Category: American Colonies

Life in the colonies was much different than you would expect. You might think that colony life was fun, with your family and friends, like a vacation. That is far from the truth. Life in the colonies was hard with lots of labor, danger, and death.

First of all, families were huge, with lots of mouths to feed. Farmers had many children, usually 7-10 because they needed all the help they could get in the fields. People in the cities(blacksmiths, tailors, candlemakers, etc.), had lots of kids because they also needed help in their professions. On TeachTCI, the text says, “Most families had between seven and ten children. (Benjamin Franklin had 16 brothers and sisters.) Farm families, in particular, needed all the hands they could get to help with chores”(Section 8 Large Families). This means that farm work was challenging with a lot of labor and back-breaking efforts.

Next, there was a lot of death in the colonies. Only half of all children in the colonies lived to be an adult. Also, if you committed a serious crime, it was punishable by death. The Large Families portion of Section 8 says, “Married women gave birth many times, but nearly half of all children died before they reached adulthood.” This is important because there were fewer people than you would think there would be, with women usually having 7-10 children, but also because you couldn’t become too attached to someone because they might die. Not only children died, but young adults perished as well. History Alive says, “Adults often died young as well.”, in Section 8. This is important because many children were left orphaned and children had many, many step-siblings. There were also many deaths that happened because of crimes. In Section 4 of the textbook, the text reads, “Certain grave crimes could be punished by death. These included murder, treason (acts of disloyalty toward the government), and piracy (robbery at sea).” This matters because serious lawbreakers were dealt with efficiently and effectively. This also discouraged crimes in the colonies as well.

Now you know that life on the farms was hard, but how about in the cities? Life was just as difficult there as well. Fires and diseases were a constant problem in the colonies, as well as mosquitos, open sewage, and rotting garbage in the streets, which the colonists were used to. TeachTCI writes, “The air was filled with the stench of rotting garbage and open sewers, but the colonists were used to it. Animals ran loose in the street. During hot weather, clouds of flies and mosquitoes swarmed about.” This is important because this made it very easy to get sick, with all the rotting trash and open sewers, not to mention the mosquitos that brought with them malaria, yellow fever, and dengue. Many colonists got sick and died, which was a major contributor to children dying before reaching adulthood. The digital textbook says, “City homes were close together on winding streets. Most were built of wood with thatched roofs, like the houses the colonists had left behind in Europe”(Section 3, Life in Cities). Later in the text, it goes, “With torches and candles lighting homes, the fire was a constant danger”(Section 3, Life in Cities). This is crucial because not only were the houses compacted together and made out of wood, but the colonists used torches and candles to light their homes. Fires became a regular threat to safety issues, so towns formed bucket brigades to put out fires. Every house had a bucket hanging over the front door, so that if anyone yelled, “FIRE!!!”, you could grab your bucket and join the line to put out the fire.

As you can now see, life for the colonists was dangerous and weary. It was not what you would expect with fun trips and sightseeing. Living in the colonies wasn’t easy and took a lot of work to survive.

Maryland was the principal restrictive state, in light of an award to Cecilius Calvert, Lord Baltimore, who named the land for Queen Henrietta Maria, spouse of Charles I. Ruler Baltimore anticipated Maryland to fill in as a safe house for English Catholics who endured political and strict segregation in England, however hardly any Catholics really settled in the province. Protestants were pulled in by the reasonable land that Baltimore offered to assist him with paying his obligations. Baltimore allowed his companions the enormous domains, which looked like medieval houses and were made ready for the ranch framework. From the outset, relations between Maryland’s Catholics and Protestants appeared to be genial. For a period they even had a similar church. In 1649, under Baltimore’s encouragement, the pilgrim get-together passed the Act of Religious Toleration, the primary law in the provinces conceding opportunity of love, but just for Christians. Be that as it may, with Maryland’s Protestants in the larger part, the demonstration was revoked. A close-to-common war broke out and the request was not reestablished until 1658 when Lord Baltimore came back to control. Strict quarrels proceeded for a considerable length of time in the Maryland settlement. Maryland quickly became one of the few predominantly Catholic areas in North America between the English colonies. The government also sent hundreds of thousands of English inmates who have been disciplined for travel fines to Maryland. Until the Revolutionary War such punishment continued.

Tobacco was the backbone of the Virginia and Maryland economies. Plantations were built up by riverbanks for the great soil and to guarantee simplicity of transportation. Since well grower assembled their very own wharves on the Chesapeake to dispatch their yield to England, town improvement was moderate. To develop tobacco, growers got huge quantities of English laborers, generally youngsters who came as contracted workers. More than 110,000 had landed in the Chesapeake area by 1700. Each contractually obligated slave implied more land for his support under the headright framework, which had the impact of pressing out small‐scale cultivating. While New England was a place that is known for towns and towns encompassed by little homesteads, Virginia and Maryland were portrayed by huge ranches and minimal urban advancement. The accentuation on contracted work implied that moderately scarcely any ladies settled in the Chesapeake states. This reality, joined with the high death rate from sickness intestinal sickness, looseness of the bowels, and typhoid eased back populace development significantly. The one basic connection between New England and the Chesapeake was the treatment of the Indians. Changes in Chesapeake tobacco costs caused a delayed financial downturn from 1660 into the mid-1700s. Unfortunately, baffled settlers took out their disappointments on the neighborhood Indians. In April 1676, Nathaniel Bacon, a relative of Virginia Governor William Berkeley, drove 300 pioneers against serene nearby clans, slaughtering them all. At the point when Bacon’s power developed to twelve hundred men, he chose to drive all Indians out of the state. Luckily, Governor Berkeley concluded that Bacon’s activities were extreme and reviewed him, however, Bacon’s military then defied the colonial government and consumed Jamestown. Bacon ventured to such an extreme as to guarantee the opportunity to servants and slaves of Berkeley’s supporters, however, he passed on abruptly, and his development self-destructed. Bacon’s Rebellion represented the pressures among white and Indian, grower and slave, and have and have‐not in the settlement, strains exacerbated by a financial downturn that more likely than not appeared without end.

