Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Essay 2 Reflection #1
Josh and I have proposed an agreement to do sort of a journaling type project for this essay. We will each have our own views and talk about things we did/things that have to do with our opposing positions (loyalist/patriot)
Friday, October 26, 2007
-English- Practice Midterm
The main issue presented in the passage by Thomas Hobbes is this; Anything a person does within a common-wealth is something they most likely do out of fear for the law. And every action they take for the law, is something that they have the right and liberty to neglect having to accomplish. Hobbes also describes how anything someone does, is an act of will and desire stemming from another act, creating a continuous chain where they will act out of necessity.
I think that in simpler terms what Hobbes is describing is that anyone has a right to act of their own will and necessity, if the law permits it. But, what he is also saying is that any person has the freedom to go about changing the law, so technically, the person did not have to do the task they did in fear of the law in the first place. I believe the authors point of view is that fear and rights are similar, and rights and necessity are similar.
From my own perspective, I feel that because someone is in fear of the law, they fail to change it, even thought they have proper rights to at least attempt to do so. So in a sense, this is in agreement with Hobbes. I have observed throughout my lifetime, people acting out of necessity after a continuous chain of other events, causes, and happenings in order to change laws and face other important issues that may need attention.
All in all, Thomas Hobes and myself have similar views on society, and the actions taken by minions of the law. Many people take actions towards specific things because they fear the law, and what will happen to them if they do not accomplish a certain task. And although many have slight power to reconstruct some areas of the law, few actually intervene and try to undertake the challenge. Eventually, a person or people will act and change something about the law that they find troublesome, becasue in the end, it all comes down to human necessity, and sometimes we need a little change in the way things are conducted.
I think that in simpler terms what Hobbes is describing is that anyone has a right to act of their own will and necessity, if the law permits it. But, what he is also saying is that any person has the freedom to go about changing the law, so technically, the person did not have to do the task they did in fear of the law in the first place. I believe the authors point of view is that fear and rights are similar, and rights and necessity are similar.
From my own perspective, I feel that because someone is in fear of the law, they fail to change it, even thought they have proper rights to at least attempt to do so. So in a sense, this is in agreement with Hobbes. I have observed throughout my lifetime, people acting out of necessity after a continuous chain of other events, causes, and happenings in order to change laws and face other important issues that may need attention.
All in all, Thomas Hobes and myself have similar views on society, and the actions taken by minions of the law. Many people take actions towards specific things because they fear the law, and what will happen to them if they do not accomplish a certain task. And although many have slight power to reconstruct some areas of the law, few actually intervene and try to undertake the challenge. Eventually, a person or people will act and change something about the law that they find troublesome, becasue in the end, it all comes down to human necessity, and sometimes we need a little change in the way things are conducted.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
AOD blog #1
-Celebration and appreciation-
The other day, I had a rather pleasant conversation on the bus with a nice man named Harvey. I had met him on a previous occasion about a month ago and we started talking just about our lives and fun things. Harvey is slightly mentally handicapped. As I'm talking to him, I realize how incredibly nice he is. He just talks to me about life and tings he does during the day and movies etc... It makes me think about my attitude towards life and other people, and how that people like Harvey, are the kind of people in this world that we need more of. I wonder why you can hardly ever meet anyone so genuine as him, and it just made me think.
The other day, I had a rather pleasant conversation on the bus with a nice man named Harvey. I had met him on a previous occasion about a month ago and we started talking just about our lives and fun things. Harvey is slightly mentally handicapped. As I'm talking to him, I realize how incredibly nice he is. He just talks to me about life and tings he does during the day and movies etc... It makes me think about my attitude towards life and other people, and how that people like Harvey, are the kind of people in this world that we need more of. I wonder why you can hardly ever meet anyone so genuine as him, and it just made me think.
essay 1 reflection post
In my essay on Bacon's Rebellion, I think I could have done slightly better. I definately have learned about the way I write and my writing process while writing this essay. I have discovered that I am so used to writing informative essays, that it's tough to have to add my opinion into everything. This is not the way I write, and I find it distracting to the reader because every 2 sentences comes; "I believe this was wrong because..." My writing philosophy involves mainly journalism and informative types of writing. I am better at this style, and I enjoy it more so than opinionated writing.
