Portfolio: Reflective Letter

At the beginning of the quarter, I felt that I was a fairly strong writer, but tot long after I found out how dangerous that assumption could be. Once I received the first essay's grade, I was shown where I really stood. I was not prepared for the high standards college level writing required me to meet. College level writing is much more difficult than any grade school I've ever gone to has assigned. Although it was challenging to really buckle down and get working, I have shown much progress from the beginning of the year. This can be shown within my first and last essays, which are included in my portfolio. Essay number one was on Bacon's Rebellion and how social classes played the largest role within the rebellion itself. My last essay was a group project, me and three others, and was perhaps the most difficult to both get done and get done well. Both of these essays have specific strong and weak points, as well as tie into my writing philosophy and style.


My first essay, on social classes within Bacon's Rebellion, was not originally worded well. This issue spawned from my inability to sum up or explain the information I acquired. I tried hard to get quality information into the essay, but I went through a series of high school thought processes trying to get it done. My brain needed to mature fast to get really great work done in such a timely fashion. So I finished the essay and turned it in on time, but the end result was not up to college standards at all; the information was lax, and it lacked a real voice. That problem, lacking a voice in essays, really stems from my educational career prior to arriving at PSEC; before I arrived at Puget Sound Early College, I mainly wrote informative essays. My instructor stressed the fact that we would not write informative essays since the beginning of the Writing 101 course. Since I received feedback on my first essay I have really worked on gathering more useful information and applying time management skills to my writing.


Many of the problems I had faced were not present in my next essay, or at least not to the extent in which they were in the essay prior. The second paper was on Patriotism within the original thirteen colonies. It was unique in the fact that I ended up working on it with one other person, which really required me to utilize a lot of different time management skills than normal. One of the main issues I had to deal with was the merging of two very different voices. I was able to manage my time well and ended with a paper that I felt proud of. My ability to get quality information had progressed quite a way in a matter of a few weeks, though still not up to par with the college writing standards. Also, my voice really shone through with this essay because I created a character and spoke through him. I was really proud of my second essay, as well as the progress I’ve made throughout fall quarter.


As my overviews of those two essays show, time management has greatly improved. Really, getting an essay or writing assignment finished is not the problem very often at all. I can get the final product done as quickly as I need to. My weaknesses lie within the actual essays themselves. Though I have been working on it throughout the quarter, I still find it hard to get useful information that is specific; I find myself using generalized information to base my arguments off of, or strengthen my arguments. Overall, I have made progress with my writing abilities. I have not gotten worse at anything, either gotten better or stayed consistently under par.


Two aspects of my writing must be looked at to get a good view of just where I stand with writing: my writing philosophy and style. My writing philosophy at the beginning of the year was as follows: writing of any kind must always start with a main idea to build off of. What seems to me to be the best way to show where I am at now would be to slightly skew the aforesaid sentence. I do not believe that it must always start with a main idea, but some sort of idea in general. An idea of what purpose the writing at hand must serve is necessary to find useful information about the paper. I guess my newly stated writing philosophy would be: writing must always start with the purpose of the paper in mind, so that information can be found in regard to the main idea. My style of writing has changed slightly; I no longer 'just write' as I would do in high school. Now I write with much more structure and organization. I tend to get to the point quicker, now that I have taken Writing 101.


A great amount of progression is shown from my second essay to the Writing 101 final. Since there were only two hours allotted for the essay to be written in, time management skills were used efficiently. I am very proud of this essay as a whole, actually. The thesis was well written and explained thoroughly throughout the entirety of the essay. One thing that I tend to do when writing is stray from the overall argument; this was definitely not an issue for the final exam, however. I followed the thesis quite strictly, which I feel very proud of. My final is definitely an example of my improvement throughout the quarter because it was better in both content and voice. It is most assuredly the paper I am most proud of myself for having written.


This quarter I learned how wrong it is to assume that meeting the standards of writing for high school meant that I was prepared for college level writing. That statement is shown in the progress that I have made within my essays. In my first essay, I didn't manage my time very well, and I wrote to simply get the paper done. However, my second essay went along much more smoothly, and was written with purpose. Even better was my final, where I took all of the necessary steps towards creating an essay, and implemented them in less than two hours. This is not to say that I have become the perfect writer. In fact, my first and second essays both show a lack of specific detail. They are both plagued with general information that doesn't support the thesis very well. Both my writing philosophy and writing style have changed slightly. Overall, I believe I have shown strong improvement in several categories such as time management and organization, but I still need to work on finding and utilizing specific information to support my arguments.

Portfolio: Bacon's Rebellion Essay (1st Essay)

Social issues among the Virginian colonists during the seventeenth century played the main role in Bacon’s Rebellion. Some believe that economy, and even race played the largest part in Nathanial Bacon’s uprising; the truth is the colonists being split into subdivisions according to how much land they owned directly led to this dispute between smalltime farmers and wealthier plantation owners. Since land was not distributed evenly, most colonists were impoverished or very poor. A wave of envy swept over those who did not have the wealth to buy land nor the land to acquire such wealth. In turn, the high class citizens feared for their two most precious properties: their land and their lives. (1) lack of a middle class made life harder for lower class citizens because they had nothing to work towards; those born poor tended to stay poor for the entirety of their lives, unless they married into a high class family. Since such a scenario was highly unlikely, the unlucky majority of Virginia stewed in their hatred and envy until finally rebelling against the system. Some major aspects of this flawed class structure are alive today in the United States, though much less life threatening.


The source of Bacon’s Rebellion was rooted within the lower class citizens’ hatred towards wealthy land owners. For the most part, the lower class citizens of Virginia hated those that ranked above them. A major portion of that hatred was due to the fact that a citizen’s place on the hierarchical structure in Virginia was hereditary. In other words, colonists at the time were born into either power or poverty. Their class, in the seventeenth century, rarely shifted up or down on the social ladder, especially within the confines of the Virginia colony. The commoners envied the wealthy, both for their land and money, as well as their places of power among the rest of the colony. From this envy, resentment blossomed. The majority of the colonists in Virginia, the poorer farmers, wished that they had more land; due to their status as un-wealthy citizens, they could not achieve such a feat. This caused frustration and anger among the lower class population.


Nathanial Bacon seized this moment in time, when the colonists were so angry and confused, to fuel his own rebellion. He knew that the poor farmers needed more land, and was well aware of how much land was untouched by Englishmen to the west. The land Bacon spoke of was being ‘unproductively’ inhabited by the Natives. With these thoughts in mind, utilizing his own power in the government, Bacon rallied up many farmers and indentured servants and set off. Monica R. Gisolfi put it into words rather well when she wrote about how Nathanial Bacon went through farmlands with his gang of poor colonists and “gather[ed] slaves and indentured servants to join [him].”(1) This quote effectively displays how deeply the poor colonists’ hate dwelled within them. It shows that Bacon and his band of followers could simply walk onto someone’s land and swipe them away from their work. It also shows how tightly knit the poor farmers and indentured servants were, because they had no bonds with the wealthy strong enough to stop them. Not only does it display how together the lower class was, but also the schism between the rich and poor.


Prosperous land was sparse, so few planters were able to generate enough profit to be referred to as high class plantation owners. Due to this rough distribution of land there was no middle class to speak of. (2) This was a main factor causing the poor to stay poor. Those underprivileged farmers had neither the land, nor the money to rise up the hierarchical social ranking of the Virginia colony. The lack of valuable land meant that the low class had no land to significantly increase their profits. Land also cost a lot more money, seeing as it was so sparingly distributed. These facts economically crippled them so they were unable to buy more land, because the ratio of citizens to available land was so high. Another effect of the lack of available land was that wealthy land owners made up a small percentage of the population. Thus, the majority of the population was impoverished. Lack of a middle class made life harder for the poor citizens of Virginia, because in order to rise up the ranks of society, they had to increase their revenue almost tenfold. As stated earlier, the lower class was unable to reach ‘wealthy’ status among the Virginians. Indentured servants who lived out their servitude became free man, which posed another problem, because they had no money to buy land. Such men and women were freed into poverty. Their dreams of a glorious life in the New World were crushed by their lack of money and residency, which did nothing but expand the gap between the rich and the poor, and raise the potential farmer to land ratio.


