Food Safety

The Meat Inspection Act of 1906, inspired by a nauseated public as a result of Sinclair's novel, "The Jungle", decreed that the preparation of emat shipped over state lines would be subject to federal inspection from corral to can. This would spur larger businesses to booming success (with more appealing products bearing the governement seal of approval) and protect consumers from buying dangerous unhealty meats.




The Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 was designed to prevent the adulteration and mislabeling of foods and pharmaceuticals. This would prevent drugstore companies from gaining extra profits with mislabeled products and so would protect consumers from ineffective or dangerously icnorrect medicines.

Railroads

The Elkins Act of 1903 was the beginning of new and effective railroad legislation. Heavy fines could now be imposed on both the railroads that gave rebates and on the shippers that impsoed them.



Even more effective was the Hepburn Act of 1906, in which bribe-infested free passes were now severely restricted. The Interstate Commerce Comission was expanded, now to include express companies, sleeping-car companies and pipelines. This marked the first time the comission was given real power to nullify existing rates and stipulate naximum rates.

An Oration for the Hay-Pauncefote Treaty of 1901

[I am writing this oration on behalf of the Hay-Pauncefote Treaty of 1901, which, being a treaty, cannot type. But don't let that discredit it...]

I am perhaps the most important event of my day! Just consider it! Before me, there was that annoying Clayton-Bulwer Treaty with Britain from way back when in the 1850s, which denied the United States the rights to build passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific. But then came the very need to do so- in Panama. Imagine the inconvenience of having to travel all the way around South America, a 3 or 4 week journey, when one could reach the same destination in just a few hours by cutting across Panama! The benefits are astronomical! And I, of course, provided those benefits. Because the Brits were so tangled up down there in Africa, they kindly consented to have me written, granting Americans right not only to build the canal but to fortify it, too! And thus the Hay-Pauncefote Trearty was born! Since, I have provided the way to amazing benfits of the wonderfully convenient crossing form Atlantic to Pacific in a few hours, via the Panama Canal!

The Fading Frontier

By 1890, the frontier line was no longer discernable. That is, all unsettled areas were enclosed by areas of settlement. Soon there would be no more land left to explore...



Frederick Jackson Turner wrote "The Significance of the Frontier in American History" in 1893., where he noted that the free land (land open to development) was going or had already gone.



It was predicted in 1827 that at least 500 years would be necessary to completely explore and develop the western U.S. Obviously, this was not true, and the speed at which the land was going drove home the point that the land was not inexhaustble. A plan was then developed to take measures to preserve it: The National Parks. Yellowstone was the first opened, in 1872, and Yosemite and Sequoia followed in 1890.

The passing of the frontier ended the romantic phase of internal development.



Safety Valve Theory: when life in the city brought unemployment, people would head to the frontier, start farming, and prosper there. Few truly did, for they either did not know how to farm or had no means of transport to the frontier.
The frontier did, however, lure immigrant farmers who were less entralled by city life.
The real safety valves were the great western cities, such as Chicago, Denver, and San Francisco. (In 1880, the area west of the Rockies to the Pacific Coast was the most urbanized region in America.

Turner suggested that real American history was the history of the colonization of the great west, a constantly developing process that began with Columbus heading west and discovering the West Indies, and so forth, to the mainland, across the mountains and plains to the Pacific.

Important Points Concerning the Trans-Mississippi West:
*Where the Native Americans' last struggle against colonization took place (and where any reamining live today)
*Where Anglo culture collided with Hispanic culture, sparking a competition for dominance in the New World
*Where America faced across the Pacific to Asia
*The scale and severity of the environment, and all its magnificence and openness, molded political and social life, and the American immigration
*Where the federal government played its most conspicuous role in economic and social development, with landholding distrubution, railroad building, and irrigation projects



Westward-moving poineers and their vast landscapes were immortalized by writers such as Horte, Twain, Jackson and Parkman, and by painters such as Catlin, Remington and Bierstadt. They planted the seeds of civilization in the immense western wilderness...




