Category Archives: American Colonial History

Self-Determination: A Defining American Characteristic

My first characteristic of what makes the United States of America different than most other nations is the concept of self-determination. In other words, we chose our own form of government and our own leaders, and have maintained that for over 230 years. Actually, the choosing of our government goes back much further than that.

The residents of Waterville Vermont wrestled with choosing leaders and setting the tax rate in the mandatory annual town meeting. How interesting it was to read those records.

From the moment that Europeans came to these shores in the early 1600s, selection of leaders through voting has been a part of our nature. The form of government was at first based on what the colonists knew back home, or what was imposed on them by the terms of the charter by which the colony was established. However, slowly, the form of government changed and settled into a pattern.

First it was pure democracy at the local level, with a fledgling republic at the colony level. By the time of the revolution, when the colonies considered themselves states, republican form of government was well-established. At the local level even, a mini-republic had mostly replaced democracy. Some vestiges of democracy remained, but for the most part the form of government was a republic.

Of course, a republic requires active participation of its citizens in terms of voting. At regular intervals, from as short as six months to as long as two years, the people chose their leaders. In doing so peacefully, the people were saying, “We are satisfied with this form of government. All we are doing now is choosing those who will lead us, either returning those already in leadership or voting new ones in.” Election after election, for more than a century before we were a nation, this process took place from New Hampshire to Georgia. Those eligible to vote chose new leaders and kept their form of government.

The colonies did well governing themselves, until the King of England tried to impose new government on them. Resistance to that became the seeds of the American Revolution.

Self-determination. We will govern ourselves. How different this was than in the Europe they had left! England had a monarch, a king or queen, who ruled. In the 17th Century the parliamentary system was flexing its muscles and growing in importance. England went through three revolutions (one bloody, two peaceful) and one counter-revolution. All other European nations had much the same. The monarchy was a coercive power. The people didn’t choose it so much as the king ruled by “divine right”. France, in a bloody revolution that would eventually lead to a worse dictatorship than the kings ever were, would throw off that monarchy thirteen years after the American Colonies declared their independence. Other nations would eventually follow suit. But it was the bloody American Revolution that set much of that in motion.

As I researched my first genealogy book, Seth Boynton Cheney: Mystery Man of the West, I had occasion to look into town records of Waterville Vermont, where Seth was born and raised until he was 13. It was interesting to see the notices of the town meeting on the last Saturday in March (right in the middle of maple sugar harvest no less) and having all voters required to attend. I read how they set the tax rate: “Voted to establish the rate at $X” or “Voted a rate of $Y to construct a fence around the cemetery.” These people were governing themselves at the local level, deciding big issues as a democracy but electing representatives to lead the municipal republic the rest of the year. I “watched” as new towns were formed, Waterville carved out of Bakersfield because the Waterville residents couldn’t cross the snow-covered mountain in March to attend the town meeting. Self-government in action, the form of government chosen by the people and maintained year by year, decade by decade, century by century.

As I researched my second genealogy book, Stephen Cross and Elizabeth Cheney of Ipswich, I saw the same thing from a much earlier period, Ipswich in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the years 1647 to 1710. I actually went back earlier than that, as I was simultaneously researching an earlier ancestor in the Cheney family, the subject of a future book. I saw the same thing with the town, and more so at the county and state level. One rabbit-hole I went down with my research that took place during Stephen’s and Elizabeth’s lives was the change in colonial charters forced upon the colonies by the king of England. This did not go over well. In fact, the seeds of the American Revolution were sown right here, as people, who had chosen and maintained a form of government they liked—self-determination—had a form of government and leaders forced on them—a coercive power—who served at the whim of and benefit of the monarch, not the people. Ipswich was a hot spot about this and some consider it to be the cradle of American independence.

Now, in 21st Century America, we have a hard time conceiving what the world was like during our colonial days. Oh, we know from studying our history what the colonies were like, and may have a vague understanding of England, from whence most of those settlers came. But I think we need more study of just how different the government was in our world. And to what extent the people had, not just the right, but the obligation to maintain that government through votes and taxes. We had our faults back then, and took far too long to address those faults. Compromises would eventually be forged that would keep us as one nation rather than several regional federations, compromises that later would almost tear us apart.

