Slavery

“I did not know I was a slave until I found out I couldn’t do the things I wanted.”-Frederick Douglass. The historical non-fiction novel, American Slavery: 1619-1877, by Peter Kolchin, describes the overview of slavery in America. This novel specifically focuses on the life of a slave throughout the colonial period all the way through the abolition of slavery.

Kolchin has specialized in slavery and labor in the American South before, and after the Civil War. In the beginning, he describes how America was heavily dependent on coerced labor. Such as how most of the Founding Fathers were slave holders. He portrays how colored people have been through so many struggles and even towards the end segregation followed. Kolchin starts off with the Atlantic Slave Trade, and then shifts his area of focus to the slave’s personal lives.

He describes their everyday life on the field, and their relationship with their owners. He presents the social outcomes that slavery had on many people and how even after the Civil War, hatred for blacks remained. The book explores through the racial mind sets and social structures in the South throughout the 17th and 19th centuries. Peter Kolchin did an incredible job covering the evolution of the institution of slavery and touching down on the economic, social, and religious factors of slavery.

The New York Times Book Review states, “Provides an informed modern history of slavery and its development, and suggests thoughtful, evenhanded conclusions on issues that have not been resolved definitely.” If one was to give thus book a rating it should be 5/5 stars. Every chapter digs into a new topic on slavery that many people may have never known. Just reading the first few sentences of a chapter grabs the reader’s attention and makes the reader want to know more. If one was to read this book they would feel as if, they were living alongside a slave and going through same moments of struggles and happiness. This book is everything that the cover suggests.

Peter Kolchin has maintained skillful organization throughout his writing. He takes the reader on the road to slavery and touches every aspect of their life. Maintaining the same writing style throughout the entire book is important, for the purpose of not making the reader confused. Fist, he divides the book into two chronological periods. For example, the first part focuses on the colonial period (lasting until about 1770) and antebellum (beginning about 1800), both the sections are separated by the turning point in the American Revolution.

This chronological outline can help the reader better appreciate how slavery has emerged tremendously, and even towards the end of it, colored people still struggled to gain independence. He also divides each of the chapters into subsections, each section overlaps onto the idea of the previous one.

For example, chapter 2 is named The Colonial Era, the first section within the chapter started off with introducing what that chapter will be about such as,” Throughout its history, American slavery evolved and changed……” (Page 28, paragraph 1) then, the second section started off with taking that idea into deeper details such as, “American slavery developed within a particular environment, conditioned by particular demographic patterns.”(Page 29, Paragraph 1).

This pattern throughout the book can help the reader in understanding the upcoming information throughout the next chapters. While discussing the evolution of slavery, Kolchin included pieces from other references too. By utilizing another source, the author portrays a better understanding on the subject. For example, in chapter 2 page 60 it states, “Planters’ diaries are filled with entries such as William Byrd’s “I talked with my people” (1740), or Landon Carter’s “I gave my people a holiday this day, notwithstanding my work is so backward”(1772), or George Washington’s “I allowed all my People to go to the races in Alexandria”(1786).”.

These references from slave owners gave much more understanding on the topic of the slave-owner intellect and paternalism. Diaries help to gain more information about any surrounding problems and the relationship between certain masters and slaves. Kolchin also used many references from Federick Douglass, who was a former slave that ran away from his master. For example, on page 178 paragraph 1 it states,” …unlike the isolated plantation, the city was not conducive to maintaining slave discipline.

“A city slave is almost a freeman, compared with a slave on the plantation,” Frederick Douglass noted bluntly.”. Kolchin used Frederick Douglass as a reference because, it shifts the reader to witness slavery from the perspective of a former slave. He also utilized simile to get information across to the reader. For example, on page 91 paragraph 3 it states,” …it was clear that Southern Slavery had survived the multiple threats it faced during the Revolutionary era and, like steel tempered by fire, had emerged from that era stronger than ever.”.

During the Revolutionary era, the North started to question slavery and its morality. So, with emancipation in the North, slavery had become more entrenched in the South and was known as a slave state. Kolchin also compared slavery to serfdom in Russia. For example, on page 228 paragraph 2 it states, “In Russia, peasants resisted the influence not only of the noble landholders who formerly owned them but also of well-meaning reformers who sought to modernize “backward” village ways, insisting that real freedom meant the right to do things their own way, without outside interference.”.

Comparing slavery in South America to serfdom in Russia, concludes how there were many similarities between them. Utilizing references, diary entries, and specific time frames, gives the reader a better understanding and an up-close look towards the subject. This book would be very useful for AP students when they are researching about slavery between 1619-1877 and need a personal point of view on political and social topics.

This book also included references from many other writers who have also written about slavery. For example, in chapter 4 page 125 it states, “What was routine and casual to white men caused anguish to black women… described by Harriet Jacobs in her searing autobiography, Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, “I cannot tell how much I suffered in the presence of these wrongs,” she wrote,”. Such a reference from Harriet Jacobs, who had escaped slavery and was later freed, places a deeper impact on the brutal life of a slave.

Honestly speaking, anyone who was to read this book would be shocked to find out that slavery in the deeper South increased dramatically, from 1790-1860. Kolchin effectively used statistics to portray the slave population and distribution, free black population etc. Towards the end of the book, Kolchin also provided a bibliographical essay that lists hundreds of other books that pertain to the topic of slavery. The theme held throughout the book was very helpful because all the events were put in chronological order.

Kolchin starts off with the spread of slavery in the American colonies and then goes to discuss how the relationship between a slave and master had changed. The Top 10 mentions aspects of slavery that one may not have known of. It mentions how some Africans lost their traditional culture and had become Americanized and brutal incidents about masters whipping their slaves and how some owners let their slaves have religious celebrations and viewed them not only as property but as humans too.

A thoughtful idea presented by the author was by including outside information from writers, former slaves, slave owners, and abolitionists. For example, in chapter 7 page 233 it states, “……hopes were raised to an exceptionally high level and the disappointment at the failure completely…”The shadow of a deep disappointment rests upon the Negro people,” wrote W.E.B. Du Bois in his poetic essay The Souls of Black Folk…”. Writers such as W.E.B. Du Bois, have shown the reality of a slave going through racism even after being free.

The author’s aim was to inform the reader about the life of a slave, and he achieved that through his detailed writing. As The New Yorker states,” A miraculous achievement.” Receiving a comment like this from a high post, presents a big impact on the authors writing. Every chapter was an attention grabber that made the reader want to know more about the escalation of slavery. Overall the book was a success because, the subject of the book was to inform the reader about the life of a slave, which was accomplished by Peter Kolchin.

The important detail to note about a book is if it flows and follows a logical order. This book has a chronological format that provides a logical flow. Its easily read because of the smooth transitions from paragraph to paragraph and the sequence of topics being in logical order. The author organizes the events of slavery from where it began, developed, and later ended. Each chapter specifically targets every aspect of a slave’s personal life.

Kolchin did not exaggerate a topic or go straight to the point. The entire book went deep into the social life of a slave and touched on the topics very well. While reading, one would feel the same emotions as a slave would be feeling. One should read this book because Peter Kolchin does a wonderful job in portraying the life of a slave from their struggles to their freedom.

