Nathan Barber Santa Margarita Catholic hs
Download 195.89 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Salient Points
- Substantive Assessment
John Larkin Thesis: John Larkin asserts that there was a great variety of social customs and behaviour in the newly independent country of the United States, many of which are entirely contradictory to the common assumption that Colonial Americans were placid and prim, for example, Larkin illustrates how many Americans in that era were dirty, smelly, bathed infrequently, had horrendous table manners, and were infested with lice and fleas. Larkin also proves that the nature of a region (fertility of the soil, temperance of the seasons) moulds the character and culture of the people who inhabit the region. For example, the people that lived in the Northern Colonies (New England) had to endure arduous labour to earn their livelihood, establishing their strong belief/hold in Calvinism and thus a dour outlook on life reflected in their stiff and formal stance; contrasted with the people living on the Western Frontier who were far more open and expressive, as they had everything to gain and nothing to lose. Larkin also emphasises how certain social traits apply to the people/country as a whole; such as the shaking of the hands, pregnancies before wedlock, tavern drinking, gambling and smoking tobacco. John Larkin also attests that social customs change slowly over time, as different customs come into and out of fashion. Salient Points: Wide variety of characteristics of facial expressions/stance due to regional differences NE- constrained, gruff, ponderous gait, slow, slouch (due to heavy labour/Calvinist beliefs) Irish- lively, Blacks- uncontrolled physical energy, rhythmic motion City folk- fast face, knitted eyebrow and compressed face of concentration- thinking of work South- plantation farmers, did little work, carried themselves gracefully/with arrogance Westerners- lively, freely expressed selves, eccentric 1800’s Americans very dirty, clothes and bodies rarely washed, clothes covered in sweat, dirt, manure. Most only washed hands and faces from washbowl in the mornings Waste- chamber pots/outdoor privies (in south just used outside-bushes), thrown into streets out windows in cities and cleaned up by pigs Bedbugs/lice/fleas infested clothing, hair, bed sheets Baths- over time more privacy- basin/washstand/ewer/pitcher in each room- but not heated By 1830 some hotels in NY had baths and flushing toilets More people more concerned with washing, but very slow advancement Americans drank more than they ever have done before, the average 4 gallons per capita More taverns than churches, in NY 1 per 80 people. Taverns social life- gaming (gambling, poker, billiards, faro betting on races/cock fights/wrestles), drinking, brawling, talking Sordid sailor grog shops- prostitutes/brawls, liquor selling groceries- craftsmen, decorous places for merchants with a fine taste Accommodated women, but mostly men, women drunk was shocking while normal in men Men drank far more than women, who got tipsy but not drunk like men folk Alcohol became a problem, people viewed it as healthy and vital, always had hard liquor to drink at meals and offer to guests/neighbours Gouging- when drunk people fought they would try and gouge the others eye out Slaves, fought amongst themselves/occasionally with masters (Nat Turner Uprising) caused stricter laws Masters used whips and flogging to keep slaves in line Public punishment for crimes- use whipping posts/stocks/branding/ear mutilation Executions were rare but drew huge crowds of thousands of people, in 1830’s began to make executions private- made crowd bloodthirsty Clapp- a preacher in 1830 campaigned civilized manners (less heavy drinking) American Temperance Society in 1826, created for social order/evangelical piety Drinking no longer fashionable, changed from the good creature to demon drink- proven by Benjamin Rush to be a poison/depressant 1810-1840’s church going became more regular- almost mandatory and stopped mail on Sunday Many couples had children before getting married, was the social norm (1/3), the only concern was if the couple didn’t get married who would pay for the upkeep of the baby (burden on town) Slaves, same freedom of courtship if not more- slaves marriages were not legitimized, may slave women raped by masters Prostitution- poor women in cities drawn into prostitution, could not find other well paying jobs Most customers were frustrated young men, prostitution was available to poor and rich Some women resorted to abortion, not considered a crime until foetus moved, used methods such as strenuous