British Colonization

[AmbivalentEye]

The English Colonies of North America

Beginning in the late 16th century and carrying into much of the 1600’s, English colonies were rapidly developing and going through extensive changes that would serve as the basis of the New World. Early on, these colonies commenced as economic prospects of Europe, but later developed as outlets to resolve much religious turmoil in the mainland. Therefore, while the original interest was in the possible profits of commerce, the settling of British North America came to be mainly due to the religious concerns of the people. These gave rise to the many diverse Protestant communities of the New World.

Beginning in the early 1600’s, the Virginia Company held high hopes in expanding commerce to the New World, so they received a Royal Charter from King James to establish Jamestown in 1607 along Chesapeake Bay. Of all the English colonies established throughout the 17th century, Jamestown was the only one made purely out economic interest and supported by the profits of the tobacco industry of John Rolfe. All other colonies following this time period arose from some connection to the religious unrest taking place in England at this time. The core of the conflict began when Queen Elizabeth passed away and King James I claimed authority of the throne. Upon doing this, he ended all of Elizabeth’s policies of religious tolerance and since she had been Protestant, and he was deeply Catholic, he, along with his son Charles, who later succeeded the throne, started a movement of religious repression of Protestants in Europe; most specifically, Puritan groups. All this conflict, hatred, and prejudice resulted in the Great Migration, which was a movement of Puritans to the New World between 1629 and 1643. This group, led by John Winthrop, was able to attain a Royal charter for the Massachusetts Bay Company to start a colony in Chesapeake Bay. The New World soon came to be known as a haven for Protestants and other groups of differing religious beliefs. In this manner, the English monarchy succeeded in reducing their “Protestant problems” in Europe.

In September of 1620, William Bradford also led another religious group known as the Pilgrims, a Separatist group that thought the Anglican Church to be corrupt and wished to create religious establishments of their own. They accomplished this in Plymouth colony. Their colony, unable to sustain any profitable crops was unable to benefit from exports and rather turned to fishing and lumbering. This was the same for many of the northern colonies that had to sustain harsh winters that would destroy crops. As a result, the majority of the later colonies of northeastern North America would be seen primarily as religious havens for various groups of people. This also meant that the Puritans, which had always valued enterprise and hard work were able to benefit from its many merchants, entrepreneurs and commercial farmers.

Puritans and Pilgrims weren’t the only groups that were persecuted in England and forced to colonize North America. Believe it or not, in the 1630’s there was a large group of Catholics that also sought escape from the religious turmoils of Europe and crossed the Atlantic to settle in Maryland. Maryland, which was established by the Calverts, granted religious freedoms and a representative government to its people. Another similar establishment was New York, started by the Duke of York who was given the land by his brother, King Charles I. In New York, Englishmen also hoped to build a community free of all the troubles taking place in Europe. The last of these persecuted nonprotestant groups were the Quakers, who believed in a personal relationship with God and an “inner light”. The Puritans and their strict theocratic ways of governing voraciously oppressed these groups of Quakers. William Penn led the Quakers, also commonly known as the “Society of Friends”, and they started a proprietary colony in Pennsylvania, which was the only colony to also accomplish long periods of peace with its surrounding Native tribes.

Finally, the last massive population that must also be accounted for are the New England communities of dissent. Some of these included Thomas Hooker, who established religious freedoms in Connecticut in 1636 after being persecuted by Puritans. Anne Hutchinson and Samuel Gorton were also victims of this Puritan oppression community and they moved to Rhode Island in 1638. Here, Roger Williams who believed in the separation of Church and State, joined these aforementioned people to attain a charter in 1644 in order to establish legally the proprietary colony of Rhode Island with full religious tolerance for all people.

Thus, with the European expansion to the New World, there wasn’t only the many prospects of economy or commerce, but most intrinsically, there was now an open haven for a great variety of peoples with differing religious ideals. From the Chesapeake colonies, to each individual New England settlement, groups such as the Puritans, Pilgrims, Quakers, Huguenots and even Catholics, finally had a place to practice their beliefs at their will and with common liberty. These diverse communities are what constituted the backbone of American society.

[skap35]

Thus, with the European expansion to the New World, there wasn’t only the many prospects of economy or commerce, but most intrinsically, there was now an open haven for a great variety of peoples with differing religious ideals. From the Chesapeake colonies, to each individual New England settlement, groups such as the Puritans, Pilgrims, Quakers, Huguenots and even Catholics, finally had a place to practice their beliefs at their will and with common liberty. These diverse communities are what constituted the backbone of American society.

Yes, from the very beginning America was a place you could come to to live and worship freely. The fact so many people had come to the territories specifically to escape persecution probably played a large role in the framing of the Constitution as well.

However, just as a side note, I find it a bit ironic that these groups came over here in the 1600's, to avoid persecution. Then as soon as they established themselves some of those groups immediately began persecution of others. Specifically the widespread witch burnings of the 1600's. I believe this was isolated to a few specific groups in the New England colonies, however.