Another threat to Virginia’s class structure was that the elite farmland owners tended to hold government offices. This point directly affected the rebellion, because the number of wealthy land owners completely outweighed the amount of lower class colonists with such power. As studies have shown, in the eighteenth century, four out of five of Virginia’s House of Burgesses’ most prestigious men held more than 10,000 acres of land each.(3) Many lower class land owners viewed this distribution of power as a conflict of interest. In The American Dream, Bacon is said to have claimed that the “elite planters operated the government for private gain.”(4) Nathanial Bacon was speaking against such a dishonorable act in Chesapeake’s society. Obviously, the rich wished to be richer, thus taking advantage of their positions of power. This enraged many commoners, who strongly needed more land, which the officials would not allow them to have. The Governor at the time, Berkley, was singled out among those who unfairly used their power. Nathanial told his followers that the governor was denying them access to the Natives’ land solely because he held substantial trades with them. This would be yet another example of how unstable the Chesapeake society was during the seventeenth century, and how it directly contributed to Bacon’s Rebellion. Poor colonists could not control their own fates because the rich held governmental positions, and they sought to destroy that restraint.


Though the rebellion was eventually crushed and the worse off colonists were put back in their place on the communal hierarchy, tensions between the classes lessened throughout Virginia. The colonists, both rich and poor, banded together to defeat the Indians. This was necessary because the Native Americans were retaliating due to the English intruding on their territories, and taking their land. The planter elites’ positions of power in the colony were not limited, however, after the rebellion. As The American Promise states, “If anything [Bacon’s Rebellion] strengthened their power.”(4) Whether their stronghold over the Chesapeake society was positive or remained negative is irrelevant to the argument of class structure’s importance in the aftermath of Bacon’s Rebellion. The important part that cannot be overlooked is that the grandees still held their land and power after such a violent rebellion was raised geared towards them losing both.


Society began to stabilize after the rebellion took place. One huge help to the cause was that the ratio of people to land began to lower. Reasons for this ratio’s slip included both the introduction of slavery and the dwindling of English immigrants due to better economy in England. Also, the Virginian government stopped enforcing, harshly, the encroachment into Indian territories. This led to less animosity between classes as free men got more land from the Natives. Indentured servants were no longer coming into the colony after slavery was introduced. Also, a middle class began to shape as slavery increased profits substantially. All of these facts lessened the tension between the lower and high class citizens of the Virginia colonies.


Today, the separation between high, low and middle classes are still very distinct. Middle class is the most common in rural areas, but even this class is vastly separated from the high class citizens. Those on the top of the tier, such as computer programmers, royalty, and media icons have much more wealth than the average person in a first world country, such as America or England. Though lifestyles have changed drastically, the rich are still envied by the poor. This is simply because they have more wealth, power, and land, like in the seventeenth century. Like colonists in Virginia, Americans today plainly wish to have more land, money, freedom and power. Technology and times have changed, but the American dream has not. It is not likely to ever change, even as society becomes more progressive; the want for high social status is in human nature, it is not a necessity, nor is it necessarily life dependent, but the want for more will always be there.


It is clear to see that social classes have had major effects in the American lifestyles since before the seventeenth century. Bacon’s Rebellion is a concrete example on how an unstable class structure can lead to a discontented society. In both seventeenth century Chesapeake Bay and the Americas today, class is viewed as the amount of wealth acquired over one’s lifetime. Even in the contemporary United States, many government officials are viewed as corrupt. Like in the seventeenth century, some are said to have ‘bought’ their way into their positions, and are even accused as creating laws solely to benefit themselves. Technology, clothing and shelter styles have all changed, but class has played, and most likely always will play, a large part in social content. The fluid class structure in seventeenth century Virginia took the leading role in Bacon’s Rebellion. There were other adding components, but the social hierarchy of poor farmers and rich planters no doubt took center stage.

---

(1) http://caho-test.cc.columbia.edu/sim/15005.html, Bacon's Rebellion: Colonial Society and Politics, 1972
(2) http://www.wm.edu/niahd/journals/index.php?browse=entry&id=440, Jacqueline Woods, 2004
(3) The Invention of the White Race, by Theodore W. Allen, 1998
(4) The American Promise, by James L. Roark, Michael P. Johnson, Patricia Cline Cohen, Sarah Stage, Alan Lawson, Susan M. Hartmann, 2005

Portfolio: Patriotism Essay (2nd Essay)

Letter One-July 20, 1769

1. Dear Mother,

These soldiers have reached my last nerve. I am consumed by such an emotional confusion; on the first hand, I loathe my place under King George and the Parliament's thumb, but you continue attempting to persuade me that I owe them my rights and liberties.2. To you, I am to aim to be nothing more than a puppet for your 'glorious' majesty to string along in life. These soldiers, mother, are noisy echoes of a patriotic lost hope. This hope, seemingly lost in you as well, can be retrieved from the well you've so carelessly tossed it into.

Like you, many of the colonists voice their loyalty to the King. Widespread hope in the King and Parliament, though loyal to England, is truthfully disloyal to the colonial Americans' rights and liberties. Such Americans, whose rights are attacked and hindered by these same two components, turn a blind eye to the truth. It can only be right to protect your liberties, both with pen and sword. Mother, you must think before you set your loyalties; the King has not your best interests in mind, so is it wise to place your trust in him?

Signed,

Laurence

---

1. The American Promise Volume A:To 1800Families Divide Over the Revolution, pg 230-32
2. Is Patriotism a Mistake? , George KatebRefer to http://historyetc.wetpaint.com/page/Research

---

Letter Three-March 6, 1770

1. Dearest Mother,

I have delayed response for good reason; though I believe not your reasoning is correct on the issue of your loyalism to the King's Law, I still respect you. It would be an awful time in life to lash out at you, most honorable mother.

I have taken your words as close to my heart as possible, but I cannot logically allow them to prosper. Can you not see what has been happening? Of course recent news just outside my home will reach you before this letter does reach your hands, but I will continue as if you stand in ignorance; blood has been shed here in Boston. Just this January a boy was shot dead for literally no reason at all. Shot in cold blood by one of your 'trusted' King's officials. I stood at his funeral in silence, yet boiling with white hot Rage. Rage, mother!

This unfiltered anger took hold of my lungs, swelled within my heart; my blood ran blistering hot through my veins. An innocent boy! This behavior has gone unnoticed by Your Royal Majesty and his party of Good men. We followed along, my Brothers and Sons, grinding our teeth. We went along with this silent Fury, day to day; nothing more than fist fights had ensued upon the Reds until yesterday evening when a riot broke out. Five men shot down, just as many more wounded, but numbers matter not. We’ve been to far too many funerals for one man to take, yet the Cause stands stronger than ever. If these words are not enough to assuage you, words from your beloved Son, than truthfully nothing short of Divine persuasion will fall on your ears (and believe me, He shall have my side.)

Your Son,

Laurence

---

1. The American Promise Volume A:To 1800Families Divide Over the Revolution, pg 230-32

---

Letter Five-April 21st, 1775

1. To one Ms. Chatterton:

To prolong this information would do more damage than it would to tell you now; this morning, at 0200 hours, your son passed away. He was part of the Bostonian militia attack against the British. His death was brought on by splintered wood shot through his shoulder. Our medic, however inexperienced she was, did her best given the situation; there were many more wounded, most with a much less tragic.

He was a brave Soldier and a remarkable man.

The following are a few diary entries that were found on his person. They have been damaged in battle, but our son seemed to have meant these be sent to you upon his returning to Boston. I hope they hold some significance to you.

-General R. Jefferson

---

---

April 18, 1775

... and as we walked onwards, towards our destination, the Reds yelled from over the hill. They spoke as if they had Power to speak, "Put down your weapons" and such. We continued in our march, until one of my Brothers opened fire. In all, eight of my Friends have passed and a handful wounded, still. We cannot be silenced, mother. I have not been wounded, and shall continue in full strength towards our colonial goal. Freedom!

---

April 19, 1775

...for I have been impaled! My left arm shudders in pain, (thankfully my writing hand fails me not) and the medic has been attempting to remove the splinters of wood from my shoulder and arm. She says that I need rest; that I should sleep now...

---

April 20, 1775

I awoke this morning in an unworldly pain. Shot through my arm, the sun's fire. I can't think about anything but my Brothers, my Friends, and my Mother. She must know that though I went against her words of advice I was fighting for her. For her Freedom, her Rights, her Liberties. Though she was too blind to see them taken for granted, I played her eyes. Though too distracted to hear the hiss behind her king's words, I played her ears. I hope she sees that I did this for her. The doctor says that I don't have much energy, and in order to get better, I must rest. Mother, take these words not for granted: our beliefs have differed, but my love for you has not left me. Thank you for all you have done for me.