It's very difficult to make the transition from high school writing into college level writing when we are not really being instructed on how to do that. I think we need more coaching and instruction on how to write rather than the usual, "write this about this using your opinion." That doesn't give me much to work with, especially after writing in a way that is almost the complete opposite of what is being expected of us now.
For the next essay I write for this class, I will definately try to make changes in my writing style. I will add in more of my opinion; although it would be easier if I knew how to do that efficiently. I am also going to spend more time at home in order to finish on time. I believe that the main thing I need to work on is just trying to figure out exactly waht it is that is being expected out of the next essay. This will hopefully help improve my writing in more ways than one.
It's very difficult to make the transition from high school writing into college level writing when we are not really being instructed on how to do that. I think we need more coaching and instruction on how to write rather than the usual, "write this about this using your opinion." That doesn't give me much to work with, especially after writing in a way that is almost the complete opposite of what is being expected of us now.
For the next essay I write for this class, I will definately try to make changes in my writing style. I will add in more of my opinion; although it would be easier if I knew how to do that efficiently. I am also going to spend more time at home in order to finish on time. I believe that the main thing I need to work on is just trying to figure out exactly waht it is that is being expected out of the next essay. This will hopefully help improve my writing in more ways than one.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Bacon's rebellion Final Draft
I am so sorry about the late essay. My internet went down last night and I couldn't finish my final draft. But I got up early today to finish and luckily my internet was working again! I really hope this doesn't count against me. Once again, I'm sorry.
Class was a predominate issue in Bacon's Rebellion of 1676. The rebellion brought about many changes in Virginia having to do with both class and status. Bacon's rebellion was brought on largely because of the way the colonial settlers were being treated by their own government. The rebellion was an example of how class, racism, and the desire for land and wealth threatened England's society.
Around 1675-1676 the colonists started to expand further west. They began to fight with the Indians for the land that they both believed was theirs. I think this was unfair for the Indians. They were there first, therefore should be entitled to this land. The government tried to erase tensions between both groups. Nathanial Bacon, along with many others of different races and quite a few lower class citizens were extremely frustrated with the idea of the Indians being allowed to keep all of the land to themselves and being protected by the colonial government. I believe that in order to not cause conflict between the two groups, they should have tried to come to an agreement to allot the land between them. This could have had a huge impact on the colony, and Bacon's rebellion possibly wouldn't have even happened had this kind of agreement been discussed. Bacon eventually had had enough, and and went to governor William Berkeley to discuss the matter of trying to get rights to encroach on native lands and attack. Berkeley said no, which led to Bacon's retaliation. He and his supporters went to war against the Indians.
Before the war began, William Berkeley, the Governor of Virginia on and off for about 20 years, was very involved in creating treaties with many Indian tribes guaranteeing lands north of the York River to belong to the Powhatan tribe.(source 3) This in my opinion, was a pretty intelligent thing to do. If establishing peace with the Natives helped the Virginian colony it was a great move on his part. Then again, as mentioned later, many colonists believed he was just doing it for personal financial and status gain. His initial motive for creating such peace treaties was to avoid further uprisings such as ones in the early 1600's. Although I believe this was only part of the reason why he created them. The last uprising before 30 years of peace was in 1646. The order that came after this time allowed for economic prosperity because of trade with surrounding Indian tribes.
Many Virginians believed that this trade only benefited Governor Berkeley and his crew. Both sides of the class divide were getting upset at Berkeley's ways. These classes included the people who ran the governmental affairs, and the small farmer group.
Nathanial Bacon believed that because he was of a higher class than most, he deserved more land. Many people who were poor, recently freed servants came to his aid hoping to get land for themselves. Bacon said, "our design is not only to ruin and extirpate all Indians in general but all manner of trade and commerce with them."(source 2) I think this definately just goes to show how greedy and power hungry Bacon was. I believe that his motives for the rebellion were extreme. He could have somehow formed a better plan that would allow him to gain more land, in a more fair way than he did.
At first, Bacon and Berkeley were civil acquaintances. That is until Bacon decided that Berkeley and some other members of the current government of Virginia did not act as a traditional government should.(source 2) Bacon basically believed that those running the government were trying to gain status by collecting money from the public by way of unfair taxes, and he did not particularly like the "new" way of government. I find it great that Bacon stood up to the government, but I do believe he could have gone about it in a very different way than he did.
