Colonal American History

DiscussionsAmerican History

Rejoignez LibraryThing pour poster.

Colonal American History

Ce sujet est actuellement indiqué comme "en sommeil"—le dernier message date de plus de 90 jours. Vous pouvez le réveiller en postant une réponse.

1sgerbic
Modifié : Jan 11, 2009, 9:48 pm

Just about to start a Graduate Colonial History class at SJSU and staring at the reading pile. I am almost finished with the first book I received and hoping others will want to discuss the books. As I post to my library I see very few reviews about these books I'm required to read, I welcome your thoughts.

Black Majority by Gordon Wood
Devil in the Shape of a Woman by Karlsen
Voyagers to the West by Bailyn
Middle Ground by White
Worlds of Wonder, Days of Judgement by Hall
Radicalism of the American Revolution by Wood
Robert Cole's World by Carr
Transformation of Virginia by Isaac
Invasion Within by Axtell
Liberty Men & Great Proprietors by Taylor
Empires of the Atlantic World by Elliott
Fault Lines of Empire by Manche
Citizens of the World by Hancock

Susan

BTW if someone knows how to correct the spelling of the topic please do so or tell me how. I'm so embarrassed!

2sgerbic
Jan 11, 2009, 9:22 pm

I am almost finished with Voyagers to the West by Bailyn. I have lots of questions that might be answered sometime during my class but I propose them here for the more knowledgeable than myself.

In Britons by Linda Colley I can't see where she mentions a problem with emigration to America or Canada. Yet the main premise of Voyages is that it was a real problem in Scotland and England. These are both dealing with the same time period, yet totally different messages.

Another question I have is that a lot who came to America seem to be renters. That surprises me as I though one of the main reasons why people left was to get away from landlords. I know that someone owned the land, but people were induced to come to America so they could make the land farmable, and then hope to rent at higher rents to someone else. Why rent at all? Why weren't more people coming as land owners, working their own land and then selling if they wanted another area? I know a lot who came were poor, but I would think landlords would be keen on loaning them money for purchasing the land later.

Maybe I'm missing lots, but still I am very curious what others think.

Susan

3morryb
Jan 12, 2009, 12:22 am

Should it be Colonial?

4sgerbic
Jan 12, 2009, 1:47 am

Yes, that is why I write at the bottom of my first post...

"BTW if someone knows how to correct the spelling of the topic please do so or tell me how. I'm so embarrassed!"

I've also posted in the FAQ how to change the subject spelling.

Susan

5JFCooper
Jan 13, 2009, 4:49 pm

Susan,
Most people who came to America in the colonial era could not afford to purchase land. Many arrived as indentured servants, more arrived as freemen without the cash to purchase land. Land was a commodity owned solely by the individuals holding charters from the reigning monarch. It had to be acquired from royal or proprietary sources, this took some wealth and influence at first.

Land speculation was the driving force of American wealth for most of the English/British colonial era. Washington made a fortune in it, the Penn family (after William died) bamboozled the Delaware people out of ALL of their unsold land in 1737 so that they could sell it off and live in style in London.

The Albany conference of 1754 provided the Penns with the eastern 1/3 of what is now PA, free and clear of any claims by the Iroquios, and so incensed the Delawares remaining in PA, that they took up the hatchet for the French.

Regular folks (farmers, traders, German refugee immigrants) could purchase land from the Penns in PA, so PA became a prosperous, and more egalitarian place than, say, Virginia. But that was an exception. Land deeds and quitrents were not easy to come by for working stiffs.

Hope this helps!
Daniel

6walbat
Jan 18, 2009, 4:19 pm

Susan,

The book on your list that I would particularly highlight is The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650-1815, by Richard White. Published in 1991, it was one of the first histories to get past old assumptions and stereotypes and look at Indian-European relations in colonial America in important new ways. White put it best, right up front:

"The history of Indian-white relations has not usually produced complex stories. Indians are the rock, European peoples are the sea, and history seems a constant storm. There have been but two outcomes: The sea wears down and dissolves the rock; or the sea erodes the rock but cannot finally absorb its battered remnant, which endures. The first outcome produces stories of conquest and assimilation; the second produces stories of cultural persistance. The tellers of such stories do not lie. Some Indian groups did disappear; others did persist. But the tellers of such stories miss a larger process and a larger truth. The meeting of sea and continent, like the meeting of whites and Indians, creates as well as destroys. Contact was not a battle of primal forces in which only one could survive. Somthing new could appear." (p. ix)