(Information taken from p. 606 - 608 of "The American Pageant", Twelfth Edition)

Franklin Fans the Flames in France

As the War for American Independence continued, it became increasingly necessary for the Americans to have the support of the French. As a whole, the American army was weak and nearly defenseless. Woefully unprepared, the patriots lacked supplies, weapons, and most of all, experience. Many men had never even used a musket before, and were lucky if they even had access to one. Not to mention, the American army was a remarkably tiny force comapred to the massive British army and navy that they had engaged in war with. It quickly became clear that the Americans would not be able to fight this war on their own.


And so, Benjamin Franklin was selected as ambassador to France. Already a well respected rebel leader, he accepted this new challenge eagerly. There could hardly be a better man for the job. Franklin was already well known and very popular and France, as a result of his scientific experiments and other discoveries. His witty aphorisms and perhaps even his fur cap played a part in winning the French. Nevertheless, Franklin would prove much more than just a popular figure.


The journey to France itself would be exceedingly dangerous for the new amabassador. At the time of his crossing, in late 1776, Franklin had signed the Declaration of Independence and branded hismelf a traitor. As a result, Franklin would have been in terrible danger had he encountered any British during his voyage. It is almsot certain that he would have been sent to London and hanged as a traitor. Despite this looming threat, Franklin bravely continued onward, safely arriving in France without any problems.


Franklin was warmly welcomed upon his arrival in France. As mentioned before, he was quite popular among the French public, renowned for his many inventions and discoveries(particularly taming lightning), as well as his exceptional wit. It has also been remarked that Franklin was something of a ladies' man... even at the age of 70 (He was noted to be a notorious flirt after the death of his wife, Deborah). This great popularity did not distort Franklin's political intelligence in any way, and it certainly was useful in allowing his gracious welcome to Paris and for great value being given to his ideas and requests, which would benefit America greatly.



And so, France would serve as an exceedingly valuable ally to America. As referenced earlier, the American army was terribly unpeprared to singlehandedly defeat the enormous British threat. For this reason, France was needed, to supply the Americans with weapons and other supplies, as well as its own soldiers and formidable naval power. At this time, France and England were the most powerful nations in Europe, and either one was possibly powerful enough to topple the other. But first, the Americans needed France's support. Benjamin Frnaklin was on the case!


France, now ruled by King Louis XVI, bitterly resented the British for defeating them in the Seven Years War. For years, they hoped that the British would lose their North American empire as well. Meanwhile, it seemed as if the America and the British were clsoe to reconciling. If this were to happen, Britain would not only regain, but probably permanantly secure, its immense empire in America! Ben Franklin, therefore, did not have a difficult time convicning the French monarch to intervene, wisely playing off their fears of a unified Britain and America. Before long, Franklin had succeeded in his quest and won the French support of the colonial effort!


Thanks to Benjamin Franklin, America's strength was more than doubled! France would, over the next few years, supply the patriots with weapons and more soldiers, in addition to an excellent navy. These valuable assets, combined with American bravery and ingeneiuity, would eventually allow the Americans to win their Independence!
As for Franklin, he would remain in France for the duration of the War. He would later serve as a peace negotiator at the Treaty of Paris in 1783, alongside John Adams and John Jay, and would so help to lay the final touches to American Independence, before his return in 1785.

And, to finish with an amusing quote by Ben Franklin: "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy!"

Sources of Information:
"The American Pageant" Textbook
theamericanscholar.org
ushistory.org

"New France Fans Out"

The beaver was one of New France's msot valuable resources, attracting French fur-trappers called coureurs du bois (literally, "runners of the woods").


The coureurs du bois, such as the ones depicted here, nearly decimated the beaver population in northern North America, leaving behind disastrous ecological damage.



