This is a very good chapter! Please read carefully.
1. Why were American farmers described as slovens?
2. Why was THE most "labor-saving device, to the American farmer, the wasteful use of land"?
26 comments:
Anonymous
said...
1: Since i did not know what a sloven was I looked it up, and the definition is "one habitually negligent of neatness or cleanliness especially in personal appearance" therefore it is not good to be a sloven. American farmers are considered slovens because they were not like farmers in Europe who were already taking part in the Agricultural revolution. American farmers were considered behind the times and were not up to date with all the new agricultural concepts and only used the old fashion ways. 2: Because America was land rich and people poor the most labor saving technique was moving on after the land had been used for farming. They did not use slash and burn or cutting down the weeds or rotation of the crops because they simply did not have the man power to do this extra work, because there was plenty more land why not just move on and leave the land you just used behind. This saved labor costs and time because families were wanting to prosper and not focus so much on labor on the land. The costs along could sink a family because of the fertilizer and hours of cultivating old land so why not just move on. Though the land was considered "wasteful" the land was able to go back to its natural state and in a form this was a variation of the crop rotation in Europe.
1. American farmers were slovens because of their lack of effort to use the farming methods of Europeans that allowed land to be renewable. They did not use manure, nor did they feed their cattle, provide adequate barns, or adequate pasturing. Livestock were so plenty, they were not even looked after. Rather than making sure they could cultivate the same land from year to year, farmers would simply move to another spot, leaving their first spot completely ruined and unable to support crops anymore. Every crop they attempted to grow would deplete land, from common plants like maize, to new plants such as indigo and rice. 2. Since labor was scarce in America, and the methods used by Europeans to rejuvenate used-up land was costly and required labor, the best way for a poor farmer to save money was to avoid rejuvenating their land. The most obvious way to avoid rejuvenating land was to keep cultivating new land, and America was one of those places where a farmer could do just that. In this way, shortage of labor and abundance of land halted the development of advanced agriculture in America. Why spend all this money developing costly technology when you can just buy more land for a lot cheaper? This attitude developed in colonial America’s circumstances. Even if we ignore the financial influences in this process, there were also issues of climate. Farmers in New England and the newly-forming Midwest could not prepare their soil in the winter they way English farmers did because snow covered the land for most of winter, leaving only a very short spring to prepare the soil. Even though this method of agriculture didn’t work out in the long run, as observed by English farmers who visited (they ran out of land), it did serve to establish agriculture in some form across America.
1. American farmers were thought of as slovens because they were ignorant of oppertunities that were being lost within their land. Baecause of their "labor scarcity and land-plenty", the American farmer did not feel the need to deal with land in the way that England was at the time. The English, with limited land, worked the same areas time and time again, rejuvinating the soil and protecting the areas from destruction. This method was simply not needed at the time in America, and because of this ignorance, the American farmer recieived much criticism for such a careless way to farm. 2. To the American farmer, land was not a luxury. Anyone with determination could own land, and there were more than enough provisions to feed the population at the time. With this mindset, it was the waste of land that proved more labor-saving than "advanced" land-saving techniques. In England, the shortage of land pushed them to find new ways to save it, and these ways proved to be difficult and take up and immense amount of labor. There was always room to expand in America. Following ways of agriculture presented by the Indians, the American farmers had an efficient way to farm that was labor-saving. Although this was labor-saving, farm animals could not survive well because of the lack of proper fencing and feed, and the drive for a quick, laborless fix led the colonies to leave acres of land barren and open to predators as well. By the mid 18th century, though, it was apparent that the farmers' labor saving time had come to a halt. With the introduction of agricultural tips from people like Jared Eliot, the problem was on its way to be helped.
1. American farmers were considered slovens because they didn't really put in the effort to be successful. For example the farmers of Europe were currently going through the agricultural revolution and the American farmers were slow to catch on. Unlike the English, the Americans did not use the method of crop rotation which was the process were every season a different crop was planted to keep the nutrients in the soil. Without crop rotation the soil is completely useless as was seen in Virginia with their tobacco. The farmers did not take care of their land. They chose to not use techniques like using fertilizer which would increase the growing season. They were lazy.
2. The most labor-saving technique used in colonial America was to not spend any money to replenish the soil. And for this reason they were considered slovens. They refused to use crop rotation or other methods like slash and burn, but once the nutrients were completely depleted from the soil they would snatch up more land and do the same thing until there was no more land. Another reason for this strange habit of farming was the lack of labor available to work the lands. It would take much more labor to rotate crops every season than to plant the same crop every season. This did not have a positive effect on the economy of America, but that did not stop the farmers who were mainly subsistence farmers.
1. The farmers were described as slovens because they weren't aware of methods/actions that could be taken to better their farming techniques/results. The farmers in England were replacing their equiptment with the updated version, suck as the iron plow pulled by a draft horse, while the American farmers were still using little trowels and stuff. The English were very critical of the American farmers. The English viewed themselves as far superior because of their new methods and tools 2. The most labor-saving device was the wasteful use of land because the American's didn't ahve to work to attain new, ariable land. Land was (initially) abundant in the colonies, one had to only go a few miles and unclaimed land was under your feet. Much labor was saved because the laborers didn't have to waste precious time rotation crops or letting the soil re-firtilize for a year because why waste the time when you could just use new, fresh land? This was veiwed as "wastful" because they didn't recultivate the land to make it (almost) instantly ariable again. Though in the long run, it could be seen as helpful, because after a couple decades, the land could be back to a like-new condition without the added effort of fertilation.
