During this module, you will be expected to read chapter 2 of your text The American Pageant and participate in a discussion with your classmates via the blog about the questions below. You should make ONE post that should be a minimum of a paragraph for each prompt with a well thought out response using information from the chapter to solidify your argument. Mr. Pondy and Mr. Walker will expect that your arguments and discussions are based in facts not just simply opinions and beliefs. Learning how to do this effectively will lead to success and less distress on your part as we progress through this course. It is also very important to keep in mind that good organization on your part will make answering questions much easier. How do you do this? By reading the chapters thoroughly and carefully, do not skip sections, captions, quotes, maps, charts, and graphs. Spend time looking at what these documents are trying to tell you and how they relate to the main chapter. I strongly suggest that you read the chapter and complete your required outline prior to attempting to answer the questions below in order to form logical points in your answers. I would also suggest that you read the discussion prompt and keep it in mind as you read the chapter and create your outlines (if you have not already done so).
Discussion Prompt 1: Compare and contrast the New England and middle colonies in terms of motives for founding, religious and social composition, and political development.
Discussion Prompt 1: Compare and contrast the New England and middle colonies in terms of motives for founding, religious and social composition, and political development.
Discussion Prompt 2: Compare the pattern of relations between colonists and Indians in New England and Pennsylvania. Why did attempts at establishing friendly relations fail?
Prompt 1: New England colonies served mainly as a refuge from religious prosecution. Massachusetts was founded by two groups; the Pilgrims at Plymouth and the Puritans at Massachusetts Bay.There was little or no democracy in these colonies and they were rules by a monarch appointed governor. Both groups wanted to have religious freedom from the Church of England. The middle colonies were more diverse and they had the biggest agriculture. Since the middle colonies contained large agriculture the biggest motive for founding was economic. The middle colonies also had an appointed governor once British rule was imposed.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: The Quakers in Pennsylvania believed in peace and approached the natives with the idea of living together peacefully. New England was completely different; they looked at the natives as savages and were upset about their presence in the new world. Friendly relationships failed for the desire of bigger space which was inhabited by the natives. Also the struggles between communication and raids from both sides led to the end of the friendly relationship. Peaceful relationships were easier to make in isolated areas. Once more Europeans came they looked to take more land from the natives and convert it to a European fashion. Natives also felt threatened by the large amounts of settlers coming.
Hey Robert! What you said about the relations between the Indians and English makes sense but in they ended badly in Pennsylvania also because of non-Quaker immigrants. In the Plymouth colony, relations started off friendly, too.
DeleteWhat's Good Robert? Sadly, I have to disagree with you on your notion concerning the lack of democracy within the colonies. Yes, there wasn't unanimous democracy, but certain counsels and congregations of individuals who were better off made calculated decisions that secured the interests of those in charge. Not everyone within these communions achieved everything they wanted, but it wasn't as authoritative as you are depicting it. ~ Triston Horton (Period 1)
DeleteYou are correct in that there was no deocracy in the New England colonies, yet there was a provisional goverment. Also the middle colonies expanded off of grain as the agriculture source.
DeleteIn prompt 2, I like that you said that the natives felt threatened by the large amounts of settlers coming. Colonial expansion and immigration caused tension between the settlers and the Indians. When the settlers started to outnumber the natives more and more, the natives got overwhelmed and nervous.
Deleteprompt 1: The New England colonies began with Virginia in Jamestwon and was setup because of religious intolerance in England. Other colonies like Massachusetts and Maryland were also created for the same reason as Virginia and were refuges; Maryland was more tolerant than Masschusetts where it was strictly puritans only. All three were commonwealths and had proprietors ruling the land, the voting rights were reserved for certain religions only and places like Maryland were setup as feudal domains. Later religious intolerance becomes more of a problem, espeacially in the Bay Colony, so people like Anne hutchinson and Roger Williams will discover Pennsylvania and other middle colonies like New Jeresy, New York, and Delaware. Religious freedom was evident as well as fertile lands filled with quakers and squatters untill they were made royal by England.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: Relations in New England were harsh, being tricked by the colonists even with peace treaties like the one in Plymouth 1621. Peace was achieved time to time but war broke out and the final push from the indians was King Phillip's war, slowing westward expansion but marking the indians defeat. Many natives were put on plantations and also sparked the New England COnfederation to protect themselves from the natives. Although there were troubles between them Pennsylvania was a refuge for quakers and indians alike such as the Savannah Indians escaping from Carolina.Pennsylvania was homed to religious disseneters but everyone there as friendly to eachother and the number one reason why peace failed was greed. Colonists just wanted too much land and labor to support themselves.
Stephen I like how in the first prompt you discussed the difference in each colonies religious tolerance and how they played an example. For example like you said Maryland and Pennsylvania where both very tolerant with their religious policy compared to Massachusetts.
DeleteI like how you involved voting rights in your response like how, usually, the Catholics and the Jewish were not allowed to vote. In Pennsylvania, they weren't even allowed to because William Penn received the land from the England king.
DeleteHey Stephen! Your points about the affects of the war with the Indian tribes were great! I didn't really consider the influence they had on creating the New England Confederation. Also, do you know what specific group made it hard to maintain peace with the Indians in Pennsylvania?
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe motives for founding New England and the middle colonies were very similar in that they longed for religious freedom of which they didn't get in England. New England was also a means for England to obtain some of the wealth (gold and silver) and power that the Spanish had gained in the New World. New England later developed the want for independence from England. The middle colonies were more known for their fertile soil and great expanses of land which allowed them to export a lot of grain, because of this the middle colonies were known as "bread colonies". The Quakers in the middle colonies were large supporters of human freedom which contributed to why the middle colonies ruled under a democratic government while New England wanted a church-government alliance.
Prompt 2:
The relations between the colonists and Indians in New England were very tense because the colonists needed supplies. To get these supplies, the colonists confiscated native provisions, raided villages, burned houses, and torched cornfields in search for what they wanted. This made it difficult to establish friendly relations because the settlers who took the native land and caused the Indians to fight back for what was theirs. However, the relations between the Indians and colonists in Pennsylvania was a bit different, the Pennsylvanians attempted to make treaties with the Indians instead of forcefully trying to take the land like the other colonies and so the relations were more relaxed. This however didn't last forever since the influence from the other colonies eventually caused problems between the Pennsylvanians and Indians. Furthermore, the Peace Treaty of 1646 banished the Chesapeake Indians from their ancestral lands and separated the Indians from the settlers further stopping any relations between the Indians and colonists.
Everything you said makes sense, but I think it is also really important to mention that relations between Indians and the English actually started off fairly friendly. Also, the Chesapeake Indians were actually a part of the southern colonies.
DeleteI agree with Katarina, the English and Indian's relationship started off fairly friendly, it just went downhill because of the English colonists wanting more land and supplies. Unless we're talking about the colonists in Pennsylvania, because they genuinely wanted a healthy relationship with the Indians, but unfortunately that was not very practical.
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe middle colonies and the New England colonies were very similar in some regards, but also had key differences. Both were built on the idea of religious tolerance and were created to escape persecution by the King in England. Puritans, being heavily affected by the intolerance in their homeland, laid the foundation for the colony of Massachusetts. Pennsylvania was established by the Quaker William Penn and was one of the most tolerant colonies in terms of religion. These colonies were separated by royal proprietors and they were given control of the land by the king. The middle colonies also displayed religious toleration, but they were also economically based. Being in the middle of New England and the southern colonies, the middle colonies inherited attributes from both regions. They relied on cash crops for their economy, but they were also religiously tolerant like the New England colonies. Both regions were ultimately under control of the English throne and were governed by proprietors appointed by the King.
Prompt 2:
In Pennsylvania, the Quakers desired to keep peace between their colony and the Native Americans, but this was not the case throughout. When this region was developing, many Native Americans were residing in the middle colonies and were treated harshly due to the colonists' greed for land. In order to expand, they would need to eliminate the Native population. However, Native Americans sought refuge in Pennsylvania, the most welcoming colony to the Natives. Before they could relocate, however, the Carolinian armies attempted to destroy them and nearly succeeded. The small population that was left migrated north, but there was little the Native Americans could do to protect their homeland. King Philip's war was the Native Americans' last stand, and they did all they could to hold of the advances of the English settlers. It slowed expansion westward, but it also marked the defeat of the coastal Native American tribes. However, the Creek, Cherokee and Iroquois still remained further inland, and they would also put up a fight to defend their land.
I like how you put a lot of detail, in prompt two, about how the relationships between the different colonists and Native Americans changed throughout the expanding of the colonies. It gives a good perspective to how the Native Americans and colonist must have felt with all the change that was going on.
DeleteHey Chris. I like how you said that the Middle Colonies inherited attributes from both New England and the Southern Colonies. Did you know that they Middle Colonies were nicknamed the "bread colonies?" It's interesting that you said the Middle Colonies were religiously tolerant like New England. From what I gathered from the reading, the Middle Colonies were open to more religions than New England because the Middle Colonies were founded by Quakers, squatters, and dissenters. Also, I like how you included all the details about the settlers' expansion in your second prompt.
DeleteHello Chris! I really liked how you added that the middle colonies relied on cash crops, but were religiously tolerant because I felt that was very important. In the second prompt i felt that King Phillips War was definetly a turning point for the Indian and English resistance. I really liked how you added that it was there "last stand" because i felt that exact same way, the Indians were never the same after that war.
DeletePrompt 1: The main reason for the founding of the New England and middle colonies was to find refuge from the religious persecution and intolerance in England. Puritans, escaping from their own king, formed the Plymouth and Massachusetts colonies; the Catholics, running from the intolerance of Protestants, founded the Maryland colony; and others trying to find sanctuary. However, another motive was the opportunity for a new job or finding wealth in the New World where rumors of a new life whispered. Whereas some of the New England colonies searched for gold and silver, the middle colonies had a different search in terms of wealth. The middle colonies had more fertile soil and better land in which to grow crops and their main income came from export. Meanwhile, the New England colonies with less abundant and had to buy things like these. An appointed governor ruled the New England and middle colonies, but both began to wish for something different. The New England colonies wished for a more religiously based government, as the middle colonies wanted a more peoples government.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: Some colonists, such as the Quakers in Pennsylvania, wished for peace between the natives but the relationship between the two peoples was overall destructive and unhelpful. The colonists, as they needed supplies and the need to support themselves, began to try and take what they needed from the natives while still trying to trade with them. The results were catastrophic as they warred and fought with each other. Another reason why relations were bad was because the colonist began to reap the land as more and more plantations sprung up. Furthermore they took some natives for slave labor. Pennsylvania attempted to create a friendlier environment than the other colonies but they failed due to the overall effect from the others. Disease and war pushed the Indians further away and created hostility between the natives and the settlers.