The coureurs du bois also recruited natives to their service, who agreed to assist them in the beaver hunt, somewhat relucantly. Natives were badly impacted by diseases carried by the Europeans. In addition, hunting the beaver violated many natives' reigious beliefs.



Meanwhile, Jesuit priests became involved, hoping for Indians to convert. While rather usnuccessful in that aspect, they did assist as explorers and geographers.



In 1682, the explorer Robert La Salle, hoping to cut off the incoming Spanish, sailed down the Mississippi River and claimed its basin, Louisiana, for France- a massive addition to the empire. Curiously, he never did return to the delta region, now the state of Louisiana, for when he sailed to the Gulf of Mexico, he only reached Texas and was there murdered by the Spanish.



In 1718, the French expanded upon LaSalle's work, reaching the river delta. They established a fort at the mouth of the river, called New Orleans. From this fort they had control of the Mississippi River, a valuable assett. The French continued to be at odds with the Spanish, competing for domination of the Gulf of Mexico.



So, by this time, the lands of New France has expanded to cover much of North America, France now claiming the alrgest piece of territory on the continent. But things rarely stay the same for very long...

The Great Awakening

In a few of my own words, the Great Awakening was a time in colonial history when the churches in the colonies revised their policies and attracted more colonists with their refreshed ideals. By the 1730s, religion was becoming a less central part of the lives of the colonists, especially the Puritan church, which had very strict rules concerning being a part of their congrgation and equally elaborate doctrines. Also at this time, many such as Jacobus Arminius began challenging such ideas as predestination as endorsed by Calvinism. Because of this, many chruches realized that it was basically necessary to be less strict in their "rules and regulations" so that they could gather new members.
Then came the new preachers. Near the beginning of the Awakening, writer and pastor Jonathan Edwards preached that one need depend entirely on God. His dramatic style became clear in "Sinners in the hands of an Angry God", in which he described in detail hell and the fates of the damned souls, which sparked much attention and conversions. Even more impressive, though, was the captivating preaching of George Whitefield. Whitefield was described as dramatic enough to convince even the most skeptical lsiteners, bringing about many, many conversions, as well as inspiring many enthusistic (and bizarre) imitators. This new, emotional aspect of religion was beinginning to undermine the stiff, stubborn concepts of the past. The Awakening also, though, set off a fair number of schisms that were primarily sparked by disgtuntled preachers of the older clergy.
The Great Awakening helped to bring about the spearation of Chruch and State in colonial America. As mentioned earlier, a number of schisms were set off as the Awakening progressed. Such schisms were primarily caused by those clergymen who still believed in the older methods of religion, as were set before the Awakening took place. Naturally, the clergymen resented the newer, more open, policies that the Awakening was setting up, and so many groups were splitting apart. As a result of this, many new breanches of denominations were being set up. Simultaneously, and most likely as a part of the newer policies of churches, it was being reconsidered how religion was truly defined. That is, if a government forces a group of people to worship in a specific way, that is not necessarily true devotion to a religion. People were becoming aware that a government need not interfere in religion, as particularly evidenced by the law that clergymen may not hold formal political office, as a means of preventing said clergymen from becoming too powerful. The Great Awakening was a significant time in American history, as it was the first spontaneous mass movement of the American people!

America, the Picture

I believe this picture, taken by me, properly represents the quintessential American landscape, and the country in general. The landscape depicted is rich in color and detail, which pretty much sums up the country's landcape as a whole. My ideal picture would have been a photo that looks across America from coast to coast, showing its immense geographical diversity. Unfortunately, this is rather impossible, because the best one can get is a satellite image, which only shows the country from above. Still, I believe this picture does well as a substitute. After all, having spent several days in the area where this picture was taken this summer, I can honestly say that it is amazing to see the moutnains of Pennsylvania and that there is little more impressive than the stunning views from atop them.
From a more metaphorical standpoint, the area depcited is very diverse in the types of life depicted, representing how America is similarly diverse, with all different kinds of people making up the coutnry's population.
Lastly, I believe this picture very much adheres to the concept of "America the Beautiful".
By the way, if anyone's curious, I took this picture at the top of a ridge near the city of Shamokin in central Pennsylvania this summer.

