A Teacher's Guide to Land of Hope: An Invitation to the Great American Story

EPIGRAPH AND INTRODUCTION

ONE LONG STORY

Summary

THE EPIGRAPH AND INTRODUCTION to Land of Hope are reflections on the meaning and value of history, including some initial thoughts about what it means to be a land of hope. We urge teachers to devote some time to a consideration of these matters in their classrooms. Land of Hope is built around the idea that history is not just an inert rendering of indisputable facts; instead, it is a reflective task whose meaning reaches the depths of our humanity. We should try to model that fact in the way we teach.

For that reason, we encourage you to give some attention to the epigraph, a quotation from the novelist John Dos Passos. Such quotations are often seen as merely decorative in character, but in this particular book, the epigraph is key to the meaning of all that follows. It appears in Land of Hope immediately after the dedication page and before the table of contents, but here it is in its entirety, for your convenience:

Every generation rewrites the past. In easy times history is more or less of an ornamental art, but in times of danger we are driven to the written record by a pressing need to find answers to the riddles of today. We need to know what kind of firm ground other men, belonging to generations before us, have found to stand on. In spite of changing conditions of life they were not very different from ourselves, their thoughts were the grandfathers of our thoughts, they managed to meet situations as difficult as those we have to face, to meet them sometimes lightheartedly, and in some measure to make their hopes prevail. We need to know how they did it.

In times of change and danger when there is a quicksand of fear under men’s reasoning, a sense of continuity with generations gone before can stretch like a lifeline across the scary present and get us past that idiot delusion of the exceptional Now that blocks good thinking. That is why, in times like ours, when old institutions are caving in and being replaced by new institutions not necessarily in accord with most men’s preconceived hopes, political thought has to look backwards as well as forwards.

JOHN DOS PASSOS

The Use of the Past, from The Ground We Stand On: Some Examples from the History of a Political Creed (1941)

Epigraph Questions and Answers

1. When do we need history? Why?

We need history in times of danger, to discover what kind of firm ground other generations have found.

2. What do you think Dos Passos means by the idiot delusion of the exceptional Now?

With that pungent phrase, Dos Passos is pushing back against the wrong-headed idea that the present age is so unique, so unprecedented, so radical a break with all previous human experience that the past has nothing to teach us.

3. Do the conditions Dos Passos is describing apply today? That is, are old institutions caving in and being replaced by new institutions? Give some examples.

Some examples are the changes and disruptions caused by the internet, porous national borders, global labor markets, and the free movement of capital across the globe. Ask students to provide other examples.

4. Dos Passos wrote this in 1941. Are our problems today greater or more frightening than then? Do we suffer from the same idiot delusion as did previous times and peoples?

The times are perhaps as frightening, but not more so. Anyway, without a knowledge of history, we would have no basis for a comparison. Hence the necessity of this course of study!

Introduction Questions and Answers

1. What does this book seek to accomplish? What are its guiding intentions? (p. xi)

It seeks to deepen our sense of our country and make us more capable of responsible citizenship.

2. What does the author mean by citizenship? (p. xi)

He means the sense of membership in society.

3. "We are, at our core, remembering and story-making creatures, and stories are one of the chief ways we find meaning in the flow of events." (pp. xi–xii)

4. "Historical consciousness is to civilized society what memory is to individual identity." (p. xii)

5. "A culture without memory will necessarily be barbarous and easily tyrannized, even if it is technologically advanced." (p. xii)

6. Where do we most reliably find our lives’ meaning? (p. xii)

We find it, at least in large part, in the stories we learn and tell.

7. What aspect of American history does the author emphasize, treating it as the skeleton of the story? (pp. xii–xiii)

He emphasizes political history.

8. "History is the study of change through time,… but it must be selective if it is to be intelligible." (p. xiii)

9. History means asking questions again and again. The past does not speak for itself, and it cannot speak to us directly. We must first ask. (pp. xiii–xiv)

10. "Hope has both theological and secular meanings, spiritual ones as well as material ones." (p. xiv)

Make sure students know what theological and secular mean.

11. What is the danger of having high ideals? (p. xiv)

High ideals make you vulnerable to criticism when you fail.

12. "All human beings are flawed, as are all human enterprises. To believe otherwise is to be naive, and much of what passes for cynicism in our time is little more than naiveté in deep disguise." (p. xiv)

13. "The history of the United States, and of the West more generally, includes the activity of searching self-criticism as part of its foundational makeup." (p. xiv)

14. "One of the worst sins of the present … is its tendency to condescend toward the past." (p. xiv)

Consider the derisive term old-fashioned.

