Week 8: Defining the Nation
This week explores the American Revolution and "birth" of the U.S. in the context of the "age of revolutions." Our readings will cover the "founding fathers" and early national debates over the size and structure of the government.
Readings:
Clark, preface and chap. 1.
Points of Entry:
The Federalist Papers -
Anti-Federalist Papers -
Haitian Revolution -
Thoughts/Questions for blog discussion:
List and analyze 2 quotes from the reading.
What are some of the arguments?
How are they related to the larger themes of the week discussed in class?
“In the British American colonies on the eve of the American Revolution, four out of every five did not have these rights because they held a status legally defined as dependent.” (5)
ReplyDeleteThis statement is arguing that in British America, men, the head of the household, were usually the only one that obtained rights, but were not reserved for them. Women, children, and racial minorities were denied of civic rights held by white men of the time. The passage is arguing that women and children are legally bound to obey their husbands and fathers. Although rights were held by men, they were not entitled to them. One had to be free of all servitude and own land to take part in civic rights and activities. It is this notion, to my belief, that started the tren of the household representing society.
“Spanish, Portuguese, and French territories in the New World had no representative political institutions that could serve, as those in the British colonies did, as loci of autonomous political activity, debate, and opposition.” (32)
The lack of this central government location was given as the main point as why none of the other colonies joined in the revolution/were unable to. Some historians argue that it was the Creole Elites that were the base behind the British American Colonies revolution. With a somewhat functional form of leadership, it was only a matter of time until the manipulation of the colonies brought about a revolution due to the laws imposed on British Americans.
Quote 1: By 1774 about 20 percent of the thirteen colonies' population was wholly or partly of African descent, and of those people no fewer than 96% were held as chattel slaves, that is as the outright property of others.
ReplyDeleteQuote 2: "Yet slaves' situation was indeed extreme. Slaves were denied most of the legal privileges obtainable by free people, and unlike some other dependents...had little hope of shedding that status."
1774, yes two years before the so-called "life,liberty, and pursuit of happiness" myth was constructed. The argument here, is that chattel slavery was the predominant status of a majority-minority population. This also means that everything that was legal "democratically" from that point on, cannot be seen as legally binding. I argue that the founding documents are fragments of imagination lacking the legitimacy of 20% popular vote. Although to be fair, and a Marxist perespective was taken, then the founding fathers would be judged according to the economic superstructure right? Okay then, lets be fair, the founding "fathers" were men whose wealth, economic system, and authority came from the degradation of slaves, period.
"Whereas in Britain only a small minority of the population was qualified by heredity or property holding to participate in politics, among adult white men in the colonies a substantial proportion owned property and hence the qualifications for political participation." (32)
ReplyDeleteAlthough only 20 percent of colonists could participate in politics, this percentage was significantly higher than that in Great Britain. The number of educated elite only encouraged the American Revolution. Colonial gentlemen continually tried to imitate their British brothers, therefore establishing a level playing field (from their perspective)between them and the British. Once the British attempted to use the colonies to their advantage, powerful colonial gentlemen spoke out in protest. Since these gentlemen maintained political power, they resorted to political action first. Using their intellect and political influence colonists attempted to right the British's mistakes, as opposed to resorting to mob violence .
Again, to further emphasize this theme Clark writes, "...the largest settler groups across the thirteen colonies had British origins or ancestry." (31)
Much like a teenager seeks independence from his parents, the American colonies sought a separate identity from Britain. Since they identified themselves as British citizens, colonists were appalled at the mother country's demeaning treatment. Being British must have instilled a sense of pride of which feelings of anger and frustration would emerge when that identity was challenged.