The Chesapeake district offered the previously minimal monetary chances to contract workers who had finished their term of commitment. Indeed, even with the limited quantity of capital required for tobacco development, previously contracted workers, in the best-case scenario moved toward becoming subsistence farmers, a class ready for such calls to defiance as those proposed by Nathaniel Bacon. As the quantity of new contracted workers declined due to constrained possibilities for progression and reports of brutal treatment, they were supplanted by African slaves. Right off the bat in the seventeenth century, the status of slaves and the contractually obligated slave was very comparative. After 1660, the Chesapeake states upheld laws that characterized subjection as a long-lasting and inheritable condition dependent on race. This made slaves gainful on the grounds that growers could depend on their work as well as that of their kids too. The slave populace, which numbered around 4,000 in Virginia and Maryland in 1675, developed fundamentally to the century’s end.

In the seventeenth century, political clashes all through England and its colonies regularly separated along democratic and aristocratic lines, however in Maryland, the parameters of these discussions were extending, making for an especially petulant political talk. On aristocratic limits was the provincial contract, which was strange for the broad powers that it conceded to the owner of the settlement, Lord Baltimore. The language of the sanction encouraged the second Lord Baltimore, Cecilius Calvert, to seek after an administering expert in the settlement that he perceived was remarkable in English governmental issues. On law-based limits, then again, was the Calvert family’s open Catholicism, which cultivated from Maryland’s prevalently Protestant populace an intense assault on distinguished establishments, urging the pioneers to seek after an equitable motivation that they too conceded extended English standards. Britain’s numerous towns, urban partnerships, and frontier settlements were all brimming with political on-screen characters hoping to make common establishments either more. popularity-based or progressively highborn, however in Maryland, the different sides had moved more remotely separated and were increasingly contradicting one another. In the challenge over nearby political experts in Maryland, each side hoped to profit from its job as a supreme on-screen character. The politicization of magnificent investment, which could be especially helpful in the quest for political boundaries in the states, injected Maryland’s political talk with liberal methods of imagined that conflicted with customary, network governmental issues. This was on the grounds that the choice to partake in the domain, dissimilar to the desires of those using political control over a network, incorporated a self-intrigued segment.

In the broader history of politics in the English colonies Maryland’s political developments in the seventeenth century have a strong role. Although Maryland was unique, the liberal political argument that emerged at that time throughout the English Empire was possible. Collaborators from all over could try to use their contributions for political gains as self-interesting imperial players. Maryland’s fierce governmental issues, exacerbated by the owner’s Catholicism and the political vulnerabilities that it made, brought to the surface a separation point that existed all through the English realm and in that manner foreseen a provincial political culture that would exist past Maryland’s eminent particularities. In Maryland, this early advent of progressive modes of political thought introduced private interest to the public realm and helped create a polarized public debate that showed evidence of the worst kind of bribery in conventional terms, while also significantly expanding the political boundaries of that colony that were possible. Maryland’s political discontinuity in the seventeenth century would really work as an early case of what might before long become typical in North American legislative issues.

Wolfgang Reinhard defines colonialism as ‘differential development’ concerning historical ideas (Reinhard et al. 1967). According to Gregory Knapp, South America became the first continent to be encountered by Europeans in the 14th century during Columbus’ third voyage in 1498. This event marked the end of the pre-Columbian period and signified the beginning of colonial rule which lasted until independence (Knapp 1991)

There are several practical applications of European colonialism and imperialism. It includes the following; establishment of trade systems, development of urban and coastal areas, the agricultural and industrial revolution, cultural diversity, and divisions. The goal of this literature review is to identify practical applications of colonialism and imperialism. It also seeks to address implications and possibilities for further studies on the legacy of European colonialism and imperialism. This argument has been supported by various empirical pieces of evidence involving population density.

Gregory Knapp has pointed out the situation of South America in the late pre-Columbian times. Agriculturalists occupied most of South America and major exceptions were in the far southern Chile, Patagonia, and the Pampas occupied by hunters and gatherers. The settlement was dispersed and formed households and small villages (KNAPP ET AL. 1991)

Before colonial rule, the population of South America is estimated at 24 million (Denevan,1992a, 1992b). This estimation was based on collating and comparing evidence from settlements and agricultural landforms. Reconstructing population density is a key problem because this finding was based only on settlements and agricultural landforms. During colonial rule, the population declined and was reduced due to relocation.

The proximity of European and indigenous generated so many interchanges and hybridity (Huberman and Socolow,1996). Irrigation improved soil which led to an increase in crop productivity. Drier and lower parts of the continent were utilized for the cultivation of crops e.g. sugarcane. During the European colonial period, Coca production was replaced with sugarcane production.

The organization of regional economies and infrastructure served the need and demands of the rapidly growing towns and cities. At the global level, division of labor was emphasized in the production of high-value goods that were suitable for transportation and transaction. The global-scale commodities were precious metals and sugar. At the local scale, the trade involved was concentrated on leathers, mules, grains, and cotton textiles. To the present day, European colonies have continued participation in global trade and have led to the exchange of goods and services with unpredictable environmental impacts.