On an unrelated note, a certain part of tonight's reading inevitably brought this song to mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkV-of_eN2w

AP US History Soundtrack

Songs 1 - 3: Virgen Madre de Dios, Apache Indian Drums, Shaman's Call (from Earth Spirit)
Given the spiritual and/or tribal nature of these pieces of music, I imagine that they were recorded in order to preserve such cultural aspects from hundreds of years ago. These parts of history are very nearly lost now, as it is common to assume that American History begins with the Pilgrims and the American Revolution, which is not truly the case. Song 1 may not specifically be from tribal ages, as it is sung in Spanish, a european language. It may have come from a time almost immediately after the arrival of the Spanish, though. With Songs 2 and 3, however, the origin is more defined. These songs very likely have their origin in the hundreds of years before North America was settled, being created by natives themselves. The drums of Song 2 may indicate a sort of dance or march for celebrations. Track 3 comes from a sort of reed instrument and the beautiful, peaceful tune suggests harmony with nature and one's surroundings, just the sort of concept the natives would have advocated.

Song 4: Brave Wolfe
This instrumental piece by Mark O'Connor (from 1997) "tells" of a battle in the French and Indian War, concerning General James Wolfe of the British, who led an attempt to capture Quebec and was killed in the process, while the attempt succeeded.
From this perspective, I find the song to be both impressive and depressing. It has a certain inexplciable quality about it that can make one imagine a battle happening in the background. It is depressing, of course, in that it tells of Wolfe, who died in his bravery. While recorded modernly, this song has a sort of feel to it that just sounds like it came straight out of the French and Indian War.

Song 5: Johnny Has Gone for a Soldier
This song, also by Mark O'Connor, tells of a nearby time in history. While the instrumental music seems Irish in origin (particularly near the beginning), the song tells from the perpective of a man (presumably Johnny), who is leaving to be a soldier in the American Revolution, the emotional pain that this time of war brought upon families that were broken apart.
I enjoy this piece of music, becuase it is a sort of thing that people today can still relate to, with men still being part of the war in the Middle East. It teaches us that no matter what war it was, no matter what era of American History, war broke up families without much promise of reuniting them, a sort of suffering that must be remembered.

Song 6: Hard Times Come Again No More
This piece, orginally written by Stephen C. Foster in 1854, tells rather simply the pains of the weary as they recover from hard times and wish them to not repeat themselves. It is applicable in all ages, reportedly being popular on both sides of the U.S. Civil War.
Again, I enjoy the song, because (in a way very much like "Johnny"), it relates a very understandable lament: that suffering should not come again. I think it teaches us that, although we can often forget it by seeing historical peole just as pictures in textbooks, pain was very real to those historical figures, just as it is to us today. The people who engoyed the song nearly 150 years ago, during the Civil War, and ourselves share something: a dislike of pain and (as the song portrays) hope for the future.

Song 7: Paddy's Lament
This song, written by Sinead O'Connor in 2002, is told as a story from the perspective of Paddy, who left Ireland during the Potato Famine, to come over to America. It tells the pain of leaving behind a home in Dublin, coupled with the strife of getting caught up in war in America, which seems to be compised only of fighting and struggle. The song then finishes with the lament that Paddy wishes to be back home in Dublin.
This song is rather depressing, but understandable from the perspective of anyone who's ever left their home to venture somewhere new, yet also to miss the life they left behind. It also presents a different (and somewhat shocking) view of America than is typical in American History, as Paddy hates living in America and wants above all else to get back to Ireland. This is in sharp contrast with the typical view that immigrants come to America for feeedom and see it as a sort of promised land... such was not the case with poor Paddy...