Prompt 1: Both the New England colonies and the middle colonies were formed to be free of religious persecution of the king in England. The New England colonies though had a different means of economic means compared to the middle colonies. The New England colonies were more driven towards finding silver and gold and were closer in relation with the royal crown back in England. On the other hand the middle colonies had a more fertile land and they were more into trading fur and other sources for their economic benefit. The middle colonies were more religiously and ethnically tolerant than the New England colonies as they were founded and established by Quakers and squatter notably William Penn who was forced into not giving Jewish people political office by the crown. Both of the governments were ran by the people with an appointed governor and both kept religion away from the political issues. Also, even though they didn't want it, the royal crown interfered in both of their political ways.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: The difference in trying to establish the relationship with the natives was different in both areas, but the results were always the same. Pennsylvania was formed by the Quakers and since their formation they always stayed peaceful and didn't act with aggregation. They tried to trade and bond with the natives more and tried to show them that they were their friends not their enemies, but this feel as greed for land started to eat away at their show for peace with the natives. While in New England the natives were always looked at with despair and viewed the enemy to begin with starting many wars between the two. For examples King Phillip had attacked over 52 settlements and destroyed 12 of them, but in the end the natives always lost. The wars in New England were for the same reason peace failed in Pennsylvania;the greed for land.
In prompt 2, you are correct in saying it was the feeling of greed that ate away ate relations between Pennsylvania and the Indians, but it was not the Quakers who felt this greed. Page 60, ch 3 states that it was the "Feisty Scots-Irish" who were "particularly unpersuaded by Quaker idealism" who eventually caused the friction, not the Quakers themselves. It was ironically their tolerance for all people that allowed intolerant people to settle in Pennsylvania and destroy hard earned relations.
DeleteNot only did New England explore the precious metals of silver and gold, they were also big on ship making and fishing. This tremendously boosted their economy and it was easy for them because of their close proximity to the coast.
DeleteI agree with your stand on the reasoning behind the acclamation of gold and silver wealth. The funding necessary to maintain an ever-competitive political climate in Europe was immense. It's only natural the English monarchy had closer ties to the colonies that were primarily funding their endeavors. The colonies to the south were more independent, in that a local market was more easily birthed from a society centered on cash crops. ~Triston Horton (Period 1)
DeleteHi Sahil! I like how you explained the different means of income for both colonies. However, you didn't mention that the middle colonies had a great grain export and many ports that proved critical to the colonies' economic standing.
DeleteHello Sahil! I thought that your responses were very well thought out and written. I liked how in prompt 2 you pointed out that both colonies had tried out different tactics to befriend the Indians, but both ended up in the same way.
DeletePrompt 1: New England and the middle colonies were both founded to search for religious freedom. Those who fled to New England were trying to rid themselves of the anti-Puritan persecution Charles I had issued. Pilgrims fled to Plymouth in Massachusetts, and very religious Puritans went to Massachusetts Bay which would become very harsh to those who didn't follow Puritan behaviors. Rhode Island would later be founded for those outcasts who weren't aloud in Massachusetts and would become very liberal. The middle colonies were more liberal as well. There, many people found more religious freedom than in New England. The middle colonies also provided a chance for economic gain which attracted many settlers. There was a lot of land to be harvested because the land was very fertile and with bodies of water along with it. Pennsylvania even offered a democratic government which many New England colonies didn't allow.
ReplyDeleteI like how you mentioned how harsh it was for non-Puritans in the Massachusetts Bay colony. If the Puritans were not harsh on non-Puritans, we might not have seen Rhode Island become a liberal colony but rather an aristocratical one like New York.
DeletePrompt 2: New England made no effort to live peacefully with the Natives, but Pennsylvania was nice enough to try. Initially, there was no fighting because the Natives didn't have the means to defeat New England. There was also signed in 1621 by the Pilgrims and the Natives. However, New England had no real intentions to keep peace, the English kept coming to the America's and pushing the Natives further back. The Pilgrims later went on to slaughter and destroy Indian houses. In Pennsylvania, a real effort was made to keep peace, but when more whites settled, keeping peace became too hard and hostilities grew.
ReplyDelete*There was also a treaty signed in 1621. :P
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe difference between the middle colonies and the New England colonies had a lot to do with how diverse on was compared to the other. In the New England colonies, such as Massachusetts Bay, they were founded as a way to break away from the Church of England. Most of the rulers of these colonies were very strict Puritans and had little to no tolerance for anyone who disagreed or protested against their set of laws. They would simply banish or exile any Quakers or anyone they felt deserved it. The middle colonies really started by Quakers fleeing the strict rule of puritans to find refuge in Rhode Island. Then as a young man William Penn got drawn into the Quakers way of religion and thought, and decided to found Pennsylvania. The middle colonies; New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Pennsylvania, were all the most diverse colonies in the new world. They had a very diverse government, accepted practically everyone, and had very lenient religious influence.
Prompt 2:
In New England, the settlers made no real effort to live among the Indians, without hostility toward their culture. All they really cared about was spreading their morals, and gaining as much land as possible. If the Indians got in the way of this initial plan, there would be rioting and small wars. Yet, in Pennsylvania, the Quakers and people of that colony had a much more open minded view towards the Indians. They had no interest in wiping them out, or converting them to anything, they simply wanted to live among them. But as the colony grew and more and more people settled in, peacefully living with the Indians became very hard to do, and hostility grew.
I like how that you said that the Quakers of Pennsylvania wanted to live among the Indians and be friends with them. They made great attempts to be friends in the beginning because some of them trusted them so much that they gave them jobs and allowed them to babysit their kids. The friendships lasted until new colonists tried to move in and take the land from the natives.
DeleteIn the 1st prompt I like how you pointed out how Quakers were "banished or exiled" by the Puritans in New England. It was such a judgmental thing of the Puritans to do. Then in the 2nd prompt you talked about how the Quakers "open minded" with the Indians which was very important considering their positive relationship.
DeleteI completely agree with your responses. I really liked how you pointed out that all the New England settlers only cared about themselves with spreading their morals and gaining land.
DeleteHey Anna! I agree with Haley, I liked how you pointed out that the settlers only cared about spreading their morals and gaining land.
DeletePrompt 1: The New England and middle colonies were both founded on the basis of escaping religious persecution but varied demographically and in terms of the government in each. For example, the Pilgrims who were extreme Separatists fled England after being threatened by James I to do so due to their religious beliefs. They founded the Plymouth colony in 1620 where the men had a crude form of representative government. Non-Separatist Puritans who feared for their faith and future established the Massachusetts Bay colony in response to Charles I dismissing Parliament and enacting anti-Puritan persecutions. Here, the government was closely linked to the church. Only freemen could be apart of the Congregational Church and take part in all forms of public functions. Although the governor, his assistance, and a representative assembly were elected, the government was not a democracy which was considered wicked. These two colonies would later be combined. Non-Separatist Puritans also founded Connecticut and New Hampshire, which were the dominant demographic in these colonies as well. There, the economies were based on fur trading and fishing. In the New England colonies, not many civil liberties and democratic functions were in place. However, in Pennsylvania in particular along with the other middle colonies, democracy, civil liberties, and economic opportunities were abundant which attracted a huge number of immigrants to the region. In addition, the middle colonies had the most religious tolerance of the three regions which further attracted the persecuted and misfits just like Rhode Island to the north. Another difference between the middle and New England colonies was that Quakers were the ones who essentially founded the middle colonies, not Puritans. Because of their peaceful, accepting nature, many people were attracted to this region and they shaped the social and political developments present there. William Penn who founded Pennsylvania played a huge role in this. Basically, both regions were founded to create religious havens but varied in terms of government and demographics.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: Patterns of relations between Indians and colonists in New England and the middle colonies were very similar-they began well and ended badly due to colonial expansion. For instance, in the Plymouth colony, Wampanoag chieftain Massasoit signed a peace treaty in 1621 with the Pilgrims and his people played a part in their first Thanksgiving that same year. However, as more English settlers came and moved inward, relations were no longer peaceful. The English destroyed a Pequot village in 1637. They later fought in King Phillip's War from 1675-1676 which practically annihilated the northeastern Indians. In Pennsylvania, Quakers and Indians coexisted very peacefully which ended when non-Quaker immigrants flooded in. These patterns in both New England and Pennsylvania were very similar in the sense that they started out in a friendly manner and ended badly due to colonial expansion.
In prompt 2, I like how you described how the peaceful relations ended due to colonial expansion and immigration. As colonies grew in size and as more people immigrated to these colonies, the relations between Indians and colonists became unfriendly.
DeleteI like your first paragraph a lot Katarina! It had a lot of detail which made the prompt easy to understand. You said that the people of Massachusetts Bay were aloud to elect their governor, his assistance and his the representative assembly yet they were not considered a democracy. Although the illusion of democracy is given, you are completely right to say that they were not democratic. The Bay was a very religious colony, and followed Puritan beliefs strictly imposing Puritanism on it's settlers as well.Those who opposed were punished harshly. Which means, although they had the power to elect magistrates, they had to vote based on Puritan views and not their own.
DeleteI like all the information you gave in the first Prompt. It was thorough and contained many details to drive you point. I also liked how you described the goverment's flaws.
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteWhile formed within a short span of time of each other, The Middle colonies and the New England colonies varied greatly. Both were formed in some degree or another as religious safe havens, but the New England colonies were predominantly Puritan, and of English and German decent, while the Middle colonies sported much more diverse demographics. The Middle colonies had much higher numbers of Dutch, French, Polish, French, and about an equal number of Germans. The Middle Colonies derived most of their livelihood from its rich fertile valleys, and was nicknamed “the bread basket” due to its high output of grains. The New England colonies spent much time and resources searching in vain for gold (no pun Intended), and retained a stronger tie with the British companies and investors that helped found it. As far as government, the Middle colonies retained a royally appointed governor, while the New England colonies kept a rudimentary parliamentary system which was in line with the non-separatist population. However, it wasn’t viewed as evil by the separatists as it was back in England, because they were much more tolerant about the two religions.
Prompt 2:
The New England colonies faced little resistance to their expansion due to previous contact between Indians and European fishermen that had caused a widespread epidemic. It was said that empty Indian fields lay ready for their cultivation, while the bones of the victims of the epidemic remained strewn about the field. The Quakers on the other hand did their best to cooperate with their neighboring Indian tribes. Their tolerance for all people and devout adherence to the decency of Jesus Christ is what characterized the group, but it was that same tolerance that let the Scots-Irishmen settle in Pennsylvania who eventually stirred up foul relations with Indians, and undid the many years of cooperation between them and the Quakers. In the end, any attempts at establishing friendly relations failed due to the Europeans’ overwhelming hunger for more land and more power, regardless of who or what stood in their way.
"...because they were much more tolerant about the two religions."
ReplyDelete"they" being the "rudimentary parliament system," not the seperatists.
My apologies.