According to Knapp, the development of environmental science in European colonies has been slow. Proposals for environmental protection will benefit from the long Iberian tradition of interest in agronomy and humanist relations with nature but will continue to struggle with the lack of a wilderness ideal.

These shreds of evidence presented by these literature reviews show the significance of the legacy behind European colonialism and imperialism.

Conclusion

The legacy of European colonization and imperialism is a key concept in understanding the events, and occurrences that led to colonial encirclement and expansion. It provides a critical background in knowing the history of Europe from the early modern period to the phase of colonization.

The current state of knowledge shows that European colonialism serves as an integral part of the world’s colonial encirclement. Generally, available knowledge has a profound understanding of colonialism and imperialism concerning processes and events of the topic; however, a continuation of the current research with consistent and strengthened methodologies will help justify the impacts of European colonialism and imperialism on the environment. It will also help in environmental conservation due to the emerging global warming issue.

The thirteen colonies are also known as 13 British colonies or 13 American colonies.

The name of the 13 colonies in Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, Connecticut, Massachusetts Bay, Maryland, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Virginia, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Providence. These colonies are also called mid-colonies, Sothern colonies, and northern colonies. Delaware, Pennsylvania, new jersey, and New York are considered middle colonies. Massachusetts Bay, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Providence, are under northern colonies and southern colonies are Maryland, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, and Georgia.

There are numerous differences between these colonies. For Example- in the Sothern colonies, people have the freedom to worship any god but in the northern colonies, people have few religious freedoms. In southern colonies, the soil is very fertile but in northern colonies, the land is not so fertile. In the middle colonies, lots of natural resources are present but in other colonies, natural resources are not present.

Southern colonies had slaves and most slaves are African while very few slaves are found in northern colonies. In southern colonies soil is fertile and the climate is also suited for farming that’s why there is more large-scale farming. In northern colonies, farming is practiced. Farmers grew enough for their families but didn’t have too much left to sell to other people. In northern colonies church controlled law and in southern conies instead of church landowners are the dominant party.

A coalition of government- is a parliamentary system in which multiple political parties cooperate, reducing the dominance of any one party within that coalition. The usual reason for this arrangement is that no party on its own can achieve a majority in the parliament. What is polarisation? Polarisation is the process by which public opinion divides and goes to extremes. It can also refer to when the extreme factions of a political party gain dominance in a party. Evidence of growing polarisation- there is numerous evidence that shows the growing polarisation of the electorate. Structural changes in US society.

There seems to be a strong correlation between income inequality and party polarization. The argument suggests that the growing socio-economic gap between the richest and poorest in US society may also be reflected in the actions of political representatives. Moreover, the return of regional divides that the US is experiencing today makes it more difficult to sustain a centrist coalition.

Carol Berkin wrote about the experience of women in colonial America. She sets her book within a structure that highlights the variety of female life arising from race, area, religion, and class distinctions. As her book covers the period from the first settlement to the early republic, Berkin also describes how women’s lives change over time. Berkin has read about females in colonial America extensively in secondary sources and has condensed a range of interpretations into a narrative appropriate for undergraduate studies.

Chesapeake society’s features were quite distinctive in many ways. The Chesapeake region deviated from English social norms and many of the social institutions in the region were therefore quite volatile, leading to unclear gender roles in the Chesapeake for females. In order to describe the union of man and woman in the Chesapeake, one would begin to simply state that it was not only common but what was normal, for both men and women to marry more than once in their entire lives. Possibly one of the factors for the second marriage was the fact that many females in the region married very young, yet some males were deemed lucky to discover a spouse because the sex ratio between males and females was six to one, yet three to one as early as 1680.

Chesapeake mortality rates seemed high. Due to bacterial diseases during pregnancy, women were particularly vulnerable to early death. Generally speaking, men lived longer than females, something that changed centuries later. As for pregnancy, until they reached menopause or died, females were usually pregnant every two years. And life expectancy for kids was no higher than for females, ‘before their twentieth birthday 45% of all white kids born within the Chesapeake area died.’

Women’s most empowering function in Chesapeake culture was that of the widow because when a woman’s spouse died, she was then held accountable for issues left behind by the said husband, such as control over riches and property. Such tasks were not only restricted but were not allowed within the culture in relation to women’s positions.

New England was described by a Puritan society, and again a man’s world. As far as social status is concerned, a female was fixed under her husband and above that of her kids and servants, and in no manner would characterize the life of a female in New England. It was common to overlap the world of the man and the world of women. It was prevalent for females to be present when loans were contracted and other company deals,, females acquired a lot of understanding in connection with such duties, and it would not be surprising to say that females most probably had influence. The wealth of a family in New England consisted of land they owned and animals.

Just as death arrived soon for many in the Chesapeake region, however, those who survived adulthood lived longer than those in tobacco areas like Chesapeake, and at least 3% and potentially even 10% of females who became pregnant and gave birth between 1630 and 1670 died after their baby was born. The more children that a mother would have the higher chance that she would die giving birth.

In New England culture, witchcraft or the’ witch hunts’ became a severe problem. Most allegations were those who suffered from a social decline or those who were poor and needy. The Salem witch hunts took place in 1692, many were accused of interfering in witchcraft, an offense evidently not taken lightly in a culture regulated by Puritans. They use spectral evidence and testimonial evidence which is extremely hard to defend against. So many would admit to being a witch so they wouldn’t be killed for lying.

