attitude led to a defeat by the Indians and the French, setting the British back. William Pitt took over, and turned it around. Overall, Britain destroyed France, and obtained land in Canada, the Great Lakes, the Ohio Valley, and Florida. Taylor mentioned that in some ways, the loser of the war benefited more than the winner. This paradoxical statement is true because Louisiana, New France, and Florida made France and Spain spend excessive amounts of money, and now they could focus on the more valuable colonies in the Caribbean.

Because of the abundance of war, Britain was in debt. They needed to make money, and North America had been seen as “virtually untaxed beneficiaries of imperial trade and protection.” (442) Britain believed that the colonists had had it too easy, and they should be taxed the same amount as the British people were. This started an antagonistic idea in the minds of the colonists. As my classmate mentioned below, this is the start of the American Dream. People immigrated to the New World in hopes of a better life. They wanted to work hard, and have property of their own. They wanted to have freedom. Once Britain started to tax them, this freedom diminished. These thoughts are the fundamental ideas for the America Revolution. I love learning about the revolution because it is so exciting to hear about an underdog feeling so passionate and eventually beating the biggest, wealthiest nation in the world.

February 16, 2014

Freedom at a Cost

This chapter shows the progression of the colonists from a people marginally dependent on the English to a unified group fully embracing the idea of independence. The beginning of the chapter covers the expansionary efforts of the British government but then Taylor dives into explaining the underlying tensions between the colonists and the crown. Citing examples such as the Paxton Boys slaughtering of Indians at Conestoga, Taylor elicits a general feeling of tension from this time period. However, the tension between the groups led to a general feeling of unification within the groups. As Max mentions in his post from February 15, the colonists were experiencing attitudes of unity while under the recently overbearing rule of the British.

John Adams’ concerns about the precedent set by royal taxes, namely the Stamp Act, seems to have laid the groundwork for the American Dream that Max mentions in his post (442). The American Dream in its most basic form is the hope and belief that anyone can “make it” if they work hard enough. Although, this notion is constantly challenged in today’s society, the British attempts to assert authority ultimately formed the American attitude of independence and embrace of the potential for social mobility.

Starkly contrasting the British acceptance of inequality, the owning of lands by a large portion of the population (not including slaves) allowed the colonists to garner a newfound sense of independence. Furthermore, I found Taylor’s perception of slavery as “labor for a master without reaping the rewards” to be very interesting phrasing to describe the colonists and the British (442). To broaden this definition of slavery to include “independent” colonists as slaves if they did not own land seemed like a very novel idea. As we have discussed in previous posts, slavery was not necessarily along racial lines but developed into that based on economic motivations.

Without trying to oversimplify this idea, it seems necessary to mention that the colonists’ embrace of this independence and lack of reliance on the British allowed them to begin the process of breaking away from the crown. Many of the colonies to the north such as Nova Scotia and Quebec still relied on the British government to hold up their economies. However, the thirteen colonies to the south were on the brink of civil war with the British. Thomas Jefferson’s quote at the end of this chapter describing America as an “’empire of liberty,’ by and for the white citizenry” was a mindset that setup the colonies for success in gaining the initial freedom from Britain but also set the colonies up for a civil war nearly a hundred years later–a cost that we will soon see to be magnanimous.

February 15, 2014

Colonial Origins of the American Dream

Chronicling the French, English and Indian conflicts that arose in the mid-eighteenth century, Taylor’s Chapter 18, “Imperial Wars and Crisis” clearly explains the origins of the colonies’ desire for independence. Taylor also notes that with the British’s victory over France in the Seven Years War and the subsequent downfall of the North American Indians, the colonies became united under England’s central rule (421). Although we have seen examples of early American ideals forming in the colonies since their origins, it can be argued that the American Dream was truly born out of England’s increasingly repressive colonial rule observed in the aftermath of the Seven Years War.

Through his discussion of colonial life in the mid eighteenth century, Taylor’s main point of comparison lies in his description of colonies before and after the Seven Years War. Ultimately, the greatest change that occurred in colonial America was the huge increase in British influence after the war. Taylor highlights that before the war, “The British posted only a few hundred troops in North America. In 1763, however, the crown decided to maintain ten thousand men in the colonies” (439). Accompanying England’s efforts to garrison the colonies was an increased amount of taxes that Parliament instituted in order to make up for the massive debt they had incurred as a result of the war. Despite new British influence and taxation, it wasn’t until some colonists visited their mother country that they truly realized how well off they truly were. In particular, these traveling colonists were appalled at the huge discrepancy between the rich and the poor seen in England (440). The combined effects of Britain’s heightened colonial involvement eventually led to a stark increase in the number of people who immigrated to the colonies from England (441). With the colonists growing weary of their British masters, tension began to rise as rumors of rebellion gained more and more validity.

