Author: Dr. Shrout

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

Christopher Columbus’ Journey to the New World:

My final project topic will focus on Christopher Columbus’s journey and discovery to America also known as the New World in 1492. Here are 3 primary sources related to Christopher Columbus and his journey in 1492. Each of these primary sources explain his journey through various sources.

World Map of 1482:

This is map that Christopher Columbus used to set sail for the New World. This map was used to navigate Christopher Columbus and his ship during his voyage to the New World. The most popular map for mariners at that time was printed in 1482 but originally compiled by the Alexandrian geographer, astronomer, and mathematician Claudius Ptolemy in the second century A.D. (https://www.loc.gov/item/today-in-history/august-03/)

Germanus, Donnus Nicolaus. World Map, Cosmographia, Claudius Ptolemaeus Ulm. (1482: Thacher Collection): https://www.loc.gov/item/today-in-history/august-03/

Letters from Christopher Columbus during his journey:

This is a series of letter Christopher Columbus wrote after his first transatalnatic voyage, where he is writing this letters to King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain on his encounter of an island, filled with innumberable people, and find their Highness. These copies of his manuscripts were made as court officials and published in April 1493 and written by Christopher Columbus. These copies of Columbus’ letters came from the Library of Congress of Rare Book and Special Collections Division. (https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/exploring-the-early-americas/columbus-and-the-taino.html)

Columbus, Christopher. Epistola Christofori Colom (Letters of Christopher Columbus). (Rome: Stephen Planneck: 1493): https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/exploring-the-early-americas/columbus-and-the-taino.html

Spanish Coat of Arms of 1493:

The Coat of Arms was awarded to Christopher Columbus from the Spanish Sovereigns due to his successful journey of discovery to America. According to the blazon, this was dated on May 20th, 1493. The Coat of Arms that Columbus was awards the royal charges of Castile and Léon (the castle and the lion) but with different tinctures or colors. In the third quarter would be islands in a wavy sea, and in the fourth is the customary arms of his family. The Coat of Arms came from Christopher Columbus’s own book of privileges from 1502, published by Henry Harrisse in 1893. The Coat of Arms came from the Library of Congress, Rare Book and Special Collections Division. (http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/1492/columbus.html).

Harrisse, Henry. “Columbus’ Coat of Arms in Christopher Columbus.” Christopher Columbus’s own book of privileges from 1502. (London: B.F. Stevens: 1893): http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/1492/columbus.html

…read more

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

Mary Beth Norton’s The Evolution of White Women’s Experience in Early America analyzes the inconsistencies in the status of colonial women according to studies up to the early 20th century and studies of the late 20th century and early 21st century. According to Norton, the dominating theme of colonial women’s history for over fifty years was that these women were better off compared to English women and women of the 19th century: “The high sex ratio also gave women crucial bargaining power in the marriage market, since their productive contributions were vital to the survival of colonial households” (Norton, 593). However, Norton later explains that this picture of women fails to tell the full story of how women were portrayed in colonial America.

Norton points out that the discussion around colonial women needs to be reconstructed in order to properly and accurately address the decline in status of the White, American woman. Three periods of time – the first initial settling (1620-1650), a period of transition (1650-1670), and the American Revolution era (1750-1815)– deeply affected the changing status of American women through a growing emphasis on family and community, altering ideas on society and polity.

In her post, Erin Wroe writes that “across the Atlantic, women’s roles were either restricted or expanded depending on their location. What can be said is women contributed to the growth of their societies, and they set an example for how women could impact their environment despite their place” (Wroe, Not Just Dainty Ladies). This reminds me of Norton’s explanation that the implementation of family and community values in American culture over time deeply impacted the role of women in societal functions. Woe’s argument clearly resonates with Norton’s statement in that Wroe explains that women contributed to social growth by setting an example for the daily acts of women from colonial America into the 19th century. I personally do believe that as time progressed, so did the status and roles of women, as seen with the first migration in the 15th century, the transition from Europe to a new hemisphere, and the war for independence of the 18th and 19th centuries. The changing in time and society contributed to the eventual restriction of American women’s rights throughout the 18th and 19th centuries.

…read more

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

Discussions regarding the early experiences of women within American colonies during the 17th to 18th centuries are often overlooked. A majority of historians conclude a simple answer that American colonial women were better off then women back in England. Within Mary B. Norton’s, “The Evolution of White Women’s Experience in Early America,” Norton argues that the experiences of women in the American colonies was more complex then what was originally thought. I found it fascinating that while women in colonies experienced higher bargaining power when it came to marriage, a lax enforcement of English common law, and border range of choices, they still faced challenges. Concepts over a patriarchal society and a nuclear family were still prevalent within colonial society just as it was an England. The difference being that American colonies, most of the time, lacked traditional communal institutions. Gender role expectations remained the same within colonial society, though vastly different patterns developed within individual colonies. Similar to the comparison of the Jamestown and Plymouth colonies in Karen O. Kupperman’s Jamestown Project, Norton compares the differences in lifestyle within the Chesapeake and New England colonies. And, just as in Kupperman’s work, both colonies developed differently due to environmental and economic factors. For women in the Chesapeake colonies they experienced a rough environment, a lack of patriarchal family practices, high mortality rates, and less likelihood of marriage due to competition from native born Chesapeake women. In comparison, New England women experienced a balanced sex ratio, a high livelihood of marriage, a stable/sustainable environment, and the influential ideas of two strong institution (the Puritan church and the stable patriarchal family). Even with the certain restrictions placed upon women in both colonies, it still seemed that they had more freedom and choices then they did back in England. That is why I found the two concepts brought up by Mary B. Norton, regarding the certain benefits women in England possessed, to be a revealing.