The Man Who Stopped England’s Slave Trade
“God Almighty has set before me two great objects, the suppression of the slave trade and the reformation of manners” – William Wilberforce

William Wilberforce was one of the greatest abolitionists in all of history. He fought for what he believed in. He believed in freedom for all people, no matter what they looked like. He thought that all people are to be valued and that they are important, even if they were different. He spent all of his life trying to get freedom for slaves. He completely stopped the slave trade into England by The Slave Trade Act of 1807(sparticus.com). After stopping the slave trade act, he continued to pursue the freedom of slaves until his death (BBC.com). William Wilberforce was born August 24th 1759 in Hull, England. When he was nine his father died and Wilberforce was sent to live with his aunt and uncle. His aunt and uncle were active in the Methodist movement and supported their teachings. During this time, he met John Newton, who would eventually play a big part in his life. His mother disliked evangelicalism and when she discovered this influence, she brought him back to Hull. In 1776, Wilberforce enrolled in St. John’s College, Cambridge (Hague, 5-25). Not long after graduation, Wilberforce ran for election for Smith, 2

Member of Parliament, representing Hull. He was 21 years old. Although running against a strong political opponent, he won the election. This was beginning of his political career. He was the youngest man ever to be elected into parliament. (Tomkins, 33) Even with all this success, William Wilberforce was having a spiritual controversy. He enjoyed the usual pastimes of dinners, cards, and gambling that he had with his friends. (Hague, 97) Wilberforce was shocked by the behavior of his fellow students at the St. Johns College and later wrote: “I was introduced on the very first night of my arrival to as licentious a set of men as can well be conceived. They drank hard, and their conversation was even worse than their lives.” (sparticus.com) He wanted clarity. He decided to visit a former tutor named Isaac Milner. Through the witness and influence of Milner, as well as by reading the Bible and another book, called “The Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul”, Wilberforce had a deep spiritual conversion to Christ. This resulted in profound changes in his life (BBC.com) After his conversion, he again sought out the man he met as a child in the Methodist movement, John Newton. Newton was a great influence on Wilberforce. It was during these times that Newton told Wilberforce about his convictions concerning the evils of the slave trade and how it needed to be stopped. This made Wilberforce interested in social reform and a desire to stop the slave trade. Wilberforce was seriously considering leaving politics and joining the church, but Newton told him that

Smith, 3
God had placed him there for a purpose. Wilberforce stayed in politics and worked on fighting to stop the slave trade in parliament. (Pollock, 50-56) Wilberforce’s effort to stop the slave trade shows us the link between his goal for the abolition of the slave trade and his Christian faith. He did not try to separate faith from politics. For example, he wrote that “a principle of true religion [ie, true Christianity] should in any considerable degree gain ground; there is no estimating the effects on public morals and the consequent influence on our political welfare.” (Wilberforce, 422) Wilberforce thought he was given a responsibility to do what he could to see that true Christianity would take ground. With that, Wilberforce looked to the Bible for direction in all areas of life, including politics (Pollock, 145). He believed that social reform must have a biblical foundation, and that those who would attempt reform without this foundation would flaw in their efforts and in the end, do harm (Pollock, 87). William Wilberforce entered bills into parliament with this goal on many occasions but all were denied. (Metexas, 91-115) He wrote a number of speeches and spent years fighting and making people realize the evil in the slave trade. In his most famous slave trade speech that he gave to parliament Wilberforce said, “When we think of eternity, and of the future consequences of all human conduct, what is there in this life that should make any man contradict the dictates of his conscience, the principles of justice, the laws of religion, and of God? Sir, the nature and all the circumstances of this trade are now laid open to us; we can no longer plead ignorance, we can not evade it; it is now an object placed before us, we can
not pass it; we may spurn it, we may Smith, 4

kick it out of our way, but we cannot turn aside so as to avoid seeing it; for it is brought now so directly before our eyes that this House must decide, and must justify to all the world, and to their own consciences, the rectitude of the grounds and principles of their decision…You may choose to look the other way but you can never say again that you did not know.” (Wilberforce) Finally, in February of 1807, a motion in favor of abolition was carried in the House of Commons, winning by the huge majority of 283 to 16. His battle against the slave trade was won. But William Wilberforce did not stop there. He continued on to fight the abolition of slavery in the whole British Empire. In 1833, just three days before Wilberforce’s death, the Emancipation Act was passed, officially banning slavery in the British Empire. (Mextas, 205-210) Christopher D. Hancock said “The most malignant evil of the British Empire ceased largely because of the faith and persistence of William Wilberforce.”

Although he spent most of his time working on the abolition of the slave trade, Wilberforce also spent time fighting for social reform and other causes. He tried to get congress to limit the number of hours that children spent working. He appealed for amendments to the Poor Law and fought for prison reforms. In 1796 Wilberforce became a founding member of the ‘Society for the Bettering Condition and Increasing Comforts of the Poor’. This organization worked to change Parish’s Relief and Workhouses for the poor and improve their overall living conditions. He worked

Smith, 5
changing policies, education and health care. Wilberforce was one of the founders of the RSPCA (The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals). Wilberforce believed that he should put forth strong effort to work on solving every social problem in the country because this is what God called him to do. Wilberforce was also generous with his money and donated most of his money to charity, as well as decreasing the rent for people who lived on his land (BBC.com).

William also wrote a book A Practical View of the Prevailing Religious System of Professed Christians in the Higher and Middle Classes of this Country Contrasted with Real Christianity. He used his book so he could tell people about God and how to live a true christian life in an unchristian world. He denounced the Christianity among his fellow countrymen, most of who thought it was enough to go to church and to be called Christians. He respectfully contrasted their mistaken suppositions with scriptural truth. He was talking about England in the early 18th century; however, these truths still apply today. William Wilberforce was determined to draw people back into the Christian faith. However, he didn’t just want people to return to Christianity and only go to church on Sundays; he wanted them to accept Christianity fully. He thought that would change the whole fabric of British society. In his book, William Wilberforce said this, “Is it not the great end of religion, and, in particular, the glory of Christianity, to extinguish the malignant passions; to curb the violence, to control the appetites, and to smooth the asperities of man; to make us compassionate and kind, and forgiving one to

Smith, 6
another; to make us good husbands, good fathers, good friends; and to render us active and useful in the discharge of the relative social and civil duties?” Through William Wilberforce’s life one can see that God gives each of us a purpose. Once he became a christian, Wilberforce wanted to follow God’s plan for his life. He had difficulty deciding if he should stay in politics or become a clergyman. John Newton told him his place in politics and he then worked very hard to make better life for people who need it. Wilberforce was 100 percent committed to God and he would have done anything for Him. He was a man who pursued God’s will and was subsequently blessed by God. God gave him a purpose and once he knew what it was, with incredible focus and determination, he pursued it vigorously for twenty years. Without knowing this purpose from God, he could not have accomplished all that he did. I think that is interesting to think about what would not have happened if God had not called him to this.

Another quality that Wilberforce had was determination; he just wouldn’t
give up. He started as a politician who just wanted to stop the slave trade and he spent seventeen years fighting it. He made speech after speech over of myriad years and never gave up. After the bill did pass, then he spent the next twenty five years working on abolishing slavery as a whole. In today’s society I think it is really easy to give up and give in to things. I know that I give up on things easily when I am under pressure and I know that I am not succeeding. I have a fear of failure and I know I need to pursue my goal and not give up on things. I think what Wilburforce did was Smith, 7

commendable because not only did he free slaves, but he spent his whole life fighting for the cause (spartcus.com). I think what I liked most about studying William Wilberforce was how compassionate and selfless he was. He did little things to make a difference in the world that led to big things. Also, he never took any credit. He gave God all the glory, and said he was only pursuing God’s will. He did what ever he could to help those around him. I think more people need to be like him, myself included. There are days that I do not want to do things, and I give in to my selfish desires. Also, at times when I do things for people, I expect a thank you or acknowledgement of my “good work”, when in reality I only did what I am supposed to be doing. William Wilberforce was a great man who did a lot of good for England while he was alive. He should be admired. He made a difference when most people wanted change, but didn’t care enough to do it. He gave up many things along the way: he gave up his time, energy, money, and his political career without a care for worldly things; he cared only about doing right and what God had called him to do.

Gustav Vassa Plot Summary Gustavus Vassas was born Olaudah Equiano in the African province called Essaka in 1745. He was the youngest son of seven surviving children and was very close to his mother. He describes a happy childhood during which he learned – as all his people did – to work hard. He is kidnapped and taken as a slave while still very young and soon finds that he has a talent for the sea and for trading. By being very frugal, he is able to save enough to buy his freedom after only a few years, though his master initially refuses to honor their agreement for the sale.