"The existence of slavery meant that divisions by race and status were more significant in Cheasapeake than the ethnic diversity characteristic of the Mid-Atlantic colonies." (19)
ReplyDelete"If racially based slavery marked the most crucial social distinctions in the South while incipient class differences were emerging in the Middle Colonies, many parts of New England could lay claim to relative equality." (21)
Slavery is the basis for most new world adventures and economies. Many people traveled for slaves in order to purchase and expand their agricultural grasps. Slavery has been talked about almost to the point of exhaustion but many must look at how slavery helped to form the United States. Without the economic foundations, the U.S. would not be where it is today. The Founding Fathers realized this and made slaves property in a sense throughout the founding documents. The quotes above further the idea that slavery was important but the second quote challenges the idea that a colony cannot thrive without slaves. New England did rely on family labor more than slave labor showing many other colonies how a nation could be built without slaves (for the most part). This piece of information tied into the basis of the anti-slavery arguments that helped the United States to develop further in the realm of equality (a basic freedom). So as important slavery was in the formation of the nation, it was just as important in allowing further development toward the goals listed in the founding documents. The ecnomic view became less and less important as time went on and the rights of people came into the forefront of many arguments. The United States proved to not be only an economic powerhouse but one that preserves rights even if it does take time to gain these rights. It is the fight that counts.
"Given their lack of economic means or other sources of independence, divorce was an avenue few women could seek to pursue anyway." Pg 5
ReplyDeleteThis quote shows that women were really limited with the types of lives they could pursue at this time in history.Women really had no choice but to get married otherwise they would be force to live their entire lives as servants. This was one large disadvantage of being a woman at this point in history.
"Surpluses from farming districts reached urban markets and were shipped by merchants there to supply the West Indies." Pg 22
This quote shows that the crops that were produced by the slaves and the plantations in the continental Americas went to feed the slaves in the West Indies. The industry in multiple areas helped fuel the Slave trade all across the Atlantic world. All of the colonies interacted with each other in order to survive in the New World.
“Foremost among these distinctions were those between people who were “independent” and legally free, and those who held one or another form of “dependant” status and were thus to a greater or lesser degree of unfree” (Clark, 3)
ReplyDeleteClark talks a great deal on the subject of dependence and independence. He says that the idea is separate from the idea of slavery because women, children and most poor whites were dependent rather than completely free. The text then goes on to talk about how labor was the driving force of the American colonies. Clark says that the demand for labor bonded 4 out of every 5 citizens of colonial America to someone else. I think that this consistent theme of bondage was an often over looked factor in the push for revolution. This relates to the discussion in class we had about rebellion or revolution because in many ways the threat of rebellion by Colonial Americans gave further incentive to break free of the British Empire and for a government not driven by the need for enslavement and dependency.
“It was occupied by Native American groups whose removal by disease, warfare, or displacement had been a constant theme.” (Clark 8)
Clark uses this idea that the land was barren and desolate before we got here to portray the image of the typical household. Many Colonial Americans had the false idea that they were there first and that they had a greater right to the land than the Native Americans. They then set out to force many native tribes into westward migration through the use of warfare and sometimes through disease. Once they had decimated the Indian population they forced them to assimilate into their culture or else they were frequently used as collateral in the slave trade. The fact that we were after more and more land also relates to the sudden spike in the demand for labor. As we conquered more land and moved further west it took more labor to tend the land and make profits in trade. I think what Clark is trying to do with his writing is talk about the fact that we often forget about the Native Americans and their role in the new society once we start talking about revolution, but in reality they are still there and they play a vital role in the American economy and in the war.
"Yet slaves' situation was indeed extreme. Slaves were denied most of the legal privileges obtainable by free people, and unlike some other dependents- such as free male children who could expect to grow p to become independent adults- often had little hope of shedding their status"(Clark 7-8).
ReplyDeleteHere Clark is discussing the fact that their was a cycle of statuses. Many slaves did not believe that they would be able to escape the life of a slave. There was also no meaning for any of their belongs and rituals such as marriages and houses. It ties into what we discussed this week because it demonstrates that slaves really did not have any power.
"Where fathers ruled and controlled access to the land their sons would one day inherit, deference to age was proclaimed as a prominent social virtue"(Clark 24-25).
In New England they believe in social order and social status. Age also played a key role because it would determine what would become of a child. The oldest would get most of what is left behind along with the responsibilities. It's like what we talked about in class because the white man has all of the power and the ability to give away their belongings where the slave does not. This shows the constant cycle of social status and importance throughout the revolution.