2.-Laurence

---

1. George Washington and Benedict Arnold: A Tale of Two Patriots, Alan CateRefer to http://historyetc.wetpaint.com/page/Research2. The American Promise Volume A:To 1800Families Divide Over the Revolution, pg 230-32

Portfolio: Final Exam

History 121 and Writing 101 have taught many students, myself included, that the two subjects are connected quite firmly. It’s not hard to see that writing and history will always hold a place in peoples’ lives, simply because they are writing and history. A question of whether it is really necessary to deeply analyze historic events comes up. Michel Foucault answers this question with his theory “Why [consider history]? Simply because I am interested in the past? No, if one means by that a history of the past in terms of the present. Yes, if one means the history of the present.” Michel Foucault’s theory of studying history is that past events are not separate from the present. His belief is that the past and present are connected, that today is a continuation of yesterday, so to speak. Out of this, I gather that history is not just a strand of events with varying importance; the study of history takes place to understand the connection between any and every event that has taken place, including contemporary happenings. It is now clear that historical events are important not because of how many lives were lost, or what controversial events took place, but due to their impact on us today. Questions pile up after this concept has been grasped, such as “what would life be like if we had never split from Britain?” and "what would have happened if the not all states ratified the Constitution?" In order to back up any opinion of such matters, a thorough understanding of happenings throughout time must be present.

Similarities between the past and the present begin to unfold once historical texts are analyzed as more than simple events. For example, during George Washington’s term as president, he stated that the United States should veer away from a dual party system. This may seem like a mere statement from a former president, but that'd be a completely above the surface observation. What’s really interesting about that is we are currently split into two main categories throughout the country: democratic and republican. Washington feared that such a system would divide the country in half, and in a way, it has. The way George Washington foresaw this becoming a problem really speaks integrated the past and present are. Yes, time has progressed and today is a much different society than it was in the 1800s. However, we are still facing the same problems that eighteenth century American citizens faced.

Not only do historical events relate to things that have happened today, or recently, they also connect to happenings from any moment in time, or at least during human existence. One great example of this is a connection made between World War II and the Holocaust. During Hitler’s reign over Nazi Germany, his followers took people from their homes simply because he persuaded them to. Adolf Hitler told those who stood behind him to send people, specifically Jews, to concentration camps, where they were to live out the rest of their lives. Those captives underwent numerous different torture techniques, and millions died simply because they were ordered to. Now, is that any different from World War II, when the US took Japanese people, even ones that have lived in America their entire lives, and brought them to concentration camps? The same basic principles are there: Jewish and Japanese people were both tortured simply because of the way they were born, and they were taken by people who only did so because they were persuaded that it was the right thing. This connection, along with the numerous others that are out there ready to be discovered, shows that the past is still relevant.

Once the connections are made, it will become clear that all events, whether from the past, present, or even future, are relevant to one another. Simply because something happened a long time ago does not mean it will not happen again, nor does it confirm that a single event will not be impacted by a prior occurrence. History isn’t taught simply to study past events, but to allow one to make links between different events throughout time. Once the ability to connect episodes from the past and present is attained, one will be better prepared for the future. Michel Foucault’s statement speaks to this thought that you should look at the past as “the history of the present.” Questions do begin to accumulate after this idea is grasped, but only when implementing these ideas can we begin to formulate answers or educated speculation. Writing and studying history cannot be escaped, because they are so firmly ingrained within life itself; the need for understanding the past, present, and one another, separates man from any other animal.

Reflective Letter

At the beginning of the quarter, I felt that I was a fairly strong writer. I found out how dangerous that assumption could be after recieving the first essay's grade, which showed where I really stood. College level writing is much more difficult than any gradeschool I've ever gone to has assigned. Although it was challenging to really buckle down and get working, I have shown much progress from the beginning of the year. This can be shown within my first and last essays, which are included in my portfolio. Essay number one was on Bacon's Rebellion and how social classes played the largest role within the rebellion itself. My last essay was a group project, me and three others, and was perhaps the most difficult to both get done and get done well. Both of these essays have specific strong and weak points, as well as tie into my writing philosophy and style.

My first essay, on social classes within Bacon's Rebellion, was worded well. I felt that I tried hard to get quality information into the essay and get it done. However, that was a highschool thought process that I was going through, and my brain needed to mature fast to get quality work done in such a timely fashion. The end result was not up to college standards at all, because the information was lax, and it lacked a real voice. That problem, lacking a voice in essays, really stems from my educational career prior to arriving at PSEC; before I arrived at Puget Sound Early College, I mainly wrote informative essays. My instructor stressed the fact that we would not write informative essays since the beginning of the Writing 101 course. Since I recieved feedback on my first essay I have really worked on gathering more useful information and applying time management skills to my writing.

Many of the problems I had with the Bacon's Rebellion essay could be seen as similiar to those withing the third essay, but let me explain. The third essay was on federalism within Massachusetts regarding the Constitution. It was unique in the fact that four people were working on it at once, which really required a lot of different time management skills than normal. One of the main issues within my latest essay was not the lack of a voice, but the presence of too many voices. The essay was poorly edited, and each voice was apparent thus confusing to the readers. On my part, however, time management was not a problem, because I got each individual paragraph and opinion piece done in a timely fashion. Also, I feel that my opinion was very well written, concise, and cohesive. This boosted the overall grade of the essay itself, and helped my ability show even within a group of three others.

As my overviews of those two essays show, time management has greatly improved. Really, getting an essay or writing assignment is not the problem very often at all. I can get the final product done as quickly as I need to. My weaknesses lie withing the actual essays themselves. Though I have been working on it throughout the quarter, I still find it hard to get useful information that is specific; I find myself using generalized information to base my arguments off of, or strengthen my arguments. Overall, I have made progress with my writing abilities. I have not gotten worse at anything, either gotten better or stayed consistently under par.

Two aspects of my writing must be looked at to get a good view of just where I stand with writing: my writing philosophy and style. My writing philosophy at the beginning of the year was as follows: writing of any kind must always start with a main idea to build off of. What seems to me to be the best way to show where I am at now would be to slightly skew the aforesaid sentence. I do not believe that it must always start with a main idea, but some sort of idea in general. Some idea of what purpose the writing at hand must serve is necessary to find useful information about the paper. I guess my newly stated writing philosophy would be: writing must alwasy start with the purpose of the paper in mind, so that information can be found in regard to the main idea. My style of writing has changed slightly. I no longer 'just write' as I would do in highschool. Now I write with much more structure and organization. I tend to get to the point as quickly as possible, now that I have taken Writing 101.

This quarter I learned how wrong it is to assume that you're good at writing. That statement is shown in the progress that I have made withing my essays. In my first essay, I didn't manage my time very well, and I wrote to simply get the paper done. However, my third essay went along much more smoothly for me, and I wrote with purpose. This is not to say that I have become the perfect writer. In fact, my first and third essays both show a lack of specific detail. They are both plagued with general information that doesn't support the thesis very well. Both my writing philosophy and writing style have changed slightly. Overall, I believe I have shown strong improvement in several catagories such as time management and organization, but I still need to work on finding and utilizing specific information to support my arguments.

Notes for Reflective Letter

1) Strengths (well)/ Improvements that need to be made/ General Progress

2) Writing Philosophy – has it changed?

3) Writing Process – Thinking, Writing, Revising

Need a clear thesis: perhaps general progress is my thesis?

1) need improvement, strengths, general progress

2) essay 1 (str, wk), essay 2 (str, wk), final (str, wk), / focus

3) General str and wk progress, specific to essay… general progress, essay 1, essay 2, etc.

Reflective letter supports either progress or lack of progress…

Other thesis:

1) progress/ not progress

2) strength/ needs improvement

3) writing style

4) process/ philosophy

5) 3 stages of writing (brainstorming, writing, revising)

6) collaboration

Can write about working in groups, writing style, TIME MANAGEMENT,

Specifically reference essays IN PORTFOLIO and not ones that are not including

Essay Three Rubric

1. Group Interaction:
Exactly 3/4 of our group did their jobs efficiently. I believe that I did my fair share, as did a few of my partners. That particular fraction that I mentioned met often and discussed the issues and obstacles placed before us. I don't feel that every member did all they could to keep our essay on track. Which brings me to my next point...