They established treaties with local Native Americans when Plymouth was established, and the English moved into the New England region. This was crucial in maintaining civil ties and working together in the region to live and thrive. There was peace forged between the plantations of Wampanoag and Plymouth that allowed life to continue peacefully, but times have changed over the years. Wetamo was born for the two communities in a time of peace, she was in an aristocratic family and married Wamsutta, the son of Massasoit, the leader of the Wampanoag tribe, when she reached marriage age. This united the two tribes and gave them a sense of peace. With Massasoit’s death and the changes that had taken place over the years with the English coming into the New World in large numbers, the issues begin to happen. Pequot’s massacre was enormous for the pair as they saw Wampanoag’s hazards. Plymouth settlers got upset like the pair when they heard that land in Rhode Island was sold to others instead, so they took Wamsutta and he died. This began the conflict that Wetamo would cause between Plymouth and Wampanoag. For Native Americans, she would have a few wins, but in the end, she died and her head was on a pole.

Compared to other colonial areas, the Middle Colonies were by far the most diverse in terms of culture, religion, ethnicity, and social class. It appears that the Middle Colonies at least somewhat embraced the changes in the social status and the establishment of women joining the workforce. Women started to create employment in the middle colonies, something less seen in the colonial world’s other areas. ‘Women were less than one-fifth of the servants of the city in 1745. By the end of the century, these females fought on the margins of society.’. The circumstances were not ideal for women servants; they could be lectured or simply fired completely. Stability was by no means a suitable representation of women’s workforce, particularly regarding the jobs of servants.

Africans were forced out of their homes, chained, branded, and marched to the ships to be taken on a ship across the Atlantic Ocean in proximity. Women may have been separated from their families. On arriving in the New World, the depression would only continue to get worse because they lost everything that they held dear to them their home and anyone they held dear.

Mary was no different because she was compelled into slavery and ended up on the tobacco plantation of Bennett. She occurred to have some luck in New World as she married Antonio. Anthony Johnson and Mary were married for 40 years and ended up having 4 kids. They had their own land and used the legislation to safeguard their rights.

The final chapter dealt with the life of a woman of the upper class named Eliza Lucas, who was the daughter of an English military officer. In her early childhood, when he was called back to a military campaign, her dad was the complete force of his plantation. She was not out of financial necessity in this location of authority, as she would have for any other female in her colony. Although her dad had the cash to employ a housekeeper, he handed everything over to Eliza.

Grace Galloway, believed her life was ideal during the Revolution. She had a happy and healthy daughter and a husband. She was an ‘imperious and confident’ lady granted before her married life, who was not for the concept of maintaining her picture worse than a canvas. A female of her status was said to have known her position in society. Though she was not a woman whose status was questioned ever, due to the fact of her father’s great wealth and public service as a lawyer in their town. Then after she married, she become legally invisible, and her husband had all the power in the family, leaving her with very little. This was what happened when you married as a woman you lose any power you had.

In conclusion, Carol Berkin wrote an amazing book about the troubles women faced and how they overcame them. This book shows how strong women are and how they will always overcome obstacles in front of them.

The American Revolution is one that some regard as not so revolutionary. The relative tameness of the revolution as compared to others is what leads to this idea. However, the usage of espionage at the time was extremely advanced and was a precedent to many agencies known today. A combination of enlightenment ideals and espionage technologies are what ultimately lead the colonies to win the Revolutionary war.

The period of enlightenment was proclaimed in the eighteenth century by philosophers who believed they have transitioned into a time of free-thinking and the celebration of the individual man. The enlightenment period had effects on more than just individual rights but on politics during this time period. For example, John Locke wrote ‘Two Treatises of Government’ in 1690, his main argument of this paper is the idea that men are free and equal by nature and refuted the claim that God has made people subject to monarchs (Tuckness). Locke’s claim was widely accepted by many colonized lands and his beliefs were prominent in the Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776. In the American colonies, the sentiment prior to the French-Indian war colonists saw themselves as subjects of the English monarchy but when that war ended there was a shift in nationalism and people began to think of themselves as Americans (Allen, 17). The change of national identity was a result of enlightenment ideals along with continued abuse and lead to the need for independence in the Americas.

Once the decision was to declare war against the monarchy of England there were decisions to be made about how to fight. General George Washington wanted to stick to the traditions of Old World armies, this includes not fighting in winter and using traditional intelligence in order to gain information on their enemies (Allen, 45). New World armies were expected to do the same, but Washington needing a win for his battered troops employed espionage tactics in order to gain information and win different battles throughout the war.

Before espionage could be used there were technologies that were required to be mastered. These technologies include maps, sophisticated communication and printing. In Washington’s early days he was trained in surveying, this skill transferred to knowing where land was wilderness as opposed to road systems (Allen, 4). There were many communication techniques that were employed by Washington and his troops that added to his intelligence networks and ultimately led him to winning the Revolutionary War. An example of this is that many members of the Sons of Liberty were printers and publishers, this control of the press allowed the Americans to spread different propaganda against the British (Allen, 18). The propaganda that was being spread was full of enlightenment ideals, for example, “defense of the freedom that is our birthright” Locke’s beliefs of individual rights are prominent within this quote. The lack of communication within the British intelligence was a factor of the American success, the intercepting of a letter and changing their contents are an example of their unsophisticated system of communication (Allen, 33). Though sometimes the colonists’ messages were also intercepted they were deeply encrypted using code as well as invisible ink to hide their messages. Benjamin Tallmadge created a spy ring in New York City and helped to develop important aspects to code writing, for example, deciding that different agents, including Washington, needed secret identities. These identities were created using different variations of three numbers assigned to members of their intelligence system along with code names. For example, Tallmadge would be identified as 721 and would be called John Bolton whereas Washington would be solely identified through his numbers 711 (Allen, 60). Tallmadge also used this system for different places, months and words that were frequently used in communication and planning throughout the war (Allen, 63). The combination of Tallmadge’s number system along with secret identities lead to a higher level of sophistication within the communication that occurred amongst the colonies, this made deciphering the code more difficult for British agents who intercepted it. Invisible ink was a technology available to both sides of the war. The most common method of this, as seen in the National Treasure movie, was using lemon juice to write and when heated a message will appear. The British used two types of ink and would stipulate which method would make it appear, fire or acid, in the corner of the message (Allen, 68). Washington wanted a more complicated ink so their messages could not be revealed as easily with fire or acid, so he sought Sir James Jay. Jay was a chemist who developed a system in which used two chemicals in order to reveal the message, this method was spread to all intelligence groups both at home and abroad (Allen, 69).