Two concepts separated the lifestyles of English women from American colonial women. First, English women could earn wages and live independently of a paternal household for a period of time so long as it followed the terms of their marriage. And second, English women were actively engaged in a market economy, exchanging goods and services along with men. Few American women had similar experiences within their communal colonial societies. It is interesting to think that even outside of patriarchal England, some American colonial women still faced restrictions depending on the colony they had settled with. I agree with the statement given by Allison Roberts, “not all of the women had the same experiences because not all of colonies treated women the same, there is no one way to define colony women.” As time would go by, colonial women would face even more challenges as the introduction of slave labor would undermined their martial status within the household. For colonial women from the 17th to 18th centuries, they gained new found freedoms within society, while at the same time they also faced new societal restrictions to endure.

…read more

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

This article was an interesting take on the lives of women in early america. The debate between if there was truly a golden age for women or not is very fascinating. I particularly liked the discussion on the set up of family and how it carried over to early America. The traditional religious English family believed the father to the head of the house and in charge of all decisions. The mother was under the father and had to defer to him for any real decisions and she was followed by the children and servants. However, this English ideal did not always translate over exactly in the colonies. I think it is interesting that in Chesapeake and New England had such different outcomes on the traditional family. New England had lower death rates, closer man to woman ratios, and more favorable conditions and were therefore, able to keep close to the English ideal of family. Chesapeake had opposite conditions and therefore had different family dynamics. The woman often married twice and men had less control and say over their mixed families (Norton 597-598). This reminded me of many different sections of Atlantic History. There was not always one way of doing things, every colony had their own experience and unique set up depending on the situations they were dealing with. This goes along with what warmturtletank says in their post about colony woman being able to be defined by a wider range. Not all the women had the same experiences because not all colonies treated women the same, there is no one way to define colony women.

…read more

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

Early colonial women enjoyed much better advantages than European women. One of the most important factors was due to the scarce number of female in the colonies. Unlike most European women who always restricted by the code of domesticity and the patriarchal society, colonial women enjoy their freedom to do what they wished. They had the power over the marriage market, economic opportunities.

I agree with my classmate, Kyle Kelsay that this article explains the experience of women in Colonial America through migration, religion, creating communities and families. In each of these categories, Mary Beth Norton gave examples on how women played such significant roles.

However this status of colonial women eventually decline in the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries. New generations brought changes to the colonies. The South began to replace white indentured servants with African slaves which altered the racial composition of American society (601). New white immigrants of various ethnic and religious backgrounds came to America with their own definition of family norms. Most importantly, as the sex ratio approached equality, men slowly reassert their authority over the women (602).

When the idea of the Republican Mother emerged, an ideal American woman was expected to be self-sacrificed, patriotic mother who raise her children to be good Christians. Such woman certainly had no place in the public world, thus women were pushed further into the home, into the Victorian cult of domesticity (618).

…read more

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

Mary Beth Norton reexamines the evolution of white colonial women between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries. Early historiographical examination led to the belief that a woman’s role in society saw steady decline in the nineteenth century, implying that their status in the early colonial period had been one of more importance. Norton argues that the early “paradigm is simplistic and unsophisticated, resting its assessment of women’s status solely on one factor (their economic function in society) and assumes that a less complex social system automatically brings higher standing for women.” (Norton, 595) A white woman’s role in colonial society can and should be defined using a wider range of anthropological features, such as: demographic patterns, religion, the law, household organization, ideas and behavior inherent in Old World societies that traveled across the Atlantic, and colonists attitudes toward themselves and their societies. (Norton, 595) Taking into account these more complicated aspects, Norton finds women’s roles between the early colonial period and the American Revolution to never really have experienced a monumental shift, while allowing for obvious differences created by developments in religion and the economy.

I find myself disagreeing slightly with her analysis of early colonial women and their roles within the development of their settlements. During that difficult period, I feel that an “all hands on deck” method was adopted out of necessity. Women were integral members in the creation of new settlements in the Chesapeake and New England arenas, not only maintaining households but also cultivating land, building shelters, procreating to allow for future generations, and even taking up arms to defend against incursions in some instances. As Alec reminds us by discussing women’s roles in the economies of Potosi and the Yoruba, society and situation will always dictate a member’s, and even more specifically, a particular gender’s status in a settlement. Because the populations of early colonial settlements were so small, women had to have been relied upon to perform duties far above and beyond normalcies carried over from England. In my opinion, as populations grew, women digressed to more traditional roles because society’s demands were once again being filled by males. I feel this was the template for all nations during Atlantic colonization.