2. Use of Contract:
We don't, at least the punishment area, use our contract. A few of us actually uphold the guidelines that the contract has set in place, such as meeting every day and posting often. Not all the members make constant contributions, and even seem to think that they must acquire permission to actually post things... or simply use this as an excuse to not have things posted. We, as a group, severely need to revise our contract.

3. Use of Wiki:
As always, the wiki was a key ingredient to our essay's completion and credibility. EVERY group member is LOGGED ON to wiki every day during class, to say the least. Not every member posts or utilizes the information on the wiki all the time, however.

4. Individual Progress:
I feel like I have progressed in my writing abilities, which tends to be the pattern after I finish an essay. Working together with my group members put a spin on my own personal style very differently than it did during the last essay with Kara. Kara and I agreed on a writing style from the get go (arguably) but Ericka, Megan, Patrick and I didn't officially compose a general plan... I feel like we should have done that; I should have started that talk up at some point before we actually started writing... it would have made things go much smoother, I believe.

Third Essay

The views of Massachusetts, especially those advocating the ratification of the New Constitution, are widespread within the state. There was still, however, the presence of anti-federalism within Massachusetts, though it was drowned out by the mainstream federalist viewpoints. Although there were some reasons to fear and even oppose the ratification of the Constitution, the most intelligent and responsible thing to do would have been to scrap the Articles of Confederation and abide by the newly composed Constitution. Yes, the ratification of the New Constitution would cause changes to occur, but they would be for the best. The independent states would become united in a governmental sense. There were many reasons it was necessary to strive towards a strong centralized government. They were able to add amendments, and all states carried equal weight in the say of our country. Our new government would also keep itself in balance, with the introduction of three branches: judicial, legislative, and executive.

The federalist and anti-federalist parties were divided over the House of Representatives. Anti-federalists disliked the idea that all the states would carry equal weight. Larger states would lose some political power and smaller states would gain political power in order to make the states have equal weight. Some of the larger states did not like this obviously because their political power was lessened because they were a larger state. The anti-federalists were not happy about the representation for each state for a different reason. They believed that the representation for each state was too small and the term was too long. One member in the House of Representatives represented about 30,000 people from their state. Whereas, the members in the state legislatures are annually elected, are selected by small circles of people, are not moved very far from their homes, their community knows everything they do, and they frequently see the people they are representing. This allows them to represent their community accurately and the people can be assured that they are well represented and their opinions are heard. Anti-federalists were afraid that with one member representing 30,000 people that there would be no way for their opinions to represented accurately. They also feared that the only representatives elected would be members of the elite and that the middle and lower classes would be shoved aside and forgotten. The federalists just wanted people who were intelligent, powerful leaders. Leaders who would pass powerful amendments that would please all the states. This was just one of the concerns that stood in the way of the ratification of the Constitution.

The anti-federalists of Massachusetts had the concern that ratifying the Constitution would demean the original Constitution of Massachusetts. Ratifying the Federal Constitution would necessitate changes in there own constitution “which would be a violation of the compact,” (1). However the Federal Constitution is not as set in stone as the Massachusetts Constitution unlike the Massachusetts Constitution the federal Constitution can be amended. The ability to make amendments is one of the most appealing attributes of the Constitution. Under the new constitution the people now would not be confined to inflexibility of the old system. The people have been presented with the power to make amendments, the government will always be held in place by the people. The people of Massachusetts chose to embrace the new Constitution and let go of the ties they had to their own Constitution. The Federalists prevailed and the Constitution was ratified.

Though the one of the US Constitution’s biggest goals was to unify the people, many thought that it would do just the opposite and divide society’s powers even further. A large argument against the ratification of the constitution, especially within Massachusetts, was that there’d be a strong separation within the states; some thought that ratifying the constitution would further disconnect the classes. This argument was founded on the basis of those who wrote the Constitution itself. Citizens believed that because the writers of the Constitution were mostly part upper class Americans, that only the wealthy upper-class men and women would hold positions of power and control in the land. Also, those select believe that the power that they controlled would be absolute. These few are severely misinformed, because there are several checks and balances that keep the government in check, both by the people and within its structure.

Belief that those who hold power control absolutely only fuels the argument towards ratification of the Constitution itself. First off, anyone can hold a place in the government as long as they’re upstanding citizens, and the people wish them to hold that position. These constrictions ensure that only productive citizens are successful in attaining a political position.

In the end the federalists won and dominated the anti-federalist perspective. The federalist’s votes outnumbered the anti-federalist votes and the constitution was ratified. Helping lay down the foundation of the great nation of America. Even though the ratification process was far from over, Massachusetts had contributed their valuable vote. Although there was still internal strife throughout the country, Massachusetts had taken a firm stand and ratified the Constitution.

Sources:

(1)Harding, Sammuel B. "The Contest Over the Ratification of the Federal Constitution in the State of Massachusetts." Harvard Historical Studies 2 (1896): 1-196. Google Scholar. Ratification of the Constitution Massachusetts.

(2) Dougherty, Mary. The American Promise: A History of the United States. 3. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2005.

(3) McGeveran,, William A., ed. "Origin of the Constitution." World Almanac and Book of Facts (2002): 530. EBSCO. Highline, Federal Way. 15 Nov. 2007. Keyword: Constitution.

Opinions

Megan:

I believe Massachusetts was just being cautious before it ratified something that would govern them for the rest of their lives. The Constitution is very important and Massachusetts just wanted to make sure that the Constitution was how they wanted it to be before ratifying it. They did end up ratifying the Constitution in the end but they were not the same as the other states.

Ericka:

Massachusetts was discerning about the ratification of the constitution. They didn’t runaround ratifying things willy nilly like the first states to ratify the constitution. Like a toad Massachusetts looked before it jumped, the other states were little frogs, they didn’t look before they jumped. After thorough examination and much debate Massachusetts ended up leaping into the glorious world of ratifying the constitution. I believe that the Massachusetts way was the best way to approach the ratifying of the Constitution. I think we all should be more like Massachusetts; they were champs at making good life choices. They analyzed the situation, strove to make it better, and then ratified the constitution like good little Americans should.

Tyler:

Since the Constitution was ratified in the end, and Massachusetts was a federalist state, I agree with their decisions and opinions. At the time, a strong centralized government was necessary. Being independent states with separate governments would not help them expand either land or control. They needed to have a stronger system that would allow them to have individual voices. Sort of like an umbrella that reached over all the states entirely was, and still is, necessary. Massachusetts was internally conflicted about the ratification of the New Constitution and was the first state to give the cause of ratifying the document trouble. Even their concerns were understandable; they did break from a centralized government, parliament, and they feared stepping back into those times. Overall, their federalist views overwhelmed their anti-federalist thoughts, and I agree wholeheartedly.

Patrick:

I stand on the Federalist side of the fight. The reason I agree with the constitution is because I agree that since all of the colonies had so much in common it would be a horrible idea to not all cooperate and function under the same government. I think that it would have been a bad idea for all of the states to run individually and have their own government for the simple fact that the colonies can all benefit from each other tremendously. It would be better because they can all use the ports and stand together in disagreements with other entities such as England.

Review on Second Essay.

General Progress-GP
Meshing of Styles-MOS
My Grade-MG
Partner's Grade-PG
Creative Conflict-CC

(GP)I think that my portion of the new essay got the point across better than the last one, and I didn't feel rushed. However, I should have spent more time making sure my paper stayed in orbit around the thesis, because it strayed a bit. It kept the same argument throughout, pro-patriotism, but it jumped around a little with the 'why' part. (MG)Because of this, I don't really deserve a good grade on the thesis portion, which would lead to a LP on my part. (PG)Kara did a much better job with her section; I believe she deserves a good grade, P+ esque.


(MOS)We, Kara and I, didn't have problems working together. Our styles, being very fluid, or non-restricting, let ideas for essay type flourish. (CC)We did, however, experience a few conflicts towards the beginning, due to this component; the style or story behind our essay had to be negotiated, and ended up a mixture of both of our ideas. I believe we dealt with it well, and the situation definitely ended up a win-win for both parties.

This essay was a good experience; I still feel, however, that I could've done better. Content was decent, the story, I thought, was well put and organized in an exciting new fashion (the ending, at least) and the five letters really seem to fit together.

