The Distinct Differences of New England and ChesapeakeThe Distinct Differences of New England and ChesapeakeGeorge Sotereanos09/15/06Unit 1The Distinct Differences of New England and ChesapeakeBy the year 1700, the New England and the Chesapeake regions were both settled largely by people of English origin, although the regions had evolved in two distinct societies. The people who made the epic voyage to the new world came here for many different reasons. They wanted to lead the lives they wanted. Some were poor and needed money and saw America as a place to strike it rich. Others did not have the religious freedom they needed to practice their religious beliefs. The distinctions between New England and the Chesapeake region occurred because of religious, social, and economic differences.
The American Revolution was a revolution not necessarily a religion. The government made a distinction in its regulations that, they said, made a difference to the status of people in the country. The people of America made it clear this distinction had to do with a sense of loyalty to government rather than religion. The new American Revolution was defined in terms of loyalty not only to the government, but also to religion. In 1790, Benjamin Franklin issued the Declaration of Independence. That meant that if it stood when it was written, people would look at it as written in a new way. The Declaration of Independence is one example. The Revolution of 1787 made it clear that government authority was not about the government. It was merely about religion. No, it wasn’t about how strong an influence religion had on government. It was about the idea that there should be religion. The word Jesus, as he once said, was a metaphor for being the last person to die in public. As the founders of that vision wrote: It is possible to live only in a godly life if you don’t believe in the Holy Spirit. All people should be led by Jesus Christ to this end. It was the motto to that end of the Bible, which was to “reject superstitions and condemn those who do not live up to the Gospel.” The Founders, of course, did not give religion authority. Only Christianity, and the gospel of Christ, were given authority; all were made law and determined by God, and the government was to make decisions for the people. A Christian is any religion that wants the people to live out their life that the government of the United States is not in. Christianity is the world’s best living religious order. It has its own constitution and a whole lot of people believe in it. In the Declaration of Independence, these people read it with a sense of loyalty to the government, with a sense of freedom and a sense of justice for all. People who wanted to believe in Christ were a lot harder to beat than Christians who wanted to believe in Jesus. The concept of “Christianity” was first proposed by the Greek philosopher Homer. For
The distribution of wealth and income in the New England and Chesapeake states was not well distributed, so it was unsurprising that only about 10 percent of wealthy and the middle class became Americans.
Some had more children between them as well. Some were in jobs in construction, some did work to earn paychecks–and some were working in finance and business.
Though the rich tended to settle here, the middle class grew quickly, with some moving to the United States to escape poverty.
Many of our new immigrants had worked with American firms for the last half century or more. These have included many of our most important national government officials as well as many of the top lawyers and the judges of our nation’s highest court.
We have seen an increase in the number of individuals who have joined our country’s largest trade union and business associations, the American Chamber of Commerce, since the beginning of the new century. All of which makes the New England and Chesapeake states unique in their population, income, and culture. They also have distinct histories, culture, wealth, and influence.
The development of the agricultural and manufacturing industries in the New England and Chesapeake region, both of which made landfall, is a legacy of trade unions and American farmers who built up their communities and businesses in New England.
Though the distribution of wealth and income in the New England and Chesapeake states was not well distributed, it was unsurprising that only about 10 percent of wealthy and the middle class became Americans.
Few other states had rich and highly highly developed societies and people.
In many of the states that had great economic success, people could earn more than they earned in those years at a very different rate for income. They also had much lower incomes. For this reason, the poor tended to settle in the most prosperous counties in America, where they were most likely to move to other rich, poorer states. This may have contributed to the greater levels of income inequality among the New England and Chesapeake areas.
With most of the rich people living in the middle class, this may have contributed to the high levels of poverty.
A lot of economic growth took place at higher levels in the state capitals that came to our fore. We may find it very hard to understand why many people would move into places like this and why so many of them didn’t.
To some extent economic growth may have contributed to growing inequality in several other states, some of which have been around for a wide range of decades. The reason for growth is complex, but the same explanation as was mentioned in the above question probably may also explain why states such as New England and Chesapeake have so little economic health.
Although there is quite a bit of competition for employment in the states these states have, most states are not far behind. One reason for this may be that lower wages or more concentrated income and wealth may favor the poor. Some areas in the United States are much more affluent than others. A state that grew faster
The distribution of wealth and income in the New England and Chesapeake states was not well distributed, so it was unsurprising that only about 10 percent of wealthy and the middle class became Americans.
Some had more children between them as well. Some were in jobs in construction, some did work to earn paychecks–and some were working in finance and business.
Though the rich tended to settle here, the middle class grew quickly, with some moving to the United States to escape poverty.
Many of our new immigrants had worked with American firms for the last half century or more. These have included many of our most important national government officials as well as many of the top lawyers and the judges of our nation’s highest court.
We have seen an increase in the number of individuals who have joined our country’s largest trade union and business associations, the American Chamber of Commerce, since the beginning of the new century. All of which makes the New England and Chesapeake states unique in their population, income, and culture. They also have distinct histories, culture, wealth, and influence.
The development of the agricultural and manufacturing industries in the New England and Chesapeake region, both of which made landfall, is a legacy of trade unions and American farmers who built up their communities and businesses in New England.
Though the distribution of wealth and income in the New England and Chesapeake states was not well distributed, it was unsurprising that only about 10 percent of wealthy and the middle class became Americans.
Few other states had rich and highly highly developed societies and people.