That "something new" includes the portrait we get from White of Indians and Europeans in the Great Lakes region negotiating a new society that called for compromises from, and imposed changes on, both sides. It's a great place to start, if you're interested, in the fascinating literature that has followed it. A few examples include:
Into the American Woods: Negotiators on the Pennsylvania Frontier, by James H. Merrell, which I think Daniel has read with profit;
Subjects of the Same King: Indians, English, and the Contest for Authority in Colonial New England, by Jenny Hale Pulsipher;
The Indian Slave Trade: The Rise of the English Emprie in the American South, 1670-1717, by Alan Gallay;
The Yamasee War: A Study of Culture, Economy, and Conflict in the Colonial South, by William L. Ramsey;
The Divided Ground: Indians, Settlers, and the Northern Borderland of the American Revolution, by Alan Taylor.

Also see the works of Daniel K. Richter, Colin G. Calloway, and Jill Lepore.

A list of further reading is perhaps the last thing you wanted, but it's just possible White's book will inspire you, as it did me, to want to read more about Indian-European interactions, from perspectives very different from the ones that I grew up with.

Phil


7sgerbic
Jan 18, 2009, 10:08 pm

"A list of further reading is perhaps the last thing you wanted, but it's just possible White's book will inspire you, as it did me, to want to read more about Indian-European interactions, from perspectives very different from the ones that I grew up with."

Your right about not needing more books, but thanks for your insight, I'm glad to know that when I get to this book it will satisfy my need to know the Native American's history from this perspective.

Susan

8sgerbic
Jan 18, 2009, 10:13 pm

"Most people who came to America in the colonial era could not afford to purchase land. Many arrived as indentured servants, more arrived as freemen without the cash to purchase land. Land was a commodity owned solely by the individuals holding charters from the reigning monarch. It had to be acquired from royal or proprietary sources, this took some wealth and influence at first."

I'm almost done with the book, about 100 pages to go. And only in the last 100 pages or so has the author explained (at least clear enough to me) what you are saying. I think that maybe this book isn't for beginners, but for the those who already have enough background in the subject to provide more details.

It seems that you would apply for a grant from the government (which meant having contacts or wealth) and then you had to improve the land. If you did not do so in a specific frame of time then you could lose that grant. People arriving were mostly indentured servants and could in time apply for their own grant, that they would improve. If this was in the beginning of the book, I must have missed it, but it would have cleared up a lot for me if I had understood that.

Susan

9ThePam
Modifié : Jan 19, 2009, 7:29 pm

Gallay's on my TBR and I've found I like almost everything by Axtell and Ekberg.

My background, btw, was early medieval but the early American experience has recently become something I've been focused on. I'll be checking back to pick up ideas and see what's going on.

10sgerbic
Jan 21, 2009, 5:42 pm

I just finished Voyagers to the West by Bailyn and must say it was detailed. It was not for the casual reader, I think most of the detail could have been put in the back with charts and or graphs. Just overwhelmed the actual results he found and the family stories.

I did not like that he only included numbers for things, but no percentages. I have no idea if 15 families leaving a city would be devastating or not? And if 1,245 people leave Scotland for South Carolina, is that a big deal? Surely they knew what the population was for the area they emigrated from? Otherwise he sounds like someone trying to make his particular area more important than it was.

As I stated in an earlier post, Linda Colley Britons: Forging the Nation which is considered a very scholarly work that covers the same years, does not mention (least not that I can find) this epidemic that Bailyn mentions. Colley does not even have the word emigration in her index. Her introduction alludes to many things she does not discuss in her work, but she does not mention emigration even there. Was it really the big deal that Bailyn makes it out to be?

America got most of its immigrants from Briton, but was it the drain on British society that Bailyn makes? Not sure why this concerns me so much, but I just think it seems strange. Reminds me of all those VH-1 programs that highlight a old rock group or star for an hour program, every time they talk as if the group/star was the "most important/influential/talked about or whatever" of that time. How can they ALL be the most important?

Anyway, I reviewed this book and only gave it 3 stars. Sorry, I know many of you loved this book. I did learn a lot from it, it was well researched, and maybe analyzed primary sources that were not used this way in the past. But I can get past the fact that the book as a whole included few introductions or conclusions and just was overwhelming for anyone but a few. Why turn people off to history, sum it up for people, the scholars can read the footnotes or view the data in the back of the book.

