Jonathan's US History Notes: A Mess

Sorry, folks. I don't know how you got here, but good luck with this stuff.

154. the Marshall Court: c. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): judicial review of state laws; also, supports the Bank of the United States, “the power to tax is the power to destroy” d. Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819): affirms that contracts are binding e. Gibbons v. Ogden: breaking a monopoly (on shipping on the Hudson River), precedent for the Federal Government regulating interstate trade f. Worcester v. Georgia (1832): Andrew Jackson ignores Marshall’s decision against the Indian Removal Act: “Now let him enforce it.” g. (Marshall was Jefferson’s cousin, but they did not like each other) 155. (war against the Barbary States, the Barbary Pirates, 1801-5: Marines sing “From the shores of Tripoli,” no declaration of war) Jefferson and Madison (1800, 1804, 1808, 1812; 1801-1817) 161. (Handsome Lake’s religious movement → revival of Iroquois cultural identity) 162. the War of 1812 a. War Hawks: Henry Clay (KY), John Calhoun (SC) – south and west: Canada’s land, British aid to Native Americans b. Tecumseh and the Prophet c. The Battle of Tippecanoe: William Henry Harrison d. Andrew Jackson and the Cherokee vs. the Creek Indians (→ later Jackson will force the Cherokee from their land; a lot of this land became cotton plantations) a. (the Creek called themselves the Muskogee, many place names come from that → “Okie from Muskogee”) b. (a civil war among the Creeks during the War of 1812) e. invasions of Canada, naval battles on the Great Lakes f. (Britain offered freedom to slaves who would fight for them; thousands of slaves ran away to take advantage of that offer and fought for Britain in the war; most of the freed people were settled in Nova Scotia) g. the burning of Washington a. (the American militia supposed to guard the capital was humiliated, despite having a 7000 to 4500 numerical advantage, at the Battle of Bladensburg, running away without a fight because they were frightened by a new kind of rocket the British had) b. (Dolly Madison famously saved a famous painting of George Washington while her husband and other men were just running and hiding) c. (most of the damage to DC was done by local looters rather than the British soldiers; burning the buildings was revenge for the US burning the parliament house of Toronto earlier in the war) d. Washington DC rebuilt after the war; slaves built the Capitol and the White House (but interestingly, many white Americans deny that fact today) h. (seized Mobile, which is today in Alabama, from the Spanish) i. new nationalism: ie. the Battle of Baltimore → The Star Spangled Banner (Francis Scott Key); (paintings in the Capitol rotunda: The Surrender of General Burgoyne and The Surrender of Lord Cornwallis at Yorktown) a. (anti-war Federalists were sometimes attacked by mobs during the war, most famously in Baltimore in 1813, where an old Revolutionary War hero [“Light Horse Harry” Lee] was beaten, and he died soon afterwards) j. the Hartford Convention (secession was discussed but rejected; still: ) → the end of the Federalist Party → the Era of Good Feelings k. the Treaty of Ghent; Andrew Jackson won the Battle of New Orleans a. (Jackson’s army at the Battle of New Orleans: the Tennessee militia; the mostly French-speaking Louisiana militia; Haitian immigrants; a group of black men, mostly free but some slaves loaned by local landowners; Irish American regiment named the Louisiana Blues; a pirate band; Choctaw native Americans; many of the blacks ran away to the British who took them to Bermuda) b. (many Americans believed that sharp-shooting western frontiersmen had won the battle, but actually it was the artillery, the product of the US’ infant industrial revolution) c. (news of the Treaty of Ghent arrived in the cities more than a week after news of the Battle of New Orleans, making Jackson’s victory seem more significant than it was, and many people gave him credit for winning the war; the messengers from the Hartford Convention arrived during the celebration and did not present their demands) l. Big losers in the War of 1812: Native Americans, defeated during the war (Tecumseh in the North, and the Creeks in the South), and after the war without help from Britain m. (after the War of 1812, the United States fought another War with Algiers; celebrating the victory, Commodore Stephen Decatur made a famous toast, “Our country! … May she always be in the right; but our country, right or wrong!”) n. the era of good feelings James Monroe to Andrew Jackson 163. 1816: Monroe: (Madison’s pick, had been both Secretary of War and Secretary of State during the War of 1812; in the Revolutionary War he had crossed the Delaware with Washington and had been wounded during the Battle of Trenton; later he had opposed the Constitution and been an opponent of Madison until they reconciled just before the War of 1812) 164. Westward migration from 1815 to 1840: a. After the war, Jackson forced even Creeks who had been allied to him to give up their land (in what is today Alabama and Georgia); President Madison ordered Jackson to let those Creeks return to their land but Jackson refused to obey and Madison was afraid to challenge him b. Jackson then made a fraudulent treaty with unauthorized Cherokees, and the Senate ratified it → expansion into the “Southwest” which became cotton land, the Deep South c. (Jackson and his family made money speculating on this land) d. (Jackson, Mississippi named for him by grateful migrants) e. (The Southwest remained a violent frontier society for a long time, not only the violence of slavery but gambling, prostitution, fistfights, shootouts, duels, knife fights, lynchings: but migration continued because of the cotton boom; most slaves were transported to the area in chain gangs, marching about twenty-five miles a day and sleeping on the ground, usually in the winter when their labor wasn’t needed) f. (similarly, in the North, a treaty with the Wyandot Native Americans in 1817 took most of their land, opening opportunities for white settlers; by 1821 most of Illinois and a lot of Michigan territory had been surrendered by Native Americans; by 1820 Ohio was the 4th most populous state, many migrants to it came from the South; often Scots-Irish, they were called “Butternuts” or “Hoosiers,” one of them was Lincoln’s father who moved north to Indiana because of his opposition to slavery; Butternuts like Lincoln resented having to compete with slavery and resisted efforts to legalize slavery in the new territories; other stuff on migration west from the North: Johnny Appleseed, the name Springfield; conflict between the Yankees and the Butternuts, though there were other groups as well, including remaining Native Americans, old French settlements, the extinction of the passenger pigeon; northern speculators encouraged the growth of towns to help their landholdings gain value; repeated western migration usually the result of failure, Laura Ingalls Wilder’s family’s story) 165. (1816): the First Protective Tariff a. (also, the Second Bank of the United States: still controversial but no longer was its constitutionality seriously questioned) b. (finally, the “Salary Grab” act → almost all congressmen who voted for it were defeated in the next election; as lame ducks they repealed the salary increase for their successors but not for themselves!) 166. (the Rush-Bagot agreement demilitarized the Great Lakes, settled the boundary between the US and Canada as far as the Rocky Mountains) 167. (in 1818 Jackson invaded Florida, the First Florida War, attacking the Seminole but also, without orders to do so, the Spanish (many Creeks were still allied to him, seeing the war as a resumption of their own civil war); he also executed some British citizens) → 168. 1819: the Adams-Onís Treaty: Florida for Texas a. (Spain was weak because Latin American colonies were revolting) 169. 1820: the Missouri Compromise: balance in the Senate at stake, so Maine was created, the line 36 30 was established (→ later the Kansas-Nebraska Act overturns this) a. end of the era of good feelings b. (Thomas W. Cobb of Georgia: “You have kindled a fire which all the waters of the ocean cannot put out, which seas of blood can only extinguish.” In response, James Tallmadge of New York, who’d started the controversy by trying to emancipate the slaves in Missouri: “If a dissolution of the Union must take place, let it be so! If civil war, which gentlemen so much threaten, must come, I can only say, let it come!” Similarly, the 77-year-old Thomas Jefferson: “This momentous question, like a fire bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the union.”) c. Revealed that the South was much more committed to slavery than it had been twenty years earlier (bc of cotton; now Virginia made money selling slaves to the cotton lands) – however, no southerners yet defended slavery as an actually good thing d. (a silly thing: during the long and heated arguments in Congress over this, a congressman was told to sit down, but he said he had to give his speech for the people he represented, “for Buncombe County.” Since then Americans have called exaggerations, especially in political speeches, “buncombe” or “bunk.”) e. Clay and Monroe arranged for Maine and Missouri to be admitted to statehood at the same time, leading the congressmen from Maine to support Missouri’s statehood even with slavery → Clay’s reputation grew from this f. (during the arguments, the insult “dough face” was invented for Northerners who betrayed their region’s interests) g. (Southern whites were alarmed that blacks living in the DC area came to the Congress galleries to listen to the debates) h. (Missouri’s constitution forbade free blacks from entering the state; and antislavery settlers in Missouri were violently opposed for awhile) 170. independence movements in Latin America → the Monroe Doctrine (actually written by JQA): no new colonies in the Americas (actually relied on British disinterest in colonization, until after the Civil War) a. however, the US still refused to recognize Haiti 171. the Panic of 1819: western land speculators, “hard times,” a. some blamed the new BUS i. managers of the Baltimore branch found to have embezzled $1.5 million → Maryland tried to tax the bank → McCulloch v. Maryland b. Monroe re-elected in 1820: the only time in US history that voters did not turn against a president during a nationwide economic depression 172. (1824): the Sectional Tariff: the balance of power was in the west 173. 1824: John Quincy Adams beat Andrew Jackson because of the “Corrupt Bargain” with Henry Clay (→ the Democratic-Republican Party splits into the Democratic Party, led by Andrew Jackson, and the Whig Party, led by Adams and Clay) 174. the “Tariff of Abominations” (1828) → the Nullification Crisis (resolved by the Compromise Tariff of 1832) The Era of Jacksonian Democracy: 1828 to 1844 175. the end of property qualifications → nearly universal white male suffrage, Jackson as “the common man” a. (South Carolina and Virginia were the last states to abolish property qualifications [at the Civil War and in 1850]) b. new states tried to attract settlers by offering universal male suffrage → old states granted suffrage to try to slow emigration to the west c. (→ universal white male suffrage revealed “white” and “male” more clearly; free blacks lost the right to vote in many states; when they could vote, they supported the Whigs) 176. the Congressional nominating caucus → nominating conventions with platforms 177. the Spoils System 178. Jackson vetoed the charter of the Bank of the United States (1832), withdrew government funds (1833) a. “the Bank Wars”: Biddle called in loans to cause a recession (the Baltimore Bank Riot) b. → more opposition to him among northern elite → the Whig Party i. the American System: tariffs, national bank, infrastructure (~Federalists) ii. opponents of Jackson: John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, Daniel Webster (initially Calhoun) iii. “Whigs” vs. “King Andrew” iv. the Democratic Party until the Civil War: opposition to national bank and national economic planning, protecting slavery, territorial expansion; limited government; appealed to people who saw themselves as outsiders, plantation owners, (and New York’s export merchants): “democracy” for the average white man, not for women, blacks or Native Americans c. deregulated banks → much more credit → speculation on Western Land → the Specie Circular (1836, as a “lame duck”) required payment for public lands in gold or silver rather than paper money → the Panic of 1837 d. one famous anti-Jackson political cartoon: e. and one famous pro-Jackson political cartoon: 179. the Indian Removal Act (1830), despite Worcester v. Georgia → the Trail of Tears (1838) to Oklahoma a. (in 1866 most of Oklahoma was also taken from the Native Americans → the Oklahoma Land Rush of 1889) b. → more land in the South for cotton c. (the Cherokee Nation; Sequoyah and the Cherokee language → literacy rate higher than white people) 180. the Nullification Crisis a. the South Carolina Exposition and Protest (1828; John Calhoun wrote it anonymously because he was Vice President) threatens secession b. John Calhoun: the foremost defender of slavery in the antebellum period, “the peculiar institution” of the South c. the Webster—Hayne Debate (1830): “Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable!” (One hundred thousand copies of this speech were sold, more than any previous speech in history.) It had a huge affect on opinion in the North, contributing to that region’s eventual stance the Civil War. d. states’ rights e. South Carolina actually nullifies the tariff (1832) → f. the Compromise Tariff (1833) g. the Force Bill (1833) 181. (1836: Van Buren: “Jackson’s Third Term”) a. (beats the Whigs’ William Henry Harrison with superior organization, though the election was closer than 1832: the main issue in the campaign was the bank wars, with business people and commercial farmers tending to vote against Van Buren) b. (Van Buren from New York Dutch, the first president not of British ancestry) c. (tried to keep Jackson’s policies: Indian Removal was completed, the Trail of Tears; the Second Florida War was fought from 1835-1842 because the Seminoles refused to move to Oklahoma; the Seminoles raided plantations to recruit slaves to join them; in 1837 a Seminole leader named Osceola and his band were captured by the army flying a fake “truce” flag, becoming a hero to many white Americans; in the end several hundred Seminoles did not leave, but about 900 blacks chose to migrate to Florida, 500 arrived and the rest either died or were re-enslaved in violation of the treaty) d. (there were also conflicts with Canada when American mobs invaded in 1837 and 1838) e. (a weak leader; Van Buren was famous for not taking sides, so that he told a joke about himself, that once someone asked him if it was true that the sun rises in the East, but in order to avoid committing himself, he responded that he always slept through sunrise) 182. 1840: Harrison: “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too” 183. (De Tocqueville: Democracy in America) 184. (1840: the Great Plains tribes negotiate a peace with each other so that they can focus on hunting buffalo for fur: the primary reason they hunted buffalo by this time was for the European fur market → the beginning of the decline in buffalo herds; by this time beaver fur was getting hard to find, and the fashion changed in Europe anyway) 185. the Webster-Ashburton Treaty (1842): settled a tiny border dispute between the USA and Great Britain over the boundary between Maine and Canada; (it was almost a war, both sides sent troops to the border, but no one fought - this was only over a little bit of the border, most of the border had been settled in earlier treaties) 186. Manifest Destiny a. (Adams believed that Texas and Cuba would eventually become US territories: “Manifest Destiny” is a phrase that belongs to the 1840s, but Adams and other people had a similar attitude just after the War of 1812) 187. (late 1830s smallpox epidemic on the Great Plains helped make possible the westward migrations beginning in the 1840s: for instance, the Mandan people of what is today North Dakota killed all but 40 out of two thousand people in a few weeks in 1837) 188. the Oregon Trail (1843: pioneers, covered wagons, wagon trains) a. (a fur trader named Jedediah Smith laid out this trail in 1824; he saw more of the Rocky Mountains than anyone had, got rich in the fur trade, and was later killed by Comanche hunters) 189. Oregon boundary dispute 1844: Polk "Fifty-four forty or fight" → compromise with Britain 190. Texas (1835 independence from Mexico) annexed by US (1845) a. (Mexican independence in 1821) b. the Texan Revolution: Mexico’s president General Santa Ana vs. Sam Houston; (Davy Crocket and the Alamo) c. (Santa Ana: chewing gum) American Economic and Social Development 1776 to 1830 191. Republican Motherhood 192. the right to reject suitors, companionate marriage 193. denm a. the Jefferson Bible b. Thomas Paine: The Age of Reason c. states disestablish religion (the 1st amendment applied to the federal government, not the states) i. disestablishment supported by Republicans, generally opposed by Federalists; in New England, supported by minority groups such as the Baptists, opposed by Constitutionalists; in some New England states the Congregationalist Churches were not disestablished until the 1830s d. → the 2nd Great Awakening 194. Washington Irving: Rip Van Winkle; the Legend of Sleepy Hollow, featuring the Headless Horseman, Columbus’ flat earth, Washington’s cherry tree 195. James Fenimore Cooper: the romantic western hero; The Leatherstocking Tales: The Deerslayer, The Last of the Mohicans, The Pioneers, The Prairie 196. (Edgar Allen Poe: another romantic) 197. the cotton gin (Eli Whitney, 1773) + British industrial revolution → expansion of cotton in the deep south → slave population growth a. (Mexican silver to the US to pay for the cotton → industrial capital) b. Southern landowners the biggest consumers in the American economy, tried to imitate European aristocrats 198. interchangeable parts (Colt’s revolver) 199. the steamboat (Robert Fulton, 1807) 200. the Cumberland road = the National Road a. (One interesting reason there were not more federal projects is that slaveholders feared that giving Congress authority to do so would amount to giving it authority to emancipate slaves! John Randolph opposing a survey bill: “If Congress possesses the power to do what is in this bill, they may emancipate every slave in the United States.” And Nathaniel Macon in a private letter: “If Congress can make canals, they can with more propriety emancipate.”) 201. the Erie Canal (finished 1825) a. → the growth of NYC, and even more startling growth in the cities along it (such as Albany, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo; in the 1820s these cities filled mostly with Yankees from New England, but some Irish immigrants were arriving as well; → the “Burned Over District” in the Second Great Awakening) b. → German, Scandinavian immigrants to the NW c. boom in canal building (stopped when railroad appeared; most canal diggers were Irish immigrants) d. immigration and the House of Representatives 202. lower transportation costs → lower costs on many goods; competition often drove local artisans or farmers out of business a. most farmers in the north farmed primarily for the market by 1820, and bought products such as shoes, hats, cloth, furniture, tools, guns, and clocks 203. other significant cities growing in this period: Richmond, Cincinnati a. (the soap company Proctor and Gamble was founded in Cincinnati in this period, until then most households had made their own soap) 204. whaling (thus, Moby Dick) 205. the African Methodist Episcopal Church a. (Sojourner Truth worshipped at the AME Zion church in NYC) 206. the American Colonization Society (1819) → Liberia 207. (example of Haiti → Denmark Vesey’s revolt, 1822) a. (Denmark Vesey was a carpenter in Charleston, South Carolina. He’d been born in the West Indies, visited Africa and various Caribbean islands, then he was sold to a French plantation on Haiti, but he was returned to the slave dealer for a refund; thus he got to Charleston, where he won the lottery and was able to buy his freedom. He was a leader in the local AME church, where he evidently frequently spoke about the injustice of slavery. There never was any revolt, no white people were actually killed, but he was accused of planning a revolt, and he and several dozen others were executed or sold. Four black witnesses were rewarded for informing. No one today knows whether Vesey was actually plotting any kind of rebellion, but he probably was, since no one who was executed claimed to be innocent.) b. → South Carolina’s John Calhoun, formerly a nationalist, became more adamant about slavery and states’ rights 208. Nat Turner’s Rebellion (1831) 209. anti-literacy laws 210. (Samuel Slater is famous for memorizing the plans of the spinning frame invented by Arkwright, then selling them to Americans in 1789; because of people like him, the US was never far behind Britain in industrial technology) 211. Francis Cabot Lowell: Lowell, Massachusetts (1814/1850s); The Lowell System, Lowell Girls a. (Lowell had memorized the structure of a loom, spying in Manchester, England) b. (one reason Lowell employed women is that so many men had migrated west and there weren’t yet many immigrants to employ) Antebellum Cultural and Intellectual History from 1830 241. transcendentalism: a. New England (sons/grandsons of the Puritans) rejecting Calvinism; romanticism b. Ralph Waldo Emerson (Self Reliance, 1841), c. Henry David Thoreau: a. Civil Disobedience (1849: refused to pay taxes for the Mexican War): influenced Gandhi, MLK, Jr. b. Walden (1854) d. Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter: portrayed the Puritans as killjoys 242. (Herman Melville, Moby Dick, 1851: a philosophical story about good and evil, questioning but basically affirming Puritan values) 243. Walt Whitman: Leaves of Grass and Emily Dickinson (in Amherst) 244. African-American religion and music 245. the Hudson River School: romantic landscapes 246. (Stephen Foster) The West and Agrarian Protest, 1861 to 1892 284. the Homestead Act (1862): cheap land in the west, homesteaders, speculators 285. the Pacific Railway Act (1862) → the Transcontinental Railroad (completed 1869) with many Chinese laborers a. (railroad → the great cattle drives from 1866 to about 1886, especially on the Chisholm Trail, and famous cattle towns such as Dodge City and Abilene; the cattle drives got smaller as more railroads were constructed) 286. the Morrill Act (1862): agriculture and technical colleges 287. gold & silver rushes: a. (Colorado, Alaska, the Black Hills, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming…) b. → capital for industrial development; mining towns → ghost towns 288. the Sand Creek Massacre: US militia attacked a village of Native Americans (Cheyenne, Arapaho), killing around about a hundred people, mostly women and children (1864, during the Civil War) a. (background: the Pikes Peak Gold Rush, which began in 1858) 289. (purchased Alaska from Russia in 1867 = “Seward’s Icebox,” “Seward’s Folly”) 290. steel-plow, “sodbusters,” sod houses 291. new technology: McCormack’s Reaper, steel plow, grain elevator, windmills, twine-binder, barbed-wire, sorghum (a drought-resistant grain) → famers’ debt and higher productivity → falling prices 292. farmers’ debt, falling prices, Federal government’s deflationary policies, railroad short haul rates → farmers’ discontent → the Grangers, the Farmer’s Alliance, the Populist Party a. the Populist Party in the South in the 1880s: poor white farmers and poor black farmers working together – often the white supremacist leaders cooperated with black leaders in the Populist Party i. (in the 1880s, Southern conservative Democrats occasionally defeated Populists by corrupting the black vote: instead of counting the votes the black voters actually cast—the Populists would’ve gotten many of them—conservatives committed election fraud and got away with it; ii. (in the 1890s, Southern conservatives broke the Populist Party in the south by aligning themselves with white supremacy; the Populist Party even came to accept the disenfranchisement of black voters in order to counter the corruption that conservatives were able to do with black votes) 293. the Grange (1867, the Patrons of Husbandry) → Granger laws regulating railroads, etc. 294. (gold rush in Montana → the Bozeman Trail → Red Cloud’s War → the Fort Laramie Treaty 1868: gave the Black Hills to Native Americans, Cheyenne and Ogallala Lakota Sioux tribes; but then the Black Hills gold rush → the Battle of Little Big Horn, “Custer’s Last Stand” in 1876; nevertheless, the Native Americans [Lakota Sioux] lost the war and the land) 295. the Robber Barons of the railroad industry (Vanderbilt, Gould, Huntington, etc.): land grants, corruption a. all the rich industrialists of the Gilded Age are sometimes called Robber Barons, but the term is best used for the really corrupt ones (such as Vanderbilt, Gould and Huntington!) – but the same men are called “captains of industry” when they’re being praised for the industrial development they brought to the USA b. (time zones were developed for railroad scheduling; because of international economic trade, all kinds of things got a lot more precise than they had been in previous centuries) c. railroads → more shipping → the mail order catalog, Sears, warehousing 296. the Coinage act of 1873: “the Crime of ’73”: gold standard, deflation a. → angers miners, farmers → the Greenback Party (1874; the party was strengthened by b. → “Free Silverites” c. → the Panic of 1873 (though this was caused by other things, including bank failures in Vienna and speculation in railroad construction) 297. the National Farmer’s Alliance (1876): coops 298. Chief Joseph of the Nez Pierce surrenders (1877): “I will fight no more forever.” 299. the Kansas Exodus, the Exodusters (1879, 1880, many to Kansas because of John Brown; fleeing the KKK and so on due to the end of Reconstruction) 300. Joseph Glidden invented barbed wire (c. 1880) → large scale cattle ranching, no more range wars (i.e. the Johnson County Range War), “tamed the west” 301. Helen Hunt Jackson: A Century of Dishonor (1881) (more famous to historians than influential) 302. (the long, cold winters of 1885-6 and 1886-7 → many dead cows, hard times for ranchers) 303. short haul rates vs. long haul rates → Wabash v. Illinois (1886) → the Interstate Commerce Act (1887) → the Interstate Commerce Commission; weakness: too vague to enforce (until it was strengthened under Teddy Roosevelt) 304. the Dawes Severalty Act = the Dawes Act (1887): “civilize the Indian” 305. (the US takes Oklahoma lands from the Native Americans →) the Oklahoma Land Rush, the Sooners (1889) 306. 1890: Wovoka, the Ghost Dance → the Battle of Wounded Knee, or the Wounded Knee Massacre, the last conflict between US army and Native Americans 307. 