Salina Sabri 9/24/06
Mr. Butler AP US
DBQ #1

When the English came forth to America in search of new opportunities they settled into two regions, New England and Chesapeake. By 1700, these two regions developed into two separate societies. They developed very distinctly as if in separate worlds. The question is why though? They both consisted of English men in search for similar things; opportunities and gold. So wouldn’t they develop similarly? The truth is they wouldn’t. Once settling in the new world, they would go their separate ways due to geography and their beliefs upon religion, family, class, economics, etc….
English men came to the new world for several reasons that would eventually split them up. To start off there was a huge population boom so England was very crowded. Due to this, they needed to colonize so there would be more room for their people to settle in. Another reason was that the enclosure movement forced small farmers off their land so they were basically out of work with no food or land. Also in England there was a rule that allowed only the eldest son to inherit property, (primogeniture,) so younger siblings decided to seek fortune in the New World where they could own land and make their own wealth. Lastly, people went for adventure, mercantilism, gold and religious freedom that they didn’t have in England. So basically everyone traveled for one thing, the chance to be more than they were in England.
At first, only men immigrated to the New World from England. Eventually women came over as well but they were fewer in numbers then men were. As the men did, women went their separate ways, some to New England and others to the Chesapeake region. It was expected that once women were brought over, families would develop and children would be born which would lead to a population increase and for the most part this was true. However we see how family development was much greater in New England than in Chesapeake. In the Ship’s List of Emigrants Bound for New England we see lists of extensive families. One family would consist of grandparents, parents, lots of children and servants. These families would have 10 or more people in them. Now when we look at the Ship’s List of Emigrants Bound for Virginia we see lists of people, but not families. We also see a large number of men but very few women unlike in New England. So basically, in New England, there were more families and very few single men but in Chesapeake there were very few families and a lot of single men.
Although all Englishmen originally came to the New World for the same reasons, opportunity and gold, some felt that opportunity was more important than gold and vice versa. In the History of Virginia by Captain John Smith, we are shown how in the Chesapeake region, settlers were there primarily to find gold. The excerpt speaks about the gold seekers who “with their golden promises made all men their slaves in hope of recompenses.” All they worried about was finding and taking care of gold. However in New England, people settled to find new opportunities. They wanted to be able to work for success, money, etc…. Gold wasn’t as important to them. So as we can see, New England and Chesapeake had different values.
Religious conflict was also a major aspect that prevented New England and Chesapeake from being unified and caused them to develop into very distinct regions. As shown to us in A Model of Christian Charity by John Winthrop in New England, people believed that they had a calling to do God’s work on earth. They shared the “Protestant ethic” and enjoyed simple pleasures like eating a good meal, drinking, singing, etc…. Winthrop believed that they should be “a city upon a hill” where they would be the role models to everyone surrounding them. He believed in acting as one and doing everything for God so others would follow in their steps. In Chesapeake people were generally not very religious. They didn’t develop around churches/religion as did New England. They were more focused on farming and making profits than practicing religion.
Another difference was the distinct class structures of New England and Chesapeake. In New England majority of the people were middle class. Settlers became ministers, small farmers, merchants, etc…. They weren’t extremely poor or rich and they had enough money to happily support themselves. In Chesapeake, there was a huge gap in between rich and poor. This was because the rich had kept the poor poor. For example, the rich people were usually large plantation owners that had indentured servants working their land. The indentured servants were supposed to work for a period of time and then they would be granted land. However, the rich didn’t want to end up losing their land so most of the time they ended up not granting indentured servants land. With no land, they couldn’t farm to make money so they often had to go back to work for the plantation owners for a low salary. So as we can see in Chesapeake you were either one extreme or another and in New England you could fall in between where you could be comfortable money wise but not be rich.
The preference of the usage of slavery varied greatly between New England and Chesapeake. In New England, slavery wasn’t really necessary due to large sized families that would work the fields. Also, unlike Chesapeake, they didn’t have such vast plantations so they didn’t really need to have the slaves. Not only that but slaves were ridiculously priced and if they weren’t really needed, there was no point in paying for them. As apposed to New England, families weren’t large enough to work the vast plantations in Chesapeake. Extra help was needed. Up until Bacon’s Manifesto indentured servants were used. However, as shown in Bacon’s “Manifesto,” justifying his rebellion against Virginia Governor Berkeley in 1676, indentured servants began to rebel because they weren’t being treated fairly. They weren’t getting the land they deserved because everything seemed to revolve around keeping the rich filthy rich. When they began to rebel plantation owners realize that they were no longer reliable so they needed to import slaves to work their fields. When they bought slaves, they got to keep whatever children they had, whatever children their children had, etc… so it was worth the money. So although it was worth having slaves in Chesapeake, it wasn’t really worth it in New England.
Last but not least, New England and Chesapeake had very different geographical features. In New England, there were many towns and cities however in Chesapeake there was only one large city, Charlestown, SC. There was no need for large cities because they had vast plantations that grew rice, tobacco, and other very profitable goods. The only thing about the plantations was that unlike in New England where everyone was very close together, they kept the people separated. Like Chesapeake, New England also had very profitable goods. They had diverse agriculture (fish, fur, etc…), shipbuilding (large supply of lumber) and trading (triangular trade where the Americas sent sugar, tobacco and cotton to Europe. Europe then sent textiles, rum and manufactured goods to Africa and Africa sent slaves to the Americas.) So as one can see although they both produced profitable goods they were very distinct because of their different geographic features.
The New England and Chesapeake regions developed very distinctly. This difference in development was caused because of the different views of their founding fathers. (New English settlers believed in different things from the Chesapeake settlers.) They were also very far apart geographically wise so there was no chance of their beliefs becoming one. Eventually, they will join together to gain their freedom from England but until then, they will go their separate ways.

