APUSH Gang,
If you're reading this, you've found my blog...congratulations! This is where you can expect to find your weekly assignments, nuggets of my wisdom, and just generally cool stuff.
This week (Aug. 29th-September 2nd), we are going to take a quick look at Britain's North American colonies prior to the American Revolution. Here's what you can expect:
1.) "American Pageant" Guidebooks, Ch. 6-8, are on my McKeel webpage and ready to be downloaded and completed. You should complete Ch. 6 & 7 this week...email your findings to me by Fri., 9/2. Start working on the Ch. 8 Guidebook over the Labor Day weekend, since you won't have anything better to do. Hee hee...
2.) You need to go to the Monterey Institute's APUSH online course (there is a link to it on my McKeel webpage) and complete the assignments for Unit 1, Chapter 3, Lesson 7-9. Here's how it works:
Lesson 7 – “Colonial Life”-View the presentation titled “Colonial Life” (Watch the entire presentation)
Topic 1 – “Origins of Slavery”
a.) Explore “Slave Ships” – click on the link to view the illustration, then answer the accompanying question
b.) Explore “The Virginia Slave Codes” – click on the link to read the Slave Codes, then answer the “Consider This” question
c.) Explore “Olaudah Equiano: A Slave Experience” – click on the link to read Equiano’s account of his experience aboard a slave ship. Then, read the five excerpts from Equiano's autobiography that were given to you in class on 8/30...
As you read all five excerpts, highlight evidence that shows the emotions and physical senses that Equiano felt during his journey across the Atlantic. Then, look up what happened on the slave ship named Zong. Due Tues., 9/6.
Topic 2 – “Diversity”
a.) Explore “Regional Imports and Exports” – click on the link to view the illustration, then answer the accompanying question
Topic 3 – “Family and Social Life”
a.) Explore the “Charter of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, 1663” – click on the link and answer the multiple-choice question
-Follow this same routine/list of assignments for Lesson 8 (“Scientific and Religious Transformations”) & Lesson 9 (“The French & Indian War”). These are due on Friday, 9/2.
3.) Answer the following Free-Response question from the 2001 APUSH end-of-the-year exam: “How did economic, geographic, and social factors encourage the growth of slavery as an important part of the economy of the southern colonies from 1607 to 1775?” You may turn this in as a Word document, handwrite your answer, or email your response to me by Thursday, 9/1.
4.) On the Monterey Institute's website, when you click on Unit 1, Chapter 3, the menu that appears to the right side of your screen includes the following: "Writing Assignment Chapter 3 – American Society Takes Shape”
-Read the two documents, then answer the questions at the end of the exercise. This is due by Wed., 8/31
5.) Answer the following question as a response on this blog. It should be well-thought-out and planned, and should contain at least 300 words. This should be posted on my blog by Thurs., 9/1.
Question - "How did the economic system of the British North American colonies affect the lives of those who lived there? Did it create different groups of 'winners' and 'losers'?"
6.) Be prepared to write your first DBQ of the year this week. It will be a comparison of the Chesapeake and New England colonies. We will go over the documents in class, but you will write the essay on your own time.
7.) This week, you will need to read Chapter 3 of Dr. Zinn's "A People's History of the United States." This chapter is entitled "Persons of Mean & Vile Condition." As you read, write a one-page precis; when you finish the chapter, answer the following:
a.) Why does Zinn choose this title for chapter 3?
b.) Do you agree with his thesis in this chapter? (for this question, it would help if you identify the thesis first) Why or why not?
c.) What would be a good alternative title for this chapter? Why did you choose this?
d.) In light of the primary documents that we viewed in class on Tues., 8/30 (in defense of indentured servitude in the Chesapeake region, and the court proceeding in Virginia in 1640), and in the context of 17th-century strife between landowning elites and their former servants, why did slavery become the better option to the labor question in Virginia and Maryland, and later throughout the South? What does Zinn say about this question?
This Zinn assignment is due on Tues., 9/6.