He does gain his freedom and soon returns to the sea, seeing there a greater opportunity for financial gain than any other he can find. He spends his time also in pursuit of an acceptable religious affiliation and eventually finds himself ready to become a missionary. Gustavus Vassa Summary and Analysis Gustavus Vassas was born Olaudah Equiano in the African province called Essaka in 1745. He was the youngest son of seven surviving children and was very close to his mother. He describes a happy childhood during which he learned – as all his people did – to work hard.

He recalls little of any true religion though he describes briefly some ceremonies in which dancing and feasting were important. He write that his people were circumcised, one of many similarities to the Jewish religion. Chapter three begins when, at age eleven, Gustavus and his sister are alone at their house while the adults worked at their agricultural pursuits. While alone, they are kidnapped by slavers. They are soon separated and Gustavus is sold to several masters for various reasons over the next six or seven months. He encounters his sister briefly during that time but notes that she was soon taken away and he never saw her again.

At the end of those months, Gustavus was taken to the coast where he is put aboard a slave ship. He promptly faints. When he wakes, he asks if the strange looking people aboard are going to eat him and is reassured that he won’t be eaten. He remains on that ship for several days until a new ship arrives. He says that the whites aboard were happy to see the other ship and those who, like Gustavus, had never seen a ship in motion under the power of sails were convinced it was magic. In chapter three, Gustavus is first taken to Barbados where he is among the few who aren’t sold.

He is then sold to a plantation owner in Virginia but stays only a short period of time before being bought by a man named Michael Henry Pascal who intends him as a gift. At that time, Gustavus is called Jacob but Pascal refuses to call him such and renames him Gustavus. On the voyage to England aboard Pascal’s trading ship, Gustavus meets a young educated white boy named Richard Baker who sees past the slavery issue and becomes friends with Gustavus – a situation that lasts until Richard’s death. Gustavus spends about two years in England, mostly traveling by ship with his master.

He talks of the kindness of the people – especially two women named Guerin – who care for him at various times while his master is away. In chapter four, Gustavus talks about his emerging self-confidence and his waning fears. In 1759, Gustavus has learned about Heaven and requests baptism. In February, he is baptized at St. Margaret’s Church in Westminster. Over the coming months, Gustavus is involved in many battles as the French and English clash. Eventually, Gustavus’s master is released from his service and plans to return to private business. Gustavus has now met a man named Daniel Queen who has taught Gustavus many things.

Gustavus regards him as a father figure and often spends his meager earnings on sugar or tobacco for Daniel. Gustavus plans to go into business with Daniel as soon as he is released from his military service but his master refuses to release Gustavus and instead sells him to another ship’s captain, James Doran. Several of Gustavus’s former shipmates vow to redeem him as soon as they are paid but he is, in the meantime, at Doran’s mercy. As chapter five begins, Gustavus writes that his current situation is a punishment for having said he planned to spend an entire day in London on “rambling and sport. He is initially forlorn but comes to believe that God gives suffering of this kind for a reason. In the West Indies, Gustavus learns that Doran has sold him to a Quaker named Robert King who says Gustavus will learn to be a clerk. Gustavus learns to handle almost all aspects of his master’s businesses which include shipping. King is kind and Gustavus knows that several other plantation owners make offers for Gustavus. When King turns them down, Gustavus always works harder and thanks God for putting him in this place.

Gustavus describes the cruel treatment of most slaves and says that he was once threatened by a man who says he will shoot Gustavus and then pay for him. Gustavus offers up the typical arguments in favor of slavery saying that men who say they believe these arguments are fooling themselves. He also points out that those with kind masters and plenty of food work harder and live longer than those who are mistreated, and that those with cruelty as a daily part of life are more likely to simply give up and kill themselves. Gustavus points out that the slave trade is a study in avarice, and that slavers lie and cheat the slaves.

He says that if slaves were treated “as men” they would be “faithful, honest, intelligent and vigorous. ” As chapter six begins, Gustavus says that he could list many more instances of cruelty, but that to list them all would be “tedious and disgusting. ” He is soon given the opportunity to become a sailor on one of his master’s vessels and chooses to do so, trading a little to make some profit for himself. He notes that he is anxious to earn money and that escape and freedom is, of course, the ultimate goal though he wants it to be by honest means.

Gustavus prepares to go to Philadelphia with the captain. Gustavus’s master hears a rumor that he is going to try to run away once they reach American but Gustavus points out that he’s had opportunities and hasn’t done so. His master sees the wisdom of the words, provides Gustavus credit for some goods to sell on his own in an effort to earn money and promises that he can buy his freedom if he earns forty pounds sterling money. He goes on the voyage to America though he is ill treated by the whites who would buy his items for sale.

In Savannah, Georgia, he is beaten by a white overseer and left for dead but the captain finds him and with the help of a capable doctor, Gustavus recovers. In chapter seven, Gustavus earns enough money to buy his freedom. His master is initially upset, saying that he hasn’t expected Gustavus to earn the money so quickly; but the captain intercedes and Gustavus is freed in return for forty pounds. Gustavus agrees to another voyage as a freed man for a wage and wants to buy bullocks to take back with him for sale but the captain refuses and insists that Gustavus buy turkeys instead.

He does so against his wishes and the bullocks all die on the crossing though his turkeys survive. The captain takes ill on the voyage and also dies and Gustavus safely takes the ship to port. He’s offered the captain’s position but refuses though he agrees to yet another voyage under the new captain, William Phillips, who runs the ship aground. They are stranded on an island for days and then find themselves at the mercy of a crew who picks them up. Phillips sells some of the slaves that had been cargo on the ship and buys passage to Georgia with plans to sell the rest, parting here from Gustavus.

It’s in Georgia that Gustavus reluctantly agrees to perform a burial ceremony for a child and he notes that it’s the first time he serves as parson. In chapter nine, Gustavus begins working his way toward his goal of reaching London. There, he encounters the Guerins and Pascal and notes that Pascal seems indifferent of the way he treated Gustavus even after being confronted about it. Gustavus begins learning hairdressing as a means of supporting himself and begins studying the French horn and arithmetic.

He soon learns that he can earn very little money in this way and decides to go to sea again, this time with a desire to see Turkey. He hires on as a hairdresser with John Jolly on a ship called the Delaware. He remains with that ship and captain until 1771, seeing and being enchanted with Turkey but declining the offer there of two wives and eventually parting ways to join Captain William Robertson on the ship Grenada Planter and then on the Jamaica under Captain David Watt. He later ends up on the North Pole, trapped for a period of time by ice.

As chapter ten begins, Gustavus continues his travels, going to Turkey for awhile, then London again and then to Spain. In chapter eleven, he is appalled by the bull baiting and eventually returns to Plymouth. In chapter twelve, Gustavus spends more time with the Quakers and is impressed by their actions and their church activities. He wants to become a missionary and says that the rest of his life is to be spent with an eye toward assisting “the cause of my much injured countrymen. ” —- Gustavus’s story begins with descriptions of his own people.

He notes that they possess slaves that are usually captured in battle or are people among his own tribe who broke specific laws. However, he writes that those slaves are not treated badly. They are required to work, but their masters work just as hard. The slaves are typically given their own house to live in and the only difference appears to be that those people are not free to leave. He doesn’t go into this discussion to any great depth. Though Gustavus couldn’t have known the horrors that awaited him aboard the slave ship, he notes that he is immediately afraid.

He mentions a fear that he’ll be eaten, but doesn’t explain. It seems likely that his people were among those who commonly told their children that kidnappers were frequently cannibals. In any case, Gustavus writes that, had he had entire worlds of his own at that moment, he would have traded them all for the chance to swap places with the lowest slave in his country. Gustavus talks at length about the fact that his people believed in cleanliness and that they were circumcised, and that many of the rituals seem to indicate that the Jewish and the African tribes of that region were related.

He quotes a writer who believes that to be true and says the writer indicates that climate is the reason for the dark-skinned appearance of the Africans compared to the traditional light-skinned appearance of the Jews. Gustavus also points out that men with higher degrees of education have discussed the matter and that he isn’t the person to answer the question definitively. As Gustavus writes about his early travels, he seems to flit from one incident to another. He relates the story of a man who got something in his eye and then lost the eye. He talks of being hospitalized for chilblains and small pox.