The middle and New England colonies had similarities and differences in their founding and their political development. Puritans, who wanted a nation of saints, were majority in New England. They considered themselves the golden standard and weren't as tolerant as the middle colonies who were religiously diverse throughout (Quakers, Lutheran, Methodist, etc.). The increased tolerance in the middle colonies also showed in their society because they were open to accepting all kinds of people. Politically, New England and the middle colonies both looked to the people as leaders of their towns. People ruling people to ensure that the needs of all are benefited. This fit into the community outlook of the puritans and the overall acceptance of the Quakers.
ReplyDeleteThe Indians' relationship with New England and Pennsylvania was similar at the root but differentiated in method. New England's relationship with them was hostile, as shown with the Pequots. They thought they were better than the Indians and wanted to enforce their society upon them but the Indians did not want someone coming in and changing life for them. William Penn had a different approach to the situation though. He refused to fight the Indians but instead, make treaties with them and buy their land. Although he was peaceful with them and gave them a good deal for the land, they still didn't want people walking all over them. In all, the failure of friendly relations is due to the vast gap between the two cultures and the unwillingness of each side to give in. Sadly the Indians were overpowered.
Chris I agree with your statement in the second prompt about how the methods between New England and Pennsylvania differed. The Quakers treated them with more respect and always tried the method of peace different than their New England counterparts who went with violence with the Natives.
DeleteHey Chris! I like how you pointed out land purchase from the Indians in Pennsylvania during your comparison in your second prompt. This was a major difference between colonies. Its a shame how they couldn't come to a compromise in New England and so many had to die!
DeleteHey Chris! I also agree with Sahil. Bringing up the specific tribe in your second prompt really relates the statement of being "hostile" to your answer. The colonists should have atleast attempted peace instead of going in with no means of it. Good answer!
DeleteNew England was founded on "religious freedom" for the Puritans. It did not include Catholics, Jews, Atheists, and many other creeds, excluding places like Rhode Island and Pennsylvania. New England composed mainly of devout protestant Christians, and showed rudimentary elements of republican ideals. The middle colonies did as well, but were much more accepting of other creeds, as they were mostly outcasts who, in their own way, had the "rugged individualist" attitude that also drove the pioneers out West.
ReplyDeleteThe New England settlers were much more aggressive when settling the New World. They essentially killed Indians for their land, and treated them very poorly and unfairly. Once Squanto and his people could no longer help the new settlers, the Indians and Pilgrims started to fight. William Penn, however, was much more civil with the Indians. In Philadelphia Indians were involved in daily life, and were even compensated for their land! The good relations didn't last long, sadly, and it too turned to fighting.
The New England and middle colonies were both formed on the idea that they were escaping religious persecution but by different religious groups. The New England colonies were composed of puritans, while the middle colonies were composed of mostly Catholics. The economies of these two sets of colonies were very different. The New England colonies relied on minerals such as silver and gold while the Middle colonies relied on fur, and fertile land to supply income. The political views of the colonies was also different. The New England colonies had a religious political system with a governor that could be related to a monarch while the middle colonies went with a government style close to a democracy.
ReplyDeleteNew England took an aggressive approach to interacting with the Indians. They attempted to force a new lifestyle onto them and not give them any say at all. Indians were killed and their land was taken from them. However in Pennsylvania, William Penn tried treaties and reasoning to peaceful relations with the Indians. The Indians helped them and they helped the Indians. The peace didn't last long though, and they began fighting just as they did in New England.
I don't think it's fair to say in your second prompt that the English forced an entirely new lifestyle onto the native american culture. Though they did force the Indians to give up land and brought them into the trade network, it's not as though the natives were forced to aclimate into English culture, go to their schools, or anything like that! In fact, the English didn't seem to want much to do with them at all, let alone make them life the same life.
DeleteWhile it is true in your first prompt that the New England colonies were predominantly Protestant, (whether separatist, non-separatist, Puritan or otherwise) I believe it is inaccurate to say the Middle colonies were "composed mostly of Catholics." Being as religiously tolerant as they were, they did "Shelter more Catholics than any other colony."[specifically in relation to Maryland][Ch. 2:Pg.34:p.4] This however does not mean that the numbered refugee Catholics outnumbered the innumerable back country squatter Protestants, nor that any other of the Middle Colonies were as Catholic as Maryland.
DeleteHey Ben! I agree with both of your prompts. I also like how you said that the settlers forced a new lifestyle because they actually did by forcing religion upon the Natives.
DeleteI agree with both of your responses. I like how you talked about both of the conflicts between the English and Indians in prompt 2 and how they forced a new lifestyle onto them.
DeleteNew England was founded on the beliefs of eluding the religious persecution they have been receiving from Old England and in other colonies throughout the west coast. Puritans were an example of those who have been violently persecuted for their ideologies in religion and were sicken of being tormented by their fellow citizens. Other groups such as Quakers were persecuted but found a chance at a different life style for them in the middle colonies. They too founded a new settlement based on their idea's and ways of life. Although the middle colonies were in the same area, they all had different beliefs in politics. Some believed in the church having the power while others say a provincial government with liberal ideas was the way to go. The Bay Colony was a colony with a provincial government. Although only the Puritans could be in political positions or be considered "freemen". As this was the case in some colonies they all relied on the raw materials they could collect in the area. Some relied on furs or the untouched fertile land, while others saw fishing as a source of income.
ReplyDeleteSince the first discovery of the Native people in the New world, tensions have been stretched to its limits. The Europeans have brought diseases the Indians have never encountered or been pushed off its original land. Many tribes were wiped out or were severely crippled population wise. This upset many tribes and this lead to wars between the settlers and Natives. As the Europeans saw their way of life normal, they saw the natives as heretics with barbaric lives. The settlers tried to change the natives ways of life with Catholicism or other religion, this rarely worked. Although some interactions were positive in both cultures, for example William Penn wanted peaceful alliances with the local natives. He tried to negotiate trades and this did work for a short period of time..until other settlers did not see eye to eye with William Penn. The settlers attacked the local natives which later would result in many future battles between the settlers and Native Americans.
Hey, I agree with both of your responses and I like how you mentioned in prompt 1 how puritans were violently persecuted for their religion, because that is the main reason they sailed to the new colonies.
DeletePrompt 1: Both New England and The Middle Colonies were founded for similar reasons: religious refuge and economic gain. Gold and silver were highly sought after and after the Protestant Reformation in England, worshippers were in a state of chaos and many chose to come to the New World to avoid persecution in their homeland. The Puritans settled in New England (Massachusetts) but had to obtain a royal charter in order to do so, meaning that their governors were appointed by a monarch back home. This led to political corruption and the unhappiness of the settlers. New England had more of a Church-State government that favored only certain religions which is why a majority of its people were Puritans. The Puritans believed they had a covenant with God to be a “city upon a hill” and be an example for humanity. When people went against this system, like Anne Hutchinson, Roger Williams, and William Penn, conflicts arose, offenders left or were banished, and they went on to find and settle the Middle Colonies. In addition to creating safe havens for religious freedom, the Middle Colonies (New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Pennsylvania) were desired for their fertile lands used for plantations, later giving the area its nickname: “the Bread Colonies.” These colonies were founded by dissenters, Quakers, and squatters which is a reason why its social/religious composition was so diverse. People enjoyed religious tolerance for the most part. The Middle colonies had a less strict and more democratic government than New England where people like William Penn wanted to experiment with liberal ideas.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: New England and Pennsylvania had different approaches with the natives but had roughly the same outcome. When the settlers first arrived in the New World, they brought with them all sorts of European diseases to which the Indians were not immune, killing off a great deal of the natives. From the beginning, the people of New England viewed the Indians as savages that were in their way. Settlers wanted to get more land for things like plantations; this land was generally taken from the natives and so were the people to work the conquered land. Tribes like the Wampanoag were tricked in to signing “peace treaties” with the settlers that ended up not serving much purpose. Lies, greed, and inconsideration led to conflicts like King Phillip’s War. The Quakers of Pennsylvania were advocates of passive resistance and peace which is why they started off with attempts to befriend the Indians. William Penn bought land from Chief Tammany for example, but as the hunger for more land grew, the good relations withered.
It's really interesting that you brought up how disease played a major role in the initial relations between the Indians and English. It almost seems unfair how the first unfavorable impression the English give the native americans is one that they can't control: even if England wanted to make a peaceful relationship, the natives wouldn't view them very kindly, because the English wiped out their people!
DeleteHi Chrissy. I also agree with Emily on your statement about the role of disease in the relationship between the colonists and the Natives. Many people do not think of that as a factor to their hostility toward each other, even though it did kill many of the Natives, which would lead to hostility by the Natives towards the colonists.
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteNew England and the middle colonies were different in ways of founding, religious and social compensation, and political development. In New England, colonies such as Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay, Connecticut, and New Haven found themselves on the ideas of religious freedom from the Church of England.For example the extremist Sparatist Pilgrims or purest Puritans in Massachusetts Bay colony, separated themselves from the Church of England and created a government in which all male adults who are Puritan have voting right. The Bay Colony would also create a state funded church with clergy who had high influence on government officals. Soon in 1638, only 8 years after its creation, people such as Anne Hutchinson and Robert Williams radical ideas that the Bay Colony did not accept. Roger Williams would be exiled and create Rhode Island as a religious free colony. Rhode island would be an example to the middle colonies different religious and social compensation not seen in New England. New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Pennsylvania, the middle colonies, unlike New England were more ethnically mixed and more democratic. The Quakers in particular made this contribution to human freedom in the middle colonies.
Prompt 2:
One of the first Indian-Colonial treaties in New England was made in the colony of Plymouth in 1621 with the Wampanoag Indians. At the time the colony of Plymouth only now started to thrive in the New World. It wasn't long however more immigrants from Europe came to New England. The unceasing desire for land by the English drove the Indians from their lands. The Indian tribes in New England were not organized nor had the numbers of soldiers required to take their lands back from the Europeans or discuss with them a peaceful treaty. A Quaker named William Penn however, showed good intentions and relations with the Indians including Chief Tammany by buying Pennsylvania, even though the King of England granted the land to him already. Even after this treaty, the relations of the Indians and the colonial people would go downhill because of the desire for land.
I thought it was really good that you had dates to go with your information because it made it easier to understand. Do you think that if William Penn had founded Pennsylvania earlier, then there could have still been peaceful relations with the Indians and influence the other colonies in the same way?
DeleteI agree with Kevin on the dates part. How do you think the relations with the Indians differ if the settlers were more kind to them and there land?
DeleteWould the world ne
different today?