1. The American farmers were described as the greatest slovens in christendom because they produced no agricultural improvements and were careless with their land. Their farming methods were considered backwards to the English because after the land ceased to support the colonial farmer, they would move to new land. In order to save labor that was already scarce, the Americans would not go to the effort of replanting the land season after season. This meant the colonists could produce quick results with limited amount of labor. However, the Europeans saw this as a waste of land, frowned upon their desire for present gain without thinking toward the future, and compared their amateur farming methods to those of the Indians. 2. The "labor-saving device" to the American farmer, which was to move from farm to farm, was the wasteful use of land because although the farmers thought they had fully exhausted their land, this was not the case. The land that they left behind could have been replanted many more times before it would become an economic burden for the farmer. But there was plenty of land so the colonists didn't think twice before moving since they were saving money by not hiring labor to replant the farm.
1. American farmers were described as slovens because they were so far behind Europe in terms of agriculture revolutions. England had been leading the revolution with bring enclosures to farms to enclose old pastures.
2. Instead of keeping the land full of nutrients for continuous use, the colonist would move to a new plot of land after several years. This was a complete waste of land, but the colonists at this time had plenty of land to spare.
1. American farmers were described as slovens because they did not put in the effort to use the farming methods of Europe such as making the soil renewable or using a drill to plant seeds. The farmers in America were in a stagnant period. They used up land and moved on rather than taking the time to cultivate and fertilize it. The American farmers wanted labor saving tools and did not want to expend labor like the Europeans and re-use old land. Americans stuck to their old farming tactics rather than using what the Europeans had developed in an Agricultural Revolution. 2. The most “labor-saving” device to the American farmer was wasteful of land because to American farmers, the best way to save labor was to use up the land and move on instead of cultivating or fertilizing the land. America was land plenty and labor scarce. Americans followed the farming tactics of the Indians in order to save labor, but because of this, Americans left broken fences and cattle uncared for, vulnerable to predators. Their manure was nothing more than a waste. Colonists wanted quick results. Tobacco and corn crops depleted the soil of nutrients; there was plenty of land and game. The Americans saw no use for the European ways when their way was much more labor efficient.
1. American farmers were describes as sloven because they were not like England. England had a limited amount of land so the British worked hard to make sure that land was arable. They passed acts and laws about agriculture to keep all of their precocious arable land fertile. The Americans, however, had very little people to work the land they possessed. They could not fertilize their lands as England could because there were not enough farmhands. In addition, cattle sometimes escaped from their pens because of holes in the fences and other such preventable things. To the British, Americans seemed to have no concerns about their land or their herds. That is why American farmers were called sloven.
2. American farmers had very few farmhands. This meant that farmers would rather buy new fields than fertilize their overused fields. The Americans also had more land than their English counterparts did, so what was wasteful to the English was productive to the Americans. People who went to America generally wanted to make a quick buck, so wasting land was seen as necessary in order to get ahead in America.
1. American farmers were considered slovens because of the wasteful way in which they used up their land and then simply moved on to new tracts, especially when compared to the agricultural reforms going on at the same time in England to try to maximize land efficiency.
2. In America during the colonial period, there seemed to be no shortage of uncultivated land, but labor was quite scarce. This was very different from England at the time, where all the land was essentially used up and there were plenty of people to work the fields. Therefore, Americans focused on the opposite of what the English did: conserving labor. To spend this precious labor on simply improving the yield of a certain parcel of land year after year was not labor-efficient; instead, yielding one crop and then moving on to produce another crop on fresh fields was preferred among the American farmers. They valued quick results instead of quality results. Another crucial factor in this was that the main crop of the colonies, corn, wore out the land quite quickly, so farmers were forced to move on to continue farming.
1. Famers were called sloves because they didn't know how to improve their farming like in England. The English had more labor and could improve upon "old land". The Americans, always short on labor but not on land, simply moved on after a place had given up what it had, instead of using time to recultivate it, a "waste" in English minds. England considered itself the best (like always), but I found it funny that borstin said "The techniques exported to the colonies from Great Britain were seldom the best" (pg 261)
2. As slightly mentioned above, Americans moved on from land and didn't spend time to recultivate it, being the "labor-saving device, to the American farmer, the wasteful use of land." They just went to land that was more plentiful.