He also mentions a man who saved him from being flogged for fighting with a “gentleman,” but does not go into any additional details. Gustavus seems to expect that his master is going to simply release him once the military stint is over and goes so far as to make plans for his future. He admits to being heartbroken upon the completion of his sale to a new master. It’s interesting that Gustavus, having encountered so many kind and generous people at this point, has ceased to believe himself a slave. He points out that he’s served his master well for many years and has earned nothing for it, and seems to expect that to be sufficient.

He has become somewhat educated and expects a slave owner to have a moral responsibility to allow him to leave when he wants. At one point, Gustavus is enamored with a tribe of the Mosquito Coast. He talks at length about their customs, including that they love the color red and that they enjoy their ceremonies. Gustavus seems to enjoy the actions of the people. He also talks of the fact that they seem similar to his own family of his childhood. Important People Gustavus Vassa Born Olaudah Equiano and sometimes called “The African,” he was born in the African province of Essaka is 1745.

Gustavus says that he’d been given another name in the early days of his slavery and had initially refused to answer to the name “Gustavus,” but eventually gave in. He is an intelligent man and adept at trading. His services are coveted because he is so capable and hardworking. When he’s purchased by a master who has land and shipping ventures, Gustavus wants desperately to go to sea. He’s learned much about shipping and knows that he has the potential to make enough money there to buy his freedom. He accomplishes saving that money in a matter of only a few years, though there are some pitfalls along the way.

When he then asks his owner to release him, the owner initially refuses but is convinced by an employee – a ship’s captain – who has taken a liking to Gustavus and prevails on the man’s sense of fair play. Gustavus loves to learn and devotes as much of his time as possible to learning a variety of things ranging from the Bible to the French horn. He says that he hates to be idle and will take on some new endeavor rather than spend evenings with nothing to occupy his hands and mind. He comes to love London and Turkey as his two favorite destinations among all those he visits.

Gustavus finds an array of friends during his travels and learns from many of them. He seems often overly trusting and occasionally finds himself in trouble when he trusts someone to make good on a promise, especially with regard to money. He says that there are those who defend slavery and that they are delusional in their arguments. Gustavus eventually applies to become a missionary. Themes The Desire for Freedom The desire for freedom is an overriding theme and the slaves who wrote these stories are each determined to find freedom, regardless of the cost.

This can be seen clearly in the fact that slaves are brutally beaten if caught in a runaway attempt, yet many continue to take the chance. One of the best examples of this desire for freedom is seen in Harriet Jacobs’ brother, William. William has been purchased by Harriett’s lover and the father of her children, Mr. Sands. Mr. Sands is subsequently elected to Congress and takes William along with him. William has the opportunity to travel through many states and to see many things, and it’s noted that Mr. Sands is not a cruel master.

Despite the fact that William is treated well with enough to eat and has the promise of eventual freedom, he seizes an opportunity to run away. In his case, there’s little cause for worry about reprisal because Mr. Sands isn’t cruel and isn’t likely to track him down. By contrast, Harriett’s Uncle Benjamin runs away, is captured and brought back where he is treated severely, and still runs away again. In the case of Gustavus, he had a master who was willing to allow him time at sea where he was able to make money on his own, but spent a great deal of money to buy his freedom.

This willingness to work for many years at jobs in addition to their regular tasks is another common theme in the quest for freedom and those who achieve that freedom are often then working to “buy” their family. Style Perspective Each of the stories is written in first person from the perspective of the author. It should be noted that three of these have two different names. For example, Gustavus Vassa was named Obaudah Equiano at birth and was later named Gustavus Vassa by a master. Because Gustavus used that name more frequently than the name given to him by his parents, he is referred to as Gustavus throughout the story.

Fredrick Douglass is a well-known name, though he was born Fredrick Augustus Washington Bailey. He took the name Douglass upon his arrival in the free states of the north, though he insisted on retaining his first name as some link to his true identity. For the sake of familiarity, he is referred to throughout this text as Fredrick Douglass. The same is true in the case of Harriett Jacobs who is writing as Linda Benton, and this author is referred to as Harriett Jacobs throughout the text. It should be noted that Jacobs admits at the beginning of the story to having changed the names of some of the people in her book.

In fact, research shows that she changed many of the names and it therefore seems appropriate that she would have changed her own name for the purposes of the story. Writing in first person seems the only possible option available to each of these authors because the stories are presented as factual events in the lives of each. Tone The story is written in a straight-forward manner but it should be noted that there are some graphic scenes that may be offensive to some readers. They are, however, a part of the history of these people and it seems appropriate that they should be presented.

For example, Gustavus Vassa describes the cruelties visited on the slaves of the Jamaican Islands. Those people were routinely beaten but the tortures often took the form of tying them in impossible positions where they were at the mercy of elements and creatures. In the case of each, the stories of separations of family members are a common theme and will likely touch the reader. It’s interesting to note that all three of these use words that may not commonly be associated with people of little formal education.

In most parts, the meanings of words are easily discerned but it should not be assumed that the level of writing is that of an uneducated person. Of the four stories, the messages of all are aptly conveyed but it seems that Harriett Jacobs’ story has a more personal slant, possibly because her story is of a more personal nature and involves her family and friends on a deeper level whereas the others, especially Gustavus Vassa, tells more of his travels and how other people treated him. The tone is often hopeless and a sensitive reader may find himself feeling pity for those involved.

Written Word Used as Propaganda The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave is an account of Frederick Douglass’ life written in a very detached and objective tone. One might find this normal for a historical account of the events of someone’s life if not for the fact that the narrative was written by Frederick Douglass himself. Frederick Douglass used this tone purposefully in an attempt to use his narrative as propaganda to convince others to join in the abolitionist’s movement.

According to Donna Woolfolk Cross in “Propaganda: How not to be Bamboozled,” propaganda is “simply a means of persuasion” (149). She further notes that we are subjected daily to propaganda in one form or another as advertisers, politicians, and even our friends attempt to persuade us to use their product, vote for them, or adopt their point of view. Propaganda is usually considered in a negative sense. However, when viewing propaganda as just persuasion, one can readily appreciate that it is neither good nor evil; the good/evil effect is the direct result of the purpose for which it is used.

Politicians and leaders have used propaganda to further their goals; Hitler’s use of propaganda as a means of controlling the population of Germany is the most recognizable example of propaganda used for evil. Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, in which he urges non-violent resistance in the cause of racial equality, portrays persuasion used with good intentions. Although speeches are highly effective at delivering ideas, the written word can be even more influential. In the early days of America, literature was used extensively as a means of persuasion.

As early as 1589 Richard Hakluyt published stories in a book he wrote for the sole purpose of persuading people to sail to America and settle land. These stories which were told to Hakluyt by captains and sailors appeared to be straightforward and narrative, however Hakluyt edited each piece so that he was able to successfully persuade the people who read his stories to sail to America and settle the land thus securing critical natural resources for England. Such was the goal with the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave.

Douglass’ objective was to appeal to the middle-class people of that time and persuade them to join in the movement. Although the Narrative was ostensibly written to prove that Douglass had actually been a slave, Douglass, working for the abolitionist group headed by William Lloyd Garrison, wrote for a specific audience: white Puritan Christians whom the abolitionists hoped to convert to their way of thinking. Thus, what began as a telling of his life experiences evolved into a tool of persuasion. As with all propaganda, Douglass’ Narrative contains certain elements that appeal to the emotions of the reader.

Douglass’ writing style was descriptive as well as convincing. This emotional hold allows the writer to sway the opinion of the reader. His horrific details of the time, helped him grasp the attention of the women who he hoped in turn would convince their husbands to help, by donating money and eventually ending slavery. He used his words effectively in convincing the readers that the slave owners were inhuman and showed how they had no feelings for other human beings as evident when he wrote: ‘The louder she screamed the harder he whipped; and where the blood ran fastest, there he whipped longest” (Douglass25).

