You'll find Zinn's book far different then the Boostin book, however I also think you'll find it easier reading. Please approach the Zinn book with an open mind since I'm not asking you to "buy in" to everything his says. You find it a much different perspective then the class text well begin in 16 days (but who's counting).
Anything that you read in this class, it is important to understand bias and point of view. Zinn in the very first chapter admits his bias and explains his point of view, therefore take it for what it's worth -- a very different perspective.
It is also important to recognize the themes Zinn covers compared to Boorstin. Such as, how does each deal with slavery, or Bacon's Rebellion (Boorstin barely mentions Bacon!). I'm going to ask you to come back and visit this later in the year (also by looking at Brinkley, our text author).
Well shall we get to some things to look at?
Early Chapters
1. Would it be incorrect to assume that you all were taught in your earlier classes what a great man Christopher Columbus was. We even have a holiday for him. However, Zinn focuses more on Columbus' more "human" qualities. Please list one of those qualities, and do not repeat one that has already been posted by your classmates.
2. Identify one of Zinn's biases and point of view?
3. If you remember, Boorstin causally mentions "King Philip's War," whereas Zinn identifies it's causes. Please make note of that but you do not need to comment here.
4. What does Zinn say about racism in America? Look at Edmund Morgan's view on racism on p. 56. Would you agree? Zinn then asks, "Is it possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred?" What do you think, given what Zinn has written?
5. It is important to note the behavior of the residents of Jamestown during the "starving time." No comment needed here.
6. Pay attention to Zinn's quotation by Edmund Morgan on p. 25.
7. What were some of the differences in how slaves were treated in Africa (by Africans) and in the colonies?
8. Why were Africans better fitted fro slavery then Indians?
9. What were some of the methods Africans slaves used to escape?
10. What ways were the treatment of indentured servants similar to African slaves?
11. Give an example of how colonial America was similar to feudal Europe, or operated more as an aristocracy.
38 comments:
1. Howard Zinn shows how Columbus believed in the white man superiority. He denounces the Indians for their lack of weapons. Columbus also, in Zinn’s eyes, is a mass murder. He was responsible for the terrible genocide of the Arawak.
4. No, I don’t think it is possible for everyone to give up racist views. As Zinn showed on page 31, people use black and white to mean to opposite things. Black was always portrayed with fear, where white was always seen as pure. How can racism be stopped if these things are easily brought up in today’s society? Also, bringing up Morgan’s view, it shows how we will look back on our actions one day and see how we were racist, since the colonist were just as aware as we are about right and wrong. We could look back and see that we are being racist towards are group, but we don’t realize because it is so normal for us just like it was for the colonists.
6. Morgan rationalizes the treatment of the Indians for the colonists. He does not say that they were right in what they did, but rather explains the situation and how it progresses.
7. Slaves in Africa were given many more rights than those in the colonies. In Africa slaves were able to marry, which alone was very different than in America. Slaves in America were constantly having their family ripped apart many American slaves did not marry. Also, slaves in Africa could own property, and there again was vastly different from what happened in America. African slaves could have slaves themselves, and become the heir to his master’s estate. Things rarely, if ever occurred in America. It goes to show how much more oppressive the colonists were compared to the other slave societies.
8. It was not that Indians were better physical fit, but rather it was the fact they would work on there own land, that drove the colonists away from enslaving the Indians. Instead the captured millions of Africans and shipped them over to America where they would be helpless because they didn’t know the land. In this way the Colonist were smart to enslave the Africans because the Africans were more controllable in the beginning.
9. On the boats, the Africans had a chance to escape being brought into slavery. If the had the chance, they would fling themselves off the side of the boat.
11. Zinn explains how slaves of the American society were like serfs in feudal Europe. Both do the field work, and are bound to one land until they are told otherwise, or can pay for their freedom. It also meant that there were two distinct classes like the classes found in Europe during the feudal era. In the upper class you had the land owners, while in the lower class you had the slaves and serfs, better known as the workers. The only major distinction between the two eras was that race played a large roll in American society, where it didn’t affect society as much in Feudal Europe.
1. In "A People's History of the United States", Howard Zinn focuses mainly on Columbus' "human" qualities. Zinn shows how Columbus over exaggerates the reports of Hispaniola. He did it too "impress" the king and queen. He also did it out of greed believing he would get more. As a result however, many Arawak Indians were killed in the process of mining for the promised amounts of gold and on the voyage back to Spain. Even though this is a negative trait, it is still seen in humans today. People lie and exaggerate statements to gain the "upper hand".
2. On many of the matters of the treatment of Indians discussed by Zinn he is biased because he uses only one source, and that came from Bartolome de las Casas. He was a participant of the conquest of cuba, but then later described the cruel treatment of the Arawak Indians. Zinn' s point of view is one that seems unbiased. He states that facts in History should be told as they are and nothing should be omitted. According to Zinn, Columbus committed many "atrocities", but later he calls Columbus a hero.
Kellie Helmer
4. According to Zinn, racism in America developed hatred, contempt, pity, and patronization. At this time in Jamestown, Virginia, the people went "crazed" because of the lack of food. This was known as the "starving time". The hatred that came with racism in America could have been due to the fact that the Virginians wanted someone else to feel their hunger at hatred, so they imported black slaves. On page 56 Edmund Morgan says, "If freemen with disappointed hopes should make common cause with slaves of desperate hope, the results might be worse than anything Bacon had done." To this I do agree because if you put to oppressed groups together they might rebel and the outcome could be worse than the Bacon Rebellion, but later he says: "The answer to the problem, obvious if unspoken and only gradually recognized, was racism, to separate dangerous free whites from dangerous black slaves by a screen of racial contempt." To this I disagree because with a racial divide there might be more violence toward each other. Similar to this, on page 31 Zinn states that black slaves and white slaves worked together and were "unconcerned about their physical differences". Later however when the laws were passed that forbade blacks and whites to mix racism began to grow amongst the poor whites, making it difficult to think that blacks and whites could live without hatred.
7. Slaves in Africa were treated with much more respect and many more rights than those of the American colonies. According to Basil Davidson, "the slaves of Africa were more like the serfs of Europe...(pg. 27)". In Africa, they were treated like human beings where in the Americas they were treated like livestock. African slaves had rights which included but were not limited to: they were allowed to intermarry and own their own property.
8. The African people were more fit for American slavery than the Indians for multiple reasons. First, the Indians were at home where the Africans would be out of place and in a environment they were not used too. The Indians easily outnumbered the colonists and had a large supply of food, so the colonists would have a hard time enslaving them.
9. On the voyage over to America many of the slaves tried to escape by throwing themselves overboard. Later, during plantation slavery in the southern colonies, many would try to escape by acting severely sick so they wouldn't have to work, some would hide out and try to pass as free men, but most of time they were found. Others would kill themselves to end the misery.
10. African slaves and indentured servants were treated similarly in a manor that they both got freed after their sentence for servitude. They could also eventually own land and their own property once released.
11. In both feudal Europe and in colonial America the serfs and slaves were bound to the land to work for their masters. Another similar trait between them was the fact that none of the government in feudal Europe was not centralized so you did not respond to any other lord. Likewise in America you did not respond to another master. A major difference however was that the serfs in Europe received protection from the lords in exchange for their work. The African slaves were not given protection from outside forces like other people or from the climate when there were severe changes.
Kelly,
Where does Zinn call Columbus a "hero?"
1: Though we celebrate Columbus as a hero for discovering the Americas and such Zinn shows the human and un-holiday aspects of Christopher Columbus. Columbus as seen from Zinn’s eyes was far from a hero by the massacres of the Arawaks which he compares to other person who had all one target and that was the indigenous people of that area. Zinn alludes to how Americans are somewhat ignorant to what our “great heros” have done in their lifetime. Though Columbus did great things in navigation and exploration there was some downside to all this greatness which sadly had to fall upon the Arawaks.
2: The bias from Zinn’s point of view is that his sources are limited and he tries to give the people of America a different perspective and shows that nothing is what it appears to be. He wants readers to dig deeper into history to unearth the truths about what happened and not just accept what a holiday or common knowledge tells you is everything. Zinn leaves out all the great things that Columbus did in his lifetime and only focuses on the bad which evens out in the long run but as only this book is concerned there is a one sided argument on if Columbus was a good person or a bad one.
4: Zinn says that racism was “practical” and was not an ethnic or looks difference but more of a class difference with a gross take of stereotyping. I think that I agree somewhat in the fact that racism was developed by classes and not skin color alone but I am not sure on if the racism in America can ever end completely because stereotyping usually has an underlying of racism. I do not think that whites and blacks can live together without hatred completely. Not saying that there is still massive hatred in myself towards African Americans but there will always be someone in America where racism towards African Americans exist because the cuts of racism will always run deep through history and therefore there would always be a small sense of hatred or hurtful feelings on either the African American or Caucasian sides.
6: This brings me back to the killing of common knowledge installed in most Americans. Though there was a colonist superiority complex they were ignorant of learning new techniques because they were already perfect and there is no room for improvement on perfection. I really enjoyed that quote because it proves that though by force the colonists were superior they were far behind the Indians in agriculture and way of life.
7: African slavery was much less hurtful on the slaves themselves because they were still in their land with their cultural aspects unlike in the colonies where they were torn from their culture and forced into colonial life. The racism from the colonists would be imaginably worse because though they were lower in status in Africa there was still the support system provided because they were able to have their culture, language, and they were treated more as serfs and not as property or an item that you owned in the colonies.
8: The Africans were better fitted for slavery because they did not know the land or have any large group of people that they could call on in case there was need for violent action. The Indians were part of the land and had lived there and had a group of people who could take a stand and rise up against the colonists if the need arose. They could take Africans from Africa and totally isolate them from their culture making them vulnerable to colonist racism.
9: Mostly there was running away from the Africans and there was uprising from groups that grew out of colonies. In other places not only in the colonies there were slaves that would run away in an effort to escape slavery but were willing to risk their life anyway because the government would take action in hunting down run aways and brutal punishment for being caught after running away.
10: They were both considered inferior to free men and they also were used for tasks that no one else wanted to do. They were also bound to the land and were put under special imprisonment to make sire they would not run away after signing the indenture or being captured. The servants and the slaves were also put on ships where there was disease and no food or water.
11: America was similar to feudal Europe and operated more as an aristocracy because of the harsh lines between the rich and the poor and there was no middle working class either you owned land or you worked land. America and feudal Europe were also the same in the fact that they were both focused around working land and making money from agricultural means which both required a lot of labor which came from indentured servants, slaves, and serfs.
1. One of the chief traits that made Columbus human, according to Zinn, was in fact his lack of humanity. It wasn’t even racism that drove his ventures, but an absence of sympathy. Based on the quotes and other facts provided by Zinn in the first chapter, it is evident that Columbus had no reverence for other people, and saw them as mere pawns in his quest to obtain gold and bring it back to Spain, even if they were his own man. Even upon their first landing on Cuba, Columbus immediately showed a lack of reverence for the human condition. The Indians who met them with open arms and gifts were immediately captured and Columbus intended to use them to find whatever gold existed on the West Indies. Also, when moving to Hispaniola, he used the timber from the Santa Maria to construct the first fortress, and left its 39 former crewmembers to search the island for gold and man the fortress. He simply deserted them there as if they were not people, but part of the ship he had used to create the fort.
2. Zinn’s most obvious bias is towards the North American Indians. Not only does he list the multiple times the English (and Spanish) abused the Indians all along the North American Eastern Seaboard, but he also includes specific quotes of the grievances of the Indians, in an attempt, not to simply victimize them, but instead to tell his history from their point of view. He goes into vivid detail of the various atrocities committed by the English upon the Indians, such as the attack of the colonists of Massachusetts Bay upon the Pequot Indians in which they burned their villages and slaughtered those who escaped the fire. Zinn is also very avid to point out that their exact intent with these attacks was to strike terror into the Indians and demoralize them. An interesting Indian perspective that Zinn includes is a quote from a letter (or some paraphrasing of a similar letter) by Chief Powhatan to the English of Virginia to cease the fighting, because it was destructive to both the settlers and Indians, and that prosperity would be so much easier in peace. Zinn provides this quote to show that it was the colonizers, and not the Indians, who were the instigators of fighting in North America.