1. During the colonial period in America, England was undergoing its “enclosure” movement which was promoting efficiency and more capitalistic methods of farming. This agricultural movement, however, was generally directed towards wealthy landlords and even the Queen, rather than the peasants and small subsistence farmers. While Europe was undergoing massive agricultural reform, the colonies of America were wedged in a period conspicuously absent of farming change. The fact that the colonial farmers were stuck on “primitive” methods of farming and were slow to change, led to the view of them as “slovenly” in the farming world. The American farmer’s case of slovenliness can hardly be charged as their fault, however. The circumstances of the New World greatly influenced their lack of conservatism and ingenuity. “The early settler was always tempted to seize whatever nature offered, especially if it was food, and so frees himself to enlarge his capital by clearing more land.” The first case for the colonial farmer was the great abundance of land and the lack of people. The vast tracts of land available to the farmers made it inevitable that they would not be prudent in their management of the land when they could simply move on to an equally fertile area. Additionally, the farmers made no use of the manure from their cattle. The smorgasbord of game and fish also decreased the necessity of efficient farming techniques, as the people could simply find their food elsewhere. The lack of knowledge about the new world also led to the “slovenly” character of American farmers as the entirety of their focus was on surviving. The unfamiliar climate and unfamiliar crops led the colonists to turn to the Native Americans for farming techniques which the English considered to be “primitive.” Additionally, the persisting colonial wars, difficult communication, and the lack of useful books and practices brought by the English made advancements difficult. While it is true that the colonial farmer was excessively wasteful in his practices of farming, even considered slovenly, the situation of America made this inevitable.
2. In a new and unfamiliar land, the most necessary element of life is the ability to survive. Thus, the American farmer was not concerned with the newest developments in technology for farming, but rather harvesting as much as he possibly could with a minimal amount of effort. Therefore, the most “labor-saving device was their wasteful use of land.” The additional expended efforts required of new English methods of practices to make land more productive, was not necessary in America. Where labor was much scarcer than land, it simply made more economical and common sense to use the land to its fill, then move on instead of spending precious hours fertilizing it for later use.
1. American farmers were described as "slovens" because the Europeans looked down on the way they farmed and lived. The Americans couldn't farm the same way that the Europeans did because of a lack of labor. The Europeans accused them of being careless about the future, which to some extent was true, in the way they would let the land become "sour" and leave it.They treated things with a general carelessness and didn't take good care of their animals, but this may have been because of a lack of people to do so. Still, the animals often went hungry and were attacked by wild animals. Their manure wasn't put to use and they didn't have shelter. 2. The most labor saving device was the abundance of farmland. However, this made for wasteful use of the land. The farmers weren't very skilled and they didn't have the time or workforce to replenish each field after it was used. This resulted in fields being abandoned for greener pastures, so to speak. For the colonists, it as easier to just find new land, which wasn't difficult to do. The English saw this practice as wasteful, but they had the opposite problem of the colonists, with labor to spare but little land.
1.) American farmers were described as slovens because of their poor land practices, which contrasted those of England. The English criticized American farmers because they were careless with their land. Americans had no view of the future, and they would overgrow tobacco and make the land "sour" and useless for future generations. Also, the Americans were critisized because of their poor care for livestock. The animals didnt have any shelter, and their manure was not properly utilized.
2.) Using land wastefully saved a lot of work for American farmers. There was an abundance of land in America, so rather than putting in the effort and time to recover land after depleting it of its nutrients, farmers could easily just buy more land to grow on. It was faster easier, and cheaper than trying to reclaim the land, saving farmers time and money.
1. American Farmers were not focused on clenliness and weren't worried about their soial standing. Therefore, they did not deem the agricultural revolution necessary. They figured that what thye did worked, and they didn't need anything new. They liked the way working in the land built strength and character.
1) Colonial American farmers were described as slovens, especially by their English counterparts, because of the way they took advantage of land-plenty. Back in England, the enclosure movement was the equivalent of today’s compact car movement in Europe. Meanwhile colonial Americans were guzzling land much like we guzzle gas today. The result: disgust by foreigners and carelessness on the American part (an essential characteristic of a sloven). But don’t be too quick to condemn the colonial Americans, because the grounds of their land consumption are backed up in the next question.
2) Americans farmers weren’t necessarily careless when they moved to new land after exhausting one plot; they were simply trying to get by. In times of desperation, what works best usually is the preferred method. In this case there was such a vast amount of land that it became the farmer’s best friend, and they weren’t going to reach the bottom of the cookie jar anytime soon. So the practice continued. This saved a great deal of labor simply because it wasn’t necessary to find a way to replenish the soil of nutrients so that it could bear crops again. Farmers enjoyed the need for less labor and supported the statement, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
1. Farmers in America were described as slovens, or untidy and careless, because the author of American Husbandry that made that comment was comparing them to the farmers in England who were in the middle of an agricultural revolution. America at the time was still in its stagnate agriculture days because of their flawed system of moving from plot to plot before cultivating everything they could out of it. Since labor was very hard to find in America it made sense that the farmers didn’t want to waste their effort, time and money trying to cultivate land when they could just as easily begin anew, even if it was rather careless. But, it’s no denying that the author had a point because the farmers were careless in ignoring the use of their cattle’s manure and bypassing the system of keeping excess grain in the winter. The colonists were either moving on from what they thought to be exhausted land or they bought too much and didn’t have to man power to cultivate all they could out of that as well. 2. While the American farmers’ method of moving from one piece of land to another as soon as the productivity had run out was considered wasteful, it was actually a huge labor-saving device. The farmers didn’t have the resources or the hands available to help deeply cultivate and fertilize the land so, why waste the time and effort when America was so land-plenty anyways? It was much easier to start growing you’re new crop in softer more malleable dirt than try to recuperate you’re old field.