8.) The APUSH test at the end of the year is scheduled for 8AM, Friday, May 11, 2012. Unfortunately, the same day is a McKeel holiday for staff and students. You will be expected to be here for the exam; administration will open the school for us, and we will be finished by noon. Please let your parents know, even though a letter will be sent home in the next few days.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
WOW!!!
SWAG!!!
Along with everything else in and about the British North American colonies, the economic system had a great impact on those who lived there. In general, the system had the same over all affects in the three sections of the colonies, South, Middle, and New England. However, it had a much contradistinctive affects on the varying persons of the colonies and thus created differences in prosperity.
First off, the wealthy, come to the Americas to make a profit. A profit, indeed, did they make. When these affluent pilgrims came to the shore of the New World, their initial goals were often to seek the fortune they could not be granted at home because they were not the first born son. They had not much to lose and so set out to the Americas to purchase land which could be tilled to yield avails. Occasionally, if fortunate enough, they could even accumulate more land by paying for the passage of indentured servants though the head-right system. This gave them both more land and labor to cultivate that land. Essentially, the wealthy were affected by the economic system by the gain of more wealth.
Continuing down the totem pole, we come to the poor whites and indentured servants. Most people of this class were often very little affected by the economic system of the New World, compared to that of the Old. Of this category were those who could not afford to pay their own passage to the Americas, and so traded four to seven years of labor in exchange for passage and a few provisions once their indenture was up. These colonists, though contrary to popular belief at first, had a largely difficult time moving up through social classes and often stayed that that from which they had come. This was made so virtually impossible for them because the wealthy were constantly buying up the available land on the coast, the frontier being far too savage. Eventually, indentured servants were even denied land at the completion of their indenture. Because of the system, they pretty much stuck in their place.
Probably the most affected of colonial residents were the African Americans, shipped for slavery. Once living free in their homelands, some with even as high statuses as “Prince”, were captured and shipped off to the Americas. They were forced into bondage and had to toil away in the hot sun of brutal summers and the biting cold of the unforgiving winters lest they be punished to the point of which their master saw fit. All of this anguish, for the prosperity, the lust, the greed, the economic gain of the white man who cracked the whip and tightened their chains. In this way they fell into simple commodity, just another part, not participant, of the white British colonial economic system.
From this perspective, we can clearly see those who came out on top and those who struggle at the bottom because of the economic system of the British North American Colonies. The previously wealthy prosper while those who struggled continue to struggle. Even those who once did not previously struggle, but were brought to America against their will, then struggled. We can see clearly the top and bottom of the totem pole, the alphas and the omegas, the “winners” and the “Losers” of this economic system.
The economic system of British North America was based on the people that settled these northern colonies. Many northern colonists were Puritans or “Separatists” who, in every, separated from the Church of England. They found it to be impure and left for the New World to establish their own purified church. As a result of this, the Massachusetts Bay Colony and Plymouth Bay were founded. Eventually other colonies were founded as a safe haven for ‘heretics’ of the Puritan religion such as Maryland, Rhode Island and Pennsylvania. The act of finding the other colonies did create a different group of people; a more religious-tolerant group but not necessarily a group of ‘winners’ or ‘losers’.
As British North America kept growing charters were granted for New Jersey, New York and Delaware to be established as profitable, coastal trading centers. The main exports for the northern colonies included fish, timber, whale and wheat products. Tobacco wasn’t as surplus in the North as it was in the South so there weren’t near as many slaves in the North then in its sister colonies. So with its economy being based on a stable trading industry, there was a stable flow of jobs for the colonists. In the more Puritan based colonies, some available jobs included being a clergyman or eventually contributing to the education system by being a teacher. Along the coastal regions you could have a career in the trading industries. With all this being said, I don’t believe a group of ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ were created. Even if some people of a higher class were to look down upon people of a lower class, there wasn’t much of a difference between them. The only ‘big’ differences would have been what religion they claimed to belong to and whether or not they owned land. Given these examples, I believe the economic system benefited many of the colonists residing in British North America.