4. Zinn comments on the longstanding argument of whether racism is a human condition, and is thus an inevitable force that will always influence the decisions of men; or that it is a fabricated dictum, created in a time of desperate necessity. Zinn argues that the latter is true, and he provides many pieces of convincing evidence to reinforce his assertion. And furthermore, the evidence he provides is varied, and from different situations. He mentions many early rebellions in the 17th century that were organized under the collaboration of both black and white servants, who undoubtedly could not work in tandem if some of them thought themselves superior. Zinn also mentions on multiple occasions the fornication between blacks and whites. If racism was a natural human instinct, then surely abhorrence would override lust and prevent inter-racial relations. There is definitely truth in Morgan’s quote on pg. 56. Without fabricating racism and thus creating an artificial division, it is doubtful the upper class of Colonial America could have kept at bay the numerous subordinate groups upon which they leeched and continued to remain wealthy. If Zinn’s assertion that racism is but a product of a past necessity, then it could definitely one day disappear. However, it may be a long time before such divisions fade away here in America, where these unfortunate principles of bigotry are older than the country itself.
6. Morgan’s quote on pg. 25 shows that the Virginians of Jamestown were disgusted by their lack of superiority to the Indians. Having initially asserted themselves over the Indians, their dismay to see the Indians prospering must have been great. It was so great in fact that they “killed the Indians, tortured them, burned their villages, burned their cornfields. It proved [their] superiority.” The unfortunate Englishmen who were attempting to maintain themselves in Jamestown were absolutely bothered that their “superior” ways were obsolete for maintaining an existence there, especially compared to the effectiveness of the supposedly “inferior” methods of the Indians.
7. The most obvious difference between slavery in America and slavery in Africa was that Americans practiced chattel slavery. In Africa, slavery, though obviously inhuman because it placed one man subordinate to another, was still very merciful when compared to that of America. An African slave would eventually become free, and many times could marry into the family who had previously owned him. Slaves could also own land, or even own their own slaves. Slaves were also allowed to remain within their own families if they wished, and they were never robbed of sense of self-worth as human beings. In America, however, there was stark contrast to this system of slavery. Having been removed from their homelands and having spent a month on the infamous “Middle Passage,” slaves in America were certainly less inclined to work for any master, and thus American slave-owners practiced very harsh forms of coercion to maintain order. Slaves were removed from their families to deny them their most chief form of self-existence. They were further broken down with punishment and constant overworking. They were taught that they were not humans, but dependents, who ought only to want to serve their master.
8. Africans were better-fit for slavery than Indians because their homeland was 4000 miles away. Indians weren’t suitable as slaves for a number of reasons. Firstly, they could easily just desert, since they lived in the place at which they were being enslaved. Furthermore, capturing Indians for slavery would most certainly incite massacres. The only way to capture Indian slaves would be to capture their entire village, but then a massacre would surely ensue when neighboring villages heard of what had happened.
9. African slaves had many methods with which they could attempt to escape, and most of these means depended largely on luck. The first generation of slaves brought from Africa still had their sense of humanity and sense of their former culture. Many times, these first generation slaves spoke the same tongue and could band together and rebel. Another means employed by African slaves was to collaborate with white servants to rebel against their masters. Individual escapees also had a number of options. Probably the most successful was to run west and join an Indian tribe where they could become part of their tribe as if one of their own. Also, an escaped slave could attempt to pretend to be a free man in another colony. A third way, though this was probably uncommon, was to join a sailing crew, and become a permanent member of that crew, thus gaining freedom.
10. Both African slaves and indentured servants were forced into subordination with harsh methods of coercion, such as whipping, starvation, and threats of punishment by death. Also, the punishments for attempted escape were very similar to those of Africans, ranging from whipping to death. Indentured servants’ lives were also highly-controlled, as were the lives of African slaves. To prevent time off for labor, masters were careful to keep female slaves from having relations, as the pregnancy would render her useless for a period of time, and she would be distracted by the child even after the birth. In both cases, masters saw their servants/slaves as insubordinate and lazy, and tried all sorts of methods of force to get them to be more productive. Female servants, much like female slaves, were sometimes subject to the lust of their masters, and certainly had no choice in the matter.
11. One of the most obvious near-feudal systems in America was the one created by John Locke. It consisted of barons who controlled 40% of the land and represented a very small portion of the population at large. Also, New England cities such as Boston showed just how bad the aristocracy had become in lording over the poor. Over the decades of the 18th century, the rich grew richer and poor grew poorer, forcing the construction of poor houses. Much like in Europe, the aristocracy of America used all kinds of rhetorical methods of distraction to keep public dissent to a minimum. In fact, many aristocrats supported the American Revolution chiefly for this purpose. An aristocrat could easily call attention to a loyalist to keep the public eye on him, and not on the aristocrat. The aristocrats also used racism to maintain their position. By placing whites above blacks in class distinction, they could help to decrease dissent amongst the white lower class. It is quite staggering to read that the top 1% of the people owned 47% of all the assets.
1. The truth about what Columbus did upon arrival in the Americas has always been masked, but here Zinn tells how columbus was horrble to the native people. He destoyed their villages hopeing to find gold and other valuable materials. So Columbus was just another greedy European.
2. Zinn seems to take the side of the native people and describes the bad side to the Europeans and the good side of the native americans.
7. In Africa, slaves were treated with much more respect. UNlike in America, they were allowed to marry and stay with their families, they were allowed to leave the place they worked and were not subject to as harsh of punishments.
8. Africans were the better choice for slavery in America because if the natives were enslaved, they would have a large advantage in uprisings and resistance. They would have an advantage because of their knoledge of the land, and they could flee to other tribes, create some kind of an alliance and bring warfare upon the colony.
9. Many slaves escaped by attacking their masters and fleeing to the wilderness and often to the Indians, where they were accepted for their common hate of the Europeans.
10. Indentured servants were similar to the slaves because they were also forced to live in poor conditions and had to work in the fields every day.
11. The colonies were similar to feudal european society because only the very wealthy had power in the government, and many of the people were forcedto work as serfs, or in the colonies "indentured servents."
1. Zinn shows Columbus’ human aspects, rather than just depicting him for his accomplishments in the New World. The Arawaks ran to greet the sailors bearing gifts, yet Columbus says “They do not bear arms, and do not know them, for I showed them a sword, they took it by the edge and cut themselves out of ignorance. They would make fine servants.” (pg 1). This depicts Columbus’ view of superiority and his want for power over these people. This is also shown on page two, when Columbus says “I took some of the natives by force in order that they might learn and might give me information of whatever there is in these parts.” Zinn depicts Columbus’ faults such as these to prove a point that Columbus isn’t a “true hero,” especially due to the massacres and want of power over the Arawaks.
2. One of Zinn’s biases and point of view is stated on page 10 “Still, understanding the complexities, this book will be skeptical of governments and their attempts, through politics and culture, to ensnare people in a giant web of nationhood pretending to a common interest.” Zinn questions the motives of the people and governments. “I am supposing, or perhaps hoping, that our future may be found in the past’s fugitive moments of compassion rather than in its solid centuries of warfare.” (pg. 11). Zinn is looking to show humanity through history, hoping to learn from this past so we can apply the knowledge into our future. Zinn tries to give a new light, a new perspective, to this history in order to broaden the opinions and knowledge we may already have, so we can look at different points in a different perspective in history so we may not focus on only one we have learned before. However, Zinn also has a bias in favor of the Indians, as is shown when Columbus first arrives. “The treatment of heroes (Columbus) and their victims (the Arawaks)-the quiet acceptance of conquest and murder in the name of the past is told from the point of view of a certain approach to history, in which the past is told from the point of view of governments, conquerors, diplomats, leaders.” (pg 9). But Zinn is not trying to victimize them, as he also tells things from their point of view and states on page 10 “My point is not to grieve for the victims and denounce the executioner…..in the long run, the oppressor is also the victim.” Zinn tries to show both sides in order to give a more broad historical view, but does mention the multiple times the Indians were massacred or abused by the Spaniards or the English. “Not able to enslave the Indians, not able to live with them, the English decided to exterminate them.” (pg. 13). The example of Powhatan’s address to John Smith is an example of their point of view, also on page 13 “I have seen two generations of my people die, I know the difference between peace and war better than any man in my country……Why will you take by force what you may have quietly by love?” Pleas went “unheard” as John Winthrop created an excuse to take the Indian land declaring the land a “vacuum,” or nothingness.
4. Edmund Morgan’s view is that both groups are dangerous free and are separated by racial segregation. Zinn’s view questions if it is possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred because in the 17th century, he mentions the rebellions where blacks and white servants joined forces, which is why more restrictions were drawn up. How could they work together if one was above the other? “All through those early years, black and white slaves and servants ran away together, as shown both by laws passed to stop this and the records of the courts.” (pg 55). Zinn believes Morgan’s view is more of a myth. Blacks and whites also had relationships together and had children. It has been proven in the past for blacks and whites to co-exist equally and stopped due to superior beliefs and fear of the whites. None of this would be possible if people were born believing in racism.
6. Although the colonists had “superior” technology, in the long run it barely helped them. “But your superior technology had proved insufficient to extract anything…So you killed the Indians, tortured them, burned their villages, and burned their cornfields. It proved your superiority, in spite of your failures.” (pg 25). This shows that colonists needed that power over someone they believed lesser. They couldn’t stand failure. The colonists were not native to the land like the Indians were, and when their methods failed, they couldn’t stand that someone had one-up on them. The colonists could barely survive there, while the Indians, with “inferior” ways, were surviving just fine.
7. “Slavery existed in the African states and it was sometimes used by Europeans to justify their own slave trade. The “slaves” of Africa were more like the serfs of Europe, in other words, like most of the population of Europe. They had rights which slaves brought to America did not have, and they were altogether different” (pg 27). African slaves had more rights than those in America and were not treated in the same ways. Slaves in Africa could marry, own property themselves, own a slave themselves, swear and oath, be a witness and heir to their masters, all of which American slaves could not do. Ashanti slaves even sometimes became adopted and part of the family. John Newton refers to slavery in Africa as “much milder than in the colonies” (pg 27). The Americans used “Chattel” slavery, which is a major difference between the two. Also, in Africa, slaves had an opportunity to be free eventually.
8. Africans were better fit as slaveries than Indians because the Indians were on their own land and Americans were unable to make the Indians work for them. “They were outnumbered, and while, with superior firearms, they could massacre Indians, they would face massacre in return. They could not capture them and keep them enslaved; the Indians were tough, resourceful, and at home in the woods” (pg 25). The Africans were “better fit” because they were from another country, so they did not know much about where they were. The Africans were captured and solid. This was something they were unable to force the Indians to do, and the Indians out numbered the colonists in the first place.
9. When the Africans were coming to America, some of them flung their selves over the edge of the ship in order to get away. Next, the Africans tried to escape by trying to run away at first, in 1640 3 servants tried to run away, and one of them was black. The black servant was charged was said he had to serve his master for the rest of his life (pg 30). Then when protests started, blacks and whites worked together, but then this was taken care of because whites soon believed they were “superior.” Besides running away, the Africans “engaged in sabotage, slowdowns, and subtle forms of resistance which asserted their dignity as human beings” (pg 32). This is another way the Africans tried to escape from their current positions. Rebellions also continued, which made white planters fear the Africans even more. Even though it was “banned,” whites were still involved in the resistance. Conspiracies were formed in order for the Africans to gain their freedom. More ways to escape became joining ship crews for freedom, running away to different colonies as “a free man,” or even joining Indian tribes.