Danielle Quinones
ReplyDelete"The South with its many subregional variations, would become particularly associated with its dominant labor system, chattel slavery. There the preeminent form of social distinction appeared to be that of race." (pgs.10-11)
Clark is arguing how race defined society and made a distinction in the South. I feel he is beginning his distinctions between the North and the South and how the South had more forms of slavery. He is also showing how social structure was based on the color of your skin and slaves were at the bottom because they were black.
"It is valid to speak of New England as in some respects a "dual economy," a region in which distinct patterns of society and economic activity existed alongside one another and require separate examination." (22)
Clark is arguing that New England's economy used society and economics to shape it. Each influenced the other. We have talked about in class before that economics and money influence a society and here Clark is showing that New England really had that.
“Freedom conveyed not just family authority, civic rights, and legal standing but power over others” (pg 4)
ReplyDeleteThis quote is talking about the hierarchy and the standings that people have in regard to the labor issues. It goes on referring to women and their place in the house hold and also people who were legally free.
“The late eighteen-century populations of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania were ethically among the most diverse in North America.”(pg 11)
This quote is referring to the North and south of America. The northern part of the colonies were more diverse and we’re more accepting as comparison to the way that the South was. The South was for slavery and all about having this one race and not accepting anything else.
"people in New England settlements were 'all in some what degree related to each other." (Clark, 22)
ReplyDeleteIn this quote Clark is trying to explain that people in New England were most likely related to each other. Most of Massachusetts was 85 percent of English decent which also indicated that it was not that diverse culturally. But New York had a variety of people but in each city in new york people were related either by blood or marriage. It depends on the location where you lived.
'All who were not independent or legally free were to some extent subject to having their labor directed by those who were." (Clark 4-5)
This quote basically sets up the labor part of Chapter 1. People who did not have wealth or have a high status of some kind most likely had to work under some sort of authority. Women being one of those people were seen as a material item because a man could divorce a women if he felt that she was not good enough or if she did not perform her household duties to his liking. Many people worked as apprentices, slaves and indentured servants just to get by in life and have some sort of money.
"the condition of a slave resembled the connection of a wife with her husband, and of infant children with their father. he is obliged to maintain them, and they cannot be seperated from him" (Clark 7)
ReplyDeleteThis quote analysis’s the relationship of a child, slave, and wife to a white male. They had the “rights” of being maintained; fed, clothed, housed, and other such aspects, but they were like property to the head of the house. The head of any house would be an adult white male. Everybody else would follow their roles in society. Women in particular served as a servant in the house, performing the household chores.
"In New England, unlike Pennsylvania, weaving had become a women's craft during the 18th century, reflecting the central role of family labor in the region's economy" (Clark 24)
Clark talks about the different economies of New England. I see this quote as a beginning to women’s important roles in the economy. They would help support the family by weaving clothes for sale and for personal use.
“Only temporarily, during the Seven Years War…and again during the Stamp act…did delegates from the different colonies gather to consider matters together” (28).
ReplyDeleteThis quote reminds me of the discussion we had about the painting of the singning of the Declaration. The image depicted a grand happening, of familiar delegates coming together again to create a new country. The quote above echoes the video clip we watched on Youtube-that the delegates rarely met together and the romanticized picture of the signing did not happen.
"...it was their common status as consumers that bound colonial patriots together in the Revolution" (30).
To me, this is absolutely true. Although the Founding Fathers may have been elites in society, a lot of colonists were not. America was founded on the ideals that anyone can succeed here, based on a market economy, where buyers and sellers set price rather than the government.
"Pennsylvania's Quaker origins especially pointed it away from attempts to secure religious conformity, and there was no attempt there to establish an official state church," p. 17-18). Clark goes to put more perspective on the Quaker stance on religion with this passage. It is generally known that the Quakers were pacifist in every sense of the word. However, Clark states that the Quaker sense of pacifism was not even a true established religion itself. They may have borrowed from Christianity, but the state of Pennsylvania had no desire to have an actual church. This means that none of the other colonies could really take Pennsylvania seriously, since religion was of high importance at the time. This point is further illustrated in the John Adams/Joseph Rutledge debates, where Adams harshly decapitates the Quaker set of mind. The religious freedom was great for the Quaker people, but at the same time, it made them weak and vulnerable to criticism.
