Colonial Puritans Assignment PDF

Preview

Summary

A 1000 word assignment detailing puritan childhood in colonial settlements...

Description



Historian Carl Degler has sought to argue that the Puritans were not stereotypically 'Puritanical'. To what extent does the primary evidence relating to Puritan childhood challenge this position?

In trying to understand what Carl Degler has sought to point out, we must first fully understand the many connotations of the word 'Puritanical'. In the basest sense, its' meaning is to adhere to strict principles, whether they are moral or religious. Although when attributed to an entire people, as it was to the Puritans, the meaning becomes somewhat unclear. It is my strong belief that, although charged with powerful religious motivations and ideals, the primary evidence challenges Degler's view very little and instead shows moderate support for his argument. A good example of this to start with is, I believe, the visual evidence of the architecture of the period. I am referring to the two homes depicted in the Roger Mowry House (c. 1653) and its' younger counterpart the Eleazer Arnold House (c.1684). These two demonstrations prove solely that the Puritan's will for a better life, free from the shadow of the Church and persecution of their faith, was not to be broken. In facing countless setbacks during their initial occupation of the New World, the Puritans did not surrender to the harshness of a wild, untamed land and instead managed, through their own hard work and determination, to build such houses and create a self-supporting community based on these very values, in which they could lay the foundations for a constructive familial archetype. Puritans have been, and are by many, considered to be devout and strict in how they live yet not all records point to this conclusion. In one such record from the Massachusetts courts, two laws concerning the children of the families are detailed1. The first of which describes how, "if any child over the age of sixteen and of sufficient understanding", disobeys or otherwise goes against their parents' word; "they shall be put to death". This law can be interpreted as an extreme course of action but was never actually imposed on any child in Puritan Massachusetts. However, the second of these laws was based around the fundamental importance of education; something that, in England, was of negligible concern. This demonstrates, in my opinion, a certain progressiveness to Puritan ideals on how society should be. The law itself states that if a child was not "learned to read and the English tongue" then the parents, especially the father, was at blame. Under analysis, this shows that the childhood of a Puritan was an important stage of their life and not to be squandered; which in turn demonstrates not, I think, a strict religious backwardness to Puritan life but their view of the vital importance of proper education.

1 Massachusetts Court Records (source: from America Firsthand, vol. 1, edited by Robert Marcus and David Burner (St. Martin's Press, 1989)

The childhood of a Puritan was found to be closely governed by their parents, so that they might not stray from responsibility and mature ideals. A primary source penned originally by one Benjamin Wadsworth states how "Children should not be left to themselves, to a loose end, to do as they please; but should be under tutors and governors, not being fit to govern themselves...".2 It is my firm belief that this should not be interpreted as the children having to be brought up to adhere to a strict set of religious morals and rules, but instead to be brought up having been shown, by their parents' guiding hand, how to live a just and honest life, free from the burden of sin. The source goes onto to state how parents should not unjustly reprimand their children for mistakes but instead show them forgiveness and how to do right by society and God. It also points out that parents who do not follow these ideals not only dishonour themselves in witness of God, but also harm their children by incorrectly raising them. In overview, this demonstrates a tremendously constructive attitude towards childhood in Puritan society and just how fundamental a time it is in shaping the life of a person. An important thing to note about Puritan childhood is that, although brought up to be religious, a child was not forsaken nor punished if they felt that the grace of God was no longer with them. They were instead advised, predominantly by their parents, on how to remain on the path of religion and not stray onto the path of sin. An excellent example of this comes from Samuel Sewall and the tribulations of his daughter. In the account, his daughter Betty tells him that she feels as though God is no longer by her side and that, when reading passages of the Bible, she weeps. Having felt this way in such a place as England at the time would have been highly punishable, but in Puritan society; Samuel helped, listened to and prayed for his daughter in hoping that she was not a "Reprobat[e]"3, thus damning her from ever basking in the grace of God. In review, this shows that Puritan society and their attitudes, towards childhood especially, were of the highest importance and not, as widely assumed, stereotypically strict and conventional. In drawing my conclusion, I would like to clearly state that I believe the primary evidence in relation to Puritan childhood demonstrates little opposition to Carl Degler's position of the stereotypical labelling of Puritans as puritanical. Rather than challenging Degler's view, the evidence instead garners some support for his claims and shows that, had Puritans been as stereotypically puritanical as assumed, they would not have such progressive and supportive views of childhood.

2 Benjamin Wadsworth, The Well-Ordered Family (Boston, 1719) 3 Samuel Sewall on the trials of his fifteen-year-old daughter (source: Diary of Samuel Sewall, 1674-1729, Massachusetts Historical Society Collections)...