1890: Federal government census bureau declared the frontier “closed” 308. Frederick Jackson Turner: The Frontier in American History, the Turner Thesis 309. “Buffalo” Bill Cody’s “Wild West” circus show: Sitting Bull 310. Manifest Destiny and imperialism 311. Mahan: The Influence of Sea Power Upon History (1890) → navy The American Renaissance: 1861 to 1917 350. Carnegie: The Gospel of Wealth (1889) a. Carnegie Libraries, etc. b. Rockefeller: the University of Chicago, etc. c. the Metropolitan Museum of Art, etc. 351. Horatio Alger: rags to riches stories such as Ragged Dick 352. realism: Stephen Crane: The Red Badge of Courage, Mark Twain: The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Henry James 353. the Ashcan School 354. Frank Lloyd Wright: prairie houses (from 1900s), (later: Guggenheim Museum, etc.) 355. Charles Ives (also post-WWI) 356. German model research universities, agricultural and technical colleges (recall the Morrill Act) 357. controversy for Christians: evolution and social Darwinism vs. the Bible and the social Gospel; “the historical Jesus” 358. the minstrel show, blackface (“Jim Crow” was a character in minstrel shows) The Progressive Era: 1901 to 1917 359. the Spanish American War (1898): a. the USS Maine sank, perhaps because it struck a mine (in Havana Harbor) b. promoted by yellow journalism such as by papers belonging to Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst c. supposed to give Cuba independence from Spain d. → US control of Cuba, affirmed by the Platt Amendment (1901) e. permanent lease of Guantanamo Bay f. Theodore Roosevelt was a somewhat popular politician before the Spanish-American War, and a member of McKinley’s cabinet, but he resigned and became famous leading the Rough Riders in the Battle of San Juan Hill → much increased popularity for T. Roosevelt → McKinley’s VP candidate in 1900 election 360. Hawaii annexed by US (1898) after (5) years of colonial occupation, coups, etc.: missionaries and Dole Pineapple Company heavily involved; indentured servants from Asia brought in to farm sugar cane 361. the Boxer Rebellion → the Open-Door Policy in China (1900) 362. the pine-American War (1899-1902, though conflict did not begin to decline until 1913): concentration camps, torture a. unsuccessfully opposed by isolationists 363. the election of 1900: a. McKinley put T. Roosevelt on ticket as Vice President to benefit from his popularity, although party leaders had doubts about TR because he was a former Mugwump b. (beat WJ Bryan) c. an anarchist assassinated McKinley → TR became president in 1901, beginning the Progressive Era 364. muckrakers (“investigative journalists”): a. Ida Tarbell, The History of the Standard Oil Company b. Upton Sinclair, The Jungle (1906) reveals disgusting things about the meatpacking industry → Pure Food and Drug Act (1906), Food and Drug Administration, the Meat Inspection Act (both 1906) → cleanest food in the world i. (the United States vs. Forty Barrels and Twenty Kegs of Coca-Cola, 1913) c. Frank Norris: The Octopus (1901) d. Lincoln Steffens: municipal corruption e. McClure’s Magazine, Collier’s Weekly, etc. 365. the Anthracite Coal Strike (the United Mine Workers) → T Roosevelt intervenes and helps workers (1902-3) = “the Square Deal” 366. Henry Ford, the Ford Motor Company (1903): the Assembly Line, welfare capitalism 367. the Industrial Workers of the World = the IWW = the “Wobblies” (Big Bill Haywood): one of the most extreme unions, with anarchists, communists, etc. (later, during the Red Scare after WWI, Haywood flees to the USSR) 368. Debs formed the Socialist Party (1908) 369. (the Hepburn Act: allowed the ICC to set maximum rail rates, also applied to pipes, ferries, bridges, etc.) 370. Conservationism: John Muir and the Sierra Club: Yosemite (1906), (earlier, Yellowstone); (later, Taft angered Roosevelt in the Pinchot-Ballinger affair, by appointing Ballinger, who did not believe in conservationism, as the Secretary of the Interior) 371. (Panic of 1907: House of Morgan saved the banks) 372. (Muller v. Oregon, 1908: shorter working hours for women; accepts that states can regulate such things, similar to Munn v. Illinois back in 1877) 373. 1908: Roosevelt selects Taft as his successor 374. (things that bothered Roosevelt: the Pinchot-Ballinger Affair, the Payne-Aldrich Tariff) 375. the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire → more support for workers, labor 376. 1912: the Progressive Party, the “Bull Moose Party” splits GOP → Democrat Woodrow Wilson wins a. the Progressive Party’s platform: 8 hour day, initiative, referendum, recall, women’s suffrage, child labor law 377. the Federal Reserve Act (1913): decentralized banks control the money supply by controlling interest rates 378. the graduated income tax (progressive tax): the 16th Amendment (1913) 379. trust-busting: Roosevelt and Taft: the Clayton Anti-trust Act (1914): more trouble for trusts, unions exempt: “the Magna Charta of labor” 380. municipal reform: city commissions, city councils 381. initiative, referendum, recall, and primaries (including “white primaries” in the south) 382. the direct election of senators: the 17th Amendment (1913) 383. 1915 film: The Birth of a Nation→ the new KKK against blacks, also against Catholics, Jews, other immigrants; Wilson segregates the Federal Government 384. (the Federal Trade Commission created to prevent monopolistic business practices, 1914) 385. (Wilson appointed Louis Brandeis in 1916, famous as a critic of big business, to the Supreme Court, but the court stayed conservative and friendly to big business) US Foreign Policy, 1901 to 1917 the pine-American War 386. “Big Stick” diplomacy, from Roosevelt’s “Speak softly and carry a big stick” 387. the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine a. (background: conflict between Venezuela and Britain) b. → the US bothered many Latin American countries (Columbia, Cuba, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, and Honduras) until FDR’s Good Neighbor Policy (1933) 388. (1903): Roosevelt supports Panama’s separatist movement against Columbia for the Panama Canal 389. the Gentleman’s Agreement (1906) 390. (the Root-Takahira Executive Agreement) 391. Taft’s Dollar Diplomacy 392. Wilson and Mexico and Pancho Villa The Warren Court 540. Earl Warren appointed by Eisenhower 541. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954; revisited 1955 to force enforcement) overturned Plessy v. Ferguson Ford and Carter 615. Nixon resigned, Ford pardoned him (1974) (Gerald Ford was not related to Henry Ford) 616. Watergate, Vietnam, etc. → cynicism, disaffiliation from the 1970s → candidates Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Obama advertising themselves as “Washington outsiders” against their opponents, “Washington insiders” 617. rights consciousness in the 1970s: violent controversies over school bussing (most famously in Boston), increasing resistance to affirmative action, white people and men using “rights” rhetoric and “reverse discrimination,” a. The Soiling of Old Glory: b. also, increasing pessimism about civil rights in African-American communities – despite the political progress of the 1950s and 1960s, economic inequality did not decline c. school bussing → de facto segregation / accelerated white flight, also, more private schools i. cities became much poorer as anyone who could afford to leave went to suburbs, replaced by poorer immigrants (poor white and black people from the South, from various countries, increasingly from Latin American countries) d. more groups becoming rights conscious: “handicapped” people, non-English speakers, etc. (→ much higher costs of education, especially in poorer places ) e. (Roots, a popular book and TV miniseries; The Jeffersons, including an interracial couple) 618. (Zbigniew Brezezinski, Carter’s National Security Advisor, whose family had been forced into exile by both Nazis and Soviets) 619. the Camp David Accords (1978): peace treaty between Israel and Egypt ( → large US “foreign aid” in the form of weapons to Israel and Egypt) 620. stagflation → high interest rates (by the Fed under Volcker) → high unemployment rates → Reagan elected in 1980 a. (→ questioning Keynesian economics) 621. 3 Mile Island nuclear meltdown → opposition to nuclear power, “NIMBY” 622. (the first “test tube baby” in 1978: controversial because the research involved destroying embryos, so anti-abortion activists opposed it; a few still oppose “in vitro fertilization”) 623. (Eisenhower’s CIA overthrew the government of Iran, installed the Shah, who was cruel →) the Iranian Revolution (Shah Pahlavi overthrown; eventually Ayatollah Khomeini takes charge) → the Iranian Hostage Crisis (1979-81), failed rescue operation → Reagan elected in 1980 a. (the Iranian Revolution + the USSR’s own “domino theory” →) the USSR’s invasion of Afghanistan in late 1979 → US support for Afghan anticommunist Muslims, “mujahideen,” began under Carter and was much increased under Reagan b. (Texas Democratic congressman Charlie Wilson, a hard-drinking playboy—he first heard of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in a hot tub with three women, two of them were strippers—did a lot to get US support for the mujahideen; the movie “Charlie Wilson’s War” is about this) c. (another American motivation was revenge for Vietnam; many of the American policy makers in the CIA and Pentagon at this time were bitter about the Vietnam War) d. today, the most famous mujahideen is Osama bin Laden, who the US did not directly support Bush I 640. Bush in 88: “Read my lips: No new taxes!,” (the “Willie Horton” ad) 641. flag burning affirmed as free speech: more “judicial activism” 642. the fall of the Berlin Wall (1989), the fall of the USSR (1990) → “a new world order” 643. the S&L crisis → bailout 644. acid rain, the hole in the ozone layer → the Clean Air Act (1990) 645. the Persian Gulf War (1990-1) a. (Bush: “the specter of Vietnam has been buried forever in the desert sands of the Arabian peninsula”) b. (→ Saddam Hussein vs. the Kurds) 646. Clarence Thomas (vs. Anita Hill 1991): replacing Thurgood Marshall, second African-American on the Supreme Court 647. 1992 LA riots: Rodney King → “gangsta rap” 648. (the war on drugs →) invaded Panama to overthrow Noriega 649. NAFTA (finalized under Clinton) Clinton 650. 1992 election: recession, new taxes (contra 1988 promise), 3rd-party candidate Ross Perot took votes primarily from Bush → Clinton won reminding himself “It’s the Economy Stupid” 651. the internet boom, the “dot com” bubble → balanced budgets 652. gays in the military: Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (1993) 653. the Clinton Health care plan: “HillaryCare” did not pass 654. the Brady Bill (1994) vs. the National Rifle Association, the 2nd Amendment 655. (1994) Proposition 187 in California: no public services for illegal immigrants 656. the Contract with America → led by Newt Gingrich, GOP victories in 1994 midterm elections, control of Congress → a. the 1995 government shutdown, b. welfare reform (the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, 1996): limits to welfare 657. the Kyoto Protocol 658. war in the Balkans 659. Monica Lewinsky → impeachment for perjury → his popularity goes up a. and other scandals (Whitewater) → “Slick Willy” Bush II 660. 2000 elections: the Green Party (Nader) took votes from the Democrats (Gore); very close election → Bush v. Gore over Florida recounts 661. 911 → the 2nd Gulf War 662. torture @ Guantanamo Bay, Cuba: “enhanced interrogation” 663. wire-tapping without warrants 664. prescription drug bill Appendix 1: Amendments to the Constitution 1-10. the Bill of Rights 11. (1804, declares that a state cannot be sued by people living outside it; however, since 1890 it has been interpreted to mean that a state cannot be sued) 12. (1804:) changes the way presidents are elected, in response to Burr’s duel with Hamilton 13. 1865: the 13th Amendment: abolishes slavery 14. 1866: the 14th Amendment: defines citizenship to include African-Americans, says that rights cannot be taken away from citizens without “due process” (since the Gilded Age, this has been interpreted by the Supreme Court so that “person” includes a corporation and a state) 15. 1869: the 15th Amendment: declares that suffrage cannot be prohibited on the basis of race, color, or for having been a slave 16. (1913:) income tax 17. (1913:) direct election of senators 18. (1919:) prohibits alcohol 19. 1920 (proposed 1919): the 19th Amendment: federal women’s suffrage 20. (1933:) “the lame duck amendment” shortens period between elections and taking office 21. (1933:) repeals prohibition 22. (1951): limits presidents to two terms (Republicans feared another FDR) 23. (1961: Washington DC gets Electoral College votes) 24. 1964: prohibits poll taxes 25. (1967: clarifies the process of a Vice President becoming a President) 26. (1967:) voting age lowered to 18 665. (1992:) Congress cannot change its pay Antebellum Cultural and Intellectual History from 1830 15. transcendentalism: a. New England (sons/grandsons of the Puritans) rejecting Calvinism; romanticism b. Ralph Waldo Emerson (Self Reliance, 1841), c. Henry David Thoreau: a. Civil Disobedience (1849: refused to pay taxes for the Mexican War): influenced Gandhi, MLK, Jr. b. Walden (1854) d. Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter: portrayed the Puritans as killjoys 16. (Herman Melville, Moby Dick, 1851: a philosophical story about good and evil, questioning but basically affirming Puritan values) 17. Walt Whitman: Leaves of Grass and Emily Dickinson (in Amherst) 18. African-American religion and music 19. the Hudson River School: romantic landscapes 20. (Stephen Foster) 1828 Jackson the Nullification Crisis over the Tariff of Abominations Nat Turner’s Rebellion → anti-literacy laws 1832 Jackson the Bank War: Jackson vetoed the Bank of the USA the Indian Removal Act the Texan Revolution (against Mexico → the Republic of Texas) 1836 Van Buren - NYC from Dutch heritage Democrat - Jackson’s choice the Trail of Tears - (the Second Florida War against Osceola & the Seminoles) 1840 Harrison → Tyler “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too” - a song used in the election campaign the elections were now big public festivals, the parties gave people alcohol, there were songs, etc. - not like a rational debate, more like a party Tippecanoe = William Henry Harrison, who’d won the Battle of Tippecanoe in 1812 WHH was a real Whig, but Tyler was popular but not a real Whig the Whigs worked hard to get WHH elected, but he died, so they wound up with Tyler (the Webster-Ashburton Treaty (1842) - fixes the border with Canada) Manifest Destiny (the 1840s) Manifest = obvious, revealed - so it was “obviously” USA’s destiny to expand to the west in many white Americans’ opinions first, this applied to Texas, but later to Oregon also neither Texas nor Oregon were US territory at that time Texas was disputed: the Texans (Americans who had migrated into Texas for the land) had won a war against Mexico & declared independence, but Mexico insisted that Texas still belonged to them Oregon was disputed: Britain, the USA, Spain, and Russia all had claims to Oregon, but only Britain and the USA had much power there 1840s: the Oregon Trail to the Oregon territory thousands of people migrated to Oregon territory to farm there covered wagons, wagon trials → the Oregon boundary dispute bt the USA & GB 1844 Polk: “Fifty-four forty or fight” = a promise to fight GB for Oregon BUT as soon as he was President, he started a war with Mexico & compromised with GB over Oregon Mexican War → the Mexican Cession - Polk expanded slavery the Mexican War was very unpopular with Whigs Thoreau: Civil Disobedience 1848 the Treaty of Guadalupe: the Mexican Cession: CA, AZ, NM (1849 the Gold Rush to CA) 1848 the Seneca Falls Convention 1848 Taylor → Fillmore g. (from 1844:) telegraph h. (Samuel Morse, Western Union) 44. the Irish Potato Famine à much increased immigration (from 1845, at the same time as the Mexican War) a. often worked in canal and railroad construction, and in factories in cities b. unlike most previous Irish immigrants, most of these were Catholics c. à Nativism, the Know-Nothing Party d. à the Temperance Movement, need for evangelical conversions e. The potato blight also hurt Britain and Germany, leading to more immigration from there as well; but those immigrants tended to spread out more rather than stay in the cities, and they were Protestant, so there was less opposition to them. 45. the Know-Nothings (also known as “the Order of the Star-Spangled Banner”) à the American Party a. à Know-Nothing Riots in the 1850s (St. Louis, Baltimore, DC, New Orleans; also, in 1844, the Philadelphia Nativist Riots) b. (helped the Democratic Party) c. (most of the Know-Nothings later joined the Republican Party.) American religion in the really early 1800s deism - a variety of religious belief that was popular with some European intellectuals in the 1700s that says there’s a God who is not the God of the Bible; the deist God is like a clockmaker who made the universe and doesn’t do anything else - most of the famous founding fathers--Washington, Jefferson, Madison, etc.--were either definitely deists or probably deists - the best example is Jefferson who made “the Jefferson Bible” by cutting out the parts of the Bible that he didn’t agree with, all the miracles; another famous deist was Thomas Paine, who wrote The Age of Reason. (After the Revolution, Paine was very popular. Washington suggested that he should be rewarded for his service, so Pennsylvania and Congress gave him money, and New York gave him a farm. Then, while he was trying to sell a design he’d made for an iron bridge, he supported the French Revolution, earning a reputation as a radical in England for his pamphlet The Rights of Man. Then he wrote The Age of Reason, a deist tract attacking traditional religion, earning him a reputation as a radical in America. He published part of it in the 1790s, helping deism to become more popular for a time; but then in the early 1800s he published more, against the advice of Thomas Jefferson, including critical analysis of passages of the Bible. The reaction against Paine’s skepticism helped lead to the 2nd Great Awakening.) The most important consequence of deism was that many states disestablished religion. (The 1st amendment applied to the federal government, not originally to the states.) This disestablishment was supported by Republicans, and generally opposed by Federalists; in New England, it was supported by minority groups such as the Baptists, and opposed by Constitutionalists; in some New England states the Congregationalist Churches were not disestablished until the 1830s. Of course most Americans were never deists, it was an elite minority. In the 1830s, we’ll see that the Second Great Awakening happened, and America became much more religious, although American religion in the 1830s was much more democratic than religion had been in the 1700s (shopping for churches, people are choosing the religion -> lead to churches changing the way they act; churches get more entertaining (2nd awakening result)/less intellectual) Also in the early 1800s, the African Methodist Episcopal Church was created for black people. This is the first ever “ethnic church.” (The AME church has been important in African-American history. For example, Sojourner Truth worshipped at the AME Zion church in NYC.) American economy in the really early 1800s the cotton gin (Eli Whitney, 1773) + British industrial revolution → expansion of cotton in the deep south → slave population growth Southern landowners the biggest consumers in the American economy, tried to imitate European aristocrats interchangeable parts the steamboat (Robert Fulton, 1807) - a great example of Industrial Revolution technology - this really helped the cotton south develop whaling was a big industry in the north (thus, Moby Dick) until about 1820s, the American economy grew about as fast as the population, but from the 1820s because of new technologies (the industrial revolution) the American economy began to grow faster than population growth, but until the Civil War, the American economy did not grow super fast, after the Civil War, in the late 1800s, with the country united under the rule of northern industrialists, the American economy started to grow super fast, and by 1900 it was the biggest economy in the world. (That’s one lifetime: a person could be born in 1820 and die in 1900 and have seen it all happen. American history happens fast.) Jefferson had an idea about slavery where white people were naturally rulers and black people slave 1600s: non christians could be enslaved 1730s: changed black into Christians = 1st Great Awakening people are slaves even if they’re christians if they’re black change of attitude to race Jefferson’s time: not only that black people are naturally slaves, but white people should not be slaves (renaissance: white people had slaves) the Cumberland road = the National Road (authorized by Jefferson to help develop trans-Appalachia) - One interesting reason there were not more federal projects is that slaveholders feared that giving Congress authority to do big national projects like the Cumberland Road would amount to giving Congress authority to emancipate slaves! (For example, here is John Randolph opposing a bill to do a land survey: “If Congress possesses the power to do what is in this bill, they may emancipate every slave in the United States.” And Nathaniel Macon in a private letter: “If Congress can make canals, they can with more propriety emancipate.”) So the slaveowners would resist national economic development until they were defeated in the Civil War. the War of 1812 Causes: conflict over trade, impressment, British aid to Native Americans, annex Canada the aid to Native Americans enabled NA to fight farmers on the frontier War Hawks: Henry Clay (KY), John Calhoun (SC) – south and west: they wanted Canada’s land, they wanted to stop British aid to Native Americans Tecumseh and the Prophet Tecumseh and his brother, usually known as the Prophet, were trying to unite the Native Americans on the frontier. Tecumseh was the political leader, his brother the Prophet was the religious leader. If they had succeeded at uniting the Native Americans, then the Native Americans would be able to fight the white settlers much more effectively. They almost succeeded, but… The Battle of Tippecanoe (right before the War of 1812, so it’s often considered part of the war): William Henry Harrison destroyed the Native American movement led by Tecumseh. This wasn’t much of a battle: WHH found the Indians at Tippecanoe undefended. Andrew Jackson and the Cherokee vs. the Creek Indians - this is another part of the war of 1812, a war against the Creek, some Indians in the south. Note that at this time the Cherokee were allied to Jackson and helped him defeat the Creek Indians. (The Creek called themselves the Muskogee, many place names come from that, and “Okie from Muskogee” was a popular song in the 1960s.) But later Jackson betrayed the Cherokee, forcing them from their land; a lot of the Creek and Cherokee land became cotton plantations invasions of Canada, naval battles on the Great Lakes Britain offered freedom to slaves who would fight for them; thousands of slaves ran away to take advantage of that offer and fought for Britain in the war; most of the freed people were settled in Nova Scotia in Canada after thee war the burning of Washington DC: the buildings was revenge for the US burning the parliament house of Toronto earlier in the war Washington DC rebuilt after the war; slaves built the Capitol and the White House (but interestingly, many white Americans deny that fact today) the Treaty of Ghent ended the war of 1812 in 1815 also in 1815, Andrew Jackson won the Battle of New Orleans (many Americans believed that sharp-shooting western frontiersmen had won the battle, but actually it was the artillery, the product of the US’ infant industrial revolution) news of the Treaty of Ghent arrived in the American cities more than a week after news of the Battle of New Orleans, making Jackson’s victory seem more significant than it was, and many people gave him credit for winning the war; consequences: Big losers in the War of 1812: the Native Americans, defeated during the war (Tecumseh in the North, and the Creeks in the South), and after the war they had no more help from Britain because Britain finally had to abandon the forts in the northwest big winners: white farmers who wanted to take Native American lands: so in the decades after the War of 1812, white farmers expanded very fast in the south, creating the “cotton kingdom” that would be the core of the Confederacy during the Civil War; in the north white farmers also expanded into lands like Indiana new nationalism: ie. the Battle of Baltimore → The Star Spangled Banner (a poem written by Francis Scott Key that became the lyrics of the US national anthem); (other less famous examples: paintings in the Capitol rotunda: The Surrender of General Burgoyne and The Surrender of Lord Cornwallis at Yorktown) (anti-war Federalists were sometimes attacked by mobs during the war, most famously in Baltimore in 1813, where an old Revolutionary War hero [“Light Horse Harry” Lee] was beaten, and he died soon afterwards) the Hartford Convention in 1815 (they discussed seceding from the union, even though they ultimately rejected it; still people turned against them: the messengers from the Hartford Convention arrived in Washington during the celebration of the Battle of New Orleans and the Treaty of Ghent, so they did not present their demands) → the end of the Federalist Party → the Era of Good Feelings from 1815 to the Missouri Crisis in 1819 (1816): the First Protective Tariff a. (also, the Second Bank of the United States: still controversial but no longer was its constitutionality seriously questioned) b. (finally, the “Salary Grab” act → almost all congressmen who voted for it were defeated in the next election; as lame ducks they repealed the salary increase for their successors but not for themselves!) 