Jennifer Castell's Blog

George Washington: Man or More?

jennifercastell — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 19:56:58 +0000

We all know who George Washington is. This week I learned a few more things about him that I didn’t know before. These things set him apart even more from the other great men in history we’ve learned about. George Washington was historic because he was the first president of the United States, but that’s not all.

George entered the army at age 20 and wanted to become a British general. He was determined to climb the ranks in the army and one day be a general. Being so young he was at first just given the job as a messenger, but he quickly became a member of the army that fought in the battles. He stood towering over his fellow soldiers at 6′3″, so you’d think that’d make him a pretty easy target to take down. What fascinated me, though, was that he was never once wounded in battle. This by far sets him apart from other men. And other men drew near to him in hopes that he would be able to protect them too. That is how his fame and glory started. Other people took notice of him, some feared him, and others wanted to be him. He was a fierce solider and a great leader.

George Washington wasn’t just a man in our history. He was a warrior, a superior officer, and our first president.

Anne Hutchinson: Right or Wrong?

jennifercastell — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 14:02:19 +0000

I chose to write this weeks blog about Anne Hutchinson. We’ve all heard about her from more then just History class. To me she’s a very interesting and important person in history. People question if what she was doing was “against the law”, and so I want to question them further. Anne Hutchinson, obviously, didn’t think she was doing anything wrong. She was simply holding discussions about what they were preached to about in mass that previous Sunday. So, in a way, she was being more committed to her faith by bringing people of the church together to discuss further the topics that were covered. I admire her for this. She heard something and wanted to talk about it and share her opinions and her others opinions about this. I wouldn’t call it a crime to be interested in what they were preached and want to explore it more. She clearly knew how to run a discussion because not only woman but men would go to her house to talk about mass. I’m sure she didn’t intend to have it end up as her preaching to them. She probably just got so emotional and so encompassed by the word of God. She did make the “mistake” of telling the court that she had received divine intervention from God, but doesn’t any person of faith? The government was afraid of losing the structure of the church because other people may claim to have this same “divine intervention” and “talks” with God. I question their thought process though. I doubt that everyone would go out and start their our “masses” and preach to people. I think that letting the people say they have a personal message from God is letting them have a deeper connection and faith in their believes. I think that if they let her continue and let other people make claims like hers, that the church would’ve become stronger, because so many people would have felt a calling. Instead they tried to stifle this and I believe that is why so many different groups broke away from the Church.

Squantos Journey

jennifercastell — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:23:28 +0000

One man in history who fascinates me is Squanto. The fact that Squanto was taken captive and brought to spain and then brought back to the american colonies is an amazing journey that help put him ahead of most people. This statement can be taken very literal and figuratively. Squanto’s whole tribe had died off by the time he had returned to the colonies due to diseases. He gained a lot of knowledge of both culture and language in the Europeans though when he was taken captive to Spain.
When the pilgrims arrived they were shocked to find Squanto and how well educated he was. The thought Indians were savages and uneducated. Squanto was the reason the pilgrims survived and flourished. He taught them how to plant and harvest crops, and he showed them all the land. Without him the pilgrims might have never survived, and therefore it could’ve taken a lot longer for the new colonies to flourish.
Who knew that being taken captive from you tribe, could help not only you, but the new world?

Puritans

jennifercastell — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:22:35 +0000

The Puritans believed in “purifying” the Church of England, and that their beliefs were right, and their fight for their faith really impressed me in a way. The Puritan movement took place in the mid 1500s. The Puritan group broke away from the Roman Catholic Church and sought to bring about their own refined division of their Christian faith. The puritans moved away to start the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the 1600s. The Massachusetts Bay Colony was a refuge for many Puritans that fled from England. The king, Charles I tried to suppress the Puritans of England in fear that they would take over the Orthodox Church. Once in Massachusetts, the Puritans became motivated to change what they believed was necessary. The Puritans took the words of the Bible very literal, and believed that they shouldn’t just go and listen to the words, but live them. They strongly valued self-examination and were strict in the way they lived life.
The Puritans did have different believes, and were oppressed by the Orthodox Church, but they believed their way of thinking was correct. Who is anyone to tell them that they are wrong? They didn’t give up when they had no voice and were being oppressed. They moved out and moved on and formed their own sect of Christianity. Without them being so strong and sticking to what they believe in, who knows if we would have any diversity in religion today?