15. For Thought: What is history? Is it a science, or a branch of literature? What is the difference between good history and bad history?

A good working definition: History is what the present finds useful to remember about the past. The past does not change, nor does human nature, but the present changes constantly, as does usefulness. And memory is necessarily selective and only partly under our control. Complete objectivity is impossible when human beings are studying human beings, so history is best understood as a branch of literature. History strives to tell the truth but can only approximate it, at best. Any account of the past that is factually in error is bad history, but the same set of facts may support different interpretations, narratives, or stories. People are complex, especially in their motivations, and there is rarely a single or simple cause for important events. The reality of the past was almost always more complicated than the historian says it is. Nevertheless, we need a knowledge of the past to have something against which to measure the present – which we also do not fully comprehend.

CHAPTER ONE

BEGINNINGS

Settlement and Unsettlement

Summary

The settlement of America had its origins in the unsettlement of Europe.

LEWIS MUMFORD

FROM THE TIME of the ancient Greeks, there has been a mystique about the West as a site of renewal, a mystique that would help fuel the European fascination with America. In fact, it is impossible to understand the history of America apart from the history of Europe; America was an offshoot of Europe that grew up during a time when Europe was undergoing large economic, social, religious, technological, and cultural changes. America would prove to be a new land where laws and customs and ideas from Europe would have freedom to develop and flourish.

Initially, though, the European discovery of America was the result of Europe’s growing commercial interest in the East. By the Late Middle Ages (1300–1500), Europe was undergoing continent-wide transformation into a modern age of innovation, exploration, trade, and expansion of its global power. By the late 1400s, France, England, Spain, and Portugal had emerged as wealthy nations with motivation to explore water routes to the Far East (the Indies) to expand trade routes and commerce.

The Italian explorer Christopher Columbus became convinced that sailing west would be a faster and more direct way to reach the East, and he persuaded the Spanish monarchs Ferdinand and Isabella to support him in that endeavor. Columbus began his exploratory voyage westward on August 3, 1492, and on October 12, his party spotted one of the islands of the Bahamas, which Columbus named San Salvador, meaning Holy Savior. Columbus would go on to command four round-trip voyages between Spain and the Americas between 1492 and 1503, establishing contact between the Old World and the New World, which would eventually give rise to the establishment and settlement of America. Yet ironically, he never quite understood what it was that he had found. America was hard to see.

Questions and Answers

1. You should assume that the author chose the title and subtitle of the chapter as indicative of its major themes. Look at and read through the portraits and pictures following p. 224 and select the three you believe best embody or exemplify these themes. Consider all the images from the beginning to the present day: which individuals and which pictures most suggest beginnings and settlement and unsettlement? Be prepared to defend your choices in class or in writing.

There are many good choices, such as several self-made men like Lincoln and Douglas. Walking on the moon is a beginning, and unsettling. The ruins of 9/11, immigrants and tenements, African Americans voting for first time – all may suggest beginnings and/or unsettlement.

2. There are fewer than twenty named individuals in this chapter, of whom two are worldwide religious figures (Christ and Mohammed) and two are modern writers (Mumford and Frost). Excluding those four, which THREE of the remainder seem to you most significant in the story of what will become the United States of America? Be prepared to defend your answers in class or in writing.

Columbus is plainly the most important. There are no clear best choices for the other two.

3. As Question 2 suggests, the most important content of this chapter comprises not particular people nor dates but ideas. Students should be able to explain each in their own words. The relevant pages for each idea are given.

4. "History always begins in the middle of things." (p. 3)

5. "What we call history is a selection, organized wisely and truthfully." (p. 4)

6. The goal [of the book], in short, is to ‘be full members of a society of which we are already a part.’ (p. 4)

7. Who can truly be called ‘native’ to America? (p. 4) Why?

Nobody can; even the Indians migrated here from Asia.

8. "The lost civilizations of the first Americans, and the explorations of the Norse and Vikings do not play an important role in this book, simply because they had no direct connection with the establishment of the United States." (pp. 5–6)

9. Yet the two answers above who do not play an important role in the book nevertheless "point to the presence of America in the world’s imagination as a land of hope and refuge." (pp 6–7)

10. "We will start our history of America in the middle of Europe’s history." (p. 7)

11. America would be an unusual kind of offshoot: unpredictable, unplanned, unanticipated. (p. 7)

12. "The settlement of America had its origins in the unsettlement of Europe." (pp. 7–8) What did Mumford mean by this?