1816 Monroe Marshall court stuff: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): judicial review of state laws; also, supports the Bank of the United States, “the power to tax is the power to destroy” Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819): the Marshall court affirmed that contracts are binding Gibbons v. Ogden (1824): the Marshall Court broke a monopoly (on shipping on the Hudson River), precedent for the Federal Government regulating interstate trade in 1818, under Monroe’s orders, Jackson invaded Florida, the First Florida War, attacking the Seminole (the main Native Americans of Florida) but also, without orders to do so, Jackson attacked the Spanish (many Creeks were still allied to him, seeing the war as a resumption of their own civil war); he even executed some British citizens, which could have led to another war with Britain - there was a big conflict between Monroe and Jackson because Jackson went beyond Monroe’s orders 1819: the Adams-Onís Treaty: a treaty with Spain, the USA got Florida in return for a promise not to take Texas (Spain was weak because Latin American colonies were revolting) (the negotiator of this treaty was JQ Adams) the American Colonization Society (1819) was established to send freed slaves back to Africa, creating the country of Liberia there the idea behind this was that free black and free white people might not be able to live together 1819 the Missouri Crisis → 1820 the Missouri Compromise when Missouri applied to become a state, no one knew there was going to be a problem, the Era of Good Feelings was going on… but …. Northerners realized that if MO became a slave state, then the Senate would have more slave owners than people from “free states” -- they didn’t want to let that happen because conflicts over infrastructure development so they opposed MO becoming a state, surprising southerners and pro-slavery people it was a really big fight: the end of the Era of Good Feelings examples: Thomas W. Cobb of Georgia: “You have kindled a fire which all the waters of the ocean cannot put out, which seas of blood can only extinguish.” In response, James Tallmadge of New York, who’d started the controversy by trying to emancipate the slaves in Missouri: “If a dissolution of the Union must take place, let it be so! If civil war, which gentlemen so much threaten, must come, I can only say, let it come!” Similarly, the 77-year-old Thomas Jefferson: “This momentous question, like a fire bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the union.” The conflict revealed that the South was much more committed to slavery than it had been twenty years earlier (because of the growth of cotton plantations; now Virginia made money selling slaves to the cotton lands, thousands of slaves were marched in chains in the winter from Virginia to the cotton lands) However, no southerners yet defended slavery as an actually good thing, that would come later. how the conflict was solved: Clay and Monroe arranged for Maine and Missouri to be admitted to statehood at the same time, leading the congressmen from Maine to support Missouri’s statehood even with slavery → Clay’s reputation grew from this some interesting little points: (Southern whites were alarmed that blacks living in the DC area came to the Congress galleries to listen to the debates) (Missouri’s constitution forbade free blacks from entering the state; and antislavery settlers in Missouri were violently opposed for awhile) a big part of the compromise was a law that no new state with territory above the line 36’30 would have slavery (later, in the 1850s, leading up to the Civil War, the Kansas-Nebraska Act would cancel this “Missouri Compromise Line)) to sum up: the balance of power in the Senate was at stake; it was solved by the creation of Maine along with Missouri and creating the Missouri Compromise Line at 36’30 the Monroe Doctrine independence movements in Latin America → the Monroe Doctrine (actually written by JQA) which said: no new European colonies in the Americas (actually relied on British disinterest in colonization, until after the Civil War, because the USA could not have stopped Britain from making new colonies) however, the US still refused to recognize Haiti the Panic of 1819: western land speculators, “hard times” some blamed the new BUS for the panic the managers of the Baltimore branch of the BUS were found to have embezzled (stolen) $1.5 million → Maryland tried to tax the bank → McCulloch v. Maryland Monroe was re-elected in 1820: the only time in US history that voters did not turn against a president during a nationwide economic depression 1820 Monroe Denmark Vesey’s revolt (1822), one of the most famous slave revolts in US history: Denmark Vesey was a carpenter in Charleston, South Carolina. He’d been born in the West Indies, visited Africa and various Caribbean islands, then he was sold to a French plantation on Haiti, but he was returned to the slave dealer for a refund; thus he got to Charleston, where he won the lottery and was able to buy his freedom. He was a leader in the local AME church, where he evidently frequently spoke about the injustice of slavery. There never was any revolt, no white people were actually killed, but he was accused of planning a revolt, and he and several dozen others were executed or sold. Four black witnesses were rewarded for informing. No one today knows whether Vesey was actually plotting any kind of rebellion, but he probably was, since no one who was executed claimed to be innocent. (The church Vesey went to is the one where the white guy shot several people a few months ago.) South Carolina’s John Calhoun, formerly a nationalist, became more adamant about slavery and states’ rights (1824): the Sectional Tariff: “sectional” because representatives voted for or against it according to their “section” or region of the US: the south was against this tariff, the north was for it, and the balance of power was in the west 1824 John Quincy Adams 1824: four different “Republican” candidates ran against each other, so it wasn’t a real party anymore; in the end, John Quincy Adams beat Andrew Jackson because of the “Corrupt Bargain” with Henry Clay the election was super close, Jackson got the most votes but not enough to win; Adams came in second, and Henry Clay was third what Jackson called the Corrupt Bargain was that Clay gave his support to Adams so Adams won the election (even though Jackson had more votes) and Clay got to be Secretary of State in his anger over this, Jackson formed the Democratic Party to work to get him elected in 1828 basically, over a period of several years, the Democratic-Republican Party split into the Democratic Party, led by Andrew Jackson, and the Whig Party, led by Adams and Clay); the Republicans stopped existing the Erie Canal (finished 1825) a huge canal project built connecting the Hudson River (which flows through NYC) to the Great Lakes - when it was finished, someone could go by boat from Europe through New York City through the Erie Canal deep into the northwest, all the way to Minnesota, Chicago, and so on - it was the biggest canal project so far in US history and many people thought the investors would lose money but it was very successful and they made a lot of money lower transportation costs → lower costs on many goods; competition often drove local artisans or farmers out of business most farmers in the north farmed primarily for the market by 1820, and bought products such as shoes, hats, cloth, furniture, tools, guns, and clocks → the growth of NYC, and even more startling growth in the cities along it (such as Albany, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo; in the 1820s these cities filled mostly with Yankees from New England, but some Irish immigrants were arriving as well; → the area along the canal with all these new towns became the “Burned Over District” in the Second Great Awakening, where the religious revivals were most fervent The fact that ships from Europe usually came to NYC first game its merchants a huge advantage over other cities along the North American coast first, mostly because they could act sooner on information about the prices in Europe many German, Scandinavian immigrants to the NW (The frontier stage of NW states, especially Ohio, was so short because of the migration made easy by the canals.) immigration and the House of Representatives: most immigrants prefered to move to northwestern states and territories (such as Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois) because they could start small farms there, while in the southwest they would have had to compete with people who owned many slaves also, many German immigrants had left behind very low social status in Germany, so that they identified with slaves a little and opposed slavery because most immigrants went to the northwest, the white population of free states was eventually much greater than the white population of the slave states therefore, from about 1830 forward, the free states will dominate the House of Representatives boom in canal building (stopped when railroad appeared; most canal diggers were Irish immigrants) culture in the USA at that time Washington Irving (active 1810s to 1830s): Rip Van Winkle; the Legend of Sleepy Hollow, featuring the Headless Horseman, Columbus’ flat earth, Washington’s cherry tree James Fenimore Cooper: the romantic western hero; The Leatherstocking Tales: The Deerslayer, The Last of the Mohicans, The Pioneers, The Prairie (1820s) - the first American whose novels were popular in Europe, which was a big deal to Americans the “Tariff of Abominations” (1828) à the Nullification Crisis (resolved by the Compromise Tariff of 1832) 1828 Jackson (Democratic Party,created by andrew ) politics and Jacksonian Democracy: the end of property qualifications → nearly universal white male suffrage Jackson portrayed himself as “the common man” (South Carolina and Virginia were the last states to abolish property qualifications [at the Civil War and in 1850]) new states in the west tried to attract settlers by offering universal male suffrage → old states granted suffrage to try to slow emigration to the west (→ universal white male suffrage revealed “white” and “male” more clearly; free blacks lost the right to vote in many states; when they could vote, they supported the Whigs) the Congressional nominating caucuses (common before 1828) → nominating conventions with platforms (common since 1828) the convention is where the party members choose their candidates for the election the platform is a statement of the party’s principles the Spoils System: the political party that won the election would give the government jobs to its supporters “to the victors go the spoils” created by Jackson the Indian Removal Act (1830) - an act that forced the Cherokee out of the south (Georgia) to the west it was controversial then, but generally popular with Jackson’s voters (the Cherokee Nation; Sequoyah and the Cherokee language → literacy rate higher than white people) despite Worcester v. Georgia: (1832): Andrew Jackson ignored Marshall’s decision against the Indian Removal Act: “Now let him enforce it.” - the last famous Marshall court case → the Trail of Tears (1838) to Oklahoma (in 1866 most of Oklahoma was also taken from the Native Americans → the Oklahoma Land Rush of 1889) → more land in the South for cotton, the expansion of slavery the Nullification Crisis a. the South Carolina Exposition and Protest (1828; John Calhoun wrote it anonymously because he was Vice President) threatened secession over the tariff tariff started being a big fight in 1810s but during Jackson’s presidency it became a huge fight b. John Calhoun: the foremost defender of slavery in the antebellum period, “the peculiar institution” of the South --- “peculiar institution” = slavery c. the Webster—Hayne Debate (1830): “Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable!”[1] (One hundred thousand copies of this speech were sold, more than any previous speech in history.) It had a huge affect on opinion in the North, contributing to that region’s eventual stance the Civil War. d. the idea of states’ rights South Carolina actually nullified (states could cancel federal law) the tariff (1832) → the Compromise Tariff (1833) & the Force Bill (1833) [1] “When my eyes shall be turned to behold for the last time the sun in heaven, may I not see him shining on the broken and dishonored fragments of a once glorious Union, on States dissevered, discordant, belligerent; on a land rent with civil feuds, or drenched, it may be, in fraternal blood! Let their last feeble and lingering glance rather behold the gorgeous ensign of the republic, now known and honored throughout the earth, still full high advanced, its arms and trophies streaming in their original luster, not a stripe erased or polluted, nor a single star obscured, bearing for its motto, no such miserable interrogatory as ‘What is all this worth?’ nor those other words of delusion and folly, ‘Liberty first and Union afterwards’; but everywhere, spread all over in characters of living light blazing on all its ample folds, as they float over the sea and over the land, and in every wind under the whole heavens, that other sentiment, dear to every true American heart,--Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable!” [1] With similar methods Jackson seized about 3/4 of Alabama and Florida, 1/3 of Tennessee; 1/5 of Georgia and Mississippi. 1832 Jackson the Bank War: (the president of the Bank, Biddle, of the US tried to renew its charter, but:) Jackson vetoed the charter of the Bank of the United States (1832), and then withdrew government funds (1833), which made the bank unable to stay in business this led to a fight because many people wanted the bank to exist (the sort of people who had been Federalists when the Federalist Party existed) there were even riots against the bank the conflict over the bank led Jackson’s opponents to form a new party: the Whig Party formed the Whig Party was mostly made of the kind of people who had been Federalists, although of course American culture had changed and some of the issues had changed one important way the culture had changed was that American politics were more democratic (because of universal white male suffrage) than it had been back in the days of Washington, Adams, and Jefferson they chose the name “Whig” because the Whigs in England had stood against royal “tyranny” and the Whig Party accused Jackson of acting like a king some famous Whigs: John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, and Daniel Webster initially the Whig Party was just people who didn’t like Jackson, so even John Calhoun was a Whig for a while, but later: the Whig Party stood for “the American System”: which meant high tariffs to protect American industry from imports, and using the profit from the tariffs to build up America’s infrastructure such as by building roads and canals and later railroads the Democratic Party until the Civil War: opposition to national bank and national economic planning, protecting slavery, territorial expansion; limited federal government; appealed to people who saw themselves as outsiders (like Irish immigrants), plantation owners, (and New York’s export merchants): “democracy” for the average white man, not for women, blacks or Native Americans consequence of destroying the Bank of the US: deregulated banks → much more credit → speculation (borrowing money to buy investments) on western land → the Specie Circular (letter about gold and silver) (which Jackson wrote in 1836, as a “lame duck”) required payment for public lands in gold or silver rather than paper money → so people thought the banks must be in trouble → the Panic of 1837 the Lowell System, the Lowell Girls - Lowell was a guy who memorized the structure of an industrial loom, spying in Manchester, England and moved to the US and started factories in the town called Lowell, Massachusetts - he employed young women, known as “the Lowell Girls” to work in his factories for several reasons: so many men had migrated west and there weren’t yet many immigrant men to employ, and because he believed women would be more obedient, less likely to go on strike or form unions - he created dorms for the girls to live in in order to make sure wouldn’t go out and party, the idea was that young unmarried women needed to be protected; if they lost their virginity before marriage they were considered prostitutes and he didn’t want his factory getting a bad reputation - in the dorms, older women know as “mothers” made sure girls didn’t go out and party - Lowell’s factories succeeded and he made a lot of money and Lowell became a prosperous town, a very important part of the American industrial revolution - however, Lowell was disappointed in one way: the girls did go on strike and demand higher wages or better working conditions sometimes - this happened between 1814 and the 1850s 1815-1828 24. Westward migration from 1815 to 1840: a. After the war, Jackson forced even Creeks who had been allied to him to give up their land (in what is today Alabama and Georgia); President Madison ordered Jackson to let those Creeks return to their land but Jackson refused to obey and Madison was afraid to challenge him b. Jackson then made a fraudulent treaty with unauthorized Cherokees, and the Senate ratified it[1] → expansion into the “Southwest” which became cotton land, the Deep South c. (Jackson and his family made money speculating on this land) d. (Jackson, Mississippi named for him by grateful migrants) e. (The Southwest remained a violent frontier society for a long time, not only the violence of slavery but gambling, prostitution, fistfights, shootouts, duels, knife fights, lynchings: but migration continued because of the cotton boom; most slaves were transported to the area in chain gangs, marching about twenty-five miles a day and sleeping on the ground, usually in the winter when their labor wasn’t needed) f. (similarly, in the North, a treaty with the Wyandot Native Americans in 1817 took most of their land, opening opportunities for white settlers; by 1821 most of Illinois and a lot of Michigan territory had been surrendered by Native Americans; by 1820 Ohio was the 4th most populous state, many migrants to it came from the South; often Scots-Irish, they were called “Butternuts” or “Hoosiers,” one of them was Lincoln’s father who moved north to Indiana because of his opposition to slavery; Butternuts like Lincoln resented having to compete with slavery and resisted efforts to legalize slavery in the new territories; other stuff on migration west from the North: Johnny Appleseed, the name Springfield; conflict between the Yankees and the Butternuts, though there were other groups as well, including remaining Native Americans, old French settlements, the extinction of the passenger pigeon; northern speculators encouraged the growth of towns to help their landholdings gain value; repeated western migration usually the result of failure, Laura Ingalls Wilder’s family’s story) → Britain didn’t leave the western forts (Detroit, etc.) Britain traded with the Native Americans enabled Native Americans to resist western expansion conflict in US bt people who did not want to pay debts and people who wanted to move west, who wanted to pay the debts so that B would leave and stop trading with NA under the AoC, Congress couldn’t do anything about it couldn’t work out a unified trade deal with Spain A few rebellions around the time of the Revolution: the Paxton Boys - at the time of Pontiac’s Rebellion - some backcountry PA people rebelled against the colonial govt of PA because the Paxton Boys wanted to fight Native Americans and take their land, but the govt of PA didn’t want to - the PB attacked the NA who were peaceful and then marched around Philadelphia the Regulator Movement - for many years between 1763 & 1770s - backcountry North Carolina guys who rebelled against some taxes and organized vigilante squads to protect themselves - these guys were violently defeated by the govt of NC, whose leaders became leaders during the Revolution, and so the backcountry NC guys were not enthusiastic about the Revolution the Green Mountain Boys - mid-1770s - colonial Vermont was a part of New York but the Vermont people wanted out of NY, so they organized a militia and fought - led by Ethan Allen, these guys fought for the Revolution, capturing Fort Ticonderoga in 1775; after the Revolution they were allowed to make a state independent of NY - THESE GUYS WON but pretty much all the others lost Shays’ Rebellion the Whiskey Revolt Fries’ Rebellion - not really much of a rebellion, but a misunderstanding between the Germans in PA (who were called Pennsylvania Dutch) and the government when the Germans tried to resist some taxation - many Federalists wanted to violently crush these guys too but the PA Dutch didn’t fight and Adams pardoned them - basically an overreaction by the Federalists… so it helped the Republicans get more popular in PA All over the place: backcountry guys against the coastal elite - bc they have different interests in VA this was Bacon’s Rebellion but after Bacon the VA leaders did a good job of cultivating the loyalty of the poor white people, using them as militias to help keep the slaves under control later, the elite guys tend to be Federalists, and the backcountry guys tended to be Republicans most state capitals were moved away from the coasts toward the backcountry by Republicans ie NY state’s capital is in Albany Seven Years War: Cause and Effect 1. High Cost of War - England was in debt, wanted to tax 2. Global Nature of the War - fought in Europe, North America & South Asia (became a fight between England and France over all their colonies) 3. Conflicts with Indians in Appalachia and Ohio - 1) various groups of Indians were fighting each other; 2) some of those groups were allied to the British and others were allied to the French; 3) the Native Americans who fought against the French would be allied to the British, and vice-versa; 4) there were a lot of conflicts between English settlers and Native Americans, but there were fewer French settlers, most of the French guys were just traders and the Native Americans were happy to trade, so most of the Native Americans were allied to France - one of the things to emphasize is that the Native Americans were not passive victims of European policy - in fact, beyond the Appalachians, in the Ohio Valley, the Native Americans usually had more power than the Europeans UNTIL the Seven Years’ War brought large French & British armies into that area British North American population growing crazy, needed more land to expand to (didn’t want to be poor) North American business people (includes George Washington) were speculating on western land (trying to buy it cheap before people moved there and then sell it more expensively when people did move there) - this was one of the main ways that people got rich in colonial history 4. William Pitt’s leadership - Pitt was an English Prime Minister - before he was PM, the war went badly for Britain, but then he became PM and his aggressive strategies enabled Britain to win the war (later, Pitt was even more popular with colonists bc he was one of the British people who defended the colonial POV during conflicts over taxation) ← you probably don’t need to know any of this 5. Colonial Militias and “Redcoat” Differences in Character and Discipline - colonial militias were hard to control because they ran away easily; the Redcoats were more professional soldiers - the militias didn’t play a very important part in winning the war, BUT they were important because colonists got military experience that paid off during the Revolutionary War 6. Treaty of Paris (1763) - the end of the war, the important thing is that France gave up all its claims to North America “No Taxation without Representation” 1. Sugar Act (1764) 2. Stamp Act (1765) 3. Grenville’s Ideas on Taxation 4. Colonial Ideas of “Rights” (vs. those of Parliament) 5. “Virtual Representation” 6. Types of Protests, Resistance to Acts 7. Sons of Liberty 8. Declaratory Act 9. Townshend Acts (Quartering Act, Duties) 10. Boston Massacre (1770) - angered many colonists, made them hate British soldiers (so it’s a step toward the war) (for the previous seven years, there was a new conflict pretty much every year; after the BM, colonists were still pretty angry, but no new sources of conflict happened until 1773) 11. Tea Act of 1773 12. East India Tea Company 13. Coercive Acts (Main Elements) 14. First Continental Congress 15. Lexington and Concord 16. Second Continental Congress 17. Declaration of Independence 18. Common Sense (by Thomas Paine) - as of late 1775, very few colonists were eager to declare independence from Britain; in early 1776 Paine’s Common Sense was published, and it was very effective in persuading many colonists to support independence (even after CS, when the war started only about ⅓ of the colonists were really enthusiastic about independence, about ⅓ more were still loyalists though loyalists tended to be less passionate than rebels; and the final ⅓ didn’t make up their mind very definitely, or didn’t care) Revolutionary War 1. Problems with Currency and Taxation - Britain didn’t have any big problems, because they were already a country, but the newly independent states had to find ways to tax and mint currency ASAP, and it was really hard to do during the war, so the American army was very poorly funded, and the states dealt with inflation and bad debt during and after the war (Hamilton in the 1790s eventually solved this, although a lot of people didn’t like Hamilton’s solution) 2. Reliance on Militias - there was an American army commanded by Washington, but there were a lot more militias (small military groups organized by patriots who weren’t directly controlled by Congress or Washington) 3. the Battle of Saratoga - the first really big American victory in the war, and when France saw this victory, France decided to join the fight the Battle of Yorktown - the final big American victory, when Cornwallis surrendered thousands of troops and Britain could no longer fight 4. Loyalism/Loyalists - people who remained loyal to Britain during the Revolution - during & after the war many of them had their property illegally but forcefully seized by patriots, so many of them fled west or to Canada, some went back to England 5. Republican Motherhood- reason to educate women Constitution 1. Articles of Confederation 2. Land Ordinance of 1785 3. Northwest Ordinance of 1787 4. Shay’s Rebellion 5. Constitutional Convention (Philadelphia) 6. Enlightenment Ideas 7. Compromises (Political, Regional, Economic) the “Great C” over representation (political compromise) the ⅗ compromise - political & regional the Commerce and Slave Trade Compromise (regional / economic) - some states didn’t want the federal gov’t to be able to regulate trade bc with that power perhaps it could outlaw slavery; other states insisted that the federal gov’t had to regulate trade - the compromise was that the slave trade would be outlawed in twenty years, and the gov’t could regulate trade, but no more discussion about outlawing slavery during the CC - looking ahead, southerners would oppose any federal gov’ts economic activity bc it could threaten slavery northern wanted federal govt (rather than state govts) to regulate trade southern didn’t want federal govt to control trade because IF the fed govt had that power, it might have the power to outlaw slavery, but agreed to the compromise after they agreed that they will not talk about slavery during the convention. 8. Outline of the Constitution Legislative Executive Judicial - very short Checks & balances 9. Ratification debate and of Bill of Rights Each state was supposed to have a meeting to vote on whether to ratify the C, and before the meetings lots of pamphlets for and against the C were published - the Federalist Papers were the most famous … the anti-Federalists (at that time it means they were against the C) were very divided and some were easy to defeat in arguments … in the end, ratification happened but it was controversial - the key thing is that the Federalists agreed to make a Bill of Rights (especially NY, VA) 10. Jefferson v Hamilton and Political Ideas - this is mostly a 1790s issue, not during the CC Washington’s Presidency 1. Main Members of His Cabinet 2. Judiciary Act (1791) 3. Whiskey (excise) Tax 4. Creation of Bank of US ← very big deal 5. Fugitive Slave Act - an act passed to help slaveowners recover runaway slaves 6. Whiskey Rebellion 7. Battle of Fallen Timbers (1794) and Treaty of Greenville (1795) (JW says: not a big deal) One of the Indian wars, Anthony Wayne Treaty of Greenville: 8. Jay’s Treaty (1794) 9. Pinckney’s Treaty (1795) - treaty with Spain allowing Americans to trade through New Orleans Washington’s Farewell Address Adam’s Presidency 2. XYZ Affair (1797) 3. Alien and Sedition Acts (1798) 4. Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (1798 – 1799) - Jefferson & Madison’s opposition to A&S Acts 5. Fries’ Rebellion (1799 – 1800) 1. Battles in 1775: a. the Battles of Lexington and Concord i. (with Paul Revere and the Minutemen; Longfellow’s poem The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere is very inaccurate historically, but is taken by many Americans as an accurate account) i. (Emerson’s poem Concord Hymn called the first gunshot of this “the shot heard round the world”) b. Fort Ticonderoga: Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys (with Benedict Arnold, the most famous traitor in American history) c. the Battle of Bunker Hill = the Battle of Breed’s Hill 2. January 1776: Thomas Paine, Common Sense: 3. the Second Continental Congress: a. the Olive Branch Petition b. the Declaration of Independence (July 4, written by Thomas Jefferson): “all men are created equal… life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” i. (John Hancock’s famously big signature) c. (adopts the Articles of Confederation in 1781) d. Note that the crises of 1774-6 created the “union.” Prior to 1774 each colony was legally independent of the others; the only legal relationship that they had was that they were all part of the British empire. For the most part, they had little other relationships with each other either: little trade, for example. Of course they had been slowly growing more related since the Great Awakening, but until 1774 at least they still did not think of themselves as anything like a “union.” It was the revolution, the need to join together to resist the British authorities more effectively, that forced the colonies together into a union. Notice that the colonies did not declare independence individually but as a union, and that they did not write new constitutions for themselves until the Congress had authorized that. In that sense, the union even precedes the states! However, in a legal sense, the states came first: at the Declaration of Independence, the 13 colonies became 13 states. Only later (in 1781) were the Articles of Confederation adopted, creating an official union. The only reason these ideas really matter is that later there will be big fights over the rights of the states versus the rights of the central “federal” government. The states’ rights advocates will point out that the states were formed first, and their opponents who favor a stronger federal government will argue that the union came first in reality, if not legally. Obviously I think the federalists had the better argument—but it’s probably just a matter of opinion! What do you think? 4. (Patrick Henry in the VA assembly: “Give me liberty or give me death!”) 5. (Nathan Hale: “I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country.”) The Revolutionary War 6. British advantages:: navy, money, organization, Loyalists, colonial desertions; Colonial advantages: Washington and British incompetence, experience in the French & Indian War, desperation, France, division in Britain 7. the Battle of Saratoga (1777) → alliance with French, arranged by Ben Franklin (the Marquis de Lafayette was the most famous French soldier during the wary) 8. winter at Valley Forge (1777-8): Prussian advisor Baron von Steuben (marching) 9. (the Sullivan Campaign = the Sullivan Expedition: Washington orders Sullivan “not merely to defeat but to destroy” the Iroquois; he burns over 40 villages à maybe leads Iroquois to nickname Washington “town destroyer”) 10. (John Paul Jones: “I have not yet begun to fight”) 11. (the Battle of the Chesapeake: a French naval victory that enabled Washington’s victory at Yorktown) 12. Cornwallis surrenders at Yorktown (1781): the decisive battle 13. the Treaty of Paris (1783): US got land as far as Mississippi River 14. many Loyalists fled to Canada, lost property 15. women in the war: “Molly Pitcher,” (the myth of Betsy Ross and the flag) → Republican motherhood 1763-1776 From the French and Indian War to the Revolution: 1756 to 1763 1. the Seven Years’ War = the French & Indian War a. background: in the Ohio River Valley, various Native American groups had been fighting each other for a long time; some of them allied with the French for war and trade (the French were expanding from Quebec); others allied with the British - in the F&I War much of the fighting was done by Native Americans against each other as well as the Europeans - in the Ohio Valley, to some degree, the French & British got caught up in a fight between Native Americans, but then this turned into a global fight between France and Britain (The Battle of Jumonville Glen in 1754, in the Ohio River Valley, was the real beginning of the war: George Washington was sent to tell the French to stop building forts in Ohio, but they refused; he returned with troops and attacked. The French got their revenge a few days later, forcing Washington and his troops to leave the valley.) during the F&I War the colonies continued to trade with French colonies, smuggling molasses from French colonies into New England - this angered the British bc it was like treason b. consequence: the French lost all North American territories → Native Americans had no allies against British settlers → colonists feel safer and eager to expand westward c. consequence: England broke → higher taxes and the end of salutary neglect, not eager for more war 2. Pontiac’s Rebellion Pontiac & the Native Americans hoped to persuade France to go back to North America because the Native Americans knew they needed to be able to play France and Britain against each other to protect themselves and get better trade deals (better terms of trade) initially, Pontiac & the Native Americans captured most of the British forts west of the Appalachians (the French would have loved to be able to do that) /showed the strength of Native Americans smallpox blankets → the Proclamation of 1763 → Daniel Boone finds the Cumberland Pass (1769), becomes popular hero → the Paxton Boys in Pennsylvania (1763-4): another backcountry vs. eastern establishment conflict Pontiac’s Rebellion only confirmed for the government in Britain that an army was needed in North America, and that the North Americans should pay for it → the Sugar Act in 1764. from the Proclamation of 1763 to the Declaration of Independence as of the end of the F&I War in 1763… Britain was in a lot of debt from the war some British soldiers had seen the colonies thriving during the war including trading with France, Britain’s enemy “salutary neglect” = Britain had not been enforcing mercantilist policies very effectively … they had been letting the colonists smuggle the colonists paid very low taxes and prospered during the war constitutional / legal issues ~ taxation Pontiac’s Rebellion - Native Americans led by Pontiac fought against the British, → the Proclamation of 1763 - set a line that the colonists weren’t supposed to pass - intended to protect the Native Americans & prevent conflict (cost more $ to fight NA) the colonists saw this as keeping them poor: they wanted to be able to move to lands beyond the line and start farms the Sugar Act of 1764 3. the Regulator Movement = the War of the Regulators (1764-1771) in NC: against taxation, corruption, the Regulators crushed by local authorities’ militia → during the Revolution, the local authorities became Patriots while most of the population were Loyalists 4. the Sugar Act (1764) a. Partially for political reasons (to create offices for ambitious politicians), but also to pay for defending the colonies, the British government wanted to keep a standing army in North America. To pay for it, Parliament passed the Sugar Act in 1764. This act actually cut the duty on molasses in half relative the Molasses Act (1733), but this time the government took steps to enforce it, and the enforcement caused some resentment among colonial merchants. b. The most famous part of the Sugar Act is the duty (tax) it placed on the import of molasses (which the colonists could make into rum). But the Sugar Act actually cut in half the duty set by Molasses Act of 1733! The problem for the colonies was that this time Parliament intended to make sure it was enforced. c. (The Sugar Act put much stricter laws into effect concerning the records that ships had to keep about their cargoes, and it became possible to prosecute smugglers in Britain without juries rather than in North America, where judges and juries were usually sympathetic to smugglers. These new laws outraged many colonials as much as the tax itself.) d. (The Royal Navy had been cracking down on smuggling since 1760, and some commanders saw an opportunity to enrich themselves by seizing colonial cargoes without troubling too much about the details of the law. On the colonial side, although the new law made smuggling molasses more difficult, it was not quite impossible. Merchants sometimes resorted to unloading their boats secretly at night, or getting false papers for their ships. But it was much more dangerous for the smugglers that it had been, and in turn it was also dangerous for informers and enforcers of the law. Mobs threatened them, and colonial officials sometimes threw them in jail. Violence between shippers/smugglers and the Royal Navy even broke out occasionally: In 1764, Rhode Island officials even fired canons at a ship of the British navy that had tried to arrest some smugglers.) e. (Even before the Sugar Act passed, merchants in Boston had published an analysis of the molasses trade arguing that any tax at all would destroy it, predicting economic disaster if it were passed. Merchants in Providence, New York City, and Philadelphia published similar arguments both before and after the Sugar Act passed.) f. (One other important aspect of the Sugar Act, though generally forgotten today, was that the colonies were only allowed to ship lumber to Britain, thus cutting down one of the most valuable goods in colonial trade.) g. At the end of the French & Indian War, there was a severe economic depression in the colonies. Many colonists blamed the Sugar Act for that depression. They were wrong to do so: it was caused primarily by the end of government spending on the war. But the Sugar Act may have made the depression even worse. h. Most of the protests against the Sugar Act focused on the effect it was supposed to have to on the colonial economy, but a few noticed a constitutional problem with it: the fact that Parliament had passed the tax without input from North Americans seemed to violate the principle of “no taxation without representation.” i. resistance to the Sugar Act → Samuel Adams became prominent in Boston arguing that Parliament cannot tax the colonies: No taxation without representation j. British Parliament: virtual representation a. Parliament’s anger about the challenge to parliamentary authority → the Stamp Act in 1765 k. Committees of Correspondence were first established in response to this, and they played a big role in later opposition to the Stamp Act, the Townshend Acts, and the Revolution 5. the Currency Act (1764): forbade the Colonies from paying debts to British merchants in their own currencies (which the colonists could inflate to effectively decrease their debt) à economic problems for colonists; (Ben Franklin is famous for his protests in London against the Currency Act) a. key concept: inflation helps debtors and hurts savers/banks 6. the Stamp Act (1765) a. to pay for British troops in the colonies b. (especially affected newspapers, lawyers, etc. → vocal, influential opposition) c. the Stamp Act Congress → the Declaration of Rights and Grievances (anonymous and disunited, but the first united colonial response to anything) d. the Sons of Liberty: (violence, such as hanging stamp seller in effigy from Boston’s “Liberty Tree,” tearing down their houses, etc.; Samuel Adams usually had something to do with this; the most famous members were him, Paul Revere, and John Adams) e. nonimportation agreement = a boycott of British goods → the Stamp Act repealed in 1766 f. the Daughters of Liberty: homespun cloth g. (when the Parliament repealed the Stamp Act, it also passed the Declaratory Act, declaring it that it had the right to legislate for the colonies, including taxation; this was ignored by the colonists) h. VA Resolves 7. (the Quartering Act of 1765: forced colonial governments to provide quarter to British soldiers, this is different that the Quartering Act of 1774, one of the Coercive Acts) 8. the Townshend Acts (1767): taxes on glass, lead, paint, paper and tea a. → smuggling, especially in Boston → Writs of Assistance (1769) allowing British to search colonial homes → the Boston Massacre (1770) b. one person killed in the Boston Massacre was black, Crispus Attucks c. (interestingly, John Adams, future rebel and president, was the lawyer who defended the soldiers who committed the Boston Massacre, and they were acquitted; also, it was Paul Revere’s newspaper that named the event “the Boston Massacre”) d. Townshend Acts repealed (in 1770) Paul Revere’s famous engraving of the Boston Massacre (interpret it): 1. (Meanwhile: the colony of New York was trying to control its backcountry, and was being resisted by Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys) 2. the Tea Act of 1773 (enabling the East India Company to sell directly, undercutting the smugglers and enabling the British to collect the tax on tea) a. → the Boston Tea Party (1773) by the Sons of Liberty (who dressed as Native Americans because they were a symbol of liberty) b. → the Coercive Acts (1774) = the Intolerable Acts i. closing Boston Harbor by blockade = starving Boston → colonies cooperate in smuggling food into Boston ii. the Quartering Act, allowing British soldiers to take buildings for quarter if the colonies did not provide them (perhaps the soldiers sometimes took quarter in private homes; historians disagree about this) iii. (the Quebec Act, giving Roman Catholics the freedom of religion) c. → the First Continental Congress (1774): boycott of British goods, plan for 2nd Continental Congress 3. (John Woolman, Pennsylvania ended slavery, 1775; influenced by the Revolution’s ideology of liberty, all northern states did by 1804) 4. Battles in 1775: a. the Battles of Lexington and Concord i. (with Paul Revere and the Minutemen; Longfellow’s poem The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere is very inaccurate historically, but is taken by many Americans as an accurate account) i. (Emerson’s poem Concord Hymn called the first gunshot of this “the shot heard round the world”) b. Fort Ticonderoga: Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys (with Benedict Arnold, the most famous traitor in American history) c. the Battle of Bunker Hill = the Battle of Breed’s Hill 5. January 1776: Thomas Paine, Common Sense: 6. the Second Continental Congress: a. the Olive Branch Petition b. the Declaration of Independence (July 4, written by Thomas Jefferson): “all men are created equal… life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” i. (John Hancock’s famously big signature) c. (adopts the Articles of Confederation in 1781) d. Note that the crises of 1774-6 created the “union.” Prior to 1774 each colony was legally independent of the others; the only legal relationship that they had was that they were all part of the British empire. For the most part, they had little other relationships with each other either: little trade, for example. Of course they had been slowly growing more related since the Great Awakening, but until 1774 at least they still did not think of themselves as anything like a “union.” It was the revolution, the need to join together to resist the British authorities more effectively, that forced the colonies together into a union. Notice that the colonies did not declare independence individually but as a union, and that they did not write new constitutions for themselves until the Congress had authorized that. In that sense, the union even precedes the states! However, in a legal sense, the states came first: at the Declaration of Independence, the 13 colonies became 13 states. Only later (in 1781) were the Articles of Confederation adopted, creating an official union. The only reason these ideas really matter is that later there will be big fights over the rights of the states versus the rights of the central “federal” government. The states’ rights advocates will point out that the states were formed first, and their opponents who favor a stronger federal government will argue that the union came first in reality, if not legally. Obviously I think the federalists had the better argument—but it’s probably just a matter of opinion! What do you think? 7. (Patrick Henry in the VA assembly: “Give me liberty or give me death!”) 8. (Nathan Hale: “I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country.”) things to talk about someday: the Regulator Movement, the Paxton Boys, the Green Mountain Boys 1781 the Battle of Yorktown, the end of the war many Loyalists fled to Canada, lost property Republican motherhood (1780s to 1830s) 1780s, 1790s: mostly the economies did not flourish Washington Irving: Rip Van Winkle - patriotic, downplaying the economic problems tobacco prices were low → Virginians considered freeing their slaves George Washington actually did free his slaves the states owed lots of debt bc of the Revolution 1781 the Articles of Confederation the first time that the states were officially united in any way - makes a federal government a “federation” of 13 independent “states” a very weak federal government - the states were still very strong pass laws: 9/13 votes pass amendments: 13/13 votes → practically impossible (Rhode Island often was the lone objector) no executive, no army, no taxation couldn’t regulate trade, couldn’t make trade deals or treaties couldn’t force states to pay debts to Britain some states or people didn’t pay debts (violated the Treaty of Paris) some states didn’t protect loyalist property (violated the T of Paris) → Britain didn’t leave the western forts (Detroit, etc.) Britain traded with the Native Americans enabled Native Americans to resist western expansion conflict in US bt who want to expand and who want to not pay debts under the AoC, Congress couldn’t do anything about it couldn’t work out a unified trade deal with Spain Spain hoped to persuade Kentucky to leave the US KY needed to use the Mississippi River for shipping (tobacco) Spain closed New Orleans to American shipping NY made a separate trade deal with Spain under the AoC, Congress couldn’t do anything about it British merchants could take advantage of disunity no one could control the western territories very well trans-Appalachian settlers took land from Native Americans settled on land they hadn’t bought historians sometimes call the 1780s “the Critical Period” bc the US could’ve fallen apart elite people like Madison had less power than they expected one theme in US history is the growth of the federal government 1783 the Treaty of Paris, the official end of the war the US got a lot of land, all the way to the Mississippi 1786-7 Shays’ Rebellion Daniel Shays led a rebellion in Massachusetts against taxation (Mass needed to pay debt/owed Britain and rich Mass guys debt) many rebels were veterans of the Revolutionary War the rebels were defeated by a militia of people closer to the coast backcountry vs. coastal elite consequence: elite people were scared that later rebellions would be bigger → support for a stronger federal government to put down future rebellions there could be a bigger rebellion that the state might not be able to put down, will need help from other states the Northwest Land Ordinance (1787): arranged by Thomas Jefferson, basically the only major law passed by the AoC Congress the most important law passed by Congress under the AoC new states, not colonies - Kentucky, Ohio, etc. will be equal to the original 13 states process: first a territory, then a state no slavery in NW territory → the Civil War (Ohio, etc. will be strong for the North) free public education financed (only in nw) land divided into impractical squares of 6 miles by 6 miles, 1/36 was to pay for the schools (there was also a Land Ordinance in 1785 to survey the NW territories and it also provided for free public education) The Federalist Era: 1789 to 1801 1789 the Constitution went into effect = became the government the Constitution = “the highest law of the land” the 1st President was George Washington bc he was the most respected the Bill of Rights (10 amendments passed almost immediately): i. the First Amendment: freedoms of speech, press, religion and assembly ii. the Second Amendment: the right to bear arms (to form militias) iii. the Fourth Amendment: no quartering → appeals to New York, who suffered under the Quartering Act iv. the Fifth through Ninth amendments: the rights of the accused, Habeas corpus, warrants, trial by jury, etc. (“to plead the fifth” is to refuse to testify against yourself) v. the Tenth Amendment: all powers not given to the federal government are reserved for the states (conflict with the implied powers clause) implied powers clause = congress interprets, increase in power for congress tenth amendment = for the benefit of states, more state power slavery in the 1790s: following the Revolutionary War (1776-1804) beliefs in freedom and equality led northern states to end slavery – mostly by gradual emancipation (and payments to slave owners), so that there were still slaves for a long time. Most slavery was rural, because urban slavery was harder to manage because slaves were more likely to make successful escapes, so the urbanization of the north contributed to emancipation. But even Virginia considered ending slavery, because the tobacco market of the 1780s and 1790s was depressed, and the cotton market hadn’t picked up yet (so for instance, George Washington complained, “I have more working Negros than can be employed to any advantage in the farming system”). Later, in the early 1800s, when cotton made slavery profitable again, and the Revolutionary War was more distant, slavery regained its popularity. women’s status after the revolution: companionate marriage, the right to reject suitors - ex. Abigail and John Adams Abigail Adams’ letter to John Adams: “…remember the ladies, and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the Husbands. Remember all Men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the Ladies we are determined to foment a Rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation.” And John’s reply: “I cannot but laugh…. Depend upon it, We know better than to repeal our Masculine systems.” Relationship between Abigail and John = not like 1700s Women status turnpikes: Beginning in the 1790s, states often built “turnpikes,” long-distance paved toll roads. The states could not afford to pay for the roads, so they chartered private companies, but usually the state owned part of the stock. Investors in the company hoped to profit from tolls, but many also invested hoping that a turnpike would increase the land values in their towns or the profitability of their farms. (In fact, travelers went around the tollbooths so much that many of the investors, often just farmers or small businessmen, lost their money. But the states tried many other ways to finance the road building—taxes, lotteries, forced road service from property owners, etc., and nothing else worked very well.) So turnpikes were extremely popular politically. The first one was the Lancaster Turnpike in Pennsylvania, linking Lancaster to Philadelphia [62 miles], built and then owned by the Philadelphia and Lancaster Turnpike Road Company. On these roads, stagecoaches could usually travel 6-8 miles an hour; on the best roads, up to 11. Later, canals and then railroads made the turnpikes less efficient, and they were not much used until the invention of the automobile. Washington’s Presidency the Judiciary Act (1789): created the Supreme Court (the Constitution said there would be one, but didn’t describe it), as well as lesser courts: “circuit courts” and “district courts;” also created the office of Attorney General (the top lawyer). (John Jay is a little famous for being the first Chief Justice, but John Marshall was the first important one. We’ll notice him later.) cabinet - Washington had to create the positions (the Northwest Indian War = Little Turtle’s War; against the Miami Confederacy = the Western Confederacy; the Battle of Fallen Timbers won by General “Mad” Anthony Wayne in 1794 → Native Americans ceded Ohio; less famously, during the war, the Battle of Wabash = St. Clair’s Defeat was the greatest victory Native Americans ever had against US military) (the Constitution ratified by all 13 states in 1791) Alexander Hamilton: Washington’s Secretary of the Treasury. Washington asked Hamilton to recommend some policies to improve the US’s economy. Hamilton made some recommendations, but other people - especially Madison and Jefferson - very strongly opposed Hamilton’s recommendations. It became the first huge fight under the Constitutional federal government. Hamilton’s recommendations included: federal assumption of states’ war debts = the federal government would take over the debt of the states This would help some of the states, especially the states with a lot of debt. But it was not bc Hamilton wanted to help the states. What he wanted was to make the federal government more important and stable. He wanted the federal government to owe people money because those people would support the government (in order to get their money back). If rich people supported the government, Hamilton believed it would be more stable. Obviously the farmers did not like this! Their taxes paid the states’ debts, meaning that the government was a way of getting money from the farmers to richer people. This was really unpopular with Virginia because Virginia had paid almost all of its debt and didn’t want to help other states pay their debts(both rich and poor unhappy) According to Jefferson’s later recollection, the Virginians agreed to let the federal government assume states’ debt because they made a deal: Philadelphia and New York both wanted to be the capital of the USA, but the Virginians wanted it to be closer to Virginia, and Hamilton (who was powerful in New York) agreed to let them make a new city, which became Washington DC, and in exchange they agreed to let the federal government assume the debt. (Making a deal like this is called “logrolling.”) Jefferson later regretted this decision. Washington had huge hopes for the new city, but throughout the 1800s until the 1930s, Washington DC was just a few fancy buildings in the middle of a swamp. high tariff (Vocabulary: tariff = tax on imports = customs duty) This was to get money for the government. In