religion – American History to 1877

February 12, 2014

Sensationalism in Salem and Misrepresenting History

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

Woodward’s exposition on the “Other Witch Hunt” in Hartford does a great job of expanding the commonly held belief that the Salem witch trials are the only and most important of the commonly misunderstood religious dynamic in the New England area. He argues, and quite successfully I believe, that the sensationalism around the Salem trials both through popular imagery as a previous post suggests, but also in the teaching curriculum throughout schools does a disservice to understanding the roots behind the actions of the colonists. It has become so popularized that the other examples of Witch Hunting and vigorous religious prosecution throughout the New England Colonies have become subverted by common thought. The Salem trials, Woodward argues, are a unique experience and create a misinterpretation of the beliefs, social experiences and events that created the situation for witch trials to exist.

In Hartford, there seemed to be a slight dichotomy of beliefs between the common people, the religious accusers and the governor, John Winthrop Junior. The Governor was a doctor who was in charge of adjudicating cases and also, as a doctor, the individual who determined causes for the physical symptoms which many times were blamed on Witchcraft. The judge for most of the cases, he would not allow for an accused “witch” to be put to death on these charges. He established a legal precedent for which to judge other trials and even presided over annulments or reversals of charges that were charged by veracious citizens. The Governor’s training in the sciences and the “magic” of the time (astrology and alchemy), this presents an interesting dichotomy between religion in science. It also shows that the sensationalism of the events in Salem do not always reflect the reality.

There was a “managerial skepticism” in the ruling elites with witch trials, as Woodward points out, only after a long history of eagerness to put accused witches to the gallows. It was not and did not have to be a religious fanaticism and inability to explain natural events that drove the populace into a prosecution and killing frenzy. Only much later was there any intercession, which is not necessarily relevant in the Salem trials and especially not in the popularization of witch trials in modern media and even education. There was a long history of Witch hunts that carried on similarly to Salem’s well before Salem received the reputation it did, and the singular approach of Witch Trial History and religious fanaticism on New England through the eyes of Salem alone hinders our understanding of all the forces at play which led to such an event occurring.

February 12, 2014

It’s a Little More Complicated Than That…

Nuance is always key. In understanding how any system works, one needs to understand the little ins and outs of it that make it the way it is. In class the other day, we touched on the topic of the development of a racialized slavery. In our discussion as a class, we were very careful to include as many factors as we could in our analysis of how race relations in the colonies evolved. This approach is one that Taylor employs in his re-writing of history, and is one I believe is critical to an accurate understanding of history.

In chapter 15, Taylor is very deliberate in his nuanced delivery of how religion developed in The New World. On page 339 he denounces the dominant narrative, which he believes, “…grossly simplifies the diverse religious motive for emigration.” We have heard the story, so plainly told, that dissenters of the Church of England fled religious persecution. This narrative leaves us to assume that all those who left England for religious reasons were under one religious denomination. This could not be further from the truth, According to Taylor, there were multiple denominations, including the Anglicans, Quakers, Presbyterians, Baptists, Lutherans, Dutch Reformed, and German Reformed. Even more important to understand was the competition between these groups. Each group wanted their belief to be the dominant one. This lead to a climate, as Taylor notes, that was not as religiously tolerant as we assume when we think of the New World, especially in New England.

Taylor’s narrative also shows an extremely important discrepancy in the two schools of thought that influenced the above mentioned groups. He pays special attention to the rift between those who were rationalists, and those who took the evangelical route. This is especially important because it holds implications outside of religion. Taylor asserts, “By emphasizing the overwhelming…power of God acting directly and indiscriminately upon souls, radical evangelicals weakened the social conventions of their hierarchical society.” Undoubtedly, religion affected other parts of colonial society, such as economics, and class structure. So if we do not understand the nuances of religion in the colonies, we cannot even get to the point where we realize that different denominations affect social structure in unique ways.

February 12, 2014

Chapter 15: Religious Revival

In Chapter 15 of American Colonies, Taylor describes the resurgence of religion in colonial America during the 18^th century. Known as “The Great Awakening,” widespread religious revival spread across the colonies in response to sweeping religious reform. Religious institutions began to become widespread across the colonies, and many adopted a more compelling form of preaching. Moreover, the evangelists in particular promoted a more “equal” society that accepted all classes of people, and attempted to further the rights of the individual.