Europe was rapidly changing, and while many of the new political institutions and economic practices it was generating were disruptive to Europe, they found a home in the newness of America.

13. A great upsurge in fresh energies and disruptions, converging from many different directions at once, was unsettling a great deal of what had become familiar in the older world. What were these fresh energies and disruptions, which were economic, social, religious, technological, and cultural? (pp. 8–10)

They were the Age of Discovery; the rise of a commercial middle class, nation-states, and monarchies; the scientific revolution; religious upheavals, including the Reformation; and new technologies like gunpowder and the printing press, all happening more or less together and impacting each other.

14. How did the Crusades indirectly create economic wants among Europeans? What were the barriers to satisfying these wants? (pp. 8–9)

They brought Europeans into contact with riches from the East; the barriers were distance and the hostile cultures that controlled the known overland route (the Old Silk Road) to Asia.

15. What technological innovations aided in overcoming the barriers mentioned above? (p. 9)

New ship designs (ships that could sail against the wind) and improved navigation through things such as compasses and map design.

Teachers may need to explain how sailing ships can make progress even sailing against the wind by angling their sails and tacking from side to side. Ships relying on human muscles for power (rowers) might work in confined areas, such as the Mediterranean, but harnessing a natural force (the wind) increased the power available many times over.

16. Trade and exploration empowered but were also enabled by the rise of two new socioeconomic and political groups: a merchant class, who might become merchant-princes, and national monarchies, of which the first four to emerge were in France, England, Spain, and Portugal. (pp. 9–10)

17. Portugal took the lead under the guidance of Prince Henry the Navigator.

What was the goal of this national effort? How, when, and by whom was it achieved? (p. 10)

The goal was to reach Asia by sailing around Africa, if they could. Bartolomeu Dias discovered the Cape of Good Hope (the southern tip), and Vasco da Gama took a fleet all the way to India and began establishing a Portuguese trading empire there.

Teachers may point out that until Dias’s voyage, the Portuguese did not even know whether Africa had a southern end that could be sailed around.

18. Why did the success of the Portuguese make them less interested in Columbus’s project but the Spanish more interested? (pp. 10–11)

The Portuguese had the route to the East, around Africa, and held it as a fiercely guarded secret. The Spanish were playing catch-up; Columbus offered an alternate route that avoided Portuguese territory.

19. Examine the Martellus map carefully (p. 2). Is the world depicted as mostly land or mostly water? What was Columbus right about? What was Columbus wrong about? (pp. 11–12)

The earth is depicted as mostly land (it is in fact three-fourths water). Columbus believed the world’s amplitude is much smaller than it is in fact.

Teachers may explain that educated people have known that the earth is round for thousands of years; an ancient Greek (Eratosthenes) even estimated how big around it is. Columbus’s theory was that the round earth was much smaller than believed, and he was mistaken. If there had not been an unknown continent for him to run into, he and his men would have died halfway across an enormous single ocean. None of these considerations, though, should be taken to minimize Columbus’s remarkable gifts of seamanship and navigational skill.

20. Why is Columbus an example of what Frost means, that America is hard to see? (p. 13)

Columbus was unable to see that he had found a new continent. That was finally confirmed when Balboa crossed Panama and saw the Sea of the South (the Pacific Ocean).

21. "What we find is not always what we were looking for, and what we accomplish is not always what we set out to do." (p. 13)

This precisely described Columbus’s predicament – and those of most historical actors.

Objective Questions

Answers are in parentheses.

Put in order:

Match the individual with his nation: (answers may be used more than once or not at all)

Document

COLUMBUS’S LOG OF HIS FIRST VOYAGE, 1492

NOTE: Columbus was interested in everything. In the interest of brevity, what follows has been edited to remove most of the geographic and botanical information. The entire log is much longer.

Thursday, 11 October. At two o’clock in the morning the land was discovered, at two leagues’ distance; they took in sail and remained under the square-sail lying to till day, which was Friday, when they found themselves near a small island, called in the Indian language Guanahani. Presently they descried people, naked, and the Admiral landed in the boat, which was armed, along with Martin Alonzo Pinzon, and Vincent Yanez his brother, captain of the Nina. The Admiral bore the royal standard; this contained the initials of the names of the King and Queen each side of the cross, and a crown over each letter Arrived on shore, they saw trees very green many streams of water, and diverse sorts of fruits. The Admiral called upon the two Captains to bear witness that he took possession of that island for the King and Queen his sovereigns, making the requisite declarations.