exercise, bitter herbal drinks At end of 1800’s Americans began limiting children in families, reducing prostitution, increasing faithfulness, longer before marriage- less children out of wedlock Abstinence, abortion, contraception manuals-author put in jail for obscenity but thousands copies Almost everybody smoked and spat tobacco, was cheap (home grown) poor used clay pipes rich bought Segar’s from Caribbean More chewing than smoking; could work and chew. Floors covered in saliva and black tobacco Traditional signs of deference done away with (bowing to people of higher social order) Instead encouraged shaking hands- showed equality among men Americans and Blacks a lot taller than Europeans, better nourished Two staple foods- corn and salted pork, (In NE also had cattle and thus butter/cheese) Game- part of diet but usually more if lived on the frontier Before 1800 families would each have a spoon and would communally tuck in to a meal By 1800 meals became social events, each person got separate plate and knife and fork, only used fork to hold meat and cut, still scooped food into mouth As new immigrants (East/Southern European) joined older American stock- more diversity Modern culture- dept stores, newspapers, radios, movies, public education Substantive Assessment: I found The Secret Life of a Developing Country to be extremely informative; Larkin provided numerous detailed examples to further prove his purpose- to demonstrate how different Colonial Americans were to the common stereotype of a prim and proper people. For example, pictures of American Cities often portray smartly dressed merchants/lawyers outside of proud, tall stone buildings. In reality, these cities streets were filled with people’s rubbish, waste and emptied chamber pots. The streets were so filthy, pigs were released into the cities to eat (clear away) the vast and unsanitary amounts of waste. Cities were also home to taverns, where men drank themselves into stupors, brawled violently, and played games of cards and gambled. Americans also smoked and chewed tobacco, filling the streets and even a courthouse in New York with black spit and chewed tobacco. However, even though the information is very interesting, I do not feel like I gained any revelations after reading this essay. For example, the industrial revolution began in England in the late 1730’s, it had to gain momentum in Europe, and then be transported over the Atlantic Ocean to reach the colonies, thus no wonder they did not flushing toilets, or other advanced manufactured tools. I would never associate the early 1800’s with cleanliness, thus I was not surprised to hear that the average American did not daily wash themselves with soap and water, or launder their clothes often. Before advanced water technology systems and mass manufacturing, acquiring hot water and soap was difficult. It is almost impossible in the capitol city of Uganda today!! Also, the practice of throwing ones waste out of the window into the street was a concept we learned in World History. It was a common practice many Europeans used at that time when serfs began acquiring freedom and moving into the cities, taking their country customs (throwing waste out of windows to ground below) with them. On a final note, I have yet to find an American who eats properly, thus back in the 1800’s I imagine table manners must have been even worse than they are now (I’m just kidding.)!!! Suki Ferris Précis Number 7 Hereford High School APUSH Mr. Bosley, Pd. 6 The Trail of Tears By: Dee Brown Thesis: Brown asserts that the forced removal of Cherokee Native Americans from their ancestral homelands was morally indecent, a terrible misuse of power on behalf of the government, and caused the Cherokee to suffer far more than was necessary. Jackson’s motives for removing the Native Americans were giving land to settlers and gold speculators in order to win an election, he does not consider the fate of the Cherokee, or how they would survive in alien lands. Brown also proves how the Cherokees were removed from their lands unlawfully, as the very person (Davis) whom Jackson sent to determine whether the Cherokee had accepted the treaty to ceding their lands in exchange for safe passage and money, reported that the treaty was actually void as the vast majority of Cherokee did not wish to give up their ancestral homeland. Thus, by enforcing the treaty, Jackson ignored the constitution, and the basic natural laws of the right to life, liberty, and property. Brown also reveals how Native Americans suffered an enormous amount (lost ¼ of population), yet had the strength and dignity not to start a violent