ReplyDelete"By comparison with either the South or the Mid-Atlantic, eighteenth century England appeared socially and ethnically homogeneous," (p. 22). This passage from Clark partially illustrates the demographic effects produced by the New England stance on slavery. New England had an 85% English population at the time. Contrasting, the South, particularly the Chesapeake Virginia area consisted of 40 percent African slaves. To think that a population could be affected by slavery so vastly is mind boggling.
"Within households especially, servants, apprentices, and slaves as well as women and children held subordinate positions, with varying degrees of restriction on their freedom but all with obligations to their masters" p.4
ReplyDeleteI saw this as an interesting point because of the fact that many slave owners treated their slaves very differently. For example, it was known that Thomas Jefferson's slaves were treated much better than the rest of the other slaves. This is where we would see why some slaves got educations and others did not.
"Slaves were unprotected by laws governing fornication or bastardly"
This was interesting this freed any of the heads of slave households of any legal recognition or powers granted to free husbands and fathers. Slaves were the property of both the slave master and the owner. This is why women were so expensive in the slave trade. Their ability to bear more men gained more of a working force for the slave master.
"Divorce was usually regarded as a male prerogative and was indeed mostly initiated by husbands who were dissatisfied with their wives' conduct." (Pg. 5)
ReplyDeleteThis quote describes that the women in this time were treated unfairly by their husbands. Husbands and fathers could command the work upon their wives and children because the law and religion supported them. This caused the women to refuse to do things such as cooking and washing which was required of them.
"Slavery was legal in all the American colonies, though historians distinguish between regions where slavery existed but was not common and those where slavery was a key element in the social and economic fabric." (Pg. 7)
At this time in history, about 20 percent of the thirteen colonies' population was made up of African decent. Slavery was considered to be a household because there were either small groups or large groups of slaves that worked for their masters on the plantation. To support this statement, many plantation owners called their group of slaves a "slave family."
"Most colonial Americans saw society as a hierarchy of social standing and authority in which individual households held positions according to their wealth, family connections, and other determinants of status."(3)
ReplyDelete+Clark's passage seemingly emphasizes the fact that the societal hierarchy of colonial America is not so different from the one that exists today. Clark even lists the specific qualities the two have in common; "wealth[and] family connections". These two determents still hold major sway in today's ideas of what high position should look like. In comparing the two societies Clark is attempting to humanize the colonists and make the reader feel as though colonial reality is a not so distant entity.
"Even in the poorest families, husbands and fathers could command the labor of their wives and children, and custom, law, and religion backed them up." (5)
+Here, Clark is trying to emphasize the reality that, every aspect of the home and business was tailored to serving the head of house. Although dissimilar to the cruelty experienced by the slaves, it was not forbidden for men to strike their wives or children in demanding their submission. Clark's ultimate focus is to communicate the absolute domination that white, adult, landowning men had over every other being in society. The sole purpose of every other person was to prosper their master;willingly, and without question or error.
"In the British American colonies on the eve of the American Revolution, four out of every five did not have these rights because they held a status legally defined as dependent"
ReplyDeleteIn this passage Clark is arguing that many of the White males had the dominate role in the households. The women, children and racial minorities were denied civic rights which the white males held. The passage also argues that the women and children are to obey their husbands and fathers of these households.
"the condition of a slave resembled the connection of a wife with her husband, and of infant children with their father. he is obliged to maintain them, and they cannot be seperated from him"
This passage is explaining that white women and children are almost like property to their husbands and fathers, whom is the head of the house. Although they did have some right to be clothed and fed each day but the women in these households were treated like servants always maintaining the household chores like cooking and cleaning but i see it as the women being the glue by maintaining the house to support the family.
"The existence of slavery meant that divisions by race and status were more significant in Cheasapeake than the ethnic diversity characteristic of the Mid-Atlantic colonies." (19)
ReplyDeletethe importance of status in the more independent colonies determined ones role in the political system. with having a large majority o f slaves in certain colonies meant that there was a more distinct recognition of status through race. and upon that the status of wealth then was used a distinction of superiority to iin between those of the same race.