Salina Sabri 9/30/06
Mr. MacLean English 11H-7
Essay Re-write

To have a good relationship with your friend(s) you must be able to trust and share everything with them. There should never be a time where you find yourself not able to rely on them or a time where you don’t share what you have with them, no matter how little or big it is. Friends need to stick together and have each other’s back no matter what and if they don’t, the truth is, there really is no friendship there. In an excerpt from Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck, and “Mending Wall,” by Robert Frost, we learn what is and what is not a true friendship.
In an excerpt from Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck, it is demonstrated to us that being together as friends is more important to Lennie and George than anything else in the world. They speak about the other men who are like them in a sense but are very different since they don’t have someone to be there for them like Lennie and George do. Lennie says, “I got you to look after me, and you got me to look after you.” This quote shows just how important they are to each other. Together they are one and if one of them was to go away, they both would be nothing.
As the passage goes on they speak of a dream they share to own a small shack with rabbits, vegetable patch, chickens, pigs, etc. Although this dream seems small, it is important to them because it belongs to them only so they have the power to decide who comes and goes. The most important thing about the dream is that they share it. From this we can see that things are less important to them if they don’t have each other to share it with. The passage ends with them sharing a can of beans. From this we can see that no matter how big or small something is, they will always share it together.
The author uses many literary elements and techniques to demonstrate the strong bond/ friendship that Lennie and George share. For example they spoke about a dream they had. The key point of this is that they shared the dream. By sharing this dream and continuously talking about it, they show us that they want to be there for each other and make each other’s dreams come true which is the plot of the excerpt. Another example is when the author uses symbolism to demonstrate how sharing and coming together is the key to their relationship. This is shown toward the end of the passage when they share the can of beans. By sharing a small can of beans together we are shown that what you have isn’t as important as what you share.
In the poem “Mending Wall,” by Robert Frost, we are shown two fairly wealthy men who share almost nothing. One wants to build a wall between their homes while the other doesn’t see why he wants this. He feels that the wall would keep them apart so how would a friendship grow if they don’t share anything? The truth is it won’t, because despite everything they have, they can’t find something to have together.
As the poem continues we see how one man wants to build a friendship while the other wants to basically separate their lives and property from one another. He is basically saying, I have my side and you have your’s so let’s both just stay there. However, the other guy doesn’t seem to get this because he wants a friendship to grow. The only problem is a friendship takes commitment from two people and if the other man doesn’t want to commit there will be no bond, sharing, trust, etc… so there will never be a friendship between them.
The author uses many literary elements and techniques to demonstrate the friendship that will never grow between the two men. For example he uses repetition to demonstrate how important the wall is to the man. He continues to say “good fences make good neighbors” so that they can get to work and build this wall so he can have his own privacy. Also he uses the apple orchard to represent a good thing, like friendship, and the pine cones to represent a bad thing, like a wall to separate them. Not only that, but, the darkness of the night represents the darkness of the neighbor’s heart and his lack of interest in companionship. Lastly, the fence represents the separation of their lives and lack of friendship present.
As one can see, friendship is really more important than wealth is. It doesn’t matter what you have as long as you share it. When you don’t share anything, a friendship will never grow just like in “Mending Fences,” by Robert Frost. But when you do share, no matter how big or small it is, you will be happy because you have someone to be with you no matter what, just like in Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck.