rebellion, simply peaceably allowed soldiers to remove them from their ancestral homelands, to alien lands. Salient Points: In the first 400 years of Europeans arriving in the Americas, they systematically forced their cultural and religious cultures upon them, and if the NA revolted, they were systematically destroyed Americans drove NA into the interior of the US, “Indian Removal” in 1700-1800 Jefferson began official removal of NA, either by treaty/war Andrew Jackson most impassioned remover of NA, hated NA- fought them in frontier wars, one of his first acts as President was to announce tribes must be sent west In 1830 Congress passed Indian Removal Act, guaranteed lands west of Mississippi belonged to NA, however settlers moved into that land before act was passed, thus pushed the boundaries back to 95 merid. 1838 General Winfield Scot arrived with artillery, infantry, dragoons in Cherokee country Georgia May 10- New Echota city, read speech demanding Cherokee had to leave land in a month to lands across Mississippi to honour treaty of 1835 For more than 100 years Cherokee had been gradually ceding lands 1819 had 35,000 square miles of fertile Georgia land settlers wanted very much In order to assimilate with Whites, NA had cultivated land, planted orchards, fenced pastures, built roads, towns, homes, learned to read and write, adopted clothing, government and religion Most of the tribe was resistant, and refused to leave 1828 Jackson was running for President, in order to win had to sweep frontier states- give land to settlers Cherokee were not citizens of US and thus could not vote against treaties- had no voice in govt Jackson justified himself- Cherokees had fought with British in Revolutionary War, but they had also been vital allies in victory over British at Horseshoe Bend Jackson made law annexing all Cherokee land in Georgia- 2/3 of Cherokee lived within border Georgia legislature abolished all Cherokee laws, sent surveyors to map land lots of 160 acres Gold was discovered at Dahlonega, adding pressure for land John Ross, Cherokee Leader, rushed to DC to protest Georgia’s actions Ross found sympathizers with Anti-Jackson men Jackson declared could not protect NA unless they were willing to move west Georgia began giving land plots away on a land lottery, and white settlers were claiming land, taking homes from Cherokee by force Cherokee remained united, all dispossessed people were found homes in Cherokee land 1834- Chiefs declared would never voluntarily leave homeland, but would cede some land in exchange for permanent protection of interior and would eventually become citizens of US Serious split in Cherokee, sub-chiefs decided further resistance futile, wanted move west before violence Ross returned to DC resume campaign saving Cherokee lands, Sub-Chiefs arrived looking terms removal Bitterness between 2 Cherokee factions, Sub chiefs got treaty for removal within days and full support from US govt, while Ross and remainder received nothing Major William Davis was sent to investigate validity of Cherokee treaty, and he declared it void as not all Cherokee has signed it. He warned the only way the Cherokee would leave is by force. 1836 General Dunlap refused to remove NA- against values However, terms of treaty expired in 1838, the govt had gathered the troops and built concentration forts Squads of troops search entire Cherokee country, capturing NA in their small cabins at diner/in the fields Many outlaws followed soldiers, and when the took NA immediately started looting and burning In less than a month thousands of Cherokees were peaceably herded into stockades 800 Cherokee crowded onto flotilla of 6 flatboats lashed to steamboat, then taken by train then steamboat Long water route- North on Tennessee river to Ohio, down Mississippi and up Arkansas to new land Drinking water/food contaminated, the young then the old died When Cherokee leaders heard of mortality rates, petitioned scot to postpone dept until autumn. Cherokees decided to organize move themselves Meanwhile, Scott’s soldiers hunted for the missing Cherokees in wilderness Tsali and brother killed the soldiers who tried to remove them; they turned themselves in to be executed to buy time for the remaining Cherokees, some of whom still live in those mountains. By end of 1838 drought was over and Ross and 13,000 Cherokee prepared for journey Huge lines of wagons, horsemen, people of foot from Tennessee to Arkansas- and beyond to NA territory Had no shoes, people were sick, travelled 10 miles per day and buried 15 at every stopping place Autumn rains softened roads, slowing down wagons, tollgate operators overcharged, seized