10. The treatment of indentured servants was similar to Africans because they were both “serving” someone who was “superior,” like a master. Their punishments and lives were controlled in basically the same ways. Their punishments ranged from being whipped or abused to being killed. Both groups were expected to do the work and be productive. Each group had little choice in their lives. “Whites and blacks found themselves with common problems, common work, common enemy in their master; they behaved toward one another as equals” (pg 31).
11. Colonial America was similar to Europe because the colonists came from Europe. All they knew was about Europe, and all their information was from Europe at first. Both places were focused on working the land, growing crops, and gaining profit with the helps of serfs or slaves. There was also a large distinction between classes, with the Aristocracy gaining the most land and had power over the lower classes, even though they had a smaller population.
1. His complete lack of caring for others. Columbus didn't care what happened as long as he benefitted. As soon as he landed he thought about how he could find the gold, and BEFORE he landed he gipped Rodrigo out of money by claiming he'd seen signs of land earlier. He kills people who are willing to trade, just not EVERYTHING that he wants. Instead of coming back, from the second voyage, with nothing he decides to fill his ships up with slaves, for something to bring back.
2. One of Zinn's biases is his idea for writing the book. He's playing devil's advocate, trying to make the readers see things from a different view (such as Columbus being a villain, etc.)
3. Note made. Moving on.
4. Zinn says racism in America is a class scorn, that to keep people from banding together one needs to think the other is superior, just like the whites and their perception of the African Americans as nothing. I believe that whites and blacks and coexist (like now, and hopefully even better in the future) but there will always be that one person who will think themselves superior, on either side, making things difficult to coexist perfectly together
5. Sounds good, note made
6. The quote is saying how the colonists were superior (in their minds) yet couldn’t do anything about the fact that “savages” were living easier than they were. They were embarrassed and would slaughter the Indians to feel superior again, but that didn’t help them grow any more food or survive better.
7. In Africa there were slaves but they were though of more as servents, they still had some rights and only became servents for a punishment, compared to America where they were slaves, with no rights, just from the color of their skin. African slaves could marry and, occasionally from working hard and getting forgiven, could become heirs to their master's land. None of that happened in American slavery.
8. Africans were better suited because they were out of their element when they came to America. The Indians knew the land, how to escape and live off it, and were too proud to be broken and become unrebellious slaves. The Africans didn't know the land at all and had a greater chance of being helpless because of their communal life culture, only that they were now alone and broken.
9. One way to escape slavery was to take crazy risks or attempt suicide, such as African Americans leaping off the slave boats to drown rather then be enslaved. Less drastic would be pretending to be sick and weak then escaping, or running away in an attempt to form a new colony of escaped slaves.
10. Black and white slaves and servents were similar in that they were both occasionally accused of conspiracy when something went wrong, because everyone wants a scapegoat. "There are hints that the two despised groups initially saw each other as sharing the same predicament" (pg 37)
11. Colonial America was like feudal Europe because it had a heirarchy of people, there were the plantation owners, then the indentured servents (like serfs) and then the slaves, who were less then the lowest class.
~Chris Sogge~
1. It is incorrect to assume that we have not been educated about the evils of Columbus. Mrs. Bono, for those of us who have had her, made us read the written accounts of the horrible things that Columbus and his men did to the Arawak. We are educated about Columbus and his "human" traits. The worst thing that Columbus did was take advantage of the Arawak. The Arawak would have given Columbus anything he asked for, but Columbus chose to kill them instead. Columbus could have just listened to the Arawak and thanked them for their hospitality but he chose to murder them.
2. Howard Zinn says on page ten of his book that he is telling history from the viewpoint if the slaves and the Indians, and all the people who have been oppressed or wronged. However, Howard Zinn is misleading. He is writing from the Marxist point of view. This means that he has to have a large oppressed underclass and a very small oppressive elite. You can see the undercurrent of Marxism in the first chapters we read. On page 9 Zinn states, “the quiet acceptance of conquest and murder in the name of progress-- is only one aspect of a certain approach to history, in which the past is told from the point of view of governments, conquerors, diplomats, [and] leaders." In this quote, you can see Zinn's distaste for leadership in the form of governments and his distaste for the oppressor, the conqueror. On pages eight and ten, Zinn uses the first person. This means that the book is not going to look at several perspectives. It is Zinn's interpretation of history from a Marxist perspective.
4. Zinn seems to think along the same lines as Edmund Morgan. They see slavery as a tool to prevent rebellion. Zinn and Morgan believe that racial differences were created to establish a social barrier between the white poor and the black slaves. This barrier would then create feelings of hatred and contempt. This barrier would stop a revolution from happening. This argument seems plausible, but I am not sure if I believe the argument. It does seem possible for whites and blacks to live together in harmony.
7. In Africa, slaves were more like feudal serfs than anything else. Slaves had rights and privileges. In Africa, slaves could own land, marry, own other slaves, be witnesses, swear oaths etc. Many times the slave was adopted into the family. Slaves in Africa were people. They had souls. Unlike in the colonies were slaves were property. They were no more than cattle to the plantation owners. Slaves were bought and sold; they had no moral value. They were just a pair of hands and a strong back to do the fieldwork. In the colonies, slaves had no soul.
8. First, no single group of people is better fitted for slavery just because of their skin color or religion. The reason why black slaves were easier to control than Indians was the location of the colonies. In the New World, the Indians were on their own turf. They knew the land and the people. Indians were perfectly capable of just disappearing into the forest and never being found. In addition, Indians had fellow tribesmen near the plantation where they were enslaved. If the white slave owners tried to enslave Indians, the Indians would defend themselves. The black slaves already came pre-conquered for the whites. Black slaves were conquered by their neighbors, then sold to the white slave traders for guns. In addition, when slave traders sold slaves, the traders mixed slaves from different tribes speaking different languages. This mixing of peoples caused few uprisings to occur from "fresh caught" slaves. The African slaves were easier to enslave in the Americas because the Africans were taken away from their homes and families, put into completely new groups of people, and told to work.
1. There are many more "human" characteristics of Columbus than many would like to point out. Another one of these traits was his obvious lust for gold. This universal drive for wealth has always shown the true colors of many men. It is the personal gain that gold can give that drives men like Columbus. Having gold could also be a way to self-justification, and the pressure from previous successful missions could have further driven Columbus to gold.
2. A Bias of Zinn that is shown through his book is his mission to reveal the reality of America, and to show the bad side of its formation. He believes in his untold story, and hopes it will be a different perspective for many historians. His bias is to be away from conventional and every day acceptance. He wanted to show the complete truth. In this, he had to focus on the "bad side" of American history, because he wanted his book to have a distinctly different feel. He fully describes some less than heroic moments for America, while placing much less importance upon some of the great things in American history. It is these things that make him seem more biased toward the bad of America.
3. Has been noted!
4. Zinn states in his book that racism has been more important in shaping a nation than anywhere else, and he challenges that racism is still forming the lives of America. Edmund Morgan says that racism isn't "natural", but a means for social control. I agree with this, because it seems like racism, over time, has been what most societies held on to for control. It was better if you were at least better than someone, and Morgan seems to tap into that need that all members of society seem to have. Then, Zinn asks, "Is it possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred?" I think that it is impossible in our day. Because of our need as people to have status, there will always be a group that is pushed down. Even if we are outwardly accepting, the internal comparisons that we make as people will always separate us from a non-racist world.
5. Noted!
6. This quote on p.25 is great to read. Edmund Morgan gives a completely different perspective than is apparent in that time. Its attacking and sarcastic tone sets it apart, and his saying really shows how desperate the colonists were to be superior. Equality really meant nothing in the New World, and it was not any better than in England. Also, the Indians, growing completely separate from the growing known world, managed to be superior in the ways that really mattered.
7. Slaves in Africa were much different than in the colonies. In Africa, Zinn compares their lives to European serfdom. This was a harsh system, but nothing like the slave life in America. In Africa, slaves at least had some rights, like the ability to marry, own another slave, and own property. They were treated like people, not like the “human cattle” of America. Also, the slaves in Africa would usually have a lasting relationship with their masters, and some would even end up becoming heirs to their masters. It was overall “milder” (p. 27) in Africa than America.
8. Africans were better fit for slavery because of their helpless position in America. Africa, a country with rich, unique tradition, is like nowhere else on earth. Being torn away from the only things they ever knew, the African slaves had nothing to redeem themselves with. Everything (land, plants, food) was different in America. They were easier to take advantage of, because they could not make it in America by themselves. Also, with so many languages in Africa, a distinct sense of unity was torn away. They were so much more vulnerable than the Indians, who already had a sense of superiority above the white people. When colonists began coming to stay with the Indians, they knew that they had something that the colonists lacked. This, plus the knowledge of land, food, and war made the Indians impossible to subdue.
9. In the helpless position they were in, African slaves had many ways that they tried to escape their impossible situation. First, traveling to America was an ordeal in itself, and the methods used on the boats were responsible for countless deaths. Many Africans jumped off of the boats to drown rather than be an American slave. The slaves would fake illness, attacked masters, and plotted in large numbers to kill leaders. Many men ran away into the forest, forming camps of runaways. Slave revolt was one way to drive fear into the plantation leadership as well, and this type of escape plan became more and more apparent.
10. Indentured servants were similar to African slaves in many ways. The slaves, like servants, were psychologically taught to be inferior. They, like servants, were reminded again and again why they were in their position, and showed that servitude was the best way. The most striking similarity, though, was their treatment on the voyage to America. The trip was about the same length, and the servants were given the same terrible treatment as the salves. Many of the passengers died of starvation on packed ships, and the disease and unsanitary conditions were just as appalling. Also, the servants were sold like property, the same way as slaves. Because of the same terrible treatment in America as well, the same type of rebellions started. Whipping was just as common, and seemingly every aspect of their lives were controlled. There was no freedom.
11. Colonial America was similar to feudal Europe in the way of an Aristocracy in a pronounced way. There was almost no social mobility. The poor people in America stayed that way, and there were no rights for Native Americans or Africans. In England, colonies like Georgia were created to get rid of the poor class that was becoming a problem in England. The same thing is apparent in America at the time. The government was unwilling to help the needy, and pushed them and all other “minorities” out of the way to focus on the more important, rich class.
1. Zinn says that Columbus was more a "human" than a "hero." Though, I can see Columbus as more inhuman that human. The way that Columbus pursued the Arawaks and slaughtering all Native Americans in his search for gold could almost be seen as sadistic, one could see him as going out of his way to kill the Natives.
2. Zinn focuses on the negatives rather than the positives. Especially when dealing with Columbus, Zinn seems to take on an almost legalistic point of view. Zinn also "gathers" all of his facts from a single source, thus getting only one angle perception rather than the multiple which would shed much more light on the facts and offer more accurate and specific details.
4. Zinn said that over time, rascicsm was becoming more "practical." and that it's only natural that whites and blacks hate eachother. Edmund, however, sees rascism as a struggle for power, one race trying to justify their dominance over the other. I don't think that it will be possible for whites and blacks to live together with absolutly no rascism between. Even today on commercials, the black man is always the one who loses the bet or who gets caught stealing. Rascism has been infused into the society and seems like it has been bred into people, like we have a natural desire to hate poeple of a differnet origin.
6. Endmond Morgan says that the colonist had the braun, but no brains. Very few listen to the Indians they slaughtered and thus they didn't learn of the essential tips needed to grow in the colonies. They thought "These people are brown, they must not know much" and they killed them.
7. In Africa, a slave was, first of all, attained through conquest not by just going next door and enslaving someone. The slaves weren't owned in masses and forces on plantations to harvest. Slaves were more like household servant, and had priviledges. If their paster was away, they might be left in charge of the business he owned. A slave would occasionally be freed if he/she worked hard enough and slaves could buy their own freedom. Slaves were never worked to death in Africa and were sometimes set to work as nannies when they became to old to do work around the house.
8. The africans were better fitted to be slaves than the Indians because of their proximity (or lach thereof) to their homeland. An Indian could easily flee back to his/her tribe if he/she managed to escape. An african would have a hell of a time returning back to Africa. Also, the Africans were brought out of their comfort zone, so the human sense of submission was ignited by their lack of knowledge of their surrounding area.