Salina Sabri 9/20/06
Mr. Butler AP US
HW#5

1) Read Chapter 6, “The Duel for North America” pg. 105-119
2) Make an outline of the chapter including these important terms and answers to questions:
a. Edict of Nantes pg. 105- The Edict of Nantes was issued by the crown in 1598 to grant French Protestants limited toleration.
b. Samuel de Champlain, the father of New France pg 105-106- Samuel de Champlain was an intrepid solider and explorer. He earned his title, “Father of New France,” by his leadership skills and excess energy. Champlain had friendly relations with the Huron Indian tribes. He even joined them in their battle, upon their request, against the Iroquois tribes.
c. Iroquois pg. 105-106- The Iroquois were the foes of the Huron Indian tribes. When they went to battle with their foes (and the whites with Champlain,) they were terrified and soon enough, destroyed. From there on, they hampered French penetration of the Ohio Valley, ravaged the settlements of the French and became allies with the British.
d. French fur trappers and relation with Indians pg. 106-107- Many European settlers wore beaver hats and the French had a lot of beavers. Since theses beaver hats were in such high demand, French fur-trappers searched through the wood and waterways to find beavers. (By searching for beavers, these people were putting themselves at risk- “two-fisted drinkers, free spenders, free livers and lovers.”) French voyageurs also recruited Indians for their fur business. In 1693 in Montreal, the Indian fur flotilla arrived in 4 HUNDRED canoes. However, the fur trade had some drawbacks. Indians were killed by the white man’s disease and debauched by alcohol. Also, slaughtering beavers by the boatload violated many religious beliefs of Indians. Despite all this the beaver hunt continues and in the process many beaver populations were extinguished.
e. The New Orleans settlement pg. 108- New Orleans was the most important fortified post set up by the French to block Spain on the Gulf of Mexico.
f. Nine World Wars pg. 108- England, France, and Spain, and their Native American people, were all involved in several world wars. Since 1688, there have been a total of 9 world wars. All these wars were for 2 things, domination of Europe and domination of the New World. (American got involved in all of these world wars as well.)
g. The Ohio Valley pg. 111- The Ohio Valley was the main cause of competition between the French and British. It was a critical area into which the English would eventually get. If French was to link their Canadian holdings to the lower Mississippi Valley it was a key are to win.
h. George Washington- land speculator pg. 111- In 1754 Virginia’s governor sent George Washington, a 21 yr old surveyor at the time, to the Ohio country as a lieutenant colonial in command of around 150 Virginia militiamen. 40 miles from Fort Duquesne he encountered a small detachment of French troops in the forest. At that time, the Virginians shot the first shots of the new war. The leader of the French was killed and his men retreated. In July 4th of 1754 he was surrounded by the French and after a 10 hr siege, was forced to surrender but was allowed to leave with his troops with the honors of war.
i. Battle of Fort Duquesne pg. 111- The Battle of Fort Duquesne was a failed attempt by the British-American army to capture Fort Duquesne during the time of the French and Indian War.
j. How was the colonial duel between the British and the French for the predominance in North American (French and Indian War or Seven Year’s War) a result of:
1. European rivalry and conflict-
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. The interaction of these two colonizing powers with the societies of the Eastern Woodlands Indians-
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

k. Significance of the Albany Plan of Union pg. 112-113- The British government summoned an inter-colonial congress to Albany in 1754. Its immediate purpose was to keep the Iroquois tribes on the British side during the war. Its long-term purpose was to achieve a greater sense colonial unity, (which would improve their common defense against France.)
l. Ben Franklin pg. 112-113- Ben Franklin was the leading spirit of the Albany Congress because he had created the plan for colonial home rule that they adapted.
m. William Pitt’s Plan pg. 113-114- When at crisis, Britain brought forth William Pitt, a superlative leader. His strength was mainly drawn from the common people whom admired him so much. He soon earned the title “Organizer of Victory.” He wisely decided to slowly assault the French West Indies whom were killing the British strength. He also concentrated on the Canadian area. In 1758 he dispatched a powerful expedition against Louisbourg. This was a success and marked the first British victory in the war so far. Quebec was next and he chose James Wolfe to assist him. Wolfe’s plan was a success and it was also a significant battle in the war.
n. Why did the British and their American Colonists eventually win the French and Indian War? British and their American Colonists eventually won the French and Indian War due to the leadership skills of William Pitt (see letter m) and Wolfe’s plans. After the Battle of Quebec, a peace settlement, the Treaty of Paris, was signed in 1763. French power was, at this time, completely thrown of the continent.
o. What was the significance of the victory with regard to the relationship between the colonists and the government of the Mother Country? DO NOT ANSWER THIS UNTIL YOU HAVE FULLY READ THIS CHAPTER AS IT IS A LONG ANSWER.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

p. Results of the French and Indian War- the Treaty of Paris pg. 118-
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

q. The Significance of Pontiac’s Rebellion pg. 118- In 1763, Pontiac led several tribes that were allied with the French into a brief, violent campaign to drive the British out of the Ohio Valley. When the British were unaware of what was going on, they destroyed all but 3 British post west of the Appalachians. They killed around 2 thousand colonists in Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia. Once aware, the British came back stronger than ever, distributing infected blankets, full of smallpox, to the Indians. This along with other tactics crushed the uprisings and pacified the frontier temporarily. This episode convinced the British that relations with the Indians had to be stabilized. This led to the Proclamation of 1763.
t. Proclamation of 1763 pg. 119- This proclamation prohibited settlement in the area beyond the Appalachians. It was created to work out the problem with the Indians fairly and prevent another bloody incident like Pontiac’s uprising; however, it seemed to be created to oppressing the colonies. (Americans were aggravated because they felt that they earned this land from the bloody war.)