Loyalty and Freedom: Kara Taylor and Tyler Keiser

Link to Laurence Chatterton (my character):

pensandswords08.blogspot.com

Letter One-July 20, 1769

1.Dear Mother,

These soldiers have reached my last nerve. I am consumed by such an emotional confusion; on the first hand, I loathe my place under King George and the Parliament's thumb, but you continue attempting to persuade me that I owe them my rights and liberties.2. To you, I am to aim to be nothing more than a puppet for your 'glorious' majesty to string along in life. These soldiers, mother, are noisy echoes of a loyalist's lost hope. This hope, seemingly lost in you as well, can be retrieved from the well you've tossed it so carelessly into.

Like you, many of the colonists voice their loyalty to the King. Widespread hope in the King and Parliament, though loyal to England, is truthfully disloyal to the colonial Americans' rights and liberties. Such Americans, whose rights are attacked and hindered by these same two components, turn a blind eye to the truth. It can only be right to protect your liberties, both with pen and sword. Mother, you must think before you set your loyalties; the King has not your best interests in mind, thus neither do you.

Signed,

Laurence

---

1. The American Promise Volume A:To 1800
Families Divide Over the Revolution, pg 230-32

2. Is Patriotism a Mistake? , George Kateb
Refer to http://historyetc.wetpaint.com/page/Research

Letter Three-March 6, 1770

1.Dearest Mother,

I have delayed response for good reason; though I believe not your reasoning is correct on the issue of your loyalism to the King's Law, I still respect you. It would be an awful time in life to lash out at you, most honorable mother.

I have taken your words as close to my heart as possible, but I cannot logically allow them to prosper. Can you not see what has been happening? Of course recent news just outside my home will reach you before this letter does reach your hands, but I will continue as if you stand in ignorance; blood has been shed here in Boston. Just this January a boy was shot dead for literally no reason at all. Shot in cold blood by one of your 'trusted' King's officials. I stood at his funeral in silence, yet boiling with white hot Rage. Rage, mother!

This unfiltered anger took hold of my lungs, swelled within my heart; my blood ran blistering hot through my veins. An innocent boy! This behavior has gone unnoticed by Your Royal Majesty and his party of Good men. We followed along, my Brothers and Sons, grinding our teeth. We went along with this silent Fury, day to day; nothing more than fist fights had ensued upon the Reds until yesterday evening when a riot broke out. Five men shot down, just as many more wounded, but numbers matter not. We’ve been to far too many funerals for one man to take, yet the Cause stands stronger than ever. If these words are not enough to assuage you, words from your beloved Son, than truthfully nothing short of Divine persuasion will fall on your ears (and believe me, He shall have my side.)

Your Son,

Laurence

---

1. The American Promise Volume A:To 1800
Families Divide Over the Revolution, pg 230-32

Letter Five-April 21st, 1775

1.To one Ms. Chatterton:

To prolong this information would do more damage than it would to tell you now; This morning, at 0200 hours, your son passed away. He was part of the Bostonian militia attack against the British. His death was brought on by splintered wood shot through his shoulder. Our medic, however inexperienced she was, did her best given the situation; there were many more wounded, most with a much less tragic.

He was a brave Soldier and a remarkable man.

The following are a few diary entries that were found on his person. They have been damaged in battle, but our son seemed to have meant these be sent to you upon his returning to Boston. I hope they hold some significance to you.

---

---

General R. Jefferson

---

April 18, 1775

... and as we walked onwards, towards our destination, the Reds yelled from over the hill. They spoke as if they had Power to speak, "Put down your weapons" and such. We continued in our march, until one of my Brothers opened fire. In all, eight of my Friends have passed and a handful wounded, still. We cannot be silenced, mother. I have not been wounded, and shall continue in full strength towards our colonial goal. Freedom!

---

April 19, 1775

...for I have been impaled! My left arm shudders in pain, (thankfully my writing hand fails me not) and the medic has been attempting to remove the splinters of wood from my shoulder and arm. She says that I need rest, that I should sleep now...

April 20, 1775

I awoke this morning in an unworldly pain. Shot through my arm, the sun's fire. I can't think about anything but my Brothers, my Friends, and my Mother. She must know that though I went against her words of advice I was fighting for her. For her Freedom, her Rights, her Liberties. Though she was too blind to see them taken for granted, I played her eyes. Though too distracted to hear the hiss behind her king's words, I played her ears. I hope she sees that I did this for her. The doctor says that I don't have much energy, and in order to get better, I must rest. Mother, take these words not for granted: our beliefs have differed, but my love for you has not left me. Thank you for all you have done for me.

2.-Laurence

---

1. George Washington and Benedict Arnold: A Tale of Two Patriots, Alan Cate
Refer to http://historyetc.wetpaint.com/page/Research

2. The American Promise Volume A:To 1800
Families Divide Over the Revolution, pg 230-32

College 100

Tyler


1.
Public College: Evergreen
Evergreen seems like a good choice for me, because it has a well acclaimed arts program, which is something that interests me. Also, the students are mostly around my age group, between seventeen and twenty four. Evergreen is also an affordable school, in comparison to larger colleges, or universities.

Private College: Hope University
Hope University is a campus of about three thousand students. It is expensive to go to, and students usually have a high gpa to go there, a three point or higher. I don’t think I’ll have a chance to get in. Truthfully, Hope University doesn’t interest me much. Students are very involved in the campus, but that’s obvious, seeing as it’s a private college and there are so few people there.

Rural College: University of Maine
University of Maine has a good arts program, which I specifically asked about. There are numerous art based activities near and on the campus around the year. Class sizes are a bit bigger than I would like, but it seems like it could still be a good place to go. It would be a good place to get involved in the community through art, but I don’t know if it’s really what I’m looking for. I intend to contact the college for more information on specific topics, such as specific classes, but until then, this is a bit of an on the fence place for me.

Traditional Large University:

Small Alternative College:

2.
I am thinking of majoring in computer science. MIT, Florida Institute of Technology, as well as the Illinois Institute of Technology. I feel like these schools would offer me much more in getting my major in Computer Science. I’m not completely sure if this is what I want to do, but my interest in math applies directly to my love of computers, and a better understanding of computers would lead me to getting jobs that deal greatly with computers.
MIT made the best impression on me, because the official seemed to know more about his campus than the others. Also, Massachusetts Institute of Technology is more well renowned as a technical college than others. If I could make it into MIT, it would definitely be my number one choice.

3.
Attend and describe one of the workshops:
College Admission Trends

This workshop was about the current trends in college admissions, both as admissions officers, and students alike. The speaker’s name was Jess Ross, and she was an admissions official at UW. She talked about how wholistic reviews were becoming more common in colleges around the Nation. Most believe that the numbers of applications have been going down, but they have been going up, which started up a vicious cycle between the two components. Colleges are looking less at GPA and test scores, and more at the person applying. This applies to only about half of the colleges around the world, but is becoming more and more of a prevalent idea.

4.

Personal Evaluation of Experience: (Useful info, unanswered questions, next phase of education and career planning)

Word Count- Laurence Chatterton

July 20- 187 words
March 6- 243 words
April 21- 403 words

Total- 833 words

Letter One, to mother From Son

Dear Mother,

These soldiers are gnawing at my last nerves. I am consumed by this confusion; on the first hand, I loathe my place under King George and the Parliament's thumb, but you continue attempting to persuade me that I owe them my rights and liberties. To you, I am to aim to be nothing more than a puppet for your 'glorious' majesty to string along in life. These soldiers, mother, are noisy echoes of a loyalist's lost hope. This hope, seemingly lost in you as well, can be retrieved from the well you've tossed it so carelessly into.

Like you, many of the colonists voice their loyalty to the King. This widespread hope in the King and Parliament, though loyal to England, is unloyal to the colonial Americans. Such Americans, whose rights are attacked and hindered by these same two components, turn a blind eye to the truth. It can only be right to protect your liberties, both with pen and sword. Mother, you must think before you set your loyalties; the King has not your best interests in mind, thus neither do you.

Signed,

Laurence

(187 words)

Loalism VS. Patriotism

Tyler Keiser- Patriot
Kara Taylor- Loyalist

---

We have decided that one of the best ideas, and easiest to accomplish, would be a letter between either a mother and a son, or a father and a daughter. So we're both pretty fluid in our writing styles, thus indecisive on what we will do for sure, but this idea sounds pretty solid.

---

Kara and I think that the mother/son letter would work best, because of the spin we could put on each side. It would be easier and more probable.