Washington’s use of spy networks throughout the war was essential to the success of the Americans. Washington himself had minor experience with being a spy during the French and Indian war, he “mingl[ed] with French officers” (Rose, 96). This allowed him to gain knowledge about their weaknesses and troop locations, the experience that Washington got from this early exposure to espionage “shape[d] his understanding of the value of open spy networks” (Halverson, 128). Another example of Washington’s innate knack for the undercover intelligence networks is that he would find people who knew the information he needed or find people who knew how to get the information he needed (Allen, 8). Washington also realized the importance of moral amongst troops and how it was essential to winning the war. Within his different spy rings his reports would range from “size and location of British military supplies” to the “health and spirits of the army, navy and city” (Allen, 50). Washington taking into account the spirits of the city gave him a better insight into how a city is faring under British control and whether or not the Americans needed to provide aid. When describing espionage Washington stated that it is “everything which can be interesting and important for us to know” (Halverson, 129). Enforcing the idea that knowledge of army positions, though important, is not the only thing espionage should be used for. Washington favored having spies that lived on the other side because their “local circumstances…give them an opportunity of making observations” (Allen, 52). Washington frequently used civilians within his networks and he sometimes would recruit them on his own. One of his notable recruits was Nathaniel Sackett, unlike other civilian members of intelligence agencies however, Sackett would report to Washington directly (Halverson, 130). Even though Washington recruited some spies, he did not have personal contact with many of them, the reason being that having spies be not directly linked to him lessened the chance for a single intelligence officer to gather all the information and use if for themselves (Halverson, 128). In order to avoid this from occurring, Washington would gather small bits of information from many sources. Washington would also use sleeper agents to gain information on the enemy, John Honeyman was a perfect example of one of these agents. Honeyman was a known Tory and was hated by the townspeople for selling meat to Hessians (Allen, 48). Honeyman was really working for Washington and was using his trusted position in order to gain information on the Hessian army, Honeyman was then imprisoned. However, a fire broke out and Honeyman escaped, no one but Washington knew that he was working for the Americans so he was able to return to his duties and keep feeding information to Washington. There were a few occasions where “American officers holding spies were unaware that the prisoner was employed by Washington” (Halverson, 132). This goes to show the levels of secrecy Washington had around his intelligence operations. Sometimes, he would implement spies that were made to be captured in order to throw off British officials. In some cases, the agent would be posed as a “fugitive from the persecution of danger” (Fitzpatrick, 368) the danger being American troops. In these scenarios, they would go into British territories under that alias, give misinformation about the location and size of the American armies and then escape back into the custody of the Americans. If possible, these agents were also tasked with carrying information about the troops they had run into (Halverson, 132). Washington also created an overseas network of intelligence-led by Silas Dean in France (Allen, 82). This network became known as the Secret Committee of Correspondence, they used their own codes, ships and would create new messenger systems (Halverson, 131). Having intelligence abroad along with intelligence in the Americans allowed Washington to have a complete vision of his enemy that allowed him to plan accordingly.

There were many different organizations and people that were connected to Washington’s intelligence networks. Some organizations include the Sons of Liberty and the Daughters of Liberty, bother organizations would help with the spread of propaganda during the revolution. The Songs of Liberty would help spread the message to foreigners aiding the British that if they desert they would get land (Allen, 79). The Daughters of Liberty were women who wanted to aid in the revolution, women were valuable members of intelligence networks because men did not believe women posed a real threat. An example of women being able to gain intelligence comes in Lydia Darragh, her home was being used by British officers as a meeting place. One night, John Andre held a secretive meeting in her home, rather than go to sleep like she was ordered she listened to the conversation and once the meeting was over faked sleep until Andre believed she had not listened (Allen, 102). Darragh sent her message to Washington which was able to confirm other reports he had received of movements of British troops. Many women did not receive the same fame from their actions as Lydia Darragh, for most female spies their true identities are not even known. For example, there was one woman known as “Old Mom” Rinker who would carry information to underground spy networks (Allen, 101). Women were not the only group that was exploited in order to help war efforts, Quakers were essential in helping aid intelligence for Americans. Robert Townsend, or Culper Jr according to Tallmadge’s code system, was a merchant and Quaker (Allen, 53). His profession and religion made him the perfect agent because his profession allowed him to travel throughout Long Island and New York City and his religion is against violence which kept suspicion away from him.