Numbers of the people of the island straightway collected together. Here follow the precise words of the Admiral: "As I saw that they were very friendly to us, and perceived that they could be much more easily converted to our holy faith by gentle means than by force, I presented them with some red caps, and strings of beads to wear upon the neck, and many other trifles of small value, wherewith they were much delighted, and became wonderfully attached to us. Afterwards they came swimming to the boats, bringing parrots, balls of cotton thread, javelins, and many other things which they exchanged for articles we gave them, such as glass beads, and hawk’s bells; which trade was carried on with the utmost good will.

But they seemed on the whole to me, to be a very poor people. They all go completely naked, even the women, though I saw but one girl. All whom I saw were young, not above thirty years of age, well made, with fine shapes and faces; their hair short, and coarse like that of a horse’s tail, combed toward the forehead, except a small portion which they suffer to hang down behind, and never cut. Some paint the face, and some the whole body; others only the eyes, and others the nose. Weapons they have none, nor are acquainted with them, for I showed them swords which they grasped by the blades, and cut themselves through ignorance. They have no iron, their javelins being without it, and nothing more than sticks, though some have fish-bones or other things at the ends. They are all of a good size and stature, and handsomely formed.

I saw some with scars of wounds upon their bodies, and demanded by signs the origin of them; they answered me in the same way, that there came people from the other islands in the neighborhood who endeavored to make prisoners of them, and they defended themselves. I thought then, and still believe, that these were from the continent.

It appears to me, that the people are ingenious, and would be good servants and I am of opinion that they would very readily become Christians, as they appear to have no religion. They very quickly learn such words as are spoken to them. If it please our Lord, I intend at my return to carry home six of them to your Highnesses, that they may learn our language. I saw no beasts in the island, nor any sort of animals except parrots." These are the words of the Admiral.

Saturday, 13 October. At daybreak great multitudes of men came to the shore, all young and of fine shapes, very handsome; their hair not curled but straight and coarse like horse-hair, and all with foreheads and heads much broader than any people I had hitherto seen; their eyes were large and very beautiful; they were not black, but the color of the inhabitants of the Canaries, which is a very natural circumstance, they being in the same latitude with the island of Ferro in the Canaries. They were straight-limbed without exception, and not with prominent bellies but handsomely shaped. They came to the ship in canoes, made of a single trunk of a tree, wrought in a wonderful manner considering the country; some of them large enough to contain forty or forty-five men, others of different sizes down to those fitted to hold but a single person. They rowed with an oar like a baker’s peel, and wonderfully swift. If they happen to upset, they all jump into the sea, and swim till they have righted their canoe and emptied it with the calabashes they carry with them. They came loaded with balls of cotton, parrots, javelins, and other things too numerous to mention; these they exchanged for whatever we chose to give them.

I was very attentive to them, and strove to learn if they had any gold. Seeing some of them with little bits of this metal hanging at their noses, I gathered from them by signs that by going southward or steering round the island in that direction, there would be found a king who possessed large vessels of gold, and in great quantities. I endeavored to procure them to lead the way thither, but found they were unacquainted with the route. I determined to stay here till the evening of the next day, and then sail for the southwest; for according to what I could learn from them, there was land at the south as well as at the southwest and northwest and those from the northwest came many times and fought with them and proceeded on to the southwest in search of gold and precious stones.

The natives are an inoffensive people, and so desirous to possess any thing they saw with us, that they kept swimming off to the ships with whatever they could find, and readily bartered for any article we saw fit to give them in return, even such as broken platters and fragments of glass. I saw in this manner sixteen balls of cotton thread which weighed above twenty-five pounds, given for three Portuguese ceutis. This traffic I forbade, and suffered no one to take their cotton from them, unless I should order it to be procured for your Highnesses, if proper quantities could be met with. It grows in this island, but from my short stay here I could not satisfy myself fully concerning it; the gold, also, which they wear in their noses, is found here, but not to lose time, I am determined to proceed onward and ascertain whether I can reach Cipango. At night they all went on shore with their canoes.