Yes, I believe self-determination is a defining characteristic of the United States of America. Other nations now have it. Yet many other nations only dream of it. It defines the USA. How long can we keep it?

Three Traits that Mark the USA

When the time came for a new form of government, American traits were well-established. This series of blog posts will explore those.

What is it that differentiated the United States of America? What separates us from all other nations? Or is there anything? Are we the same as the other nations, but we became wealthy and powerful by chance of time and location? Did we just happen to find the right combination of population and resources?

Many talk of American exceptionalism. When did that kick in? Were we exceptional at the beginning, or did we develop into an exceptional people and nation in response to circumstances?

These are difficult questions. I’ve been pondering them for a while—at least ten years, since I’ve been writing the Documenting America series. I’m learning more and more as I do the research on this. In addition to that, I do a lot of research into genealogy—American genealogy. My first genealogy book dealt mainly with the years 1830-1910, long after American traits would have been established. My second genealogy book dealt with the years 1640-1710, right in the foundational period. As I wrote that genealogy/family history book, my thoughts began to focus on that question: what differentiated the USA from other nations?

As I researched to finish this work, I came upon some Massachusetts Bay Colony documents that led me to concluding one of the characteristics I’ll discuss in this series.

Added to researching my books is a love of history and an ability to self-study and learn. I love to read, and history is about my favorite topic to read. Since I started writing history books it’s difficult to read history for simple enjoyment or personal learning. Still, I try.

I don’t know that I’ve finished my thought process on all of this, but I believe I have identified three items that are in our nature that made a difference in our journey to exceptionalism.

  1. The consent of the governed. Another explanation for this is self-determination. We decide what type of government we want and establish it.
  2. The common man as a landowner. A big difference in the USA is everyone—just about everyone—owned land. This gives a huge change in perspective on government.
  3. Peaceful transition of power. When we change leaders—with two notable exceptions—the transition happens easily and peacefully.

These are probably not the only things that have contributed to making the USA into the nation that it is, but I see them as critical components.

In three posts coming soon (maybe not next, but soon), I’ll cover these three factors. By the time I finish them, I may have another one or two posts to make in the series. I hope many will read these posts, and consider how these helped to make us what we are.

A Little Progress

This was a strange weekend. First off, I ate too much, almost all on Sunday. We went out to eat after church with good friends, and had way too many chips and salsa. I actually ate a smaller entree than I normally do at this place, but the chips were too much. Then we had an evening gathering at church last night, a soup dinner. The event was our Alabaster offering, a twice a year offering for missions building projects. The soup was good (both bowls), the dessert was good, and the fellowship was good.

By the time I got home I felt bloated. I didn’t feel like doing much of anything. We were having Internet connection troubles, and I re-booted the modem and router twice. While doing that, I started a virus scan on my computer. It’s an ancient computer, and it wasn’t done scanning an hour later. I took the time, after playing some mindless computer games, to file papers. I tend to let this go then file a bunch in a flurry of activity. I filed a few, then was down to those that defy being put in a preset category. By evening’s end I had a bunch of those done.

But the big thing to report is that I got back to writing for Suite101.com. I posted two articles: one examining Robert Frost’s poem “The Mountain”; and one talking about British loyalists in the period before the American Revolution. These two articles actually did fairly well with page views over the last three days. I had intended to write the second article about “The Mountain” on Sunday, but after eating so much wasn’t up to it.

So, what’s on for today? In the office I’ll be archiving projects and copying time sheets. At noon I’ll head out to the Crystal Bridges Museum construction site, where I’ll be giving two talks this afternoon, to the Arkansas Floodplain Managers Association, about the floodplain issues we faced in designing the museum. Then tomorrow and Wednesday I’ll attend the convention. I’ll miss this morning’s activities at the convention, but I have to get ready for my presentation.

Book Review – The Presidency of George Washington

This was not in my reading pile. However, after I finished Robertson’s Harmony of the Gospels, I wasn’t quite ready to tackle the next book in the pile, which is Steinbeck’s East of Eden. But I had in the pile of books on the end table between Lynda’s and my reading chairs a thin volume she picked up somewhere, The Presidency of George Washington, by Jack D. Warren, Jr.; The Mount Vernon Ladies Association, 2000, ISBN 0-931917-34-4. Warren is one of the major modern editors of George Washington’s papers, which will run to twenty or so volumes when done. Actually, since that was written in 2000, that editing might be done by now, I’ll have to check.