Chapter 40 1. Sloven means one who is consistently careless with their work. The Americans i believe were described as this because they refused to replenish and rejuvenate the land. They just moved on to the next avaible space. They were not joining the agricultural revolution of Europe on ways to fertilize, effectively pasturize, take better care of their livestock, etc. The Americans were seen as just plain lazy.
2. The use of land was a labor-saving device because colonists did not have to worry about refertilizing the land after growing tobacco then corn (for example). There was no need for land maintenance because you could just move on to the next plot of land to do your farming. This saved the colonists money and also their time and effort.
1. Sloven: : one habitually negligent of neatness or cleanliness especially in personal appearance. I'm going to take this definition a little looser. "The American planters and farmers are in general the greatest slovens in christendom" because when the quote was made, Europe was in the middle of the Agricultural Revolution, whereas in America, the "colonial period was an age of stagnation in agricultural science". Where English farmers and researchers worked to improve yield, inventing seed drills and fervently advocating plowing and weeding to increase root health and crop yield per acre, the American colonies were still, according to George Washington, yielding "not more than eight to ten bushels of wheat [in] an acre." Where in England they sought to find the most efficient and productive farming techniques, Washington muses that "the aim of the farmers in this country, if they can be called farmers, is, not to make the most they can from the land, which is, or has been, cheap, but most of the labor, which is dear." This is probably because of the lack of available land in heavily industrialized England to waste, where in America, the settlers were faced with thousands of acres of unclaimed,cheap land for their use. As Boorstin explains, "To American colonists for whom labor was scarcer than land, it seemed more economical to use up the land and move on than to spend precious hours in cultivating and fertilizing...they wanted 'labor-saving' devices, and in these early years the most obvious labor-saving device happened to be the wasteful use of land." The English only saw this as slovenly because of a difference in value: where England had a surplus of available labor and not much space for its application, the available labor for the settlers was sparse, and space freely found.
2. The wasteful use of land was the most labor-saving device because the settlers simply did not have the time, energy or labor resources to 'recycle' their land. Instead, it was much easier to just move on to the next piece of land, of which there was much to choose from, than to rotate fields, or practice slash-and-burn. All they had to do was up and move a few miles, where they would again come upon an area where the soil was fine and fertile, and all the farmer had to do was cut down the trees, plow, and suck the nutrients out of the earth with crops. Because this work was so much simpler than repeatedly maintaining and fertilizing the same piece of land, American farmers moved agriculturally "like the Indians".
1. American farmers were known to be slovens due to their wasteful means of farming. Because they thought they had a virtually endless frontier land to work with, they never developed what one might call ‘conservative’ farming techniques, namely, techniques that allowed them to reuse land or keep it from becoming useless. This wasteful attitude also kept them from creating many agricultural advancements in the early days of colonial farming. 2. This statement is like saying “the most labor-saving device to a student, is not doing ones homework,” by which I mean that if one cares not for the outcome, the short term goals and expediency gained by not caring if one ruins the land or gets bad grades respectively, then one can be much faster in either farming or getting to relax.
1. American farmers were described as slovens because there were many examples of carelessness in their agricultural practices and animal husbandry: fields were not properly maintained, fences were not repaired, animals were let to run wild, etc. At the time, England was obtaining many new agricultural innovations and ideas, so this English agricultural movement greatly contrasted with the American “slovenliness.” This lack of proper farming was partly due to the fact that there was much more land available in America than there had been to farmers in England, so the need for wise farming technique was not as pressing; the lack of readily available labor; and the relatively urgent need that colonists had for food. It was more pressing to harvest food, so that the newfound colonies did not starve, rather than worry if their agricultural practices were sensible or not.
2. Because there was not a lot of labor available to colonial farmers, and there was an abundance of land, it was more efficient for farmers to find ways to save labor, even if the land was wasted, rather than to preserve land.
1. Why were American farmers described as slovens? Americans were described as slovens because they failed to use many of the agricultural methods that were popular in England. For example, the colonists didn’t use manure. There was so much land and livestock that the American farmers simply let them run free and feed themselves, and there was no need for the concern that the British had for their lands and animals.
2. Why was THE most "labor-saving device, to the American farmer, the wasteful use of land"? Wasting land was the quickest and easiest way to make money in America. This is still seen today, as slash and burn agriculture in the rainforests is a wasteful way to quickly make money.
1. Americans farmers were described as slovens because they did not jump on the band wagon of European practical new ways of farming. Rather they stuck with their old, less proffitable, careless ways.
2. THE most labor saving device was that of the abundance of land. Once one farmers plot was all used up they could jump ship to another new fertile plot of land.
1. Why were American Farmers described as slovens? American farmers were described as slovens because they were very careless with there land. The reason why they were nicknamed sloven was because the people in england used newer farming technics which were better for the land.
2. Why was THE most "labor-saving device, to the American farmer, the wasteful use of land"?
America was rich of bountiful land and there was no end to it. The farmers could, instead of working the same field and slash-n-burning it, go to a different field once the one acre had been used up.