horses Cole weather made NA contract measles/whooping cough Time last of Wagons reach the Mississippi to cross, river was frozen over, had to wait till channel cleared Hundreds of sick/dying were in wagons or lying on the ground covered in a single blanket When finally reach NA territory, 4,000 Cherokee had died, ¼ of the population. Remember it as “the trail where I cried” Substantive Assessment: Dee Brown’s assessment of the Trail of Tears is concise and contains an abundant amount of facts and information about the forced removal of the Cherokee Native American Tribe. I learned some new information, and was surprised and shocked on multiple occasions. For example, when Brown revealed how tiny the population of the Cherokee was, a mere 16,000 in total, I was shocked to know that the white settlers would not allow such a tiny tribe of people to keep their land. What also amazed me was the audacity of Georgia to enact a land lottery, and hand out Cherokee land to land hungry settlers like candy on Halloween. I was also astonished at how little resistance the Cherokee put up against the soldiers and the settlers, how they did not revolt even when they knew their land and homes were being stolen from them unlawfully, and the journey ahead was dangerous and uncertain. I believe this displays a stark ideological difference between the NA and the Americans, who started bloody rebellion simply because they were taxed. Perhaps the most shocking part of the essay was the impression I received of the government, they appeared to have no regrets or second examinations of their abandoning of basic rights and protections. Brown proves how the NA tried to assimilate into American Culture, farming land, adopting western religion, government, and language. When the NA rejected Jackson’s proposal of removal of NA, they peacefully petitioned. It is incredible to think that Jackson did not in any way see the resemblance of the Cherokee to the American Colonists. Hadn’t the Colonists petitioned England when they believed the taxes to be unfair? It is terrifying to think that government has the power to ignore all written law in order to achieve goals. Doesn’t that make all of us susceptible to the wrath, inhumanity, and negligence of Government? In my opinion, the most effective part of Brown’s essay is the fact that he used many Westerners as sources for information, and discussed the two parties of the dilemma, instead of solely focusing on the Cherokee. However, I also found Brown’s article to be particularly un-inspiring. The Cherokee Trail of Tears is such a tale of woe, I imagined it would be impossible to write about the event, and not fill the reader with grief, shame and anger at the wrong doings of the early US govt, and greed of settlers. However, Brown proved me wrong, his article is unquestionably the most life-less piece of literature I have yet to read in this class. If Brown had wanted to impress upon his readers the wrong-doings of the US govt, the insatiable greed of settlers, and the mental and physical pain the Cherokee had to endure, Brown should have included more quotes and tales of the Cherokee. I think Cherokee quotes are vital to this essay because their language, religion and culture is based off their love and dependence of their land, thus their quotes would more effectively reveal their loss, than that of a passing Westerner. Also, I wish Brown had used more impassioned language, such as the like of Patrick Henry (rhetorical devices), as then the readers would truly be horrified and impassioned against the evil of greed, and filled with grief for the Cherokee (which I imagine is the response he was aiming for), instead of merely feeling more informed on the topic. Suki Ferris Précis # 9 Hereford High School APUSH Mr. Bosley, pd. 6 Gallantry Under Fire By: John E. Aliyetti Thesis: John E. Aliyetti asserts that coloured troops proved they could perform and achieve success in battle (as well as white men could) due to their courageous effort at the battle of New Market Heights. He reveals that the valour and fortitude of the coloured troops overcame the racism they faced from their leaders (not allowed to be officers, were over-exposed in order to prove ability), to expose their own true colours (coloured troops were mostly successful). Aliyetti proves his opinion by describing the heroism of the coloured soldiers in the face of certain death (James- grabbed the national colours and ran into the fray, firing with the one arm he had left), and their steadfast determination to reach their goal (as musket fire rained down on the troops, they patiently waited for the forest in front of