Prompt 1: In the cases of both the New England and middle colonies, any settlers coming from England must have been desperate enough to flee England in search of a better life. Both reasons were for religious tolerance and freedom, though both societies evolved differently over time. In Massachusetts, the Puritains created a majorly religious-based society, and the society evolved over time to hold very conservative views, even hosting its own witchcraft scare. The middle colonies were quite a bit more diverse due to the fact that there was a greater variety of religions and cultures present. Over time, this lead to a society that was much more tolerant and liberal in its view of the rest of the world. Instead of relying solely on one cash crop (like Virginia), the New England and Middle colonies focused economically on finding gold and silver, and furs, respectively. Even though these societies evolved differently due to interactions with others and the environment, they were tied together by a mutual obligation to the English crown, which would later tie them together in a struggle for their independence.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: Put very generally, relations between colonists and native americans failed because both groups were too individually oriented to reach any sort of agreement. Though each of England's colonies had different origins, all of them were driven by a desire for self-preservation. The native americans showed interest in New England trade, but political integration was too difficult to consider, and friendly relations were put off in England's interest in developing its own colonies and focusing on keeping them under control. Pennsylvania and the New England colonies had a greater potential for creating peaceful relations with the natives because they did not seek land as actively and aggressively as Virginia, which was totally dependent on its tobacco industry. But, as more settlers came to the new world, the initial population that came to America for peace and freedom was diluted into a more varied culture that had no intention of cooperating with the native americans.
i agree with your second prompt too and also the wars caused even more hostile relations like King Phillip's War, but atleast it slowed some European expansion but not all of it.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with your general reasoning. If the Indians and English or Europeans in general, put aside their differences and respected those differences of one or another, treaties would be made and land sold instead of stolen. However, the only agreements made for the most part were in 1621 at Plymouth and when William Penn bought Pennsylvania from the local tribes where peace between settlers and the Indians existed for a few years after.
DeleteI have to disagree with you and austin. Treaties were made between the New England colonists and the Pennsyvanian colonists with the Indians. The Wampanoag Indians made a treaty with the Pilgrims who occupied Massachusetts (a New England colony)and that treaty allowed them to celebrate their first Thanksgiving together. Also, the Quakers who populated Pennsylvania (a middle colony)wanted to live in harmony with the Indians and so signed a treaty with them. The Quakers would walk among the Indians unharmed and even employ the Indians to watch their children. Although the peace didn't last, they once did have treaties. The Quakers relationship wasn't affected because of their differences either. Other immigrants who lived in the Pennsylvania colony underminded their treaty because they didn't feel the same way as the Quakers. Lastly, in the text book it says that the Quakers bought land from the Indians, not stole land. If you understood what you read in the text book, you would have known that the Quakers who lived in Pennsylvania never, themselves had any friction between them and the Indians. To conclude, not all the colonists didn't attempt to make peace.
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteBoth the Middle and New England colonies were founded on religious freedom, but were also formed with wealth in mind. Quakers seeking refuge founded Pennsylvania, and the same foundation was set in Massachusetts for with Puritans. Rhode Island was for the outcasts and unproductive members of the New England colonies. Connecticut was stumbled upon by a group of Puritans who loved the fertile soil, which helped the economy grow, and food for the settlers. The middle colonies were more successful in growing crops than the New England colonies because the New England colonies were rocky and plants didn’t grow well in the harsh climate. The Middle and New England colonies were both made primarily of Puritan Europeans. Puritans lived an extremely strict life centered around the church, so the social lives in these colonies were little compared to other colonies. New England and the Middle colonies were the center of the political world of in American. Many delegates for the colonies met in Pennsylvania and New York to discuss American rights, and through these discussions the seed of American Independence was planted.
Prompt 2:
Attempts at forming friendly relations with the Indians in New England and Pennsylvania failed for a couple reasons. In Pennsylvania, the Quakers and Indians were in good relations because of the Quaker’s pacification and tolerance. This peace brought non-Quakers into the colony, and destroyed the Quaker and Indian relationship. In New England Indian and colonist relations were always rough, but everything erupted with King Phillip’s War. A few tribes banded together against the settlers and destroyed many towns, and the Indian and colonist problems were never resolved.
The middle colonies were preferably to crop exports than the New England Colonies but were also home to religious dissenters too, i fee lthat also Pennsylvania and some of the lesser colonies like Delaware and New Jeresey were jsut as important as the ones you stated.
DeleteI feel that your last statement saying," th Indians and colonist problems were never reslved" sould have some reasoning or facture behind it. I mean if you look further into the future, not all but some of the Indians and settelers fond a way to co-exist in the New World.
DeleteI agree with your statement about King Philip's War and how that was the breaking point of peace between the Indians and New England. It really affected their relationship and you're right, they never really cleaned it up. For the most part, they stayed bitter towards each other.
DeleteI like how you you said that peace brought non-Quakers into the colony, and how therefore that destroyed good relations between the Nativer Americans and colonist.
DeleteI liked how you compared some of the exact New England colonies with some of the exact middle colonies and it shows that you realy gave prompt one thought and spent time finding great information from the book. However, in prompt two it would have been good to include how the New England colonists tried to keep friendly relations. An example could be the treaty signed between the Wampanoag Indians and the Pilgrims that aollwed them to celebrate their first Thanksgiving together. This shows that their relationship with the Indians didn't always have friction as you stated in your prompt two.
DeletePrompt 1: The New England region, as well as the middle colonies, could be considered similar in their motivation for migration to the "New World". Both were born from separatist movements seeking refuge from the authoritative policy of the Church Of England. In addition, royal interest was maintained by the ability of both regions to produce goods and wealth for royalty abroad. Although sharing this similarity, their differences define the success and history of each individual colony. A major difference is the method wealth was produced within the separate regions. Colonies in the New England realm of North America centered on the acclamation of silver and gold the provided an influx of wealth into local and Europeans markets alike. The middle colonies took advantage of the fertile soil, to produce cash crops like sugar cane and tobacco. The majority of the English population was Puritan, concentrated within Massachusetts and Plymouth. Other religions including Quakers, Squatters, ect. retreated south to the middle colonies, as a result of the overly conservative values of Puritans. Because of the persecution to the North, the middle colonies nurtured a more tolerant society that allowed a progressive and culturally diverse atmosphere, Pennsylvania sticking out among them. This allowed the middle colonies to grow more vigorously and become more prominent than their northern counterparts. ~Triston Horton (Period 1)
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: The presence of a primarily Puritan population in the New England region allowed for consistent tension between natives and colonists. Under the impression they were "god's children", Puritans held themselves higher than any other human being. This self-centered attitude naturally birthed conflict between the natives and separatist puritans; assuming they had a god given right to rape the lands of the savages, incidents such as King Philip's war came with ease. The tension present in Pennsylvania had differing origins, in that the Quakers had good intentions from the start. The toleration that allowed for positive relations between the natives and Quakers, also permitted Puritans and others to migrate to Pennsylvania as well. As the presence of non-Quaker Europeans increased, land hungry tabaccoists sought more land, and like in the New England regions, conflictions naturally followed. Both regions were similar as well; natives had similar viewpoints throughout. Native populations rightfully saw the intruding colonists as evil and a threat, and Europeans viewed natives as obstacles to progression. Ambiguously, interested were always self-oriented. Triston Horton (Period 1)
I completely agree with your first prompt. You made a great point by saying that the persecution in the North was what made the Middle Colonies diverse and different. Their tolerance and openness to new ideas is what made them more successful. In your second prompt I really like that you mentioned the Puritans' self-centered attitude and how it affected their relationship with natives and people of other religions.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePrompt#1-Both New England and the middle colonies have many similarities and differences. For starters, both where formed with thewanting of free religious by most settelers, in which they could not find in England. New England was a place that welcomed many types of people but mostly Puritans and Separatists. New England wasnted fulling exepting to all religions, for example one thing they would end up doing is not giving Jewish people an office in politics. While the middle colonies where more exepting and tolerant of the other religions. The middle colonies where full of Quakers and Squatters, and many different types of people. New England found most of their fortune with the gold/silver around them as well as with fishing, which was a great prophet to them. On the other side with the middle colonies, they where more interested in the trading buisness as well as fishing. But they gained most of there prophets from trading and crop working.
ReplyDeletePrompt#2-When new settelers arrived in the New World, they had found that it had already had inhabitants on the newly discovered continent. These new settelers would have bad and good encounters with these people they called the Indians for over a century. They where also delt with, for say, in many different ways as the new colonies would start to form with the new arrivales of white settelers. With New England, they didnt care for much of the Indians. There was no real effort toward finding a friend ship with them. When a conflict appeared, they would deal with them in a more modern way of war they had diveloped back in Euroupe. While in Pennsylvania, the settelers thrived for the friendship with the Indians. They wanted to find that peacefull state with the Indians. They celabrated the first Thanksgiving with the Indians in 1621. They also had the Massasoit, chieftan of the Wamponoag, sign a treaty in 1621. but as the years past and the settelers numbers grew, the treaty was hard to keep in line. But most of the friendly making would end in disaster due to the thribes that would feel threatened by the settelers. They say what could happen to them and some of the thingsthe settelers did would dispise the Indains and upset them. Although there had been some good attempts with the indians, almost all of them would end with deathly results of both the Indians and the settelers.
Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England and middle colonies had their differences concerning their foundations but were also similar. The one main thing that these separate colonies had in common was their search for religious freedom. New England was the home base for Puritans whether they were Scottish Presbyterians or French Huguenots who helped settle those areas. Another group, the non-separatist Puritans, settled the Massachusetts Bay Colony. All of these people had one thing in common and that was breaking away from the Church of England, headed by King Henry VIII. This breaking away from the Church of England was known as the Protestant Reformation lead by Martin Luther. The middle colonies were settled by people known as Quakers. They were looked down upon by the Puritans and therefore found home in places like Rhode Island. Unlike New England, the middle colonies were more tolerant of other beliefs and religions. Both governments were headed mostly by governors but the English monarchy still meddled with their politics.
Prompt 2:
The relationships made by New England and Pennsylvania with the Indians were different according to the people in those colonies, but always ended up the same, in unfriendliness. Those in New England did not have a high respect for the Indians and saw them as nothing but savages. Because of this, King Philips war took place. King Philip, or Metacom helped a bunch of Indians tribes come together to fight against the colonists. He led attacks on 52 Puritan towns and killed hundreds of colonists. Matters were different in Pennsylvania named after William Penn, leader of the Quakers. The Quakers were a people who wanted pacification and peace with the Indians. This peace did not last and as stated previously, everything ended in unfriendliness.
Hey Maddie! I like how you specified which religious group settled where. And in the next paragraph you went on further to explain how these groups' relations with the Indians were effected by their settlement.Good job!
DeleteHello Maddie! I really liked your first sentence in the second prompt because i feel that exact same way, it always ended up the same between the Indians and the Englsih. King Phillips War did have a lasting affect on both the Indians and the English and I liked how you added about William Penn and the Quakers because I feel that is important.
DeleteHey Maddie! I liked how in prompt 1 you pointed out that the colonies had their similarities along with their differences. Also In prompt 2 I liked how you mentioned that the New England colony had no respect for the Indians unlike the Middle Colony.
