Description
answer from other students in Discussion 2 Compare and contrast early English efforts at colonization of the New World with that of the Spanish. Consider these questions and provide additional insights of your own: What factors influenced these colonization efforts? Which country was initially more successful? Why?
1，Connor Adams
12/21/23, 10:22 AM
Throughout the history of the Americas, colonization has taken on many different forms and designs. When it comes to the Spanish and English, however, there are plenty of differences that occured. Of course the first big difference is the time gap; columbus set off in 1492 whereas the English didn’t explore the new land until 1585 when they attempted to establish a colony on “Roanoke Island” but the colony “mysteriously vanished, swallowed up by the wilderness or by its native neighbors” (Page 31, Par. 1). Another big difference was the original desire for exploring the New World. The Spanish initially explored the New World with the goal to “convert, profit, or conquer” (Page 29, Par. 3). Though this was a portion of why the English explored, the English also wanted to prove that their colonies were not ones that could easily be “contrasted embarrassingly with the glories of the spanish empire” (Page 31 Par 2.) The first permanent settlement of the Spanish was hispaniola by Christopher Columbus, but the first successful settlement by the English would not exist until 1607 with the colony of Jamestown in what would be called Virginia. Finally, there is the difference between the colonization of America by the English and the Spanish in the area of which they landed. The english landed in North America on the eastern coast, explored south and the traveled westward; whereas the Spanish landed in south America and traveled North in their conquest of the Americas.
Though there were many differences between the exploration of the Americas by the Spanish and English, one must also look at and address the many similarities between the explorations of America. The first similarity that sticks out is the interaction with native americans. Both the English and spanish had never seen people like the Natives, so they attempted to either befriend or control the Natives living in that land. The Spanish affected the “Taino natives in Hispaniola” and caused their population to “dwindle from 1 million to about 200” through aggression and slavery as well as the deadly diseases they brought with them (Page 16, Par. 1). The English began by befriending the Powhatan tribe and chief Powhatan initially wished to work alongside the English; however, relations between natives and English revealed to be tense as many English settlers only wished to use the natives for their resources and many “starving colonists took to raiding Indian food supplies” (Page 34, Par. 2). The English also forced the native americans in Virginia to go nearly extinct through violence and unknown diseases, forcing the number of the Powhatan people to less than ten percent of who was their to begin with. We also see a similarity in the migration from exploration to exploitation. Both the English and Spanish found themselves looking to find Gold and liquidate a profit, a french traveler even saying that for the Spanish “everything is dear in spain, except silver” (page 29, par. 2). The English and Spanish wanted to do everything they could, even exploiting the precious resources of the new land, to bring glory and gold back to their home countries.
answer from other students in case studyT
hough there are many differences in the ways that the Spanish and English approached the new world, these to nations also found themselves matching each other in the ways the explored and ultimately reached very similar results.
2.Jason Lemmon
Settlement in a new place requires levels of patience prior to making progress. Colonizing the ‘New World’ was handled somewhat differently between the Spanish and the English due to influences, complications, and existing rifts with religious entities and the powers involved. During the centuries that followed Columbus’ arrival, many countries on the other side of the Atlantic vied for land in the New World. Spain had been venturing to these new lands for a while before the English were interested in spreading out. English sailors became plunderous under the rule of Elizabeth I, and were seizing Spanish goods while the the two countries were “technically at peace” (pg.31). The Protestant Reformation, a result of King Henry VIII breaking ties with the Roman Catholic Church, created an “Invincible Armada” knowing that the seas were growing with danger. Several attempts to set up settlements in the New World were thwarted during this time. It wasn’t until after 1606 that the Virginia Company (VC) received a charter from King James I for a “settlement in the New World.” (pg. 33) When the VC finally began to set up small settlements, the war with the natives ensued. To potentially create a peace treaty, an Englishman named John Smith married Native Pocahontas to end the war. Contrary to the problems the Natives had with the Spanish, the English, by way of marriage, tried to coexist with the natives. The Spanish forced enslavement upon the Natives. The Indians’ presence created unrest in both countries. The English were also dealing with the Dutch and Swedish on and off for years. Both countries had their methods for settlement. Both carried desire across the ocean from those who had dispatched them in search of new land. Any resistance from the Indians on any land where they inhabited was met with violence initially. It was a kill-or-be-killed mentality. The Spanish seemed more interested in making slaves of Natives rather than killing them off, thus the significant difference between the methods both countries dealt with; it was because of this method it is potentially the reason the Spanish were more effective. Utilizing Native inhabitants will always be better and settlement than simply killing them off. Ultimately, the English methods prevailed, but not at a much larger cost.