fact, until the early 1900s, the main source of money for the federal government was the tariffs. But like all taxes, tariffs were unpopular with people who had to pay them. national bank = the Bank of the United States Jefferson, Madison, most farmers hated banks and bankers Hamilton wants people to start businesses (for thriving economy), people w business ideas, willing to work, being able to get money (need entrepreneurs to get money) Hated banks; but had a world view didn’t think it’s fair to make poor pay interest (taking advantage of poor people), giving them little bit of money but taking more money back from them, ruining peoples’ lives (debtors prison) Jefferson and Madison were on the side of debtors, always had debt /not the bankers 1600s 1700s Farmers are good, bankers are taking advantage of other peoples’ weaknesses Roman republic good and successful = governed by people who are strict constructionism vs. loose constructionism does the Constitution give them the right to create national bank? D. excise tax (sales tax) on hard liquor → the Whiskey Rebellion (1794) → demonstration of the strength of the new Federal government keeps whiskey as long as possible until bad year (weather, flood) responsible farmer makes a lot of whiskey Hamilton sees drunk people, this is a harmless good tax. Farmers of Pennsylvania rebelled Shays’ Rebellion vs Whiskey Rebellion - Shays’ put down by Massachusetts / WR put down by Washington (from elite’s POV, WR went better than Shays’ Rebellion) - Made people think the federal government was working - E. subsidies for manufacturers - did not get Hamilton wanted government to give money starting factories People didn’t do that what if Hamilton had won? Industrial rev could’ve happened sooner, or big rebellion Lost fight, America didn’t do IRev for a while (new states: Vermont and Kentucky) ---------------Washington’s first term------------------(major events) the Wars of the French Revolution → got a new government in France, other countries attacked France popular support for France but fear of another war with Britain → (We want France to win but we don’t want to fight with England) 1. France sent “Citizen (title) Genet” to try to build up support for France in the US 2. → the Proclamation of Neutrality (1793) - (for France, this is a betrayal) (later, Genet had to beg Washington to let him stay in the US because the Revolutionary government of France would probably have killed him, so he is sometimes considered the first political refugee in the US) 3. the Jay Treaty = Jay’s Treaty (1794): gave the coast what they wanted, but angered the west (→ the War of 1812) 4. the Pinckney Treaty = Pinckney’s Treaty (1795): right of deposit in New Orleans, to help the west (→ the Louisiana Purchase) 5. Washington's Farewell Address: no parties; isolation; credit (don’t default on the debt, we might need to borrow more money) Adams (1796: 1797-1801) the First Party System: c. 1796 to 1824: Federalists vs. Democratic Republicans = Anti-Federalists a. the Anti-Federalists called themselves “Democratic Republicans” but Jefferson didn’t like the term “democratic,” so they were usually called the “Republicans” – but this was not the same “Republican Party” that exists today (the modern one was started right before the Civil War) (different ideas) b. most Federalists were in the northeast; most Republicans in the south and west; many Federalists were merchants, while Republicans were farmers c. the Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L’Overture; (because of fear of encouraging slave revolt, Haiti was not recognized by the US until Abraham Lincoln; many Haitian refugees, especially slaveholders both French and black, fled to New Orleans, others went to Baltimore, Florida, and so on) d. Federalists tended to oppose slavery and sympathize with England and Haiti; Republicans tended to support slavery and sympathize with France e. main Federalists: Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, John Marshall f. main Republicans: Thomas Jefferson, James Madison g. party newspapers, Congressional nominating caucus 13. the Alien and Sedition Acts: a. the Quasi-War or Undeclared War on France in the Caribbean - not really a big war, just some French boats and American boats shooting at each other, capturing each other - but it could’ve led to a big war, so Adams’s government wanted to stop it by negotiation with France b. → the XYZ Affair - when the French diplomats arrived to negotiate, they demanded bribes before negotiating. Adams took this as an insult (because that’s not how diplomacy works: essentially, the French were demanding “tribute,” as if they had conquered the USA) and told Americans about it, calling the three French diplomats X, Y, and Z rather than by their real names. (If he’d told their real names, angry Americans might have murdered them.) That’s why it’s called the XYZ affair. When Americans found out that the French diplomats had demanded bribes, many of them got very angry, and the slogan was “a million dollars for war, not one penny for tribute,” meaning that they would pay taxes to pay for a war with France. (Republicans like Jefferson believed that Adams’s government was lying about the XYZ affair, but Adams was telling the truth.) c. → the Alien Act and the Sedition Act = the Alien and Sedition Acts - these acts were passed in the midst of the fury over the XYZ affair. The Alien Act gave Adams’s government the power to expel or deport foreigners (“aliens”) such as the French diplomats. Almost nobody was deported. The Sedition Act was more serious: it gave Adams’s government the power to put people in prison for opposing Adams’s government. So Adams’s government put some Republican newspaper editors in jail. (In private, Adams said he didn’t want this power and he didn’t want to put Republican newspaper editors in jail. But no matter what he said, he could’ve vetoed the Sedition Act, and chose not to.) … (Republicans at that time and most later Americans have seen the Alien and Sedition Acts as violations of the Bill of Rights - for example, the Sedition Act seems to violate the First Amendment’s promise that the federal government would make no law limiting the freedom of speech. This is one of the main reasons Adams is usually not remembered as a good president… some people even consider him one of the worst presidents. However, that’s not very fair to Adams because in fact it was Hamilton’s people, real Federalists, who really abused the government’s power at that time. Adams tried to stay above party politics, as Washington had done, the way a King of England would be supposed to.) This conflict over the Alien and Sedition Acts shows that USA hadn’t yet figured out how to do party politics yet. Since Republicans were not in power, they wanted to oppose the government, but they didn’t want to be disloyal to the country. On the other hand, Federalists including Adams saw all opposition as disloyalty to the country. It took a few more years before the concept of “loyal opposition” to the government became normal.) d. → the Virginia Resolutions and the Kentucky Resolutions = the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions written by Madison and Jefferson, establishing the idea of “nullification” - In the VA & KY Resolutions, Madison and Jefferson (who were the governors of VA & KY at that time) declared that they would not enforce the Alien & Sedition Acts in Virginia or Kentucky. In other words, they vowed to “nullify” those laws in Virginia and Kentucky. This is a big deal because it shows the problem of federal government: who is REALLY the boss in Virginia and Kentucky? Is it the federal government, or is it the governments of Virginia and Kentucky? This problem would last until the Civil War showed that the federal government is really the boss in the states. Since then, most Americans have agreed that state governments are not allowed to disobey the federal government. But even now, a few people think the states should have more “rights,” and these people are usually white racists, who resent the Civil War, and even more strongly resent the federal government’s role in the Civil Rights Movement (in the 1950s and 1960s, at the time of Martin Luther King, Jr.). This question wasn’t resolved at the time of the VA & KY Resolutions because Jefferson and the Republicans won most of the elections of 1800 and changed the Alien and Sedition Acts, so the question of “nullification” just went away. e. (→ the Nullification Crisis in 1832 - we’ll study this later - basically, the concept of “nullification” that Madison and Jefferson used in the VA & KY resolutions comes up again in a crisis in 1832 that nearly turned into a little Civil War) 14. “the Revolution of 1800” - This is what the election of 1800 was called. It was not a real revolution, just an election, but it was the first time in US history that a party who controlled the government lost power and another party took over. So for people at the time, who did not have very clear ideas about political parties or “loyal opposition” to a government, it felt a little like a revolution. Americans were proud that unlike the French Revolution (and many later revolutions), the Revolution of 1800 was bloodless - no one was killed, no one’s heads were cut off…. (One of the greatest things Adams did for the USA was leaving office without a fight. In some young countries, the incumbent ruler just declares the election invalid and kills some people who disagree with him. It’s hard to keep a democracy! Of course, hopefully Adams’s supporters would not have supported him if he’d tried to keep power through violence. But perhaps Washington could’ve done that - during the Revolutionary War, some soldiers had actually wanted him to overthrow Congress by force, but luckily for America he refused - so the precedent Washington set by voluntarily leaving office after two terms is even more important.) (Jefferson beat Adams because of the three-fifths clause: if not for the 3/5ths clause, some states with a lot of slaves would’ve had fewer electoral college votes, and Adams would’ve won. This made slavery a bit less popular among Federalists!) a. the Midnight Judges, including John Marshall - after an election, there are several months before the newly elected people take office. So, in this case, there were several months during which Adams knew that Jefferson had won the election of 1800, but Adams was still the president. (We call a politician in Adams’s situation “a lame duck.”) So what Adams did during that time was appoint a bunch of Federalist judges. The Republicans were obviously unhappy about that (because judges can’t be un-appointed: they usually serve for life), and called these judges “the Midnight Judges” as if Adams had appointed them at midnight. The most famous of them was John Marshall, who became the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Along with Alexander Hamilton, Marshall is one of the most important men in American political history who didn’t become a president. Marshall served as Chief Justice for about 30 years, and partially because of him Federalist ideas became more common in America during those decades even though Federalist politicians usually lost elections. 1640s the English Civil War: King Charles I vs. Parliament the war ended migration 1650s the Commonwealth / Interregnum - Oliver Cromwell the Navigation Acts - example of mercantilism mercantilism: colonies’ job is to support the mother country’s economy supplying raw materials, buying manufactured goods the Anglo-Dutch Wars New Amsterdam → New York 1660s the Restoration of Charles II Restoration Colonies: 1660s to 1688 **** Pennsylvania - very quickly grew South Carolina the Dominion of New England - Charles II & Edmund Andros *** Bacon’s Rebellion: 1676 *** former indentured servants (mostly white but some black) rebelled against the government of Virginia in Jamestown they wanted help fighting the Native Americans to take land the government of Virginia was controlled by rich men who already had land and wanted to trade peacefully with the Native Americans aftermath: the leaders of Virginia turned to slavery rather than indentured servitude the leaders of Virginia cultivated the loyalty of poor white people to help control their slaves, therefore the leaders of Virginia helped fight the Native Americans “white” vs. “black” - racism gave the poor white people higher status 1730s the Great Awakening context: religious reaction to the Enlightenment - emotional, not very intellectual involved all the British colonies of North America - shared culture began Jonathan Edwards: Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God George Whitefield - the Great Itinerant new denominations: “the new lights” vs. “the old lights” + new schools like Princeton new denominations such as Baptists were more democratic Georgia James Oglethorpe: a charity colony, a buffer between Florida (Spain) & SC not a religious colony (the Enlightenment) Peter Zenger’s trial - precedent for the freedom of the press - we’ll talk later the Molasses Act - a tax on molasses (sugar) the Stono Revolt - a slave revolt in South Carolina (they wanted to go to Florida) The Critical Period: 1781 to 1789 Short Story: The result of the war had shown that Great Britain would not rule the thirteen states (now “states” and no longer “colonies”), but it had not forged them into a single state. As of 1781, no one could be sure what relations the states would have with each other. By 1789, they had been welded together, under a centralized “federal” government that violated some of the principles of independence and embodied others. But there was disagreement about what exactly were the principles of the Revolution. Now the federal government of the United States had been established. It would survive at least two and a half centuries, but no one could be sure of that at the time. Long Story: 3 star IDs: the Articles of Confederation, the Northwest Ordinance, Daniel Shays, Shays’ Revolt, the Constitution, James Madison, the separation of powers, checks and balances, The Federalist Papers, 2 star IDs: the Critical Period 1 star IDs: Key Concepts: What were the weaknesses of the federal government under the Articles of Confederation? What were the goals of the Northwest Ordinance? How did the Constitution reflect the experience of British “tyranny?” How did the makers of the Constitution try to prevent future tyranny? The Young Republic: 1789 to 1812 1792 Washington re-elected 1796 Adams elected 1800 Jefferson elected in the “Revolution of 1800” 1804 Burr killed Hamilton in a duel Hamilton proposed to repay the original (“par”) value of the debt. The problem was that many of the soldiers, who had received the securities as pay, had sold them to speculators at a fraction of their value. When some people found out about Hamilton’s plan, they rushed to buy them from people who did not realize what was happening. Sleazy bankers were cheating the valorous veterans of the Revolutionary War, and Hamilton was cooperating. Madison was deeply offended, but Congress sided with Hamilton. Washington’s Second Term: Jay’s Treaty and Washington’s Farewell Address After Washington’s Farewell Address, most people realized that the primary candidates for President in the election of 1796 would be John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, because of their leadership during the Revolution. Many voters still believed that anyone who wanted to be President could not be trusted with the power, so like Washington before them, Adams and Jefferson both denied that they wanted to be President, and neither of them campaigned actively. Although Adams and Jefferson kept a dignified distance from the controversy, the partisans were busy accusing each other of treason. So Jefferson won the election, and his Vice President was Aaron Burr. In 1804, Vice President Aaron Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. 3 star IDs: Alexander Hamilton, the XYZ affair, the Alien and Sedition Acts, the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, nullification, the Revolution of 1800, John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, War Hawks, John Calhoun, Henry Clay, Tecumseh and the Prophet, William Henry Harrison, the Battle of Tippecanoe 2 star IDs: the Pinckney Treaty, the Quasi-War with France, the midnight judges, the Barbary Pirates, Aaron Burr 1 star IDs: Key Concepts: What kinds of people tended to be Federalists? What kinds of people tended to be anti-Federalists? Memorizing Presidents Now we will start memorizing the presidents: it’s not as hard as it sounds. Notice that you can remember much of this very easily. Chant to yourself, “Washington, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Jefferson, Madison, Madison.” Then remember that Jefferson was elected in “the Revolution of 1800” and you can reconstruct the first two columns without any further memorization. As for the third column, I don’t expect you to be able to fill it in from memory. I only want you to be able to put the event in the right box. For instance, if I tell you “Jay’s Treaty” you should know it happened in Washington’s second term; if I tell you “the XYZ affair,” you should be able to tell me it happened when John Adams was the President. Finally, don’t confuse learning this chart with actually learning the history. You don’t just need to know when the Louisiana Purchase was (Jefferson’s first term) but what it was. If you cannot write about anything in the third column, you have some studying to do! The War of 1812 3 Star IDs: Andrew Jackson, the Battle of New Orleans, the Hartford Convention, 2 Star IDs: 1 star IDs: Stephen Decatur, Key Concepts: From the Era of Good Feelings to 1828 Short Story: Most Americans felt very good about the results of the War of 1812, and with the Federalist Party out of politics there were a few years without major conflicts between Americans, so it has become known as the Era of Good Feelings. Until the end of the War of 1812, a lot of American attention had focused on the Atlantic Ocean and Europe, but with the conclusion of the war, American attention seemed to focus on the Americas instead. Spain’s former colonies won their independence from Spain, and President Monroe declared that Europeans were not welcome to make new colonies in the Americas—a position that became known as the Monroe Doctrine. Meanwhile in 1819 the USA negotiated an extremely favorable treaty with Spain, the Adams-Onís Treaty, acquiring Florida. Andrew Jackson forced many Native Americans out of western Georgia, and out of the states that became Alabama and Mississippi. Into these lands moved white people who were eager to set up cotton plantations. Cotton had been booming, as the new industrial factories of Britain had a seemingly insatiable demand for it. The Era of Good Feelings came to an abrupt end in 1819, when Missouri applied for statehood. Whether Missouri would be “a slave state” or “a free state” proved surprisingly explosive, dividing the North and South. The root problem was representation in the Senate. As you should remember, each state gets two senators, so adding a state would mean adding two senators. The problem was that the Senate was perfectly balanced between slave states and free states, and the North did not want to allow two more senators from a slave state. After a lot of passionate rhetoric from both sides, Henry Clay worked out the Missouri Compromise, by which Maine also became a state. 3 Star IDs: James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, the Monroe Doctrine, the Missouri Compromise, the Corrupt Bargain, the Tariff of Abominations 1 star IDs: the first protective tariff, the Adams-Onís treaty Jacksonian Democracy: 1828 to 1844 You should remember that in the early 1800s many leaders from New England had advocated secession from the United States, most notoriously in the debates at the Hartford Convention. (Less famously, hopes of secession were behind the events that led to Burr’s duel with Hamilton.) Ever since then New England had a reputation for being unpatriotic. The leadership from New England seized the Nullification Crisis as an opportunity to reclaim national leadership, and to put away their unpatriotic reputation—and they largely succeeded. The most famous example of their newfound nationalism is from a speech by Daniel Webster. … Let’s read the concluding lines of Webster’s Second Reply to Hayne, one of the most famous speeches in American history: When my eyes shall be turned to behold for the last time the sun in heaven, may I not see him shining on the broken and dishonored fragments of a once glorious Union, on States dissevered, discordant, belligerent; on a land rent with civil feuds, or drenched, it may be, in fraternal blood! Let their last feeble and lingering glance rather behold the gorgeous ensign of the republic, now known and honored throughout the earth, still full high advanced, its arms and trophies streaming in their original luster, not a stripe erased or polluted, nor a single star obscured, bearing for its motto, no such miserable interrogatory as ‘What is all this worth?’ nor those other words of delusion and folly, ‘Liberty first and Union afterwards’; but everywhere, spread all over in characters of living light blazing on all its ample folds, as they float over the sea and over the land, and in every wind under the whole heavens, that other sentiment, dear to every true American heart,--Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable! You should be able to see the nationalism in that speech. (Notice that it is only two sentences long, essentially: “When I die, let me not see the Union broken. Let my dying eyes see the Union and liberty preserved.” But there is a lot of very emotional language in there: “drenched… in fraternal blood,” “characters of living light blazing on all its ample folds”) Even though the Key Terms: 3 star IDs: the Kitchen Cabinet, the Nullification Crisis, the Bank War, the Trail of Tears, 2 star IDs: Martin Van Buren, 1 star IDs: Nicholas Biddle, Manifest Destiny and the Mexican War: 1844 to 1848 A smallpox epidemic on the Great Plains… 3 star IDs: Manifest Destiny, the Oregon Boundary Dispute, James K. Polk, Fifty-four forty or fight, the Rio Grande River, the Mexican Cession, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, 2 star IDs: 1 star IDs: Zachary Taylor Key Concepts: How did Whigs and Northerners feel about the Mexican War? Compare and contrast the Whigs’ reaction to the Mexican War to the Federalists’ reaction to the War of 1812. From the Mexican War to the Civil War The main idea of this section is what where the immediate causes of the Civil War. You should already be aware of some of the more distant causes: economic differences and conflict over the tariff, and moral and religious conflict over slavery. But more immediately, the new land in the west led, as many feared it would, to increased sectional tension, and the new generation of leaders was unable (or unwilling) to solve their disagreements through nonviolent compromise. That is the famous picture of John Brown. 3 star IDs: the Gold Rush of 1849, San Francisco, the Compromise of 1850, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, Stephen Douglas, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Bleeding Kansas, James Buchanan, Abraham Lincoln, the Dred Scot Case, 2 star IDs: the Mormon War, 1 star IDs: the Pony Express, Key Concepts: How did western expansion lead to the Civil War? The Civil War 3 star IDs: the Anaconda Plan, Robert E. Lee, the Homestead Act, the Morrill Act, the Morrill Tariff, the Battle of Antietam, the Emancipation Proclamation, the Battle of Gettysburg, the Gettysburg Address, the NYC Draft Riots, William Tecumseh Sherman, Sherman’s March to the Sea, 2 star IDs: 1 star IDs: Key Concepts: Which slaves were not directly affected by the Emancipation Proclamation? The Roaring Twenties: 1919 to 1929 1919: the 18th Amendment 3 star IDs: the Model-T, Fordism, Taylorism, scientific management, The Principles of Scientific Management, the flapper, the Harlem Renaissance, jazz, the Scopes “Monkey Trial,” the Lost Generation, F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby, 2 star IDs: Amos ’n Andy, talkies, Duke Ellington, Louis Armstrong, Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises 1 star IDs: Bessie Smith, A Farewell to Arms, Key Concepts: What groups of people benefited most from the prosperity of the 1920s, and what groups benefited least? What were the economic trends in the late 1920s? Palmer Raids, the steel strike of 1919 The Great Depression: 1929 to 1938 On October…1929, the stock market crashed. 3 star IDs: Hoovervilles, John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 2 star IDs: Hooverflags, the Bonus Army, 1 star IDs: Douglas MacArthur, For Whom the Bell Tolls, Key Concepts: How was Hoover’s response to the Great Depression similar to and different from FDR’s? How were the various policies of the New Deal supposed to work? Who opposed the New Deal from the right? Who opposed it from the left? How did the New Deal Coalition change the Democratic Party? How did the Great Depression affect traditional male and female roles in the family? World War II: 1938 to 1945 Harry Truman was a product of the Democratic Party machine of Kansas City. Pendergast… 3 star IDs: Rosie the Riveter, the Manhattan Project, Truman 2 star IDs: Pearl Harbor, Douglas MacArthur, Eisenhower, 1 star IDs: Pendergast, Frank Sinatra Key Concepts: Why were so many Americans opposed to entering World War II? How did the war affect the American economy? The Seventies: 1973 to 1980 3-Star Identifications Jimmy Carter, the Camp David Accords, the Iranian Revolution, the Iran Hostage Crisis, The Unipolar World: 1990 to 2011 Timeline 1990 the First Gulf War 1991 Clarence Thomas 1992 Rodney King, the LA Riots Bill Clinton elected 1993 Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell 1994 Proposition 187 the Contract with America 1995 government shutdown 1996 welfare reform the Personal Responsibility and Right to Work Act – the official name for the welfare reform bill passed in 1996 Monica Lewinsky - 1992 election recession → opposition to NAFTA Ross Perot’s “giant sucking sound” Clinton: It’s the economy stupid Perot takes more vote from Bush → Clinton 1990s economy: the internet boom, the dot com bubble balanced federal budgets Don’t Ask, Don’t tell (1993) Appendix B: Complete Chart of Presidents and Main Events : 1789 George Washington the Judiciary Act 1792 George Washington Jay’s Treaty (undated: the Pinckney Treaty; the cotton gin; the Whiskey Rebellion) the Farewell Address 1796 John Adams the Quasi-War with France the XYZ Affair the Alien Act, the Sedition Act the Virginia Resolution, the Kentucky Resolution the election of 1800: the “Revolution of 1800” the “Midnight Judges” 1800 Thomas Jefferson Marbury v. Madison the Louisiana Purchase Burr and Hamilton fought a duel 1804 Thomas Jefferson the Embargo Act undated: the steamboat 1808 James Madison the Non-Intercourse Act Fletcher v. Peck the War of 1812 1812 James Madison the Hartford Convention the Treaty of Ghent the Battle of New Orleans 1816 James Monroe the Adams-Onís Treaty McCulloch v. Maryland the Missouri Compromise – 1820 1820 James Monroe the Monroe Doctrine the election of 1824: the “Corrupt Bargain” 1824 John Quincy Adams the Erie Canal the South Carolina Exposition and Protest election of 1828: scandalous 1828 Andrew Jackson the Indian Removal Act Nat Turner’s Revolt Worcester v. Georgia 1832 Andrew Jackson the Bank War the Force Bill, the Compromise Tariff the Specie Circular 1836 Martin Van Buren the Panic of 1837 the Amistad the election of 1840 “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too” undated – the Republic of Texas 1840 William Henry Harrison John Tyler the Webster-Ashburton Treaty the Dorr Rebellion the annexation of Texas the election of 1844: “Fifty-four forty or fight.” 