Anna Olson Group 2

Throughout the readings in Skemp, we continue to see William and Benjamin develop not only their personal, but business relationship. They were both so optimistic in everything they did, especially after the repeal of the Stamp Act in 1775. There is no way they were going to allow minor setbacks to put a damper on their dream of creating a British colony in the Illinois country. My question here is, would Benjamin have accomplished the things he did and be as famous as he is today were is not for his illegitimate son, William? In the last reading, I was under the impression that Ben was the one doing Will all the favors but now I feel it’s the other way around. In November 1768 when Hillsborough personally attacked Ben, William was right there to back his father up and convince the assembly to conform to the Mutiny Act. This is just one of the examples that show what a strong political bond Ben and Will had. Will tended to his father’s business and political affairs and also cared for his extended family in times of need, which allowed for Ben to remain in London. Ben and Will were each other’s “invaluable allies”.

Ari Pearson Group 2

In chapter 5 of America, a Concise History, the British Victory in The War for Empire gives rise to changes in the British government and its policies both at home and abroad. These changes will create an environment from which the colonists will eventually strike out for independence. During the war it becomes apparent to both colonists and British officials that their philosophies no longer match up as conflicts arise in the decision making processes. After the discovery during the war, that local governments have become powerful and influential in the colonies, the British Government feels the need to strengthen its position of power over the colonies by a more strict enforcement of the Navigation Acts and by deploying troops in the colonies. A national debt caused by the war also causes Britain to tax the colonies, further straining relations between the two.
It is interesting that after fighting so hard for "Empire", every action of the British government seems only to undermine the British supremacy in the colonies. After the proposal of the stamp act, Benjamin Franklin responds with a request for American representation in Parliament. Clearly the American people feel that they are British subjects as they are talking about representation at this point. It seems that they would have been willing to pay the taxes if they had a voice in the creation of legislation. It is the defiance of these wishes intended to hold supremacy over the colonies by the British that actually caused them to break away and rebel. Had Britain given them representation in the Parliament when it was proposed by Ben Franklin, would colonists have decided to start the battle for independence? Do you think the revolution was inevitable and that giving them representation would have only prolonged the process? Perhaps even with representation in the government, the unreasonable taxation, trade regulation and military presence would have caused the rebellion. Was there a specific turning point in the rebellion such as the stamp act or was this an inevitable out come of the growing maturity of a young society?

Caitlin Thornbrugh Group 2

In reading Skemp’s work I think it is important to remember the idea we were talking about in discussion that we are studying history from someone’s perspective. What would the history of colonial America be described at if we were under the direction of a British historian. What descriptions of the people and events would be different? In describing Benjamin Franklin the majority of Americans would choose to look at all he contributed to the founding of our society. I wonder what the English would have to say about him. On page 77 Skemp discusses his “contradictory” messages as he tried to be the middle man. The American government is not quick to admit its wrongdoings. The description of Lord Hillborough plays on the emotions of the readers to build up an aversion to him—he is described as “unbending” and issuing “firmer control over the colonies.” Then set against the hero Ben Franklin in a “showdown” it makes it hard for the American reader to see maybe he was just trying to do what he felt was the right thing for his job and for his country. There is a quote from Franklin saying he should be known for his “Conceit, Wrong headedness, Obstinacy and Passion.” Could some of these adjectives also describe Franklin himself? An example of this would be when he sends the letters between Hutchinson and Oliver to Thomas Cushing. I think Henretta’s description of Hillborough’s activities on page 149 leaves more room for the reader to draw their own conclusions, because it simply states what he did, and uses only direct quotes from him.

Mallory Hayes-Group 1

From reading about Ben and Will in Skemp, it seemed to me that their relationship started off rough. It's sad that Will might have felt ignored by his dad; considering all the achievements he is known for and how much of his time and effort he must of put into them. Even though Will was given many great educational and career opportunities by his father, it seemed like Ben was mapping out how he wanted his son to be, even at a young age. Not being accepted for who you are or who you want to be can affect a person. Maybe Will just wanted to make his dad proud but by doing it on his own standards, like when he joined the forces. Ultimately they seemed to find a common ground, like their interests in electricity and the whole kite experiment. After that, long leisurely trips to England also bonded them closer. How would have Will and all of us turned out if Ben gave up some of the things that we still benefit from today, if he would have concentrated more on his needy son and hovered over him after his run away attempt? What would we be missing out on if Ben dropped out of the spotlight to tend to his family affairs (like after his baby boy died)? Thankfully he was too ambious of a person to do so.
In Henretta, the thing that got me the most was the Great Awakening. I can imagine going to church before this happened and falling to sleep during every sermon. People finally realized how to not be so uptight and structured. They needed to spice things up a bit! Sure, go ahead and get a theater performer to speak the word of god to you, as long as it works and keep you AWAKE that's all that matters. It was also a good thing for the kids back then too. I'm sure they were stoked to go to church now! If this would not of taken place would there be as many people attending church today? Or better yet, would Methodist and Baptist be major parts of religion, after all this new style is what made the two so big?