Boundaries Between Humans

jennifercastell — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:21:29 +0000

We talked about how in the 1600s the lines between the social classes we’re become more blurred. The poorest white people now had slaves and black people underneath them in the social classes. So despite some whites being very poor and not having any political or powerful standings, they can still say that they are better then somebody. That somebody that is now their property, the black slave.
We say that this is blurring the figurative lines between this social class ladder but in a way it might only be blurring the lines between the middle and lower class. The poor whites that were the lowest class now have somebody beneath them so it blurs the line between them and the middle class because they are now almost equals. The slaves coming into the colony gave the poor whites a free step up in the ladder to having a better position in the colony. What about the rich, though? I think this in a way just gave the rich, well established people to have more power because there is another class under them. So was this really a good thing? Depends on who you asked. Of course the rich and the poor whites would say this was a good thing because they both gained something from it. Mutualism is a great thing, but some people shouldn’t be given more power. Everyone is power hungry, especially the ones on top so will this event cause another downward spiral? We’ll have to keep reading to find out…

Columbian Exchange

jennifercastell — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:20:42 +0000

I’m choosing to write this weeks blog on the Columbian exchange because I heard people talking about it in the commons and that some people were still not exactly sure what it was. I find it to be the “eye opener” of the world. Since Columbus and his men traveled to the Americas, the world has been exposed to new things. The Columbian Exchange was really different parts of the world being exposed to new and valuable resources they didn’t have before. The Americas were now exposed to yes, deadly diseases, but also weapons, domesticated animals such as horses, and plants such as bananas. The Old World was also exposed to new things through the findings in the Americas. The Americas exported goods such as Alpaca, beans, corn, tomatoes, tabacco, and more. The Colombian Exchange was a major “event” that everyone really benefited from. It’s hard to say who “gained” from it more, because the New World gained just as much as the Old World did. They both had a more “wealthy” economy because of the new found products. It goes to show that exposure to new products through trade can really boost the economy for everyone.

Male Vs.Female Domination

jennifercastell — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:13:24 +0000

In the new world by the mid 1600s the male to female ratio was 6-1. As we learned, the civilization wasn’t very successful with that ratio. The men of the English colonies were used to the woman providing for them and caring for them, so when the got to the americas and realized nothing was just given to them, they had a culture shock. In this case it is true, that men like to not have to do work and just have the woman provide for them. Is this the case always, though? I think not. Now, men and woman are constantly battling for a position of “the main bread winner”. This isn’t true in all cases, but now men tend to be more dominant, at least more then they were in the 1600s. The English men did evolve with the times, eventually, and they did learn how to start actually providing for themselves with the push of John Rolfe. I think it’d be very interesting though if they had to learn these things without the help of any woman around them to help them out, and without the help of a strong leader figure.

Never Knowing What You Want

jennifercastell — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:12:13 +0000

A good point was brought up today in class that I wanted to go more in depth upon. The Europeans tooks risks trying to find happiness in the new world. People always want things that they don’t have, Right? Well this is true with many people, and many countries. In history, countries were always looking for more money, territory, and power. What they had was never enough for some power-hungry rulers. The Native Americans, however, were happy with what they had. People may question is this because the Native Americans didn’t know what was out and about in the rest of the world? or were they really just content with what they had?
It seems to me like this problem plaques almost everyone. Why can’t people be happy and realize the good in what they do have? It seems like theres always going to be that one thing that someone else has that you want, or just a little more land that you could control. Why don’t rulers see what they have and try to embrace it? Why couldn’t the Europeans notice they have a lot of land, and they have newer technology and they have great people? This could be linked to my last post: isolation inhibits innovation. If countries try to block out what others have, to focus on the good they do have, they might never evolve with the rest of the world. It seems like this may be a never ending cycle of wanting and risking.

“Isolation Inhibits Innovation”

jennifercastell — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:11:28 +0000

Today in class Mr.Huston brought up a good point that got me thinking. He said that “Isolation inhibits innovation”. In multiple cases throughout history this is true. When countries just sit back and not try to find out what others are doing then tend to isolate themselves. It’s not that they aren’t aware of one another, it’s just that they don’t show a great interest into finding out how others become successful. This, in turn, backfires on them. In the Americas, the Native Americans weren’t well at adapting to their environment. They didn’t know how to alter crops so that they could grow in their different climates. They also didn’t know how deadly trying to live with domesticated animals would be at first.

Becoming aware of what works and what doesn’t is only the first step, though. Countries need to listen to and help one another. People (Rulers), think that Isolation is the key to success so that other countries or places won’t try to copy them and steal their glory. This is just peoples egos talking. Everyone wants to take credit for things and not share with anyone. People try to lessen others success so theirs is “more important”.

In Kindergarten we learn simple things: to be nice, to help others and to share. How come this is so hard for people to understand? To many leaders in the world get greedy. In order for anyone to become successful they have to be willing to look out and see what other people are doing, learn to adapted in their own way, and then they to will become successful. It’s not about stealing somebody’s good idea, it’s about noticing it and learning to evolve it. Too many problems happen that impact a lot of lives that could be avoided throughout history.

You don’t start building a house from the top down, you need to work your way up. I think that in history people keep adding onto the house, building off one another, and eventually, if this continues, it could become a great home.