This book is a cross between scholarly and popular. Warren’s work is almost all from original sources, both Washington’s outgoing correspondence, and some incoming. Official state papers were another source, as were newspapers and pamphlets from the period.

I suppose I haven’t read much about George Washington’s presidency. I remember reading a book about the first Congress, which would have touched on it, but that was long ago. Washington’s main task was to start the new nation off on a sound footing and hold it together. Fears of it splintering into multiple nations was real. The government under the Articles of Confederation was a disaster. Already sectionalism and partisanship were beginning, as the agrarian South and the commercial North distrusted each other, and the growing West distrusted them both. The national debt was sky high as a result of the revolutionary war. Some of the problems he had to face were:

  • Establishing precedents for almost everything, and to do so in a way that befitted a representative republic, to downplay fears that the American experiment would fail and a monarchy would be the result, also in a way that made the nation respectable to the European monarchies.
  • Establish sound government financial policies.
  • Provide governance for the lands west of the Appalachian Mountains.
  • Avoid being drawn in to the European war that started as a result of the French Revolution, which happened just a few months after he took office.
  • Sooth over the conflict between his two most important cabinet members, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson.
  • Establish the national capitol somewhere.
  • Give his citizens reason for hope that they could truly govern themselves.

I think we tend to forget that the government established by our founding fathers in the Constitution, after trial and error, was a huge experiment. At that time no such government existed. The British parliamentary monarchy was much different government. Perhaps Washington’s biggest task was simply to prove that the experimental government would not collapse. That it didn’t collapse is shown, in Warren’s words, to have been much the result of Washington’s leadership in those crucial first eight years.

The book is only ninety-six pages of text, with four pages of end notes, two of suggested reading, and a decent index. The book reads longer than its pages, however. The margins are somewhat small, and few illustrations are used. The scholarly language does not lend itself to a long session of reading. I was able to get through a chapter a night, or at times only half a chapter–if I waited until too late in the evening when my brain couldn’t handle it.

This one is a keeper. I’m not sure whether I will ever read it again, but it is a good reference book, and perhaps I could pull some articles from it, or use the footnotes and sources as springboards for additional research. If you run across it, get it and read it. You won’t be sorry.

SEO: An Unfruitful Weekend Study

Due to my low revenues from my Suite101.com posts to date, I had little motivation to write articles for that content site this weekend. It seemed to me that blackberry picking would be more profitable (got about a quart). I wanted to push through the discouragement to write a poetry article and a history article. I even brought home some references from the office to maybe write a civil engineering article. Alas, on Friday evening I decided I really should 1) clean-up the articles already written for linking and images, and 2) do some research in SEO: search engine optimization.

The clean-up was easy. I found some public domain photos residing on the Internet, with the site giving permission to copy and use. And I added a bunch of links, internal and external to Suite 101, to my existing articles. I’m probably not done with that, but I’m close. On to SEO.

I found, however, that I couldn’t deal effectively with SEO. I found plenty of references, but my mind was just not in it. I’d pull up a reference, and begin to read, but quickly said to myself, “Is this really necessary? How does this equate to advancing a career in creative writing? How will my ego, demeanor, and pocketbook be bettered by this? And how will this affect my creative writing? Will it diminish my other writing?” Not being able to answer, I kept shifting to mindless computer games–as if Minesweeper will better advance my second career.

By Sunday afternoon I had had enough. Since SEO wasn’t working, I knuckled down and wrote two articles and posted them. One is the last in my series about Robert Frost’s poem “Into My Own.” The other is in my continuing series on the lead-up to the American Revolution, this one on some writing of Samuel Adams. These are probably not any better optimized for SEO than ones I posted earlier. They do, however, have links and images. And today I’m getting some hits for them.

This morning before work I was able to concentrate a little on SEO. I found some good training sites and copied and pasted them into a Word document, and printed a few pages. I think part of my problem is I still have not learned to read stuff on the web for comprehension. I need to learn that to save a tree or two, but I’m not there yet. So my reading material for the evening is in hand. I’m off to plan the next two engineering articles I’ll write.