DeleteThe main common point between the two groups was the goal of religious freedom.The non separatists of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the goal of these people was to separate from the church of England. The leaders of this religion were the Quakers, the Quakers were tolerant of all religions thus looked down upon by the Puritans. The Puritans of New England believed the Church of England was not "pure" and that all true Christians should have broke away from England. Both of the colonies were founded for these reasons as well as to profit off of the goods and money to be made there.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: The attempted relationships between the colonists and puritans failed for many reasons. The incoming of many of the colonists disrupted the lives of the Native peoples including demographic and cultural transformations for the Native Americans. However disease was by far the biggest problem that the people struggled with. The people of New England did not hold the indigenous people in high esteem to begin with they saw the Indians as animals. They even tried to fight the Indians under King Phillip. The people of Pennsylvania or the Quakers tried to become friends with the Native Americans however disputes arose and in the end the both groups of people ended up unhappy
Hi Nick! I agree with both of your responses. I liked how you pointed out that the Quakers were looked down upon by the Puritans in Prompt 1.
DeletePrompt 1: The main reason for exploring the new world between the middle colonies and new England were that they were both on search for a place that accepted their religious freedom and gave them the right to be what they believed in. The New England colonies had also had a strong feel for a search for gold and silver to increase economic wealth. The middle colonies had been more tolerant towards people of other religions such as the Jewish people unlike New England who had not given many religions the right to political suggestions.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: The relationships between colonists and puritans had usually failed because the lifestyles of the Indians contrasted majorly with the colonists of Pennsylvania and new England. the Indians had been to self oriented to come to any form of political agreements with the colonists although they did admire the trade system of the English. Native Americans had always struggled to retain their relationship over economic struggle and success and rapidly changing political alliances.
Prompt 1:The formation of the New England colonies was due to the fact of the Puritans growing incre3asingly unhappy of the slow process of the Protestant Reformation in England. A dedicated group of Puritans, known as Separatists, broke away from the Church of England. One of the more famous groups of Separatists was the ones fleeing Holland on the Mayflower in 1608. All freeman and adult males were allowed to belong to the Puritan congregations. This allowed approximately two-fifths to join the franchise, the franchise excluded men not in the church and woman. The government that was held was a provisional government, unlike the middle colonies that were democratic. The Quakers had a high religious tolerance well people were allowed to say what they believed in as everyone was viewed as a child in the sight of God. Not only did they have fertile land to create grain, but they has had rivers which played a vital role in the fur trade industry.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2:The Quakers in Pennsylvania created good relationship with the Native Americans with its tolerance it was a safe haven for southern Indians who migrated north. Relations were good until the Scots-Irish came to the New World and were uninfluenced by the Quaker idealism of good relations with the Indians. In the New England colonies tensions between the puritans and Native Americans grew rapidly as the English settlements spread west. After the Pequot War, which was a conflict over the Connecticut River Valley, it had annihilated almost all the tribe. Critics in England made it clear that they were upset with the way they were treating the Indians and in order to redeem themselves they attempted to convert the remaining to Christianity. Later a pan-Indian alliance against the English Settlers took place; the Indians had attacked fifty-two puritan towns annihilating 12. The creator, Metacom, was beheaded and taken back to Plymouth where it was displayed for many years.Overall the relationship between colonist and Nativer Americans failed due to the fact of expansion westward.
Hey Katelyn! I liked that you mentioned how the Quaker and Indian relations were good in the beginning, and how you realized it was because of their tolerance.I also liked how you talked about the reason for Puritans moving and how that formed New England. Good job!
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteBoth the New England colonies and the middle colonies separated from the from the Church of England in search of a place with more religious freedom. That being said, the Puritans settled down in Massachusetts were they created a society mainly based off religion. Puritans believed that their religion was correct and exiled all who said other wise. A different group called the Quakers settled down in places like Pennsylvania, where they believed all men were children of God and welcomed all religions. The Puritans were much more strict and judgmental than the Quakers. Economic wise, the New England colonies focused more on finding precious metals while the middle colonies planted crops and traded pelts.
Prompt 2:
The relationship between the colonist and the natives nearly always ended in turmoil. Many times, it begins with friendly confrontations but are soon escalated because of the colonist's greed for land, riches, and food. The New England colonies looked down upon the Native Americans, believing they were savages and lesser being. They kept pushing the natives away from their lands and homes and when ever the Indians fought back, they were crushed by diseases and superior technology. The Quakers on the other hand befriended the Indians but many of the problems the New England colonies had arose in the middle colonies as well. Basically, the colonist's greed ruined their relationship with the Indians.
I thought that your explanations were very clear and easy to understand. Do you think that New England was more successful selling their precious metals or the middle colonies with their crops and pelts?
DeleteHi Justin! You did a great job explaining why relations between Indians and Puritans always turned sour in your second paragraph. I agree with what you pointed out about greed being the main cause. Do you think relations would've thrived if all the colonies treated the Natives as William Penn and the other Quakers in Pennsylvania did?
DeletePromt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England colonies were Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. These colonies all had different motives for founding but mainly for religion. Massachusetts was founded in 1629 by non-Separatist Puritans because they feared for their faith and wanted to separate from the impurities of the Church of England, which were allowing non-visible saints into the church. Connecticut was founded in 1635 by Dutch and English settlers who were attracted to its fertile land. After being founded, Puritans created New Haven to create a church-government alliance with Masachusetts, which became a part of Connecticut. Then, Rhode Island was founded in 1636 for complete freedom of religion. If you compare these motives to the middle colonies motives, which were New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, they weren't similar. The middle colonies were founded because of battles between different countries. New York was founded in 1664, as well as, New Jersey, Delaware was founded around 1655, and Pennsyvania was founded officially in 1681. New York was founded after a battle between the English and the Dutch and Delaware was founded after a battle between the Swedish and the Dutch. However, Pennsylvania was founded for religious purposes, just like some of the New England colonies. It was founded as a refuge for abused Quakers.New Jersey was founded by Quakers as well. The New England colonies religious population was Puritans, Quakers, and for Rhode Island, Jews, Catholics, Quakers, and any other religion. In Massachsetts, Puritans dominated and even controlled the government. Only freemen, which were visible saints, were allowed to vote who is govenor and representatives in the General Court. Connecticut was made up of Puritans, Dutch, and English settlers. It was governed by a democratic regime and created the Fundemantal Orders. Rhode Island consisted of many different religions because it was created for complete religious freedom. It was individualistic and independent. The middle colonies were mainly dominated by the Quaker faith. Each colony had religious toleration, and were ethnically mixed. They all, also, were under a democatic control like Connecticut and exported grain to have a stable economy. By comparing and contrasting the New England and middle colonies, you would find that religion were many of the motives for founding, the religious and social composition were mainly Puritans and Quakers who were mainly English settlers, and that the governments and politics were either democratic or run by the religious leaders as a self-government.
Prompt 2:
ReplyDeleteThe pattern of relations between the colonists and Indians in New England and Pennsylvania were surprising very similar. In the New England colonies, the Plymouth Pilgrims and the Wampanoag chieftain, Massasoit, signed a treaty between the Indians and colonists in 1621. The treaty helped the relationship between the two and even allowed them to celebrate their first Thanksgiving together. However, as more English settlers came to New England, they started to take more land that belonged to the Indians. There friendly relations failed in 1637 and so began the Pequot War and King Philip's War. The relaionship between the Indians and Pennsylvania settlers started and ended the same way. Pennsylvania was populated by Quakers and they made a great effort to live in peace and harmony with the Indians and so signed a peace treaty. The treaty created a friendly relationship between the two and it was going so well that the Pennsylvania colonists would even use the Indians as babysitters and went among them unharmed. But eventually, like the New England colonists, the Pennsylvania colonists needed more land for their expanding colony and because of the Quakers tolerance, immigrants who weren't in the Quaker faith would undermind the policy and the Indians. Their settlement began to push westward and occupy Indian land which caused the friction in their relationship. Both of their attempts at establishing friendly relations failed because of the expanding colonies.
Hi Victoria! I like your second prompt, it was really well thought out. However, I have to disagree, I don't think the colonists of New England made a real effort to keep peace with the Natives. It's true that they signed a treaty for peace, but that didn't last long because the English weren't really making a huge effort. After the huge influx of English that went into New England came about, hostilities grew between the Natives and the English. If the English had real intentions to keep peace, they could have tried to make different arrangements with the Natives instead of setting fire to Indian homes and slaughtering the Pequot tribe.
DeleteHi. I liked your prompts, both were well thought out and great in detail. Maybe though, war could have been avoided in these areas. If the colonists had compensated the Indians a conflict might have been avoided. It was in fact the fault of expansion but things may have gone differently. We will never know what may have come to pass. Overall i agree with your opinion.
DeletePromt 1: Ther formation of the New England and the middle colonies was caused by the search for religious freedom. A group of extreme Puritans that wanted to break away from the Church of England were known as "Separatists." They saw the Church of England as wrongful for letting in sinners or people who werent "visible saints." This group of people essenntially started the state of Massachusets. The Massachusets area soon flourished, extending laws to all freeman which was a huge sense of freedom and independence. Than a new group of people called the Quakers started to disagree with the authority of the Puritan clergy. Quakers were a strong willed devoted democratic group of people who believed strongly in passive resistance. Pennsylvania was created as an aid for these Quakers because many of them were banished or abused. A man named Roger Williams was banished from the Massachusets bay area because of his outspoken toungue against the government. He essentially started the first Baptist church in Rhode Island and allowed Rhode Island to be a free state for all religions. This is including Jews and Catholics who were banished in a lot of other colonies. Puritans also spread their colonies to conneticut and later what was known as New Haven around 1638. The Puritans wanted an even closer group of church like government than in Massachusets. Massachusets bay also absorbed the nothern lands up by Maine, mainly for its fur and than took New Hampshire who also sprang from the fishing and trading companies of the north. The governments and politics of these colonies were either like the Quakers with a little more freedom, or the Puritans mainly off of religion.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: The colonists and the Indians got a long for some time at the beginning of colonization in the New World. However, as more English settlers arrived and pushed inland, more intense confrontations broke peace between these groups of people. In 1637 a war broke out between the English and the Pequot tribe. The English ended up winning the war almost killing the whole tribe, and this war would spark an unrest between the Puritans and the Indians. The Indians tried banning together to form an allaince which ultimately started King Phillips war in 1675. This war had a horrible effect on both the English and the Indian tribes. When the war was over 52 Puritan towns were destroyed and Indians reduced significantly in numbers . The main reason for failure between the Indians and the English was because of the expansion of new colonies in the new world.
Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England colonies and middle colonies had many similarities and differences when it came to the motives for founding these colonies, religious and social composition, and the political development. Both were motivated to found in order to get away from religious trouble. The New England colonies were founded by Puritans looking to reform and purify the Church of England. As puritans they believed that they had a covenant with God to create a society that would be a model for mankind. They had a religious system of Bible Commonwealth and believed that only “visible saints” could be admitted to church membership. The middle colonies, however, were made up of mostly Quakers, who believed in equality and peace. Both the New England and middle colonies had similar government systems, making it necessary to vote on decisions made in the colony and having limits set on who could and who could not vote.