2. Why was THE most "labor-saving device, to the American farmer, the wasteful use of land"? The wasteful use of land was the most labor saving device because it took a lot of work for farmers to farm in such a way that would save nutrients in the soil. Rotating crops was very labor intensive, and it was much easier for farmers to simply move to somewhere else once the soil had been depleted. The huge abundance of land made this possible. Mira Schlosberg
26 comments:
1: Since i did not know what a sloven was I looked it up, and the definition is "one habitually negligent of neatness or cleanliness especially in personal appearance" therefore it is not good to be a sloven. American farmers are considered slovens because they were not like farmers in Europe who were already taking part in the Agricultural revolution. American farmers were considered behind the times and were not up to date with all the new agricultural concepts and only used the old fashion ways.
2: Because America was land rich and people poor the most labor saving technique was moving on after the land had been used for farming. They did not use slash and burn or cutting down the weeds or rotation of the crops because they simply did not have the man power to do this extra work, because there was plenty more land why not just move on and leave the land you just used behind. This saved labor costs and time because families were wanting to prosper and not focus so much on labor on the land. The costs along could sink a family because of the fertilizer and hours of cultivating old land so why not just move on. Though the land was considered "wasteful" the land was able to go back to its natural state and in a form this was a variation of the crop rotation in Europe.
1. American farmers were slovens because of their lack of effort to use the farming methods of Europeans that allowed land to be renewable. They did not use manure, nor did they feed their cattle, provide adequate barns, or adequate pasturing. Livestock were so plenty, they were not even looked after. Rather than making sure they could cultivate the same land from year to year, farmers would simply move to another spot, leaving their first spot completely ruined and unable to support crops anymore. Every crop they attempted to grow would deplete land, from common plants like maize, to new plants such as indigo and rice.
2. Since labor was scarce in America, and the methods used by Europeans to rejuvenate used-up land was costly and required labor, the best way for a poor farmer to save money was to avoid rejuvenating their land. The most obvious way to avoid rejuvenating land was to keep cultivating new land, and America was one of those places where a farmer could do just that. In this way, shortage of labor and abundance of land halted the development of advanced agriculture in America. Why spend all this money developing costly technology when you can just buy more land for a lot cheaper? This attitude developed in colonial America’s circumstances. Even if we ignore the financial influences in this process, there were also issues of climate. Farmers in New England and the newly-forming Midwest could not prepare their soil in the winter they way English farmers did because snow covered the land for most of winter, leaving only a very short spring to prepare the soil. Even though this method of agriculture didn’t work out in the long run, as observed by English farmers who visited (they ran out of land), it did serve to establish agriculture in some form across America.
1. American farmers were thought of as slovens because they were ignorant of oppertunities that were being lost within their land. Baecause of their "labor scarcity and land-plenty", the American farmer did not feel the need to deal with land in the way that England was at the time. The English, with limited land, worked the same areas time and time again, rejuvinating the soil and protecting the areas from destruction. This method was simply not needed at the time in America, and because of this ignorance, the American farmer recieived much criticism for such a careless way to farm.
2. To the American farmer, land was not a luxury. Anyone with determination could own land, and there were more than enough provisions to feed the population at the time. With this mindset, it was the waste of land that proved more labor-saving than "advanced" land-saving techniques. In England, the shortage of land pushed them to find new ways to save it, and these ways proved to be difficult and take up and immense amount of labor. There was always room to expand in America. Following ways of agriculture presented by the Indians, the American farmers had an efficient way to farm that was labor-saving. Although this was labor-saving, farm animals could not survive well because of the lack of proper fencing and feed, and the drive for a quick, laborless fix led the colonies to leave acres of land barren and open to predators as well. By the mid 18th century, though, it was apparent that the farmers' labor saving time had come to a halt. With the introduction of agricultural tips from people like Jared Eliot, the problem was on its way to be helped.
1. American farmers were considered slovens because they didn't really put in the effort to be successful. For example the farmers of Europe were currently going through the agricultural revolution and the American farmers were slow to catch on. Unlike the English, the Americans did not use the method of crop rotation which was the process were every season a different crop was planted to keep the nutrients in the soil. Without crop rotation the soil is completely useless as was seen in Virginia with their tobacco. The farmers did not take care of their land. They chose to not use techniques like using fertilizer which would increase the growing season. They were lazy.
2. The most labor-saving technique used in colonial America was to not spend any money to replenish the soil. And for this reason they were considered slovens. They refused to use crop rotation or other methods like slash and burn, but once the nutrients were completely depleted from the soil they would snatch up more land and do the same thing until there was no more land. Another reason for this strange habit of farming was the lack of labor available to work the lands. It would take much more labor to rotate crops every season than to plant the same crop every season. This did not have a positive effect on the economy of America, but that did not stop the farmers who were mainly subsistence farmers.
1. The farmers were described as slovens because they weren't aware of methods/actions that could be taken to better their farming techniques/results. The farmers in England were replacing their equiptment with the updated version, suck as the iron plow pulled by a draft horse, while the American farmers were still using little trowels and stuff. The English were very critical of the American farmers. The English viewed themselves as far superior because of their new methods and tools
2. The most labor-saving device was the wasteful use of land because the American's didn't ahve to work to attain new, ariable land. Land was (initially) abundant in the colonies, one had to only go a few miles and unclaimed land was under your feet. Much labor was saved because the laborers didn't have to waste precious time rotation crops or letting the soil re-firtilize for a year because why waste the time when you could just use new, fresh land? This was veiwed as "wastful" because they didn't recultivate the land to make it (almost) instantly ariable again. Though in the long run, it could be seen as helpful, because after a couple decades, the land could be back to a like-new condition without the added effort of fertilation.