As mentioned in the previous post “Religious Awakening in the Colonies,” Taylor does a particularly good job of painting a clear picture of the religious diversity in the colonies. His use of numerical statistics, particularly the number of churches in each specific region, clearly demonstrates the power and prominence of religion within the colonies. Taylor’s decision to discuss religion in a regional context is particularly effective. He discusses religion separately in the northern, southern, and middle colonies, allowing the reader to clearly understand the diverse and various religious differences in each of these geographic regions. By discussing the impact of religion on each separate region, Taylor allows the reader to grasp how religion uniquely impacted the social and political hierarchy of the colonies.

I found religion’s role within the colonies particularly fascinating. Having just discussed the ideas of tolerance and certain freedoms within social class, it was interesting to see that religion was being used to better the colonists lot in life. As Taylor notes, religion allowed women to have a voice that was previously denied to them in the colonies. The Quakers in particular, valued the voice of women in their service. Moreover, the Baptists and other evangelists began to become interested in including African slaves and Indians in salvation, allowing them to attend service and worship as equals with the other members. However, fearful of the Africans unifying under a singular identity, the Anglicans soon put an end to the baptism of slaves. A pattern we see continued from earlier readings.

Overall, I feel as if Taylor has done an exceedingly good job in portraying religion in the colonies. He discusses each religion separately, and narrates a compelling story about the role of each early religion. My one complaint with Taylor comes early in the chapter. Taylor writes that it is a myth that “English colonists fled from religious persecution into a land of religious freedom” (339). However, I feel as if in previous chapters, religion was portrayed by Taylor as a major factor in the emigration of the early English colonists. While he made it clear that economics certainly played a role in people flocking to the new world, I feel as if he almost perpetuates the very myth that he warns us against earlier in our readings.

January 22, 2014

Economics and Religion in English Colonization

In chapters 6 and 8, Taylor examines the early failures and eventual successes of English colonies. The British arrived in the New World some time after the Spanish, Portuguese, and French had laid claims to the land, and while the economy the English developed varied significantly from those of the Spanish empire and of the French trading posts, all Europeans came to America with similar objectives. I agree with many of Taylor’s points on incentives to emigrate, and I believe these incentives warrant close study.

In reference to the reading on Tuesday, Dana attributed French and Spanish violence to desire for wealth and greed. European powers saw rivals in each other and relished the chance to change their fortunes in America. Grey’s blog post reinforces the significance of economic incentives in a claim that, for the French and Spanish, the economy outweighed all other factors in New World colonization. Grey even names religion an “afterthought” to “economic conquests.”

This theory, voiced in my classmates’ writing and often inferred in Taylor’s work, often aptly describes European and native relations. Downplaying the significance of religion, however, fails to capture the essence of colonial interactions. Religion plays a crucial role in understanding the cultural differences that the Europeans encountered, and certainly in English colonization, religion and economics serve as interdependent, equally important incentives.

Taylor frames English colonization in Virginia as a strictly economic venture, devoid of missionaries and of the desire to Christianize natives. He does identify the colonists’ intentions to first “absorb[… natives] as economic subordinates” and then convert them, an excellent point, but I feel Taylor detracts too much from religious incentives even in this description. Religion, as much as economics, determines English attitudes towards colonization.

What else but religion do the English exploit to justify seizing the land? The English insisted they could take the land because of a religious obligation to improve it, undoubtedly derived from a passage in Genesis: “fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over… every living thing that moves upon the earth” (Genesis 1:28). Taylor also pinpoints an English obligation to “subvert the native culture and transform the Indians into lower-sort English men and women” (128). While the English had economic reasons for subverting the natives, also present is a desire for cultural conversion. Making the natives English naturally encompasses a conversion to Christianity. While the English might have lacked the missionaries of the French and Spanish, religion remained a crucial factor in colonization.

The Great Migration to New England, in particular, perfectly captures the interplay of religion an economics, and I mostly agree with Taylor’s portrayal of Puritan colonists. The Puritans associated “material aspiration” inextricably with “the pursuit of salvation” (166). A hardworking and devout community, the Puritans met the challenges of colonization far more readily than the inhabitants of Jamestown. Puritan emigrants sailed to America with their families and with a sense of purpose, and Taylor describes them as successful, equitable, and determined, even if stern, people.