The Americans’ use of espionage, their more sophisticated technology, and their liberating ideologies are what ultimately lead them to win the war. The British had spies as well, but they were not as well informed and had inferior communication which leads to confusion amongst their ranks. The complex spy network led by Washington allowed him to know about many different aspects of intelligence that he planned accordingly for. The British also had invisible ink but unlike the Americans, it could be easily revealed using an acid or heat whereas the colonists used a two chemical system when encoding their messages. One technology the British did not have on their side was the ideology that they were fighting for their fundamental rights. The passion the Americans had to defend their land as a result of enlightenment ideals ultimately lead them to victory.

Citations

1. Allen, Thomas B. George Washington, Spymaster: How the Americans Outspied the British and Won the Revolutionary War. National Geographic Books, 2007.
2. Fitzpatrick, John C. The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources 1745-1799 Volume 21 December 22, 1780-April 26, 1781. Vol. 21. Best Books on, 1939.
3. Halverson, Sean. ‘Dangerous Patriots: Washington’s Hidden Army during the American Revolution.’ Intelligence and National Security 25.2 (2010): 123-146.
4. Rose, Alexander. Washington’s Spies: The Story of America’s First Spy Ring. Bantam, 2014.
5. Tuckness, Alex, ‘Locke’s Political Philosophy’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = .

Colonialism has played a significant role in crafting our ‘contemporary international politics’; an influential force that has contributed to our current global issues. The term colonialism connotes an image of a domineering and oppressive empire controlling a subservient colonial state. This prestigious role is particularly seen in the Western world, where they ‘dominate the international society’ and have a form of colonial power over the ‘underdeveloped third world .’Although the colonial system has become extinct, the effects of it are still being experienced by the once-colonized countries. The extreme economic and social inequality that is occurring in the world today can be seen as a consequence of momentous historical events, with European colonialism being one of the most prevalent and major. The continuing existence of Western supremacy and characteristics of colonialism such as racism and xenophobia are still widespread, revealing that colonialism is still a dominant characteristic of global politics and demonstrating the fact that ‘the colonial past influences the postcolonial present’.

The colonial strategy of ‘[playing the] leading role’ and economically exploiting a region is still transpiring in the Western world today; the use of ‘racialized labor recruitment’ in underdeveloped nations resembles the works of colonialism. This economic influence is a form of indirect control through the facade of aid, investments, and trade policies, which ultimately make these nations ‘economically dependent’. In the contemporary context, domestic workers in Third World countries such as Bangladesh and India, work in dangerous conditions to produce goods for Western businesses such as Nike and Primark. These Western companies exploit child labor and sweatshops, paying them as low as $2 an hour; such mistreatment can be considered as modern-day slavery. This highlights how Core countries such as the USA are still deeply invested in colonial pursuits which essentially allows them to exert ‘economic power across the globe without direct political control’ and reveals that Western consumers are entitled to ‘own and expend a majority of the world resources’. The West’s negligence of human rights violations and conditions in these factories demonstrates how colonialist attitudes are still occurring in this modern domain. In a world where Western countries benefit vastly by acquiring resources from developing nations through labor workers, emphasizes how colonialism is still a dominant factor of international politics both historically and in the present.

Colonialism is a dominant factor of international politics can also be seen in the cinematic portrayal of ‘the “East”’ and how they ‘are defined as the “Others”’. Cinema that enforces stereotypes is predominantly produced in the United States and Europe for example films such as Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Stereotypical films have high racial implications which pollute the minds of the West and make the ‘Others’ seem sinister and simply the subject of ridicule. These cynical connotations of other cultures resemble the attitudes that were held during the period of colonization and reflect the ‘European imagery of barbarians and outsiders’; unveiling how current Western views of the non-West are effects of European colonialism. Universal perceptions of undeveloped nations as being ‘native, primitive, savage, barbarian’ make the Western world seem more ‘superior and evolved.’ These widely-held views allowed European powers to ‘classify [non-Western people] into hierarchies’ making the ‘natives’ appear inferior. Said unveiled how People of the Orient are symbolized as being ‘exotic, backward and non-rational’, whereas the West is identified with more positive qualities such as being more ‘secular, liberated… and civilized.’ The comparison between the Western states and the non-Western world is a continuance of the hierarchal beliefs that were prevalent during colonialism and highlights how it is still existing in our international politics.

Contemporary issues such as discriminatory acts against ethnic minorities and the rising xenophobia occurring in the United States reveal how colonialism is still a dominant factor in our world politics. Recently, the Muslim Travel Ban policy enforced by Trump can be seen as a reflection of colonial xenophobia as it targets specific races and ethnicities– creating a great divide in ‘the relationship between the East and West.’ An echo of colonialism can also be seen in the US detention centers where Mexican migrants were detained – parallel to the British concentration camps used in the Second Boer War when South Africa was colonized. Treating humans differently on the basis of religion, race, and ethnicity is an aspect of colonialism and still exists today. Racial infringements in government politics and our current domain reveal how an element of colonialism is still present in our society and international politics.

Overall, it can be argued that colonialism is still a dominant characteristic of international politics and our contemporary issues and events are an effect of it. Colonial attitudes that ensued in the past are mirrored in today’s society such as how Western knowledge is credited more than the non-Western world. Issues of racism and ethnic discrimination resemble the xenophobic colonial attitudes that are widespread today in our global politics. The Global West dominating the rest of the world is a continuance of colonialism and demonstrates how the ‘colonial experience is crucial to reach an understanding of contemporary politics’. These problems highlight that colonialism is still a dominant characteristic of international politics.

The manifest of destiny was a term that was coined in the mid-18th century by a journalist called John L. O’Sullivan, where he urged his fellow Americans to uphold their Divine Providence and undertake the mission to conquer the entire country. Furthermore, the American frontier refers to continuously advancing western border in North America. This essay will examine and interpret these two terms.