Although a self-taught writer and orator, Douglass makes use of sophisticated elements of persuasive writing. Simultaneously, he chooses these events for how they will affect the Northern audience’s opinion of Southern slaveholders. Considering the fact that this was written during the height of the abolition movement the novel had to be effective in order to advance the success of the movement.

The distant tone was effective because if Douglass had written with an impassioned tone, readers would have noticed it and simply wrote it off as a biased work, unable to see the issue from both sides. Through personal anecdotes, Douglass draws an accurate picture of slave life. Douglass also shows that slavery was not a constant source of pain and suffering: “I was not old enough to work in the fields, and there being little else than field work to do, I had a great deal of leisure time,” (Douglass 71).

This is effective in proving his point because it allows him to show the whole of slavery and not be biased in his views. Douglass uses family relationships, starting with his own birth, to gain the compassion of his target audience. “Frequently, before the child has reached its twelfth month, its mother is taken from it, and hired out on some farm a considerable distance off, and the child is placed under the care of an old woman, too old for field labor” (749).

Douglass mentions this particular anecdote to specifically capture the compassion of his targeted audience; white women. In Douglass’ autobiography however, the elements alone do not prove his intent to write for any reason other than to prove his background as a slave and defend his credibility against the critics of the abolitionists that charge that Douglass could never have been born a slave as he claimed (McKivigan 18). The most convincing argument for the contention that this was written as propaganda is the manner in which the persuasive elements are used.

The body of the narrative is written in a simple and straightforward manner; the story is told quite matter-of-factly, even the horrific scenes of the cruel beatings and killings of slaves. This lack of histrionics is true even when the targets of the overseers’ whips are Douglass’ own family members. Yet, when Douglass speaks of Southern Christianity defending slavery, he works himself into a fury of emotion and uses the more obvious elements of propaganda. When he writes of the religious practices and hypocrisy of the same slaveholders, he again reverts to persuasive rhetoric.

Some chapters are genuine throughout, while others contain much propaganda. One segment in particular, that having to do with the fate of his grandmother, is written in a style that is not consistent with the rest of the book. Rather, extremely histrionic, in which the believable, factual Douglass disappears, and is replaced by someone writing solely for effect “My dear old grandmother, whom you turned out like an old horse to die in the woods-is she still alive?.. Send me my grandmother! ” (Preston 167).

It appears that Frederick Douglass did begin his autobiography with the intention of writing his story in a realistic manner; the basic narrative bears that out. But in the course of writing his intent strayed, and he became aware of the power that could be unleashed by inflaming the emotions of readers. Undoubtedly encouraged in his use persuasive rhetoric on an oratory level, he eventually created a masterpiece of propaganda. Works Cited Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. New York: Signet, 1968. Douglass, Frederick. A Slaves Family Life”. Thinking and Writing About Literature. A Text and Anthology. Ed. Michael Meyer. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2001. 749. Cross, Donna Woolfolk. “Propaganda: How not to be Bamboozled. ” Language Awareness. Ed. Paul Escholz, et al. New York: St Martins Press, 1994. 149. McKivigan, John R. , ed. Frederick Douglass. People Who Made History. Michigan: Greenhaven Press/Thomas Gale, 2004. Preston, Dickson J. Young Fredrick Douglass The Maryland Years. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980.

According to the anonymous author , “Objectivity is neither possible nor desirable. It’s not possible because all history is subjective; all history represents a point of view. “, which In other words means that people see history In the way they want to see It based on what they think Is Important. It Is not possible to be objective because everything one says and thinks Is based on our perceptions, knowledge, thoughts and feelings . It Isn’t desirable because If someone Is trying to get a point across, they have to be subjective. History, while trying to be objective is mostly subjective.

The historian brings their feelings, prejudices, backgrounds, as well as their P. O. Vs. to historical situations. This effects how history is told and written about. The various authors that have wrote about Columbus arrival to the New World based it off of their own view of the world and of Columbus. In ” A People’s History of the United States “, Howard Zion approaches his view on history in a more opinion based way. Howard Zion beings by retelling the encounter between the natives and Columbus. Zion’s view of this Is different from the traditional encounter most historians talk about.

Howard Zion points out that the Europeans came to the Americas in search of slaves and gold and brutally killed almost all the Indians, who according to many other people were a peaceful people. This shows that Zion Is subjective and doesn’t view Columbus as an “enlightened ” explorer but rather a brutal one that would do anything such as torture others to get what he wants. Then Zion gives his opinion on how history is usually told from the Elite groups point of view. Zion points out that Columbus thought the Natives were weak and wouldn’t be able to defend themselves.

Howard Zion does give facts about the encounter such as using Columbus own Journal as evidence but he does become biased in certain parts of the first chapter. In other words , Zion wanted to tell the Natives pop because he wants the reader to know about that part of history. Zion wanted to expose Columbus as a cruel man. The idea of exploitation of resources, of people, of cultural differences was an Important factor In the conquest of the New World. Zion’s way of thinking and his thought one how the elite shouldn’t be the only one that students should read about were reasons why Zion Is not objective at all.

He does become biased and bases his reasons on thoughts about letting the reader hear the Natives side of the story. In A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America”, Ronald Attack is subjective as well because he takes the Natives side by pointing a lot of negative defects of the Europeans. At first , Ronald Attack talks about how the Natives viewed the Europeans. Attack states that the Natives saw the Europeans as “ugly ” and “strange” . Ronald gives the reader an insight on how the Natives felt towards these explorers. A lot of other historians don’t teach about the thoughts of the oppressed people.

Then Attack talks about how the the English Justified colonization, enslavement and murder. The English didn’t view their taking of the land as robbery. Attack points out that Columbus saw these people As loving their neighbors as themselves, and having the sweetest talk In the world, and gentle, and always with a smile. Then the author writes about how the Europeans would destroy the Natives villages. The Europeans reclaimed the natives as savages and non-human. As an opportunity to take over the land. The Natives would be categorized as “the other” while the Europeans were entitled to the land.

Attack describes the Europeans as greedy and in control. Attack focuses on the severe treatment of the Indians and how this affected them in a negative way. This can be seen as being biased because Attack views the Natives as the victims and the Europeans as the villains . In the “American Pageant, chapter 1: New World Beginnings”, David M. Kennedy, Thomas A. Bailey, and Elizabeth Cohen present history in a more objective way. It is objective but the author still presents history in the way they want the reader to see it. They tell the reader only what they want them to know.

These authors start off by talking about the shaping of North America and the theory of Pangaea is explained. Then they inform the reader about early Americans such as the Pueblo Indians , Mound Builders and and Eastern Indians. Later on in chapter one , the authors start to talk about Columbus arrival to the New World. Throughout this section of the text , there was no opinions made. The authors state that Columbus was trying to reach the East Indies and how he misjudged the size of Earth. They are informing the reader rather than trying to convince them about a certain topic.

The authors don’t give their opinions on Columbus nor talk about his treatment towards the Natives. The quote does not go with this text because this text is showing that objectivity can be possible. The authors are being objective because they are basing their Judgment on the facts and what has been presented without putting any personal beliefs or bias comments. In “A Patriot’s History of the United States: From Columbus’ Great Discovery to the War on Terror, Chapter 1: The City On A Hill , 1492-1707”, Larry Shareware and Michael Allen’s way of telling the reader history can be seen as more objective.

Shareware and Allen wants to give the reader a fair story of the nation to the reader but does the opposite. Both authors become subjective because their history telling is based on patriotism. They want the reader to see the proud history of America. Allen and Shareware want to show their appreciation and respect for the United States. They leave out the negatives that occurred in history . This book (chapter 1) shows that history is a product of it’s authors. Since both of these authors are proud Americans , they want to show the positives of the nation throughout history.