Largely, I agree with the facts presented. Quite unlike other colonists, the Puritans fared remarkably well in the New World and created communities enriched by religious and educational programs. My only critical response is the tendency of history books to portray Puritans somewhat, well, politely. Yes, Taylor mentions the Salem witch trials, the exile of religious dissenters to Rhode Island, and the tense relations with England, particularly with the monarch. Juxtaposed with the incredible violence of the other colonies, however, the Puritans appear an admirable group, the type of colony, if any, one might want to join. Even with their faults, they aimed to create a moral society, not to exploit natives and make a fortune.

I remember feeling similarly about the Puritans in my high school US History class, but that same year, we also read some Puritan literature in English. The Puritans possessed many talents, but likability was not among them. In Particular, I remember Jonathan Edward’s sermon, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. Here is a short excerpt:

“The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked: his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire; he is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in his sight; you are ten thousand times more abominable in his eyes, than the most hateful venomous serpent is in ours.”

(For those interested: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/edwards/sermons.sinners.html)

I don’t believe Taylor writes about the Puritans incorrectly, per se, but I do think primary sources paint a far more vivid picture of Puritan society than secondary sources. With that sermon in mind, Taylor’s description of the Puritans facing criticism in England takes on a much deeper meaning. One can easily imagine what they might have said of the society allegedly “awash in thieves, drunks, idlers, prostitutes, and blasphemers” (162). No wonder the king threatened to remove them from England; Puritans make poor neighbors.

Regardless of their character, though, the Puritans do exemplify the blending of religious and economic themes in colonial America. Trying to separate the religious from the economic in the colonization of America is as difficult as it is impractical. More beneficial to the study of history is the acceptance of religion and economics as one intermingled and cohesive influence.

January 20, 2014

Instability of Trade, Economy, and Structure

In Chapters 3 & 5 of American Colonies, Taylor focuses on New Spain and Canadian post-initial contact interactions with the native tribes and mainly focuses on the trading and economic relationships. Especially with the Spanish Empire, Taylor argues that violence and domination of the native cultures was largely the result of economic incentives by privately investing Spaniards financing conquistadors. The Spanish middle class was faced with a stagnant social and economic situation on the Iberian Peninsula, and therefore found the greatest opportunity for social mobility and economic gain was the new world. Taylor notes the most noticeable change of economic status happened with successful conquistadors. Veiled by religion, the conquistadors were simply out for economic gains.

However, Taylor notes that these immediate and violent conquests were often unsustainable. This would be the point where in order to maintain a sense of credible, long term, and sustainable economic cashflow, administrators, priests and skilled workers were required to enter into the social and economic structure of the Spanish conquests. This influx of new Europeans, mainly males, began to form the new social structure based off of race in the new world. This poses a significant problem for the Indian culture, however. As Rebecca stated in the last post, the Native social structure was not a monolith. There had already existed an extremely complicated hierarchy and tribal system well before the conquistadors made their first contacts. Treating an entire culture as a subservient entry into the new European system will ultimately be problematic and unsustainable.

The unsuitability of the new social structure and the increase of a Catholic presence augments Taylor’s argument that religion, while being the basis of conquistadors’ justification for attacking, killing, enslaving and usurping the natives, was truly an afterthought that rode the coattails of economic conquests. Only when the conquistadors failed to consistently create a market due to social disruption did priests find their way into the social scheme of the Americas and given authority. I find this argument overwhelmingly compelling.

It is strengthened further when almost an identical situation unfolds in Canada, as the French initially successful with fur trades only later provide substantial religious presence in the areas. While the violence in the north was perpetuated more by the natives and the Five Nations especially, Taylor argues that the increase in violence led to an increased demand in European Weaponry, especially guns, by the natives. This demand led to the over-hunting of beaver and again, to an unsustainable economy.

This does seem slightly simplistic, but as an Economics major, I enjoy understanding the effects simple economic transactions can have on overall populations, and it seems that through both of these geographic areas religion was used as an economic tool rather than a moral or religious one. In order to rectify the deep harm the European conquests had on both civilizations, religion was brought in to rectify it. Not for religious purposes itself, but rather for an assurance of stable social structure for long term economic prosperity.