Religion and colonization also played a massive role in North America, in the 17th century. The Americans believed in the separation of church and state, freedom of speech and freedom of religion. However, the pressures of fundamentalism, institutionalization, and traditionalism fuelled their lust for wealth and power and were used as a justification for murder and land possession.

The task of conquering North America was not an easy one as it spanned a total area of 24,709,000 square kilometres it was occupied by Spain, France, and the indigenous Native Americans. This conquest can be separated into numerous frontiers.

The first frontier started when the settlers on the Atlantic coast started looking West. They dreamed of exploring the lands, expanding their colonies and further escaping the influences of England. After the war of independence, the Americans expanded quickly setting up settlements as they please. Despite partially coexisting with the Native Americans, this new expansion was starting to affect the Native Americans and war followed. It was that Battle of fallen timbers that led to the Americans gaining the Northwest territory. This first real advancement proved to be an ironic one as these new settlements quickly differed in opinion over slavery, taxes, and religion.

By 1800 Kentucky, Pennsylvania and Tennessee had been added as territories and in 1803 the ‘Louisiana Purchase’ in which the American purchased Louisiana from France. Shortly thereafter, Britain being highly dissatisfied with the Americans for trading with their enemies the ‘war of 1812’ broke out as the Americans refused to stop their trade with the French. Simultaneously, before the ‘war of 1812’ had ended the ‘Battle of Moraviantown’ (1813) broke out which was against the British and the Native Americans. Having been greatly outnumbered, the Americans won the war driving the Native Americans out of Ohio and further increasing their territory taking the rest of Ohio and Ontario in Canada.

The third and final frontier managed to claim the rest of North America and lasted from 1840 until 1890. This new frontier lead to an entirely different aspect of North America as it was not the same agricultural ripe land as the East, instead, the land was dry, treeless and rainless and had rocky mountains. This land was commonly referred to as the ‘Wild West’. There was plenty of mining opportunity and the many bison lead to the development of the tapping industry. However, this land was much more difficult to cultivate and utilize so focus was initially shifted back inland until the necessary resources were gathered so that railroads and mines could be built, as well as labour forces assembled.

The Americans started as British outcasts and ended up conquering what is one of the vastest countries in the world. The Americans have proved to be a strong and hard-working force, regardless of whatever difficulties came they fought for what they wanted, however poorly justified their motivation for colonization may have been.

As settlers first began moving into the Eastern regions of North America, life was tough for them. Unknown terrain, possibly hostile Natives, new diseases, and unclean environments. At first, the colonists weren’t even capable of surviving and keeping up with the land. England sent over perfumers and bankers rather than farmers or blacksmiths which resulted in a very fatal blow to the population of colonists sent over. But they soon realized what they had taken responsibility for and fixed their mistake. The starting of new colonies wasn’t easy but in the end, the people of Chesapeake turned around and created a blossoming colony that we can now proudly call the U.S.

Two major colonial regions began at around the same time, yet were drastically different in many ways. Those regions were New England and Chesapeake of course. First was the colony of New England. This region in the NorthEastern part of what is now the US was pretty cold which allowed most bugs that carried deadly or harmful diseases to be killed off. Another major factor that helped this colony thrive and flourish was that there wasn’t a mixing of salt and fresh water. The water was clean so this allowed the colonists to bathe and drink without worry. They also had much more of even men to women ratio that helped them reproduce at a quicker and healthier rate. Because of the healthier climate, even sex ratios, and cleaner environments, men and women tended to live longer and have higher life expectancies.

Now, in contrast to the New England people, the Chesapeake was struggling much more with staying alive and well to build a colony. The environment was unclean to start. They arrived at a part of the North American coast that was very marshy. This was a hazard to health because mosquitoes ran rampant due to the regionally higher temperatures and swamp-like environments and this was a cause for concern because they carried malaria. Malaria was a huge problem during these times because the medicine and “treatments” they had for illnesses were often ineffective or resulted in a quicker death. Life expectancy was much lower in this region as well. 30 to 31 years lower than that in New England. Infant mortality was also very high with a 25% mortality rate among them. With very few children being born and people dying off more quickly, it’s amazing that they even had the manpower to pick themselves back up.

So the question is, how did the Chesapeake people survive? It’s honestly quite interesting if you look at how they started, where they ended up, and how much of a difference there is in between. The Chesapeake people ended up having something pretty great going for them. They had three major cash crops: tobacco, rice, and indigo. Indigo was a very popular blue dye in England at the time and tobacco was very big there too. Slave labor was also very heavily depended upon. With more and more African slaves being transported to the colonies, the need for indentured servitude decreased. With indentured servitude no longer necessary, people could now save up their money before coming over here which meant the want for more land to produce crops also increased along with the population. All of these factors contributed to the Southern economy flourishing and defining social and political structures.

Another big question that needs to be answered is: did the Chesapeake deserve to survive? Putting aside the awful treatment of Africans aboard the ship on the Middle Passage and the fact that they even treated African people as less than others, I do think that the Chesapeake people did deserve to survive. From the very beginning, they were met with a harsh climate, had to face pretty terrifying mortality rates, and just figure out how to survive in a new region altogether. But before it was too late, they had figured out fantastic ways to produce a healthy and booming economy and colony.

Taking everything into account, it’s amazing that there was such a successful creation of the U.S. today when you consider the hardships that all of the colonists had to face coming over here. Although there was such a drastic difference between the northern and southern colonies, both wound up becoming something greater than I’m sure any of the colonists could ever have imagined. Despite the struggles that the South faced in their upbringing in Chesapeake, they faced it head-on and survived some of the harshest conditions. With everything I’ve learned about the colonial people, I know that they were tough and dedicated people more than deserving of survival.