---

To set ourselves apart from the text within the book, which itself is a parent-child relationship, we are thinking about maybe taking Craig's idea and recording our reading... however, if after we write our letters, we decide that we have already set ourselves apart from those readings, then we will not do anything different... and we'll just keep our documents as they are.

---

We haven't decided on what we will do for sure, but this is where we will start:

Letter to Patriot son from Loyalist mother

Kara is going to play the role of the loyalist mother who is offended by her son's decision to part from the king and parliament...I am the opposite role.

Midterm Practice

John Winthrop’s sermon on the boat to New England shows how highly Puritan society held themselves. The statement that they ‘shall be as a city upon a hill’ means they believe they will be the center of everyone’s attention. I do not agree that the King paid much attention to these new colonists, because he was simply happy to have rid them from England, so that they could all continue their corruption in peace. Though I don’t see the King having a close eye on the Puritans, I do believe that other citizens of England, as well other countries, were very watchful. If this colony went well, they could pursue lives in the area in a parallel fashion. Puritans believed that they were chosen by God to purify the Church of England; they were to live by the laws of the bible, and not let the king interfere with God’s plan. This is the case for many churches that are formed in contemporary society. To this day, people choose to improve upon their church or religion, or branch off into what they feel is right. The case of the Puritans, however, was due to the corruption of England’s government, both the monarchy, and the hierarchy of the church itself.

Though they believe that their holy cause will lead them to the utmost success, this is not the cause, because economics become a huge problem, as well as surviving with limited help from England, who they broke away from. Puritan society focuses mainly on the religious purification of the Church of England. Monarchy in England led to the government dipping their greedy fingers into the church, for numerous sorts of personal gain. Not only this but the sects of the church themselves were using their powers within the church for their own personal growth. The Puritans chose to break of from this selfish alliance, so they spoke against it. After becoming fed up with their political and religious outcries, the King sent them away to form a colony, New England. All of this thought leads them to forget about what their true goal should be: the success of the colony itself. Without proper economic goals, they cannot survive, and they spend far too much time focusing on religion. This leads to numerous conflicts, such as the Salem Witch Trials, as well as the overall displays of public humiliation.

Puritan success is not nearly as evident as success in other colonies with different viewpoints. Colonies such as Virginia, whose main concerns are economic issues, have a much more positive stance in the colonial times. Tobacco and cotton, however blasphemous it is, seem to get you further than simple faith in the Lord. This is shown when Winthrop states that followers will say "the Lord make it like that of New England." Winthrop assumes that all others will simply trust in God to lead them to success. This idea does not sit well with me, because there is much more to this life than a belief of a higher entity. Economics is such a defining aspect of life, even in the times that Puritan society came about. If John Winthrop had merely opened his eyes, and broadened his views, he would see this. Clearly, the thought that God would lead them to achieve all that he wished to achieve was unwise.

John Winthrop completely overlooks the true nature of starting up a colony. They must survive off of their wits, and that trust in God does not always lead to direct victory on this earth. He did, however, do his job by psyching up all of his followers. They truly trusted his opinions, and followed him one hundred percent, in the beginning. Even though they tried to stray from corruption of their church, it did find a way into their society. Public humiliation was a large part of everyday life within the New England colony. This led to distrust of one another, and an implosion of the structure of their lives. They sought to become a better, holier alliance than the Church of England was, but ultimately failed. Triumph in God did not lead to success within the colony. With this all in mind, I think that John Winthrop let his role go to his head; they needed far more than just God’s approval, and the approval of others. If they had focused on what they were doing themselves, rather than what others would think of them, they could have succeeded on a far greater scale.

Essay #1 Reflection Post

How do you think you did?

I believe that I did fairly well on the essay. To me, it was both clear, concise, and well organized. Though some one of the sources (1/4) was not extremely credible, the essay, overall, was well written, and covered the standards for the history sheet. I should have used several more sources, and weeded out the ones that weren't necessary, which was rooted in our Wiki problem with annotations, which we simply did not do. If I'm being asked to grade myself using the np/lp/p/hp structure... I guess I'd give myself somewhere between lp and p, because I could really have used my time better. The essay, as a whole, could've been much better. Some of the essays that I read were truly better than mine, both in source material and overall structure, so I should strive to better my material usage and structuring as well.


What have you learned about your writing process and philosophy?

Writing using the 'They Say I Say' template made my job a lot easier. Without it, I believe that my essay, as a whole, would've been structured a lot looser, which could have resulted in an unclear, questionably worded essay, which I don't feel I ended up with. I used all of my knowledge of the 'They Say I Say' template, as well as a few others, and applied them directly to my writing, which increased my writing ability, I believe. Writing in the following order: Prewrite/think/Write/Rewrite/Revise, has been a structure that I've always loosely followed, since middle school, however, using it strictly helped me get my message across, I believe.

My philosophy mainly revolved around how often I wrote, so I guess this simply strengthened my case.


What have you learned about college writing vs. high school writing?

College writing is much more involved than high school writing. Writing at a college level requires much more research, whereas, in high school, it's all in a text book. This last essay forced me to look outside of the text book and search for other papers and readings with opinions on the topic that I was writing on. This isn't restricting, to say the least. I felt as though I was more free to do with my paper as I chose to do with it, even though there were fairly strict requirements that had to be met.


What changes will you make next time?

In the future, when using the Wiki, at least, I intend to annotate on the page. This will help both myself, and those around me. Also, I will make more time to write my essay. Making more time is always a goal of mine that I don't tend to follow through with. Though I end with decent papers, I feel as though, with more time, I could've done more, or at least made it easier on myself.

Bacon's Rebellion: Fueled by Unstable Class Structure-Final Draft

There was an uneven distribution of power, land and wealth among the colonists in Virginia during the seventeenth century. This played a large role in the rebellion set into play by Nathanial Bacon. Land was quite scarce in the Chesapeake Bay region of Virginia, so those who had it were set apart from those who simply did not. Since land was not distributed evenly, most colonists at the time were impoverished, or just very poor. A wave of envy swept over those who did not have the wealth to buy land nor the land to acquire such wealth. This caused the high class citizens to fear for their property and their lives. (1) Both the lack of a middle class and the high class’ obvious majority in Virginian government added to the high class’ fear and the low class’ anger. The class structure at the time of Bacon’s Rebellion led to the rebellion itself, and also had a hand in the events to follow. Some major aspects of this class structure are alive in the United States, to this day.


Bacon’s Rebellion largely revolved around the feelings that both the lower class colonists and farmers had towards the upper class plantation owners. For the most part, the lower class citizens of Virginia hated the class above them. A major portion of that hatred was due to the fact that the class of each individual citizen was directly given to them by their parents. In other words, colonists at the time were born into either power or poverty. Their class, in the seventeenth century, rarely shifted up or down on the social hierarchy, especially within the confines of the Virginia colony. The commoners envied the wealthy, both for their land and money, as well as their places of power among the rest of the colony. From this envy, resentment blossomed. The majority of the colonists in Virginia, the poorer farmers, wished that they had more land; due to their status as un-wealthy citizens, they could not achieve such a feat. This caused frustration and anger among the lower class population.


Such ideas caused a deafening uproar of confusion, and the feeling of being taken advantage of. Nathanial Bacon seized this moment in time, when the colonists were so angry, to fuel his own rebellion. He knew that the poor farmers needed more land, and was well aware of how much land was untouched by Englishmen to the west; the land he spoke of was being ‘unproductively’ inhabited by the Natives. With these thoughts in mind, utilizing his own power in the government, Bacon rallied up many farmers and indentured servants and set off. Monica R. Gisolfi put it into words rather well when she wrote how Nathanial Bacon went through farmlands with his gang of poor colonists and “gather[ed] slaves and indentured servants to join them.”(1) This quote effectively displays how deeply the poor colonists’ hate dwelled within them; that Bacon and his band of followers could walk onto someone’s land and simply swipe them away from their work. It also shows how tightly knit the poor farmers and indentured servants were, because they had no bonds with the wealthy strong enough to stop them. Not only does it display how together the lower class was, but also the schism between the rich and poor.