Sunday, 14 October. In the morning, I ordered the boats to be got ready, and coasted along the island toward the north- northeast to examine that part of it, we having landed first at the eastern part. Presently we discovered two or three villages, and the people all came down to the shore, calling out to us, and giving thanks to God. Some brought us water, and others victuals: others seeing that I was not disposed to land, plunged into the sea and swam out to us, and we perceived that they interrogated us if we had come from heaven. An old man came on board my boat; the others, both men and women cried with loud voices – Come and see the men who have come from heavens. Bring them victuals and drink. There came many of both sexes, every one bringing something, giving thanks to God, prostrating themselves on the earth, and lifting up their hands to heaven.

It was to view these parts that I set out in the morning, for I wished to give a complete relation to your Highnesses, as also to find where a fort might be built. I discovered a tongue of land which appeared like an island though it was not, but might be cut through and made so in two days; it contained six houses. I do not, however, see the necessity of fortifying the place, as the people here are simple in war-like matters, as your Highnesses will see by those seven which I have ordered to be taken and carried to Spain in order to learn our language and return, unless your Highnesses should choose to have them all transported to Castile, or held captive in the island. I could conquer the whole of them with fifty men, and govern them as I pleased. I returned to the ship, and setting sail, discovered such a number of islands that I knew not which first to visit; the natives whom I had taken on board informed me by signs that there were so many of them that they could not be numbered; they repeated the names of more than a hundred. I determined to steer for the largest, which is about five leagues from San Salvador; the others were some at a greater, and some at a less distance from that island. They are all very level, without mountains, exceedingly fertile and populous, the inhabitants living at war with one another, although a simple race, and with delicate bodies.

Monday, 15 October. About sunset we anchored near the cape which terminates the island towards the west to enquire for gold, for the natives we had taken from San Salvador told me that the people here wore golden bracelets upon their arms and legs. I believed pretty confidently that they had invented this story in order to find means to escape from us, still I determined to pass none of these islands without taking possession, because being once taken, it would answer for all times. We anchored and remained till Tuesday, when at daybreak I went ashore with the boats armed. The people we found naked like those of San Salvador, and of the same disposition. They suffered us to traverse the island, and gave us what we asked of them.

The natives we found like those already described, as to personal appearance and manners, and naked like the rest. Whatever they possessed, they bartered for what we chose to give them. I saw a boy of the crew purchasing javelins of them with bits of platters and broken glass. Those who went for water informed me that they had entered their houses and found them very clean and neat, with beds and coverings of cotton nets. Their houses are all built in the shape of tents, with very high chimneys. None of the villages which I saw contained more than twelve or fifteen of them. Here it was remarked that the married women wore cotton breeches, but the younger females were without them, except a few who were as old as eighteen years. Dogs were seen of a large and small size, and one of the men had hanging at his nose a piece of gold half as big as a castellailo, with letters upon it. I endeavored to purchase it of them in order to ascertain what sort of money it was but they refused to part with it.

Source: http://www.christopher-columbus.eu/logs.htm

Document Questions and Answers

1. What was Columbus’s first priority? Why?

He claimed the lands for Spain. He was serving the king and queen who financed his voyage – and whom he hoped would finance more.

2. Assuming that different goals and motives are mentioned in the log more or less in order of importance – is this a reasonable assumption? – what was Columbus’s second priority after claiming the territory for Spain?

The next thing mentioned is conversion to Christianity: As I saw that they were very friendly to us, and perceived that they could be much more easily converted to our holy faith by gentle means than by force, I presented them ...

3. What two topics does Columbus consider next?

He considers their lack of wealth and their military weakness: But they seemed on the whole to me, to be a very poor people. They all go completely naked…. Weapons they have none, nor are acquainted with them, for I showed them swords which they grasped by the blades, and cut themselves through ignorance. They have no iron, their javelins being without it, and nothing more than sticks, though some have fish-bones or other things at the ends.

4. Were the natives ignorant of war?

No. I saw some with scars of wounds upon their bodies, and demanded by signs the origin of them; they answered me in the same way, that there came people from the other islands in the neighborhood who endeavored to make prisoners of them, and they defended themselves.

5. Some historians have interpreted the following to mean that Columbus immediately envisioned the natives as slaves: It appears to me, that the people are ingenious, and would be good servants and I am of opinion that they would very readily become Christians, as they appear to have no religion. They very quickly learn such words as are spoken to them. Ask students how they would interpret these words and, more generally, how they would judge Columbus’s attitudes toward the natives.