*If anybody wants to comment about mine please feel free. And if I'm completely wrong, please tell me (: (preferrably Mr. Fields)
SWAG
SWAG!!! ;)
During the times of colonization, the economic system was becoming very diverse. There were three different levels of people, lower class, middle class, and the upper class, which lived in the British North American colonies. The lower class, or the ‘losers’, were the poor people of the town. They had the cheap houses, which were not that big, worked hard, and could barely make ends meet every month. Most would think that the economic system really did not affect the lower class because they worked for only themselves. Actuality, the economic system did affect them because they had to go sell their food somewhere, so if the economy was in the dumps, they would be in trouble, but if the economy was good, they would be very prosperous. The middle class citizens were not dead poor like the lower class but were not extremely rich like the upper class. They were more along the line of living in the cities and towns and they had jobs in stores of factories. As for them if the economy was bad they would suffer the most because they do not have the crops to grow their own food and they do have a surplus of money to buy their food, but if the economy was good they would not have the difficulty of making things meet, like the lower class, but they would have some extra money each month. The upper class people were the elites, these people worked in politics, like a lawyer, medical field, as a doctor, or in the ministry, as a minister. If the economy was good, they would only become even richer than before, and if the economy was in a rut they would still be fine and could live their lives like nothing is wrong. The economy would of greatly affected the middle class more than it would affect the lower or upper class.
The economic system of the British North American colonies definitely affected those who lived there. Two of the major economical boosts in the colonies were slave industry and agricultural trade. Agricultural trade, as we know it, ties in neatly with the slave industry. Indentured Servants, who I would call "losers" in this situation, were pretty much stuck. The top notch land owners were decreasing the hiring rates because African slaves costed much less in the long run. Once the indentured servant paid their due time, they were to get some land and a little money from their former masters and go fend for themselves. That life was supposed to be superb, as descried in "A Character of the Province of Maryland", by George Aslop. We all know those were point blank lies. As the years passed on, Indentured Servants were getting less and less of their promises and getting pushed out west. Slaves, the other "losers" in the situation, weren't getting any better treatment. As the economy grew among the plantation owners and such, slave owners were buying more slaves. Being captured from their native countries and being stuffed onto horrid , bloodcurdling boats. 1/3 or more of them died form either being sick, being thrown overboard, or both. Fun. Anyway, once they reached the colonies, they would most likely be separated from their loved ones and treated as if they were a herd of cattle. All this time, the economy is growing, but the desire for money basically brainwashed theses people into doing atrocious acts. Merchants, tradesmen, etc., were probably making ends meet at this point. What about the winners you might ask? Well, that's obvious. The slave/plantation owners were, without a doubt, the "winners" in the economy of that time period. They bought slaves, they generated products, they sold them, they got richer, they bought more slaves, etc. The cycle probably went on and on. Another benefit for them? The slaves were slave for life. to add on to that, the children of their slaves were also their "property." This takes us back to the indentured servants looking for jobs because they just finished their 7 year duties. Come to find out their masters made a different kind of agreement. Bye indentured servants! Pretty bad, huh?
That's how I think the economy of the British North American Colonies affected the people who lived there.
Aaron Reich
Period - 2
The economic system of the British North American colonies affected the people who lived there greatly. The economic system affected the South, Middle, and New England colonies differently. The New England colonies had Puritan values which influenced their economic system greatly. They had the rich not give up their wealth. They did though tax them to help out the poor. The middle and southern colonies though were not strong with Puritan values. They had more of an economic mindset for capitalism. The rich came to the colonies and became richer owning tobacco plantations and such.They they employed indentured servants by paying for their voyage to the New World. Some indentured servants became successful and obtained their own land after their servitude being about four to seven years. This was only about ten percent. Another ten percent became alright and did okay for themselves becoming artisans and such. The other eighty percent though became very poor and either died, went back to England, or went back into servitude employment. This system greatly created losers and winners. The winners being rich. The losers being indentured servants and slaves. Another problem is that the rich would occupy all of the coastal land. This then forced poorer white men looking for land to travel in Indian land thus causing wars. The rich used this as a buffer. The rich and colonial governments would not send in troops to assist them. The worst losers though were the African slaves forced into enslavement and brought to America. Many African slaves died in the journey. When they arrived in America, they were forced to work hard labor for their lifetime. They were beaten and whipped constantly. So overall the economic system of the British North American colonies affected the people who lived there greatly creating a system of winners and losers with a huge divide.