1844 James K. Polk the Mexican War the Wilmot Proviso the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo 1848 Zachary Taylor Millard Fillmore the California Gold Rush the Compromise of 1850 1852 Franklin Pierce Commodore Perry forced Japan open to trade the Gadsden Purchase the Kansas-Nebraska Act Preston Brook beat Charles Sumner with a cane 1856 James Buchanan Dred Scot v. Sanford the Lincoln-Douglas Debates John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry the election of 1860: Lincoln elected → South Carolina and other states seceded 1860 Abraham Lincoln the Civil War the Homestead Act the Morrill Act the Battle of Antietam the Emancipation Proclamation the Battle of Gettysburg the New York Draft Riots the election of 1864: Sherman’s victories in the South → Lincoln reelected; Don’t Change Horses in the Middle of the Stream 1864 Abraham Lincoln Andrew Johnson Sherman’s March to the Sea Lee surrendered at Appomattox Lincoln assassinated the 13th Amendment, the Freedman’s Bureau the midterm election of 1866: Radical Republicans Undated: Presidential Reconstruction Congressional Reconstruction the election of 1868: Waving the Bloody Shirt 1868 Ulysses S. Grant 1872 Ulysses S. Grant the election of 1876: the “Compromise of 1877” 1876 Rutherford B. Hayes 1880 James Garfield Chester Arthur Garfield assassinated by a stalwart the election of 1884: “Mugwumps” vote Cleveland (Democratic) bc GOP candidate Blaine so corrupt 1884 Grover Cleveland (I) 1888 Harrison 1892 Grover Cleveland (II) the election of 1896: McKinley defeated Bryan, who gave the Cross of Gold speech 1896 McKinley the Spanish-American War the election of 1900: McKinley won with T Roosevelt as running mate 1900 McKinley Theodore Roosevelt McKinley assassinated the Anthracite Coal Strike → the Square Deal 1904 Theodore Roosevelt 1908 Taft the election of 1912: the Bull Moose Party (Progressive Party) split Republicans 1912 Woodrow Wilson the election of 1916: “He Kept Us Out of War” 1916 Woodrow Wilson the election of 1920: “Return to Normalcy” – Debs nearly 1 million votes 1920 Harding 1924 Calvin Coolidge the election of 1928: “Republican Prosperity” 1928 Herbert Hoover the midterm election of 1930: Democrats took both houses on Prohibition 1932 Franklin Delano Roosevelt the New Deal the midterm elections of 1934 → the 2nd New Deal 1936 Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1940 Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1944 Franklin Delano Roosevelt Harry S. Truman the midterm elections of 1946: GOP took Congress with “Had Enough?” the election of 1948: Truman beat the “Do Nothing” GOP Congress and the Dixiecrats 1948 Harry S. Truman the election of 1952: “I Like Ike” 1952 Dwight Eisenhower 1956 Dwight Eisenhower 1960 John F. Kennedy Lyndon Baines Johnson the election of 1964: the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party 1964 Lyndon Baines Johnson the election of 1968: chaos at the Democratic Convention in Chicago 1968 Richard M. Nixon the election of 1972: Nixon won with “the Southern Strategy” (and cheating) 1972 Richard M. Nixon Gerald Ford the midterm elections of 1974: Democrats gain many seats → defund the Vietnam War 1976 Jimmy Carter the election of 1980: the Iran Hostage Crisis 1980 Ronald Reagan 1984 Ronald Reagan the election of 1988: “Read My Lips: No New Taxes” 1988 George H. W. Bush the election of 1992: Ross Perot 1992 Bill Clinton the midterm elections of 1994: the Contract with America → the Republican Revolution 1996 Bill Clinton the election of 2000: Bush v. Gore 2000 George W. Bush 2004 George W. Bush 2008 Barack Obama Appendix Z: Methods and Reasons Students: You can skip this part, and probably should because it won’t help you in any way. This is really for your parents. (But of course no better way of getting you to read something will probably ever be invented than telling you that it’s for your parents and not for you. So, knock yourselves out.) I could not find any completely satisfactory texts of US history for students preparing for the College Board’s standardized tests on the history of the United States: the Advanced Placement (AP) test, and the SAT II subject test. So eventually I decided to make my own. The SAT II test consists entirely of multiple-choice questions, so students preparing for that test primarily need to recognize the significant people and events of American history. Some basic skills with charts, maps and political cartoons are also necessary. Inevitably, some of the questions ask about something that the student hasn’t learned (or has forgotten). Even so, students familiar with the main ideas of American history can correctly guess—perhaps “figure out” would be better—the answers to most of these questions. In fact many of the questions appear designed to require that kind of thought process. So, more ambitious students must learn to analyze historical events and processes in order to solve those questions (we could say “in order to guess more accurately”). All of that applies to the AP test as well, because half of that test consists of a multiple-choice section nearly equivalent to the SAT II test. (I advise all students preparing for the AP test to take the SAT II test: there is absolutely no extra preparation involved, so they might as well.) But the other half of the AP test requires students to write three essays, so an AP student must have some skills that are not required for the SAT II: basic English writing ability, and also some idea about what qualifies as a good thesis statement and good analysis. The first essay is a “document-based” question (DBQ), which requires the students to recognize what historical situations are relevant to the documents, and then to write an essay about those situations, using the documents as evidence. In other words, it is designed to test a student’s ability to write an undergraduate-level history paper. In order to help students prepare for that, I’ve excerpted many primary sources and analyzed them. Hopefully the students will learn by example; of course we’ll also practice in class. The second and third essays are “free response” questions (FRQs), meaning that the student must write an essay, relying entirely on her memory and understanding of US history, in response to essay prompts. These FRQs present the real challenge for ambitious students, because they often ask very particular questions, requiring deeper knowledge than the multiple-choice questions or the DBQ. In order to get a very good score on an FRQ, a student must know her subject very well—in addition to being a decent writer. But since there are so many potential essay topics, a student aiming for very good FRQ scores must study a lot of American history very well. Such a student will do very well on the multiple-choice questions on either the SAT II or AP test! Sounds tough, and it is. But there is good news for ambitious students. First of all, a student can get a 5 without getting great scores on either of the FRQs, let alone both of them. In fact, if a student does really well on the other sections, she can even bomb one of the FRQs pretty badly and still score a 5. Of course the only sound strategy is to try to do very well on the FRQs, and there are a few techniques we can use to improve FRQ essays, almost regardless of how well a student knows the material. The texts by The Princeton Review, Kaplan, Barrons, and TEA don’t cover the material deeply enough, and they have some inaccuracies (though probably none likely to hurt a student’s score). They all oversimplify history too much to be useful to an ambitious AP student. On the other hand, high school textbooks are just too long to be convenient. (Ordinary textbooks are notoriously inaccurate as well, but AP textbooks are usually at least a little better.) Another problem is that the reading level of many good texts is simply too difficult. For example, the best text I’ve found, the article on US history from Encarta, was just a little too hard for many students. (It could have been a little more detailed as well.) The Princeton Review’s text, trying to be clever, is also confusing at times: the kind of student who can appreciate its jokes without trouble will not need a review at such a low level. An unfortunate paradox: these texts write at a high level, and teach at a low level. My text covers American history in sufficient detail that students will be able to get perfect scores on the College Board tests even if they don’t use any other texts—but as briefly as possible, so that in emergencies it might be possible for my students to read the text in two or three weeks. I’ve tried to make my text especially interesting, so that it will be memorable. Unlike most other texts intended for high school students, I do not censor information about sex, violence, racism, exploitation, and so on. This is real history, not a kid’s cleaned-up version. (I understand that some of you might wish to protect your children from this kind of history, but, sadly perhaps, that’s a lost cause in the internet age. By the time a student is old enough to take an AP test, there is very little remaining to protect them from.) Secondly, I focus a little more on the personal lives and dramas of the famous people, including their flaws. That is not required for any test, but it is usually helpful because makes the important material easier for students to remember. For example, many students find Madison’s and Hamilton’s politics at least a little easier to remember when they also know about their personal relationship. Another reason my text differs is that most texts underestimate students’ intelligence and interest. Far from being bored by topics such as political philosophy or economics, in my experience almost all students are interested in such things and intelligent enough to understand them fairly well. One of the reasons that history is sometimes so boring for students is that teachers and texts present such topics as simply as possible, making them childish nonsense. Perhaps paradoxically, I find students more interested when things are explained to them more fully. And that interest matters a lot to me, because it renders the material more memorable. Students generally realize that they’re not growing up into a world where nearly perfect people are nearly always right, and bad people are wrong. They’re trying to gain an adult understanding of the world in which almost everyone thinks they’re the good guys, good intentions often go awry, motivations are mixed, and almost nothing important is simple. Of course the past was like that too, and not only do we not need to hide it from students, they’re generally fascinated by it. The legends of the great goodness of figures like Thomas Jefferson or Helen Keller are much less interesting that the real people were—Jefferson who secretly had a second family with one of his slaves, Keller the communist—and the truth about them is unquestionably more educational. Some educators and parents fear that these complications might render the students less virtuous citizens, but in the first place most of my students are n rather than American; in the second, most of my students are more likely destined for positions of influence that will require mature understanding than for stations in life in which rulers would require blind patriotic obedience; and third, I think the students are more likely to become virtuous citizens if we tell them the truth. Each section begins with a “Short Story” written in larger font, the shortest possible account of the information in that section. Students should know every single detail of the Short Stories. I wrote the Short Stories at a relatively difficult reading level, approximately the level used by the College Board on its US history tests. (These tests assume a reading comprehension ability roughly equivalent to what is needed for the SAT I test.) I know that most of my students are not capable of reading well on that level, and so they need practice. Some students understand US history fairly well but miss a lot of multiple-choice questions because they didn’t understand terms in the question or answer choices. These students need to read the Short Stories carefully. The “Long Stories” (in the smaller font) cover the history in greater detail and at the lowest reading level that I can manage. In the Long Stories, some vocabulary words are in bold. These words aren’t just important for US history, but for any mature discussion of politics, law, culture, history, and so on. I usually try to avoid terms like this in the Long Stories because I want students to understand it easily, but of course I cannot avoid them entirely. But because students need to learn such words, I use them as often as possible in the Short Stories. You can find a complete list of the “Key Terms” and their definitions in an appendix. In each section, following the Long Story there is a list of “IDs:” important people, events, court cases, laws, books, and so on that appeared in the section. Some of these are marked “3 star,” which means that even the least ambitious student must learn these in order not to fail the tests completely. The “2 star” IDs are less likely to appear on the tests, but ambitious students should certainly learn them. The “1 star” IDs are only recommended to the most ambitious students, and are more likely to be helpful for the essay section of the AP test than for either test’s multiple-choice section. Below the IDs are questions that students should be able to answer—especially students taking the AP test—when they finish reading each section. If they are unable to answer these questions, they need to reread part or all of the section. The multiple choice questions, like those on the College Board tests, often require historical reasoning: the answer is not always directly in the text, but a student who understood the text should be able to reason their way to the correct answer on these questions. This is just an introduction, and there’s no reason for you to read it unless you want to know what the heck I’m thinking, as in why I teach the class the way I do. This is really for the parents. If you’re a student, you really ought to skip it, and get right to the history part… though now you’re probably highly motivated to read this part to, right? Well, it won’t hurt you. But it is not on any quizzes or tests. I’ve written this account of the history of the United States because I haven’t found a text that serves my student well enough. My students have unique needs. English isn’t their first language, so I need a text that is fairly easy to read, without anything confusing, like ironic commentary. But they hope to get very high scores on the College Board’s tests, so they need a text that covers the material in a fairly detailed and sophisticated way. (Basically, I need a text that covers the subject at a college freshman level, but is written at a seventh grade level.) My students are busy. They don’t have loads of time to study, so they need it as concise as possible. But they also need it to be very memorable, which means they need it to be as interesting as possible. Finally, at least some of my students appear destined to wield some considerable influence in the world in the future, and I’d like to help them understand how the world works as well as I can, so that they can really benefit from their opportunities, but also make responsible decisions. And they’re usually not American citizens, so I don’t need to worry about instilling patriotism. The bad news is that I know of no textbook nor even a “cramming” guide that really meets these needs. (I wish, oh I wish I did! Creating all this material is a lot of work!) But the good news is that I’m confident that such a text could exist. These goals are not at all an incompatible with each other. And so I have created a text that—I hope!—fulfills all these requirements. I have, in a sense, meager qualifications for writing this text, in that I am not a professional or a trained historian. I do know the history of the United States pretty well, as I’ve been teaching it for years, and interested in it for many more. I’m not a researcher, and nothing here represents my own research. Of course the material in this text is to the best of my knowledge an accurate presentation of the best scholarship of our times, with which I have tried to be fairly acquainted. But I write this text as a teacher, and so my real qualifications are my teaching experiences, which have given me a sense of what works pedagogically. In one respect, however, my goals differ from those of most other teachers: I am unapologetically focused on the College Board’s tests, the “SAT II US History subject test” and the “AP US History test.” I’m not just trying to get my students through a year of mandatory history class, but trying to help them achieve high scores on competitive tests. Many intelligent people strongly criticize the College Board tests, and often with good reasons. The tests do reflect very accurately the unfair advantages enjoyed by students from better schools and more privileged backgrounds. Colleges that want to give other students a fair shake know better than to uncritically take scores on the College Board tests at face value. Nevertheless I have a lot of respect for the College Board, in that I believe its tests are well made. They really do accurately reflect a student’s knowledge of the subjects they intend to test. That is: the only reliable way to do well on the SAT II US History subject test or the AP US History test is to know the subject well. There are no shortcuts or easy ways: the students either have the knowledge and the skills, or they don’t, and their scores will reflect that fairly accurately. (The fact that students with privileged backgrounds disproportionately tend to have that knowledge and skills is a credit to their families and schools, rather than a result of the College Board’s bias toward such students. If we want to address the disadvantages faced by other students, we have to address the “root causes” of which systematically differential scoring on College Board tests is a mere symptom.) The practical significance of this for now is that, since my primary goal in this text is nothing other than to help my students get higher scores on those tests, the best way to do so (given how well-made the College Board tests are) is precisely to help my students understand the history of the United States as well as possible, and to help them learn to think critically about that history. (And also, in the case of AP students, to help them learn to write well about it.) The first obstacle to that, as I mentioned earlier, is my students’ reading levels. A few of them can read a college-level text without much trouble, but they are the minority. Unfortunately for the majority of my students, the tests assume a fairly high level of fluency. (Or, it might be better to say, the tests punish lower levels of fluency.) So the first goal of my text is to be compressible at about a seventh-grade reading level, which is what I estimate my students usually have. Don’t underestimate them, though: they’re improving quickly, especially the ambitious ones. The second goal of my text is to help them understand social and political discussions written at a college level, and even to improve their ability to understand primary source materials. My strategy is to write most of the text at a seventh-grade level, but to expose them to “key terms” of “educated discourse” along the way. I gradually increase the difficulty, so that by the end of the text, from the material covering the 1980s, all but the most important information is at about an eleventh-grade level. The “review sections” throughout the text use difficult vocabulary and syntax. I use the same strategy in my class discussions. Throughout most of the discussion my goal is to increase my understanding of the material itself, so I present it as simply and directly as possible. As the students begin to meet that goal, I begin to express the ideas in more difficult terms. Ideally, every single class will be a journey first to better understanding of the material and then to better understanding of the terms educated native English speakers use to discuss such material. Even if some of the vocabulary and syntax is relatively childish, the material itself isn’t. History is not a subject for sheltered children. I am in some sense fortunate that almost all of my students’ parents care about test scores almost to the exclusion of all other values. I do not have to worry about flattering patriotic vanity, offending religious values, or propping up politically correct humbug. Therefore, as another goal is to make the information as memorable possible, I try to make it as interesting as possible. (Like probably all teachers, I have repeatedly observed that, other things being equal, an interested student learns a huge amount of material more easily than an uninterested student learns a small amount.) One text I’ve seen—probably better not to “name names”—tries to make itself more interesting by adopting an ironic tone. That can be effective for some students, but I’ve found that mine usually can’t read well enough to distinguish between the facetious comments and the candid history. So I do try to employ some mild humor, but never in any way that might confuse the students about the material itself. Parents, teachers, and the students themselves usually underestimate how interesting history is to students, and so we resort to gimmicks to try to make it more interesting. In fact, history itself usually interests students more than we expect. Therefore my primary strategy to make the text interesting (and therefore memorable) is to make it honest. Most texts intended for students censor themselves, as though high school students didn’t already know about sex, violence, dishonesty, racism, exploitation, corruption, and so on. Supposedly it would be bad for them to read (in a text book) that prior to the Civil Rights movement Southern white men could get away with molesting or even raping a black woman, while black men could be lynched for simply seeming to be attracted to a white woman. (They can read it in To Kill a Mockingbird and Black Boy, but not in their history texts.) But I do not censor myself, in class or in this text. This is real history, not edited for sheltered children. In my experience students really want this. They are realizing that much of what adults have told them about the world is moralistic cant, and they’re trying to figure out how it actually works, because on some level of their consciousness they realize they will have to make their place in the real world rather than a cartoon version of it. Those who doubt that many students are interested in history would probably be very surprised to see what happens to their interest when we tell them the truth. Of course my main motivation is to help them do well in their classes and on tests, but they do need to gain an adult understanding of the world at some point—and there’s no time like the present! I also explore economic history a little more than other texts. Textbooks generally underestimate students’ (or perhaps history teachers’) ability to understand economics. Trying to make it simpler, they explain things like banking panics in ways that are oversimplified and therefore also confusing. But in my experience, students are more interested when such things are explained to them more fully, and therefore they remember them more easily. All of my students have been intelligent enough to understand such things, at least at the basic level that helps them analyze historical events and patterns. Similarly, I present more information about the ideas of the past. Again, textbooks generally underestimate how interesting students find the intellectual and political debates of the past. But oversimplifying such things only causes confusion, discomfort, and disinterest. Finally, I tell more stories about the personal lives and dramas of the famous people, including their flaws, than other texts do. We sometimes focus too much on analyzing and skill-building, and forget that people of all ages just like good stories, and history is full of them. So in these ways my text will be somewhat more detailed and hopefully far more interesting than others. It is more than is needed for any test, but again, in my experience it is much easier for students to remember a heck of a lot of interesting material that makes sense, than to remember a lot of boring material that doesn’t make very much sense. Nevertheless, the final constraint on my text is space. I want it to be small enough for a student to read in two weeks. That means I get right to the point, omitting the tricks that many textbooks use as “hooks,” which usually don’t work well anyway because they are transparently condescending. I’d like to alert you to one more thing before starting the actual story. A lot of students (I was like this) think that “real” history is political history. That’s kind of true: political history is important, and you’ll learn far more about it from this text as from traditional high school textbooks. But we don’t only need to know why Abraham Lincoln won the election of 1860, we also need to know what the lives of slaves were like, why the economy of the North was more prosperous than that of the South, how the role of women changed on the Western frontier, what books were influential, what people did for entertainment. When I was a student I thought that kind of thing was just in the textbook to make it more interesting for us. Well, I was wrong. Hopefully they are interesting, but regardless, they are just as real and important as the political history. Don’t neglect that kind of information: the College Board loves to question you on it, and if you can write about it on your essays, I can guarantee big points. When I took the AP test, one of my free response questions was on the 1950s. I talked about the Cold War and McCarthyism, but most of my essay was about social history: television sitcoms, how people dressed, suburbs, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Elvis, the beginnings of the Civil Rights Movement. I didn’t know who was president, so I didn’t say anything specific about politics. At the time I thought I’d bombed it; then I got a “5” on the test, and now that I know more about history, I realize that I nailed it. My essay was awesome. If in your essays you analyze pop culture in terms of gender, class and race, your essays will be awesome too. That’s not to say that my essay couldn’t