Ap Us Colonial America Dbq

Anthony Edwards8/24/12 AP US History- Jones compound America DBQ An interesting characteristic of the colonies that the English founded during the 17th and 18th centuries on the eastern coast of un guinea pigd day America is that while all were indeed settled by the great unwashed from Eng nation they each veritable their own very distinct cultures and elbow rooms of a equalness. While the alter milieus from each colony to the next for certain isnt a negligible factor in the diversification of the colonists cultures in the New World, on that point argon more striking factors that locoweed be considered.The colonists themselves it seems had very different viewpoints, goals and demeanor when some(prenominal) regions are compared. Examples of cardinal regions that were both settled by the English that developed very different and arguably contrasting cultures are the New England and the Chesapeake colonies. It is apparent that the main goals and natures of the colonists in e ither region were dissimilar.In New England colonists were primarily Puritans and focused on religion, self-government, family values, and cooperation for the good of the community where in the Chesapeake colonists ofttimes relied on the royal government and were focused on getting great wealth and furthering their own individual achievement. These dissimilarities as well as other factors identical the environment caused the two cultures to develop in very separate ways. Every society is shaped by its environment and its culture can be greatly influenced by its surroundings.The society of the New England colonies was formed in an battleground of temperate, generally cool temperatures, clean water, and rocky, infertile soil. This meant that the colonists werent plagued by many an(prenominal) diseases and relied on the trade of furs, lumber, and fish. This contrasts to the unhygienic environment the Chesapeake colonists faced. The land of the Chesapeake was often mosquito infes ted and its inhabitants were constantly in the danger of outbreaks of disease.The Chesapeakes economy focused on baccy as its main export, meaning that the fate and the well-being of many Chesapeake colonies relied on the demand of tobacco products back in the Old World. Another factor that can shape a society is the certain makeup of the people within the society. The colonies in New England were primarily settled by entire families forming communities with other families. There are many accounts f the emigrants on board ships dancing for America and very often the ships travelling to New England had examples of entire families seeking a fresh start with husbands, wives, sons, daughters, and occasionally servants (Document B). In contrast, the lists of emigrants bound for the Chesapeake usually held a majority of young men, un tie in to one another and a small muckle of young women, again, unrelated. It seemed only individuals, most not even at the age of 35, came to the Chesap eake to start their new lives (Document C).This of hang meant that the society in New England was oriented around family and understandably focusing on the well-being of those related to the colonists. In the Chesapeake most colonists held no relation to each other and so didnt terribly attending for anyone else but themselves. These factors by themselves would be enough to see an ostensible difference between the societies, however in that respect are still more factors that led to the dissimilar developments of these two unique cultures. The Puritans that came to New England had a news report of cooperation and a focus on the good of the Puritan community.After they left England to worship as they pleased and debar persecution they went to the Netherlands. Eventually many Puritans became worried that their children would become Dutchified and wanted to retain their culture. To avoid further Dutchification the Puritans got a take on from the Virginia Company to settle in the New World. They landed off the mark however, mayhap to their benefit as they were supposed to land in the unhealthy Chesapeake, and found themselves in what would at long last become New England.In 1630 a man on board a ship sailing to New England named John Winthrop wrote what he ruling would be A Model of Christian Charity. His views of course pleased his fellow New Englanders as he was destined to become the Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony for many years. His views expressed in his literary productions seemingly portrayed most Puritans opinions on the ideal community where all families, rich and poor, ought to work hand in glove for everyones benefit and have the utmost brotherly affection for each other.Failure in doing so would head in Gods withdrawal of his assistance and spare His enemies to speak ill of Him and His way of life (Document A). Clearly New Englanders held both God and cooperation in the highest reverence. In stark contrast, a certain professional John Smith wrote an account of the history of Virginia in which he once described his colony in a manner that would surely displease Winthrop. Captain Smith describes the food of many of the colonists being only when meal and water, men focusing only on finding and selling gold, and a group of deserters essay to return to England (Document F).The colonists were ill prepared and focused more on wealth than provisions, showing no authoritative sense of community or cooperation. It seems then that New England would be destined to develop into a series of tight knit, pious, cooperative communities where the Chesapeake would consist of those who eventually succeeded in finding their fortunes and those who would eventually have to be busy by them. While all colonies were ultimately under the control of the royal government there were varying degrees of control over each colony. Some colonies, resembling the ones in the Chesapeake area, were appointed a royal governor.Others like the New England colonies elected their own officials and often had freemen participate in government. A common theme end-to-end the history of the Chesapeake colonies is