Song 8: Jesus Christ
This curious song by Woody Guthrie (in about 1930) takes the Bible and puts it in (relaviely) modern times. It takes the story of how Jesus tells the rich to give what they have to the poor. Naturally, they had no such intentions and so had Jesus crucified. Guthrie takes the story and places it in America around the 1930s and so makes it such that the rich people today would have nothing of Jesus' teaching and "lay him in his grave" if he was to preach. Perhaps he sis uggestign that this is the case: that people don't really repsond to or comply with Jesus' teachings, and the coutnry is becoming less religious...
I like this song a lot. The message stated above is very powerful, because there's a certain ammount of truth to it. What if jesus really did come down and walk among the U.S. today? Would we as Americans openly be disciples? Or would we do as Guthrie thinks and lay Jesus in his gave???
If anyone's interested, I know a song that tells a rather similar story: "The Twenty-first Time" by Monk and Neagle.

Song 9: Do Re Me
This song, written and recorded around the 1930s tells of the difficult situation that many farmers in the midwest found themselves in around this time: the Dust Bowl. This horrible time sent those farmers looking for a new way of life out in California. However, the song says that they're not going to get by if they don't have the "do re me", which although not explained, most likely means something along the lines of proper spirit or a means of getting by.
This song seems a bit unpleasant to me. It just tells those poor farmers that if they don't have the "do re me" they may as well go back to where they came from (not very encouraging). Maybe it would have been better if Guthrie was singing it (after all, it was his song...).

Song 10: Strange Fruit
This song, recorded in 1939 by Billie Holiday, denounces racism against balcks in the 1930s. The title imagery, strange fruit, symbolizes two black men who were hanged in 1930. Holiday seemed to intend to increase pride among Blacks, in being a strange fruit, a special fruit, but not a bad fruit.
I agree with the message of this song entirely, it being an anti-racism song. Despite it ultimately being depressing, it is also enlightening. Of course, it provides more insight into how Black people felt about the trrible way they were treated back then, especially because it was written at that very time in history.

Song 11: A Change is Gonna Come
This song was originally wirtten by Sam Cooke in 1964, covered by Seal in 2008. It tells of the Civil Rights era from the perspective of any black person. While noting the troubles they faced at that time, he is otimistic that things are about to change in their favor. Such sentiments were likely influenced by figures such as Martin Luther King, Jr.
I enjoy this song a lot. It has good rhythym and a sort of jazzy feel to it, characteristic of music created by black people of that age. More to the point, it, like Strange Fruit, provides insight on racism from the perspective of those opressed. And rather than the somber feel of Strange fruit, this song is alive with hope and anticipation. It shows that the opressed blacks were not daunted to the point of not expressing their feelings (through music), a very admirable trait they posessed.

Song 12: Youngstown
This Bruce Springsteen song was released in 1995 and it tells of an unemployed steelworker in Youngstown, Ohio around the 1960s or 70s. the worker remebers time from previous years, sucha s his father's reurn from WWII and the troubles that bother them today, as he remembers working in the factory, and singing to a "Jenny" (which, interestingly enough, is not a person, but the furnace!).
Well, I'm not quite sure what to make of this song. It seems pretty depressing all the way through, what with the whole "I'm sinking" message... Anyway, I suppose we can realize from this song that the 60s and 70s were not just about peace, love and the age of hippies- there was much suffering yet to be had. This song also functions as a great tribute to those who lived through those times...

Song 13: The Times They Are A-Changin'
This song was released by Bob Dylan in 1964, and does just as it says in it's title: begins to take recognation of a new era in the history of the world, as globalization and modernization take effect. The song pretty much says to get ready for the new age, because it's coming and nothing's going to change that!
This song is pretty itneresting, because while it is talking about modernization, I can just see a guy playing this from a rocking chair on a dusty wooden porch, with it's sort of "old country" feel to it. We can learn from this song that while people may not have wanted to admit it, they could see chang ecoming. After all, by this time, people had Tvs, radios, any other forms of information, so they were hardly in the dark. Anyway, I think this song still ahs meaning today, because things still are a-changin' (compare 2010 to 2000 for an example!).