In the first chapter , the authors point out that Columbus and other explorers such as Cortes were innocent and didn’t deliberately give the Native Americans diseases. The authors tell the history that all history books have in it but is also trying to go against “A People’s History of the United States. ” The authors point out that because Americans had a Christian Culture , they took life, liberty and property as serious manners. They also point out that hard work was a building block of the success of America. From chapter one , Allen and Shareware show a conservative perspective because they want the reader to see that the U.

S is a special nation because when the New World was found, settlers adopted several systems such as religious integrity, private property rights and also competition amongst groups like political parties. These authors want to show the reader that history can be subjective while containing facts. In “The Devastation of the Indies: A Short Account”, Bartholomew De Lass Cases does show a subjective way of telling history because he takes a side. Bartholomew tells the reader that the Europeans were cruel Soldiers would use this hospitality as an advantage to take over cities and villages.

This would allow them to get to the gold and slaves they wanted. Bartholomew goes on saying that the Europeans would massacre millions of natives , raping innocent woman and killing innocent children. The Spaniards would use slaves to build buildings and to attack other villages since sometimes the Spaniards didn’t want to use their own men. Bartholomew points out that the Spaniards committed genocide. There are two sides to every story and Barcarole goes with the side of the indigenous people. Bartholomew focused on the horrific actions taken by the Spaniards. Ironically , Barcarole was a Spaniard priest but still went against his people .

He believed that the conduct of the Spaniard Christians were not one of someone that followed the Christian faith. This ties in with the quote because Bartholomew is being subjective and is making it clear that objectivity can’t be possible in his brief account . Bartholomew wanted to portray the Spaniards in the worst light and also tell people the unfairness treatment that the Natives had to go through. Therefore , various authors that have wrote about Columbus arrival to the New World and the history of Early America have based it on their point of view and thoughts.

An authors ultra and worldview can affect the way they write about history by making it bias. Some authors might take a side and argue for that side. Authors will make their point using facts to back up their opinions. This leads to the conclusion that objectivity is rare in writings about history although it isn’t impossible . While the authors of “The American Pageant ” present history using facts and don’t take sides , other authors want to pursue the reader and make the reader believe what they believe. This shows that history is subjective because an author will base tell history in the way they want to.

The Powhatan (also spelled Powatan and Powhaten), is the name of a Virginia Indian tribe. It is also the name of a powerful group of tribes which they dominated. It is estimated that there were about 14,000-21,000 of these native Powhatan people in eastern Virginia when the English settled Jamestown in 1607. They were also known as Virginia Algonquians, as they spoke an eastern-Algonquian language known as Powhatan.

In the late 16th and early 17th centuries, a mamanatowick (paramount chief) named Wahunsunacawh created a powerful organization by affiliating 30 tributary peoples, whose territory was much of eastern Virginia, called Tsenacommacah (“densely-inhabited Land”)

Wahunsunacawh came to be known by the English as “Chief Powhatan. ” Each of the tribes within this organization had its own weroance (chief), but all paid tribute to Chief Powhatan. After Chief Powhatan’s death in 1618, hostilities with colonists escalated under the chiefdom of his brother, Opechancanough, who sought in vain to drive off the encroaching English.

His large-scale attacks in 1622 and 1644 met strong reprisals by the English, resulting in the near elimination of the tribe. By 1646 what is called the Powhatan Paramount Chiefdom by modern historians had been largely destroyed. In addition to the ongoing conflicts with the ever-expanding English settlements and their inhabitants, the Powhatan suffered a high death rate due to infectious diseases, maladies introducted to North America by the Europeans to which the Native Americans of the United States had developed no natural immunities.

By this time, the leaders of the colony were desperate for labor to develop the land. Almost half of the English and European immigrants arrived as indentured servants. As colonial expansion continued, the colonists imported growing numbers of enslaved Africans for labor. By 1700 the colonies had about 6,000 black slaves, one-twelfth of the population. It was common for black slaves to escape and join the surrounding Powhatan; white servants were also noted to have joined the Indians.

Africans and whites worked and lived together; some natives also intermarried with them. After Bacon’s Rebellion in 1676, the colony enslaved Indians for control. In 1691 the House of Burgesses abolished Indian slavery; however, many Powhatan were held in servitude well into the 18th century. In the 21st century, eight Indian tribes are recognized by the state as having ties with the original Powhatan complex chiefdom.

The Pamunkey and Mattaponi are the only two peoples who have retained reservation lands from the 17th century. The competing cultures of the Powhatan and English settlers were united temporarily through the marriage of Pocahontas and John Rolfe. Their son Thomas Rolfe was the ancestor of many Virginians; thus, many of the First Families of Virginia have both English and Virginia Indian ancestry.

History

Naming and terminology The name “Powhatan” is believed to have originated as the name of the village or town that Wahunsunacawh came from. The official title Chief Powhatan used by the English is believed to have been derived from the name of this location.

Although the specific situs of his home village is unknown, in modern times, the Powhatan Hill neighborhood in the East End portion of the modern-day city of Richmond, Virginia is thought by many to be in the general vicinity of the original village. Tree Hill Farm, which is situated in nearby Henrico County a short distance to the east, is also considered as the possible site. “Powhatan” was also the name used by the natives to refer to the river where the town sat at the head of navigation. The English colonists chose to name it instead for their own leader, King James I.

Many features in the early years of the Virginia Colony were named in honor of the king, as well as his three children, Elizabeth, Henry, and Charles. Although portions of Virginia’s longest river upstream from Columbia were much later named for Queen Anne of Great Britain, in modern times, it is called the James River. It extends from Hampton Roads westerly to the confluence of the Jackson River and Cowpasture River near the town of Clifton Forge. (The Rivanna River, a tributary of the James River, and Fluvanna County, each survive as named in legacy to Queen Anne).

However, the only water body in Virginia to retain a name which honors the Powhatan peoples is Powhatan Creek, located in James City County near Williamsburg. Powhatan County and its county seat at Powhatan, Virginia were honorific names established years later, in locations west of the area populated by the Powhatan peoples. The county was formed in may, 1777. Complex chiefdom Likewise, perhaps more significant misnomers are the terms “Powhatan Confederacy” and “Powhatan Confederation. This grouping of tribes is clearly not best-defined in modern terms as a confederacy. That word is generally thought of as a grouping of entities each with greater individual power than the group when united. In many uses, a confederacy is distinctly different in structure from a centralized greater power than the parts, such as the current federal structure of the United States. Many historians attribute to a minor level the failure of the Confederate States of America during the American Civil War in part to the weakness of the central government in comparison to the Union. It is important for a reader to note that most historians do not consider this difference as one of the major weaknesses leading to the Southern loss. However, the term Confederacy has become associated with the principal of states’ rights versus the central U. S. government). Using the word “confederacy” to define the Powhatan tribes extant in 1607 can therefore, be misleading when seeking to understand these people, their governments and their culture. It is true that the various tribes each held some individual powers locally.

Each had a chief known as a weroance (male) or, more rarely, a weroansqua (female), meaning “commander,”. As of 2010, we do not know to what degree most of the various tribes belonged to the group by choice or perhaps by coercion or even greater force. As early as the era of John Smith of Virginia, the individual tribes of this grouping were clearly recognized by the English as falling under the greater authority of the centralized power (whatever it is labeled) led by the chiefdom of Chief Powhatan (c. June 17, 1545 – c. 1618), whose proper name was Wahunsenacawh or (in 17th century English spelling) Wahunsunacock. At the time of the 1607 English Settlement at Jamestown, he ruled primarily from Werowocomoco, which was located on northern shore of the York River. This location of Werowocomoco, itself only rediscovered in the early 21st century, was very central to locations of the various tribes. The improvements discovered during archaeological research at Werowocomoco have reinforced the paramount chiefdom of Chief Powhatan over the other tribes in the power hierarchy. Such issues in other cultures and the definitions are covered at some length by author Robert L.