Prompt 2:
Bitter relationships between the Indians and the colonists had been around since the very beginning of colonization. Both colonies in New England and Pennsylvania, started out trying to keep peace between the colonists and the Indians but this did not last for long. In New England, the peace was lost when settlers pushed too far into the Connecticut River Valley and meanwhile trying to convert Indians to Christianity. These things soon led to hatred and battles between the settlers and the Indians. In Pennsylvania, as more settlers arrived, the Quakers’ policy of peace was ruined and all peace was lost. Overall, peace was not able to be kept in these colonies because the people were not able to agree, or keep to the agreements that had been made.
Hey Lindsay. I like how you included how the settlers tried to convert the Indians to Christianity in the second prompt.
DeleteYeah, it's really important to take note of religious differences and how they affect the interactions of cultures. In this case, everything was already being changed for the Native Americans, a push towards Christianity may have even been the final straw as it could be seen as everything they believed in being taken away.
DeleteHey Lindsay. I like how you described the differneces in religion between the Puritans and the Quakers. It's interesting that even though the New England colonies and the middle colonies had different beliefs, they both still ended up failing to create permanent good relations with the Indians.
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England and Middle colonies do not have very similar backgrounds. All three of the New England colonies, being Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, were founded because of differences in religion and no tolerance for it to be dealt with. The Middle colonies were Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and Delaware. All of the Middle Colonies, with the exception of Pennsylvania, were founded because of the battles between different countries. Pennsylvania is somewhat similar with the New England colonies because it was founded as for religious reasons. Massachusetts was founded by a group of non-Separatists Puritans because they wanted to break from the Church of England. Connecticut was founded for the attraction of its fertile land and eventually New Haven was created to form a church-government alliance with Massachusetts. Rhode Island was founded for complete freedom of religion, especially Catholics and Jews. As for the Middle Colonies, Pennsylvania was founded for religious freedom of the Quakers. New Jersey was also founded by Quakers. New York was founded from a battle between the English and the Dutch. A battle between the Swedish and the Dutch founded Delaware. The New England and Middle colonies both have similar forms of governing systems. Each colony has a different set of rules as to who has a say in the government status, and if there is a say in the people, there are separate rules as to who can and cannot vote.
Prompt 2:
The relationship between New England and the Indians and Pennsylvania and the Indians were quite similar. In Pennsylvania, William Penn bought land from the Indians. He treated the Indians very gently, so gentle in fact that the Quakers could walk through their land without fear of being harmed. As more and more non-Quakers came to Pennsylvania, the relationship got worse and worse. In New England, the Wampanoag Indians tried to befriend the whites. The chieftain Massasoit signed a peace treaty with the Plymouth pilgrims in 1621. As more English settlers came, they wanted to expand into Indian territory and the Indians got upset and broke the peace treaty. They fought in the Pequot War in 1636 where the English annihilated the Indians. Both relationships started out smooth and easy only for newcomers to disrupt the peace.
Hey Anna! I liked how in your second prompt you described the relationship between the non Quakers entering Pennsylvania and the increasing hostility to the Indians. The Quaker lifestyle allowed peace between the Indians and the Natives, but not all people agreed with them, causing increasing difficulties.
DeleteHey Anna. I liked how you said that both relationships started out smooth and easy only for newcomers to disrupt the peace. I noticed this as well and felt it especially applied in the Midlle colonies.
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England colonies and the middle colonies were founded for religious tolerance and freedom. Massachusetts was formed by the Separatist Pilgrims who wanted to seperate from the Church of England. The colony was very religion-based and the colonists agreed to make it a holy society to be a model for humankind. Pennsylvania was founded by Quaker William Penn. Quakers were very religious and their faith was despised by many. William Penn founded Pennsylvania for his fellow Quakers and experimented with liberal ideas in government. The middle colonies had fertile soil and a broad expanse of land, unlike the New England colonies, which allowed them to export large amounts of grain. However, the New England colonies had waterfalls in their rivers, unlike the middle colonies, which allowed for more manufacturing with water-wheel power.
Prompt 2:
Colonists and Indians in Pennsylvania got along well for a long time. William Penn often bought land from the Indians and treated them well. Pennsylvania had a reputation for having very well Indian-white relations. Non-Quaker Europeans starting immigrating to the colony, which broke the Quaker Indian policy. This ruined the good relations between the colonists in Pennsylvania and the Indians. Colonists and Indians in the New England colonies were also friendly at first. Over time, more English settlers came and pushed inland, causing confrontations between Indians and colonists. These confrontations led to the Pequot War between the English settlers and the Pequot tribe, which resulted in four decades of uneasy peace between the settlers and the Indians.
I thought both your prompts were very well written and contained many good details. An interesting fact about the New England colonies was that because the climate was very cold it helped prevent the spread of life threatening diseases. The colder climate is also another reason why agriculture was preferred in the warmer southern colonies.
DeleteHey Ally. I really enjoyed your first prompt. I like how you included that the New England colonists wanted their location to be seen as a holy society model. I feel as if many people forget that fact and it was cool how you remembered it and executed it well.
DeleteDiscussion Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteNew England colonies and middle colonies have many similarities in terms of motives. They all separated from the Church of England due to religious tolerance. The Separatist Puritans settled down in Massachusetts while the Quakers, who held opposite views, settled in Pennsylvania. The Puritans were very strict involving life, marriage, etc. They felt that their religion was correct and any others were wrong. Quakers, on the other hand, felt that everyone is a child of God and accepted all "misfits" (those who were abused or could not handle being in a place of little or no religious tolerance). Politically, democracy expanded but there were setbacks, but some of them were through the Dutch. As for land, the middle colonies had fertile soil, a broad expanse of land, unlike the rocky New England colonies, which gave them opportunities with farming and exporting grains. The New England colonies had waterfalls and rivers giving them a chance to manufacture with water-wheel power.
Discussion Prompt 2:
Attempts at friendly reactions fail in Pennsylvania because non-Quakers came to Pennsylvania, undermined their authority, questioned their ways, and in the end changed it. The difference between the relations between colonists and Indians in New England and Pennsylvania was that because the Quakers in Pennsylvania were so tolerant of other religion and people, the Indians were no different. The Indians in Pennsylvania kept peace and lived normally with the Quakers and "misfits." They hired the Indians, even as babysitters. But, New England colonies came to where Indians lived, took land, made bad relations, then either tried to fix it or kept abusing them. The Indians would then be on edge and then rebel against the England settlers rule after being treated badly and abused.
Hi Amanda! I like how you talk about non-Quaker settlers coming into Pennsylvania and changing the ways of a colony that was supposed to be a haven for Quakers, anyway. However, I feel that it is important to note that the settlers in New England did initially try for peace with the Native Americans. Still, I think that you're definitely right in saying that the disruption of peacefulness between the English and Native Americans was a result of the English pushing farther west and taking land.
DeleteHi Amanda! I already commented but its not showing up for me so if its on here twice thats why! But I thought that you did a very good job at comparing and contrasting. I liked how you explained something about one colony and then explained why the other colony was just the opposite. I also liked how you included that the Quakers accepted all the misfits, I hadn't caught that when I was reading the chapter myself.
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeletePlymouth and the Massachusetts Bay Colony, parts of New England, were formed by Puritans searching for religious freedom, though the founders of Plymouth, which was later absorbed into the Massachusetts Bay Colony, were Separatists and the founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were not. Similarly, Pennsylvania, a middle colony, was also founded for religious freedom by William Penn, but the ones searching for freedom in this case were Quakers, not Puritans. Roger Williams, who found himself unwelcome in Massachusetts because of his radical ideas, founded Rhode Island, a New England Colony. Both Pennsylvania and Rhode Island were religiously tolerant, even towards Catholics and Jews (though in Pennsylvania they could not hold office or vote). Other New England colonies did not feature such tolerance as Rhode Island, leading to a higher degree of diversity in it and Pennsylvania, and the appeal of Pennsylvania led to the colony's very fast development. On the other hand, strongly aristocratic New York (a middle colony which was actually founded by the Dutch as New Amsterdam) featured a diverse cosmopolitan population despite very little religious tolerance by the initial Dutch leaders. In fact, all of the middle colonies (Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and Delaware) were generally more diverse, more tolerant, and more democratic than the other colonies.
Prompt 2: Though colonists and Native Americans in New England got off to a good start, signing a treaty between the English and Wampanoags, they eventually fell into conflict with the westward push of the settlers, culminating into multiple wars. Quakers in Pennsylvania held very friendly relationships with the Native Americans, also formed a peace treaty, and went among them unarmed. However, like in New England, the peace did not last. The diversity and tolerance of Pennsylvania was actually the cause of this--non-Quaker settlers were welcome in the colony, but many of the non-Quakers did not share the same desire for peace, undermining the Quaker policy and eventually leading to conflict. Ultimately, both attempts at peacefulness failed.
To expand on what I mean by saying that the middle colonies were more democratic, in New England, only "freemen" could vote; i.e., only adult males belonging to the Congregational Church. The middle colonies extended the vote more freely, though Pennsylvania was pressured by England into not giving Jews and Catholics the vote. Still, even in New England, this gave many more people political power than what would have been found in England.
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England and Middle Colonies had similar motives for founding their colonies. The want to break free of the Church of England and create a haven for specific religions fueled the expansion of both the New England and the Middle colonies. The New England colonies were based more on specific religion in each colony, such as the Puritans in Massachusetts, and the church-government that existed in Massachusetts and Connecticut, although Rhode Island fit into the Middle Colonies than the New England colonies due to the higher amount of religious freedom and tolerance. in the Middle colonies, aside from the mainly Quaker Pennsylvania, although they still did allow some other religions, had almost or complete religious freedom, like New York and New Jersey, which explains the now expansive culture of those places. the government was a lot like the religion in the Middle Colonies, and was very open and diverse. The New England an the Middle colonies were founded for similar reasons, but were handled differently.
Prompt 2:
The relations between the native Indians and the New England colonists and Pennsylvanian colonists were very different, bu always ended in similar manners. The New England colonists barely attempted peace with the Natives, and because of that many conflicts and wars, such as the King Philips War, raged between the two because of the colonists want to expand their colony. in Pennsylvania, the Quaker lifestyle that existed did not allow for hostility towards the Natives, but the ever increasing greed of the colonists in trade with the Natives and want for land diluted the want for peace with the Natives.
Hi Rachel! I liked how in prompt two, you included that the Quaker lifestyle helped them to keep peace with the Indians. Although the peace didn't last forever, it was easier to keep peace in the beginning because that was the way they had always treated others and lived their lives.
DeleteRachel, I liked the way that you described both the differences and similarities between the New England and middle colonies in your first prompt. I thought the same thing about the two. Why do you think the two regions were handled so differently?