The subconscious beginnings of the rebellion started when riffs between Indians and colonists first began to arise again in 1675. It sparked when a group of Doeg Indians entered the property of Thomas Mathew and claimed that he did not pay them for goods they had traded earlier on. In retaliation, the Natives attempted to steal a number of Mathew's hogs. Thomas Mathew then killed quite a few of the Indian group. The killings went back and forth between the two tribes until eventually gov Berkeley wanted to start a war against the Indians. He later decided to instead opt for a defensive policy. The Indians made another attack in the winter of that same year which lead to several servants of Bacon's and others' being killed. (source 1)
Bacon then asked Berkeley for adequate funding to allow him to start an army of volunteers (mostly lowly planters and farmers) to lead against the Indians in the region. I think Bacon knew that the lower class citizens would be most likely to join forces with him, because they hoped to gain land for themselves in the process. At first, Gov. Berkeley turned town Bacon's request.
In June of the next year Bacon finally got his grant after holding the governor at gunpoint. He was also given permission to enslave all Indians captured in battle. The rebellion lasted throughout the summer with Bacon and his low class followers seemingly at the high end of the rebellion. They eventually drove out the governor and his followers. Jamestown was burned in September on 1676. There was no more English authority in the colony after this event took place.
After Bacon's death in October ¹, many of his followers turned to allegiance with England and became followers of the King and the governor. Still trying to gain freedom from their lower class lifestyle were 20 English servants and 80 black slaves. They eventually gave up the hope of maybe becoming something bigger than a poor lower class citizen. Well after the rebellion ended, there was still constant fear among the elite power that those of lower class would retaliate as Bacon and his followers did.
sources:
1- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Bacon
2- http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/us_labor_history/105076
3- http://moe.ic.highline.edu:2117/view/00435597/di957160/95p0870z/0?currentResult=00435597%2bdi957160%2b95p0870z%2b0%2c9E07&searchUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jstor.org%2Fsearch%2FBasicResults%3Fhp%3D25%26si%3D1%26gw%3Djtx%26jtxsi%3D1%26jcpsi%3D1%26artsi%3D1%26Query%3Dbacons%2Brebellion%26wc%3Don
Class was a predominate issue in Bacon's Rebellion of 1676. The rebellion brought about many changes in Virginia having to do with both class and status. Bacon's rebellion was brought on largely because of the way the colonial settlers were being treated by their own government. The rebellion was an example of how class, racism, and the desire for land and wealth threatened England's society.
Around 1675-1676 the colonists started to expand further west. They began to fight with the Indians for the land that they both believed was theirs. I think this was unfair for the Indians. They were there first, therefore should be entitled to this land. The government tried to erase tensions between both groups. Nathanial Bacon, along with many others of different races and quite a few lower class citizens were extremely frustrated with the idea of the Indians being allowed to keep all of the land to themselves and being protected by the colonial government. I believe that in order to not cause conflict between the two groups, they should have tried to come to an agreement to allot the land between them. This could have had a huge impact on the colony, and Bacon's rebellion possibly wouldn't have even happened had this kind of agreement been discussed. Bacon eventually had had enough, and and went to governor William Berkeley to discuss the matter of trying to get rights to encroach on native lands and attack. Berkeley said no, which led to Bacon's retaliation. He and his supporters went to war against the Indians.
Before the war began, William Berkeley, the Governor of Virginia on and off for about 20 years, was very involved in creating treaties with many Indian tribes guaranteeing lands north of the York River to belong to the Powhatan tribe.(source 3) This in my opinion, was a pretty intelligent thing to do. If establishing peace with the Natives helped the Virginian colony it was a great move on his part. Then again, as mentioned later, many colonists believed he was just doing it for personal financial and status gain. His initial motive for creating such peace treaties was to avoid further uprisings such as ones in the early 1600's. Although I believe this was only part of the reason why he created them. The last uprising before 30 years of peace was in 1646. The order that came after this time allowed for economic prosperity because of trade with surrounding Indian tribes.