Carneiro in his 1981 work on anthropology, The Chiefdom: Precursor of the State. The Transition to Statehood in the New World. The center of power held by Chief Powhatan (and his several successors) is much more concisely defined as a “complex chiefdom. ”  To refer to this complex chiefdom, the term “Powhatan Paramount Chiefdom” has become favored. Over time, this and other revisions to the knowledge and information available about the Powhatan peoples native to Virginia will undoubtedly be made as research work at Werowocomoco and elsewhere continues in the 21st century. See also: Werowocomoco edit] Chief Powhatan builds his chiefdom Wahunsunacawh had inherited control over just six tribes, but dominated more than thirty by the time the English settlers established their Virginia Colony at Jamestown in 1607. The original six constituent tribes in Wahunsunacock’s group were: the Powhatan (proper), the Arrohateck, the Appamattuck, the Pamunkey, the Mattaponi, and the Chiskiack. He added the Kecoughtan to his fold by 1598. Some other affiliated groups included the Youghtanund, Rappahannocks, Moraughtacund, Weyanoak, Paspahegh, Quiyoughcohannock, Warraskoyack, and Nansemond.

Yet another closely related tribe in the midst of these others, all speaking the same language, was the Chickahominy, who managed to preserve their autonomy from the Powhatan Paramount Chiefdom. In his famous work Notes on the State of Virginia (1781–82), Thomas Jefferson estimated that the Powhatan Confederacy occupied about 8,000 square miles (20,000 km2) of territory, with a population of about 8,000 people, of whom 2400 were warriors. [11] Later scholars estimated the population of the paramountcy[clarification needed] as 15,000. [edit] The English settlers in the land of the Powhatan John Smith taking the King of Pamunkey prisoner’, a fanciful image of Opechancanough from Smith’s General History of Virginia (1624). The image of Opechancanough is based on a 1585 painting of another native warrior by John White[1] The Powhatan Confederacy were the Indians among whom the English made their first permanent settlement in North America. This contributed to their downfall. Conflicts began immediately; the English colonists fired shots as soon as they arrived (due to a bad experience they had with the Spanish prior to their arrival). Within two weeks of the English arrival at Jamestown, deaths had occurred. The settlers had hoped for friendly relations and had planned to trade with the Virginia Indians for food. Captain Christopher Newport led the first English exploration party up the James River in 1607, when he met Parahunt, weroance of the Powhatan proper. The English initially mistook him for the paramount Powhatan (mamanatowick), who was in fact his father, Wahunsunacawh. On a hunting and trade mission on the Chickahominy River in December 1607, Captain John Smith, later president of the colony, was captured by Opechancanough, the younger brother of Wahunsunacawh.

Smith became the first Englishman to meet the paramount chief, Powhatan. According to Smith’s account, Pocahontas, Wahunsunacawh’s daughter, prevented her father from executing Smith. Some researchers have asserted that a mock execution was a ritual intended to adopt Smith into the tribe, but other modern writers dispute this interpretation. They point out that nothing is known of 17th-century Powhatan adoption ceremonies. They note that an execution ritual is different from known rites of passage.

Other historians, such as Helen Rountree, have questioned whether there was any risk of execution. They note that Smith failed to mention it in his 1608 and 1612 accounts, and only added it to his 1624 memoir, after Pocahontas had become famous. In 1608, Captain Newport realized that Powhatan’s friendship was crucial to the survival of the small Jamestown colony. In the summer of that year, he tried to “crown” the paramount Chief, with a ceremonial crown, to make him an English “vassal. They also gave Powhatan many European gifts, such as a pitcher, feather mattress, bed frame, and clothes. The coronation went badly because they asked Powhatan to kneel to receive the crown, which he refused to do. As a powerful leader, Powhatan followed two rules: “he who keeps his head higher than others ranks higher,” and “he who puts other people in a vulnerable position, without altering his own stance, ranks higher. ” To finish the “coronation”, several English had to lean on Powhatan’s shoulders to get him low enough to place the crown on his head, as he was a tall man.

Afterwards, the English might have thought that Powhatan had submitted to King James, whereas Powhatan likely thought nothing of the sort. In fact, only by being warned beforehand by a sympathizing servant, was an assassination plot led by braves averted (the British also refused to let the natives take their muskets for “safekeeping”). After John Smith became president of the colony, he sent a force under Captain Martin to occupy an island in Nansemond territory and drive the inhabitants away. At the same time, he sent another force with Francis West to build a fort at the James River falls.

He purchased the nearby fortified Powhatan village (present site of Richmond, Virginia) from Parahunt for some copper and an English servant named Henry Spelman, who wrote a rare firsthand account of the Powhatan ways of life. Smith then renamed the village “Nonsuch”, and tried to get West’s men to live in it. Both these attempts at settling beyond Jamestown soon failed, due to Powhatan resistance. Smith left Virginia for England in October 1609, never to return, because of an injury sustained in a gunpowder accident.

Soon afterward, the English established a second fort, Fort Algernon, in Kecoughtan territory. The Coronation of Powhatan, oil on canvas, John Gadsby Chapman, 1835 In November 1609, Captain John Ratcliffe was invited to Orapakes, Powhatan’s new capital. After he had sailed up the Pamunkey River to trade there, a fight broke out between the colonists and the Powhatan. All of the English ashore were killed, including Ratcliffe, who was tortured by the women of the tribe. Those aboard the pinnace escaped and told the tale at Jamestown. During that next year, the tribe attacked and killed many Jamestown residents.

The residents fought back, but only killed twenty. However, arrival at Jamestown of a new Governor, Thomas West, 3rd Baron De La Warr, (Lord Delaware) in June of 1610 signalled the beginning of the First Anglo-Powhatan War. A brief period of peace came only after the capture of Pocahontas, her baptism, and her marriage to tobacco planter John Rolfe in 1614. Within a few years both Powhatan and Pocahontas were dead. The Chief died in Virginia, but Pocahontas died while in England. Meanwhile, the English settlers continued to encroach on Powhatan territory.

After Wahunsunacawh’s death, his younger brother, Opitchapam, briefly became chief, followed by their younger brother Opechancanough. In 1622 and 1644 he attacked the English to force them from Powhatan territories. Both these attempts were met with strong reprisals from the English, ultimately resulting in the near destruction of the tribe. The Second Anglo–Powhatan War that followed the 1644 incident ended in 1646, after Royal Governor of Virginia William Berkeley’s forces captured Opechancanough, thought to be between 90 and 100 years old.

While a prisoner, Opechancanough was killed, shot in the back by a soldier assigned to guard him. He was succeeded as Weroance by Necotowance, and later by Totopotomoi and by his daughter Cockacoeske. The Treaty of 1646 marked the effective dissolution of the united confederacy, as white colonists were granted an exclusive enclave between the York and Blackwater Rivers. This physically separated the Nansemonds, Weyanokes and Appomattox, who retreated southward, from the other Powhatan tribes then occupying the Middle Peninsula and Northern Neck.

While the southern frontier demarcated in 1646 was respected for the remainder of the 17th century, the House of Burgesses lifted the northern one on September 1, 1649. Waves of new immigrants quickly flooded the peninsular region, then known as Chickacoan, and restricted the dwindling tribes to lesser tracts of land that became some of the earliest Indian reservations. In 1665, the House of Burgesses passed stringent laws requiring the Powhatan to accept chiefs appointed by the governor. After the Treaty of Albany in 1684, the Powhatan Confederacy all but vanished.

Red line shows boundary between the Virginia Colony and Tributary Indian tribes, as established by the Treaty of 1646. Red dot on river shows Jamestown, capital of Virginia Colony. Capitals of the Powhatan people The capital village of “Powhatan” was believed to be in the present-day Powhatan Hill section of the eastern part of Richmond, Virginia, or perhaps nearby in a location which became part of Tree Hill Farm. Another major center of the confederacy about 75 miles (121 km) to the east was called Werowocomoco. It was located near the north bank of the York River in present-day Gloucester County.

