Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
History and personal identity
The relationship between English colonists and British in the French-Indian War
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: History and personal identity
How were national and personal identities formed during the 18th and 19th centuries?
In Fred Anderson’s monograph, The War that Made America, he writes about the course of the French and Indian War, and how it shaped the colonists’ views about England. As the war progressed, the colonists began to realize what it meant to be British, and they also began to distance themselves from the British. Colonists began to create their own identity when they disagreed with British policies, and this conflict of ideologies later led to the creation of the United States. In Soul by Soul, Walter Johnson describes how slave-owners and slaves created their own identities based off of each other. Johnson describes how slave-owners depended on their slaves
…show more content…
Life in the South before the Civil War was completely dependent on slaves. White men could only move into a higher class by purchasing more slaves. The more slaves a man owned meant that he was responsible for more people. White men identified themselves through how much authority they had over their wives, children, and slaves. With more slaves, there were more people dependent on the white man, so he had more authority over more people. White men were defined by how many people relied on him and how much authority he had. White slave-owners were also defined by how they treated their slaves. Some slave-owners acted paternalistic towards their slaves, and helped to unite slaves’ families. Slave-owners did this so that their slaves would like them and fulfill their fantasy of a happy slave who loved his owner. Some masters felt like the only way they could be a good owner was through treating their slaves well. However, some slave-owners took pride in breaking their slaves in order to make their slaves completely dependent upon their master. Slave-owners wanted to be completely powerful over their slaves, and often this meant destroying their slaves’ values. If a master had total control over slaves, that meant he was a good master. Slave-owners built their identity with how much authority they had over their …show more content…
In both monographs, a separate entity is responsible for shaping a person’s identity. In The War that Made America, the colonists’ conflicting ideologies with the British led them to create a new American identity based off of being different from the British. In Soul by Soul, slave-owners created their own identity from their dominance over their slaves, and slaves created their identity through their responses to enslavement. Both of these monographs demonstrate how an outside source, no matter what it is, can shape a person’s identity. Through these books, the audience learns that their identity is separate from themselves. How a person reacts to a situation, whether it be a war, taxes, or slavery, determines their identity. In the 18th century, colonists created a national identity through their responses to British demands. In the 19th century, slave-owners and slaves produced a personal identity based off of their dependence on one another; slave-owners depended on dominance over slaves, and slaves depended on their agency in face of slavery. In times before the American Revolution to the Civil War, people were united by the fact that they depended on an outside source to determine their uniqueness and their
Holton, Woody. Forced Founders: Indians, Debtors, Slaves, and the Making of the American Revolution in Virginia. Chapel Hill, NC: UNC Press, 1999. 231. Print.
They needed to teach their slaves the ways of Christianity, treat them as a good Christian is supposed to. “If Southern slavery was humane and generous and rooted in Christianity, then it could easily be justified … as an institution beneficial to [both masters and slaves]” (Finkelman 32). As long as they provided their slaves with sufficient food, water and shelter, and evangelical education, their ownership was morally sound. However, though the South biblically substantiated the institution of general slavery, they did not make a sufficient argument to legitimize racial slavery.
Even in Post-Civil War times, they still maintained the master and slave relationship until the 13th amendment came about. After the 14th amendment came about, the colored had more breathing room but that didn 't stop the whites from looking down on them. That was part of their culture where the blacks were still slaves in their minds but the times are changing and they just couldn’t cope with that. During the Supreme court case “Plessy v. Ferguson” the majority of the Justices ruled that separate and equal was the precedent. This shows that changing the law alone wouldn 't change the southern attitude towards race! This man named Homer Plessy is 1/8th black and is still considered black, they made separate bathrooms and water fountains specifically for each race because sharing just was not an option. This shows that whites at the time had a hard time coping with the
The institution of slavery, from the year 1830 to 1860, created a divide between the northern and southern regions of the United States. Southerners, who relied on slaves to maintain their plantations, supported the institution, as it was a major part of their economy. Meanwhile, northerners, many of whom depended on slave produced cotton for textile mills and goods for the shipping industry, were divided on the slave issue, as some saw it as a blessing while the abolitionists saw it as a horrific institution. Overall, attitudes toward the institution of slavery, due to a variety of causes, differed in the varying regions in the United States from 1830 to 1860.
For Edmund S. Morgan American slavery and American freedom go together hand in hand. Morgan argues that many historians seem to ignore writing about the early development of American freedom simply because it was shaped by the rise of slavery. It seems ironic that while one group of people is trying to break the mold and become liberated, that same group is making others confined and shattering their respectability. The aspects of liberty, race, and slavery are closely intertwined in the essay, 'Slavery and Freedom: The American Paradox.'
Current modernists attempted progress from the terrible prejudice toward African Americans, however traditionalists prevented the new movement of equality for blacks. Many people are influenced by previous experiences and expect situations to continue on endlessly without change, similarly F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote, “ So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past”( Fitzgerald). In deeper meaning this quote means that as humans we are constantly trying to relive what has already happened, and if we try a little harder or run a little faster events might have had a different outcome. I believe this a major point of differentiation between modernists and traditionalists in the south. Throughout history wealth was defined by the amount of slaves one owned, the more slaves you had the richer you were. However, during the 1860s during the presidency of Lincoln, slavery was abolished and times changed in the united states. The proclamation declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free.”(Emancipation Proclamation, January 1, 1863; Presidential Proclamations, 1791-1991; Record Group 11; General Records of the United States Government; National Archives.) Plantation farmers in the south were infuriated by the new law and seceded from the united states and made a confederacy, which brought about the civil war. Despite inclusive wording, the Emancipation Proclamation was limited in many ways. It applied only to states that had seceded from the Union. After years of fighting the North won and reconstruction began. Reconstruction was a difficult task and wasn't taken lightly, for after the defeat the south had much resentment and hostility toward the...