Many Virginians believed that this trade only benefited Governor Berkeley and his crew. Both sides of the class divide were getting upset at Berkeley's ways. These classes included the people who ran the governmental affairs, and the small farmer group.
Nathanial Bacon believed that because he was of a higher class than most, he deserved more land. Many people who were poor, recently freed servants came to his aid hoping to get land for themselves. Bacon said, "our design is not only to ruin and extirpate all Indians in general but all manner of trade and commerce with them."(source 2) I think this definately just goes to show how greedy and power hungry Bacon was. I believe that his motives for the rebellion were extreme. He could have somehow formed a better plan that would allow him to gain more land, in a more fair way than he did.
At first, Bacon and Berkeley were civil acquaintances. That is until Bacon decided that Berkeley and some other members of the current government of Virginia did not act as a traditional government should.(source 2) Bacon basically believed that those running the government were trying to gain status by collecting money from the public by way of unfair taxes, and he did not particularly like the "new" way of government. I find it great that Bacon stood up to the government, but I do believe he could have gone about it in a very different way than he did.
The subconscious beginnings of the rebellion started when riffs between Indians and colonists first began to arise again in 1675. It sparked when a group of Doeg Indians entered the property of Thomas Mathew and claimed that he did not pay them for goods they had traded earlier on. In retaliation, the Natives attempted to steal a number of Mathew's hogs. Thomas Mathew then killed quite a few of the Indian group. The killings went back and forth between the two tribes until eventually gov Berkeley wanted to start a war against the Indians. He later decided to instead opt for a defensive policy. The Indians made another attack in the winter of that same year which lead to several servants of Bacon's and others' being killed. (source 1)
Bacon then asked Berkeley for adequate funding to allow him to start an army of volunteers (mostly lowly planters and farmers) to lead against the Indians in the region. I think Bacon knew that the lower class citizens would be most likely to join forces with him, because they hoped to gain land for themselves in the process. At first, Gov. Berkeley turned town Bacon's request.
In June of the next year Bacon finally got his grant after holding the governor at gunpoint. He was also given permission to enslave all Indians captured in battle. The rebellion lasted throughout the summer with Bacon and his low class followers seemingly at the high end of the rebellion. They eventually drove out the governor and his followers. Jamestown was burned in September on 1676. There was no more English authority in the colony after this event took place.
After Bacon's death in October ¹, many of his followers turned to allegiance with England and became followers of the King and the governor. Still trying to gain freedom from their lower class lifestyle were 20 English servants and 80 black slaves. They eventually gave up the hope of maybe becoming something bigger than a poor lower class citizen. Well after the rebellion ended, there was still constant fear among the elite power that those of lower class would retaliate as Bacon and his followers did.
sources:
1- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Bacon
2- http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/us_labor_history/105076
3- http://moe.ic.highline.edu:2117/view/00435597/di957160/95p0870z/0?currentResult=00435597%2bdi957160%2b95p0870z%2b0%2c9E07&searchUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jstor.org%2Fsearch%2FBasicResults%3Fhp%3D25%26si%3D1%26gw%3Djtx%26jtxsi%3D1%26jcpsi%3D1%26artsi%3D1%26Query%3Dbacons%2Brebellion%26wc%3Don
Monday, October 15, 2007
Rough Draft: Bacon's Rebellion
Class was a predominate issue in Bacon's Rebellion of 1676. The rebellion brought about many changes in Virginia having to do with both class and status. Bacon's rebellion was brought on largely because of the way the colonial settlers were being treated by their own government. The rebellion was an example of how class, racism, and the desire for land and wealth threatened England's society.
Around 1675-1676 the colonists started to expand further west. They began to fight with the Indians for the land that they both believed was theirs. I think this was unfair for the Indians. They were there first, therefore should be entitled to this land. The government tried to erase tensions between both groups. Nathanial Bacon, along with many others of different races and quite a few lower class citizens were extremely frustrated with the idea of the Indians being allowed to keep all of the land to themselves and being protected by the colonial government. I believe that in order to not cause conflict between the two groups, they should have tried to come to an agreement to allot the land between them. This could have had a huge impact on the colony, and Bacon's rebellion possibly wouldn't have even happened had this kind of agreement been discussed. Bacon eventually had had enough, and and went to governor William Berkeley to discuss the matter of trying to get rights to encroach on native lands and attack. Berkeley said no, which led to Bacon's retaliation. He and his supporters went to war against the Indians.
