The Development of American Colonies

History 105
American Colonial Diversity and Marginalization of Oppressed Groups
It is often said that history is written by the winners. In the case of early American history, this is also true. Although America’s founding settlers, much like the Founding Fathers of the new nation, are often portrayed as enthusiastic proponents of liberty, the truth is far more complicated. Although the New World did offer greater social mobility to some groups than did the original Mother Country from which so many settlers came, a new form of social immobility, partially based upon race was instituted in many ways, which disenfranchised African Americans and Native Americans.
Economics and Race
The New World colonies were founded for diverse reasons, and this is reflected in their evolution. Geography, the character of the settlers, and a number of other critical social and historical factors ensured that the colonies evolved in very diverse ways. For example, the early English colony of Jameson was largely founded for economic reasons. Although this particular colony was ultimately not successful, later women who came to what would eventually become the state of Virginia were called tobacco brides because the woman’s dowry was usually tobacco (Foner, Give Me Liberty, 26). This highlights the extent to which the cash crop was a factor in the development of the emerging economy of the new colony. This dependence upon cash crops likewise is reflected in the colony’s dependence upon slavery and its asymmetrical power relationships, even among freed men. Later, of course, tobacco would be replaced by cotton as the driving economic force behind the South’s economy.
The dependence upon slavery would soon become characteristic of all the Southern colonies. What was once considered among whites transient status, in the form of indentured servitude, instead became a permanent status for Black residents of the Americas in the form of racially determined slavery. While indentured servitude was common throughout the colonies, and house slaves were present in all the new settlements, slavery as a primary means of subsistence was concentrated in the South. Of course, this would later become the source of increased tensions between the two regions, North and South, even during the framing of the Constitution and later during the Civil War, but even before America was formally a nation, status, citizenship, and freedom were racially coded.
This was, of course, not the only form of racial discrimination practiced in the New World. Tensions were rife between Native Americans and colonial incursions, particularly amongst the English versus purely trade-driven Europeans such as the French. Still, during the early stages of settlement, there were some efforts to establish better relationships with the Native American population: “Despite their insistence that Indians had no real claim to the land since they did not cultivate or improve it, most colonial authorities in practice recognized Indians’ title based on occupancy. They acquired land by purchase, often in treaties” (Foner, Give Me Liberty, 56). Although later in history the colonists would not show this kind of regard for the Native Americans’ right to any land, even if it was specified in treaties, during this early stage they at least showed slightly more consideration.
Even when the colonists were showing some degree of consideration to the Indians’ rights as independent nations to enter into treaties, however, they were changing the land in a manner which altered the structure of the relationship of humans to nature that a significant, negative impact upon native settlement. Settlers fenced in land, allowed their own livestock to roam freely, which damaged Indian hunting and gathering. Using wood as fuels also deprived Indians of cover while hunting (Foner, Give Me Liberty, 58). Although the Native Americans engaged in some profitable trading relationships, overall the effects upon native life were harmful and ultimately undercut their claim upon the land and their right to dictate how to use their territories and govern their lives.
Religion
Religion similarly emerged as a distinction between the different colonies. The New England colonies were founded by Puritans who sought to purify the Anglican Church or cleanse it of so-called Popish influences. In contrast to the later, secular or Deist ideals of the Founding Fathers, who would deemphasize the importance of religion and instead stress the need for liberty, John Winthrop, of the Massachusetts Bay Colony instead decried so-called natural liberty as evil, versus the liberty he believed was superior, that of the freedom given by God (Foner, Voices of Freedom, 31). Although the Puritans may have been persecuted themselves, this did not inspire within their society a love of religious liberty. In Massachusetts, individuals such as the female preacher Anne Hutchinson who spoke out against the orthodoxy of the church elders, such as their advocacy of predestination, were condemned (Foner, Voices of Freedom, 34). However, it should be noted that, despite Hutchinson’s trial, there was often greater prospects for female empowerment within Puritan society than in traditional, English society—certain more so for working-class women: “Although all ministers were men, the Puritan belief in the ability of believers to interpret the Bible opened the door for some women to claim positions of religious leadership” (Foner, Give Me Liberty, 66).
Furthermore, in contrast to the dogmatic beliefs of the Puritans, the colony of Maryland advanced the Act Concerning Religion which permitted tolerance within the state’s borders. Pennsylvania, although founded for religious reasons by the Quaker William Penn, ultimately proclaimed itself a colony which would allow freedom for all (Foner, Voices of Freedom, 47). Regardless, once again colonial practices in many ways had a negative impact upon Native Americans, as missionaries attempted to alter traditional religious and belief structures in the name of spreading the Gospel.
Governing Structures
Another notable difference between Northern and Southern colonies was their governing structures. Southern colonies tended to be far more dispersed, and have limited oversight. Northern colonies, such as Massachusetts, were heavily regulated, largely because of the influence of the church, but also because of their smaller size and the closer proximity with which people lived to one another (Foner, Give Me Liberty, 68). Later on, this different approach to governing would create friction between different states in terms of dictating how America itself would be ruled.
Similarities and Differences
While there were profound differences in terms of economics and the predominance given to religion within the colonies, it should be noted that there were some uniting similarities. There was an underlying concept of liberty that united all settlers, even if that concept of liberty was vastly different. Some colonists came for religious freedom; some for economic freedom, but all believed that the New World offered them greater potential to live their lives without the existing constraints that hemmed them in back home.
The problem was, however, was that their conceptions of liberty were often conflicting. Freedom for one group did not mean freedom for all. Even within the Puritan colony, there were conflicts about the degree to which religious liberty could be expressed. The Puritans wished to be free to observe what they considered to be the correct religious doctrine, not for all inhabitants to be free to follow their conscience. And economic freedom for colonists often meant the denial of freedom of Native Americans to enjoy their land rights, and for African slaves to enjoy any freedom at all, particularly in the Southern colonies. In fact, the enrichment of the South was dependent upon the loss of freedom of many.
Works Cited
Foner, Eric. Give Me Liberty. New York: W.W. Norton, 2011.
Foner, Eric. Voices of Freedom. New York: W.W. Norton, 2016.