9. Some Africans would try to escape before even reaching their final destination by jumping off their ships. Those who still wanted to escape once in the Americas would either feign sickness and flee as soon as their master let his guard down or simply make a break for it while working on a plantation.
10. Indentured servants and African slaves were similar in the fact that they were property. The indentured servants were bound to their land and slaves were bound to their master. Both were treated harshly and were kept in bad condition, just healthy enough to work for 16 hours a day. Indentured servants, however, had a greater chance of being freed, but soon had to sell themselves again because they had no land of their own.
11. Colonial America was similar to Feudal Europe in the fact that there were the lords (masters) and their peasant workers (slaves/servants). There were even little fiefdoms in the colonies, a.k.a. multiple plantations owned by a single individual but each had it's own overseer. The slaves and servants rarely traded hands and often worked on the same lnad for their entire life.
1. One of Chritopher Columbuses "human" qualities was his extreme selfishness and disregard for anyone but himself. He genocided the Arawaks so that he could find gold and become rich and move himself up in society. He exaggerated the accounts of the west indies to the king and queen himself so that he could gain favor from them.
4. I think that racism is so ingrained in the minds of some people, that it would be impossible to erradicate it completely. Also, racism has been taught subconciously over the years to many different generations. The dark or black, is considered evil, bad and disgusting while whitenes and light are good and are the heroes. PEople need a scape goat. they need someone to blame and the african americans and other minorities happened to be chosen.
7. African slavery was very different fro mcolonial slavery. Slaves in Africa were treated as people, they had hearts, they needed to be cared for. In te colonies, slaves were livestock. they got absolutely no rights. They belonged to the master, and once they were sold, they belonged to their new master and had to do whatever they were told.
8. The colonists chose Africans over Native Americans for slavery not because the Africans were amazingly physically fit for the work, but because the Natives new the terrain. The Native American people could escape much more easily due to the fact that they new their way around America better than hte colonists ever would. They had he home court advantage and could lose the colonists in a heartbeat.
9. One method African slaves used to escape was pretty ingenious. They would befriend groups of native people. then, when they wanted to escape, they would have their native friends tell them the best plan of action. then, when they did escape, they would become a part of that village/ tribe. In this way, they were not totally stranded once they escaped.
10. Indentured servants and slaves are alike in that, both had to do exactly what their master wanted. However, i do not think it is fair to compare them. Slaves were totally mistreated andwere not released after they completed a cetain number of years for their master. Slaves also did much more dirty and hard work than indentured servants.
11. A way that America was similair to feudal europe was that slaves were treated as the serfs were. Serfs had to work the land and had to work the same plot of land until their lord told them they could leave, or they could finally pay their way to freedom. It created a social ladder. Slaves were under their masters. that was what it ammmounted to in the colonies.
1.) One of Columbus' more human qualities, as described by Zinn, was his complete lack of kindness. In fact, it was quite the opposite with Columbus. He was selfish and cruel, as was clearly displayed in his mass murdering of the Arawak people. Despite the Arawaks being generally kind and welcoming, Columbus killed many of their people for selfish reasons. It was gold he wanted, and the Arawaks were just looked at as a distraction for Columbus' dreams of wealth and power.
2.) One of Zinn's biases, as clearly displayed by his description on page ten, is strongly for Indian and Africans, which will obviously make it anti-european/white people. This bias is clearly displayed in his description of Columbus and his expeditions. He focuses on the mass murders and cruelty committed by Columbus. While the facts and information are probably true, it is a totally different view of this American "hero'.
7.) There were many and major differences between the treatment of slaves in Africa versus America. First of all, African slaves had more rights. They were able to marry and own land, which contrasted sharply with the slave values in the colonies. Additionally, American slavery just took slavery to a whole new level. In Africa, slavery was generally small, and the slaves were treated more as servants. However, American slavery was massive. Slaves were brought over by the hundreds, and one plantation owner could be in charge of dozens of slaves by themselves. Working conditions were terrible, and they were forced to work for incredibly long periods of time. To put it simply, American slavery was an atrocity and not at all the same as African slavery.
8.) The major reason the Americans chose to enslave Africans rather than Americans was because Africans were more controllable. They were far away from their homeland and the land of America was foreign to them, making it much more difficult to escape. Also, because the african slaves were seperated from the major African population, there was no way for non-enslaved Africans to form any type of revolt. If they enslaved Indians, on the other hand, other non slave Indians would make attacks on the slave owners.
9.) One method slaves used to escape was to throw themselves overboard on the boat going to the colonies. Another technique to escape slavery was to fake major illness, so they were seen as useless to their owners. Finally, another "escape" from slavey was to kill themselves.
10.) Indentured servants were similar to African slaves in the way that their treatment was decent compared to American slavery. Both groups were eventually allowed freedom and the right to their own land. While conditions were better than American slaves, they were still both subject to very harsh practices like whipping and starving.
1. In any modern-day country, nationalism is enforced through pride of the foundations of one’s country. Christopher Columbus is often portrayed as a hero, but Zinn aptly points out many of Columbus’s more “human” qualities, revealing him not to be the invincible man previous stories have made him to be. One human quality of Columbus, besides his obvious greed, belief in white superiority, lust for gold, and cruelty…was the error of stupidity and ignorance. Our national hero’s calculations for sailing to Asia were thousands and thousands of miles off target! While it is true that navigators of this time did not have the most accurate of equipment, peoples of previous civilizations hundreds of years prior were able to calculate the diameter and circumference of the earth within miles of the correct number. While one does not have to be a genius to be considered a hero, shouldn’t the previous idol of America at least possess common sense?
2. Zinn’s bias is perfectly summed up by the quote “The cry of the poor is not always just but if you don’t listen to it, you will never know what justice is.” Zinn explains that he prefers to unveil the historical side of the story you rarely hear without being overly sympathetic to those points of view. For example, Zinn says “When we read the history books given to children in the United States, it all starts with heroic adventure, there is no bloodshed, and Columbus Day is a celebration. True to his word (and bias) Zinn gives us accounts of the atrocities committed which are rarely shown in the highly romanticized conquest of America as he recounts examples such as two “Christians” decapitating two Native American boys just for fun.
4. Racism, a pervasive and vulgar feeling which permeates American history, is a national state which is bred by situation, not natural progression, argues Zinn. He makes the convincing point that it was likely that slavery in America, and thus racism, sprouted from the need of settlers on the brink of survival, the helplessness of Africans stripped from their homeland, the immense profit to be gained from slave trade as well as utilizing them on plantations, the want of superiority over other humans, the tight control system designed against slave revolts, and the harsh legal punitive measures taken to prevent intermixing of white and black. Dislike and fear of another race can only go so far, and it is false to presume that the massive enslaving of millions upon millions of Africans combined with the above factors was, as some historians argue, “natural.” Zinn asks if it is possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred, and based on his arguments, the answer would be yes. When put in similar perilous circumstances, the tendency to work with one another, despite race, has often been observed. The mere fact that so many laws had to be put in place simple to prohibit the intermixing of races proves that. In 1663, black slaves and white indentured servants teamed together in a rebellion for freedom. A few white free men aided black slaves in attempts at freedom and black male slaves often ran off with white women. In other historical accounts it has been made clear that white males often took black mistresses as well. These glitches in the history of American racism shed evidence and hope on Zinn’s question that black and white peoples can live in harmony.
6. Edmund Morgan provides an interesting take into the feelings of the settlers in the New World in regards to the Native Americans. It was the white colonists need to exemplify superiority over the Native Americans which fueled the cruelty which has been exposed today. The colonists believed themselves to be civilized while the natives were primitive and savage. It was, therefore, extremely frustrating to the settlers when their seemingly superior technologies failed to produce results. When their own community members deserted to Native American villages, the settlers retaliated by violently torturing and murdering them. While this display proved dominance in the noble aspect of violence and cruelty, the colonists still failed to reap a bountiful harvest.
7. The major difference between African treatments of slaves as opposed to the American treatment of slaves was the characteristic of humane vs. chattel slavery methods. African slaves were given liberties such as marrying, owning his own property, owning his own slave, being allowed to bear witness, as well as becoming the heir to his masters. Basically, African slaves were still considered human. Slaves in the Americas, however, were deemed as simply a piece of property, a personal belonging or brute, rather than a human. The treatment of slaves in America was abominable and anything but humane (such as two of every five black slaves dying while marching under ship and gunpoint…and that’s even before they arrived in America).
8. Several factors made Africans the ideal slave, as opposed to the Native Americans. The first was familiarity. Native Americans held superiority over the white settlers as they held deep knowledge of the land and what it took to survive. Their resistance to slavery was more successful because they were on their home court. African slaves, on the other hand, had been stripped of their home and customs, and were forced to live in a new land with unfamiliar language, clothing, and heritage. Zinn claims that this “helplessness made enslavement easier.”
9. African attempts at escaping enslavement began even while the slave traders were still in Africa. There were accounts of Negroes so adamant upon resisting slavery that they would drown themselves rather than be captured. The Africans in America escaped slavery by two prominent methods: revolt and running away. The constant threat of slave revolts kept slave owners on their toes as one account claimed the slaves to become “killers, arsonists, and insurrectionists.” Runaway slaves held different methods of escape as well. Slaves recently shipped from Africa would ban together and attempt to establish their own villages on the frontier of mildly explored boundaries. Later generation slaves, on the other hand, took an “every man for himself” approach, and would flee individually and simply attempt to pass as a free man.
10. The treatment of white indentured servants and black slaves were very similar initially. Both were impounded with the resounding thought that they were inferior to their white masters. White indentured servants were oftentimes treated as badly as black slaves, as both were viewed as property, not human beings. This similarity in hardship and poor social status brought the two groups together as white indentured servants were known to band with black slaves in hope of rebellions and freedom. However, as white masters noticed this growing bond, they took measures to further separate white from black as a law was passed in Virginia granting more rights to servants once their indenture was over. Thus, the white ruling class ensured that the indentured servant class was to remain inferior, but that blacks were even more inferior than the servants. Additionally, a law was never passed to make it legal to dismember white indentured servants, as was enacted in the Virginia Code of 1705.
11. African empires of this period shared a similar feudal system to that of Western Europe (and Japan). The system was based upon the relationship between lords and vassals, but instilled a more communal spirit than the feudalism of Europe. The lords of African “manors” did not possess the weapons necessary to enforce the malicious obedience the European lords held over their vassals and serfs. Additionally, the thought of private property in Africa was a foreign one, and punishments for theft were much lighter than in the European community. AS one Congolese leader joked, “What is the penalty in Portugal for anyone who puts his feet on the ground?”
1. The way in which Zinn depicts Columbus and the information about him is actually not new for me, but Zinn does go into much greater detail and I learned many additional things about him. A good deal of the darker human traits of Columbus have already been mentioned, but one fact that makes him very human is that he was completely wrong in his assumption that he had reached Asia and he falsely gave the name of Indians to the Arawaks.
2. One of Zinn’s biases is revealed outright when we writes, “this book will be skeptical of governments and their attempts.” I agree with Elizabeth that there is a clear undercurrent of Marxism in the way that Zinn writes. He does not hide the fact that he personally finds many governments are not established for the common interests or the good of their people and that he will express this in the way he writes his book. Instead of examining government, Zinn’s point of view is through the eyes of the ones who were not victorious, of the oppressed, and of the workers.