Before the war began, William Berkeley, the Governor of Virginia on and off for about 20 years, was very involved in creating treaties with many Indian tribes guaranteeing lands north of the York River to belong to the Powhatan tribe. This in my opinion, was a pretty intelligent thing to do. If establishing peace with the Natives helped the Virginian colony it was a great move on his part. Then again, as mentioned later, many colonists believed he was just doing it for personal financial and status gain. His initial motive for creating such peace treaties was to avoid further uprisings such as ones in the early 1600's. Although I believe this was only part of the reason why he created them. The last uprising before 30 years of peace was in 1646. The order that came after this time allowed for economic prosperity because of trade with surrounding Indian tribes.
Many Virginians believed that this trade only benefited Governor Berkeley and his crew. Both sides of the class divide were getting upset at Berkeley's ways. These classes included the people who ran the governmental affairs, and the small farmer group.
Nathanial Bacon believed that because he was of a higher class than most, he deserved more land. Many people who were poor, recently freed servants came to his aid hoping to get land for themselves. Bacon said, "our design is not only to ruin and extirpate all Indians in general but all manner of trade and commerce with them."¹ I think this definately just goes to show how greedy and power hungry Bacon was. I believe that his motives for the rebellion were extreme. He could have somehow formed a better plan that would allow him to gain more land, in a more fair way than he did.
At first, Bacon and Berkeley were civil acquaintances. That is until Bacon decided that Berkeley and some other members of the current government of Virginia did not act as a traditional government should. Bacon basically believed that those running the government were trying to gain status by collecting money from the public by way of unfair taxes, and he did not particularly like the "new" way of government. I find it great that Bacon stood up to the government, but I do believe he could have gone about it in a very different way than he did.
The subconcious beginnings of the rebellion started when riffs between Indians and colonists first began to arise again in 1675. It sparked when a group of Doeg Indians entered the property of Thomas Mathew and clamed that he did not pay them for goods they had traded earlier on. In retaliation, the Natives attempted to steal a number of Mathew's hogs. Thomas Mathew then killed quite a few of the Indian group. The killings went back and forth between the two tribes until eventually gov Berkeley wanted to start a war against the Indians. He later decided to instead opt for a defensive policy. The Indians made another attack in the winter of that same year which lead to several servants of Bacon's and others' being killed.
Bacon then asked Berkeley for adequate funding to allow him to start an army of volunteers (mostly lowly planters and farmers) to lead against the Indians in the region. I think Bacon knew that the lower class citizens would be most likely to join forces with him, because they hoped to gain land for themselves in the process. At first, Gov. Berkeley turned town Bacon's request.
In June of the next year Bacon finally got his grant after holding the governor at gunpoint. He was also given permission to enslave all Indians captured in battle. The rebellion lasted throughout the summer with Bacon and his low class followers seemingly at the high end of the rebellion. They eventually drove out the governor and his followers. Jamestown was burned in September on 1676. There was no more English authority in the colony after this event took place.
After Bacon's death in October, many of his followers turned to alleigance with England and became followers of the King and the governor. Still trying to gain freedom from their lower class lifestyle were 20 english servants and 80 black slaves. They eventualy gave up the hope of maybe becoming something bigger than a poor lower class citizen. Well after the rebellion ended, there was still constant fear among the elite power that those of lower class would retaliate as Bacon and his followers did.
Around 1675-1676 the colonists started to expand further west. They began to fight with the Indians for the land that they both believed was theirs. I think this was unfair for the Indians. They were there first, therefore should be entitled to this land. The government tried to erase tensions between both groups. Nathanial Bacon, along with many others of different races and quite a few lower class citizens were extremely frustrated with the idea of the Indians being allowed to keep all of the land to themselves and being protected by the colonial government. I believe that in order to not cause conflict between the two groups, they should have tried to come to an agreement to allot the land between them. This could have had a huge impact on the colony, and Bacon's rebellion possibly wouldn't have even happened had this kind of agreement been discussed. Bacon eventually had had enough, and and went to governor William Berkeley to discuss the matter of trying to get rights to encroach on native lands and attack. Berkeley said no, which led to Bacon's retaliation. He and his supporters went to war against the Indians.