Economics and social structure goes hand and hand. If one is weak and easily disruptable, then the other must come down as well. With that being said, the basic outline of all British North American colonies were; New England, Middle, and Southern colonies. New England's social structure was based off community and close knit towns, middle colonies were known for it's aristocratic lifestyle, and southern colonies were based off profit, and geographically isolated with others. Each section had it's own social structure, which led to the drastic differences between the three and determined the outcome who were deemed the "winners" and the "losers."
New England was known for it's tightly knit communities and strong social relations with others. The Puritan ideals and goals were to unite as one and reach a common goal to fufill the blessings of their God and create a strong, well standing colony. With that being said, the Puritans believed that every colonist should be fairly equal, (although being wealthy was not wrong, and was considered to be a blessing from God) every settler would recieve a piece of land to build a house, and a commonground for breeding cattle and growing crops. They would also support each other, (a wealthy person had to look out and support someone least fortunate.) to prevent outbreaks, and keep the colony standing. The New England General Court also set up minimum work wages and price regulations to help the settlers to live healthy and comfortably. This gave a sense of a strong economic system where everyone pitches in, to support the town and it's people. Therefore greatly increased the amount of "winners."
In contrast, the Southern ideals were extremely different from the New England colonies. In the Southern colonies, cash crops like indigo, tobacco, and rice were the main source of income. Because the southern colonies were such an extensive agricultural area, large plantations were set up to receive maximum profit from crops. Therefore, land was taken up by plantations, rather than buildings. The plantations also isolated many of the settlers, and it was almost geographically impossible to create a community. As larger plantations grew, a stable workforce was needed, and at the time the indentured servants were brought from the New World to start over a new life. People from the New World began to sell themselves for labor for a certain amount of years, after their contract ended they would be rewarded with a land grant and supplies needed to start over a new life. Although, the first batch of indentured servants did receive land, the later servants did not because wealthy planters were beginning to run out of land. Therefore, the late servants were pushed west without the protection from Indians. This great schism between the "winners"(wealthy planters) and the "losers"(Indentured servants) brought up Bacon's Rebellion, which worsened the indentured servant's situation. Wealthy planters did not trust the indentured servants and turned to African slaves. While the indentured servants were struggling and halted in the New World, wealthy planters retaliated with suppressible African slaves to continue harvesting crops for economic gain.
Middle colonies like New York were living the aristocratic lifestyle, so it is obviously a place full of “winners” that being the wealthy elitists.
===================================
(@Mr. Fields: I think i took a very different approach to this, I wanted to explain how the setup of the colonies, affected the economy, which then affected the outcome of the "winners" and "losers." But my question is...is this on topic, or is it just a wordy explanation of the social structure, rather than the economy?)
Economically, the British North American colonies dramatically affected the lives of those who resided there. From the production of tobacco crops, wheat, turpentine, tar, and ships, there were several commodities for an individual to prosper on; however, the aforementioned commodities would only benefit certain people. The British North American colonies’ economy established groups of those who possessed the ability to ascend in society, and those who never dared to even approach the ladder of opportunity.
Ambitious individuals and even some former indentured servants, who had completed their duration of servitude, could achieve prosperity. In fact, two former indentured servants had become signers of the Declaration of Independence. Though, statistically, most indentured servants, after completion of their servitude, became either farmers or housewives. Paupers and convicts, who among them were robbers, rapists and murderers, who were involuntarily shipped to America, ironically, came to be highly respectable citizens.