Tracey Ganem Group 1

Benjamin advanced pretty far on his own two feet given that his father, Josiah, was a candle maker among other things, and his mother, Abiah, was an indentured servant (bought by Benjamin’s father for 20 pounds). Benjamin seemed to be a bit unwise to me at first. Maybe it was his lack of experience in the “real world” but most of his plans fell through in the beginning. Benjamin is always portrayed as this brilliant guy when in fact he was a bit absent minded in some areas (such as preparing for his failures). Benjamin’s first job with Samuel Keimer was a dud because the two didn’t get along which pretty much set the standard for all of his successes to come-- starting his own business seemed to be inevitable. Benjamin and his son, William, were a lot closer than most history classes reveal to their students. I never read much about either of their personal lives until this book (Skemp reading). In chapter 3: Government men, Skemp states that Benjamin and William start to drift apart because of the Franklins’ English Sojourn. I did not really understand their drifting apart because throughout chapter 3 both men seem to still keep in close contact with one another, so the 3rd chapter kind of lost me.
In chapter 3: The Great Aristocratic Land Grab (Henretta), Charles II was considered to be an extravagant man who was always in dept which reminded me in many ways of the reading on Benjamin Franklin (with Benjamin constantly being in debt). Charles II ends up giving all his territory between the Delaware and Connecticut Rivers to his brother James, the duke of York, which also reminded me of Benjamin Franklin in the aspect of Benjamin’s close relationship with his son William. In the Skemp reading Benjamin and William share their success and in the Henretta reading Charles II and James share their territory (although they are not father and son but brothers). John Lock’s Two Treatises on Government was a confusing concept for me that was hard to get past in the reading but Lock later emphasized the impact of environment, experience, and reason on human behavior which let me get a closer look at Lock’s reasoning. Chapter 4 of the Henretta reading was focused a lot on the Puritan Ideology which states that men are head of the house and women basically have babies and clean the house (in so many words). As a female, I was thinking maybe the loss of property in one-half of all white men in the Middle Atlantic region in the 1760s had something to do with the men not helping out with all the women‘s chores. (just a thought).

sarah rabe group 1

In the readings by Henretta the slave trade is talked about quite frequently. The way I see it is without slaves we wouldn't have made the progress we have today, and that’s pathetic. Just because whites were to lazy to do the work necessary for producing goods they turned to people of a different color skin and discriminated against them because of that. What if the tables had turned and the Africans took over the whites and turned them into their slaves? How different would our world and cultures be today? To me it is easy to relate slave trade to the holocaust because obvious relationship between the two is discrimination because of cultural differences. In both cases whether they were Jewish or Africans they both lost the feeling or self worth, dignity and their cultural identities all together. Why did so many people step in to stop the holocaust yet the slave trade put more than 15 million Africans under control of wealthy whites who felt they had more power over everyone?

In skemps readings the conflicts that arise between Benjamin and William never seem to diminish. After Benjamin had given William so many opportunities to do well in life by actively participating in his printing businesses he continually refused the opportunities. It was very difficult for Benjamin to understand why his son was so different then he was. William was so resentful of his father’s passions because he constantly took part in public affairs. Benjamin tried to be a good father but it was very hard for him to watch his son defend the king and empire because it was very hard for him to get recognition being a colonist. How would you deal with your child continually rejecting the opportunities you gave them?

Zach Davis-Presentation Group 1

The readings from Skemp mention several times that Benjamin Franklin dreads returning to the Colonies after spending time in England. He prefers the intellectual environment in England over simple company in America. What if Benjamin Franklin decided to never return to the colonies? Would losing his impressive influence reshape our country? How integral a part of America's history is Benjamin Franklin?

The Enlightenment was a very important part in the development of logical thinking, reason over religion, and democracy. The movement had no clear spark that started the entire thing. It seams that maybe the thinker's like John Locke may have sparked it but maybe the movement sparked the thinker's whom helped spread the Enlightenment. I believe that there was a spark before the theorists and thinkers that probably inspired them to spread theses ideas. There is no doubt in my mind though that the contributors to the Enlightenment and its spread played an important role in revolutionizing the way we think.