their colony on the royal government for protection and provisions. In 1673 Governor Berkeley of Virginia had written a declaration stating how vulnerable his colony was to attack to the royal government . Berkeley claimed that there was more land to oppose than the amount of men could handle, and that there were as many servants as there were freemen protecting the frontiers (Document G).Of course Berkeley was looking for for royal intervention, something he in all likelihood did more often than not. However while the dependence on royal government of the Chesapeake colonies by itself may be enough to cause substantial amounts of unrest, there was also much corruption in the colonial government. There was eventually a rebellion of freemen and others who matt-up that the upperclass of the Chesapeake colonies were using the workers and servants to benefit themselves and not the community. This rebellion was named Bacons Rebellion after the man who led the revolt.Bacon eventually wrote his Manifesto explaining why he lead the revolt against Governor Berkeley. Bacon calls to attention the fact that many officials would of a sudden gain much wealth and power that seemed almost impossible to achieve given their status ledger entry the colony. Bacon also claims that the colonial officials were taking from public wealth and resources to increase their own power (Document H). Bacon and many others like him were tired of being controlled by those who they believed to be corrupt and thieving.Both of these instances show how the Chesapeake colonies relied on royal officials to govern them. This may be due to the fact that the Virginia Company was basically in control of the Chesapeake while it was still at first being colonised, and most of the men didnt care about who was in charge so long as they c ould find a way to obtain their fortunes. The Chesapeake colonists goals were short sight and get themselves in a prime position to be oppressed by disregarding the importance of their roles in government and focusing on their pursuit of wealth.Where the Chesapeake colonists actions are a prime example of how to allow a group of people to be oppressed, the New England colonists took a very hands on approach to their own government resulting in an overall better quality of life and community. There were many regulations and articles that the colonial government set forth to keep their communities running smoothly and fairly. In 1636 there were several Articles of Agreement appointed in Springfield, Massachusetts that set forth a plan to make a proper, Puritan community.The articles claimed that as soon as possible the community would procure a minister for the township, that the town would be comprised of forty families regardless of their financial standing, and these families wil l have a proportionate plot of land to live on and a section of the meadow or planting ground (Document D). The goal of these articles was to allow the town to maintain equal opportunity for all inhabitants to contribute to society in whatever way they could, and to live as comfortably as possible while doing it.In 1676, Connecticut made regulations on pay and prices for its inhabitants to avoid tradesmen and merchants overpricing their goods only to benefit themselves. The regulations also stated that the tradesmen and sellers may receive a moderate advantage in order to better serve the community and God as overpricing their wares would be sinful and tyrannic (Document E). The New England colonists wished to not only make their new homes in the New World, but also to brook a place where all Puritans and New Englanders can live in tight knit, fair, and model Christian societies.The New England colonists did not only set up model communities for themselves, but also for their ch ildren and their childrens children and so on. This reflects the colonists focus on community, self-government, and family values. An important thing to remember about the colonists that settled the Chesapeake and New England is that they once did grant a country and society in England even though it may seem that they might as well have came from completely different countries.It is then important to note that simply because two groups of people come from the same country, doesnt mean they are alike in any way. To look at our own country now, although we are often taught that we can all find common ground amongst those in our society there are still blatant differences in culture between ethnicities, regions, and religions. However, it is more overabundant to look at ones goals and aspirations to truly see how unique each person or group of people can be.The Chesapeake and New England colonists were both English and where England may seem to have a relatively homogenous culture th e goals of the colonists were basically opposites. The New Englanders wanted a place where they can live and thrive in holy, cooperative, safe communities and provide a place where their people and their children can live the better(p) lives possible. The Chesapeake colonists basically only wanted to find their fortunes and acquire wealth and power. These goals are reflected in both of the regions development.Lest we not forget then, that we as a people must now focus on what our goals are. If any lesson can be taken from the development of the New England and Chesapeake colonies now for our country it is that if we focus on short sighted goals like the corrupted American Dream of fortune or the corporations and big businesses main wishes of continued unsustainable oddment of resources and environments only for profit then we shall perhaps find ourselves in the position the Chesapeake colonists found themselves in.However, if we take a lesson from the New England colonists and foc us on building a better tomorrow for our children and society then perhaps we shall thrive in model communities like the ones found in Massachusetts or Connecticut or elsewhere in colonial New England. It is important that we recognise what sort of path we are mind down, we must learn from our past to provide a better future for generations to come.