Werowocomoco was described by the English colonists as only 15 miles (24 km) as the crow flies from Jamestown, but also described as 25 miles (40 km) downstream from present-day West Point, measurements which conflict with each other. In 2003 archaeologists initiated excavations at a site in Gloucester County that have revealed an extensive indigenous settlement from about 1200 (the late Woodland period) through the early Contact period. Work since then has added to their belief that this is the location of Werowocomoco. The site is on a farm bordering n Purtain Bay of the York River, about 12 nautical miles (22 km) from Jamestown. The more than 50 acres (200,000 m2) residential settlement extends up to 1,000 feet (300 m) back from the river. In 2004, researchers excavated two curving ditches of 200 feet (60 m) at the far edge, which were constructed about 1400 CE. In addition to extensive artifacts from hundreds of years of indigenous settlement, researchers have found a variety of trade goods related to the brief interaction of Native Americans and English in the early years of Jamestown.

Around 1609, Wahunsunacock shifted his capital from Werowocomoco to Orapakes, located in a swamp at the head of the Chickahominy River, near the modern-day interchange of Interstate 64 and Interstate 295. Sometime between 1611 and 1614, he moved further north to Matchut, in present-day King William County on the north bank of the Pamunkey River, not far from where his brother Opechancanough ruled one of the member tribes at Youghtanund. Characteristics The Powhatan lived east of the fall line in Tidewater Virginia.

They built their houses, called yehakins, by bending saplings and placing woven mats or bark over top of the saplings. They supported themselves primarily by growing crops, especially maize, but they also fished and hunted in the great forest in their area. Villages consisted of a number of related families organized in tribes led by a chief (weroance/werowance or weroansqua if female). They paid tribute to the paramount chief (mamanatowick), Powhatan.  According to research by the National Park Service, Powhatan “men were warriors and hunters, while women were gardeners and gatherers.

The English described the men, who ran and walked extensively through the woods in pursuit of enemies or game, as tall and lean and possessed of handsome physiques. The women were shorter, and were strong because of the hours they spent tending crops, pounding corn into meal, gathering nuts, and performing other domestic chores. When the men undertook extended hunts, the women went ahead of them to construct hunting camps. The Powhatan domestic economy depended on the labor of both sexes. ” All of Virginia’s natives practiced agriculture. They periodically moved their villages from site to site.

Villagers cleared the fields by felling, girdling, or firing trees at the base and then using fire to reduce the slash and stumps. A village became unusable as soil productivity gradually declined and local fish and game were depleted. The inhabitants then moved on. With every change in location, the people used fire to clear new land. They left more cleared land behind. The natives also used fire to maintain extensive areas of open game habitat throughout the East, later called “barrens” by European colonists. The Powhatan also had rich fishing grounds.

Bison had migrated to this area by the early 15th century. The Powhatan people today [edit] State and federal recognition As of 2010, the state of Virginia has recognized eight Powhatan Indian-descended tribes in Virginia. Collectively, the tribes currently have 3,000-3,500 enrolled as tribal members. It is estimated, however, that 3 to 4 times that number are eligible for tribal membership. Two of these tribes, the Mattaponi and Pamunkey, still retain their reservations from the 17th century and are located in King William County, Virginia.

Since the 1990s, the Powhatan Indian tribes which have state recognition, along with the other Virginia Indian tribe which has state recognition, have been seeking federal recognition. It has been a difficult process. They have been hampered by the lack of official records verifying heritage and by the historical misclassification of family members in the 1930s and 1940s, largely a result of Virginia’s state policy of race classification on official documents.

After Virginia passed stringent segregation laws in the early 20th century and ultimately the Racial Integrity Act of 1924 which mandated every person who had any African heritage be deemed black, Walter Plecker, the head of Vital Statistics office, directed all state and local registration offices to use only the terms “white” or “colored” to denote race on official documents and thereby eliminated all traceable records of Virginia Indians. All state documents, including birth certificates, death certificates, marriage licenses, tax forms and land deeds, thus bear no record of Virginia Indians.

Plecker oversaw the Vital Statistics office in the state for several decades, beginning in the early 20th century, and took a personal interest in eliminating traces of Virginia Indians. As a follower of the eugenics movement and, by modern day standards, a white supremacist, Plecker falsely surmised that there were no true Virginia Indians remaining as years of intermarriage has diluted the race. Over his years of service, he conducted a campaign to reclassify all bi-racial and multi-racial individuals as black, believing such persons were fraudulently attempting to claim their race to be Indian or white.

The effect of his reclassification has been described by tribal members as “paper genocide”. Initially, the Virginia tribes’ efforts to gain federal recognition encountered resistance due to federal legislators’ concerns over whether gambling would be established on their lands if recognition were granted, as it would raise federal tax concerns and also casinos are illegal in Virginia. In March 2009, five of the state-recognized Powhatan Indian tribes and the one other state-recognized Virginia Indian tribe introduced a bill to gain federal recognition through an act of Congress. The bill, “The Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act”, included a section forbidding the tribes from opening casinos, even if casinos became legal in Virginia. The House Committee on Natural Resources recommended the bill be considered by the US House of Representatives at the end of April, the House approved the bill on June 3, 2009. The bill was then sent to the Senate’s Committee on Indian Affairs, who recommended it be heard by the Senate as a whole in October. On December 23, 2009, the bill was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under general orders, which is where the bill is currently.

The motivation behind each endeavors goals could have been the use for good, wealth, money, or prosperity. The chemistry of the compound is related to their usage and motive for obtaining them because molecules can control the trade and use of one specific area of the world. Some major molecules that were valued are phenol, Suppression, silk, cellulose, and glucose. Phenols were used as antiseptics during surgery to prevent cuts and wounds from getting infected. Suppression, which is rubber, has been made into countless everyday items that we use to this day.

Silk is one of the most valued fabrics in the world. Silk is very hard to harvest and it is expensive. Cellulose is the main component of cotton. Cotton is cheap and most of our clothes are made out of it today but it has fueled slavery for most of the 18th and 19th centuries. Glucose is our everyday sweetener that is always at hand but this has also been a product of slavery during the same time period of cotton. All of these molecules have been valued at some point or another. Each molecule here has been a product of someone’s endeavor to gain some sort of goal. . Serendipity Is the occurrence and development of events by chance In a happy or beneficial way. A decent majority of chemical discoveries are serendipitous, either by means of trying to create artificial chemicals, failing and creating something accidental, or just by plain dumb luck. Most of the discoveries and expansions of intro compounds has to do with luck. One account of pure randomness is when Christian Frederica Such¶been spilled a mixture of nitric acid and sulfuric acid on his wife’s apron.

When he hung it to dry, he had converted the cellulose in the apron as an internal source of oxygen; when heated, it exploded. Phenols also had a high probability in chance. Joseph Leister covered a clothe in phenols as an antiseptic which worked almost every time in use. This led to the cleanliness for germ-free techniques In surgery. Suppression, or rubber, Is another discovery with luck by Its side. If a Christopher Columbus hadn’t gone to the new world and brought back rubber a lot of our everyday Items wouldn’t exist.

Charles Macintosh also discovered a waste product from a local gas works that could convert rubber into a fabric. This fabric is a very useful item in our lives, for its waterproof qualities. Wonder drugs have come a long way in past couple of centuries, from herbs to pills. Without these painkillers, many would have suffered or even died. Chlorination compounds have kept our food fresh and spoil free for decades. CIFS have refrigerated items across oceans and continents and kept them from rotting, which could have been detrimental to sailors in the 19th century.

All of these chemical discoveries had some type of serendipitous involvement in our world for good and beneficial reasons. 3. “With great power comes great responsibility. ” In some cases, the men In charge began to neglect their moral power of the Industry. During the process of making silk In the early 20th century, the corporations used child labor. The children could get in places could not, sanitary or unsanitary. The children got very little or no infectious diseases and had deformed backs.

Today in the world, Japanese corporations treat their workers the same: low pay and poor working conditions. Slavery was another big issue once the trading of sugar began. When sugar plantations began in the new world, we enslaved innocent Africans to work on the plantations. The slaves had to work from the break of dawn till the sun set. Slaves were beat if they didn’t obey the master’s rules and they poor living conditions. Today in Africa children are tricked into being enslaved to work on cocoa plantations just as slaves did two hundred years ago.