Song 14: The Hands that Built America
This song from the soundtrack to "Gangs of New York", released in 2002, has a very powerful message to it. In a few words, it says that the building of America did not stop once we won the American Revolution. The building up of America continues today, and includes everyone who lives in this country, from every race and age. Concluding, the final verse refrences the tagedy of September 11, 2001.
I enjoy this song a lot, perhaps most in this collection! It is a very different sort of patriotic song, because rather than just praising the coutnry, it digs deeper and shows that "America" really is- more than just a flag, an eagle, and iconic monuments, America is all the people who live within the United States of America!!! This song teaches an important lesson that can perhaps lead to more acceptance of new people, regardless of race and belief. We all make up this "sweet land of liberty" and ought to recognize that fact more often!

Song 15: We Didn't Start the Fire
Who deosn't love a CD that concludes with a great Billy Joel song? Released in 1989, this song pretty much sums up a wealth of historical events from the life of its singer, from 1949 onwards for 40 years! Not much else to say, because Joel just recites an amazingly detailed list of events. Interestingly, he has been noted to have been a bit of a history nut himself...
Well, I think this song is great! While maybe not too informative in an in-depth sort of way, it has a very catchy beat that is sort of irresistable (this song's going to be going through my head for days). From it, I think we can learn that over just 40 years, an amazingly large number of historically significant events can happen. I wonder what would get into a song detailing what happened from 1994 to 2010???


And now it's on to the classroom! I'm looking forward to an exciting year in AP US History!!!

Mayflower: A Story of Courage, Community, and War

And so, after a nearly 3-month hiatus from blogging, it is time to return to the blog for AP US History!!! Here can be found my thoughts, as provoked by the questions concerning Philbrick's informative (and incredibly detailed) account of the story of the Pilgrims.

1. What beliefs and character traits that typified the Pilgrims enabled them to survive in the hostile environment that greeted them in the New World? Did some of the same traits that helped them survive limit their survival in other ways? How so?
The Pilgrims had several important character traits that allowed them to survive in the New World. The first of these was faith. From the moment the idea for the journey originated, the pilgrims looked to God with firm belief. Although the situation often seemed desperate, even impossible, they managed to maintain their faith that somehow, God was helping them to find a better life. This faith may well have come from their next major trait: hope. This was likely the driving force behind their journey: the hope that someday they could finally reach the New World and make it their "promised land". This hope, combined with their faith, fed their most important character trait: determination. The pilgrims were msot definately determined. They kept pushing forward, even in darkest times. However, while this trait may have assisted int ehir survival, it also amnaged to hinder it. At times, the pilgrims (especially those that explored the new territory) were so determined that they managed to put themselves in life-threatening situations without much foresight, and they found themselves facing unfriendly natives or unforgiving climates and just barely being able to make it out alive (if even that). This determination was also likely the source of some rather foolish mistakes in the years that followed...

3. Philbrick shows us that many of the classic images that shape our current view of the Pilgrims—from Plymouth Rock to the usual iconography of the first Thanksgiving—have been highly fictionalized. Why has America forsaken the truth about these times in exchange for a misleading and often somewhat hokey mythology?
It is most likely that America has shaped Thanksgiving into what it is commonly known as today for commerical reasons, more likely than out of sheer ignorance. That is, when Lincoln dedicated the holiday, it was probaably meant to remember the truth as it should have... but over time, people saw the great feast of the first Thanksgiving as something that should be mimicked today and once food companies picked up on that, it became the entire focus of the holiday (well, that and football). This doesn't, however, apply to just Thanksgiving. Similar situations can be found in Christmas and Easter, whcih are now trademarked by Santa Claus and the easter Bunny, rather than the Nativity and the Resurrection. It's a sad truth that just seems to comsume a very consumer-based society.