4. Zinn mentions that the earliest established relationship between blacks and whites in America was one in which blacks were mostly inferior as slaves. However, there was not at first much of a difference between the status of slaves and indentured white servants, and there are records of them “fraternizing” together and of interracial marriages being fairly common. The rulers of the colonies were scared that the poor whites and blacks would band together to overthrow them and so it can be said that colonial rulers were instigating racism in order to keep the two groups separate. This was accomplished through laws that forbade them to have sexual relationships and by usually favoring whites; for example, if there was a rebellion, sometimes the whites were pardoned while the blacks received punishments. Edmund Morgan describes on page 56 this type of racism that was “a realistic device for control” instead of something “natural.” I agree that the plantation owners strived to make more racism than there actually was to separate poor whites and blacks, but at the same time, it was a natural belief at the time held by the slave-owning whites that blacks were inferior to them. However, given what Zinn has written, it seems like blacks and whites can live with each other without hatred, seeing the examples of how many interracial marriages there were at the time and the fact that whites and blacks had to be kept apart because their masters thought they were together too much.
6. Edmund Morgan’s quote explains the biggest reason he thought that the colonists used violence against the Indians. The Indians had lived in the colonies for hundreds of years and were familiar with all the workings of the land and how to most easily reap it’s benefits. They probably made it look easy to the colonists, who had to struggle to survive. The colonists were very much out of their element; they had fled England maybe not understanding the difficulties they would face in starting an entire community from scratch. It took many years for the Americans to succeed in the New World, and it involved many dying, such as the winter of 1609, named “the starving time,” when 600 colonists were whittled down to 60. Morgan explains that the colonists’ early failures in spite of the fact that they thought of themselves as superior to the Indians led to frustration and desperation and the lashing out of colonists against the Indians.
7. In Africa, there was not such a distinct dividing line between the master and the servant. Zinn writes that they were more like the serfs of Europe than the slaves of America, seeing as they
had more rights: the right to marry, to own property, to own their own slaves, and to become heir to their masters in some cases, which was unheard of in the colonies. There was also the possibility of the African slave to become a member of the family he had served. African slaves in Africa were also comfortable with the culture and land of the area in which they served, seeing as it was probably their native area.
8. Africans were better suited for slavery in the colonies than the Indians because of the fact that Africans were thousands of miles away from their homes and in a culture that was very foreign to them. They knew nothing about the lay of the land and were away from their families and could not speak the language of the colonies. Indians had lived in the region for many, many years and knew the land and the nature much better than the colonists did. They also had tribes and family members who would no doubt attempt rescue missions and raids if they were captured. All in all, the disconnected African would cause fewer short-term problems than the Indians.
9. Some Africans tried to escape as early as during the passage to America by jumping of off the ships and drowning themselves. Slaves in America escaped both alone and in groups of other slaves and sometimes white slaves. “Under the pretense of feasts and brawls,” groups of slaves would convene to try to form a plan of escape. Some of these plans centered around stealing guns and ammunition to use against whites during their escape. If they succeeded, some escaped into the wilderness and tried to establish small communities there, while others escaped to towns to try and pass themselves off as free men.
10. Both indentured servants and African slaves were considered inferior to their masters and so lived in somewhat similar situations. Considering that laws had to be passed to keep white and black slaves away from each other, it is reasonable to think that it was not uncommon for them to “fraternize,” and they did intermarry with one another from time to time as previously mentioned. However, this relationship was discouraged through acts passed in 1705 which placed indentured white servants above black slaves on the social ladder and reducing the things that they shared in common.
11. Colonial America operated in some ways like feudal Europe or as an aristocracy because there existed a privileged minority who ruled the majority of land. For example, in the New York colony around 1700, three-quarters of the land was owned by 30 people who effectively controlled the lives of their tenants, and about the same time, 50 families had most of the power and land in Virginia.
1. Taking advantage of the Indians in that they were "so naïve and so free with their possessions that no one who has not witnessed them would believe it," Columbus uses the Indians to his gain and to mask the fact and divert attention away from his mistake in finding "Asia."
6. In Edmund Morgan's quote, he makes an attempt in justifying why the colonists were so cruel to the Indians. Through everything, the colonists believed they were superior to the Indians due to the fact that they were civilized and the Indians were savages. However, once a selected few of colonists realized that the Indians had a much more efficient way in living that required less labor, they joined the Indians to live with them. This not only challenged the point that the Americans were not as superior as they thought, but was also disloyalty. As retaliation, the colonists found just reasons for killing the Indians, torturing them, and burning down their villages and cornfields. In the end, Morgan points out that although the Americans thought they had sought revenge, they still did not grow as much corn.
8. Since the Africans were less accustomed to the New World than the colonists were, the Africans were extremely helpless in this wilderness of a land. Also, the colonists preferred to enslave the Africans because although "Africa lost 50 million human beings to death..." (pg29), the Americans received a huge profit in transporting them overseas; this carelessness toward the fact that Americans were killing this African slaves was justified by the fact that they believed there was a great availability of blacks.
9. In order to escape, African slaves ran away in groups rather than individually like American slaves. Some escapes by taking weapons to defend themselves and were prepared to be out in the wilderness for awhile since they took with them food and clothes. Also, since Africa slaves accounted for a great number of the American population, they could easily band together and start rebellions that if they grow so much out of control, they could make a big impact. However, there were slaves that never saw freedom since laws stated that if a slave did not return to its master shortly after attempting to run away, then they were free game for anyone just to shoot them and there.
1. One of the human qualities of Columbus discussed by Zinn would be his want for fame and fortune or rather greed. He set off on his journey to find riches of gold in Asia and was driven by the rewards of 10% of the profit and governing rights over the new found land. The mass murdering of the Arawaks was only a minor occurrence to Columbus because he was so blinded by the want of riches and fame.
2. The one point of view of Zinn’s that really stuck out to me was the way accounts and people can lie about the past. By simply just omitting a fact or event can be kind of taken as lying, and as Zinn said, “lying or quiet omissions takes the risk of discovery.” When the person studying the account of events realizes that something is missing, that one point of view is gone, it can create a bias towards that author. Zinn also points out that pointing out a wide range of facts in the presence of a frowned upon event or person, like Columbus and his mass murder, isn’t trying to cover anything up, but rather show that the other things that happened and were achieved shouldn’t be put aside and not realized. Zinn also states that with each account of history there will always be a bias and that it is basically inevitable, and he also states that his perspective of the following chapters will be from the oppressed, rather than Boorstin’s focus on the oppressors, view.
8. The African slaves that became a huge source of profit for the colonists in contrast to the white man or Indian because of the lack of initial resistance. The African villages and towns taking part in the slave trade were eager to make nice profit and because the passage over to the colonies was so scaring mentally, physically, and ripped the slaves of their language and culture, the colonist had an initial hold. The colonists of Jamestown would rather spend time on the availability of the black slave population than try to arm up enough to be able to control the Indians, who had more power and knowledge of the land which gave them the upper hand.
9. Since the slaves were so cramped and jammed in the small quarters on the ships of the Europeans massive numbers escaped in one way or another before they reached the New World. Sometimes the shackles around their necks gave the sensation of suffocation, which wasn’t helped by the fact that there were too many Africans in an area, and slaves went mad, sometimes killing other Africans so they could breathe or jumping off the ship into the ocean. Drowning was by far a better end than the suffering that surrounded them on the boats. Also, when the slaves that did survive arrived in the colonies groups started breaking free and running away, trying to find a way back to Africa. Slaves born in America had the extra incentive to run and try to become a free citizen, and sometimes ended up creating small villages out in the mountains and acquiring weapons and ammunition.
10. One comparison seen between the indentured servant population of Europe and the “slaves” of the African population is the treatment of both groups. The slaves in Africa were given more rights, to own property, to marry, to not be enslaved or forced to labor for the rest of their life, just like indentured servants in Europe had more rights. Both groups weren’t servants for life, and they still held human qualities with their owners, which can be inferred from the fact that they did have rights.
11. The way in which colonial America was similar to the feudal system of Europe can be seen through the Fundamental Constitutions written by John Locke. He set up a system of eight barons, that were upper class and the only ones allowed to be governor, who controlled 40% of the land. When a rebellion against the land distribution caused a monopoly of the upper class to take place over the land the system of the poor working for rent under the wealthy lords is seen once again.
1) One of Columbus’s human traits was his allowance for false representation of his expedition. On his return he didn’t mind that his story was being told with a large hole in it that simply shoved genocide in the closet. Just like any celebrity trying to hide a conspiracy today, Christopher Columbus didn’t mind the fact that the murder committed by him and his crew was casually left out of many accounts.
2) Zinn’s bias is that he favors the representation of the lower class and also minority groups. This can become a bias because he may lack the attention in situations for those in middle and upper classes. It can also reflect an established attitude he may have for aristocrats and higher classes that most likely is negative. It is important to recognize this so the book can be read in a cautious air.
6) The quote by Edmund Morgan emphasizes the fact that demonstrations of superiority really gave the Americans little gain when dealing with the Indians. It goes to show that no matter how sophisticated technology can get, sometimes one must learn from those who thrive on simplicity. The mistake made by Americans in encountering Native Americas was taking jealousy out through genocide, which may have satisfied some people, for the colonists, they “still did not grow much corn.”
8) Africans could be enslaved much easier because of their having no society to return to after being brought to America. Native Americans could escape back to the familiar land where they came from. But for African Americans, there was no equal and similar culture anywhere on the continent. No one spoke their language or had their culture. Thus they were forced to stick together as slaves.
10) Indentured servants and black servants were common in the fact that they had the same work and the same master to despise and want escape from. This created a sense of equality between the two types of servants, regardless of race. This common struggle allowed a bond to form between the two and this was quickly observed by higher authority and laws created against the fraternization of whites with blacks.
1. One of Columbus' more human qualities was his excessive greed. I saw this exemplified when a sailor, Rodrigo, spotted land early in the morning. The first person to spot land was supposed to be given a reward of 10,000 maravedis every year for life. However, Columbus couldn't stand for the sailor getting the reward and claimed that the night before he had seen light in the distance and took the reward instead. (I suppose he just decided that seeing the land the night before wasn't important enough to mention before Rodrigo saw it...) And it's correct to assume that in elementary school, that's what I was taught, but as Elizabeth said, since middle and high school we have been told about the gruesome things Columbus did.
2. (Not sure if this is what you're asking here) Zinn's point of view in this book is that of the "victims" instead of the history of the "heroes" that we're used to hearing. He prefers to "try to tell the story of the discovery of America from the viewpoints of the Arawaks, o the constitution from the standpoint of the slaves, of Andrew Jackson as seen by the Cherokees..." I recall Mrs. Bono telling us that it's always the winners who write the history, so Zinn is trying to tell the story from the standpoints we don't hear as often. He also says he wants to try not to make it a romanticized story to "grieve for the victims and denounce the executioners." He also says the the oppressors were victims themselves in the long run and the victims were also oppressors.
4. I think it is possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred. When you look at little kids they don't care what color skin the other has, they just go about their business. Sometime while growing up, they have the racist notions given to them and some will choose to accept them. If it is possible for us to live without hatred when we're younger it must be possible to live without them when we're older, but with society the way it is, it would be difficult for a child to never be exposed to racist ideas at some point in their lives.
6. I agree with the quote in that that was most likely the reasons that the colonists did what they did. They saw their lack of superiority as shameful since they had it in their mind that they were superior. However I don't agree that this was the correct or moral thing to do. It's obvious that the Native Americans knew how to live here and the "civilized" Europeans didn't. Things would have been drastically different if the colonists weren't prideful and tried to learn from the Native Americans rather than hurt them for understanding the land better. As the saying goes, "Pride before a fall." Had they not let their pride intervene, maybe the settlers could have had more peaceful relations with the Native Americans and not have gone through rough times like the "starving times."
7. Slaves in the Americas were treated as property whereas slaves in Africa were actually treated as people. They could own property, marry, own slaves of their own, swear oaths, be a competent witness, and sometimes become an heir to their master. Sometimes the salve's family would intermarry with that of the master. Slavery in Africa wasn't racial. However, this is not to say that slavery in Africa was comfortable. They were still harshly treated and had to work hard, but they did have more rights.