them to be cleared in order to carry on). Aliyetti also provides evidence to reveal white mans growing respect for coloured troops (explains fourteen members of the coloured division were given Medals of Honour, a rare privilege, and given silver coins of recognition from their commander). Salient Points: Fall of 1864, Confederacy was nearly defeated An obscure battle in mid-September proved that black men could fight in battle just as well as white men Major General Benjamin F. Butler commander of Army of James convinced Grant to allow him to assault key forts and try to break through Richmond The 3rd division of X corps would lead attack against confederate forces at New Market Heights Third division X had never been in combat, and their commander had never led a force as large into battle Butler- abolitionist, one of the first to promote acceptance of black soldiers into army 1864- more than 100,000 black troops in Union army (fugitives/free), 140 regiments- 10% of union army Butler wanted to see for himself how well his black soldiers performed in battle 3rd division had 3 brigades- 3,800 troops in total, 2 more brigades as well (led by Paine and Terry) All enlisted men were black, all of the officers were white Brigade’s led by Duncan, Draper (Duncan would lead, followed by Draper in a two pronged attack) and then Holman (task was to keep left flank secure) Division expected inexperienced militia, turned out to be Texas veterans of Greggs Brigade, under Bass Texans supported by artillery and cavalry Duncan’s brigade moved into position (wanted another division to draw out first and detract attention, but other division never moved) Troops moved out, forming five-brigade front of 2,300 yards Realized how large the opposing force was, under heavy musket fire from Texans- men dropping like flies An obstacle slowed down army- had to chop down a forest that was in the way while under heavy fire Drapers brigade joined Duncan’s- were suffering from musket and cannon fire When reached main confederate line, fire came down from a set of fortified pits- yet another obstacle Fire/smoke/gunshot made it impossible to give or understand orders Draper tried to rally troops around colours, but men were falling too fast Black soldiers replaced white officers, grabbed regimental colours and led ragged arm toward the battle Drapers attack deteriorated- heavy fire roared into his regiment Duncan’s brigade started a yell, Duncan and Drapers brigade rallied together and attacked confederates who fell back Attacked Fort Gilmer, but Robert E Lee organised troops and held the fort At the end of the battle, the confederate line was pushed back, captured Fort Harrison-renamed Burnham Richmond defence remained intact, Lee attacked the next day but was forced to retreat with heavy casualties The siege of Richmond lasted another six months when Lee surrendered at Appomattox court house When the war ended, more than 186,000 black men had served in the union Black soldiers had fought 149 engagements, 49 major battles 20 black men were awarded Medal of Honour, 16 won at the battle of New Market Heights The battle of New Market Heights was a day of glory- but at a heavy price- hundreds died Butler admitted he deliberately exposed black men beyond the value of the engagement to test them, and establish confidence in their ability Rewarded his soldiers by ordering 200 Army of James Medals (from Tiffany’s- silver coin) This caused controversy and the soldiers were not allowed to wear medals on uniform Virginia route 5- highway historical marker about Battle of New Market Heights, honours soldiers who fought Medal of honour- Americans had lingering resentment of British nobility, hated formal uniform decked with medals Since 1782 no medals had been given out by the US army/navy After Civil war, navy and army requested Lincoln sign Army of medal bill Sergeant William H. Carney of Company C MA received first medal of honour- grabbed units flag and led attack to fort and only returned when only dead/dying union soldiers were left In civil war 2,438 medals of honour were given out 1917 this number was deemed too large, 911 were rescinded Final number of medals-1,200 soldiers, 310 sailors, 17 marines 37 medals of honour were given out on Battle of New Market Heights, 17 to black men 1918 congress approved secondary medals, the Distinguished service cross, silver star Medal of honour only given out to those who were gallant and intrepid at the risk of their lives, above the call of duty, and committed acts which could not have been criticised Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 195.89 Kb. Share with your friends:
|