"Even in the poorest families, husbands and fathers could command the labor of their wives and children, and custom, law, and religion backed them up." (5)
The role inside the house holds reflected the political structure. The way this is so, is that not until the women suffrage movement, the female population had no voice in the political system and is a reflection of the common house hold. the White man of the house is the one who holds is in charge of the property which meant that since he is charge of the property then he is the one who represents the family in political activities
“ ‘Freedom’ and the privileges of legal and economic independence were enjoyed by no more than one in five colonial Americans.” Pg 4
ReplyDeleteClark is trying to explain that only rich, white colonists had “freedom”. It was enjoyed if you had money and if you had the rights that people of color did not have. Freedom was available to those who knew how to work the system and to people who had the right connections to money and political power.
“In New England colonies, which alone made legal provision for divorce, several eighteenth-century petitions claimed that wives had refused to perform household task, such as cooking and washing, that custom required of them.” Pg 5
This quote is basically saying that men had the right to divorce their wife if she was not performing the necessary tasks that a woman should perform. This law was very unacceptable because most men at that time would sleep with other women, while they were married, and would not be charged or scolded for adultery. Where as, when a woman would cheat, she would be publically humiliated.
"Households were the primary, and almost universal, agents of social and economic oranization, and it was under their auspices that most productive activity took place." (Clark 3)
ReplyDeleteOnce you think about it it was the households that did everything from create the ideas that founded the nation to the specialization of labor.
"Land ownership patterns helped determine the character and prosperity of farming." (Clark 12)
It is interesting to look at the differences that each individual farm had, whether the differences were determined by region or my polotics. For example some farms had slaves some did not. Crops varied between farms as well as some farm owners werre looking at maximum profit while others only at producing crops for the greater good.
-In one sense, slavery was merely at one end of a spectrum of dependent relationships that were characteristic of household production.- "the condition of a slave resembled the connection of a wife with her husband, and of infant children with their father. He is obliged to maintain them, and they cannot be separated from him.
ReplyDelete- This particular excerpt presents the idea of a slave's relationship to their slaveholder. The slaves living conditions represented how important the relationship with the slave owner was. Slaves were ultimately deemed property during those times of captivity.
- "The observation that the American slave population could expand by natural increase would underpin many calculations about the future of slavery and its political implications during the Revolution.- In Richmond County, Virginia in 1783, 54 percent of slaveholders owned only one to five slaves each; but 41 percent of slaves lived in units of between sixteen and fifty slaves each.
-This excerpt exemplifies the harsh conditions slaves were forced to reckon with. Slaves were forced to work together under the authority of their slave owners. The slave owner could ultimately own more than one slave. Since slaves were forced to live together in large units there was no sense of individuality for the slaves.
"Conflicts between colonial aspirations and the british government's efforts to control this expansion were among the revolution's root causes" pg. 31
ReplyDeleteWhat this quote is talking about is the fact that after the seven year's war the british parliament put restrictions on how far west the colonist could go, the Appalachians. This is one of many causes for unrest in the colonies.
"... they tended not to see themselves as only temporary colonial residents carrying out the functions for families or business partners based at home, where they would in due course expect to return. American elites were at home." pg. 35
This quote is talking about the differences between the American colonies and spanish portuguese and french colonies. It also mentions american elites, these people are the foundation for the revolution. These are the leaders of the colonies, everyone look to the elites for leadership, and it's because of these elites that people started talking about rebelling against the british.
1. "By 1774 about 20 percent of the thirteen colonies' population was wholly or partly of African descent, and of those people no fewer than 96% were held as chattel slaves, that is as the outright property of others"
ReplyDeleteThis quote represents the fact that the 13 American colonies were not just made up of white British settlers. Even though the African Americans were seen as slaves and part of property, they were still human beings and should have a right to live by the rules that bind everyone. So slavery played a big role in decision making during this time period.
2. "Second, the largest settler groups across the thirteen colonies had British origins or ancestry" (Clark page 31).
This quote seems ironic because Britain was the colony that ruled over the America's and led to the Declaration. This settlers should have been devout followers and it seems to show that instead of siding with Britain, they all sided against them. This could be one of the reasons why the 13 colonies became such a strong force in creating and establishing the Constitution.