Identity is primarily described primarily as what makes a person who they are. While it is seen as an individual asset, one’s identity can be shaped and persuaded not only by life experiences, but by society as well. Bryan Stevenson speaks on several controversial issues and proclaims certain societal problems and the typical behaviors noticed in response to them. How one approaches the issues that are spoken about may expose their true identity. Stevenson argues that how one reacts to racial inequality within the criminal justice system may regulate their identity. In addition to that, how dealing with the nation’s history may force a growth on one’s identity, eventually bringing peace and acceptance to the nation. Lastly, how one views the
The economies of the North and South were vastly different leading up to the Civil War. Money was equivalent to power in both regions. For the North, the economy was based on industry as they were more modern and self-aware. They realized that industrialization was progress and it could help rid the country of slave labor as it was wrong. The North’s population had a class system but citizens could move within the system, provided they made the money that would allow them to move up in class. The class system was not as rigid as it was in the South. By comparison, the South wanted to hold on to its economic policy. In doing so, the practice of slavery kept the social order firmly in place. The economic factors, social issues and a growing animosity between the two regions helped to induce the Civil War.
From 1750 until 1800 the colonial United States endured a period of enormous achievement along with a substantial amount of struggle. Before 1750, the new colony’s first struggle was between the colonists and England over who would have leadership within the New World. Once settled, the issues emerged from within the colonies themselves, particularly with the “belongings” they brought and imported. African American slaves were seen as property, and were not given any innate rights such as liberty or freedom when following their master to the New World. The revolution for the colonists from England began, with new freedoms received by the colonists; the slaves began to question their rights as humans. Innate rights such as liberty and freedom
Slavery is the idea and practice that one person is inferior to another. What made the institution of slavery in America significantly different from previous institutions was that “slavery developed as an institution based upon race.” Slavery based upon race is what made slavery an issue within the United States, in fact, it was a race issue. In addition, “to know whether certain men possessed natural rights one had only to inquire whether they were human beings.” Slaves were not even viewed as human beings; instead, they were dehumanized and were viewed as property or animals. During this era of slavery in the New World, many African slaves would prefer to die than live a life of forced servitude to the white man. Moreover, the problem of slavery was that an African born in the United States never knew what freedom was. According to Winthrop D. Jordan, “the concept of Negro slavery there was neither borrowed from foreigners, nor extracted from books, nor invented out of whole cloth, nor extrapolated from servitude, nor generated by English reaction to Negroes as such, nor necessitated by the exigencies of the New World. Not any one of these made the Negro a slave, but all.” American colonists fought a long and bloody war for independence that both white men and black men fought together, but it only seemed to serve the white man’s independence to continue their complete dominance over the African slave. The white man must carry a heavy
George Fitzhugh stated, “The slaves are all well fed, well clad, have plenty of fuel, and are happy.” (Doc. 2) Most slaves were treated nicely by their owners if they did what their owners wanted of them. The owners used this is a way to cope with the immoral owning of humans. In their defense, most of them had grown up being told this was okay and that things had always and will always be like this. Alexander H. Stephens said himself, “it’s foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man.” (Doc. 7) Stephens knew that this mindset would be hard to change and so he wanted people to understand that White southerners actually had it embedded in them that they were better at their core than blacks. The whites thought that they had given the slaves freedom by bringing them to the new
Huge concentrations of land and slaves were amassed within a society that otherwise distributed its wealth quite broadly. Southern colonies eventually developed democratic political institutions based on widespread distribution of land, but at the same time they exhibited gross economic disparities.” [p. 9] The black belts connected with how many slaves a person had to be a self maker. The more slaves that a person had was if or not they were seen as an intellectual and a great person. Black belt wanted more and more slaves so that they can say that they were self maker. Most slave owner had more than almost 20 slaves with a big slave house. They had at least 20 or 30 slaves in the field while their were at least like 10 in the house. The slave owner had so many slaves that the slave didn't live with the slave owner they had they own house with their family or other
The American Revolution was a “light at the end of the tunnel” for slaves, or at least some. African Americans played a huge part in the war for both sides. Lord Dunmore, a governor of Virginia, promised freedom to any slave that enlisted into the British army. Colonists’ previously denied enlistment to African American’s because of the response of the South, but hesitantly changed their minds in fear of slaves rebelling against them. The north had become to despise slavery and wanted it gone. On the contrary, the booming cash crops of the south were making huge profits for landowners, making slavery widely popular. After the war, slaves began to petition the government for their freedom using the ideas of the Declaration of Independence,” including the idea of natural rights and the notion that government rested on the consent of the governed.” (Keene 122). The north began to fr...
Slavery was the core of the North and South’s conflict. Slavery has existed in the New World since the seventeenth century prior to it being exclusive to race. During those times there were few social and political concerns about slavery. Initially, slaves were considered indentured servants who will eventually be set free after paying their debt(s) to the owner. In some cases, the owners were African with white servants. However, over time the slavery became exclusive to Africans and was no limited to a specific timeframe, but life. In addition, the treatment of slaves worsens from the Atlantic Slave trade to th...
What is identity? Identity is an unbound formation which is created by racial construction and gender construction within an individual’s society even though it is often seen as a controlled piece of oneself. In Dr. Beverly Daniel Tatum’s piece, “The Complexity of Identity: ‘Who Am I?’, Tatum asserts that identity is formed by “individual characteristics, family dynamics, historical factors, and social and political contexts” (Tatum 105). Tatum’s piece, “The Complexity of Identity: ‘Who Am I?’” creates a better understanding of how major obstacles such as racism and sexism shape our self identity.