CHAPTER TWO

THE SHAPING OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA

Summary

DURING THE HIGH MIDDLE AGES, which culminated around 1300, Roman Catholicism dominated Western Europe. But under the surface, there was a growing tension between the Church and people of all classes. While the great cathedrals marking the landscape testified to the Church’s wealth, power, and cultural influence, many of the poor began to grow resentful at the great divide between the opulence of the Church and the poverty of their own circumstances. The middle class, too, came to feel that the Church interfered with economic life, and the increasingly powerful monarchs resented the Church’s interference in matters of taxation, property, and legal jurisdiction. On top of that, a growing number of clergy and theologians were troubled by what they saw as doctrinal errors within the Church and sought reforms to correct them.

These and other factors led to the Protestant Reformation, which transformed the European religious landscape. Two theological reformers in particular led the way: Martin Luther, whose Ninety-Five Theses would catalyze the Reformation in Germany in 1517, and John Calvin, a French lawyer who rejected the hierarchical church-governance structure of Catholicism and sought to found the state and community on restored religious principles.

The Reformation’s direction in England was unique, however – a fact that would eventually have enormous implications for the shape of religion in the North American colonies. King Henry VIII of England separated the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church as a result of the pope’s refusal to grant him an annulment and solidified the change by directing Parliament to pass the Act of Supremacy. But unlike Luther and Calvin, Henry had little interest in the theological reform of the Church, a fact that made the English Church different from its peers on the European continent. Hence the Church of England found itself steering an uneasy middle course, neither entirely Catholic nor entirely Protestant, and with contending factions on both sides that hoped to push the Church one way or another.

But for most of the century after Columbus’s voyages to America, the Catholic Spanish were the dominant force in the New World. It was not until the epochal defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 that the way was opened for English dominance in North America, which in turn strongly influenced the institutions, laws, and government structures that would come to prevail in North America.

There were a variety of motives behind English colonization, a variety well illustrated by the contrast between Virginia and New England. Virginia was the first permanent English colony, established in 1607 at Jamestown. Many of the initial 105 inhabitants were men sent by the Virginia Company, a jointstock company, seeking material wealth. These urban-dwelling gentlemen were peculiarly unsuited for the rigors of colonial life, and the colony would never have survived without the discovery of tobacco, which brought security to the local economy through the revenues from extensive exports to Europe. By 1639, Virginia’s tobacco production had exploded to three million pounds per year.

By contrast, the New England colonies were founded by Puritans, men and women with deeply held Calvinist religious conviction and zeal, who believed that the Church of England had not yet done enough to purify itself from the corruptions of Roman Catholicism. These Puritans wanted to restore the purity of apostolic Christianity, to build a New Zion in a new land. In drafting and signing the Mayflower Compact in 1620, the Pilgrims of Plymouth Plantation committed themselves to one another, and to the laws and authorities, constituting themselves as a civil society before they even set foot on American soil. Ten years later, at the settlement of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, John Winthrop’s A Modell of Christian Charity laid out the settlement’s mission and guiding purposes, which were profoundly and exclusively religious in character.

That tension between material and spiritual motives would mark much of the American colonial experience.

Questions and Answers

1. Fewer than thirty individuals are named in this chapter, ten of whom are kings or queens of England. Below is the short version of English history Americans should know:

TUDOR DYNASTY (five rulers in three generations)

Henry VII (r. 1485–1509): took the throne by force

Henry VIII (r. 1509–47): six wives; broke England away from Roman Catholic Church; succeeded by three children

Edward VI (r. 1547–53): Henry VIII’s sickly son; Church of England became more Protestant during his reign

Mary I (r. 1553–58): Bloody Mary; Henry VIII’s eldest daughter; tried to restore the Catholic Church; died after a brief reign

Elizabeth I (r. 1558–1603): Virgin Queen under whom expansion to Ireland and America began; stable on the throne once it was established that she would not marry; the Stuart king of Scotland would succeed her

Tudor dynastic instability and weakness prevented English expansion overseas until Elizabeth, but began the establishment of English sea power (defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588), the English conquest of Ireland, and its attempted colonization of Virginia and set the stage for the English Civil Wars of the mid-1600s.