Prosperous land was so sparse, so few planters were able to generate enough profit to be referred to as high class plantation owners. Due to this rough distribution of land there was no middle class to speak of. (2) Also, this was a main factor causing the poor to stay poor. Those underprivileged farmers had neither the land, nor the money to rise up the hierarchical social ranking of the Virginia colony. The lack of valuable land meant that low class had no land to significantly increase their profits. These facts lead them to being unable to buy more land, because the ratio of citizens to available land was so high. Land must have cost a lot more money, seeing as it was so sparingly distributed. Another effect of the lack of available land was that wealthy land owners made up a small percentage of the population. Thus, the majority of the population was impoverished. Lack of a middle class made life harder for the poor citizens of Virginia, because in order to rise up the ranks of society, they had to increase their revenue almost tenfold. As stated earlier, the lower class was unable to reach ‘wealthy’ status among the Virginians. Indentured servants who lived out their servitude became free man, which posed another problem, because they had no money to buy land. Such men and women were freed into poverty. Their dreams of a glorious life in the New World were crushed by their lack of money and residency, which did nothing but expand the gap between the rich and the poor, and raise the potential farmer to land ratio.


Another threat to Virginia’s class structure, and point that directly affected the rebellion was that the elite farmland owners tended to hold government offices. As studies have shown, in the eighteenth century, four out of five of Virginia’s House of Burgesses’ most prestigious men held more than 10,000 acres of land each.(3) Many lower class land owners viewed this distribution of power as a conflict of interest. In The American Dream, Bacon is said to have claimed that the “elite planters operated the government for private gain.”(4) Nathanial Bacon was speaking against such a dishonorable act in Chesapeake’s society. Obviously, the rich wished to be richer, thus taking advantage of their positions of power. This enraged many commoners, who strongly needed more land, which the officials would not allow them to have. The Governor at the time, Berkley, was singled out among those who unfairly used their power. Nathanial told his followers that the governor was denying them access to the Natives’ land solely because he held substantial trades with them. This would be yet another example of how unstable the Chesapeake society was during the seventeenth century, and how it directly contributed to Bacon’s Rebellion. Poor colonists could not control their own fates because the rich held governmental positions, and they sought to destroy that restraint.


Though the rebellion was eventually crushed, things did get better in Chesapeake. The colonists, both rich and poor, banded together to defeat the Indians. This was necessary because the Native Americans were retaliating due to the English intruding on their territories, and taking their land. One thing that did not change was the planter elites’ positions of power. Their power in the colony was not limited, however, after the rebellion. As The American Promise states, “If anything [Bacon’s Rebellion] strengthened their power.”(4) Whether their stronghold over the Chesapeake society was positive or remained negative is irrelevant to the argument of class structure’s importance in the aftermath of Bacon’s Rebellion. The important part that cannot be overlooked is that the grandees still held their land and power after such a violent rebellion was raised geared towards them losing both.
Society began to stabilize after the rebellion took place. One huge help to the cause was that the ratio of people to land began to lower. Reasons for this ratio’s slip included both the introduction of slavery and the dwindling of English immigrants due to better economy in England. Also, the Virginian government stopped enforcing, harshly, the encroachment into Indian territories. This led to less animosity between classes as free men got more land from the Natives. Indentured servants were no longer coming into the colony after slavery was introduced. Also, a middle class began to shape as slavery increased profits substantially. All of these facts lessened the tension between the lower and high class citizens of the Virginia colonies.


Today, the separations between high, low and middle classes are still very distinct. Middle class is the most common in rural areas, but even this class is vastly separated from the high class citizens. Those on the top of the tier, such as computer programmers, royalty, and media icons have much more wealth than the average person in a first world country, such as America or England. Though lifestyles have changed drastically, the rich are still envied by the poor. This is simply because they have more wealth, power, and land, like in the seventeenth century. Like colonists in Virginia, Americans today plainly wish to have more land, money, freedom and power. Technology and times have changed, but the American dream has not. It is not likely to ever change, even as society becomes more progressive; the want for high social status is in human nature, it is not a necessity, nor is it necessarily life dependent, but the want for more will always be there.


It is clear to see that social classes have had major effects in the American lifestyles since before the seventeenth century. Bacon’s Rebellion is a concrete example on how an unstable class structure can lead to a discontented society. In both seventeenth century Chesapeake Bay and the Americas today, class is viewed as the amount of wealth acquired over one’s lifetime. Even in the contemporary United States, many government officials are viewed as corrupt. Like in the seventeenth century, some are said to have ‘bought’ their way into their positions, and are even accused as creating laws solely to benefit themselves. Technology, clothing and shelter styles have all changed, but class has played, and most likely always will play, a large part in social content. The fluid class structure in seventeenth century Virginia took the leading role in Bacon’s Rebellion. There were other adding components, but the social hierarchy of poor farmers and rich planters no doubt took center stage.


(1) http://caho-test.cc.columbia.edu/sim/15005.html, Bacon's Rebellion: Colonial Society and Politics, 1972
(2) http://www.wm.edu/niahd/journals/index.php?browse=entry&id=440, Jacqueline Woods, 2004
(3) The Invention of the White Race, by Theodore W. Allen, 1998
(4) The American Promise, by James L. Roark, Michael P. Johnson, Patricia Cline Cohen, Sarah Stage, Alan Lawson, Susan M. Hartmann, 2005

Second Draft.

There was an uneven distribution of power, land and wealth among the colonists in Virginia during the seventeenth century. This played a large role in the rebellion set into play by Nathanial Bacon. Land was quite scarce in the Chesapeake Bay region of Virginia, so those who had it were set apart from those who simply did not. Since land was not distributed evenly, most colonists at the time were impoverished, or just very poor. A wave of envy swept over those who did not have the wealth to buy land nor the land to acquire such wealth. This caused the high class citizens to fear for their property and their lives. (1) Both the lack of a middle class and the high class’ obvious majority in Virginian government added to the high class’ fear and the low class’ anger. The class structure at the time of Bacon’s Rebellion led to the rebellion itself, and also had a hand in the events to follow. Some major aspects of this class structure is alive in the United States, to this day.


Bacon’s Rebellion largely revolved around the feelings that both the lower class colonists and farmers had towards the upper class plantation owners. For the most part, the lower class citizens of Virginia hated the class above them. A major portion of that hatred was due to the fact that the class of each individual citizen was directly given to them by their parents. In other words, colonists at the time were born into either power or poverty. Their class, in the seventeenth century, rarely shifted up or down on the social hierarchy, especially within the confines of the Virginia colony. The commoners envied the wealthy, both for their land and money, as well as their places of power among the rest of the colony. From this envy, resentment blossomed. The majority of the colonists in Virginia, the poorer farmers, wished that they had more land; due to their status as un-wealthy citizens, they could not achieve such a feat. This caused frustration and anger among the lower class population.


Such ideas caused a deafening uproar of confusion, and the feeling of being taken advantage of. Nathanial Bacon seized this moment in time, when the colonists were so angry, to fuel his own rebellion. He knew that the poor farmers needed more land, and was well aware of how much land was untouched by Englishmen to the west; the land he spoke of was being ‘unproductively’ inhabited by the Natives. With these thoughts in mind, utilizing his own power in the government, Bacon rallied up many farmers and indentured servants and set off. Monica R. Gisolfi put it into words rather well when she wrote how Nathanial Bacon went through farmlands with his gang of poor colonists and “gather[ed] slaves and indentured servants to join them.”(1) This quote effectively displays how deeply the poor colonists’ hate dwelled within them; that Bacon and his band of followers could walk onto someone’s land and simply swipe them away from their work. It also shows how tightly knit the poor farmers and indentured servants were, because they had no bonds with the wealthy strong enough to stop them. Not only does it display how together the lower class was, but also the schism between the rich and poor.


Prosperous land was so sparse, so few planters were able to generate enough profit to be referred to as high class plantation owners. Due to this rough distribution of land there was no middle class to speak of. (2) Also, this was a main factor causing the poor to stay poor. Those underprivileged farmers had neither the land, nor the money to rise up the hierarchical social ranking of the Virginia colony. The lack of valuable land meant that low class had no land to significantly increase their profits. These facts lead them to being unable to buy more land, because the ratio of citizens to available land was so high. Land must have cost a lot more money, seeing as it was so sparingly distributed. Another effect of the lack of available land was that wealthy land owners made up a small percentage of the population. Thus, the majority of the population was impoverished. Lack of a middle class made life harder for the poor citizens of Virginia, because in order to rise up the ranks of society, they had to increase their revenue almost tenfold. As stated earlier, the lower class was unable to reach ‘wealthy’ status among the Virginians. Indentured servants who lived out their servitude became free man, which posed another problem, because they had no money to buy land. Such men and women were freed into poverty. Their dreams of a glorious life in the New World were crushed by their lack of money and residency, which did nothing but expand the gap between the rich and the poor, and raise the potential farmer to land ratio.