4. The Pilgrims established a tradition of more or less peaceful coexistence with the Native Americans that lasted over fifty years. Why did that tradition collapse in the 1670s and what might have been done to preserve it?
The tradition of peace that had been established in the 1620s seems to have fallen through the cracks because it was not effectively passed on to the next generation. After all, the main combatants in King Phillip's War were direct descendants of the original natives and pilgrims. It is possible that the wisdom of cooperation and community made so much sense to those such as Bradford and Massasoit that they felt very little need to discuss it with their children. Eventually, those children grew up and became more itnerested in gaining more land and power and so they essentially established a relationship with each other that was the opposite of what their parents intended. Hence the deviation from cooperation to war.

5. Discuss the character of Squanto. How did the strengths and weaknesses of his personality end up influencing history, and why did this one man make such a difference?
At a glance, Squanto seemed to be just what the Pilgrims needed. He was understanding and helpful, and most importantly, spoke English and could therefore assist the Pilgrims in developing acqaintance with the natives, particularly Massasoit. So, this influenced history deeply in that he in so doing essentially saved the Pilgrims by helping them to survive. However, Squanto was not just the friendly savior the Pilgrims came to see him as. With great intelligence, cunning and deception, he created mistrust among his fellows in an attempt to gain power, which may, in a way, have been setting the kindling that would fuel the flames of war in the future. This was almost certainly not his intention, but an effect of his efforts nonetheless...

6. The children of the Pilgrims were regarded in their own time as “the degenerate plant of a strange vine,” unworthy of the legacy and sacrifices of their mothers and fathers (p. 198). Why did they acquire (and largely accept) this reputation? Was it deserved? Were the denunciations of the second generation a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy?
This rather blunt statement concerning the children of the Pilgrims is a somewhat accurate description of them. It was not deserved for all of them, but for those who sought the power gained by winning a war, it is perfect. As mentioned before, the Pilgrims were strangers in a new place who grew to accept and be accepted by the natives. Their children were nearly the opposite: they wanted power and land and resources, and had no concern for the natives reactions to invading thier lands. they ended up slaughtering natives and in so developing hatred between them, upsetting the very work their parents had done fifty years previously. And yes, as the second generation disregarded the wisdom of their parents, it was a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy.

8. Compare Philbrick’s portrayals of natives in Mayflower with the ways in which they have been represented in popular culture, for instance, in Hollywood movies. How does Mayflower encourage us to rethink those representations? On the other hand, are there some popular images of Native Americans that seem to be somewhat rooted in what actually happened in the seventeenth century?
Hollywood shows us what we want to see. In modern society, we want to see our ancestors, the Pilgrims, as the heros of the story and the natives as the savage, heathen villains- barely even human. So they have come to be known. However, in sharp contrast, Philbrick respresents both sides of the story in great balance. We see both the struggles of the Pilgrims and those of the antives, alongside each other and can sympathize with both groups. In this way, it is very hard to determine who is the real hero and villain, a fact that Philbrick portrays very well in not maiing the end of the war a happy victory or a celebration, because both sides suffered greatly and similarly. Although somehwat juvenile, I believe a decent telling of a similar story is Disney's Pocahontas. Here we have two main characters, one on each side of the battle (albiet a different one) and can see both sides of the story and how both sides of the battle (natives and settlers) had their greatnesses and their faults. Curiously, though, it is the English who ultimately become the villains... something of an ironic twist.

9. In the chaotic, atrocity-filled conflict known as King Philip’s War, does anyone emerge as heroic? If so, what are the actions and qualities that identify him or her as a hero?
While, as I stated earlier, there was so much pain and evil on both sides of this conlict, it is hard to pinpoint any one being as heroic. However, I find that Benjamin Church came out as something of a hero. This is not just because he led the party that eventually killed Phillip. It is because of how he led his group. He defied common practice and teamed up with the natives, even former enemies, to work for the common good. He did not try to use them as puppets- he used their methods in addition to his own and so learned a lot and together, they became quite the impressive force. Chruch and his group displayed the kind of teamwork and cooperation that heralded back to the Pilgrims. In this way, he was a hero in my perspective.