8. Africans were more fitted to slavery in the Americas than the native Americans because they were in greater numbers, they were in a state of mental and physical helplessness and they were unfamiliar with the land. There were so many Africans coming from Africa that it was easier to use them as slaves than it was the naive Americans. The journey bringing them to the Americas was so difficult that if they didn't die during the passage, they were in a state unfit for retaliation or escape. They were sick, tired, weak, in general miserable. The Native Americans also lived in America so they were more familiar with it, making it easier for them to find places to hide after an escape.
9. Some Africans would jump overboard in passage because death was a better option, they decided, than being tortured in slavery. If they escaped from a plantation, they would sometimes go to a different city and pretend to be a free man. There were cases when slaves would kill their overseer or master in order to escape, but if caught that would bring them certain death. Others would make plans either in a group or alone to make an escape and live on their own or join a group of Native Americans.
10. Indentured servants were treated similar to African slaves in that they were looked down upon. In the quote on page 37, the indentured servants are called "social (but white) inferiors." They would be punished by having extended terms of work They were feared like the slaves because they were put to difficult work that no one else would do, so they would fraternize and sympathize with slaves. They had common problems an d the same enemy in their master.
1. Though Christopher Columbus is often taught to have been the savior of the west, or at least in some respects, the prophet, for it was supposedly his work which brought the settlers to the America’s, the light which history truly casts upon him shows a very different persona. From Mass Murderer of the Arawaks, to the incessant greed in the search for gold, Columbus rarely showed traits which one associates with Hero’s. On top of this, his racism was perhaps the most prominent of his negative traits- Though the Arawaks and other groups didn’t have firearms because they were not necessary and hadn’t yet been developed or imagined, Columbus puts it down to nothing more than their inferior race.
2. Identify one of Zinn's biases and point of view?
-One bias of Zinn’s is that he speaks very communistically, that he always writes to the viewpoint of the workers, the downtrodden masses, rarely of the justifications of the elite in their choices, though often, it must be said, there is little justification.
4. What does Zinn say about racism in America? Look at Edmund Morgan's view on racism on p. 56. Would you agree? Zinn then asks, "Is it possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred?" What do you think, given what Zinn has written?
-Edmund Morgan points out that racism is not a “natural” occurrence, meaning that it really had little to do with race, but more that it came out of the unending class struggles of the time. Due to this, I believe, that racism is possible to overcome. People might still have inborn prejudices now, but think on it- where did these prejudices come from? People repeating them. Oral tradition, you might say. If our generation, or perhaps one further down the line, decides to stop repeating them, allowing the younger generation to be exposed to them, then these prejudices will die out.
6. Pay attention to Zinn's quotation by Edmund Morgan on p. 25.
It shows the pain of the settlers, how their rampant murder of thousands of Native Americans was in truth, nothing more than killing in frustration and envy of what the Natives could accomplish, which you could not. This, I think, is the crux of the racism issue, when one starts to blame another for their own short fallings, its only a few small steps from blaming an individual or a small group to blaming their community, to blaming their race.
7. What were some of the differences in how slaves were treated in Africa (by Africans) and in the colonies?
-In Africa, slavery was much more “mild” than it was in the colonies. For example, slaves were usually only taken at war time, often they were more of indentures, accepted into families, treated hospitably, fed well, not overworked, especially not to the point of near death as in many plantations. By contrast, in the colonies, slaves were treated infinitely worse before they even arrived, by means of the middle passage. They were treated as livestock, yet worse. People usually take pains to makes sure their livestock have room to move and stay healthy and fed on long voyages, even this wasn’t done for the slaves, they were chained up, rarely fed, forced to stay in holds with the dead, decaying, and dying, listening to the unending moans, screams and wails of those around them. Then once in the colonies, they were treated as Chattel, and nothing more. They were forced to work until they were close to dead, fed little more than needed to keep them alive, and sometimes not even that much. They were not counted as human, so inhuman punishment and treatment came naturally to all of the slaveholders.
8. Why were Africans better fitted for slavery then Indians?
-The main reason was that the African slaves were out of their element. They had been treated terribly, brought thousands of miles, to lands distant and unknown to them, abused and disregarded, and their wills broken. The Indians, however, were still on their land, if they escaped, they could run back to their tribes, or neighboring tribes to help them survive, thus their will was much more difficult to brake, they were harder to tame, and thus were unfitted for the Chattel slavery of the colonies.
9. What were some of the methods Africans slaves used to escape?
-Slave revolts were always a constant fear to the Slave owners, and as such, as much as possible, slaves would attempt to create large scale revolts to strike fear into their masters hearts. They would fight back, run away, kill their enslavers when possible, and when they escaped, if possible they would make enclaves in the forest, or go to live with native Americans.
10. What ways were the treatment of indentured servants similar to African slaves?
-For both servants and slaves, they were trained, taught and constantly reminded of their inferiority, and perhaps inhumanity. They were constantly under pressure to give the best work and most effort they could, in the hopes it might save them from a visit to the whipping post. Further, on the trip from Europe to America and Africa to America, both the slaves and Indentures were treated terribly, packed in with little more regard than crates and boxes, with somewhat the same motive; pack in as many as possible.
11. Give an example of how colonial America was similar to feudal Europe, or operated more as an aristocracy.
- A striking example of the similarities of feudal Europe (or feudal Japan, really any feudal area) was the lack of social mobility. Serfs in feudal Europe were much the same as slaves and indentures in colonial America. They were forced to work, for no wages as they owed their lives to their liege lords/plantation owners, they could not escape, save by some miracle (somehow being freed or being raised in status by a noble.) Similarly, the working class was oppressed by the nobility, or by the bourgeoisie, as they were taxed heavily, pushed down, and escaping to the upper echelons of society in both was difficult.
1. Would it be incorrect to assume that you all were taught in your earlier classes what a great man Christopher Columbus was[?] We even have a holiday for him. However, Zinn focuses more on Columbus'[s] more "human" qualities. Please list one of those qualities, and do not repeat one that has already been posted by your classmates.
One of Columbus’s “human” qualities was his quest for notoriety and prestige for finding a new trade route to the West Indies and then later for “discovering” the “New World”
2. Identify one of Zinn's biases and point of view?
Throughout the book, Zinn frequently refers to “class” struggle as the momentum-providing factor of history. “The history of any country, presented as the history of a family, conceals fierce conflicts of interest…between conquerors and conquered, masters and slaves, capitalists and workers, dominators and dominated in race and sex.” (10) This presents to me that the author shares the Marxist view that one’s class or race or sex is the determinative factor of one’s humanity. Zinn, throughout chapter five, refers, contemptuously, to the race and the sex and the class of the founding fathers. Throughout chapter eight, Zinn regularly refers to American troops as “Anglo-American” with a contemptuous air directed towards their race. Zinn also continually portrays the rich as the “bad guys” by only giving one side of any given strike/conflict; that side being of the poor/workers.
4. What does Zinn say about racism in America? Look at Edmund Morgan's view on racism on p. 56. Would you agree? Zinn then asks, "Is it possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred?" What do you think, given what Zinn has written?
Race is an inconsequential factor of a human being. Not only does it not reflect on one’s character, personality, or beliefs but to think that it does is highly illogical and rather stupid. In my opinion I would have to say that racism has all but died out and it is quickly on its way to the ash heap of history, however, by continually claiming that racism still exists it inadvertently gives the dying body of racism a shot of adrenaline, making it live a few moments longer than it needs to.
6. Pay attention to Zinn's quotation by Edmund Morgan on p. 25.
It does rather make sense; logic does tell us that a more scientific/advanced method of doing something will yield more fruits of labor. But if the tools we rely on fail us miserably and our “less” advanced neighbors are thriving, obviously we would feel cheated or angry.
9. What were some of the methods Africans slaves used to escape?
Since large-scale revolt was nearly impossible due to Southerners inherent fear of said revolt and a well-armed and racist militia, slaves had to make their escape attempts in small groups and by the cover of night with the help of outside groups such as the Underground Railroad.
10. What ways [was] the treatment of indentured servants similar to African slaves?
Both groups, from an early age, were indoctrinated with their own inferiority, constantly belittled, constantly overworked, and constantly punished.
11. Give an example of how colonial America was similar to feudal Europe, or operated more as an aristocracy.
The similarity between America and feudal Europe can best be seen in Virginia, where the Creoles there attempted to set themselves up in a similar manner as the aristocrats in Europe. Much like in Europe, one individual or a family would own large partitions of land on which numerous farmers worked and paid rent to the individual/family.
1. I found it funny when I read your part about how great columbus was, for this very true up until my Npa education with the Bono's. On this point though Zinn did look at more of Columbus's human traits, or qualities. One human quality that Columbus possessed was a serious obsession with gold. On page 2 it mentions the imformation that columbus wanted most "where is the gold."
2. A strong biase that I noticed within Zinns text is a lack of soures and a habit of making the Europeans and the founding a negtive experience. "Was all this bloodshedand deceit-from Columbusto Cortes, Pizzaro,the Puritans-a necessity forthe human race to progress from savagery to civilization." (17) Note the very negative tone presented
3. okay
4. Edmund and Zinn are both saying that racism could not have been avoided, and that someone wil always be racist, and that it is a "device for control" (56)Zinn also states that slavery is a way to make concessions from the middle class without hurting their image at all. (57)
5.okay
6. I found Edmund's example of what happened very sad, and thanks to him I can picture how things proceeded to happen. I particularrly enjoyed the part about still not growing much corn, so they did all this but what was the point, what did it bring you.
7. One might say that all in all the slavery in Africa was much better than the slavery in America. As wierd as it is to be referring to slavery as better I mean that the slavery In Africa was not as crude as the Slavery in America. The African slaves had much better treatement. African slaves did not lead a plandation lifestyle, and it was much less destructive (of humans and say family ties.) (28)
8. The Africans presented better slaves for the Americans because they were from another country completly new to the land and were totally dependent upon their masters. If it were a Native American slave then they would have known the land, where to got to hide, how to hide, and not to mention the fact that the Nates would have put up great resistance in numbers if they were enslaved.
9. One of the most common ways of escaping slavery was to run away with other slaves. Rebellions also took place along with feigning severe sickness. The slaves were treated so poorly that some even commited suicide or made attempts to escape knowing that even if they were caught a sentence of death would be better than remaining a slave.
10. Both the endentured servants and african slaves were being forced to work for a master. Both work was in most cases involved intense labor and punishments for lack of work, incorrect work, or laziness.
11. America and Feudal Europe were very similiar in the fact that they both feature a strong class system, with upper class, middle class, slaves/servants ect.
Early Chapters
1. The glorified version of Christopher Columbus is not all it is cracked up to be. One of the qualities that brings him down from the thrown that has been implanted in our heads, is his sexuality. Columbus had extreme sexual needs. To satisfy these needs in the New World Columbus raped and captured native women from local tribes. What is even worse and slightly confusing is that he was so desperate for sexual dominance that he was willing to do it with a woman who he felt was inferior and that he felt racist towards. This tells of his character that he liked to be dominant over the helpless and was so desperate for sex he would go so low as to be with a native “savage” Arawak.
2. In Zinn’s early chapters you can read his overall feeling of sympathy for the Native Americans. He seems to believe that the Spanish were always and completely in the wrong. This is proved, in one way, through the amount of time and respect that is devoted to Las Casas and his writing. Also, on page 6 Zinn says, “Total control led to total cruelty.” The word total here is Zinn’s emphasis and shows the true brutality of the Spanish. The whole first chapter goes on to describe the Indians’ sufferings including: the Aztecs, the Peruvians, the Powhatans, and the Pequots. This is biasness because although Zinn supports his feelings, he writes little of Indian counterattacks or the fact that Natives were not always peaceful.