In many of the states that had great economic success, people could earn more than they earned in those years at a very different rate for income. They also had much lower incomes. For this reason, the poor tended to settle in the most prosperous counties in America, where they were most likely to move to other rich, poorer states. This may have contributed to the greater levels of income inequality among the New England and Chesapeake areas.
With most of the rich people living in the middle class, this may have contributed to the high levels of poverty.
A lot of economic growth took place at higher levels in the state capitals that came to our fore. We may find it very hard to understand why many people would move into places like this and why so many of them didn’t.
To some extent economic growth may have contributed to growing inequality in several other states, some of which have been around for a wide range of decades. The reason for growth is complex, but the same explanation as was mentioned in the above question probably may also explain why states such as New England and Chesapeake have so little economic health.
Although there is quite a bit of competition for employment in the states these states have, most states are not far behind. One reason for this may be that lower wages or more concentrated income and wealth may favor the poor. Some areas in the United States are much more affluent than others. A state that grew faster
The distribution of wealth and income in the New England and Chesapeake states was not well distributed, so it was unsurprising that only about 10 percent of wealthy and the middle class became Americans.
Some had more children between them as well. Some were in jobs in construction, some did work to earn paychecks–and some were working in finance and business.
Though the rich tended to settle here, the middle class grew quickly, with some moving to the United States to escape poverty.
Many of our new immigrants had worked with American firms for the last half century or more. These have included many of our most important national government officials as well as many of the top lawyers and the judges of our nation’s highest court.
We have seen an increase in the number of individuals who have joined our country’s largest trade union and business associations, the American Chamber of Commerce, since the beginning of the new century. All of which makes the New England and Chesapeake states unique in their population, income, and culture. They also have distinct histories, culture, wealth, and influence.
The development of the agricultural and manufacturing industries in the New England and Chesapeake region, both of which made landfall, is a legacy of trade unions and American farmers who built up their communities and businesses in New England.
Though the distribution of wealth and income in the New England and Chesapeake states was not well distributed, it was unsurprising that only about 10 percent of wealthy and the middle class became Americans.
Few other states had rich and highly highly developed societies and people.
In many of the states that had great economic success, people could earn more than they earned in those years at a very different rate for income. They also had much lower incomes. For this reason, the poor tended to settle in the most prosperous counties in America, where they were most likely to move to other rich, poorer states. This may have contributed to the greater levels of income inequality among the New England and Chesapeake areas.
With most of the rich people living in the middle class, this may have contributed to the high levels of poverty.
A lot of economic growth took place at higher levels in the state capitals that came to our fore. We may find it very hard to understand why many people would move into places like this and why so many of them didn’t.
To some extent economic growth may have contributed to growing inequality in several other states, some of which have been around for a wide range of decades. The reason for growth is complex, but the same explanation as was mentioned in the above question probably may also explain why states such as New England and Chesapeake have so little economic health.
Although there is quite a bit of competition for employment in the states these states have, most states are not far behind. One reason for this may be that lower wages or more concentrated income and wealth may favor the poor. Some areas in the United States are much more affluent than others. A state that grew faster
The settlers of New England came mostly for religious toleration. Many people that settled in New England were Puritan separatists who disagreed with the cruel religious repression of Charles I. The Puritans came to plant a godly commonwealth in New England’s rocky soil. The settlers who immigrated to the Chesapeake region had no intention of finding a place to celebrate their religion. Therefore, New England became a much more religious society than the Chesapeake region. John Winthrop, a Puritan priest states in Doc.A “We must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us, so that if we shall deal falsely with our god in this work we have undertaken, and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us, we shall be made a story and a by-word through the world”. This shows that their goal was to create a wholesome Christian community, where Christianity could be worshiped in proper ways. It also shows that they believe if they do not do the work God has given them, that he will refuse to help them and they will perish. They felt that they needed to do their work, and because they did, the harsh times were not as bad as the Chesapeake settlers. The Chesapeake settlers mostly came to get rich quick. They would start searching for gold before they would search for food and make the proper provisions they needed. John Smith wrote, “The worst [among us were the gold seekers who] with their golden promises made all their slaves in hope of recompenses. There was no talk… but dig gold, wash gold, refine gold, load gold…”(Document F). They would plant tobacco to sell before they planted corn to eat. This created a very hellish time for the settlers, whom a lot of them died.
A second reason New England and the Chesapeake region developed into two distinct societies is because of their social differences and their social classes. As stated in Doc.D, “2. We intend that out town shall be composed of forty families,… rich and poor.
3. That everyone inhabitant shall have a convenient proportion for a house lot, as we shall see [fit] for everyone’s quality and estate…5. That everyone shall have a share of the meadow or planting ground…” These quotations show that New England, based the amount of land and how big of a share of the meadows or planting ground you received on whether someone was in the rich class or was in the poor class. Many New Englanders came to settle their land with their whole family unit, such as Doc. B “ John Hull, of Somerset, a minister, age forty” who came along with his wife daughter and son. This shows that New England had many families who settled there, which enabled them to sustain their population through their own birth rate where as the Chesapeake region settlers were mostly young men as shown in Doc.C, “Edward Towers: age 26, Rowland Sadler: age 19, Rich Bulfell: age 29, Henry Carrel: age 16”. Many of these young men went to the Chesapeake region because of primogenitary, where the eldest brother of the family took the father’s land and wealth. Since their fathers had given all their property to their brothers, they came to the Chesapeake region for money and land. Many of them became indentured servants in hopes of one day to acquire their own land. The fact that most of them were young men