Before the war began, William Berkeley, the Governor of Virginia on and off for about 20 years, was very involved in creating treaties with many Indian tribes guaranteeing lands north of the York River to belong to the Powhatan tribe. This in my opinion, was a pretty intelligent thing to do. If establishing peace with the Natives helped the Virginian colony it was a great move on his part. Then again, as mentioned later, many colonists believed he was just doing it for personal financial and status gain. His initial motive for creating such peace treaties was to avoid further uprisings such as ones in the early 1600's. Although I believe this was only part of the reason why he created them. The last uprising before 30 years of peace was in 1646. The order that came after this time allowed for economic prosperity because of trade with surrounding Indian tribes.
Many Virginians believed that this trade only benefited Governor Berkeley and his crew. Both sides of the class divide were getting upset at Berkeley's ways. These classes included the people who ran the governmental affairs, and the small farmer group.
Nathanial Bacon believed that because he was of a higher class than most, he deserved more land. Many people who were poor, recently freed servants came to his aid hoping to get land for themselves. Bacon said, "our design is not only to ruin and extirpate all Indians in general but all manner of trade and commerce with them."¹ I think this definately just goes to show how greedy and power hungry Bacon was. I believe that his motives for the rebellion were extreme. He could have somehow formed a better plan that would allow him to gain more land, in a more fair way than he did.
At first, Bacon and Berkeley were civil acquaintances. That is until Bacon decided that Berkeley and some other members of the current government of Virginia did not act as a traditional government should. Bacon basically believed that those running the government were trying to gain status by collecting money from the public by way of unfair taxes, and he did not particularly like the "new" way of government. I find it great that Bacon stood up to the government, but I do believe he could have gone about it in a very different way than he did.
The subconcious beginnings of the rebellion started when riffs between Indians and colonists first began to arise again in 1675. It sparked when a group of Doeg Indians entered the property of Thomas Mathew and clamed that he did not pay them for goods they had traded earlier on. In retaliation, the Natives attempted to steal a number of Mathew's hogs. Thomas Mathew then killed quite a few of the Indian group. The killings went back and forth between the two tribes until eventually gov Berkeley wanted to start a war against the Indians. He later decided to instead opt for a defensive policy. The Indians made another attack in the winter of that same year which lead to several servants of Bacon's and others' being killed.
Bacon then asked Berkeley for adequate funding to allow him to start an army of volunteers (mostly lowly planters and farmers) to lead against the Indians in the region. I think Bacon knew that the lower class citizens would be most likely to join forces with him, because they hoped to gain land for themselves in the process. At first, Gov. Berkeley turned town Bacon's request.
In June of the next year Bacon finally got his grant after holding the governor at gunpoint. He was also given permission to enslave all Indians captured in battle. The rebellion lasted throughout the summer with Bacon and his low class followers seemingly at the high end of the rebellion. They eventually drove out the governor and his followers. Jamestown was burned in September on 1676. There was no more English authority in the colony after this event took place.
After Bacon's death in October, many of his followers turned to alleigance with England and became followers of the King and the governor. Still trying to gain freedom from their lower class lifestyle were 20 english servants and 80 black slaves. They eventualy gave up the hope of maybe becoming something bigger than a poor lower class citizen. Well after the rebellion ended, there was still constant fear among the elite power that those of lower class would retaliate as Bacon and his followers did.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
outline
I. Class is shown a lot in Bacon's rebellion.
A. Bacon's rebellion was greatly affected by the class of different people.
a. Bacon was angry about the english government caring more about the indians than their own people
b. He thought the indians were recieveing more support and land etc... from the english goc. which he believed should have belonged to the english and not the indians
c. He retaliated and his followers were of all different classes. They all believed that this was wrong and that they should get the same amount, if not more land than the indians.
II.
A. Bacon's rebellion altered how many thought and lived their lives.
a. Indians: less land. it was being taken by bacon and his followers.
b. sometimes they became slaves because they had nothing left.
IIV.
