Moravian College

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Was Old Virginia Really That IDYLLIC? Long before Patrick Henry or George Washington bestrode the soil of Virginia, the state basked in rich mythology of an early history that, in the mind’s eye, featured an agricultural paradise of sorts, with master planters overseeing their fi elds with fi rmness and gentility. It was the romantic counterpoint to gritty, prosaic Massachusetts. For Brian Davies ’06, the question wasn’t whether that gallant mythology held up to historical scrutiny. He’d done enough combing through Virginia history and its historians to know that much of it is a fanciful version of reality. He was, rather, curious about how far the actual Virginia of the 17th century differs from the particular idealism that still wafts about in some circles. How did life on the ground level actually evolve during those tumultuous 1600s? He discovered that, in contrast to the imagined stability, the century had been fraught with instability and confl ict. His research took him to the University of Virginia and to sources wherever he could fi nd them. Among the problems of tracking those developments is that so many original sources were lost when Richmond was burned at the end of the Civil War. The star-crossed settlement of Jamestown had been the fi rst center of European population, starting in 1607. The Virginia Company, based in London, founded the colony and established a system ruled by wealthy planters. By 1619, tobacco was king, whetting the appetite of planters for more land and more crops. But there were obstacles to this kingdom building. One was pestilence. Disease-bearing insects carried malaria and other deadly sicknesses, wiping out large numbers of settlers. The other problem was, of course, that other people, Native Americans to be exact, took exception to the idea that newcomers were encroaching on STUDENT: RESEARCH PROJECT NO. BRENDAN WRIGHT land they claimed as their own. As early as the 1620s, as Brian discovered, the Powhatan Confederacy of Indians and the settlers had attacked each other— and things would get much worse. One of the low points was a Powhatan assault in 1640s. Brian traces the jockeying for power that went on during the rest of the century, framing his discussion as a portrait of increasing chaos that bore little resemblance to imagined order and tranquility. A new type of planter from a merchant background began to arrive in the colony with plans to exert infl uence. An emerging class of yeomen had accumulated suffi cient money to buy their own plots of productive earth. Tensions between the wealthy, seemingly entrenched nobility and the rising cohort of less affl uent challengers erupted in Bacon’s Rebellion in 1676. According to Brian, the leader of the uprising, Nathaniel Bacon, faulted the colony’s governor, Sir William Berkeley, for failing to protect the frontier planters from Indian raids. Other factors, Brian explains, included a desire for greater political participation by the lower-class planters. Berkeley was driven from Jamestown and Bacon died of malaria shortly thereafter. Brian’s research shook up the neat structures of the mythology. “Many historians believed this group of wealthy planters held complete control of the colony,” he writes. “Whereas I attempt to show the cracks in the planters’ veneer of authority.” 13 ■ SENIOR ■ JUNIOR ■ SOPHOMORE ■ FRESHMAN
STUDENT: RESEARCH PROJECT NO. BRIAN DAVIES JAMES W. PAXTON ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF HISTORY ■ SENIOR ■ JUNIOR ■ SOPHOMORE ■ FRESHMAN Since antiquity, social scientists have employed the idea of “human nature” to reinforce their arguments and theories. But the term has a rhetorical power that limits the possibility of imagining theoretical alternatives. Brendan Wright ’06 wanted to discover just how these claims operate within the canon of political theory. Working with Khristina H. Haddad, assistant professor of political science, he combed the works of a half dozen of the most renowned political theorists. For some, human nature was decidedly benevolent; for others, it was essentially malevolent. To Brendan, any theorist’s view of human nature determines what system of social organization is believed to be necessary and what moral code is adhered to. Ultimately, Brendan found none of the claims of human nature to be satisfactory 14 | 15
Page 1 and 2: M O R A V I A N C O L L E G E 05 06
Page 3 and 4: PRESIDENT: CHRISTOPHER M. THOMFORDE
Page 5 and 6: What’s the Big Deal about ALGAE?
Page 7 and 8: When is a Furnace a BLAST? For Mich
Page 9 and 10: STUDENT: RESEARCH PROJECT NO. JESSI
Page 11 and 12: How Could Churches Get a JUMP START
Page 13 and 14: Why Does the Jump Jump When IT DOES
Page 15: STUDENT: RESEARCH PROJECT NO. VANES
Page 19 and 20: Who Was the Real LILLIAN HARDIN? Ja
Page 21 and 22: $100,000+ Arcadia Foundation Mr. &
Page 23 and 24: Ms. Andrea M. Frankenfi eld Ms. Kim
Page 25 and 26: Mrs. Kyla McFadden Baldo Mr. Frank
Page 27 and 28: Mr. Daniel P. Bloom Mrs. Shupriya M
Page 29 and 30: Mrs. Charlene Coleman Frable Ms. Al
Page 31 and 32: STUDENT: RESEARCH PROJECT NO. Mr. G
Page 33 and 34: Mr. Lance E. Metz Mr. Frazier M. Mo
Page 35 and 36: GREYHOUND CLUB Miss Carol V. Apple
Page 37 and 38: Dr. A. Peter Haupert Mrs. Jean Soso
Page 39 and 40: THIRD CENTURY CLUB Miss Margaret L.
Page 41 and 42: Ms. Wilma A. Lewis Rev. Dr. F. Thom
Page 43 and 44: Dr. Florence C. Kimball Ms. Bertie
Page 45 and 46: Mr. & Mrs. Andrew J. Guff Mr. Odell
Page 47 and 48: STUDENT: RESEARCH PROJECT NO. Dr. H
Page 49 and 50: Mr. & Mrs. Edward B. Clewell Mrs. B
Page 51 and 52: 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 A. B.

Moravian College

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?