have been better. It’d have been good to say something about the n War or the “I Like Ike” campaign. You should learn about the political history as well as the social and cultural history. But the point now is: you have to know about the social and cultural history. That’s real history. In this text, I’ve written about novels, paintings, architecture, songs, television shows, and movies, not just for fun, but because knowing that will help you on the tests, and not knowing that will hurt you. OK, so you’ve got a load of work to do, haven’t you? Political history, social history, cultural history, intellectual history…. Well, here’s how you should go about it. Read this text for fun. Don’t worry about memorizing anything unless I tell you to memorize it. Just read it like a story—there are even pictures! The only thing is, as you read, pay attention. Don’t think about food or television shows or video games or sports or the attractive boys and girls in your classes. Think about what you’re reading, and if you realize that you haven’t been paying attention, go back and re-read the stuff that you daydreamed through. There are questions at the end of each section. If you can’t answer those questions, re-read until you can. If there’s anything in the text that you can’t understand, ask me about it in class. Let’s get started. none of the existing texts that I’ve found satisfy me. The texts by The Princeton Review, Barrons, and so on generally don’t cover the material deeply enough, and they have some inaccuracies (though perhaps none that would hurt a student’s score). They all oversimplify history too much to be useful to an ambitious AP student. On the other hand, high school textbooks are just too long to be convenient. (The regular textbooks are notoriously inaccurate as well, but the AP textbooks are usually at least a little better.) Another problem is that the reading level of many good texts is simply too difficult. For example, the best text I’ve found, the article on US history from Encarta, was just a little too hard for many students. (It could have been a little more detailed as well.) The Princeton Review’s text, trying to be clever, is also confusing at times: the kind of student who can appreciate its jokes without trouble will not need a review at such a low level. But Anyway, my first goal in this text is to cover American history in sufficient detail that my students will be able to get perfect scores on the College Board tests even if they don’t use any other texts. But I want to do so as briefly as possible, so that in emergencies it might be possible for my students to read the text in two or three weeks. This class is the history of the United States of America, and the history of the United States technically begins on July 4th, 1776 when some relatively rich and powerful British colonists, all men who considered themselves white men, declared independence from Great Britain. At that moment was born the United States of America, and its history begins then. But obviously we cannot begin our class at that point. The USA has a pre-history, or it would be better, more precise, to say there is a history of the pre-USA. So the question is where do we start? As far as the College Board is concerned, we can start in 1607, with the founding of the first successful British colony, Jamestown. But there is about one question per test on material as far back as 1492, when Columbus initiated permanent contact between Europe and the Americas. Some teachers want to give you background to Columbus, and some want to give you a lot of information about Native Americans before 1492. I’m one of those, and I want to start my story about two hundred thousand years ago. About My Methods and Reasons I’ve prepared this text for my students, most of whom are preparing for the College Board’s standardized tests on the history of the United States: the Advanced Placement (AP) test, and the SAT II subject test. I could not find any completely satisfactory texts of US history for my purposes, so in the end I made my own. My primary goal must be to help students get higher scores on the tests, because that is what I am paid to do! Sometimes this means getting a student who would ordinarily get a 500 on the SAT II test or a 1 on the AP test up to a 650 or a 3; sometimes it means getting a student from a 650 to a 790, or from a 3 up to a 5. (Could you follow that?) Those are really four distinct purposes, and in a way they require four distinct texts, but I’ve tried to structure this text so that it can serve all four purposes at once. To explain that structure, we need to understand the tests. The SAT II test consists entirely of multiple-choice questions, so students preparing for that test at a relatively low level primarily need to work on recognizing the significant people and events that appear on that test. Some basic skills with charts, maps and political cartoons are also necessary. Inevitably, some of the questions ask about something that the student hasn’t learned (or has forgotten). Even so, students familiar with the main ideas of American history can correctly guess—perhaps “figure out” would be better—the answers to most of these questions. In fact many of the questions appear designed to require that kind of thought process. So, more ambitious students must learn to analyze historical events and processes in order to figure out such questions (we could say “in order to guess more accurately”). All of that applies to the AP test as well, because half of that test consists of a multiple-choice section nearly equivalent to the SAT II test. (I therefore advise all students preparing for the AP test to take the SAT II test as well. There is absolutely no extra preparation involved.) But the other half of the AP test requires students to write three essays, so an AP student must have some skills that are not required for the SAT II: basic English writing ability, and also some idea about what qualifies as a good thesis statement or good analysis. The first essay is a “document-based” question (DBQ), which requires the students to recognize what historical situations are relevant to the documents, and then to write an essay about those situations, using the documents as evidence. In other words, it is designed to test a student’s ability to write an undergraduate-level history paper. (The DBQ on the US history test is the easiest of the history subject DBQs. It does require some knowledge of US history, whereas the DBQ on the AP European history test does not require any knowledge of European history, but it requires very little knowledge compared to the multiple-choice section or the other essays. Compared to the DBQs of the world and European history AP tests, the AP US DBQ does not require or reward a very deep analysis of the documents.) The second and third essays are “free response” questions, meaning that the student must write an essay, relying entirely on her memory and understanding of US history, in response to essay prompts. These FRQs present the real challenge for ambitious students, because they often ask very particular questions, requiring deeper knowledge than the multiple-choice questions or the DBQ. In order to get a very good score on an FRQ, a student must know her subject very well—in addition to being a decent writer. But since there are so many potential essay topics, a student aiming for very good FRQ scores must study a lot of American history very well. Such a student will have relatively no problem with the multiple-choice questions on either the SAT II or AP test! There is good news for ambitious students. First of all, a “5” is the highest score that a student can get on the AP test. That is good news because a student can get a 5 without getting great scores on either of the FRQs (let alone both of them). Students don’t need to be so well prepared that they could get great scores on all FRQs. In fact, if a student does really well on the other sections, she can even bomb one of the FRQs pretty badly and still score a 5. There is more good news. There are a few techniques we can use to improve FRQ essays, almost regardless of how well a student knows the material. Nevertheless, the only sound strategy on the AP test for ambitious students is to learn US history very, very well. So those are the issues I had in mind when I created the structure of this text. Each chapter begins with “IDs:” important people, events, court cases, laws, books, and so on. Some of these are marked “3 star,” which means that even the least ambitious student must learn these in order not to fail the tests completely. The “2 star” IDs are less likely to appear on the tests, but ambitious students should certainly learn them. The “1 star” IDs are only recommended to the most ambitious students, and are more likely to be helpful for the essay section of the AP test than for either test’s multiple-choice section. Below the IDs are “Key Concepts” phrased as questions that students should be able to answer—especially students taking the AP test—when they finish reading the text. Next there are two sections of text. “The Short Story,” is supposed to be the shortest possible account of the information in that chapter. Students should know every single detail of this section. After that there is “The Long Story,” which I strongly recommend for ambitious students. This section covers the history in greater depth than AP textbooks, and includes a lot of details. One of my goals in “The Long Story” is to make the material interesting for the students, so it includes a lot of “juicy gossip” and more biographical information about some famous people than is really necessary for any test. Hopefully that will make the more important material easier to remember. “The Long Story” analyzes the material at an AP level—that is, at a college level—including a lot of information that would not be covered in an ordinary high school US history. In my experience, this kind of analysis is actually interesting to most students, and many courses serve the students badly by omitting it. In both “The Short Story” and “The Long Story,” some vocabulary words are in bold. Unlike the IDs, these words aren’t important just for US history, but for any college-level discussion of politics, law, culture, history, and so on. I usually try to avoid terms like this in “The Long Story” because I want students to understand it easily, but of course I cannot avoid them entirely. Anyway, I use them a lot in “The Short Story” because I need students to learn them. Some students understand US history fairly well but miss a lot of multiple-choice questions because they didn’t understand terms in the question or answer choices. Those students need to improve their vocabulary. (Of course that will help with all kinds of things, including other tests.) A complete list of the “Key Terms” and their definitions can be found in the appendix. Below “The Long Story” a timeline appears. I don’t want students to try to memorize the dates on these timelines. That would be a huge waste of time. Instead, the students should consult the timelines if they get confused reading the text. But most importantly, the students should use the timelines to help them review the material after reading the text. If they don’t recognize something from the timeline, they should review the text. Since I am a mere teacher rather than a scholar, and since my purpose is pedagogical and not scholarly, I have not done any original research for this text. I rely entirely on the work of real scholars, and as all students should I’ve included a bibliography at the end. How to Study History - “analyze” o understand causes, effects, influences • understand that these are usually theoretical • you’re allowed to guess o history is not what happened, but why it happened, and how do you know o identify patterns • X was like Y - identify trends, and then note exceptions - don’t worry about illustrating moral lessons o to understand, not to celebrate or condemn o both sides (whenever possible) - Jonathan’s Laws of AP Essays About My Methods and Reasons Hello, my students! And, hello to parents and anyone else into whose hands this text happens to fall…. Students: You can skip this part, and probably should. You can go right to the next section, “Dates to Memorize.” I’ve prepared this text for my students, most of whom are preparing for the College Board’s standardized tests on the history of the United States: the Advanced Placement (AP) test, and the SAT II subject test. I could not find any completely satisfactory texts of US history for my purposes, so in the end I made my own. My primary goal must be to help students get higher scores on the tests, because that is what I am paid to do! To understand my teaching strategies, we need to understand the tests. The SAT II test consists entirely of multiple-choice questions, so students preparing for that test primarily need to recognize the significant people and events of American history. Some basic skills with charts, maps and political cartoons are also necessary. Inevitably, some of the questions ask about something that the student hasn’t learned (or has forgotten). Even so, students familiar with the main ideas of American history can correctly guess—perhaps “figure out” would be better—the answers to most of these questions. In fact many of the questions appear designed to require that kind of thought process. So, more ambitious students must learn to analyze historical events and processes in order to solve those questions (we could say “in order to guess more accurately”). All of that applies to the AP test as well, because half of that test consists of a multiple-choice section nearly equivalent to the SAT II test. (I advise all students preparing for the AP test to take the SAT II test: there is absolutely no extra preparation involved, so they might as well.) But the other half of the AP test requires students to write three essays, so an AP student must have some skills that are not required for the SAT II: basic English writing ability, and also some idea about what qualifies as a good thesis statement and good analysis. The first essay is a “document-based” question (DBQ), which requires the students to recognize what historical situations are relevant to the documents, and then to write an essay about those situations, using the documents as evidence. In other words, it is designed to test a student’s ability to write an undergraduate-level history paper. The second and third essays are “free response” questions (FRQs), meaning that the student must write an essay, relying entirely on her memory and understanding of US history, in response to essay prompts. These FRQs present the real challenge for ambitious students, because they often ask very particular questions, requiring deeper knowledge than the multiple-choice questions or the DBQ. In order to get a very good score on an FRQ, a student must know her subject very well—in addition to being a decent writer. But since there are so many potential essay topics, a student aiming for very good FRQ scores must study a lot of American history very well. Such a student will have relatively no problem with the multiple-choice questions on either the SAT II or AP test! Sounds tough, and it is. But there is good news for ambitious students. First of all, a “5” is the highest score that a student can get on the AP test. That is good news because a student can get a 5 without getting great scores on either of the FRQs (let alone both of them). In fact, if a student does really well on the other sections, she can even bomb one of the FRQs pretty badly and still score a 5. There is more good news. There are a few techniques we can use to improve FRQ essays, almost regardless of how well a student knows the material. Nevertheless, the only sound strategy on the AP test for ambitious students is to learn US history very, very well. I decided to write my own text because Those are the issues I had in mind when I created the structure of this text. Each section begins with a “Short Story” written in relatively large text, supposed to be the shortest possible account of the information in that section. Students should know every single detail of the Short Stories. The Short Stories are written at a high level of difficulty, the level used by the College Board on its US history tests. I’d estimate that these tests assume a reading comprehension ability roughly equivalent to what is needed for the SAT I test. I know that most of my students are not capable of reading well on that level, so they need practice. But in order for them to understand better, the Short Story is followed by a Long Story, which covers the history in depth and at the lowest reading level that I can manage. In both “The Short Story” and “The Long Story,” some vocabulary words are in bold. Unlike the IDs, these words aren’t important just for US history, but for any college-level discussion of politics, law, culture, history, and so on. I usually try to avoid terms like this in “The Long Story” because I want students to understand it easily, but of course I cannot avoid them entirely. Anyway, I use them a lot in “The Short Story” because I need students to learn them. Some students understand US history fairly well but miss a lot of multiple-choice questions because they didn’t understand terms in the question or answer choices. Those students need to improve their vocabulary. (Of course that will help with all kinds of things, including other tests.) A complete list of the “Key Terms” and their definitions can be found in the appendix. Below “The Long Story” a timeline appears. I don’t want students to try to memorize the dates on these timelines. That would be a huge waste of time. Instead, the students should consult the timelines if they get confused reading the text. But most importantly, the students should use the timelines to help them review the material after reading the text. If they don’t recognize something from the timeline, they should review the text. Since I am a mere teacher rather than a scholar, and since my purpose is pedagogical and not scholarly, I have not done any original research for this text. I rely entirely on the work of real scholars, and as all students should I’ve included a bibliography at the end. Each chapter begins with “IDs:” important people, events, court cases, laws, books, and so on. Some of these are marked “3 star,” which means that even the least ambitious student must learn these in order not to fail the tests completely. The “2 star” IDs are less likely to appear on the tests, but ambitious students should certainly learn them. The “1 star” IDs are only recommended to the most ambitious students, and are more likely to be helpful for the essay section of the AP test than for either test’s multiple-choice section. Below the IDs are “Key Concepts” phrased as questions that students should be able to answer—especially students taking the AP test—when they finish reading the text. How to Study History - “analyze” o understand causes, effects, influences • understand that these are usually theoretical • you’re allowed to guess o history is not what happened, but why it happened, and how do you know o identify patterns • X was like Y - identify trends, and then note exceptions - don’t worry about illustrating moral lessons o to understand, not to celebrate or condemn o both sides (whenever possible) - Jonathan’s Laws of AP Essays The Columbian Exchange When people think of “the Columbian Exchange” they sometimes include non-biological transfers, such as the movement of iron technology from Europe to the Americas. However, the best way to think of the Columbian Exchange is biologically: animals, plants, viruses, and so on from the “Old World” (Africa, Asia, and Europe) went to the “New World” (North and South America), and others from the New World went to the Old World. Almost all of these biological exchanges benefited Europeans; many but not all were harmful for the Native Americans. The most important thing that went from the “Old World” (Africa, Asia, and Europe) to the New World (North and South America) was smallpox, because it killed so many Native Americans. No one really knows how many Native Americans died of smallpox and other diseases, but a standard estimation is 90%. In spite of the immigration of European colonists and African slaves to the New World, so many Native Americans died that the population of the Americas was smaller in 1776 than it had been in 1492. But smallpox was not the only disease to arrive with the Europeans: measles, influenza, malaria, and yellow fever were among the others. Without smallpox and other diseases, the Native Americans would have been able to resist European conquest and colonization much more effectively. (This image, from a sixteenth century history of the Spanish colonies, shows the Aztecs dying of smallpox.) A second very important traveller from the Old World to the New World was sugar. As we will see, the sugar plantations were the destination for most of the slaves brought from Africa, and for world or European history you might want to remember that the profits of these plantations helped capitalism develop in Europe. Later we’ll consider how horses and sheep changed Native American societies. Cattle will also transform the west. We’ll see that rice played an important role in the history of the Carolina colonies. Although so many diseases went to the New World, one might have gone the other way: syphilis, a sexually transmitted disease that Columbus’ men might have contracted as they seduced or raped the Native American girls, and then carried it with them back to Europe, where it became a major scourge until the development of antibiotics after World War Two. We don’t know for sure that syphilis came from the New World with Spanish explorers, but the timing of its appearance in European ports perfectly fits that theory, and there is no other very compelling explanation. Pretty much everything else that passed from the New World to the Old World was good, especially new crops like potato, maize, beans, squash, tomatoes, and red pepper. These crops contributed significantly to the huge growth of the European population over the next few centuries. The cassava, a tuber similar to yams, also led to population growth in Africa. In general, the flora and fauna of the Old World flourished in the New World, and were even impossible to control. Horses lost by the Spanish roamed wild on the Great Plains; wild pigs spread through the forests of North America, often destroying Native American fields. Everything from dandelions to earthworms prospered in the new environment. This process continues today, as Americans fight (probably in vain) to keep Japanese kudzu out of their yards, and to protect the alligators of the Everglades from Burmese pythons. Similar things happened all over the world, as Eurasian plants and animals often replaced native varieties. Some historians call this “ecological imperialism.” Even though European colonists and settlers weren’t often very aware of what was happening, ecological imperialism helped created environments more familiar to them, and natives had to adapt to these new conditions as well. (We’ll see, with regard to the horse and sheep, that sometimes they did so very successfully.) Still, the diseases remain the most important factor in the colonization of North America. All of the natives of Hispaniola and most of the natives of the Caribbean died out; soon, most of the natives of North America died as well. They often died in huge plagues that destroyed entire villages over the course of a few weeks. Neither the Native Americans nor the Europeans understood the way diseases work—germ theory would not be discovered for several more centuries! Instead both Natives Americans and Europeans often attributed the diseases to supernatural forces. As we’ll see, the Europeans very frequently considered the diseases as evidence that God was blessing their colonial efforts. The Native Americans also considered possibilities like that, and sometimes incorporated European traditions into their own, hoping to get some of the superior spiritual power that Europeans seemed to have. They rarely entirely abandoned their own traditions, and probably couldn’t have done so even had they tried. At least occasionally European missionaries would genuinely try to help the Native Americans too, and their failure to prevent disease sometimes led to conflict when the Native Americans believed they’d been duped. Other times a virulent plague would discredit Native American religious leaders, so that in addition to the physical deaths they also faced spiritual and cultural crises. Key Terms: • smallpox • sugar • horses Regardless, the main killer everywhere was smallpox. As the population of the Spanish colonies declined so quickly, the encomienda system became less profitable, and was replaced by haciendas, large rural estates similar to feudal manors. The surviving Native Americans worked on haciendas like peasants, either for wages or for shares of crops. As haciendas replaced encomiendas in Mexico, in the Caribbean sugar plantations Native American slaves were replaced by African slaves. Although we’ll be most interested in slavery in the British colonies of North America and in the United States, most of the African slaves brought to the Americas had destinations further south, primarily in the Caribbean and Brazil, where the profitable sugar plantations were. In the sixteenth century, Spain’s great European rival was France. The French did not sit idly by while Spain reaped such great wealth in gold and silver from the New World. At first, France hoped to find a Northwest Passage through the Americas to Asia. For that, they employed an Italian sailor, Giovanni Verrazano, who in 1524 explored the coast of North America. He found the Hudson River and Manhattan Island, but not a Northwest Passage. A decade later, France tried again, sending Jacques Cartier, who sailed up the St. Lawrence River and founded a colony that failed due to scurvy and Native American retaliation to thefts committed by the French. After that, for several decades the French gave up settling in the north, but they tried other places. In 1555 French Calvinists—we’ll cover these religious labels in the next chapter—also established a colony, where Rio de Janeiro is today. But in 1560 the Portuguese destroyed it too. French pirates had much more success. In 1523, a French pirate named Jean Fleury stole from the Spanish much of the gold that they’d just stolen from the Aztecs. In the 1550s, French pirates even ventured into the Caribbean, even plundering Havana, the main port of Cuba. The Spanish responded by building large galleons to carry their treasure, armed with cannons and sailing together in convoys for protection. This was expensive, however, and they paid for with taxes on the gold and silver being shipped. In turn, these taxes encouraged smugglers to take their chances avoiding both the pirates and the tax collectors—some people were both smugglers and pirates, depending on the opportunities they saw. The Spanish destroyed French pirate bases in Florida, where the colonists were also French Calvinists, and then, to prevent the