4. On page 23 Zinn comments, “There is not a country in world history in which racism has been more important, for so long a time, as the United States.” Morgan’s view on racism is described as a “realistic use of control” by the “freemen”. He says that racism is not (at the beginning) an issue of color but just a result of class scorn. I would agree with this. Proven by history, the people in control create racist notions to maintain power and give reasons for their brutality. Paranoia and greediness for power feed racism. Based on Zinn’s writings it seems highly unlikely that the hatred between blacks and whites will ever die. On the end of the blacks I can understand the resentment they must feel for their sake as well as their ancestors. Today in America, racism towards blacks from the white perspective is greatly looked down upon. However, this does not stop it. Racists remain rooted in America. Although, the chances of racism disappearing completely are small, I have hope that we will see it die eventually. Even now we make new steps in society to end this, such as Obama’s presidency. Racism will end someday with the changing of modern times and notions.
6. Zinn’s quotation from Morgan made me see how arrogant and selfish the colonists really were. It also upsets me that, as a child, in the media I saw Natives portrayed as savages and the colonists as the dominant figures. From history and this quote, I have learned that the Natives were actually advanced and had mastered the conditions of the New World. If the colonists had opened their eyes I believe the Native knowledge could have benefited them greatly.
Taylor Oster 2009
Early Chapters continued
7. African slavery was much different that American slavery. African slavery was more like serfs of Europe. In Africa slaves had basic rights. In America conditions were much worse. Slaves had no rights, no family ties, and no future (other than lifelong labor). They suffered from extreme racism and abuse and reduced to non-human. Therefore the excuses of the slave traders were really poor reasons to institute slavery and the trade.
8. Africans were better fitted for slavery than the Indians for two main reasons. One was the availability of the Africans. After massive populations of Natives had died from disease there was a lack in slave resources. The African slave trade was highly available and profitable. The second reason for the better fit of African slaves was due to the Middle Passage. The traumatic, disgusting, and despicable treatment of the Africans from Africa to America left the surviving blacks demoralized and broken mentally. It was easier to beat these slaves into submission. The combination of this and pulling the Africans from their family and home gave an easy dominance of the slaves. This is why the Africans were more fitted for slavery.
9. Although the African slaves were broken they still resisted and attempted to escape. They would meet under false pretences to plan escapes. Some would want to massacre all the whites by their own tools. If groups managed to escape they would try to from communities in the wilderness and form a stronger front. If one person escaped he would attempt to pass himself off as a freeman. These creative ideas prove that although the Blacks’ situation looked bad they still had hope.
10. Treatment and feelings towards indentured servants were similar to those of African slaves. Slave and servant owners saw both groups as, “shiftless, irresponsible, unfaithful, ungrateful, dishonest...” Both of these groups were disrespected and abused and dehumanized, although to different degrees.
11. Colonial America had many aristocratic qualities to it. Class lines became more distinct. Slavery encouraged this. Plantation owners served as the wealthy class and owned many black and white slaves. The feudalistic quality was how the slaves and servants worked for the planters in order to be a ten ant of the land. Other parts of the aristocracy included African slaves, farmers, and indentured servants.
Taylor Oster 2009
1. I find it rather amusing that you said what a “great man” Columbus was and I do hope you were kidding. Yes, we have been educated of the greatness of Columbus by the heralded Mrs. Bono, who had us read written accounts by Bartolome de las Casas of what Columbus and his men wrought upon the Native Americans he came upon. The first few pages of Zinn’s book showed you just how fantastic a chap he was---the first thought in his mind when he meets Indians is that they’d be good servants (and so he began taking them back to Spain, where they died, and kept doing so to avoid going back with an empty brig), he took Rodrigo’s pension by claiming to have seen land first (he probably didn’t), exaggerated his discoveries and then began slaughtering every Native he saw for gold they didn’t have, even though he himself said that they “are so naïve and so free with their possessions…[that] when you ask for something they have, they never say no.” However, the most horrible “human” traits I found in Columbus were on his second expedition. The first, when his men, roaming the islands for slaves to take home, exacted their revenge for the death of sailors sent to invade a village by scouring the island for women and children to take as sex slaves; second, when Columbus, desperate for gold, began using the “copper plates” on the Indians and hunted them down with dogs when they fled; and the third, his complete wipeout of the Arawak Indians by 1650.
2. Zinn states his viewpoint, or bias, on page 10 as to be on the side of the neglected and unrepresented oppressed people in history. He tells us he will “tell the story of the discovery of the Americas from the viewpoints of Arawaks, of the Constitution from the standpoint of the slaves, of Andrew Jacksonas seen by the Cherokees, of the Civil War as seen by the New York Irish, of the Mexican war as seen by the deserting soldiers of Scott’s Army…” and so on and so forth. I personally prefer this point of view. After all, isn’t the quintessential additional document for a DBQ exactly this, a document or point of view from a voice you never hear?
3. Noted.
4. Zinn says that no country in the history of the world was so defined by racism for so long a time than America, and seems to agree with Morgan that a primary cause of racism is to socially separate poor white “free men” from black slaves, preventing them from sympathizing with each other and working for a common cause, likely in the direction of revolts or social upheaval. Considering this opinion, I think it’s reasonable to read between the lines and say that both Zinn and Morgan believe that it’s possible for “blacks and whites to live together without hatred”, since they both believe they could band together, find “common cause…[of] desperate hope”, and even work together to achieve it.
5. Again noted. And, eww.
6. Attention paid.
7. This point has been heavily emphasized by Mr. Bono. First of all, as Zinn points out, slaves in Africa had rights, and were more like the serfs of Europe than the slaves of the colonies. They could marry, own property, own slaves, be a witness and testify, and often were adopted into the family. However, colonial slavery was chattel slavery, where slaves were not people but property. As Zinn states, “slavery in the Americas [was] lifelong, morally crippling, destructive of family ties, without hope of any future”, and the slaves did not often live very long.
8. The main reason Zinn provides was African “helplessness”. While the Indians had home turf advantage, often leading to very successful escapes into their own territories that they knew well, as well as often fighting to keep the land they lived on, the blacks were torn from their own land and transported thousands of miles away, to a foreign land whose terrain was unfamiliar, where they were mixed with other Africans with different languages and cultures thus that they could not even band together to preserve a little piece of home. Where Indians could fight to keep their homelands, the blacks did not have a “home” in the Americas they could fight for or run to. They were thoroughly uprooted, subdued by the horrific journey across the Pacific, and worked until they died.
9. African slaves, during the journey over the Pacific, sometimes jumped overboard to drown rather than to suffocate in the ship or be worked to death. In the Americas, the blacks “taught disobedience to the Indians”, (in northern Virginia) plotted to kill all the whites in the area and “escape during a mass funeral” and ran away and tried to establish their own settlements in the wilderness (some of the plans for this course of action included arms, ammunition, provisions, clothes, bedding and tools to bring along).
10. Initially, indentured white servants and African slaves were not treated unlike each other, and thus often bonded because of similar predicaments, planning revolts together, working together, and as Morgan says, “it was common…for servants and slaves to run away together, to steal hogs together, get drunk together.” However, this common sense of togetherness ended when harsher slave codes were published at the same time offered white servants more rights and “benefits” because “all white men were superior to black”, therefore causing a social rift between the two groups.
11. The slavery system gave rise to a system in America not unlike Feudal Europe, with white masters at the top, acting not unlike lords of the manor, and black slaves at the bottom, brutally treated and worked, not unlike feudal peasants. There was no social mobility, and the plantations were like their own little manors and kingdoms. The slaves were bound to the land and worked it their entire lives under harsh conditions, were never treated humanely, and had overseers, just like feudal peasants.
1. Through younger education, Columbus had been a hero to the New World, without fault and without murderous intentions, though specific lessons on him were vague to prevent the topic of his reality. However, his reality is no longer kept secret in further education. Zinn explains multiple 'human' aspects of Columbus such as his lacking trust in the locals of the New World, though reasonable, was consistently blind considering he didn't find much gold, just as the locals explained, but insisted in the lies of the Indians worthy of bloodshed.
2. Zinn described Columbus based off of the accounts of Bartolome de las Casas who relived the horrors Columbus committed while in the New World. He used little other resources other than personal views educated off of Las Casas reviews.
4. I think that racist views, once achieved, are rather difficult to ammend, especially if issued at a younger and more sensitive age. It is possible for whites and blacks to live simultaneously without conflict, much less hatred, if one has an open mind and is tolerant to the differences shown. Though I think there would be hesitancy between the two, an eventual relationship could be worked out. As for Morgan, he shows how regrettable history can be, and just how unchangeable it is, no matter how far or in depth we look on it, it can't and won't be changed for the better, the only thing we can do is live in the now and make the present future history praise worthy.
7. Slaves in colonies were nothing but scum on the street and labor in the fields costing little to nothing of the owner's expense. However, in Africa, slaves were still blood, and given fair treatment with rights those in America did not have.
8. Africans were harder workers and less rebellious than the Indians made out to be. Not to mention, taking a person out of his/her environment alienates them and prevents much to be done against his/her master, whereas the Indians knew the land and thus rebelled against slavery, knowing and being comfortable away from European infection and not depending on their technology while under slavery.
9. Many Africans would jump ship if given a chance, before they reached the American main land. Many others ran away in the cover of darkness or while working out in the fields, when supervision was a thin surface.
10. Indentured servants became a part of their master's land. They were property, not humans, and were treated poorly as compared to a servant for hire.
11. Only the rich and well off had much power in colonial America. It became a feudal system with the aristocrats on top and unsurprisingly, the better off. The structure was corrupt in that little to no one else had a say in how things were run, aside from the people across the oceans giving orders to be carried out by their trusted on the other side. This feudal system consisted of the usual class divisions, the upper class of more noble rank, money in the pocket and influence across the state, and the lower class of little coin and little to offer but their labor.
1. Would it be incorrect to assume that you all were taught in your earlier classes what a great man Christopher Columbus was. We even have a holiday for him. However, Zinn focuses more on Columbus' more "human" qualities. Please list one of those qualities, and do not repeat one that has already been posted by your classmates.
Columbus has not been glorified in any class I have taken since elementary school…
One of his human qualities is expressed in the way he justifies his cruelties. He says “Let us in the name of the Holy Trinity go on sending all the slaves that can be sold.” (4) Columbus justifies himself in religious terms, convincing himself that what he is doing is holy—probably so he doesn’t suffer from overwhelming guilt.
2. Identify one of Zinn's biases and point of view?
Zinn almost always identifies with the common, poor, working man. Initially this opinion is expressed as sympathy for the Native Americans, and later he repeatedly shows the upper class as bad while glorifying the commoner’s plight. This identification with common working men makes sense—Zinn is known as an anarchist and socialist, so his views would likely tie in with those classes.
4. What does Zinn say about racism in America? Look at Edmund Morgan's view on racism on p. 56. Would you agree? Zinn then asks, "Is it possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred?" What do you think, given what Zinn has written?
Morgan expresses his opinion that racism is not natural, not a part of human nature. It is described instead as “something coming out of class scorn…” (56). Because of this, I believe Zinn’s opinion is that it is possible for blacks and whites to live without hatred, but that it may never actually happen.
6. Pay attention to Zinn's quotation by Edmund Morgan on p. 25.
I actually laughed at this quote—it expresses the irony and confusion of the Americans perfectly. I thought Morgan perfectly expressed how the Americans were could have benefitted from Native American assistance but their racism prevented them from getting it.
7. What were some of the differences in how slaves were treated in Africa (by Africans) and in the colonies?
Slaves were treated much better in Africa than in the colonies. They were still seen as humans in Africa—they were fed, had room to move, and were only taken during wars. In the colonies, the slaves were kept in terrible conditions (like the middle passage voyage) that weren’t fit for livestock.
8. Why were Africans better fitted from slavery then Indians?
Firstly, many of the Indians had been killed by disease and colonists, so there were more Africans available. In addition to that, it was easier to keep Africans slaves because they were not at home in America. The Indians were on their land, and able to use it to their advantage. The Africans were brought over in terrible conditions, separated from their families, and therefore completely demoralized in addition to being in a strange new land nothing like their home.
9. What were some of the methods Africans slaves used to escape?
Colonies of escaped slaves were sometimes formed when enough African slaves would escape. Others who escaped could go hide there. Slaves would sometimes escape by jumping off the slave ships on the voyage over, or by deceiving their keepers in America and running off.
