Alan Taylor – American History to 1877

February 16, 2014

The American Revolution: An Ironic Conception of “Independence”

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: “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 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

Evangelism: the Spiritual Arena for Liberty

In his blog post, “Religious Awakening in the Colonies,” Kurt points out that traditional American history classes portray the Puritans as conservative dissenters from the Church of England who fled religious persecution in England, and settled in America to seek religious tolerance. Kurt acutely acknowledges that this singular, romanticized narrative does not take into account the complexities of religion in the early American colonies. Contrary to popular belief, America was not settled as a land of religious freedom. Early colonists saw religious practice as black and white; their faith was the absolute word of God, and every other faith was wrong. Further, church and state were interconnected, and religion primarily dictated political alliances. This created a societal climate where religious groups battled for political dominance, fearing their subjugation on behalf of another group’s hegemony.

Chapter 15: “Awakenings, 1700-75” of American Colonies effectively outlines the complexities of religion in early America (as summarized above), which facilitated the spiritual revival of the eighteenth century. Taylor’s analysis exceeds other religious histories I have read, because it does not attempt to depict American religion as a straightforward, uncontroversial narrative. I especially appreciated Taylor’s attention to the denominational divide between the evangelicals and rationalists, and the demographics that characterized each sect. The evangelicals, led by Jonathon Edwards and George Whitefield, provided colonists the opportunity to have a personal, emotional relationship with God—one that was not mediated by the socially stratified institution of the Church and clergymen. Evangelicals preached that in the religious sphere, social status was not indicative of one’s ability to access God and attain salvation. Rather, any sinner who accepted his or her absolute deference to God could experience emotional conversion, and consequently, God’s grace (Taylor 345). Evangelism’s inclusive nature provided a spiritual arena for marginalized members of society to take control of their destiny, despite the political, social, and economic restraints that characterized their position in the community. Women, in particular, used evangelism to assert their personal freedom in a patriarchal, misogynistic world. Taylor affirms that “by claiming utter submission to God’s command, and by speaking his words rather than their own…women claimed a freedom from the social restraints placed upon their gender” (351). In essence, by affirming the absolute authority of God, women bypassed the institutionalized patriarchy of gender oppression, and rejected their inferiority to men. Indians and Africans also utilized evangelism as a space for control, individualism, and freedom that colonial society prohibited. It is crucial to note, though, that the liberty evangelism provided was limited to the spiritual realm. The Great Awakening did not positively impact the status of women, Africans, and Indians in the political and social order of colonial America, but merely offered a temporary recluse for individual control. Unfortunately, marginalized members of society never experienced equality in their lifetime, but clung to evangelism as the key to future salvation and freedom.

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

January 29, 2014

“Barbarians”: a Justification for Oppression

In Chapter 8: “Puritans and Indians, 1600-1700” of American Colonies, Alan Taylor addresses a series of violent conflicts that occurred between the New England Indians and the Puritans shortly after Puritans founded the Plymouth settlement. While Taylor focuses on an overview of the wars until the Indians’ defeat following King Phillip’s War in 1676, he also outlines Puritans’ justification for aggressive action against the Indians, which often included massacres of Indian women and children. Puritans, who perceived themselves as “God’s Chosen People,” considered Indians to be “savage people, who are cruel, barbarous, and treacherous.” Throughout Taylor’s text, as well as in many other academic histories I have read, white western Europeans frequently describe Indians and other non-Aryan races as “barbarous” in comparison to their own “civilized” society.

Coincidentally, just before reading Chapter 8 of Taylor, I read Walter D. Mignolo’s The Idea of Latin America for my Spanish seminar, “Latin American Culture and Literature Before 1900.” The central argument of Chapter 1: “The Americas, Christian Expansion, and Racism,” affirms that European colonizers justified their dominance over South and North American Indians by categorizing them into varying degrees of “barbarous”, thus affirming Europeans’ superiority over them. Bartolome de Las Casas, a Spanish friar who participated in the colonization of the Americas, outlined the racial inferiority spectrum, dividing “barbarians” into four distinct categories. The first form of barbarians exhibited irrationality and “a degenerate sense of justice reason, manners, and/or human generosity.” The second categorization deemed barbarians to be a group of people who lacked a written alphabet and language system mirroring Spanish’s appropriation of the Latin language. Third, barbarians did not have a formal system of law and justice as defined by the nation-state. Finally, groups of people who rejected the Christian faith were Pagans, and consequently, barbarians.

While the Puritans did not specifically utilize Las Casa’s system for barbarianism as justification for their violent oppression of the Indians, it is a useful template to understand the complex system of racialization that cemented Puritans’ sense of superiority. In her blog post, “Violent Puritans and the Not-So English Middle Colonies,” Rebecca articulates Puritans’ religious rationalization for the massacre of Indians, who “claim they are permitted to exploit others because they are in God’s favor.” Rebecca does an excellent job of explaining this vicious cycle; Puritans’ successful massacre of Indians served as Divine validation for their superiority, thus perpetuating Puritans’ belief that they were “God’s Chosen People” and Indians were Pagan barbarians. Following Las Casas classification of barbarians, Puritans primarily grouped the New England Indians under the fourth category—Pagan barbarians who rejected Christianity. Puritans, whose entire society centered around conservative Protestantism, judged Indians with respect to their religious beliefs. It is significant to recognize that other colonizers, like Spanish conquistadores, may have placed a larger emphasis on different types of barbarism in affirming their superiority over Indians. For instance, South and Central American Indians’ lack of a conventional language and alphabet system highlighted their alleged barbarity in terms civility and intellectual capabilities.

Most importantly, I believe one must recognize that Europeans did not cognitively articulate the grounds for Natives’ inferiority that justified the oppression and annihilation of Indian population. Rather, during the period of colonization, the complex system of racialization that still polarizes modern society was already cemented in the collective mindset of Europeans. Indians’ barbarity need not be articulated, it just was. In the study of American history, we must consciously acknowledge the racialization that shaped society and not ignore it as relic of antiquity, or risk being complicit in the institutionalization of racism.

Knowlton, Rebecca. “Violent Puritans and the Not-So English Middle Colonies.”

Mignolo, Walter D. The Idea of Latin America. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2008.

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