A. People are still classified according to their wealth/status
a. Class is shown today through material items.
c. If someone is rich they are of higher status, poor- lower status
A. Bacon's rebellion was greatly affected by the class of different people.
a. Bacon was angry about the english government caring more about the indians than their own people
b. He thought the indians were recieveing more support and land etc... from the english goc. which he believed should have belonged to the english and not the indians
c. He retaliated and his followers were of all different classes. They all believed that this was wrong and that they should get the same amount, if not more land than the indians.
II.
A. Bacon's rebellion altered how many thought and lived their lives.
a. Indians: less land. it was being taken by bacon and his followers.
b. sometimes they became slaves because they had nothing left.
IIV.
A. People are still classified according to their wealth/status
a. Class is shown today through material items.
c. If someone is rich they are of higher status, poor- lower status
Friday, October 5, 2007
Notes etc on Bacon's Rebellion
http://www.nps.gov/archive/colo/Jthanout/BacRebel.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon
http://www.virginiaplaces.org/military/bacon.html
History notes:
The colonial government and surrounding natives agreed to a treaty in the 1640's in which native americans relinquished all claimes to land already settled to the english.
The number of land hungry colonists continued to multiply. However, encreaching on native lands and threatning the viability of the treaty.
The colonial government hammered out a fragile peace with the Indians but frontier settlers saw little in these terms that would benefit them.
People following Bacon, rebelling against the government were mainly farmers and others of lower class.
Beneath this dispute about Indian policy, smoldered hostilit between frontier planters and tidewater gentry, between struggling farmers and priveleged granduers.
Nathanial Bacon led frontier settlers, who charged the elite with operating the government for their own private gain and favoring Indian interests over their own.
Elections in 1676 ousted the political elite, and put in power political leaders, including bacon.
The new legislature passed a series of reform measures that favored small planters and the frontier settlers.
Gov Berkley, the gov of Virginia, branded Bacon a traitor; this prompted Bacon and his followers to declare war on the governer and the elite.
Berkley and his men crushed the rebellion, and the elite strengthened their positions.
In the aftermath of the rebellion, tension lessened between great planters and small farmers.
Mainly because the elite recognized that it was safer for colonists to fight Indians rather than each other.
Henceforth, colonial authorities made little effort to restrict settlers' encroachment in Indian lands.
SLAVE LABOR!!--
The most profitible part of the new world empire in the 17c lay in the caribbean, on the tiny island of Barbados, where sugar production fueled the export market.
Sugar production was an expensive proposition made possible by costly machinery, and extensive slave labor. Only the wealthiest planters could participate.
For slaves, work on a sugar plantation was a life sentence to brutal, unremitting labor. Usually only lasting about 5 years into their slaving life.
CAROLINA!!--
The early settlers of what would become South Carolina were immigrants from Barbados
The Barbadian immigrants brought their slaves with them; by 1700, slaves made up about 1/2 of the population.
SLAVE LABOR IN THE CHESAPEAKE!!--
The slave free person ratio remained low in the Chesapeake compared to Carolina; nevertheless, Chesapeake planters began to purchase massive amounts of slaves from 1670-1700
By 1700, about 1 in 8 peoplein the region was a black person from Africa.
The slave labor system polarized Chesapeake society along lines of race and status.
Most whites of the Chesapeake did not own slaves. Despite this, tensions from economic stratification among whites was muted by the fundamental distinction between slave (black) and free (whites.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon
http://www.virginiaplaces.org/military/bacon.html
History notes:
The colonial government and surrounding natives agreed to a treaty in the 1640's in which native americans relinquished all claimes to land already settled to the english.
The number of land hungry colonists continued to multiply. However, encreaching on native lands and threatning the viability of the treaty.
The colonial government hammered out a fragile peace with the Indians but frontier settlers saw little in these terms that would benefit them.
People following Bacon, rebelling against the government were mainly farmers and others of lower class.
Beneath this dispute about Indian policy, smoldered hostilit between frontier planters and tidewater gentry, between struggling farmers and priveleged granduers.
Nathanial Bacon led frontier settlers, who charged the elite with operating the government for their own private gain and favoring Indian interests over their own.
Elections in 1676 ousted the political elite, and put in power political leaders, including bacon.
The new legislature passed a series of reform measures that favored small planters and the frontier settlers.