10. As Mayflower shows, the American Indian tribes of New England were not a monolith, either culturally or politically. However, the English were not consistently able to think of them as separate tribes with different loyalties and desires. How did misconceptions of racial identity complicate the politics of King Philip’s War?
Well, the English were not very interested in getting to understand their opponents in this war, and so they never really came to the conclusion that the natives were many different peoples, not just one tribe of savages. This is just the sort of ignorance that causes people to lose wars and get themselves killed. The majority of the English saw every living native as their enemy, and so created for themselves an enemy that was near impossible to conquer. This was the time when they complicated their situation and caused it to worsen, by pitting themselves against potential allies. However, the somewhat wiser among the English saw that there were natives who did not serve Phillip and became acquainted with them, creating a force that could help them win the war.


11. During King Philip’s War, significant numbers of Native Americans sided with the English. How do you regard those who took up arms against their fellow natives? Do you see them as treacherous, opportunistic, or merely sensible? If you had been a native, which side would you have taken, and why?
I think that the natives who sided with the English were very brave and yet also a bit treacherous. They were essentially abandoning their former ways and their tribes, but that was necessary for themselves. It is much like in any situation where hurt subjects must overthrow a tryrannical leader (in this case, King Phillip). And yet, they were also very brave, for they were going up against this highly dangerous force. Again, they were rather heroic, like Church, because in working with the English, they displayed the power that comes from trusting each other and working together. As one can tell, I would likely have joined the English forces had I been a native in this war. And yet, this is all done with hindsight, which is of course 20/20... had I been there and not known how this all would have turned out? Well that's a bit harder to say...

12. Philbrick shows that the English, as well as the American Indians, engaged in barbaric practices like torturing and mutilating their captives, as well as taking body parts as souvenirs. Could either side in King Philip’s War make any legitimate claim to moral superiority? Why or why not?
In a word, no. Now, in several more words, especially when one views the situation from this perspective, there was no side of the war that was pure and clean or with the right to claim superiority. Both of the opposing sides had strong point and weak points, as stated previously, but here is an unpleasant spot where they were both equal: the mutilation of victims. It is pretty horrendous, no matter who does it... However, it can tend to be associated with natives, and in that way, it is forgotten that the English did it as well. No matter what part of hsitory it is, no side is truly superior on a moral standpoint, because everyone is human, and therefore prone to the same human msitakes.


15. One reviewer of Mayflower asserted that Nathaniel Philbrick “avoid[ed] the overarching moral issues [of his subject] and [took] no sides.” Do you find this to be true? Are there moral lessons Philbrick wants us to learn? If so, what are they?
I find that this reviewer only took what was stated directly in the book. And from that perspective, of course there is no evident moral. After all, it's an adult-level history novel, not a kiddy book where they actually say "the lesson we can learn here is...". In this sort of work, any morals are typically implied. Alright, so I find that there is a moral lesson that can be learned from this work, and it is somethign that I ahve been referencing time and time again: that victory can be best achived through teamwork and cooperation, and that immediate distrust and hatred will lead to disaster. Along these lines, another related moral is that ignorance is very far from bliss. Those who were the monsters in this war (on both sides) were the ones who only took the enemy for what they were on the surface, never bothering to know them for who they really were, and then slaughtering them on sight. Their ignorance blinded them and ultimately led to their destruction. And, lastly, as is the case with almsot any story pertaining to histroy, a lesson that can be found is to not forget the atrocities of the past and cover them up with pleasant, distorted representations, which is exactly what we learned had been done concerning the First Thanksgiving. All in all, the terrible things that happened in the past are the basis for lessons that will help us in thwe future.