Another threat to Virginia’s class structure, and point that directly affected the rebellion was that the elite farmland owners tended to hold government offices. As studies have shown, in the eighteenth century, four out of five of Virginia’s House of Burgesses’ most prestigious men held more than 10,000 acres of land each.(3) Many lower class land owners viewed this distribution of power as a conflict of interest. In The American Dream, Bacon is said to have claimed that the “elite planters operated the government for private gain.”(4) Nathanial Bacon was speaking against such a dishonorable act in Chesapeake’s society. Obviously, the rich wished to be richer, thus taking advantage of their positions of power. This enraged many commoners, who strongly needed more land, which the officials would not allow them to have. The Governor at the time, Berkley, was singled out among those who unfairly used their power. Nathanial told his followers that the governor was denying them access to the Natives’ land solely because he held substantial trades with them. This would be yet another example of how unstable the Chesapeake society was during the seventeenth century, and how it directly contributed to Bacon’s Rebellion. Poor colonists could not control their own fates because the rich held governmental positions, and they sought to destroy that restraint.


Though the rebellion was eventually crushed, things did got better in Chesapeake. The colonists, both rich and poor, banded together to defeat the Indians. This was necessary because the Native Americans were retaliating due to the English intruding on their territories, and taking their land. One thing that did not change was the planter elites’ positions of power. Their power in the colony was not limited, however, after the rebellion. As The American Promise states, “If anything [Bacon’s Rebellion] strengthened their power.”(4) Whether their stronghold over the Chesapeake society was positive or remained negative is irrelevant to the argument of class structure’s importance in the aftermath of Bacon’s Rebellion. The important part that cannot be overlooked is that the grandees still held their land and power after such a violent rebellion was raised geared towards them losing both.


Society began to stabilize after the rebellion took place. One huge help to the cause was that the ratio of people to land began to lower. Reasons for this ratio’s slip included both the introduction of slavery and the dwindling of English immigrants due to better economy in England. Also, the Virginian government stopped enforcing, harshly, the encroachment into Indian territories. This led to less animosity between classes as free men got more land from the Natives. Indentured servants were no longer coming into the colony after slavery was introduced. Also, a middle class began to shape as slavery increased profits substantially. All of these facts lessened the tension between the lower and high class citizens of the Virginia colonies.


Today, the separations between high, low and middle classes are still very distinct. Middle class is the most common in rural areas, but even this class is vastly separated from the high class citizens. Those on the top of the tier, such as computer programmers, royalty, and media icons have much more wealth than the average person in a first world country, such as America or England. Though lifestyles have changed drastically, the rich are still envied by the poor. This is simply because they have more wealth, power, and land, like in the seventeenth century. Like colonists in Virginia, Americans today plainly wish to have more land, money, freedom and power. Technology and times have changed, but the American dream has not. It is not likely to ever change, even as society becomes more progressive; the want for high social status is in human nature, it is not a necessity, nor is it necessarily life dependent, but the want for more will always be there.


(1) http://caho-test.cc.columbia.edu/sim/15005.html, Bacon's Rebellion: Colonial Society and Politics, 1972
(2) http://www.wm.edu/niahd/journals/index.php?browse=entry&id=440, Jacqueline Woods, 2004
(3) The Invention of the White Race, by Theodore W. Allen, 1998
(4) The American Promise, by James L. Roark, Michael P. Johnson, Patricia Cline Cohen, Sarah Stage, Alan Lawson, Susan M. Hartmann, 2005

About Next Post

My essay doesn't have all of the quotes in it, yet. I put it together with what I knew was going in there... then added 'filler' information... basically, everything other than the main ideas are on the cutting-board. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE criticize my work. I need to know what DOES NOT WORK. Thank you.

Bacon’s Rebellion: Fueled by Unstable Class Structure

Bacon’s Rebellion largely revolved around the feelings that the lower class colonists and farmers had towards the upper class land owners. For the most part, the lower class citizens of Virginia hated the class above them. A major portion of that hatred was due to the fact that the class of each individual citizen was directly given to them by their parents. In other words, you were born into either power or poverty. You class, in the seventeenth century, rarely shifted up or down on the social hierarchy, especially within the confines of the Virginia colony. The commoners envied the wealthy, both for their land and money, as well as their places of power among the rest of the colony. From this envy, resentment blossomed. The majority of the colonists in Virginia, the poorer farmers, wished that they had more land, but, due to their status’ as unwealthy citizens, they could not achieve such a feat. This caused frustration and anger among the lower class population.



Nathanial Bacon seized this moment in time, when the colonists were so angry, to fuel his own rebellion. He knew that the poor farmers needed more land. He was also aware of how much land was untouched by Englishmen to the west, and was being unproductively inhabited by the Natives. With these thoughts in mind, utilizing his own power in the government, Bacon rallied up many farmers and indentured servants and set off. Monica R. Gisolfi put it into words rather well when she wrote how Nathanial Bacon went through farmlands with his gang of poor colonists and “gather[ed] slaves and indentured servants to join them.” Upon analysis of this quote, you see how effectively it displays how deeply the poor colonists’ hate dwelled within them; that Bacon and his band of followers could walk onto someone’s land and simply swipe them away from their work. It also shows how tightly knit the poor farmers and indentured servants were, because they had no bonds with the wealthy strong enough to stop them. Not only does it display how together the lower class was, but also the schism between the rich and poor.



Since prosperous land was so sparse, few planters were able to generate enough profit to be referred to as high class, wealthy plantation owners. Due to this rough distribution of land there was no middle class to speak of. Also, this was a main factor causing the poor to stay poor. Those underprivileged farmers had neither the land, nor the money to rise up the hierarchical social ranking of the Virginia colony. The lack of valuable land meant that low class had no land to significantly increase their profits. These facts lead them to being unable to buy more land, because the ratio of citizens to available land was so high. Land must have cost a lot more money, seeing as it was so sparingly distributed.Another effect of the lack of available land was that wealthy land owners made up a small percentage of the population. Thus, the majority of the population was impoverished. The lack of a middle class made life harder for the poor citizens of Virginia. As stated earlier, the lower class was unable to reach ‘wealthy’ status among the Virginians. Indentured servants who lived out their servitude became free man, which posed another problem, because they had no money to buy land. Such men and women were freed into poverty. Their dreams of a glorious life in the New World were crushed by their lack of money and residency. This did nothing but expand the gap between the rich and the poor, and raise the potential farmer to land ratio.



The small percentage of wealthy land owners tended to be government officials. Many lower class land owners viewed this distribution of power as a conflict of interest. In The American Dream, Bacon is said to have claimed that the “elite planters operated the government for private gain.” Nathanial Bacon was speaking against such a dishonorable act in Chesapeake’s society. Obviously, the rich wished to be richer, thus taking advantage of their positions of power. This angered many commoners, who strongly needed more land, which the officials would not allow them to have. The Governor at the time, Berkley, was singled out. Nathanial told his followers that he was denying them access to the Natives’ land solely because he held substantial trades with them. This would be yet another example of how unstable the Chesapeake society was during the seventeenth century, and how it directly contributed to Bacon’s Rebellion; the poor could not control their own fates because the rich held governmental positions, and they sought to destroy that chokehold over them.


Though the rebellion was eventually crushed, things did got better in Chesapeake. The colonists, both rich and poor, banded together to defeat the Indians. This was necessary because the Native Americans were retaliating due to the English intruding on their territories, and taking their land. One thing that did not change, was the planter elites’ positions of power. Their power in the colony was not limited, however, after the rebellion. As The American Promise states, “If anything [Bacon’s Rebellion] strengthened their power.” Whether their stronghold over the Chesapeake society was positive or remained negative is irrelevant to the argument of class structure’s importance in the aftermath of Bacon’s Rebellion. The important part that cannot be overlooked is that the grandees still held their land and power after such a violent rebellion was raised geared towards them losing both.


Society began to stabilize after the rebellion took place. One huge help to the cause was that the ratio of people to land began to lower. This led to less animosity between classes as free men got more land from the Natives. Indentured servants were no longer coming into the colony after slavery was introduced. Increase of land helped many freed servants acquire residency and farmland. Also, a middle class began to shape as slavery increased profits substantially. All of these facts lessened the tension between the lower and high class citizens of the Virginia colonies.