French from returning to Florida, in 1565 Spain founded San Agustín, which has become St. Augustine, Florida, generally regarded as the first successful colony in what would become the United States. One of the reasons for San Augustín’s success was that Spanish missionaries had a lot of power there, and they were able to maintain good relationships with local Native Americans, especially through trade. Soon the Spanish started several more colonies in the area, including one as far north as the Chesapeake Bay, where the first successful English colony would be a few decades later. The Spanish captured a Native American from that area, baptizing him and naming him Luis de Velasco. He met the king of Spain and offered to return to the area to convert his people to Christianity. He arrived with a Spanish crew that hoped to start a colony, but then he warned the Native Americans to resist, and led a surprise attack against the Spanish. This event gave some English people hope that the Native Americans would welcome them as liberators against the Spanish! Later the Spanish also feared that the French would use the Rio Grande as a base to attack Mexico. So in 1598 the Spanish tried to colonize the Rio Grande, hoping to convert the Native Americans there to Catholicism, and still hoping to find silver. The first attempt ended in failure under an incompetent governor, but in 1607 the viceroy appointed a new governor, who founded Santa Fe, far from the main pueblos, and ordered the colonists to grow their own crops. The colony never flourished, but it survived, and we’ll pick up its story again later. Having conquered much of the Americas, Spain increasingly focused on settling and ruling it. When thinking about the Spanish colonial governments, the implicit question is why Spain was able to control them so effectively. After all, none of them became independent until several decades after British colonies had won independence in North America. Part of the answer is that Spain kept her colonies effectively divided. Spain divided its colonies into provinces known as “viceroyalties.” At the top was a “viceroy,” a governor appointed by the king. To prevent the viceroys from getting too powerful, the kings also appointed councils know as audencias, which drafted laws and conducted trials. The king also appointed an archbishop to each viceroyalty. The viceroys, audencias, and archbishops generally worked against each other rather than together. The governments were incredibly inefficient, but therefore they were also unable to rebel. But just to be sure, the monarchs would occasionally appoint visitas from Spain, who would thoroughly investigate all three. Unlike later English colonies, there were no elected or representative assemblies. A lot of the conflict in Spanish colonies was between missionaries and secular governors: as during the time of the conquistadors, missionaries protested against exploitation of Native Americans but destroyed the native religious culture, while governors were usually unwilling to act against powerful landowners. Few women from Spain made the trip to the New World, so the Spanish frequently took Native American wives. Soon a caste system (“casta” in Spanish) based on skin color developed throughout the Spanish colonies, replacing the simple distinction between conquering Spanish Christians and conquered Native American pagans. At the top were people believed to be purely Spanish, followed by people who were believed to be mostly Spanish but a little Native American, down to pure Native Americans and Africans at the bottom. The mestizos, people of mixed Native American and European ancestry, became the majority of Mexico’s population by 1700. In the Caribbean there were smaller numbers of mulattos, people of mixed European and African ancestry. Religious syncretism flourished in the Caribbean as the African slaves preserved many aspects of their own traditions while adopting Christian traditions as well, leading to “Afro-Caribbean” traditions. The most famous example is the tradition usually called “Voodoo,” though the word “Vodou” is more appropriate, which developed primarily in Haiti and was also common in the American South, especially around New Orleans. Similar traditions developed in the islands off the Carolina coast. Some traditions of “Voodoo” in the United States are known as “hoodoo.” For instance, the famous blues song “I Got My Mojo Working” refers to a hoodoo charm. There are many, many more examples of such religious syncretism throughout the Caribbean and South America. Spain (and Portugal) continued to dominate South America, Central America, and Mexico until the 1800s, but by the end of the 16th century other countries—especially England, France, and the Netherlands—were establishing colonies in North America, which would eventually become the United States and Canada. The main events that made it possible for other countries to establish American colonies took place in Europe, not in the Americas. In the next section we’ll cover the religious terms “Catholicism” and “Protestantism,” but for now you only need to know that in the second half of the 16th century Catholics and Protestants were at war throughout Western Europe. The Catholics were led by King II in Spain, who used his wealth from the New World to sponsor his militant opposition to Protestantism. The Protestants were led by the Dutch, who were rebelling against Spain, and by England under Queen Elizabeth. Meanwhile France was torn apart by a civil war between Protestants and Catholics, each led by different prominent families. But Spain seemed invincible. A decade earlier his navy had defeated the Ottomans, previously considered to be the strongest navy in the Mediterranean, and he had also conquered Portugal, adding it and its colonies to his empire. In 1588, II prepared to overthrow Elizabeth and reestablish Catholicism in England, to crush the Dutch Revolt, and to make sure the Catholic side won the French Wars of Religion. He built a large “armada” of ships intended to transport his army to England. The expense of this was tremendous, but II was confident. Francis Drake had other plans. Fiercely Protestant—Drake’s family had been victims of Queen “Bloody” Mary’s persecutions in the years before Elizabeth came to power—for many years before Drake had been harassing Spanish shipping as a pirate. He had quite an adventurous life, with lots of near brushes with death. He captured two Spanish treasure ships and then he circumnavigated the world. Then in 1588, Spain prepared to invade England…. a. Peace in 1604 This has been a long chapter and I can imagine some students will feel overwhelmed. You’ve read of plagues of smallpox annihilating entire peoples; of conquistadors raping and pillaging at will among those broken peoples, and enslaving them to work in silver mines and sugar plantations; of pirates plundering the great ships laden with treasure; of priests trying to save souls and to destroy cultures; of corrupt and inefficient government; of Native Americans initially trying to use Spanish power to their own advantage in conflicts among themselves, then discovering too late the overwhelming power and ruthlessness of the Spanish, and the failures of their own traditions to protect them from smallpox and conquistadors; and of the gradual creation of new identities to replace the ones destroyed in this collision of cultures. Some of the territories we’ve covered in this chapter will become important parts of the history of the United States: Florida, New Mexico, California, the Rio Grande; we’ll learn about Texas later too. In a very real sense, the history of the United States does not begin with the British colonies on the eastern Atlantic coast, but with these Spanish colonies in the south. It was into this world of Spanish colonies, with a bit of French as well, that the English began to venture in the late sixteenth century. Timeline 1492 Columbus’ first voyage across the Atlantic 1493 Columbus’ second voyage 1497 John Cabot explored Newfoundland, claiming it for England 1498 Columbus’ third voyage 1499 Ojeda’s first voyage, with Vespucci in the crew Da Gama returned to Europe from India 1500 Columbus stripped of governorship Cabral discovered Brazil 1502 Columbus’ fourth voyage 1513 Ponce de León explored Florida 1514 Balboa crossed Panama, discovered the Pacific Ocean 1516 Thomas More’s Utopia published 1519 Cortés arrived in Mexico Magellan set off to circumnavigate the world 1521 Cortés’ conquest of the Aztecs was complete 1522 survivors of Magellan’s voyage return to Spain French pirate Jean Fleury stole much of the Spanish treasure 1524 Verrazano explored the North American coast for France 1528 Panfilo de Narvaez failed to conquer Florida 1531 the first apparition of the Virgin of Guadalupe 1532 Pizarro began to conquer the Inca 1534 Cartier explored the St. Lawrence River 1536 Cabeza de Vaca found by Spanish slave raiders 1538 Coronado set off to explore the southwest 1539 Hernando de Soto began his voyage through the southeast 1542 Cabrillo explored the California coast 1565 San Augustin, Florida, founded 1571 Spanish colony at Chesapeake Bay destroyed 1588 Francis Drake destroyed the Spanish Armada 1609 Santa Fe founded Key Concepts: • How did Native Americans respond to European religious traditions? Key Terms: • Juan Ponce de León • encomienda • Moctezuma (Montezuma) • Tenochtitlán • Hernán Cortés • Bartolomé de Las Casas • A Short History of the Destruction of the Indies • the Black Legend • hacienda • the Northwest Passage • Giovanni Verrazano • Jacques Cartier • galleon • San Augstín (St. Augustine) • mestizo New France and New Netherland in the early 17th century As we’ve seen in “The Spanish Century,” during the early 16th century France paid the explorers Giovanni Verrazano and Jacques Cartier to look for a “Northwest Passage” through North America to Asia, but he didn’t find one. Cartier even tried to start a colony, but it failed. From the time of Cartier, the French called Canada “New France,” although for at least fifty years almost no French people actually lived there successfully. Then France tried to start several colonies as refuges for the Huguenots, as well as bases for their piracy of Spanish shipping, but Spain kept destroying them. Perhaps you remember that Spain founded San Augustín in Florida in order to fight French pirates more effectively. France had more success in Canada. Well before 1600 French merchants were succeeding in the fur trade, out of the reach of Spanish power. But after Spain was weakened by the destruction of “the Spanish Armada” in 1588, France was able to try to found colonies again. They tried several times beginning in 1598, and eventually they succeeded with a colony known as Acadia. Acadia was small and its history was very complicated—it failed, they tried again, it failed again, then they tried again, then they had a civil war with themselves…. Probably the most important thing about Acadia for students of United States History is that later, after the French and Indian War (1754 or 1756 to 1763) the British deported many Acadians to Louisiana, where the pronunciation of “Acadian” became “Cajun.” Cajun culture is relatively well-known in the United States for its cuisine (especially “gumbo”) and its music, zydeco, which was influenced by the French creoles as well. The most famous colony of New France was Quebec, founded in 1608 by Samuel de Champlain. Like most other early colonies, Quebec struggled for many years, and its population stayed below a thousand for many decades. Their main activity was trading fur. In order to purchase fur from the Native Americans, Quebec made an alliance with the Algonquin and Huron peoples, who used the guns they acquired from the French to attack the Iroquois peoples further South. The Iroquois League (also known as “the Iroquois Confederacy”) was probably the most impressive Native American organization in eastern North America. It seems to have been organized in the sixteenth century—after Columbus, while Europeans were exploring the Americas, but before Europeans had reached the Great Lakes area where the Iroquois lived. The Five Tribes of the Iroquois League were the Mohawks, the Oneida, the Onandaga, the Cayuga, and the Seneca. The Huron were once part of the league, but later they left it. According to Iroquois tradition, these tribes had suffered unending “mourning wars” in which some Iroquois groups tried to kidnap people from other Iroquois groups to replace the people who’d died in previous wars. Of course, during a mourning war more people died, and they also needed to be replaced by further mourning wars, so it was an unending cycle of warfare. Then the Iroquois League was formed by a prophet named Deganawid¬a and his disciple Hiawatha. These religious leaders persuaded the Iroquois to stop fighting each other and to organize themselves into a cooperative league, which then began to attack external enemies, especially the Algonquians—including those Algonquians who were acquiring guns from the French traders in Quebec…. The Iroquois League was led by a sachem, a man who was elected by elderly women from each Iroquois tribe. As we’ll see, Americans learned a few things about how to run a republic from the Iroquois example. In the colonial period, the Iroquois’ main enemies were Algonquians and the Hurons. There were actually many kinds of Algonquians, including the Mahican, Mohegan, Massachusett, and Wampanoag peoples—all of those will play a role in American history. The Hurons were originally an Iroquois tribe, but they broke away in order to ally and trade with the French. Originally the Huron didn’t even hunt the beaver: they traded food for beaver skins with Indians living to the north and west, and then traded the beaver for manufactured goods from the French. Meanwhile, just a little south of Quebec, in the Hudson River Valley, the Netherlands started their own colonies, “New Netherland.” In the 17th century, the Dutch had a huge global empire, dominating trade in the North Sea, the Baltic Sea, and on the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, including the slave and sugar trades. In one year, Dutch pirates (financed by capitalist investors) captured the entire Spanish fleet of silver. The Dutch had colonies in Brazil, the West Indies, South Africa, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia: New Netherland was just one of many Dutch colonies, and not one of the more profitable ones. New Netherland began after 1609, when an English sailor working for the Dutch, Henry Hudson, looking for a Northwest Passage, rediscovered Manhattan Island and the river now named the Hudson River. As soon as Henry Hudson had explored the region, Dutch traders began to move into the Hudson River Valley to buy fur from the Native Americans. The first official Dutch colony in North America was founded a few years later in 1613, way up the Hudson River. It was called Fort Orange and Beverwyck, Dutch for “Beaver Town,” and today it is known as Albany (and it is the capital of New York). The Dutch West India Company was founded a little later. This was a joint-stock company…. The Dutch partners in the fur trade were the Iroquois. When the Iroquois acquired firearms from the Dutch, they were better able to fight against the Huron and Algonquians, who had been getting guns from the French. We’ll see that this war between the Iroquois on one side (allied to the Dutch) and the Huron and Algonquians on the other (allied to the French) intensified in the mid-1600s. The Dutch West India Company was supposed to have a monopoly on the fur trade, but the traders continued to smuggle it for themselves, so the company lost money. Later, in 1625, to protect Fort Orange from attack by rival European countries, the company founded another colony at the mouth of the Hudson River, which they called New Amsterdam; today we call it New York City. (The Pilgrims had hoped to settle there in 1620, but hadn’t been able to make it.) There is a famous legend that the Dutch bought Manhattan Island from the local Native Americans for $24 worth of beads; it seems that there was some kind of trade, but the details are unknown, and we also don’t know what the Native Americans thought the trade involved, since they didn’t have the European system of land ownership. Anyway, New Amsterdam attracted a lot more migrants than Fort Orange, who started farms and also participated in the trade in beaver fur. Unlike the Spanish and French, the Dutch did not bring missionaries or try to convert the Native Americans; unlike the English, they didn’t even claim they would. 1. the Dutch West India Company – a joint-stock company: 2. 1613 Fort Nassau → Fort Orange → Albany 3. New Amsterdam (1624) → New York City 4. Dutch influence: Easter eggs, Santa Claus, bowling, 5. 3 star IDs: New Netherland, New York 6. 2 star IDs: Manhattan, Albany surrendered to the British during an Anglo-Dutch War (1664) 1. France: a. (Catholic missionaries, especially Jesuits) b. (La Salle’s exploration from Quebec down the Mississippi) c. fur: trade rather than conquest – Timeline 1523 Verrazano explored North America for France 1534 Cartier explored Canada 1564 Huguenot colony Fort Caroline established in Florida 1565 Spain destroyed Fort Caroline 1598 First attempt to found Acadia 1608 Quebec founded by Champlain 1609 Henry Hudson explored the Hudson River Valley 1610 Acadia successfully founded 1613 Albany (“Fort Orange”) founded 1625 New York City (“New Amsterdam”) founded • the Iroquois League • the Iroquois Confederacy • sachem • joint-stock company • Describe the political traditions of the Iroquois League. a. silver from Peru (especially Potosi) and Mexico → much increased global trade, the commercial revolution in Europe, the price revolution → capitalism i. (the Dutch benefited more than the Spanish) At the Sand Creek Massacre, by Howling Wolf (1874-5): In that case, the question might not even reward you for knowing that the illustration portrayed the Pequot War: the College Board might even tell you that! The question would ask you to interpret the illustration. What can you learn about the people who made that illustration by analyzing it? In this case the College Board is trying to test your SKILLS. So if you spend a lot of time memorizing random stuff like the dates of the Pequot War, but not much time learning how to interpret historical documents (like illustrations, sermons, political cartoons, speeches, etc.), you will not do well on the test! I've used the Pequot War as an example, but this applies to everything in APUSH. If you forget the date of the founding of Jamestown, ok, whatever. You're probably ok. If you don't know the dates of the Starving Time at Jamestown, you're definitely ok. But if you don't understand WHY the Starving Time happened, you might be in trouble. Or, if you can't critically interpret a letter from John Smith talking about the Starving Time, you're in trouble, because although that document won't be on the test, some documents will be! (The College Board is absolutely right about this. Someone might memorize your birthday and the dates that you graduated from elementary school and middle school, but you wouldn't say that person understands you! On the other hand, your best friend might not know your birthday. But if she doesn't know your birthday, her guess shouldn't be wrong by more than a year!) So, let's think of your strategy for APUSH. First of all, of course there is a lot of stuff to learn, but as much as possible, let's learn it by comprehension rather than memorization. Don't focus on questions like, "When did this happen?" Or, "Who was the person who did X?" Instead, focus on questions like, "WHY did this happen?" And, "WHY did this person do X?" Every single time that you learn that something happened, but you don't learn about WHY that happened, you're taking a risk! Secondly, pay attention to primary sources. I don't mean that you should read the whole text of Jonathan Edwards' "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God." That would waste time. But your book will have some quotes from that sermon (if it doesn't, we'll get you a different book!), and you should make sure you understand them (that's a reading comprehension issue) and understand how you can relate the quotes to historical conditions. For example, when John Winthrop called Massachusetts "a city on a hill," what did he mean? How does that relate to the history of New England, and the history of the United States? Ok, so, now you're about ready to read the packet that I sent you. The first ten pages or so are nothing but background material, stuff that won't be on the test, but I think APUSH will be easier for you if you know it. In a sense, all of the pages are background material, but as you read, I hope you won't be just learning some disconnected, random facts, but understanding why things happened. For example, if you read it you should be able to tell a little bit about why the Spanish colonies didn't declare independence until several decades after the American Revolution. Hopefully you'll remember that Soto explored the Mississippi River valley, but hopefully you'll also know why he explored it, and what some of the consequences of this exploration were. ASAP I'll fix up my writing on the Jamestown Colony and send it to you... hopefully even tonight or tomorrow. Maybe I can get a little more to you soon too. But soon you'll be far ahead of me, and we'll be dependent on your textbook and any other materials your teacher has. (I won't have access to many materials... I'll be living out of my car for a while!) Let's talk about memorizing dates just a little bit more. For early American history, you only need to know a few dates: 1492 Columbus' first voyage 1607 the founding of Jamestown 1620 the founding of Plymouth 1630s the migration of Puritans to New England ~1730s the Great Awakening 1756-63 the Seven Years' War 1776 the Declaration of Independence 1787 the Constitutional Convention 1789 George Washington became the first President We'll talk about some easy ways to remember those. A few that you could add: 1517 Martin Luther's 95 Theses 1588 the destruction of the Spanish Armada 1640s the English Civil War 1650s the rule of Oliver Cromwell 1660s the Restoration 1688 the Glorious Revolution That's enough! Once you get into the era of Presidents, we'll memorize the Presidents (it's much easier than it sounds) and we'll almost never memorize another date. For example, you'll know that when George Washington was the President, the US signed the Jay Treaty with Great Britain. What was the date of the Jay Treaty? Who cares! That's when. G-Dub was the President, so it was sometime between 1789 and 1797: that's good enough for anyone. And so on with everything between 1789 and 2015! All of these splits didn’t happen without bloodshed. The sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were filled with religious wars, most famously the Dutch Revolt, the French Wars of Religion, the Thirty Years’ War, and the English Civil War. The sixteenth century Spanish monarchs (Holy Roman Emperor Charles V and his son II) spent their wealth from the New World trying to stop Protestantism. By the beginning of the eighteenth century, many elite Europeans had become much less enthusiastic about fighting over religion. Still, even in the eighteenth century, more new kinds of Protestantism appeared. In American history, two especially important ones were the Baptists and the Methodists. The Baptists didn’t have any particular founder, but as we’ll they’re associated with Roger Williams of Rhode Island. Today the Baptist denomination is very common in the United States: in particular, Southern Baptists are the largest religious group in the USA except for Catholics. John Wesley, who spent some time in colonial Georgia though he mostly lived in England, founded Methodism. Methodism is also very common in the United States today, and especially in the South Methodists churches are often considered the main rival to the Baptists. Then, as we’ll see in more detail later, in the 19th century several more new denominations appeared in America, including the Mormons. At the same time, American Congregationalists started new religious movements like the Unitarians or Universalists. We’ll learn about the Transcendentalists, who tended to join the Unitarian movement, leaving behind their Puritan backgrounds. Another term that is often used to describe many American Christians is “Evangelical.” That can be a very confusing word, because sometimes people use it to refer to all Protestants. Usually, however, it refers to the kind of Protestant that emphasizes conversion experiences—being “born again,” becoming a Christian, “accepting Jesus,” and so on. Evangelicals typically work hard to “evangelize,” or get other people to convert to Evangelical traditions or have those conversion experiences. Evangelical churches emphasize preaching and hymn singing. Influenced largely by Calvinism and Methodism, usually the Bible is the only religious authority they recognize, and they usually emphasize the idea that Jesus died in our place to satisfy God, enabling him to forgive our sins. Evangelical churches are usually Baptist, Methodist, or Presbyterian, but they no longer care very much about those labels, and for the past few decades, Evangelical ties to previous denominational labels like “Baptist” or “Methodist” have become so weak that many Evangelicals do not use them anymore, often rejecting them entirely. Often they don’t belong to any organization larger than their local church. Another confusing label you might see is “fundamentalism.” As we’ll see, fundamentalism appeared in the early twentieth century among Evangelicals who rejected modernist ideas like evolution. But the word “fundamentalism” is now used very widely to describe people of any religion or ideology who reject scientific ideas, cultural pluralism, or western culture. It is especially used to describe groups willing to use terrorist violence to promote their beliefs. That is unfair to most Christian fundamentalists, who have almost never resorted to violence (though of course a few have: for instance, a few Christian fundamentalists have murdered doctors who perform abortions). By far the most important information in this chapter is that in the sixteenth and seventeenth century religious ideas and identities were very serious topics: all or almost all European wars of those centuries were fought at least partially over religion. Religion and politics were inseparable—almost no one could imagine separating them yet—because the political rulers of those times depended on religion to legitimize their power. The devout Catholic Spanish kings Carlos I (the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V) and his son II spent much of their wealth from the New World fighting Protestantism in Europe. Most of the Europeans who went to North America, including the British settlers in North America, brought these attitudes with them. When these labels come up in American history, if you’ve forgotten any of them you will want to review this section. • Quakers • the Society of Friends • Methodists • John Wesley • Baptists • Unitarianism • Evangelicalism • fundamentalism