DeleteHey Rachel! I liked how your prompts were very detailed in the differences and similarities between the two colonies. It's interesting how the relations between the settlers and natives fell as more settlers came.
DeletePrompt 1: The New England and Middle colonies had similarities and differences when it came to founding, the religious and social composition, and the political development of these colonies. The New England colonies were settled by the Puritans, seeking religious refuge in the new world. The also wanted more purity in the church. They founded the government in a way to be a "light" to the world and set up a democratic government where "free" men could vote. The middle colonies were founded, mostly, by the Quakers. for example in Pennsylvania, they had peace accords with the Indians showing christian "brotherly" love. These areas also set up a democratic government.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: The bitter relationships between the Indians and the colonialists came after a time of peace. when both areas settled, they made peace with the Indians in the land. The Quakers for example had a treaty. However, it was not to last for the colonialists wanted more land and had less respect for the natives.
Hi Michael! I like how you mentioned that the colonists not only wanted more land, but they also had little respect for the Native Americans. If they had had more respect, I think things would have gone very differently.
DeletePrompt 1: The New England colonies and the middle colonies were formed in search of religious toleration and a better life. The New England colonies were more focused on gaining gold and silver While the middle colonies exported fur and grain for their economic benefit; Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey even became the "bread colonies" due to their grain exports. The middle colonies were unusually liberal and religiously tolerant and therefore more ethnically diverse than the New England colonies. The middle colonies were the most "American" because they had religious freedom, democratic control, and land was easily acquired along with the right to.vote. New England was mostly puritan and protestant with less religious diversity. Both the governments of New England and the middle colonies were democratically based, with an assembly elected by the people.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: Relations between Indians and puritans in New England began with the Wampanoag befriending the Plymouth Pilgrims with a treaty in 1621 and celebrating Thanksgiving together. As more colonists arrived, confrontations arose and a pan-Indian alliance was formed to resist English enroachment in 1675 led by Metacom (aka King Phillip). King Phillip's war broke out and ended in 1676. It slowed Westward expansion for the colonists but ultimately defeated the Native tribes. Natives were enslaved on plantations and the New England Confederation was created to protect the colonies from the possibility of Indian attacks. Benevolent Quakers in Pennsylvania were tolerant to every religion and ever person, including the Native tribes. William Penn bought more land from the Indians instead of conquering for it, creating a kind of truce between the groups. Pennsylvania became a peaceful sanctuary for Quakers and Natives; they even felt comfortable hiring them to babysit Unfortunately, immigrant colonists didn't agree with Quakers and began to mistreat the Indians, causing this peace to falter and collapse.
Hi Breydan, I really liked your explanation of the different interests of the colonies in prompt one. In your second prompt, you mentioned the close relationship between the Quakers and the Indians. Do you think there was anything that could have been done to repair their relationship?
DeletePrompt One: The New England colonies of the New World can be seen to share many common traits with eachother, the most obvious being a longing for religious freedom. After separating themselves from the Church of England they began to then split apart into their own personal groups (Quakers, Puritans, etc.). However in the Middle colonies this was not as important as the economic practices in regards to agriculture, making most of their wealth and letting this system structure their colonies. Here there was more leeway for religious tolerance on a more general scale. They were also far more democratic, and less orderly than the New England colonies.
ReplyDeletePrompt Two: While at first New England tried to create a friendly relationship with the Native Americans, the inevitable push of colonists inland raised tensions and eventually gave out to begin conflicts that then escalated to war. Likewise, although Pennsylvania made one of its main points to be kind to the Native Americans, as many non-Quakers who came to Pennsylvania did not agree with the policy of peace. Thusly, the Quakers' way was soon overridden and here too conflict began.
Prompt 1: The New England and middle colonies were founded in search of wealth and religious freedom. The New England colonies were a refuge for people who wanted religious freedom from the Church of England. The Puritans settled at Massachusetts Bay, while the Pilgrims went to Plymouth. The fact that they had crown appointed governors left the settlers unhappy. In contrast, the middle colonies offered religious freedom to multiple different religious backgrounds. In addition to being more accepting, the middle colonies also had richer land than the New England colonies and focused on agriculture.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: There were similar relationships between the New England colonists and Indians and the Pennsylvania colonists and the natives. Both ultimately ended in a negative way. For example, the New England settlers entered King Phillip’s war with the Indians in 1675. The Indians’ loss led to their enslavement under the colonists. In Pennsylvania, things were different because the people were Quakers, and they accepted people of every lifestyle. Instead of taking land, the Quakers bought it from them. Because of this, a sort of truce had been established until immigrants began to oppose it, undoing the work of the Quakers and stopping any possibility of peace.
Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England and the Middle colonies had several simmilarities and differences when it came to founding, religious and social composition, and political development. Both were founded mainly as a refuge from religious persecution and the on idea of religious tolerance. The New England colonies were founded by Puritans that were aiming to purify the corrupted Church of England. The Middle colonies consisted mostly of the peace loving Quakers who were against war and believed in more equality. While the New England colonies were more concerned with finding gold and silver, the Middle colonies focused more on fur trading and were more agriculturally based, in part because of the richer, more fertile soil. Both regions were politically influenced by the king, but were governed by an appointed proprietor.
Prompt 2:
The pattern of relations between colonists and Indians in New England and Pennsylvania were relatively the same. In 1621, a treaty was signed between the Plymouth pilgrims and the Wampanoag Chieftain, Massasoit. This treaty caused good relations between the two and even led to the first Thanksgiving in which Indians and colonists came together in celebratory feast. Unfortunately, as more and more colonists arrived, relations between the two turned sour and led to the Pequot war in 1637. In Pennsylvania, things went the the same way and a treaty was signed between the two. The only difference was that the peaceful Quakers made a huge effort in living in harmony with the Indians. Relation were so well, that settlers could walk through the Indian village unarmed with no worries and even occasionally used the Indians as babysitters. But soon more colonists arrived that didn't share the same peacefull outlook as the quakers and they slowly pushed westward into Indian territiry causing friction and fighting. Both regions ultimately failed at establishing permenant friendly relations between Indians and colonists because of the univrersal desire to expand the growing colonies.
I liked your specific mentioning in prompt one of the Wampanoag Chieftain Massasoit, it is important to note just how influential these leaders really were at those times in terms of what they would cause later on in history. If that treaty hadn't occurred, it begs the question of whether or not Thanksgiving would still be a part of our culture at all.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteVirginia in Jamestown was the beginning of the New England colonies and was set up because of religious intolerance in England. Maryland and Massachusetts were other colonies that were refuges and were created for the same reason as Virginia. Massachusetts was less tolerant then Maryland, it was mostly puritans. Massachusetts, Maryland, and Virginia's voting rights were only for certain religions and all had proprietors ruling the land. Places like Maryland were setup as feudal domains. Anne Hutchinson and Roger Williams discovered Pennsylvania and other colonies: Delaware, New Jersey, and New York, because religious intolerance became a problem in the Bay Colony. Quakers and squatters filled fertile lands until they were made royal.
Prompt 2:
The Indians and the colonists had a broken relationship ever since colonization started. The New England and Pennsylvanian colonies tried to keep the peace between the colonists and the Indians but it did not last very long. When settlers pushed too far into the Connecticut River Valley, the peace was broken in New England. Also, settlers forced Christianity upon the Indians. Feelings of hatred toward each other were because of those things and battles broke out between the Indians and settlers. The Quakers' policy of peace was ruined in Pennsylvania because more settlers came. Because it's peoples' nature to disagree, peace was not able to be kept in the colonies and agreements could not be honored.
Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteDespite New England and the middle colonies’ close proximity, they were extremely dissimilar. Two areas that would eventually become united had open contempt for one another on the bases of religious and social differences. In regards to how the motivation for their founding however, they are quite similar. Both New England and the middle colonies were founded in an attempt to create a retreat from religious persecution. New England’s government was a very primal form of democracy in which voting was the right of all white males of the Puritan congregations. However, in 1691 Massachusetts was made a royal colony with new a new English governor and the right to vote was extended to all male property holders. This was very similar to the distinctive middle colonies that all but aristocratic New York had some varying for of democratic control. The religious composition of New England was primarily Puritan while the middle colonies generally were extremely diverse. This diversity earned places like Rhode Island nicknames like “that sewer.” The Puritans demonstrated hypocrisy towards religious groups like the Quakers and demonstrated religious persecution, much like they themselves experienced in Old England. The middle colonies became polar opposites and showed the most “American” qualities. They did not force any religion upon the citizens and made land easily attainable no matter their ethnic background.
Prompt 2:
The relationships with Indians in New England ultimately ended the same way in Pennsylvania, with the failure of peaceful relations. In New England peace with the Indians resulted from an epidemic caused by English settlers. Unfortunately, this peace was short lived. Because there was no policy that prevented settlers from invading native lands, they took what they wanted and tensions grew. In addition, the conversion of local Indians increased the stress upon the Indian people. War followed and the result of King Philip’s War was an end to organized tribes by the northern colonies for many years. In Pennsylvania, the Quakers actively pursued peace and land was bought from the natives, not stolen. The Indians sought out Pennsylvania as a place where whites and Indians could live peacefully but because of Pennsylvania’s diversity many groups weren’t accepting of these “savages” and ultimately this hope for peace was diminished.
Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe main similarity between all of the colonies' motives for founding was simply religious freedom. They were all in search of a place where their beliefs could be accepted. The Middle colonies were consisted of mostly Quakers who were all for peace, love, and no war. They focused on equality and were involved more agriculturally than the New England colonies. The New England colonies were more interested in searching for gold and silver. They were way more intense and strict than the Middle colonies' democracy.
Prompt 2:
The Indians and those who settled in the colonies failed to create peaceful relationships with each other. Settlers forced Christianity among the Natives, which the Natives did not appreciate. The peace between the Natives and the New England colonies was lost when the settlers began to push too far into the Native territory. The peace between the Natives and Pennsylvania was ruined when more and more settlers arrived. Any peace agreement was easily ruined in one way or another.
I thoroughly enjoyed your point in Prompt 2 about the Native Americans' unappreciative attitude toward the settlers' attempts to lead Native Americans to Christianity. I personally believe that was a large deciding factor in the continual struggles between the two groups of people.