Susan

11sgerbic
Jan 21, 2009, 8:55 pm

Okay Phil, you have influenced me. I'm starting The Middle Ground by White tonight.

Susan

12sgerbic
Jan 22, 2009, 12:05 am

Okay, I've read through the intro 3 times, and the epilogue twice. This book the Middle Ground seems revultionary. White explains that Americians invented Indians. After living together for two centuries Indians were no longer "familiar to whites" Now they were to be studied, preserved.

I feel like I am at the edge of understanding this concept. I understand better if analogies are used, and hope he does so in the work.

The middle ground he refers to is what developed between whites and Indians for many years. Then Indians lost that leverage, and were forced to become something of novelity, he calls it becoming "the other".

13walbat
Modifié : Jan 22, 2009, 7:57 pm

Yes, I do think that you will find that the narrative in the bulk of the book will provide the factual detail to make White's key arguments -- the ones he lays out in his introduction and sums up in his epilogue -- more concrete and understandable.

His argument about 'the other' is important because that change in the way that whites viewed Indians has shaped our vision of Native Americans ever since -- primitive and perhaps noble in some 'savage' way, but little more than a curiosity in the grand march of European civilization across the continent.

And it not only led whites to view Indians as a group to be studied, and even preserved, but also made it easier for 19th century Americans to justify and carry out the violence that finally subjugated the surviving Native American population. With apologies to White, I would put it this way: reducing a group of people to 'the other' strengthens the dominant culture's sense of superiority over them and gives those so marginalized just two choices -- assimilate or be exterminated.

That said, I think White's examination of this gradual transformation in the white-Indian relationship over the course of two centuries reveals something more than simply this grim conclusion. Drawing on fragmentary sources from all over the place, he shapes a picture of what it was actually like on the 'middle ground.' Bit by bit, he puts together the factual details that not only tell the larger story, but over and over again confront the reader with challenges to deeply-ingrained assumptions.

And he does it with a wit that I, at least, appreciate. In the first chapter, 'Refugees,' arguing that 17th century Jesuit missionaries followed the migratory patterns of the Indians, rather than Indians flocking to the missions as is sometimes assumed, he concludes: 'To argue that either this mission or the later fort and mission at Michilimackinac led the Indians to settle the area is like arguing that people go to airports to be solicited by religious zealots and only incidentally to catch airplanes.' (p. 23)

Phil

14sgerbic
Jan 22, 2009, 10:54 pm

Awesome Phil

What I want to know is why you all who have read these books hasn't posted a review of the books? I love the reviews, and take them seriously when purchasing or what book to read next.

The books like these that are low on popularity really need the reviews. And not just the star rating or a couple lines. Seriously, reconsider writing reviews, I for one read them.

Susan

15walbat
Jan 24, 2009, 1:09 am

Susan

I agree with you about the value of serious reviews, and I hope to post more in the future (I have only one so far). That's easiest when you've just finished a book. "The Middle Ground," on the other hand, I read several years ago, and I looked closely at it again only because of our conversation. Perhaps having thought about it again, I should turn those thoughts into a review.

Phil

16JFCooper
Modifié : Jan 29, 2009, 12:18 am

Susan,
I wish I had time to write reviews of all the Colonial History I've read!
Have a look at my library. :-) I only add books I have actually read or will actually read.

Favorite authors of cross culture history are Daniel K. Richter and Francis Jennings. But a more recent work by James K. Merrell, Into the American Woods: Negotiators on the Pennsylvania Frontier, is well worth your time.

If you haven't read William Cronon's Changes in the Land, Revised Edition: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England do so at your earliest opportunity.

Enjoy your studies, it's the best way to get through Grad school.

I teach the US History surveys at Columbia College in Sonora, CA as an adjunct faculty member, so this stuff is like mana for me. Just read Pauline Maier's From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765-1776 and I'm finishing her more recent book, American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence. Both of these are great, but neither is recommended if your are unfamiliar with major personalities and major events of the time period. Maier has aimed her book at an upper division History major (at least).

Good luck!
Daniel

17carterchristian1
Jan 29, 2009, 2:26 am

Very interesting observation. I was recently at Washington's birthplace near Colonial Beach VA and learned how these land acquisitions George W built on began with his great grandfather who arrived after a shipwreck and married a landholder's daughter, and as a literate man was soon working for father in law Pope, soon receiving his own land.