10. What ways were the treatment of indentured servants similar to African slaves?
Both indentured servants and slaves were inferior. Both were kept in terrible conditions on the voyage across the Atlantic. They were constantly afraid, fearing terrible punishments that could be meted out by their owners/masters.
11. Give an example of how colonial America was similar to feudal Europe, or operated more as an aristocracy.
Both early America and feudal Europe had rigid, unchanging class systems. Serfs were perpetually under the control of lords—there was no way to escape this. Similarly, slaves and their children were perpetually owned by plantation owners. Both of these areas featured upper classes that completely controlled the poor.
1. Would it be incorrect to assume that you all were taught in your earlier classes what a great man Christopher Columbus was. We even have a holiday for him. However, Zinn focuses more on Columbus' more "human" qualities. Please list one of those qualities, and do not repeat one that has already been posted by your classmates.
One of Columbus’ more “human qualities” is that he had no sympathy or mercy towards the Indians he came in contact with. Zinn says that Columbus’ quest for gold and riches led him to exploit the Indians and deem them as inferior and easy to control. Zinn criticizes Columbus and his use of genocide to control the Americas.
2. Identify one of Zinn's biases and point of view?
Throughout the beginning chapters of Zinn’s book, he continues to look at Columbus’ mass murders of the Indians. He portrays the Indians as a peaceful and generous people who were whole-heartedly willing to give up whatever the conquerors desired. He even used accounts of de Las Casas to demonstrated the cruelty of the Spaniards toward the Indians. These accountsby Las Casas clearly support Zinn’s argument that the Indians were unfairly treated and oppressed.
4. What does Zinn say about racism in America? Look at Edmund Morgan's view on racism on p. 56. Would you agree? Zinn then asks, "Is it possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred?" What do you think, given what Zinn has written?
Howard Zinn stated “There is not a country in world history in which racism has been more important, for so long a time, as in the United States,” (pg. 23). Zinn goes on to say that racism was justification for the colonists to exploit and enslave the African Americans and oppress the Indians. The idea of white superiority allowed colonists to take and control land and people that they would otherwise not have been able to get if it weren’t for the extreme belief of racism in the States. Zinn says that hatred between blacks and whites was a result of racism. Edmund Morgan said, “If freemen with disappointed hopes should make common cause with slaves of desperate hope, the results might be worse than anything Bacon had done.” I think Morgan is probably right here. If slaves and free whites had join together to upset the established control, they would have likely been effective in doing so. They would have had the advantage in numbers to make a greater impact than the people before them, but racism kept this from occurring to pleasure of the elite. Regarding Zinn’s thoughts on whites and blacks living together without hatred, I think this could have been possible if not for the great impact racism had on society. There were times, as in Bacons rebellion where whites and blacks worked together for a cause, but it was rare.
7. What were some of the differences in how slaves were treated in Africa (by Africans) and in the colonies?
In Africa, slaves were more like Zinn called “serfs in Europe,” meaning they still labored for a master but they were given more rights than the slaves in America. Slaves in both places were a considerable amount of the population, and in both places they lived under harsh conditions. However in kingdoms like Ashanti in Africa, slaves could own property and their own slave, marry, and most of the times a slave would be adopted into the family, far different from the rights of slaves in the Americas.
8. Why were Africans better fitted fro slavery then Indians?
Africans wiere better fitted for slavery over the Indians because the Indians were much more aggressive and had well established societies. The Indians were able to flee into the forests and escape the harsh conditions of slavery, and they culture was so uniquely advanced that even whites who were in trouble or fearful could flee to Indian villages and live with them.
1. Zinn focuses on Columbus' more "human" qualities.
~ Perhaps a very human quality of Columbus was his ignorance. And hence, his denial of relinquishing his assumptions - even if he was blatantly wrong.
2. Identify one of Zinn's biases and point of view?
~ Thankfully, Zinn confesses his bias and POV in the very beginning. One of his biases lye in his passion against Columbus, Cortes and all those 'great' discoverers of America. One of his points of view lies with the 'Pacifists in the era of World War 2' - hence lying with the minorities of the world.
3. This notice has been noted, and I do hope my noticing has also been noted.
4. What does Zinn say about racism in America? Look at Edmund Morgan's view on racism on p. 56. Would you agree? Zinn then asks, "Is it possible for blacks and whites to live together without hatred?" What do you think, given what Zinn has written?
~ racism in America took a new level as it became both a cultural norm, and a cultural absolute. Zinn explains how these racist views have been practically grafted into the minds of many Americans. Yes, it will be difficult - but not entirely impossible for whites and blacks, and all races in between, to live without casting each other tense eyes. Sadly, the situation of Blacks Vs. Whites has lived long past the days of slavery - and remains a tense topic to this day.
5. Duly noted.
7. What were some of the differences in how slaves were treated in Africa (by Africans) and in the colonies?
~ Slaves in Africa were treated majorly as servants. They were given specific rights, as opposed to slaves in the American colonies. Slaves had no rights, and were literal items of prophet, rather than servants.
8. Why were Africans better fitted fro slavery then Indians?
~ Indians, unable to resist European diseases, were unfit for slavery, as explained by Zinn, because they could oppose the white men who invaded their homeland. They had the advantage of home turf, and were hence more liable to rebel. African slaves were tossed from both their culture and their homelands, placing them in a totally weakened position - allowing them to become easier victims of slavery.
9. What were some of the methods Africans slaves used to escape?
~ African slaves used sabotage and distractions to open up time windows that allowed for escape.
10. What ways were the treatment of indentured servants similar to African slaves?
~ Although indentured servants were given the promise of freedom and rights and money, servants were often treated as terribly as slaves. Servant women were raped, servant men beaten, and servants in general given small wages and little food. Although it was said to be their right to food and shelter, indentured servants were often neglected this right as well.
11. Give an example of how colonial America was similar to feudal Europe, or operated more as an aristocracy.
~ Colonial America was much like Feudal Europe because of the overflowing population of impoverished peoples, and the small percentage of noble-ranked citizens. This was a basic example of the large population of serfs, and the few ruling monarchs who owned the land, and the serfs.
Zinn Early Chapters:
1. Zinn quotes a diary entry that Columbus wrote about the Indians he encountered and that showed a kinder side of Columbus that the world had not known. This quote showed that Columbus appreciated the encounter with the Indians and how civil they were and how they did not attack Columbus and his crew men. This shows that Columbus was not always a tyrannical, evil man and that he had a softer side and part of him actually appreciated and even maybe liked the Indians.
2. Zinn is one of the least biased novelists and historians that I probably have read. He seems to be more concerned with informing the world about history instead of impressing his own opinions and bias upon his readers. He objectively tells his readers about slavery and wars and many other things without forcing his readers to listen to him. One thing that Zinn is biased about is Columbus and how the world has been taught that Columbus was an awful person but Zinn is out to show that Columbus is not that horrible terrible person that the world has made him out to be.
4. Edmund Morgan clearly states that he does not think that blacks and whites can live peacefully together and the only solution in his eyes is to have racism. I do not agree at all with Mr. Morgan because obviously blacks and whites have been living together peacefully in one country because we’ve been living that way for many years. There are still people in the United States, especially in the south, that still are racist and still do not want to live with people of a different race and color, but in the end they are capable of living peacefully with each other and are able to put aside their past prejudices and get along with others.
7. The slaves in Africa were treated much better than the slaves in America. Zinn said, “the ‘slaves’ of Africa were more like the serfs of Europe.” So, the slaves in Africa were able to get out of slavery by working for a certain amount of time, but in the colonies they were in for life. Also in the colonies the slavers had no rights and were often starved and killed horribly and just treated awfully, but in Africa they had certain rights and were treated like actual humans not like in the colonies where they were treated worse than cattle.
8. The Africans were better suited for slavery than the Indians because they were less likely to run away because they did not want to admit that the whites were winning by running away so they stayed more than whites or Indians did. Also Africans were stronger than the Indians and whites and were harder workers.
9. Most of the African slaves normally would run away together in groups unlike Indians who would run away individually. When the slaves would run away and hide in swamps and ditches and forests to hide and keep out of sight so they were not caught. If they could find the people, many runaway slaves would hide in barns and houses of helpful people.
10. Slaves were treated like indentured servants in the way that they were not treated necessarily kindly and were forced to do copious amounts of labor and were often subjected to slandering from their owners.
11. America functioned more as an aristocracy not like feudal Europe because they chose the citizens that were most qualified to lead and that was who led, not a system with lords, vassals, and fiefs.
1. I believe that one of Columbus's more human qualities probably wouldn't be considered human. Columbus slaughtered many natives and showed no mercy. He was also ignorant of where he was and his only thought was to gain riches. And yes greed is an extremely human quality that leads to many inhumane things.
4. Zinn said that racism was practical. It was practical because it gave the whites a reason to treat other human's so harshly. I would say that I agree with Morgan's statement because if the white indentured servants and the black slaves were to get together there would be a major uprising on the aristocrats hands and they would loose there power.Given what Zinn has written in that way I think that it isn't, but Given my own opinion and experience I think it is possible. We just have to look forwards not backwards.
7. The differences in African Slavery and American slavery were great. In Africa slavery was not hereditary, so if your parent was a slave you were not. Also Slavery was not permanent it was a punishment in some cases. Even slaves of war were usually accepted into a family. Also in Africa the slaves had rights. They were allowed to mary and even own thier own slaves. In America Maraige was not allowed and families were constantly ripped apart. African slavery also lacked two elemants of American slavery. there was no great profit from it and in Africa slaves were still considered people while in america they were considered property.
8. Africans were better fit for slavery than the natives because they had already grwon immune to many of the European diseases.
9. African slaves would try to escape in the middle passage by throwing themselves overboard when the chance appeared. In land they would act sick and hide also they would try to sneak out at night.
the one above is Rebecca Harkness
1. Would it be incorrect to assume that you all were taught in your earlier classes what a great man Christopher Columbus was. We even have a holiday for him. However, Zinn focuses more on Columbus' more "human" qualities. Please list one of those qualities, and do not repeat one that has already been posted by your classmates.
My earliest history lessons, (until about 8th grade) did glorify Columbus to a point which is almost disturbing when we hear about the things he did in the process. One of Columbus's more human cualities was when Zinn discusses how it was not Columbus who first spotted the New World, but was in fact one of his men, but Columbus was given the credit for this upon his return to Spain.
2. Identify one of Zinn's biases and point of view?
One of Zinn's more obvious bias' is that even though we have glorified Columbus over the years, he is not the hero we imagine. Yes, he discovered the land that we now call our home, but he was responcible for the brutal killings of thousands of native Americans in doing so. Zinn's point of view is that instead of glorifying the man who discovered this continent, we should teach also what attrocities he commited in the process.
1. Would it be incorrect to assume that you all were taught in your earlier classes what a great man Christopher Columbus was. We even have a holiday for him. However, Zinn focuses more on Columbus' more "human" qualities. Please list one of those qualities, and do not repeat one that has already been posted by your classmates.
Yes, in elementary school I was definitely taught about how great Columbus was, but since then the Bonos (and actually maestra Ortiz, too) have been teaching everyone about how cruel he really was. I would say one of his "human" qualities was that he was not very inteligent. He had no idea that he had discovered a new continent. He believed that he was in Asia, though it was probably pretty obvious that he wasn't, considering America would not have matched any descriptions of Asia from other explorers' logs and documents.
2. Identify one of Zinn's biases and point of view?
Zinn is biased towards everyone who might be considered the "underdog." He takes the point of view of those who are not typically glorified or even sypathized with by most historians.
11. Give an example of how colonial America was similar to feudal Europe, or operated more as an aristocracy.
Colonial America was very similar to feaudal Europe. There was a landowning class, who formed the aristocracy, and then there were the indentured servants and the slaves, who made up a class similar to the English peasants.
Mira Schlosberg
Post a Comment