Indentured servants signed a contract stating that upon completion of the duration of their servitude, they were to receive compensation in return for their labor which typically consisted of land, money, a gun, clothes and food. However, there not being enough land to hand out to the indentured servants led to the former servants being pushed westward, where the threat of Indians was great and the land infertile. This generated anger and frustration among the former servants, which had eventually led to conflict, most notably Bacon’s Rebellion, an uprising consisting of about one thousand unfortunate former indentured slaves and Virginians. Those most unfortunate among all of those residing in the British North American colonies, however, were the African-American slaves who had possessed no freedom whatsoever and dared not to even dream about rising in society, as they held no equality to whites.
In summarization of my point, the British North American economy led to the establishment of groups that were considered “winners” and “losers” in society. Although there were numerous opportunities that could lead to prosperity in British North America, social and economic factors obstructed some from acquiring the eagerly sought wealth and prestige.
I think that the economic system they had was pretty unified. I mean, you still have the rich, the poor, and the middle class starting to form, but they all sort of helped each other. At least, that’s what I get out of it. The rich would give to the poor. The poor would then, in return, have to be grateful. Then you would have the middle class, that was just sort of there.
Of course, they could have had more of a system where everyone had the same amount of money and everyone was equal in everything. That would be the perfect world, but let’s face it, that will never happen, especially during the Early Settlements. Even if they had an “All for One” attitude, doesn’t mean that that’s going to be the results of it. There was always someone with the upper hand, and that would be the rich.
So, yes, there was a group for the “losers” and one for the “winners” As you might guess, the rich would be the winners and the poor would be the losers. The richer, upper class basically had everything they needed and wanted, and still had more than enough. Then you had the other side of the community, which would be the poor. They had to earn everything they had. They had to hard work to get what they had.
Would say, though, that there were some thins positive that came to the poor, and some negative to the rich. The poor had the community to help them out. Yes, they still had to work for everything they got, but there was always someone there to help them out if they needed it. While the rich were usually the ones to help. It was almost demanded. They had to help, it was for the good of the community.
Personally, I feel there really isn’t a exact winner or loser. I think they just live in the same community, all there to help one another. Some were just better off.
Amado Rodriguez
The economic differences of each colony had a profound impact on the lives of their respective inhabitants. It was commonly reflective of their social structure and ideologies such as religion. The economic situation also varied depending on geographical location and commerce.
The Puritans of the New England area operated considerably different than the other colonies. Instead of constantly being driven by the desire for personal gain the Puritans were well known for lending each other a hand when needed, be it financially or emotionally. The wealthy were the generally the ones who assisted puritans undergoing financial tribulations. Despite this fact Puritans society was far from socialist. On the contrary, Puritan beliefs encouraged individual prosperity and never inhibited a Puritan’s ability to grow wealthy. All that was asked of the Puritans was that they remain a strong unified society and obey the word of god, leaving wealth entirely to the discretion of the citizen. The Puritan society could very well have been a pretext to the modern form of capitalism that we see in America till this day.
Compared to the economic and social system of the New England Puritans the colonists of the Southern colonies were almost completely different. The economy of the Southern colonies relied primarily on the goods produced by their staple crops which included tobacco and rice. The agriculturally based economy led the Southerners to be extremely isolated from one another and shared little bonds when compared to the Puritans. The success of the plantations created an even larger gap between the social structure of the South. Wealthy plantation owners continued to get richer while poor Southerners with no land became poorer. Even the governments of the Southern colonies seemed to favor the rich over the poor. One example being the act that rewarded any plantation owner who paid the passage of African slaves with many acres upon acres of land. This elite favoring act ultimately ended in an uprising known as Bacon’s rebellion.
(@Mr.Fields, it is perfectly ok to tell me that my essay was the best in the class :)
SWAG X2
Phillip, for your first blog response it was fine. I like how you set up the "New York" angle for later...after the Revolution, some of the wealthy financiers and shipping magnates ran the economic interests of the new country, and they were not at all interested in all of that freedom-and-individual-liberties nonsense...they wanted a strong central government (and national bank) that would insure their credit would be paid back. That's part of the reason why the first national capitol was near Wall Street.
Post a Comment