1. The American farmers were described as the greatest slovens in christendom because they produced no agricultural improvements and were careless with their land. Their farming methods were considered backwards to the English because after the land ceased to support the colonial farmer, they would move to new land. In order to save labor that was already scarce, the Americans would not go to the effort of replanting the land season after season. This meant the colonists could produce quick results with limited amount of labor. However, the Europeans saw this as a waste of land, frowned upon their desire for present gain without thinking toward the future, and compared their amateur farming methods to those of the Indians.
2. The "labor-saving device" to the American farmer, which was to move from farm to farm, was the wasteful use of land because although the farmers thought they had fully exhausted their land, this was not the case. The land that they left behind could have been replanted many more times before it would become an economic burden for the farmer. But there was plenty of land so the colonists didn't think twice before moving since they were saving money by not hiring labor to replant the farm.
1. American farmers were described as slovens because they were so far behind Europe in terms of agriculture revolutions. England had been leading the revolution with bring enclosures to farms to enclose old pastures.
2. Instead of keeping the land full of nutrients for continuous use, the colonist would move to a new plot of land after several years. This was a complete waste of land, but the colonists at this time had plenty of land to spare.
1. American farmers were described as slovens because they did not put in the effort to use the farming methods of Europe such as making the soil renewable or using a drill to plant seeds. The farmers in America were in a stagnant period. They used up land and moved on rather than taking the time to cultivate and fertilize it. The American farmers wanted labor saving tools and did not want to expend labor like the Europeans and re-use old land. Americans stuck to their old farming tactics rather than using what the Europeans had developed in an Agricultural Revolution.
2. The most “labor-saving” device to the American farmer was wasteful of land because to American farmers, the best way to save labor was to use up the land and move on instead of cultivating or fertilizing the land. America was land plenty and labor scarce. Americans followed the farming tactics of the Indians in order to save labor, but because of this, Americans left broken fences and cattle uncared for, vulnerable to predators. Their manure was nothing more than a waste. Colonists wanted quick results. Tobacco and corn crops depleted the soil of nutrients; there was plenty of land and game. The Americans saw no use for the European ways when their way was much more labor efficient.
1. American farmers were describes as sloven because they were not like England. England had a limited amount of land so the British worked hard to make sure that land was arable. They passed acts and laws about agriculture to keep all of their precocious arable land fertile. The Americans, however, had very little people to work the land they possessed. They could not fertilize their lands as England could because there were not enough farmhands. In addition, cattle sometimes escaped from their pens because of holes in the fences and other such preventable things. To the British, Americans seemed to have no concerns about their land or their herds. That is why American farmers were called sloven.
2. American farmers had very few farmhands. This meant that farmers would rather buy new fields than fertilize their overused fields. The Americans also had more land than their English counterparts did, so what was wasteful to the English was productive to the Americans. People who went to America generally wanted to make a quick buck, so wasting land was seen as necessary in order to get ahead in America.
1. American farmers were considered slovens because of the wasteful way in which they used up their land and then simply moved on to new tracts, especially when compared to the agricultural reforms going on at the same time in England to try to maximize land efficiency.
2. In America during the colonial period, there seemed to be no shortage of uncultivated land, but labor was quite scarce. This was very different from England at the time, where all the land was essentially used up and there were plenty of people to work the fields. Therefore, Americans focused on the opposite of what the English did: conserving labor. To spend this precious labor on simply improving the yield of a certain parcel of land year after year was not labor-efficient; instead, yielding one crop and then moving on to produce another crop on fresh fields was preferred among the American farmers. They valued quick results instead of quality results. Another crucial factor in this was that the main crop of the colonies, corn, wore out the land quite quickly, so farmers were forced to move on to continue farming.
1. Famers were called sloves because they didn't know how to improve their farming like in England. The English had more labor and could improve upon "old land". The Americans, always short on labor but not on land, simply moved on after a place had given up what it had, instead of using time to recultivate it, a "waste" in English minds. England considered itself the best (like always), but I found it funny that borstin said "The techniques exported to the colonies from Great Britain were seldom the best" (pg 261)
2. As slightly mentioned above, Americans moved on from land and didn't spend time to recultivate it, being the "labor-saving device, to the American farmer, the wasteful use of land." They just went to land that was more plentiful.
~Chris Sogge~
1. During the colonial period in America, England was undergoing its “enclosure” movement which was promoting efficiency and more capitalistic methods of farming. This agricultural movement, however, was generally directed towards wealthy landlords and even the Queen, rather than the peasants and small subsistence farmers. While Europe was undergoing massive agricultural reform, the colonies of America were wedged in a period conspicuously absent of farming change. The fact that the colonial farmers were stuck on “primitive” methods of farming and were slow to change, led to the view of them as “slovenly” in the farming world. The American farmer’s case of slovenliness can hardly be charged as their fault, however. The circumstances of the New World greatly influenced their lack of conservatism and ingenuity. “The early settler was always tempted to seize whatever nature offered, especially if it was food, and so frees himself to enlarge his capital by clearing more land.” The first case for the colonial farmer was the great abundance of land and the lack of people. The vast tracts of land available to the farmers made it inevitable that they would not be prudent in their management of the land when they could simply move on to an equally fertile area. Additionally, the farmers made no use of the manure from their cattle. The smorgasbord of game and fish also decreased the necessity of efficient farming techniques, as the people could simply find their food elsewhere. The lack of knowledge about the new world also led to the “slovenly” character of American farmers as the entirety of their focus was on surviving. The unfamiliar climate and unfamiliar crops led the colonists to turn to the Native Americans for farming techniques which the English considered to be “primitive.” Additionally, the persisting colonial wars, difficult communication, and the lack of useful books and practices brought by the English made advancements difficult. While it is true that the colonial farmer was excessively wasteful in his practices of farming, even considered slovenly, the situation of America made this inevitable.