My point is that even though America had been a place to come to avoid persecution and oppression, it wasn't until the United States was born and the Constitution written that these groups truly had freedom to live and worship as they pleased.

[softwareNerd]

Here (link) is another thread on "colonialism". Edited September 4, 2005 by softwareNerd

[AmbivalentEye]

" I find it a bit ironic that these groups came over here in the 1600's, to avoid persecution. Then as soon as they established themselves some of those groups immediately began persecution of others. Specifically the widespread witch burnings of the 1600's. I believe this was isolated to a few specific groups in the New England colonies, however."

Yes, you are right. it was with the Puritans. Puritans established the Massachusetts Bay colony saying that they would have religious freedom, but in fact, they were only referring to themselves. Puritans often exiled pilgrims and spent their time burning Quakers. Puritan ideals were always very strictly enforced in the colonial era and I believe ore than 2/3 of the religious conflicts during this time was due to their plans to "purify" society.

[Dagny]

I think the colonization of Australia is really interesting. The idea of putting all convicts on a far away island because your jails are overcrowded and how it turned into modern Australia seems fascinating. I'm planning to do some reading up on this subject to learn the details. The British certainly have done their share in shaping our world.

[skap35]

The British certainly have done their share in shaping our world.

One thing I find interesting about colonization is that of China. During the time that Europe was busy dividing up the world, China was far more powerful, militarily than most of Europe. They could have easily been more successful at colonization, but they had this arrogant attitude that "China was the center of the world, therefore there was no point in exploring that wasteland beyond China's borders."

The end result was that Britain ended up wearing them down through the opium wars. So had they actually grabbed up some land before Europe did, they could have been very powerful. In fact, there is evidence that ancient China discovered America *years* before the vikings did. If they didn't have such an arrogant attitude they could have easily changed the world even more than Britain did.

[Praxus]

One thing I find interesting about colonization is that of China. During the time that Europe was busy dividing up the world, China was far more powerful, militarily than most of Europe.

What part of europe are you referring to?

[the tortured one]

It is interesting to note that, of the remains of the colonial period, the most prosperous modern nations are those of British descent. America, Australia, Hong Kong, etc. Even India is showing a rapid acceptance of Capitalism after a history of anti-life Hinduism, Buddism, and Islam. Other colonial powers, such as Spain, consistently left mercantilist heritages, which fell into communism and socialism all too easy.

for an interesting read on religion in the new world, read the book "Freethinkers" by Susan Jacoby. Don't expect anything Earth shattering, philosophically, as she comes across as slightly liberal. But don't let that detain you, it's a finely written book that presents a history not taunt in the textbooks. She explains how post-Revolutionary War America was a power struggle between different religious factions, all hoping to make a Christian nation. Remember, this is the 1790's, 20 years before the French Revolution. Even though the treaty of Wesphalia made religious wars a thing of the past (though not so distant past at that time) most of the Christian regimes were still in place. It was thought that a protestant America could help tip the balance of power away from Catholic Spain, Italy, and France.

She also highlights Patrick Henry, Robert Ingersoll, and highlights some of the fights between religion and secularism. Early religious scuffles include the fight to prevent vaccines, anaesthesia, and other things not even considered today. I wonder if one day our fights: Abortion, stem cell research, and cloning, will one day end up like that, not even thought about.

One thing I find interesting about colonization is that of China. During the time that Europe was busy dividing up the world, China was far more powerful, militarily than most of Europe.

A bold statement, especially given Europe's high technology. Care to elaborate?

Edited September 22, 2005 by the tortured one

[skap35]

A bold statement, especially given Europe's high technology. Care to elaborate?

This was coming from a British History course I took several years ago, so the details have faded from my memory. But the overall argument was as follows: First, it took Europe about (arguably) 700-800 years to recover from the fall of Western Rome. That period, of course would be the dark ages. So when European exploration/colonization started to take off, China had an 800 year head start on Europe. Fortunately for Europe, China was too arrogant to take advantage of that. Their leaders over the years basically had this belief that China was the center of the world, which made it pointless to explore whatever was out there.

Chinese superiority is evident when you examine the colonization patterns of China (and to a lesser extent India) compared to Africa and the Americas. When Britain first arrived in India and China, they didn't just start colonies like in other parts of the world. They were accepted as traders by those in power and had limited influence beyond that. Compare that to Africa or America, where they just came ashore and automatically started a colony. Or fought briefly and then started a colony. The established powers in China and India were far too powerful to allow that to happen (at least at the start of Imperialism). Eventually Britain became more powerful as their economy further developed, and was able to gradually gain more administrative influence in India (and eventually take total control). In China, they never really had total control of the territory, but eventually had enough power to repeatedly defeat them in the succession of Opium wars and force the authorities in China to allow the importation of opium. That never could have happened at the start of European Imperialism because China was far too powerful.

And yes, Europe's advanced technology and mutually advanced economy did contribute a great deal to their eventual superiority. So I do agree with you there, but I'm just pointing out how the superior power of those two areas of the world resulted in very different colonization patterns than the rest of the colonized world.

Edited September 29, 2005 by skap35