1.In the spring of 1638, Anne Hutchinson and her children left the Massachusetts Bay Colony, forced onto an island in Narragansett Bay near what is now Rhode Island. The year before, Hutchinson had been a highly respected church member in a Puritan church in Boston. But then she was put on trial and sentenced to banishment from the Massachusetts Bay colony and excommunicated from her church. What had Hutchinson done? Why was she such a threat to the Massachusetts Bay Colony?
David Powell
Many people around her considered Anne Hutchinson to be a religious leader in her colony. She would use her vast knowledge of the Bible, gained from studying and reflection, to discuss religious ideas, challenge the Puritan theological teachings, and challenge government rules. In particular, she often challenged the church and the people in charge, stating that the people needed to have a personal and direct relationship with God. Her teachings earned her a reputation as a leader, which was seen as an act of defiance on its own (National Park Service Article). Women were not allowed to speak or teach in public then, and her reputation scared some church and government officials. Her ideas were seen as heretical by the leaders of the Puritan church, as she challenged the established order. Because of this, she was put on trial in 1637 for heresy and sedition, which led to her banishment from the colony.
People like Governor John Winthrop felt threatened because she challenged the church, its teachings, and the people like him who were at the head. The church at the time was a social and religious stability point of the colony, meaning that they saw the challenge as not only a challenge towards them but a challenge to the colony (Kennedy, page 54). After her banishment, many of Anne Hutchinson’s followers went with her to what is now Rhode Island. In the Massachusetts Bay colony, however, the ideas she left behind continued to linger in the minds and hearts of those who had listened to her. Tensions continued to rise in the Puritan community, as many people began to question the religious leader at the time, and many began to question the religious freedom they had in its entirety (Kennedy, page 54).
While I do not agree with some of her theological beliefs, I think Anne Hutchinson was not wrong to challenge the Puritan church. She based many of her beliefs on scripture and posed the challenge in a way meant to benefit the people in her community, not bring them down. I believe that it is biblical to challenge fellow believers when you see them on the wrong path. As the bible says, “iron sharpens iron.” Ironically, the puritan church was formed to “purify” Protestantism from all traces of Catholicism (Case study document). When Anne challenged the established teachings, the higher-ups did not consider her words to have any weight and charged her with heresy. In doing so, the Puritan church was displaying an ideology that partly reflected Catholicism, the very thing they sought to purify themselves from.
2 Shelby Phillips
Anne Hutchinson was a mother of fourteen children, daughter of a clergyman who preached of the Puritan faith, and an immigrant from England to the Massachusetts Bay colony of Boston. At first, Anne was a highly respected member of the Puritan church, but her differing views led to her civil trial, eventual banishment from Boston, and the excommunication from the Puritan church. Hutchinson believed that God could provide a free gift of salvation to those who believed in Him. In comparison, Anne also believed that the Puritan church was a Covenant of Works, meaning that they preached that in order to gain salvation, one must earn it by their works and good deeds on earth.
Anne was extraordinarily brilliant, strong-willed, and proficient in a theological argument which made her a treat to the to the established order of the church (Kennedy & Cohen, 2020, p.54). Not only did she possess differing opinions than that of the church, but Anne also began hosting small groups at her home which was highly promiscuous during the time due to women not being allowed to teach or speak in public. Moreover, her view that “a holy life was no sure sign of salvation and that the truly saved need not bother to obey the law of either God or man” was known as “antinomianism” and was considered “high heresy” (Kennedy & Cohen, 2020, p.54). Furthermore, “she eventually boasted that she had come by her beliefs through a direct revelation from God” which was seen as even higher heresy which left the Puritan church no choice but to banish her “lest she pollute the entire Puritan experiment” (Kennedy & Cohen, 2020, p.54).
Hutchinson had not broken any set-forth laws, but due to her advancing strong leadership role in the community, the fact she was a woman teaching the gospel in her home, her opposing views, and the fact she was accused of heresy, the political and religious authorities of Massachusetts Bay were determined to get rid of her because she was becoming a very large threat to the entire Puritan experiment and community. The Massachusetts Bay Colony believed that they were a city upon a hill and that their existence was a holy mission from God; “Its success would be a stimulus for religious reformation the world over. Its failure, a disaster”, therefore any threat to its existence must be put out (Session 4). Overall, Anne Hutchinson was seen as a threat the Puritan church for many reasons including her strong opposing views and her leadership role as a woman. The colony could not handle any risks of division; therefore, Hutchinson was charged as a heretic, questioned before a court, and sentenced to banishment.
Sources Used:
Kennedy, D.M., & Cohen, L. (2020). The American Pageant: A History of the American People. Cengage Learning.
Session 4 in Course Materials