At this point in time, when the colonists saw that the liberties they had enjoyed for so long were in danger, we can see the origins of the American Dream. While this dream has changed over the years, its current version involves, as Grey highlights in his blog post about Obama’s most recent state of the Union address, a belief that a certain work ethic and self-restraint entitles Americans to freedom and the ability to openly pursue their goals. By describing the rising sentiments of colonial resistance, Taylor asserts that colonists saw the increased British authority as a hindrance on their ability to achieve this early version of the American Dream.

Finally, Taylor’s illustration of the colonies’ changing sentiments towards their British overlords is both thorough and fair. While some texts will offer nothing but praise for the colonists beginning to part ways with a oppressive government, Taylor qualifies their intentions by stating that in doing so, they were only truly concerned with the rights of wealthy, white, property-owning men. The colonists’ aspirations for freedom therefore excluded the poor, women and minorities, notably African Americans and Indians (443). By identifying the shortcomings of the early American Dream, Taylor subtly highlights that while the colonists’ decision to seek independence from England was an important and brave one, it should not be thought of as morally righteous in nature.

February 12, 2014

Religious Awakening in Colonial America

In his chapter on the religious revivals that transpired in British colonial America during the eighteenth century, Taylor debunks the popular myth that North America was colonized solely for the purposes of religious freedom. Aside from the Quakers, who genuinely sought a plurality of religions in the colonies, the majority of the colonists who settled North America intended to replicate the homogenous religious atmosphere that dominated England during this time period (339). He explains that every region of colonial America was peppered with different congregations, each competing for religious dominance. The Congregationalists primarily dominated New England, the Anglicans largely controlled the South, while the Quakers and the Presbyterians composed the largest denominations of the Protestant faith in the middle colonies (342).

As the author of “Religious Awakening in the Colonies” astutely notes, religion in the colonies was far more complex than numerous denominational divisions. In addition, each congregation was internally divided between rationalists and evangelicals. The rationalists rejected the traditional foundations of Christianity, opting instead to focus their faith on science. They believed that God never interfered with the laws of the natural universe since he had created it. Therefore, rationalists believed epidemics and natural disasters to be “natural” instead of interpreting them as divine anger. Additionally, rationalists preached eternal salvation through good behavior (344 – 345). Evangelicals, on the other hand, believed eternal salvation could only be attained through God’s grace. The evangelicals emphasized emotions and individualism, disturbing listeners with images of terror during their sermons to remind them of “their impending and eternal sentence in hell.” They balanced these depictions however, with images of eternal joy in heaven. The purpose of these “revivals” was to get their listeners to surrender to God and ultimately feel the exhilaration of God’s saving grace (345). Known as the Great Awakening, these series of revivals were led by prominent religious figures such as Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, and Gilbert Tennents.

The evangelicals would eventually be referred to as the New Lights while their opponents – those who dismissed the emotional sermons of the evangelicals and defended the traditional foundations of the Christian faith – became known as the Old Lights (351). In addition to this divide, the evangelicals split into moderates and radicals. The moderates rejected the radicals’ belief in the free flow of divine grace and attack on the establishment of the Christian church. They accepted evangelical preaching, conversions, and most of the professional clergy who supported the revivals, but denounced the emotional outbursts of the poorly educated exhorters in order to maintain their own power and authority in colonial society (353). Overall, I enjoyed and favorably received Taylor’s take on the Great Awakening. His account thoroughly dissected the religious complexity of colonial America that is noticeably absent from traditional American history texts.

February 12, 2014

Sexism in the Salem Witch Trials

As Alex highlights in his blog post regarding Mary Beth Norton’s article, “Witchcraft in the Anglo-American Colonies,” the knowledge that we have on the topic is limited to stories transferred by word of mouth, as newspapers were not yet available. Therefore, Norton identifies many differing viewpoints on the origins of witchcraft accusations in the late 1600s. These theories range from poor economic conditions to Norton’s own idea that the Salem witch phenomenon was attributed to an Indian war that occurred during the same time period.

Given the stereotype that has evolved over the years to portray witches as being female, the theory that I found most interesting was that explained by Elizabeth Reis in her Damned Women: Sinners and Witches in Puritan New England. Norton states that Reis’s work revolves around the question of why so many more women were accused of being witches than their male counterparts. Ultimately, she posits that the “gendered nature of Puritan religious experience” accounted for this situation, meaning that sexism and gender inequality were structurally ingrained in the Puritans’ daily lives.

To further her claim that gender bias was a leading factor in many of the Salem witch trials, Norton cites an argument made by Carol Karlsen in her book, The Devil in the Shape of a Woman: Witchcraft in Colonial New England. Norton notes that the witches described by Karlsen, “Seem to be early protofeminists or at least women who did not act in conventionally feminine ways.” By identifying a large group of people accused of being witches as women who defied their traditional roles, Karlsen asserts that sexism was apart of the Puritan colonies. While there were most likely more than one cause for the Salem witch trials, Norton’s summarization of two arguments pointing to the Puritans’ gender prejudice shows that their views regarding the role of women likely played a central role in explaining why more women were accused of being witches than men. Furthermore, the Puritan sexism that created a link between women and accused witches helps to explain the historical causes for today’s conventional image of the female witch.