Throughout American history, there has been some type of impact (good or bad) from different cultures and races that created diverse America we know today. What it means to be a diverse country is that there are different cultures and people living in one place. Many races of people came from other countries and regions of the world to hopefully live a better life in America. However, while it is diverse that doesn’t necessarily mean that everyone was treated equally. There are many pros to being a diverse country, for example, gaining information and perspective from different races to increase the growth and knowledge of the country. While there are some pros, there are also some cons as well for example communication issues, the battle of power, and conflict. So being a diverse country comes with its pros and its cons. America has always been a diverse society. Just because America is diverse doesn’t mean everything was smooth sailing. There was a lot of conflict with the difference in gender/power roles (males vs females), racial differences (slavery vs anti-slavery), and regional differences (north vs the South). But it was these differences and conflicts that started to create the diverse America we have today.

Diversity started to appear as many men and women from different cultures (African Americans, Indians, Spanish) wanted to come to the New World (America) to make a better life for themselves and their families (Black People in White People’s Country). However, getting into the New World wasn’t cheap, many people would labor for someone with money as payment to go to the New World (Black People in White People’s Country). Wealthy white people started to use this to turn people into slaves. Slavery was a major influence on the racial differences in America. Back in that time, African American slaves were looked at as human and treated cruelly and unfairly because of the color of their skin. White slave owners saw African Americans as property that they purchased for labor and to control using slave codes to strip them of all their rights (Black People in White People’s Country, Nash 1). White people were held to the highest, while African Americans were the lowest race. For many years, African Americans had to deal with mistreatment and injustice without having much power to stop it.

This caused the black slaves to finally say enough was enough and they started to rebel. This had always been a fear for white people as they worried that the mass growth of black slaves would outnumber them, and they would eventually overthrow them (Black People in White People’s Country). They decided that freedom and change were going to happen by doing nothing if they wanted to change, they had to act. Ben Franklin, who was the symbol of the Enlightenment movement, mention the virtues of tolerance and tyranny and when it comes to diversity between blacks and whites, there wasn’t really any tolerance and a lot of tyrannizing. Ben Franklin’s virtues started to make people really think and open their eyes to the world around them. His main goal was “to create and to celebrate, a new ruling class of ordinary citizens who learned to be tolerant of the varied beliefs and dogmas of their neighbors” (Citizen Ben’s 7 Great Virtues, Isaacson 2). This idea was used to make people create their own beliefs and make their own decisions.

Speaking of opening people’s minds, Thomas Jefferson was one of the first white slave owners who started to wake up and see slavery for what it was: inhumane. He started to see it as “a blob in a country” (Thomas Jefferson and the Meaning of Liberty, Wilson 1) and that it is rereferred to as an issue that is staining and corrupting the country. He started to see that using this labor system (slavery) is wrong and how they treated African Americans was wrong also. Just because they were different from him, doesn’t mean he should treat them so cruelly.

Even though slavery was one of the hardest times in American history, the differences between white people to black people created many difficulties but also some positive insights. As many African Americans were starting to fight in wars for America, giving them extra manpower against their enemies (Thomas Jefferson and the Meaning of Liberty, Wilson 1), more people started to become anti-slavery, and more black slaves started to take a stand against injustice.

Race wasn’t the only diversity America faced, there were also regional differences and gender differences as well. For the northern and southern colonies, there were huge differences in climate, families, and gender roles. Something as simple as the climate can make a difference. In the Southern region, the climate was harsh and lead to the fast spreading of deadly diseases. This led to people’s life expectancy being low around the 40s (Family Life in Plymouth and the Chesapeake, slide 10). Low life expectancy meant that married life was very short, and many wives had to live without their husbands along with children without parents (Family Life in Plymouth and the Chesapeake, slide 10). However, it wasn’t like there were many women for men to marry anyway. There was a huge imbalance of males and women in the south: fewer women than males so only a handful of males got married, at least till they died from disease and the women become available (Family Life in Plymouth and the Chesapeake, slide 11). In contrast to the north, the climate was much healthier and there was a longer life expectancy (living till the 60s) plus marriages last a lot longer compared to the south (Family Life in Plymouth and the Chesapeake, slide 12). Since life expectancy was high, this allows many husbands and wives to have many children and their population grew rapidly. This showed that even the smallest of things can have huge impacts on regions and have different effects.

During the revolution, it was the North who started to see black people as more than just slaves as they started to use African American slaves as soldiers and in the wars to defend America. In return, some of the slaves that fought were rewarded with their freedom (Thomas Jefferson and the Meaning of Liberty, Wilson 1). For the North, they started to change their mindset towards slavery, that maybe it wasn’t as necessary as they thought. Compare this to the South who were not so willing to release their slaves as they saw it as a loss of control and power (Thomas Jefferson and the Meaning of Liberty, Wilson 1). In Southern eyes, they saw the freeing of slaves would lead to future rebellion and the killing of white people.

Even though the North and South were different, there were some similarities especially when it came to gender roles. The males had all the power and authority while the women were expected to be submissive and dependent on their husbands (Family Life in Plymouth and the Chesapeake, slide 20). It is a woman’s duty in the community to take care of the children and make sure they are raised well to become active members of the growing society. That is how women were seen back then, and it wasn’t necessarily fair but that is how things were back then.

In conclusion, there were many conflicts in American history that make it seem like diversity caused a lot of trouble but that is far from the truth