Gov Berkley, the gov of Virginia, branded Bacon a traitor; this prompted Bacon and his followers to declare war on the governer and the elite.
Berkley and his men crushed the rebellion, and the elite strengthened their positions.
In the aftermath of the rebellion, tension lessened between great planters and small farmers.
Mainly because the elite recognized that it was safer for colonists to fight Indians rather than each other.
Henceforth, colonial authorities made little effort to restrict settlers' encroachment in Indian lands.
SLAVE LABOR!!--
The most profitible part of the new world empire in the 17c lay in the caribbean, on the tiny island of Barbados, where sugar production fueled the export market.
Sugar production was an expensive proposition made possible by costly machinery, and extensive slave labor. Only the wealthiest planters could participate.
For slaves, work on a sugar plantation was a life sentence to brutal, unremitting labor. Usually only lasting about 5 years into their slaving life.
CAROLINA!!--
The early settlers of what would become South Carolina were immigrants from Barbados
The Barbadian immigrants brought their slaves with them; by 1700, slaves made up about 1/2 of the population.
SLAVE LABOR IN THE CHESAPEAKE!!--
The slave free person ratio remained low in the Chesapeake compared to Carolina; nevertheless, Chesapeake planters began to purchase massive amounts of slaves from 1670-1700
By 1700, about 1 in 8 peoplein the region was a black person from Africa.
The slave labor system polarized Chesapeake society along lines of race and status.
Most whites of the Chesapeake did not own slaves. Despite this, tensions from economic stratification among whites was muted by the fundamental distinction between slave (black) and free (whites.)
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Tobacco's influence on society
It's amazing how tobacco was once (and still is) thought of as quite a trendy thing to do, while tobacco users never knew fully the dangers of smoking until many years later. In the 1600's, tobacco first originated in Virginia. It soon became the cash crop of the state, and many were eager to cultivate it for the wealth it brought. Unfortunately, back then, many people did not associate smoking with being as deadly as it really was. And because a person's lifespan was somewhat shorter in the 1600's than modern times, nobody really knew that the tobacco was indeed shortening their lifespan a trifling amount. Tobacco in the early years was made into more cigars than cigarettes, and what cigarettes were made were mainly just pure tobacco. That however, is not so much how they are developed today. As stated on "www.whadafxup.com" ingredients such as tar, ammonia, sodium hydroxide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen cyanide, and higher amounts of nicotine than in previous years are now additives and some of the main components of cigarettes. Both in the 1600's and today, cigarettes and other tobacco products have been almost subliminaly aimed at a younger generation. In the 1600's, postwar cigarette ads were geared towards women and children. Even now, advertisments are put into movies such as "The Muppet Movie." Also reported on "http://www.whadafxup.com/" was the fact that in 2006, an estimated 75% of youth rated movies, and 90% of R rated movies gave reference to tobacco products. Also stated was a quote from a 1984 tobacco company that simply declares younger adult smokers "replacement smokers." From the 1600's on, a large portion of the nation were fans of cigarettes and cigars. It was not until the 1960's that researchers discovered the many health defects associated with the usage of tobacco. Today most of society is well informed of the dangers of tobacco, yet many continue to use the products of the tobacco companies. One of the reasons why people are so hooked is because the nicotine levels are double the amount than in previous years in order to keep people addicted. This in turn, equals more money for tobacco companies, who seem to not care even remotely about the health risks of the use of their products. A quote relayed by "http://www.whadafxup.com/" is said by the CEO of a major tobacco company in 1997. He states; he would "instantly shut his doors, to get a better hold on things," if it were proved to his satisfaction that smoking causes cancer. That same company now admits on their website that smoking does indeed cause cancer, yet they continue to manufacture these lethal products.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Community service reflection
Friday's community service project was overall, an exciting and new experience for me. My group members and I were instructed to help out our client by digging up grass around her house so that we could proceed to lay down plastic, and later bark overtop of that. Our group worked very nicely together. There was a great effort put into the teamwork aspect of the project. Although we ended up not having enough time or recources needed in order to finish our work. We did however, get about hald of our client's lawn looking quite beautiful. I hope that the remainder of her lawn gets finished soon, so that she can have a fabulous looking exterior to her home. This was an extremely exhilerating experience, and I would love to have the opportunity to something similar in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