2. In a new and unfamiliar land, the most necessary element of life is the ability to survive. Thus, the American farmer was not concerned with the newest developments in technology for farming, but rather harvesting as much as he possibly could with a minimal amount of effort. Therefore, the most “labor-saving device was their wasteful use of land.” The additional expended efforts required of new English methods of practices to make land more productive, was not necessary in America. Where labor was much scarcer than land, it simply made more economical and common sense to use the land to its fill, then move on instead of spending precious hours fertilizing it for later use.
1. American farmers were described as "slovens" because the Europeans looked down on the way they farmed and lived. The Americans couldn't farm the same way that the Europeans did because of a lack of labor. The Europeans accused them of being careless about the future, which to some extent was true, in the way they would let the land become "sour" and leave it.They treated things with a general carelessness and didn't take good care of their animals, but this may have been because of a lack of people to do so. Still, the animals often went hungry and were attacked by wild animals. Their manure wasn't put to use and they didn't have shelter.
2. The most labor saving device was the abundance of farmland. However, this made for wasteful use of the land. The farmers weren't very skilled and they didn't have the time or workforce to replenish each field after it was used. This resulted in fields being abandoned for greener pastures, so to speak. For the colonists, it as easier to just find new land, which wasn't difficult to do. The English saw this practice as wasteful, but they had the opposite problem of the colonists, with labor to spare but little land.
1.) American farmers were described as slovens because of their poor land practices, which contrasted those of England. The English criticized American farmers because they were careless with their land. Americans had no view of the future, and they would overgrow tobacco and make the land "sour" and useless for future generations. Also, the Americans were critisized because of their poor care for livestock. The animals didnt have any shelter, and their manure was not properly utilized.
2.) Using land wastefully saved a lot of work for American farmers. There was an abundance of land in America, so rather than putting in the effort and time to recover land after depleting it of its nutrients, farmers could easily just buy more land to grow on. It was faster easier, and cheaper than trying to reclaim the land, saving farmers time and money.
1. American Farmers were not focused on clenliness and weren't worried about their soial standing. Therefore, they did not deem the agricultural revolution necessary. They figured that what thye did worked, and they didn't need anything new. They liked the way working in the land built strength and character.
1) Colonial American farmers were described as slovens, especially by their English counterparts, because of the way they took advantage of land-plenty. Back in England, the enclosure movement was the equivalent of today’s compact car movement in Europe. Meanwhile colonial Americans were guzzling land much like we guzzle gas today. The result: disgust by foreigners and carelessness on the American part (an essential characteristic of a sloven). But don’t be too quick to condemn the colonial Americans, because the grounds of their land consumption are backed up in the next question.
2) Americans farmers weren’t necessarily careless when they moved to new land after exhausting one plot; they were simply trying to get by. In times of desperation, what works best usually is the preferred method. In this case there was such a vast amount of land that it became the farmer’s best friend, and they weren’t going to reach the bottom of the cookie jar anytime soon. So the practice continued. This saved a great deal of labor simply because it wasn’t necessary to find a way to replenish the soil of nutrients so that it could bear crops again. Farmers enjoyed the need for less labor and supported the statement, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
1. Farmers in America were described as slovens, or untidy and careless, because the author of American Husbandry that made that comment was comparing them to the farmers in England who were in the middle of an agricultural revolution. America at the time was still in its stagnate agriculture days because of their flawed system of moving from plot to plot before cultivating everything they could out of it. Since labor was very hard to find in America it made sense that the farmers didn’t want to waste their effort, time and money trying to cultivate land when they could just as easily begin anew, even if it was rather careless. But, it’s no denying that the author had a point because the farmers were careless in ignoring the use of their cattle’s manure and bypassing the system of keeping excess grain in the winter. The colonists were either moving on from what they thought to be exhausted land or they bought too much and didn’t have to man power to cultivate all they could out of that as well.
2. While the American farmers’ method of moving from one piece of land to another as soon as the productivity had run out was considered wasteful, it was actually a huge labor-saving device. The farmers didn’t have the resources or the hands available to help deeply cultivate and fertilize the land so, why waste the time and effort when America was so land-plenty anyways? It was much easier to start growing you’re new crop in softer more malleable dirt than try to recuperate you’re old field.
Chapter 40
1. Sloven means one who is consistently careless with their work. The Americans i believe were described as this because they refused to replenish and rejuvenate the land. They just moved on to the next avaible space. They were not joining the agricultural revolution of Europe on ways to fertilize, effectively pasturize, take better care of their livestock, etc. The Americans were seen as just plain lazy.