Surveying was George W's tool in acquiring land it appears.

Those poor indentured.

18sgerbic
Jan 30, 2009, 10:33 pm

Oh my, you are all so much more well read than I am, I did the right thing to start a thread. I feel better knowing that there are several of you out there who also love this stuff and can advise me if I need it.

I just had my first class Wednesday night and it looks so interesting. The professor loves her subject and I can't wait to get into some discussions with my fellow classmates that seem so much smarter than I. I know that is just perception on my part, but I'm sure it is also true.

I've read a few books on George Washington, but none on his family. Can you recommend one or two carterchristian1?

And JFCooper your library looks very interesting. I don't know about mana, but I do love history. Someday when Graduate school is all over I may be able to revisit these books. Actually it is interesting as my professor is giving us lists of books to read to help understand the books that are assigned. Silly woman!

I have already given up just about everything outside of work, eating and doing some laundry, where can I find the time to read everything and more? Guess that is the $64,000 question?

Thanks for your comments all.

Susan

19nbmars
Mar 4, 2009, 1:05 pm

Relatively new book out: The Common Law of Colonial America, Volume I: The Chesapeake and New England 1607-1660 by William E. Nelson

From Oxford U. Press:

Description
William E. Nelson here proposes a new beginning in the study of colonial legal history. Examining all archival legal material for the period 1607-1776 and synthesizing existing scholarship in a four-volume series, The Common Law in Colonial America shows how the legal systems of Britain's thirteen North American colonies--initially established in response to divergent political, economic, and religious initiatives--slowly converged into a common American legal order that differed substantially from English common law.

Drawing on groundbreaking and overwhelmingly in-depth research into local court records and statutes, the first volume explores how the law of the Chesapeake colonies--Virginia and Maryland--diverged sharply from the New England colonies--Massachusetts Bay, Connecticut, New Haven, Plymouth, and Rhode Island--and traces the roots of these dissimilarities from their initial settlement until approximately 1660. Nelson pointedly examines the disparate motives of the legal systems in the respective colonies as they dealt with religion, price and labor regulations, crimes, public morals, the status of women, and the enforcement of contractual obligations. He reveals how Virginians' zeal for profit led to a harsh legal framework that efficiently squeezed payment out of debtors and labor out of servants; whereas the laws of Massachusetts were primarily concerned with the preservation of local autonomy and the moral values of family-centered farming communities. The law in the other New England colonies, Nelson argues, gravitated towards the Massachusetts model, while Maryland's law, gravitated toward that of Virginia.

20sgerbic
Mar 26, 2009, 3:03 pm

Thank you I will add this to my growing list

21JFCooper
Avr 3, 2009, 10:12 pm

I just discovered The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, edited by Jared Sparks. Volumes 1, 8, and 9 are available for free in several different formats from Project Gutenberg (http://www.gutenberg.org).

Very cool. I love Primary Sources.

Daniel

22GoofyOcean110
Avr 20, 2009, 2:56 pm

nbmars: How readable is this? it sounds interesting, but I am not well versed in reading legal anything, regardless of the time period. is this just for scholars?

23nbmars
Avr 21, 2009, 12:33 am

>22 GoofyOcean110:
I didn't read the book; I just saw the announcement of it coming out. From the write-up, it sounds like it may read like Albion's Seed, which was fascinating, but I don't know for sure.

24GoofyOcean110
Mai 1, 2009, 12:11 pm

>21 JFCooper: Daniel, Those look really interesting -- but there are 12 volumes!! I dont think I'm quite up for that challenge. Is there a particular volume that you think is the most worthwhile? Alternatively, is there an abridged or edited version of these primary sources, preferably in one volume? Something the interested layman such as myself could sink my teeth into?

25JFCooper
Mai 13, 2009, 11:42 am

bfertig,
Just get one and go with it. They're reproductions of letters sent back and forth between the Continental Congress (Congress of the United States after 1781) and folks like Silas Deane, John Adams, Ben Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson. This means that the context of the letters will be up to you to learn from other sources, but the exchanges are quite readable and interesting.

Daniel

26PollyAnnaHP
Juil 21, 2009, 9:55 pm

Susan,

I've read The Devil in the Shape of a Woman, I have found it is one of the better books on the subject of The Salem Witch Trials.