…read more

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

Gutierrez, Christian

Dr. Shrout

HIST-410: Atlantic History

6 of November 2016

The Golden Age of Women: Truth or a Myth?

The decade is the roaring 20’s, women have just be given the right to vote and a young Elisabeth Anthony Dexter is about to originate a theory that would dominate historical ideology on women during the early colonial period. The idea of a Golden Age for women, which stated that there was a decline in women’s role in society starting the 19^th century. It states that due to an unequal sex rate and blurred social roles women actually had more rights during colonial America than their English predecessors.

Mary Beth Norton challenges the idea of the Golden Age by comparing women in 17^th century England, New England, and the Chesapeake Bay. She commences by comparing the Chesapeake Bay with New England women, in the Chesapeake mortality rates were incredibly high which meant reproduction was crucial for the success of the colony. Women, however, were in short supply which meant they often got married sooner and widowed at a young age, which supports Dexter’s theory, however, they often remarried right away because they needed a man to support them, a woman status in the colony was that of her husband. While in New England they still married young but mortality rates were stable and often marriages would last well into old age, which completely disproves Dexter’s claim. While in England woman will marry at an older age which meant they needed to acquire a wage earning job to support them till marriage. In this respect, English women had more autonomy .

Norton informs the reader of the social structure of the average colonial household being patriarchal, which meant the husband was the top of the social hierarchy and therefore had complete control over his wife, who would simply care for the children and do household chores…under hs supervision. She mentions the crucial role of practice and their distaste for women in power which helped cripple woman’s social status by not allowing them a role as spiritual leaders.

What I gathered from the reading was colonial English women had less of a social power than the Native American and African women. While colonial American women did get to trade with one another for spun wool or butter their native American counterparts were heavily impacting the economy. As Alec wrote for the Potosi readings “women soon dominated urban market vendors.”

…read more

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

Mary Beth Norton’s article explains the experience of women in Colonial America through migration, religion, creating communities and families. Mary Beth Norton explains women’s experience during Colonial America is different than in Britain because Colonial America had more opportunities for women to succeed in religion, marriage, and societies. In the late 16th to early 17th century, British migrants started to move to the United States to create their own colonies and build societies in the Northeast. (Page 596). During the 17th century and 18th century, houses women lived in New England were better built and more spacious because women had increased domestic work spaces and better control of household activities through gardening or cooking. (Page 600). Women increased the population in Colonial America and economic because of the quality household goods, manufacturing spinning wheels for clothes, and produce cheese and butter. One example of Women in Massachusetts was women’s production in Colonial America because it brought increased production, female trading networks along with social networks, women working in mill factories, and women became more independent through production. (Page 604-605). Women and girls learned to read through religious independence because more women joined the church more than men, they read the Bible in church, and women could better educate their children through church. I think women’s role became more significant in Colonial America because they had more freedom and became independence, women helped increase the economics in the Northeast, and women played a role in a political prospective through societies and social interaction through trade in production and economics. Colonial women helped create an identity in Colonial America because women migrating to the United States developed their own identity by creating their own society, educations through religion, economics through production and trade, and building a better future for their children. This reminds of Marissa Cervantes’ post from Michael Gomez’s article because women in the Sierra Leone and Akan societies had increased role in their community and given more power political and social interaction in their communities. Women’s roles were also significant through religion because they helped establish their colonies and communities.

…read more

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

Women’s experiences in Britain and the colonies differed because of their involvement in society as well as their roles. Unlike in the colonies, British women had the freedom to navigate the market and contributed to the economy (Norton, 601). They worked for their own wages and even lived independently from their husbands. In England, women had greater control of their personal lives and were active in supporting their country’s economic state. They did not have to wholly submit to a patriarch-led household and could make a living for themselves with little interference. In the colonies, it was a different story for women. Since women migrated to more spread out territories, they did not have the same opportunities as their British counterparts. The majority of women often depended on their husbands for income (Norton, 601). Men had more dominance, and society determined how women should act in the household. Instead of being independent figures in colonial households, women were expected to submit to their husbands and be a moral example to their families. The “cult of domesticity” that emerged in the 1700s limited women’s roles to their residences, and it purely focused on how they could support their husbands and children (Norton, 618). Across the Atlantic, women’s roles were either restricted or expanded depending on their location. What can be said is women contributed to the growth of their societies, and they set an example for how women could impact their environment despite their place.

Mary Beth Norton’s article reminded me of Chapter 5 in the class textbook where it discussed migration. Many families immigrated to the colonies in search for employment or to start new lives (Egerton et al. 178). However, women were exchanging their rights in the process of settling in a new land. They had to adapt to new structures in colonial society and sometimes did not have the same freedoms they had in their homeland. I agree with Kyle Kelsay on his point about women having freedom when it came to religious matters in the home. Women helped their children grow spiritually and taught them biblical values. Even though women were unable to obtain leadership positions in the church, they had opportunities to educate their families about the teachings of Christianity.

…read more