2. The use of land was a labor-saving device because colonists did not have to worry about refertilizing the land after growing tobacco then corn (for example). There was no need for land maintenance because you could just move on to the next plot of land to do your farming. This saved the colonists money and also their time and effort.
Taylor Oster 2009
1. Sloven: : one habitually negligent of neatness or cleanliness especially in personal appearance. I'm going to take this definition a little looser. "The American planters and farmers are in general the greatest slovens in christendom" because when the quote was made, Europe was in the middle of the Agricultural Revolution, whereas in America, the "colonial period was an age of stagnation in agricultural science". Where English farmers and researchers worked to improve yield, inventing seed drills and fervently advocating plowing and weeding to increase root health and crop yield per acre, the American colonies were still, according to George Washington, yielding "not more than eight to ten bushels of wheat [in] an acre." Where in England they sought to find the most efficient and productive farming techniques, Washington muses that "the aim of the farmers in this country, if they can be called farmers, is, not to make the most they can from the land, which is, or has been, cheap, but most of the labor, which is dear." This is probably because of the lack of available land in heavily industrialized England to waste, where in America, the settlers were faced with thousands of acres of unclaimed,cheap land for their use. As Boorstin explains, "To American colonists for whom labor was scarcer than land, it seemed more economical to use up the land and move on than to spend precious hours in cultivating and fertilizing...they wanted 'labor-saving' devices, and in these early years the most obvious labor-saving device happened to be the wasteful use of land." The English only saw this as slovenly because of a difference in value: where England had a surplus of available labor and not much space for its application, the available labor for the settlers was sparse, and space freely found.
2. The wasteful use of land was the most labor-saving device because the settlers simply did not have the time, energy or labor resources to 'recycle' their land. Instead, it was much easier to just move on to the next piece of land, of which there was much to choose from, than to rotate fields, or practice slash-and-burn. All they had to do was up and move a few miles, where they would again come upon an area where the soil was fine and fertile, and all the farmer had to do was cut down the trees, plow, and suck the nutrients out of the earth with crops. Because this work was so much simpler than repeatedly maintaining and fertilizing the same piece of land, American farmers moved agriculturally "like the Indians".
1. American farmers were known to be slovens due to their wasteful means of farming. Because they thought they had a virtually endless frontier land to work with, they never developed what one might call ‘conservative’ farming techniques, namely, techniques that allowed them to reuse land or keep it from becoming useless. This wasteful attitude also kept them from creating many agricultural advancements in the early days of colonial farming.
2. This statement is like saying “the most labor-saving device to a student, is not doing ones homework,” by which I mean that if one cares not for the outcome, the short term goals and expediency gained by not caring if one ruins the land or gets bad grades respectively, then one can be much faster in either farming or getting to relax.
1. American farmers were described as slovens because there were many examples of carelessness in their agricultural practices and animal husbandry: fields were not properly maintained, fences were not repaired, animals were let to run wild, etc. At the time, England was obtaining many new agricultural innovations and ideas, so this English agricultural movement greatly contrasted with the American “slovenliness.” This lack of proper farming was partly due to the fact that there was much more land available in America than there had been to farmers in England, so the need for wise farming technique was not as pressing; the lack of readily available labor; and the relatively urgent need that colonists had for food. It was more pressing to harvest food, so that the newfound colonies did not starve, rather than worry if their agricultural practices were sensible or not.
2. Because there was not a lot of labor available to colonial farmers, and there was an abundance of land, it was more efficient for farmers to find ways to save labor, even if the land was wasted, rather than to preserve land.
1. Why were American farmers described as slovens?
Americans were described as slovens because they failed to use many of the agricultural methods that were popular in England. For example, the colonists didn’t use manure. There was so much land and livestock that the American farmers simply let them run free and feed themselves, and there was no need for the concern that the British had for their lands and animals.
2. Why was THE most "labor-saving device, to the American farmer, the wasteful use of land"?
Wasting land was the quickest and easiest way to make money in America. This is still seen today, as slash and burn agriculture in the rainforests is a wasteful way to quickly make money.
1. Americans farmers were described as slovens because they did not jump on the band wagon of European practical new ways of farming. Rather they stuck with their old, less proffitable, careless ways.
2. THE most labor saving device was that of the abundance of land. Once one farmers plot was all used up they could jump ship to another new fertile plot of land.
1. Why were American Farmers described as slovens?
American farmers were described as slovens because they were very careless with there land. The reason why they were nicknamed sloven was because the people in england used newer farming technics which were better for the land.
2. Why was THE most "labor-saving device, to the American farmer, the wasteful use of land"?
America was rich of bountiful land and there was no end to it. The farmers could, instead of working the same field and slash-n-burning it, go to a different field once the one acre had been used up.
2. Why was THE most "labor-saving device, to the American farmer, the wasteful use of land"?
The wasteful use of land was the most labor saving device because it took a lot of work for farmers to farm in such a way that would save nutrients in the soil. Rotating crops was very labor intensive, and it was much easier for farmers to simply move to somewhere else once the soil had been depleted. The huge abundance of land made this possible.
Mira Schlosberg
Post a Comment