DeletePrompt1: New England and the middle colonies were founded in search of a haven for religious freedom. Those people from England who didn’t agree with the Church of England saw the New England colonies such as Massachusetts as the place to go-a place to practice their religion the way they wanted. Puritans however said that they only wanted to separate from the Church’s impurities, not its religion, but later the Puritans showed just how much they hated the church by exiling those who didn’t believe in what they did. The middle colonies were very different in the fact that they allowed different religions to practice freely and almost everyone had equal rights. William Penn was forced to not allow Catholics and Jewish people to vote due to influence from the King due to Penn’s charter. The middle colonies were not only more lenient on religion; they also had better agriculture and grew faster than the New England colonies. For example, Philadelphia began gaining food exports in as little as two years after being founded and Pennsylvania as a whole was only surpassed by Massachusetts and Virginia as of 1700.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: The relationships between Colonists and Indians in New England and Pennsylvania started completely different but unfortunately ended in similar ways-violence and hatred. In Pennsylvania for example, the relationship between Colonists and Indians seemed to be off to a good start. Peoples from the old world shared their knowledge and some Indians even became baby-sitters for colonists; but the colonists became greedy and the relationship was lost. In New England, there was never a good relationship between colonists and natives. Diseases were brought over with the colonists, and they killed off many native cultures and Indians were already seen as “disposable” and never looked upon as possible allies by the colonists of New England, just things (not people) in the way.
Hey Julie! I really enjoyed how you made sure to say that wealth was a reason for finding the new colonies. Most people just see the main reason as being religious freedom. In prompt two, you brought up a good point about the immigrants opposing the buying and selling of land and not just wanting it, they wanted it without a price. Good job!
ReplyDeletePrompt 1: New England and the middle colonies were founded for similar reasons such as religious freedom and political development. People from England who did not agree with the Church of England found that the New England colonies were the perfect place to go to practice their religion freely. The middle colonies allowed different religions to practice freely and many people would go to these colonies from New England to save themselves from religious persecution. The middle colonies were way more lenient on religion than England and New England.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: The relations between colonists and Indians in New England and Pennsylvania both started for different reasons but both had a similar violent end. In New England the colonist brought over that killed many native cultures and Indians. The colonist did not see this as a problem as they never looked upon the Indians as allies or equals. In Pennsylvania the relationship between colonists and Indians started off good. The colonist would share their knowledge of the old world and in return the Indians helped share their knowledge of the New World. However,the colonists became greedy and the good relationship soon ended when the colonists began to believe that they were better than the Indians.
Hi Lexie! I strongly agree with your second prompt, most colonist/Native relations ended violently, and the cultures of many were often ravished in the process. The colonists were very cruel, and though some tried to be peaceful, the majority of them gave themselves bad reputations!
DeleteHey Lexie. I totally agree with you how the New England colonists never saw the Indians as equals. It's funny though because the Indians lived for many years in North AMerica before the colonists arrived yet they were inferior to these new colonists.
DeletePrompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England and middle colonies weren't much different in terms of motives for founding, although gold and exploration were no longer in the equation of the founding of the middle colonies. The New England colonies, as well as the middle colonies both chased profit, sought other political beliefs, and required protection from religious persecution. The New England colonies primarily remained loyal to England and quickly obeyed orders to wage war, while the social composition of middle colonies' peaceful Quakers led them to seek equality and avoid violence. Additionally, political development spread much faster for the New England colonies with Massachusetts' introduction of democracy, enabling free men to vote. The religious beliefs of the middle and New England colonies also differed, the New England colonies supporting England's puritanism and enforcing it upon others, while the middle colonies did not.
Prompt 2:
The peaceful attempts between colonists and Natives in New England and Pennsylvania failed because of the ever flip-flopping patterns of trust and treason between both parties. No policies prevented the Europeans from taking the lands of the Natives, and the Europeans often paid no care to how many people's lives their expeditions disrupted, taking their land and stealing their provisions didn't cross the new settler's minds twice. On the other hand, the Quakers avoided stealing land, and sought out to buy it, but alas the amount of selfish people who overpowered the Natives outnumbered the amount of people who sought peace and tarnished their reputations.
Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England and middle colonies had a lot of similarities but also a lot of differences. People often times left England for “religious toleration” and ended up in the middle colonies where they offered this. The Church of England prosecuted people who opposed their views. When England established the colony of New England, they carried their beliefs of religion with them. The middle colonies were established based on the economy versus religion like New England. In the middle colonies there was more of a sense of religious toleration. If someone wanted to be wealthy in the middle colonies all they had to do was work and they wouldn’t get prosecuted for religion unless they were Jewish or Atheists.
Prompt 2:
The relationship between settlers and Indians was always very unstable. After King Philip’s war in New England wiped out all of the Indians, their relationship was permanently damaged. The Natives in Pennsylvania didn’t mind the settlers until more and more of them started flooding in and intruding.
Prompt 1: New England and the middle colonies were established for some of the same reasons. In the 16th century, King Henry broke with the catholic church and the puritans wanted to reform the Church of England. The puritans decided to get away from the Anglican church in England and sail to the New World. They wanted religious freedom and to escape persecution, which is the main reason the Pilgrims came to New England and the other colonies. After Plymouth merged together with Massachusetts, the right to vote was given to all male puritans. Quakers were abused and often banished from Massachusetts so they were forced to settle in another colony, such as Rhode Island. The middle colonies included New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New York, and they were established for mostly economic reasons. They all had a broad expanse of land and exported grain. New York was founded by the Dutch for trading. The middle colonies were also more ethnically diverse than other colonies.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: When the Pilgrims arrived in New England in 1620, the Indians were in no position to resist the Pilgrims or fight them because of the epidemic, which wiped out most of their tribe. They tried to be friends with the Pilgrims at first until tension built up and the Pequot War broke out. The Pilgrims destroyed the Indians, and tried to convert the survivors to Christianity. Years later, the Indians tried one last attack to beat the English, but that also failed. In Pennsylvania, William Penn bought land from the Indians. He treated the Indians kindly with respect, and their was no tension between them and the Englishmen. However, as more immigrants flooded Pennsylvania, the English stopped treating the Indians kindly and treated them poorly instead.
Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteBoth the middle colonies and the New England colonies had different and similar motives for founding, religious and social composition, and political development. Both colonies felt it necessary to escape the religion in their born countries. Quakers made up the majority of the New England colonies, they used passive resistance to keep a peaceful colony. The middle colonies were mainly consisted of puritans who believed in predestination and visible saints. The social composition that was present in these colonies was a result of which religions were practiced. Though the political development of each region differed the colonies made sure there were places for the colonists to vote.
Prompt 2:
Both Pennsylvania and New England had good relations with the Native Americans. Colonists of Pennsylvania went out of their way to make sure they had the Natives' trust. The people of New England just lived alongside the Natives. This short time of peace would come to an end. The New England peoples began to interfere with the Natives' territory which in turn caused much conflict and soon lead to the wipeout of this group of Indians. Pennsylvania's relations went cold when more than just Quakers moved to the area. These settlers were unkind to the Natives which ruined the trust that was gained.
Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteBoth the middle colonies and the New England colonies had different and similar motives for founding, religious and social composition, and political development. Both colonies felt it necessary to escape the religion in their born countries. Quakers made up the majority of the New England colonies, they used passive resistance to keep a peaceful colony. The middle colonies were mainly consisted of puritans who believed in predestination and visible saints. The social composition that was present in these colonies was a result of which religions were practiced. Though the political development of each region differed the colonies made sure there were places for the colonists to vote.
Prompt 2:
Both Pennsylvania and New England had good relations with the Native Americans. Colonists of Pennsylvania went out of their way to make sure they had the Natives' trust. The people of New England just lived alongside the Natives. This short time of peace would come to an end. The New England peoples began to interfere with the Natives' territory which in turn caused much conflict and soon lead to the wipeout of this group of Indians. Pennsylvania's relations went cold when more than just Quakers moved to the area. These settlers were unkind to the Natives which ruined the trust that was gained.
I like how you stated that the relationship between the settlers and Indians was always unstable because , in a way, the were never at peace.
ReplyDelete@Cecilia Rodrigez
ReplyDeletePrompt 1: The New England and middle colonies had different and similar motives for founding. One similarity that they shared was deciding to break away from The Church of England and express their own religious freedom. People from New England were strict Puritans as where the middle colonies consisted of Quakers. Puritans believed that their religion was "correct" and superior to all other religions. They firmly believed in conversion where God comes to you and tells you if you are going to heaven or hell. From that point on they must live as a visible saint. Whereas Quakers held a great tolerance for others and their religions. They accepted those thrown out by Puritans such as Anne Hutchinson. Puritans referred to these people as misfits. As for land, the middle colonies had extremely fertile soil,and a broad expanse of land. However New England colonies had rocky mountains,which presented the opportunity of farming and exporting grains. The New England colonies also obtained many waterfalls and rivers which resulted in the making of the water wheel and other new devices.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: When colonists first arrived in New England and Pennsylvania, Indians were accepting but unsure of them. The Indians decided to have peaceful interactions with the colonists at first. In Jamestown many colonists suffered from malnutrition and starvation. They had no idea how to harvest and didn't want to because they were gold hungry. Many died in this "Starving Time" era. These colonists began to raid Indian villages stealing their foods/good along with burning down their villages and harvest fields. These colonists were also land hungry. Many peace treaties were made, as an example of John Rolfe marrying Pocahontas but they all failed. A famous battle between English colonists and Indians was the King Philip wars. When Metacom son of Massoits of the Wampong Tribe made a false truce with King Philip he decided to attack all of the English colonies that he could. He attacked 52 and 12 were destroyed resulting in 100 total deaths of indians and colonists. King Philip got his revenge by selling his wife and son into slavery and quartering and beheading Metacom. It became very apparent that the indians and colonists could not coexist with each other.
Prompt 1:
ReplyDeleteThe New England and middle colonies were mainly founded on the basis of an area free of religious persecution. Alot of the colonists in such areas were from England, an area that only accepted Anglicanism, this made England a hostile environment for anyone that followed any other form of Christianity. Due to England's recent population shift of over a million, many of the colonists were poor working class people, and often came to America to find their fortune. Much of the colonies maintained close ties with England thanks to much of the funding coming from English companies, and the Monarch often appointed a Governor to take charge of the colonies.
Prompt 2:
Since Europeans started to discover the Americas, they fought and argued repeatedly with the native people. At the beginning they tried for peace, in 1621 a treaty between the Wampanoag Indians and the colonists was signed, but as more colonists immigrated to the Americas the respect toward the natives was lost, casuing more and more conflict. The colonists also encrouched on native land, without hesitation. As conflict rose, wars began to break out killing many of each group. Even though it eventually ended, the hostility between the two groups was still always on the verge of breaking.
Prompt 1: The New England colonies and the middle colonies had many similarities and differences in the reason for founding. The New England colonies starting with Plymouth, and Massachusetts Bay were founded for the main reason of religious freedom. In England the only accepted religion at the time was Anglicanism making it hard for the Pilgrims, and the Puritans. The middle colonies were mainly founded for economic reasons. Plantation became big, and the middle colonies began to strive off of that attraction where as the New England colonies offered their religious freedom and in turn strived off of that.
ReplyDeletePrompt 2: In the beginning, the Natives of America tried to be civil with the newly arriving settlers and everything was going well until the settlers began to struggle. Facing starvation and failing crops, the English began to raid the native American tribes, stealing things they needed in order to live. Eventually this led to tension between the two cultures and they became unfriendly and faced many feuds.