STUART DYNASTY (six rulers in four generations)

James VI of Scotland/James I of England (r. England 1603–25): king of Scotland who took the English throne by prearrangement when Elizabeth died; this is the James of Jamestown and the King James Bible; refused to give the Puritans what they demanded, stating no bishops, no king, and persecuted them so that many left for New England

Charles I (r. 1625–49): drove many Puritans to Massachusetts Colony; tried to rule without Parliament; executed after losing Civil Wars

Interregnum (1649–60): England ruled by Puritan military dictator Oliver Cromwell; some royalists (Cavaliers) fled to Virginia

Restoration (1660): King and Parliament restored after Cromwell’s death in 1659

Charles II (r. 1660–84): the merry monarch under whom was much colonization; New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the Carolinas (Restoration colonies) established; was careful not to challenge Parliament’s authority

James II (r. 1684–88): brother of Charles II; former naval commander and Duke of York; overthrown by Parliament in Glorious Revolution of 1688 because he was Catholic

Mary II and husband, William of Orange (r. 1689–1702): Mary was the daughter of James II; Protestant rulers of the Netherlands invited by Parliament to succeed James II – note that Parliament is hiring and firing kings

Anne (r. 1702–14): sister of Mary; also Protestant; ruled until she died childless; succeeded by the Hanover Dynasty

Twelve of the thirteen colonies were settled under Stuart rule. Circumstances in England led directly to various groups wanting or needing to go to America.

HANOVER DYNASTY

Protestant kings of Hanover in Germany; became rulers of England beginning in 1714 until the present day

George I spoke no English, George II only poor English

George III (king in 1776) was the first fully English monarch from the family, which changed its name from Hanover to Windsor during World War I (because Hanover was part of Germany and on the other side)

Colony of Georgia established in 1732 under George II (last of thirteen, and only one established after 1700)

Teachers should stress that separation of church and state is a modern idea; during the 1600s and later, most Churches agreed that the correct number of Churches was one: theirs. Churches were established, meaning tax supported and basically part of the government. Changing the Church was tantamount to changing the government, which is a revolution.

2. The Reformation was a huge event in world history, breaking down medieval Roman Catholicism, reinforcing the rise of the modern nation-state (including national churches like the Church of England), and igniting a century and a half of religious wars, mainly in Europe but also worldwide. But the reformers (collectively termed Protestants) also divided among themselves: the first, the German monk Martin Luther, was followed by the French lawyer John Calvin. Lutherans and Calvinists warred against Catholics and against each other, and the Presbyterian Kirk founded by John Knox became the national church of Scotland. The English Civil Wars of 1639–49 were three-sided religious as well as political conflicts: King Charles I and his Church of England versus Calvinist Puritans who dominated Parliament versus Scots Presbyterians. All three groups were prominent in certain colonies: the Anglicans (Church of England) in Virginia, the Puritans in New England, and eventually the Presbyterian Scots-Irish in western Pennsylvania. It is important to remember that the peoples of the thirteen colonies that eventually become the United States had been at least rivals and often deadly enemies back in Britain.

3. What did Calvinists believe? Why did English Calvinists come to be called Puritans? How did Queen Elizabeth settle the tension between Anglicans and Calvinists? (pp. 17–18)

The Elizabethan settlement left the Church of England Protestant in doctrine but episcopal (ruled by bishops) and retaining Catholic liturgy. This created Puritans, who wanted to make the Church fully Protestant rather than half and half.

Calvinists reject the episcopal form of church organization (bishops who are appointed by other bishops), preferring either the Presbyterian model (representative government elected by members) or congregationalism (each local church is independent). The Presbyterian Kirk (church) was the national church of Scotland and waged war against both the Church of England (Protestant but not Calvinist) and the English Puritans (Calvinist and Congregationalists) in the three-sided Civil Wars of 1639–49.

Calvinists believe in the absolute sovereignty of God, including election (predestination), providence (everything happens according to God’s plan), and calling – God places you where he wants you and expects you to be the very best you can be, whatever that is. Calvinists believe that salvation is by grace alone, that grace is a gift of God, and that authority rests in the Bible alone (sola scriptura).

One might think that belief in predestination would lead Calvinists to fatalism (whatever will be will be), but in fact Calvinists see themselves as servants of God, basically soldiers in God’s army – and God’s army will triumph. Any defeat, even death, is insignificant and temporary. Calvinists need only concern themselves with doing their best at whatever God has set them to do and trusting in him for the outcome.

4. Why and how was Spain the dominant power in the western hemisphere (and indeed in the world) from 1500 to, say, 1588? (pp. 20–22)

Spain’s conquest of Mexico and Peru gave it gold literally by the ton, making Spain by far the wealthiest nation. The Spanish army was the best in the world and dominated Europe. The defeat of the Armada by English sea dogs in 1588 prevented Spain’s achievement of hegemony and began the slow slide of Spain into the second and then third rank of power.

5. What was the single most important factor in the destruction of various indigenous peoples after contact with Europeans? What was the Columbian Exchange? Could the deadly diseases have been avoided? (p. 21)

The natives of America had no inherited immunity to diseases like smallpox, measles, and mumps. These killed them by the millions – no one knows how many died. The Columbian Exchange also applied to animals like horses and to crops such as maize. No one could have anticipated or prevented the spread of disease; no one even knew how diseases spread or how to cure them.

6. Sea power trumps land power. The defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 changed the course of world history and especially the history of what became the United States. How? (pp. 21–22)

Sea dogs like Sir Francis Drake were involved in the English expansion into Ireland and then Virginia; in fact, one of the early attempts to plant a colony in Virginia had to be abandoned because the ships had to be redirected to fight the Armada. Had the Spanish been able to invade England, or even had the Spanish fleet been able to dominate the Atlantic, English colonization of America would have been impossible.

7. How were Spanish (and later French) governance and institutions fundamentally different than those of England? (p. 23)

Spain was Roman Catholic and far more absolutist and domineering of its colonies than Protestant England. Power was centralized, and self-rule was all but absent.

8. English colonization of the New World was not a centrally directed government project. (p. 23)

9. What is a joint-stock company? Why is this form of business organization best for financing risky endeavors? (pp. 23–24)

Joint-stock companies are the predecessors of modern corporations. Stock owners elect directors (one vote per share). Investors can limit risk, as many people pool their funds to finance a venture.

10. Why did Jamestown nearly perish? Why did it finally survive? (Pioneering is the process of discovering new ways to get killed.)

They were in an unhealthy swamp and wasted time looking for nonexistent gold. Powhatan’s Indians were a formidable enemy. The food ran out. The all-cause death rate approached 90 percent. What saved them was a steady reinforcement from England and the discovery of tobacco as a cash crop.

11. Who was Nathaniel Bacon? (p. 25)

He led the less advantaged people of the colony against the wealthiest planters (of whom he was one) over an anti-expansionist Indian policy that thwarted access to land on the frontier.

Teachers may add that Bacon’s Rebellion of 1676 is complex in origin and susceptible to conflicting interpretations; it is not clear who were the good guys. But it did mark the point at which Virginia began to move away from the system of white indentured servanthood and toward black chattel slavery. They needed the whites to be armed because of the Indians, and it is difficult to keep armed men subservient.

12. What is the (only real) difference between the Pilgrims and the Puritans? (pp. 25–26)

Both were Calvinists and Congregationalists. The Pilgrims were Separatists who had given up on reforming corrupt England, while the Puritans saw Massachusetts as a means of demonstrating the practical value of their beliefs in order to persuade old England to adopt them. Once England became a Puritan dictatorship under Oliver Cromwell (1650–59), this goal became moot, and Plymouth Plantation was easily absorbed into the large Massachusetts Colony.

13. What is the social contract? (We will see this idea again in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.) (p. 27)

It is the agreement by which a people create for themselves a government to serve their needs.

14. What was John Winthrop’s vision for Puritan Massachusetts? (pp. 26–28)

Winthrop saw the colony as a model society, a city on a hill, to be a light unto the nations.

15. Be able to contrast the motives and experiences and principles of Virginia and New England. Which do you think has shaped America more? Be prepared to defend your answer in class or in writing.

Virginia was founded primarily for economic reasons and retained much of the social structure of the mother country, with a planter aristocracy, some middle-class whites, and black slaves. Its economy was focused on staple crop agriculture, and its society was paternalistic and deferential.

New England was founded primarily for religious reasons, though its inhabitants were not indifferent to material prosperity. The economy was based on the sea: on fishing and, especially, shipping. Merchants were often wealthy but typically lived modest lives not much different from the lives of the large middle class. Towns were governed democratically, with most men able to vote. Slavery was legal until independence but not very widespread.

16. How did dissidence among the Massachusetts Puritans lead (in two opposite directions) to two new colonies? (p. 28)

More extreme Puritans left to found Connecticut, and dissident Puritans were driven out to found Rhode Island.

17. How did Pennsylvania come to be? (p. 29)

King Charles II owed William Penn a lot of money and paid him with land, to create a haven for Quakers.

18. Which was the last colony to be founded? When and why? (p. 29)

Georgia was founded in 1732 as a planned refuge for debtors and to provide silk for the mother country. It was also a buffer